Brian, were it not for MDT's *physical* model, how would you explain time and all its arrows and assyemtries across all realms, entropy, quantum mechanics' nonlocality and entanglement, all of Einstein's relativity, and the universal appearance of Huygens' Principle across all realms? How would you account for the gravitational slowing of clocks and light, as well as the gravitational redshift? What *physical* model do you, Brian Beverly, propose, that would *physically* unify all these entities?
And please don't say, "tiny vibrating strings," nor "little loops."
Brian--how else would you weave change into the fundamental fabric of spacetime, where it needs to be, as without change there can be no measurement, and thus no physics? How would you unfreeze time while unifying the dualities and liberating us from a block universe, while provding a universal invariant underlying relativity?
And please don't say, "wormholes," nor "multiverses," nor "tiny, little vibrating strings," nor "little loops," nor "spacetime atoms," nor "M-theory." Don't even say, "quantum gravity," even though they trained you to do so, threatening bankruptcy and banishment, if you spoke otherwise.
Behold MDT--the great unifier and invariant source underlying all *physical* phenomenon--in relativity and quantum emchanics--in statistical mechanics and entropy.
For the first time in the history of relativity, *change* has been *physically* woven into the fundamental fabric of spacetime, with dx4/dt = ic. And that's where change needs to be! For can you name any branch of physics in which change, and time, do not exist? Without change, no measurement can be made.
MDT is unique in that it offers a *physical* model underlying entropy, entanglement, and nonlocality, and too, all of relativity can be immediately derived from its simple postulate and equation.
I expect MDT to bring additional boons for years to come!
Thanks for the questions Brian. Below please find my answers.
"Why did you not prove your essay thesis with a derivation?"
I do. Consider a 4D universe: x1, x2, x3, x4, where x4 is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c described with dx4/dt = ic. Ergo relativity. In my paper I show that this can be given as the motivation for substituting ict for x4. All of relativity arises because of this. Please see Einstein's 1912 Manuscript for more. The essays are limited to 5,000 words, but still I showed how Einstein's Relativity derives from a deeper principle--the fourth dimension is expanding rletaive to the three spatial dimensions at c, or dx4/dt=ic. Consider a 4D universe: x1, x2, x3, x4, where x4 is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c described with dx4/dt = ic. Ergo relativity.
"Why do you never mention the derivation of the speed of light using the electric and magnetic constants?"
Again, the paper is limited to 5,000 words. It is not a physics textbook--it is an essay. I could put this in a longer paper. Or perhaps you would like to write a paper: "Moving Dimensions Theory and the derivation of the speed of light using the electric and magnetic constants."
"In your derivation of X4 = ict why do you multiply by dx infinitesimals and ignore a dx^2 on the L.H.S. rather than writing it as dX4 = icdt and integrating?"
On the L.H.S we have (dx4/dt)dx4. Now dx4/dt=ic, so we substitute ic for dx4/dt.
"Why do you only write X4 = ict then list phenomena and explain them with only the phrase, "which results because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions"?"
I offer detailed *physical* descriptions of all the phenomena that can be expalined with a *physical* model of a fourth expanding dimension given by dx4/dt=ic. Please read the entire paper and stop making false accusations.
"If any arbitrary vector in some vector space is a linear combination of basis vectors then how does a changing 4th dimension effect the vector space?"
How does a changing dimension affect the vector space in General Relativity?
"I thought relativity was a change in bases?"
Relativity is a lot of things.
"Why do you assume a continuous theory when quantum mechanics is discrete?"
General relativity is continuous, as far as we know. And MDT stipulates that while the three spatial dimensions are discrete, the fourth dimension's expansion mainfests itself as a spherically-symmetric wavefront expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions with a wavelength of the Planck Length.
"How did you derive a continuous theory of everything without the mathematics of Cantor?"
