Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: jeffreyH on 23/09/2016 17:17:23

In general relativity we can actually detect the effects of gravity on time. The Lorentz factor leads to the conclusion of length contraction. However, unlike time dilation, this is only a mathematical convenience. You cannot actually detect a change from any point of observation. This takes away the issue of length contraction during rotation. Where the radius would have to contract in order for the spinning object to not disintegrate.

In general relativity we can actually detect the effects of gravity on time. The Lorentz factor leads to the conclusion of length contraction. However, unlike time dilation, this is only a mathematical convenience. You cannot actually detect a change from any point of observation. This takes away the issue of length contraction during rotation. Where the radius would have to contract in order for the spinning object to not disintegrate.
In reality we can actually detect the effects of gravity on the rate of the Caesium atom which we use to measure time.
Of course objects do not contract in length although spin can make an object contract at its ,,poles,,

In general relativity we can actually detect the effects of gravity on time. The Lorentz factor leads to the conclusion of length contraction. However, unlike time dilation, this is only a mathematical convenience. You cannot actually detect a change from any point of observation. This takes away the issue of length contraction during rotation. Where the radius would have to contract in order for the spinning object to not disintegrate.
In reality we can actually detect the effects of gravity on the rate of the Caesium atom which we use to measure time.
Of course objects do not contract in length although spin can make an object contract at its ,,poles,,
Those are very pertinent observations.
Say Fred plans his journey to star x. He knows it is l lightyears away and calculates that with enough fuel he can reach it in n years at velocity v. He knows nothing of relativity. When he actually undertakes the journey he finds that he reaches star x in 1/2n years. So now he concludes that his distance measurements must have been in error and the star was only 1/2l light years away. He has experienced length contraction without being able to detect it. Due to time dilation. In which case time dilation must relate to the amount of inertia in the moving mass.

In general relativity we can actually detect the effects of gravity on time. The Lorentz factor leads to the conclusion of length contraction. However, unlike time dilation, this is only a mathematical convenience. You cannot actually detect a change from any point of observation. This takes away the issue of length contraction during rotation. Where the radius would have to contract in order for the spinning object to not disintegrate.
In reality we can actually detect the effects of gravity on the rate of the Caesium atom which we use to measure time.
Of course objects do not contract in length although spin can make an object contract at its ,,poles,,
Those are very pertinent observations.
Say Fred plans his journey to star x. He knows it is l lightyears away and calculates that with enough fuel he can reach it in n years at velocity v. He knows nothing of relativity. When he actually undertakes the journey he finds that he reaches star x in 1/2n years. So now he concludes that his distance measurements must have been in error and the star was only 1/2l light years away. He has experienced length contraction without being able to detect it. Due to time dilation. In which case time dilation must relate to the amount of inertia in the moving mass.
Sorry Jef for being argumentative, If Fred knows star X is l light years away, knows means prior information ,
If Fred has prior calculated the distance , he does not know the accuracy of his calculation until he tests his calculations are accurate by making the journey.
I do not 'see' how or why you are suggesting a contraction or time dilation of the journey experience, the error would be in the calculation, nothing more than that?

The box
You are not understanding the deeper meaning of time as it relates to SR. JefferyH on the other hand is confusing length contraction with time dilation. In SR your synapsis slow with all biological processes in the body. The electron makes its cycle but has to also add the distance through space into its cycle. So your clock slows. Your also a biological clock so you age slower.
Length contraction is only a visual phenomenon and not physical. It is the competition between the speed of light and the speed of an object. At relativistic speeds light cannot reflect off the entire length of an object. This is due to the finite speed of light. Many believe it to be physical but they do not understand relativity correctly. They only understand relativity math without the physical reason. Rotation is due to light being independent of the source. Those who consider light in an inertial frame as being perpendicular are not following relativity but there own version of relativity. You need to consider a sphere of light when created and you approach a vector from the past position from where light came. That angle causes the contraction viewed. Geometry will follow the Lorentz contraction when using light independent of the source. Those that just follow math without understanding the math come to a different conclusion.
JefferyH has the better idea on relativistic affects and deeper understanding.

