Special Relativity: Alternatives?

[arkain101]

Thankyou CraigD,

The story was fun and entertaining all the way through ;)

 

If the radio-frequency light moving between Galileo’s transmitter and the DSN’s receiver is moving at a constant velocity relative to something independent of Galileo and the DSN – called by convention “the luminiferous aether” – we should be able to measure the relative motion of either by the difference in measure lightspeed between them in different directions. If we can’t, light is behaving in a way unlike more obvious things like sound waves, water waves, and machine-gun bullets, and a theory is needed to explain how. After a century, the favorite theory to explain this remains Special Relativity.

 

This is the most important section I could explain. Even with the "the luminiferous aether", the operation behind light and its travel mechanisms is NOT like sound waves and water waves.

 

Let me explain.

 

Lets call Aether X. It is absolute rest.

Lets call moving object 'inertial frame' (A)

Lets call rest observer (:fly:

Lets use the speed of light it is 'C'.

Lets use the equations E=MC^2

 

In the way sound waves work if an object is traveling away from you it will send sound to you more slowly, and distort the sound. A doppler shift.

 

In aether it does not work like this.

 

Lets build a scenario with aether.

 

Any direction the light travels it travels at C, and any observer will measure this.

 

frame 'A' is moving at velocity 0.2C away from observer 'b' who is at rest.

 

Frame a is moving 0.2C relative to the aether.

 

A photon that leaves in the direction of travel of frame a will travel away from observer B at C and will travel through the aether at C.

 

A photon that travles from frame a to observer b, -this is where it comes together-.

Typically in the way sound works a photon would leave frame A at velocity C minus the velocity of the moving frame A to give a total of 0.8C towards the observer B.

However, in the form of aether, the atom has energy of that of the square of C.

What occurs here is that the atoms on frame A that emmitt the photons must continue to obey the laws of physics. Thus the photon is emitted from frame A to observer B at velocity 1.2C as to remain in velocity C relative to the aether. The photon also travels towards the observer B at velocity C,

as we see with;

-frame A (-0.2C) relative to observer B.

-photon (1 C) must obtain 1.2C relative to moving frame A to remain C for observer and aeather.

 

We presume that atom (source of light) has the freedom to act up to that of velocity C relative to the aether and nothing else. Thus the energy of the matter must be that of E=MC^2 otherwise it would never create C velocity when traveling away from an observer at velocity .999C (as an example).

 

The difference is that aether wave functions come from a electrodynamic source and sound waves come from a momentum source.

 

The aether source has properties which must obey the observed laws of physics.

 

When this is all implemented into the rest of all motion, space and time. It does as I say work as flawlessly as that of SR.

[arkain101]

The Theory of Absolute Relativity

 

 

Introduction

This is a theory of relativity with a form of luminiferous aether of absolute rest. In this paper it is shown the possible flaw in the original testing for luminiferous aether in the famous Michelson-Morely experiment. Furthermore, it goes on to show all experimental data and laws of physics can still be obeyed by a form of absolute rest and luminiferous aether. Lastly the required apparatus to correctly test to show a form or lack of luminiferous aether.

 

 

 

Experimental Data

In the original Michelson-Morely experiment it was expected to have light wave results similar to that of sound waves or water waves. However, this is not the case in the operation of luminiferous aether. It must be considered that any wave of light must comply to the constant velocity of C in all frames of observation, most importantly the absolute rest frame of aether. It is possible to get two types of C depending on which technique you measure the speed of light, both still obey the constant of light to all observers (note: this is possible when we accept light that moves away from an observer can NOT be considered directly observable thus its values elude the observer, but will remain a value of C when measured after its return trip to that same observer). These two types are 1) The time it takes for light to reach a distant detector according to the observer(at light source). 2) The time it takes for light to travel a path and reflect back to the observer.

 

Let us look at the details behind the latter descriptions.

 

If you are not familiar with the Michelson-Morely experiment, Visit this link ( http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/more_stuff/flashlets/mmexpt6.htm ) to become familiar with the apparatus and experiment. This experiment was designed to measure a difference in arrival time for the two different paths of light.

