Is there really something wrong with the theory of relativity? The theory of relativity is not corre

Any physical theory is the product of people's understanding of the natural world under certain conditions, taking Newton's law as an example, under macroscopic conditions, it is proved to be true for objects moving at low speed, but not for microscopic particles moving at high speed. Similarly, the theory of relativity is also a theory based on certain conditions (the speed of light does not change), and if one day people find that the speed of some object will exceed the speed of light, then the theory of relativity is not valid, which actually shows that the truth is relative.

For now, there is no problem at all.

To sum up, the theory of relativity is a theory that corrects the previous understanding of the structure of space-time (absolute length, absolute time, Galilean transformation, space-time flatness) by selecting a certain principle of relativity in certain situations, (all inertial frames are equivalent to gravitational effects), and corrects the previous cognition of the structure of space-time (absolute length, absolute time, Galilean transformation, space-time flatness), and provides a more accurate and reasonable explanation of existing physical phenomena. As for whether Einstein chose these two principles of relativity or not.

The theory of relativity, as a theory, is correct within its scope of application, and when it goes beyond the scope, it cannot be said to be incorrect, but it is not applicable.

But there can be a lot of mistakes about a theory, just like classical physics is correct, but many people don't understand it completely.

At present, there are many errors in many textbooks, but these errors are differences in everyone's understanding of a theory, and do not represent errors in the theory itself.

For example, the theory of relativity overturns the absolute view of space-time, which is a false statement. The theory of relativity only abandons the ether, and there is no question of absolute space-time in the theory of relativity, which does not mean that the concept of absolute space-time is overthrown.

Although people initially speculated that there was such a substance as "ether", which was the medium of all motion, with the development and progress of science and the improvement of people's technical level, it was found that the existence of such a thing as ether as a substance was impossible after experimental measurement, so it became a fictitious absolute reference established in the theory of absolute time and space, just like power lines, magnetic field lines, and longitude and latitude lines on the earth are objectively non-existent things, but they are also the reference system of absolute motion.

But the ether is not realistic as a frame of reference, because a substance that does not really exist cannot be captured and measured, and therefore cannot be truly used as a frame of reference.

But light has been shown to have a constant velocity in a vacuum, so that although the aether cannot be captured, light can, so light can be used instead of the aether as a frame of reference according to the principle of relative motion.

Unlike ordinary matter as a frame of reference, the speed of light cannot be assumed to be 0, because that would give all subjects a very large initial velocity, so it must be assumed that the speed of light is a fixed value. This is the principle of the invariance of the speed of light.

The theory of relativity is based on the speed of light as a reference speed, just as we can assume that the river is stationary and the banks are moving, just as it is understandable to assume that a reference object is justified. Some people say that the basic assumption of the theory of relativity that the speed of light is constant has not been proven, so who can prove that the ground is stationary when we assume that the ground is stationary? Assumptions do not need to be proven, and there is no right or wrong.

If we assume that light is a reference, we must abandon the aether as a reference, just as if we assume that the river is still, we must abandon the riverbank stillness, not to overturn the aether theory, but to abandon the ether theory. Just as to assume that the river is still is to abandon the stillness of the ground.

Abandonment and overthrow are two different concepts. It cannot be said that the assumption that the ground is stationary is overturned.

Of course, because the frame of reference is changed, the original physical expression will inevitably change. It's like the same curve has different forms in different coordinate systems. To study the theory of relativity, we should consider the problem from the basic premise that the speed of light is constant, and we cannot insist on the theory of the speed of light at the same time, which will lead to the problem of self-contradiction.

Many of the so-called "mistakes" are caused by using different frames of reference at the same time, such as the twin paradox.

Such an error does not mean that the theory of relativity itself is wrong.

In Einstein's time, it was thought that space was a vacuum, so it was believed that light did not need a medium to propagate.

Now we know that there is rarefied air in space, and air is one of the optical mediums.

The medium determines the speed of light, not hinders it.

So, if your rocket is moving relative to the Earth's atmosphere, the light emitted is still the speed of light for the Earth. If the air follows the motion of your rocket, it will never reach Earth.

Light is an ordinary wave, and it propagates by a medium.

The light is energetic, and since the "light" emitted by the spaceship can be seen on Earth, it is already moving. Light must reach people's eyes before it can be felt.

The latest discovery by European scientists: neutrinos are faster than photons at 60 kilometers per second, and if confirmed, Einstein's theory of relativity will be impacted and modern physics will be rewritten.

First of all, I will explain why this discovery is amazing: in the Lorentz transformation, the denominator of the change of x is the V square of the subtract c square under the root number, if you write it out, in a drawing, as long as you have a diploma in the third year of junior high school or above, you will know it (for details, please refer to the content of the Lorentz change in the encyclopedia).

In fact, the reason is simple, Lorentz's proof comes from the plane, while the theory of relativity is aimed at four dimensions.

In Einstein's autobiography, he has made it clear that the theory of relativity is to solve the "absolute problem", that is, to prove the existence of no ether by the speed of light (special relativity), and to explain the ** of inertia (general relativity), and to solve the coordinate problem that has long plagued mankind (Lorentz transform). What he is suitable for is the space-plus time problem with boundaries that cannot form an Euclidean plane model, that is, the theory of continuity is based on four-dimensional space, and may not be applicable to infinite or multidimensional space. To put it more generally, it means that the model formed according to the theory of relativity has boundaries, and the properties of objects are determined by all or most of the properties of fixed matter and atomic structure, and are not applicable to all spaces.

The fact that there must be more dimensional spaces in the universe, many of which may have been transformed from space to planes again, and whether these spaces are suitable for the theory of relativity is unclear, and we are not yet sure. Even the composition is unclear after the Aether is denied - there is still a long way to go!

In addition, the explanation of inertia in the theory of relativity is still not so satisfactory.

Therefore, the theory of relativity may be incorrect, and the mystery of neutrinos discovered this time proves once again that perhaps the factors that affect the distance traveled by a point are not only time and speed, but also other factors.

This finding is similar to James Morey's experiment, which rejects Galilean variations (the proof comes from mathematical calculations), and the latter may partially negate the theory of relativity. This is not a bad thing, as these could bring humanity one step closer to the quasi-Euclidean model.

I believe that in 30 years, there will be a young man who will solve it.

It hasn't been proven wrong, but some phenomena show that it has relative limitations like Newton's theorem, which is like the overthrow of Newton when the wet carpet of love, it takes mathematical progress to explain, mathematics can't ****, lottery, but it does....Every progress changes human society.

It can only be said that it is imperfect, just as Newton's classical mechanics is not applicable to microscopic objects moving at high speed, but it is widely used in real life, and the same theory of relativity may have certain limitations, but at present, other microscopic particles are strictly in line with the theory of relativity.

According to the current discovery of neutrinos exceeding the speed of light, the theory of relativity is wrong, but whether there are other reasons is still under investigation.