0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Starting from the wave / particle duality when we observe usual waves like sound or water waves, we know they are actually made of molecules, that we can imagine being particles. That means to have a wave you need particles interacting following some rules/laws. However, when we zoom in, it might slightly different, but the same idea.We can define space as a made of infinitely small points (infinitely small is not equal to zero) close together.
... So now we have a definition of time = to motion and fundamental motion is c through space. Your particles of space have to be the cause of relativity not just work with relativity. My personal understanding come from thinking about relativity for most of my life almost to the point of being an obsession. To the logical mind mechanics has to rule physics that include mathematics. Mathematics of the observations of relativity have been applied so this suggests an understanding of ratios using the speed of light. Without mass this is a very simple concept. That fundamental motion is uniform and c. Its only when we add mass that we have light, magnetism, electricity and the wavelength spectrum. Where does mass mechanically receive the ability of movement? From c of course. Any other direction moves us away from the cause of relativity.
Each point in space has some properties. Mass corresponds to high density of space. Properties can be transfered to the next point. The speed of transfer between two adjiacent points is alwys the same and it is c. The time of transfer is infinitely small. c=dx/dt. A universal time cannot be set because we don't know what density of space to refer to.
Quote from: GoC on 09/10/2016 14:27:44 ... So now we have a definition of time = to motion and fundamental motion is c through space. Your particles of space have to be the cause of relativity not just work with relativity. My personal understanding come from thinking about relativity for most of my life almost to the point of being an obsession. To the logical mind mechanics has to rule physics that include mathematics. Mathematics of the observations of relativity have been applied so this suggests an understanding of ratios using the speed of light. Without mass this is a very simple concept. That fundamental motion is uniform and c. Its only when we add mass that we have light, magnetism, electricity and the wavelength spectrum. Where does mass mechanically receive the ability of movement? From c of course. Any other direction moves us away from the cause of relativity.My model shows that local time relates to local c. For an object, Locally c0= dx0/dt0; but for an object close to a bigger mass space is shrinked and also locally, c1=dx1/dt1. dx1<dx2. Always dt0=dt1. Then c1<c0. However they define as c0 and c1 their own causality speed and cannot be exceeded locally.The particles of space are not quite particles because their motion is limited by how much space stretches and contracts. The source of relativity is the space itself and the time between two adjiant points which is fixed but cannot be measured since it is infinitely small.I think, I need to change the definition here. I had something else in my mind. The time of transfering information from one point to next one is fixed, not the speed.
.... I can relate with your perspective, specialy with "the time of transfering information from A to B is fixed (adrifting), not the speed (does not posses acceleration on it's own)... Intristing point of view, can you tell me, "I'll consider the awnser only as especulation", the question is, do you consider that, the light, has a speed when in reference to space, if so, witch number would describle this speed of light, our current one, or if not so, to be something (concept) totaly different from "speed of light"?
The speed of light is constant no matter your speed or gravitational state. The speed of light can be viewed as the energy state of space. Equivalency between SR and GR is dilation of space energy for GR and percent of energy used for SR in velocity. c is total zero point energy being used for velocity c. Even between galaxies dilation is reduced by the inverse square of the distance. Galaxies have their own dilation we view as their lensing. 75% of the light produced in a galaxy is in the center. This is where the lensing is the greatest and red shifted the most compared to our position in our own galaxy. So we view all galaxies as red shifted from our observed position. The big bang is based on SR red shift calculations when the red shift is actually GR. The background radiation is from the energy state of space being affected by mass. The increased red shift with distance is a prism effect of convex lensing needed to view further into the universe. What is wrong with current science allowing magic to rule our understanding?
Yes of course like sound uses air the spectrum uses dark mass energy. There is a mechanical reason for relativity.
You are trying to combine the standard model with a totally new one. That is like trying to use a mac program in windows. They are incompatible. You need to throw out one operating system to create a different one. We have a problem with virtual photons where we are trying to propagate bullets (particles) as photons. If we have a matrix (aether type) of operating system relativity has a completely different cause. The cause becomes mechanical rather than postulates. If we have a matrix it has to be the reason for electron movement, light speed, magnetism, gravity, weak and strong force. It cannot flow in a direction to move light although it might flow. Because light is constant in every direction. This only leaves one possibility for the propagation of light. c is a spin of particles (dark mass) and the spin of the particles dark energy at c. This is a definition of a different operating system. All observations need to be redefined through this system for mechanical relativity. The standard model has no mechanical basis for relativity. Postulates was a good start but only a start.What is your basis of a mechanical operating system for relativity?
