[Physics] Arguments for or against the variable time (of Relativity)

[Hans van Leunen]

Mike,

The Hilbert Book Test Model uses the fact that quaternionic number systems
exist in several versions that differ in the way that they are ordered. The
can be ordered by Cartesian coordinate systems and they can be ordered by
polar coordinate systems and each can be done in different ways. A single
quaternionic Hilbert space can harbor several of these versions in parallel
as eigenspaces of what I call reference operators and they can play the role
of parameter spaces that are used by quaternionic functions. On their turn
the target values of these functions can be used for the definition of new
categories of operators. In this way Hilbert space operator technology can
be merged with function theory, differential calculus and integral calculus
and this all can happen in the realm of a separable quaternionic Hilbert
space and its non-separable companion Hilbert space. The different versions
of quaternionic number systems relate to different elementary particles.
When this is exploited, then the set of elementary particles restrict to the
members of the first generation fermionic members of the standard model. You
must read the paper “The Hilbert Book Test Model” in order to get the full
explanation of electric and color charges of these particles. The paper also
explains the mass of the particles and how they cause the deformation of the
gravitation field. The model does not support a big bang. Instead it
implements a history-less beginning. The paper treats only the lower levels
of reality. It has its own model of a photon. The paper introduces some new
mathematical methods. Please read: http://vixra.org/abs/1603.0021 

 

Sincerely yours, Hans

 

Van: Physics [mailto:physics-bounces at tuks.nl] Namens mike at mlawrence.co.uk
Verzonden: zaterdag 22 oktober 2016 14:40
Aan: General Physics and Natural Philosophy discussion list
<physics at tuks.nl>
Onderwerp: Re: [Physics] Arguments for or against the variable time (of
Relativity) 

 

Hans, 

  

Thanks for the clarification. I would be interested to understand how you
would treat my interpretation of what reality consists of. Put briefly,
there is only one type of particle/anti-particle that exists. When the two
are partly or wholly merged as a 'pair', they rotate, vibrate and move in
three dimensions, alonside and overlapping with myriad others the same. They
have their own time, but we cannot measure it because we are made of
composites that form when such pairs unmerge and chase each other. The
result is initially chains of such pairs, each particle/anti-particle
chasing the next along, and being chased by the one behind. The second stage
is the chains catching their own tails and forming loops. Loops of three
pairs are our fermions. Their rotational rate, as they chase each other
around the loop, gives the loop a frequency w and a size. Each particle has
h angular momentum. Because the unmerging involves each
particle/anti-particle spinning about an internal axis, each has + or - 1/6
electron charge, and so the possible total loop charges correspond to our
fermions. The masses of the particle/anti-particles in each loop give rise
to what we term the ‘mass’ of the loop. The charges give rise to the loop
charges and the spin of the loop ½ h. So the size of mass energy and spin
energy in all loops is equal. Actually the total of any energy in a loop is
always zero, but we can measure the effects that are observable as their
mass, charge and spin. 

So in terms of ‘time’, each loop is its own time, being the inverse of its
frequency. In adding ‘energy’ to a loop (eg the electron) what we do is
increase its rotational frequency. So every particle carries its own version
of time within it. We can only use the loops to measure the frequencies of
other loops, so the fundamental level of the original pairs is beyond our
observation. 

So in a big bang event, where pairs start to unmerge, time does not begin
for us until loops start to form. Before that there is only fundamental
time. 

The paradox in the model is that there is always zero total energy in all
loops. They move because of the effects of the same energy within one loop
acting on the same energy in another loop. So although we can discuss the
frequency of a loop as its time, and consider the frequency as an energy,
there is no time or energy in total. This enables the quantum realm to
exist, but only in volumes where there are no fundamental pairs to provide
viscosity to resist the motion of loops. This resistance is what provides
the speed of light, because the photon is a loop and anti-loop rotating in
the same plane and merged across each particle/anti-particle in the opposite
loop. The six new pairs thus formed are like a short chain, chasing/being
chased at maximum force up to a terminal velocity. That terminal velocity is
what we call light speed and depends on the density of pairs and loops in
the local area. The ‘energy’ lost in the photon moving against the
background viscosity results in a reduction in photon frequency – a red
shift. The amount of red shift in photons up to extremely high frequencies
is proportional to the individual distance travelled by each
particle/anti-particle in the photon and has not be allowed for in any
cosmological calculations. So part of the red shift we observe around us is
due to viscosity, although I cannot estimate how much. 

