The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY  (Read 17214 times)

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #25 on: 12/08/2008 13:43:11 »
This might be of some interest.

Some theorists think that dark energy and cosmic acceleration "are a failure of general relativity on very large scales", larger than superclusters.

It is a tremendous extrapolation to think that our law of gravity, which works so well in the solar system, should work without correction on the scale of the universe. Most attempts at modifying general relativity, however, have turned out to be either equivalent to theories of quintessence, or inconsistent with observations. It is of interest to note that if the equation for gravity were to approach r instead of r2 at large, intergalactic distances, then the acceleration of the expansion of the universe becomes a mathematical artifact,[clarify] negating the need for the existence of Dark EnergyNature of dark energy

Regards

Alan
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #26 on: 13/08/2008 10:11:27 »
and QED doesn't try to say exactly what the six different quark flavours actually represent.

QED? Shouldn't that be QCD?
 

Offline xersanozgen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #27 on: 13/08/2008 10:51:02 »
I want to remember some basis rules of scientific integrity.

If we organize a relativity problem between two vehicles which one of them is on Mars and other is on Venus; we must not use the value of their velocities at Vehicle's own speed indicator. Once we must procure similar characteristic for the values of speeds.  The values of both vehicles' speed must be calculated according to same or single reference for example the sun.

I hope there any problem is not.

Bibliography

Ersan O. The Age and Diameter of Universe,Infoyay 2001
 

Offline xersanozgen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #28 on: 13/08/2008 10:53:19 »
 What is the "Universal relative velocity (Vur)"?

It is sufficiency/necessary to use the value of speed indicator on the earth (by local conditions). This value of the speed is relative according to first reference or coordinate system. This value of speed presents the performance of the vehicle (we may think the maximum of performance).

If we want, we can find the velocity of the same vehicle according to the sun by vector methods. This value of speed is "relative" according to second or consecutive reference system. The third reference system is our galaxy. The fourth is local cluster of galaxies…. And then chaining ….. the external system is out of general form of Universe. Universal relative velocity of the vehicle is relative according to consecutive system of Universe. We can find this relative value by traditional methods, with vector analysis.


Bibliography:

Ersan O. Autopsy Report of SR,Infoyay.2008
« Last Edit: 13/08/2008 18:44:36 by xersanozgen »
 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #29 on: 13/08/2008 19:03:14 »
and QED doesn't try to say exactly what the six different quark flavours actually represent.

QED? Shouldn't that be QCD?

Oops! - I was thinking of Quantum Electrodynamics - it should indeed be Quantum Chromodynamics.
 

Offline xersanozgen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #30 on: 19/08/2008 09:35:38 »

An important nuance for experiments and analysis of light kinematics:

The essential uniqueness of the light actor as a partner of SR.

The actors of mechanical experiments are evident, almost they have a name. For example we start and complete the experiment with this subject. It is very important. Because the experiment does not finished by the blue vehicle while we had begun it with red vehicle.

If we start the experiment with the ball numbered 3528 we must complete the experiment with the same numbered ball (3528). This is an undefined principle; but it is absolute requirement.

But such of light experiments are organized with the light in continuity because of some technical difficulties. In this case we can never be sure the completing the experiment by the chosen light actor, if we suppose that the light is like numbered balls or consecutive (recursive/flowing) impulses.

The light actor of SR experiments or analysis must be supposed as a flash impulse. The light actor must be isolated as a single/individual subject from case of continuity. We can succeed this for theoretical analysis.
 

lyner

  • Guest
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #31 on: 19/08/2008 22:00:41 »
I'm sorry, that needs translation.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #32 on: 20/08/2008 06:54:39 »
"if we suppose that the light is like numbered balls or consecutive (recursive/flowing) impulses. "
We don't supose that, all photons (of a given enegry) are identical.
 

lyner

  • Guest
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #33 on: 20/08/2008 09:14:47 »
Thank you BC - you have cracked the code for me.

