Re: Why a time of the real world must be galilean (motion, Mach-ian)

On 12/16/2024 08:04 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 12/16/2024 07:47 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 12/16/2024 04:09 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 12/16/2024 04:19 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> wrote:
>

W dniu 16.12.2024 o 11:49, J. J. Lodder pisze:
>

>
The genial insight that Einstein started to have in 1905

>
The mumble of the idiot was not even consistent.
>
>

It is an inherent property of the space-time we find ourselves in,

>
It may be an inherent property of the space-time your
bunch of idiots find yourselves in; it is no way an
inherent property of the space-time sane people
find themselves in.

>
You should rejoice instead. Since the whole framework of the world
and all physical theories must conform to the relativity postulate
it should be real easy to find falsifications of it.
>
Easy, isn't it?
>
Jan
(not holding my breath)
>

>
You mean that motion is relative? That motion exists at all?
>
That's all that "relativity" theory is, that motion
is relative, yet as well, in the Mach-ian, is that
there's motion that's absolute, sort of about
the star and pole-star, the frames,
the frame-spaces the space-frames.
>
You mean the L-principle that light's speed is
constant in a deep space in vacuum? That's the
L-principle as with regards to it being part
of "relativity theory" it would have a mechanistic
reduction.
>
It's kind of like Fresnel said, "both aether and
not aether", as with regards to violations of
the gravitational/g-force equivalence principle
which happen all the time, and kind of like Einstein
said, "well yeah there's an aether".
>
Then for space-contraction and this and that, and
about mass-energy equivalency, there are a variety
of considerations for "a severe abstraction to
mechanical reduction", giving that electrons move and
all without changing the mass, per se, of things,
where though the usual idea is that it's electron-holes,
with regards to displacement current and true current
or what, and "third current".
>
Or, there's usually never "negative mass" in the
theory while yet electrons as the force carriers
in the electrostatic and electromagnetic, the theories,
have arbitrarily small rest mass.
>
It's kind of like in electron orbitals and screening,
what starts working up cases after Wigner about
degeneracy and doublings, about Beta decay and
these kinds of things, why electrons would make
orbitals if they were constantly kind of bouncing
vis-a-vis that nucleons clump and electrons do not.
>
>
You mean that motion is relative? Well, yeah,
otherwise it would be rest. Define motion, then.
>
Make it Mach-ian while you're at it.
>
>

>
>
>
Thanks, GG. Reflect on this with regards to comment in physics.
>
That's all that "relativity" theory is, that motion
is relative, yet as well, in the Mach-ian, is that
there's motion that's absolute, sort of about
the star and pole-star, the frames,
the frame-spaces the space-frames.
>
You mean the L-principle that light's speed is
constant in a deep space in vacuum? That's the
L-principle as with regards to it being part
of "relativity theory" it would have a mechanistic
reduction.
>
It's kind of like Fresnel said, "both aether and
not aether", as with regards to violations of
the gravitational/g-force equivalence principle
which happen all the time, and kind of like Einstein
said, "well yeah there's an aether".
>
Then for space-contraction and this and that, and
about mass-energy equivalency, there are a variety
of considerations for "a severe abstraction to
mechanical reduction", giving that electrons move and
all without changing the mass, per se, of things,
where though the usual idea is that it's electron-holes,
with regards to displacement current and true current
or what, and "third current".
>
Or, there's usually never "negative mass" in the
theory while yet electrons as the force carriers
in the electrostatic and electromagnetic, the theories,
have arbitrarily small rest mass.
>
It's kind of like in electron orbitals and screening,
what starts working up cases after Wigner about
degeneracy and doublings, about Beta decay and
these kinds of things, why electrons would make
orbitals if they were constantly kind of bouncing
vis-a-vis that nucleons clump and electrons do not.
>
>
You mean that motion is relative? Well, yeah,
otherwise it would be rest. Define motion, then.
>
...
>
You've raised some intriguing points about the nature of motion,
relativity, and the underlying mechanisms of physics. Let's delve into
some of your observations:
>
Motion and Relativity:
>
Relative vs. Absolute Motion: You're correct that motion is relative.
It's always defined with respect to a reference frame. However, this
doesn't negate the existence of absolute motion. For instance, the
Earth's rotation and revolution around the Sun are absolute motions,
even though they're relative to other celestial bodies.
Defining Motion: Motion is typically defined as a change in position
over time. This definition, while straightforward, can be nuanced. For
example, consider the motion of an electron in an atom. Is it truly
moving in a well-defined orbit, or is it a quantum superposition of
states?
>
Relativity Theory and Its Implications:
>
L-Principle and Aether: The constancy of the speed of light in vacuum is
a fundamental postulate of special relativity. While it might seem
counterintuitive, it has been experimentally verified numerous times.
The concept of an "aether," a medium through which light propagates, was
once popular but has been largely abandoned due to the lack of
experimental evidence.
>
Space-Contraction, Time Dilation, and Mass-Energy Equivalence: These are
well-established consequences of special relativity. They have been
experimentally verified and have profound implications for our
understanding of the universe. However, as you point out, these concepts
can be challenging to reconcile with our intuitive understanding of
space, time, and mass.
Electron Motion and Mass: Electrons in atoms do not have well-defined
orbits in the classical sense. Their behavior is governed by quantum
mechanics, which describes them as probability distributions rather than
point particles. This quantum mechanical description avoids the
classical paradoxes associated with electron motion.
>
Open Questions and Challenges:
>
Gravitational/G-Force Equivalence Principle Violations: While general
relativity is remarkably successful in explaining gravity, there are
still unresolved questions and potential violations of the equivalence
principle, particularly in the context of quantum gravity.
Negative Mass: Negative mass is a hypothetical concept that has been
explored in various theoretical contexts. While it's not currently
observed in nature, it could potentially play a role in exotic phenomena
like wormholes and dark energy.
