Alternative Models of Reality

anonimus

@Zeeya Merali,

Thank you for your clear reply! I confess that my question was too vague. What I meant was the clarification of an old (famous) theory. Anyway, I will think about your advice.

Georgina Woodward

Relativity revisited using an explanatory framework with both substantial reality and output of EM processing: I will set this out again here with some improvement to the clarity and then break it down in a following post. It would be good to get any thoughts on that.

It must be remembered throughout that things are seen only by receipt of EM information not any kind of remote knowledge.

Scenario:There are two people lets say Alice and Bob, both have their own clock. Bob has a stationary reference frame, Alice moves at very high velocity relative to Bob. At the instant Bob sees 1 minute elapsed on his near clock he receives light from Alice's clock which forms into an image showing less than 1 minute has elapsed on her clock. It takes time for the light to reach him so if he waited for the light that would show 1 minute on Alice's clock more than 1 minute would have elapsed on his own. As it takes time for the light to reach Bob from Alice during this time Alice and her clock have continued to move further away and as Bob sees the less than one minute of Alice's clock, she is seeing the full 1 minute of her own clock. Alice's minutes only appear slower to Bob because of the non infinite speed of light carrying information from which his 'Image' of distant things is formed. Alice's velocity is underestimated IF it is calculated as distance traveled according to Bob divided by his own clock's time measurement of how long it has taken Alice to reach the seen position. He thinks she has only gone as far as she is seen to go rather than the distance she actually travels despite him.

This is the interesting bit- There are now two different kinds of simultaneity: The simultaneity of Bob's present with his full minute showing clock and the image of Alice's slower time AND there is the simultaneity of Bob's substantial matter clock's completion of a full minute and Alice's substantial matter clock's completion of a full minute. The latter is the reality of the substantial matter, where the matter called Alice and the matter called Bob actually is and the configurations of matter corresponding to the time on the clocks themselves, independent of what is seen via EM transmission , receipt and conversion to output. It is assumed the clocks were synchronized prior to the test and that they remain accurate throughout. Alice will have the reciprocal simultaneity seeing her own full minute simultaneous to an image of Bobs slower clock.

Alice and Bob need not be people they could be replaced by inorganic detectors.

Georgina Woodward

I thought it was probably better to do this here than on the Physics of the observer page.

Lets say Alice and Bob agree on the co-ordinate of the starting position of Alice and her clock(A) So the position of substantial A, (P1) is the agreed equivalent (I.E. corresponds to ) of the position assigned to the image of A seen by Bob (X)

Distance traveled by substantial A= length between P1 and P2

Distance of travel seen by Bob is the length between starting position Image A, X and seen image A position at 1 minute on his clock, Y . That is distance XY

Velocity of substantial A is length P1 P2 / time taken as measured by A

Velocity of Alice according to Bob and his clock (B) is length XY/ time measured by B. Not the distance between the images as seen but the measurement corresponding to those coordinates as would be measured 'on the ground'.

When image A is seen at Y object A is at P2. The difference is the distance A moves in the time it takes the light from Y to reach B

Image velocity of A is XY/ image A clock time as seen by Bob; which is equivalent to( XY YZ)/1 minute. [YZ is an unknown distance to P2]

YZ is the distance traveled at Image velocity A in the time it takes light to travel Y to B. Having found Y Z, position of Z corresponding to P2 can be found.

This is only significant at a significant proportion of light speed as light travels extremely quickly , so distance Y B is covered extremely quickly giving very little time for A to go much distance unless A is also travelling extremely quickly.

Comments welcome.

Georgina Woodward

I should have written speed instead of velocity because I haven't got any direction component, so just substitute speed where I have written velocity in previous posts.

Georgina Woodward

Rather than change the introductory description, I'll specify a direction for Alice as she and her clock have one it just hasn't been mentioned. The distances are then vectors that can be simply added as there is no change in direction. Bob is looking directly North and Alice is traveling West to East.

Georgina Woodward

John,

I took a look at some worked examples as you hinted I should. I would be very grateful if you could take a look at and comment on the above. I think it does communicate the structure of the explanatory framework in a new way.