 

The theory of absolute relativity hypothesises there will never be a difference in arrival times between the two different paths of light in an aether enviroment while the system is in motion through the aether, using the configuration in the past Michelson Morely experiment.

 

There are 5 images including four stages and a conclusion tablet of the Michelson-Morley Experiment.

 

 

The system is moving through the aether at a velocity of 0.1C.

 

Image 1. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment.jpg

step 1:The light leaves the laser (light source) at 0.9C head on into the aether which is traveling 0.1C. This is in accordance with experimental data of wave mechanics. The aether is expected to create a wind effect that would differ the velocity of light moving 'upstream' as it were.

 

Image 2. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment2.jpg

step 2:The light splits into the two perpendicular paths. The green arrow (we call A) remains going 0.9C, as the paths has been unchanged.

The red arrow (we call :hihi: turns perpendicular to the aether and is now capable to travel at C or 1C, because it is not moving parrallel with the motion of the proposed aether.

 

Image 3. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment3.jpg

step 3:The light reflects and returns to the center mirror. Historically it was not calculated that the light could measure beyond C relative to the apparatus. However, it is absolutely acceptable for the light to reach C relative to the aether on its return trip, thus creating a measurement 1.1C relative to the experiment system. Although, the apparatus observer must take into consideration its own velocity relative to the aether. As so we have;

Observer velocity 0.1C, Light velocity C. Thus the distance that is covered between observer and the light is 1.1C, although this does not affect the true velocity of the light, and all laws of physics are obeyed.

 

Image4. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment4.jpg

The light waves turn on the final stretch to make there way to the detector, perpendicular to the aether at a velocity of 1C, at this point they have regained equal posistion (as will be seen in the table of image 5).

note: one arrow was crossed out to show that they have returned to one wave form again.

 

Image5. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment5.jpg

This table shows the different velocities of the light relative the experiment system in each step. At the end of the trip the total velocity remains equal. I called this net velocity, however, it is the average velocity that is also equal. In the past they didnt expect aether to be able to function in a way to have light remain as a constant for observers. In the way I have shown, I hypothesis it can.

 

Here we see that in the past, the expectation of having light act like sound waves or water waves, was incorrect and the experiment would fail because of that. If light acted similar to sound waves it would not coincide with experimental evidence that C remains constant. However, as just previously described, when the source of light is can have a varying velocity of emition, it will agree with lights observed constant.

 

 

How is light able to exceed C relative to an inertial frame as it leaves 'downstream' into the aether?

 

Enter E=MC^2.

 

While obeying the law that nothing can exceed the speed of light, a moving object is predicted to be able to send light faster in the direction opposite of motion than it is in the direction of motion relative to the observer of that source. In doing so it obeys the law of light always traveling C, relative to the aether, which as mentioned, works into being constant for all observers in conventional return trip measurements.

 

It is due to this that an atom has the energy of the square of the velocity of light in a magnitude of the multiplication of its total mass.

In order to obey the constant of C in aether mechanics the atom must be capable to act in speeds beyond C relative to itself to match C relative to the aether. However, it is possible for an atom to act this way as said ealier:

(note: this is possible when we accept light that moves away from an observer can NOT be considered directly observable thus its values elude the observer, but will remain a value of C when measured after its return trip to that same observer).

 

 

How to correctly detect a form of aether.

 

In my understanding, if the Michelson-Morely Experiment was rearranged to only send light in a strait line from, source to a detector a detectable result would be possible, to prove and or correctly disprove a moving aether wind.

 

An example of the corrected appartus.

Note: light sources aimed in perpendicular angles

 

laser (light source 1a) to ------------> detector (1b) @ angle x

 

laser (light source) (2a) to ------------> detector (2b) @ angle y

 

The prediction of this theory is that the result would find:

- a difference in arrival time for the two light sources

- a difference in frequencies between the two lights (if their sources were identical

- a velocity of the aether

 

This is a general simple form of the experiment. If the light was capable to make a return trip the experiment would fail to show any change between the two light paths and light would be measured to be a constant of C. The light must make one path from A to B to detect any change.