Is this John Baez, by any chance, or one of his well-funded grad students with some free time? MDT did not derive a continuous theory of everything. MDT fully supports all of quantum mechanics. Quantum Gravity does not exist--neither in nature nor theory--as far as we know. While you go on and on, attacking the non-funded MDT, you give the myths/hoaxes of quantum gravity--which are funded by hundreds of millions of dollars to create chiny youtube videos that attract legions of young, daring fanboys and mercenaries--a free pass. Perhaps you are working for them? Again, please read the MDT paper, and you'll see I state: "The above equation physically accounts for quantum mechanics' action-at-a-distance and relativity's length contraction, as well as entanglement and the equivalence of mass and energy. Diverse dualities--wave/particle, time/space, and mass/energy--all originate from this same principle. The model accounts for the gravitational redshift and the gravitational slowing of clocks, while showing why there is no need to quantize gravity as no physical entities are transferred in gravitational alterations of energy. The theory provides a physical model for time and its arrows--time is not the fourth dimension, but rather a phenomenon that emerges because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions in units of the Planck length. As the measurement of time is inextricably wed to energy, which is the propagation of photons, and as photons propagate as matter surfing the fourth expanding dimension, time inherits properties of the fourth dimension in relativity's mathematics, but time, as measured on our watches, recorded in our memories, and perceived in radioactive decays and entropy, is not the fourth dimension."
"How do you explain the temporal and spatial derivatives of the Schrodinger equation? I thought it was the requirement that psi(x,t) = Aexp[i(kx - wt)] | E = hbar w | P = hbar k must yield the classical energy equation E = p^2/2m."
I have no idea what the point of this question is. MDT fully supports all of quantum mechanics.
"Why do you even mention the non-relativistic Schrodinger equation but never mention the Dirac equation?" The paper was limited to 5,000 words, and it covers Einstein's Annus Mirabilis, entropy, time and all its arrows and assymtries across all realms, quantum mechanics' nonlocality and entanglement, all the dualities--space/time, wave/particle, mass/energy--and all of Einstein's Relativity; as well as Huygens' Principle, Big Bang Theory, and Einstein's original papers. The paper also presents a hitherto unsung universal *physical* invariant from which all these physical phenomenon arise--the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the trhee spatial dimensions at the rate of c. If the paper were 5001 words, I would have mentioned "Dirac," too. Yes--I know that Dirac's Relativistic QM treats time and space on more equal footing, and MDT also has insight into this.
"Why do you mention that light has a probability of being found in some large circle? I thought QED showed these probabilities cancel each other out."
Do you have a degree in physics? Until a photon is meausred, in the simplest case, it expands as a spherically-symmetric probabilistic wavefront.
Indeed, the fourth dimension itself is nonlocal!
Consider a photon emitted from a source. Quantum mechanics describes the photon's propagation as a spherically-symmetric wavefront of probability expanding at c.
Relativity tells us that the photon does not age--it stays at the same place in the fourth dimension.
Ergo the fourth dimension is nonlocal--it is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at c. Ergo the spherically-symmetric wavefront of probability expanding at c, which describes the photon's propagation, yet represents a locality in the fourth dimension.
This fits perfectly with Einstein's 1912 paper, where he wrote x4 = ict, or dx4/dt = ic. As you can see, the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c.
Now, in light of this (no pun intended), is it no wonder that two intially-interacting photons remain entangled? For even though they propagate in opposite directions, they yet remain ageless, and in the same place in the fourth expanding dimension!
And too, the photons remain in the same place in time, although time is an emergent parameter, that we can measure on watches and clocks, that arises because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, carrying matter in the fourth dimension at c, which manifests itself as photons. Hence you can see why E=mc^2--energy is but matter caught upon the fourth expanding dimension.
I expound on all this in my paper:
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/238
Now the amazing thing about the fourth expanding dimension is that it actually distributes locality! Finally we have a *physical* model for nonlocality, which turns out to be the same physical model underlying all of relativity and entropy--underlying time and its arrows, while weaving change into the fundamental fabric of spacetime, unfreezing time and liberating us from teh block universe! O happy day! Moving Dimensions Theory, which postulates that the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimension at c, provides a most powerful *physical* model underlying relativity, quantum mechanics, entropy, entanglement, nonlocality, and time and all its arrows across all realms.
