distinquishing between the "expansion of space" and the "contraction of time"
The "red shift" need not be interpreted as an
"expansion of space",but rather as a "slowing of time".
Since space and time are concepts that are relative to each other (i.e. are defined in inverse relation to each other), a slowing of time would mean that it would take longer to traverse a fixed spatial distance,and if one were convinced that the movement of time remained fixed/unchanged/constant then one could only account for the fact that the journey took longer by assuming that the other variable(space/distance) had lenghtened or undergone expansion.
Thus the observation of an expanding universe/space could be accounted for with equal validity in terms of a contraction or slowing of time
Velocity or speed is defined as the rate of change in space(distance) as a function of time: V= D/T
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module4_time_dilation.htm
The nature of Velocity:
Velocity=V=d/t
Velocity is the rate of "contraction of space"as a function of "time"
Thus when we say that something ,"C" travels at 186000 miles a second or 700 million miles an hour
we mean that in one second the spatial distance between object A (source) and object B (destination)
contracts/diminishes by 186,000 km.
If we vary one variable while holding the other constant:
Velocity increases by increasing "d" (the numerator) while keeping "t" constant, or by diminishing "t" (the denominator) while keeping "d" (space) constant.
"C' (the speed of light) is a fixed ratio of "d/t".
For this ratio to remain constant, any increment or decrement in the numerator must be cancelled by an equivalent change in the denominator. Thus C= d+1/t+1 = C ; C= d-1/t-1 =C ; d = Ct ; t = d/C
If "d" increased independently of "t",then C could not remain constant,but would increase.
Thus for "C" to remain constant ,there cannot be an "expansion of space" without a corresponding equivalent "expansion of time".
In other words any "expansion of space" must be cancelled out by an equivalent "speeding up of time"!
The "expansion of space" is a consequence of pegging the speed of light as a constant.
But if we instead fix/hold "distance"/space as constant ,then it is the speed of light that must change with "time"! C= v = d/t ;d = Ct
If light traveled twice as fast as it does...it would only take four minutes (instead of 8 minutes) to reach us from the sun.But the same effect would be achieved if space contracted by half
In other words, halving the distance between A and B (a contraction of space)is equivalent to doubling the speed of light! The corollary of this is that an expansion of space equal to a doubling of the distance between A and B, would be equivalent to halving the speed of light ...since it would take twice as long to traverse the expanded distance between A and B.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
STRETCHING AND CONTRACTING SPACE AS THE SOLE CAUSE OF ALL MOTION
Monday, April 3, 2006 9:21 PM
From: "bill dality"
To: tomas@yahoo.ca
I suppose that's one possibility...if a law of "conservation of space" were in effect
But if space is expanding in all directions equally then the sides BC and AD are also moving away from each other (not towards each other)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:04:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: "tomas " <@yahoo.ca>
Subject: RE: STRETCHING and CONTRACTING SPACE AS THE SOLE CAUSE OF ALL MOTION
To: "bill dality"
SUPPOSE YOU HAVE A SQUARE ABCD. THEN AT SOME POINT IN TIME THE OPPOSITE SIDES AB AND CD START MOVING APART WHILE THE OTHER OPPOSITE SIDES START MOVING TOWARDS EACH OTHER. USING THE THEORY THAT OBJECTS ARE NOT REALLY MOVING BUT RATHER IT IS THE SPACE BETWEEN THEM WHICH CHANGES, DOES IT MEAN THAT THE SAME SPACE CAN STRETCH AND SHRINK AT THE SAME TIME?
NO LONGER ON COCA, SWITCHED OVER TO AYAHUASCA.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:16:16 -0800 (PST)
From: "bill dality"
Subject: Speed ,distance,time...getting from A to B by the contraction of space
To: tomas@yahoo.ca
Velocity =distance/time
If "space-time" are a single dimension then what does "velocity" mean?
These dimensions must be separated for "velocity" to have any meaning!
Light speed is not the fastest speed there is!
There does not appear to be any limit to the speed at wch space expands. Einstein only placed a limit (light speed)on the velocity at wch an object possessing mass can travel within space. Space is not a substance and theoretically has no mass.Space or volume is derived by cubing a linear dimension.
