You were right: Rotational motion is relative, too, Mr. Einstein!

You were right: Rotational motion is relative, too, Mr. Einstein!

Anonymous
Anonymous

May 19th, 2016, 6:17 pm #1





It has been one hundred years since the publication of Einstein's general theory of relativity in May 1916. In a paper recently published in EPJ Plus, Norwegian physicist Øyvind Grøn from the Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences and his co-author Torkild Jemterud demonstrate that the rotational motion in the universe is also subject to the theory of relativity. Imagine a person at the North pole who doesn't believe the Earth rotates. As she holds a pendulum and can observe the stars in her telescope, she remarks that the swinging plane of the pendulum and the stars rotate together. Newton, who saw the world as a classical physicist, would have pointed out that it is the Earth that rotates. However, if we assume the general principle of relativity is valid, the Earth can be considered as being at rest while the swinging plane of the pendulum and the night sky are rotating. In fact, the rotating mass of the observable part of the universe causes the river of space--which is made up of free particles following the universe's expansion--to rotate together with the stars in the sky. And the swinging plane of the pendulum moves together with the river of space.










https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 120254.htm





Quote
Share

Heisenberg "top of iceberg
Heisenberg "top of iceberg

May 20th, 2016, 11:52 am #2


I agree...
Quote
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

May 20th, 2016, 5:50 pm #3




It has been one hundred years since the publication of Einstein's general theory of relativity in May 1916. In a paper recently published in EPJ Plus, Norwegian physicist Øyvind Grøn from the Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences and his co-author Torkild Jemterud demonstrate that the rotational motion in the universe is also subject to the theory of relativity. Imagine a person at the North pole who doesn't believe the Earth rotates. As she holds a pendulum and can observe the stars in her telescope, she remarks that the swinging plane of the pendulum and the stars rotate together. Newton, who saw the world as a classical physicist, would have pointed out that it is the Earth that rotates. However, if we assume the general principle of relativity is valid, the Earth can be considered as being at rest while the swinging plane of the pendulum and the night sky are rotating. In fact, the rotating mass of the observable part of the universe causes the river of space--which is made up of free particles following the universe's expansion--to rotate together with the stars in the sky. And the swinging plane of the pendulum moves together with the river of space.










https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 120254.htm




https://www.funnypica.com/wp-content/up ... ly-pic.jpg
Quote
Share

AAF
AAF

May 21st, 2016, 3:00 am #4




It has been one hundred years since the publication of Einstein's general theory of relativity in May 1916. In a paper recently published in EPJ Plus, Norwegian physicist Øyvind Grøn from the Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences and his co-author Torkild Jemterud demonstrate that the rotational motion in the universe is also subject to the theory of relativity. Imagine a person at the North pole who doesn't believe the Earth rotates. As she holds a pendulum and can observe the stars in her telescope, she remarks that the swinging plane of the pendulum and the stars rotate together. Newton, who saw the world as a classical physicist, would have pointed out that it is the Earth that rotates. However, if we assume the general principle of relativity is valid, the Earth can be considered as being at rest while the swinging plane of the pendulum and the night sky are rotating. In fact, the rotating mass of the observable part of the universe causes the river of space--which is made up of free particles following the universe's expansion--to rotate together with the stars in the sky. And the swinging plane of the pendulum moves together with the river of space.










https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 120254.htm












"As she holds a pendulum and can observe the stars in her
telescope, she remarks that the swinging plane of the pendulum and the
stars rotate together. Newton, who saw the world as a classical physicist,
would have pointed out that it is the Earth that rotates. However, if we
assume the general principle of relativity is valid, the Earth can be considered
as being at rest while the swinging plane of the pendulum and the night sky are
rotating. In fact, the rotating mass of the observable part of the universe causes
the river of space--which is made up of free particles following the universe's
expansion--to rotate together with the stars in the sky. And the swinging plane
of the pendulum moves together with the river of space. "







No; Mr. Einstein was NOT right:
Rotational motion is not relative!






Why should "the rotating mass of the observable part of the universe"
be so unbelievably CHOOSY & PICKY?


What is the BIG REASON behind choosing one single 'miserable'
lonely pendulum on the North Pole, by "the rotating mass of the observable
part of the universe"
, to rotate with it; and leaving, at the same time,
the Pacific Ocean, the Himalayas, the Alps, Brisbane, and Oslo at rest?


The truth is that if the universe does rotate - an event highly unlikely
to happen anyway – then all of the things, inside it, must rotate together,
including, of course, the whole earth & the lonely and 'miserable'
pendulum at the North Pole.


And therefore, the lonely and 'miserable' pendulum, on the North Pole,
can distinguish and differentiate very easily between the rotation of the universe
and the rotation of the earth around its own geometrical axis.


