<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=PeteWeyrick</id>
	<title>Conservapedia - User contributions [en]</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=PeteWeyrick"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/PeteWeyrick"/>
	<updated>2026-10-09T12:08:54Z</updated>
	<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.35.14</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Counterexamples_to_an_Old_Earth&amp;diff=802932</id>
		<title>Counterexamples to an Old Earth</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Counterexamples_to_an_Old_Earth&amp;diff=802932"/>
		<updated>2010-08-09T16:08:56Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;PeteWeyrick: /* Astronomy */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;It takes only one &amp;quot;counterexample&amp;quot; to disprove the theory of an [[Old Earth]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Most of the &amp;quot;evidence&amp;quot; for an [[Old Earth]] is based on claims that lack testability, as in [[radiometric dating]], and hence would not even satisfy minimum requirements for admissibility in court.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  As with any logical proposition, one contradiction disproves the proposed rule.  If each of the 25 counterexamples provided here has merely a 10% chance of being valid, which is certainly an underestimate, then the probability that the Earth is billions of years old is only 7%. From another perspective, '''these counterexamples demonstrate that the Earth must be young with a likelihood of at least 93%'''.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Counterexamples ==&lt;br /&gt;
The growing list of counterexamples to the theory of an [[Old Earth]] includes:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Astronomy ===&lt;br /&gt;
# The [[moon]] is receding from the [[Earth]] at a rate&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/ApolloLaser.html Measuring the Moon's Distance] ''Apollo Laser Ranging Experiments Yield Results'' by Fred Espenak, GSFC Planetary Systems Laboratory (LPI Bulletin, No. 72, August, 1994).&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; that would have placed it too close to the Earth merely four billion years ago, causing instability in its orbit, tidal catastrophes on Earth, and other problems, causing Earth and the moon to be as they are today.&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Spiral galaxies]] appear to be young, and only implausible proposals of the existence of [[dark matter]] can reconcile the spirals with a belief in an old universe.&lt;br /&gt;
# The planetary orbits in the solar system - including Earth's - are unstable and unsustainable over the long periods claimed by Old Earth believers.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.newsweek.com/id/201582 Newsweek: &amp;quot;An embarrassing little secret of astronomy ....&amp;quot;]. (Newsweek has inexplicably taken down its article, but it is quoted by Google and other links)&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7248/full/nature08096.html Existence of collisional trajectories of Mercury, Mars and Venus with the Earth] by J. Laskar  &amp;amp;  M. Gastineau, ''Nature'' 459, 817-819 (11 June 2009).  Believers in an Old Earth speculate that the instability would not result in problems in a billion years, but other computer simulations could be developed to demonstrate multi-body instability for the solar system far more recent than that.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
# At least one [[spiral galaxy]] spins in the direction opposite to the spin of its tail, suggesting an age too young to have generated the tail and contradicting the theory that the tails of spiral galaxies were formed over a long period of time.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.unisci.com/stories/20021/0207023.htm &amp;quot;Hubble Shows Galaxy Rotating In The Wrong Direction&amp;quot;]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
# The primary reaction in the [[Sun]] is the fusing of [[hydrogen]] to make [[helium]], but the ratio of these remains too high for the Sun to have been burning for millions of years.{{fact}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Geology ===&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:Stratigraphy_of_the_Grand_Canyon.png|right|thumb|300px|The Unconformity is readily apparent in the [[Grand Canyon]] where foliage and ground cover do not obscure the rock face.]]&lt;br /&gt;
# The continued existence of fragile natural arches without having collapsed a short time period for erosion and stresses on them&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.naturalarches.org/big9.htm&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;.&lt;br /&gt;
# An extrapolation of time between the collapse of weaker arches&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/11/AR2008081102290.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; with still-standing stronger arches supports a young earth age.&lt;br /&gt;
# The massive [[Great Lakes]] and freshwater lakes near the equator could not exist for millions of years, and several of these lakes are rapidly receding in volume.&lt;br /&gt;
# The existence of inland saltwater lakes, such as [[Mono Lake]] and the [[Great Salt Lake]], suggest a recent global [[flood]].&lt;br /&gt;
# The plentiful supply of high concentrations of underground well water, which would be expected based on familiar principles of [[entropy]] to dissipate over a long period of time.&lt;br /&gt;
# The relative purity of underground well water, which should be a muddy slurry had millions of years of erosion taken place.&lt;br /&gt;
# Earthquakes alter the Earth's rotation every century; extrapolating by orders of magnitude in time would have resulted in the occurrence of much larger earthquakes that would have destabilized the rotation&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;A similar analysis may be performed for the likelihood of devastating collisions with meteors as time is extrapolated by orders of magnitude.