谢谢沈先生,应该加几个字就好了
如爱因斯坦的同时性的相对性和您的不可操作性,就是为了解决一些孛论而提出的方法,这些方法都是相对论的延伸,仍属于相对论效应。
我认为相对论是自洽的,无内在矛盾。但是这并不是它正确的证明。判定它正确与否,唯一的方法是与事实作比较:
According to the general relativity (1916), the formula for the eastword procession of the planetary perihelion be
Δω＝24π3a 2/ T 2 c 2(1－e 2) (9)
We can accumulate the values of processions as follow: for the Mercury: 43″ per century≈0.38cm/s, for the earth : 3″.84 per century, for the Uranus : 0″.002 per century. They are all from the west to the east in the same direction. 其速度用V表示。With V represents their speeds. Through his observation, U. S. astronomer Simon Newcomb (1835-1989) got the value of the eastward procession of the Mercury’s perihelion to be 43″ per century, completely as the same value acquired through calculation with equation (9). This made scientists astonished and exclaim admiringly. But in fact it was wrong. The Δω in equation (9) showed the increase increment of the celestial ecliptic longitude of the perihelion: V=43″ per century. But it was in the zodiacal ecliptic coordinate system K. While Newconmb made his observation on the earth. His result: V’=43″ per century was in the earth coordinate system K’. V and V’ were the same speeds (values) in different coordinate system and could not be equal (by axiom Ⅲ). Taking the earth as a bicycle, Newcomb observed the speed of motor as 3m/s. Only by adding the speed of bicycle can we acquire the real speed of motor. Thus the real observed value of the Mercury in the zodiacal coordinate system K must be 43″＋3″.84＝46″.84 per century, quite larger than the calculated value by equation (9). Only by negating axiom Ⅲ, can there be V＝V’, and can the general relativity be founded.
In the inertial system, the light speed is of the same nature in all directions: the transverse light speed c1 and the vertical light speed c2 must be equal: c1＝c2 . Unfortunately, there is no straight-line motion at uniform speed in the universe at all. So Einstein abolished the inertia system in 1916, thinking that natural laws must keep constant in the coordinate system of natural motion (as on the earth). Thus on the earth in the Michelson’s experiment taking the light speed as of the same nuture in all directions: c1＝c2 . But at that time people wrongly thought the light speed c and c’, to be in different inertia systems and thus c≠c’. The experimental result c＝c’ must be c1＝c2 , being wrongly written as c＝c’ ( a negation of axiom Ⅲ ), this was a historical misconception.
Let’s define: m＝100,000km, then c=300,000km/s can be written as c=3m/s. In the Maxwell equations, the light speed must be invariable:
In system K c＝3m/s (3a)
In system K’ c’＝3m/s (4a)
Seemingly the invariance of light speed were correct. So we consider that, as the right ends of the equations are exactly the same, then their left ends must be equal: c＝c’, thus arise the principle of the invariance of light speed. Compare (3a) and (4a) with (3) and (4). They are exactly the same, merely change sign v into c, then equation (6) be c＝c’. That’s the principle of the invariance of car speed (3m/s). By c＝c’ we may deduce the Lorentz transformation and vice versa. Thus c be the limit speed. Nevertheless this c may be light speed or car speed. For the same reason, V＝V’ may be called the principle of the invariance of star speed, deducing the Lorentz transformation and the star speed 43″ per century being the limit speed. These are the multiform of the new system acquired by the negation of axiom Ⅲ. Are they correct? Let’s take a look at facts:
按广义相对论计算,天王星东进值是0″.002/百年.而实测值是3″.13/百年,比理论值大1565倍。另外,
如果再变换到黄道坐标系, 3″.13＋3″.84＝6″.97/百年,是(9)式计算值的3485倍。是不是海外行星的摄动造成这一偏差的呢? 1930年发现了冥王星,但是冥王星的质量太小,只有0.0024地球质量,不能造成这样大的偏差。更何况冥王星和海王星本身也出现了东进现象,都远大于(9)式的计算值:按(9)式计算,海王星: 0″.00072 / 百年, 冥王星: 0″.00042 / 百年。这几乎为零的进动,是不可能被观测到的。而事实上,天文学家们却发现了海王星、冥王星的东进。这说明海王星、冥王星的东进值最少也要比(9)式的计算值大三～四千倍。不然,就不可能被观测到。观测实践与理论的偏差,就是实践与对称观念的偏差。因为牛顿理论和相对论都是对称理论,这些偏差显示天体运动是“非对称运动”。又如恩克彗星的公转周期在不断缩短,也显示了天体运动是非对称运动。这些天文事实,迫使我们应该用一种全新的非对称观念来认识世界。根据这些天文事实来建立非对称理论,这些巨大的偏差就不会存在了。因为非对称理论就是根据这些偏差建立起来的。
狭义相对论是建立在洛仑兹变换的基础之上.但是洛仑兹变换和伽利略变换都是质点运动的坐标变换。它们都不适合波动过程的坐标变换是可以肯定的,但是在没有波动过程的坐标变换之前,科学不能空白,暂借洛仑兹变换用用是权宜之计。切不可认为它就是科学终极。好在刘启新老先生已经做好了波动过程的坐标变换。正在把它翻译成英文,可惜我们的英文水平太低,想请沈先生指教,行吗?先谢谢了。上面的英文多有不妥之处,用红色标出,黑字是参考词。有图,贴不上来,如果沈先生愿意帮忙,请给E-mail,立即寄来。请E-mail到liuqixin56@163.com
|