25. CRITIC of a GENERAL RELATIVITY THEORY (GRT)
Huge merit of the А. Einstein is that he has offered version of the
mechanism of a longrange action of a gravitational field (other serious
versions of the mechanism of action of a gravitational field does not exist at
all in science) as against of the Newton, for which one a longrange action of
a gravitational field and its infinite rate of propagation did not call doubts,
though he and did not uncover the mechanism of its action.
In the basis GRT the
principle of equivalence lies, on which one it is impossible action of a
gravitational field to distinguish from constant acceleration, with which one
the spectator is gone.
Here there is a not
superfluous quotation from the book: D.R. Merkin, Brief history of a classic
mechanics, "Physical and Mathematical literature", М., 1994, page 133, where the author
quotes work of the Einstein and supplies with her commenting.
"...Therefore at stateoftheart of our knowledge there are no basis to
consider, that the reference systems _{1} and _{2} in any relation
differ from each other, and in further we shall guess a full physical
equivalence of a gravitational field and relevant acceleration of a reference
system". In the further Einstein repeatedly returned to this problem,
changed an enunciating and designations, but the entity of main thought
remained former. Eventually, the words "a full physical equivalence"
were exchanged by words "a principle of equivalence"; this principle
together with others (we do not stop on them) lies in the basis of a general
theory of relativity (GRT). Before to pass to further, we shall make two
remarks.
а. The principle of
equivalence concerns only to gravitational fields and the is not spread to
other fields  circumstance, about which one forget some scientists.
b. In principle
equivalence are considered uniform accelerations, homogeneous gravitational
fields. It means that this principle has local character, fair for a rather
small part of space and restricted time".
Apparently, that the
limitation GRT by small area of space and short period brings to nothing its
practical usage.
Let's consider two
cases.
1. We moves with
constant by acceleration g=9.8 m/sec^{2} in the spacecraft at
the expense of infinite generosity of the sponsors ensuring us by combustible,
in spite of the fact that for maintenance of this constant acceleration it is
necessary to burn a progressively increased fuel because of relativistic
increase of mass of the spacecraft. It is uneasy to consider under the formula t=V_{t}/g,
that speed of light we "shall reach" rather fast  in 33 days. In 23
weeks we already can in hundreds miscellaneous ways determine that mass of all
ambient bodies is incremented.
2. We sit on a surface of the Earth
approximately in a homogeneous gravitational field and we attempt to determine
change of mass of surrounding objects. It is possible to wait though up to
Second Advent  anything to find out it will be not possible. This example
clean disclaims a principle of equivalence GRT. Nay: by uplifting on some
meters some body, we by any ways can not commit change of mass of this body and
at the same time easily we shall determine by modern instruments change of
intensity of a gravitational field.
New neoclassical
physics easily explains all experimental "affirming" GRT, such, as
the abnormal rotation of a perihelion of a Mercury, bending of light beams at
passage them near to massive bodies and red displacement in a radiation
spectrum released by massive bodies, as a photon, as well as any other
particle, has a gravitational charge.