As you yourself said, "energy shouldbe of space, not mass", there is only one type of energy correct, different wavelengthts, different process, but you agree that there is only one "source of energy", don't you? I reading as much as I can to fix the wholes on this alternative perspective, that I trully believe will achieve nothing, but seems logical to explore all possibilities... Resuming into a question, do you believe on the possibilitie that "photon" is a temporary contruction of the aether, proving its existence, that are created and dismissed wherever energy is not traveling, occuring?
What is your basis of a mechanical operating system for relativity?
So you have to describe your operating system before your claim relativistic effects. Unless you are not following Relativity. If that's the case you can claim anything.Relativity has a mechanical cause. Either a substance to transfer energy (an Ether type) or the void type by main stream. Only you can chose to which you subscribe.
Yes relativity postulate is constant c. Time is a man made concept that is explained very well by relativity mathematics. Tick rates change depending on the space you occupy. So what we measure as time is different by the math of relativity. Saying time is constant is going backwards.
Time is just a relative speed of reactions while we all are in the present. We are just a biological clock. SR speed reduces the available energy of c by using it for speed. This is reflected in tick rate of clocks.
The reason for me to abandon it was it did not satisfy all four pats of Relativity. Specifically it fails dilation. We
In relativity mathematics photons have to be virtual or just not part of mass.
Yes your idea is logical for two issues of an operating system. What in your model moves the electron and photon confounded in every frame?
Einstein used proper speed as a constant. This aspect of Relativity is very important. Measured distances change by dilation and speed. There is an equivalence between SR and GR. We can show by math the visual length of a measuring stick lengthens as we approach c. This has nothing to do with the Lorentz contraction of an observer at rest. The physical size of a measuring stick does not change with speed (SR) just the visual length. It is the same with the Lorentz contraction. This can be shown geometrically with the finite speed of light competing with the speed of an object. In GR (gravity) dilation is the equivalence. What is amazing, the photon and electron are confounded to measure the same speed of light, in a vacuum, in every frame. A clock can be placed in any angle compared to the vector speed and geometrically, shown to tick at the same rate. Both a light clock and a mechanical clock tick in synchronization. This is proof there is a control mechanism fixing both the electron cycle and photon distance, in every frame to be the same measured ratio. Your idea is a higher density of micro particles slowing down the speed of light to take longer. I thought through that process in the past and had to abandon that approach. The reason for me to abandon it was it did not satisfy all four pats of Relativity. Specifically it fails dilation. We know light curves around a celestial body by expansion of space. Your first thought is, correct there must be more particles and it curves around them. But when you think deeper you begin to realize, there is a control mechanism of space time measurement. This has to be in the form of energy. Now the question becomes where is the fundamental energy. Two choices come to mind. It is either mass as science now believes or it is of space. We can consider the electrons as fundamental energy but that does not satisfy electrons and photons being confounded in every frame. In relativity mathematics photons have to be virtual or just not part of mass. This leaves us with one logical choice. The energy has to be of space to move electrons and photons in a confounded manor. Energy spin state of c would have to be stretched in the presence of mass occupying space. The physical clock electron based moves further to remain the same relative speed of c. There is no logical reason for more particles/mass. Mass would reduce the density of energy by taking up space energy once occupied and removing that energy to move the electrons. Gravity being caused by mass attracted to a lower energy density.I might be incorrect in my logic but you need to find a operating system for relativity as a whole and not just one specific cause of one observation.We are in a catch 22 in our understanding using postulates. We are all making claims based on our own operating system of beliefs. Main stream has nothing to work with because of the MMX. Rather than disproving one type of Ether which is all it disproved, main stream science refuses to consider an Ether not yet disproved.Main stream removed the tools needed to understand the four forces. They traded mechanics in for magic.
On reply #29No offense, but I think we should refrain ourselves from making aggressive and impulsive comments and find a more polite manner to reply to issues. I appreciate the simple interest in folowing my post even though statement might not be correct. Your comments are very appreciated as well but I suggest not offending other persons. Sorry for this.
