An angle on general theory of relativity

[Capriccio Phisyco]

If, lets say, the c in the theory is not considered a constant, the new angle on the theory would be (c+)2=E/-m. It is a new angle derived from a thesis that antimatter cannot be limited to the speed of light, and that therefore it is confined to intertwining between disintegration and integration in different forms.

[swansont]

If, lets say, the c in the theory is not considered a constant, the new angle on the theory would be (c+)2=E/-m. It is a new angle derived from a thesis that antimatter cannot be limited to the speed of light, and that therefore it is confined to intertwining between disintegration and integration in different forms.

What is (c+)2=E/-m supposed to mean? What is the rest of the word salad supposed to mean?

 

I assume that's c^2, which is now imaginary. What's the interpretation of that?

 

If c is not constant, then Maxwell's equations are not obeyed. That should be easy to test with antimatter; we should have noticed it already.

[Capriccio Phisyco]

"I assume that's c^2, which is now imaginary. What's the interpretation of that?"

 

It is still a constant though it has an imaginary c+2(+indicates that more constants(n) are inside the constant, not that the constant is imaginary, rather that it is a scale of constants)which I like to relate to negative mass, which is not represented as negative2 but rather as E/-m since it is an ongoing process into negative mass, which is similar to the Gauge theory in that way that both are hypothetical. I don't see the reason that it needs to obey Maxwell's equations since the hypothetical particles which obey this quazitheory don't need to have electromagnetic potential. The rest of my original post is a way of saying that the negative mass going to a massless state and vice versa is inherently possible since negative mass and a massless state have to have a correlation.

 

To reason further;

 

The rest of my original post is a way of saying that the negative mass going to a massless state and vice versa is inherently possible since negative mass and a massless state have to have a correlation and that correlation doesn't need to provide a pair of particles, but a correlating set of formulae.

 

One minor proof would be the Casimir effect, which proves my original theory in a way.

 

 

"Casimir effect and propulsion

The Casimir effect has been linked to the possibility of faster-than-light travel because of the fact that the region inside a Casimir cavity has negative energy density. Zero energy density, by definition, is the energy density of normal "empty space." Since the energy density between the conductors of a Casimir cavity is less than normal, it must be negative. Regions of negative energy density are thought to be essential to a number of hypothetical faster-than-light propulsion schemes, including stable wormholes and the Alcubierre warp drive.

 

There is another interesting possibility for breaking the light-barrier by an extension of the Casimir effect. Light in normal empty space is "slowed" by interactions with the unseen waves or particles with which the quantum vacuum seethes. But within the energy-depleted region of a Casimir cavity, light should travel slightly faster because there are fewer obstacles. A few years ago, K. Scharnhorst of the Alexander von Humboldt University in Berlin published calculations⁵ showing that, under the right conditions, light can be induced to break the usual light-speed barrier. Under normal laboratory conditions this increase in speed is incredibly small, but future technology may afford ways of producing a much greater Casimir effect in which light can travel much faster. If so, it might be possible to surround a space vehicle with a "bubble" of highly energy-depleted vacuum, in which the spacecraft could travel at FTL velocities, carrying the bubble along with it.

 

 

 

References

1. Casimir, H. G. B. "On the attraction between two perfectly conducting plates." Proc. Con. Ned. Akad. van Wetensch B51 (7): 793-796 (1948).
2. Lamoreaux, S. K. "Demonstration of the Casimir force in the 0.6 to 6 mm range." Physical review Letters 78 (1): 5-8 (1997).
3. Schwinger, J. "Casimir light: The source." Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 90: 2105-6 (1993).
4. Munday, J. N., Capasso, F. & Parsegian, V. A. Nature 457, 170–173 (2009).
5. Scharnhorst, K. Physics Letters B236: 354 (1990)."

Edited September 16, 2012 by Capriccio Phisyco

[swansont]

"I assume that's c^2, which is now imaginary. What's the interpretation of that?"

 

It is still a constant though it has an imaginary c+2(+indicates that more constants(n) are inside the constant, not that the constant is imaginary, rather that it is a scale of constants)which I like to relate to negative mass, which is not represented as negative2 but rather as E/-m since it is an ongoing process into negative mass, which is similar to the Gauge theory in that way that both are hypothetical. I don't see the reason that it needs to obey Maxwell's equations since the hypothetical particles which obey this quazitheory don't need to have electromagnetic potential.

Charged antimatter doesn't have to have electromagnetic potential?

 

The rest of my original post is a way of saying that the negative mass going to a massless state and vice versa is inherently possible since negative mass and a massless state have to have a correlation.

You just changed the buzzwords around but added no meaning to them.

