We begin to make sense of the name of this blog.
I will try to highlight some concerns that arise from the conception of time as postulated by Einstein's special relativity. very brief summary: For Einstein's speed increases time slows down and space contracts with respect to a given reference system. Some perceive the slowing of time, however, the observer from another frame of reference the object (or person) that is increasing the speed, for those who in fact is accelerating time flows smoothly without slowing down. What happens to speed of light (which Einstein stands as an absolute limit of speed reached)? do not know ..... Really, is unknown. And this basically because the mathematical formulas that are used to measure the time dilation and contraction of space in the relativistic sense ( the Lorentz transformations), the speed of light must be broken down .... We know that mathematics is in front of his puzzles each time a result is zero or infinity. Well in this case the speed of light, to determine what happens to the photon (the particle that constitutes the light) by applying the Lorentz transformations we find ourselves with the zero as denominator .... The mathematical meaning of the transformation is (for a period of misuse of Godel incompleteness theorem) undecidable. My question is simple:
in the theory of relativity says that the speed increases time, that we keep in the frame that is accelerating with respect to us, slows down until it = 0 in the hypothetical case in which that object was moving at the speed of light . The propose this thought experiment: imagine to observe a photon to observe and imagine a hypothetical clock of the photon. The photon in a vacuum, since light travels at speeds definition = c. This means that I, looking at the clock of the photon, I see it still. The time photon to me that the watch does not exist, is = to zero photon that is eternal. First question: is the same for the photon? That is, if the photon look at his watch it would look or move normally the observers at rest? Second question: But to me that if I observe that the photon has no time, how is it that I can observed following the events of my first observation that involving photon? Let me explain how it is possible for something that did not have time to say that my observation that after the photon hit the surface of such a mirror and it will reflection? If I observe that his time is = to zero, to me that a photon has no "after" should ever be where I have observed the first time, because for me that I look is timeless and therefore can not participate in any future event: for him the future does not exist, there after, where I shall be eternally watch ... .. In other words, there can be movement in space without the time?
I asked this question a number of professors of physics I want to quote a famous professor from whom I do not have permission to disclose the particulars which I kindly replied as follows:
"A ray of light is not 'can be given the prerogatives of a observer and therefore does not make sense love him assign a tool measure as a clock. If you try to do this', even in a experiment, we run into situations that do not have paradoxical explanations. A ray of light can 'only be viewed but not' definable, even mathematically, what a ray of light would look. Since it is not 'defines a time measured by a beam of light, the phrase "a photon has no time" must be understood better as "not' define a proper time of the photon 'and this' course back to the previous answer ie 'that there is no clock in solidarity with a beam of light. Indeed it makes no sense not to say that intervals of time for a photon are all equal to zero because 'the zero' a number and this 'would mean a measure that a photon can not but' do. Obviously the phrase "the time of a photon and 'zero' is to be understood as " read the clock time intervals of a body subject to observation, they tend to zero when the velocity 'of the body tends to that of light than one who does the measure ". So property 'of the photon can not read their own time and' inferred as the limit of physical measurements. However, a ray of light or can also be observed as such by an observer who obviously moving at speed ' child and to which and 'associate a physical clock. To this observer the photon ' like any other object that moves over it, and then has an energy, a quantity' of motion and so characterizes it. The observations made for the measures also apply to time and space requirements. When we talk about movement in space means than a few observers who measure the distance traveled by a body, for example just one photon at a given time interval. But space and time are measured by an observer who is not 'the photon. In the case of light the confusion arises when unconsciously want to transfer to the photon prerogatives that are typical of our daily way of thinking. We tend to give the photon a future that is instead ' our future: the photon, like any other body, it moves in our future and it' what 'that we measure. "
E 'was also asked a similar question to this website NASA and the response was as follows:
" For a photon, or Any Other Essentially particle traveling at the speed of light, Could Be Any arbitrarily long distance traversed in less than a second....but eternity is different. For you to get boosted to a speed where 'eternity would pass in an instant' you would travel essentially an infinite distance, and the energy you would need to accelerate you would be infinite as well. For a photon, it is a completely meaningless exercise to ask how fast time passes for a photon, and in some sense in the 'rest frame' of such a massless particle, time is meaningless."
