EINSTEIN'S THEORY OF RELATIVITY - A CRITICAL REVIEW

EINSTEIN'S THEORY OF RELATIVITY — A CRITICAL REVIEW

(From Albert Einstein to Lev Okun is just one step OR from “great” to funny is just one step).

M. V. Telkov   

[email protected]               

April — June 2024

 

Summary.

An analysis of the presentations of the special theory of relativity (STR) in many undergraduate physics lecture courses, as well as in a classic book of E. F. Taylor and J. A. Wheeler “Spacetime Physics”, W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco London 1966, as well as in TONS of internet resources on STR, as well as Einstein's original STR paper published in 1905, shows CLEARLY that they all use the SOFISM of replacing the trajectory of light in a moving system/frame — with the trajectory of light seen in a moving system/frame from point of view of a stationary system/frame. From here length contraction, time dilation and other STR effects in a moving system/frame are ERRONEOUSLY deduced in accordance with the so-called Lorentz transformations. Here I discuss this SOPHISM, the groundlessness of the central postulate of STR (which was proven by Olof Roemer already in 1679 as being wrong, 200+ years before A. Einstein), as well as the absurdist consequences of STR, obtained precisely as a result of sophistic techniques and wrong postulates when designing this ill theory. The theorem of M. V. Telkov about the falsehood of STR+GTR as physical theories is proved and presented. The consequence of these is the physical falsity of all theories based on A. Einstein's STR+GTR as having a false basis.

In this work, the foundations of A. Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity are critically examined and TWO independent proofs of the FALSITY of A. Einstein's theory of relativity are presented: one was discovered, the second was logically proved by me.

I will also introduce the opinions of other scientific colleagues regarding STR+GTR.

The reason for my interest and investigation of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity (STR) were the so-called «paradoxes of STR» («a long log that flamboyantly fit in a shorter barn», «the different timings of the same events when viewed from different reference sites», «differently aging twins in a rocket and on Earth»: i.e. contractions of bodies and time dilation which allegedly occurs in motion, as predicted by A. Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, STR), these supposedly «the highest achievements of human genius», which did not coincide at all with my own impressions of nature and the understandings of what is good and what is evil…

And I began my «investigation».

Being a graduate of one of the natural science faculties of Lomonosov Moscow State University, the MSU (biological faculty and yet of the Soviet era), as well as being a tough researcher with extensive experimental and fair big life experiences, I studied Einstein's STR carefully and thoughtfully for three or four months at my leisure time: by the lectures 9-10 professors of physics faculties of the MSU, LSU, UFU and MIPT on the YouTube, by dozens of videos of enthusiasts of STR and GTR in the Internet, I also looked through the book «Physics of Space-time» by Taylor and Wheeler, ed. Mir, 1971, — «classics and tuning fork» of this buoyant genre, and of Soviet-Russian university textbooks on general physics and STR… I also read the original article by A. Einstein «ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES», 1905, where the Special Theory of Relativity was first presented by its author himself.

This article presents the RESULTS of MY ANALYSIS and my VERDICT on A. Einstein's STR+GTR.

Let's start from considering the consequences of the so-called «Lorentz transformations», the mathematical basis of STR (see Fig. Consequences of Lorentz transformations).

Actually, the «Lorentz transformations» are mathematical equations for the coordinates x, y and z, and time t, for a certain object, which are used to find new coordinates, say, from a stationary system (or frame), in another, say, moving one; using «Lorentz transformations», you can find/recalculate the coordinates of this object in a new coordinate system/frame. That’s is it and that is all about it.

However, when moving, according to the Special Theory of Relativity of A. Einstein (and only according to it), quite unexpected events are happening: time dilation in a moving system and length contraction of objects in it! Especially they are noticeable at the speeds comparable to the speed of light c = 300,000 km/sec: in this case, objects must be compressed to zero length along the axis of motion, and not from the action of some force, but from the contraction of a space itself! But A. Einstein reassures that it is in no way possible for physical bodies to achieve such a speed, because, according to his equations, the mass of a body and its momentum become infinitely large and the time itself stops forever! – Isn’t it wonderful?

