20 Oct 2009
Note:This is my theory not yet peer reviewed.
More to learn, I have. Improve this theory, I shall.
In the Michelson Morley experiment, the time taken for light to travel was expected to be maximum in the direction of travel and minimum in the direction perpendicular to travel, however it was found that they were the same.
To explain the results of the Michelson Morley experiment Fitzgerald proposed that the length of an object decreases by a factor of sqrt( 1 - v2/c2 ). And Einstein proposed that time is relative to the velocity of a moving object and that time slows down as velocity of an object approaches the speed of light.
Here's my theory on what happens. I propose that it is not the length of the object alone that reduces but the length of the universe as a whole along the axis of travel reduces and as an object approaches the speed of light, the length of the universe for that object becomes close to zero. That is the distance between two objects is relative to the speed with which they approach each other. In this model rate of time is constant in all reference frames, only the distance changes with respect to absolute speed. That is the space curves towards the object along the axis of travel.
Hyperspatial tilting explains the result of the MM experiment as follows. The time taken for light to travel in the direction of travel is less than expected because the distance to travel has contracted due to hyperspatial tilting. In other words, the velocity of light from a moving object is the same as the velocity of light from a stationary object because space is compressed in the direction of travel. Hyperspatial tilting explains the result of the Michelson Morley experiment as well as a time relativity theory with the additional benefit that it does away with confusing time paradoxes.
As an object approaches the velocity of light, the length of the universe as far as it is concerned becomes close to zero. In other words it is in hyperspace. Under this view the velocity of light is not only the maximum possible but the maximum required to reach any place in the universe. The apparent velocity of the object in normal space will appear to be thousands or millions or billions of times the speed of light.
Unlike story books where you jump into and out of hyperspace in an instant. This theory proposes that you enter hyperspace gradually as you accelerate to light speed and then move to a distant point in the universe and then you decelerate to zero. At one g it will take about one year for a ship to accelerate to light speed and another year to decelerate to zero. So within two years a ship containing humans can reach any part of the universe at a comfortable one g.
Assuming a robotic ship is capable of accelerating at 1000 g without damage, it can accelerate to light speed in about 9 hours and decelerate to zero in another 9 hours. So it can carry information and cargo to any part of the universe even other galaxies and be back by supper time the next day.
One important question is why doesn't light travel to any part of the universe in this way? Because it has mass close to zero so it doesn't curve space in any significant way even at the speed of light. Both mass and velocity are required to curve space into hyperspace.
The length of a line in a two-dimensional Cartesian coordinate system is given by Pythagoras' theorem:
h2 = x2 + y2
One of the basic theorems of vector algebra is that the length of a vector does not change when it is rotated. However, a closer inspection tells us that this is only true if we consider rotations confined to the plane. If we introduce rotation in the third dimension, then we can tilt the line out of the plane. In this case the projection of the line on the plane will get shorter. Does this mean length is not invariant? Obviously not. In a 3D Cartesian coordinate system the length is given by the three-dimensional version of Pythagoras's theorem:
k2 = x2 + y2 + z2
Pythagoras theorem gives k2 = h2 + z2 but h2 = x2 + y2 therefore k2 = x2 + y2 + z2. The length of an object is constant whether it is rotated or moved from one place to another in a 3D coordinate system.
This is invariant under all rotations. The apparent violation of invariance of length only happened because we were 'missing' a dimension. It seems that, provided all the directions in which an object can be tilted or arranged are represented within a coordinate system, the length of an object does not change under rotations.
Since objects decrease in length as velocity increases, an assumption of special relativity is that the object is tilting into the time dimension, in order to keep the length invariant.
s2 = x2 + y2 + z2 - (ct)2
One of the fundamental flaws in special relativity is that it assumes that space dimension x contracts and becomes time dimension t as time dilation.
Space cant become time and time cant become space. This is as obvious as saying apples can't become oranges and oranges cant become apples. Yet that is what relativity proposes. It proposes space becomes tilted into time leading to spatial contraction from the point of the moving object and time dilation from the point of the stationary object. The proposal of a 4th spatial dimension eliminates this anomaly. Anyway time is not a real dimension as you cant go back in time. Time is just a measure of changes. Length contraction cant become slow down of changes (time dilation).
The equation of hyperspace can be given as:
lh2 = w2 + x2 + y2 + z2.
As an object with mass approaches the speed of light the x dimension gets tilted into the w dimension. lh is the hyperspatial length and it is preserved across the tilt.
Since the object tilts into the hyperspatial dimension, it only seems to contract. Only 3D length k changes. The 4D hyperspatial length lh does not change. So there is really no length contraction.
