An Intuitive Model for Special Relativity

[TakenItSeriously]

I must be crazy

 

 

This is still a work in progress. Unfortunately, hackers have been constantly delaying my progress by modifying or even deleting files so I decided to post before suffering another devastating setback which have occurred more than a few times before. I can only speculate as to why.

 

I believe enough is done to validate the convergence of the model and to get a reasonably good idea about how valid the hypothesis may be. Hopefully you can suspend your disbelief long enough to get to the model and the evidence.

 

This post is actually a prelude to the much more important logical model for a TOE which I hope to release soon. It has been on hold until I finished this current project for an intuitive SR model, which removed some major hurdles critical for finishing the TOE.

 

The TOE to follow appears to be completely consistent and answers all of the major problems with QM, SR, GR, Cosmology, and may be a logical model for M theory, though I know nothing about string theory aside from the interpretations I've read about, but everything I could find seem to fit.

 

I can say It is not something that I could have simply invented and is far to brilliant for me or any other human on the planet to have come up with, of this I'm certain. I found it by following a proper analog which I discovered in my previous profession which is the only reason I'm here sticking my neck out making impossible claims about the most vetted Theory in the history of Man. Believe me, I get how ludicrous my claims must sound.

 

I should also note that I am not a physicist or mathematician. Nor do I hold any degrees beyond a high school degree.

 

I am an autodidact and I have a gift for solving logic based problems.

 

My most significant accomplishment was solving High Speed Digital Design creating a complete solution for PCB layout strategies, guidelines, and techniques that are be immune to any SI problems of high speed signals including EMI issues.

 

Also being being the first AFAIK to successfully tune out impedance mismatches for signals at speeds up to 10GHz with 15ps rise-times, back around the turn if the century.

 

My most notable accomplishment was being the first to create Gigabit Ethernet designs that could pass EMI Testing. It was notable because the entire enterprise market had failed to solve this problem for 2 years after the chips were available. Not a single product was able to pass as far as I'm aware until the company I worked for joined the Gigabit market and customers saw that all of our evaluation boards passed. However It was all built into the solution I had accomplished around 7 years before that time.

 

So my greatest and most stressful accomplishment I would have to say was not giving up on getting anyone to pay attention to my work that was completely ignored for 7 years.

 

And that is the best reason to take this project seriously. Because there wasn't a chance in hell I'd go through that again if I didn't feel it was absolutely necessary. It wouldn't matter if I was 100% certain I was right. I still wouldn't release the work.

 

The only reason I finished these projects and releasing it now is because I feel a moral obligation to release it even though it's probably a hopeless cause that it will be taken seriously.

 

If you find the work overly simplistic, that is because that is the nature of logic. I doubt the solutions could have been accomplished using math alone which is probably the main reason no physicist has found the solution using math. Logic is simply the more appropriate tool to apply to the relativistic domain IMHO.

 

Thank you for you're time and feedback.

Sincerely

TakenItSeriously

Paul Ikeda

Retired Sr Staff System Design Engineer and HSDD Expert.

 

 

 

Intuitive Model of Special Relativity

"Everything should be as simple as possible, but not simpler."

- Albert Einstein

 

Abstract

I began with a hypothesis that length contraction was the definitive source of the Twin Paradox. In order to show evidence that would support this hypothesis, I simplified the problem to it's simplest possible form as a ship traveling at a constant velocity while flying by both planets, seperated by 4 lightyears thus removing the turn around and the second leg of the problem.

 

Therefore there would be no acceleration, no turn around, no frame jumping in the problem. Their is only the length contraction which I had originally proposed as the source of the time deviation and the relativistic doppler shift which is used to show the source of the time deviation in the origional solution to the problem.

 

This implied that the relatvistic doppler shift was just another aspect of the spacetime effects of contraction or expansion.

 

I provided four logical arguements for each link betweer time and distance to frequency and wavelength to show that it was logically consistant that they are the same effects of expansion and contraction.

 

I next combined the relativistic spacetime effects to the relativity of simultaniety (lag-time) and calculated their combined Lorrentz Transformations using mathematical formalism to reveal the exact same formulas that are used for Relativistic Doppler Shift thus validating the logical conclusions made earlier.

 

By combining the relativistic spacetime effects with their lag-times, we can also see that Special Relativity is symmetrical where spacetime expands behind moving objects and contracts in front of moving objects in synch with redshift and blueshift. Also, it appears to be consistent with all relativistic effects though havent had the time to confirm each one of those yet.

 

We also discover that Special Relativity is symmetrical in time and space between observers while it quickly becomes apparent that all of the relativistic effects are also different aspects of the same spacetime expansion and contraction.

 

We also see that the rotation of spacetime is the ultimate cause in the ubiquitous thought experiments that create so many of the veridical paradoxes in Special Relativity.

 

From this convergence, I was able to create a new intuitive model that should make Special Relativity much easier to Understand and reveal all of the mysteries that it had been hiding for over a hundred years.

