This article has been written by Dr Mahesh C. Jain who is also author of the book "Encounter of science with philosophy". At the age of 40 years the author read this theory for the first time and strongly felt this can not be right. Nature can't work this way and subsequently found 36 scientific objections to this theory. All the 36 objections are contained in two chapters of the above stated book. Readers are requested to meet the objections found by the author. A few important objections have been dealt with in this article. For further information visit : http://www.sciencengod.com http://www.sciencengod.com/clipboard.htm

1. 36 Objections to Einstein’s Theory of Relativity
Einstein’s Theory of Relativity was published in the year 1905 as the most
general explanation of nature and its phenomenon.
Einstein based his theory on two hypotheses which he referred to as
fundamental hypotheses. The first hypothesis says that optical phenomena are
independent of the conditions in which they occur and the second hypothesis is
about constancy of velocity of light. Both the hypotheses are unverified, irrational
and implausible as the most valid generalized explanation of nature and its
phenomenon. Einstein has no where given reasons in support of his claims about
the two fundamental hypotheses as being the most valid generalized explanations
of nature.
In year 1919 Sir Arthur Eddington of Royal Astronomical Society
experimentally demonstrated mathematically precise gravitational deflection of
light – A fact predicted by Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. On the basis of this
single piece of evidence, the entire theory came to be accepted as the most valid
generalized explanation of nature without further enquiry and investigation. Soon
physicists elevated it the level of Gospel truth even though they found it too
difficult to understand. All those who were in disagreement with Einstein were
unable to prove their point of view.
This theory is a glaring example of as to how at times one can reach the
right conclusions for wrong reasons.
Einstein and his followers limitlessly extrapolated the two fundamental
hypotheses to Unified Field Theory and even beyond through a series of
unverified, irrational and implausible turns and twists (assumptions and
presumptions). For example Einstein beginning from his two fundamental
hypotheses in his own style mathematically and logically deduced the equation
E=∆mc2 but actually advocated the famous equation E=mc2 without offering any
explanation as to how ∆m can be equated with m, both being entirely different
physical quantities as per his own derivation. Moreover Einstein did not consider
for a moment that to prove the equation E=mc2, there is no need to rely upon his

2. two fundamental hypotheses. It can be easily proved using Planck’s Law and
de Broglie’s equation.
It is a historical fact that in the course of unlimited extrapolation of
Einstein’s Theory, several physical phenomena were predicted, identified and
defined, at times right predictions for wrong reasons such as mass energy
equivalence, gravitational mass of photons, black holes etc. But Einstein’s Theory
has led to a mythology of its own creation such as gravitational collapse of
universe leading to formation of black holes which is quite implausible keeping
properties of matter in view, string theory where strings are beyond human
experience, space time continuum, Geodesic lines etc.
This unlimited extrapolation of two fundamental hypotheses is totally
unwarranted because nature is hierarchically organized and the applicable rules
vary from one hierarchical level to another. Before anything can be accepted as
the most valid generalized explanation of nature, it needs to be shown that it is
valid across the entire natural hierarchy. It has never been shown that the two
fundamental hypotheses are valid across the natural hierarchy.
Again it has never been shown that Einstein’s fundamental hypotheses are
valid in non-linear domain. Moreover before accepting Einstein’s Theory of
Relativity as the most valid generalized explanation of nature, it needs to be
shown that both the fundamental hypotheses can sufficiently explain all natural
phenomena such as Consciousness, all origins, creations, evolutions, phenomena
of life etc. Therefore Einstein’s Theory of Relativity does not provide
comprehensive explanation of natural phenomena.
The author in his book “ENCOUNTER OF SCIENCE WITH PHILOSOPHY – A
SYNTHETIC VIEW” has listed 36 objections to Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.
Proponents of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity are called upon to meet these
objections in order to defend their faith and to continue to enjoy their faith and
belief in the same.
The fact is that physicists have, historically, misguided themselves in
believing in existence of mathematic-logically perfect explanation of nature,

3. cosmos and phenomena of life. Physicists live with the pious hope that one day
they would be able to comprehensively explain nature and its phenomena and on
that day physics would emerge as the most fundamental of natural sciences. So
the so called singularities surprise them and three dimensional space has been
extended to 20 dimensions and they talk about time machine, supergravity and
gravitons- entities beyond human perception, direct or indirect.
Finally, no doubt, mathematics and logic are the best tools in pursuit of
understanding nature and its phenomena but they are limited in their
applicability by nature of interacting entities and the context and this must always
be kept in mind while using these tools.
Author: Dr Mahesh C. Jain – he is practicing medicine and has written the
book “Encounter of Science with Philosophy – A synthetic view” The book begins
from a scientifically valid concept of God and from this humble beginning
embraces the entire cosmic phenomena within its fold.
Visit: www.sciencengod.com
www.sciencengod.com/clipboard