Note how nonlocal entanglement only occurs for two objects that where intially interacting. So it is that all nonlocality must have a local origin. And the expansion of the fourth dimension, which begins as a single point but then distributes locality in a spherically-symmetric manner in our 3D at the rate of c, accounts for this--think Huygens' Principle, which underlies quantum mechanical (Feynman's many paths) and classical wave behavior. And suddenly we see that MDT also offers a *physical* model behind the *why* of Huygens' principle, as well as entropy, and time and all its arrows and assymetries! And as nonlocality walks hand-in-hand with quantum mechanics' probability, we have a *physical* raison d'etre for qm's probabilistic nature!
Postmodern physicists write a lot about the "Time axis" in their papers and coffee-tabel books, but you need to keep in mind that the time axis is a human construct, and that we do not live in a block universe wherein time is frozen. the block universe is also a human construct, which Godel had problems with. Also, Einsetin never said that time is the fourth dimension in his 1912 paper, but rather he wrote x4=ict, and t and ict are very different things. It is amazing how many physicists have thrown away the ic in front of the t, and gotten tenure while conceiving of time machines they never build, and wormholes they never see, not to mention multiverses and parrallel universes and tiny little vibrating strings in their block universe wherdin funding is an established part of the future which has already happened, but you get the point. All the pop-sci books and texts always have those pictures of light cones, but what they forget is that photons do not travel in straight lines, but rather quantum mechanics tells us that photons travel as expanding spherical wavefronts of probality in our 3D. And in doing so, they maintain a locality in the fourth expanding dimension.
Those who argue with MDT's postulate that the fourth dimension ise expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions are actually arguing with the photon. And yet, the photons keep right on travleing at c--billions upon billions upon billions of them--every second, as they surf the fourth expanding dimension, while yet retaining a locality in time an dthe fourth expanding dimension. I would not be surprised if photons start protesting all the tenured elite who are trying to freeze them and emprison them in their block universe, wherein time and progress in theoretical physics must remain frozen.
Now of course we can forgive Einstein for not noting all this in his 1912 paper, as he never quite accepted quantum mechanics' reality, but for all those of us who passed undergrad and grad quantum, and for all of us who use computers which were built upon nonlocality's reality and wave/particle duality--it is time for all of us to admit that the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, and that this fundamental universal invariant gives rise to the time we measure on our watches, which we we also enjoy designating as an axis in diagrams when writing coffee-table physics books that have frozen time so as to write chapter after chapter about time travel.
"Why do you never mention pure states, eigenvalues or entropy when discussing entanglement?"
Again, the paper is 5,000 words long. I assume the readers generally know what pure states, eigenvalues, and entropy are. If not, they will likely be familiar with the physical reality described by entropy. As one of John Baez's quantum gravity grad students finally realizing that quantum gravity was a postmodern hoax to enrich boomer physicists at the expense of physics and young physicists' careers, perhaps you could write a paper: "Moving Dimensiosn Theory and Entanglement: pure states, eigenvalues, and entropy"
"If a part of the universe is expanding at c how do you explain non-locality? I thought this would just create event horizons."
I'm not sure the universe is expanding at c. MDT simply states that the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at c.
"Why do you mention the absolute rate of c changing as a cause for an accelerating and decelerating universe? I thought the speed of light was a constant."
Yes--c does seem to be constant--doesn't it? But as you know, thre are a lot of VSL theories out there. Perhaps one could make use of MDT, if VSL turns out to be right.
"If everything I have spent precious time and money learning is wrong, then should I drop physics and go to law school? I'd be sad, the laws of man are not as cool as the laws of nature."
Yes Brian, I am sorry that you are now becoming liberated from the block universe and frozen time. You will have to finally cowboy up now and leave wormholes, tiny little vibrating strings, multiverses, time travel fantasies, and parallel universes behind. It is time to read the foundational papers--Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, and Dirac. You will have to find your own way now, independent of spacetime atoms, bouncing universes, time machines, and quantum gravity youth camps. Yes indeed--you write, "the laws of man are not as cool as the laws of nature," and that is exactly why physics has ground to a halt--for it has replaced the laws of nature, such as MDT, with the laws of man and their snarky bureuacracies which pen millions of indecipherable papers so as to drown out the lone voices of reason. String theory, loop quantum gravity, multiverses, the landscape, hamsters, geometric mysticism, E8, and snarky quantum grvaity regimes, which have made a most profitable religion out of consistent, hand-waving failure, are on their way out, as they are all based on pseudo-laws made by men who placed the bottom line over the higher ideals.