Quote
If we start the experiment with the ball numbered 3528 we must complete the experiment with the same numbered ball (3528). This is an undefined principle; but it is absolute requirement.
That is not necessarily the case.
Allow yourself to think in terms of the photon only existing at the interaction (what happens at each end) and the wave function being what describes the situation in between source and detector (on the way). The need for a particular photon to follow a whole journey is now eliminated.
The way to deal with modern ideas is not to insist on bringing all your old ideas with you. Every significant step that has been made in the past has required similar leaps away from 'comfortable' and established views.
The reason that experiments have not dealt with individual photons is not just a 'technical difficulty'; it is fundamental.
 

Offline xersanozgen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #34 on: 21/08/2008 21:34:04 »
Thank you BC - you have cracked the code for me.

Quote
If we start the experiment with the ball numbered 3528 we must complete the experiment with the same numbered ball (3528). This is an undefined principle; but it is absolute requirement.

Allow yourself to think in terms of the photon only existing at the interaction (what happens at each end) and the wave function being what describes the situation in between source and detector (on the way). The need for a particular photon to follow a whole journey is now eliminated.
The way to deal with modern ideas is not to insist on bringing all your old ideas with you. Every significant step that has been made in the past has required similar leaps away from 'comfortable' and established views.
The reason that experiments have not dealt with individual photons is not just a 'technical difficulty'; it is fundamental.


That is not necessarily the case.


CORRECT: We can measure the velocity of light by using perpetual/flowing photons.

WRONG: If we want to measure the relative value "c - v" of light's speed according to Earth.

There is a nuance. Many speculations rove in sight because of this nuance.

The original text of SR bases the relative speeds of materials; light is fictionalized. Einstein's explanation is closer to modern physics. But Lorentz's proceeding is an analysis of light motion by classical mechanic. Also Einstein had used Lorentz's explanation in his book (for students) at 1916.

In my opinion elementary analysis is better instead of abstruse thinking as in original text.

The way to deal with Lorentz's setting requires the individual photon. That is fundamental. We can use the individual photons for theoretical analysis. The experiments with flowing photons may be deceptive or misleading. For example Michelson-Morley experiment. If we can use the halves of single photon we would determine different number of interference. That is technical difficulty.
 

lyner

  • Guest
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #35 on: 22/08/2008 15:22:17 »
Quote
CORRECT: We can measure the velocity of light by using perpetual/flowing photons.
How can you say that? You can measure the time between the emission and reception of some light energy. No one has a CLUE about how it travels. It may be 'perpetual, flowing photons' or it may not be. All we know is the effect the experiment gives.

Quote
If we can use the halves of single photon we would determine different number of interference.
But it isn't just 'halves' of photons which are involved; every flow of em energy follows the 'rules' of diffraction. The two slits experiment is the very simplest (although, of course, the slits have finite width, in practice and have their own associated diffraction pattern). If you insist that the photon exists as 'fractions' you have to allow it to spread, in the limit,in all directions and be spread everywhere. Where's your 'little bullet' now?
The Photon, as a concept, is a useful thing to explain many interactions but trying to use it when describing the propagation of em energy is seriously fraught. We are on to a loser if we insist in saying what anything 'really is' and this (what I am criticising) is an excellent example of that statement.
 

blakestyger

  • Guest
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #36 on: 22/08/2008 19:31:41 »
xersanozgen, Copernicus didn't determine that the Earth went around the Sun, he suggested it. What he was originally trying to do was produce more effective tide tables for navigators and this heliocentric system did just that - coupled with the observation that fewer epicycles were needed to account for some planetary orbits this way. Because it was a 'tidier' system in the mathematical sense it was seen to be right, by him and one or two others; elegance is still important in pure mathematics.
 
He was never able to demonstrate his system directly.
 

Offline xersanozgen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #37 on: 23/08/2008 10:15:17 »
Quote
CORRECT: We can measure the velocity of light by using perpetual/flowing photons.
How can you say that? You can measure the time between the emission and reception of some light energy. No one has a CLUE about how it travels. It may be 'perpetual, flowing photons' or it may not be. All we know is the effect the experiment gives.