 

 

Conclusion

It is possible for medium (aether) like universe to obey the laws of physics and create the same experimental observation that have been performed to test the theory of SR with space-time.

 

 

Support on this theory.

 

http://www.wbabin.net/physics/kingston.htm

A length of 20 meters for each arm should be adequate, since the experiment based on the Mossbauer effect using a gamma ray from iron-57 (‘Harvard Tower Experiment’ by Pound, Rebka, and Snyder) was able to show the difference in speed over a distance of about 22.6 meters, although the results were interpreted as a change of energy rather than speed.

The Mössbauer effect

 

http://www.rsc.org/Education/EiC/issues/2002July/july2002Adetunji.asp

With his hastily-constructed apparatus, Mössbauer recorded the recoilless nuclear resonance absorption of -rays by iridium-191 as a function of the linear (tangential) speed of the source.

 

apparatus image. - http://www.rsc.org/images/adetunji_jul02_fig4_tcm18-36458.jpg

 

The angle of light source propogation in respect to space can directly affect the frequency emitted from a gas that is excited by the same light (energy) source.

[arkain101]

I am looking to express the following in mathmatical form.

 

 

 

I would appreciate anyones help with putting this paper together full bodied. Math with the logic.

 

I feel I have made very valid points that should take interest in the science communnity.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

 

I want to express 2 comparissons for the (michelson morely) MM experiment.

 

comparison #1.

 

using the same vector quantities mentioned in the paper I want to show the results with sound wave mechanics for the light experiment.

I want to compare

-scenario 1 with absolute rest space (aether medium)

to

-scenario 2 non absolute space.

 

Then comparison #2.

 

using the same vector quantities mentioned in the paper I want to show the results with this theorys version of light wave mechanics. (that is any light wave will emmit from a source at a velocity 'v'=C .

-scenario 1 with absolute rest space (aether medium).

-scenario 2 with non absolute space.

With this I want to show that the MM experiment was configured in such a way that it was unable to detect aether regarldess if it was there or not.

 

We understand with experimental evidence that light is the same velocity to each observation frame.

So in comparison #1 we show that sound wave mechanics are false (that which the theory of aethe was constructed on) for light, and that the apparatus arrangement was flawed.

 

In comparison #2 we can show that aether can infact obey the observed laws of physics and allow C to be constant to each observation frame. Thus also showing that the apparatus was flawed in being able to detect such aether.

 

It should not be to difficult considering I have the ground work layed out.

 

I will add it here below.

 

The system is moving through the aether at a velocity of 0.1C

(and obviously at rest for non absolute space)

 

That is all the data really needed please see the next post to see the guidelines of the two comparisons.

(and if needed refer to the MM experiment in the Absolute Relativity paper ealier posted)

[arkain101]

Lets lay out the laws of each form.

 

Sound wave mechancs. (for comparison #1)

 

from wiki

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

A simple example concerns the model on which aether was originally built: sound. The speed of propagation for mechanical waves, the speed of sound, is defined by the mechanical properties of the medium. For instance, if one is in an airliner, you can still carry on a conversation with the person beside you because the sound of your words are travelling along with the air inside the aircraft. This effect is basic to all Newtonian dynamics, which says that everything from sound to the trajectory of a thrown baseball should all remain the same in the aircraft as sitting "still" on the Earth. This is the basis of the Galilean transformation, and the concept of "frame of reference".

 

So this is newtonian form of physics. That is, (back to our MM experiment) if an object was traveling in the wind, the speed of the light wave in this sound wave model would be relative to the streaming wind of the aether.

 

 

Absolute Relativity - Aether wave Mechanics (for comparison #2)

 

In this form the emitter of the light is restricted by the aether, that has a maximum velocity of C to travel through it, and futhermore only a velocity of C.