"The
measurements, executed recently with pinpoint accuracy of the form of the Sun
have shown, however, that the Sun slightly oblate for poles and have small
convexity for equator. How to interpret results of these measurements, for the
present it is not so clear; if they are correct, it is necessary to introduce
to apparent value of precession rate of orbit of Mercury in one more correction
component 4" for centuries. The introduction of such correction would
baffle the consent between experiment and prediction of a general theory of
relativity. If will be established, that this new correction really is valid,
then the radical elaboration of the theory can be demanded". J.B. Marion,
Physics and the physical Universe, “World”,
"...The
displacements of positions of several hundreds stars were measured, and on the
average light deflection has appeared equal 2"; the general theory of
relativity forecasts for it value 1.75". Unfortunately, the accuracy of
these measurements makes only about 10 % and a series of results contradicts
each other, so it is impossible to consider the indicated measurements as final
affirming of the theory". J.B. Marion, Physics and the physical Universe,
“World”,
"In a general
theory of relativity is established, that the light quanta redden, when they
are spread from area greater on an absolute value of a gravity potential to
smaller, i.e. leave for a strong field of gravitation. For example, the photons
which are going from the Sun or in the other case, going bottomup in lab for a
surface of the Earth. The photons moving in laboratory experiment from the top
downward become violeter. Despite of a smallness of these effects, they are
measured". I.D. Novikov, Evolution of universe, "Science", М., 1983, page 54. "These
experiments do not represent check of a general theory of relativity, as the
prediction of gravitational displacement can be made already on the basis of
only one principle of equivalence (and it only one of postulates of the theory)
both ratio between mass and energy Е=mс^{2}". J.B. Marion, Physics and the physical
Universe, “World”,
Let's count up value
of gravitational red displacement on the basis of neoclassical notions. Mass of
a photon radiated from a surface of some star:
_{}
(25.1).
Energy which is
expended a photon on overcoming of a gravitational attraction of a star:
_{}
(25.2),
where M  mass
of a star, r_{0}  its radius, G  gravitational
constant. Same energy will change the frequency photon from n_{0} up to n:
_{}
(25.3).
Substituting (25.1)
in (25.2) and equating (25.3), we can find after some transformations
expression for a relative frequency change of a spectral line _{}. This expression is those:
_{} (25.4).
Substituting in
(25.4) numerical data for the Sun, we shall discover, that the red displacement
for it will make 2×10^{6}. It is possible in
(25.4) to express mass of a star through its volume and mean density:
_{}
(25.5),
where _{}
density. In this case it is interesting to count up, what there should be
"star" having nuclear density (10^{14} g/cm^{3}),
that it could not radiate photons (z=¥). Radius it
is received equal 570 kms, and mass is about peer to 40 masses of the Sun. I
address attention of the reader that in (25.4) there is absent a frequency of a
photon, and the red displacement is determined only in parameters of a star. On
this basis the alternate interpretation of the law Habble is possible (see
(25.5)): the red displacement of radiation of remote objects of the Universe is
stipulated by proportional increase of density or their sizes depending on
distance up to these objects. This interpretation allows introducing in the
essential correctives at operational use of the law Habble in calculations of
motion of remote objects of the Universe.
If a relative
frequency change to calculate under the formula _{}, from the formulas (25.1), (25.2) and (25.3)
we shall receive:
_{} (25.6).
The formulas (25.4),
(25.5) and (25.6) are approximate (since (25.2) is fair only at removal of a
photon on indefinitely large distance). The formula (25.6) coincides with
formula under the theory of the Einstein and is tested experimentally on red
displacement on a limb of the Sun (see, for example, O. Struve etc. Elementary
astronomy. М., 1967, page 427428). Thus, the red displacement of radiation from massive objects has not
the relation to GRT and SRT.
The precise
calculation of a gravitational frequency change of a photon can be executed on
the basis of the second
_{} (25.7),
where h 
Planck constant, C  speed of light. An equation (25.7)  second
_{}
(25.8).
Equating (25.7)
forces of a gravitational attraction, after some transformations, we shall
receive a differential equation for a photon. The solution of this equation for
a relative frequency change Z will be:
_{}
(25.9).
If r_{}, to resolved
an exponent in a series and to limit by two first terms of decomposition, we
shall receive (25.6).
New physics considers, that mass of bodies (gravitational charge) is
already there is their relativistic inert mass (see theory of elementary
particles), since it arises at circular move (from a point of view of orthodox
physics  with constant by a centripetal acceleration) neutrino in elementary
particles. Therefore inert and gravitational mass same and to speak about their
"equivalence" it is needless. Thus, the separation of mass on inert
and gravitational (experimentally is demonstrated, that they are peer with very
large accuracy) is an only scholastic problem, since gravitational mass as a
matter of fact is inert. In this connection, farfetched is also principle of
equivalence of these masses put by the А.
