'The 100 Authors' who opposed Einstein and Relativity from 1905-1930. Buried by claims of 'racism'.

Many of their arguments long predate the Nazi party and can be found in books and articles published before, during and just after World War 1. Relativity is based on the corruption of reality.

“The theory of relativity is a mathematical masquerade, behind which there is an almost inextricable tangle of confusion of terms, contradictions, fallacies, arbitrary assumptions and disregard for sound logic.

The world becomes one of an infinite number of possible coordinates made of bundles composed of dynamics and causation, but also all actual physics, disappears….

The theory achieves its record with the relativization and reversibility of the terms before and after, cause and effect, and similar cinema jokes....” (Dr. E. Ruckhaber, p. 49, in ‘One Hundred Authors Against Einstein’, 1930).

Dr Ruckhaber (Jewish) and his quote above with its admittedly rough translation, is one of the best summaries of the fraud that is the Relativity cult. Ruckhaber was a professor of philosophy in Berlin. Relativity is not science as evidenced by the scientific method. It was, as Ruckhaber well understood, first and foremost an interpretative philosophy. The entire nexus of the complicated and circular mathematics is of course the philosophical imperative to deny what tens of thousands of light interference experiments found – no movement of the Earth but a confirmation of the aether wind.

From Einstein’s confused and largely plagiarized thesis it is a short hop to the testicles can be an ovary, the universe is revolving around the merry-go-round which is apparently immobile, and our universe is one of thousands of ‘multiverses’ (given that everything is ‘relative’). ‘The Science’ cannot explain the planet we live on, or how the moon was formed, or why Venus’ rotation is backward and slowing down. But apparently, pace its own propaganda, ‘The Science’ knows everything. It knows very little.

Racism

Einstein used the charge of antisemitism starting in the early 1920s. Ironically his own diaries reveal Einstotle to be rather racist and misogynistic. Some recent pundits surmise that the Jewish philosopher was actually anti-semitic, based on recent ‘hate laws’. Shutting down debate by calling someone a racist or anti-semite has a long antecedent. It is not a new phenomena.

The cult of Relativity is more about propaganda and ‘politics’, than it is about ‘science’.

Einstein never bothered to produce a mechanical proof to support his philosophies. He would avoid and then calumny his opponents. The Relativity cult’s reaction to this book ‘100 Authors’ is proof of that. These author’s were and still are dismissed as Nazis and antisemitics.

All the arguments used in this book long pre-date the Nazi party. This work has nothing to do with ‘racism’.

The charges of racism are false. Unlike Einstein, ‘The Science’, ‘teachers’ and ‘experts’, the author has read the book. Not all of the claims in the author’s very limited opinon are correct, but too many of them are spot on to ignore. They devastate Einstotle’s cult. People should read the work and decide for themselves.

False charges

The arguments contained in this work pre-date the scribbling of the German equivalent of Muhammad’s Koran (Hitler’s Mein Kampf), in 1925. The Nazi party was not a force in German politics until 1929. The arguments used by the 100 authors even pre-date World War I in many cases. Roughly 33% or more of the authors are Jewish, including the 3 primary editors, or are foreigners and not German. Further, there is not a single line that even mentions Jews or is remotely antagonistic to any group including Jews.

Yet, pace the Relativity cult’s propaganda, the author is supposed to believe that non-Germans, Jews, and secular, normal German scientists, philosophers and engineers, whose arguments in the main can be dated back to WW1 and to the early 1920s, long before the rise of Nazi power, were closet Nazi supporters and ‘fascists’.

Absurd.

The only well-known scientist out of these 100 authors who became a Nazi supporter was Phillip Lenard. Lenard’s argument against Relativity can be traced back to 1916 and further, when the National Socialist Workers Party did not exist. Lenard was highly regarded and capable, and part of a far larger group which simply could not accept the fantasy world of Einstein¹.

Even in Lenard’s case, the charge of ‘Nazi’ or ‘racist’ to debauch his input is irrelevant. His arguments were based on ‘science’ and evidence and even if he was ‘hostile’ to Jews before the rise of the Nazis that does not render his arguments incorrect, though it may or may not impugn his character (everything is relative isn’t it?).

The claims

Below is a small summation by category of their complaints. The arguments against Relativity cover the spectrum of mathematics, physics and philosophy – or the 3 main categories which comprise the ‘Relativities’ plural, given that the 2 main Relativities (special and general) are mutually exclusive, and that the very flexible interpretation of tautological mathematics and illogical ontological arguments, gives rise to any number of other ‘Relativities’.

There is no single unified, coherent, logical and proven ‘Relativity’. None. It is a buffet of geometrical-choice, where you can create your own ‘Relativity’. Einstein’s own maths lead to an infinite set of interpretations and conclusions. As with the non-science fraud of ‘Evolution’ the answer is always the same – ‘Relativity is proven’.