 

Thus an object moving through the aether will have light emmit at a slower velocity in the direction of travel (to maintain C in the aether) and a faster velocity in the opposite direction of travel (to maintain C).

 

In detail: The light retains C, (we base this off of the fact the energy available from the matter is a value of the square of the speed of light with a magnitude relative to the multiple of the matters mass.

 

Shortly, an object can emmit light between C and C+C (in the range of C+C when the object (light source) is moving very near C). The object (or matter) emmits as fast as it can at all times and the medium (aether constrains it)

 

This is the guidelines to follow when sorting out:

 

one last time:

comparison #1 (sound wave mechanics) and comparison #2. (lights obeying aether mechanics)

[arkain101]

I wonder who will be the first to take the challenge. :eek:

 

If you can show the math, you can prove my logic. The person that works this out will have shown aether (absolute rest) is a plausible hypothesis. :shade:

 

I will see what I can do in the meantime. :cup:

 

Note:

If you havnt read each post and want to tackle this problem refer to post's:

37 - http://hypography.com/forums/143076-post37.html

and

38 - http://hypography.com/forums/143178-post38.html

[CraigD]

This is a general simple form of the experiment. If the light was capable to make a return trip the experiment would fail to show any change between the two light paths and light would be measured to be a constant of C. The light must make one path from A to B to detect any change.

Earlier, I suggested that 1-way light travel time data between Earth and the Galileo spacecraft that orbited Jupiter from 1995 to 2003. However, another 1-way radio signal is widely available, from the 29 GPS satellites currently orbiting the earth. Although these sources are much closer than Earth was to the Galileo spacecraft, the clocks on the GPS radio transmitter satellites are much more precise (if they were not, the GPS would not be useful for precision positioning).

 

GPS satellites are about 20200000 m above the surface of the Earth. The light travel time for this distance is about 0.067 s. Earth orbits the Sun at a speed of about 30287 m/s. So, if light travels at a constant speed relative to a fixed aether, a GPS-derived distance from a satellite directly overhead of a receiver at the equator on an equinox (about 3/20 or 9/21 each year) at about 6:00 AM local time, should differ by about about 2*30287*0.067 = 4058 m. However, GPS is accurate to about 15 m. Therefore, light does not travel at a constant speed relative to a fixed aether, invalidating arkain’s Theory of Absolute Relativity.

 

Rather than attempt to obtain raw GPS data to confirm, which the typical commercial GPS receiver does not provide, one can examine the technical literature of the GPS, or consult with a person expert in the GPS, to confirm that the system does not calculate an adjustment for the Earth’s velocity relative to any absolute coordinate system. Were there an aether, the GPS would be able to adjust for the Earth’s movement relative to it to provide precise positioning data. It’s not possible for such an adjustment to occur accidentally – it would have to be explicitly coded for in GPS software. My examination of the wikipedia article “GPS”, which list adjustments for sources of error as small as 0.5 m, does not list such an adjustment, confirming the invalidation of the TOAR.

I wonder who will be the first to take the challenge. :shade:

 

If you can show the math, you can prove my logic. The person that works this out will have shown aether (absolute rest) is a plausible hypothesis.

I believe I have just disproved the aether (absolute rest) hypothesis.

 

Arkain is to applauded for making a true, falsifiable scientific hypothesis. In science, a disproven hypothesis is arguable more important than one that has not yet been disproven.

[arkain101]

reply to CraigD.

 

Hi,

 

this is just a short reply (its very early for me today, I am hungover, and I am on my way to get alll my wisdom teeth out so I am also pre-drugged up as it were on pain killers), but I really enjoyed the detailed reply today. I have however already considered a satellites dilation and believe I have found a way to equally describe such results and measurments, if you will that we currently find today.

One cause of the dilation in this theory is predicted by gravity

The other cause of dilation in this theory is from posistion misplacement and thus, extended distance to actual object, which results in the long run of around .0000whatever the delay is.

I have not done exact maths but I have done what explains its in the neighborhood. I have only been interested in explaining the section already mentioned.

