MDT Theory; physics for the engineer

[HydrogenBond]

I started another post that attempted to show how the engineer stands between science and the constraints of practical reality. The type of science this is closest to the engineer is practical science. This is not to discount the importance of pure and theoretical science, but only to say that practical reality sets many constraints that often makes it difficult to interface even sound pure and theoretical science with reality. Practical constraints like money, resources or even closed minded regulatory beaurocrats afraid of novelty, can affect whether valid pure or theoretical science can interface practical reality.

 

Based on this understanding of the interface between between science and practical reality, I attempted to develop an integrated portable physics model which is easier for interfacing extreme physics with practical reality. Again this is not to discount the value of existing theory, but to address the type of theory that is more condusive to the constraints of practical reality. Instead of trickle down theory from the physics geniuses to the engineer, this is more analogous to trickle up theory based on the practical needs of the engineer. Water does not normally run uphill unless the engineer designs a pump.

 

The MDT model defines physics in terms of only three variables. The three variables are mass potential, distance potential and time potential. The reason these were chosen is based on special realtivity and the assertion that the laws of physics are the same in all references.

 

If we add velocity to a moving reference, the laws of physics will still be the same in the new reference. The only adjustments needed to alter all the laws of physics, so they remain the same in the new reference, are changes in mass, distance and time relativity. This logically implies that all the laws of physics can be explained in terms of just these three variables. I call the mass relativity, mass potential;M, the distance relativity, distance potential;D, and the time relativity, time potential;T. This is the only premise needed for the MDT model. How these adjustments occur should become more evident as the model is developed.

 

Below, what I have done is plot the (relativistic) velocity associated with M, D and T (mass, distance and time potential) as the X,Y and Z axis. The result is a cube. The reason I plotted velocity instead of gamma was so tI could end up with finite axis that go from 0-C, since velocity can not exceed the speed of light. If I had plotted special relativity gamma it would go from 0-infinity, which can not be easily plotted and would be an infinite fuzzy cube, which is sort of useless from a practical point of view.

 

 

Although velocity is plotted, the use of the model requires one do a little math in their head. For example, at (000) since velocity equals zero in all three variables, this point would imply no special realtivity affects in mass, distance and time. At (CCC), since velcoty is C in all three variables, this would imply infinite gamma, and therefore infinite special relativity in all three variables. Points like (0C0) show no speciality relativity in mass and time but infinite special relativity in only distance due its velocity at C, etc.

 

The last point (0C0) raises an interesting situation. It essentially implies a situation where mass, distance and time potential are not all moving together in a linear way. Rather one of the variables is able to change with the other two held constant. This may seem strange, but it can be used in a practical way to define the eight singularities of nature all on one graph, including blackhole, primordial atom, absolute zero, etc. I will show how this works after any concerns, to this point, are addressed.

[cwes99_03]

Not to take away from your thoughts here, but perhaps I could encourage you to turn to the Definitions of thread that I started. We are discussing the definition of theory, and I believe these points might contribute value to that discussion.

[Erasmus00]

Your variables are ill defined. What do you mean by mass potential? Is it the same as mass? Is time potential the same as time? Distance potential the same as distance? What are you using potential to mean? It doesn't appear to be the same as energy in the usual sense.

 

What does your plot actually represent? What is a "mass potential" of c? Why is mass potential limited to c? What does a time potential of c represent? etc.

 

How can we take only these three variables for a basic physical model when simple experiments demonstrate the need for an electric charge? Without an electric charge, how can we represent electricity/magnetism in your cube? Can your model make any predictions? You claim your model will help interface "extreme" physics with practical reality, what "extreme" physics do you feel your model includes?

 

How does representing something in an abstract way on a cube in any way help tie something to practical reality? How is your cube an improvement over traditional space-time type diagrams?

 

Much explanation seems necessary.

-Will

[HydrogenBond]

I would like to explain the three variables of the MDT model. The variables mass potential; M, distance potential; D and time potential; T are more than just mass, distance and time. They are compact variables with many parts.

