Einstein’s Relativity as I see it

[AnisDys2351]

One of the fundamental postulates of special relativity, the constant velocity of light in all reference of frame, though experimentally correct, it is illogic and unrealistic to human’s mind. And this is what makes special relativity a puzzle, and for many, hard to take.

 

I believe this velocity oddness is due to what I can call the illusion of reference of frame. Allow me to get myself clear:

 

When we are in cars we see trees and people moving when they are not. Or, simple, we see the sun rising and setting every day when it is not moving. Now we had fallen in the same illusion: Light doesn’t move; matter shrinks on itself and makes us think that light is moving (I know how it sounds, I can explain)

People of our time grew up with an idea that matter is composed of small indivisible entities, but can you imagine indivisible entities? This is a false idea; matter is condensed energy. Think now about the strong force that binds protons and neutrons together. Don’t you notice something awkward: Where do atoms fetch all that force from? No where else if not into themselves of course, and as a result they must run out of it, and as a result I know they get smaller and smaller. All I want to say is: an object can’t stay with the same size; that is energy consuming.

 

Unfortunately there is no frame that can be used to observe this motion of matter receding. Unless! Of course! The frame of light! Light has no mass, means, it can’t be pushed, it can’t be attracted, and it can’t be moved!

 

In this view (“” 1 meter of matter was 3.10⁸ meters in a second before) the special theory of relativity becomes so easy, and most importantly, logic.

Now try review the theory in this new image, if you got it, and see it yourself how simple it becomes:

• Remember that gravity rules over everything that has mass. Do you see now why no object can reach the speed of light? And do you see why exceeding it would be like moving in the opposite direction?
• Time, here, changes with motion. The less you move the less it changes, and at c when you are not moving, it doesn’t change.
• And the speed of light will be recorded at the same velocity in all reference of frame.
• Etc.

 

I can’t tell you how much through this insight I developed, even in general relativity and many other subjects. And I told myself, why not share! If it helped me, it could help someone else. Though the world could not recognize it now, I know they will one day. And I like this voice inside me that says: I am right!

 

And I am sorry for my English.

[Strange]

Now we had fallen in the same illusion: Light doesn’t move; matter shrinks on itself and makes us think that light is moving (I know how it sounds, I can explain)

 

And you don't think that is "it is illogic and unrealistic to human’s mind" ? Bizarre.

 

What evidence do you have for this idea of yours? Please show us a mathematical analysis and the predictions it makes.

 

 

Though the world could not recognize it now, I know they will one day.

 

I'm not holding my breath.

 

 

And I like this voice inside me that says: I am right!

 

This is a very common delusion among people who make up these sort of random ideas.

 

What is means is that you are not doing science.

[Purephysics]

You make some interesting (if not slightly odd) assumptions in this; primarily you appear to have attempted to mix relativistic physics (speed of light, Einstein's Relativity) with quantum mechanics (sub-atomic particles). This quandary has been the subject of much research for some considerable time - the search for the theory of everything, currently, I believe, being lead by Superstring theory.

 

You have managed to simplify it so (as you believe) because you have not given the subject a rigorous enough treatment. In this you have also not provided any mathematical models of proofs for your assumptions. Currently, this is conjecture at best.

 

 

...I believe this velocity oddness is due to what I can call the illusion of reference of frame. Allow me to get myself clear:

 

When we are in cars we see trees and people moving when they are not. Or, simple, we see the sun rising and setting every day when it is not moving. Now we had fallen in the same illusion: Light doesn’t move; matter shrinks on itself and makes us think that light is moving...

 

^^ This doesn't make an logical sense.

 

 

People of our time grew up with an idea that matter is composed of small indivisible entities, but can you imagine indivisible entities? This is a false idea;...

 

You've poked a hole in something but unfortunately haven't really provided any form of justification, a "because..." to answer your problem.

 

I'd suggest a little more study into either of the fields would be greatly beneficial.

[Mordred]

also read this thread on light doesn't move, the correct answer is light does move. (see the thread for examples)

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/83906-does-light-actually-travel/

 

this page has a couple of experiments that show the photoelectric effect on various objects

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoelectric_effect

 

also see this thread on how light can move individual particles via its momentum and exchange of momentum

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/phy00/phy00222.htm

 

unfortunately I'm off to work so otherwise I'd take the time to find better articles

Edited July 16, 2014 by Mordred

[Strange]

the constant velocity of light in all reference of frame, though experimentally correct

 

Experimentally correct and predicted by theory. There isn't a lot of wiggle room there.

 

 

Light doesn’t move; matter shrinks on itself and makes us think that light is moving

 

The trouble is, light moves in different directions. When light is moving from left to right, are you shrinking from right to left? Does turning a laser beam around cause everything to shrink in different directions?

 

 

it is illogic and unrealistic to human’s mind.

but can you imagine indivisible entities? This is a false idea

 

These are both examples of "argument from incredulity" (I don't believe it so it must be wrong). The whole purpose of the scientific method is get away from these personal biases and look at the objective evidence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

 

 

No where else if not into themselves of course, and as a result they must run out of it

 

Force is not energy and there is no reason for it to "run out".

 

 

The frame of light!

 

Light does not form a valid frame of reference (because it involves dividing by zero). There is a whole thread on this somewhere.

 

 

Do you see now why no object can reach the speed of light? And do you see why exceeding it would be like moving in the opposite direction?

 

No. Please demonstrate this in mathematical detail.

Edited July 16, 2014 by Strange

[xyzt]

Though the world could not recognize it now, I know they will one day. And I like this voice inside me that says: I am right!

Riiiight!

[Strange]

I think it is rather sweet that people with almost no understanding of the subject think that they are going to change the world. Ah, bless.

[Purephysics]

I think it is rather sweet that people with almost no understanding of the subject think that they are going to change the world. Ah, bless.

 

That's just what I was thinking, and alluded too as well.

[Bignose]

I can’t tell you how much through this insight I developed, even in general relativity and many other subjects. And I told myself, why not share!

So, how does the math change with your method? And can it make more accurate predictions of what is observed? Here is a good refernce for you to start with: http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0510072

 

Please use some of the graphs in that paper to present a graph with your prediction, the current best prediction from GR, and the data. Show us that your idea makes more accurate predictions than what we have today, and I guarantee you will get a lot of people paying attention to your idea. On the other hand, if your idea cannot make better predictions, then you're not going to get much interest in your idea at all.