In search of unifying time and energy - Part III

Hello People.

Took some time in the coming...eh? Well, this is a convo I had with a friend on Yahoo Messenger again. He's a second year Engg Student in Bombay....and mad about pure physics.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

krish_r123u: i really hope sometimes i could have time to do some physics... i just cannot resist to have a go at quantising time and distance
abhilashdwarakanath: i believe we can quantise time
abhilashdwarakanath: and when we do, we'd have found an answer to the universe's beginning
abhilashdwarakanath: quantising in the sense, giving a physical and tangible identity to time
abhilashdwarakanath: as a dimension
abhilashdwarakanath: and a function of the continuum
krish_r123u: a function... isnt it THE continuum?
abhilashdwarakanath: that's what they believe
abhilashdwarakanath: :D
abhilashdwarakanath: they call it the space-time continuum
abhilashdwarakanath: i don't believe space and time are a related fabric
abhilashdwarakanath: i believe time and energy are manifestations of some superior thing, or they're simply different forms of one another. If we try to theoretically analyse and deduce the inter-relationship between mass-energy and time, it takes you into a vicioius circle. Mass and Energy are forms of one another, energy is a function of space-time, which means energy would be a function of time, which would means we should be able to quantise time. But then, in a relativistic sense, everything in this world moves in a time frame of its own, and the most fundamental energy-carrying particles we know are time-independent...i.e. time means nothing to them...they're in a suspended state of animation in time.
abhilashdwarakanath: when we prove time is equatable to energy, i'd believe we'd have gotten close to deciphering the primal particle...or virtual particle of the Universe.
abhilashdwarakanath: :)
krish_r123u: it is equatable
krish_r123u: i have been able to get that far..
krish_r123u: *equivalent
abhilashdwarakanath: krish, if that's true...then you're sitting on a Nobel Prize :P
krish_r123u: i wish
krish_r123u: ok
krish_r123u: here is the proof
abhilashdwarakanath: the thing is...is your math correct?
krish_r123u: if you are itnerested
krish_r123u: *interested
abhilashdwarakanath: coz i had done to too...and my math was all f**** up. Lost the whole thing when my hard disk crashed. :(
krish_r123u: it is... i know how to divide and multiply
abhilashdwarakanath: yup, i am interested
krish_r123u: it is very simple math actually
abhilashdwarakanath: *math
krish_r123u: i think somebody else would have already done it
abhilashdwarakanath: not yet
krish_r123u: ok, T = To/(1 - v^2/c^2)^1/2... M = Mo/(1 - v^2/c^2)^1/2 ... and E = Mc^2... at any state of an object to consider M and T, v is a constant... multiply c^2 on both sides of equation 2 and divide by equation 1
krish_r123u: assume at one joule, time is one second
abhilashdwarakanath: ok......
krish_r123u: what do you get?
krish_r123u: let Mc^2 = E and Moc^2 be Eo
abhilashdwarakanath: ok...
abhilashdwarakanath: listen, with which frame of reference are you keeping v const?
krish_r123u: it will make sense when you divide
krish_r123u: those equations are relativistic. you can keep any reference frame
krish_r123u: i think
abhilashdwarakanath: no
abhilashdwarakanath: you have to specify
krish_r123u: there is no absolute reference frame?
abhilashdwarakanath: no dude
abhilashdwarakanath: how can there be?
krish_r123u: yes
krish_r123u: there isnt
krish_r123u: those equations are derived from that
abhilashdwarakanath: the very concept of relativity is to render obsolete absoluteness and simultanity
krish_r123u: so how does it matter what reference frame am i taking? it could be the motion of any two objects with respect to each other... whatever the reference frame, the relative velocity v is constant... and well, that gets omitted when you divide
abhilashdwarakanath: hmm....
krish_r123u: ok
krish_r123u: you want the final expression?
abhilashdwarakanath: yeah
krish_r123u: ok... one minute..
krish_r123u: T/E = To/Eo
krish_r123u: therefore T is proportional to E
krish_r123u: you got it?
abhilashdwarakanath: we aren't looking at proportionality
abhilashdwarakanath: we are looking at equality
krish_r123u: it isnt equal
krish_r123u: just proportional
abhilashdwarakanath: one more thing...relativity is flawed :D
krish_r123u: so i said equavalent
krish_r123u: oh wow NOW you tell me
abhilashdwarakanath: Quantum Mechanics is correct to a degree more than that of Relativity. Relativity and QM both together explain about 90% of the physical laws, but then both contradict each other...heavens! Couldn't God have made a simpler world??! :|
krish_r123u: but the equation i got describes many things... from mythology to slowing of time
krish_r123u: in experiments
krish_r123u: now listen to another thing
abhilashdwarakanath: relativity explained a lot too
abhilashdwarakanath: but how would you explain the acceleration of an EM pulse to 300 times the speed of light?
abhilashdwarakanath: how can it explain creation of matter and energy?
abhilashdwarakanath: QVF?
abhilashdwarakanath: ZPE?
abhilashdwarakanath: it can't
krish_r123u: from the proportionality, T =(To/Eo) E... now for To and Eo, you can take one joule and one second... that is why i said one joule for one second
krish_r123u: hmmm well these experiments... acceleration of other things besides light to greater than c... and stuff... that is when i started thinking twice about relativity
krish_r123u: if you take one and one, you get T = Ec^2
abhilashdwarakanath: relativity is flawed..as i said
krish_r123u: or rather..
krish_r123u: E = c^2 T
abhilashdwarakanath: T = EC^2? :-?
krish_r123u: ..
abhilashdwarakanath: hmmm
krish_r123u: oh sorry damn...
krish_r123u: T = E
krish_r123u: simple
krish_r123u: one joule and one second
krish_r123u: ZPE is a seperate thing altogether... it has to do with the whole of energy itself
krish_r123u: i dont see how it contradicts relativity
abhilashdwarakanath: krish, it does
abhilashdwarakanath: imagine...ZPE speaks of a photon at rest