Quote
If we can use the halves of single photon we would determine different number of interference.
But it isn't just 'halves' of photons which are involved; every flow of em energy follows the 'rules' of diffraction. The two slits experiment is the very simplest (although, of course, the slits have finite width, in practice and have their own associated diffraction pattern). If you insist that the photon exists as 'fractions' you have to allow it to spread, in the limit,in all directions and be spread everywhere. Where's your 'little bullet' now?
The Photon, as a concept, is a useful thing to explain many interactions but trying to use it when describing the propagation of em energy is seriously fraught. We are on to a loser if we insist in saying what anything 'really is' and this (what I am criticising) is an excellent example of that statement.

The light is used by uninterrupted form in experiments of SR (the measurements of velocity or Michelson-Morley). I claim that if we can interrupt the light for example with Kerr obstructer, and we can complete the experiment by single flash impulse we can interpret more significant results.

The primary receptions of SR are simple* and the analysis of SR deals elementary for light's motion. Even the Lorentz's transformations are reduced relation by "λ" of the relation of classic relativity (x - v.t). In my opinion we don't need to think complexity for SR.  Also Einstein and Lorentz could not think by our actual knowledge in 1905. They did not put the meaning or analyze light's motion by high advanced physics. The fiction SR is simple that it can be understood by medium education. Of course it has a point of hardness for our logic.

I solved this point by reconstructing of a postulate. I'll declare it after Olympics. The space-time, the light kinematics and SR will be transparent** due to this announce.

 

*But Einstein wrote the original text of SR like by abstract or advanced mathematical thinking.
** Of course it is optional. I can just only state. If it would be understood easily it will be effective and take place in paradigm. Somebody will use and examine it. They will analyze and compare the new results by natural realities. I hope it will not take long time.
 

Offline xersanozgen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #38 on: 23/08/2008 10:30:51 »
xersanozgen, Copernicus didn't determine that the Earth went around the Sun, he suggested it. What he was originally trying to do was produce more effective tide tables for navigators and this heliocentric system did just that - coupled with the observation that fewer epicycles were needed to account for some planetary orbits this way. Because it was a 'tidier' system in the mathematical sense it was seen to be right, by him and one or two others; elegance is still important in pure mathematics.
 
He was never able to demonstrate his system directly.

Thanks for your gentle explanation.

I had said in some forums as "Galileo's determination"; but somebody corrected me "it was Copernicus". Of course Galileo had intented to say "The earth turns around the own axle of earth, against to belief of "the sun turns around the earth". The idea for orbital turning of earth is suggested by Copernicus as you say.
 

Offline Flyberius

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #39 on: 23/08/2008 11:28:40 »
Not long now!
 

Offline xersanozgen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #40 on: 24/08/2008 15:24:45 »
MASTER-KEY (1) INFORMATION for the COLLAPSE of SPECIAL RELATIVITY

The list the series of consecutive reference systems in accordance with their comprehending capacity:

A material or any one (The source of light or Einstein's train for SR)
The Earth (or Einstein's rails)
The Sun
Milky Way
Local cluster
Super cluster
The general form of Universe

Light coordinate system (Macro reference system)

NEW CONCEPT: The velocity of light is relative according to "light coordinate system/macro reference system/most external system". The velocity of light is character as Vor (Vor: The relative velocity according to out of universe).

The light does not accept anything by reference system except itself (The first coordinate system is reference for materials. The first coordinate system of light is the most external system. The values of light's speed "Vor and original*" are equal (But these values for materials are different).

The measures of light's velocity by present techniques give always the value "c" by this (Vor) labeling.

The theory of SR supposes and loads the meaning that the value "c" is relative according to its source (or train). It is very important: "Which speed do we intend to measure?"

Anyway, the new concept is actually. Henceforth, we would understand and use the meaning that the value "c" is relative according to macro reference system.

If a theoretical analysis is organized by "the light coordinate system", the units of time and length remain like classical physics (the values of velocity of all partners would be use by the character as Vor, especially for the source and observer).

