Original article, here: High Speed Motion and an Increase in Mass debunked
http://w w w.feandft.com/high-speed-motion-and-an-increase-in-mass-debunked/
High Speed Motion and an Increase in Mass debunked
“Einstein’s theory of high speed motion (that is, his mathematical expression and his interpretation thereof) is accepted as having been “confirmed by a large number of experiments,” and it is currently part of the dogma of conventional physics. The truth is, however, that those experiments, no matter how great their number may have been, or how conclusive their results, have confirmed only the mathematical aspects of the theory. The point that now needs to be recognized is that the speed limitation does not come from these confirmed mathematics; it comes from the untested interpretation…
The Twin Paradox Absurdity
If Einstein’s assumption that the mass varies with the speed is valid, then the mass of a moving object reaches infinity at the speed of light. A greater speed is thus impossible. But this is only one of the possible interpretations of the mathematics (which he based his theory upon), and neither Einstein nor anyone else has produced any tangible evidence to support this interpretation. New “tests of Einstein’s theory” are continually being reported, but they are all tests of the mathematics of the theory, not tests of the theory…
The findings of the scalar motion investigation agree with the mathematical expression of this theory of Einstein’s, as they must do, since physical facts do not disagree with other physical facts, but they indicate that he made the wrong guess when he chose mass as the variable quantity in the acceleration equation. It is a decrease in the effective force that accounts for the decrease in acceleration at high speeds, not an increase in the mass…
This casual acceptance of the interpretation by the physicists has placed a roadblock in the way of gaining an understanding of phenomena in which speeds greater than that of light are involved. Since, as we have found, the decrease in acceleration is due to a reduction in the effective force of the electric charge, there is nothing in the mathematical relations that would prevent acceleration to higher speeds where means of applying greater forces are available (stellar and galactic explosions for example). This conclusion, reached by correcting the interpretation of Einstein’s equation, without affecting the equation itself, is the same conclusion that we reached when we subjected the experimental results to a critical consideration. The mathematics of Einstein’s theory describe the process of acceleration by means of a one–dimensional (electric) force. They do not apply to the maximum possible acceleration by other means”. (The Neglected Facts of Science, Scalar Motion, Chapter 4)
“The electrons and other particles employed in the experiments can probably be taken as representative of matter in general, but there is certainly no adequate justification for assuming that the limitations applying to electrical processes are equally applicable to physical processes in general. What the experiments demonstrate, therefore, is not that it is impossible to accelerate physical objects to speeds in excess of that of light, but that it is impossible to do so by electrical means. Inasmuch as we have found, in the preceding pages, that electrical processes are confined to the one dimension of motion that can be represented in the spatial reference system, the results of this present investigation are consistent with this more limited conclusion. They do not, however, preclude acceleration to higher speeds by some other process, such as, for example, the sudden release of large quantities of energy by a violent explosion…
Absolute Stellar Oblation witnessed as electrical vortices bore through both Poles to unwind a Star to it’s death via it’s equator, so that it may be “born again” as other Stars
Turning now to the current theoretical view of the situation, Newton’s Second “Law” of Motion, F = ma, or a = F/ m, which is the form that enters into the present discussion, is a definition, and therefore independent of the physical circumstances. It follows that the observed decrease in acceleration at high speeds must be due either to a decrease in the force, F, or to an increase in the mass, m, or both. There is nothing in the experimental situation to indicate which of these alternatives is the one that actually occurs, so when Einstein formulated his theory of high speed motion he had to make what was, in essence, a blind choice. However, charge is known to exist only in units of a uniform size, and therefore has a somewhat limited degree of variability, while mass is much more variable. For this reason a variation in the mass at high speeds appeared to be the more likely alternative, and it is the one that Einstein selected”. (The Neglected Facts of Science, Scalar Motion, Chapter 4)
Here we have again the claim, that a particle would attain infinite mass by being accelerated to the speed of light. Does anyone else remember how their stomach churned in total disbelief and nausea as the instructor who was parroting this lie to them with great certainty, tried to force this ugly and impossible idea into their young and still pure minds?
Because einstein made a blind choice and assumed mass increased, instead of the force becoming less effective, he sent the entire investigation into a blind alley where speeds in excess of light are artificially impossible. (Which greatly benefits the owners of the means of contemporary energy production, otherwise known as energy barons and the current handlers of the greatly hated shrub administration).
