A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY OR QUANTUM MECHANICS?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 7th 15, 12:03 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY OR QUANTUM MECHANICS?

The main poison killing physics is Einstein's 1905 false constant-speed-of-light postulate and its logical child - the idiotic relative time (or spacetime):

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blogs/p...uantum-theory/
Frank Wilczek: "Einstein's special theory of relativity calls for radical renovation of common-sense ideas about time. Different observers, moving at constant velocity relative to one another, require different notions of time, since their clocks run differently. Yet each such observer can use his "time" to describe what he sees, and every description will give valid results, using the same laws of physics. In short: According to special relativity, there are many quite different but equally valid ways of assigning times to events. Einstein himself understood the importance of breaking free from the idea that there is an objective, universal "now." Yet, paradoxically, today's standard formulation of quantum mechanics makes heavy use of that discredited "now."

http://www.space.com/29859-the-illusion-of-time.html
"Fotini Markopoulou-Kalamara, a theoretical physicist at the Perimeter Institute, said, "I have the distressing experience of physicists telling me that time is not real. ... It confuses me, because time seems to be real. Things happen. When I clap my hands, it happened. ... I would prefer to say that general relativity is not the final theory than to say that time does not exist." Time is a prime conflict between relativity and quantum mechanics, measured and malleable in relativity while assumed as background (and not an observable) in quantum mechanics."

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...spacetime.html
"Rethinking Einstein: The end of space-time (...) The stumbling block lies with their conflicting views of space and time. As seen by quantum theory, space and time are a static backdrop against which particles move. In Einstein's theories, by contrast, not only are space and time inextricably linked, but the resulting space-time is moulded by the bodies within it. (...) Something has to give in this tussle between general relativity and quantum mechanics, and the smart money says that it's relativity that will be the loser."

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...erse-tick.html
"...says John Norton, a philosopher based at the University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Norton is hesitant to express it, but his instinct - and the consensus in physics - seems to be that space and time exist on their own. The trouble with this idea, though, is that it doesn't sit well with relativity, which describes space-time as a malleable fabric whose geometry can be changed by the gravity of stars, planets and matter."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013...reality-review
"And by making the clock's tick relative - what happens simultaneously for one observer might seem sequential to another - Einstein's theory of special relativity not only destroyed any notion of absolute time but made time equivalent to a dimension in space: the future is already out there waiting for us; we just can't see it until we get there. This view is a logical and metaphysical dead end, says Smolin."

http://www.bookdepository.com/Time-R.../9780547511726
"Was Einstein wrong? At least in his understanding of time, Smolin argues, the great theorist of relativity was dead wrong. What is worse, by firmly enshrining his error in scientific orthodoxy, Einstein trapped his successors in insoluble dilemmas..."

https://edge.org/response-detail/25477
What scientific idea is ready for retirement? Steve Giddings: "Spacetime. Physics has always been regarded as playing out on an underlying stage of space and time. Special relativity joined these into spacetime... (...) The apparent need to retire classical spacetime as a fundamental concept is profound..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U47kyV4TMnE
Nima Arkani-Hamed (06:11): "Almost all of us believe that space-time doesn't really exist, space-time is doomed and has to be replaced by some more primitive building blocks."

http://www.homevalley.co.za/index.ph...s-are-changing
"Einstein introduced a new notion of time, more radical than even he at first realized. In fact, the view of time that Einstein adopted was first articulated by his onetime math teacher in a famous lecture delivered one century ago. That lecture, by the German mathematician Hermann Minkowski, established a new arena for the presentation of physics, a new vision of the nature of reality redefining the mathematics of existence. The lecture was titled Space and Time, and it introduced to the world the marriage of the two, now known as spacetime. It was a good marriage, but lately physicists passion for spacetime has begun to diminish. And some are starting to whisper about possible grounds for divorce. (...) Einstein's famous insistence that the velocity of light is a cosmic speed limit made sense, Minkowski saw, only if space and time were intertwined. (...) Physicists of the 21st century therefore face the task of finding the true reality obscured by the spacetime mirage. (...) Andreas Albrecht, a cosmologist at the University of California, Davis, has thought deeply about choosing clocks, leading him to some troubling realizations. (...) "It seems to me like it's a time in the development of physics," says Albrecht, "where it's time to look at how we think about space and time very differently."

All sane Einsteinians have already left or are going to leave Einsteiniana's sinking ship:

http://www.reset-italia.net/wp-conte...iam-andiam.jpg

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old July 7th 15, 06:44 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY OR QUANTUM MECHANICS?

The aftermath of the introduction of Einstein's 1905 false constant-speed-of-light postulate (dead science, irreversibly deranged minds):

http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdf
Thibault Damour: "The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards the future) is possible. As a gedanken experiment (if we neglect practicalities such as the technology needed for reaching velocities comparable to the velocity of light, the cost of the fuel and the capacity of the traveller to sustain high accelerations), it shows that a sentient being can jump, "within a minute" (of his experienced time) arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, and see, and be part of, what (will) happen then on Earth.. This is a clear way of realizing that the future "already exists" (as we can experience it "in a minute")."

http://www.randomhouse.ca/hazlitt/fe...-drama-physics
"The Crazy Drama of Physics (...) Now when a new scientific development comes along, it's as though terms like "light" and "speed" and "time" are characters in a long-running foreign soap opera. They all have complicated backstories, and the multiple costume changes don't help. At first, "time" was just a simple campesino, but then - twist! - it's revealed that "time" and "space," who we thought was a swashbuckling bandito, are the same person, except then - twist! - it turns out that maybe they're twins, and because one of them was in a spaceship for a while during the third season, now the one that stayed behind and inherited the contessa's fortune is older than he is. (...) If you've managed to wrap your mind around that - the idea that the past, present, and future all exist at once and are therefore immutable and hence there are no surprises and also, by the way, logically no free will - welcome to the current episode, in which we posit that - twist! - time does exist. Lee Smolin's 'Time Reborn: From the Crisis in Physics to the Future of the Universe' claims that now is real, the future hasn't happened yet, and there are genuinely new things under the sun. The contessa and her daughter weren't blackmailing the duke at all, or at least, not with the secret we thought he had. The duke's mad wife was the sane one the whole time."