Since this theory proposes that spatial x dimension tilts into a 4th spatial w dimension there is no involvement of time. So rate of time is constant in all reference frames. There will however be apparent time dilation because of velocity discrepancy as explained below.
Since there is no real length contraction, there is no mass gain as absolute velocity increases.
Since there is no mass gain, infinite energy is not required to achieve absolute velocity of light for any body with mass. Energy is required only to tilt the object from the x dimension into the w dimension. The w dimension is like a shortcut through space. Since light cant enter the w dimension without the help of mass and since light is our primary means of knowing about the universe, we are unable to see the 4th spatial dimension.
The key statement of this theory is that the universe REALLY contracts (in 3D) if an object moves. The current scientific wisdom is that the universe does not REALLY contract but may seem to contract. For example in the muon population experiment, it is proposed that as far as the muons are concerned the 6000 ft mountain has shrunk to 670 feet. But this shrinkage is not considered real, it only seems to the muons that the mountain has shrunk but it is not really so. If it was real the muons will require very little time to cross it and therefore their observed local speed will be faster than light and this is considered impossible at present. The current refrain is:
We are constantly bombarded by these muons, but the Earths atmosphere is not actually contracting for each one of them, is it?
My Answer: Yes the earths atmosphere REALLY contracts for each and every one of them along their path of travel because the muons, because of their high speed are making use of the w dimension.
To falsify this theory we have to prove that the universe does not really contract. For this we take the MM experiment to space. We split it into three parts, the two mirrors and the half silvered mirror. We put them on three separate space ships s1, s2 and s3. Let s1 be the forward spaceship. Let s2 be behind s1 and let s3 be to the side of s2 perpendicular to s1-s2. Let the distance between s1 and s2 be d12. Let the distance between s2 and s3 be d23. Now we setup the experiment at zero speed. Let the distance d12 and d23 be dz at zero speed.
Now we give equal acceleration to all three ships. Since all three start at the same speed and all three give equal acceleration, at any point in time all three will have equal velocity, therefore all three will have equal length contraction hence their measurement rods will be identical. After an agreed number of seconds all three switch off their engines and the shift is measured. Then do acceleration once again, stop accelerating and measure the shift. Repeat.
Let dv be the calculated distance of d12 at velocity v. dv = dz * sqrt( 1 - v^2/c^2).
In this scenario, the d12 will remain at dz as it is not in the object and the universe does not really contract so the position of the interference fringes will shift. And as the velocity becomes more and more the shift will become more and more. If this happens it will resurrect the luminiferous aether theory which was considered discredited because the MM experiment didn't produce a shift. We will be able to measure the speed and direction of the aether by repeating the experiment in different directions. This scenario will also prove that speed of light is not absolute as the relative speed of light remaining constant depends on length contraction (in 3D). If there is no contraction the relative speed of light will decrease.
In this scenario d12 will contract to dv and there will be no shift.
Objectivity is the opposite of relativity. Relativity is subjective reality and depends on point of view. If a ship 1 km long travels in a 1 billion km room at 0.866c, relativity says from the point of view of the ship, the ship stays at 1 km but the room becomes 1/2 billion km. But from the point of view of the room the room stays at 1 billion km, but the ship becomes 1/2 km. The ship is supposed to be 1 km and 1/2 km at the same time. But this scenario is manifestly false, because if the ship conducts a MM experiment inside itself it will find that there is no shift, so the ship is length contracted from its own view point. So relativity is false and subjective reality is madness. Objective reality is that which is real independent of the observer. The observer may affect reality but then the reality stays changed. It doesn't flip flop in the same moment for different observers. Objectivity says the ship becomes 1/2 km from the point of view of the ship and from the point of view of the room, that is, the ship really is length contracted, though the ship may not be able to perceive it until it does an MM experiment. Objectivity brings clarity to thought. Relativity muddies up reality and messes up thinking. At first I named this theory as hyperspatial relativity, but as I studied up relativity more and more, I began to dislike that subjective madness more and more. Then as I am a fan of Ayn Rand, I renamed this theory as Objectivity in her honour.
Let vh be the hyperspatial velocity, va be actual velocity in 3D, lh be the hyperspatial length, la be the actual length in 3D. From Fitzgerald contraction we have:
la = lh * sqrt( 1 - va2/c2 )
Dividing both sides by time we get:
vh = va / sqrt( 1 - va2/c2 )
So the hyperspatial velocity is always more than actual velocity. This will cause apparent time dilation. Though the rate of time is the same for both the moving object and the stationary object, the hyperspatial velocity of the object carries it much farther than you can expect from the actual velocity. So the clock on board the moving object shows the time it would have showed had it only traveled the actual speed, rather than at hyperspatial speed which is greater.