Per chi è digiuno di inglese la traduzione è la seguente:
"Per un fotone, o qualsiasi altra particella che viaggi essenzialmente alla velocità della luce, qualsiasi distanza arbitrariamente extended may be crossed in less than a second, but eternity is different. In order for you to be accelerated at a rate that "steps eternity in an instant" You travel an infinite distance and the energy that should be expected to accelerate esssere also infinite. For a photon is a completely meaningless exercise ask how fast time goes by a photon, and in a sense, at all times property of the massless particle, time is meaningless, "
One who gave this response works at NASA and its curriculum is this.
A couple of observations: we are told that a photon can theoretically take an infinite distance in less than a second (but if time is zero should perhaps say instantly) , the photon would be virtually simultaneously at the beginning and end of its hypothetical path (note that we are dealing with an infinite ...); also said that there is time for a photon is meaningless and that it can not be defined mathematically. Apart from that, as I was writing, the Lorentz transformations do not the doctor ordered us to this point: our photon would travel an infinite space in a time zero, in practice our photon would instantly at any point of its trajectory. Not that I perceive the passing of the time the photon is in every point of his career. So it does not travel farther at speeds of c (the speed of light) but it would have infinite velocity in the same way: it is inpossibile take an infinite space with a finite speed (as high ..) .
Beyond the paradoxes which I have just indicated, if such things are possible, at least on paper, that there are photons that have photographed events surrounding the beginning of the universe (and indeed we see the light death of stars thousands of light years ...) and that they continue to wander the universe forever.
However, the math does not allow us to understand this limiting case the theory of relativity, but this is not an insignificant unless it is a problem of language: I do not have the time to define and describe a time zero and an infinite path in an instant, however, that the photon should not exist as a T equal to zero. But we go beyond.
According to the theory of relativity in fact, two observers moving relative to each other they come to coincide in one point at a certain time (for example, a stationary observer in a railway station and an observer moving on a train passing through the station) are to have riferienti different time according to the Lorentz transformations.
So contemporary events and therefore exist for the stationary observer may well be past or future for the observer in motion and then to prove that no longer exist or do not exist. Are contemporary, the moment of coincidence, only the events that occur in the plane perpendicular to the direction of the train.
There is therefore a concept of relativity of existence in the sense that what exists for an observer may not exist or have existed already in motion for another compared to him.
is the loss of a conception of objective existence.
The only way to reconstruct a concept of existence if it covers every now be moving with respect to each of us is to think that every event in the past, present and future exist together, simultaneously.
This concept is explained by this masterfully written Fantappiè Italian mathematician Luigi. (Here is the biography of Fantappiè ).
relativity leads us to the conclusion that all events past, present and future as coexisting at any time.
But the strangeness of relativity are not over:
I think anyone who knows the famous formula E = mc 2.
Well, maybe someone will wonder what I am 'writing, even if doing local mind to how to solve quadratic equations of the surprise should disappear;
Einstein's formula is a case of a particular formula for the first time published in 1890 by Oliver Heaviside and perfected later by Henri Poincare and Olinto de Pretto.
The original formula called energy equation (E)-time (p) - mass (m) was as follows:
E 2 p = 2 c 2 + m 2 c 4
This equation, like all those on appeal, has two solutions, one positive (+ E) and negative (-E).
"Of course" the negative (-E) was considered a mathematical trick and was not taken into consideration: indeed, it would imply that causes items in the future (it reverses the sign of the energy and that time) in this act. Einstein obvious to what the formula only to systems in which the inertial moment (p) is equal to zero. This door
E 2 = 0 + m 2 c 4
that is resolved as a simple equation of the first degree, or with the famous E = mc 2
formula Einstein found himself in trouble again when Wolfgang Pauli discovered the spin associated with the spin of electrons, the spin corresponds to a speed inherent in the constituents themselves matter and therefore time (P) could not be more clear .... You return alladoppia solution and negative energy. Where is our
-E?
A possible solution could be this .....
It 's interesting to note that in modern physics, however, there are other phenomena that include the reversal of the temporal coordinates. For each existing particle Dirac discovered the existence of an 'antiparticle (antimatter) and Feynmann said that, since the wave functions of electron energy for the product always appears if the time, when I consider enrgie and negative sign change even at the time, everything remains as before. In short, an electron propagates over time can be interpreted as a positron (its antiparticle) which propagates back in time.
What happens then to a photon?
What about the negative energy?
How does it affect our reality that past, present and future seem to coexist at all times?
are not trivial questions and I hope in the coming days to explain why .....