1.
In reviewing the MM experiment, on the left, the path in the x direction was assumed equal to the path in the perpendicular direction, x = p. The transit time for x was calculated to be > that for p. The results were negative. Lorentz and others proposed a contraction in the x direction to explain the results, as shown on the right.
The lab speed of .6c is exaggerated for clarity, since the lower limit of the effective speed was only 30 m/s.
On the left, there are 2 returning signals from Rx and Rp. Applying time dilation assigns each an earlier time, but does not make them simultaneous. Only length contraction does that. SR which appears 15 yrs later only assigns a longer length (R) to x, i.e.
t=x/(c/γ)=γx/c. Notice it's just a question of which value you associate with γ.
2.
The anaut uses the earth based distance 1 ly to calculate transit time. Moving at .6c his arrival time t is 1/.6=1.67 yr. He and his clock rate are .8 (earth normal). He arrives at 1.33 yr ship time. He hasn't made any errors even if he is familiar with SR. He assumes a pseudo rest frame (allowed by SR) and explains the early arrival of his destination (the effects of his time dilation) as the contraction of the universe as it passes by in the opposite direction at .6c. He can't detect his length contraction since his measuring devices contract proportionally. His length contraction is a deformation of material, a motion induced phenomena. The universe contraction is a deformation/altering of his perception, also a motion induced phenomena. He can also choose to interpret the scenario as his time dilation, based on his acceleration from earth.
When physicists accelerate particles to high speeds, no one sees the rest of the world contract. Likewise, an anaut moving at high speed cannot cause such an event.
The observer is not exempt from the effects of high speed, the same as any material object.

The box
You are not understanding the deeper meaning of time as it relates to SR. JefferyH on the other hand is confusing length contraction with time dilation. In SR your synapsis slow with all biological processes in the body. The electron makes its cycle but has to also add the distance through space into its cycle. So your clock slows. Your also a biological clock so you age slower.
Length contraction is only a visual phenomenon and not physical. It is the competition between the speed of light and the speed of an object. At relativistic speeds light cannot reflect off the entire length of an object. This is due to the finite speed of light. Many believe it to be physical but they do not understand relativity correctly. They only understand relativity math without the physical reason. Rotation is due to light being independent of the source. Those who consider light in an inertial frame as being perpendicular are not following relativity but there own version of relativity. You need to consider a sphere of light when created and you approach a vector from the past position from where light came. That angle causes the contraction viewed. Geometry will follow the Lorentz contraction when using light independent of the source. Those that just follow math without understanding the math come to a different conclusion.
JefferyH has the better idea on relativistic affects and deeper understanding.
Well! there is nothing I do not understand on the subject of time or contraction.
I understand why you think ''time'' slows down but quite clearly you do not understand that time does not slow down. Time is not motion or a rate, time is timeless and just is.
It is not totally true that an object cannot contract in length, i.e a car hitting a brick wall at high speed certainly contracts in length as the momentum continues to take the rear of the vehicle forward while the front of the vehicle is stopped by the wall.
Interpretation is the key to understanding anything, without interpretation being precise it is nothing more than mumbo jumbo.

To get the subtleties of the subject it would be useful to read up on the lifetimes of muons and how time dilation affects them.
http://hyperphysics.phyastr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/muon.html (http://hyperphysics.phyastr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/muon.html)
Does the sky contract to accommodate the muons or do they simply travel further?

I am a realest so for me of course the reaction availability at 0.98c is much less than a relative rest frame. Space does not contract to my mind. There are no worm holes. We live in a three dimensional universe with motion. You cannot create a perfect circle in a three dimensional universe. Point to point can get closer and smaller but still not create a perfect circle.
Your understanding affects your interpretation of observation. We cannot view a Photon or Muon to understand the processes and are stuck with just guesses. Relativity and relativistic math appear to be accurate with observation. It is the subjective interpretations that are suspect. Is there a medium? If you say no there is nothing to work with to know why the electron always cycles to the photon distance traveled in every frame. If you say yes to a medium we have to consider energy is in the medium and not in mass because of the MMX.
Since I am a realest something makes the electron move relative to the photon distance traveled. The Muon reaction time is related to relativity also. It cannot react at the same distance through space at relativistic speeds but be sure in the view of a realest its a slow reaction possibly caused by compressed space and not contracted space causing the increased distance.