John Cox

Georgina,

I'm not ignoring what you are wrestling with, I've just got a head full and need to decompress. But yes, "things are seen only by receipt of EM information" is the same thing as 'pulling measures at light velocity'. jrc

Georgina Woodward

Hi John,

do you mean you have a head cold? If so get well soon.

Georgina Woodward

Premise: There is one ever changing configuration of the (Object) universe that is uni-temporal, that is, the same time everywhere. The temporal expression corresponding to the existing configuration is uni-temporal -Now. Only the youngest configuration has substantial existence.

Relating the given example to that premise: The first configuration that is considered has substantial objects Bob and his clock(B) at position B and substantial objects Alice and her clock(A) at position P1. So there is a relation between them within that configuration of a distance BP1. When substantial object A reaches P2, B is at B'(unmoved if the motion of the Earth is ignored). There is within this uni-temporal -Now a relation between the substantial objects A and B forming part of the newest configuration of the object universe of a distance BP2.

Georgina Woodward

The second premise: The speed of light is not infinite but finite, measured as 299 792458 m/s.

Relating that premise to the given example. Traveling at the speed of light it takes time for light emitted from source substantial objects A to get to B'.

The simultaneity observed by Bob, is the image reality formed from observation of his own clock and Alice's clock, showing apparent loss of synchronization of the clocks, with Alice's clock appearing to be slow. The simultaneity observed by Alice is the image reality formed from observation of her own clock and Bob's clock, showing apparent loss of synchronization of the clocks, with Bob's clock appearing to be slow. The times and positions observed are not those of the substantial matter but apparent 'events' formed from received light.

Georgina Woodward

Apparent events fabricated from received light are distinct from the configurations of and interactions of substantial bodies. (Sources of EM potential information)

Motion of an observer alters the pathway through the light that is within the environment , giving image realities corresponding to the EM information received.

Different relative motions can produce different apparent simultaneities due to differences in when and where the EM information is received. So when an apparent event is seen to occur is variable but when a substantial body interaction or relation occurs is invariant as it belongs to a particular configuration of the Object universe.

Georgina Woodward

The first premise together with Newton's first law explains the "arrow of time". Each configuration of the Object universe contains the relations between substantial bodies and the 'incumbent forces'that act to produce the resultant configuration (with the new incumbent forces, and so on). The direction of imagined vectors representing the motion are irreversible because of Newton's first law. EM information is produced by the interaction of light with substantial matter. The second premise (the extremely high but not infinite speed of light) explains why the image realities formed from received light can not show time reversal. As that would require travel of the observer to exceed the speed of light, in order to receive the EM information in the order younger (more recently produced) to older (less recently produced); rather than the normal -older to younger- order of receipt.

Georgina Woodward

Here is an illustration of the maths described in my second post here. It must be remembered that this is occurring in a uni-temporal Object universe, in which substantial objects can not exist at different times.Attachment #1: RICP_Worked_example.png

Georgina Woodward

1. When a substantial object is moving exceedingly fast it (the substantial object) can have moved ( and altered) in the time it takes EM information to reach a distant observer.

2. When there is a large distances between substantial body and the observer, the length of time it takes for light to reach the observer gives time for the substantial object to have moved and altered between emission and receipt of the EM information.

3.When the observer is moving at very high speed there is the theoretical possibility that EM information pertaining to different times of EM emission are combined into an output image reality , as the receipt of that information is near simultaneous due to the high speed of that observer.

Georgina Woodward

For clarity illustration 3 should show Bob's clock as the image of his own clock that he sees simultaneously with the image of Alice's clock.( Perhaps coloured blue to indicate that like the Alice images.) As that is what he is seeing. Processing times cancel out as they are considered the same for processing light from his own clock and light received from Alice's clock.

Georgina Woodward

Premise 3. Light considered as a wave phenomenon can be compared to other kinds of periodic motion.

Illustration: Three observers watch a click wheel with a constant period of rotation. A. is a co-moving observer. B. is an observer moving in the direction of the wheel's motion but at half speed.C. is a stationary observer. According to the three observers the wheel has moved different horizontal distances and the relative horizontal translation velocity of the wheel varies. In this particular experiment :A. sees V=0 ,B. sees V= 10cm/click, C. sees v= 20cm/click. As it is the same motion seen three different ways it has to be the same absolute motion in Object reality and take the same absolute time in Object reality (I.E. exist only within the same sequence of change of the Object universe).

