**( Αϊνστάιν: ΛΑΘΟΣ ΠΑΡΑΔΟΧΕΣ)**

**MODIFICATION OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY FOR INTERPRETING THE GENERATION AND ABSORPTION OF PHOTONS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FORMATION AND DISINTEGRATION OF MATTER, SINCE EINSTEIN IN BINDING ENERGIES AND CONSERVATIVE SYSTEMS IS INVALID.**

**By Prof. L. Kaliambos (Natural Philosopher in New Energy)**

This article was announced to many universities around the world (Jan 2011).

Writing in Google Scholar "Kaliambos" one sees my papers " Impact of Maxwell's equation of the displacement current on electromagnetic laws and comparison of the Maxwellian waves with our model of dipolic particles." presented at the International conference "Frontiers of fundamental physics" (Olympia, 1993) and "Nuclear structure is governed by the fundamental laws of electromagnetisn" (2003) presented also at a nuclear conference held at NCSR 'Demokritos", (2002) with a large number of integral equations and figures which reveal the structure of nuclei by rejecting Einstein's relativity. (See the published papers in "User Kaliambos" along with our additional paper "Spin-spin interactions of electrons and also of nucleons create atomic molecular and nuclear structures").## PREFACEEdit

In order to interpret the generation and absorption of photons responsible for the formation and disintegration of matter it was necessary to modify Einstein’s special relativity. So the primary purpose of this scientific article is to introduce the readers to the concepts and ideas of Einstein’s special relativity , although our new approach to our understanding of nature met much scepticism and occasionally overt resistance. Understandably readers find concepts and axioms of special relativity difficult to embrace. In presenting this subject I have adopted an historical approach because the reader is better able to follow the reasoning that led Einstein at the start of the twentieth sentury to saggest, what then seemed preposterous propositions. There are some reasons for including historical material. First it helps the readers appreciate that science is an ongoing human enterprise that whatever we may today accept as "scientific truth" is subject to question and may well have to be abandoned in light of new data . And second, the occassional historical paragraphs provide a welcome interlude between more difficult mathematical analysis.

Einstein in his first postulate repeats Galileo's and Newton's ideas that all natural laws are the same like the same games of billiards played in a train whether it is at rest or is moving. Whereas in his introduction he wrote that the electromagnetic equations are not the same in both cases. Moreover in his second postulate following the errors of Maxwell he thought that a moving light source behaves like a moving boat producing in the sea waves whose the velocity is independent of the motion of the boat. In fact, the famous experiment of Michelson (1887) showed that the moving light source behaves like a moving gun shooting bullets whose the motion does depend on the motion of gun. Under this condition in 1993 for understanding the nature of photons I developed the model of dipolic particles according to which Einstein's special relativity should be modified for explaning the absorption and generation of photons.

