Evidence for the existence of absolute time

Ilja Schmelzer wrote:
"kenseto" schrieb
"Ilja Schmelzer" wrote
"Sam Wormley" schrieb
There is no need or evidence for absolute time in physics, Ken.

Of course Ken does not know such evidence, but there is a lot.

ROTFLOL....the evidences you provided are based on the assumption that the
SM is the correct model of the universe. It obviously is not. It does not
include gravity.

My theory includes gravity too.

But your theory is not SM. The evidences for the existence of absolute
time your presented
is based on the SM model.

Sam Wormley wrote:
kenseto wrote:
Evidence for the existence of absolute time...

There is no need or evidence for absolute time in physics, Ken.
--------------------------------
but there is a great need to understand that
THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE TIME!!

time is just a human tool invension
it is
motion comparison to some agreed motion (or translation ) refference
!!
just as simple as that !!
(that is one of my postulates )

ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------------------

"kenseto" schrieb
Ilja Schmelzer wrote:
"kenseto" schrieb
"Ilja Schmelzer" wrote
....the evidences you provided are based on the assumption that the
SM is the correct model of the universe. It obviously is not. It does
not
include gravity.

My theory includes gravity too.

But your theory is not SM. The evidences for the existence of absolute
time your presented is based on the SM model.

The SM also appears as a limit of my theory.

Ilja

schrieb
but there is a great need to understand that
THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE TIME!!

Don't cry.

There is a lot of evidence for absolute time:
- the violation of Bells inequality: Every realistic (hidden variable)
theory needs a preferred frame.
- quantization of gravity (problem of time).
- the black hole information loss problem.
- local energy conservation
- explanation of the origin of the CMBR
- a geometric interpretation of the SM fermions as
C x A(3) x /\(R^3) which needs a preferred frame.
- fermion doubling: A lattice Dirac equation on
C x A(3)(Z^3) gives this bundle in the continuous
limit without doublers.
- The natural E(3) action on this space commutes
with all SM gauge fields.

Ilja

"Ilja Schmelzer" wrote in message
...

"kenseto" schrieb
Ilja Schmelzer wrote:
"kenseto" schrieb
"Ilja Schmelzer" wrote
....the evidences you provided are based on the assumption that the
SM is the correct model of the universe. It obviously is not. It
does
not
include gravity.

My theory includes gravity too.

But your theory is not SM. The evidences for the existence of absolute
time your presented is based on the SM model.

The SM also appears as a limit of my theory.

How does your theory explains the following:
1. the observed accelerated explansion of the far reached regions of the
universe.
2. the horizon problem without the ad hoc inflationary hypothesis.
3. the observed flatness problem.
4. the observed rotation curves of galaxies disagree with the predictions of
GR.
5. the Uncertainty Principle.

Ken Seto

"kenseto" schrieb
"Ilja Schmelzer" wrote
"kenseto" schrieb
Ilja Schmelzer wrote:
"kenseto" schrieb
"Ilja Schmelzer" wrote
My theory includes gravity too.

But your theory is not SM. The evidences for the existence of absolute
time your presented is based on the SM model.

The SM also appears as a limit of my theory.

How does your theory explains the following:
1. the observed accelerated explansion of the far reached regions of the
universe.

Similar to GR with Einstein's cosmological constant.

2. the horizon problem without the ad hoc inflationary hypothesis.

Inflation is a natural consequence of the terms I have to add to
Einstein's equation.

3. the observed flatness problem.

The only homogeneous solution in my theory is the flat one.

4. the observed rotation curves of galaxies disagree with the predictions
of
GR.

Some CDM may be used, similar to GR.

5. the Uncertainty Principle.

Quantum theory is a completely independent question. My theory
may be quantized in a canonical way.

Ilja

"Ilja Schmelzer" wrote in message
...

"kenseto" schrieb
"Ilja Schmelzer" wrote
"kenseto" schrieb
Ilja Schmelzer wrote:
"kenseto" schrieb
"Ilja Schmelzer" wrote
My theory includes gravity too.

But your theory is not SM. The evidences for the existence of
absolute
time your presented is based on the SM model.

The SM also appears as a limit of my theory.

How does your theory explains the following:
1. the observed accelerated explansion of the far reached regions of the
universe.

Similar to GR with Einstein's cosmological constant.

But how does your ether theory gives rise to the CC??

2. the horizon problem without the ad hoc inflationary hypothesis.

Inflation is a natural consequence of the terms I have to add to
Einstein's equation.

But how does your ether gives rise to inflation? What you claim is not your
ether theory. It is the current fix for the Standard Big Bang Model.