 

For example, distance potential is the potential for interaction within distance or space. All the forces of nature interact via distance and therefore define distance potential. The distance potential of the strong and weak nuclear forces are smaller than that of EM and gravity, since their force potential is limited to smaller distances. A comet flying through space begins with a certain distance potential associated with its motion. If it becomes attracted by a planet and is placed into orbit, its distance potential will decrease. If we take a canister of compressed gas and release it, the gas will increase distance potential.

 

This may seem silly but the goal of the MDT model is physics in three variables. The requirement is very compact variables, with mass, distance and time relativity already chosen because of special relativiity.

 

Time potential is the potential to interact in time. For example, if we look at the proton, it lasts for billions of years. This implies the proton contains high time potential within its structure, since it can interact in time for the life of the universe. If we bust apart a proton in a particle accelerator, its sub structure does not last very long, implying the substructures only contains a small amount of time potential. As the long lived proton fluffs out into its short lived components, due to collider collision, this implies that some of the proton's original time potential is converted into the distance potential of the substructure creating a spectrum of motion and force fields.

 

If we look at mass potential it defines potential in mass. Currently there is debate as to the nature of mass. What this variable does is cut to the chase and compare the amount of potential called mass. For example, the proton has more mass potential than the electron. A galaxy has more mass potential than a star. When mass is converted to energy, mass potential is converted to the distance and time potential of energy; wavelength (D) and frequency (T). If energy converts to mass, time and distance potential change to mass potential. One may notice how this also implies an equivilency between changes in space-time and changes in mass. If one increases the local mass potential space-time will contract (local time and distance potential change).

 

Let me show one last fun example of all the MDT variables working together. If we look at a baby it has low mass potential and low distance potential (can neither move far or think very far outside itself). On the other hand, it has maximum time potential stored within its young DNA (the DNA clock lasts a human lifetime). As the baby becomes a tottler its time potential decreases (gets older or closer to expiration) while its mass and distance potential increase as reflected by its increasing size and its increasing mobility and interaction with the environment.

[cwes99_03]

Compact and many parts do not easily apply to the same thing.

 

What does all this potential have to do with anything? What does the variable you call time potential have to do with measurements or theories outside that of your own mind?

 

Sorry HBond, but I think I'd recommend this for strange claims.

[HydrogenBond]

I am just building up some background before showing how it all comes together. The potential comes from the premise that all the laws of physics are the same in all references. The only thing that is measured to change between references is relativistic mass, distance and time. This makes all the adjustments needed in the laws of physics. I call this 3-aspect adjuctment iin only mass, distance and time, potential instead of relativity. The word potential is a little more flexible, since the word relativity will narrow one's vision down to just one thing. While the word potential is a word with a wide range of possible sources.

 

If one was to slow from a relativistic reference back to the stationary refernece on earth, one would have to dissippate a lot of energy. That potential energy is contained in the mass, distance and time relativity. This potential energy, integrated in mass, distance and time relativity (potential) was sufficient to adjust all the laws of physics for that fast reference. After this potential dissipates, the laws of physics are readjusted back to our stationary reference.

 

If special relativity used 20 variables to explain all the relativity affects needed to adjust the laws for a new reference I would have used 20. But it only uses 3, so I am stuck with only three. It is much easier with 20, but three has to work or special relativity needs revision. I did not chose three, Einstein did.

 

Let me give an example of what I mean. Almost everyone has a gut feeling that all the forces are integrated into the unified force. Someday, one equation or one set of equations will be able to explain any force. For it to really work, certain variables in the equation(s), if zeroed out, will reduce the main equation(s) back to one of the old force equations. It sort of like how special relativity reduces down to Newtonian Mechanics when v=0. When all the force are combined into one, nobody will insist on or need four separate equations for force. It will only take one. The variables M,D, T are very compact concepts, with multiple parts, which when combined in various combinations will allow one to say the same thing as umpteen variables, while only requiring three varaibles.

[HydrogenBond]

After working the model over time, I decided to take it one step further and use it to also explain particles and not just laws of physics. Particles, although entities or waves contain a certain potential and contain the substance needed for the laws of physics. This should be related to the laws of physics in a direct way.