Moving Dimensiosn Theory liberates us from both frozen time and the block universe.
Brian, were it not for MDT's *physical* model, how would you explain time and all its arrows and assyemtries across all realms, entropy, quantum mechanics' nonlocality and entanglement, all of Einstein's relativity, and the universal appearance of Huygens' Principle across all realms? What model do you, Brian Beverly, propose, that would *physically* unify all these entities?
Or have you come here not to create, but to destroy, so as to please your elders/funders/God-Kings of coffeee table phsysics books which make the unreal--wormholes, time travel--tiny, little, vibrating strings--real, while exiling the real--MDT's hitherto unsung universal invaraint--the fourth dimension is expanidng relative to the three spatial dimenions?
The late professor J.A. Wheeler--"the last notable figure from the heroic age of physics lingering among us -- a man who could claim to be the student of Bohr, teacher of Feynman, and close colleague of Einstein"--was a very, very humble man, considering his massive accomplishments; and very kind to give me the time of day, with that eternal twinkle in his eye, which shines on, even though he has departed this world. So often it is that the
Greats have Great Humility, and Benjamin Franklin's thirteenth, and most important precept, was "Humility: Imitate Scorates and Jesus."
I remember Wheeler clenching his fist one day while looking out the window of his Jadwin Hall office, and stating that "today's world lacks the noble," and then turning and smiling and saying, "and it's your generation's job to bring it back." I was just a twenty-year-old junior, nodding silently and anxiously in agreement, and those words have stayed with me and meant more and more over the years, as they seem to explain so much about postmodern life--our disregard for the classical eternities and Einstein's 1912 Manuscript (which I get the feeling nbody here has yet read, or is going to read), and our arrogance that has lead to the current financial crisis/wealth transfer to the top, the breakdown of the family, and the resounding lack of progress in physics, other than the progress that has been made by deconstructing the classics, which tends to work better in realms that do not require empirical evidence.
I also remember standing in PJ Peebles' office that year, when I had him for quantum mechanics, and asking him, "when a photon is emitted from a light bulb, do we really not know where it's headed? Is it really just a probabilistic wave expanding at the rate of c?" "Yes," he said. And that stuck with me, because this is what quantum mechanics telles us. And relativity tells us that the ageless photon stays in the exact same place in the fourth expanding dimension. Ergo the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions. dx4/dt = ic. It really is that simple, and yet the world yet refuses to see. But the world shall.
It was many years later that I wrote that equation down, but somehow I sensed it that year, walking between Peebles' and Wheelers' offices. Somehow I sensed the block universe did not exist, and I knew that someday I would rise to free time and liberate us from frozen time and frozen theoretical physics.
Legend has it that Einstein eventually came up with relativity because he so often contemplated what it would be like to catch up with light--a pursuit which began in his childhood. I often wonder, had Einstein known that light actually propagates as a spherically-symmetric probabilistic wavefront at the rate of c--had he actually known quantum mechanics--would he have seen that the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, or dx4/dt=ic?
What's really funny to me is not that people try to refute MDT, but that they try to refute the timeless, ageless photon, free will, quantum entanglement, nonlocality, entropy, time and all its arrows and assymetries, simple math, elegance, relativity, and novel physical theories that come with a postulate and equation.
MDT: The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions: dx4/dt = ic
What's even funnier to me is that while refuting the obvious, profound, and simple, people stubbornly want to hold onto the block universe, time travel into the past, wormholes, tiny little vibrating strings and loops that make different colors of light travel at different c's, hyperspace, and other complete and unadalturated mythologies which don't make logical sense, and which have no empirical basis whatsoever. I have often made the joke that parallel universes, which are supposedly always popping in and out of existence, exist just long enough for theoretical physicists to get tenure, but disappear before the experimentalists can get tenure.
And yet, I maintain that physics ought be about *physics.*
Hundreds of years from now someone will read these words and know that one lone cowboy stoop apart the madding crowd to state what he sees, to state what he saw.