For quotation:  Ersan O. Autopsy Report of SR Infoyay  2003, 2008.

I am here for the questions.

*Original speed: the speed which it can create by its own power.

 
 

Offline xersanozgen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #41 on: 02/09/2008 17:16:52 »
Master-Key of Collapse of SR (4)

1-   It is possible and effective the isolation some secondary factors for scientific analysis. So, it is obtained the elementary analysis on master axle of the event or subject. For example, the traveling line is straight and the speed of subject is fixed in SR; also the observer, the source and the light travels on parallel lines. They present easiness for basic analysis.
2-   But, we have no the rules of these isolations or reductions. The scientists may use and decide the appropriate dosage. The optimum dosage is defined by the concept of necessity and adequacy. If the isolation is exceeded, the claims can be defended easily. But if needless isolations are removed their precision may be impaired.
3-   In my opinion the possibility of scientific isolation is used over optimum or extremely in SR analysis. For example the theory is set by an inertial system and the light in the original text. And so it has consistence easily. It may be not perceived as a problem the light at the opposite direction according to the direction of its source on relative subject.
4-   Lorentz's analysis has clarity for the light at the opposite according to its sources'. But also he analyzed the light at the same direction of its source. Here it is a needless isolation. If we analyze the opposite light by the rules of SR, this time we find "the time contraction" instead of dilation.
5-   The theory of SR organized between only two actors with train-rails example or Earth-spaceship. But universe is never composed of only two subjects. The third and other actors menace the results of SR like in a marriage.

For example: If the relative speed of the train is Ve according to the earth; Vv according to Virgo; Vf according to the cluster Fornax; Vc according to the super cluster Coma; Va according to Abell 2246; V326 according to 3C 326.1 etc…The contraction of the train's length will be the values of  e %, v %, f %, c %, a %, …..x % etc. simultaneously because of SR. And the time dilations for the train will be the values of e' %, v' %, f' %, c' %, a' %,……x' % etc. simultaneously by SR. But it is impossible the different values of deformations simultaneously.
 

Offline xersanozgen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #42 on: 19/09/2008 11:10:32 »
There are some definitions in science history; they were imperfect. The reason of deficiency may be because of could not perceiving the complete of picture especially for universal subjects. An example and its identical for SR:

[nofollow]
[nofollow]
 

Offline xersanozgen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #43 on: 21/09/2008 11:12:34 »
There are some definitions in science history; they were imperfect. The reason of deficiency may be because of could not perceiving the complete of picture especially for universal subjects. An example and its identical for SR:



 

The form of Earth is flat, because we have visual evidence: The sun and the moon are always upside in everywhere.

The measured value of light's velocity is relative according to local frame; because we have experimental evidence, we measure and find always the value "c" in everywhere.


The form of Earth is spherical.It was hidden because of local looking. But we can perceive this reality due to advanced science.

The measured value of light's velocity is relative only according to most external frame. We distinguish this reality/alternative due to thinking like abstract mathematics. We can measure and find the value "c" because  of the technique of the measuring mechanism  (with mirrors and uninterrupted light)
« Last Edit: 22/09/2008 15:58:14 by xersanozgen »
 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #44 on: 21/09/2008 23:58:03 »
I flatly refuse to read stuff that's multi-coloured.  If you want people to pay any attention to what you write and really want some feedback from them, make it easy for them to read.
 

lyner

  • Guest
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #45 on: 22/09/2008 10:05:15 »
Also your posts are too many and too rambling to expect anyone to read them. Why not just post one post and wait for a reply?
Failing that, get your own website and fill it with all the nonsense you want.
 

Offline xersanozgen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #46 on: 22/09/2008 15:59:53 »
Also your posts are too many and too rambling to expect anyone to read them. Why not just post one post and wait for a reply?
Failing that, get your own website and fill it with all the nonsense you want.

www.infoyay.com/english.php [nofollow]
 

lyner

  • Guest
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #47 on: 22/09/2008 23:37:55 »
That's ok as far as it goes but I can only see a list of headings on the web page.
 

