NEW: NOTE TO THE READER: IT IS TIME [20110803-11]--
The author is preparing a short booklet of a few pages and diagrams to explain the first order correction to Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity: The final result, when published, will make plain all the funny stuff about CERN neutrinos traveling faster-than-light, (if not already by neutrino shaping per above), and quantum-entanglement faster-than-light, and show a most-amusing result that the Special Theory, for all its accuracy, is but an Almagest of bizarre equations, that, for all their accuracy, must imply that 'we' are probably one-level away from understanding the exact coincidence of mathematical metric theory and astrophysical spacetime theory: which hitherto was only ever an approximation, (cf the Thompson theory of the smoke-ring-atom we discovered one-level away from understanding what electrons, are).[The following is being prepared as a powerpoint-kind presentation whence its oversized font]
High
Energy Astrophysics
Mr. Raymond Kenneth Petry (Senior Visitor)
Extracurricular -
Presentation
Nov. 6, 2011 (preliminary draft)
FIRST
ORDER CORRECTION TO SPECIAL RELATIVITY
Special
Relativity theory, published a century ago, was a lemma to a conjecture that the
speed of light en vacuo was constant in all directions: Doctor-Candidate Albert
Einstein assumed it so, and published his consequences; The Michelson-Morley
tabletop interferometry experiment had shown the speed of light equal in a few
pairs of directions, Lorentz-Fitzgerald answered it with Length-contraction,
Time-dilation; Others raced to up, theory and practice: Minkowski introduced his
Invariant, for computing this new space-time with mathematical, conventionality;
Hilbert almost beat-out Einstein publishing his equations of General
Relativity….
But--
nobody so-much-as checked Einstein’s arithmetic: the bounds of functions: Albert
never checked that his work was complete, meanwhile decrying
quantum-entanglement for bucking his concept of Locality, And earned some
chiding that he must’ve done poorly as a boy in mathematics, But neither did
Hilbert check…
Withstanding,
quantum-entanglement faster-than-light and more recent evidence that neutrinos
from
BUT→
(A COLORING BOOK FOR HIGH ENERGY ASTROPHYSICISTS,
DOCTORAL
CANDIDATES,
SIMULTANEITY:
Solved. (Physicists had misassumed it to be possible.)
SPATIAL
RELATIVITY: Solved. (It came from a hundred light-years
away.)
THE
RELATIVISTIC TWINS [CLOCK] PARADOX: Solved. (Non
simultaneity.)
SPOOKY
ACTION AT A DISTANCE: Solved. (An open-jaws experiment).
NEUTRINOS
FASTER-THAN-LIGHT: Solved. (An open-jaws experiment).
DARK-ENERGY
ACCELERATED-EXPANSION OF THE COSMOS: Solved. (The equivalence of spherical
cosmic radius and linearly expanding motion.)
THE
DARK
MATTER: Notes. (Still a linear combination of MACHOs and
WIMPs.)
THE
THE
NEAR FUTURE DISCOVERY: (When the Almagest equals the Reality.)
BUT→
PRIMER:
SPACETIME RELATIVITY,
Suppose an Observer
Frame, far from gravitational influential effects, and, every event occurring in
this Frame: This is the way science has been done thousands of years on Earth:
despite Earth’s solar orbit and gravity-well… But the notion is, calculable for
objects and events passing in gedanken (thinkabout)
experiments:
Suppose on the far
side of our Frame an interstellar beacon flashes as it passes
exactly-aligned-center, a marker there, the light travels 500 seconds to reach
us, while the object continues-on 15000 kilometers, gliding 30km/sec. Slowish
but→ Its light appears in a direction advanced
10-4 radians, forward of its new position, relative to us, due to
Stellar Aberration: whether it, moved, or we moved…
But→
This shows the
difference between Observation, and Measurement: We know by observing-devices
and estimate by calculation where the object is at the moment of its beacon
flash: Physicists usually try to observe the measurements of events confirming
their calculations, but astrophysicists usually try to observe the events and
deduce, the measurements, But, this is not always possible or
convenient…
BUT→
PRIMER:
SPACETIME RELATIVITY: TWO FRAMES,
We
assume, per Einstein’s Special Relativity, physics events will result the
same when repeated anywhere within Euclidean flat space, And we assume the speed
of light is constant, 299792.458 km/s; Then, we derive and CHECK,
calculations.
