Reply To: Precession of the perihelion of Mercury

[Gyula Szász]

“The relativistic expressions for E and p obey the relativistic energy–momentum relation:

E^2 – (pc)^2 =(mc^2)^2

where the m is the rest mass, or the invariant mass for systems, and E is the total energy”

First of all, is the “invariant rest mass” the rest inertial mass or the gravitational mass for the system? These are generally different. And what is the “total energy”? Furthermore, the energy is not conserved. This equation is an illegal oversimplification and has no relevance in physics. I’m wondering why such an equation is used in academic physics. The energy is not connected with the impulse p according this equation with the mass. Furthermore, the conservation of energy is unable to determine the equation of motions of particles. The whole definition of the theory of special relativity (1905, Einstein) is only a catchphrase and is scientifically without value.

If one would describe the four elementary particles, i=e,p,P,E, without radiation field and without interaction to the field, one would have the expression for the Lagrange density

L(particles)(x) = ∑ (i=e,p,P,E ) mi ⋅ c ⋅ ∂ ν ji(n) ν (x)

with ji(n) ν (x) = ( c ρi(n) (x), ji(n) (x) ) the particle number probability density and the particle numbers are conserved. Here are the principle uncertainty for the determination of the positions and velocities of particles contained. The integration about finite regions of Minkowski space Ω gives the action integral for the derivation of the equation of motions of the particles, however the subsidiary condition of particle number conservation must also be fulfilled. What Einstein did 1905 was nothing at the definition of special relativity.(unfortunately the text editor does not transfer the lower and upper indexes)

• This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by Gyula Szász.