Social Icons

3 Februari 2016


For more than 100 years, we’ve only been playing around in experiments so far
Genius has two sides, cleverness and stupidity. General relativity is the stupidity. 

Einstein's proving method for his hypothesis of general relativity via eclipse is not scientific. Did you have any reason and facts?

Yes.Let's look at the picture below.

 Courtesy of google image

At the picture we see an illustration the deflection of starlight by gravity. Deflection of light is a different angular between Actual Position and Apparent position of star. Another term for Actual position is True Position, and another term for Apparent position is Observed Position of star. In astronomy, true position and observed position of star is three dimensional (the Celestial Coordinate System). In practice,  the deflection of light is a different Altitude or Height (H) between height of star at true position and height of star at observed position.

Then, let see the proving method as suggested by Albert Einstein:

“From these purely theoretical considerations Einstein concluded that light, like any material object, travels in a curve when passing through the gravitational field of a massive body. He suggested that his theory could be put to test by observing the path of starlight in the gravitational field of the sun. Since the stars are invisible by day, there is only one occasion when sun and stars can be seen together in the sky, and that is during an eclipse.

Einstein proposed therefore, that photographs be taken of the stars immediately bordering the darkened face of the sun during an eclipse and compared with photographs of those same stars made at another time. According to his theory, the light from the stars surrounding the sun should be bent inward, toward the sun, in traversing the sun’s gravitational field; hence the images of these stars should appear to observer on earth to be shifted outward from their usual positions in the sky.

Einstein calculated the degree of deflection that should be observed and predicted that for the stars closest to the sun the deviation would be about 1.75” (Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr.Einstein, London, Victor Gollanez LTD, First Published June 1949, Preface by Albert Einstein, page 78-79 ).

Reasons and Facts ::

1. “Einstein proposed therefore, that photographs be taken of the stars immediately bordering the darkened face of the sun during an eclipse and compared with photographs of those same stars made at another time.”

The words ‘ made at another time ‘  means it was  NOT SCIENTIFIC in the scientific point of view of astronomy. Deeply wrong.

2.The deflection of light is a different angular between True Positions and Apparent Positions of the stars. From Einstein’s proving method via eclipse no one can determine True Positions of the star All of photographs be taken of the stars, before eclipse and during eclipse are the conditions of the stars in Apparent Positions.

It is really hard to understand that Einstein’s proving method of his hypothesis that was not scientific,  that was conducted by a team led by Arthur Eddington in 1919 solar Eclipse.

Expedition 1919 Solar Eclipse

Based on data from the Royal Astronomical Society, Arthur Eddington aimed to the group of Hyade stars from the city of Oxford in England at the nights in the months of January and February 1919. After that, Eddington together with his team left for Principe Island in West of Africa, and aimed to the Hyade stars during the solar eclipse on the date of May 29, 1919 at the city of Roca Sundy. Andrew Crommelin's team aimed to the Hyade stars during the solar eclipse from Sobral, Brazil.

Oxford, Roca Sundy and Sobral has it own CELESTIAL SPHERE : Celestial Sphere for an observer in Oxford, Celestial Sphere for an observer in Roca Sundy.and Celestial Sphere for an observer in Sobral.   

Portrait of star taken by an observer from Oxford and portrait the same star from Roca Sundy ( and from Sobral ) can not be compared, because the Celestial Sphere is only applicable at a certain time and at a certain place on which such observation is performed.

The result was ERROR. 

Facts :

Error and the deflection of light was certainly not measurable. 

Einstein predicted : 1.75 seconds of an arc.

Arthur Eddington : 1.61seconds of an arc. (During 1919 eclipse an observer in Roca Sundy. The weather conditions in Roca Sundy. Principe Island-West Africa, were interferret with by clouds).

Andrew Crommelin: 0.93 seconds of an arc.(During 1919 eclipse an observer in Sobral. The weather conditions in Sobral, Brazil, were excellent).

That is why Einstein never received a Nobel prize for relativity

The Nobel Prize in Physics 1921 was awarded to Albert Einstein "for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect".The Nobel citation reads that Einstein is honoured for "services to theoretical physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect".

At first glance, the reference to theoretical physics could have been a back door through which the committee acknowledged relativity. However, there was a caveat stating that the award was presented "without taking into account the value that will be accorded your relativity and gravitation theories after these are confirmed in the future".

To many, and to Einstein himself, this felt like a slap in the face. Hadn't Eddington proved the theory? Yes, but the trouble was Eddington's observations had not been perfect and he had discarded data he considered poor from his final analysis.

Hadn't Eddington proved the theory?  NO. THAT WAS ERROR. BIG LIE IN SCIENCE FOR MORE THAN 100 YEARS

You can applied Einstein's proving method 1000 times and the result will be ERROR !

Read More:

About Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington 

Just experiments, again and again ....We’ve only been playing around in Newton’s world so far
If a scientist conveys a theory and at the same time shows its proving method, however after being examined it is found out that his proposed proving method is proven to be unable to be performed due to not being scientific, then automatically such proposed theory prematurely falls by itself. And the test cannot be carried out by other methods not as requested by the theory founder, since it is reasonably assumed that such proving is made based on belief. 


Powerful telescopes and huge gravitational wave detectors will test a theory that one man worked out a century ago with a pencil and paper.

Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity remade gravity and solved problems that Newton’s theory couldn’t. It’s passed each of the dozens of experimental tests devised since its debut in 1915. But physicists have barely gotten started.

“We’ve only been playing around in Newton’s world so far,” says Neil Cornish, a physicist at Montana State University. That will soon change, though, as several bold experiments enabled by telescopes of unprecedented reach — and in some cases by entirely new ways to gather data — are poised to study how gravity behaves around some of the universe’s most extreme objects.

“This is where general relativity really gets going,” says Cornish. Powerful telescopes are already looking for minute hiccups in the whirring of stellar corpses called pulsars. A global effort will soon photograph, for the first time, a black hole. And huge gravitational wave detectors will scan thousands of galaxies for tiny ripples in the cosmic fabric of space-time.

Each of these experiments — some of the most ambitious ever conceived — will test a theory that one man worked out a century ago with pencil and paper. Yet most physicists are still betting on that one man.

 Read More :



If Einstein's theory of general relativity was correct, then the light from stars that passed closest to the sun would show the greatest degree of bending, and the stars whose light tracks are very far from the sun have their lights not being bent or deflected. The stars whose lights are not deflected means that there is no difference between the apparent position and the true position of the stars.
If being consistent with this theory, it means that all stars visible at night time are at the appearance of the stars on their true positions, because the said stars do not pass through the field of gravity. This is certainly incorrect if it is seen from the astronomical scientific point of view. The stars in the sky at night time and seen by the observers, all are stars on apparent positions, not on their true positions.

Einstein ignored light refraction: astronomical refraction and terrestrial refraction, and ignored three dimensional positions of stars (celestial sphere coordinate system), when he proposed the proving method for general relativity. Einstein's proving method via eclipse is not scientific and deeply wrong. General Relativity has been wrong since the beginning.

Did you know news in Physics 11 February 2016 (LIGO Experiment )?

Ironically amazing, collision of two black holes was detected and to prove  'The Reluctant Father of Black Holes' was right.


Blogger Templates