GPS navigation, star light bending and others

Every observed phenomenon that is claimed as proof of relativity can be explained by simple reasoning based on classical physics. But the religion of relativity has mesmerized and spoiled the scientific minds so much that the latter now believe only in weird phenomena and absurd interpretations and can’t see or accept things as they are.

GPS and Relativity

Spoiled by the relativity ‘demon’, both lay people and scientists repeatedly claim that satellite navigation systems do not work accurately unless the time dilation phenomenon of relativity is taken into account. Let’s explore the truth.

The observation is that there is difference between the times recorded by the satellite clock and the earth based clock.

According to the religion of relativity, this difference in the time between the two clocks is due to the phenomenon of Time dilation. Relativity assumes that it is the Time that gets affected by gravity and motion (but not the clocks).

The more sensible argument is – Time as such runs the same everywhere but it is the Clocks that get affected by gravity and motion. So the clocks tick differently in different gravitational fields despite the Time running same everywhere; and hence is the above observed difference.

People with least commonsense would realize that Time and Space are nonmaterial concepts while clocks are material things (including the atomic clocks upon which the relativists swear). So how can gravity affect the nonmaterial concepts and not affect the material things? So relativity and time dilation are ridiculous.

Bending of star light

Relativists think that if at all Ether exists, it must only exist and behave in the way their silly religion decides! Because Ether doesn’t behave as per their stupid religion, the religious believers swear that Ether doesn’t exist at all!

When a ball spins in a pond of still water, the ball spins a layer of water around itself. This spinning of water is not an all or none phenomenon. The ‘layer’ of water that is closer to the ball gets spun faster and as we move away from the ball, this ‘drag’ becomes less and less noticeable and becomes negligible beyond the ‘horizon’. And same would be the case with Earth spinning in the ocean of Ether.



Obviously, as the star’s light passes though the spinning Ether medium, the light waves bend and hence the star may appear to be at a different location than it’s ‘actual’ position.

Sagnac effect can be easily explained using the Doppler shift, and it needs neither special relativity nor ether drag.

The Fizeau’s experiment actually proves that the speed of light gets affected by the motion of its medium. If the SOL is constant and unaffected by the motion of water, then both light rays (one going against the water flow and the other travelling along the direction of water flow) must have remained coherent.

But relativists are ‘clever’ to claim even the obviously contradictory evidence as highly supportive of their religion. Another important trait of relativists is tampering with the reference frames. They create and ignore reference frames as and when they like to keep their religion alive. These traits are ‘inherited’ simultaneously as the weird theory makes its way into the minds of the relativists and ‘occupies’ them. The poor relativists, under the influence of the relativity demon, can’t see things as they are but are forced to make weird assumptions and interpretations out of them.

Go to Next Page

Go to Previous Page

Go to Main Index


  • Aaron Do  On March 6, 2014 at 6:45 am

    Your GPS explanation sounds much more plausible. However, it does seem like there needs to be a little conspiracy mixed in: “Luckily, the time correction (for the GPS systems) remains the same whichever way one thinks”. If you do have any further explanation I would be very interested to hear it. Probably there was some fudging of the results when the scientists actually calculated how much they need to account for “time dilation”. Your ether explanation for why particles can behave like waves is also very interesting. I wish you the best of luck in having such ideas accepted/explored in the scientific community. Also, I will be sure to buy your book when its finished 😀


    • drgsrinivas  On March 10, 2014 at 12:56 am

      I do believe that there is always some amount of fudging when ever relativists ‘prove’ their stupid theory. Of course they don’t do that consciously – they are neither intelligent nor selfish enough to manipulate data!

      The most striking example of relativists’ subconscious fudging of data is when they prove time dilation for muons travelling in circular orbits. Apparently muons made to travel in circular orbit (ring accelerator) experienced time dilation as exactly predicted by special relativity. But muons travelling in circular orbits are actually in accelerated motion and not in uniform motion which implies that one must use general relativity and not special relativity to predict the time dilation in that scenario. And if the stupid theory of relativity were to be correct, the muons would have experienced time dilation as predicted by general relativity but not special relativity. This kind of self contradicting ‘proofs’ are plenty in relativity (Michelson Morley experiment, Twin flight experiment, Cosmic ray muons etc) but when we try to explain the same to the relativists, they ‘mess’ up with reference frames and blame our ignorance for not being able to catch up with their weird thinking and mathematics.