But is this really so?

Below is the fig. Consequences from Lorentz transformations": time dilation and length contraction in a moving system/frame (see).

 

 

Fig. 1. Consequences of Lorentz's transformations in STR.

Everything would be fine, but in the materials, that I studied on STR I was struck by the PRESENCE OF SOPHISMS (logical errors or deliberate manipulation of meaning)!

This was discouraging — WHY?

Yes, when deriving the equations of “Lorentz transformations”, authors sometimes use a thought experiment with the so-called “light clocks” (which are used to visually demonstrate the passage of time and which are designed by sending a beam of light from bottom to top — to the mirror, where it is reflected back down, and it constantly runs back and forth, and each such send of light measures 1 unit of time, and we can watch it and the light trajectory).

So, Einstein’s followers convince everyone that for a moving person/frame, the light in his light clock allegedly (ALLEGEDLY!!!) goes along the HYPOTENUSE, and not along the vertical cathetus of a right triangle, as it goes for a stationary observer/frame, that is why Einstein’s followers say, the time slows down for a moving system/frameas compared to a stationary observer/frame (“The hypotenuse is always longer than the cathetus in a right triangle, right?").

Below is a print from the lecture “Poincaré-Einstein mechanics, introduction to the special theory of relativity (M.D. Fitkevich)”, Inst. Nuclear Physics RAS, MIPT, April 20, 2023. It is in Russian but everything is pretty clear: they compare trajectories of light in light clocks in a stationary system/frame and a moving one…

 

Fig. 2. Trajectories of light in light clocks in stationary and moving frames. And deduction of Lorentz factor which is used extensively later in many “relativist equations”. Note that trajectory of light in a moving frame is from point of view from a stationary frame (!). But actually, light in a moving system/frame goes exactly the same way as it goes in a stationary frame — vertically.

 

Let’s look at this picture from the lecture: Einstein’s followers claim that light in the stationary system/frame K’ goes vertically up and down along the side cdt’, and in the moving system/frame K, due to its shift in the direction of movement, light goes along the hypotenuse cdt. They write down the Pythagorean theorem (the square of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the cathetes, see figure) and from there they cheerfully derive the equations of Lorentz transformations, which supposedly lead to time dilation and the lengths contraction along the axe of movement in the moving system/frame! At the same time they receive the so-called “Lorentz factor”, or “relativistic factor”, or gamma = ((1- (v/c) ²) ^-1/2, where v is the speed of the object, and c is the speed of light, which is then used in various equations.

Let us note that light along the hypotenuse cdt goes in a moving system from the VIEWPOINT OF A STATIONARY OBSERVER/FRAME (i.e., this is how he sees it from the outside).

— But wait a bit, gentlemen: WHY DOES IT MATTER TO THE MOVING OBSERVER WHAT “SEEMS” TO A STATIONARY OBSERVER to be happening to him, and why on earth should it “slow down the time to the moving observer?” And why its lengths will be contracted"??? — What kind of nonsense is this? This trick in Logic is called “substitution of concepts” — a violation of one of the basic laws of Logic — the “law of Identity”!

This is sheer sophistry or just fraud!

— The fact is that there are at least TWO trajectories of light moving here in the PHYSICAL and LOGICAL sense: ONE trajectory — from the point of view of the moving observer/frame (here — along the vertical segment — cdt'), so to speak — “REAL”, and the other — THE TRAJECTORY THAT SEES TO AN EXTERNAL, STATIONARY OBSERVER/frame, — the hypotenuse — cdt, — the “APPEARING” trajectory or “MOCK” (at least in the logical sense and from the point of view of who is really moving).