Just to complete the cycle, loops falling into a large black hole get
stretched until they break back into chains.  A black hole is thus a chain
star where the mass, spin and charge of the infalling loops gets take
gradually by the hole. There is no sudden event horizon and suitably
energetic and symmetric photons can reform and escape the hole, although
losing most of their frequency (energy!) in doing so. A black hole is thus
also a symmetry machine, changing asymmetric and symmetric loops into only
symmetric ones. 

Since every loop has zero total energy, although with a frequency, then any
loop is a valid centre for consideration as a centre of reference. The
‘mass’ that the loop appears to have is not in its component parts, but in
the deflection it makes against space due to the physical area of the loop.
There is no such general thing as ‘space-time’, only space and the
individual time for the loop under consideration. 

I would be interested to understand how you would treat my loops and their
relationships with each other. 

Apologies for the long post, but the paper with all the details is just
about to be published and the final printed version requires proof reading.
I will send a hyperlink when it is available. 

Cheers 

Mike 

  

  

On Oct 22 2016, Hans van Leunen wrote: 

Dear Mr Serret,



First the notion of time itself must be cleared. Contemporary physics
applies two notions of time: coordinate time and proper time. Coordinate
time is our common notion of time, but that choice causes a spacetime
structure with a Minkowski signature. This selection must be separated from
the fact that nature does not allow speeds faster than the speed of
information transfer. That subject is treated by Lorentz transforms. 

So what is it that you want to discuss, the concept of time or the results
of Lorentz transforms?

The treatise of the concept of time goes to the foundation of reality. The
Lorentz transform is a pure mathematical concept.



It is possible to create a mathematical model of reality that can be
formulated in a few lines. The mathematical model applies a Euclidean
signature of the space-progression structure.

Progression corresponds to the proper time concept.

The model starts with its foundation, which is taken to be an orthomodular
lattice (the discoverers of this lattice called it "quantum logic"). 
The set of closed subspaces of a separable Hilbert space forms a realization
of this lattice. 

The elements of an orthonormal base of this Hilbert space represent the
atoms of the lattice. 

Hilbert spaces can only cope with division rings. These are number systems
of which every non-zero element owns a unique inverse. I choose the
quaternions as the number system. 

The rational quaternions can be used to enumerate the members of a selected
orthonormal base. A special reference operator can be defined that uses the
members of the selected orthonormal base as eigenvectors and the enumerators
as the corresponding eigenvalues. 

The next step involves the definition of a subspace that is spanned by the
eigenvectors that belong to eigenvalues that share the same real part. We
interpret this real part as progression and the imaginary part as spatial
location.

PROGRESSION IS A REAL NUMBER VALUED SCALAR THAT PLAYS THE ROLE OF PHYSICAL
TIME.

Now let the progression value increase. Consequently, the created subspace
scans as a vane over the Hilbert space and divides it in a historic part, a
static status quo (the vane), and a future part. 

All discrete objects in universe appear to be modules or modular systems.
Elementary modules exist that are not configured from other modules. 

In the model, the elementary modules are represented by one-dimensional
subspaces and a special operator provides them with a spatial location. That
operator uses a stochastic process to generate the location. 

Thus, the elementary module hops in a hopping path. After a while the
landing locations of the hops have formed a (coherent) location swarm. The
swarm owns a location density distribution. Both the hopping path and the
location swarm represent the elementary module. The location density
distribution corresponds to the squared modulus of the wave function of the
elementary module.

The modules are interpreted as observers. The observers travel with the
vane. With these ingredients, the model offers two different views. One is
the creator's view. The other view is the observer's view. 

The creator can view the model independent of the value of progression.
In the creator's view the observers follow a zigzag life path that at some
instants reflect against the vane, where observers can interpret the
incident as a pair creation or as a pair annihilation.

This simple model throws a different light on how the universe can be
structured. The model is more extensively treated in "The Hilbert Book Test
Model";
> http://vixra.org/abs/1603.0021

In order to comprehend the model, you must comprehend lattice theory,
Hilbert spaces and number systems.



Sincerely yours,

Hans van Leunen,

Retired physicist



Van: Physics [mailto:physics-bounces at tuks.nl] Namens O. Serret
Verzonden: zaterdag 22 oktober 2016 10:20
Aan: physics at tuks.nl <mailto:physics at tuks.nl> 
Onderwerp: [Physics] Arguments for or against the variable time (of
Relativity)



Would you be interested to discuss the arguments about the variable time of
Relativity ?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20161022/a7b1dcee/attachment.html>