General
Relativity For Teletubbies
Sir Kevin Aylward B.Sc., Warden of the
Kings Ale
Axioms,
Clocks & Relativity
“A clock always reads the correct time, and time is
what a clock reads”
Ahmmmmm…………
Back to the Contents section
Overview
Does QFT give a qualitative
account of the failure of the MMX to detect motion through an alleged Aether
generated reference frame, and thus account for the results of SR,
notwithstanding the two fundamental postulates of SR?
Can SR be regarded as as a theory in a conventional sense, in the knowledge that the two postulates of SR cannot be verified independently of each other, thus forming a circular system.
Introduction
Special Relativity has its
fair share of distractors, although by few in the established environment.
However, it is clear that the fundamental results of SR, that is, the
Lorentz Transformation (LT) agree with observations extremely well, with no
known disagreements. Thus, there is no reasonable doubt that the LT is an
accurate description of observations.
The question posed here
is, if one examines the facts as known
today, is the theory of SR correct, that is, are
the axioms of SR correct, notwithstanding that the results agree with all
the empirical evidence? That is, was it justified in rejecting the essence of The Lorentz Ether Theory
(LET), which has identical predictions, in light of today’s knowledge,
specifically QFT.
This point is addressed in this paper Fields&Aether, however, the following expands on that view.
A further fundamental point also arises that, as "time" in special relativity, is defined as "what a clock reads", and that SR requires that a "clock always reads the correct time", a circular argument is formed, with the logical conclusion that SR cannot be a theory in a conventional sense at all.
Axioms & Reality
SR makes definitions that
are mathematically consistent. However, SR is fundamentally based on the axiom
that clocks always read the correct same time, independent of velocity profile. SR does this, whilst being completely ignorant of what time physically means or is,
other than simply defining time, as
what a clock reads. This is, clearly, entirely circular.
A clock always reads the correct time, and time is
what a clock reads.
This is clearly
meaningless, and cannot rationally lead to an explanation of anything.
One should appreciate
exactly what a circular argument system actually means. It says that one can
have an entirely consistent system, yet it can still be false.
That is, anything at all
may be “proved” in a circular system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning
If the clock axiom is
false, SR falls apart as a realistic model. That is, one that has a one to one
correspondence with the observables that it claims to be modeling.
This is true, even if the final results just happens
to be correct.
The issue here though, is
that when one takes clocks on round trips they
read different from its reference clock that stays put. This is a physical
real result, and the actual “Theory of Special Relativity” is irrelevant to these
observations.
Thus, the immediate,
direct implication of that real, physical result is that something happened to the clock due to that motion. It's what
engineers would take as the simplest solution. The physical evidence clearly
casts at, first instance, doubt of the stability of clocks undergoing motion, unless there are stronger arguments to
indicate otherwise.
However, SR takes a
somewhat strange alternative; SR simply denies this by fiat, and simply claims
that this magical mathematical object "space-time" exists such that
the clock "takes a longer path in it" to account for the different
readings, even though, SR has no understanding of what time actually is.
SR just claims that
everything you thought you knew, was wrong.
Relativity Postulate & Clocks
The route of the circularity in the definition of time, is the Relativity postulate.
The relativity postulate, essentially, states that physical processes should not depend on a relative velocity with respect to some observer, although in the literature it is worded in many different ways, some of which are incorrect.
Thus, the assumption that clocks should always tick the same, independent of velocity. However, as stated, clock ticks themselves are required for the verification of the speed of light postulate, thus the system is intrinsically circular, its two postulates depend on each other and thus can not therefore constitute a theory in any conventionally accepted manner.
The additional issue is that the relativity postulate does not imply that which is communally attributed to it.
This postulate is taken to also mean that, it is impossible for someone inside a box, to detect the motion of the box, without looking outside the box.
This is false. It is very conceivable, in principle, that physical processes depend on velocity, yet those in the box would still be unable to detect such motion.