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
# The lack of erosion between rock layers&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.amazon.com/review/R1WTZL8GG4H9K0&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.knowthebible.net/id115.html&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;.&lt;br /&gt;
# Levels of contamination in water are rising, as water procedes through the [[water cycle]] it becomes progressively more contaminated.  If earth (and life) had existed for billions of years, a limit would have long been reached where water (essential to life) was too contaminated for life to continue.&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Paraconformity]] and unconformity such as that seen at the [[Grand Canyon]] disprove the [[uniformitarianism (science)|uniformitarian]] view of earth history.&lt;br /&gt;
# All [[carbon dating]] of water supplies, even the most ancient and the deepest underground reservoirs, result in relatively young ages,&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.betalabservices.com/PDF/Geyh.pdf&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; and no water has been found suggesting an Old Earth.&lt;br /&gt;
# The ratio of strontium isotopes in seawater, which should change due to long-term erosion, has varied by only 0.35% throughout history. In fact, its value today is exactly the same as in the oldest samples, which are claimed to be from 500 million years ago!{{fact}}&lt;br /&gt;
# The interior of the earth is heated by decay of radioactive isotopes, which could not possibly still be persisting in sufficient quantities after 5 billion, or even half a billion, years.{{fact}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Biology ===&lt;br /&gt;
# The intelligence of humans is rapidly declining, whether measured by SAT scores,&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;SAT scores have been rapidly decreasing in real terms.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; music, personal letters,&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;E.g., Civil War letters.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; quality of political debates,&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;E.g., contrast the Lincoln-Douglas debates with debates today.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; the quality of news articles,&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;''The Federalist'' was written for the newspaper audience in the late 1780s, but is far too intellectual for newspapers today.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; or any other measure.&lt;br /&gt;
# The age of onset of [[puberty|sexual maturity]] is rapidly changing, suggesting that life is in a short-term rather than long-term equilibrium&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;For evidence of a rapidly changing age for sexual maturity in fish, see http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/46/3/235&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;.&lt;br /&gt;
# The high observed rate of [[extinctions of species]] and harmful [[genetic mutation]]s suggest a relatively short period for the existence of life rather than a long one.&lt;br /&gt;
# The age of onset of [[cancer]] is markedly decreasing,&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/109865519/abstract?CRETRY=1&amp;amp;SRETRY=0&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; suggesting rapid changes inconsistent with an alleged long existence to life.&lt;br /&gt;
# The oldest direct evidence of life -- written documents, clothing, remnants of civilizations, tree rings, etc. -- is no older than about 3000 B.C.&lt;br /&gt;
# The number of natural, pure-bred bred dogs declines over time as dogs naturally crossbreed; a short period of time is suggested by the fact that there are over 100 different natural, pure breeds of dog thriving today.&lt;br /&gt;
# Lack of genetic diversity among the ''Homo sapiens'' species.  Were evolution and the old earth true, the human population would show a much larger genetic variance&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/descent.html#rpafAHIwKHS7&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== External links ==&lt;br /&gt;
*[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth  Age of the earth -101 evidences for a young earth and universe] by [[Creation Ministries International]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;references/&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== See also ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Counterexamples to Evolution]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Counterexamples to the Bible]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Counterexamples to Relativity]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:geology]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>PeteWeyrick</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Counterexamples_to_Relativity&amp;diff=802930</id>
		<title>Counterexamples to Relativity</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Counterexamples_to_Relativity&amp;diff=802930"/>
		<updated>2010-08-09T16:05:32Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;PeteWeyrick: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The [[theory of relativity]] is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions.  It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;See, e.g., historian Paul Johnson's book about the 20th century, and the article written by liberal law professor Laurence Tribe as allegedly assisted by [[Barack Obama]].  Virtually no one who is taught and believes relativity continues to read the Bible, a book that outsells New York Times bestsellers by a hundred-fold.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  Here is a list of 22 counterexamples: any one of them shows that the theory is incorrect.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
#The [[Pioneer anomaly]].&lt;br /&gt;
#Anomalies in the locations of spacecraft that have flown by Earth (&amp;quot;flybys&amp;quot;).&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23410705/&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