(see entry under "space,time,etc."
This generates a paradox : How is it possible to distinquish the increasing separation of two objects due to the expansion of space and another kind of motion that is not due to the expansion of space?...The relative motion between the two objects is the same and indistinguishable.
When describing the motion of one object in relation to another could we not say in equivalent terms that the objects themselves remain stationary, and it is the space between them that moves and undergoes expansion/contraction.
We say that the position of an object relative to another object cannot change at the speed of light because the mass of the object would become infinite. Why could we not simply avoid this problem by saying it is the space between the objects wch is expanding at light speed (or greater than light speed)? The objects do not accelerate to light speed(in fact they remain stationary);rather it is the space between the objects wch expands/contracts at light speed.
Are these not in effect equivalent descriptions of the same event?
If light waves are also stretched (red-shifted)as space expands then all measurements of spatial distance will be affected/distorted as the measuring rod(light) used to measure distance is itself lengthened!
The "expansion of space" increases the time required to traverse the distance/space between point A and point B.. Conversely ,"spatial contraction" decreases this time, ..and taken to the limit, both distance and time collase to zero! This "spatial collapse" might explain "quantum tunneling" whereby "energy" can traverse space from point A to point B instantaneously.(without the constraint of the light speed limit).
A corollary of this thesis follows:
To achieve travel at or greater than light velocity we need to learn how to contract space!
Quantum theory casts doubt on the notion that distant objects are really separated since "entangled" particles can act instantaneosly in unison even if separated by the width of a galaxy. The question is ,does this quantum effect also apply to human-scale objects? (see "Quantum entanglement")
If it is not possible for there to be a separation between observor (A) and observed (B),then observor and observed are a unified and inseparable whole/unity (AB)!
see "The concept of Non-dualism (Oneness)"
The "red shift" need not be interpreted as an
"expansion of space",but rather as a "slowing of time".
Since space and time are concepts that are relative to each other (i.e. are defined in inverse relation to each other), a slowing of time would mean that it would take longer to traverse a fixed spatial distance,and if one were convinced that the movement of time remained fixed/unchanged/constant then one could only account for the fact that the journey took longer by assuming that the other variable(space/distance) had lenghtened or undergone expansion.
Thus the observation of an expanding universe/space could be accounted for with equal validity in terms of a contraction or slowing of time
Velocity or speed is defined as the rate of change in space(distance) as a function of time: V= D/T
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module4_time_dilation.htm
The nature of Velocity:
Velocity=V=d/t
Velocity is the rate of "contraction of space"as a function of "time"
Thus when we say that something ,"C" travels at 186000 miles a second or 700 million miles an hour
we mean that in one second the spatial distance between object A (source) and object B (destination)
contracts/diminishes by 186,000 km.
If we vary one variable while holding the other constant:
Velocity increases by increasing "d" (the numerator) while keeping "t" constant, or by diminishing "t" (the denominator) while keeping "d" (space) constant.
"C' (the speed of light) is a fixed ratio of "d/t".
For this ratio to remain constant, any increment or decrement in the numerator must be cancelled by an equivalent change in the denominator. Thus C= d+1/t+1 = C ; C= d-1/t-1 =C ; d = Ct ; t = d/C
If "d" increased independently of "t",then C could not remain constant,but would increase.
Thus for "C" to remain constant ,there cannot be an "expansion of space" without a corresponding equivalent "expansion of time".
In other words any "expansion of space" must be cancelled out by an equivalent "speeding up of time"!
The "expansion of space" is a consequence of pegging the speed of light as a constant.