Einstein in the basis of a general theory of relativity. The relevant price and
most this theory (correct development of the theory which is coming from of a
postulate, that А=А should result: А=А and no more
that).
"Basically anywhere
does not follow, that mass creating field of gravitation, determines also
inertia that bodies. However experiment has shown, that inert and gravitational
mass are peer each other. This fundamental law of the nature termed as a
principle of equivalence, the А. Einstein has put in the basis of a general theory of relativity
(theory of gravitation). It is experimentally a principle of equivalence is
established with very large accuracy". Physics of a microcosm,
"Soviet encyclopedia", М., 1980, page 244. From this quotation it is visible, that, deliberately
whether or not, but there is a tangle between two "by principles of
equivalence". New physics by two arms polls for a principle of equivalence
of gravitational and inert mass, but categorically against "of a principle
of equivalence" in sense of an indistinguishability of a gravitational
field and motion of a body with acceleration. Last "principle" has
received a title "of a strong principle of equivalence".
The Einstein, when
speaks about equivalence of inert and gravitational mass means something
another. That to legalize the principle of equivalence, he views the
farfetched problem: whether the masses in the second



Fig 25.1
"According to a
general theory of relativity, free bodies, being in a timespace continuum of
the Riemann, moves with the relevant accelerations along geodetic lines, i.e.
along lines of the least curvature. Thus, the gravitation was reduced to property
of a timespace continuum that has given the basis to some scientists to term
GRT as the geometrical theory of gravitation. As already it was scored, the
One of ways of check
of conclusions GRT about contortion of space  time near to massive bodies is
the study of deviation of a light ray passing near to the Sun. One photo of a
sidereal palate make during solar eclipse, and another in halfyear of the same
segment of a sidereal palate. Then the photos mate and determine visible
displacement of stars. On a figure 25.1 the data received in 1922 of the
Campbell and Trumpler (a figure is borrowed from the book of the V.A. Fig 25.1
Acukovsky "Logical and
experimental fundamentals of a relativity theory", М., 1990, page 46).
The explanations of
rather grey areas of a figure will follow below.
Agrees GRT deviation
of light rays near to the Sun makes:
_{}
(25.10),
where _{} angle
of visible deflection of star, G  gravitational constant, M 
mass of the Sun, r_{s}  radius of the Sun, R  distance
from a light beam up to center of the Sun, c  speed of light. (Physics
of space, М., 1976,
page 211). The indicated authors have received on a limb of the Sun (at r_{s}=R)
value 1.^{"}72_{}0.11. The good coincidence with the theory is
stipulated by large desire of the authors to confirm GRT, since the described
method of check GRT can not neither confirm this theory, nor to deny it for the
following reasons (that concerns and to beam deflection of light under the
theory of the Newton).
1. Because of large brightness of a
corona of the Sun, the stars near to its limb are not visible and it is
necessary to extrapolate the data on a limb of a hyperbolic curve. As the
hyperbola has here steep branch which is going around in perpetuity, and the
apparent displacement have a wide scatter of values, on a limb it is easy to receive
any desirable displacement of a ray.
2. Both under the
theory GRT and under the theory of the



3. From a figure 25.1 it is visible,
that the part of the images of stars displaces "where it is
necessary"  from the Sun, the part of the images displaces in the counter
side, and the part generally does not displace anywhere, and the majority last
is in immediate proximity from the Sun. It is impossible to explain this fact
from stands GRT or the theories of the
The author agrees with an
official astronomy, that the explanation of results figured on a figure by 25.1
refraction of light on clouds of plasma in a corona of the Sun (extending down
to orbit of the Earth), is not convincing, since the refraction of a visible
light in a corona is inappreciable.