Arkain is to applauded for making a true, falsifiable scientific hypothesis. In science, a disproven hypothesis is arguable more important than one that has not yet been disproven.

And thank you very much buddy. It has been a bit of a stuggle and has also required alot of hours to present what I have and its good to hear I have done so rather correctly, consdering I am just a diamond drilling redneck from northwest british columbia ;)

[arkain101]

E=MC^2

 

Assume it requires an amount of energy from an atom to create a wave in the medium of a static space.

 

The ammount an object can contain is directly perpotional to its total mass.

 

Then we use the fact that when light IS made form an atom it must travel C in the static medium of space to obey the constant of light. Or let us say the atom will act in speeds up to C + C however it can only act in a velocity of C relative to the aether. We presume the aether has such properties that allow waves to be created a finite value, C, which is directly related to the permittivity permeability of that space. Which is exaclty how one can calcualte the value of C.

 

So an atom traveling through the static space at say 0.9C, it must send light out at 0.9C to obtain a value of 0C reltative to the aether, then it must also send out + C on top of that to reach a value of C relative to the aether of which we know is the constant speed of light.

 

Thus it is not the equation which dictates the energy in mass. It is the way in which mass and matter behaves in the permittivity permeability of the static space that results in an equation of C + C velocities.

 

Now to understand that when you are dealing with moving energy we use the equation Ke=1/2 (M *V^2)

This explains that the energy in a moving object is relative to the square of its velocity, due to inertia of the two objects that interact to transfer a value of kentitic energy.

 

So an atoms energy when interacting with the specific values of permittivity permeability of space it is capable to act in speeds of C in one direction relative to the aether and pseeds of C in the opposite direction relative to the aether. Thus the energy in an atom is C^2 mulplied by its mass. That is the theoretical amount of energy to be expelled.

 

Without any other equation, Energy contained in an atom must be equal to the square of the speed at which it can emmit that energy which is C, and its magnitude of capacity is directly related the total mass of that object.

[arkain101]

editting

[arkain101]

edit.

[arkain101]

"edited"

 

Let us go over the Michelson-Morley Experiment. These are the equations and expectations of operation in the experiment. I will explain while refering to this imsage where I beleive it has gone wrong, and what differences come about when you change it (it=the geometry more or less)

 

Note: from this view on the experiment you are like a birds eye view observation frame. This is important to keep in mind.

 

In the 'rest frame' example everything looks great, everything IS right. The only thing to remember is you can not see light travel like this. It is purely a hypothetical diagram to express the visualization. This will become important to understand later in this post.

 

The moving frame diagram is the classical concept of the lights path as it moves with-in a moving frame. It is drawn to cover a longer distance as it reflects along the mirrors. However as I said we are looking from a (birds eye view) observation frame if you will. It is not possible for us to 'see' a photon move along mirrors in this nature. Thus the expectation of it to act in this form is not certain.

 

One would need the light or laser path to reflect off of dust particles (or smoke particles) as it made its journey along the mirror paths. Thus if there is distance between the observer (from our birds eye like view) and the system, then there is a delay in time, and a seperation in posistion in all moving light paths.

 

Let us presume that the light path remains at rest (in respect to the direction of motion of the system) as it leaves the light source. Thus as the light moves along it remains covering the same distance as in in the rest diagram, traveling in a strait line. As the light moves there occurs a very slight drift in the light getting left behind. In this thought experiment, only just a slight drift to cause it to impact the mirror just millimeters the the 'left' in comparison to when it is at rest.

 

Next, the light reflects from this new source, a new photon!, and is sent out towards the center mirror and as it moves it along it again drifts just slightly 'downstream" <--.

 

Lastly, the light reflects from this mirror and is sent from this new source. Again it is a new photon. This source then sends the photon at C relative to the rest, and above C relative system (if we presume we know the velocity of such an aether).

 

The distance the light covered remains exactly the same as when at rest. The velocity of the light relative to at rest never changed. And for any posistion of observation the light would still measure to act at C.