#Increasingly precise measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury show a shift greater than predicted by relativity, well beyond the margin of error.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;In a complicated or contrived series of calculations that most physics majors cannot duplicate even after learning them, the theory of general relativity was conformed to match Mercury's then-observed precession of 5600.0 arc-seconds per century. Subsequently, however, more sophisticated technology has measured a different value of this precession (5599.7 arc-seconds per century, with a margin of error of only 0.01), and leading promoters of relativity (such as Professor Clifford Will) have omitted this in listing tests confirming relativity.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#The discontinuity in momentum as velocity approaches &amp;quot;c&amp;quot; for infinitesimal mass, compared to the momentum of light.&lt;br /&gt;
#The logical problem of a force which is applied at a right angle to the velocity of a relativistic mass - does this act on the rest mass or the relativistic mass?&lt;br /&gt;
#The observed lack of curvature in overall space.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;If space were curved, one would never expect the universe as a whole to be almost precisely flat.  Yet it is.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
#The universe shortly after its creation, when quantum effects dominated and contradicted Relativity.&lt;br /&gt;
#The [[action-at-a-distance]] of [[quantum entanglement]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Quantum entanglement has not yet communicated information faster than the speed of light, but has already exhibited action faster than the speed of light.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#The [[action-at-a-distance]] by Jesus, described in [[John 1-7 (Translated)|John 4:46-54]].&lt;br /&gt;
#The failure to discover [[gravitons]], despite wasting hundreds of millions in taxpayer money in searching.&lt;br /&gt;
#The inability of the theory to lead to other insights, contrary to every verified theory of physics.&lt;br /&gt;
#The change in mass over time of standard kilograms preserved under ideal conditions.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[[Mystery:Why Is the Kilogram Losing Weight?]]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#The uniformity in temperature throughout the universe.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6092-speed-of-light-may-have-changed-recently.html (&amp;quot;A varying speed of light contradicts Einstein's theory of relativity, and would undermine much of traditional physics. But some physicists believe it would elegantly explain puzzling cosmological phenomena such as the nearly uniform temperature of the universe.&amp;quot;)&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#&amp;quot;The snag is that in quantum mechanics, time retains its Newtonian aloofness, providing the stage against which matter dances but never being affected by its presence. These two [QM and Relativity] conceptions of time don’t gel.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=splitting-time-from-space&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#The theory predicts [[wormholes]] just as it predicts [[black holes]], but wormholes violate causality and permit absurd time travel.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v61/i13/p1446_1 .  The popular science press promotes black holes to a far greater extent than wormholes.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#The theory predicts natural formation of highly ordered (and thus low entropy) black holes despite the increase in [[entropy]] required by the [[Second Law of Thermodynamics]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Contrived explanations have been suggested for this dilemma, such as Stephen Hawking proposing that the entropy of matter in a black hole is somehow stored in the surface area of its event horizon to be released back into its surroundings as the black hole decays by ... &amp;quot;Hawking radiation.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#Data from the [[PSR B1913 16|PSR B1913+16]] increasingly diverge from predictions of the [[General Theory of Relativity]] such that, despite a Nobel Prize in Physics being awarded for early work on this pulsar, no data at all have been released about it for over five years.&lt;br /&gt;
#The fact that many useful devices have been developed based on insights provided by the theory (without relativistic corrections, [[GPS]] would lose accurate at a rate of over 6 miles per day); countless lives have been saved or helped, and the theory has led to other useful theories and has benifited scienfitic progress. This is not by any means necessary to verify the theory, but is a nice bonus.&lt;br /&gt;
#Relativity requires different values for the inertia of a moving object: in its direction of motion, and perpendicular to that direction.  This contradicts the logical principle that the laws of physics are the same in all directions.&lt;br /&gt;
#Relativity requires that anything traveling at the speed of light must have mass zero, so it must have momentum zero.  But the laws of electrodynamics require that light have nonzero momentum.&lt;br /&gt;
#Unlike most well-tested fundamental physical theories, the theory of relativity violates conditions of a conservative field.  Path independence, for example, is lacking under the theory of relativity, as in the &amp;quot;twin paradox&amp;quot; whereby the age of each twin under the theory is dependent on the path he traveled.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;In defense of the theory, it is noted that it mandates conservation of the matter-stress-energy tensor (the only way to get ''real'' conservation, since matter and energy are interchangeable.)  This follows from the &amp;quot;contracted Bianchi identity&amp;quot;.  [http://www.mth.uct.ac.za/omei/gr/chap6/node14.html]  Also, the curl of the &amp;quot;gravitational field vector&amp;quot; is exactly zero in the absence of moving sources, due to symmetries of [[Riemann]]'s tensor.  It follows, from [[Stokes' Theorem]], that the gravitational field is conservative and has a potential function.  Energy is conserved.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#The Ehrenfest Paradox: Consider a spinning hoop, where the tangential velocity is near the speed of light. In this case, the circumference (&amp;lt;math&amp;gt;2 \pi R&amp;lt;/math&amp;gt;) is length-contracted. However, since &amp;lt;math&amp;gt;R&amp;lt;/math&amp;gt; is always perpendicular to the motion, it is not contracted. This leads to a paradox: does the radius of the accelerating hoop equal &amp;lt;math&amp;gt;R&amp;lt;/math&amp;gt;, or is it less than &amp;lt;math&amp;gt;R&amp;lt;/math&amp;gt;?&lt;br /&gt;