"The phenomenon of refraction
plays the relevant role in atmospheres of some planets, in particular of
Jupiter. Strangely enough, but it practically is incidental for light waves in
case of atmospheres of the Sun and stars. But for radio waves in range about 1
m index of refraction even of the external layers of the Sun, corona can appear
very large. The radio waves of metric range passing through a corona, very
strongly deviate the initial direction". O. Struve etc. Elementary
astronomy. М., 1967,
page 56.
Provisional arrangement and form of
clouds of plasma are figured on a figure 25.1 by grey colors. It is possible to
explain an apparent picture of visible deviation of a position of stars by full
internal reflection of light in clouds of plasma. This effect completely
greases a picture of a gravitational departure of light rays, and partially
boosts visible deviation of stars, since on the average in a direction on the
Sun the electron concentration in plasma is higher, than in other directions.
The additive less than in 1" suffices to reject contortion of space near
to the Sun. If the light beam from a star passes inside a cloud of plasma,
deviations is not watched. If the light beam passes near to boundary of a
cloud, where the density gradient of charged particles is boosted, the
deviation of a visible position of a star in a direction of a perpendicular
from a surface inside of a cloud is watched at the expense of full internal
reflection. Therefore deviations in a visible position of stars in this case
have the most miscellaneous directions.
"From (4) follows the phase
velocity of radio waves in plasma v_{ph}>c  speed of
light, that. As it is visible from the formula (4), electromagnetic waves with
frequency, smaller Langmuir (_{}<_{0e}), in plasma to be
spread can not. On the other hand, the electromagnetic waves with the greater
frequency, being spread in the side of increase of an electron concentration, test
full internal reflection just as light from boundary with matter possessing
smaller index of refraction. These features are relevant at research of
radiowaves propagation in a solar corona, interstellar gas and
ionosphere". Physics of space. М., 1976, page 426.
"The physical distinction of
active and quiet areas in a solar corona is, that electronic density at all
altitudes of coronal condensation approximately in 3 times is higher, than at
the same altitudes of a unperturbed corona. The ionized gas is focused in
different structural formations (tubes, arches etc.), which one form by
magnetic fields of the Sun, leaving in a corona. The fact of existence powerful
of coronal beams displays, that the influence of a field has an effect up to
distances in tens radiuses of the Sun". Physics of space. М., 1976, page 548.
Thus, the check GRT on deviation of
light rays of stars near to the Sun is not correct.
The more perspective method
represents not measurement of an angle of a gravitational aberration of a light
beam, and measurement of a relative frequency change of spectral lines of a ray
passing near to a massive body. More in detail to consider this problem, we
shall decide a problem about deviation of a trajectory of a photon under action
of an external force, directional perpendicularly trajectories of a photon.
On the second
_{} (25.11).



The computational scheme of impulses
of a considered case is figured on a figure 25.3, where _{} angle of
deflection. The second
_{}
(25.12).
Let's equate (25.11) and (25.12):
mdV+Vdm=hd_{}/C
(25.13).
As _{}, that _{}. Let's substitute in (25.13) and we shall
decide a received equation:
_{}
(25.14).
From a figure 25.3 it is visible,
that V/C=sina, at small angles Sin_{}, therefore:
_{}
(25.15).
From (25.15) it is visible, that the
external force increments frequency of a photon, since the additional impulse
imparts to it. From a figure 25.3: cos_{}=m_{0}/m,
i.e. trajectory of a photon under action of perpendicular force to deploy on 90^{0}
it is impossible, and mass of a photon under action of such force grows.
The overseeing by a relative
frequency change of light from a star at coating its by Sun is more usable to
conduct from space, since in this case "eclipse" of the Sun can be
organized on a long time. In process of approach of the solar disk the spectral
lines of a star should displace in a shortwave portion of the spectrum
pursuant to the theory of the Einstein:
_{}
(25.16)
or with the theory of the
_{}
(25.17),
where (_{}_{0})/_{} 
relative increase of frequency of light, _{} deviation angle of light
ray, M  mass of the Sun, G  gravitational constant, R 
distance from center of the Sun up to a ray. The similar experiment is much
more exact, since is not subject to influence of clouds of plasma, the relative
frequency change is measured with a splithair accuracy and the processing of
results is more comfortable, as the experimental points will formed an alone
hyperbola.