1-Mathematical corruption

1. Dr. J. Le Roux (French), “The conclusions sometimes have no relation to the premises, the basic components of the calculations assume a meaning that does not correspond to the definition in the underlying data….it takes its own principle as the starting point…geodetic measurements in the form of quadratic differentials with four variables, through space time with four dimensions….this hypothesis contradicts gravity….my very clear conclusion is that Einsteins RTH (relativity theories) does not belong in the field of positive science.” (p. 20, 27)

2. Georg Wendel, “ He (Einstotle) accepts certain errors of older physicists or mathematicians…he accepts four-dimensional space, a thought from Riemann and Helmholtz….accepts the errors of non-Euclidean geometry…accepts the doctrine of finite space…Palagyi rightly says…’playing with transformations is a dangerous tautology, since it gives the appearance that it contains a demonstration of the principle of relativity while it only expresses the logical-methodical principle that we represent the absolute regularity of a movement in differential equations..’” (p. 65, 69)

3. Dr I. Geissler, “Lorentz had already set up the transformation formulas before him….Einstein now makes his own ‘theory’ in such a way that the bodies do not shorten with regard to the space….but that simply the spatial lengths are shorter (!) as soon as they are on another moving body…he always supposes the evenness of the time and space lines…” (p. 11)

4. Dr. Arvid Reuterdahl, “The Fitzgerald-Lorentz contraction Hypothesis is pure mathematical fiction which is not supported by any known and observable fact, it was invented to account for the alleged negative result in the Michelson-Morley experiment.” (p. 41)

5. Dr. Armin Gimmerthal, “That Einstein’s formulation of the relativity principle is a forgery….That all transformation equations….are false….That the evidence taken from Minkowski’s ‘World’ – a mathematical fantasy.” (p. 12)

6. Dr Hans Israel, “The substitution x – vt = x’ does not apply to the reflected light beam of the Michelson interferometer direct against the earth translation….achieved in this case by the substitution x + vt = x’. After that, the principle of relativity no longer applies…” (p. 14)

7. Dr. W. Walte, “…if energy can neither disappear nor be newly created…the enlargement of a body derived from Einstein’s formulas without the need for energy is in contradiction with the energy principle.” (p. 60) (E=MC2 is wrong in other words)

8. Dr. St. Mohorovicic, “(Relativity) is content only with the mathematical description of natural phenomena, and it dispenses with any physical explanation…Confusion only arises when the mathematician thinks he can do physics in this way.” (p. 95)

2-Corruption of ‘Time’

1. Dr Prof H. Mellin, “Since (Relativity) denies absolute simultaneity, it (unconsciously) denies not only mathematics, but also empirical reality….Without simultaneity, there can be no talk of uniformity, irregularity, speed and acceleration.” (p. 32)

2. Dr. Walther Rauschenberger, “The assumption that simultaneity is relative is completely absurd.” (p. 39)

3. Dr. Arvid Reuterdahl, “The truth is that although Space and Time are always associated in this phenomenal world of action, nevertheless, space differs so fundamentally from Time that a Oneness cannot be established.” (p. 41)

4. Dr Hans Driesch; “..time is essentially something fundamental other than space. That there should be many ‘times’ ‘simultaneously’ is an incomprehensible thought.” (p. 8)

5. Dr. S. Friedlaender, “Without any physical justification, Einstein treats time as a body moved with or by bodies. With such physically untenable means one does not solve problems.” (p. 9)

6. Dr. Armin Gimmerthal, “Einsteins views on space and time are untenable….a relativization of simultaneity is obvious nonsense.” (p. 12)

7. Dr. J. Le Roux, “…the universe is formed by a total of n mass points, the position of the whole will depend on 3n variables. The corresponding analytical space will have 3n dimensions. Time is not a complementary coordinate…” (p. 24)

8. Dr. Karl Vogtherr, “1. Time is a one-dimensional continuum. 2. The time passes monotonically i.e. there is only a transition from earlier to later…3. The points in time separate periods of time, which are mathematical variables.” (p. 51)

3-Corruption of ‘Light’

1. Dr. Walther Rauschenberger, “The basic senselessness (of Relativity) is the assumption that one and the same ray of light should have the same speed in relation to any body in motion!!! This is absolutely impossible – it is a completely insane thought.” (p. 39)

2. Dr O. Kraus, “The optical experiment by Michelson seemed to show that the light emitted by an earthly light source behaves exactly as if the earth was at rest (Relativity denies this)….thus a projectile theory like Newton’s and Poisson’s would apply…” (p. 17)

3. Dr. S. Friedlaender, “In the movement of light, Einstein confuses its independent classification with subordination. His assertion that the movement of light, as independent, makes no contrast to other movements, is groundless and incomprehensible, hence the whole theory is untenable.” (p. 9)

