(Translated from my first blog at http://cosmodel.tiandi.com) Einstein said, about the origin of his general theory of relativity: “While I sit at my Born office, an idea came to my mind: one feels no weight when freely falling. I was shaken at the thought, which gave me deep impression and led to my later theory of gravity.” The theory is the general theory of relativity. It is not hard to understand if you recall your experiences of losing weight when falling. You are used to the homogeneous and downward gravity (weight) when you are static with respect to the earth. If there were no support from the earth, all stuff would fall freely. Each one sees others being static or moving straightly with constant speeds. That is, any freely-falling body, when considered a reference frame, concludes that all other freely-falling bodies do not suffer gravity. This is called Einstein’s equivalence principle. Now I would ask Einstein a question, does your equivalence principle continue to be true if there is such gravity which has the similar properties to the ones of air pressure? We know we are living amidst air. Air exerts pressure. At each spatial point the pressure puts in all directions with identical magnitude. For example, a large plastic ball can be pressed into the size of a fist if the pressure is big enough. Why is the ball pressed into fist-shaped not arm-shaped? Because the pressures of identical magnitude press to the center of the ball, from all directions. Therefore, static balls remain static if only pressure exerts on. If Einstein’s equivalence principle applied to air pressure then the balls would fall freely. Because the balls do not fall in any direction, the principle does not apply to air pressure. The reason is simple: pressure is isotropic while the earth gravity directs in the direction of its center. What is Einstein’s general theory of relativity? One of its assumptions is that gravity can be described by the order-two form of the components of generalized velocity. Einstein suggested that different kinds of coefficients of the form describe different situations of gravitation. Schwarzschild found a solution of the coefficients which is used to describe the gravity of the earth or the sun. The solution passed three types of solar tests. The coefficients depend only on the spatial position, i.e. the polar distance to the center of the sun. People pay much attention to these kinds of coefficients which describe spatial inhomogeneity. I found the other kind of form whose coefficients depend only on time. The gravity described by the form has the similar properties to the ones of air pressure, i.e. the isotropic properties. Therefore, Einstein’s equivalence principle does not apply to this kind of gravity. The question arises, does there exist such gravity in the real world? Everyone knows the doctrine of inflation universe which is based on the principle of isotropic universe. The principle says that, in the large-scale universe, no position is preferred and people observe the same properties in one direction as in the other. There exist the observational evidences which support that the universe is isotropic. Therefore, my form can describe the isotropic gravity of large-scale universe which is spatially homogeneous but temporally inhomogeneous. We have a flat universe instead of the inflation one! My model can obtain Hubble’s law in much simpler way than the inflation model (see http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0605213 ). Why did people propose inflation? Because the second assumption of the general theory of relativity is that spacetime is curved. Why spacetime is curved? Because Einstein has a wrong belief that his equivalence principle applies to whatever kind of gravity. His reasoning is that there exist freely-falling frames in any local gravitational field in which gravity is not detected, which resembles the way that any local area of curved surface is flat. His belief is that gravity is equivalent to the curvature of spacetime. Well, I have found the above-mentioned example to which Einstein’s equivalence principle does not apply. Therefore, the assumptions of curved spacetime and inflating universe are fundamental mistakes. Without the assumptions, gravity can be quantized (see http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0604084), all regular galaxy patterns have simple analytic formulation (http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0510535 , http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0510536), the corresponding galactic dynamics are obtained, the difficulty of galactic constant rotation curves are resolved (http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0512614), and the introduction of dark matter is not necessary. You are welcomed to join the discussion. http://www.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0605213 The Faulty Assumptions of the Expanding-Universe Model vs. the Simple and Consistent Principles of a Flat-Universe Model http://www.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0604084 Flat-Spacetime Covariant Gravity, its Quantization and Solar Application http://www.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0512614 Einstein`s Geometrization vs. Holonomic Cancellation of Gravity via Spatial Coordinate-rescale and Nonholonomic Cancellation via Spacetime Boost http://www.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0510535 A Symmetry-induced Expression of Spiral Galaxy Patterns and its Physical Implication http://www.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0510536 A Symmetry-induced Model of Elliptical Galaxy Patterns
There's one thing I will bet my life is inequivalent: Will you feel your ego fall when it is brought down to earth equivalent to the rate it encountered on your voyage in the good spaceship lollypop? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