Both Einstein and Minkowski wrote x4 = ict, but they never saw that this naturally implied dx4/dt = ic. All of relativity is right--it's just that change is now forever wedded into the fundamental fabric of spacetime with dx4/dt = ic. I know they will ignore this and continue to raise tens of millions for mytholgies, while training grad students in the art of sycophancy, thuggery, and anonimity, and picking the best to reward with a few pennies now and then from their millions, as senior citizen physicists dictate the questions, banning those who wer eborn with their own curiosities, like Einstein, Newton, Bruno, Galileo, and every other scientist and artist who has ever contributed to art and science.
And Einstein's Relativity may be derived from dx4/dt= ic, which represents a more fundamental invariance of this universe--the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions. Einstein introduced relativity as a principle--as a law of nature not deduced from anything else, and well, I guess I was dumb enough to ask, 'why relativity?' And I found the answer in a more fundamental invariance--the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, or dx4/dt = ic.
And not only can all of relativity be derived from this, but suddenly we are liberated from the block universe and time and progress in theoretical physics are unfrozen. And change is seen in a most fundamental equation that *weaves* change into the very fabric of space-time, where it needs to be, as change pervades every realm of physics and all acts of *physical* measurement. And suddenly we have a *physical* model for entropy, time and its arrows and assymetries in all realms, free will, and quantum mechanics' nonlocality, entanglement, and wave-particle duality. The fourth expanding dimension distributes locality, fathering time. MDT accounts for the constant speed of light c--both its independence of the source and its independence of the velocity of the observer, while establishing c as the fastest, slowest, and only velocity for all entities and objects moving through space-time, as well as the maximum velocity that anything is measured to move. And suddenly we see a *physical* basis for the dualities--for space/time, wave/matter, and energy/mass or E=mc^2. Energy and mass are the same thing--it's just that energy is mass caught upon the fourth expanding dimension, and thus it surfs along at "c."
The biggest tragedy of postmodern physics is not that it doesn't accomplish anything, but that it has banned the asking of foundational questions, without which, nothing can be accomplished.
MDT asks, and *answers*, the following, all with its simple postulate and equation:
What is the *physical* reason for length contraction? What *physical* entities of this universe give rise to length contraction? What deeper *physical* reality dictates that any moving object must be foreshortened in the direction of its motion? What is *physically* going on on a deeper level? There must be some *primary* cause--some universal invariant--for length contraction, time dilation, entropy, entanglement, nonlocality, and time and all its arrows and assymetries, and all the dualities--space/time, mass/energy, and wave/particle.
And then, as time went on, I found I was able to answer a wide array of foundational questions with: "Because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimension: dx4/dt = ic." And I went back to Einstein's original words in his 1912 Manuscript and found that he had never quite provided a deeper motivation for setting x4 = ict, other than that it works! Well, x4 = ict because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions.
And this small recognition of a primary universal invariant answered an abundance of questions with a *physical* model. And when diverse questions spanning all realms of physics are answered by a common *physical* model, surely that points the way towards unification!
One reason I think String Theory and Loop Quantum Gravity have not made much progress is because they have not been asking the fundamental questions I enumerate below. Rather, a system is set up where grad students and postdocs apply for grants to work on questions asked by the people with the funding, who while not ebing successful at physics, have been quite successful at science fiction and raising funds. Max Planck, Joseph Campbell, and F.A. Hayek all tell us why this does not work:
"New scientific ideas never spring from a communal body, however organized, but rather from the head of an individually inspired researcher who struggles with his problems in lonely thought and unites all his thought on one single point which is his whole world for the moment." --Max Planck
And again we see the primacy of the honest individual in the classic, epic hero's journey!
"A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man." --Joseph Campbell
In King Arthur's Court, is was dishonorable for a knight to follow another knight into the woods, but rather they had to find their *own* path, like Dante did.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth
And the Nobel Laureate economist F.A. Hayek agrees!