Now:
Suppose we measure a system of photons bouncing among mirrors in one frame, from
a second frame moving past at high speed: Because the speed of light is constant
according to spatiotemporal measurement in the second frame as well, photon
motions must be correlated -convolved- with the selected frame measuring the
system: Artifacts must be measurably-and-computably-real not merely measured as
apparent-parallax....
Special
Relativity for
velocities, notices that perpendicular paths of lengths equal in the Rocket
Frame were very unequal, both length and transit time, in our Observer Frame:
Mensurability required that the other-Frame be time-dilated and
length-contracted, and their transformation equations would advance the
lag-direction time over the lead time: All might have been thought
good-enough-for-government-work, but length contraction seemed to violate the
speed of light and acceleration at great distances in the cosmos, and time
advancement would necessarily jam the Frame edge on causality
alone.
(There
seemed to be a merger of measurement-and-observation where parallax would become
the Special Relativity standard, measurement and
calculation….)
Case 1.
The Clock by perpendicular light beam: The onboard beam travels side-to-side W =
CT, but that in the exterior Frame is a longer, triangular-hypotenuse path of
length
L’ =
CT’ = √(W2 + (VT’)2), for width W, time T, relative
velocity V, lightspeed constant C,
resolving
to CT’ = CT / √(1-(V2/C2)), or T’ = T / Γ, the
usual-famous Relativistic equation with its gamma-curve Contraction-factor Γ =
√(1-(V2/C2)) (sometimes-as the
reciprocal);
(Γ,
represents the simplest, constant substitution: 1/Γ occurs as readily as
Γ.)
Case 2.
The Clock by collinear light beam: The onboard beam travels end-to-end
front-and-back L = CT, that in the exterior Frame is a pair of unequal, longer,
paths of length
L’1
+ L’2 = (CT’1 = L’ + VT’1) + (CT’2 =
L’ - VT’2) in total, for length L, path lengths L’1,
L’2,
resolving
to L’ = (C-V) T’1 = (C+V) T’2, or T’1 =
T’2 (Γ*2/Γ2) and L’ =
……..
resolving
to L’1 + L’2 = (LΓ / (1-(V/C))) + (LΓ / (1+(V/C))), or
L’avg. = CT’avg. = CT / Γ.
These
relations were then superseded by Lorentz Transformations and their Minkowski
spacetime Invariants: X’ = (X+VT)/Γ, T’ = (T+(VX/C2))/Γ, (Ct, x; y,
z) = Ct + xi + yj + zk.
(We
should also expect ‘Bernoulli-Venturi’ Contraction on the perpendicular, but the
shrinkage would be common-- and, so, Observable only at great
distances.)
Altogether,
the only valid sense of single-event is when the object is self-connected: not
Frame-Relative per sé though that was the special case in the original
experimentation: Mirrors running parallel remained parallel but collinear
mirrors needed reinforcement….
But is
also seems obvious that a moving Frame is always
uptodate….
Clock
Simultaneity Paradox
Suppose
two Stellar triplets have synchronized their clock-time (to the average between
them). The Rocket triplet goes the distance-- But finding that distance
contracted, arrives sooner (All time-dilated the same) and cumulates less
time;
But
then paradoxically, as v → c and the Rocket’s distance → 0, its rider reads both Stellar clock times → 0, when contrarily those clocks read of the long wait
all-those-years for the Rocket to get light-years from one to the other…!
BUT→
Spatial
Simultaneity Delay
Since
there is no-way, by no-means of Rockets passing, for either Earth-sync’ed clock
to jump into the future before its own present, the clocks at a distance must
have instead been ‘late’ to begin-with, and the Rocket passing revised its view
of ‘weird’ static-time-offset: Only Present-here is Now, while all others,
proportional to their distances, are late, younger, behind the
present-here-and-now…! BUT→
A premise discovery under the title,