4. Dr. Arvid Reuterdahl, “Einstein’s postulate that the velocity of light is Absolute, is utterly false. Postulating one Absolute against the relativistic destroys relativity….Einstein’s first paper (1905) is mathematically wrong because he derives a spherical wave front instead of an elliptical one from his light source.” (p. 40)

4-Corruption of the ‘Aether’

1. H. Wittig, “There is no reason for physics to dispense with the assumption of an aether. If natural science were to cancel the aether….have to resort to another auxiliary hypothesis for material reasons in order to be able to explain the near effect…of Newton’s remote effects.” (p. 102)

2. Georg Wendel, “Einstein declares the ether to be non-existent, while through it alone a propagation of light is possible and the entire continuity of the universe would be destroyed if no light ether is assumed between the molecules and atoms…” (p. 66)

3. Dr. Sten Lothxgxus, Stockholm, “ (discussing the Fizeau experiment which had a great impact on Einstotle, given that it denied the movement of the Earth)….If the expression L(2v/c) is divided by the wavelength, we get…the displacement of the fringes of the interferences found by Fizeau…This means a victory for the classical principle of relativity (found in Newton), because it has been proven that the speed of light is changed by +/-v, which was the speed of the water flow (disproving Relativity). (p. 31)

4. Dr Rudolf Weinman, “The Fizeau experiment confirms the Michelson experiment…also proves…that even a Michelson experiment with reference to an inner-terrestrial movement would not deliver c (light speed invariance).” (p. 61)

5. Lothar Mittis, “The ether gravity must therefore normally also be determined by the fact that the light beam is at least curved by the attraction when it approaches a gravity field. Such a curvature was also noted by Eddington (an Einsteinian marketer and physicist)….(Relativity) is a sick product of a sick time.” (p. 34)

6. Dr. Karl Vogtherr, “According to the result of the experiment by Michelson and Gale (1925) on must assume that the etheric envelope of the earth does not participate in the daily rotation of the earth, which is in agreement with the assumption that the aether is frictionless and is only held on the earth’s surface by gravity…” (p. 55)

7. Drs. P. Lenard and F. Schmidt, “We assume a meta-ether that is everywhere and that does not take part in the movement of the earth, while the earth, like every piece of matter, has its own ether….informal explanation of the Michelson experiment also with fixed star light, the aberration, the curvature of the light, path…Miller...experiments at great altitude.” (p. 90)

Note: these comments on the aether comport with many posts on this substack. If the aether does not exist, neither can light or sound transmission. The existence of the aether is the simplest and most scientific explanation why light interference experiments find no movement of this planet.

5-Corruption of Philosophy

1. Dr. Erich Ruckhaber, “Einstein confuses subjective and objective reality….The fundamental error of Einstein, like that of his predecessors Mach, Petzoldt, and others, is a purely logical one and exists entirely independently of any epistemology or metaphysics….the confusion of…mathematical formulas with reality…reducing time to space is the same as trying to reduce movement to rest.” (pp. 47-8)

2. Georg Wendel, “He (Einstotle) declares every subjective appearance to be equally true…every claim…would be equally correct…Einstein teaches a curved space – an unbelievable mistake in reasoning, since space has no design and expands into infinity in all directions.” (this is what the Big Bang states) (p. 66)

3. Dr. Ludwig Goldschmidt, “Einstein and Weyl (an Einstein disciple and marketer) operate in an area for which precise and reliable philosophical knowledge must be assumed. Their ignorance, however, is only exceeded by the grotesque inflation of a self-consciousness…”(p. 13)

6-Corruption of Mercury’s perihelion

1. Dr. Ludwig Goldschmidt, “Einstein only received the Mercury derivation from the erroneous view of calculating it relativistically….a physical explanation is not given….the rotating solar electro-potential can lead to a shackling of Mercury through which it hurries…(this could be another explanation for the perihelion of Mercury)” (p. 15)

2. Dr. Arvid Reuterdahl, “Einstein was forced to amputate this theory in order to magically unfold Gerber’s Newtonian formula which he used, without acknowledgement, to make this calculation. Therefore the motion of the plane of Mercury proves the correctness of Gerber’s Newtonian computation, but not the truth of Einsteinism.” (p. 43)

Note: the fraudulent claim that mercury’s perihelion ‘confirms Relativity’ is dealt with here.

