Lothar Mitis

LOTHAR MITIS / VIENNA

FACTS AND EINSTEIN

The facts incorrectly presented by Einstein are:

1. All normal natural phenomena, whether they are understood energetically or materially, are without exception subject to the most powerful of all monisms, gravity, they are heavy. These include the sound medium [as] air and the light medium [as] ether.

2. Apart from the bare nature of their means of reproduction, there are also numerous extensive analogies for sound and light: Both phenomena are vibrations into which their media are caused by vibrating or shining bodies. Under otherwise the same circumstances, both cover the same distances at the same time, so they need a certain amount of time to reproduce. In the same medium, they propagate in a straight line. Both are reflected or otherwise distracted. Both move in waves. For their perception, organs of their own have developed in the sensitive living beings. And so on. The analogy relating to the barik* of the media of sound and light is almost a matter of course. The same result follows from Planck’s theorem that wave movement always coincides with corpuscular movement, also according to Broglie, who also assumes physical waves for light. [*-don’t know translation.]

3. The etheric gravity must therefore normally also manifest itself in the fact that the light beam is at least curved by attraction when it approaches a gravity field. Such a curvature was also noted by Eddington.

4. As a result of the heaviness of the air, nobody should come up with the idea of wanting to detect the earth’s movement acoustically by assuming, for example, that the speed of the sound waves must be different, depending on whether they are observed in the direction of the earth’s movement or in another direction. Because the sound is listened to in the same way in all cases. Similarly, nobody should want to optically prove the earth’s movement (through earthly rays of light).

Michelson, to whom the heaviness of the ether was still foreign, wanted to provide this visual proof, but achieved no success. The failed attempt proved that earth and earthly ray of light belong to the same system of motion, that the light ether is heavy.

How does Einstein react to all these insights, which to the sober philosopher, physicist and astronomer are presented as plain truisms? He denies point 1 (ethereal weight). For him, light is a purely abstract, immaterial and therefore Abarian* miracle thing.

[*- don’t know translation.]

He evades point 2 (analogy for sound and light). Nor does he draw any, or at least not the relevant, conclusions from the sentences of Planck and Broglie.He also treats point 3 (baric* curvature of the light rays) by eliminating gravitation.

This curvature should not take place as a result of attraction, but for reasons that arise based on the fantastic concept of curved and finite space. [*- don’t know translation.]

From his Abarian* attitude regarding point 4 (Michelson experiment), however, the most adventurous wonders of the world result, which immediately evaporate when the air and ether are carried along evenly. To clarify the “negative” result of the Michelson’s experiment - this result is positive for the Bariker* - Einstein sets up two “postulates” (unproven assumptions) of the most peculiar kind, namely:

[*- don’t know translation.]

Postulate 1 describes the speed of light c (= 300,000 km) as ∞ (infinitely large) with all the mathematical privileges of this largest size. Now astronomy reckons with countless light years. But since c is only a vanishing fraction of a single light year, so is the equation of this tiny path with ∞ an assassination act on all reason.

Einstein used this sacrilege to set up Postulate 2 “Constancy of the speed of light”, which says: ∞ = c = 300,000 km = c +/- n, that is: compared to any other speed, c remains (because c = ∞ = ∞ +/- n = c) constant, and not approximately (in the practical sense), but in the strictest theory. In such an unreasonable way, the relativity of time and, in the transferred sphere of activity, that of space can also arise. Because when the same light beam has the same speed (c = c - m = c - n) compared to different moving systems should, this miracle is supposed to be “explained” once again by a new miracle, namely by the fact that the time and space units of the differently moved observers are unequal (sometimes larger, sometimes smaller).

This RTH is the sick product of a sick time.

See d. V. “Einstein’s fundamental error”. Hillmann, Leipzig 1930. 35

[Note “Abarian” – don’t know what means. Suspect words can’t translate here refer to “barbarian” in some way. ]

Dr. VINCENZ NACHREINER / NEUSTADT a. d. Haardt AGAINST EINSTEIN’S RELATIVITY THEORY Philosophy: The “spacetime thing” of the RTH contradicts the undoubted Kant-Schopenhauer theory of space, time and matter. Analytical mechanics: When changing the law of gravitation, even for spherical celestial bodies, the masses cannot be taken into account as being concentrated in the center.