"The tragedy of collectivist thought is that, while it starts out to make reason supreme, it ends by destroying reason because it misconceives the process on which the growth of reason depends. It may indeed be said that it is the paradox of all collectivist doctrine and its demands for "conscious" control or "conscious" planning that they necessarily lead to the demand that the mind of some individual should rule supreme--while only the individualist approach to social phenomena makes us recognize the super-individual forces which guide the growth of reason. Individualism is thus an attitude of humility before this social process and of tolerance to other opinions and is the exact opposite of that intellectual hubris which is at the root of the demand for comprehensive direction of social purpose." -F.A. Hayek, The End of Truth, The Road to Serfdom
So it is that in asking my own questions, I had to find my own way through the woods. And in Arthurian Legend, which Joseph Campbell oft talks about, it is dishonorable to follow someone else's path through the forest, but instead, one must blaze one's own trail. Dante starts off alone in this dark woods in the Divine Comedy, and Morpheus tells Neo, "there is a difference between knowing the path and walking it." "I can tell you of the way, but you must find it and walk it on your own."
Could you ever imagine Eisenstein working on something he wasn't naturally curious about? The Greats were never sycophants, but that is exactly who today's funders surround themselves with. Pete Woit blogged aboutthe sycophancy in American academia.
Here are some of the questions that are answered with Moving Dimensions Theory's simple postulate and equation: "because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions: dx4/dt = ic."
I know it is a crime to ask such questions, another crime to answer them, and yet another crime to answer them with a simple postualte and equation, as postualtes and equations represeting hitherto unsung *physical* realties have been outlawed, and the top grad students and postdocs are regularly sent forth to detroy them, while wearing masks, in the dark of night, for all sycophants must eventually transform into anonymous cowards,as the Nobel laureate economist hints at in his two chapters "The End of Truth," and "Why The Worst Get on Top."
But, yet, the fourth dimension moves. "E pur si muove!" as Galileo atated. We have been liberated from frozen time and the block universe! Ergo I have free will, and I shall use it to both ask and answer foundational questions in physics via MDT's simple elgance and beauty.
Below are some of the questions that are answered with Moving Dimensions Theory's simple postulate and equation: "because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions: dx4/dt = ic."
0. Why time? Why time's arrows and asymmetries?
0.1 Why relativity? Why the principle of relativity? What deeper physical reality underlies relativity?
0.2 Why entanglement and nonlocality?
1. Why is light's velocity a constant c? Why relativity's postulates?
2. Why is light's velocity c independent of its source?
3. Why is it that nothing can travel faster than c?
4. Why does a photon, which travels at c, not age?
5. Why does a photon's spherically-symmetric probablistic wavefront define simultaneity--a locality in the fourth dimension?
6. Why are energy and mass equivalent? Why E=mc^2?
7. Why do all of time's arrows point in the same direction--towards dissipation, decoherence, and entropy?
8. Why do so many physicists say time is the fourth dimension, when Einstein never said x4 is time, but instead said x4 = ict?
9. Why can matter can appear as energy or mass?
10. Why is it that when matter appears as pure energy, it propagates at c through space?
11. Why does all matter have particle--local--and wave--nonlocal--properties?
12. Why does all energy have particle--local--and wave--nonlocal--properties?
13. Why is it that when matter appears as stationary mass it propagates at c through the fourth dimension?
14. Why is it that when matter appears as energy, it propagates at c through the three spatial dimensions?
15. Why is it that to move at c through space is to stand still in the fourth dimension?
16. Why is it that to move at c through the fourth dimension is to stand still in space?
17. Why is it that all objects move at but one speed through space-time--c?
18. Why is the universe expanding?
19. Why does radiation expand outwards, but not inwards?
20. Why do we see retarded waves, but not advanced?
21. Why is it that entropy imitates the general motion of all radiation and the universe's expansion--a spherically-symmetric expanding wave?
22. Why is it that Huygens' Principle, which underlies all reality ranging from QED to Feynman's many-paths, to classical physics, state that every point of a spherically-expanding wavefront is in turn a spherically-expanding wavefront?
23. Why are all photons described by a spherically-expanding wavefront propagating at c?
24. Why is it that two initially-interacting photons remain entangled, no matter how far they travel apart?
25. Why is it that two initially-interacting photons remain the exact same age, no matter how far they travel apart?
26. Why is it that Young's double-slit experiments show that both mass and energy have nonlocal wave properties?
27. Why is it that the collapse of the wave function is immediate in the photoelectric effect, and all other experiments?
