Energetic Forum (http://www.energeticforum.com/)
-   Personal Development (http://www.energeticforum.com/personal-development/)
-   -   SRT (an another interpretation) (http://www.energeticforum.com/personal-development/20867-srt-another-interpretation.html)

 socratus 10-29-2017 11:19 AM

SRT (an another interpretation)

One postulate of SRT says:
the speed of quantum of light in vacuum is constant (c=1)

Another postulate of SRT says:
all movements (including the constant speed of quantum of light)
are relative motions in the respect to an absolute aether medium T=0K.

It is possible if constant speed of quantum of light is minimal and
quantum of light can have speed faster than minimal (c>1).
(tachyon solution).

Third postulate says:
the speed of quantum of light is independent of its source.

It is possible only if the source of its speed is self-quantum action (h or h/2pi).

==========================================

 socratus 10-30-2017 10:52 AM

Sorry, I want to rewrite my post.
================
1. Light quanta move trough an absolute aether medium: T=0K.
a) this was Maxwell and Lorenz point of view.
b) Minkowski hid this absolute aether medium into mathematical unity
of 4D spacetime (an other name is : negative -2D Pseudo-Euclidian space)

2) the speed of quantum of light in zero vacuum (T=0K) is constant (c=1)

3) all movements (including the constant speed of quantum of light)
are relative motions in the respect to an absolute aether medium T=0K.

4) It is possible if constant speed of quantum of light is minimal and
quantum of light can have speed faster than minimal (c>1).
(tachyon solution).

5) the speed of quantum of light is independent of its source.
It is possible only if the source of its speed is self-quantum action (h or h/2pi).
The result of self-quantum action is described by Lorenz transformations.
========================================

 socratus 10-31-2017 08:46 AM

By the way,
Minkowski 4D spacetime is as absolute reference frame as the aether medium.

The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil
of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth,
space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows,
and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality.
Minkowski. (Sep 21, 1908)

Then, why do we need to use complex mathematical equations
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minkowski_space) to explain that 2+2=4,
when the Minkowski spacetime is a simple zero continuum T=0K ?
=========================

 socratus 10-31-2017 02:24 PM

1) We live on planet Earth therefore when we say time it must mean gravity-time.
Gravity-time depends on its masses and speed.
Without gravity-masses we don't have time.
SRT is theory without gravity, without gravity-mass therefore it can seem that
SRT is a timeless theory.

2) But indeed, SRT does speak about a time.
It can mean that the subject of SRT is not gravity-time, but time that belongs to the
individual quantum particles. These quantum particles have no gravity-mass, but
they have pure energy-mass. And this pure energy mass of quantum particles
depend on their own speed/ spin. (h or h/2pi).
Different value of spin of quantum particles create their individual mass and energy-time.

=============================================

*

 socratus 11-13-2017 09:57 AM

Was Einstein wrong?
Paul Davies 2003:
The idea of a variable speed of light, championed
by an angry young scientist, could one day topple Einstein's theory of relativity.
Einstein's famous equation E=mc^2 is the only scientific formula
known to just about everyone. The "c" here stands for the speed of light.
It is one of the most fundamental of the basic constants of physics. Or is it?
In recent years a few maverick scientists have claimed that the speed of light
might not be constant at all. Shock, horror!
Does this mean the next Great Revolution in Science is just around the corner?

Was Einstein wrong? | Prospect Magazine
=====================================

**

 socratus 11-14-2017 01:28 PM

In 1908 Minkowski showed that everything that happened in SRT took
place in an absolute 4-dimensions spacetime. This solution was adopted
by all scientific community.
However, if SRT explains some real quantum action, then the mathematical absolute
4-dimensions spacetime also must be some real absolute reference frame,
but in the books about SRT it is impossible to find the real
(not mathematical) image of 4-dimensions spacetime.
=======================

 socratus 11-16-2017 06:02 AM

A strange new world of light.
Date:
November 2, 2017
Source:
Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences

There's nothing new thing under the sun -- except maybe light itself.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...1102141857.htm
================================================== ===========

 socratus 11-25-2017 01:58 PM

SRT: Einstein's two postulates. / other interpretation/

a) The laws of physics are the same in all material (!) inertial reference frame:
/ Galileo transformations./
All material (!) inertial frames of reference are approximately (!) inertial
reference frame.

b) The speed of light in vacuum's constant / absolute continuum (T=0K) has
constant speed: c=1

c) All laws of physics change when quantum particles transfer from absolute
vacuum continuum (T=0K) to inertial reference frames. / Lorenz transformations./

=====================

 socratus 12-12-2017 06:24 AM

a) SRT describes physics in the absence of gravity,
It means that stars, planets, galaxies cannot be SRT subjects.
It means that SRT is interesting in situation around gravity-masses.
And the ''object'' that surrounds all billions and billions galaxies.
is an absolute , infinite, eternal*Minkowski 4D spacetime - ''space fabric'' .

b ) All material inertial reference frame like stars, planets, galaxies . . .
are approximately inertial systems.
The laws of physics are the same in all inertial reference frame
( Galileo transformations ) and therefore all different observers
on different inertial reference frame (planets) will see that the speed of quantum of light
as constant, independently of who measures this speed and how fast the observers move
with respect to the absolute , infinite* ''space fabric'' .

c) All physical laws change when we try to unite inertial and absolute references frame.

============================

 socratus 12-03-2018 12:48 PM

1 Attachment(s)
"On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" --- 2018
===
1 - One SRT postulate says: all laws (including laws of motion )
in all inertial systems ( it means in planets where Newton / Galileo /
Descartes laws work) are equal.

2 - Another postulate says: the speed of light in a vacuum is constant
regardless of the motion of the source of the light / - Michelson experiment /

3 - In all inertial systems the speed of objects / particles is relative and never
can reach the constant speed of light and therefore to compare one postulate
with another postulate is nonsense.

4 - But the fact of constant speed of quantum of light contradicts the idea of
“transformation theory”. Then it possible to say:
Lorentz transformation theory violates constant speed of light.
Lorentz transformation theory says: the light speed is not always constant.
The speed of quantum of light sometime can be c=1 and sometime cannot be equal 1.

5 - Maxwell introduced light as EM subject and Lorentz introduced
an electron in Maxwell's EM theory.
Questions.
'' Could not an electron transfer a part of its energy to light ?''
''What is connection between a quantum of light and an electron?''
'' What mechanism works between an electron and quantum of light ?''

6 - Just as electrons jump from one atomic orbital to another
(by emitting or absorbing light) in the Bohr model of the atom,
so also in electromagnetic events electrons can jump from event to event
by emitting or absorbing quantum of light

7- '' . . . the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" explains behavior
of quantum of light in the vacuum (in Minkowski an absolute space-time,
in the flat continuum without gravity-masses)
====
P.S.
"One might still like to ask:
'How does it work?
What is the machinery behind the law?'
No one has found any machinery behind the law. . .
We have no ideas about a more basic mechanism from which these results can be deduced."
- Richard Feynman
======

 All times are GMT. The time now is 04:59 AM.