 

The simplest way to explain this potential with only three variable was to assume all particles are made up of near infinitessimal units of mass, distance and time. The smallest measureable units of mass, distance and time begin to approach this smallest level substructure. For example, in the MDT model, a stationary proton will not have any bulk motion in space or time, however, its many known substructure components, are based on special realtivity affects in mass, distance and time that occur in very tiny regions of space.

 

For example, if anyone ever asked why protons last so long compared to the separated aspects of its sub-structure, the answer is easy. The proton composite contains a high level of time dilation. This gives the proton (composite) a high level of time potential, allowing it to exist and interact in time for billions of years in stationary reference. Its distance relativity or potential brings the universe in closer, in its reference, allowing it to more easily interact at long distances within stationary reference. If we look at its composite mass, a near infintessimal mass unit, would require a velocity near C to get even a small amount of finite mass. This consistent with mass and energy being very close.

 

The question one may ask is how could this come to be. The answer is easy. The universe's early relativity reference crytallized into special realtivity particles. These particles expanded with respect to each other to add secondary MDT components to these eternal composites, from which the laws of nature are expressed. This model allows the universe to expire as a whole at the same time its original reference little pieces expire.

 

When particle composites attract they are lowering the potential in their MDT components. The output affect we see in stationary reference are the laws of physics. These laws reflect the natural interaction combinations of these three components.

[cwes99_03]

HBond, I can't read your entire posts because I don't have sufficient time.

 

You are suggesting that the reason that any of us is alive for a length of time is because of an inherent characteristic of the particles that make up our body. You say this by saying that the protons in the universe exist in a different time frame from other things like a composite of protons called a human being or whatever you choose to refer to.

 

Biggest problem with this is that all of the molecules (thus the tiniest parts of our body) are constantly being exchanged with others through the air we breath the food we eat and drink and the cosmic radiation we receive.

 

You are grasping for something that as far as I and the majority of the world can see, doesn't exist and needs no further explanation. If you are trying to explain why we die, then have fun, but until you have more proof of your theories you should be posting this in strange claims.

[HydrogenBond]

I am going to push forward. I will backtrack if necessary. Below is the MDT cube with the eight apex singularities plus the finite versions of the apex singularities that we see in the universe.

 

 

There are eight apex points or singularities. There are two uniform apex singularities (000) and (CCC) and six intermediate apex singularities with various combinations of 0 and C. The two uniform apex singularities (000) and (CCC) are nothingness and eternity. The (000) point has no mass, distance or time potential so it defines nothing. While the (CCC) point has infinite mass, distance and time potential so it defines eternity or the summation of parallel universes, upteen dimensions, God, etc. The potential between nothingness and eternity define (0+, 0+, 0+) and (C-, C-, C-). These are the subunits MDT foundations of all particles, and the finite three MDT parameters of the bulk universe, respectively.

 

The concept of a grand daddy black hole is the apex at (C, 0, C). M=C would define its limiting gravity or infinite mass potential, while T=C will define its extreme time potential or eternal stability. The D=0 would define its singularity with respect to size or distance. Absolute zero is the apex at (0, C, 0). Absolute zero is not a possible mass potential state or M=0. The universe can’t exist at absolute zero so its time potential is zero or T=0. While the uniform coldness of space implies this apex needing to be everywhere with respect to distance or D=C for absolute zero to exist. These two opposing apexes set a potential with each other, keeping each singularity from forming in the universe, while forming finite versions within the universe, i.e., finite black holes (C-, 0+, C-) and the near absolute zero temperature of space (0+, C-, 0+).

 

Another pair of opposing apexes is (0, C, C) and (C, 0, 0). The first is zero mass with infinite distance and time potential. This would be eternal empty infinite space. The second would have infinite mass potential but no size and would not last even an instant. This is the extreme mass point singularity. The potential between them creates finite instead of completely empty infinite space (0+, C-, C-) and a finite mass singularity that is a little bigger than a point that last a little longer than an instant (C-, 0+, 0+). This is the primordial atom.