28. Why is there no way for an object to gain velocity without being reduced in length via relativistic length contraction?
29. Why does a photon trace out a null vector through space-time? How can movement across the universe describe a path of zero length?
30. Why does time's arrow point in a definitive direction?
21. Why does entropy increase?
32. Why do moving clocks run slow?
33. Why is time travel into the past impossible?
34. Why does free will exist?
35. Why is it that time is not frozen---how come the block universe does not exist? Why do we have free will?
36. Why does a photon's probabilistic wavefront travel at c?
37. Why is the velocity of quantum entanglement c? Why is it that only initially interacting particles can yet be entangled? Why is it that they must first share a common locality or origin, in order to share an entangled nonlocality when they are separated?
38. Why is it that in Schrodinger's equation, the first derivative with respect to the fourth dimension is proportional to the second derivative with the respect to the three spatial dimensions? Any change in position in the fourth expanding dimension is an acceleration in the three spatial dimensions.
39. Why is it that a photon emitted from the sun is red-shifted as it travels away? It's wavelength appears longer as it is measured against space that is less-stretched. A photon inherits the local geometry of the space-time where it was emitted.
40. Why do clocks in gravitational fields run slow?
41. Why are photons red-shifted as they move away from massive objects, and blue-shifted as they move towards them?
42. Why the conservation laws? Why does an object maintain its rotation in space-time, unless acted upon by an exterior force?
43. Why is the velocity of every object through space-time c?
44. Why is it that the only way to stay stationary in the fourth dimension is to move at c through the three spatial dimensions?
45. Why is it that the only way to remain stationary in the three spatial dimensions is to move at c relative to the fourth dimension?
46. Why does a photon have zero rest mass, and how does zero rest mass imply the velocity of light? None of the object's matter exists in the three spatial dimensions, but only in the fourth expanding dimension.
47. Why time's arrows?
48. Why time's asymmetries?
49. Why entropy?
50. Why is there an i in x4=ict?
51. Why is the velocity of light both independent of the velocity of the source and the velocity of the observer?
52. Why are light, time, and measurement so fundamentally related?
53. Why the - sign in-front of x4 in the space-time metric? What is different about x4?
Well, MDT answers all theses questions, and more, with a simple physical postulate and equation: "The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions or dx4/dt = ic."
Over the years, MDT has provided a *physical* model that answered these and other questions, unifying diverse fields and physical phenomena in a common, simple principle.
Now as MDT unfreezes both time and progress in theoretical physics, it will be opposed by many. Furthmore, as MDT explains away wormholes and time travel into the past, which have never been seen but yet form the foundations of many modern religions adhered to by geometric mystics and soothsayers, it will be opposed even more. As MDT provides a simple equation and postulate that hearken on back to the heroic age of physics, instead of presenting indecipherable math that can be used to raise massive funding for some groupthink Matrix/corporate-state/MTV show, it will be opposed even more, by those in The Matrix who have nothing to gain by simple truth and beauty, and so much to lose--their illusions of grandeur.
I think all the questions started back in the late eighties/early nineties with "why length contraction?"
Why does an object become foreshortened in the direction of its motion? Why is it that the only way for something to move is to become shorter in the direction of its motion?
When I wondered about this, as when I pondered all the above questions MDT answers, I tried to envision the *physical* structure of space-time and reality that would account for the behavior. For ultimately physics is about physics, and sometimes, a mathematical equation comes forth which supports the physical reality--in this case of a ofurth expanding dimension: dx4/dt= ic.
And here is how it worked out while contemplating the physical reality underlying relativistic length contraction.
Consider a ruler--it gets shorter as it moves due to length contraction.
But wait, does not a ruler also appear shorter as it rotates? Consider a ruler at the end of a football field, parallel to the field goals. As it rotates, it will appear shorter and shorter to us, as we stand at the other end of the field, looking on. Have you ever noticed this illusion, as a rotating radar on a distant ship looks like something that keeps contracting and expanding? It is hard for us to tell it is rotating--rather we might actually guess that it is actually getting physically shorter and longer.
