Escaping From Einstein's Amazing Mind Part 1

“Einstein’s theory of relativity is a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king… its exponents are brilliant men, but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists.”

Nikola Tesla

Did this mind really get rid of the Aether as claimed?

"It depends on which relative time space Einstein you ask, man. It's like, all relative,dude..."

Is Einstein a thought dream machine genius or an author of brainteasing puzzles?


"Einstein's relativity work is a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king... its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists."   Nikola Tesla   New York Times (11 July 1935)

Special Relativity vs General Relativity

Einstein contradicts his prior unfounded ad hoc assumptions.

Did you know paradoxes are not a sign a theory is true?

Paradoxes indicate the idea is no theory, but is in fact just fallacy.


EINSTEIN V EINSTEIN: Einstein at War with himself, in his own words

1905: Einstein Dismisses The Need For The Ether or an “Absolutely Stationary Space”
"The introduction of a “luminiferous ether” will prove to be superfluous inasmuch as the view here to be developed will not require an “absolutely stationary space” provided with special properties, nor assign a velocity-vector to a point of the empty space in which electromagnetic processes take place."

superfluous (adj.) 

"early 15c. (earlier superflue, late 14c.), from Latin superfluus "unnecessary," literally "overflowing, running over," from superfluere "to overflow," from super "over" (see super-) + fluere "to flow" (see fluent). Related: Superfluously; superfluousness."


1920: Einstein Embraces The Need For The Ether or an “Absolutely Stationary (IE Motionless) Space”
"Recapitulating, we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it."

" According to the relativists, space has a tendency to curvature owing to an inherent property or presence of celestial bodies. Granting a semblance of reality to this fantastic idea, it is still self-contradictory. Every action is accompanied by an equivalent reaction and the effects of the latter are directly opposite to those of the former. Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curvature of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies and, producing the opposite effects, straighten out the curves, Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible. But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies as observed. Only the existence of a field of force can account for them and its assumption dispenses with space curvature. All literature on this subject is futile and destined to oblivion. So are also all attempts to explain the workings of the universe without recognizing the existence of the ether and the indispensable function it plays in the phenomena."

Nikola Tesla

source: Dynamic theory of gravity - Open Tesla Research


Let's Get Metaphysical: A Coffee Cup Proves Einstein Wrong

If I am drinking a cup of coffee at rest at the train station and you are doing the same on the train that is pulling into the station, and that train comes to an abrupt halt, only one of us will have spilled coffee and that will be you not me. Einstein makes use of a train car thought experiment that includes a stationary train station and he attempts to use twisted relativistic fallacious reasoning to explain how not moving can be just like moving and vice versa. Einstein's work resulted in a parroted choir song about relative frames of reference and no one true still point. All of this mathematical unreasoned madness relies on people pretending the model real and ignoring the very real motionless experience right under their feet. We can only demonstrate an immobile world, despite all university promoted hype to the contrary. When one actually goes back and looks at the original claims and experiments that are supposed to support these ideas, one comes across flaws in logic that reveals these theories to be nothing but fallaciously reasoned propaganda fantasy.

"We can now appreciate why that argument is not convincing, which we brought forward against the general principle of relativity at the end of Section XVIII. It is certainly true that the observer in the railway carriage experiences a jerk forwards as a result of the application of the brake, and that he recognises in this the non-uniformity of motion (retardation) of the carriage. But he is compelled by nobody to refer this jerk to a “real” acceleration (retardation) of the carriage. He might also interpret his experience thus: “My body of reference (the carriage) remains permanently at rest. With reference to it, however, there exists (during the period of application of the brakes) a gravitational field which is directed forwards and which is variable with respect to time. Under the influence of this field, the embankment together with the earth moves non-uniformly in such a manner that their original velocity in the backwards direction is continuously reduced.” Albert Einstein, General Relativity

This is an assumption based on the Newtonian Bucket experiment which fails to recognize that all that is needed to explain this phenomena is understanding relative motion and inertia. The above thought experiment shows the limitations and circular reasoning inherent in such speculations. The liquid in the bucket need not be concerned with the fixed stars or any other body. The sides of the bucket are what keep the liquid from flying off in what would otherwise be a straight line. Centrifugal and centrfical forces explain everything fine without any metaphysical theorizing needed.