In short, Einstein's argument, for relative rotation, must bite the dust and collapse
on itself in utter disgrace and humiliation; and even this handy-dandy illustration
by Colleague Ufonaut99, during the sizzling Australian summer, when the
taipans are running all over the Outback like hell:


?w=640


could not save it:







Just take a closer look:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/t ... wo+bodies-





















Quote
Share

jaquecusto
jaquecusto

May 21st, 2016, 2:41 pm #5




It has been one hundred years since the publication of Einstein's general theory of relativity in May 1916. In a paper recently published in EPJ Plus, Norwegian physicist Øyvind Grøn from the Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences and his co-author Torkild Jemterud demonstrate that the rotational motion in the universe is also subject to the theory of relativity. Imagine a person at the North pole who doesn't believe the Earth rotates. As she holds a pendulum and can observe the stars in her telescope, she remarks that the swinging plane of the pendulum and the stars rotate together. Newton, who saw the world as a classical physicist, would have pointed out that it is the Earth that rotates. However, if we assume the general principle of relativity is valid, the Earth can be considered as being at rest while the swinging plane of the pendulum and the night sky are rotating. In fact, the rotating mass of the observable part of the universe causes the river of space--which is made up of free particles following the universe's expansion--to rotate together with the stars in the sky. And the swinging plane of the pendulum moves together with the river of space.










https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 120254.htm




Hi,AAF!

Let's see this exemple:



Rotating spinning top on a stationary disc.



Standing spinning top on a rotating disc.

Apparently, in this second case, the spinning top will fall. In this situation the spinning top is stopped and does not produce the gyroscopic effect.
But if the universe is spinning except the top, what will happen?
Quote
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

May 21st, 2016, 5:43 pm #6




It has been one hundred years since the publication of Einstein's general theory of relativity in May 1916. In a paper recently published in EPJ Plus, Norwegian physicist Øyvind Grøn from the Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences and his co-author Torkild Jemterud demonstrate that the rotational motion in the universe is also subject to the theory of relativity. Imagine a person at the North pole who doesn't believe the Earth rotates. As she holds a pendulum and can observe the stars in her telescope, she remarks that the swinging plane of the pendulum and the stars rotate together. Newton, who saw the world as a classical physicist, would have pointed out that it is the Earth that rotates. However, if we assume the general principle of relativity is valid, the Earth can be considered as being at rest while the swinging plane of the pendulum and the night sky are rotating. In fact, the rotating mass of the observable part of the universe causes the river of space--which is made up of free particles following the universe's expansion--to rotate together with the stars in the sky. And the swinging plane of the pendulum moves together with the river of space.










https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 120254.htm




>>>>> However, IF WE ASSUME the general principle of relativity is valid .....


https://www.funnypica.com/wp-content/up ... eople1.jpg
Quote
Share

Heisenberg "top of iceberg"
Heisenberg "top of iceberg"

May 21st, 2016, 6:43 pm #7




It has been one hundred years since the publication of Einstein's general theory of relativity in May 1916. In a paper recently published in EPJ Plus, Norwegian physicist Øyvind Grøn from the Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences and his co-author Torkild Jemterud demonstrate that the rotational motion in the universe is also subject to the theory of relativity. Imagine a person at the North pole who doesn't believe the Earth rotates. As she holds a pendulum and can observe the stars in her telescope, she remarks that the swinging plane of the pendulum and the stars rotate together. Newton, who saw the world as a classical physicist, would have pointed out that it is the Earth that rotates. However, if we assume the general principle of relativity is valid, the Earth can be considered as being at rest while the swinging plane of the pendulum and the night sky are rotating. In fact, the rotating mass of the observable part of the universe causes the river of space--which is made up of free particles following the universe's expansion--to rotate together with the stars in the sky. And the swinging plane of the pendulum moves together with the river of space.










https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 120254.htm




>>>>> However, IF WE ASSUME the general principle of relativity is valid .....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fk0RvzaHq_Q
Quote
Share

Joined: March 30th, 2013, 7:19 am

May 22nd, 2016, 1:41 pm #8




It has been one hundred years since the publication of Einstein's general theory of relativity in May 1916. In a paper recently published in EPJ Plus, Norwegian physicist Øyvind Grøn from the Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences and his co-author Torkild Jemterud demonstrate that the rotational motion in the universe is also subject to the theory of relativity. Imagine a person at the North pole who doesn't believe the Earth rotates. As she holds a pendulum and can observe the stars in her telescope, she remarks that the swinging plane of the pendulum and the stars rotate together. Newton, who saw the world as a classical physicist, would have pointed out that it is the Earth that rotates. However, if we assume the general principle of relativity is valid, the Earth can be considered as being at rest while the swinging plane of the pendulum and the night sky are rotating. In fact, the rotating mass of the observable part of the universe causes the river of space--which is made up of free particles following the universe's expansion--to rotate together with the stars in the sky. And the swinging plane of the pendulum moves together with the river of space.










https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 120254.htm




Hi AAF,

Hah - call that a snake? THIS is a snake :


Actually, my son’s Jungle Python. OK, admittedly the taipan would have it for breakfast, but still he looks cool

But forget the taipan’s ….. Got this shared to me today :

Even the birds in Australia want you dead !