7-Corruption of solar spectral refraction

1. Dr. H. Fricke, “..furthermore, Einstein presented the deflection of the light beam by the force of the sun as proof of the correctness of his theory in contrast with Newton’s theory. But now, more than a hundred years before Einstein, the German scholar v. Soldner calculated the same deflection of the light beam by the sun’s gravity from Newton’s theory!” (p. 82)

2. Dr. Arvid Reuterdahl, “In 1911 Einstein’s theory produced a deflection of light equal to 0.83 second of arc. In 1918 he found that the deflection was 1.7 second arc. The latter is two times the former. Einstein makes no apologies or explanations concerning these glaring mutual contradictions.” (p. 43)

3. Georg Wendel, “Gerber’s observations (in 1887 using Newtonian equations)….the spectral lines (redshift) are broken with imperfect, outdated apparatuses made are quite unreliable…(Einstein’s) observations on the deflection of the light rays at the edge of the sun showed values that were far too small and values that corresponded to the influence of refraction and aberration.” (the aether is another explanation for light aberration and redshift) (p. 71)

There is a long list of objective and verifiable science which nullifies ‘Relativity’ and highlights its corruption.

Bottom Line

Einstein’s declamation of ‘racism’ against such men is just another example of the apocrypha and misdirection which emanates from ‘The Science’ and the Einstein cult. If you criticize the secular non-practicing Jewish theologian, who in his youth attended a Catholic school, you are a racist. It matters not what your arguments are based on, and how logical or exact they might be.

We saw this during the Corona, Convid plandemic where scepticism of the narrative was met with charges of ‘racism’ given the prevalence of Jewish personalities within the criminal pharmaceutical industry or government agencies charged with ‘health’ or plandemic management. Cries of racism or Nazism are the hollow whimpering’s of someone who has lost the argument.

These ‘100 authors’ pointed out immutable facts.

1. Einstein’s mathematics is tautological and absurd.

2. Relativity is a flawed and sophomoric-tautological philosophy not a science.

3. Einstein provides no physical proofs for his claims or maths.

4. Einstein does not understand, or intentionally ‘misinterprets’, the data from Fizeau and Michelson-Morley (an aether is detected, the Earth is not moving). The entire premise of his philosophy is therefore physically disproven.

5. Relativity’s postulations about time, light and motion are wrong.

6. Einstein roared confusion and corruption about time, clocks, measuring clocks, the role of an observer (future post will cover this), light speed invariance, and the aether.

7. Special and General Relativity are mutually exclusive.

8. Einstein’s own disciples and interpreters were at odd with his own theories.

9. Mercury, sunlight displacement and even the photon, are inaccurate and do nothing to prove Relativity, given they can be explained perfectly well with classical physics.²

10. Quantum mechanics, well in train by 1930, disproved large areas of Relativity.

The arguments contained in this book are still relevant today. Not a single claim mentioned in this book and summarised above has ever been addressed by the Relativity cult. None of these charges are ever taught.

By 1930, based on money, investment and ‘science’-media propaganda, Relativity was elevated as ‘The Science’.

It ‘proved’ Copernicanism. It ‘saved the phenomena’. It was untouchable. Einstein drily remarked in 1932 that he was surprised that his ‘thought experiment’ had attracted such devoted and violently passionate disciples. At least he was honest enough to admit that it was a philosophical fraud.

Privately, if he was a man of any intellect and honesty whatsoever, Einstein must have agreed with these ‘100 Authors’ and their perspicacious observations.

All hail.

===

‘Hundert Autoren Gegen Einstein’, 1931, English translations of varying quality exist. Published by Dr Hans Israel (Jewish), Dr. Erich Ruckhaber (Jewish), Dr Rudolf Weinmann (Jewish). Apparently this book is antisemitic.

¹Lenard’s objections were famous by 1918. In 1922 there was a conference in Leipzig where 19 physicists, mathematicians, and philosophers collectively objected to Einstein’s Relativity philosophy. This is hardly known. The group included Lenard, Gehreke, Lipsius, Palagyi, Fricke, Lothigius and other leading men in the aforementioned fields.

²Einstein was awarded a Nobel prize for the photon-electric effect in 1921, which was largely disproven by Millikan in 1916. Yet in the public mind it was Relativity which garnered the Nobel and this gave his cult endless propaganda ammunition. Einstein postulated that light was a photon (or particle) subject to ‘brownian motion’ (1905). Light as a particle in motion was not a new idea in 1905, not in 1805, not even in 1705. Light is considered to be a wave of particles (or corpuscles pace Newton). The Nobel gift to Einstotle was basically ‘The Science’ granting acclamation to one of its own, who ‘saved the phenomena’. We see this every year and in other areas of ‘politics’ and ‘scientific’ achievements and awards. In the normal vernacular it is called ‘corruption’.

Herbert Dingle: ‘Science at a Crossroads’, a critique of Special Theory of Relativity (STR) and its clocks, never answered

Einstein and the Space-Time deceit. 'Time' has nothing to do with 'Space'.

The 'Lorentz Transformation', the basis of 'Relativity' and its tautological, fantasy world.