Watching the Clock: Quantum Rotation and Relative Time by Alan M. Kadin

Alan, Nice essay. You have certainly gone for the heretical approach, but it would solve a lot of problems if you are right. Question is, does it create nre ones that are worse?

Since you are making radical claims that must affect known physics can you provide any predictions or observations that would distinguish your theories from the standard models, or are all consequences beyond current technology?

Alan

Whether the tick rate of a timing device is subject to physical influence is another matter, but is irrelevant to time. The device is a device, it 'tells' the time, it is not time.

The same applies to spatial measuring devices. Within the realms of practicality, rulers are made to exacting standards and of material which resists external influence (eg heat). But if a ruler expands with heat we do not presume the reality has altered. That is because, as with timing, the reference for the system is a conceptual constant, in this case a spatial matrix. In timing it is a rate of change.

Paul

Dear Alan,

Very interesting easy because I also am on the real spin and real vector field track.

I thought about possible experiments.

I think I could propose an experiment to show a large scale entanglement effect between single silver atoms and their origin evaporation oven content by and alternative double Stern Gerlach experiment.

John S. Bell described his doubts about the Stern Gerlach experiment interpretation in his book: "Speakable and unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics on chapter 16 page 140-141.

Ref, [7].

John Bell argued that there is no logic to be found behind the fact, that there is a so called "absence of smearing" of the particle impact pattern on the screen.

The silver atoms should come out the oven with random orientation, as a consequence Joh Bell argued, the impact on the screen of silver atoms should have a smeared effect.

The proposal for my experiment , is based on the hypothesis that all heated and vaporized silver atoms inside the silver oven are entangled as a whole and that magnetic measurement of one atom travelling outside the oven influences the magnetic polarity of all the other atoms in the oven.

If the oven sends the silver atoms (by shutters) alternately to the two magnets, then the resulting impact pattern on both screens will show an additional BAR in the middle of the original impact pattern. (see figure )

Why? because if the first atom leaves the oven it will have a horizontal spin state perpendicular to the N-S axis of the S_G magnet as left over from the former process of ejection with the entanglement effect on the oven to the opposite 90 degree rotated S-G magnet

See perhaps also: http://vixra.org/pdf/1103.0015v1.pdfAttachment #1: Dual_Stern_Gerlach_experiment.jpg

Sorry for my mistake;

I wrote:

Very interesting easy because I also am on the real spin and real vector field track.

It should have been:

Very interesting essay because I also am on the real spin and real vector field track.

Alan,

I may have bit off more than I could eschew!

GPS might not actually be operating 'correctly' and in fact might be dragging things around unnecessarily due to indirect couplings over the internet and geolocation IP databases...

Stephen

You may or may not be correct. But attempting to 'solve' The GPS 'issue' misses the point. Timing devices are not time, they tell the time. Physicaal existence (as knowable to us-and this is science not religion) can only occur in a sequence of discrete existent states with no form of indfiniteness or alteration therein. So the issue becomes how does that work in practice and how does this impact on certain well known 'theories'.

Paul

Hi Alan,

In my opinion this is the best essay in this edition, congratulations. It is nice to finally meet someone who prefers physical intuition rather than pure abstract formalism. Nowadays that approach is very rare.

You claim that "NQP provides a unified basis for classical and modern physics on all scales. All matter and energy are comprised of primary relativistic vector fields (electrons, photons, quarks, etc.) which form into coherent wave packets in real space, similar to solitons." I have never used the soliton notion but only a more general wavepacket. The reason is that the soliton is to restricted e.g it will never merge. Moreover I start from GR and not SR (I do not need the Einstein equations but the idea that a force field is a manifestation of spacetime geometry) and try to apply that idea to all known fundamental "forces".

Despite the differences I could not criticize your essay because generally it supports mine and vice versa. The idea of real wave instead of an abstract one is the base. Your "true quantum waves are only present at the bottom of the hierarchy" (taken from your publication http://arxiv.org/abs/1107.5794) comes together with "Quantum waves are not universal aspects of all particles, but rather provide a way to quantize the primary fields". If I understand well the outcome may mean e.g. that gravity is not a fundamental but emergent force?

Our ideas have a lot of important issues in common e.g. no need for dark matter or energy, no wave-particle duality, no Copenhagen interpretation and the most important scale invariance. However in my case the scale invariance means an universal metric (that I am looking for and it is not FLRW or Einstein metric as they are not really universal).

The Schrödinger's and Einstein's ideas of true waves were similar but they were too early in history and their visions were burdened with the yoke of the ether and another initial problems and eventually destroyed for barely 90 years.

In my essay I have tried to focus more on the contest subject so I have not described fully my concept and it can be found in references. I have created the prediction and the experiment proposal based on the spacetime geometry.

As I have mentioned I understand that our ideas are far from identical but as Einstein said "fundamental ideas play the most essential role in forming a physical theory. Books on physics are full of complicated mathematical formulae. But thought and ideas, not formulae, are the beginning of every physical theory. The ideas must later take the mathematical form of a quantitative theory, to make possible the comparison with experiment."

I have rated your essay 10 so you shall take the first place at the moment (with Community Rating 7)! Congratulations.

Alan,

It's good to see you present another perspective on your theory. We agree in many particulars, but not all. I found your discussion of linearly polarized single photons intriguing. You say:

"This linearly polarized light beam is attenuated until the very low count rate corresponds to discrete single photons. But can one really distinguish that from counterrotating photon pairs?"

Are you ignoring the 'herald' photons, or are you suggesting that, even with the herald's trigger, another photon accompanies the heralded photon?

Best,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

I am sorry Alan, the rating should be kept confidential. I was too enthusiastic.

Alan,

I did not know about the new detector capabilities. It will be fascinating to see if they measure two photons. I hope you are correct, as I too prefer only circular polarization.

Best,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

.Alan, I can agree with much that you write, I have raised a simple information-relativity paradox hoping that it will become equally legendary as the 20th century paradoxes in physics.

Recent results in quantum communication, i.e. entangled photons, are in fact an embarrassment to the relativists. You must also remember sitting in an enclosed elevator ones view becomes rather incestuous. I am looking forward to exiting change in science it will come one way or another.

Alan, nice essay. I'd just like to point out that current technology is capable of determining whether black holes are possible. Unless there is something seriously wrong with the scientific establishment, there should be some resolution to the question of black holes by the end of the decade. The missions proposed will be as historic as Eddington's nearly a century ago, whatever the outcome. We live in interesting times.

For example, the Laser Astrometric Test Of Relativity (LATOR) would be capable of duplicating Eddington's measurement of deflection of starlight due to the Sun except with much greater accuracy using laser interferometry. The predicted accuracy is enough to measure the second order term in the expansion of your equation (5) which would be negative in the case of general relativity, and positive with twice the magnitude for the metric in your essay. Yet another choice is the exponential metric which has a positive second order term equal in magnitude to that of general relativity and is an approach I think you would find interesting. In my last year's essay there is a novel derivation based on a modern reformulation of Newtonian gravitational potential energy. -Colin