Like I said, nine minutes before you posted this, the interference pattern still appears when the electrons are fired one at a time. Therefore the pattern cannot possibly to do with electron-electron interference. You are simply wrong.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
unifying gravity and electromagnetism
- Thread starter drgsrinivas
- Start date
Like I said, nine minutes before you posted this, the interference pattern still appears when the electrons are fired one at a time. Therefore the pattern cannot possibly to do with electron-electron interference. You are simply wrong.
drgsrinivas
Thinker
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2008
- Messages
- 175
time dilation and the weirdness
Apparently different observers/clocks measure different times for the same ‘duration’ in the space, depending on their relative motion. Clocks apparently run slower or in other words time dilates as one moves faster, and hence the speed of light remains constant.
Also time apparently runs slower or time dilates near massive objects.
Time dilation has been ‘proved’ experimentally by running two flights with equal velocity in the opposite directions, one east wards and another west wards. It was 'noted' that the clock in the east bound flight recorded less time than that in the west bound flight ‘indicating’ time dilation. This is because, earth’s rotational velocity (as it spins towards east) gets added to the east bound flight making its relative velocity more than the west bound flight which runs opposite to the direction of the earth’s spin.
If that was true I should imagine that clocks in some way get affected by gravity and their own motion (as can predicted by the gravity/acceleration equivalence) rather than there was any real time dilation or contraction.
We can straight away discard the idea of constant speed of light using the same twin flight experiment. Imagine that a beam of light with velocity ‘10C’ is shone towards the west. A west bound flight whose velocity is ‘2C’ will measure the velocity of light as only 8C unless its time gets dilated. Similarly the east bound flight with a velocity 2C will measure the speed of light as 12C unless its time runs faster. But we know that this was not the case from the above experiment.
Apparently different observers/clocks measure different times for the same ‘duration’ in the space, depending on their relative motion. Clocks apparently run slower or in other words time dilates as one moves faster, and hence the speed of light remains constant.
Also time apparently runs slower or time dilates near massive objects.
Time dilation has been ‘proved’ experimentally by running two flights with equal velocity in the opposite directions, one east wards and another west wards. It was 'noted' that the clock in the east bound flight recorded less time than that in the west bound flight ‘indicating’ time dilation. This is because, earth’s rotational velocity (as it spins towards east) gets added to the east bound flight making its relative velocity more than the west bound flight which runs opposite to the direction of the earth’s spin.
If that was true I should imagine that clocks in some way get affected by gravity and their own motion (as can predicted by the gravity/acceleration equivalence) rather than there was any real time dilation or contraction.
We can straight away discard the idea of constant speed of light using the same twin flight experiment. Imagine that a beam of light with velocity ‘10C’ is shone towards the west. A west bound flight whose velocity is ‘2C’ will measure the velocity of light as only 8C unless its time gets dilated. Similarly the east bound flight with a velocity 2C will measure the speed of light as 12C unless its time runs faster. But we know that this was not the case from the above experiment.
Like I said:
Me said:
A beam of light cannot have a velocity of light of 2c or 8c or 10c. Your thought experiment bares no resemblance to the physical universe. It is utterly meaningless in every possible way.
drgsrinivas
Thinker
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2008
- Messages
- 175
Enter the weird world of relative time
If time dilation was true
1.If there was no absolute time, certain things make no sense- velocity, acceleration, frequency etc.
2.Twins paradox
a.Due to the expanding universe, we on this earth are already moving at close to the speed of light relative to the receding galaxies at the ‘far end’ of our universe. This should make us immortal!
b.Coming to the twins paradox, it is said that if one of the twins travels to the outer space at close to the speed of light, on his return from the space trip, because of time dilation, he would apparently be younger than his earth bound twin. But we could argue that the earth bound twin was also moving at the same speed relative to the space bound twin. So time should dilate for both them equally.
c.As motion is a relative thing in this universe, the concept of time dilation for fast moving things is rather absurd.
3.If time runs slowly near strong gravitational fields, it must have run increasingly slowly as we trace back our expanding universe to the point of big bang.
a.As time runs infinitely slowly as we approach the big bang singularity, we would never ‘reach’ the stage of singularity, if at all this existed.
b.Or at least the predicted time scale of events since big bang are totally wrong – one billionth of a second immediately after the big bang could well be equivalent to our 13.5 billion years, which is the estimated age of our universe!
4.Earth older than Sun?
a.As time should run slower for the Sun than for the Earth, at some point of time, it is possible that our Earth gets older than the Sun and similarly our moon older than our earth.
b.Also we are probably looking at the sun that is actually in our past and the moon which is in our future! So time travel is possible!
May be that weirdness of weirdness leads us to the reality and this is what mathematicians and scientists are hoping for! (Like negative value multiplied by another negative giving a positive value)
If time dilation was true
1.If there was no absolute time, certain things make no sense- velocity, acceleration, frequency etc.