      Having said that relativity maths does seem to predict certain things correctly and I am unable completely ignore them. May be that their weird maths somehow are able to ‘correctly’ predict how much an atomic clock on a satellite slows down compared to the one on the surface of Earth. (But of course the same maths utterly fails when it comes to pendulum clocks as I have explained elsewhere. And this itself proves that time dilation is a delusion.)

      And despite the fact that quantum mechanics is based upon some stupid notions; the mathematics of that weird theory seem to correctly ‘guess’ many things. But the mere fact that maths are able to predict certain things in certain scenarios can’t make a particular theory correct. The incompatibility between the mathematics of relativity and that of quantum physics exemplifies this fact.

      We can manage to accurately predict events in our surroundings by observing the world through a concave lens. And we can also manage to predict the same by looking via a convex lens but we would probably need a different set of mathematics. Despite the fact that both models are able to predict things accurately, each gives a different picture of our surroundings. And neither of them actually represents the correct picture. Unless we manage to integrate both views, we can’t claim that we have correctly understood our world.
      Similarly, it is likely that each of the two ‘great’ theories of modern physics represents one of the several possible distorted and narrow views of a more broader and complete picture of our logical universe.

      Liked by 1 person

  • Galacar  On April 11, 2014 at 12:26 am

    Nice work! I love your site! Refreshing to say the least!

    GPS don’t need relativistic corrections at all!

    to be find here:

    Do a search on the page for gps and you will find it.
    ( I didn’t want to copy/paste the article here because of its length)

    btw what a ‘conicidence’ I just started a forum about the Einsteinhoax:

    Anyone here is very welcome!

    I am a bit sick from the treatments on ‘scientific’ forums so I started my own!

    And yes, relativity is a religion, but so is the whole of science for a specific


    Really hope to se you peopleon my forum as well!

    Warm greetings

    Galacar (Holland)


  • Stone-head  On October 30, 2014 at 6:19 am

    This one always makes me laugh. Not only is relativity not needed, you don’t even need a clock on the receiver!!! To find your position on earth you only need to find the DIFFERENCE between timestamps on the recieved signals! Using 4 satelites and the speed of the signal, tje difference of the times can pinpoint your location, think about it. Relativity, even if it wasn’t complete insanity is totally unneeded. Grade 3 arithmetic and a stopwatch could do it.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Galacar  On November 6, 2014 at 12:08 am

    to Stone-head

    Great one! Thanks!


  • Galacar  On December 11, 2014 at 7:50 pm

    Well, well, well, well.:

    “Hatch, a former president of the Institute of Navigation and current Director of Navigation Systems Engineering of NavCom Technologies, is one of the world’s foremost experts on the GPS. Concerning the question of whether the operation of the GPS proves the validity of SR, he has come to conclusions diametrically opposite from Clifford Will’s. In Relativity and GPS[29,30], he argues that the observed effect of velocity on the GPS clocks flat out contradicts the predictions of special relativity.”


  • Galacar  On December 11, 2014 at 7:54 pm

    And just to show how relativity dissident are treated read this:

    “There has been a particularly vicious attitude towards critics of Einsteinian relativity at U.C. Berkeley ever since. I ran into it in 1985, when I read a paper arguing for absolute simultaneity at that year’s International Congress on the History of Science. After I finished, the Danish chairman made some courteous remarks about dissidents he had learned about in Scandinavia, and then turned to the audience for questions. The first speaker was one of a group of about 4 young physics students in the back. He launched immediately into a horrible tirade of verbal abuse, accusing me of being entirely wrong in my analysis, a simplification of the Melbourne Evans analysis-‘Evans is wrong; you are wrong,’ he shouted. He accused me of being way out of line to present my ‘faulty’ arguments on his prestigious campus. When I started to ask him ‘Then how would you explain…’, he loudly interrupted me with ‘I don’t have to explain anything.’ The rest of the audience felt so disturbed by all this, that the question session was essentially destroyed.