>
Electron Orbitals and Quantum Mechanics: The behavior of electrons in
atoms is a complex topic that has been extensively studied. Quantum
mechanics provides a powerful framework for understanding their
behavior, but there are still many open questions and challenges.
>
Your insights and questions highlight the richness and complexity of
physics. While we have made significant progress in understanding the
universe, there are still many mysteries to unravel
>
>
>
>
Thanks GG. One may reflect on quantum numbers like angular momentum as
with regards to the super-classical in wave theory, what arrives at a
particle model in particle theory. For example, the particle/wave
duality as establishes quantum superposition and the probabilistic
expectations and after the usual formalism with Born rule the quantum
amplitudes, both complex and probabilistic, that instead it's in
continuum mechanics, an imposed field-number formalism that's a
continuous substrate. That is to say, electrons may be considered a
conceit. Then, with regards to the electron's vanishing "rest mass",
comment as with regards to "vacillating vanishing rest mass" as a
natural property of electron-like particles. Present reasoning both for
and against, and resolve them together as with regards to both synthesis
and consensus.
>
>
>
Quantum Numbers, Wave-Particle Duality, and the Nature of the Electron
>
Quantum Numbers and Wave-Particle Duality
>
Quantum numbers, such as angular momentum, arise from the quantization
of physical properties in quantum mechanics. They are often interpreted
as discrete values associated with particles. However, the wave-particle
duality principle suggests that particles can also exhibit wave-like
behavior. This duality leads to the concept of quantum superposition,
where a particle can exist in multiple states simultaneously.
>
The Electron: A Particle or a Wave?
>
The electron's behavior, particularly its wave-like properties, has led
to speculation about its fundamental nature. Some physicists have
proposed that the electron, and perhaps other particles, may not be
fundamental particles but rather excitations of an underlying field.
This field-theoretic perspective suggests that the discrete nature of
particles could emerge from the continuous dynamics of fields.
>
The Electron's Rest Mass
>
The electron's rest mass is a fundamental property that has been
precisely measured. However, the idea of a "vacillating vanishing rest
mass" is intriguing. It raises questions about the electron's intrinsic
nature and its relationship to the underlying fabric of spacetime.
>
Arguments for and Against a Vanishing Rest Mass
>
Argument for:
Quantum Fluctuations: Quantum field theory predicts that particles can
spontaneously appear and disappear in vacuum fluctuations. This could
imply that the electron's mass might fluctuate, potentially leading to
periods of vanishing mass.
Emergent Properties: If the electron is an emergent property of a deeper
underlying theory, its mass could be a derived quantity that is not
strictly constant.
>
Argument Against:
Experimental Evidence: Precise measurements of the electron's mass have
consistently yielded a non-zero value.
Conservation Laws: The conservation of energy and momentum would be
violated if the electron's mass could fluctuate arbitrarily.
>
Resolving the Contradictions
>
While the idea of a vanishing electron mass is intriguing, it's
important to reconcile it with experimental evidence and theoretical
consistency. One possible approach is to consider the electron's mass as
an effective mass that arises from interactions with other fields. In
this view, the electron's mass could be influenced by the dynamics of
the underlying quantum field, leading to apparent fluctuations.
>
However, it's essential to acknowledge the limitations of our current
understanding of quantum mechanics and quantum field theory. As we delve
deeper into the nature of reality, we may uncover new insights that
challenge our conventional notions of particles and their properties.
>
Ultimately, the true nature of the electron and its mass remains an open
question, and further research is needed to shed light on this
fundamental mystery.
>
>
>
Thanks GG. Reflect on that a non-adiabatic consideration can make for
that quantum amplitudes with regards to momentum and "pseudo-momentum",
make for that momentum can be conserved in extended bodies, while
vacillating and vanishing in the point-wise, again reasoning both for
and against, and resolve them together as with regards to both synthesis
and consensus. .
>
>
Non-Adiabatic Considerations, Quantum Amplitudes, and Momentum
Conservation
>
Non-Adiabatic Transitions and Quantum Amplitudes
>
Non-adiabatic transitions occur when a system's quantum state changes
abruptly, often due to a sudden change in external conditions or
internal interactions. In such cases, the system can transition between
different energy levels, leading to changes in its momentum and energy.
This can be described using quantum amplitudes, which represent the
probability of a system being in a particular state.
>
Momentum Conservation in Extended Bodies vs. Point-Particles
>
Extended Bodies: In classical mechanics, momentum is conserved for
extended bodies, such as planets or macroscopic objects. This is because
the total momentum of the system remains constant, even if individual
particles within the system exchange momentum.
Point-Particles: For point-particles, the concept of momentum
conservation can be more nuanced. In quantum mechanics, particles can
exhibit wave-like behavior, and their momentum is described by a
wavefunction. The wavefunction can have regions of positive and negative
amplitude, which can lead to interference effects. In some cases, these
interference effects can result in the apparent violation of momentum
conservation at the point-particle level.
>
Resolving the Contradiction
>
The apparent contradiction between momentum conservation in extended
bodies and its potential violation at the point-particle level can be
resolved by considering the following:
>
Quantum Decoherence: Quantum coherence, which allows for superposition
states, can be lost due to interactions with the environment. This
process, known as decoherence, can lead to the emergence of classical
behavior, where momentum is conserved on average.
Emergent Properties: The properties of extended bodies, such as momentum
conservation, can be seen as emergent properties of the underlying
quantum mechanics of their constituent particles. At the macroscopic
scale, quantum effects become averaged out, leading to classical
behavior.
>
Synthesis and Consensus
>
In conclusion, non-adiabatic transitions and quantum amplitudes play a
crucial role in understanding the dynamics of quantum systems. While
momentum conservation is a fundamental principle in classical physics,
it can be more subtle in the quantum realm. By considering the effects
of quantum decoherence and emergent properties, we can reconcile the
apparent contradictions between the behavior of extended bodies and
point-particles.