But if we instead fix/hold "distance"/space as constant ,then it is the speed of light that must change with "time"! C= v = d/t ;d = Ct
If light traveled twice as fast as it does...it would only take four minutes (instead of 8 minutes) to reach us from the sun.But the same effect would be achieved if space contracted by half
In other words, halving the distance between A and B (a contraction of space)is equivalent to doubling the speed of light! The corollary of this is that an expansion of space equal to a doubling of the distance between A and B, would be equivalent to halving the speed of light ...since it would take twice as long to traverse the expanded distance between A and B.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
STRETCHING AND CONTRACTING SPACE AS THE SOLE CAUSE OF ALL MOTION
Monday, April 3, 2006 9:21 PM
From: "bill dality"
To: tomas@yahoo.ca
I suppose that's one possibility...if a law of "conservation of space" were in effect
But if space is expanding in all directions equally then the sides BC and AD are also moving away from each other (not towards each other)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 20:04:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: "tomas " <@yahoo.ca>
Subject: RE: STRETCHING and CONTRACTING SPACE AS THE SOLE CAUSE OF ALL MOTION
To: "bill dality"
SUPPOSE YOU HAVE A SQUARE ABCD. THEN AT SOME POINT IN TIME THE OPPOSITE SIDES AB AND CD START MOVING APART WHILE THE OTHER OPPOSITE SIDES START MOVING TOWARDS EACH OTHER. USING THE THEORY THAT OBJECTS ARE NOT REALLY MOVING BUT RATHER IT IS THE SPACE BETWEEN THEM WHICH CHANGES, DOES IT MEAN THAT THE SAME SPACE CAN STRETCH AND SHRINK AT THE SAME TIME?
NO LONGER ON COCA, SWITCHED OVER TO AYAHUASCA.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:16:16 -0800 (PST)
From: "bill dality"
Subject: Speed ,distance,time...getting from A to B by the contraction of space
To: tomas@yahoo.ca
Velocity =distance/time
If "space-time" are a single dimension then what does "velocity" mean?
These dimensions must be separated for "velocity" to have any meaning!
Light speed is not the fastest speed there is!
There does not appear to be any limit to the speed at wch space expands. Einstein only placed a limit (light speed)on the velocity at wch an object possessing mass can travel within space. Space is not a substance and theoretically has no mass.Space or volume is derived by cubing a linear dimension.
(see entry under "space,time,etc."
This generates a paradox : How is it possible to distinquish the increasing separation of two objects due to the expansion of space and another kind of motion that is not due to the expansion of space?...The relative motion between the two objects is the same and indistinguishable.
When describing the motion of one object in relation to another could we not say in equivalent terms that the objects themselves remain stationary, and it is the space between them that moves and undergoes expansion/contraction.
We say that the position of an object relative to another object cannot change at the speed of light because the mass of the object would become infinite. Why could we not simply avoid this problem by saying it is the space between the objects wch is expanding at light speed (or greater than light speed)? The objects do not accelerate to light speed(in fact they remain stationary);rather it is the space between the objects wch expands/contracts at light speed.
Are these not in effect equivalent descriptions of the same event?
If light waves are also stretched (red-shifted)as space expands then all measurements of spatial distance will be affected/distorted as the measuring rod(light) used to measure distance is itself lengthened!
The "expansion of space" increases the time required to traverse the distance/space between point A and point B.. Conversely ,"spatial contraction" decreases this time, ..and taken to the limit, both distance and time collase to zero! This "spatial collapse" might explain "quantum tunneling" whereby "energy" can traverse space from point A to point B instantaneously.(without the constraint of the light speed limit).
A corollary of this thesis follows:
To achieve travel at or greater than light velocity we need to learn how to contract space!
Perhaps changing space is no more an impossibility than breaking the sound barrier!
According to Einstein ,"space" is malleable ,and can be bent and even collapsed.
(Incidentally "time" also is not a fixed entity ,but is also influenced by the speed of travel .
The flow of time slows to zero as we approach the speed of light,and at light speed time flow stops altogether.).
According to the Fitzgerald-Lorenz principle ,the dimension of lenght collapses to zero at the speed of light!
That is,at light speed ,space collapses in the direction of motion!
This is equivalent to stating that the spatial distance between A and B becomes zero, or that A and B occupy the same point in space,or that the distance between A and B can be traversed instantaneously.
This suggests that we can travel great distances instantaneosly by manipulating time and space.If it is not possible for there to be a separation between observor (A) and observed (B),then observor and observed are a unified and inseparable whole/unity (AB)!
see "The concept of Non-dualism (Oneness)"
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete"To achieve travel at or greater than light velocity we need to learn how to contract space!"
