# Thread: Master Theory (edition 2)

1. Originally Posted by Masterov
For example: from target of elementary particle accelerator generate unstable particles emitted from the known lifetime (tau leptons - 5 10^-13 seconds) sometimes. During life, they manage to overcome the distance that can not be overcome if the move at the speed of light.
Have you learned about why muons formed in the upper atmosphere reach the ground? For the same reason, leptons manage to cross distances that exceed your stupid misconceptions. How stupid are you? Really.

2. Originally Posted by Masterov
For example: from target of elementary particle accelerator generate unstable particles emitted from the known lifetime (tau leptons - 5 10^-13 seconds) sometimes. During life, they manage to overcome the distance that can not be overcome if the move at the speed of light.
Because they experience time dilation relative to the accelerator. They experience about $5 \times 10^{-13}$ seconds but to us it seems like $10^{-10}$ seconds and thus during that time they move further than $5 \times 10^{-13} \times c$.

The muons are seen to move at something like 0.9999c and they live for around $\gamma(0.9999c) \times 5 \times 10^{-13}$ seconds, during which time they travel a distance $\gamma(0.9999c) \times 5 \times 10^{-13} s \times 0.9999c$.

See how it works? If a particle lives for a time T from its point of view then if it moves at a speed v relative to the accelerator then it will be seen to live for a time $\gamma(v)T$, where $\gamma(v) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}}$. Since distance is speed times velocity it'll be seen to move a distance $v\gamma(v)T$. No one, either the particle or accelerator, sees anyone move faster than light, it is all consistent.

Seriously, learn some special relativity.

3. Originally Posted by AlphaNumeric
Because they experience time dilation relative to the accelerator.
It is not possible. Time dilation (of Einstein's theory) is a consequence of the presence of velocity, but does not the acceleration.

Einstein speek: $\frac{dt'}{dt}=\gamma$. (Transverse Doppler effect.)

$t'$ - time of under review IRF.

4. Originally Posted by Tach
How stupid are you? Really.
You'll pay for this your words (if you happen to be wrong). In this case, you (if you're an honest person) do to finish his scientist career. (I am sure that your colleagues will help you with this if you show indecision.)

5. Originally Posted by Masterov
It is not possible.

Einstein speek: $\frac{dt'}{dt}=\gamma$. (Transverse Doppler effect.)

$t'$ - time of under review IRF.
Why isn't it possible? Because you don't understand basic stuff?

$d \tau= dt \sqrt {1-(v/c)^2}$

so

$dt=\gamma d \tau$

Using Alfanumeric's notation, if a particle lives a time $T$ in its proper frame , it will live a time $\gamma T$ in a frame where the particle moves at speed $v$. This is basic stuff, you are totally ignorant.

6. Repeat: I'm looking for a professional who understands the relativism and can answer the question: Einstein bestowed the absoluteness to the cross-scale (but not for time) - on what basis?

You not has knowledge to give a qualified answer to this question, but repeated a phrases:
Originally Posted by Tach
you are totally ignorant.
Originally Posted by Tach
How stupid are you? Really.
You hear these phrase to your address from your colleagues every day and to do cackle like parrots. (I suspect).

I see no reason to continue to communicate with you.

7. Originally Posted by Masterov

Einstein speek: $\frac{dt'}{dt}=\gamma$. (Transverse Doppler effect.)

$t'$ - time of under review IRF.
You mean $\frac{dt}{d \tau}=\gamma$ where $\tau$ is the proper time? You don't know the basics yet you pretend to discuss relativity.

8. Originally Posted by Masterov
Repeat: I'm looking for a professional who understands the relativism and can answer the question: Einstein bestowed the absoluteness to the cross-scale (but not for time) - on what basis?
Masterov,

No one answers the question you have posed several times now likely for two reasons. First is we, or at least "I" am not entirely sure what you mean. And second, I am not sure Einstein ever addressed the question himself and again we, or "I" have no real idea what his thoughts were or might have been.

I can give you my thoughts on the issue, with the disclaimer that though I have read some of the older literature I have not had access to all of the literature that might have some influence on this topic and anything I say is only my opinion. (And yes I am fully aware of what some folks think about personal opinions. It really does not concern me. I remain opinionated anyway!)

In special relativity Einstein was dealing with a modernization of Relativity, which predates his efforts by several hundred years at least. His effort seems to have been largely to address Relativity from a context that incorporated Maxwell's work on electrodynamics. Hence, the title of his 1905 paper, "On the electrodynamics of moving bodies" and a flat Minkowski space-time, in which time moves in only one direction, consistent with experience.