>
It's important to note that our understanding of quantum mechanics is
still evolving, and new insights may emerge as we continue to explore
the fundamental nature of reality.
>
>
Thanks GG. With these ideas, reflect further on the idea of "vacillating
vanishing rest mass" of electrons, the force carrier according to
electrostatics and electromagnetism, reasoning thoroughly and
dialectically.
>
>
The Vacillating Vanishing Rest Mass of Electrons: A Dialectical
Exploration
>
The concept of a "vacillating vanishing rest mass" for electrons, while
intriguing, presents significant challenges when reconciled with our
current understanding of physics.
>
Arguments in Favor of the Concept:
>
Quantum Fluctuations: Quantum field theory predicts that particles can
spontaneously appear and disappear in vacuum fluctuations. This could,
in principle, lead to fluctuations in the electron's mass, including
periods of vanishing mass.
>
Emergent Properties: If the electron is an emergent property of a deeper
underlying theory, its mass could be a derived quantity that is not
strictly constant. This could allow for fluctuations or even periods of
vanishing mass.
>
Arguments Against the Concept:
>
Experimental Evidence: Precise measurements of the electron's mass have
consistently yielded a non-zero value. This experimental evidence
strongly contradicts the idea of a vanishing rest mass.
Conservation Laws: The conservation of energy and momentum would be
violated if the electron's mass could fluctuate arbitrarily.
Electromagnetic Interactions: Electrons are fundamental particles that
mediate electromagnetic interactions. A vanishing mass would
significantly alter our understanding of these interactions, potentially
leading to inconsistencies with experimental observations.
>
Dialectical Synthesis:
>
To reconcile these opposing viewpoints, we can consider a more nuanced
interpretation:
>
Effective Mass: The electron's mass might be an effective mass that
arises from its interactions with the underlying quantum field. This
effective mass could fluctuate due to quantum fluctuations, leading to
apparent variations in the electron's mass.
Quantum Decoherence: Quantum coherence, which allows for superposition
states, can be lost due to interactions with the environment. This can
lead to the emergence of classical behavior, where the electron's mass
appears to be constant.
>
While the idea of a vacillating vanishing rest mass is fascinating, it's
important to balance theoretical speculation with experimental evidence.
At present, there is no strong experimental evidence to support this
concept. However, as our understanding of quantum mechanics and quantum
field theory continues to evolve, we may uncover new insights that could
challenge our current understanding of the electron's mass and its role
in the fundamental forces of nature.
>
>
Thanks GG. Consider for example when electron orbitals have it that
electrons in orbitals actually leap or resonate across otherwise the
centroid of mass of the atom, while resulting as well in eventuality of
position, filling the shape of a classical orbital after gravity's model
of inverse square.
>
>
Electron Orbitals and Quantum Leaps: A Closer Look
>
The Quantum Leap Model
>
The concept of electrons "leaping" or "resonating" between orbitals is a
common misconception that arises from a classical interpretation of
quantum mechanics. While it's true that electrons can transition between
energy levels, this process is fundamentally different from classical
mechanics.
>
Quantum Mechanics and Electron Orbitals:
>
In quantum mechanics, electrons in atoms are described by wavefunctions,
which represent the probability of finding the electron in a particular
region of space. These wavefunctions give rise to the concept of
orbitals, which are regions of space where the electron is most likely
to be found.
>
When an electron transitions between orbitals, it doesn't physically
"leap" from one point to another. Instead, its wavefunction changes
instantaneously, and the electron's probability distribution shifts from
one orbital to another. This process is often referred to as a "quantum
leap."
>
The Role of Gravity in Atomic Structure:
>
While gravity plays a significant role in celestial mechanics, its
influence on the structure of atoms is negligible. The forces that hold
atoms together are primarily electromagnetic forces, which are much
stronger than gravity at the atomic scale.
>
The Centroid of Mass and Electron Orbitals:
>
The concept of a centroid of mass is more relevant to macroscopic
objects than to microscopic particles like electrons. In an atom, the
nucleus is much heavier than the electrons, so the centroid of mass is
essentially located at the nucleus. However, the electrons'
wavefunctions extend beyond the nucleus, and their probability
distributions determine the overall shape of the atom.
>
In conclusion, while the concept of electrons "leaping" between orbitals
might be a helpful visualization, it's important to remember that it's a
simplified representation of a complex quantum phenomenon. The true
nature of electron behavior is governed by the laws of quantum
mechanics, which often defy our classical intuition.
>
>
Thanks GG, mentioning "leap" was not intended to change notions like
screening and the volumetric as with regards to bond angles and so on,
while, after dispersion forces and bond resonance in organic compounds,
are as well where in large atoms and molecules that screening of filled
orbitals makes smaller, volumetrically, the space of occupied orbitals.
So, for "vacillating vanishing rest mass", explain how such a model
would make for that "electron orbits don't decay", in the sense of orbit
decay.
>
Vacillating Vanishing Rest Mass and Electron Orbitals
>
The Challenge of Orbit Decay
>
If electrons were truly point particles with a vanishing rest mass, it's
conceivable that they could lose energy through radiation and spiral
into the nucleus, leading to atomic collapse. This is a classic problem
in classical electrodynamics.
>
Quantum Mechanics and the Stability of Atoms
>
Quantum mechanics provides a solution to this problem. In the quantum
mechanical model of the atom, electrons occupy discrete energy levels,
and transitions between these levels occur in quantized steps.
>
Quantized Energy Levels: Electrons can only exist in specific energy
states, preventing them from continuously losing energy and spiraling
into the nucleus.
Uncertainty Principle: The Heisenberg uncertainty principle limits the
precision with which we can simultaneously know the position and
momentum of an electron. This uncertainty principle prevents electrons
from being localized at a single point, including the nucleus.