DeleteIt is possible that the "light speed limitation" that applies to the movement of objects (such as photons) within space
does not apply to the movement (expansion/contraction) of space itself!
If space can expand/contract at or greater than light speed then the distance/space between point A and point B in space can be traversed much more quickly by collapsing space!
Why do you suggest that the expansion/contraction of space may not be subject to the "speed of light" limitation?
DeleteAre you referring to the "Fitzgerald-Lorenz Contraction"?
The "contraction of space" or spatial collapse is the logical reverse equivalence of "cosmic expansion" wch began with the Big Bang/Creation event.
DeleteRecent measurements suggest that the velocity of cosmic expansion is increasing
.Knowing the present velocity of expansion and the rate of increase permits the calculation of how long it would take take to reach or exceed the limit of light speed.
What happens to the universe when this "limit"
Deleteis reached?
At light speed... time stops and according to "Fitzgerald-Lorenz" , space collapses
DeleteRedshift is an experimentally easy-to-determine property of the galaxy's light that tells us how much the universe has stretched between the time the light was emitted and the time it was received).
DeleteAny galaxy with a redshift greater than 1.4 is currently moving away from us faster than the speed of light.
What would be the experience of moving through space at the speed of light?
DeletePerhaps one would have to become light
Deleteto know this!
the "Fitzgerald-Lorenz Contraction" hypothesis states that a moving body exhibits a contraction in the direction of motion when its velocity is close to the speed of light.
DeleteJoe says that "at light speed space collapses"
DeleteAccording to Fitzgerald-Lorenz,
it is not space that contracts but the lenght of an object moving at or near light speed .
This interpretation is based on the premise that the space that an object occupies is only external to and separate from the object itself.
An alternative interpretation is that space/volume is also contained within the object ...and therefore if the object is "flattened" in the direction of motion ,then the space contained within the object is flattened or collapsed also.
The question is what is the limit of this contraction?
Can it be taken to the point of dimensionlessnees and invisibility?
Can/does an object become invisible as it approaches the speed of light?
from the observation viewpoint of light:
DeleteSupposing a lazer beam was shot out from tbe earth and we were able to hop onto it just as it departed at the speed of light.
Were we to look back at the earth from the observational frame of reference of the laser pulse, the earth would have dissapeared,i.e.become invisible.
This is because our perception of the earth depends on light from the earth reaching us.
But no light emanating from the earth can ever catch up to us.
The earth has not ceased to exist but rather has ceased to be observable.
In other words any object/mass moving away from an observer at light speed is unobservable.
When the relative speed between observor(subject)and observed(object) reaches light speed, the object of observation ceases to be visible/observable.
In fact if we looked backward from the observational frame of reference of a speeding photon
all we would see is blackness...because no light could ever catch up to us!
Therefore an object may appear black(black hole/dark matter)not just becuz it is emitting no light but also becuz
the ligbt wch it emits cannot reach us.
What then would you see if you looked "forward"?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Deletemotion as expansion of space:
DeleteTwo objects, A (earth) and B (photon), separate and move away from each other in opposite directions.
A and B transmit information about their position in space by sending laser pulses to an observor, C.
From C's perspective in the absence of another reference point it is not possible to distinquish whether A is stationary relative to B, or B is stationary with respect to A.
C only observes that the distance between A and B is increasing at the rate of 300,000 km/ second.
In equivalent terms the space between A and B is expanding at the speed of light.
Expansion faster than light:
Deletehttp://www.businessinsider.com/galaxies-travel-faster-than-the-speed-of-light-2015-10
According to this, Relativity Theory places no limit on the speed at wch space itself can expand.
DeleteIn other words space can expand at speeds greater than the speed at wch light travels.
What are the implications of this?
https://youtu.be/myjaVI7_6Is
How is it possible for galaxies with redshifts greater than 1.4 to be moving away from us faster than the speed of light.