Compare this to Einstein's light clock with two mirrors. It's translation can be viewed either in a co- moving or stationary reference frame. The absolute motion of the oscillating light, its period,( compare with the rotation of the wheel) is the same which ever the reference frame, and the absolute time (change in configuration of the Object universe including the changes that pertain to the clock) is the same, as it is the same phenomenon occurring. Time dilation often explained using the light clock, involves taking the (relative) distance traveled (translation) and dividing that by c. That is a relative translation velocity (compare the translation in the wheel analogy). The difference compared to co-moving with the clock, or being stationary with it, is the relative spatial distribution of the same periodic motion. The absolute periodic motion (wavelength, frequency and amplitude) is independent of the relative translation, as underlying all reference frames it is the same absolute motion that is occurring.

If the spatial distribution of light relative to an observer's reference frame increases, the EM information it encodes is also relatively more distributed and the "time " that will be output by an observer receiving that light could be altered dependent on relative motion of the observer and the EM information. That output is a relative, derived, Image reality. The relative distribution of EM sensory data does not directly affect the absolute, intrinsic change that is happening to the Object universe.This is relevant to the twins paradox. Derived, relative, output reality can not directly affect intrinsic, absolute, Object reality. Irrespective of observer reference frames, change in the configuration of the Object universe continues unaffected including processes of ageing.

Georgina Woodward

Re. Einstein's light clock. The light traveling between the mirrors is not moving in a straight line like a ray, but undergoing wave motion. Following an oscillating path that is the same whether there is relative translation or not. The notion that the light takes a longer path when the clock is moved is based on the straight line assumption. Instead it can be thought of as a fixed length of periodic motion with a fixed frequency, extended spring like in the translated reference frame. Following the path along the spring it is the same length whether the spring is extended or not. It is the same 'spring' in both reference frames and so the same length along the 'spring'. This means the speed of light is the same in both reference frames , even though it appears that when the clock is moved the light is travelling further in a straight line at c , making the period of the clock longer.

Georgina Woodward

In order to extend relativity to light, electricity and magnetism , the concept must be held that those phenomena are unchanged by changing reference frame. As the light within the light clock can not be travelling further within the clock because of the way it is looked at, the time period measured by the clock itself is not slowed by the translation of the clock. Even though this means disregarding the logic of the straight line light path argument. Though the period and frequency of the light motion is unaltered (traveling the same wave motion distance in the same time, from the relative perspective of the observer the motion is extended over a longer spatial distance. Having the effect of making the wavelength appear longer and the frequency lower. ( This might have some relevance to the question of ubiquitous red shift within cosmological observations.)

Georgina Woodward

Where I wrote " the time period measured" I meant in this case the period i.e time for the light to complete its journey from mirror to mirror, (akin to the tick of a mechanical clock.)

Georgina Woodward

Re. the concept of wavelength.

Definition:"noun, Physics. The distance, measured in the direction of propagation of a wave, between two successive points in the wave that are characterized by the same phase of oscillation." Dictionary.com

It can be understood from this that wavelength is a spatial distribution measurement that combines position due to periodic motion and linear translation in the direction of propagation. The amount of linear translation has been shown to vary according to observer reference frame. Unlike the intrinsic period that is invariant with change in reference frame.

Georgina Woodward

That could be important for astronomy.

Georgina Woodward

It will be helpful to differentiate the relative, output measurements and observations that form a derived reality ( that includes Image reality) I.e. All relative properties, that vary according to reference frame FROM Intrinsic qualities of substantial bodies in Object reality, that are invariant with change of reference frame. I'll attach a table in a following post. This differentiation is relevant to the measurements conducted in experiments. It will enable researchers to ascertain whether it is the underlying Object reality that is being observed or the relative, derived reality that is formed upon measurement.

Georgina Woodward

Table showing intrinsic qualities of Object reality and properties of Derived output reality.Attachment #1: Table_showing_intrinsic_and_derived_reality.png

Georgina Woodward

The table can be improved. RE.Object universal time: There are two ideas that need to be on the Intrinsic side. One is the continual change in the configuration of relations in the Object universe. That can be thought of either as a change in the pattern of arrangement of the constituents of Object reality or as intrinsic energy. The other idea is that the flux has to happen across a sequence of configurations of which only the youngest has substantial existence. A sub set of the universal flux is local flux; sub set of the universal uni-temporal -Now is local configuration of constituents and relations. The two different kinds of derived time on the table are OK but there is another way of considering change that is occurring and that is as kinetic energy, which is also a relative property.