For check of gravitational red
displacement, which one for the Sun makes under the theory of the Einstein and
_{}
(25.18),
where R_{0}  radius
of the Sun, by SenJohn from an observatory Mount



The dotted straight line on a figure 25.4 corresponds to the formula (25.18).
On an ordinate axis the red displacement of Fraunhofer lines in a spectrum of
the Sun in recalculation on velocity on Doppler Effect is shown (it would be
better to point directly relative frequency change). On an abscissa axis
distance from center of the Sun up to its edge is put off.
On the greater part of the disk of
the Sun of displacement of frequency are small and are explained by official
physics by vertical flows of matter, which one compensates red displacement and
only for a limb of the Sun the displacement of frequency corresponds to the
theory, since for vertical flows in this case is not present Doppler component
in a direction to the spectator. The reduced data, apparently, convincingly
confirm the theory (only not clearly which  Einstein or



corresponds to experimental data more.
The experimental affirming of an
equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass is declared by official physics
by the convincing proof of validity of views of the Einstein, though this fact
has not the direct relation to conclusions GRT for two reasons: at first, it is
not a corollary, and initial hypothesis GRT with the subsequent not correct
gamble, secondly, this fact has not unambiguous connection with conclusions
GRT, since can be explained in another way, for example, as it is made by new
physics or how it was interpreted by the Newton, not making generally of any conclusions,
on the strength from conspicuity of equality of these masses.
GRT contradicts both first and second
On the Einstein all bodies moves in curved space, therefore, not
rectilinearly, and with acceleration, therefore, under action of force. Is
asked, whence they scoop energy for such motion  from curved space? The
general theory of relativity allots space and time with physical
characteristics (for example, the spacetime is bent). But to speak about space
there is a sense only then, when we have the bodies, arranged in it, and to
speak about time it is be worthwhile only then, when there are any changes.
The special theory of relativity considers that absolute space is not present,
and the general theory of relativity as a matter of fact accepts a concept of
absolute curved space  time. Where of the logic? If a bending relatively, the
masses of bodies calling this bending are relative also but it already full
nonsense, since mass of a body is absolute also it easily to measure. "In
a mechanics of the
In curved space  time the photons too should be moves on geodetic lines,
i.e. for the spectator the Universe should be introduced not uniformly by
filled matter, as it is visible directly, and from the majority of areas light
will not reach at all Earth while from some areas it is capable only to the
Earth and to be moves. Therefore spectator of the Universe of the Einstein
should see a pair of light spots on a background of a remaining completely
black palate. Indirectly it is possible to judge an inaccuracy GRT on the fact,
that perennial attempts of the Einstein to explain electrostatic interaction by
spacetime geometry (as all equations of this interaction are similar to a
gravitational interaction) have suffered full failure. "By showing, that
the gravitation can be viewed as geometrical property of space  time, bound with
its curvature (in GRT and remained vague: where the hen, and where an egg 
that is primary, curved space calling gravitation or mass calling a bending of
space  V.K.), he attempted to find it other geometrical characteristic, which
one could correspond to electric charge. Thus, in the searchings of way of
unification of these two forces of the nature the Einstein was grounded on
spacetime geometry". Fundamental structure of a matter,
"World", М.,
1984, page 174175.
The lag time of radio signal at radiolocation of Venus from time before
and after the moment of a top conjunction (Venus behind the Sun) was measured
with the purpose of check "deceleration of a course of time" in a
gravitational field of the Sun. A solid curve under the theory of the Einstein.