DeleteI thought Einstein's theory of Relativity prohibited any object possessing mass from traveling at tbe speed of light (let alone at velocities greater than the speed of light)?
from the observation viewpoint of light:
Deletesupposing a photon, B,is ejected from an atom, A, and we were able to hop onto it (the photon) just as it departed at the speed of light.
From the observational frame of reference of the photon, B,we are at rest and the atom (wch has lost its visibility but presumably has retained its mass) is now receding from us at the speed of light.
So clearly by transposing our point of view (from A to B)and identifying the photon as having the rest frame of reference we have demonstrated that an object with mass (in this case the atom wch emitted the photon) can travel at the speed of light!
And if an atom can do so,so can a galaxy.
I mean according to Relativity it is equally possible to state that the atom is moving away from the photon
Deleteas much as the photon is moving away from the atom.
Or a third eqiivalent statement is that the space/distance between the atom a.d the photon is expanding at the speed of light!
This third description assumes both atom and photon are at rest and it is the intervening space between them that is moving.
You said that an object/mass moving away from an observer at light speed is unobservable./invisible/black because any light it may emit can never reach us.
DeleteSo how is it then that galaxies have been observed with redshifts greater than 1.4 and therefor moving away from us at greater than the speed of light?
Should not such galaxies be invisible?
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Delete
DeleteAccording to Einstein nothing with mass can move as fast as light, or faster.But empty space has no mass and can therefore move at any speed including speeds greater than that permitted for objects possessing mass.The speed at wch space itself can expand is unlimited!
Therefore there is nothing which prevents objects that are separated by huge distances from moving relative to each other faster than the speed of light.
That would explain how galaxies can be moving away from us at greater than the speed of light (that is, having redshifts greater than 1.4)...but how can they be observable? They should be invisible because the light they emit could never reach us!
DeleteHere's an explanation:
Deletehow can we possibly see a galaxy that is moving away from us faster than the speed of light?
The answer is that the motion of the galaxy now has no effect whatsoever on the light that it emitted billions of years ago. The light doesn't care what the galaxy is doing; it just cares about the stretching of space between its current location and us.
So we can easily imagine a situation where the galaxy was not moving faster than the speed of light at the moment the light was emitted; therefore, the light was able to "outrun" the expansion of space and move towards us, while the galaxy moved away from us as the universe expanded.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWhat's hiding in the darkness?
DeleteThere is an imteresti.g corallory that emerges:"blackness is not emptiness"
Any object/mass moving away from an observer at light speed is unobservable/invisible because any light emitted from it can never reach the observor.
So an observor would have no way of knowi.g of the existence of any such object!
The observor would therefore(following empiricist dogma) reach the erroneous conclusion that objects cloaked by invisibility/blackness do not exist because they cannot be observed/detected.
This then solves the problem of undetectable "dark matter"!
"Dark matter/dark energy" is that part of the universe wch is invisible/black by virtue of its speeding away from us(the observor) at speeds equal to or greater than the speed of light.
In fact wherever we see blackness(the absence of light) such as the darkness between stars in the night sky, we may need to infer that darkness does not represent emptiness/nothingness, but rather objects speeding away from us at the speed of light.
redshifts grreater than 1.4 means the expansion of space can exceed the speed of light
Deletethe"emptiness" of space is a perceptual illusion
so-called "empty space" accounts for 70% of the entire mass of the universe
This "dark matter/energy" is hidden within empty space,
and is "dark" because it is invisible.That is,it is not observable.
If empty space contains 70% of the total mass of the universe,
how is it possible for space to expand at greater than light speed?
How is it that space can expand at faster than light speed?
DeleteThe usual explanation is that space is empty vaccuum
Empty space contains no material substance and therefore has no mass.
Space can therefore expand faster than light speed since no material object is breaking the light speed barrier
Therefore, empty space can certainly expand faster than light.
But...so-called "empty space" is not empty, and there is no such thing as an "empty vacuum"
So-called "virtual" particles are continually popping in and out of empty space (materializing within seemingly empty space).
These particles by definition possess mass and therefore the space containing them was not massless!
The phenomenon of "quantum entanglement" is sometimes seen as evidence that information can be transmitted from point A to point B at faster than the speed of light.