 

The last pair of opposing apexes is (C, C, 0) and (0, 0, C). The first would have infinite mass potential stretched out over infinite distance but only lasting an instant. The second would have no mass or size but would last an eternity. The first would be similar to the near infinite mass point spread uniformly over infinite space for an instant. The second is eternal time without any mass or size. The potential between will create a near infinite mass spread over a near infinite universe, that lasts slightly longer than an instant (C-, C-, 0+). The second will result in a very large but finite time interval with a very small amount of mass and size (0+, 0+, C-).

 

There is more to the MDT cube. There are also twelves edges and six faces to the cube. In the geometric center of the cube is where all the eight apex singularities converge. Once the surface of the cube is defined, any state within universe can be found inside the cube and it parameters can be expressed using the surface of the cube.

[HydrogenBond]

You are suggesting that the reason that any of us is alive for a length of time is because of an inherent characteristic of the particles that make up our body. You say this by saying that the protons in the universe exist in a different time frame from other things like a composite of protons called a human being or whatever you choose to refer to

 

The reason for finite life expectancy is determined, in part by DNA. It is also connected to environmental influences. After we die the protons and electrons are conserved to do other things.

 

With respect to the DNA, the fertilized ovuum is analogous to a wound spring. Instead of a mechanical release of potential the potential is released chemically. When can slow the release of potential with good healthy habits. But eventually, the DNA spring shoots its wad and we expire. It takes two, or male and female to wind a new DNA spring or to give it enough potential to last a human lifetime.

 

If one wanted to live much longer, the DNA spring would have to be rewound, in situ. Sort of like those self winding watches that uses the motion of the body to keep itself wound. The DNA can't do this, since it is only the spring. The secondary mechanism is the brain.

[GAHD]

hmm, so where are you going with this? can we work something practical out of it?

[Qfwfq]

And is there support for all these rather odd claims?

[HydrogenBond]

Let me repeat myself one more time. The laws of physics are the same in all references. Check!. According to special relativity the only things that are measured to change between references are relativsitic mass, distance and time. These are dependant on the velocity of the reference via special relativity gamma. Check! Simple logic implies that only changes in mass, distance and time relativity (function of velocity) is needed to adjust the laws of physics so thyey can stay the same in any references. Therefore, because only three things need to change and are able to make all the adjustments in the laws of physics for the new reference, this implies that the laws of physics can be expressed in just these three variables.

 

One may asks, how can only changes in mass, distance and time relativity or what I call mass, distance and time potential, alter all the laws of physics between referecne? The MDT cube shows how things relate and integrate.

 

After studying the cube, which was invented last year, I tried to explain some of my basic understanding of the three variables. The three variables are very dense and mean more than just mass, distance and time. They are potentials that affect mass, distance and time interactions. All the laws of physics involve one or more these interactions.

 

Charge is normally viewed as something unique, which it is. It has no mass or mass potential. However, it does interact in distance and time and therefore can be defined by distance and time potential. It is closely related to its first cousin EM energy which is also based on distance and time potential or wavelength and frequency. In the case of charge, its distance and time potential do not multiple to the speed of light since charge is finite and does not travel at C.

[cwes99_03]

OK, so if you have it all figured out, like it seems you do. Let's see the full equations that show how an object traveling at 5% of c gets from point a(x1,y1,z1) to point b(x2,y2,z2) in time t with acceleration a, and change in acceleration g(x).

[Erasmus00]

Charge is normally viewed as something unique, which it is. It has no mass or mass potential. However, it does interact in distance and time and therefore can be defined by distance and time potential.

 

This is flawed. Distance and time change between reference frames (as do velocities). However, charge is relativistically invariant (it doesn't change). How then do your propose to represent charge on your cube?

 

Also, consider that your model doesn't seem to have any quantitative ability whatsoever. You claim this model is to help interface "cutting edge science" with "reality" so that engineers can work with this "extreme" science. Engineers need numbers, so how do you propose they extract them from your model? Can you do a general relativity calculation using your model? For instance, can you use your cube to calculate the schwarzchild radius for me? (the radius below which light can't escape).