Heh … the Aussie tourist board probably want me dead by now ! so I’d better remind everyone that yes, we do have no end of loveable and amazing creatures over here as well
AAF: In short, Einstein's argument, for relative rotation, must bite the dust and collapse on itself in utter disgrace and humiliation; and even this handy-dandy illustration by Colleague Ufonaut99, … could not save it:


The illustration showed perfectly well what I stated :
[S_1 having] EXACTLY the same position means that there is NO up/down motion being seen.

NO up/down motion being seen means NO "circular obit in the sky".

NO circular orbit in the sky means that your entire argument falls apart.
The fact that you never addressed this, nor found any flaw in the list of steps from first principles, except by just repeating the claim, hardly means that the illustration failed. So I stand by my last post in that thread :
Ufonaut: If there was ANY validity to [your] claim, then you would have been able to find a flaw in the working out of that list of steps, … if there is no flaw in steps up to 31, then the final step 32 conclusion is valid, which means that your arguments are not 

So your challenge is simple : If you want to continue the discussion, then find a flaw in those steps that we can further discuss, because otherwise your claims remain empty. 
The challenge is still open ... if you want to take it up
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 30th, 2013, 7:19 am

May 22nd, 2016, 2:30 pm #9




It has been one hundred years since the publication of Einstein's general theory of relativity in May 1916. In a paper recently published in EPJ Plus, Norwegian physicist Øyvind Grøn from the Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences and his co-author Torkild Jemterud demonstrate that the rotational motion in the universe is also subject to the theory of relativity. Imagine a person at the North pole who doesn't believe the Earth rotates. As she holds a pendulum and can observe the stars in her telescope, she remarks that the swinging plane of the pendulum and the stars rotate together. Newton, who saw the world as a classical physicist, would have pointed out that it is the Earth that rotates. However, if we assume the general principle of relativity is valid, the Earth can be considered as being at rest while the swinging plane of the pendulum and the night sky are rotating. In fact, the rotating mass of the observable part of the universe causes the river of space--which is made up of free particles following the universe's expansion--to rotate together with the stars in the sky. And the swinging plane of the pendulum moves together with the river of space.










https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 120254.htm




Hi Jaquecusto,

Not sure what point you’re trying to get at here. When I first saw the diagrams, I thought you were trying to claim that Relativity would incorrectly equate the two situations because they have the same relative rotation between top and disc. Such a claim would be false, of course, since the situations are not symmetrical - after all, the rotating top (in the first picture) experiences acceleration (and so centrifugal force, etc), that the stationary one does not.
Apparently, in this second case, the spinning top will fall. In this situation the spinning top is stopped and does not produce the gyroscopic effect.
But if the universe is spinning except the top, what will happen?
If the universe is spinning except the top, then the top will feel the inertial drag … the acceleration … from the universe. You guessed it - that’s the first picture, so the top does not fall.

Don’t get caught up with incorrect picture about “the universe is spinning”. As per the discussion in the other thread, it’s really the relative rotation between the object and the universe that we’re talking about. After all, a second top could be spinning at a different rate, and we’d also be talking about the universe spinning around it. Clearly, the universe itself could not be spinning at different rates, simply because of a couple of tops
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: March 30th, 2013, 7:19 am

May 22nd, 2016, 2:40 pm #10




It has been one hundred years since the publication of Einstein's general theory of relativity in May 1916. In a paper recently published in EPJ Plus, Norwegian physicist Øyvind Grøn from the Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences and his co-author Torkild Jemterud demonstrate that the rotational motion in the universe is also subject to the theory of relativity. Imagine a person at the North pole who doesn't believe the Earth rotates. As she holds a pendulum and can observe the stars in her telescope, she remarks that the swinging plane of the pendulum and the stars rotate together. Newton, who saw the world as a classical physicist, would have pointed out that it is the Earth that rotates. However, if we assume the general principle of relativity is valid, the Earth can be considered as being at rest while the swinging plane of the pendulum and the night sky are rotating. In fact, the rotating mass of the observable part of the universe causes the river of space--which is made up of free particles following the universe's expansion--to rotate together with the stars in the sky. And the swinging plane of the pendulum moves together with the river of space.










https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 120254.htm




Hi Heisenberg "top of iceberg",

Yep, the Sagnac effect is perfectly consistent with SR/GR.

One thing that many anti-relativists seem to forget, though, is that the Sagnac effect totally disproves Emission theory - that is, the idea that the speed of light is dependent on it's source. In fact, that's why Georges Sagnac came up with the experiment in the first place
Quote
Like
Share