Georgina Woodward

Attached is an improved table of intrinsic qualities and derived properties. Intrinsic and kinetic energy have been included and I hope I have made the temporal descriptions clearer.Attachment #1: Improved_table__intrinsic_and_derived_.png

Georgina Woodward

Re. sequential change in relations and configurations within the Object universe: Focus can be put on the sequential or ordered nature of the change, which gives a temporal expression. Or focus can be put on change of the configuration or pattern of the object universe, which is a spatial or relational expression, or focus can be put on the change itself which is an expression about intrinsic energy.

Georgina Woodward

Gravitational time dilation and the RICP explanatory framework

A look at the non reciprocity of signal transmission made apparent by looking at a rotating frame of reference, as possible cause of seen time differences in the different gravitational potentials.

Separate consideration of affects on atomic clock timekeeping.

Two stories to help understanding of non reciprocity of signal transmission and reciept- (a matter of relativity and not changing underlying reality), and the equivalence principle.Attachment #1: Gravitational_time_dilation_and_the_RICP.pdf

Eckard Blumschein

Georgina,

could you please reveal to lazy foreign readers like me what the letters R, I, C, P in RICP stand for?

++++

Georgina Woodward

Dear Eckard,

RICP means 'Reality in the context of physics' that I have abbreviated.

I realize I left out discussion of the plane traveling in the Earth rotation direction.-The higher frequency for the plane with the greatest velocity, exceeding the Earth rotation, in the Earth rotation direction, also needs mentioning. It could be due to the increase in mass of the atomic nuclei used for time event generation, due to additional inertia (resistance to change of motion ) at that higher velocity. That might have a dampening effect on the noise causing imprecise frequency matching. Giving a cleaner faster matched frequency generation and consequent faster rate of the clock.Attachment #1: Gravitational_time_dilation_and_the_RICP__amended.pdf

Georgina Woodward

Hi Eckard, All,

any questions, comments criticisms welcome. I have been told that my explanations are too complicated as I try to say too much at once and always relate back to my own explanatory framework; causing difficulty for those unfamiliar with it. At the same time I am told I use simplifications in my explanations that just aren't accurate physics. I had to defend my spring analogy which is admittedly naive but it works as an explanatory tool. I think it might have been useful to include it in discussion of gravitational time dilation. Take a look at the discussion of the light clock if you don't know what i'm talking about. The wavepath actually taken is the source underlying reality for all relative measurements of it. This may have relevance to quantum physics.

Georgina Woodward

Hi All,

please take a look at the previously linked file showing a discussion of gravitational time dilation. Comments, questions and criticism welcome. I am attaching a couple of diagrams to accompany 'The lift' and 'The Earth and satellite' stories, which may be helpful.Attachment #1: The_lift_Earth_and_satelite_stories.png

Georgina Woodward

Light is isochronous. Its frequency and hence also its period depends upon the frequency of the source and the medium it is passing though. The light is not affected by how it is observed. Thinking about the light clock illustration : it can be observed by a co moving observer A who considers it stationary or a by a stationary observer B who sees its lateral translation. This gives an apparent difference in the distance traveled by the light according to observers A and B for the same event.As it is the same event it must in Object reality take the same length of time to complete and consist of the same number of cycles. As the intrinsic period is unaltered, to complete the same number of cycles in both views the wavelength of the light in B's view is apparently increased. This allows the greater apparent distance to be covered in the same time. There is no need to say clock in B's view is running slow.

Georgina Woodward

Thinking about the wave motion of the light: it is the radians per unit time, and so revolutions or cycles per unit time and so intrinsic period that are constant for a light wave traveling through a homogeneous medium or vacuum not the observed linear distance per unit time. As observed linear distance depends upon the reference frame of the observer and is a relative measurement whereas the period depends upon the frequency of the source.