In general relativity we can actually detect the effects of gravity on time. The Lorentz factor leads to the conclusion of length contraction. However, unlike time dilation, this is only a mathematical convenience. You cannot actually detect a change from any point of observation. This takes away the issue of length contraction during rotation. Where the radius would have to contract in order for the spinning object to not disintegrate.
How do you know a change can't be detected? If you put eight rectangular objects round the edge of a circle such that each is touching the next one "head to tail", what happens if you then rotate them round the circle at 0.866c? They will all contract to half their rest length and gaps will open up between them such that you could fit twice as many of these objects into the same space. See http://magicschoolbook.com/science/refframecamera.htm  click on the button on the left and then type "d" to select an illustration of something close to this. The initial view shows the eight rectangles length already contracted to half their rest length, as required by their speed of travel. If you type "2" you'll see the same thing from the frame of reference of the lowest red rectangle on the screen, at which point it is shown at its rest length. If you type "3" you'll see the same for the red rectangle on the right with that rectangle displaying its rest length. "1" gets you back to the original view. Pressing "s" (for "start/stop") will run time, although it actually shows these objects passing the circle on tangents to it rather than going round it, but it is easy to see that if they were going round it you could have twice as many in that space as the rest length of the rectangles would ordinarily force them to take up, and the 16 objects would then be forming a chain contacting the whole way round, thereby showing that the contraction is real.
No one's done the experiment because the speeds are too high and a small disc rotating fast enough would hide what happens by flying apart long before any length contraction can show up, but a huge disc could hold together and would behave as I've described.

You need to think in terms of mass flow dm/dt in relation to the gamma function. This falls in line with both the increase in relativistic mass and dilation of time with no resort to a physical change in length. I could go through a full proof but I have other issues to contend with at the moment.

You need to think in terms of mass flow dm/dt in relation to the gamma function. This falls in line with both the increase in relativistic mass and dilation of time with no resort to a physical change in length. I could go through a full proof but I have other issues to contend with at the moment.
Not quite true, an object that gains more ''mass'' expands in all directions, an object that loses ''mass'' contracts back to equilibrium entropy.
Relativistic ''mass,, is an increase in speed and not an increase in ''mass''.
An object falling that is 1 kg will remain 1 kg in free fall, but the acceleration of G gives the object relativistic weigh and force.
The actual mass of any object is m=0, because m=g
Without g an object has no mass, it is mass less and weightless.
Time dilation is not a time dilation, it is a timing synchronisation offset, time ''flows'' constantly externally of the Caesium atoms that you use to measure time.
added I have added a real simple diagram with 4 lines that show why you are wrong about time dilation and contraction.
The first two lines are of external space and equal in length.
The third and 4th lines being internal synchronous unless the 4 th line is in in motion.
p.s understand the bottom two lines are internal relative to the top two lines and do not affect the top two lines.
added oh no, I can't quite believe I have started to discuss this again, so why I am it I might as well tell you what time dilation actual is.
Time dilation is thermodynamics and the affect of a bodies entropy emit/gain ratio, when a body is in motion or moves away from a larger mass, the object emits less because of distance and speed to the other body. It will always lose and gain entropy at a rate, motion/distance changes this rate.
I have told you before that things extract ''things'', ''energy'' that is greater than the S will emit and attract to things with a lesser S.
All things want to be the same. All things want to remain at ''room'' temperature.
>E will always ''find'' a way to travel to things with <S than an equilibrium.
Imagine this, the electricity that comes into my home is pulled along the wire, it is pulled along the wire because the wire is less energy than the electricity, the electricity reaches the element where it is then pulled/stretched across space to the wall. If the wall was to contract in distance to the end of the wire the stretch would compress and red shift, if it were to contract even further it would eventually become compressed to blue.
White light is beyond 750nm, less distance = less nm and greater magnitude.
What you see in the above video, the plasma is being pulled, you can not see this effect between bodies with your eyes but I assure you it is there but invisible.