Offline xersanozgen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #48 on: 28/09/2008 12:23:46 »
Slower And Faster Tempo Of Time At The Same Clock

Figure-1: To = T'o = 0




[SIZE="2"]..................A………….........………S……........………B[/SIZE]
Figure-2 Tı = 10 earth-second

1-   We want to analyze spaceship's motion by the theory of SR or Lorentz's analysis. The value of its speed is "v" according to The Earth.
2-   The Earth is a reference frame.
3-   The spaceship has a source of light (a flash). And an observer is on the Earth.
4-   At the moment of To The observer and the flash are at the point "A". And it flashes.
5-   Light impulse of the flash has the same value of speed "c" according to the spaceship and the Earth (according to the theory).
6-   Flash's light can travel to every direction. We consider the same directional light for first analysis (Fig.-2).
7-   At the moment Tı (= 10 earth-second) the light is at the point "B" and the spaceship is at the point "S".
8-   The results according to the theory: (t=10 - 0=10 earth-second)

AS = v.t = 1 800 000 earth-km

L = AB =c.t= 3 000 000 earth-km (traveling length for light according to earth and the unit of earth)

SB = 1 200 000 earth-km

L'(same) = SB = 1 200 000 / [1 - (v/c)^2]^1/2 = 1 500 000 ship-km (traveling length for the same light according to spaceship and the unit of ship).

t'(same) = (t - v.L/c^2) / [1 - (v/c)^2]^1/2 = 5 ship-second (traveling time of the same light according to spaceship).

c = L'(same) / t'(same) = 1 500 000 / 5 = 300 000 space-km/space-second.

OK.  THE THEORY IS CERTIFICATED.
 

Offline xersanozgen

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #49 on: 28/09/2008 12:26:46 »
Slower And Faster Tempo Of Time At The Same Clock


...............B'…………………………………...............A…………………........S………........……B

AS = v.t = 1 800 000 earth-km

L = AB' = c.t = (-) 3 000 000 earth-km

SB' = 4 800 000 earth-km

L'(opp.)= 4 800 000 / [1 - (v/c)^2]^1/2 = 6 000 000 ship-km (traveling length for the same light according to spaceship and the unit of ship).

t" (opp.) = (t - v.L/c^2) / [1 - (v/c)^2]^1/2 = 20 ship-second.

c = L'(opp.) / t"(opp.) = 6 000 000 / 20 = 300 000 ship-km/ship-second

OK. THE THEORY IS CERTIFICATED.

12-   Yes, we obtained the fixed value for the velocity of light in both case.
13-   T(same) =T'(same) = T(opp.) = T'(opp.) The moment of analyzing time  is a singular time because of the existence of the light.
14-   We have a problem. Because:

                           t'(opp.) >t(reference) > t'(same)
 20>10>5

It means:    Faster tempo > Ref. Tempo > Slower tempo

15-   The same directional analysis requires slower tempo of time to remain the fixity of light's velocity.
16-   But the opposite directional analysis requires faster tempo of time to remain the fixity of light's velocity.
17-   It is not possible two different tempos for one clock in the same frame simultaneously because of causality.
18-   One unit of ship-second is concerning with the relative speed of spaceship only. The ship-km is not problem; it has independence from light's direction. But the tempo of time is related with light's direction.

THE THEORY of SR has A CONTRARY.


Conclusions:


1-   We don't need the opposite directional light to perceive this contrary; because Einstein had said in his book: The perpendicular light is not a reason for deformation of time (because its relative value of speed's projection is zero according to ship's direction. Slower tempo and reference tempo of time is together in the same frame; also this case is imposibble.
2-   Doubtless the theory has sympathy because of time-travel. And there are the fanatics for the theory. They may want to kick the ball to touch. But this examination has clarity. If some one can not leave the theory because of its fantastic results like time travel, he consider misinforming. 
3-   Of course the light can travel the directions of 360 degree even spherical for
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

THE COLLAPSE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY
« Reply #49 on: 28/09/2008 12:26:46 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums