The True Nature of Einstein's Relativity - Revision history

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

2026-07-21T13:34:01Z

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

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:34, 21 July 2026
Line 6:		Line 6:
	\| published = 2012		\| published = 2012
	\| journal = [[Proceedings of the NPA]]		\| journal = [[Proceedings of the NPA]]
	\| volume = [[9]]		\| volume = 9
	\| num_pages = 5		\| num_pages = 5
	\| pages = 12-16		\| pages = 12-16

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

2026-07-21T11:29:54Z

Fill in keywords from the wiki's abstract records

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:29, 21 July 2026
Line 3:		Line 3:
	\| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6501.pdf Link to paper]		\| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6501.pdf Link to paper]
	\| author = [[Roger J Anderton]]		\| author = [[Roger J Anderton]]
			\| keywords = Einstein, Special Relativity, General Relativity
	\| published = 2012		\| published = 2012
	\| journal = [[Proceedings of the NPA]]		\| journal = [[Proceedings of the NPA]]

ClaudeBot: Remove stray backslash-escaped quotes (\' and \") left by an old import escaping bug

2026-07-20T03:39:51Z

Remove stray backslash-escaped quotes (\' and \") left by an old import escaping bug

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:39, 19 July 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Infobox paper		{{Infobox paper
	\| title = The True Nature of Einstein\'s Relativity		\| title = The True Nature of Einstein's Relativity
	\| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6501.pdf Link to paper]		\| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6501.pdf Link to paper]
	\| author = [[Roger J Anderton]]		\| author = [[Roger J Anderton]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-02T03:09:04Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:09, 1 January 2017
Line 18:		Line 18:
	[[Category:Scientific Paper\|true nature einstein 's relativity]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|true nature einstein 's relativity]]

	[[Category:Relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity\|true nature einstein 's relativity]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-01T18:29:52Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:29, 1 January 2017
Line 14:		Line 14:
	==Abstract==		==Abstract==

	In 1919 Einstein supposedly revolutionized physics. However, Einstein's calculation for light bending was based on Newtonian physics. So really in 1919 it was confirmation of Newtonian physics by Eddington. The News media prematurely jumped onto the story and misrepresented it as a new theory overthrowing Newtonian physics. This emphatically was not the case. Ideally the scientists should have debated Eddington's result before it being reported to the news media. But since the news media were now portraying it as revolution in physics, scientists were then banned from debating whether it was a new theory overturning Newtonian physics. Thus the News media misrepresentation of it being a new theory was allowed to continue along with the myth of Einstein's genius. With the adoption of general relativity then came the adoption of special relativity, but that theory was also really just a misrepresentation of Newtonian physics. There was in fact ? no evidence then and there is still no evidence now for Einstein's relativity to be a new theory of physics replacing Newtonian physics. An accident occurred in 1919 where the adoption of a new theory took place based on there being no evidence for it.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]		In 1919 Einstein supposedly revolutionized physics. However, Einstein's calculation for light bending was based on Newtonian physics. So really in 1919 it was confirmation of Newtonian physics by Eddington. The News media prematurely jumped onto the story and misrepresented it as a new theory overthrowing Newtonian physics. This emphatically was not the case. Ideally the scientists should have debated Eddington's result before it being reported to the news media. But since the news media were now portraying it as revolution in physics, scientists were then banned from debating whether it was a new theory overturning Newtonian physics. Thus the News media misrepresentation of it being a new theory was allowed to continue along with the myth of Einstein's genius. With the adoption of general relativity then came the adoption of special relativity, but that theory was also really just a misrepresentation of Newtonian physics. There was in fact ? no evidence then and there is still no evidence now for Einstein's relativity to be a new theory of physics replacing Newtonian physics. An accident occurred in 1919 where the adoption of a new theory took place based on there being no evidence for it.

			[[Category:Scientific Paper\|true nature einstein 's relativity]]

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

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-30T17:08:52Z

Imported from text file

New page

{{Infobox paper
| title = The True Nature of Einstein\'s Relativity
| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6501.pdf Link to paper]
| author = [[Roger J Anderton]]
| published = 2012
| journal = [[Proceedings of the NPA]]
| volume = [[9]]
| num_pages = 5
| pages = 12-16
}}

'''Read the full paper''' [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6501.pdf here]

==Abstract==

In 1919 Einstein supposedly revolutionized physics. However, Einstein's calculation for light bending was based on Newtonian physics. So really in 1919 it was confirmation of Newtonian physics by Eddington. The News media prematurely jumped onto the story and misrepresented it as a new theory overthrowing Newtonian physics. This emphatically was not the case. Ideally the scientists should have debated Eddington's result before it being reported to the news media. But since the news media were now portraying it as revolution in physics, scientists were then banned from debating whether it was a new theory overturning Newtonian physics. Thus the News media misrepresentation of it being a new theory was allowed to continue along with the myth of Einstein's genius. With the adoption of general relativity then came the adoption of special relativity, but that theory was also really just a misrepresentation of Newtonian physics. There was in fact ? no evidence then and there is still no evidence now for Einstein's relativity to be a new theory of physics replacing Newtonian physics. An accident occurred in 1919 where the adoption of a new theory took place based on there being no evidence for it.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]

[[Category:Relativity]]