The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?  (Read 200849 times)

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #550 on: 18/01/2014 13:05:59 »
One way is to define a container universe, and you need one for it, don't think you can get away from it. Then you assume that all relative motion takes itself out, then you apply an eye of a God to it and define it as there is 'global' definition of this energy 'propagating' in the vacuum, that is constant and in a equilibrium.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #551 on: 18/01/2014 13:08:24 »
When this container model meets observer dependencies it breaks down into multi verses though.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #552 on: 18/01/2014 13:10:07 »
The container model is described through 'dimensions'.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #553 on: 18/01/2014 13:12:29 »
A degree of freedom, described locally, what would that be? Could I define some center to it and then displacements from that center describing a 'motion', as in a degree of freedom. relative me (someone/thing) observing it?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #554 on: 18/01/2014 13:16:38 »
So where is that 'energy' you find the sun to have stored?
In the detector?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #555 on: 18/01/2014 13:21:37 »
You see, assuming lights propagation, you need to define different patches of a vacuum containing different 'energy' in each instant of measuring 'energy/rays etc' propagating through it. That one hurts my head, what happened to the neutral aspect, and equivalence, of a vacuum here?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #556 on: 18/01/2014 13:25:14 »
You can't use a container model, with dimensions, at the same time define the vacuum as being neutral, while defining it to contain different energies, propagating? What are you doing here? Imagining the vacuum to be some sort of ocean with 'streams of light'? Then you must differ 'bosons' from a vacuum, and 'energy'. What do that leave a perfect vacuum?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #557 on: 18/01/2014 13:27:56 »
So you then must define 'bosons' as something different from the concept of 'energy', if you want a vacuum to contain it. Or you split it in two, 'bosons and 'energy' ' and then, a perfect vacuum.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #558 on: 18/01/2014 13:33:11 »
I guess you prefer the first, letting a 'energy' differ from bosons. Can you prove that one?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #559 on: 18/01/2014 13:36:32 »
Can you prove different patches of a vacuum containing different energies then?

I don't think so, neither the first, nor the last question. What you can prove is that using a sun (source), then placing a detector (sink) somewhere inside a defined vacuum you will find proportionality. It is from finding the relations we define the propagation.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #560 on: 18/01/2014 13:41:37 »
As soon as you introduce a proper mass, it start to interact with bosons. Using a mass closing in to gamma radiation, you should find a retardation of motion, as the photons create a pressure, through their momentum.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #561 on: 18/01/2014 13:43:37 »
What is a perfect vacuum?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #562 on: 18/01/2014 13:49:44 »
All would be good, possibly? If we had this container defining it, and naturally so 'dimensions'. But the container, and the dimensions, are observer dependent giving us locally defined 'multi verses' here, and now.
=

That's what Lorentz transformations is all about, translating observer dependencies.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #563 on: 18/01/2014 13:54:23 »
And if you want to connect 'energy' to different regimes, defined by temperatures, then that to the 'dimensionality'? Including that perfect vacuum?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #564 on: 18/01/2014 13:58:44 »
I would say ones definition of a perfect vacuum is a relation, to mass and motion, locally defined. What we may agree on is what we think defines a perfect vacuums 'property's'. And that is it containing degrees of freedom, as defined from a observer, and so distance(s). You can define it as having a relation to energy too, but I don't know what 'energy' is.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #565 on: 18/01/2014 14:06:56 »
light has a vector, doesn't it? We give it a source, then define a propagation and vectors for it (speed and direction). Then we define it to have a momentum, giving it a pressure on mass, acting in the direction of its propagation.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #566 on: 18/01/2014 14:08:25 »
That's a pretty robust argument for lights propagation, isn't it?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #567 on: 19/01/2014 14:44:28 »
My universe becomes pretty weird, doesn't it? It assumes that as soon as a arrow is gone, and that you do by scaling, every 'direction' must point to a 'center'. And as there is no arrow, any definition of distance, so splitting that center into 'points', must lose their meaning. If something is perfectly homogeneous, equivalent in all aspects, without a arrow. How do you introduce it to get to the isotropy (distances and dimensions)?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #568 on: 19/01/2014 14:45:50 »
It's a 'sidereal universe' we live in. There is no up or down to it, ignoring gravity. Any direction is as good as any other.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #569 on: 19/01/2014 14:47:33 »
And what makes it possible to define a distance is a arrow. So how do we introduce that arrow?
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #570 on: 19/01/2014 14:51:34 »
The observer, isn't it :)

From relativity's point of view you must have a observer. You can replace that for needing two frames of reference, one frame defining the other, from its local clock and ruler.

That's your 'time' in a sidereal universe, becoming your arrow.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #571 on: 19/01/2014 14:56:33 »
Decoherence becomes really interesting to me, for defining it. It's what 'evens out' QM ,becoming the laws of Newton and Einstein macroscopically. Decoherence needs a arrow, and the arrow becomes decoherence.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #572 on: 19/01/2014 15:05:21 »
Then we have this assumption that laws are time invariant, meaning that you can play the movie backwards. I think it is correct, but I also define it such as it is a logic you must find, if you want a universe such as ours. I do not jump from there to a definition in which as a shadow creeps forward on a sun dial, it will be as true to say it also should be able to creep the opposite way. I differ between a needed logic, giving us repeatable experiment, and a presumption that you should be able to use that logic for reversing your arrow.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #573 on: 19/01/2014 15:09:03 »
What I suspect I'm saying here is that I would expect 'time' to have a direction, a property of time, or possibly as a result from properties interacting becoming a arrow. Mathematics can prove all sorts of things, depending on your system of logic.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11999
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #574 on: 19/01/2014 15:15:57 »
Can you see why 'time travels' becomes impossible from such a definition?

It's about a whole universe played backwards, from using an idea of decoherence. You can't lift yourself out of the fractal.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: How does a 'field' become observer dependent?
« Reply #574 on: 19/01/2014 15:15:57 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length