Experimental Disproof of Special Relativity - Revision history

ClaudeBot: fix apostrophes lost to the character-encoding bug (Einstein?s -> Einstein's); URLs left untouched

2026-07-22T13:03:04Z

fix apostrophes lost to the character-encoding bug (Einstein?s -> Einstein's); URLs left untouched

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:03, 22 July 2026
Line 12:		Line 12:
	==Abstract==		==Abstract==

	According to Einstein, Special Relativity Theory (SRT) is valid for inertial reference frames in constant relative translation. But such a condition is never fulfilled in nature, where curved paths and accelerations are everywhere present. This situation implies questions that are devastating for SRT; any answer at all is fatal to SRT and to the Lorentz transformations (LT?s) it implies. Furthermore, comparative analysis of classical optical experiments and other ?relativistic? phenomena reveals arbitrariness and confusion about the experimental validation of SRT. Actually, what has been experimentally established is an unclear amalgam of SRT and general relativity theory (GRT). The foundations of both theories are thus brought into question.		According to Einstein, Special Relativity Theory (SRT) is valid for inertial reference frames in constant relative translation. But such a condition is never fulfilled in nature, where curved paths and accelerations are everywhere present. This situation implies questions that are devastating for SRT; any answer at all is fatal to SRT and to the Lorentz transformations (LT's) it implies. Furthermore, comparative analysis of classical optical experiments and other ?relativistic? phenomena reveals arbitrariness and confusion about the experimental validation of SRT. Actually, what has been experimentally established is an unclear amalgam of SRT and general relativity theory (GRT). The foundations of both theories are thus brought into question.

	[[Category:Scientific Paper\|experimental disproof special relativity]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|experimental disproof special relativity]]

	[[Category:Relativity\|experimental disproof special relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity\|experimental disproof special relativity]]

ClaudeBot: infobox: unlink bare volume/issue numbers (removes redlinks to numeric titles)

2026-07-21T13:30:04Z

infobox: unlink bare volume/issue numbers (removes redlinks to numeric titles)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:30, 21 July 2026
Line 5:		Line 5:
	\| published = 1998		\| published = 1998
	\| journal = [[Galilean Electrodynamics]]		\| journal = [[Galilean Electrodynamics]]
	\| volume = [[9]]		\| volume = 9
	\| number = [[2]]		\| number = 2
	\| pages = 23-26		\| pages = 23-26
	}}		}}

ClaudeBot: Fill in keywords from the wiki's abstract records

2026-07-21T11:27:51Z

Fill in keywords from the wiki's abstract records

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:27, 21 July 2026
Line 2:		Line 2:
	\| title = Experimental Disproof of Special Relativity		\| title = Experimental Disproof of Special Relativity
	\| author = [[Antonis Agathangelidis]]		\| author = [[Antonis Agathangelidis]]
			\| keywords = special relativity theory, Lorentz transformations, General Relativity, SRT
	\| published = 1998		\| published = 1998
	\| journal = [[Galilean Electrodynamics]]		\| journal = [[Galilean Electrodynamics]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-02T02:31:56Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:31, 1 January 2017
Line 15:		Line 15:
	[[Category:Scientific Paper\|experimental disproof special relativity]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|experimental disproof special relativity]]

	[[Category:Relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity\|experimental disproof special relativity]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-01T17:23:41Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:23, 1 January 2017
Line 11:		Line 11:
	==Abstract==		==Abstract==

	According to Einstein, Special Relativity Theory (SRT) is valid for inertial reference frames in constant relative translation. But such a condition is never fulfilled in nature, where curved paths and accelerations are everywhere present. This situation implies questions that are devastating for SRT; any answer at all is fatal to SRT and to the Lorentz transformations (LT?s) it implies. Furthermore, comparative analysis of classical optical experiments and other ?relativistic? phenomena reveals arbitrariness and confusion about the experimental validation of SRT. Actually, what has been experimentally established is an unclear amalgam of SRT and general relativity theory (GRT). The foundations of both theories are thus brought into question.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]		According to Einstein, Special Relativity Theory (SRT) is valid for inertial reference frames in constant relative translation. But such a condition is never fulfilled in nature, where curved paths and accelerations are everywhere present. This situation implies questions that are devastating for SRT; any answer at all is fatal to SRT and to the Lorentz transformations (LT?s) it implies. Furthermore, comparative analysis of classical optical experiments and other ?relativistic? phenomena reveals arbitrariness and confusion about the experimental validation of SRT. Actually, what has been experimentally established is an unclear amalgam of SRT and general relativity theory (GRT). The foundations of both theories are thus brought into question.

			[[Category:Scientific Paper\|experimental disproof special relativity]]

	[[Category:Relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-30T15:29:47Z

Imported from text file

New page

{{Infobox paper
| title = Experimental Disproof of Special Relativity
| author = [[Antonis Agathangelidis]]
| published = 1998
| journal = [[Galilean Electrodynamics]]
| volume = [[9]]
| number = [[2]]
| pages = 23-26
}}

==Abstract==

According to Einstein, Special Relativity Theory (SRT) is valid for inertial reference frames in constant relative translation. But such a condition is never fulfilled in nature, where curved paths and accelerations are everywhere present. This situation implies questions that are devastating for SRT; any answer at all is fatal to SRT and to the Lorentz transformations (LT?s) it implies. Furthermore, comparative analysis of classical optical experiments and other ?relativistic? phenomena reveals arbitrariness and confusion about the experimental validation of SRT. Actually, what has been experimentally established is an unclear amalgam of SRT and general relativity theory (GRT). The foundations of both theories are thus brought into question.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]

[[Category:Relativity]]