|
|
Acknowledgments
This paper is dedicated to Professor J. E. Hogarth of Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, who conjectured in 1953 the nonexistence of dynamic solutions for the 1915 Einstein equation. The author wishes to express his appreciation to Professor Xin Yu for the hospitality of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University where substantial of this work was done in 1995. The author gratefully acknowledges stimulating discussions with Dr. H. C. Chan, Professor C. Au, Professor J. E. Hogarth, Professor S. A. Lamb, Professor P. Morrison, and Professor H. Nicolai. The author wishes to thank the referees for valuable comments and pointing out useful literature; and Ms. P. Ma for the French abstract. The author is indebted to Mr. David P. Chan and Mr. Richard C. Y. Hui for their supports and hospitality while in Hong Kong. This publication is supported by Innotec Design, Inc., U.S.A.
ENDNOTES
1) Some authors prefer, different from Einstein, to define K = 8( (c-4 [55]. Then, the four velocity u( would be defined as cdx(/ds, where ds2 = g(( dx(dx( such that equation (1) remains the same.
2) The time-tested assumption that phenomena can be explained in terms of identifiable causes is called the principle of causality. This is the basis of relevance for all scientific investigations. The principle of causality implies that any parameter in a physical solution must be related to some physical causes.
3) This explicit reinterpretation of Einstein's equivalence principle (based on Pauli's misinterpretation that Einstein objected [57]) as just the signature of Lorentz metric was advocated by Synge [58] earlier and Friedman9) currently. Recently, it has been proven that such a reduction is inconsistent with Einstein's own interpretation and physical principles [11,35,57] as well as in disagreement with experiments including the Michelson-Morley experiment [59]. However, the advocates disregard all these inconsistencies because, owing to their inadequate understanding of physics at the fundamental level, they believe that a coordinate system (including its metric) has no physical meaning [60]. (Moreover, following the step of Fock [61], Ohanian, and Ruffini openly declared in their book [55], which is endorsed by Wheeler, that both of Einstein's equivalence principle and the principle of relativity are invalid.) Nevertheless, this seemingly exceedingly ingenious defense collapses because the observed gravitational red shifts unequivocally imply that their interpretation is invalid in physics.
4) A dynamic metric solution in gravity is related to the dynamics of its source matter. A dynamic source, according to relativity, would generate gravitational radiation [1]. For the perihelion of Mercury and the deflection of light, the metric is a static solution although solutions of the test particles are calculated. It was believed that the influence of a test particle to the metric could also be calculated with (1). However, as suspected by Gullstrand [40,41] and conjectured by Hogarth6) [31], the truth is the opposite. |
|