Imagine a ship traveling at 0.866c. For this ship the hyperspatial velocity is twice the actual velocity. Now, for every clock tick it travels twice as much as the actual velocity. So the on-board clock would seem slower at the end of the journey. Its like a jet lag. In a jet lag, our body clock is keeping the clock of a different time zone. Just because our body clock is showing a different time than the jet doesn't mean that our body clock is ticking slower, it only means that our bodies have traveled faster than normal. Though clocks in all time zones have the same rate of ticking, by moving a clock from one time zone to other, it will be made to seem that the rate of time of that particular clock has changed. This will be because the clock would have moved faster or slower than the rate of ticking. The rate of ticking itself does not change. Similarly the clock on-board the ship is keeping the time of the actual velocity instead of the hyperspatial velocity.
Let an object with mass travel at 0.866c for 10 sec. So its actual speed will be 258934 km/s. Its hyperspatial speed will be 517868 km/s. After 10 seconds its on-board clock will read 10 ticks but it would have traveled 5178680 kms. So its clock is showing the reading of the position at 2589340 km. So it is jet lagged. If its hyperspatial speed was only 258934 km/s, then its reading will coincide with the position of its velocity and there will be no lag and no apparent time dilation. This lag doesn't mean that the on-board clock is ticking slower than the stationary clock. It only means that the hyperspatial velocity is much greater than the actual velocity.
When objects are rotating around one another, this apparent time dilation will be obvious, because the longitude will not match the clock. But when objects are moving out in space, this will not be obvious as the clocks will show identical time and there will be no longitude to show up the discrepancy in velocity.
Imagine points a, b, c, etc each one light second apart. Let a ship leave point a at a speed of thousand times the light speed. It reaches point b after 1 millisecond, point c at 2 milliseconds, point d at 3 milliseconds, point e at four milliseconds. Now light /image leaving the ship at b, c, d etc will take 1, 2, 3, 4, etc seconds (Note seconds vs. milliseconds) to reach point a. So an observer at point A will see the ship to be moving at light speed even though the ship is moving at thousand times the light speed. This is called time dilation. Even if a ship were to travel at million times the speed of light. Still light leaving the ship will reach point a in the same sequence at the same speed. So to an observer at point A the ship will appear to travel at light speed regardless of how much faster the ship travels. Now let the ship return to point A. Under no circumstances can it reach point a before even the image of its leaving point A has reached point A, even if were to travel at billions of times the speed of light, because the light/image has to travel 0 distance between point A and point A. So a ship can't go back in time even if it were to travel at many times the speed of light. Only the image of its travel might arrive later than its return.
The time dilation is only apparent dilation, it only appears that the ship is moving slowly than it is actually moving. Only the images are time dilated. There is no actual difference between the rate of time on the ship and the rate of time for the observer at point A.
Now imagine a ship leaving Earth and reaching Alpha centauri in two years. The image of its leaving Earth will reach Alpha four years after its start. On Alpha the ship would appear to have reached Alpha two years before it started from the Earth. But still there is no time travel involved. Only the image is playing catch up. The actual ship would never arrive before it actually started. Also the image of the ship leaving Earth may never reach Alpha for the smaller the object and further away it is from us the clarity of its image would be dispersed across light years and Alpha centaurians may never be able to see the ship leaving earth because it would be too small and too far away when it started.
This has been demonstrated by noting that atomic clocks at differing altitudes (and thus different gravitational potential) will eventually show different times. This can be explained by hyperspatial tilting as follows. The atomic clocks are at different gravitational potentials so the atoms of higher gravitational potential have a bigger radius due to spatial expansion hence their frequency changes infinitesimally because of spatial expansion. Hence the two clocks show different times, even though they both have the same rate of time (according to this theory).
GPS systems experience a time dilation that is a consequence of both motion and gravitation. It can be explained by hyperspatial tilting of the atoms of the atomic clock due to effects of motion and the less hyperspatial tilting of the atoms due to lower gravitational pull together changes their frequency hence the accuracy of the time measured by them. Hence GPS time dilation is due to spatial changes and not because of any actual difference in the rates of times.
Rossi and Hall (1941) compared the population of cosmic-ray-produced muons at the top of a mountain to that observed at sea level. Although the travel time for the muons from the top of the mountain to the base is several muon half-lives, the muon sample at the base was only moderately reduced. This is explained by (the obsolete time relativity theory as) the time dilation attributed to their high speed relative to the experimenters. That is to say, the muons were decaying about 10 times slower than if they were at rest with respect to the experimenters.