I will try to highlight some concerns that arise from the conception of time as postulated by Einstein's special relativity. very brief summary: For Einstein's speed increases time slows down and space contracts with respect to a given reference system. Some perceive the slowing of time, however, the observer from another frame of reference the object (or person) that is increasing the speed, for those who in fact is accelerating time flows smoothly without slowing down. What happens to speed of light (which Einstein stands as an absolute limit of speed reached)? do not know ..... Really, is unknown. And this basically because the mathematical formulas that are used to measure the time dilation and contraction of space in the relativistic sense ( the Lorentz transformations), the speed of light must be broken down .... We know that mathematics is in front of his puzzles each time a result is zero or infinity. Well in this case the speed of light, to determine what happens to the photon (the particle that constitutes the light) by applying the Lorentz transformations we find ourselves with the zero as denominator .... The mathematical meaning of the transformation is (for a period of misuse of Godel incompleteness theorem) undecidable. My question is simple:
in the theory of relativity says that the speed increases time, that we keep in the frame that is accelerating with respect to us, slows down until it = 0 in the hypothetical case in which that object was moving at the speed of light . The propose this thought experiment: imagine to observe a photon to observe and imagine a hypothetical clock of the photon. The photon in a vacuum, since light travels at speeds definition = c. This means that I, looking at the clock of the photon, I see it still. The time photon to me that the watch does not exist, is = to zero photon that is eternal. First question: is the same for the photon? That is, if the photon look at his watch it would look or move normally the observers at rest? Second question: But to me that if I observe that the photon has no time, how is it that I can observed following the events of my first observation that involving photon? Let me explain how it is possible for something that did not have time to say that my observation that after the photon hit the surface of such a mirror and it will reflection? If I observe that his time is = to zero, to me that a photon has no "after" should ever be where I have observed the first time, because for me that I look is timeless and therefore can not participate in any future event: for him the future does not exist, there after, where I shall be eternally watch ... .. In other words, there can be movement in space without the time?
I asked this question a number of professors of physics I want to quote a famous professor from whom I do not have permission to disclose the particulars which I kindly replied as follows:
"A ray of light is not 'can be given the prerogatives of a observer and therefore does not make sense love him assign a tool measure as a clock. If you try to do this', even in a experiment, we run into situations that do not have paradoxical explanations. A ray of light can 'only be viewed but not' definable, even mathematically, what a ray of light would look. Since it is not 'defines a time measured by a beam of light, the phrase "a photon has no time" must be understood better as "not' define a proper time of the photon 'and this' course back to the previous answer ie 'that there is no clock in solidarity with a beam of light. Indeed it makes no sense not to say that intervals of time for a photon are all equal to zero because 'the zero' a number and this 'would mean a measure that a photon can not but' do. Obviously the phrase "the time of a photon and 'zero' is to be understood as " read the clock time intervals of a body subject to observation, they tend to zero when the velocity 'of the body tends to that of light than one who does the measure ". So property 'of the photon can not read their own time and' inferred as the limit of physical measurements. However, a ray of light or can also be observed as such by an observer who obviously moving at speed ' child and to which and 'associate a physical clock. To this observer the photon ' like any other object that moves over it, and then has an energy, a quantity' of motion and so characterizes it. The observations made for the measures also apply to time and space requirements. When we talk about movement in space means than a few observers who measure the distance traveled by a body, for example just one photon at a given time interval. But space and time are measured by an observer who is not 'the photon. In the case of light the confusion arises when unconsciously want to transfer to the photon prerogatives that are typical of our daily way of thinking. We tend to give the photon a future that is instead ' our future: the photon, like any other body, it moves in our future and it' what 'that we measure. "
E 'was also asked a similar question to this website NASA and the response was as follows:
" For a photon, or Any Other Essentially particle traveling at the speed of light, Could Be Any arbitrarily long distance traversed in less than a second....but eternity is different. For you to get boosted to a speed where 'eternity would pass in an instant' you would travel essentially an infinite distance, and the energy you would need to accelerate you would be infinite as well. For a photon, it is a completely meaningless exercise to ask how fast time passes for a photon, and in some sense in the 'rest frame' of such a massless particle, time is meaningless."