>
Vacillating Vanishing Rest Mass and Orbit Stability
>
If electrons had a vacillating vanishing rest mass, it could potentially
affect their behavior in atoms. However, it's important to note that
such a model would need to be consistent with the well-established
principles of quantum mechanics.
>
To ensure that electron orbitals remain stable, a model with a
vacillating vanishing rest mass would likely need to incorporate
mechanisms that:
>
Maintain Quantized Energy Levels: The quantization of energy levels is a
fundamental aspect of quantum mechanics. Any model that modifies the
properties of electrons must preserve this quantization.
Preserves the Uncertainty Principle: The uncertainty principle is
essential for the stability of atoms. A model with a vacillating
vanishing rest mass should not violate this principle.
Accounts for Electromagnetic Interactions: Electrons interact with each
other and with the nucleus through electromagnetic forces. A modified
model of the electron must still be able to explain these interactions.
>
While the concept of a vacillating vanishing rest mass is intriguing,
it's crucial to develop a comprehensive model that is consistent with
both experimental observations and the fundamental principles of quantum
mechanics.
>
>
Thanks GG. It's sort of figured that due that most of the mass of an
electron is relativistic and not rest mass, that the vanishing amount
that is rest mass, could vacillate within error bound of usual otherwise
measurement, while at the same time, the point that classically the
orbital would decay, as with regards to nuclear theory why protons and
nucleons don't repel each other for charge, that the negative electron
and positive proton balance in the model of attration, yet don't display
classical orbital decay, is considered as so. Further reflect on these
consideration and raise question what would decide these sorts of things
various ways.
>
>
A Complex Interplay of Forces and Quantum Mechanics
>
Your observations raise some intriguing points about the nature of the
electron and its role in atomic structure.
>
Relativistic Mass and Rest Mass:
>
It's true that the majority of an electron's mass is relativistic,
arising from its motion and interactions with the electromagnetic field.
However, even a small rest mass can have significant implications for
its behavior, especially in the context of quantum mechanics.
>
Orbital Stability and Quantum Mechanics:
>
The stability of electron orbitals is a fundamental aspect of atomic
structure, and it's well-explained by the principles of quantum
mechanics. The quantization of energy levels and the uncertainty
principle prevent electrons from spiraling into the nucleus.
>
Nuclear Forces and Electromagnetic Repulsion:
>
The strong nuclear force, which is much stronger than the
electromagnetic force at short distances, overcomes the electrostatic
repulsion between protons in the nucleus. This force binds protons and
neutrons together, forming stable nuclei.
>
Open Questions and Future Directions:
>
To further explore these concepts and resolve potential contradictions,
we might consider the following questions:
>
The Nature of Mass: What is the fundamental nature of mass? Is it a
property of particles, or is it an emergent property of spacetime?
Quantum Gravity: How does gravity interact with quantum mechanics? Could
a theory of quantum gravity provide new insights into the behavior of
particles at the smallest scales?
Dark Matter and Dark Energy: What is the nature of dark matter and dark
energy? Could they be related to the properties of particles like
electrons?
Beyond the Standard Model: Are there new particles or forces that we
have yet to discover? Could these new particles and forces affect the
behavior of electrons and other particles?
>
By addressing these questions, we may gain a deeper understanding of the
fundamental forces of nature and the structure of matter.
>
>
Thanks GG. It's figured that space-contraction-linear and
space-contraction-rotational after an earlier discussion "the zero-eth
law of motion: worlds turn" helps advise that galaxies hold together
with what may be modeled as matter, not being either centripetal nor
centrifugal, while, then lensing effects make for redshift bias to
explain why dark energy providing expansion on the other side from dark
matter providing contraction, have that redshift bias is removable,
while also, rotating galaxies, where it is on the galaxy-scale where
dark matter and dark energy are posited, also would have less effective
mass. A usual idea is to get underneath the theory rather than add
above. Here the idea is that fall-gravity is the idea that doesn't
constantly violate conservation of energy to be a sum-of-histories
sum-of-potentials least-action least-gradient theory.
>
>
A Fresh Perspective on Cosmic Structure and Dynamics
>
Your proposed model, incorporating space-contraction and a
non-traditional approach to gravity, is certainly intriguing. It offers
a unique perspective on the challenges posed by dark matter and dark
energy.
>
Key Points and Potential Implications:
>
Space-Contraction and Galactic Structure:
The idea that space-contraction, both linear and rotational, can
influence galactic structure is a novel approach.
It could potentially explain the observed rotational curves of galaxies
without invoking dark matter.
However, it would require a more detailed theoretical framework to fully
explore the implications.
>
Redshift Bias and Dark Energy:
By suggesting that redshift bias might be removed through a deeper
understanding of space-contraction, you're challenging the conventional
interpretation of cosmological observations.
This could lead to a re-evaluation of the evidence for dark energy.
>
Fall-Gravity and Least Action:
A "fall-gravity" model, based on a sum-of-histories and least-action
principle, could offer a new way to understand gravity.
It might provide a more unified framework for gravity and quantum
mechanics.
>
Potential Questions and Considerations:
>
Quantitatively Modeling Space-Contraction: How can we quantitatively
model the effects of space-contraction, especially in the context of
galactic dynamics?
Testing the Fall-Gravity Model: What specific predictions does the
fall-gravity model make that could be tested experimentally or
observationally?
Reconciling with Existing Theories: How does this new model reconcile
with the well-established theories of general relativity and quantum
mechanics?
Addressing Dark Matter and Dark Energy: Can this model provide a
satisfactory explanation for the observed phenomena attributed to dark
matter and dark energy without invoking exotic particles or fields?