This can be explained in this theory as follows. As far as the muons are concerned because of their high speed the distance between the top of the mountain and the sea level was very much less than that measured by the observers so they had to travel a lot lesser distance than they are perceived to have so the muon sample was only moderately reduced compared to what it would have been had they had to travel a longer distance. In other words for the muons the mountain height had shrunk to a molehill height because of their very high speeds, but for the observers it was still a mountain height. In fact many sites propose this concept, they say the 6000 ft mountain has shrunk to 670 feet. But they don't realize that if the mountain has shrunk so much the muons will require very little time to cross it hence many of them would not have decayed so there is no need for time to dilate for them to survive.
If the speed of light appears to be constant (c) when it was expected to be different (c+v in the direction of travel and and c-v opposite the direction of travel), it can be explained in two ways. Velocity = distance / time. If time taken is the same when it was expected to take longer in the parallel direction you can say the time has dilated (or become more) OR that distance has become less. Why the deuce do you need to propose both distance has reduced AND time has dilated then the velocity would be a lot more or you would also have to explain how much the dilation of time and the contraction of space have each contributed to the increase of velocity (or reduction in expected time of travel).
Velocity is directional. You can move in only one direction at a time. Hyperspatial tilting is directional, whereas time dilation can't be directional. You can't say the front and back of the ship is experiencing more time dilation while its left and right are experiencing less time dilation. Either the whole of the ship is experiencing the same time dilation or not. Now it is reasonable to propose that a directional phenomenon (velocity) is explained better by a directional theory (hyperspatial tilting in the direction of motion) than by a non directional theory ie time dilation.
The results of this experiment can be taken as proof of spatial contraction of atoms and the space between atoms due to the presence of a higher gravitational field, rather than as proof of time relativity.
Hyperspatial tilting brings back the notion of absolute motion. The direction of absolute motion of an object is defined as the direction in which space is compressed the most. And if the space in front of a moving object is compressed more than the space perpendicular to the object then it is said to have more absolute motion. In other words absolute motion of an object is measured with respect to space itself and not with respect to any other object. Of course it may be difficult or impossible to measure this absolute motion as space is elastic.
Let A be an object with an absolute motion of zero and C be a light wave traveling at absolute velocity c. Now the relative velocity of C with respect to A is c-0 or c. Now let A increase its absolute velocity to v, Now the relative velocity of C wrt A should have become c-v, but due to hyperspatial tilting the relative velocity increases back to c. So absolute motion can increase irrespective of relative velocity.
Time relativity almost forbids star travel, whereas hyperspatial tilting will open up trillions of star systems and millions of galaxies for human expansion. The beauty of the hyperspatial tilting is that you will have to face acceleration ONLY for ONE light speed while achieving many times the velocity of light. If there was no hyperspatial tilting, to achieve twice the sped of light you will have to face acceleration of 1g for two years, for thrice the speed of light you will have accelerate for three years etc. With hyperspatial tilting you can achieve billions of times the speed of light while facing only acceleration of 1g for 1 year. Va is the accelerated velocity or the velocity for which you will feel acceleration. Whereas Vh is the hyperspatial velocity for which you will not feel acceleration effects.
Trusted Timestamped copies of this page:
|Name||Version||Timestamp by||Trusted Timestamp done on|
|hyperspatial-objectivity1a.exe||1||Verisign||Sunday, March 7, 2010, 6:28 AM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity1b.exe||1||Comodo||Sunday, March 7, 2010, 6:28 AM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity1c.exe||1||Globalsign||Sunday, March 7, 2010, 6:28 AM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity2a.exe||2||Verisign||Monday, June 21, 2010, 8:36 PM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity2b.exe||2||Comodo||Monday, June 21, 2010, 8:36 PM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity2c.exe||2||Globalsign||Monday, June 21, 2010, 8:36 PM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity3a.exe||3||Verisign||Wednesday, November 3, 2010, 2:51 PM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity3b.exe||3||Comodo||Wednesday, November 3, 2010, 2:51 PM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity3c.exe||3||Globalsign||Wednesday, November 3, 2010, 2:51 PM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity4a.exe||4||Verisign||Monday, January 10, 2011, 5:10 PM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity4b.exe||4||Comodo||Monday, January 10, 2011, 5:10 PM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity4c.exe||4||Globalsign||Monday, January 10, 2011, 5:10 PM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity5a.exe||5||Verisign||Tuesday, August 28, 2012, 3:42 PM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity5b.exe||5||Comodo||Tuesday, August 28, 2012, 3:42 PM|
|hyperspatial-objectivity5c.exe||5||Globalsign||Tuesday, August 28, 2012, 3:42 PM|