 

An observer that remains at rest with this system observes the same thing, only from a closer distance presuming it is (along for the ride so to speak).

 

Moving onto the fringe shift.

 

The wavelength in the form I suggested would act differently.

Laws obeyed: for both the classical form & the form I described

-The light would remain at C

-The wavelength would change depending on the velocity of the system. (in repsect to observers)

 

In the form I am describing,

Once the two different light paths has been 'fired' in the same direction they should then end up as the same frequency one they reach the detect. This is because it is a new photon fired in a new direction and they are both fired in the same direction and the frequency of these two different paths comes from the same source. So on the final aproach they will then regain the same equal frequency. Aswell as the same arrival time. The only shift that could be measured or expected to be measured would be that of experimental error.

 

Let us see results of this experiment.

see here http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/morley.html#c1

or below:

Over a period of about 50 years, the Michelson-Morley experiment was repeated with growing levels of sophistication. The overall result is a high level of confidence that the wavelength shift is consistent with zero.

 

______________________ (cm) Calculation Observation Ratio

Michelson, 1881 _________120 .04 .02 2

Michelson & Morley 1887 ___1100 .40 .01 40

Morley & Miller, 1902-04 ___3220 1.13 .015 80

Illingworth, 1927 _________200 .07 .0004 175

Joos,1930 _______________2100 .75 .002 375

 

We see that there is still a fringe shift. That being two different frequencies arriving at a screen. These shifts are claimed as experimental error. Special Relativity allows NO shift possible.

 

But as you see in the form of observation I have described, also, no shift is possible.

 

Thus if this test is considered to confirm something in science, It has confirmed special relativity, and it has confirmed absolute relativity, since they both would not allow fringe in this experiment. This experiment is not one with alot of confidence.

 

 

This is why I said there are two techniques to measure light that may give different results. Also, this is why I described the better means of testing for aether.

[arkain101]

MM experiment expectations in respect of Absolute Relativity.

 

This image shows the path of light through the MM apparatus in the aether enviroment according to the predictions in the AGR theory. The light remains Constant to C realtive to the aether. It aslo remains constant to C relative to any return trip measurements for an observer at rest with the apparatus.

 

As shown, the path time is equal to that C for observer, for aether.

There can be no fringe shift as the light paths have equal freqency and arrival time, Just as the MM expirement concluded.

 

A principle that forms under this model is:

Light has no momentum. That is, it will not contain or carry the motion of the source it leaves from.

 

Velocity is constant, (no acceleartion).

Velocity is proposed to be low enough not to cause too serious of a drift.

Just see how the laser(or photon if you prefer) continues in a perfect strait path in the aether at C in 1 dimension (vertical)

[arkain101]

___The following is some interesting Principles to AGR. Absolute General Relativity.

 

-The concept of a dimension may not be fundamentaly applied. That is, a dimension may not be fundamentally connected to the theories foundations. Zero dimensions, to understand what one would call Theory of everything.

 

-E=MC^2 maximum exchange of momentum is <--- C & C --->

Maximum velocity resorts to losing 1/2 the mass of an object every frame of acceleration.

 

 

-The most fundamental operation in the physical universe is 1:1 (one to one). This is, the result of infinity interacting with infinity, or lets say zero interacting with zero. This developes an action or ONE, and this action once in place is expressed as 1:1.

 

___The theory can not be simplified any further, it is done. It desribes a frame as dimensionless, and a frame itself can be reduced to the most fundemental expression as 1:1. This may seem confusing. However, thats what it comes down to.

[arkain101]

It appears to me that this theory may not be titled correctly.

 

I discovered tonight as I made progress and with work of KickassClown, that this theory is fact in its foundations, and should Imediatly be jumped upon, that of KAC's work too.

 

This theory of relativity is prepared to support new experimental data on the conception of the uniberse. Be it aether like (which is plausable but unlikely) or space-time like (which is plausible but unlikely) or dimensionless frame misconception space-time(plausible and likely).

