Enter the content which will be displayed in sticky bar


The Incorrectness of The Classical Principle of Equivalence, And The Proper Principle of Equivalence, Which is How Ever, Not Necessary For A Theory of Gravitation

Tolga Yarman
Metin Arik
Alexander L. Kholmetskii
Year: 2008
In this article, we show that the analogy between the effect of acceleration and the effect of gravitation, making up the Classical (C) Principle of Equivalence (PE), which is the basis of the General Theory of Relativity (GTR), constitutes a non-conform analogy, i.e. it does not embody a one to one correspondence between the two worlds coming into play. This will constitute a starting point to show the inadequacy of the Classical Principle of Equivalence (CPE). On the basis of a quantum mechanical theorem previously established, we prove that, the CPE is further inaccurate. For one thing, it happens to constitute a violation of the law of energy conservation. More specifically, owing to the law of energy conservation, broadened to embody the mass & energy equivalence of the Special Theory of Relativity (STR), next to the usual mass dilation due to the movement in question, the force field too, is to alter the rest mass subject to an accelerational motion (which happens something totally overlooked by the GTR). This assertion is well compatible with the recent disclosure that the time dilation displayed by a rotating object is much greater than the one classically predicted on the basis of just the Lorentz factor, associated with the motion. Thence, we establish a Proper PE. The approach we present, leaves unnecessary the CPE, thus the GTR, and yields a whole new theory about gravitation, along with all end results of this theory, up to a third order Taylor expansion, yet with no singularity (thus, no black holes), and with an incomparable ease, with a different metric too. Our approach in fact is (not restricted to gravitation, thus is) extendable to all fields.