Will science change in the near future?

[Meneghin]

With this first thread, I would like to put forward a proposition which science may or may not, in the near future, find it a suitable alternative to the ongoing state of things. I am specifically referring to the Relativity paradoxes and to the many unanswered questions plaguing Quantum mechanics. With both these scientific disciplines, the problem seems to rest and to lean heavily:

(a) on the abstract status of «time», and

(b) on the emptiness of «space».

To make a long story short, the parameter «time» when applied to Science in general has been made to play the part of the interloper ever since natural philosophy became science, that is: ever since Galileo. Likewise, the parameter «space» was first tainted by the word «ether» which suggested «alchemy» or something magic; and then, even worst, by the word «vacuum». That was the end of space as a physical entity.

This brings me back to my proposition. As a matter of fact, it is my intention to clothe time and space as physical entities, and in so doing eliminate all the paradoxes infesting Relativity and all the problems plaguing Quantum mechanics. Here I go: time and space are physically created by an electromagnetic process to be identified with the existing electromagnetic spectrum. This would imply that free (optical) space is an expanding substance composed of infinitely many small pointlike electromagnetic point-sources of self-generating energy each having its own unsaturated sink with continuous absorption (the wavelength proper of the process for the creation of time and/or space). More important still, the proposition would give Time and Space “body” and in a way will take us back to Poincaré’s relativity, that is: to Lorentz and Poincaré absolute frame of reference.

To hit the nail on the head, I should say that if time is made in the whole of space; then, each point-source carries its own time and if one walks over the point-sources, flies over them or whatever his unit measure of time becomes shorter. The faster the walking, the shorter the unit measure of time and... the paradox is no longer there.

In closing, and with my mind on the parameter «time», I would like to mention that Roger Penrose, eminent scientist and Rouse Ball professor at the university of Oxford, a couple of paragraphs before the end of chapter 8 of his book «The emperor’s new mind», says something like this: «In my opinion our present view of physical reality, particularly in relation to the nature of “time”, it’s ripe for a big overturning, maybe even bigger of that caused by present day Relativity and Quantum mechanics». I have translated from my Italian copy of the book.

[D H]

There are no paradoxes infesting relativity. There are some things that appear to be paradoxical but are not. The point of these paradoxes is to illustrate that you need to think differently to understand relativity. Once you learn to look at things right the paradoxes disappear.

[rigney]

With this first thread, I would like to put forward a proposition which science may or may not, in the near future, find it a suitable alternative to the ongoing state of things. I am specifically referring to the Relativity paradoxes and to the many unanswered questions plaguing Quantum mechanics. With both these scientific disciplines, the problem seems to rest and to lean heavily:

(a) on the abstract status of «time», and

(b) on the emptiness of «space».

To make a long story short, the parameter «time» when applied to Science in general has been made to play the part of the interloper ever since natural philosophy became science, that is: ever since Galileo. Likewise, the parameter «space» was first tainted by the word «ether» which suggested «alchemy» or something magic; and then, even worst, by the word «vacuum». That was the end of space as a physical entity.

This brings me back to my proposition. As a matter of fact, it is my intention to clothe time and space as physical entities, and in so doing eliminate all the paradoxes infesting Relativity and all the problems plaguing Quantum mechanics. Here I go: time and space are physically created by an electromagnetic process to be identified with the existing electromagnetic spectrum. This would imply that free (optical) space is an expanding substance composed of infinitely many small pointlike electromagnetic point-sources of self-generating energy each having its own unsaturated sink with continuous absorption (the wavelength proper of the process for the creation of time and/or space). More important still, the proposition would give Time and Space “body” and in a way will take us back to Poincaré’s relativity, that is: to Lorentz and Poincaré absolute frame of reference.

To hit the nail on the head, I should say that if time is made in the whole of space; then, each point-source carries its own time and if one walks over the point-sources, flies over them or whatever his unit measure of time becomes shorter. The faster the walking, the shorter the unit measure of time and... the paradox is no longer there.

In closing, and with my mind on the parameter «time», I would like to mention that Roger Penrose, eminent scientist and Rouse Ball professor at the university of Oxford, a couple of paragraphs before the end of chapter 8 of his book «The emperor’s new mind», says something like this: «In my opinion our present view of physical reality, particularly in relation to the nature of “time”, it’s ripe for a big overturning, maybe even bigger of that caused by present day Relativity and Quantum mechanics». I have translated from my Italian copy of the book.

