Posted on 01/14/2002 8:14:36 PM PST by My Favorite Headache
1. Photons travel at the speed of light.
2. As things are accelerated toward the speed of light, distances shrink toward zero.
3. Therefore, from the photon's point of view, the Universe is located all in one spot!
So does this mean that all the light we see in the world is just one damn photon zipping all over the place (in our minds) , but in actuality (from its point of view) just fidgeting around in one place!
I thought Alan Greenspan was the Prime Mover.
Or is he the Mover of the Prime ...
Rate?
Please let me know if the following sheds any light on the question: How is spin in quantum systems a direct result of special relativity
Fixed-but-unknown would violate other things that can be measured. QM is weird. Much of the reason for the weirdness is that the basic objects in QM are not the macroscopic things we normally deal with, but the wave function. Physicist can explain things much better than I can.
I mean, the ironic statement physicists make about quantum states: "you don't know the value of a quantum parameter until you measure it." -- well, duh? What is the evidence that the state is not a characteristic property of an individual particle before it is measured?
Any interaction that reveals this characteristic is a measurement. Otherwise the characteristic remains unknown, not necessarily indefinite -- or is there a clear argument that convinces physicists that it is indefinite, not merely unknown?
I wonder if you've run across some exposition on other paradox in the current physics. One is the "twin paradox" where one brother rockets off into space at 0.99 C for a period of time and comes back to earth to find his twin brother quite older. Now since the time dilation is due to relative speeds, how come the earth bound brother is not younger, having speed off from his rocketship bound brother at 0.99 C? What happens if both rocket off in opposite directions (but in a circular path), so that they meet sometime in the future? Who will be older?
Or another strange paradox: how did the universe expand outside of the Swartzchild radius after the big-bang? I mean, here we have the hypothesis that all matter may eventually collapse into black holes that it can never escape from, and the opposite hypothesis that the universe originated from a singularity that was obviously smaller than the Swartzchild radius for the matter contained in the universe.
On the Big Bang and the Swartzchild radius, here’s a nice discussion of Symmetry Principles of the Unified Field Theory.
As for me, however, I tend to a higher dimensional dynamic solution such as this one: Space-Time-Matter Consortium
For a thorough discussion of the theory click here
It has been exciting for me to watch them develop this theory over the past few years. I now tend to visualize the observed realm at 4 coordinates as an unfortunate selection of coordinates from a higher dimensional dynamic. Under their theory, the big bang itself, could be a higher dimensional shock wave. Here's more on how the theory holds with regard to:
Astrophysics
Cosomology
Particle Physics
"Out of the box" thinking has a great appeal to me. Perhaps it might to you, also!
Right. But it isn't, and that's the problem.
Always in palingenesis, never getting there. Glad I'm not a Jainist. Or a Cynic for that matter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.