And by replacing one trajectory with another, the sophists get that the light goes along the “HYPOTENUSE” — cdt, and not along the “UPRIGHT SEGMENT” — cdt’, from which follows “TIME DILATION”!

 

And from this, by transforming the coordinate x' into x, according to the corresponding simple expression, x = (x' + Vt') * Lorentz factor = (x' + Vt') * ((1- (v/c) ² ) ^-1/2, where V is the speed of movement of the moving system, c is the speed of light, and t is time, “LENGTH CONTRACTION” is obtained in the moving system along the axis of movement (See Fig. Consequences from Lorentz transformations).

— Is not it smart, right?

Nonetheless, it is ABSOLUTELY CLEAR that in the above thought experiment, both in the moving and in the stationary/still system/frame, the light in their “light clocks” ACTUALLY goes EXACTLY THE SAME WAY – straight vertically (cdt'), and therefore the light clock (like ordinary clocks, of course) for both, in the moving frame and the stationary/still frame/observer, ACTUALLY go EXACTLY THE SAME, and therefore there is NO TIME DILATION, and NO LENGTH CONTRACTIONS in a moving system/frame, no matter how hard Einstein’s followers tried to “prove” it!

Just so! — AND NOT OTHERWISE!

(This approach with the false hypotenuse of the movement of light in the so-called “light clock” for a moving one in comparison with the movement of light along a vertical cathetus for a stationary observer is used in many lectures for physics students, and also in the classical book by Taylor and Wheeler “ Physics of Space-Time", 1971, edition «Mir», see page 34, Fig. 13 and further; there is also a fresh English-language video on YouTube with a popular ever-smiling professor from Oxford, namely prof. Cox, which convinces its audience in the same thing and in the same way. Actually, the same sophistic approach in used in TONS of other sources of STR… Including Wikipedia on STR (see the fig. Time dilation in moving system/frame B as compared to stationary system/frame A).

Fig. 3. Falsified trajectory of light in light clocks in a moving frame from wikipaedia.

And principally the same type of a SOFISM (of a substitution of the trajectory of light in a moving system/frame with the trajectory of light in moving system/frame that is visible from the point of view of a stationary observer/frame) is contained in A. Einstein’s ORIGINAL WORK “ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES”. A. EINSTEIN, June 30, 1905).

— But a sophistry is only a sophistry, just as a deception is only a deception, and thus we see that the main conclusions of the STR — time dilation and lengths contractions during movement — HAVE BEEN FALSE – these are NOT actually HAPPENING.

So, the theory of STR by A. Einstein is based on a logical error… Or sophism and fraud?!

Let historians decide on this, and I, paraphrasing, CONCLUDE: “EINSTEIN IS MY FRIEND, BUT THE TRUTH IS DEARER.”

And this was the FIRST of the REFUTATIONS of EINSTEIN'S THEORY OF RELATIVITY that I promised, made on the basis of a number of lecture courses for university physics students, tons of the internet resources on STR, the classic book by E. F. Taylor and J. A. Wheeler “Spacetime Physics”, W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco London 1966, and also the original article of A. Einstein himself, published in 1905, — namely, by the finding and a refutation of the SOPHISTRY of substitution of light trajectories in these sources which were used for introducing the basic principles of STR (i.e. time dilation and lengths contraction during movement).

Someone may object by saying that these were simply “childish ways” of introducing STR, “for students and neophytes”. And there are others “highly scientific” methods: with rotors, tensors etc., which are not yet comprehensible to neophytes...

— Well, there are such ways, so what? — Are you sure that if you were deceived by the trajectory of light, you will not be deceived by complex mathematics?! After all, the sophistry with the substitution of the trajectory of light is contained in the very first work on STR published in 1905, written, presumably, by A. Einstein himself!

