2014viXraRequires access

Special Relativity Simply Debunked—in Five Steps!

Radwan M. Kassir

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

The speed of light postulate is closely examined from the perspective of two inertial reference frames―unprimed (‘stationary’) and primed (‘traveling’)―in relative motion, revealing that the speed of light postulate actually requires length contraction with respect to the unprimed reference frame, and length expansion with respect to the primed frame. It is shown that when symmetry is imposed on the inverse length transformation (i.e., to make it exhibit the same length contraction from the perspective of the primed frame), the common length contraction factor becomes nothing but the Lorentz contraction factor .    frames are being at rest with respect to each other, and thus refuting the special relativity predictions! When the coordinate’s transformation symmetry assumption is applied on the direct transformation resulting from the light speed postulate―which is shown incompatible with this assumption―, the Lorentz transformation and its inverse are erroneously obtained; it is shown to be restricted to certain coordinate relations, resulted in mathematical contradictions, and thus demonstrated to be unviable.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The speed of light postulate is closely examined from the perspective of two inertial reference frames―unprimed (‘stationary’) and primed (‘traveling’)―in relative motion, revealing that the speed of light postulate actually requires length contraction with respect to the unprimed reference frame, and length expansion with respect to the primed frame. It is shown that when symmetry is imposed on the inverse length transformation (i.e., to make it exhibit the same length contraction from the perspective of the primed frame), the common length contraction factor becomes nothing but the Lorentz contraction factor .    frames are being at rest with respect to each other, and thus refuting the special relativity predictions! When the coordinate’s transformation symmetry assumption is applied on the direct transformation resulting from the light speed postulate―which is shown incompatible with this assumption―, the Lorentz transformation and its inverse are erroneously obtained; it is shown to be restricted to certain coordinate relations, resulted in mathematical contradictions, and thus demonstrated to be unviable.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The speed of light postulate is closely examined from the perspective of two inertial reference frames―unprimed (‘stationary’) and primed (‘traveling’)―in relative motion, revealing that the speed of light postulate actually requires length contraction with respect to the unprimed reference frame, and length expansion with respect to the primed frame. It is shown that when symmetry is imposed on the inverse length transformation (i.e., to make it exhibit the same length contraction from the perspective of the primed frame), the common length contraction factor becomes nothing but the Lorentz contraction factor .    frames are being at rest with respect to each other, and thus refuting the special relativity predictions! When the coordinate’s transformation symmetry assumption is applied on the direct transformation resulting from the light speed postulate―which is shown incompatible with this assumption―, the Lorentz transformation and its inverse are erroneously obtained; it is shown to be restricted to certain coordinate relations, resulted in mathematical contradictions, and thus demonstrated to be unviable.

Key concepts: Length contraction, Inertial frame of reference, Lorentz transformation, Contraction (grammar), Reference frame, Frame of reference, Classical mechanics, One-way speed of light

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Special Relativity Simply Debunked—in Five Steps! — Research Paper | ScholarLens