3. the observed flatness problem.

The only homogeneous solution in my theory is the flat one.

So your theory is no different than the Standard Big Bank Model???

4. the observed rotation curves of galaxies disagree with the
predictions
of
GR.

Some CDM may be used, similar to GR.

Sound like you are resorting to ad hoc fixes like asronomers do when
encounter observations that disagree with GR. How does your ether gives rise
to this CDM??

5. the Uncertainty Principle.

Quantum theory is a completely independent question. My theory
may be quantized in a canonical way.

So your ether theory can't explain the UP.

Ken Seto

"kenseto" schrieb
"Ilja Schmelzer"
"kenseto" schrieb
"Ilja Schmelzer" wrote
"kenseto" schrieb
How does your theory explains the following:
1. the observed accelerated explansion of the far reached regions of
the
universe.

Similar to GR with Einstein's cosmological constant.

But how does your ether theory gives rise to the CC??

Quite similar to Einstein's theory. I have a requirement for the Lagrangian
This requirement is fulfilled iff the Lagrangian has the form L = L_1 +
L_GR,
where L_1 is a special term which does not appear in GR,
but L_GR is the most general Lagrangian of GR.
It can contain also the term with the cosmological constant.

2. the horizon problem without the ad hoc inflationary hypothesis.

Inflation is a natural consequence of the terms I have to add to
Einstein's equation.

But how does your ether gives rise to inflation?

The additional term L_1 leads to a modification of the Einstein equations.
If I compute this modification for the standard expanding universe, one part
of this additional term becomes more and more important in the past, and
prevents the Big Bang singularity.

What you claim is not your
ether theory. It is the current fix for the Standard Big Bang Model.

Sorry, it is my ether theory of gravity, as described in gr-qc/0205035.

3. the observed flatness problem.

The only homogeneous solution in my theory is the flat one.

So your theory is no different than the Standard Big Bank Model???

It is different. Because it does not lead to a Big Bang singularity.
But, different from GR, which has homogeneous solutions with non-zero
curvature, no such homogeneous solutions with non-zero curvature exist
in my theory.

4. the observed rotation curves of galaxies disagree with the
predictions of GR.

Some CDM may be used, similar to GR.

Sound like you are resorting to ad hoc fixes like asronomers do when
encounter observations that disagree with GR. How does your ether gives
rise
to this CDM??

I don't know yet. The best candidate in my ether model are additional
degrees of freedom related with gauge theory.

5. the Uncertainty Principle.

Quantum theory is a completely independent question. My theory
may be quantized in a canonical way.

So your ether theory can't explain the UP.

The UP is a standard consequence of standard QM. It does not need any
separate explanation.

Ilja

"Ilja Schmelzer" wrote in message
...

"kenseto" schrieb
"Ilja Schmelzer"
"kenseto" schrieb
"Ilja Schmelzer" wrote
"kenseto" schrieb
How does your theory explains the following:
1. the observed accelerated explansion of the far reached regions of
the
universe.

Similar to GR with Einstein's cosmological constant.

But how does your ether theory gives rise to the CC??

Quite similar to Einstein's theory. I have a requirement for the
Lagrangian
This requirement is fulfilled iff the Lagrangian has the form L = L_1 +
L_GR,
where L_1 is a special term which does not appear in GR,
but L_GR is the most general Lagrangian of GR.
It can contain also the term with the cosmological constant.

This is the same as Einstein's original intention for the CC. IOW it is an
ad hoc item to make your theory agrees with observation. It is not an
original prediction of your ether theory. BTW what is the value of CC
according to your theory? Does your CC has the same vaue in the near by
region as the CC in the far reached region?

2. the horizon problem without the ad hoc inflationary hypothesis.

Inflation is a natural consequence of the terms I have to add to
Einstein's equation.

But how does your ether gives rise to inflation?

The additional term L_1 leads to a modification of the Einstein equations.
If I compute this modification for the standard expanding universe, one
part
of this additional term becomes more and more important in the past, and
prevents the Big Bang singularity.

What you claim is not your
ether theory. It is the current fix for the Standard Big Bang Model.

Sorry, it is my ether theory of gravity, as described in gr-qc/0205035.

The problem is that your theory is only a math theory. If your theory is
truly a physical ether theory you should be able to explain all the
proceeses of nature in terms of your ether physically as well as
mathematically.

Ken Seto

"Ilja Schmelzer" wrote in message ...

The SM also appears as a limit of my theory.

Are you saying that you have a theory that integrates the
SM (which I know little about) with GR?

Martin Hogbin