But till him the theories the speed of light is a stationary value, from what
the reference systems it did not measure. Apparently, that this velocity can
decrease only at a pass of light (in this case of radio waves) in some medium,
what the clouds of plasma, ejecting Sun is. It is possible to explain
observations if to admit a mean factor of a refractive of clouds of plasma from
the Sun all of n=1.000000125. The lag corresponds to
"increase" of distance at 30 kms. It is known, that the radio waves are
refracted in clouds of plasma going from the Sun. From simple geometrical
reasons follows, that the refractive of a radio beam on direct and return path
to a surface of Venus urges radio signal to pass superfluous not 30 kms, and
almost 8000 kms, if it are refracted on a limb of the Sun. If the refractive
happens in a corona of the Sun or further away, that, "superfluous"
distance decreases. In these conditions "coincidence" of experiment
with the theory of the Einstein does not confirm, and disclaims it. It is
better to keep track of by a frequency change of radio signal, which one under
the theory of the Einstein should decrease in a gravitational field of the Sun
because of "deceleration of a course of time" irrespective of, to
Venus or back radio signal is gone. "Blue" it at motion to the Sun
and "reddening" at motion to Venus is completely compensates on
return path to the Earth.
The notions SRT concerning rate of propagation of a gravitational field
are contradictory. On the one hand, with speed of light the changes of a
gravitational field are spread (gravity waves, which one, despite all
reasonable efforts only, and have not found out, assigning them very small
energy, though the gravitational interaction in space scales is great). On the
other hand, GRT considers the Universe indefinitely extended in time and space,
and the gravitational field except for as indefinitely extended generally is
difficult to itself for presenting. Therefore is received, that the
gravitational field in GRT, as well as in the theory of the
The Einstein in the general theory of relativity (GRT) all parameters of
the second
The logic GRT is
those:
1. Space is curved.
2. The body in this
space is moves on geodetic lines. As the body is gone not rectilinearly,
signifies, it is gone with acceleration, i.e. the force of a gravitation acts
on it.
3. The motion of a
body with acceleration is equivalent to increase of intensity of a
gravitational field.
4. To close this faulty logic
circle, it is necessary to admit, that the reason of a bending of space is the
presence in it of gravitational charges (masses).
If to accept on a faith these
statements, we at once shall meet with a violation of law of preservation of
energy because of a positive back coupling of listed points. Mass of all bodies
owes in this case spontaneously and unrestrictedly be incremented or to
decrease, since any body, bending space around of itself, will be moves
accelerated at growing rate, that will cause to increase of its mass and even
greater bending of space. It is necessary to a body to decrease speed of the
motion and here its acceleration will be diminished, that will cause at the end
to decreasing a bending of space and mass.
Here it is necessary to point for
one defect in the logic GRT. Reasoning about motion of bodies on geodetic lines
in curve space, at which one they have a centripetal acceleration, since moves
is curvilinear, we not advertise of that circumstance, that these reasoning
concern to the spectator located in Euclidean ("direct") space. If we
shall be in that space, as the moving body, for us it will be moves
"rectilinearly" without a centripetal acceleration. And if from
"curve" the spaces to watch motion of a body in a Eucledean space, we
again shall come to an error conclusion, that it is gone curvilinearly and has
a centripetal acceleration with all outflow conclusions GRT.
Thus, all conclusions SRT can be
received from the opposite backgrounds: absence of inertial reference systems, absolute
motion, the absolute speeds of light, i.e. that relativity, are termed as which
one the special and general theory of the Einstein does not exist. The
equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass is a not initial hypothesis (as
in the theory of the Einstein), and corollary of a constitution of elementary
particles of new physics. The experimental facts uniquely verifying the theory
of a gravitation of the Einstein miss. Therefore in the present moment we can
not confirm validity SRT and GRT.
GRT has arisen on the basis SRT,
therefore refusal from SRT simultaneously is refusal and from GRT.