## WRONG ASSUMPTIONS OF EINSTEIN IN THE INTRODUCTIONEdit

Historically Galileo and Newton formulated the laws which interpret why a game of billiards played in a train is the same whether the train is at rest with respect to the earth or is moving with a uniform velocity u. Note that such systems were called inertial reference systems in the so-called Galilean transformation since Galileo studied them with a detailed analysis and found that the gravitational force F = mg of a falling object is the same whether the laboratory is at rest or is moving with a uniform velocity. Similarly the experiments of the laws of Newton (1687), Coulomb (1785) and Ampere (1820) give the same results in a moving train or in a laboratory on the earth.
However Einstein in his paper “ **On the electrodynamics of moving bodies**” (1905) starts with the wrong assumption that applications of electromagnetic laws on moving bodies lead to asymmetries. Forty years earlier Maxwell in his paper “**A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field**” (1865) introduced the fallacious hypothesis that the electric current in the induction law is due to an electric force, which led to the misleading self propagating fields under his second hypothesis of the displacement current which is also wrong according to the experiment in 1963 of French and Tessman. ( See in Google Invalidity of Maxwell’s self propagating fields). Following the same errors Einstein emphasizes in his introduction that *if the magnet is in motion and the conductor at rest, there arises in the neighbourhood of the magnet an electric field. But if the magnet is stationary and the conductor in motion, no electric field arises*. In fact, this is the well- known motional emf which cannot lead to asymmetries, since in both two cases the induction law is consistent with the basic law of Ampere in which the magnetic force is due to relative motions of charges. Faraday in his paper “**Experimental Researches in Electricity”** (1832) summarizes that *a circumferential magnetism is exhibited by an electric current*.
Also Einstein believed that when an observer moves with the charges he measures only electric forces. However this is a fallacious idea because the magnetic force cannot depend on the relative motion of an observer but on the relative velocities as a result of the acceleration of charges in the sources connected with the reference frame of the laboratory. This inconsistency can be shown also in one experiment about the magnetic forces inside a rotating long charged cylinder. If an observer is rotating with the cylinder he will measure only magnetic forces inside. Electric forces cannot appear, because the electrostatic equations say, there, will be no electric fields inside.
Furthermore Einstein in his first postulate after replacing Maxwell’s immovable ether with the vacuum writes that all natural laws (including also electromagnetism) are the same in all systems. Then for the development of his theory for the increase of mass as a result of the speed he said that he was motivated by the difficulties inherent in Maxwell’s self propagating fields, without explaining what is the natural law which is responsible for the increase of mass. Here we clear that in our development of the **model of dipolic particles** we described the invalidity of Maxwell’s self propagating fields.

Moreover the model of dipolic particles solves the relativistic problem since the interaction of dipolic photons with other particles lead to the formula M = γMo under the application of the laws of Coulomb and Ampere which are the same in all inertial frames.

## EINSTEIN'S ERRORS IN HIS SECOND POSTULATEEdit

Although in the above transformation the earth is chosen as a “rest” system it is surely not a rest frame in an absolute sense. The earth rotates about its axis, it is in orbit about the sun, and the entire solar system revolves about the center of our galaxy. Newton understood this by writing: *Instead of absolute places and motions, we use relative ones*. The reason the true “immovable center” of the world cannot be identified is inherent in Newton’s laws of motion and was called Galileo’s principle of relativity. Moreover he assumed the equivalence of all systems but made also the additional assumption of an absolute space and time written in the forms : r' = r – ut and t' = t.
Then Maxwell who had formulated his theory of self propagating fields was forced to accept the hypothesis of an immovable ether to support his theory. He expressed it in these words: *There can be no doubt that the interplanetary and interstellar space are not empty, but are occupied by a material substance or body which is certainly the larger, and probably the most uniform body of which we have any knowledge*. Of course it suggested that just as the velocity of sound is modified by motion of an observer moving through the air, the measured velocity of light should be influenced by the motion of the earth through an immovable ether.
Under those ideas Michelson and Morley (1887) performed precise measurements of the speed of light on earth along the parallel x and perpendicular y direction to an assumed velocity u of the earth moving in the inertial reference frame of the hypothetical immovable ether. According to the Galilean transformation in x direction along a distance Lo the time Tx required for light to travel and come back is Tx = Lo/(c-u) + Lo/(c+u).

On the other hand the time Ty for the same distance Lo in y direction is Ty = 2Lo/(c^{2 }– u^{2 })^{0.5}Evidently, under the hypothesis of a moving ether with respect to the earth there must be a time difference between the two paths since Tx > Ty, but the results showed that Tx = Ty which means that u = 0. Of course this result leads to three assumptions.
A). In Case in which there is an ether it should be dragged by the apparatus since u = 0.

