0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Here is my new and original theory, published nowhere else, I call it The Illusion of Velocity Theory. Essentially, the theory is that light in one inertial frame of reference cannot have true velocity in another inertial frame of reference in relative motion to it unless the source is located in one and the receptor in the other. The perception that light has velocity in the inertial frame of an observer if both the source and receptor are in another inertial frame which is in motion relative to it is an illusion, thus, the title "The Illusion of Velocity Theory". If the source is in one frame and the receptor in another in motion relative to it, velocity can only be measured if the person measuring it knows the distance and time between the two, which is rarely the case, since those parameters would be constantly changing and the observer would need to be in contact with observers in the other frame to have the information required to define the parameters, so generally any perception of velocity of light, or anything else, in one frame from another in relative motion to it is illusory. This postulate, or recognition of objective fact, happens to invalidate most, if not all, of Einstein's thought experiments involving inertial frames in motion relative to each other, because he doesn't appear to have taken those objective facts into account, they all seem to involve the perception of the velocity of light in one inertial frame from the viewpoint of another inertial frame which is in motion relative to it, as if the velocity exists in both frames, even though the source, receptor, and all parameters of velocity are located in only one of the two frames.First I will give my definition of velocity: the quantification of motion based on the parameters of distance and time. Obviously I couldn't measure the velocity of a baseball being thrown from a pitcher to a catcher on a ball field from a moving car. How would I do that? I could obviously only do it on the ball field. A similar situation occurs when I try to measure the velocity of light from a laser to a target, both being mounted on posts on the ground a certain distance apart, from a rocket traveling past them at, let's say, 150,000 km/s, for instance. Neither the laser nor the target are on the moving rocket so they do not have a particular velocity in the inertial frame of the rocket. Were I to make a rough estimate of the velocity of the laser beam, based merely on visual observation, I might think that it was moving at a velocity of only 150,000 km/s, because I and the rocket were moving at 150,000 km/s in the same direction. I might make the mistake of subtracting the velocity of the beam from my own velocity. That would be an example of "the illusion of velocity". If the rocket were traveling in a direction opposite to the direction of the laser beam, I might make the mistake of adding my own velocity to that of the laser beam, concluding that its velocity was 450,000 km/s. That would be another example of "the illusion of velocity".The laser beam actually had no particular velocity relative to me or the rocket, because it neither originated nor terminated in the rocket, and traveled no distance therein over any period of time therein, therefore it had no velocity in the rocket which could be measured in any way, it was an "illusion of velocity", if you will.That, my friends, is the Illusion of Velocity Theory, accept it as valid or not, as you choose. It is my original theory, much like Special Relativity was Einstein's original theory, and this forum states that members are free to post their own original theories here, which would be appropriate to a forum section entitled "New Theories". If you find a logical fallacy in the Illusion of Velocity Theory, feel free to describe it.
... Please only one preposterous, outlandish claim per thread.
The illusion is caused...
It's not an illusion.
interpretation of quantum mechanics?
What has QM got to do with it?
Proper time operator and its uncertainty relation https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03136866/documentAbstractWe study the quantum properties of an oscillator in proper time. This proper time oscillator is a particle model with mass that is on shell. Its internal time can be treated as a self-adjoint operator. The displaced time and displaced time rate of the oscillator obey an uncertainty relation resembling the one between position and momentum, which is different from the usual energy-time uncertainty relation. In addition, we demonstrate that a matter field with proper time oscillators satisfies the Klein–Gordon equation. It has the properties of a zero-spin quantum field. The formulations adopted permit a more symmetrical treatment between time and space in a matter field.
We could say that the particle is the punctual definition of the mass. In reality, like the massless photon, the particle in quantum mechanics boils down to packet of energy. It should not be forgotten that the particle is "true" only during the observation, because otherwise the particle comes down to waves. A particle is a collapsed wave function due to observation.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 26/01/2022 19:53:43What has QM got to do with it?Quantum mechanics is the underlying reason for the constitution of relativistic physics. So I take the interpretation at the source.
In Relativistic quantum chemistry, ...
Relativistic quantum mechanics, predicts that the unique color of the metal Gold is due to time dilation
@puppypower I don't understand what you're saying.
It took some time to develop the tools needed to prove relativity,
I wish to continue the explanation of the gravitational oscillator a little further while waiting to complete the functionality of the graviton.In the gravitational oscillator that I present, there are two types of radiation. First there is the vertical radiation, called fermionic, either the oscillation of the particle from bottom to top and from top to bottom; And there is horizontal radiation, or bosonic radiation. For fermionic radiation and with the example of lepton we have a movement of the particle from bottom to top in the oscillator which allows to transport an electric charge to the surface of the energy sea. In the opposite direction, either from top to bottom the particle goes back in neutrino, either with a neutral charge.In this model there is a very strong link between energy and electric charge by potential difference, and the neutrino and gravity.The charge deposited by potential difference at the surface of the energy sea will then be a component part of the matter for an ephemeral moment t after the following charge has been consumed.Vertical radiation = Fermionic matter = particleHorizontal radiation = Bosonic matter = wave
...Vertical radiation = Fermionic matter = particleHorizontal radiation = Bosonic matter = wave