Scientists, members of the educted public, and representatives of the academic community and the news media do not generally realize that the most reasonable interpretation of the famous Michelson-Morley experiment was that light was an active force and not radiant energy. The Lorenz transformation was not necessary for an explanatory basis for the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment, and there was no need at all for Einstein to formulate many of his assumptions under special relativity to explain the constancy of the alleged speed of light in vacuo, such as the effects of velocity on measuring rods and clocks.

Based upon his refusal to accept the results of the Michelson-Morley experiment showing light to be an active force, Einstein argued that the simultaneity of events was relative. But, his argument was based upon the assumption that light was radiant energy and not an active force. His argument was based on his famous example of two strokes of lighting at points A and B that would be simultaneous as to a railway embankment but not simultaneous as to a passenger on a train that was in the process of travel that included points A and B at the time of the strokes. However, the two strokes of lightning as active forces would be simultaneous to observers both on the embankment and on the train. The belief of classic physics in the simultaneity of events was a reasonable belief and clearly was not disproved by the Michelson-Morley experiment, with the argument used by Einstein being faulty.

The experiment used two mirrors so arranged that on a rigid body that their reflecting surfaces faced each other. Assuming that light is radiant energy, a ray of light would require a definite time T to make the round trip between the mirrors, if the system is at rest as to the ether. However, by calculation, it was determined that a slightly different timeT` would be required to pass from one mirror to the other and back again, if the body, together with the mirrors, were moving relativiely to the ether. Moreover, it was also shown by calculation that for a given velocity v with reference to the ether, this T` is different when the body is moving perpendicularly to the plans of the mirrors than when the motion is parallel to these planes. The estimated time difference between these two times is exceedingly small, and in the experiment the time difference should have been clearly detectable. The experiment, however, gave a negative result.

The result should have been interpreted as establishing light is an active force and not radiant energy. If light was active energy, T` would be the same as T and T` would not be different whether ther presupposed motion was perpendicular or parallel to the plans of the mirrors. The commitment of scientists to the presupposition that light was radiant energy and that light travels from one point to another was so strong that the fact that the experiment established light as an active force could not be accepted.

Scientists then engaged in what they often do when a presupposition is disproved: They formulate new presuppositions, which lack any evidentiary basis, to explain the negative results. H.A. Lorentz made the presupposition that the form of the electron experiences a contraction in the direction of the electron`s motion. No reason was given for the contraction other than the motion itself gave rise to the contraction. A formula was set forth to determine the contraction, with the contracted length being proportional to the square root of one minus v squared divided by c squared, with c being the velocity of light in vacuo and v being the velocity measured in the experiment.

Einstein himself recognized that the Lorentz hypothesis was not justifiable by electrodynamic facts, but accepted the Lorentz hypothesis because he believed that as a law of motion it was confirmed with great precision. Since the calculated velocity of light is extrapolated from the time it takes for light`s manifestation to arise between manifestations of interrelated active forces, the assumption that light is radiant energy gave rise to a presupposed and mythical velocity that, in turn, was modified by the Lorentz transformation. The Lorentz Transformation instead of leading to the calculation of the velocity of light as radiant energy leads, in effect, to a measure of an active force that is proportional to the improperly measured velocity divided by the assumed velocity of light in vacuo.

Many persons are confused by what Einstein meant by his principle of relativity in a restricted sense applicable to his theory of special relativity but not to his theory of general relativity. The principle of relativity is to the effect that the laws of nature are the same in co-ordinate systems going at a uniform rates of velocity with one another. In other words, where one co-ordinate system can be transformed to another co-ordinate system, the laws of nature are the same. For Einstein to formulate his theory of special relalivity, he needed the Lorentz transormation in order to transform velocity in one co-ordinate system to the velocity measured in another co-ordinate system. Special relativity ignores gravity and acceleration and its conclusions are only applicable to co-ordinate system assumed not to have forces leading to acceleration and gravity. The genius of Newton and Einstein was in their ability to abstract from the complexity of the manifested universe and to keep many things constant in order to get a handle on things to make applicable commutative mathematics and increased control over matter.

In special relativity space is Euclidean and the velocity in invariable. Under general relativity the velocity is variable and space is non-Euclidean. They are different theories that are based upon different premises and that lead to very different conclusions. Yet, many popularizers of Einstein`s theories, apparently based upon their own ignorance, have misinformed the general public as to relativity. For example, Einstein never said, and he was too bright to have said, that if you were a passenger on a space ship going at a speed approaching the speed of light, and return to Earth fifty years later, you would have aged very slowing but your children and grandchilden would be very old on your return. The example is the improper application of special relatuvity conclusions to a general relativity example. You cannot properly use the conclusions from a theory that does not take into consideration gravity and acceleration to an example involving acceleration from the planet Earth and deceleration upon returning to the planet Earth.

Under General Relativity the determinations related to the perihelion of Mercury differs slightly from determinations based under Newtonian mechanics and Newton`s law of gravitation. According to general relalivity, a ray of light will experience a curvature of its path when passing through a gravitational field, with the curvature being similar to that path of a body projected through a gravitional field. As a result, we should expect that a ray of light passing close to a heavenly body would be deviated towards that body. This assumption can be tested by a photographic registration of stars during a total eclipse of the Sun. During a total eclipse of the sun the predicted effect did take place.

Einstein assumption that there is such a thing as radiant energy is false. The field has not established the existence of radiant energy. The field is an oscillating unit of manifestation whose dimensions is that of potential rather than an energy. It may result in the energy-less transport of energy but it is not energy itself. Mass is not convertible into energy. Einstein confused an active force that can transmitt energy with radiating energy. His formula is not false but the conception underlying the formula is faulty.

Postulates and Working Hypotheses

Background and Underlying Premises

� Wilson Ogg