In fact, the whole essence of the Theory of Relativity and its oddities stems from the special properties of the speed of light declared by A. Einstein in his postulate: its absoluteness, non-additivity and its unattainability for material bodies; but this is ABSOLUTELY FALSE, since, say, astronomer Olaf Roemer, 200+ years before Einstein, in 1679, used the additivity of the speed of light and the motion of the Earth around the Sun to calculate the quantitative value of the speed of light (from the apparent changes in the period of revolution of the satellite Io around Jupiter – which depends on the phase of rotation of the Earth around the Sun and its speed of movement towards or from the Jupiter)...

So the speed of light is probably quite an ordinary speed, and probably quite achievable by material bodies! And in vain A. Einstein intimidated everyone with its special properties and on this basis came up with a theories of STR + GTR that still fools many people...

That is why a second, strict proof of the falsity of STR+GTR will be given here, in the form of “M.V. Telkov’s theorem on the falsity of STR and GTR as physical theories” — it clearly, according to Aristotle’s Logic, closes all the ways for STR and GTR to be physically true and implementable in nature! See below.

In the meantime, let's continue:

Some professors, obviously “embarrassed” by the “false hypotenuse” described above, derive Lorentz transformations from the properties of mathematical groups (See, for example, S. S. Gershtein “Field Theory. Lecture No. 1: Theory of Relativity. Lorentz Transformations. 2013.” ). — But where are the mathematical groups, and where are physics and nature? Moreover, the properties of mathematical groups are distorted by the very special, invariant-constant speed of light in all systems, and by the fact that it cannot be combined with any movement — it is absolute, unchangeable and unattainable by material bodies! This is the main postulate of STR. And this is precisely from where “time dilation”, “length reduction”, and all other so-called “STR paradoxes” come from.

Other followers of Einstein derive “Lorentz transformations” differently, say, in Soviet-Russian physics textbooks for university students (for example, A.N. Matveev “Mechanics and STR”) this is done by ordinary algebraic substitution. But again – very special speed of light “breaks” everything: lengths, times, masses — with the same “cheerful” logic of the “cheerful mathematician” which states: “it’s impossible to divide on zero, and therefore the speed of light is unattainable for material bodies and this does not happen in nature”...

— Do you smell sulfur, gentlemen?

 

But after all: mathematics is dry and paper tolerates everything… Moreover, one can draw any formulas — and on their basis to order the NATURE: “Lie down, my sweetie”… — Rough, right? But this is exactly what happens! But actually they order us to lie down! And already ~ 120+ years!!!

— They say that there are about two dozen of methods for deriving Lorentz transformations… However, let’s not forget that physics is not mathematics, and in physics mathematical “discoveries” should be supported by physical experience that fits to the properties of natural bodies and relationships, and also prove it with appropriate experiments… Otherwise (especially due to ignorance of LOGIC and haste) what comes out is just nonsense.

And out of the NONSENSE — monsters come out — the so-called “PARADOXES OF STR of A. Einstein” (long log which fits in a shorter barn, due to contraction of moving bodies; twins aging differently that in rocket and that on the Earth; non-simultaneity of the same events seen from different points of view; that is, the very “sleep of the mind that gives birth to monsters” – right from the famous painting by Salvador Dali)…

 

Note that it does not matter that Lorentz himself derived his transformation formulas differently: he simply so “guessed to correct” Galileo’s transformation formulas for coordinates and time. He discovered his “relativistic factor” and boldly manipulated it in the equations so that the transformation of coordinates and time “smoothly fit” into Maxwell’s equations for electromagnetic waves and these transformations became invariant… At least so said prof. A. A. Yakuta from the faculty of Physics of the Moscow State University at his Lecture about STR (see: Yakuta A. A. – “Mechanics – STR. Lorentz transformation and its consequences”)…

— One way or another, but the result is the same as with the false hypotenuse — “time dilation” and “length contraction” in the moving system, which, of course, ARE NOT present IN REALITY.

