the problem with lorentz transformation is that during calculations the frames of reference are changed arbitrarily to fit the presumtions. if you stick to one reference frame from the beginning till the end, then there will be no time dilation. the space-time interval comes directly from the lorentz transformation, and if i remember correctly, big part of the relativity conclusions by einstein was based on the lorentz transformation. you see where it is heading to?!
the errors in logic are clearly visible from the graphical representation of the lorentz transformation.. or to be precise — from several assumptions represented in the graphical form, plus the arbitrary transformation itself. watch the video below first, then read my detailed explanation of every mistake in the logic there.
just a note: the presenter in the video is not stupid, he talks by the book, but that’s the problem which i have encountered in so many academic discussions — some truths are considered not questionable, because some supposedly even smarter people have worked it out. nobody is perfect, so you should always question even the most established mathematical formulas. if not, then an error in logic can carry on into entire fields of mathematics and physics, wasting lives of generations of scientists trying to solve some issues, unsolvable with the formulas with errors in them. i wish i had more persistence decades ago, to insist on the clear errors in the theory of relativity, but back then i had no idea of the mistakes in the lorentz transformation, so i wasn’t absolutely sure i had my conclusions right.
watch the video presentation and i will explain the mistakes..
so, lets discuss it..
in the beginning of the explanation the curve of different ticking clocks is arbitrarily bent — they should have been on the same level on the time scale. even worse — he sais time ticks slow to travelers, while in fact by this arbitrary graph the travelers had passed more time on the time scale, aging faster than the stationary observer — total contradiction. or, it would make “sense” only if the reference frames are arbitrarily taken, without a fixed reference point, resulting in a mathematical nonsense.
next. in the video, for the zero time of the moving object, the previously horizontal line of space axis is arbitrarily tilted to connect the 45 degree lines of light. big mistake. the connecting lines of light are very much of different length, which means they are not reaching the moving object at the same time. the horizontal plain of space axis should have been left unchanged, if the reference frame was stationary. the “sloped x-axis”, even if permitted to manipulate from the reference point of the moving object, is sloped in a wrong direction. the entire presentation is a total mess of arbitrary assumptions — it perfectly shows all the mistakes in the lorentz transformation initial inputs, and in the frames of reference.
the line of the moving object can never tilt beyond 45 degrees, which is correct, because it would mean exceeding the speed of light, but the connecting lines which are longer will show redshift while the shorter lines will show blueshift, if the space is expanding and contracting respectively. in the example though the light simply arrives at different times, not in zero time as presumed in video, by unknown to me logic.
i’m not done with the lorentz transformation yet — hold onto your chair. in the end of the video he grids up the traveler’s reference frame (with all the errors of logic in it) and squares up everything. why?! by the same logic he could as well square up the reference frame of the traveler, without any transformation.
you see.. in the formulas without graphical visualization it is easy to misunderstand the connection of lines of time as a reference only, but in fact the lines represent physically passing time — the length of the connecting lines must be taken into account. only the vertical and horizontal axes must be taken as reference lines, without arbitrarily applying the same property of reference to the passing time. and again the issue with arbitrary reference frames — in case of space-time one cannot mess around with the frame of reference, because it would mean jumping space without time. if you want to change the frame of reference during your calculations, you must account for the passing of time during that change of space, which will nullify the whole point of lorentz transformation, because the time dilation will disappear.
the very idea of applying lorentz transformation for time dilation is absurd, it’s just an abstract mathematics full of logical errors not corresponding to reality. the time dilation don’t take into account the complex movement of celestial objects in aether. read the article to get a clarification about aether — it is there and proven, just not in all the textbooks yet..
.. the displacement of galaxies related to each other is already with the speed of millions of kilometres per hour, so if an object takes a hike from earth it may in fact be slowing down, relatively speaking, instead of speeding up, or even more realistically, as earth also orbits sun, and solar system has its orbit in galaxy, then a “stationary” observer will be wobbling around. but that’s not the real point. the real point is that the relativity principle is not preserved during lorentz transformation. all those calculations and graphs are based on the presumtion — on a thought experiment with a flaw in it — that time moves slower on a moving object close to speed of light. the mistake in lorentz transformation is visible not only from its graphics, but from the very presumption that a speed of an object slows time. i have written about it before — if you perform the same calculations after flipping the stationary and moving reference frames, then the slowing of time will be result for another object, not to the same as before. both results, directly opposite, cannot be correct at the same time.
here’s an article with the detailed description of the error in the theory of relativity..
it’s time for the mathematical community to wake up and scrap lorentz transformation for time dilation, with whatever consequences it may bring to the understanding of reality.
show me the lorentz transformation with correct input of data and with a single reference frame for the duration of the entire calculation. then perform the same for each reference frame separately, without mixing them arbitrarily.. and come to the same answer with each separate calculation. it is impossible. if you can do it, i will take my words back and will post an article that i was wrong.