To not tire any more reader, on it
we shall finish to a critic GRT, though it would be possible to write in this
occasion the whole book. It is important to us now to understand, that this
theory internally is contradictory. Instead of critic, it is much more
convincing to give the constitutive alternate theory, which one explains all
paradoxes, inconsistencies, experimental and observation facts. Such theory will
be given in the chapter dedicated problems of a cosmology. There it is
necessary still repeatedly to recall GRT.
Comments of the author to chapter 25. Paradoxes of
distorting of space  time.
The main idea of a general relativity theory is, that any body distorts
around of itself a spacetime, that, as the Einstein asserts, is the cause of a
gravitation. To agree an special relativity theory, the Einstein has accepted,
that the distorting of space  time is diffused with speed of light.
These notions result in listed under paradoxes, which one demonstrate,
that the basic idea of a general relativity theory is error.
1. Only at propagation of distorting of space  time with indefinitely
by a high speed center of distorting (the center of a gravitation) will
coincide a center of mass. At any other terminal velocity of propagation of
distorting of space  time this distorting will lag a little most driving body,
its motion therefore will become effective to brake, since the gravitation of a
body is biased from the body in the party inverse to motion a little.
Therefore motion of any space bodies is impossible.
2. The solar system is as a whole gone on galactic orbit with speed of
250 kms / sec, therefore all distortings of spaces  times called by the
members of a solar System lag in the party inverse to motion in a galaxy. It
results that the planets which have appeared at the front of the Sun come
nearer to the Sun, and appeared behind  leave from the Sun. In outcome the
eccentricity of orbits is augmented, and the semimajor axis of orbits are
marshaled in one direction  in a direction motions of a system in a galaxy.
Actually, all orbits of planets are stepbystep turned in the party of orbital
motion with miscellaneous speed, bound with inertia of a planet, specially
large for a Mercury, therefore semimajor axes of elliptical orbits are arranged
as a whole chaotically.
3. At distorting space  time there are no physical causes for anisotropic
distorting in miscellaneous directions. Therefore directions of planes of
orbits of the members of a solar System should be equiprobable in space,
however Solar System practically flat.
Space and
time the not physical objects, therefore can not have any properties, including
dimensional. Space are interspaces between bodies, and time  interspaces
between events. Dimensional have only physical objects, for example string is
onedimensional, the plane is twodimensional, and the orb is
threedimensional. The concept of space arises for a label of an interspace
between objects and in absence those it is not make sense. The concept of time
is similar arises for a label of an interspace between events and in absence of
events too it is not make sense.
If the interspaces between bodies are reduced, it is equivalent to
compression of a matter, and if are augmented, it uncompression of a matter.
Naturally, that the term «compression» is not equivalent to the term «density».
In itself it nor is physical object and has not any properties. As compression
of a matter, and it uncompression can not be indefinitely large, though this
and cannot assign a numerical characteristic. It is possible on another to
formulate: space is a rest of a matter. If the interspaces between events are
reduced, it is equivalent speed up of events, and if are augmented, it is
equivalent to deboosting of events. Naturally, that the term «speed up» or
«deboosting» is not equivalent to the terms «speed» or «acceleration».
Naturally also, that speed up or deboosting of events can not be indefinitely
large, though this cannot assign a numerical characteristic. It is possible on
another to formulate: the time is a motion of a matter.
If to
view properties, for example, concrete depending on numerous parameters at its
manufacturing, it is possible to enter conditional mathematical
multidimensional space of these parameters, in which one the strength of
concrete will vary in all measurements of this space. But it is necessary to
recognize, that the introduction of such space is an only mathematical method,
in a reality it does not exist.
Point
zerodimensional, two points create onedimensional space three points creates
twodimensional space. Four points generally create threedimensional space.
The further increase of number of points ad infinitum does not add dimensional.
As any actual physical object can be presented consisting from infinite number
of points, any physical object is always threedimensional. Mathematical
reflection of threedimensional of physical objects is the Cartesian
coordinates, where all three axes have identical dimensionality of distance.