Per chi è digiuno di inglese la traduzione è la seguente:
"Per un fotone, o qualsiasi altra particella che viaggi essenzialmente alla velocità della luce, qualsiasi distanza arbitrariamente extended may be crossed in less than a second, but eternity is different. In order for you to be accelerated at a rate that "steps eternity in an instant" You travel an infinite distance and the energy that should be expected to accelerate esssere also infinite. For a photon is a completely meaningless exercise ask how fast time goes by a photon, and in a sense, at all times property of the massless particle, time is meaningless, "
One who gave this response works at NASA and its curriculum is this.
A couple of observations: we are told that a photon can theoretically take an infinite distance in less than a second (but if time is zero should perhaps say instantly) , the photon would be virtually simultaneously at the beginning and end of its hypothetical path (note that we are dealing with an infinite ...); also said that there is time for a photon is meaningless and that it can not be defined mathematically. Apart from that, as I was writing, the Lorentz transformations do not the doctor ordered us to this point: our photon would travel an infinite space in a time zero, in practice our photon would instantly at any point of its trajectory. Not that I perceive the passing of the time the photon is in every point of his career. So it does not travel farther at speeds of c (the speed of light) but it would have infinite velocity in the same way: it is inpossibile take an infinite space with a finite speed (as high ..) .
Beyond the paradoxes which I have just indicated, if such things are possible, at least on paper, that there are photons that have photographed events surrounding the beginning of the universe (and indeed we see the light death of stars thousands of light years ...) and that they continue to wander the universe forever.
However, the math does not allow us to understand this limiting case the theory of relativity, but this is not an insignificant unless it is a problem of language: I do not have the time to define and describe a time zero and an infinite path in an instant, however, that the photon should not exist as a T equal to zero. But we go beyond.
According to the theory of relativity in fact, two observers moving relative to each other they come to coincide in one point at a certain time (for example, a stationary observer in a railway station and an observer moving on a train passing through the station) are to have riferienti different time according to the Lorentz transformations.
So contemporary events and therefore exist for the stationary observer may well be past or future for the observer in motion and then to prove that no longer exist or do not exist. Are contemporary, the moment of coincidence, only the events that occur in the plane perpendicular to the direction of the train.
There is therefore a concept of relativity of existence in the sense that what exists for an observer may not exist or have existed already in motion for another compared to him.
is the loss of a conception of objective existence.
The only way to reconstruct a concept of existence if it covers every now be moving with respect to each of us is to think that every event in the past, present and future exist together, simultaneously.
This concept is explained by this masterfully written Fantappiè Italian mathematician Luigi. (Here is the biography of Fantappiè ).
relativity leads us to the conclusion that all events past, present and future as coexisting at any time.
But the strangeness of relativity are not over:
I think anyone who knows the famous formula E = mc 2.
Well, maybe someone will wonder what I am 'writing, even if doing local mind to how to solve quadratic equations of the surprise should disappear;
Einstein's formula is a case of a particular formula for the first time published in 1890 by Oliver Heaviside and perfected later by Henri Poincare and Olinto de Pretto.
The original formula called energy equation (E)-time (p) - mass (m) was as follows:
E 2 p = 2 c 2 + m 2 c 4
This equation, like all those on appeal, has two solutions, one positive (+ E) and negative (-E).
"Of course" the negative (-E) was considered a mathematical trick and was not taken into consideration: indeed, it would imply that causes items in the future (it reverses the sign of the energy and that time) in this act. Einstein obvious to what the formula only to systems in which the inertial moment (p) is equal to zero. This door
E 2 = 0 + m 2 c 4
that is resolved as a simple equation of the first degree, or with the famous E = mc 2
formula Einstein found himself in trouble again when Wolfgang Pauli discovered the spin associated with the spin of electrons, the spin corresponds to a speed inherent in the constituents themselves matter and therefore time (P) could not be more clear .... You return alladoppia solution and negative energy. Where is our
-E?
A possible solution could be this .....
It 's interesting to note that in modern physics, however, there are other phenomena that include the reversal of the temporal coordinates. For each existing particle Dirac discovered the existence of an 'antiparticle (antimatter) and Feynmann said that, since the wave functions of electron energy for the product always appears if the time, when I consider enrgie and negative sign change even at the time, everything remains as before. In short, an electron propagates over time can be interpreted as a positron (its antiparticle) which propagates back in time.
What happens then to a photon?
What about the negative energy?
How does it affect our reality that past, present and future seem to coexist at all times?
are not trivial questions and I hope in the coming days to explain why .....
0 comments:
Post a Comment