Comments on: The Ontological Einstein – Minipaper https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/10/the-ontological-einstein-minipaper Safeguarding Humanity Wed, 10 Oct 2012 20:37:26 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8 By: Otto E. Rössler https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/10/the-ontological-einstein-minipaper#comment-155162 Wed, 10 Oct 2012 20:37:26 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=5413#comment-155162 I am trying to understand what you mean. Einstein, following Poincaré, was forced to combine space and time; so Minkowski could arrive at his absolute “world” (not “space” or “time”).
I have to say that the way you look at it above is very original. Nevertheless I would be very surprised if you are able to arrive at new quantitative predictions. I never saw a replacement of special relativity by a better theory so far.

]]>
By: wavettore https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/10/the-ontological-einstein-minipaper#comment-155156 Wed, 10 Oct 2012 19:01:59 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=5413#comment-155156 Incapable to recognize the issue of simultaneity Einstein believed that Time was the same while Space instead had changed. The bureaucracy of traditional science prevents the recognition of any event unless certain criteria are first met. The problem is precisely in the compilation of these “laws” or criteria introduced by a few scientists in the name of all science. This antiquated approach results in a lack of progress.

As for the special theory of relativity (which denies all absolutes and meanings of truth), this regards the example of two beams of light hitting one same embankment of a railroad on two Points: Point A and Point B. In between the two there is also the middle point, Point M. If one train was running over that track then on the train we would also have Point A1 on the wagon of the train correspondent to above Point A and also one other corresponding Point B1 right above Point B. We would also have on the train the corresponding Point M1 above Point M. Einstein’s theory is that as for Point M (not moving because on the embankment) those two beams are simultaneous and equidistant instead for the passenger sitting on M1 and moving towards Point B1 (and also toward Point B) the two beams are not simultaneous because the beam in Point B1 is being approached by the moving train, therefore closer to M1. In this example, while Einstein’s concept of Time is rigidly kept unchanged in regard to the embankment instead the concept of Space is extended to also the next moment in Time when the traveler will move even if in that precise instant the traveler has not moved yet.

http://www.wavevolution.org/en/freethinking.html

]]>
By: Otto E. Rössler https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/10/the-ontological-einstein-minipaper#comment-154784 Wed, 03 Oct 2012 07:46:46 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=5413#comment-154784 Thank you for your important questiion, dear Benjamin:

“Ontological” — being true in an absolute (“being”) sense (ón, ontós in Greek means “being”) — is the opposite of relative. Einstein discovered behind the observer-relativity (or as an implication of it) an ontological level. He sometimes wondered whether he should not have abandoned the name“relativity” for his theory because it can be misleading.

]]>
By: Benjamin T. Solomon https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/10/the-ontological-einstein-minipaper#comment-154775 Wed, 03 Oct 2012 01:51:08 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=5413#comment-154775 Otto Rössler, why do you use the term ‘ontological’?

]]>