B). If one rejects the ether he must apply the photon theory of Einstein or our model of dipolic particles to see that this result is consistent with the Newtonian mechanics. For example the parallel velocities υ of an emitted electron and c of an emitted photon with respect to a radioactive material in a train moving with a velocity u are the same also when the material is put in a stationary train. In other words this situation seems to be like the same velocity v of a sound in the moving train which drags the air. It means also that the velocities c of photons and υ of electrons emitted from radioactive nucleus in the train behave like moving waves in a misleading ether which moves with the velocity u of the train. Therefore for the moving dipolic photons which give local time-varying electromagnetic fields a stationary observer on the earth (in front of the train) will measure the velocity u of him with respect to the source of photons or to the train by applying the Doppler effect δν/ν = u/c .
It is of interest to note that Doppler (1842) showed that if an observer moves with respect to a light source the frequency of light is changed. So an observer on the earth will measure the extra δν, by using the non relativistic relation δν/ν = u/c when there is not any absorption of photons ( complete reflection). In case in which the observer on the earth absorbs δν he will measure δν/ν =0 like the stationary observers in the train who measure the velocity c. . Note that the same non relativistic relation was used by Einstein in General Relativity. ( The relativistic frequency leads to complications). We justify it because a moving photon contains a mass and behaves like all moving particles which in gravity retain the same mass.( You will see in this article that in a closed conservative mechanical system without absorptions of photons the relativistic relation M = γ Mo cannot be used, because Einstein's special relativity is invalid in closed mechanical systems).
C ). If one needs to support the fallacious idea of an immovable system despite the laws of Newton and Galileo’s principle of relativity he may follow a third assumption by introducing a simple postulation that Lo in x direction contracts and becomes L<Lo while the Lo in y direction must remain constant as Lo. So the only way is to write Tx = Ty in the above equations, which lead to L = Lo/γ where γ = 1/(1-β^{2})^{0.5}. Here β = u/c which means that always γ>1. Under the influence of Maxwell’s immovable ether, FitzGerald (1889) and Lorentz (1892) following the third assumption independently suggested that as a result of motion through the ether the linear dimension Lo of an object contracts along the line of relative motion as L = Lo/γ. Note that γ is called the Lorentz factor in the well-known Lorentz transformation proposed by Lorentz in 1904 , while in the Galilean transformation the Lo remains the same at different velocities.
It is surprising that this length contraction L = Lo/γ according to the **model of dipolic particles**is a correct contraction due to the interaction of dipolic photons with a charged particle which increases the mass as M = γMo because of the absorption of photons. Here we examine this real dynamical situation due to the absorption of dipolic photons which seems to be similar to the hypothetical contraction of the apparatus of Michelson moving through the hypothetical immovable ether.
So we choose the reference frame of the light source which is analogous to the reference frame of the immovable ether. For example a stationary electron in the train after the interaction with a dipolic photon is accelerated and moves with a final velocity v with respect to the train or with respect to the virtual ether of the local time-varying fields which drags the light source, since they are local time-varying fields of the moving photons. Because of the increase of mass we must observe a length contraction L= γLo along the direction of v and use the Lorentz mathematical analysis based not on the assumptions that bodies move through an immovable ether but on the fundamental law of the absorption of photons since the particle is accelerated with respect to the train or with respect to the virtual ether connected invariably with the light source. That is, for the smaller real distance L we may write Tx = Ty. In case in which the electron is accelerated without absorption we measure a constant Lo by writing Tx>Ty as in the case of the Michelson experiment. In other words the relativistic electron which moves with a velocity v with respect to the reference frame of the light source behaves like the stationary observers in the train who always measure the same velocity c.
In 1905** **Einstein using the Lorentz factor γ of the Lorentz transformation proposed that the mass Mo of a moving particle increases as M = γΜο. However despite his development of photon theory he did not reject completely the ether but replaced it by the vacuum, since it was a great difficulty for him to abandon the Maxwellian waves moving through an immovable system. In his book “The evolution of physics” he emphasizes that the space is responsible for the propagation of light and one may use the word *ether* to express this fundamental property of space. He also writes that in case in which the light waves move through an ether it cannot be dragged by the earth, which is in contradiction with the Michelson experiment which showed that if there is an ether it will be dragged by the earth. He wrote also that one must assume a situation between an immovable ether and an ether which moves with the earth. Under this confused hypothesis of invariant light speed c Einstein introduced the strange idea in his **second postulation** that **the speed of light as measured in any inertial reference frame, is c regardless of the motion of the light source relative to that reference frame**.
Of course this postulate violates common sense, because the observer on the earth should measure the same velocity c or δν/ν = 0 or u/c = 0, like the observers in the train, while the experiments of Doppler for the observer on the earth give δν /ν = u/c . Note that this idea can be justified only in case in which δν is absorbed by the apparatus of the observer. According to our model of dipolic particles the light source seems to drag a virtual ether of all particles emitted from the radioactive material in the train like the balls of billiards which during the game contain the velocity u of the train. Whereas the velocity of the waves in the sea produced by a moving boat is independent of the motion of the boat. It is surprising that Einstein's strange idea contradicts not only his theory of photons (particles having mass ) but also his concept of simultaneity. According to Einstein’s hypothesis the events for the observers in the train are simultaneous because δν/ν = u/c = 0, while for the observers on the earth the events are not necessarily simultaneous because δν/ν = u/c. In 1916 Einstein proposed a new conception of the immovable ether. He wrote to Lorentz on the 17^{th} June 1916 : *I agree with you that the general relativity theory is nearer to an ether hypothesis than is the special relativity theory. *It is of interest to note that when Michelson and Einstein met briefly in 1931, Michelson remarked that he regretted that his experiment might have been responsible for giving birth to such a “*monster*” –referring to special relativity.