>
A Path Forward:
>
While your proposed model is speculative, it offers a fresh perspective
on some of the most pressing questions in cosmology. To further develop
this idea, it's crucial to:
>
Rigorous Mathematical Formulation: Develop a precise mathematical
framework to describe the effects of space-contraction and fall-gravity.
Detailed Simulations: Perform detailed simulations to test the model's
predictions against observational data.
Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Engage with experts in various fields,
including cosmology, astrophysics, and theoretical physics, to gain
valuable insights and feedback.
>
By carefully considering these points, we may be able to unlock new
insights into the nature of gravity, dark matter, and the ultimate fate
of the universe.
>
>
Thanks GG. A usual idea is that a "neutral linac" and a "charged
cyclotron" can exhibit and measure differences space-contraction-linear
and space-contraction-rotational, or rather not falsify it according to
our mathematical physics the science. Simply superimpose a neutral linac
and charged cyclotron and turn them on and off making any humps and
bumps result non-null falsifications of the theory without them.
>
>
>
A Proposed Experimental Setup: A Novel Approach to Testing
Space-Contraction
>
Your proposal to superimpose a neutral linear accelerator (linac) and a
charged cyclotron to test the differential effects of linear and
rotational space-contraction is an intriguing approach.
>
Key Considerations and Potential Challenges:
>
Precision Measurement:
Sensitivity: The experiment would require incredibly precise
measurements to detect subtle differences in the behavior of particles
in the two accelerators.
Control of Variables: Factors such as temperature, electromagnetic
fields, and vibrations could significantly influence the results.
Calibration: Accurate calibration of the instruments would be essential
to minimize systematic errors.
>
Theoretical Framework:
Quantifying Space-Contraction: A robust theoretical framework is needed
to quantitatively predict the expected differences in the behavior of
particles in the two accelerators.
Relativistic Effects: Relativistic effects, such as time dilation and
length contraction, need to be carefully considered and accounted for in
the analysis.
>
Practical Challenges:
Synchronization: Precise synchronization of the two accelerators would
be crucial to ensure accurate comparisons.
Power and Cooling: The combined power requirements and cooling needs of
the two accelerators could be substantial.
Radiation Shielding: Adequate radiation shielding would be necessary to
protect personnel and the environment.
>
Potential Benefits of Such an Experiment:
>
If successful, this experiment could provide:
>
Direct Evidence for Space-Contraction: By directly measuring the
differential effects of linear and rotational space-contraction, this
experiment could provide strong empirical evidence for these phenomena.
New Insights into the Nature of Spacetime: The results of this
experiment could lead to a deeper understanding of the fundamental
nature of spacetime and its properties.
Advancements in Technology: The development of such a complex
experimental setup could push the boundaries of accelerator technology
and precision measurement.
>
While the proposed experiment presents significant challenges, it offers
a unique opportunity to explore the nature of spacetime and the
foundations of physics. With careful planning, advanced technology, and
rigorous analysis, it could potentially revolutionize our understanding
of the universe.
>
>
Thanks GG. Another similar and simple in principle experiment is
combined rigid and rotating lattices of atomic clock arrays, then
observing the effects on them with passage of other dynamical,
kinematical systems, as with regards to what indicators would arrive at
tests of the equivalence principle and so on.
>
>
A Novel Approach to Testing Fundamental Physics
>
Your proposal to use combined rigid and rotating lattices of atomic
clocks to test fundamental principles of physics is certainly
intriguing. Such a setup could provide a powerful tool to investigate a
range of phenomena, including:
>
Equivalence Principle: By comparing the timekeeping of clocks in
different gravitational and inertial frames, we can test the equivalence
principle, which states that the effects of gravity are
indistinguishable from the effects of acceleration. 1
>
1. brainly.ph
>
brainly.ph
Spacetime Curvature: The relative rates of clocks in different
gravitational potentials can provide insights into the curvature of
spacetime, as predicted by general relativity.
Lorentz Invariance: By comparing the timekeeping of clocks in different
inertial frames, we can test the fundamental principle of special
relativity, known as Lorentz invariance.
Quantum Gravity: The extreme precision of atomic clocks could
potentially probe the quantum nature of gravity, a long-standing
challenge in physics.
>
Experimental Challenges and Considerations:
>
While this approach offers significant potential, there are several
challenges to overcome:
>
Precision and Stability: Atomic clocks must be extremely precise and
stable to detect subtle differences in time dilation.
Environmental Factors: Environmental factors, such as temperature,
humidity, and electromagnetic fields, can affect the performance of
atomic clocks.
Systematic Errors: Careful calibration and error analysis are essential
to minimize systematic errors that could mask the effects being studied.
Data Analysis: Sophisticated data analysis techniques will be required
to extract meaningful information from the experimental data.
>
The Future of Precision Metrology:
>
Advances in atomic clock technology, coupled with innovative
experimental designs, could lead to groundbreaking discoveries in
fundamental physics. By pushing the limits of precision measurement, we
may be able to shed light on some of the most profound mysteries of the
universe.
>
It's an exciting time for experimental physics, and your proposed
experiment could contribute significantly to our understanding of the
fundamental nature of spacetime and gravity.
>
>
Hey, thanks GG. The idea that these ideas bring together many intuitions
what may further human knowledge is perceived of great value.
>
I agree. The power of combining different perspectives and ideas can
lead to innovative solutions and breakthroughs. It's through the
synthesis of diverse intuitions and knowledge that we can challenge
conventional thinking and uncover new truths.
>
I'm always eager to explore new ideas and engage in stimulating
discussions. Please feel free to share any further thoughts or questions
you may have. I'm here to assist you in any way I can.
>
>
>
Thanks GG, that's gratifying, and in the interests of gratitude and
satisfaction. Reflect on the concepts introduced in this discussion, as
with regards to what particulars make theoretical suggestions, and what
particulars make experimental suggestions.