(As a joke: the compression/contraction/“flattening” of bodies is predicted by the special theory of relativity only along the axis of motion, and what happens along the other two axes is not specified. But judging by the formulas of Lorentz transformations, the values ​​​​on the other axes are preserved without changes, and as a result, material bodies are simply “flattened” along the axis of motion due to the compression of space! This is a special nonsense of STR, in blatant contradiction to all physical experience and Logic. But, probably, relativists think about the physical body like this: “it’s somehow flattened all there, accordingly, you understand”… — Yes, we do understand that under the guise of “Genial Theory” you produced to us some bullshit)…

And this is the genius of all time (see photo of A. Einstein with his tongue out).

 

Fig. 5. Genius of all times, the designer of STR+GTR, Albert Einstein.

This is where from the well-known “paradoxes of STR” (read: “absurdities”) flow, which in their essence are true “logical negations” of STR!

Nevertheless, trying to understand STR (which, according to the physicists themselves, few succeed, and even drives many away from physics, especially schoolchildren — which is not surprising, since only a stupid and/or vile person can “understand” logically contradictory stupidity), — and I was wondering this way, and other, I argued in specialized social networks, asked questions to professional physicists, but NO ONE answered me clearly and reasonably...

— Either they remain silent, or they “went to the blue” (at the same time, some “insulting me with a word”: “Telkov, who are you [*******] with, Einstein? Laughter...” — And this is a real quote from a comment on my post from a character with an elegant surname Geino… — Eh, I wish I could tell him who he really is!

When I just began to study STR, I believed for some time that “Lorentz transformations” are just seeming effects to an outside observer, but neither reduction in lengths nor dilation of time occurs in reality in a moving system (by the way, this is exactly what was taught in SOME of Moscow high schools in the mid-1970s)…

— But NO — in OUR TIME, physicists confidently say that the dilation of time and the reduction of lengths along the axis of motion of a moving object are REAL… See, for example, the lecture of Prof. from the faculty of Physics, of the Moscow State University A.A. Yakut “Mechanics — STR. Lorentz transformation and its consequences"; description of the paradox of aging twins in a rocket and on Earth from the book E. F. Taylor and J. A. Wheeler “Spacetime Physics”, 1966; the Hafele-Keating experiment of 1971 with the measurement of time dilation during a long flight on an airplane around the Earth, — however, there is an opinion that it was simply fabricated, — see the video of physicist-engineer E. N. Avdeev on the website: https://efirfizika. ru/ )

In this regard, the book written by V. I. Sekerin “THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY — A MYSTIFICATION OF THE XX CENTURY”, Novosibirsk: Art Avenue Publishing House, 2007, is very interesting, where, quote: “The inconsistency of STR as a physical theory is proven, the history and origins of its invention are described, the idealistic philosophical essence and harmfulness of study and it’s applications in practice are shown.”

Therefore: having once again carefully weighed everything, and finally, on my own (and in agreement with many critics of STR, who criticize it, however, somewhat differently from me) I come to the conclusion that Einstein’s STR+GTR is a SOPHISTIC MOCKERY!

By the way, on the website https://efirfizika.ru/ E.N. Avdeev provides as many as 7 (seven) proofs of the falsity of Einstein’s theories in HIS OPEN LETTER to the Academy of Sciences of the Russian Federation.

And I completely agree with them!

And here is another proof, and a strict one:

 

M.V. TELKOV'S THEOREM ABOUT THE FALSETY OF A. EINSTEIN'S THEORY OF RELATIVITY as a physical theory.

1.According to the Special Theory of Relativity (STR) of A. Einstein, in a moving system/frame the following occurs: 1) Length contraction along the axis of motion, 2) time dilation, all according to an outside stationary observer. The body contraction and time dilation for a moving person occurs in REALITY (i.e., these are NOT changes that ”seem” to someone). Mathematically, this is described by the so-called Lorenz transformations (see).

2. However, if there are several or many “observers”, and they themselves move at different speeds, then WHAT — the first moving one, observed, contracts to DIFFERENT DEGREES, and “TIME DILATION” occurs in DIFFERENT ways (and at the same time DIFFERENT) — according to all these observers – too???

