Lorentz transforms physical incoherence

I am not responding to myself :-)
I simply use the opportunity to draw everybody's attention to
a very interesting paper on the concept of time:

Hinweis zum Urheberrecht
Bitte beziehen Sie sich beim Zitieren dieses Dokumentes immer auf
folgende
URN: urn:nbn:de:bvb:355-opus-4820
URL: http://www.opus-bayern.de/uni-regens...exte/2005/482/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Simon, Johannes

Change without time. Relationalism and field quantization
pdf-Format: Dokument 1.pdf (828 KB)

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

Kurzfassung in englisch

The nature of time has long been debated in human history and
nowadays is considered of central importance for understanding
quantum gravity. We focus on and advocate the relational concept
of time, which was put forward in the 17th century in opposition
to Newton's absolute time, and only in 1990 explored in a quantum
mechanical framework by Carlo Rovelli. After a historical introduction
the mathematical models of time are carefully analyzed in
chapter 1, followed by a discussion of the role of time played
in fundamental theories. Using as an example nonrelativistic
mechanics, the process of parametrization is explained, leading
to a separation of a 'canonical time coordinate' from an arbitrary
evolution parameter. The discussion of the role of time in special
and general relativity as well as in quantum mechanics shows that
more fundamental theories use less structure of time. This is
followed by an exposition of the history of the relational concept
of time, which negates the existence of an absolute duration and
therefore often is called "timeless". Next it is shown how fundamental
theories can be formulated and re-interpreted using this concept.
We put emphasis on the hitherto neglected connection between
relationalism and non-extensibility, while absolute time is shown
to be unproblematic in classical mechanics just because of the
possibility to extend the system without changing its nature.
We conclude chapter 1 with a new axiomatic basis for the construction
of time observables based on a simultaneity relation between
'observations', which are treated as a primitive concept and
intuitively correspond to measurement events, but without knowing
'when' these events occur. There is no fundamental time observable;
any observable qualifies as a time observable, if it allows to
separate all instants. Chapter 2 gives a brief account of three
main problems connected with time: a) The problem of the arrow of
time. This has to be disentangled from the problem of irreversibility:
a solution of the latter essentially excludes cyclic motions and
is required for a solution of the former, which consists in showing
that a fundamental direction between any two non-identical instants
is physically meaningful. We give a formal definition of the arrow
of time. This classical analysis is followed by a review of the
problem of the arrow of time in quantum theory, where the situation
becomes more complicated because of indeterminism. The discussion
shows that there is no experimental evidence for a fundamental
arrow of time, so that no contradiction with the relational concept
of time arises. b) The problem of time measurement, which is of
particular importance for the relational approach, in which time
has no reality except if measured by a clock. In quantum theory
useful time operators seem to be possible only within the more
general formalism of positive operator valued measures (POVM).
Clocks based on an oscillation mechanism do however require phase
measurements; quantum phase operators can be defined as certain
POVMs. Phase difference operators do also exist in the traditional
Hilbert space formalism, if another quantization is used, as is done
with relational quantization. c) The problem of quantum gravity
is sketched only briefly. Chapter 3 introduces and discusses a model
of Rovelli consisting of two oscillators with no external time.
In this model one oscillator is considered as a clock and defines
a relational time for the other one. In the first section we introduce
this model and generalize it to a free massless scalar field in one
dimension. We establish the relation between a single field mode
and the infrared behaviour of the field through constants of motion.
In the second section after a short review of canonical quantization
we review Rovelli's quantization and generalize it to the free field.
We could not prove the existence of the quantization map, but
calculations using computer algebra indicate that the quantization
does exist. For an enlarged algebra we are able to prove the
nonexistence of a quantization map similar to a proof by Groenewold
and van Hove. In chapter 4 we observe that a clock time always
requires infinitely many degrees of freedom, and we make the
hypothesis that a time observable is given by the infrared behaviour
of quantum fields, leading to a classical notion of time when using
algebraic quantum mechanics. This does however not solve the main
problem of quantum relationalism: Which conditions determine
a particular evolution?

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

1.2.7 Summary of Chapter 1.2 The role of time in physical theories
(pp. 26,27)

Let us briefly summarize in which respect the structure of time in
Newtonian
mechanics has been reduced in increasingly fundamental theories.

In special relativity the temporal ordering of spacelike events,
duration and simultaneity become dependent on the choice of inertial
frame. Duration transforms linearly between these frames. The choice
of synchronization procedure is to some extent arbitrary.

In general relativity the notion of inertial frame is generalized
to a reference frame with curl-free velocity field. If a cosmic
time does exist, the events along different worldlines of freely
falling observers can be synchronized. The arbitrariness of
synchronization remains.

In quantum theory classical notions of time are used, but duration
is not observable for isolated systems.

See also pp. 38,39 of time.pdf:

In special relativity the description of observations as seen from
different Lorentz frames is equivalent. Each Lorentz frame defines
a simultaneity relation and we can apply the above reasoning.
A change of Lorentz frame also affects the equilocality relation,
which like simultaneity is an equivalence relation among observations.

Lorentz invariance of a theory can then be seen as the unobservability
of certain changes of the simultaneity relation which are accompanied
by certain changes of the equilocality relation.

My comment:

The unobservability justified the linking of time and location
in the basic relations
x' = alpha x + beta t
t' = epsilon x + gamma t
However, such linking leads to a formula (the Lorentz time
transformation), which is incoherent.


Marcel Luttgens

The URL has been corrupted by Google.
It should read
http://www.opus-bayern.de/uni-regens...exte/2005/482/

wrote in message ups.com...
I am not responding to myself :-)
I simply use the opportunity to draw everybody's attention to
a very interesting paper on the concept of time:

[snip without looking]


My comment:

The unobservability justified the linking of time and location
in the basic relations
x' = alpha x + beta t
t' = epsilon x + gamma t
However, such linking leads to a formula (the Lorentz time
transformation), which is incoherent.

Someone who does not understand what the variables
x, t, x' and t' stand for in these equations is not very well
placed to have an opinion about the coherence of the
equations.

You are an imbecile, Marcel, learn to face it.
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/di...chSimpler.html

Dirk Vdm

You wrote:

[snip without looking]

This proves that your IQ is very low, perhaps 60.
All you can do is "parroting". I hope that you are not representative
of
SRists. Your only justification is that you are suffering from
Alzheimer's
disease.

Marcel Luttgens