To get the subtleties of the subject it would be useful to read up on the lifetimes of muons and how time dilation affects them.
http://hyperphysics.phyastr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/muon.html (http://hyperphysics.phyastr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/muon.html)
Does the sky contract to accommodate the muons or do they simply travel further?
Or do they fall into a denser medium and gain life from the medium to sustain their extension period......

I am pulled to the ground because I have less entropy and energy than the ground, the ground is also pulled to me because I have less energy than the ground.
That is what gravity is.
added Because the ''outer space'' is ''cold'' the energy from ''inner space'' is attracted to the ''outer space''and is stretched/pulled outwards.

OK so mass flow is basically m/t. If we look at time dilation we have
[ tex ]\Delta t' = \frac{\Delta t}{ \sqrt{1  \frac{v^2}{c^2} } }[ /tex ]
For a relativistic mass flow we can define the equation
[ tex ]f' = \frac{m_0 \sqrt{1  \frac{v^2}{c^2}}}{\Delta t}[ /tex ]
So as velocity increases the flux of energy slows. Hence time dilation. I did not have to resort to using length at all.
OK So basically latex is screwed. To see what the equation looks like go here https://www.codecogs.com/latex/eqneditor.php (https://www.codecogs.com/latex/eqneditor.php) and copy and paste the stuff in between [ tex ] and [ /tex ] into the equation editor. You might learn something.

the box,
You are new to the rabbit hole.
jeffreyH,
You have the advantage of knowing what to expect when you go from room to room in the rabbit hole using math.
There is mechanics behind the math that is elusive and most are satisfied by knowing what to expect in each room.
When you try to go past the math we are in a subjective nightmare and are told to stop because it is unfathomable. I would disagree. Why do we view the cat larger in one room and why do we only see the Cheshire's teeth in another? We have to build the mechanics to reproduce the entire rabbit hole and not just one room. The current subjective understanding is not coherent to form the mechanics.

the box,
You are new to the rabbit hole.
jeffreyH,
You have the advantage of knowing what to expect when you go from room to room in the rabbit hole using math.
There is mechanics behind the math that is elusive and most are satisfied by knowing what to expect in each room.
When you try to go past the math we are in a subjective nightmare and are told to stop because it is unfathomable. I would disagree. Why do we view the cat larger in one room and why do we only see the Cheshire's teeth in another? We have to build the mechanics to reproduce the entire rabbit hole and not just one room. The current subjective understanding is not coherent to form the mechanics.
You give me much more credit than I deserve.

No, you have a thinkers mindset and not just a follower mindset.
dt changes but c remains the same for GR. c has to travel a greater distance in a more dilated environment. We measure time by cycle distance of the electron or light distance of the photon while c remains the same.

The major thing about ignoring length contraction is that it rids relativity of the absurdity of contraction during rotation. Otherwise neutron stars may have a hard time staying intact if they have relativistic angular momentum.

"Length contraction is a mathematical convenience"
Yes, that is correct according to the concept I'm trying to promote.
According to SR, space is dilating and objects appear smaller when viewed from a frame in which that object is moving. That happens because SR works with abstract objects rather than particle models. This way there will always be things it can't explain.
My concept says something else. Particles get elongated along the motion line, in the absolute space. The experiment that confirms that is the slowing down of light when using OAM. Light that has l > 0 can be thought as a new particle. If you accelerate it, l number reduces. If l = 0 , the speed reaches c. However, electrons have a secondary helix and thus the wavefronts can have more values for speed. Think of it as an OAM wave that instead of travelling straight, if follows a loop or a helix. Anyway, the same principle applies, that is, trajectory pattern dictates the speed of the particle.