ReplyDeleteBut perhaps it can be more accurately understood as information transfer between two points in space ( A and B) in zero time;that is, instantaneously!
….or as if there were no distance (zero space) separating Point A and Point B!!
Entangled particles behave as if there were neither space nor time between them!
DeleteThe concept of "spatial collapse" suggests that two points/objects A and B separated by spatial distance
Deletecoalesce into one point as the distance between them collapses to zero.
This seems related to travel through space via "wormholes' ..
DeleteWhat about time travel?
Deletetime and space can be manipulated!
time slows with speed of travel .(clocks slow down the faster they move)
time flow is also affected by a gravitational field--the stronger the gravitational field the more time is slowed.
(there is a mathematical formula for calculating how much time is slowed by a gravitational field)
.Check out Ronald Mallett's book:
"Time Traveler: A Scientist's Personal Mission to Make Time Travel a Reality"
http://www.phys.uconn.edu/~mallett/main/main.htm
Light travels at 300,000 km/second
DeleteAccording to Einstein at that speed time stops..
This means that light can go from its point of emission "A" to any destination "B" instantaneously; i.e.in zero time.
Or alternatively the space between A and B contracts to zero!
This comment has been removed by the author.
Deletea "wormhole," is a distortion/infolding of space which theoretically would let something travel vast distances instantaneously, essentially enabling us to break the cosmic speed limit by traveling great distances in a very short amount of time.
DeletePhysicists Just Achieved The First-Ever Quantum Teleportation Between Computer Chips
DeleteDAVID NIELD31 DEC 2019
https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-manage-quantum-teleportation-between-computer-chips-for-the-first-time
As 2019 winds to a close, the journey towards fully realised quantum computing continues: physicists have been able to demonstrate quantum teleportation between two computer chips for the first time.
Put simply, this breakthrough means that information was passed between the chips not by physical electronic connections, but through quantum entanglement – by linking two particles across a gap using the principles of quantum physics.
We don't yet understand everything about quantum entanglement (it's the same phenomenon Albert Einstein famously called "spooky action"
How does entanglement work?
Delete"Entanglement" implies the instantaneous and simultaneous transfer of information between spatially separated points
Einstein was convinced that there is no such thing as instantaneous action at a distance( not involving an intermediary medium)such as Newton's force of gravity.
Action at a distance cannot occur with an infinite velocity of transmission.(or with any velocity greater than the speed of light).
In view of the finite velocity of light , signal/information propogation necessarily takes time.
Einstein said that information transfer from A to B must pass through the intervening space between A and B ,and the signal could only be carried by electromagnetic radiation wch always travels at the finite speed of light.
In other words , the instantaneous transfer of information (as seems to ocurr during "entanglement") is impossible.
In other words, if two particles/photons occupying the same quantum state are physically separated by any spatial distance AB, changing tje quantum state of one cannot produce a simultaneous change in the other.
This is because a passage of time is required for information transfer to occur across any distance.
The maximum velocity with wch information can be transmitted across space is the speed of light.
Theoretically, quantum entanglement can work over any spatial distance.
How is information transferred between two entangled particles,A and B, in zero time (without traversing the intervening space/distance between the particles)?
How does information transfer occur while circumventing the light speed limit?
But if both time and spatial distance collapse to zero at the speed of light...,it is quite understandable that information can traverse zero distance in zero time;i.e. instantaneously!
In other words, the apparently distinct and spatially separated points A and B... are in actuality one and the same point!
The inter-relatedness of "space" and "time":
ReplyDeleteThe expansion of space alters the measurement of time!
If the velocity of light is to remain constant under all conditions,any expansion of space must be accompanied by a proportional dilation of time ,because space and time are reciprocally interdependent according to the equation:
C = V = D/T
Were it not so, the speed of light would not remain constant.
If space expands (the numerator "D' in the above formula) ,and "T" (the denominator) does not change ,
then C (the velocity of light) would necessarily increase in value.
Since the expansion of space is widely accepted as "factual",
where is the evidence for a corresponding "dilation of time"?