For example, if one has a person that is doubled in size, with his house doubled in size, and his chairs all doubled in size, his fridge doubled in size, he wouldn't know, until he compared himself with someone outside his house.
That is, if the size doubling was due to a failure of the Relativity postulate of independence of physical processes on velocity, those in the box would not know that their "laws of physics" had been changed
This is exactly the effect known to be the case according to the LT.
The person traveling with
a clock has no awareness that he is "covering a longer path in space
time" with respect to another observer. Everything looks the same to
him...Except it don't when he reaches his destination.
What was 1000 light years away when he started, has
shrunk to 1 light year, which is the only way SR can account for the fact that
he reached his destination whilst traveling less than the velocity of light, in
his own lifetime.
Thus in order to preserve the claim of the Relativity postulate, essentially, disproven by the fact that reunited clocks read different, SR takes the extraordinary measures of declaring the magical object time itself is a function of velocity, and not the clocks.
The simplest solution, is that the process that make clocks tick, change as a function of velocity, as explained below.
What Time Is
Time is not magic.
What time and space is, is
quite obvious
Space is accounting for the fact that individual
objects don't all sit on
Time is accounting for the fact that objects change
their position and momentum.
Space is created by
objects existing. Time is created by objects moving. It’s truly that simple.
If all objects stopped
moving, time would stop. This is trivially obvious.
“Time” is the result of a
real physical process. Aging means that the positions and momentums of internal
objects of an object, change. This is trivially
obvious.
Clocks cannot age less,
unless their physical processes change less. This is trivially obvious.
If clocks change less,
their physical processes must have been altered. This is trivially obvious,
notwithstanding the circular claims of SR.
A truly empty universe,
cannot have any properties whatsoever, unless of course, one believes in magic.
Thus, the idea that there
is some magical characteristic named “Time” that “exists” independently of physical objects and their physical properties,
and that clocks just measure this magic characteristic, is simply not logically
sustainable.
LT, MMX & Quantum Fields
It is a mathematical fact
that any result of the LT, may be used as the basis of a construction of the LT.
On can thus just take the experimental result of clock readings,
and deduce that measurements of the speed of light will always appear to be the
same value, because the clock is reading
differently due to its motion.
As Lorentz discovered with
his particular own view of a “Quantum Field”, such a LT may be constructed that
accounts for observations in a frame independent way.
Lorentz’s,
misunderstanding was that he took the view that an Aether was an entity with a
separate existence from the objects interacting with it, such that one could
therefore detect motion through it. Such a view was mistaken but does not
invalidate the principle of a Quantum Field interacting with measuring
instruments.
With today’s knowledge of
(alleged) quantum fields (QFT), there is a position
held by some, that all physical objects are, essentially, constructed from a
real physical field, that is an Aether in all but
name. The only relevant distinction from the Lorentz Aether, is that the fields
are dynamic not static, and that all objects are local concentrations of
those fields.
Thus, as all the
instruments in the MMX would be constructed out of the Quantum Field that is
being measured, its relative velocity to such a field would remain
constant. Thus the MMX would be bound to
produce a null result.
It is therefore not
unreasonable to suggest that such processes and fields may indeed affect clock
readings as required by the LT. It’s the simplest solution. Physical objects
such as fields, interact with objects in that field.
To be contrasted with the “time” is what it is and changes,
which is, essentially, magic.
The Reality
It is a known fact that
any physical theory can be written covariantly, that
is independent of coordinate systems. It’s just an exercise in mathematics.
Thus, what appears to be
the case with SR, is that a physical theory has taken
© Kevin Aylward 2000 - 2020
All
rights reserved
The information
on the page may be reproduced
providing
that this source is acknowledged.
Website
last modified 17th May 2020
http://www.kevinaylward.co.uk/gr/index.html
kevinEXTRACTextract@kevinaylward.co.uk
Remove EXTRACT from the email address