Nuts And Bolts: Taking Apart Special Relativity

Rated 2.00/5 based on 4 reviews
Nuts and Bolts: Taking Apart Special Relativity is an attempt to disprove Einstein's theory of special relativity. It is written to appeal to a wide audience. Nuts and Bolts explains the formidable equations of special relativity in unprecedented detail. Soon everyone will conclude that special relativity is invalid, and I mean soon in the geological sense time, may science make us immortal. More
Download: epub mobi (Kindle) pdf more Online Reader
About Jim Spinosa

Born in 1955,Jim Spinosa remembers,as a youngster,
being entranced by the science fiction novels he
perused in a small,corner bookstore in Denville,
NJ. The cramped confines of that store had claimed
to contain the largest selection of books in Northern New Jersey. His penchant for science fiction engendered an interest in physics. Often daunted by the difficulty of physics textbooks,he
questioned whether physics could be presented as clearly and concisely as science fiction,without sustaining any loss in depth Nuts and Bolts:Taking
Apart Special Relativity is an attempt to answer that question.


Review by: Irene Evans on Oct. 19, 2018 :
Why do we believe in Einstein’s theories of special and general relativity? Is it because we believe in Santa Claus? You will opine that very few people over the age of nine believes in Santa Claus. But, do these disbelievers believe in the things Santa Claus represents? Santa Claus represents the belief that getting presents will make you happy. But, here’s the catch. It seems that we are programmed to believe which specific presents will make us happy. If you think about it, you may agree that it is so. For example, for a very brief time, perhaps two years, in the 1960s Nehru jackets were a popular fashion item. Strangely, my brother wanted a Nehru jacket for Christmas. He received a light blue (turquoise) Nehru jacket probably from Sears. In all the years, since the fad for Nehru jackets died out, he has had no desire to own a Nehru jacket in fact I don’t think he has even thought about a Nehru jacket. It is the same way with Einstein’s theories. We believe that understanding science will make us happy. We believe science is a good thing. These do not seem to be positions that are controversial. Yet, let’s add the unspoken truth: we are programmed to believe in certain scientific theories just as my brother was programmed as a youngster to desire a Nehru jacket. Look around and you will see this kind of programming is not limited to youngsters. The fad for women to wear knee-high and higher boots appears to be waning, but just as the fad is waning now, a year or two years ago it was inexplicably waxing. Women’s fashions in general do appear to be programmed onto women.
It’s quite possible that if Einstein’s special and general theories of relativity are ever officially invalidated, they will have to be dismissed as a hoax of unimaginable proportions not merely as incorrect scientific theories. The scope of the hoax is too different, too much of the other for those of us living in its unquestioned presence to imagine. It is odd that no one has seemingly caught on to the notion that Einstein is portrayed as a god. In 1973 “The World Book Encyclopedia” contained the following in the article “Albert Einstein.” “Although he was not associated with any orthodox religion, Einstein’s nature was deeply religious. Merely to come into his presence was always a profoundly spiritual experience.” It would seem that even the casual observer of things scientific would realize there is something special that separates Einstein from other scientists in his popular presentation. In time, perhaps, there will be a reckoning, and we will need to ask if Einstein was one of the most confused individuals of the last century, and if his theories were a kind of transport system for Leftist ideas. There is things unspoken that undergird his theories: You have the power and the ability to create reality, and as a corollary you have the right to insist that you are not creating reality, but merely discovering its true nature. Cynically, the truth becomes a mess that takes more than a lifetime to clean up. A propagandist might have the insight that if you create a theory that is too difficult for any one person to unravel, and you have the power of the popular media behind you to declare that it is the truth, then it becomes the truth.
It may seem far-fetched but special relativity may be Einstein’s attempt to create a scientific theory that includes a notion put forward by the skeptical philosopher David Hume in the 1700s namely that cause and effect cannot be proven. Briefly, Einstein has two observers at the mid-point between two simultaneous lightning strikes both of whom are moving toward light ray A (produced by lightning strike A) and away from light ray B (produced by lightning strike B). One observer sees the lightning strikes as simultaneous while another observer sees them as non-simultaneous. This would seem to violate cause and effect. It seems either both observers should see the lightning strikes as simultaneous (through the operation of a kind of scientific conventionalism) or both observers should see them as non-simultaneous. The argument is further obfuscated by the extraneous fact that one observer is moving toward point A and away from point B while the other observer is not.
(review of free book)
Review by: David Rice on April 15, 2014 :
Yet another "I'm much smarter than Albert Einstein" book.
(review of free book)
Review by: gregthoner on Jan. 18, 2014 :
Anyone can write a book that is filled with endless equations, which few readers can understand, and then claim to have disproved Einstein. Christopher Jon Bjerknes could sue the author for gimmick infringement. The author should write a book that a wide audience could understand and then let the wisdom of the people be the test of his claims. One of the few merits of the book is that among the authors seemingly endless cavails against Einstein's relativity theory, he avoids labeling Einstein as a Pythagorean, a pejorative with more than a hint of anti-Semitism.
(review of free book)
Review by: karlrowe on Jan. 16, 2014 :
Another pathetic attempt to disprove Einstein's theories. Einstein was a physicist of the first rank and a genius; the author is neither. He's not evenb a physicist. He only betrays his ignorance of the exquisite equations that make up the framework of relativity, the most rigorously confirmed theory in all of science. If he had any real knowledge of physics, he would not have the arrogance and temerity to question one of the giants in the annals of human thought.
(review of free book)
Report this book