 

Thanks for the opening Idaho. I can't go into a thirty minute dissertation on how this universe works. I'm not a scientist or a physicist, so anyone can refute my analysis. I'll only refer to a couple things I believe to be true and hope they make sense. First, time is only relevant to the physical aspects of our universe. Secondly, the continuum it moves out into could care less, and is timeless. Eventually I believe the whole thing will start all over again. Call it a BB or what ever. But no!, it won't be a big crunch or freeze up and fade into infinity; but will result in a lengthy and natural decay as part of the cycle. Edited January 15, 2011 by rigney

[Meneghin]

To DH

 

I am well aware of what a paradox is to you. Nothing new under the sun. History tells that once a paradox becomes a customary thing runs the risk of becoming a dogma, that is: an unquestionable truth. That's OK with me. I am respectful of it and I think it is a very good way of explaining something which cannot be explained otherwise. This is what I am doing now. If time is embedded in space then if someone walks through it, his getting older less than his twin brother is the most natural thing to happen. There is no need to explain a "created and unwanted" paradox. If time is a product of nature, as it appears to be, an airline pilot after flying all his life for a crust would become some 20 seconds biologically younger than his twin brother. Easy explained. There is no paradox period.

Edited January 16, 2011 by idaho

[Edtharan]

I am well aware of what a paradox is to you. Nothing new under the sun. History tells that once a paradox becomes a customary thing runs the risk of becoming a dogma, that is: an unquestionable truth. That is ok with me. I am very respectful of it and I think it is a very good way of explaining something which cannot be explained otherwise. This is what I am doing now. If time is embedded in space than if someone walks through it, his getting older less than his twin brother is the most natural thing to happen. There is no need to explain a "created and unwanted" paradox. If time is a product of nature, as it appears to be, an airline pilot after flying all his life to make a crust would become some 20 seconds biologically younger than his twin brother. Easy explained. There is no paradox period.

The word paradox means a situation where there is a logical incosistancy.

 

The twins "paradox" is not a true paradox. It is only a paradox if you use Newtonian physics rather than Relativity.

 

In Newtonian Physics (and this is also how most people think of the world), Time is an absolute and universal property of the universe. that is Time is the same regardless of how you move or where you are or the state of gravity around you. This is untrue, time depends on how you are moving and where you are (and the gravity around you).

 

This is not an abstract thing that scientists make up to make the maths work but it is a real, measurable phenomina.

 

Using highly accurate atomic clocks, they have performed two experiments (actually tthese experiments have been done more than once each, it is just that there are two types of them).

 

the first was that they put an atomic clock on an aircraft and another at the airfield where the plane was to take off. They then flew the plane around for a while and landed it again. After this they compared the two atomic clocks against each other and the atomic clocks read a different time (minute fractions of a second, but a large enough difference to be easily detectable by these extremely accurate clocks). This shows that as you move around, Time moves at a different rate.

 

The other experiment they did is to place an atomic clock at the base of a mountain and another at the top of a tower on top of the mountain. They left them there for a while and then brought them together. they found, as predicted by relativity, that the atomic clock at the top of the tower ran at a faster rate than the one at the bottom of the mountain. As gravity is very slighyl stronger at the bast of the mountain (closer to the Earth) than at the top (futehr away from the Earth), gravity slowed Time down.

 

These experiments prove that time is not an absolute or universal property of the universe, but can be varied from place to place and how someone is moving. These are not abstract mathematical adjustments to formulas to getthem to equal out, but are real, measureable phenomina that need to be explained, and relativity explains what is goping on.

 

Basically, Space and Time are actually interchangeable and can be warped and bent depending on motion or gravity. As one nears a gravitating object, the gravity causes space and time to "rotate", and the way it does this is to rotate time into space and space into time (it is not exactly how it works, but it is close enough to give us an understanding of what is going on for non-scientists). This is also the same for acceleration as acceleration acts like gravity.

 

Now, you can apply this to solve a few problems. In the first experiment as the plane was flying around, it was accelerating. This caused time and space to be bent into one another. As Time is bent into space, the plane was travelling slower along time as part of its motion in time becomes motion in space.

 

With the Twins "paradox", as the first twin accelerates away from the second, they bend space and time a bit so that their motion in time becomes a bit of motion in space, this means that they are travelling slower through time and thus age slower. However the twin that stays at home (the second twin) is moving normally thorugh time and this means they will age faster than the first twin.

 

Under the assumption that Time is universal, such an effect is not logically possible, but under Relativity, where time is not universal, there is no paradox as it is completely logical as to the effect. So the twins Paradox is only a paradox under Newtonian physics and not relativety, and that is why it is called a parado because at the time it was proposed, they were tryiing to work out if Newtonian Physics or Relativity was more true, and it was designed to show the paradox of Newtonian physics and show that Relativity was correct.

[amber r shaffer]

With this first thread, I would like to put forward a proposition which science may or may not, in the near future, find it a suitable alternative to the ongoing state of things. I am specifically referring to the Relativity paradoxes and to the many unanswered questions plaguing Quantum mechanics. With both these scientific disciplines, the problem seems to rest and to lean heavily:

(a) on the abstract status of «time», and

(b) on the emptiness of «space».