The last three words there are perhaps significant, "consistent with experience". Einstein seemed at least in the early stages of his work to base his theoretical models on the results of experiment and experience. And time as a mater of experience moves in only one direction.

After publishing his 1905 paper on Relativity he began to explore its impact on gravity and at least two known and unresolved observations that Newton's vision of gravity could not explain, the perihelion advancement of Mercury's orbit and the apparent instantaneous action at a distance required, for Newton's field equation to be functionally accurate, which it was and remains to be.

I am not sure that anyone can truly say or know what it was that initially lead Einstein to the concept of curved space, as an explanation of the known problems of gravity at the time. It may well have been nothing more than recognizing the impact that the Lorentz Transformations would have on flat Minkowski space-time. However, he arrived at the conclusions he did, and space-time as defined from the perspective of GR became curved... And while we have experience in the world such that spacial coordinate systems can physically have meaning in all directions from a starting point, our experience of time was still limited to change progressing in only one direction, forward and into the future.

However, in associating the Lorentz Transformations with a curvature of space also came implied changes to time. Time when viewed from the perspective of a curved and dynamic space-time and the Lorentz Transformations, lost any ridged structure, and become to some extent flexible, in its rate of change. The flow of time could a can be imagined to be subject to both the curvature of space and relativistic affects, while consistent with experience it still remains constrained to motion or change in only one direction, forward and into the future.

From the perspective of GR while time cannot be imagined to change directions it can be imagined to move at differing rates depending upon the conditions within which it is viewed..., whether that is the now curved space of GR or the relativistic effects of velocity as described within SR.

Since our experience of time involves motion in only one direction, representing time as moving in two directions from a starting point or zero reference point is not consistent with experience. We can at least at present only imagine time as past, present and future and that it only moves from the present to the future, the past being as far as experience is concerned an artifact of memory. Though I am sure that the past would remain, should our memories fail, experience continues to move only into the future.

9. Originally Posted by Masterov
It is not possible. Time dilation (of Einstein's theory) is a consequence of the presence of velocity, but does not the acceleration.
Accelerators accelerate particles so that they have, relative to the Earth, high velocity. Apply an acceleration and you change the velocity, by definition!

The accelerators get the particles to speeds like 0.9999c. Lots of relative speed.

Originally Posted by Masterov
You'll pay for this your words (if you happen to be wrong). In this case, you (if you're an honest person) do to finish his scientist career. (I am sure that your colleagues will help you with this if you show indecision.)
What on Earth are you talking about?

If you were an honest person you'd learn some basic physics.

Originally Posted by Masterov
Repeat: I'm looking for a professional who understands the relativism and can answer the question: Einstein bestowed the absoluteness to the cross-scale (but not for time) - on what basis?
Rpenner has provided a ton of formal mathematics, haven't you realised he understands it? If you want people with various letters after their name then I've got a PhD in physics.

Originally Posted by Masterov
I see no reason to continue to communicate with you.
You have no understanding of relativity and you don't seem to even realise it. The question is why should anyone continue to communicate with you?

10. Your English is good. Even though you were writing a lot, I understood almost everything. But some sentences i do not understand.
Originally Posted by OnlyMe
And time as a mater of experience moves in only one direction.
What is the meaning "mater"? (matter?)
in flat Minkowski space-time time moves in only one direction, consistent with experience.
In flat Minkowski space-time time moves in only one direction:

$s^2=(ct)^2-x^2-y^2-z^2=(-ct)^2-x^2-y^2-z^2$

Direction of time is not definite. (Is it?)
It does not matter now.

11. Time doesn't move. It is a concept used to explain motion.

12. Originally Posted by NietzscheHimself
Time doesn't move. It is a concept used to explain motion.
Yes! I'm agree.

I tried to realize the model of matter (hamiltonian) generator in Minkowski space, but I could not. (It was eight years ago.)

This forced me to try to understand Einstein's theory. So originated Master Theory.

Time of my generator is static also.

13. Originally Posted by Masterov
Your English is good. Even though you were writing a lot, I understood almost everything. But some sentences i do not understand.What is the meaning "mater"? (matter?)
This was a bad phrasing. Perhaps... Time as a result of experience moves only toward the future.., or Time is experienced only to move in one direction...

In flat Minkowski space-time time moves in only one direction:

$s^2=(ct)^2-x^2-y^2-z^2=(-ct)^2-x^2-y^2-z^2$

Direction of time is not definite. (Is it?)
It does not matter now.
Mathematically the direction of time is not definite perhaps. Mathematics and experience are not always equivalent and remember I was attempting to "imagine" some basis for Einstein's treatment of time and space.