 

To reason further;

 

The rest of my original post is a way of saying that the negative mass going to a massless state and vice versa is inherently possible since negative mass and a massless state have to have a correlation and that correlation doesn't need to provide a pair of particles, but a correlating set of formulae.

 

One minor proof would be the Casimir effect, which proves my original theory in a way.

 

 

"Casimir effect and propulsion

The Casimir effect has been linked to the possibility of faster-than-light travel because of the fact that the region inside a Casimir cavity has negative energy density. Zero energy density, by definition, is the energy density of normal "empty space." Since the energy density between the conductors of a Casimir cavity is less than normal, it must be negative. Regions of negative energy density are thought to be essential to a number of hypothetical faster-than-light propulsion schemes, including stable wormholes and the Alcubierre warp drive.

 

There is another interesting possibility for breaking the light-barrier by an extension of the Casimir effect. Light in normal empty space is "slowed" by interactions with the unseen waves or particles with which the quantum vacuum seethes. But within the energy-depleted region of a Casimir cavity, light should travel slightly faster because there are fewer obstacles. A few years ago, K. Scharnhorst of the Alexander von Humboldt University in Berlin published calculations⁵ showing that, under the right conditions, light can be induced to break the usual light-speed barrier. Under normal laboratory conditions this increase in speed is incredibly small, but future technology may afford ways of producing a much greater Casimir effect in which light can travel much faster. If so, it might be possible to surround a space vehicle with a "bubble" of highly energy-depleted vacuum, in which the spacecraft could travel at FTL velocities, carrying the bubble along with it.

 

 

 

References

1. Casimir, H. G. B. "On the attraction between two perfectly conducting plates." Proc. Con. Ned. Akad. van Wetensch B51 (7): 793-796 (1948).
2. Lamoreaux, S. K. "Demonstration of the Casimir force in the 0.6 to 6 mm range." Physical review Letters 78 (1): 5-8 (1997).
3. Schwinger, J. "Casimir light: The source." Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 90: 2105-6 (1993).
4. Munday, J. N., Capasso, F. & Parsegian, V. A. Nature 457, 170–173 (2009).
5. Scharnhorst, K. Physics Letters B236: 354 (1990)."

I don't see a mention of negative mass particles in this quote you lifted from that other site.

[Capriccio Phisyco]

Well, you make a lot of sense. I think that I am a seriously dabbling in physics... I thought that people would be open minded to the idea that antimatter is not the opposite of matter, that is to say, that they had a different creation, and, hence a different set of rules... Since the wording is too strong for me here I wont dabble any more.

 

But c^2 is possible, if you know about the Casimir effect

 

Can i ask something, then i will stop this thread? Does antimatter need to be charged? Is it proven? This is not an idiots reply, just a question, I understand I was dabbling

[studiot]

A simple answer to the issue of antimatter is that yes it is in some sense the opposite of ordinary matter. That is because it was introduced to be exactly that. No more and No less.

 

However that does not mean there is no room in the universe for some other entitity that is neither matter nor antimatter. All that is required is some evidence of this entity.

 

So it is perfectly legitimate to postulate the existance of such an entity or entities and search for it (them).

 

Scientists in the past have done exactly that, sometimes with success, sometimes not.

 

Phlogiston, Philosophers Stone, Vital Force, Aether are examples of failure.

 

Positrons, displacement current are examples of success

[Capriccio Phisyco]

Thank you for your support, i am not capable to search for it but i think that it is pretty logical that there cannot be a constant for speed, i don't want to be a philosopher or a priest searching for a new Aether, it just makes sense to me that not all particles have a pair, that the forces we know cannot be the only forces, after all, this is a young science, so it made sense to me that i write about an E that has a Cn2(or c^2) and hence the m is negative. And in search for that i thought that instead of putting a square on the negative mass, it would be an interesting twist to put just minus mass instead

[studiot]

it would be an interesting twist to put just minus mass instead

 

It might be but it would be even more productive to add something to that which is already established, rather than substitute something else.

[swansont]

Well, you make a lot of sense. I think that I am a seriously dabbling in physics... I thought that people would be open minded to the idea that antimatter is not the opposite of matter, that is to say, that they had a different creation, and, hence a different set of rules... Since the wording is too strong for me here I wont dabble any more.

 

But c^2 is possible, if you know about the Casimir effect

 

Can i ask something, then i will stop this thread? Does antimatter need to be charged? Is it proven? This is not an idiots reply, just a question, I understand I was dabbling

Dabble away, but science has to agree with what we observe in nature, and we test ideas to see if they are right.

[Capriccio Phisyco]

What about dark energy and the Casimir effect? http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=575 and http://www.lsst.org/lsst/public/darkenergy2? Maybe this could explain the faster than light movement in the classic GR theory

[ACG52]

There is no faster than light movement.