That is, the first observed one is SIMULTANEOUSLY reduced/shortened TO DIFFERENT DEGREES, and indefinitely (presumably, by the number of “observers” and their moving activity), acquiring differently existing many DIFFERENT ENTITIES, which are also in DIFFERENT TIMES at the same time?

3. But they themselves (“observers”), according to the principle of relativity, mutually, must contract relative to the first subject/object of movement (and ALL AT THE SAME TIME, EACH IN DIFFERENT WAYS, and to an UNDETERMINED DEGREE!!!) and thus should happen for them all this BEDLAM!???

 

4.YES? SO?

According to STR — SO!

 

5. But it is IMPOSSIBLE for a physical body to neither be AT DIFFERENT TIMES AT THE SAME TIME, nor HAVE AT THE SAME TIME DIFFERENT, indefinitely different (!!!), SIZES!

-Right?

-RIGHT!

This blatant ABSURDITY in its physical IMPOSSIBILITY and at the same time a NECESSARY consequence of the STR proves the FALSE of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity as physical theory.

 

6.And since GTR (General Theory of Relativity) is a generalization of STR (Special Theory of Relativity), then GTR (General Theory of Relativity) of Einstein is false!

 

Or: applying the technique discussed above to accelerated motion (which is what theory of general relativity considers) — we obtain an absolutely symmetrical situation — i.e. We’ll also come to the absurdity — the impossibility of a physical body to be in different (and indefinitely different) times and sizes at the same time.

That's all — as a logical result, A. Einstein's theory turned out to be “completely absurd,” that is, we carried out a complete negation of Einstein’s theory according to the strict criteria of Aristotle’s Logic!

– So we have come to the proof of the complete physical INCONSISTENCE and FALSENESS of A. Einstein's SRT+GTR!

THE THEOREM IS PROVED.

Consequences: ALL THE THEORIES BASED ON A. EINSTEIN’S THEORY OF RELATIVITY are FALSE (“Big Bang Theory”, “theory of an expanding universe”, “black holes”, “white holes”, “dark matter” and etc.) as having a false basis.

I understand that this sounds paradoxical and unusual — but this is required by Logic (that is, the entire concentrated experience of humanity about the correctness of thinking)!

And therefore: forget about STR + GTR (and all their “paradoxes” = absurdities, such as a log that shortens as it moves, and quickly fits into a shorter barn; about time dilation when moving; about twins aging differently in a rocket and on Earth; about the non-simultaneity of events in different coordinate systems, etc.) as a bad, inappropriate “joke”.

— There are no “Lorentz transformations” and no “Einstein’s theories” — all these are “jokes”, universally and very OBSESSIVELY inflated by the mass media.

I understand that it is difficult to accept the abovementioned, as Mark Twain once said: “It is easier to deceive people than to convince them that they are deceived.”

As a result: manipulations-sophisms, paradoxes-absurdities, absence of confirmation by experimental data, the presence of astronomical data that directly contradict STR+GTR — and still: “STR+GTR and quantum mechanics are the best parts in modern physics — its basis” ©!!!

And such pearls: “From the formulas E=mc ²/(1-(V/C)²)^1/2 and p=mV/(1-(V/C)²)^1/2, it is obvious that a massive body unable to move at the speed of light, since in this case the energy and momentum of the body must turn to infinity,” L. Okun.

— BUT this is still the same pointing finger to NATURE: “Hony, lie down, it’s written so here in the formula.”

And at the same time there are astronomical OBSERVATIONS about the movements of material bodies many times faster than the speed of light!

And even Olaf Roemer in 1676 used the additivity of the speed of light and the movement of the Earth in space to measure the speed of light itself! — The same property that A. Einstein “prohibited with his main postulate of STR+GTR” 200+ years later (postulate about the constancy of the speed of light in all inertial systems and its in-additivity with anything and with any movement)! Whether A. Einstein did not know about O. Roemer’s method of measuring the speed of light?