## THE FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF THE ABSORPTION OF PHOTONS LEADS TO THE RELATIVISTIC FORMULA M = γ Mo (New ideas on relativistic dynamics)Edit

After such strange ideas I presented at the International Conference “Frontiers of fundamental physics” (1993) the model of dipolic particles. In this model I suggested that the speed of light c is the same in all inertial systems and it is connected invariably with the source like the velocity υ of a moving electron in which the reference frame is the radioactive material because both particles contain mass like the balls of billiards in a train. Then my second effort was to explain the results of Weber who in 1864 showed that the proportionality factors of electric and magnetic forces are related to the constant speed of light c . Indeed I showed that the speed of dipolic photons is always c in an inertial frame of the light source because the opposite charges under the application of the basic electromagnetic laws exert along the dipole axis repulsive magnetic forces which become equal to the electric ones when the dipole axis is perpendicular to the velocity c in the reference frame of the light source.
On the other hand it is well-known the experiment of Bucherer and Neumann who in 1914 showed that an electron’s mass increases as its speed increases relative to the apparatus. Of course this experiment which shows the increase of mass cannot be related with the experiment of Michelson who performed to find the velocity of the apparatus or the light sourse with respect to a non existing immovable ether. So the solution of the problem should be based rather on the separated conservation of mass during the exchange of energies between matter and light.
In 1903 a very important experiment was performed by the American physicists Nichols and Hull who confirmed the predictions of Maxwell that P = U/c when the light is absorbed completely. If one writes P = mc for a photon he will conclude that the mass is a variable quantity. Then using the interaction of a dipolic photon with a stationary electron in the train (or stationary electron with respect to the light source) having a rest mass Mo one arrives at our complete fundamental formula hν/m = ΔE/ΔM = c^{2}, which leads to the conclusion that nature is inherently symmetric, since we arrives to the principle of Matter-Light equivalence, which leads directly to M = γ Μo under the two separate laws of conservations of mass and energy. Now one can understand that the second law of Newton F = dp/dt is valid after using M = γΜο. Then we write: m = ΔΜ and hν = ΔΕ. (See in Google new ideas on the nature of mass-energy equivalence). It means that during the absorption of photons the mass m of a photon is absorbed by the electron mass Mo which becomes greater as M = (Mo + m) = γMo. Also applications of electromagnetic laws on the interaction of dipolic photons with a stationery electron with respect to the light source give Ey(-e) dy = dU and Bz(-e)dy = dP. Since Ey/Bz = c we get U/P = c which leads to M = γΜο.