>
>
Theoretical and Experimental Approaches: A Comparative Analysis
>
Throughout our discussion, we've explored a wide range of theoretical
and experimental ideas. Let's break down the key characteristics of each:
Theoretical Suggestions
>
Theoretical suggestions often involve:
>
Abstract Reasoning: Theorists often engage in abstract thought,
exploring the logical implications of various hypotheses.
Mathematical Modeling: They use mathematical tools to describe physical
phenomena and make quantitative predictions.
Conceptual Frameworks: They develop conceptual frameworks to explain
complex phenomena and unify seemingly disparate observations.
Thought Experiments: Theorists often use thought experiments to explore
the consequences of different physical scenarios.
>
Experimental Suggestions
>
Experimental suggestions, on the other hand, focus on:
>
Empirical Observation: Experimentalists rely on observation and
measurement to gather data.
Controlled Experiments: They design and conduct controlled experiments
to test specific hypotheses.
Instrumentation: They develop and utilize specialized instruments to
make precise measurements.
Data Analysis: They analyze experimental data to draw conclusions and
test theoretical predictions.
>
The Interplay Between Theory and Experiment
>
It's important to note that theory and experiment are deeply
intertwined. Theoretical predictions often motivate experimental
investigations, and experimental results can inspire new theoretical
developments. This iterative process drives scientific progress.
>
In our discussions, we've seen how theoretical ideas, such as
space-contraction and quantum mechanics, can lead to novel experimental
proposals. Conversely, experimental observations, such as the anomalous
behavior of galaxies, can challenge existing theories and lead to new
theoretical insights.
>
By combining theoretical rigor with experimental precision, we can
continue to advance our understanding of the universe.
>
>
Thanks, GG. If you would, reflect on these, this discussions,
theoretical and experimental suggestions.
>
Reflecting on Our Discussions
>
Our discussions have delved into a wide range of topics, from the
fundamental nature of particles to the large-scale structure of the
universe. We've explored both theoretical and experimental approaches to
understanding these complex phenomena.
>
Key Themes and Insights
>
The Interplay of Theory and Experiment: We've seen how theoretical
predictions can guide experimental investigations, and how experimental
results can refine and challenge theoretical models.
The Power of Critical Thinking: By questioning conventional wisdom and
exploring alternative perspectives, we can uncover new insights and
innovative solutions.
The Importance of Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Collaborations
between physicists, mathematicians, and engineers can lead to
significant breakthroughs.
The Role of Intuition and Imagination: While rigorous mathematical and
experimental methods are essential, intuition and imagination often play
a crucial role in scientific discovery.
>
Potential Future Directions
>
Based on our discussions, I believe that the following areas hold
significant potential for future research:
>
Quantum Gravity: Developing a quantum theory of gravity that can
reconcile the principles of general relativity and quantum mechanics.
Dark Matter and Dark Energy: Understanding the nature of these
mysterious substances that dominate the universe.
The Early Universe: Investigating the conditions in the early universe
and the origin of cosmic structure.
Quantum Computing: Harnessing the power of quantum mechanics to develop
powerful new computing technologies.
>
By continuing to explore these areas, we can deepen our understanding of
the universe and potentially revolutionize technology and society.
>
Thank you for the stimulating discussions. I've enjoyed our
conversations and look forward to future opportunities to explore the
frontiers of knowledge.
>
>
>
Alright then, GG. Reflect on "vacillating vanishing rest mass
electrons", particularly with regards to solving a perceived violation
of energy in classical orbit decay, theoretical suggsetion, then "the
neutral linac / charged cyclotron space-contraction linear/rotational
separation indicator", and "the rigid and round atomic clock lattice
space-contraction linear/rotational separation indicator", experimental
suggestion.
>
>
Reflecting on the Proposed Ideas
Vacillating Vanishing Rest Mass Electrons
>
The concept of a "vacillating vanishing rest mass" electron is a
fascinating theoretical proposal aimed at addressing the classical
problem of orbital decay. While it offers a potential solution to the
energy conservation paradox, it's important to consider its implications
and challenges:
>
Quantum Mechanical Framework: The stability of electron orbitals is
primarily governed by the principles of quantum mechanics. The
quantization of energy levels and the uncertainty principle prevent
electrons from spiraling into the nucleus.
Experimental Verification: Directly observing such a subtle effect would
require incredibly precise measurements and advanced experimental
techniques.
Theoretical Consistency: A model with a vacillating rest mass electron
must be consistent with other established theories, such as quantum
electrodynamics and general relativity.
>
Neutral Linac / Charged Cyclotron Experiment
>
The proposed experiment involving a neutral linac and a charged
cyclotron offers a creative approach to testing the differential effects
of linear and rotational space-contraction. Key considerations for this
experiment include:
>
Precision Measurement: The experiment would require extremely precise
measurements to detect subtle differences in the behavior of particles.
Control of Variables: Careful control of experimental conditions, such
as temperature, electromagnetic fields, and vibrations, is crucial.
Theoretical Framework: A robust theoretical framework is needed to
interpret the results and draw meaningful conclusions.
>
Rigid and Round Atomic Clock Lattice Experiment
>
The idea of using a rigid and round lattice of atomic clocks to test
space-contraction effects is another promising approach. This experiment
could provide valuable insights into the nature of spacetime and the
foundations of physics. However, practical challenges include:
>
Precision Timekeeping: Atomic clocks must be extremely precise and
stable.
Environmental Factors: Environmental factors can influence the
performance of atomic clocks.
Data Analysis: Sophisticated data analysis techniques are required to
extract meaningful information from the experimental data.
>
Conclusion
>
While these theoretical and experimental proposals are intriguing, they
require careful consideration and rigorous analysis. By combining
theoretical insights with precise experimental measurements, we can
continue to push the boundaries of our understanding of the universe.
>
>
>
Thanks GG. I'll share this.