I want to apologize for my lack of emotion. I have struggled with this aspect of my nature all of my life. I come across as being rude without the understanding of the feelings of others. While I have empathy for visual physical pain I am not able to process emotional pain properly to what is considered average. I have a below average emotional understanding. I might not have the capacity to learn. I can only apologize when accused and continue to offend. [Quote/]Alex Siqueira« on: Today at 03:06:12 » Nilak« on: Today at 11:00:40 » [\Quote] Both of you are understanding there are particles beyond mass that we can perceive. This is a size and motion problem that we will never detect other than orthogonally. Motion of macro mass is possible because of the motion of micro mass c. Einstein Suggested we cannot assign motion to an Ether. A flow of ether would invalidate relativity. A static Ether was disproven by the MMX. There is only one motion left and that is micro particle spin c that actually causes relativity. We can only postulate micro particles spin at c because like electron movement, currently there is no mechanical cause being expressed by main stream. I will postulate a cause for electron motion. Nilak you are in the first stages of understanding and Alex perceives most of the mechanical process to understand a possible explanation for relativity mathematics.Nilak if you give your particles spin c the views you express will take the form of relativity. No micro particle in space occupies that space indefinitely unless the spin function is a ridged matrix of the universe. I am leaning towards a grid matrix of spin c because light has a different distance east to west than west to east. New York to San Francisco is fourteen ns further for light to travel than in the opposite direction. If you go north to the axis and then south and reverse the direction atomic clocks remain synchronized. So it might be likely that the Earth as it travels through space dilates the new particles in space same as light traveling through space dilates new particles.The spin nature of the micro particles create a rotational path forward with its own dilation of the particles not enough to make a wave other than background noise. When the electron jumps its orbit it changes its path abruptly causing a wave to be generated. The rotation causes a backward and forward wave with a mirror image on the reversed side. When you bring those sides back together the one affects the other as spooky at a distance entanglement. In reality the reverse wave was created from the start and the wave spin when measured by one is opposite of the other. similar to you being tricked by a magician by not understanding the trick.Dilation of energy is of course density of micro energy particles being expanded by moving the electrons of macro mass. Particle spin does not slow down its just the light wave moves through more space between particles. Light curves around dilation trying to stay as close to the original wave density of space as possible.Gravity of course is mass trying to occupy the least dense energy space possible by the inverse square of the distance to the most dilated position. The moon pulls up the ocean 6 inches by its dilation of space and inverse square affect.This brings us to galaxies having an accumulated dilation we view as the lensing affect. The light produced in dilation is red shifted because of the accumulated expansion of micro energy particles. They are most expanded in the center of galaxies where 75% of the stars create the galaxy light. So we can explain red shift from our less dilated position in our galaxy by GR rather than main stream claiming it to be SR red shift. The big bang is not necessary to magically produce mass. Macro mass is produced in suns by creating electrons. They are created from micro energy by fusion. I can explain relativity mechanically with just the postulate of spinning micro mass. Space time, micro mass energy, Dark mass energy call it anything you like.It may take 500 years before main stream quits floundering in their belief in magic and not having the tools (spinning micro mass) to understand relativity both mathematically and mechanically.
just saying the word photon brings a particle to mind. Visual nm for the wave, the electron jumps from one state to another rotationally disturbing the spin state of c particles. The rotation and length from the rest state creates the wave where 180 degrees one side is a push forward and the other side a pull backward. This wave front is propagated in all directions. the 180 degree shell is perfectly opposite so it is considered entangled when you determine the spin state of one side the other side is the opposite spin state. Entangled wave information does not travel faster than light. They are opposite spin states at the creation of light. Main stream is being tricked by their understanding of light being a particle.It is only the wave on spin particles already at c that are disturbed and propagate that disturbance at c until the pattern is dissipated by mass and detected as work energy.
Quote The reason for me to abandon it was it did not satisfy all four pats of Relativity. Specifically it fails dilation. WeI don't see right now, why it fails dilation. The coordinated time is constant, proper space and time dilates and contracts proportionaly creating a field of density regions, leaving the measurement of c in proper reference frame constant. C=dx''/dt''=dx'/dt' the external observer sees c'=dx'/dt, c''=dx''/dt. Also, density of space is constant in abery reference frame, and it varies when viewed from an observer.Quote In relativity mathematics photons have to be virtual or just not part of mass. If I follow my model, photons are propagating values of space points properties. So, their mass can be viewed as mass of the space they occupy at a particular moment. That mass would be not detectable and could be associated with dark matter. These photons would't produce mass, but only propagate information. Do you think there is a problem here ?
Entropy properties following this concept.Space point entities tend to collapse to a single point. This can be viewed as negative energy. The information pushed into the system, also known as energy, does the opposite and can be viewed as positive energy.The tendency to collapse is a factor that, reduces the entropy of the system while the information, as positive energy increases the entropy. The positive energy is always matches the negtive energy. The total entropy depends on the definition of entropy. As a degre of disorder, the total entropy varies with time.Gravity.Instead of time space curvature, the gravity is simply a tendency of space to collapse to its initial state. As it collapses its mass/density increases. To balance this you need energy. An high density space near an even higher density will require more energy to be pushed away so the effect is that those density will travel toward each other.
The metric of space coresponds to the point entities of this concept. Near objects the metric of space is contracted. This translates to increased point entities density
Despite, energy expanding space being more intuitive, it might be exactly the opposite. Energy, makes these point entities gathering , otherwise they have the tendency to dissipate.
Analyzing the equivalence principle it looks like space itself gets continuously attracted by mass,
which is more space density.