Time dilation:
Deleteif the speed of light is constant, time cannot be constant.
http://www.thebigview.com/spacetime/timedilation.html
DeleteEinstein said that tbe speed of light is a constant.
Since velocity is the ratio of space/time...
at light velocity time stops and distance collapses.
For C to remain constant as t-->0,
distance or space must also contract.
That is, the numerator must decrease as the denominator decreases; otherwise the ratio of d/t (wch defines velocity) could not remain constant.
time and. spatial distance are both dependendent on speed.
DeleteDistance contracts as one's speed increases and approaches the speed of light.
Similarly the flow of time slows as one approaches light speed.
At light speed ,space and time collapse to zero.
So why then does light still take time to traverse space?
According to the phenomenon of "entanglement" , information can move through space from point A to B instantaneously (in zero time).That is, without the passage of any time!
DeleteThis is contrary to the dogma that information transfer takes a finite (non-zero) amount of time....and the fastest speed at wc h information transfer can occur is the speed of light. If instantaneous transmission is not possible, then "entanglement" is not possible!
How do particles become "entangled"?
ReplyDeleteI don't know.
ReplyDeleteBut this guy might:
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/indepth/44015
He has teleported dozens of particles!
"entanglement" is a phenomenon that emerges out of Quantum Mechanics.
entangled particles communicate without any signal being transferred across the space and time that separates them.(as if they were spatially and temporally inseparable).That is,as if the space and time between the two particles didn't exist!
The question is: does the phenomenon of entanglement also operate at the macro level of objects --wch after all, are also made of particles?
DeleteThere is only one world...and we are part of it!
Some claim this behavior (entanglement)is limited to the microscopic world. But this ‘two-world’ view (that is, one set of physical laws for small objects, and another for the rest of the universe including us) has no basis in reason and is being challenged in laboratories around the world.
A couple years ago, researchers published a paper in Nature (Jost et al, 459, 683, 2009) showing that quantum behavior extends into the everyday realm. Pairs of vibrating ions were coaxed to entangle so their physical properties remained bound together when separated by large distances (“spooky action at a distance,” as Einstein put it). Other experiments with huge molecules called ‘Buckyballs’ also show that quantum reality extends beyond the microscopic world. And in 2005, KHC03 crystals exhibited entanglement ridges one-half inch high, quantum behavior nudging into the ordinary world of human-scale objects.
http://www.quantum.at/people/personalwebsites/anton-zeilinger/scientific-profile.html
DeleteI think that electrons jump from one quantum state or orbit to another instantaneously(without traveling through the intervening space).
ReplyDeleteThat is, they dematerialize in one quantum space and reappear in another.
Each such "leap" to a less energetic outer orbital state is accompanied by a concurrent release of a quanta of energy corresponding to a specific wavelenght and frquency.
You seem to be sayong that a possible explanation of howentangled subatomic particles communicate (exchange information instantaneously) is through the collapse of the distance or space between them.
DeleteBut this begs the qjestion of how.
How does space contract to zero?
...and wbat triggers such a collapse?
How does the phenomenon of "quantum entanglement" relate to "spatial colapse"?
ReplyDeleteThe phenomenon of "quantum entanglement"
suggests --at least in theory--
a means of transcending the limitations of time and space.
A possible mechanism for the transfer of information (communication) without signal transmission is by "spatial collapse".
That is , information can traverse the intervening space between sender and receiver instantaneously (in zero time) if space collapses to zero.
The question is whether this can only occur in the quantum domain or whether it can take place in the macro world also?
If it is restricted to the quantum realm, how can we benefit ?
Joe says that "at light speed space collapses"
ReplyDeleteAccording to Fitzgerald-Lorenz,
it is not space that contracts but the lenght of an object moving at or near light speed .
This interpretation is based on the premise that the space that an object occupies is only external to and separate from the object itself.
An alternative interpretation is that space/volume is also contained within the object ...and therefore if the object is "flattened" in the direction of motion ,then the space contained within the object is flattened or collapsed also.
The question is what is the limit of this contraction?
Can it be taken to the point of dimensionlessnees and invisibility?