#The Twin Paradox: Consider twins who are separated with one traveling at a very high speed such that his &amp;quot;clock&amp;quot; (age) slows down, so that when he returns he has a younger age than the twin; this violates Relativity because ''both'' twins should expect the other to be younger, if motion is relative.  Einstein himself admitted that this contradicts Relativity.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Einstein attempted to explain the paradox based on the acceleration that one twin uniquely undergoes, but the length of travel can simply be extended such that any effect from acceleration would be ''de minimis''.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#Relativity predicted that clocks at the Earth's equator would be slower than clocks at the North Pole, due to different velocities; in fact, all clocks at sea level measure time at the same rate, and Relativists made new assumptions about the Earth's shape to justify this contradiction of the theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(add to list)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{Relativity}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== See also ==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www2.udec.cl/~rvera/Adilemma.pdf A dilemma]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Counterexamples to Evolution]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Counterexamples to an Old Earth]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Counterexamples to the Bible]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;references/&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:physics]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>PeteWeyrick</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Counterexamples_to_Relativity&amp;diff=802925</id>
		<title>Counterexamples to Relativity</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Counterexamples_to_Relativity&amp;diff=802925"/>
		<updated>2010-08-09T15:58:22Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;PeteWeyrick: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;The [[theory of relativity]] is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions.  It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;See, e.g., historian Paul Johnson's book about the 20th century, and the article written by liberal law professor Laurence Tribe as allegedly assisted by [[Barack Obama]].  Virtually no one who is taught and believes relativity continues to read the Bible, a book that outsells New York Times bestsellers by a hundred-fold.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  Here is a list of 22 counterexamples: any one of them shows that the theory is incorrect.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
#The [[Pioneer anomaly]].&lt;br /&gt;
#Anomalies in the locations of spacecraft that have flown by Earth (&amp;quot;flybys&amp;quot;).&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23410705/&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &lt;br /&gt;
#Increasingly precise measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury show a shift greater than predicted by relativity, well beyond the margin of error.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;In a complicated or contrived series of calculations that most physics majors cannot duplicate even after learning them, the theory of general relativity was conformed to match Mercury's then-observed precession of 5600.0 arc-seconds per century. Subsequently, however, more sophisticated technology has measured a different value of this precession (5599.7 arc-seconds per century, with a margin of error of only 0.01), and leading promoters of relativity (such as Professor Clifford Will) have omitted this in listing tests confirming relativity.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#The discontinuity in momentum as velocity approaches &amp;quot;c&amp;quot; for infinitesimal mass, compared to the momentum of light.&lt;br /&gt;
#The logical problem of a force which is applied at a right angle to the velocity of a relativistic mass - does this act on the rest mass or the relativistic mass?&lt;br /&gt;
#The observed lack of curvature in overall space.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;If space were curved, one would never expect the universe as a whole to be almost precisely flat.  Yet it is.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;  &lt;br /&gt;
#The universe shortly after its creation, when quantum effects dominated and contradicted Relativity.&lt;br /&gt;
#The [[action-at-a-distance]] of [[quantum entanglement]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Quantum entanglement has not yet communicated information faster than the speed of light, but has already exhibited action faster than the speed of light.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#The [[action-at-a-distance]] by Jesus, described in [[John 1-7 (Translated)|John 4:46-54]].&lt;br /&gt;
#The failure to discover [[gravitons]], despite wasting hundreds of millions in taxpayer money in searching.&lt;br /&gt;
#The inability of the theory to lead to other insights, contrary to every verified theory of physics.&lt;br /&gt;
