I am thrilled to share that my new book, Disruptive: Rewriting the rules of physics, is available for pre–order at Barnes & Noble and at Amazon.com!
Disruptive is a thought–provoking book, one that introduces a new unified model called Modern Mechanics, and explains where and why Einstein’s theory went wrong. It will fundamentally change our understanding of physics, space, and time.
Please follow me at my new blog www.StevenBBryant.com an Facebook at Steven B. Bryant for more info!
Here is an interesting article where a group of people essentially want to stone people who do not hold their belief.
This has happened before. Once, there was a man named Galileo, who believed that the planets orbited the Sun, not the Earth. His view ran counter to the prevailing view of the day, which was that the planets orbited the Earth. Because he held a dissenting view, he was placed under house arrest until his death. While we may think that being jailed for holding a different scientific opinion is a historical footnote, some modern people and groups hold the exact same mentality.
Today, if you talk about climate change, you may strike an extremely emotional chord with some. Groups that support climate change want to prosecute those who believe something else. Belief, while extremely important in religion, is not scientific. The very notion that people want to prosecute those with differing points of view is dangerous. If any group – whether a supporter or a dissenter, cannot defend a position on scientific grounds and instead has to resort to punishment to advance their ideas, they cannot be called scientists. They go by another name: zealots.
In Disruptive: Rewriting the Rules of Physics, I not only challenging Einstein’s theory of relativity, I show why it is wrong and where Einstein made specific mistakes. There is no ambiguity or room for “interpretation.” This book challenges the prevailing view. If left to the people who authored this letter, I would face arrest, prosecution, and punishment.
Are ideas so frail that they cannot withstand challenge? Should theories be elevated to the point where they are unquestioned laws?
No. Scientific theories and interpretations of data must be able to withstand any challenge and question. We must never stifle ideas, even those that we disagree with.
I know I’ve been gone for a while. But I’m back with very exciting news!
I’m currently writing a physics book where, I’m happy to share, I’ve turned the corner from “heavy writing” to “heavy editing”. I should have a solid draft complete in the next few months and will publish the book in the Fall. In preparation for the book’s release later this year, I’ve just launched a new Facebook page – Steven B. Bryant, which can be found at http://www.facebook.com/StevenBryantAuthor. I’m super excited and hope you’ll Like and Follow my new Facebook page where I’ll keep you updated on progress and activities.
The news is buzzing this week with claims that researchers at the CERN, one of the world’s leading research centers, conducted an experiment that “proved” Einstein wrong. They claim that they were able to make neutrinos travel faster than the speed of light. But the media is sensationalizing things just a bit because the researchers “deliberately do not attempt any theoretical or phenomenological interpretation of the results.” [See their paper].
I’m excited by this experiment because it supports the findings that there are subtle, but significant, theoretical and mathematical mistakes in Einstein’s theory.
Also exciting, is that this experiment might be used to differentiate Modern Classical Mechanics (which is conceptually consistent with this experimental) from Relativity theory (which appears to be conceptually inconsistent with this experiment).
Over the past few days, people have asked me to summarize what is wrong with Einstein’s theory. I can summarize it as follows:
We must remember that Einstein’s equations produce good results in many cases. So, this experiment is important because it could become a distinguishing experiment. Theories that support this experiment will prevail, while those that do not will undergo major revision, or will need to be jettison.
I invite you to explore the site. If you’re new, I hope you explore the papers and videos. If you’re a returning visitor, welcome back!
Until next time, Be Well!
Steve
Last year , a friend posted to his blog a brief excerpt of an NPR radio show which pitted a Special Relativity challenger against one of its supporters. During the introduction, the reporter mentioned a test developed by a UC Riverside mathematician. This test, The Crackpot Index , is a combination of satire and seriousness. In reality, it highlights a number of common pitfalls that are repeatedly made by those challenging the establishment. If you score too high on this test, you will be labeled a Crackpot.
“I never could figure out how rods got shorter simply by travelling at higher velocities or how time (which doesn’t appear to be a “thing”) could actually dilate. Your Episode #20 was excellent, showing the critical difference between length and rates. So that’s it! Those things don’t really happen.”
Glenn Borchardt, PhD
Odds are that you’ve arrived here because you either 1) are convinced that something is wrong with Einstein’s theory of Relativity and want to explore what that might be or 2) you believe that Special Relativity is right and want to know what people who disagree with his theory are saying.
Regardless of the reason that brought you here, I hope that as you explore the materials on the site you’ll learn something new. We cover a lot of material ranging from the specifics around Einstein’s mistake, to the introduction of an alternative model, to a review of some of the more well known scientific experiments related to Special Relativity.
I’ve been talking about updating my website for some time. The main goals were 1) to make it easier to update and maintain and 2) make it support dynamic content. This site also integrates the website with the blog. Previously they have been two different sites. While they are now integrated, the main podcast feed still originates from the blog site. I’m hoping to make the transition seamless for those who have already subscribed.
As you navigate the site, you may find that some of the material is changed. Over the next few months, I will be updating the content to bring it in line with my latest thinking and research. For example, in the Mistakes section, I now present only two analysis; one for people comfortable with algebra, and a second for the more advanced person who is comfortable with function syntax and scope rules.
Overall, I am happy with how the new site has turned out and welcome your feedback on what I can do to make it better. So, after you’ve had a chance to navigate around, please feel free to drop me an e-mail at Email@RelativityChallenge.com and let me know what you think.
Cheers!
Steven