http://discovermagazine.com/2015/jun...rrow-never-was
"Is the Future Already Written? A conscientious cosmologist rejects Einstein's notion that time is an illusion and the future is set. George Ellis is not afraid to rock the establishment. In his youth in South Africa, his target was a recognizably corrupt and racist government. Now a cosmologist at the University of Cape Town, Ellis has set his sights on something more abstract: the flow of time itself. First developed by Albert Einstein early in the 20th century, the orthodox view holds that the passage of time is an illusion. There is no difference between the past and the future - both are set in stone. Yet for Ellis, the philosophical implications of this mainstream theory do not simply run counter to our intuitions; he considers them dangerous... (...) Ellis' new model is a modification, rather than a radical upheaval, of the block universe. In his framework, set out in a series of highly regarded papers published from 2006 onward, Ellis retains four-dimensional space-time, in line with relativity's predictions. However, he argues that Einstein took that concept too far."

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old July 7th 15, 05:52 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY OR QUANTUM MECHANICS?

https://edge.org/response-detail/11356
John Baez (2008): "One of the big problems in physics - perhaps the biggest! - is figuring out how our two current best theories fit together. On the one hand we have the Standard Model, which tries to explain all the forces except gravity, and takes quantum mechanics into account. On the other hand we have General Relativity, which tries to explain gravity, and does not take quantum mechanics into account. Both theories seem to be more or less on the right track - but until we somehow fit them together, or completely discard one or both, our picture of the world will be deeply schizophrenic."

http://lecercle.lesechos.fr/economie...t-schizophrene
Marc Lachièze-Rey: "La physique est schizophrène (...) ...relativiste le matin, quantique le soir... mais schizophrène lorsqu'il tente de concilier les deux visions. C'est là que réside le problème fondamental de la physique d'aujourd'hui."

Schizophrenic but... nutritious:

http://s8int.com/images9/eistein.jpg

Pentcho Valev
  #4  
Old August 9th 15, 04:50 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY OR QUANTUM MECHANICS?

http://www.jpost.com/Business-and-In...pleased-411597
"According to standard quantum mechanics, time "ticks" at the same speed all over the universe. In Einstein's general theory of relativity, time depends locally on gravity. But according to the general theory of relativity, time does not "tick" at the same pace everywhere as it is influenced by gravitational forces of large masses such as the Earth. The researchers thus asked what would happen to the clock after passing simultaneously through several places where time "ticks" at a different pace once it was in one place again."

Was that a relevant question to ask? Either Newton's universal time used in standard quantum mechanics or Einstein's "variable" time is wrong, so one of the two theories - quantum mechanics and Einstein's relativity - should be immediately discarded. Which one? This is the only relavant question.

Pentcho Valev
  #5  
Old August 10th 15, 11:21 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY OR QUANTUM MECHANICS?

The problem of the incompatibility of Einstein's relativity and quantum mechanics will never be solved by the scientific establishment - in its unsolved state this problem has been a money-spinner for both physicists and philosophers for a very long time:

http://www.sphere.univ-paris-diderot...que126&lang=fr
PROJET PHILOSOPHIE DE LA GRAVITATION QUANTIQUE CANONIQUE
Projet de l'ERC (European Research Council) porté par Gabriel Catren (Principal Investigator).
"This research proposal addresses from a philosophical perspective one of the most important unsolved problem of theoretical physics, namely the formulation of a quantum theory of gravity. Quantum mechanics and Einstein's theory of gravity - i.e. general relativity - are the two main revolutions of 20th century physics. These theories have radically challenged and modified our conceptions about time, space, motion, matter and causality. However, the formulation of an unanimously accepted and experimentally tested quantum theory of gravity capable of harmonizing these new insights in a consistent synthesis remains - since 1930s - an open problem. (...) On the one hand, general relativity is a turning point in an old debate about the nature of space, time and motion which includes Descartes' theory of relative motion, the Leibniz-Clarke correspondence, Kantian conception of space and time as a priori conditions of human sensibility and Mach's criticism of Newtonian absolute space and time. On the other hand, quantum mechanics constitutes a groundbreaking landmark in the history of the scientific and philosophical attempts to define the formal determinations (or "categories") of generic physical systems, like for instance the "categories" of substance (and identity over time), causality (and predictability), experimental observability, predication (and logic), objectivity of knowledge (and its relation to the notions of symmetry and invariance), etc. For these different reasons, the research programs in quantum gravity engage foundational questions in which physics and philosophy are necessarily entangled."

The main "turning point" is special, not general, relativity. It gave birth to Einstein's spacetime, the idiotic offspring of his 1905 false constant-speed-of-light postulate, that even Einsteinians are trying to get rid of now.

Pentcho Valev
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
RELATIVITY AGAINST QUANTUM MECHANICS Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 0 April 3rd 13 06:52 PM
RELATIVITY INCOMPATIBLE WITH QUANTUM MECHANICS OR WITH ITSELF? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 16 March 29th 10 02:37 PM
Beyond relativity and quantum mechanics Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 4 January 22nd 09 08:03 AM
PHILIP BALL: Why General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics AreIncompatible Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 19 August 4th 08 03:41 AM
THE NEW QUANTUM MECHANICS ACE Astronomy Misc 0 January 24th 07 04:38 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.