    Fig. 1 Based on the above, time t in which the electric charge +q covered the distance ÁÌ = L is: 
   and the distance ÁÌ = L covered by the electric charge +q is: 
   
   As we well know, an electric charge +q moving at a constant velocity V along a straight line xx¢ is equivalent to an electric current of intensity i. Thus, in Fig. 1, the electric charge +q which moves over time t and at a constant velocity V from
point Á to point Ì is equivalent to a linear electrical conductor of length L. This conductor is flown by an electric current of intensity i. Also, we know that an electrical linear conductor of length L is surrounded by a magnetic field of strength B. Now, the following problem arises: Problem: In Fig. 1, how high is this magnetic field¢s strength B measured by the stationary observer O¢, when the moving electric charge +q is exactly opposite to him (i.e. at point M)?
To solve this problem, we proceed as follows: SOLUTION According to the BiotSavart law, we know that for the linear conductor of length L (Fig. 1) flown by an electric current of intensity i, the magnetic field¢s strength Â measured by the stationary observer O¢ is: 
   
   Yet since in Fig. 1: 
   relation (3) is written as follows: 
  
Also, given that: 
 
 and 
 
  
relation (5) is written as follows: 
   Therefore, (if t0 namely L0) and when the moving electric charge +q reaches point Ì, then given that R = r relation (6) is written as follows: 
   Relation (7) obviously provides the solution to our problem. Note: In relation (7) the magnetic field¢s strength Â is measured in Gauss, the electric charge q in Cb, the velocity V in
cm/sec, and distance r in cm. In addition, relation (7) results “directly” from the BiotSavart law, as well, if we consider that at point M there is an elementary electric current of length dL for a time dt, where dL = V. dt and BASIC CONCLUSIONS
Let us assume (Fig. 1) that there are several observers , being at rest on the surface of the Earth. In this case, when the moving electric charge +q passes directly opposite them, that is, at points , respectively, then (according to the above problem¢s solution) each of the stationary observers , will obtain the same result as regards the strength of the magnetic field, which according to relation (7) is: 
   a) 
 
   
   However, since the electric charge +q and railcar S move at the same velocity V, then the electric charge +q is at rest relative to the moving railcar S. Yet (as stated above), the electric charge
+q which is at rest relative to the railcar S, generates a magnetic field of strength Â (Relation (10)) relative to the observer P sitting in the moving railcar S. So, how is this phenomenon explained? We know that according to Classical Physics and the Theory of Relativity “Electric charges which are at rest relative to an inertial frame of reference o.xyz (e.g. railcar S) do not generate any magnetic field for an observer P found in this inertial reference
frame o.xyz, that is, on railcar S”. Therefore, Classical Physics and the Theory of Relativity fail to interpret the phenomenon of magnetic field generation for the observer P sitting in moving railcar S. However, an accurate interpretation of the above phenomenon is provided only by the Electrogravitational Theory, if we accept the existence of Ether and the fundamental “Law of Magnetic field Formation” formulated below: 
  
LAW: An electric charge q (either positive or negative) for any observer (either in motion or at rest) creates around the orbit of its movement a magnetic field only: 1) When the electric charge q crosses the Ether of a celestial body¢s Etherosphere, or 2) When the electric charge q crosses the stationary Ether of the universe, which is found outside of the celestial bodies¢ Etherospheres. 


   Note: For information on Ether and the Etherospheres of celestial bodies, See “The Electrogravitational Theory” on www.tsolkas.gr
The abovementioned fundamental law is applied in experiments (4), (5), (9), (15), (16), (17) as detailed on the above website. The error of the Theory of Relativity As it is well known, the Theory of Relativity holds the following: “An observer P found in an inertial frame of reference S cannot prove by any Physics experiment whatsoever (either from the field of Mechanics or
electromagnetism) whether this reference frame S is in motion or at rest relative to another inertial frame of reference S¢”. What Einstein asserts is wrong for the following reason: In Fig. 1, the observer P who is inside the inertial frame of reference o.xyz (i.e. the railcar S), by knowing the quantities q and r and by measuring (e.g. with the use of a magnetometer)) the magnetic field¢s strength Â, is in a position know on the basis of relation (10) whether the
railcar S is in motion or at rest relative to the Earth, S¢. Because relation (10) ultimately gives: 
   
  
Consequently: If the magnetometer used by the observer P on board the railcar S shows Â = 0, then from relation (11) it results that V = 0, and thus, the observer P comes to the conclusion that the railcar S is at rest relative to the Earth S¢.  If the magnetometer shows B ≠ 0, then from relation (11) ) it results that V≠ 0, and thus, the observer P comes to the conclusion that the railcar S is
moving relative to the Earth S¢.
(See Experiment 15 on www.tsolkas.gr)
So, this is where Einstein erred! Therefore, given this error, the postulates of the Special Theory of Relativity are totally wrong. After everything detailed in this chapter, the following conclusion can be drawn: 
   Conclusion Ether exists in Nature. Classical Physics and the Theory of Relativity are founded on an erroneous basis, and for this reason: Classical Physics must be complemented by the existence of Ether in nature, while the Theory of Relativity must be rejected as an utterly false theory of physics.



