 THE SCIENCE SITE

Questions from interested visitors, answered by Dr. V.

The following series of questions are from a person who has a basic interest in science and is trying to relate my theory with certain aspects of Einstein's theory. To submit similar questions, click here.

Q1: Hi Dr Weldon. I have been reading your book Secrets of the Atom. It is ok to ask some questions? In Einsteins General theory of relativity there are thought experiments about Elevators in Space where one is being accelerated upward with the same acceleration as that of gravity of the earth. It is stated that if you are in this elevator you cannot determine whether the force pushing you to the floor because of this acceleration is any different than a gravitational field. It seems it says that acceleration and matter have something in common. Also that inertial and gravitational mass are equivalent, is also part of this theory. Einstein says gravity is the curvature of spacetime. When I thought about the elevator going up to produce a gravitational field inside of it, I thought, ok, so if I am on the earth, standing, this is the same as that floor in the elevator pushing up on me. So what is causing the earth to be accelerating upward to push me downward to its surface? Is it
accelerating upward in all directions at 32ft/sec/sec? Or is the presence of the earths mass equivalent to this acceleration? Or is it the Spacetime curvature around the earth that holds me down at 32ft/sec/sec? This whole theory says uniform acceleration is relative, and this leads to a theory of gravity. How can such a curvature of Spacetime do this? Is Einstein wrong about this Spacetime curvature idea?

A1: The acceleration of an elevator in space is considered to be an "inertial force" (F = ma). The gravitational force that is exerted on us at the surface of the earth is thought to be a static force. Since we are revolving around the center of the earth once each day, there is an outward inertial force, and we should be flying out into space. However, the force of gravity holds to the center of the earth. If we dig a hole and drop into it, we are being acted on by the gravitational force at 32 ft/sec/sec. Matter and acceleration do have something in common, by virtue of the equation F = ma. As you can see by this equation, m = F/a, so the acceleration is inversely proportional to mass. Dr. Einstein and I part company in regard to his statement that inertial mass and gravitational mass are equivalent. Nevertheless, they are related. The curvature of space/time is a theory based on the Lorentz equations. My interpretation of these equations is somewhat different from that of Lorentz and Einstein. My theory is based on electrical forces, and the fields that they create when they move. I have shown that it is the shape of the field wave that exhibits curvature as it moves through space. The Minkowski relationship was also misinterpreted by Minkowski and Einstein. The Minkowki equation falls out of the antenna radiation wave equations, which is not simply a coincidence.

Q2: Why do the General Theory of Relativity Field equations predict the discrepancy in Mercury's orbit so accurately, if the theory is not correct? Also the bending of light around large masses, which has also been confirmed by measurements of star positions by the sun during eclipse? Also, I have read that Newtons equations of gravity fall out of the theory, as well as Maxwell's equations. If the theory is incorrect, how can this be? Also, in the Special theory, Einstein says the speed of light is an invariant, independent of the motion of the emitting source. Is this wrong too? Because the derivation of the equation E=mc[c] is based on this assumption!

A2: I haven't seen any documents that show that Maxwell's equations fall out of the Theory of Relativity. However, Maxwell's equations are invariant with respect to the Lorentz equation, and Lorentz's equations are fundamental to the Theory of Relativity. As to the speed of light (c), that was predicted first by Maxwell's equations. The theory of Relativity is compatible with the speed of light being constant. However, there was a basic assumption in the application of Maxwell's equations to electromagnetic radiation, in that the field wave is assumed to be spherical in shape. I have shown that this is not the case, and that the field wave moves in two directions simultaneously. In the radial direction, it does move at the speed of light, as is illustrated by the well known and proven electromagnetic radiation equations. However, the tangential component of velocity is unlimited with radius. Therefore, Einstein was only half right. The speed of light is therefore not invariant, although it appears so in the far field. While Einstein may have based his energy equation (E = mc^2) on this assumption, I was able to derive this energy equation, based only on known electromagnetic equations, in Chapter VI of "Secrets of the Atom" (in only 8 pages - - - see equation 21 on page 64).

Q3: I guess I need an illustration on this one: I don't know what the radial direction and tangential direction mean. And the far field.

A3: See pages 78-82 of "Secrets of the Atom", Figures IX-1 through IX-5. The atom is at the center of the graphs. The radial is the distance from the center of the graph. The tangential direction is the direction tangential to any radial. In other words, at 90 degrees to the radial. In space, the radials extend out into space indefinitely. As the radial rotates, the tangential velocity at points along the radial increase with the radial distance. Therefore, at some distance point, regardless of the speed of rotation, the speed of light will be attained. Further out on the radial, the speed of light is exceeded. Try to imagine holding a very light, stiff rod that is very long. Swing the rod in circles, and the outermost point on the rod will be traveling the fastest. So what happens? The force of the atmosphere will cause the rod to bend. A similar thing happens to transverse electromagnetic waves. That is what is plotted in the figure. The tranverse velocity increases with distance, but the distance between successive radial crossovers, at any given angle, remains constant. This constant characteristic is equivalent to the phenomenon of the constant speed of light, c. There are additional curves of this type in "The Secret of Gravity".

Go to page 2