#The change in mass over time of standard kilograms preserved under ideal conditions.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[[Mystery:Why Is the Kilogram Losing Weight?]]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#The uniformity in temperature throughout the universe.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6092-speed-of-light-may-have-changed-recently.html (&amp;quot;A varying speed of light contradicts Einstein's theory of relativity, and would undermine much of traditional physics. But some physicists believe it would elegantly explain puzzling cosmological phenomena such as the nearly uniform temperature of the universe.&amp;quot;)&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#&amp;quot;The snag is that in quantum mechanics, time retains its Newtonian aloofness, providing the stage against which matter dances but never being affected by its presence. These two [QM and Relativity] conceptions of time don’t gel.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=splitting-time-from-space&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#The theory predicts [[wormholes]] just as it predicts [[black holes]], but wormholes violate causality and permit absurd time travel.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v61/i13/p1446_1 .  The popular science press promotes black holes to a far greater extent than wormholes.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#The theory predicts natural formation of highly ordered (and thus low entropy) black holes despite the increase in [[entropy]] required by the [[Second Law of Thermodynamics]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Contrived explanations have been suggested for this dilemma, such as Stephen Hawking proposing that the entropy of matter in a black hole is somehow stored in the surface area of its event horizon to be released back into its surroundings as the black hole decays by ... &amp;quot;Hawking radiation.&amp;quot;&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#Data from the [[PSR B1913 16|PSR B1913+16]] increasingly diverge from predictions of the [[General Theory of Relativity]] such that, despite a Nobel Prize in Physics being awarded for early work on this pulsar, no data at all have been released about it for over five years.&lt;br /&gt;
#The fact that many useful devices, such as [[GPS]] have been developed based on insights provided by the theory; countless lives have been saved or helped, and the theory has led to other useful theories and has benifited scienfitic progress. This is not by any means necessary to verify the theory, but is a nice bonus.&lt;br /&gt;
#Relativity requires different values for the inertia of a moving object: in its direction of motion, and perpendicular to that direction.  This contradicts the logical principle that the laws of physics are the same in all directions.&lt;br /&gt;
#Relativity requires that anything traveling at the speed of light must have mass zero, so it must have momentum zero.  But the laws of electrodynamics require that light have nonzero momentum.&lt;br /&gt;
#Unlike most well-tested fundamental physical theories, the theory of relativity violates conditions of a conservative field.  Path independence, for example, is lacking under the theory of relativity, as in the &amp;quot;twin paradox&amp;quot; whereby the age of each twin under the theory is dependent on the path he traveled.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;In defense of the theory, it is noted that it mandates conservation of the matter-stress-energy tensor (the only way to get ''real'' conservation, since matter and energy are interchangeable.)  This follows from the &amp;quot;contracted Bianchi identity&amp;quot;.  [http://www.mth.uct.ac.za/omei/gr/chap6/node14.html]  Also, the curl of the &amp;quot;gravitational field vector&amp;quot; is exactly zero in the absence of moving sources, due to symmetries of [[Riemann]]'s tensor.  It follows, from [[Stokes' Theorem]], that the gravitational field is conservative and has a potential function.  Energy is conserved.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#The Ehrenfest Paradox: Consider a spinning hoop, where the tangential velocity is near the speed of light. In this case, the circumference (&amp;lt;math&amp;gt;2 \pi R&amp;lt;/math&amp;gt;) is length-contracted. However, since &amp;lt;math&amp;gt;R&amp;lt;/math&amp;gt; is always perpendicular to the motion, it is not contracted. This leads to a paradox: does the radius of the accelerating hoop equal &amp;lt;math&amp;gt;R&amp;lt;/math&amp;gt;, or is it less than &amp;lt;math&amp;gt;R&amp;lt;/math&amp;gt;?&lt;br /&gt;
#The Twin Paradox: Consider twins who are separated with one traveling at a very high speed such that his &amp;quot;clock&amp;quot; (age) slows down, so that when he returns he has a younger age than the twin; this violates Relativity because ''both'' twins should expect the other to be younger, if motion is relative.  Einstein himself admitted that this contradicts Relativity.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Einstein attempted to explain the paradox based on the acceleration that one twin uniquely undergoes, but the length of travel can simply be extended such that any effect from acceleration would be ''de minimis''.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
#Relativity predicted that clocks at the Earth's equator would be slower than clocks at the North Pole, due to different velocities; in fact, all clocks at sea level measure time at the same rate, and Relativists made new assumptions about the Earth's shape to justify this contradiction of the theory.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(add to list)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{Relativity}}&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== See also ==&lt;br /&gt;
* [http://www2.udec.cl/~rvera/Adilemma.pdf A dilemma]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Counterexamples to Evolution]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Counterexamples to an Old Earth]]&lt;br /&gt;
*[[Counterexamples to the Bible]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;references/&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:physics]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>PeteWeyrick</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>