abhilashdwarakanath: a photon is at rest with respect to what?
abhilashdwarakanath: Relativity wants 2 frames of reference for rest and motion
abhilashdwarakanath: but the bloody photon is in a time-dilated state of its own
abhilashdwarakanath: time means nothing to a photon
abhilashdwarakanath: :D
krish_r123u: hm
krish_r123u: yes
krish_r123u: do you know about waves in a string?
krish_r123u: transverse waves?
krish_r123u: they travel at the same speed... all of them
abhilashdwarakanath: nope...have heard, but that's about it
krish_r123u: no matter what the amplitude or energy
krish_r123u: it just depends on the medium
krish_r123u: now energy, time, distance etc... must be properties of the *medium* through which the photon travels
krish_r123u: at the same speed, no matter whatever the energy
krish_r123u: i think it must be an analogy
abhilashdwarakanath: that's why i always hold Vaccuum isn't vaccuum
abhilashdwarakanath: NOBODY listens to me!!!! :|
krish_r123u: they ruled out ether i know... but i still think there is a medium
krish_r123u: they do
krish_r123u: atleast i know it isnt
krish_r123u: or scientists now know
krish_r123u: latest research into ZPE says just that
abhilashdwarakanath: yup
abhilashdwarakanath: casimir effect
abhilashdwarakanath: it isn't latest...1948.........but validated during the cold war...?
krish_r123u: casimir effect is old, i think.
krish_r123u: there are many later researches
krish_r123u: hmm validated in the 1960s if i am not wrong
krish_r123u: or did someone do it yesterday? :p
abhilashdwarakanath: let me tell you one more thing.......the famous M n M expt which brought relativity to the fore was a little flawed too :D
abhilashdwarakanath: not yesterday :))
krish_r123u: so ether exists?
krish_r123u: YAY !
abhilashdwarakanath: not aether....They had given Aether such properties that would've simply rendered Relativity wrong. Complete elasticity? Constantness of relative drag velocity? Ah...no, they were thinking on very ideal lines.
abhilashdwarakanath: but something
krish_r123u: M n M experiment ruled out the ether.
abhilashdwarakanath: i'd say a completely different manifestation of a primal virtual particle that would have certain...umm...comfortable properties. We cannot see light when it travels through vaccuum. We also, cannot 'see' dark energy or matter. Dark matter comprises 95% of the universe's matter. When the LHC is built at CERN, and they devise an experiment to validate the existence of the Higgs-Boson and the Higgs's field, I think they'll not be able to find it. I somehow, do not like the Higgs-Theory. I would in fact, bet my bottom dollar, on them finding a particle with properties similar and superior to that of the anti-particles that make up dark matter, which would also be in a time dilated state. That brings us to one very logical conclusion. We are looking, thus, at an anti-particle of the Photon. They call it, now, the Scaon. But according to Dirac, there should NOT be an anti-particle of the photon, because of it's time-independentness. Now, this thing contradicts Dirac too. We must remember that Dirac didn't know of Dark Matter at that time. Was there something missing in his theory?
krish_r123u: oh well, not ether with those properties... but a medium of some sort should exist for light to go through it
krish_r123u: ok
abhilashdwarakanath: which is the basis of the universe
krish_r123u: consider a string which is taut and is tied to one end. the other end is jerked... a wave travels. the transfer of energy is seen by the observer, but it is just the motion of particles in the string and so the energy is just transferred due to those particles... but the transfer of energy is what we observe
krish_r123u: the medium must be of some sort which cannot be distinguished... and neither light that travels through it can be distinguished unless it strikes another object
krish_r123u: cause it is the same medium...energy... spacetime..
krish_r123u: any disturbance of the medium causes a photon..
krish_r123u: there is another important thing i want to tell...
krish_r123u: ok. now hmm... i said in that proportionality equation... assume one second for one joule. i just assumed... it may not be valid. However you can get a valid figure. calculate the mass of a radioactive isotope, and also its half life. now... increase its KE, and calculate the half life again. Repeat this experiment till you get a satisfactory number of lines and plot a graph. if it is a straight line, then the two quantities are proportional and the constant is easily found...
krish_r123u: you can try this when you get particle accelerators
krish_r123u: it might give you the equation you wanted
krish_r123u: to unite time and energy..
krish_r123u: ..
krish_r123u: it is a known fact that the half life of a particle changes with energy..
krish_r123u: there?
krish_r123u: *satisfactory number of points..
krish_r123u: ..
abhilashdwarakanath: Krish, basic high school physics will tell you that Time and Energy are proportional because of Velocity dude!! It's simple math! Derive that from any basic relation for energy! We are not looking to compound the equivalence of Time and Energy. We are trying to UNIFY time and energy by EQUATING them to space-time as a function of themselves. We are basically looking to prove "matter and energy is created when in a certain primal perfect particle, time freezes and condenses and gives rise to it's sister form..i.e. energy due to the QM behaviour of the Quantum Field contained within itself, that which would act on Einstein's laws. We are looking to accelerate two different facets of that particle in different directions at the speed of light, which would dilate time to the maximum. Which in principle, means that this particle would infact, be a Boson...which is what the Higgs's particle is....though, the Higgs's field would in all actuality, be this field I mentioned above'.
abhilashdwarakanath: And before I start to contradict myself hopelessly, and get all my concepts wrong, I think I'll go out and get a breath of fresh air! See ya later!
krish_r123u: Ok..see u later!