To make a long story short, the parameter «time» when applied to Science in general has been made to play the part of the interloper ever since natural philosophy became science, that is: ever since Galileo. Likewise, the parameter «space» was first tainted by the word «ether» which suggested «alchemy» or something magic; and then, even worst, by the word «vacuum». That was the end of space as a physical entity.

This brings me back to my proposition. As a matter of fact, it is my intention to clothe time and space as physical entities, and in so doing eliminate all the paradoxes infesting Relativity and all the problems plaguing Quantum mechanics. Here I go: time and space are physically created by an electromagnetic process to be identified with the existing electromagnetic spectrum. This would imply that free (optical) space is an expanding substance composed of infinitely many small pointlike electromagnetic point-sources of self-generating energy each having its own unsaturated sink with continuous absorption (the wavelength proper of the process for the creation of time and/or space). More important still, the proposition would give Time and Space "body" and in a way will take us back to Poincaré's relativity, that is: to Lorentz and Poincaré absolute frame of reference.

To hit the nail on the head, I should say that if time is made in the whole of space; then, each point-source carries its own time and if one walks over the point-sources, flies over them or whatever his unit measure of time becomes shorter. The faster the walking, the shorter the unit measure of time and... the paradox is no longer there.

In closing, and with my mind on the parameter «time», I would like to mention that Roger Penrose, eminent scientist and Rouse Ball professor at the university of Oxford, a couple of paragraphs before the end of chapter 8 of his book «The emperor's new mind», says something like this: «In my opinion our present view of physical reality, particularly in relation to the nature of "time", it's ripe for a big overturning, maybe even bigger of that caused by present day Relativity and Quantum mechanics». I have translated from my Italian copy of the book.

 

I was at the Air and Space Museum yesterday and when I got home was reading about some of the newest data ( I think that a pair of telescopes that have been dealing in the invisible spectrum are making a good deal of new data that doesn't fit in with some theories that have been at least challenging or impossible to fit in to a tidy box. I'm pretty sure that a major almost accepted theory of the big bang doesn't work because on of its attributes is that it will slow down and instead they measured the speeding up of galaxies and thats space stuff.

In the news was something that I thought that outside of Back to the Future when at the end the guy comes back with a Mr. Fusion hooked to his car. That was not something that had been achieved as far as I knew. Instead, not only has it been achieved but replicated and the fact that the United States DOE seems to use it's funding of research to forms of energy that will only mask a very serious issue of not only climate change but dwindling resources and I can't imagine how all of these happening would not push us in to some huge war with another country that wants the same things that we do.t is I think in the same way that new forms of energy moved this country and that would really show how influential the oil electric gas and coal industries are to political campaigns in both parties. There is a cold fusion product that was built but these two Italian scientists and they showed this machine off to a group of scientists who along with media was able to confirm that the product used an imput initially of 400 kw and were able to produce an output exceeding 12,000kw. The pair claim that the product is going to be ready for sale at about $100 dollars in 6 months or less. I would think that if true and I do believe it is this technolgy would bring our world in to a new age. Sorry for the long post about things that I just found out about but as far as I know you could have known about all of these things for a long time. Peace

[lemur]

Here I go: time and space are physically created by an electromagnetic process to be identified with the existing electromagnetic spectrum. This would imply that free (optical) space is an expanding substance composed of infinitely many small pointlike electromagnetic point-sources of self-generating energy each having its own unsaturated sink with continuous absorption (the wavelength proper of the process for the creation of time and/or space).

If space consisted of many point-like point-sources, what would constitute the space between the points? If the points generated co-terminous fields, what would determine the motion of the points relative to each other and why wouldn't the gradation between the points and their exteriors be observable?

[Meneghin]

I was at the Air and Space Museum yesterday and when I got home was reading about some of the newest data ( I think that a pair of telescopes that have been dealing in the invisible spectrum are making a good deal of new data that doesn't fit in with some theories that have been at least challenging or impossible to fit in to a tidy box. I'm pretty sure that a major almost accepted theory of the big bang doesn't work because on of its attributes is that it will slow down and instead they measured the speeding up of galaxies and thats space stuff.

Amber, I am pleased you came back. We can keep in touch through facebook or we can e-mail each other or better still chat here in "the lounge" forum. Peace be with you.

 

If space consisted of many point-like point-sources, what would constitute the space between the points? If the points generated co-terminous fields, what would determine the motion of the points relative to each other and why wouldn't the gradation between the points and their exteriors be observable?

The space or length in-between the point-sources would be no more no less then Planck's length. What I am suggesting is that the expansion of the universe is uniform and constant and if that's the case it would magnetize each and every pointlike point-source which would then start an electromagnetic chain reaction. Anyway, in a couple of days I'll post a new topic and I'll try to throw a bit more light on the subject.

Edited January 23, 2011 by idaho