 

I have provided the logical deductions and mathematical formalism that should provide sufficient evidence of the convergence. Much of the ansillary evidence I havident had time to verify.

 

While the following proposals will appear to be a radical departure from Special Relativity nothing has actually changed or been violated other than our perspective of the universe.

 

 

Proposals

• Unify all Newtonian and Relativistic effects as different aspects of the same two effects:

  spacetime contraction in front of moving objects.

  spacetime expansion behind moving objects.

• Show that spacetime is symmetrical and consistent with relativity.
• Provide an intuitive relative model for SR.

  Reveals how the dual densities of the CMB is a relativistic effect of expansion and contraction

  Represents the absolute value of the velocity of the earth in the universe, mostly in the movement in the Milky Way.

  Revelas the CMB as the common reference that has been missing.

  Reveals how the expansion of the Universe is a relativistic effect of expansion

  DE ≡ Relativistic Energy

  The rate of expansions increase over distance explains the beginning of accelerated expansion 5 billion years ago as the transition into the relativistic domain.

  Reveals the dichotomy of spacetime consistant with Hubble's Law:

  Spacetime contracts over time

  Spacetime expands over distance

 

Introduction

Outline of Arguements

• The first order consequences caused by the constancy of c:
• The invariance of v
  if time dilation is true then distance expansion must also be true
  if distance contraction is true then time compression must also be true
• The Rotation of Spacetime

  As v→c Time rotates into Space

  As v→0 Space rotates into Time

• The Lorentz Transformation
• Causality Loops
• Unifying Doppler Shift and Spacetime effects

  Relativistic Doppler Shift - Normal Doppler Shift ≡ Relativistic Length Contraction + Relativistic Time Dilation

  Normal Doppler Shift ≡ Relativity of Simultaneity

  Relativistic Doppler Shift ≡ Relativistic Length Contraction + Relativistic Time Dilation + Relativity of Simultaneity

• Validate the definitive source of time deviation in the "Twin Paradox" problem.
• Validate the definitive source of time deviation as length contraction.
• Validate the cause and effect link.
• Validate the doppler effect/spacetime equivalence using the Doppler solution.
• Validate the remaining solutions as secondary effects of the constancy of c.

  Frame Jumping

  The turn Around

• From those proposals I will provide a New Logical Symmetrical Spacetime Model
• Observers in different inertial frames share symmetrical views of space and time but not identical views
• Unify all relativistic effects to aspects of contraction or expansion
• Solves the Lopsided CMB

  Lopsided CMB is a relativistic efect of Length Expansion/Contraction

  Global Reference Frame

  Expands spacetime in our lookback cone

  Contracts spacetime of the universe in our future cone

  Represents the absolute velocity of the Earth

• Solves the Accelerating Expansion of the Universe Mystery

  accelerated expansion over space

  decelerated expansion over time

  DE ≡ Relativistic Energy

  Accelerated Expansion ≡ Relativistic Expansion

  The curious result spontanious expansion starting 5 Billion years ago now has a simple explanation as a relativistic spacetime effect of distance expansion triggered when velocities of expansion hit relativistic scales

 

Arguments:

Another look at the "Twin Paradox"

In order to demonstrate the definitive source of the time deviation, as length contraction, we need to eliminate all other possible sources. In order to do this we can reduce the problem as a one way solution using three observers.

 

 

Unifying Doppler Shift with Spacetime

Another Key aspect of the rotation of spacetime is the unification of relativistic effects into a single set of spacetime expansion and spacetime contraction. Consider the following equations for frequency and velocity:

 

f = c/λ

v = Δx/Δt

where:

c ≡ the speed of light (m/s)

λ ≡ wavelength/cycle (m)

f ≡ cycles/second (1/s)

v ≡ velocity (m/s)

Δx ≡ change in distance (m)

Δt ≡ change in time (s)

Looking at the units shows that frequency and velocity are both functions of space and time.

 

 

Cause of Contraction Effects (Blueshift)

• Distance contraction ⇒ Time compression (cause: the invariance of v)
• Time compression ⇒ Frequency compression (cause: time ∝ frequency)
• Frequency compression ⇒ Wave length contraction (cause: the constancy of c)
• Wavelength contraction ⇒ Distance contraction (cause: the conservation of information)

Cause of Expansion Effects (Redshift)

• Distance expansion ⇒ Time dilation (cause: the invariance of v)
• Time dilation ⇒ Frequency expansion (cause: time ∝ frequency)
• Frequency expansion ⇒ Wave length expansion (cause: the constancy of c)
• Wave length expansion ⇒ Distance expansion (cause: conservation of information)

The Invariance of V

Is another hidden consequence of this rotation. Given:

v = Δx'/Δt'

The invariance of v tells us that relativistic effects must be reflected proportionately for both distance and time.

 

Special Relativity tells us that time dilation and length contraction are real. Therefore we must accept that Length expansion and time compression are also true through the invariance of v.