And yes I tend to over think and over explain things. One of my former bosses used to routinely complain that I was providing too much unnecessary information. This is as it it is. There is no help for it. Just as there is no help for the fact that though I try to see the perspectives of others, I remain opinionated myself.

14. Why should me slow down time? I've shown that we can restrict the deformation of space.

Why?

15. Originally Posted by NietzscheHimself
Time doesn't move. It is a concept used to explain motion.
This is true and yet, the direction of time remains a subject of great discussion, both in the past and present.

16. OnlyMe, Matter generator must be hamiltonian. Ie time must be reversible. This means that: if exist Matter, then exist anti-Matter (time flowing in the opposite direction).

The electron and positron are distinguished direction of time.

I understand it.

17. Originally Posted by Masterov
Your English is good. Even though you were writing a lot, I understood almost everything.
Firstly, English is my native language. Secondly, I think it's important to be coherent. And thirdly, writing technical physics is a coherent way is literally my job.

Originally Posted by Masterov
But some sentences i do not understand.
If you are unfamiliar with the concepts I have referred to then it is a sign you need to familiarise yourself with basic relativity. This stuff is covered during undergraduate physics courses. I've taught it to 1st years.

Originally Posted by Masterov
What is the meaning "mater"? (matter?)
Matter, the substance of materials and objects.

[QUOTE=Masterov;2814170]In flat Minkowski space-time time moves in only one direction:

$s^2=(ct)^2-x^2-y^2-z^2=(-ct)^2-x^2-y^2-z^2$[/tex]No, only one of those expressions is even possibly right. There is a choice in how you write down the metric of Minkowski space-time, it is known as the signature. The space-time metric is either $\eta = \left( \begin{array}{cccc} -1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & +1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & +1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & +1 \end{array}\right)$ OR it is $\eta = \left( \begin{array}{cccc} +1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & -1 \end{array}\right)$. It is not both.

The first is often written as (-+++), while the second is written as (+---), referring to the signs on the diagonal. For the (-+++) signature the space-time interval is $ds^{2} = \eta_{ab}dx^{a}dx^{b} = -dt^{2} + dx^{2}+dy^{2}+dz^{2}$.

This has nothing to do with the direction of motion, it is a statement about lengths of curves through 4 dimensional space-time. The length of a curve is independent of the direction you move along it.

18. Originally Posted by Masterov
OnlyMe, Matter generator must be hamiltonian. Ie time must be reversible. This means that: if exist Matter, then exist anti-Matter (time flowing in the opposite direction).

The electron and positron are distinguished direction of time.

I understand it.
I must admit that, I do not.

It does not seem to be consistent with experience and I remain to some extent still influenced by a classical understanding of experience. Though I do remember on one occasion when experimenting with a particular mushroom that events did seem to take on an order not entirely consistence with my previous experiences. Sadly the experiment was not repeatable in a consistent manner.., though I did try on numerous occasions.

19. Originally Posted by Masterov
OnlyMe, Matter generator must be hamiltonian. Ie time must be reversible. This means that: if exist Matter, then exist anti-Matter (time flowing in the opposite direction).
Hamiltonian flows are something very specific. A system can have a well defined Hamiltonian but that doesn't mean all things which follow from that related to Hamiltonian flows. You mention antimatter, but that isn't due to a Hamiltonian flow, it is due to conjugacy properties of fields.

For instance, in QED the Lagrangian involves both $\psi$ and $\bar{\psi}$, specifically $\mathcal{L} = \bar{\psi}(i\gamma^{a}\partial_{a}-m + ie\gamma^{a}A_{a})\psi$. The fields are $\psi$ and $A_{a}$, the electron and photon respectively. The field $\bar{\psi}$ is obtained from $\psi$ but represents positrons.

A Hamiltonian flow describes how the dynamics/properties of a system can be modelled by trajectories through the system's phase space. The Hamiltonian flow basically refers to the motion a system moves through in phase space as time passes. For instance, if you want to know how some quantity A varies as the system evolves then you compute $\dot{A} \propto \{A,H\}$, where { , } is a Poisson bracket. This is seen in quantum mechanics (after quantisation obviously) in the form of Heisenberg's Equations, where the rate of change of some quantity is proportional to the commutation with the Hamiltonian, $\dot{A} \propto [A,H]$.

20. Originally Posted by Masterov
You not has knowledge to give a qualified answer to this question, but repeated a phrases:You hear these phrase to your address from your colleagues every day and to do cackle like parrots. (I suspect).
There's a wonderful insult here, I suspect: "to do cackle like parrots" sound particularly good...

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•