This is refuting the slowing of moving substantial clocks not discrepancies due to signal transmission and receipt. It also refutes the light clock explanation applied to the twins paradox, in which metabolic processes are likened to clock processes. This does not address other reasons for alteration in timekeeping of clocks such as those mentioned in the previously attached file 'Gravitational time dilation and the RICP'

Eckard Blumschein

"light can be observed by a co moving observer A who considers it stationary" ?

Being used to think in terms of ideal resonance I cannot imagine a real Aaron Bernstein sensor that moves with the ideal vacuum speed c of light propagation.

++++

Georgina Woodward

Hi Eckard,

great to hear from you. You have quoted me incorrectly. I was talking about an observer moving with the light clock so that its lateral translation is not observed only the up down of the light beam. I actually said "Thinking about the light clock illustration : it can be observed by a co moving observer A who considers it stationary." This is important because it gives two different views of the light beam one without lateral translation A, and one with lateral translation B. The difference between the two views is the spatial distance of the translation. The intrinsic period is not affected by the different observer viewpoints. This is an important deviation from the conventional explanation of time dilation using the light clock.

Georgina Woodward

The time it takes for the light to travel up and down without apparent lateral translation is the same as the time for it to travel with the translation. In Object reality it is the same event and the light is travelling a certain distance in a certain period regardless of how it is observed. Though it would seem the wave speed for the translated route must be higher if wavelength is increased but period remains the same. That is about appearance. In Object reality the speed is determined by the relationship of magnetic and electric constants and is c. Einstein would instead have the period of the clock pass more slowly as "time itself is slowed" allowing the wave speed to remain the same for the observer of the translated clock and also for more distance to be covered at the unaltered speed in extended time. Both methods can give the same distance traveled in the same number of cycles.

Georgina Woodward

For analogy 3 walkers could have an intrinsic speed of 10 miles per hour that is the product of the motion of their bodies, and unaffected by how they are observed. It is a function of metabolism, nervous and sceleto-muscular relations. They are then made to walk in parallel straight paths. The walkers are watched by 3 observers. One remains with the walkers. One follows the walkers taking the straight path but at half their speed and one watches the two walkers on the straight path from a stationary position as they pass.This gives 3 different relative speeds for one intrinsic speed. The lateral translations being 0, 5 and 10 miles in one hour. If the walkers were instead a light beam there would be still be 3 different relative speeds for the unchanged intrinsic speed of light that is product of the relationship with electric and magnetic constants.

Georgina Woodward

All 3 light beams have traveled the same distance in the same time in Object reality , so are traveling at the same speed, even though they are all seen with different lateral, spatial translations from the different relative perspectives, implying different speeds.

Georgina Woodward

This is about the light clock illustration of time dilation.

There seems to be something wrong with multiplying the intrinsic speed of light by relative distance. It converts what was simply differences in observed lateral spatial displacement into differences in time taken. The spring analogy works well to make the difference in distance of the relative viewpoint compared to the distance in Object reality intuitive. Using that analogy it can be seen that the spiral path is the same length for the same event however it is viewed. As the same distance is traveled at the same intrinsic speed there is no difference in time taken for the different relative viewpoints of the clock. Multiplying the intrinsic speed of light by relative distance is introducing a time error.

Any comments or thoughts related to this welcome.

Georgina Woodward

I see that I got a bit muddled. d=v X t. Its not c being multiplied by the relative diagonal distance but change in time. The diagonal light paths ABC is equated to c X (change in time to complete path ABC) as seen by the stationary observer. And if the distance straight up and down between the mirrors is L then change in time for the observer staying with the clock is 2L /c

It still seems that the intrinsic speed of light ( in which it travels both 2L and ABC in the same time ) is being muddled with the relative distances to give different times i.e.delta t=/=delta t'.

It must travel both 2L and ABC in the same time in Object reality because it is the same event. It starts within the same starting configuration of the object universe and ends within same ending configuration of the Object universe.

Georgina Woodward

Some comment on what I've written would be much appreciated. What is the general impression? Am I thinking about this in a constructive way or making some kind of fundamental error? I'm not convinced by the common illustration of moving clocks slowing, demonstrated with the light clock thought experiment. I hear it said (and animated) that the diagonal paths are longer than up and down only and thus the time counted by the clock is slowed. Yet the light is still doing 2L up and down only from the co moving observer viewpoint and as far as the clock itself is concerned.It is important to me because the twins paradox is about substantial matter acting clock like and being affected by time dilation. I am not convinced that it is while at the same time time dilation due to transmission and receipt of signals does occur. It will be useful to eliminate that paradox while retaining the useful aspects of special relativity.