Δt' = γ·Δt (time dilation)

⇒Δx' = γ·Δt' (length expansion)

 

Δx' = Δx/γ (length contraction)

⇒Δt' = Δx/γ' (time contraction)

Time ∝ Frequency

Frequency is directly linked to the time of the transmissions source, if the dimension of time is slower than the time of the observer who is receiving the signal, then its frequency will be changed accordingly. For example if a signal is transmitted at 1GB/s and there was a time dilation of 60% from the receivers perspective, then the signal would be only be received at 600MB/s before including any more shift due to normal doppler shift.

 

The Constancy of C

f = c/λ

Since c is constant, than any change in the frequency is going to be an inverse change in λ

 

Conservation of Information

Light is information and its continuous between the source and the observer. Since information canot be destroyed or created then the wavelength must be directly related to any changes due to expansion or contraction.

 

Unified Symmetrical Intuitive Spacetime Model

The consistancy in the arrangement of unified effects combined with the complete symmetry between observers allows us to greatly simplify our two inertial reference frame model with a new unified, symmetrical, and intuitive spacetime model.

Spacetime Contraction ahead of moving objects (blueshift)

Spacetime Expansion behind moving objects (redshift)

 

Figure 1: I use the doppler shift waves here to illustrate how the basic framework of how all effects fit into this singel model which can also be broken down to be analized as pairs of observers or just returned to their original inertial frames if need be.

 

Example:

We can illustrate this effect by imagining the first leg of the "Twin Paradox" from all perspectives, while including the clock signal transmitted from each source.

 

A ships (S) trajectory is calculated to pass near two planets (A & B) that are separated by a distance of 4 lightyears while moving at a constant relativistic velocity v = 0.8c. There are observers with telescopes and transponders broadcasting perpetual clock signals all at the same universal frequency from the ship and from each planet.

 

Each example below represents a POV at a particular time:

E1 ≡ ship passing A

E2 ≡ ship passing B

The oberver is always displayed on the left and the direction of the moving object is indicated by the arrow (≺ or ≻).

 

Relative frequency is shown using "~" in each POV. Since the broadcast information is conserved, the amount of broadcast information must be the same regardless of the observers inertial frame. Therefore, the relative number of wave symbols displayed is consistent though their frequency will differ.

 

 

A Edited October 27, 2016 by TakenItSeriously

[TakenItSeriously]

So it's been a few days with 66 views and no replies so far which, I hope, is not terrible news. At least it implies that their are no gapping holes in the hypothesis that could be easilly refuted.

 

I appologize if the post was confusing to read, especially the outline section. The incidents with hackers is a bit more frustrating than one might think. They seem to have access to my Evernote account with 24/7 access to all of my files. This gives them time to go through each of my latest documents and modify them, roll back revisions, remove key sections, or just make a mess of the document in general.

 

Since I limit my online exposure to an iPad only, there is no avoiding this by saving documents locally in a way that cannot be updated from outside sources. Therefore, I had to modify the entire post just before posting in a single sitting. After that, I couldn't be certain about what might have been changed the next day so I found it impossible to post a completely "clean" versian that hadn't been tampered with.

 

If you've taken an interest in this project, please save a copy to your own computer using clip all. Hopefully the wide distribution will be enough to discourage tampering with the online version. I don't meen to disparage the security of these forums, but it's better not to even tempt the hackers who are, at times, extraordinarily capable in their attacks if they need to be.

Edited October 30, 2016 by TakenItSeriously

[studiot]

 

 

So it's been a few days with 66 views and no replies so far which, I hope, is not terrible news. At least it implies that their are no gapping holes in the hypothesis that could be easilly refuted.

 

No it's just too long to read.

 

Offer your idea a point at a time and you may then build up a bank of agreed points to develop into a full blown argument.

[TakenItSeriously]

No it's just too long to read.

 

Offer your idea a point at a time and you may then build up a bank of agreed points to develop into a full blown argument.

Thanks Studiot.

 

I should explain that there's an odd effect that seems to impact the relativistic domain where causality seems to work sideways and in a parallel fashion. It creates the strangest problems to deal with, because reading and writing is a linear process so I would consistantly get stuck when trying to provide a cohesive arguement.

 

Before rejecting such an odd notion, I ask the reader to recall that SR is a theory about a transition between two domains that follow different laws. so perhaps in that respect it may not seem so unreasonable.

 

My first instinct was that the causality issue would create more problems then solve by handling one point at a time.

 

However after giving it a little more thought, I now think a variation of pairing it down to smaller more manageable groups could work.

 

Ill need to try it offline first but I hope to post an example soon. Thanks again for the idea.

[swansont]

Before rejecting such an odd notion, I ask the reader to recall that SR is a theory about a transition between two domains that follow different laws.

 

By making the laws of kinematics follow the same protocols as electrodynamics. i.e. One of the domains was just an approximation.