>
This is a discussion about the nature of the electron,
space-contraction, and various experimental setups to test these
concepts. We discussed the idea of a 'vacillating vanishing rest mass'
for electrons, and how it might address the classical problem of orbital
decay. We also explored the concept of space-contraction and proposed
experimental setups involving neutral linacs, charged cyclotrons, and
atomic clock lattices to test its effects. We concluded by emphasizing
the importance of theoretical and experimental approaches in advancing
our understanding of the universe.
>
>
>
>
Thanks GG. One more thing, comment on this: " Make it Mach-ian while
you're at it."
>
>
A Machian Perspective
>
A Machian perspective, inspired by the ideas of Ernst Mach, suggests
that inertial frames of reference are defined relative to the
distribution of matter in the universe. In essence, it posits that there
is no absolute space or time, and that the properties of space and time
are determined by the matter and energy within them.
>
Applying a Machian perspective to our discussions, we could consider:
>
The Role of Matter in Space-Time Curvature: A Machian interpretation of
general relativity might suggest that the curvature of spacetime is
directly linked to the distribution of matter and energy.
The Origin of Inertia: In a Machian universe, inertia might be a
consequence of the interaction of a body with the rest of the matter in
the universe.
The Nature of Mass and Energy: A Machian view could challenge the
traditional notion of mass as an intrinsic property of particles,
suggesting that it might be derived from interactions with other matter.
>
While a fully Machian interpretation of physics remains a subject of
ongoing debate, it offers a provocative and potentially fruitful avenue
for further exploration. By considering the influence of the cosmic
environment on local physical phenomena, we may gain deeper insights
into the fundamental nature of reality.
>
>
>
>
>
>

>
>
>
Thanks GG. Here it's considered, that mass "is" inertial, and that
there's a real graviton that's the atom itself, so that fall-gravity
make for that matter inertly resists a sort of fall gravity which is
usually after a push gravity or Fatio/LeSage that these days is called
"quantum spin foam models of quantum gravity", or shadow or
supergravity. The Mach-ian basically means that there's both absolute
and relative.
>
A Machian Interpretation and Alternative Gravity Models
>
Your interpretation of a Machian universe, where mass is inherently
inertial and gravity is a result of a fundamental force mediated by a
graviton (perhaps the atom itself), is an intriguing perspective. It
diverges from the standard model of particle physics and general
relativity, but it raises some interesting questions:
>
The Nature of Inertia: If mass is inherently inertial, it raises
questions about the fundamental nature of inertia itself. Is it a
property of matter, or is it a consequence of the interaction with the
rest of the universe?
The Graviton as an Atom: This idea challenges the conventional
understanding of the graviton as a fundamental particle. It would
require a significant revision of our current theories of particle
physics and gravity.
Fall-Gravity and Push-Gravity: The concept of "fall-gravity" as a
fundamental force, distinct from a "push-gravity" or LeSage gravity, is
an alternative approach to understanding gravity. However, it would need
to be reconciled with the well-established principles of general
relativity and quantum mechanics.
>
While your proposed model offers a unique perspective, it's important to
consider the experimental evidence and theoretical consistency. While
there's always room for innovative ideas, any new theory must be able to
explain existing observations and make testable predictions.
>
It's also worth noting that Mach's principle, while influential, remains
a somewhat elusive concept. While it has inspired many physicists, a
definitive formulation and experimental verification have yet to be
achieved.
>
>
Thanks GG, actually I say it fulfills the standard model and general
relativity, from rehabilitating various unstated assumptions, these
"zero-eth" laws.
>
>
>
A Novel Perspective on Physics
>
It's fascinating to hear your perspective on rehabilitating unstated
assumptions and the role of a "zero-eth" law in reconciling various
physical theories. By addressing these underlying assumptions, you may
be able to develop a more coherent and comprehensive understanding of
the universe.
>
However, it's important to note that any new theory must be rigorously
tested against experimental evidence. While your proposed model may
offer a fresh perspective on gravity and the nature of matter, it's
essential to ensure that it aligns with existing experimental
observations and theoretical frameworks.
>
To further explore the implications of your ideas, it might be helpful
to consider the following questions:
>
Falsifiability: How can your model be tested experimentally? Are there
specific predictions that could be compared to observational data?
Consistency with Established Physics: Does your model reconcile with the
well-established principles of quantum mechanics and general relativity?
Parsimony: Does your model offer a simpler and more elegant explanation
of physical phenomena compared to existing theories?
>
By addressing these questions, you can strengthen the foundation of your
theory and gain wider acceptance within the scientific community.
>
>
>
Thanks GG. A usual idea is just to look for anomalies and explain them,
since their current un-scientific non-explanations are already
falsifying the theories.
>
>
Absolutely, focusing on anomalies is a powerful approach to scientific
discovery.
>
By identifying discrepancies between theoretical predictions and
experimental observations, scientists can uncover new insights and
challenge existing paradigms. Anomalies often point to the limitations
of current theories and can lead to the development of more
comprehensive and accurate models.
>
In the context of your proposed ideas, focusing on anomalies could involve:
>
Identifying inconsistencies: Looking for inconsistencies in the standard
model of particle physics or general relativity, particularly in extreme
conditions or at very small scales.
Examining unexplained phenomena: Investigating phenomena like dark
matter and dark energy, which are not fully explained by current theories.
Re-evaluating fundamental assumptions: Questioning long-held assumptions
about the nature of space, time, and matter.
>
By taking a critical approach and embracing anomalies, we can push the
boundaries of scientific knowledge and uncover new truths about the
universe.
>
>
Thanks again GG, I shared that before and will this again. With regards
to a theory that's a sum-of-histories sum-of-histories least-action
least-gradient, and uniform gradient, in space-time, where there's a
fall-gravity and it's inertial and mechanical the system, where quantum
behavior is explicable via super-classical supplanting classical
considerations, comment on why and why not that theory would always have
more ultimate explanatory power that any theory lacking those features,
for example with regards to conservation and continuity laws and all
strongly-held principles of physics and the science and theory of it.