My concept says something else. Particles get elongated along the motion line, in the absolute space. The experiment that confirms that is the slowing down of light when using OAM. Light that has l > 0 can be thought as a new particle. If you accelerate it, l number reduces. If l = 0 , the speed reaches c. However, electrons have a secondary helix and thus the wavefronts can have more values for speed. Think of it as an OAM wave that instead of travelling straight, if follows a loop or a helix. Anyway, the same principle applies, that is, trajectory pattern dictates the speed of the particle.
Anytime you create conditions that do not follow Relativity postulates there is a high probability you are incorrect. What is a particle and what is a photon? These are the questions that need answering before we can claim a physical interpretation of a visual image. Consider light reflection off an object going half the speed of light with an observer in that frame. If the light is in the same direction as the object the reflection is twice the size of the object. If the light source is opposite to the direction of travel the object only reflects 66.6% of the actual size. This has nothing to do with the actual size of the physical object being viewed. Yes the electron moves in a angular screw motion at the speed of light motion. The vector speed is viewed slower than the total motion of c. The photon vector speed is c. The angular motion of the electron jump is the photon packet imprinted on space energy c. Your velocity changes have no real observed changes of vector speed. All spectrum waves travel at the same speed. This is the observed measurement that follows vector geometry as jefferyH claims and relativity predicts. Light being independent of the source means there is no perpendicular view with vector speed. The hypotenuse view is a contracted view unless you are in the vector speed frame where your measuring stick appears longer by reflection. At half the speed of light your measuring stick appears 13.4% longer than at relative rest. This can be shown using plain geometry. Using the Lorentz contraction is a mathematical convenience.
Nilak
How do you get around the fact that all frames measure the same speed of light. Especially since relativity follows geometry vector motion using c as a constant. If c was variable geometry would fail observation.

Nilak
How do you get around the fact that all frames measure the same speed of light. Especially since relativity follows geometry vector motion using c as a constant. If c was variable geometry would fail observation.
If you are in a box while travelling at v, the box extends by Lorentz factor (x'=x*gamma). Your clock will tick slower because particles geometry change and you get t' = t*gamma. Hence c=c'=dx/dt=dx'/dt'. When you measure c using a mirror, you always get c. However the speed difference is cv while the light ray travells towards the mirror and c+v after it gets reflected back.
This has been confirmed experimentally although people thought c was measured from a third reference frame. There is also a mathematical demonstration availabe for this.

If you are in a box while travelling at v, the box extends by Lorentz factor (x'=x*gamma).
The visual image extends but not the physical object in SR.
When you measure c using a mirror, you always get c. However the speed difference is cv while the light ray travells towards the mirror and c+v after it gets reflected back.
This would depend on the angle of the mirror to the direction of vector speed. Physically Perpendicular to the mirror and sideways to the vector motion the c is the hypotenuse angle to the speed of the box. This has no negative number. Geometrically any angle of the clock to the vector motion gives the same tick rate of the frame. Any speed different from c would give a different answer than the observed one. So we can understand it is the added distance of the hypotenuse and not a change in c that causes the gamma term in Relativity SR.
Deviate from Relativity postulates and you no longer follow observations in physics.

The angle of the mirror with the vector speed is 90 degrees in the simplest case. Particle waves that compose the box move follow a helix which extends on all directions but the lead front is moving on a single axis.

The angle of the mirror with the vector speed is 90 degrees in the simplest case. Particle waves that compose the box follow a helix which extends on all directions but the lead front is moving on a single axis.

The angle of the mirror with the vector speed is 90 degrees in the simplest case
Ok lets look at what is happening to your reflection in SR at half the speed of light. You are standing in front
of the mirror. The angle of reflection to enable you to see your reflection is 30 degrees forward to the mirror
and 30 degrees back to observe your image. Light is independent of the frame by Relativity so there is no
perpendicular view with vector velocity. Your image is contracted by the inverse square of the distance the light image traveled.
When you increase your vector velocity the angle decreases and the hypotenuse increases. This is what
happens to the light clocks in your frame to measure the tick rate of your frame. There is equivalence to
the electron cycle while traveling a vector speed. This is proof that there is fundamental energy (zero point energy)
in space. Both the photon and electron energy are reduced by the same ratio to c. At c the electron can not cycle.
At c the photon cannot go faster. c is the rest state of mass and c is the total energy state in vector velocity
for the photon. The angular total motion for the electron is always c while the vector speed is always less.
This is the confounding between photon and physical clocks.