Georgina Woodward

Light is a periodic phenomenon. Some evidence:... Recording the field variation of visible light calls for an oscilloscope that exhibits a temporal resolution of several hundred attoseconds (1 attosecond being a thousandth of a femtosecond). The researchers recently succeeded in developing a technique which can measure the instantaneous electric field of red light (quarter period ~ 620 attoseconds) and record its variation with a resolution of 100 attoseconds. Max Plank Gesellschaft. Quantum physics Light oscillations become visible

In mathematics, a periodic function is a function that repeats its values in regular intervals or periods. ...Periodic functions are used throughout science to describe oscillations, waves, and other phenomena that exhibit periodicity.........Geometrically, a periodic function can be defined as a function whose graph exhibits translational symmetry. Specifically, a function f is periodic with period P if the graph of f is invariant under translation in the x-direction by a distance of P. From Wikipedia, Periodic function, my emphasis. This seems to show that mathematically the period is unaffected by the translation. It is only a spatial change. So it follows that the period of the light clock should be unaffected by lateral translation.

Georgina Woodward

Elimination of the twins paradox

As the period of periodic motion is unaffected by linear translation (mathematical fact), it follows that the period of clocks themselves are unaffected by linear translation (ideal physics). (Though there are variables that can affect timekeeping of clocks in practice that need considering, see the discussion about atomic clocks in 'Gravitational time dilation and the RICP amended' file.) In support of the twins paradox, human metabolism has been likened to a clock, sometimes reduced to an argument about the oscillation of individual atoms. That argument can be turned around and used in support of no alteration of metabolism under translation. This is only elimination of one of the paradoxical conclusions from special relativity not an attempt to discredit special relativity.

Georgina Woodward

My previous post was in regard to how translation affects clocks themselves (and by extrapolation matter with 'clock like' atomic vibrations) rather than what different observers see because of their reference frames.

To deal with the latter issue: Special relativity works for inertial frames, that is non accelerating frames. In the Twins paradox scenario there are many different reference frames and the majority are accelerating.I don't think the number of different reference frames has been fully appreciated.

The stay at home twin is in the circular motion accelerated frame on the Earth. The travelling twin has 7 different reference frames. 5 out of the 7 being accelerating (or decelerating) frames. They are as follows -1. linear acceleration up to near light speed 2. steady velocity near light speed 3. deceleration prior to turning (no hand break turns in space, especially not at the speed of light!)4. circular motion acceleration as space ship turns around. 5. linear acceleration back up to near light speed 6.steady velocity near light speed 7. deceleration on approach to landing. Therefore it can be concluded that the twins paradox, in regard to observation, is an error due to misapplication of the theory.

Georgina Woodward

I meant handbrake turn. Its amusing to me anyway. Imagine a spaceship travelling at near light speed turning on a point.

Georgina Woodward

Thanks all,

I have found that acceleration can be handled in calculations involving special relativity but it isn't treated relative to a stationary observer but as a constant velocity observed by a co moving observer. It makes me wonder how the patchwork of different reference frames would work.

There are a number of different frequency shifts and changes in latency or lag of the signals. For the spaceship there is non reciprocal 'gravitational ' red shift of the signal from Earth throughout. There is increasing lag or latency on the way out first accelerating and then increasing steadily until slow down for turn around, when the increase in lag slows. On the way out there will also be an accelerating increase in Doppler red shift as it accelerates away from the Earth, then a steady red shift while it is cruising and decreasing as it slows to turn. There will be a period of relatively little change in the lag and no (or insignificant) Doppler shift during turn around. There is similar inconsistent changing blue shift and decreasing lag on the return journey. The Earth observer will have non reciprocal 'gravitational' blue shift throughout, reciprocal lag, and red and blue shifts associated with change in direction (Away or towards signal source)and correlated with the accelerations.

Comparison of just two reference frames, ship and twin seems inadequate.

Georgina Woodward

I should have said 3 reference frames (one stay at home and 2 traveling, out and back )are inadequate for representing the scenario.

« Previous Page Next Page »