The time is onedimensional and it is impossible to itself to present something
in coordinate system, where all three axes or even two axes have identical
dimensionality of time. In essence differ from objects processes, which one is
always manydimensional, as the set of the factors influences their passing.
Each of these factors can be presented as independent coordinate; therefore
conditional mathematical "space" of any process is manydimensional.
Any contortion of geometrical space or space of process mathematically is
equivalent to a bending of coordinate axes, which one on definition are
rectilinear. On this basis consideration of multidimensional space and its
contortion is nonsense both mockeries at physical and mathematical sense.
Let's
suspect that the orthodox notions about a capability of contortion of space and
time are correct. At any contortion there are local zones of stretching and
squeezing. If some body is moves in a zone of squeezed time or squeezed space,
it passes a particular section for more short time or for that the time passes
lengthier way. It is equivalent to increase of velocity of a body or its
kinetic energy, which one has arisen from anything. The similar reasoning for a
segment of spread space or time result in a conclusion that the energy of a
body without leaving a trace fades. Thus, the orthodox notions about properties
of space and time do not correspond to a scientific level since contradict an
energy conservation law.
25.2. Fourdimensional spacetime is a silly
fabrication
Space on sensible speculation is threedimensional, and the time is onedimensional.
The orthodoxes have managed to superpose these concepts as monster: a
spacetime. Therefore it is necessary to be disassembled, what represents this
monster.
The fourmeasurement object cannot be presented by human imagination and
it is exact outcome of evolution our brain reflecting only an objective
reality. However, it is possible to take advantage of that all three
orthogonal axes of space are equivalent and to not take into consideration any
of them. Then it is possible to esteem flat space with a time axis,
perpendicular this plane. Now we shall take any point of spacetime.
Apparently, that through this point it is possible to pass uncountable set of
planes and the time axis will be perpendicular any of these planes. From here
follows, that the time axis anywhere is not particularly directed, i.e. the
time is not a vector quantity and in fourmeasurement spacetime it does not
exist. But the time is not also scalar value, since the statement is senseless,
that in the given point of spacetime quantity of time can be more or less.
Thus, the time has not quantitative and qualitative characteristics (value and
direction), intrinsic to any physical object. Therefore to meter a Newtonian
time we can not and compelled to limit only by measurement of interspaces
between events. Here orthodoxes could object, that on their notions before Bing
Bang of time did not exist. My counterevidence is, that the Universe exists
eternally in time, therefore «beginning» or «end» has not. If we divided of the Siamese
twin  spacetime in twain, then it is possible to reason separately on space.
In any arbitrary point of space it nor has directions and values. Therefore we
are compelled to limit only by measurement of interspaces between bodies.
Process of measurement of space and time is absolutely identical. We affix a
rigid straight line a straightedge between two points of space or between two
events and we read out on a uniform scale interspaces in arbitrary units of
time or spacing interval. If the straightedge will be rubber or curve (such
straightedges the orthodoxes frequently use), our measurements and conclusions
from them will be always erratic.
Around of space and time the uncountable army of the theorists is feed.
Everyone attempts as much as possible to leave of tracks in these areas to
justify the salary. Therefore and henceforth there will be more and more absurd
theories on this subject. On inconsistencies, arising at it, the attentions do
not раy. For example, Stephen W. Hawking
all life is engaged in black holes. Naturally, that they do not remain in
initial interpretation, and Hawking permanently devises all their new
properties. Thus he permanently refers to a relativity theory, but under this
theory the gravitation is conditioned by exchange of gravitons, which one can
not move with superlight speed. This fact is ignored, and recently even
«vaporization» of black holes is professed at the expense of heat radiation and
radiation of particles, that contradicts the concept «of a black hole».
They for him that of a singularity with the zero size and infinite density, are
suddenly resulted extensive reasoning on a surface of a black hole. The poor
spirit of a