    Such reactions are not uncommon. To even begin to criticize Einsteins’s theory of special relativity has become a scientific heresy of the highest order. The prevailing attitude of the physical establishment is that anyone who doubts the validity of this “bedrock of modern physics” is insane, and that trying to refute it is a symptom of “psychosis”[24].

    Caltech Professor David L. Goodstein states in a video-tape lecture

    “There are theories in science, which are so well verified by experience that they become promoted to the status of fact. One example is the Special Theory of Relativity-it’s still called a theory for historical reasons, but it is in reality a simple, engineering fact, routinely used in the design of giant machines, like nuclear particle accelerators, which always work perfectly. Another example of that sort of thing is the theory of evolution. These are called theories, but they are in reality among the best established facts in all of human knowledge.”[25]”

    To think that the world of science is rational, honest, integer, logical, is in my eyes a form of clinical insanity!

    I really think, the ( science) world is bloody mad!


  • drgsrinivas  On November 21, 2015 at 3:52 pm

    Another wonderful site exposing the relativity mythology.

    Wondering how I missed that! Thanks Aaron Do!


  • drgsrinivas  On April 30, 2016 at 11:10 am

    I note that some believers of relativity religion are heavily upset over this post and are debating on how to save their religion from true rationalists.

    It is obvious that these ‘reality deniers’ are not able to digest their religious superstitions being exposed. They appear determined to bring about a ‘fatwa’ that they should just ignore any argument that challenges their religion.

    Just have a flavor of that religious group’s blind faith in their stupid religion


  • aether  On April 30, 2016 at 11:06 pm


    I think the link in your last comment is broken.

    They appear determined to bring about a ‘fatwa’ that they should just ignore any argument that challenges their religion.

    Indeed! I pointed out how GPS actually disproves relativity on the below linked website in response to Professor Koberlein’s claims to the contrary. My comment was deleted after about one hour. So much for academic freedom and open debate.

    I specifically pointed out that Ron Hatch (an engineer with numerous GPS patents) and other engineers, have openly stated for years that GPS has nothing to do with relativistic time adjustments. I even mentioned that ordinarily a theory only has to be dis-proven once …….. except for the theory of relativity, which can only be “confirmed”.

    What a joke these people are! You can’t argue against religion. And for the relativists, their “science” is religion.

    Are special and general relativity wrong? Nope. They’ve been confirmed in the lab. In fact whenever you use your mobile phone’s GPS to find a local coffee shop, you’re communicating with satellites that correct for the effects general and special relativity. Relativity is not merely abstract theory, it is now applied technology.

    Apparently, to the relativists, denial is just a river in Egypt.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Galacar  On January 1, 2018 at 9:38 pm

    I love this one:

    The fact that GPS works is not proof that Relativity is correct. It is proof that relativists use the words proof, truth and fact to shove their theories down your throat through authority.




  • King  On January 3, 2018 at 11:35 am

    ‘every phenomena claimed to prove relativity can be explained by simple classic physics…’

    Indead, it only take sanity (not equations) to realize that if a clock tick at such and such rate under such and such conditions, then probably something is happening to the clock itself, and not to the invisible concept the clock is alegedly ‘measuring’

    But some still might be surprised at where the equation ‘predicting’ the event comes from. So let me zeroin along those lines. Actualy, there are myriads of ways of showing that indead, under suitable conditions, simple events explicable by Newt’s phyc can give rise to clocks ticking in ways relativists ‘predict’.

    For clocks to tick, forces call them F0,F1,F2 must act on them. We can, for instance, have a resultant force:

    F0=F1-F2, so that F0/F1=1-F2/F1

    Under plausible atomic structures, such as F being centrifugal, we have F=mv^2/r, or such. So F2/F1=v^2/c^2


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.