– It is [********], because this was one of the very first measurements of the speed of light, which, of course, all physicists of that time knew about. And as Einstein manipulated the speed of light quite massively it his theories, he knew the history of its measurement for sure!

For a detailed analysis of this, see the book: V. I. Sekerin “THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY — A MYSTIFICATION OF THE XX CENTURY”, Novosibirsk, 2007, on pp. 19-21).

And still — “this is not possible according to Einstein’s formulas.”

— So… the formulas of Einstein and his entire theory (and even BOTH OF THEM: STR and GTR)!

— We need to solve this problem somehow… Already everything looks very gloomy and long neglected!

(In the previous version of my opus about A. Einstein's STO+OTO, I did not touch at all the question of body mass.

 

And this is RELATIVELY reasonable, since the relativists-Einsteinians themselves don't agree about mass at all

--------     

 

As a result: A. Einstein's STR and GTR are speculative mathematical theories, internally contradictory, and contradictory not only to nature, but also to Logic, and simply to common sense.

They are based on not proven POSTULATES, introduced in lectures and in the original article of A. Einstein – with a SOPHISM — substitution of the trajectory of light, and ultimately lead to ABSURD CONSEQUENCES (“Paradoxes” )…

For these reasons, it is quite possible to classify STR+GTR not as physical theories, but as OBSESSIVE and IMPOSED nonsense.

Unfortunately, on the basis of STR+GTR, uncritically thinking individuals and the Einstein mafia have built many speculative theories, which, due to the physical inconsistency of STR+GTR, are themselves physically untenable, but, nevertheless, fill the information field of modern physics.

It is clear that the difficult but necessary path of PURIFICATION lies ahead.

And this is my “message to the world” — is a small but necessary step in this direction...

 

Miroslav Vasilievich Telkov, Ph.D.

[email protected]   April – June 2024             

Cited literature:

1. A. EINSTEIN, June 30, 1905. «ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES». По статье: This edition of Einstein’s On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies is based on the English translation of his original 1905 German-language paper (published as Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter K¨orper, in Annalen der Physik. 17:891, 1905) which appeared in the book The Principle of Relativity, published in 1923 by Methuen and Company, Ltd. of London

2. E. F. Taylor, J. A. Wheeler “Physics of Space-Time”, translation ed. Mir, 1971, original by E. F. Taylor and J. A. Wheeler “Spacetime Physics”, W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco London 1966.

3. Lecture: M. D. Fitkevich “Poincaré-Einstein mechanics — introduction to the special theory of relativity”, Institute of Nuclear Physics RAS, MIPT, April 20, 2023.

4. Lecture: A. A. Yakuta “Mechanics — STO. The Lorentz transformation and its consequences” Teach-in, Lectures by scientists from Moscow State University, Faculty of Physics of Moscow State University. (youtube)

5. Website of E. N. Avdeev: https://efirfizika.ru/

6. V. I. Sekerin “THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY — A MYSTIFICATION OF THE XX CENTURY”, Novosibirsk: Art Avenue Publishing House, 2007.

7. Lecture: S. S. Gershtein “Field Theory. lecture No. 1: Theory of Relativity. Lorentz transformations. 2013" (youtube)

8. O. Kh. Derevensky “Fig leaves of the Theory of Relativity” http://newfiz.info/

9. M. V. Korneva, V.A. Kuligin, G.A. Kuligina (ANALYSIS Research Group)

ERRORS, PREJUDICES AND MISCONCEPTIONS IN MODERN ELECTRODYNAMICS, 2012 http://kuligin.mylivepage/ru

10. A. N. Matveev “Mechanics and Theory of Relativity.” Textbook for universities. 3rd ed. Ed. «ONYX 21st century», 2003.