These youtube videos almost illustrate this rotating radar effect:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jd6ZxHk2-zA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMlsmqWSo8A&feature=related
And I saw that relativistic length contraction is a rotation of sorts. The ruler is rotated out of our three spatial dimensions. But what is it rotated into? It is rotated into the fourth dimension. But why, when this happens, does the ruler always, always propagate in the direction of its foreshortening? Well, it is because the fourth dimension--the dimension which the ruler is being rotated into--is moving! Thus relativistic length contraction is always, always accompanied by a change in velocity.
Rotate something into the fourth dimension, and it gains a translational velocity. Give something a translational velocity, and it will appear foreshortened in our three spatial dimensions. All because the fourth dimension is expanidng relative to the three spatial dimensions or dx4/dt = ic.
Then, right after I pondered length contraction, the - sign in the space-time metric puzzled me. Why does x4 have a - sign in-front of it? How is x4 different from the three spatial dimensions? What is a photon telling us by defining a null vector? A photon can cross the universe, and yet not travel at all? Ahaha! For in the fourth dimension, it has not moved, as the fourth dimension has been moving with it, just as a surfer stays with the wave they ride. This brings de Broglies' pilot waves to mind...
Well, that's some of the story behind MDT. A very early version of it appeared in my 1998 dissertation:
http://elliotmcgucken.com/dissertation.html
And I am forever indebted to J.A. Wheeler, through whom I first encountered not only these questions, but the courage to ask them. Wheeler always used to say, "I want to know what the show is all about, before it's out." And not only were foundational questions allowed and encouraged in his office, but one could not enter nor leave without naturally asking them. His Great Spirit has moved on, and while the past is no longer real, the immortal soul is, as Socrates concludes:
"I think Socrates, said Cebes, that even the dullest person would agree, from this line of reasoning, that the soul is in every possible way more like the invariable than the variable.
And the body?
To the other.
Look at it in this way too. When soul and body are both in the same place, nature teaches the one to serve and be subject, the other to rule and govern. In this relation which do you think resembles the divine and which the mortal part? Don't you think that it is the nature of the divine to rule and direct, and that of the mortal to be subject and serve?
I do.
Then which does the soul resemble?
Obviously, Socrates, soul resembles the divine, and body the mortal." --The Phaedo
For some reasons I wrote a lot of sonnets that first year in grad school--often during quantum mechanics. At the end of the semester, when the professor was passing out the exams, he looked at me and said, "You will do very well on this! You took many notes!" I guess he thought I was taking notes the whole time. I've never been much of a class learner, but I made up for it by staying up late, reading the quantum texts. It wasn't always efficient, but here're some of the poems I wrote in quantum mechanics--I sent them to Wheeler during that first year of grad school:"
"cxl.
Now suppose we have a hole in a slate,
A photon from a source passes on through,
And it darkens a grain on a film plate,
To say it went through the hole would be true.
Several photons pass through, we wait a bit,
And quite a simple pattern we do see,
A bright spot directly behind the slit,
Fading away as you move outwardly.
We choose to add an additional slit,
The photon seems to have a decision,
It must choose one of them through which to fit,
For photons are not allowed to fission.
But now there are fringes, common to waves!
In this manner, can particles behave?
cxli.
What's seen is an interference pattern,
Which is common to every type of wave,
On the vast ocean or from a lantern,
This is the way every wave does behave.
Though you think particles blacken the spot,
Between the source and plate light is a wave,
As to its whereabouts we can say not,
Such is the way reality behaves.
These ghostly facts are true of all matter,
Electrons and protons and you and me,
We're but empty waves that somehow matter,
Striving to comprehend reality.
Wavy winds blow, our consciousness is lit.
It makes up our mind, our minds make up it.
cxlii.
"The question is to be or not to be,
Whether it is nobler within the mind,
To believe in indeterminacy,
Or refute that God plays dice in the wind.
Are there many worlds, or only just this one?
And is Schrodinger's cat alive or dead?
Of p and x, can we only know one?
And of Wigner's good friend, what can be said?"
He smiled and said, "no question, no answer,
This above all, science holds to be true,
Love is in the mind of the romancer,
And the kind of love determines the view."
He looked up to the sky, a sky few see,
A sky filled with a child's curiosity."
Best,
Dr. E (The Real McCoy)