 

The reason I posted this is that as I came to see tonight , testing this theory is not required to do as what i was interested in has already been heavily researched. The theory can now be proclaimed complete, and subjected to review.

 

If accepted it leaps our perception in ways like understanding the earth was round when it was considered flat so long.

 

So anyway, I understand I can more clearly express the paper on this theory, and the wizards of math and physics out there can apply its principles, and see where that gets things.

[arkain101]

The concept of a dimension may not be fundamentaly applied. That is, a dimension may not be fundamentally connected to the theories foundations. Zero dimensions, to understand what one would call Theory of everything.

 

-E=MC^2 maximum exchange of momentum is <--- C & C --->

Maximum velocity resorts to losing 1/2 the mass of an object every frame of acceleration.

 

 

-The most fundamental operation in the physical universe is 1:1 (one to one). This is, the result of infinity interacting with infinity, or lets say zero interacting with zero. This developes an action or ONE, and this action once in place is expressed as 1:1

 

Lets elaborate on what some of those principles entail.

 

 

First I must express what I think is getting close to being the fundamental equation, and would assumably be the concept of 1:1 that I explained earlier.

 

(Mass=Matter)

We take E=MC^2

We express it as E / M = d^2 / t^2 (that is Energy / Mass = distance squared / time squared)

 

E / M = d^2 / t^2

The left side of this equation (E / M) is the property of existence. This is, mass and energy Things we refer to as 'tangible' or let us say cause. We will call this "real". It can be a frame of reference. This is SR (scientifically real).

 

The right side of this equation (d^2 / t^2) is the observed part of existence. This is things like, events, change, distance, time, space. These are not tangible, also let us call it effect. This is SU (scientifically Unreal)

 

What has been described above for the perspective of this theory of relativity, in other words the scientific perspective, but NOT our everyday human perception.

 

However on the other hand lets look at this from our 'current' human perception of reality in everyday living.

 

E / M = d^2 / t^2

 

The left side of this equation (E / M) is Percieved Unreal. We can NOT literally see the mass, and the energy. IE an atom and a photon. It is like magnetics and electromagetics and electrons. These things are elusive. This is PU (percieved unreal)

 

The right side of this equation (d^2 / t^2) is Percieved as REAL. We observe distance or space. We observe change or time. This is what makes up our reality and our existence. If we have space and we have change we have our universe. This is PR (percived real)

 

 

Now with that said we can begin to see there is form of perception.

 

Here we have Principles per say to comply with this relative theory.

 

-Space and Time must be concluded 'unreal' that is the fabric of space and time is non existant to an observing frame. To further explain, everything that can be detected, measured, and/or observed in a frame of reference is that that occurs INSIDE that frame of reference. It 'appears' there is distance and it 'appears' there is change happening in that distance. However it is to be concieved that the space between you and what you observe is non-existant. That is to say there is NO fabric of space-time. You must conclude it IS NOT THERE. There is only Observed change and distance inside your frame. That is, the atoms themselves is all there is.

 

-Energy and Mass must be considered ALL there is, this is relativly real. This is to say, there is only these frames. And ALL frames have zero dimension. So mass and energy must have zero dimension. The space and time fabric is not a frame, so it can not be in the frame of mass and energy.

 

One way is to imagine a bubble surrounding all observers that acts like a movie screen tightly wrapped around the matter and energy of the observing frame. However matter (an object of visual size) itself is composed of several trillion frames of reference, atoms, all of which are dimensionless points of observation, that observe space and time.

 

This perception of reality opens up the ability to comprehend the effects of special relativity and the constant of light regardless of observers motion. Everything (meaning space [space-time]) between position X and position X is not in a frame and plainly NOT there. Again this says, what is space? it is a misconception, a trickery of sorts of our human perception that is not there. Relative to mass(matter) and energy (excluding consciousness and life) this is the perception or let us call reality of these properties.

 

This may seem rediculous to comprehend at first.

 

I want to express this equation in as many forms as I can. However I need my work checked because I have poor mathamatical knowledge. I forgot alot of it.

