|
|
Perhaps, due to confusing mathematical theorems with Einstein equivalence principle as Pauli did, this principle is often not explained adequately in some books [21-23]. To deal with all the theoretical inconsistence superficially, some theorists claimed that the space-time coordinates have no physical meaning in general relativity. Such a speculation disagrees with the fact that there are non-scalars in physics. The deflection of light is related to the light ray being observed as an almost straight line away from the sun, and gravitational red shifts are related to gtt - the time-time component of space-time metric.
Nevertheless, based on such an absurd claim, Hawking [18] declares, n general relativity, there is no real distinction between the space and time coordinates, just as there is no real difference between any two space coordinates." On the other hand, Hawking [18] also believed, n arrow of time, something that distinguished past from future, giving a direction of time". Apparently, he did not see that there is an inconsistency between these two statements. Moreover, like others, Hawking accepted the deflection of light. He probably did not realize that the deflection angle could be defined only in a certain type of physical coordinate systems, where the trajectory of a light ray, when far away from the sun, is approximately a straight line. Note that such logical deficiency is a common problem among those so-called tandard" relativists.
Theorists such as Synge [19], Fock [39] and more recently, Hawking [18,40], Ohanian, Ruffini, and Wheeler [22], who do not understand Einstein equivalence principle for various reasons including inadequate understanding of physics or mathematics at the fundamental level or deficiency in logic, advocated essentially that the basis of general relativity should be the Einstein field equation alone. However, experimentally the unrestricted validity of Einstein equation has not yet been established beyond reasonable doubt [7,25,26,41].
Theoretically there is no satisfactory proof of rigorous validity of Einstein field equation [42-44] (e.g., the inadequate source term mentioned in §1, is the cause of the unphysical solution (29) [6,8]). In fact, in 1953 Hogarth [36] conjectured that the 1915 Einstein equation is invalid for a dynamic two-body problem; and Einstein himself had pointed out that his equation might not be valid for matter of very high density [3]. Moreover, it has been proven by the binary pulsar experiment that Einstein equation must be modified [7] and Yilmaz [45] pointed out that Einstein equation of 1915 is only a test particle theory. Moreover, in terms of physics, a static solution is only an approximation for some dynamical problems. This means that, to support Einstein illustration of the equivalence principle with calculations on the light bending, it is necessary to show that his linear equation is justifiable for dynamical problems. Thus, it is necessary to derive the Maxwell-Newton Approximation independently from physical principles (§4) since the 1915 Einstein equation is valid for static problems only. |
|