Initially, I thought it only gets attracted until a point of equilibrium and only Black holes don't establish the equilibrium, but it is not
Space is more dynamic than I thought. But somehow acceleration is harder to explain because I need to imagine waves accelerating other waves.
On top of this all waves like EM or waves corresponding to strong/weak force travel at the same rate (x/t=ct=c).
Then a velocity below c in a x direction must be because of field values propagating in y an z direction in a circular pattern.
. Also when crossing a higher density space light must not slow down to confirm x/t constant, which seems to be true.
When crossing a glass cube, probably one of the reasons light gets slowed down is due to trajectory deviation and not higher space density.
If gravity is contracting space, then gravity waves are space waves.
Quote Analyzing the equivalence principle it looks like space itself gets continuously attracted by mass,In my opinion only mass gets attracted to mass.
Quotewhich is more space density.Why do you view it as more space density?
QuoteInitially, I thought it only gets attracted until a point of equilibrium and only Black holes don't establish the equilibrium, but it is notEquilibrium is the point between two bodies where a third body between has equal attraction.
Quote. Also when crossing a higher density space light must not slow down to confirm x/t constant, which seems to be true.When the voyagers left the solar system they went into a higher density space (less dilated). Their clocks tick rate increased. This sent back a closer signal like the voyagers slowed down. It was incorrect to assume they slowed down. It was just another proof of GR. c energy being more dense away from mass.
QuoteWhen crossing a glass cube, probably one of the reasons light gets slowed down is due to trajectory deviation and not higher space density.It is the decrease in energy density in mass that causes the refraction of light direction that causes the trajectory change.
QuoteIf gravity is contracting space, then gravity waves are space waves.You are confusing Doppler and gravity as the same cause. They are not. In Relativity we first had postulates. Then the math that fell from those postulates mimicked observation to show the power of Relativity as reality. The third part is the mechanics. This is what scares those in science today. What if you worked on something all your life and found it to be false? It would be as difficult as convincing the Pope there was no God. No disrespect intended. And the followers are even more committed to follow the subjective interpretations wanting to be with the group of professed knowledge.I totally believe in Relativity postulates and math. I make suggestions of a mechanical process that may or may not be true but like the postulates my mechanical view follows relativity. If you were to go into the rabbit hole (Relativity) You would need more than the math to know why things grow and shrink or why you can only see the eyes of the cat. The mechanics o relativity is the next step in the process of understanding.Why do you think the voyagers slowed down? Or did they?
QuoteQuote. Also when crossing a higher density space light must not slow down to confirm x/t constant, which seems to be true.When the voyagers left the solar system they went into a higher density space (less dilated). Their clocks tick rate increased. This sent back a closer signal like the voyagers slowed down. It was incorrect to assume they slowed down. It was just another proof of GR. c energy being more dense away from mass.Why higher density space? I think they went into lower density space, thus tick rates increased. I don't know what you mean by closer signal.
The voyagers could have slowed down because of the gravity exerted by our galaxy.
But also being in a more dilated space would make them sent the same signal.
Gravity is a difference in dilations of space. This does cause attraction between masses. But the affect between the weight of the voyagers and the solar system is insignificant by volume.
That is what I thought initially. The Minkowski spacetime diagram presents the universe as a single 4d block. This creates the appearance of a static universe. My idea is that the time dimension is totally different. Energy conservation is along the time axis only. The time as a distance dimension is only a mathematical tool. The universe is not static. When you say 'bent spacetime' you think of fowllowing a curve in spacetime, and this is correct. But this deprive you intuitively by the idea of motion. Therefore gravity is not difference in space dilation. Gravity is relative motion of space structure. Gravity is caused by a continuous process of space contraction and it is not a force itself. It doesn't follow the rules of newtonian forces. But this is what Einstein says but not quite explicitly when explaining GR. You simply follow the time line in a spacetime diagram and see that space contracts. When light is moving through this space its trajectory becomes curved.You are saying "Gravity is a difference in dilations of space". "Difference in dilations" is not very clear. Dilation is not density, but a process of decreasing density. Did you actually mean the same thing I've described? I've described it simply as a process of space contraction.
Space dilation process is the opposite of gravity also known as antigravity. Negative mass is simply a structure that creates space dilation in all directions. Black Holes probably do that but only at poles. Since mass is given by space density multiplied by volume, negative mass is not mass but an energy that makes space dilate
The points and their mass are infinitesimal, but the sum is a finite number. That is what mass essentially is.
It turns out that this problem of mass as the source of gravity is not really a problem because Einstein field equations of GR don't use the newtonian mass neither.Acording to GR, the gravitational field is caused by stress-energy tensor. In newtonian gravity, mass density is the source.
Einstein doesn't deny the aether either. I understand he says that completely rejecting the existence of an aether deprives space from all the properties,