Here we clear that the photon waorks since E and B occur at the same time. But since the electron is at rest with respect to the source of light, the magnetic force appears after the electric force, which produces the velocity dy/dt of the electron. However after Newton's concept ACTION AT A DISTANCE or INSTANTANIOUS SYMULTANEITY the velocity dy/dt must approach to zero under a lenght contraction (dy) and a time dilation (dt). That is, the fundamental laws of electromagnetism which are the same in all inertial frames lead to the Lorentz transformation of length contraction and time dilation under the Lorentz factor γ. Since during the interaction of dipolic photons with a stationary electron with respect to the light source we see that there is a smaller distance L = Lo/γ because the electron carries also the mass m of photon. In other words we arrive at M = γMo after the application of the law of the light absorption P = U/c without using the above fallacious assumptions of Lorentz and Einstein. Here we clear that because of the absorption of photons the increased mass modifies the absolute time during the acceleration. Whereas in closed mechanical systems (without absorption or generation of photons) the time is absolute and the Galilean transformation is always fundamental and correct to describe such phenomena in closed conservative mechanical systems. Of course this conclusion differs fundamentally from Einstein's assumptions who did not know that there is an acceleration due to the absorption of photons which cannot be related to a relative motion of two observers.

## EINSTEIN'S BASIC ERRORS FOR THE TWO SEPARATE CONSERVATIONS OF MASS AND ENERGY ( New ideas on the mass-energy equivalence) Edit

It is surprising that the special relativity was based on the errors for the two separate conservations of mass and energy. As Einstein wrote for the two conservation laws *Through relativity theory they melt together into one principle*he did much to retard the progress of physics for revealing the natural laws which lead to the special relativity. The increase of mass in Einstein’s theory is due to the relative motion with respect to an observer, which leads to complications also in case in which we accept Einstein’s wrong idea that mass is converted into energy . Here in the relation M = γ Mo the increase of velocity β = u/c (increase of energy) leads to the increase of mass which is opposite of his idea. Such a strange idea led physicist to conclude that the origin of the nuclear binding energy is the mass defect ΔM which must be converted into energy.
In fact the nuclear binding energy is due to the charge distributions in nucleons which give the strong nuclear force under the application of the laws of electromagnetism.( See in Google Nuclear structure by L. Kaliambos). For example the released energy in the nuclear structure of deuteron becomes the energy hν of photon. In this process the mass defect ΔΜ becomes the mass m of photons. That is we observe two separate conservations of energy and mass.

## EINSTEIN'S IDEA OF RELATIVE MOTION'** OF TWO RANDOM OBSERVERS LEADS TO COMPLICATIONS ( New ideas on Einstein's relative motions)**Edit

**OF TWO RANDOM OBSERVERS LEADS TO COMPLICATIONS ( New ideas on Einstein's relative motions)**

According to the model of dipolic particles we do not use uniform velocities of two observers but the acceleration of an electron in an inertial system. For example if the electron in the train is not affected by a photon it will remain stationary in the train. If it accelerates to a velocity υ without any absorption of dipolic photons it will give a work dW = Fds = υm(dυ/dt)ds = υ(mdυ) of the Newtonian mechanics. However in the case of the absorption of a photon it will give a relativistic work dW = υ( mdυ+ υdm) of the relativistic dynamics which leads to the relativistic formula M = γMo. Using Einstein’s the stationary electron in a train moving with a velocity u and a stationary electron on the earth of course an observer on the earth will measure the velocity u of the electron in the train but he cannot use the formula M = γMo because the electron in the train is not accelerated. Under this fallacious situation the observer in the train will measure the relative velocity u for the stationary electron on the earth but similarly he cannot use the equation M = γMo because the stationary electron on the earth is not accelerated. Also he cannot determine the rest mass Mo of the stationary electron because Einstein had chosen random inertial frames moving with random velocities with respect to the light source which for him is independent of the velocity c of dipolic photons. In case in which the electron accelerates without any absorption of photons both observers on the earth and in the train are forced to use the work of Newtonian mechanics. They will use the formula M = γMo when it is accelerated under the absorption of photons. This very simple example allows us to conclude that Einstein's relative motion between two observers leads to complications because the relativistic problem is a dynamical problem of the absorption and generation of photons. Therefore Einstein's concept that his theory was termed “special” because it applies the principle of relativity only to the special case of inertial reference frames is a fallacious idea.