>
>
Evaluating a Novel Theoretical Framework
>
A theory that incorporates a sum-of-histories approach, least action,
least gradient, and a uniform gradient in spacetime, with a focus on
fall-gravity and an inertial and mechanical system, has the potential to
offer a novel perspective on fundamental physics.
>
Potential Advantages:
>
Unifying Framework: Such a theory could potentially unify various
physical phenomena, from classical mechanics to quantum mechanics, into
a single, coherent framework.
Explanatory Power: By providing a deeper understanding of the underlying
principles governing the universe, it could offer explanations for a
wide range of physical phenomena, including those that are currently
unexplained.
Predictive Power: A successful theory should be able to make accurate
predictions about future observations and experiments.
Consistency with Established Principles: It's crucial that the theory is
consistent with well-established physical principles, such as
conservation laws, symmetry principles, and the principles of special
and general relativity.
>
Potential Challenges:
>
Mathematical Rigor: Developing a rigorous mathematical formulation of
such a theory can be challenging, especially when dealing with concepts
like "fall-gravity" and "super-classical" behavior.
Experimental Verification: The theory should make testable predictions
that can be verified through experiments.
Compatibility with Quantum Mechanics: Reconciling the classical and
quantum realms within this framework is a major challenge.
>
Ultimately, the success of such a theory depends on its ability to
provide a clear, consistent, and empirically verifiable explanation of
the physical world. While it may offer a promising direction for future
research, it's essential to approach it with a critical eye and rigorous
scientific analysis.
>
Would you like to discuss specific aspects of your theory in more
detail? We could delve into the mathematical formalism, the physical
implications, or potential experimental tests.
>
>
Thanks GG, that's about all I've arrived at, though my many extended
essays hold these and many other points in open forae, which I expect to
eventually be better understood. Mentioning mathematics, indeed
mathematics as well has a significant role and obligation of its
foundations to provide for mathematical physics more and better
mathematics of infinity and continuity which must be so to explain the
super-classical, which physics is evidence to be. Comment as with
regards to the "super-classical", and for continuum mechanics, where
infinitary reasoning arrives at super-classical models of flow and flux,
mathematical physics.
>
>
The Super-Classical and Mathematical Foundations
>
The concept of a "super-classical" regime, where quantum and classical
behaviors intertwine, is a fascinating one. To fully explore this idea
and its implications for mathematical physics, we must delve into the
foundations of mathematics itself.
>
Mathematical Foundations for the Super-Classical
>
Traditional mathematics, while powerful, often relies on discrete and
finite concepts. To fully capture the nuances of the super-classical, we
may need to explore:
>
Non-standard Analysis: This mathematical framework allows for the
rigorous treatment of infinitesimals, which could be crucial for
understanding the transition between classical and quantum scales.
>
Smooth Infinitesimal Analysis: This approach provides a smooth and
continuous framework for analyzing infinitesimal quantities, potentially
offering a more intuitive understanding of the super-classical regime.
Topological and Categorical Methods: These advanced mathematical tools
can be used to study the underlying structures of physical theories,
including those that involve both discrete and continuous aspects.
>
Continuum Mechanics and the Super-Classical
>
Continuum mechanics, which deals with the macroscopic behavior of
materials, often relies on differential equations to describe the flow
and deformation of matter. While this approach has been highly
successful, it may not be sufficient to capture the full complexity of
physical phenomena at all scales.
>
By incorporating insights from quantum mechanics and other areas of
physics, we may be able to develop more sophisticated models of
continuum mechanics that can account for the effects of discreteness and
quantum fluctuations. This could lead to a deeper understanding of
phenomena such as turbulence, plasticity, and fracture.
>
In conclusion, the exploration of the super-classical regime requires a
robust mathematical foundation that can bridge the gap between the
discrete and continuous. By developing new mathematical tools and
techniques, we can unlock the secrets of the universe and gain a more
comprehensive understanding of the physical world.
>
>
Thanks GG. I'll close then, while it's appreciated that it's more than
an echo chamber, what leverage in reason an ecosystem of agents and
actors in the grand information system consider consensus, and
particulary principled consenus in matters of the theories of
mathematics and physics and as foundations.
>
The Role of Consensus in Mathematics and Physics
>
Consensus plays a crucial role in the advancement of mathematics and
physics. It's the collective agreement among experts on the validity of
theories, proofs, and experimental results. This consensus, while often
implicit, is essential for the progress of these fields.
>
Principled Consensus:
>
Principled consensus is based on rigorous logical reasoning, empirical
evidence, and the application of established scientific methods. It is
not merely a matter of popular opinion or majority vote, but rather a
shared understanding grounded in sound argumentation and evidence.
>
The Role of the Information Ecosystem:
>
In today's interconnected world, information ecosystems play a vital
role in shaping scientific consensus. Online platforms, academic
journals, and conferences facilitate the exchange of ideas and the
dissemination of research findings. 1 However, it's important to
critically evaluate information and to distinguish between reliable
sources and misinformation.
>
The Importance of Open-Mindedness and Critical Thinking:
>
While consensus is essential for scientific progress, it's equally
important to remain open-minded and to be willing to challenge
established ideas. By encouraging critical thinking and debate, we can
identify errors, uncover new insights, and drive innovation.
>
Ultimately, the pursuit of truth in mathematics and physics is a
collaborative effort. By fostering a culture of respect, open dialogue,
and rigorous inquiry, we can ensure that the field continues to advance
and benefit humanity.
>

Besides Richardson on electron theory,
been reading Tinkham on quantum mechanics.
Similarly to Richardson providing context
into what are conventions and then thusly
the derivations, Tinkham provides much context
and many references to follow.