General Relativity and Time

What traditions?

What traditions?

The uncertainty principle was discovered and tested by physicist so it has been "figured out". I am sure there is more to learn in this area though. It is discussed it is even taught in colleges!

Always trying to come up with analogies is not helping you. The analogy of motion blur to the uncertainty principle is nonexistent.

These are words that have been strung together without an coherent message.

You cannot tell position or momentum or basically anything other than it is not a very good picture. Maybe the cameraman had the hic-ups and the ladies are not even moving.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The reference in reference effect predicts the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. If one assumes space-time is all there is, but there was a hidden secondary reference, one will not be conscious enough to try and match the shutter speed to the action speed to get rid of the blur. They will use references that always give the effect.

The next question is why a quantum universe? This is also basic to physics and appears as an another mystery. We know it is there, but why?

A quantum universe is also expected from a reference in reference universe. Quanta occur in discontinuous steps with respect to space-time. Reference is reference would explain quanta as being due to movement between references. This movement will make the quanta appear discontinuous in either reference, if we assume only one reference. If we assume reference in reference, the gaps in one reference are the meat in the other reference.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Why do you think this?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Because he's far more comfortable making shit up (or repeating incorrect statements) than he is with facts and rationality.

 

Reference in reference resolves these two gaps in existing theory; why quanta and why Heisenberg Uncertainty. Why is that such a social negative and taboo, even is an area of the forums called alternate theory?

If you look at energy, it also exists in two references at the same time. Besides being a particle and a wave, energy moves at the speed of light, which is the same in all references, while also having wavelength and frequency which are space-time reference dependent. One aspect of energy does not change, being in the C reference, while another aspect changes with space-time reference. Reference in reference is not new. I have been point this pointing this out for years but making this personal has clouded the mind.

 

It's all very well and good to think up an idea to solve a problem, but how do you imagine such a hypothesis could be falsified?

 

Krash661's brief allusions happen to correlate, at least circumstantially, with aspects of my own "ether" model of space, time, gravity, and energy.

In my model of the ether, gravity differs from magnetic energy only because of their vast differences in terms of distances, which "underfires" gravity's "electro" component compared to electromagnetism. -In cosmic space, there exist resonating, identical, elemental ether units both inside cosmic bodies being gravitationally attracted, and in the space between them. As these elemental ether units all resonate with each other, the bodies are gravitationally attracted toward each other.

The same elemental ether units are also in outer space, far from the magnetically energized fields near celestial bodies, but in outer space, the ether is not magnetized and the rate of time is slower because the vibratory rate of the (non-magnetically affected) elemental ether units is slower. -The observed slowing of clocks inside space vehicles such as orbiting satellites, at certain heights, is due to resonance between the elemental ether units of the clock and outer space, mediated from the clock all the way to outer space via super-refined ether units. -(Such a clock's time-rate is also affected by the velocity of the vehicle, which affects the degree of resonance between the etheric elements of the clock and identical etheric units in space.) -The clock's time-rate is actually that of outer space time, because resonances between elemental ether units act amazingly instantaneously across vast distances of space. -Witness so-called "quantum entanglement."

In my model, quantum entanglement represents radiated packets of etheric energy which have the same vibratory pattern. Elemental ether units are the only actual participants in this phenomenon, with the quantum units kinetically "walled off" like cool "arms" of a quiet purring ether mechanism which can turn itself on and off, by itself, any time.

Not just gravity and magnetism, but other phenomena like light, spontaneous human combustion, and others all are explainable via the same basic ether model. These phenomena appear vastly different from each other, as we observe them in our quantized setting on earth, but they are all due to the same basic underlying ether mechanism. They all represent phenomena which, as we observe them at our observed quantum-level, where they are manifested via spin-vector forces, but at their underlying basic level, they all arise from vibrational elemental etheric forces, where radiated packets of etheric energy have varying patterns of vibration, producing phenomena which appear vastly different after they undergo transition to quantum-scale spin-vector energic mechanisms.

 

Particle colliders have shown this to be true for years. A proton is a collection of in situ sub particles which when combined as a proton will last billions of years. If we collide protons and release the sub structure, their time scale changes to a fraction of a second.

If the laws of physics are same in all references, then this fraction of a second also applies to the reference inside the proton. But for that to be true, these same sub particles would need to be extremely time dilated inside the proton, so a fraction of a second in their in situ reference, will last billions of years in space-time reference.