## INVALIDITY OF RELATIVITY IN CONSERVATIVE SYSTEMSEdit

According to the Bohr model the rest mass Mo of the electron in the system electron-proton is determined when the electron is stationary far away from the proton (ionization of hydrogen atom). Using again Einstein’s the fallacious ideas of the relative motion between observers one expects to measure a mass M>Mo since in the formation of the hydrogen atom the electron moves around the nucleus with a considerable velocity υ/c = 0.007 in its ground state having a kinetic energy EK = 13.6 eV. But because of the binding energy the moving electron has a mass M<Mo. Here the model of dipolic particles solves the problem by using the absorbed mass of a the dipolic photon during the ionization of the hydrogen atom. Under the interaction of the atom with a photon the absorbed photon gives to the atom an energy hν = 13.6 eV and its mass m Since the kinetic energy of the proton is negligible the electron gets the total kinetic energy EK = 27.2 eV with a velocity v/c = 0.01. Also it gets a total mass Mo = M+m which is equal to the rest mass Mo. Although the electron looses its kinetic energy which leads to ionization the electron mass Mo remains constant since in close mechanical systems where the mechanical energy is not converted into the energy of light the theory of Einstein cannot be applied. For example in the system ball-earth when the potential energy is converted into the kinetic energy the mass remains constant during the motion. When the mechanical energy is conserved in which the sum of potential and kinetic energy is constant we do not observe absorptions of photons. In this case we use the Newtonian mechanics and the Galilean transformation which is always correct. However in the experiment of Joule who created thermal energy, a mass ΔM is lost according to the formula of the matter – light equivalence. Summarizing we conclude that since the idea of special relativity or relative motion of two observers leads to several complications it is better to use the principle of matter-light equivalence.