-Will

[HydrogenBond]

This model is intended to be a conceptual tool from which one can deduce complex integrated relationships. I have not made an attempt to interface it with existing mathematics, since such math is not fully integrated with things that should be connected. I could turn it around and ask how does existing theory integrate the blackhole with absolute zero? If it can't do that, maybe something is missing?

 

I agree I have not fully defined charge on the cube. I need to explain the twelve edges of the cube first to show where the EM force fits in. This should help place positive and negative charge. The model in its existing form is not quantitative. It needs to be interfaced with exsiting theory. I am presenting a nucleus from which this might be possible.

 

The Faces of the MDT Cube

 

What I would like to introduce are the six faces of the cube. If one looks at the six faces of the MDT cube, each of these will have two variables with the third variable fixed at V=0 or V=C. What these represent are the light speed wave phases. There are three pairs each with two components.

 

The easiest to see is light or energy. Energy has no mass, allowing it to travel at C. What we see with respect to energy are its pertubations in distance and time, i.e., wavelength and frequency. The two sides that describe energy are (0, D,T) and (C, D,T). The first is implicit of what we see. No mass but varaible distance and time potential. The second implies infinite mass potential. This second apect is how enegy sort of sees itself, since at the speed of light the entire mass of the universe would be contained within its reference. In other words, if one had no mass but traveled at C the entire mass of the universe would appear to overlap your reference. This mass is separate from you but appears to occupy the same reference space.

 

Another pair of sides are (M,D,0) and (M,D,C). In this case there is variable mass and distance potential with time potential either at 0 or C. I call this the entropy spectrum but the nomenclature is confusing. I am open to suggestions. What it amounts to are the observed near perpetual motions that occur within the universe, like electrons moving around a nucleus or planets moving around stars. These are combinations of mass and distance potential that appear to last forever. This is (M,D,C) component. The (M,D,0) component implies zero time potential or is a snap shot of its perpetual motion stopped in time. Perpetual motion like an electron around a proton requires interaction between the mass over distance. The zero time element may imply an instantaneous light speed exchange spectrum that comprises its perpetual motion.

 

The last set of sides are (M,0,T) and (M,C,T). This light speed wave phase has variable mass and time potential with distance potential either at 0 or C. The best way I could describe this is the heat spectrum. In other words, mass and time potential together gives off heat, even when there is a balance of forces, i.e., blackbox radiation. The easiest example to see, which combines both aspects of the heat spectrum is the uniform background temperature of space. The (M,0,T) aspect is a point in space while the (M,C,T) is infinite space (universal space) both at the same uniform temperature.

 

If we go back to energy or (0,D,T) and (C,D,T) since the product of wavelength and frquency must equal the speed of light, these variables should be represented as a line instead of an area. The cube area is connected to the observed red and blue shifts from one reference that is measured in other references. Something similar is also occurs for the other two light speed wave phases. This gets esoteric. It is part of the adjustments need to keep the laws of physics the same in all references.

 

These are summarized on the graph below;

 

[Erasmus00]

What you have done seems to define the faces of your cube, but not the volume. What do the points in the volume mean?

 

Now, your model also seems to have many unanswered, fundamental questions. Why is "space potential" limited to c? Why is "mass potential" limited to c?,etc.

 

Now, you make the claim that energy has no mass and (hence) travels at c. First, if relativity is the backbone of your model, you have to note that all energy carries mass. Next, this works for traveling electromagnetic energy but doesn't work for other forms of traveling energy. Sound waves for instance, do not travel at c.

 

Further, your heat face seems like it must overlap content with your energy face. Consider that blackbody radiation is simply traveling e/m energy, just like your "energy" face. Heat itself is just a measure of average energy.

 

Lastly, your "entropy" face seems to be connected with situations in which entropy isn't a very useful concept. We never talk about the entropy of a planet orbitting a sun, why not? The system isn't large enough to really use statistical physics on. The entropy is useful when we have a system so large that statistical theory becomes nearly perfect. Hence, we make the assumption any state with a given energy is equally likely.

 

However, in a one body orbitting problem not all energy states are equally likely. Every time you look, the planet is in the same energy state, and entropy becomes a less useful concept.

-Will