2.Twins paradox
a.Due to the expanding universe, we on this earth are already moving at close to the speed of light relative to the receding galaxies at the ‘far end’ of our universe. This should make us immortal!
b.Coming to the twins paradox, it is said that if one of the twins travels to the outer space at close to the speed of light, on his return from the space trip, because of time dilation, he would apparently be younger than his earth bound twin. But we could argue that the earth bound twin was also moving at the same speed relative to the space bound twin. So time should dilate for both them equally.
c.As motion is a relative thing in this universe, the concept of time dilation for fast moving things is rather absurd.
3.If time runs slowly near strong gravitational fields, it must have run increasingly slowly as we trace back our expanding universe to the point of big bang.
a.As time runs infinitely slowly as we approach the big bang singularity, we would never ‘reach’ the stage of singularity, if at all this existed.
b.Or at least the predicted time scale of events since big bang are totally wrong – one billionth of a second immediately after the big bang could well be equivalent to our 13.5 billion years, which is the estimated age of our universe!
4.Earth older than Sun?
a.As time should run slower for the Sun than for the Earth, at some point of time, it is possible that our Earth gets older than the Sun and similarly our moon older than our earth.
b.Also we are probably looking at the sun that is actually in our past and the moon which is in our future! So time travel is possible!
May be that weirdness of weirdness leads us to the reality and this is what mathematicians and scientists are hoping for! (Like negative value multiplied by another negative giving a positive value)
drgsrinivas
Thinker
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2008
- Messages
- 175
I am not sure if the rest of the crowd also has the same limitations like you.
I'll make a start...
Nope. We still have perfectly reasonable formulations of these things. What we don't have is an absolute frame of rest. This doesn't matter though, so long as we're consistent in terms of which reference frames we use and/or we use the correct transformations between frames.
No it shouldn't. We see our selves getting older at the rate we do and we see ourselves die. Therefore we are not immortal. Another observer in a different reference frame may measure us aging at a different rate to what we measure but if they do the correct co-ordinate transformations they will see that their measurementa are entirely consistent with ours.
Nope. The twin paradox was solved a century ago. Why not bother to actually read about it's solution?
No it isn't. It may be counter intuitive but that doesn't make it wrong.
Limitations? Please do elaborate.
sol invictus
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2007
- Messages
- 8,613
You're very limited, Tubby. You have difficulty understanding nonsense.
I'm afraid I too suffer from the same limitation.
ferd burfle
Graduate Poster
Why is it that physics crackpots always present their ideas saying "we" and "our" as if those reading are active participants in their delusions?
ferd
ferd
dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
Same here. I don't speak gibberish either.
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,967
Quite the opposite: The experiment can and was used to show that the speed of light (c) is indeed constant.
I don't know what you mean by '10C', but in any case, you are wrong. No matter what speed you move, light beams shot forwards and backwards will be seen to leave at the speed of light, c. Not only that, but stationary observers intercepting them will also observe them to be moving at c.
Hans
Evidence for the speed of expansion ?
Even if it were true, in their reference frame we would appear to be immortal
Except that one twin (the one who has remained on earth) has remained in the same inertial reference frame whereas the other twin occupies one inertial reference frame on the way out and another on the way back.
If you can be bothered to read about it, it's all here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox
It may be absurd to you but it has been observed experimentally and described theoretically (but not necessarily in that order)
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,967
There is relative time. That is enough.
Solved long ago.
No, because there is no universal rest reference.
No. Acceleration was only applied to one of them.
No, but it is a bit hart to understand.
Time does not run infinitely slowly. Since the mass of the universe is finite, the gravitational time change is also finite.
So what?
No. Time is perceived to move slower on the sun. But at each point of their existence, Earth and the sun are simultaneous.
No.
No, but people who can't grasp things will continue to jump to weird conclusions.
Hans
OK I'll bite.
How can the beam of light have a velocity of anything other than C when the speed of light in a medium is constant ?
Remember, the speed of constant speed of light in a given medium has been demonstrated again and again experimentally.
Errr... are you actually directing this at me?
Wowbagger
The Infinitely Prolonged
That's like proving that it is possible to go back in time, by saying: "Imagine someone went back in time..."
Or proving "1 plus 1 is not equal to 2" by starting "Well, imagine if 1 + 1 = 3...".
Where is the actual explanation for how the speed of light would not be constant (in a vacuum)?
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2006
- Messages
- 26,902
Sounds like he could use a good dose of Staphysagria*. Among its other amazing homecraptic abilities is that of controlling anger.
-----------
* http://abchomeopathy.com/r.php/Staph
Some of us are also familiar with the correct equation E2 = p2c2 + m2c4. It's interesting how crackpots always seem to focus on the popular simplification rather than the full equation that would be needed to do any real physics.
We have four different forces.
Reality is not really a limitation.