 

E / M = d^2 / t^2

--->

SQRT[E/M] = d / t

--->

add more derivations here __

 

 

 

 

Let us express this equation in words as best as possible.

E / M = d^2 / t^2

 

The 'stuff' we are made out of, energy and mass(matter), is equal to the things events and distances we observe squared. futher elaborating: This is, the forces in the matter and energy will act accordingly in tune with square of (distances, velocities(time)): like, gravity, KE, strong and weak forces. Obsevering the Energy and matter's relationship we see it in squared operations.

[arkain101]

It may be hard to see what this is saying, so I will paste a post I made that tried to describe this very thing.

 

___There is still space and time (perceived) in an observation frame. It is just the idea of far away and distant are not really there, you only see an image, or percieve they are there. -however this does not imply that what you percieve can not kill you-

 

An atom for example (or a rock) does not percieve an image of what surrounds it or anything of that matter, Thus it experiences only which contacts it DIRECTLY. Its frame is of zero dimension. Mass and Energy are frames of reference and they are dimensionless.

 

Yes, so it is very possible to assume, in respect to this view on relativity you could eliminate (in your perceptoin) all the space (since it is not there), and all the time (rate of change, since it is not there) in the universe, which would of course UNITE everything that there is, inside one source. This would be a world of mass and energy with no space and no time (no dimension), which is a world we dont directly experience here in the human mind of perception.

 

In respect to this theory it is true we (our consciousness and emotional being of a self) are of this ONE THING (of mass energy) that has NO space in it, and No time in it (like no velocity and restriction of change).

 

However our very human brains and whatever it is that is behind our consciousness (plausibly mass&energy) creates a perception of a world that is infact very illusionary relative to matter and energy. It seems according to this OUR true self of being resides in a dimensionless body of mass-energy, and this human experience creates a perception that you are infact in a universe of grandness, where your percieve dimension.

 

If you take the energy of something lets say a pen, and you devide it by its measured mass. You get a very large number.

 

That number is the speed of light or let us say the measured universal constant squared.

 

So the square root of (the energy of an object devided by its mass) is equal to the constant we see in the universe, that upholds our perception. Energy with the inverse of its mass.

 

So in relation to a very important question in science: What is mass and why does it have the attributes that it has and what is energy and why does it have the attributes that it has?

 

Mass is something that resists events (changing, acceleration)

 

energy seems to resists space (be many places at once).

 

They both have no dimensional quality. Thus To percieve the world of where mass and energy reside, is to percieve one source, of no size and no change.

 

The relationship of space (energy) devided by changing that space (mass) is the fundamental operation behind everything we percieve in the universe.

 

Or let us express it as SQRT(E / M ) = D / T

SQRT(E / M ) defines velocity

 

V = D / T

Velocity is the universe because velocity is change the universe is change. Change is constant. So there will be a constant velocity, and I presume a constant distance/time, found in this universe.

Since D/T represents C. C is found constant, than V=C thus constant velocity

 

 

Next:

 

SQRT(E / M ) = D / T

>

The SQRT(E / M ) = C

 

This should relate to this equation in some form. I am not yet familiar how so.

 

Eo , Permittivity = 10^7 / 4*Pie C^2

Uo . Permeability = 4*pie 10^-7

 

4*pie is the relation ship of a constant of which deals with volume. So We are describing perception (of space and change) with Permeability and Permittivity, thus perception must obey C.

 

So because Permittivity is dependent on C, it shoul be entwined with with energy (light).

 

Permeability on the other hand should define some form of volume for mass.

[arkain101]

Summery of the relativity theory understanding.

 

 

You can detect what is inside your point of observation, then make a perception of what is outside your point of observatoin based on those detections, but that perception is not real, or let us say tangible. You can not grab onto an idea physically.

 

You see, this is describing how our human consciousness Fools us into thinking we are in a NEWTONIAN like 3 dimension spacial entity.

 

http://Newtonian mechanics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newtonian_mechanics

 

Which should point to why Newtonian physics fall apart eventually, as it has been measured to do so.