 

scientific knowledge is just too advance to be translated into one's own primitive conceptual framework. it's analogous to if i were to try to translate quantum mechanics into the grunts and screeches of a chimpanzee.
there's a high attrition rate for scientist in these programs. you would think they would be energised by the challenge, but a lot of them take the ego deflation very hard when they find out not only how much they don't know, but how much they're not capable of understanding.
this is usually the second main reason they resort to basic sciences and attempt to re-establish established science.
the main reason is simply because they are uneducated and have no where near such experience, as they come to these cesspools labeled as science sites.

edit-
it's as simple as, why are you not in a lab or project site working ?

 

I invented the concept as a way to solve a problem. I was thinking about Heisenberg Uncertainty, several years back, and was wondering about the observation that one can measure the momentum or the position of an electron, but not both at the same time.

The question I asked myself was, how can you measure both at the same time? My thinking was since we can measure one at a time, all we need to do is have two different scientists, with one looking with blinders at only position and the other with blinders looking at only momentum. Then we do a picture in picture with two video feeds, so I, as a third party, can see both at the same time; reference in reference. The limitation of Heisenberg's observation was connected to one reference trying to do it all, not looking at two independent but connected references.

Let me extrapolate this. Instead of just observing, say our two scientists have also developed a way to control their observation. The first can vary the position, while the second can control the momentum, by tweaking knobs on a control panel. Since position and momentum are connected, as part of one integrated effect, changes in position will be limited by needed changes in momentum, and changes in momentum will need to accompanied by needed changes in position. Neither scientist will be in full control of their own aspect, since both position and momentum are mutually dependent. Each will see uncertainty in control, as each scientist, impacts the other.

The only way for this to be predictable is for both to work as team.

 

Coming up with a concept to resolve an issue is only as good as it being able to actually do what it says.

While it sounds great, as far as I understand it simply isn't possible for two observers in different references to measure the same particle - one for momentum, the other for position. Even with blinders. The issue is that whoever gets there first destroys the ability to precisely measure the other property at that same time. The third party won't see both, it will just see one or the other.

As James said, the issue is not one of relativity but of operators that are non-commutative, and it's not simply that you can't measure the two properties precisely at the same time, but that the particle doesn't actually have precise values of those two properties simultaneously. It is simply a case of one OR the other, not both.
Conceptualising different references so as to be able to measure both seems to be to misunderstand the nature of what you are looking at.

 

krash661, If interested, my ether model is explained in more detail in a recent post of mine under "Ether, the only path to unifying cosmic forces."

To address your comment "why are you not at a project site,?" - I do have a potential field test, designed to generate an etheric energy field, and then to test for a predicted effect, but the test would be expensive and is beyond my means to finance. -It's based on codebreaking an obscure source of information in a historical Document. -This project would involve testing for a predicted decrease in the densities of materials inside the test system, an effect not found with known forms of energy. I would like to find a sponsor. If a new form of energy were found, it could have beneficial properties.

 

The delusion is strong with this one.

 

Lol, are you serious? Please tell me that's a joke. That isnt how the HUP works. The HUP is a fundamental principle governing the operation of the universe, not an artefact of insufficient measurement technology!

 

He has been told that many times. He steadfastly refuses to listen or learn.

 

The paradox is you (traditions) can't explain why uncertainty or why quanta, yet you seem to be able to make absolute statements of its limits. If you don't understand how the car works, then not knowing you are stuck in first gear, might make you think 20 mph is top end speed of the car. I will come back when I have more time.

 

How about you come back when you have more knowledge, instead?

 

Here is a way to measure both the position and momentum of a particle at the same time, something the traditionalists have not been able to do and therefore claim to be impossible. All it takes is ingenuity based on an understanding of how Heisenberg Uncertainty works. Black box uncertainty will makes it too hard to do this applied science since one has to assume crap shoot.

What you do is make a target, so a specific position is fixed ahead of time. Next, you hit the target with the particle and measure its momentum. You don't need to measure momentum and position, since position is fixed ahead of time. This is a variation of reference in reference, with one reference made constant ahead of time; in situ particle reference is fixed in basic particle composites like the proton.

 

it's as simple as, why are you not in a lab or project site working ?