Can/does an object become invisible as it approaches the speed of light?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteYou seem to be saying that it is not possible to differentiate between an object moving "through space" away from each other, and motion that is due to the stretching of space itself,
Deletemost people who have been on a road trip have experienced the sensation of standing still(although the speedometer was reading 110 km/hr) while the ribbon of road rushed toward and under one like a conveyor belt.
Delete...or sitting in a speeding train,and looking out the window to see the landscape rushing by backwards as though the train itself was standing still
If one were in a rocket ship traveling at light speed toward a destination point "B" ,one might similarly perceive oneself to be not moving at all...while the destination point "B" seemed to be rushing toward one at the speed of light.
Or to put it yet another way,neither oneself nor point "B" are moving ,but it is the spatial distance separating the two points that is collapsing/contracting at the speed of light thereby bringing the two points together.
If the spatial distance between A and B is diminishing/contracting at the speed of light, it could be because:
ReplyDeleteA is standing still and B is moving toward A at light speed,
or B is standing still and A is moving toward B at light speed
or both A and B are moving toward each other each at half the speed of light....and etc.
If A and B are each moving toward each other at 0.75 of the speed of light the spatial distance between them is diminishing/collapsing at 1.5 X the speed of light!
ReplyDeleteClearly the speed of light is not the "highest speed possible"
when it comes to the contraction and expansion of space!
relativity of motion:
ReplyDeletesupposing a photon(A) leaves the earth (B)and travels outward into space.
Relative to the stationary earth the photon is moving at the speed of light (300,000 km/s).
But if we transpose our point of view and assume the observational frame of reference of tne photon...the photon seems to be standing still and it is the earth that is receding from it at the speed of light!
If we don't want to commit to either observational point of view,we can correctly state that the space/distance between A and B is expanding at the speed of light!
It seems unthinkable that the earth could be moving away from the photon at the speed of light!
ReplyDeleteBut...according to the theory of relativity every motion must be considered as a relative motion.
Thus the photon departing from the earth is in motion with respect to the earth
But from the reference point of the photon ,the photon is stationary and it is the earth that is moving away from the photon.
Both descriptions of this single event are equally valid and justifiable depending on one's observational viewpoint or frame of reference
Neither reference body is unique,special, or more valid than the other.
According to the theory of relativity, no object possessing mass can be accelerated to light speed. But from the body of reference of the photon ,the earth's current state of motion is equa!l to the speed of light!
If it was not "accelerated" to that speed, it must have reached its current uniform speed instantaneously (i.e. in zero time)!
But what if the theory actually says that "no body possessing mass can move at the speed of light" whether it was accelerated to that speed or whether it reached that speed instantaneously?
Another solution would be to assume a point of view external to both the earth and the photon.
From this observational vantage point ,
from the instant of separation between photon and earth, it is the space between them that is increasing/expanding at the velocity of light.
this seems like an impossibility.
ReplyDeleteTaking the point of view of the photon as our reference point requires us to assume that this reference body is "at rest" ...but yhis seems illogical because we know that photons are never at rest.
Doesn't matter!
We are making the assumption that the photon is at rest and are observing/measuring the motion of the earth relative to the photon.
From the observational frame of reference of the photon ,the earth is receding from it at the velocity of light!
the statement that "the earth is receding at the velocity of light"
contradicts the principle that no object possessing mass can travel at light velocity
The Backwards Donkey
ReplyDelete(the principle of relativity is well illustrated by this Sufi tale: what one perceives depends on one's point of observation.There is always more than a single point of view!)
A certain wise man was widely reputed to have become irrational in his presentation of facts and arguments.
It was decided to test him,so that the authorities of his country could pronounce as to whether he was a danger to public order or not.
On tbe day of the. test he paraded past the courtroom mounted on a donkey,facing the donkey's rear.
When the time came for him to speak for himself,he said to the judges:
"When you saw me just now, wch way was I facing?"
The judges said: "Facing the wrong way."
" You illustrate my point, " he answered,
"for I was facing the right way,from one point of view.
It was the donkey wch was facing the wrong way ."