NEW IDEAS ON EINSTEIN'S CONCEPTS FOR SPACE AND TIME

Here the length contraction (dy) and the time dilation (dt) are due to the quantum dynamics of INSTANTANEOUS SIMULTANEITY of Newton's concept ACTION AT A DISTANCE. However the length contraction according to Einstein’s ideas was a kinematik effect as a result of relative motions in vacuum of two observers. In 1905 Poincare was the first to recognize that the transformation has the properties of a mathematical group. In the same year Einstein derived the Lorentz transformation under the assumption of simultaneity. On the other hand in 1915 Lorentz wrote to Einstein that for the formulation of his transformation he used a local time which must be regarded as no more than an auxiliary mathematical quantity. However according to the model of dipolic particles the length contraction and the time dilation are dynamical effects due to the absorption of dipolic photons, which seem to be real situations because during October 1971 a demonstration of time dilation was reported by Hafele and Keating.
Under this condition since nature is inherently symmetric we expect to observe the opposite scheme of length dilation and time contraction. Starting from the photon-electron system we abandone Einstein's concepts of two random observers and determine the rest mass Mo as a stationary particle in the reference frame of the light source where v/c = 0. After the absorption of a dipolic photon the acceleration of the electron leads to the quantity v/c< 1 because of the absorption. In this case we measure ΔΕ/ΔΜ = hν/m or M= γMo of the moving electron under the length contraction and the time dilation. Then we expect to see the opposite situation when the electron is decelerated. In this case a photon will be generated according to the above matter-light equivalence. Also we expect to see what happens between these two opposite schemes, that is, in case of an absolute space and time.
In the simple system for the formation of atoms (electron-proton system) under a closed mechanical system the potential energy k(-e)e/r = -27.2 eV will be transformed into the kinetic energy KE = 27.2 eV with a velocity v/c = 0.01.During this transformation (without any absorption of photons the mass of the system remains constant. So we are able to accept Newton's additional concept of an absolute space and time and apply the Galilean transformation which describes the closed mechanical systems under a constant mass during the acceleration. But according to the quantum mechanics which has its origin in the same law P = U/c the half of the kinetic energy (27.2/2 =13.6 eV) will be transformed into hν of a generated dipolic photon for the formation of the hydrogen atom having the same angular momentum of photon (S = h/2π) .
Bohr understood it very well. In his paper “ On the Constitution of Atoms and Molecules”(1913) he proposed that the dynamical equilibrium of the system – nucleus and electron – conforms with Newtonian mechanics. According to the Bohr model electrons can exist only in certain states and when the system makes a transition from one state to another it emits or absorbs photons. Thus we will measure the binding energy – 13.6 eV of the hydrogen atom. During this transformation one must assume that there is a length dilation and a time contraction because the electron deceleration leads to the lower velocity υ/c = 0.007. That is, we observe four schemes. A). According to Newtonian mechanics for the formation of atoms the transformation of the potential energy into the kinetic energy (acceleration in a closed mechanical system) occurs under an absolute space and time since the rest mass Mo remains the same at high velocities. B) According to Quantum mechanics the deceleration of the electron cannot send the electron to its position of the rest mass. Instead it obeys the principle of matter-light equivalence ΔΕ/ΔΜ = hν /m for the formation of atom . During this formation of atoms a photon is generated under the scheme length dilation and time contraction. C ) For the disintegration of atoms according to the law of absorption of photons (limitation of special relativity). The interaction of photon with the atom leads to the acceleration of the electron with the absorption of photon under the scheme length contraction and time dilation. In this case the greater velocity increases the mass M to Mo. D ). The mass Mo is decelerated under an absolute space and time obeying again the Newtonian mechanics because the mass Mo remain the same in both cases of the v/c =0.01 and v/c = 0.

## CONCLUSIONSEdit

After the limitations of wrong special relativity due to an assumed kinematic effect of moving observers we see that there are two schemes of space time during the formation and disintegration of matter, since Einstein's ideas in a detailed analysis of the hydrogen atom under the quantum mechanics lead to complications.

**A). Absolute space-time of acceleration and (lenght dilation - time contraction) during the formation of matter**

1). According to Newtonian mechanics for the formation of atoms the transformation of the potential energy into the kinetic energy (acceleration in a conservative system) occurs under an absolute space and time since the rest mass Mo remains the same at high velocities. In this case relativity is invalid, because there is not any absorption of photons.

2) According to Quantum mechanics there is deceleration of the electron which obeys the principle of matter-light equivalence ΔΕ/ΔΜ = hν /m for the formation of atom with M<Mo. During this formation of atoms a photon is generated taking the energy ΔΕ = hν and the mass ΔM = m of the atom under the scheme length dilation and time contraction. Also this situation cannot be related with special relativity which should give M> Mo.

**B). Length contraction-time dilation and absolute space-time of deceleration during the disintigration of matter**

1 ) For the disintegration of atoms according to the law of absorption of photons (invalid special relativity). The interaction of photon with the atom leads to the acceleration of the electron with the absorption of photon under the scheme length contraction and time dilation. In this case the acceleration f electron from υ/c = 0.007 to the quantity v/c = 0.01 increases the mass M to Mo like the results of special reletivity. However here we do not observe relative velocities but a real acceleration in the reference frame of the source of light in the train, since photons of different light sources outside the train give different results.

2 ). Then the mass Mo is decelerated under an absolute space and time obeying again the Newtonian mechanics because the mass Mo remain the same in both cases of the v/c = 0.01 and v/c = 0.