Length Contraction, Mass Increase and Time dilation for dummies
“Stating that the einstein theory is erroneous in many respects, Dr. Tesla stated as early as 1900, in his patent 787,412, that the current of his transmitter passed over the surface of the Earth with a speed of 292,830 miles a second. According to einstein the highest possible speed is 186,300 miles a second.
Tesla indicated knowledge of speeds several times greater than light and had apparatus designed to project so-called electrons with a speed equal to twice that of light.
Tesla disagreed with the part of the einstein theory which states that the mass of an object increases with it’s speed. The mass of a body is unalterable, contended Dr. Tesla, according to the article, ‘otherwise energy could be produced from nothing, since kinetic energy acquired in the fall of a body would be greater than that necessary to lift it a small velocity’.” (The Literary Digest, November 7th, 1931)
Tesla interviewed on his birthday, was quoted in the following: “The theory of relativity, he described as a mass of error and deceptive ideas violently opposed to the teachings of great men of science of the past and even to common sense. ‘The theory’, he said, ‘wraps all of these errors and fallacies and clothes them in magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom the ignorant people take for a king. It’s exponents are very brilliant men, but they are meta-physicists rather than scientists. Not a single one of the relativity propositions has been proved (outside of the math).” (New York Times, July 11th, 1935)
“Mass and Energy differ only in dimensions; that is, energy is the reciprocal of one-dimensional velocity while mass is the reciprocal of three-dimensional velocity. This mass-energy relation does not mean that a quantity of energy always has a certain mass associated with it; on the contrary it indicates that reciprocal velocity exists either as mass or as absolute momentum, or as absolute energy, depending on the effective dimensions, not as all three or any two simultaneously. Mass is equivalent to energy only when and if it is transformed from the one condition to the other and the mass-energy equation merely gives the (theoretical) mathematical equivalents in the event of such a conversion.
In other words, an existing quantity of energy does not correspond to any existing mass but to the mass that would exist if the energy were actually converted into mass. For these reasons einstein’s hypothesis of an increase in mass accompanying increased velocity cannot be accepted”. (The Structure of the Physical Universe, Chapter XXXII)
The Crab Nebula, Type II Supernova remnant, From 1054 A.D., Vortex Jets (chaotic filaments), Fractals and Atomic Vortices
Tesla also debased einstein’s notion of an “increase of mass” due to acceleration in the following statement: “The kinetic and potential energy of a body is the result of motion and determined by the product of it’s mass and the square of it’s velocity. Let the mass be reduced and the energy is diminished by the same properties. If it be reduced to zero, the energy is likewise zero for any finite velocity.” (New York Sun, July 12th, 1937)
“The kinetic energy increment could increase the mass only if it were actually converted to mass by some appropriate process, and in that event it would cease to be kinetic energy; that is, the corresponding velocity would no longer exist. Actually this hypothesis of einstein’s is inconsistent with his concept of the conversion of mass into energy, regardless of the point of view from which the question is approached. Mass cannot be a by-product of kinetic energy and also an entity that can be converted into kinetic energy; the two concepts are mutually exclusive…
This hypothesis was formulated as a means of accounting for the otherwise unexplained decrease in acceleration at very high velocities (in particle accelerators), but in the system now being developed from the Fundamental Postulates this phenomenon is found to be due to the vanishing of (the electro-magnetic) force as velocity approaches unity, rather than to any variation in mass”. (The Structure of the Physical Universe, Chapter XXXII)
“In astronomy the currently accepted ideas are almost completely wrong, because of the strangely unquestioning acquiescence in Einstein’s assumption that the experimentally observed decrease in acceleration at high speeds is due to an increase in mass, and that speeds in excess of that of light are therefore impossible.
…As has been demonstrated in the course of the development of the theory of the universe of motion (The Reciprocal System of Theory), the speed of light is a limit applying only to one-dimensional motion in space, and there are vast regions of the universe in which motion takes place in time, or in multi-dimensional space. Most of these are inaccessible to (sensory) observation from our position in the universe, but some of the entities and phenomena of these regions do have observable effects on the material sector (Pulsars and Quasars), the sector in which we make our observations”. (The Universe of Motion, Chapter 10, )