Relativity And Simple Algebra

[Moronium]

Hint:  It's a theory that has been adopted by Nobel prize winning physicists like George Smoot (and many, many others) in this century.  Technological advances have killed SR.  It's no longer just a subject of metaphysical speculation, which can't really be tested.  Few laymen seem to have gotten the news, however.  Well, more than that, they refuse to consider any evidence at all, and just stubbornly and obediently cling to the dogma they've been taught.  The information is readily accessible.  Hell, it's even outlined right on wiki's page for the twin paradox.

Edited March 6, 2019 by Moronium

[ralfcis]

Yeah, wiki, I don't care. I am developing my own theory here that supports relativity's facts, not its theory as I've told you 50 times. Can you not set up shop on my threads and go off and preach somewhere else handing out your pamphlets. I'm not interested in reading them just as you're not capable of understanding mine. Go away please. You're taking up my space with endless repetition. You don't believe that c is the speed limit and that the relativistic combo law and time dilation fall out of that so what are you doing here trolling this thread?

Edited March 6, 2019 by ralfcis

[Moronium]

Yeah, wiki, I don't care. I am developing my own theory here that supports relativity's facts, not its theory as I've told you 50 times. Can you not set up shop on my threads and go off and preach somewhere else handing out your pamphlets. I'm not interested in reading them just as you're not capable of understanding mine. Go away please. You're taking up my space with endless repetition. You don't believe that c is the speed limit and that the relativistic combo law and time dilation fall out of that so what are you doing here trolling this thread?

 

Heh, you just continue to prove virtually every point I make.  Your "own" theory, eh?  One that eliminates time dilation, which has repeatedly been shown to exist.  Truck on in your fantasy world, Ralf.  

 

If you understood anything that you're trying to talk about, you would understand that, if, as you say, you reject "relativity's explanation of time," then you are also compelled to reject the combo formula and the notion that the speed of light is constant in every inertial frame.

 

But you don't have any clue what you're talking about.  And you don't want to know.  You don't care about facts, consistent scientific theory, evidence, reason, logic or anything else.

 

You just want to play with numbers. Forget science and take up numerology, why doncha?

Edited March 6, 2019 by Moronium

[ralfcis]

I don't want to get into a long nitpicky explanation that will only confuse you so I will retract my statement about time dilation. I use the formula everywhere but my difference from relativity is the missing time is converted into time equivalent distance separation which doesn't come into play until one initiates a velocity change. Too complex to explain again for you. I'd tell you to go back and read the explanation but that would be a waste of your time.  I see no way you could ever understand anything that was written here so could you just go like you said you would. 

[ralfcis]

Ok I was working late into the night on resolving the 5 problems I was having with the math which were:

 

1. I had resolved how to massage light signal travel times to determine Bob and Alice's causal and perspective times regardless of depiction of the constant relative velocity in  Loedel and Minkowski STD's. I was going to check this method works for Bob at -1/3 c and Alice at .6c both going away from each other with the earth in the middle. This tool will allow me to break outside the box relativity has set for allowable determination of age difference. For example there should be no difference in age difference determination whether you consider Alice returning to Bob at -7/9 c or Alice returning to Bob at -.15/17 c and Bob making a change at the same causal time (causal simultaneity at tau =4) away from Alice at -1/3c (where 7/9 c =15/17c -1/3c). I haven't yet done the math on this.

 

2. I had resolved that each leg of a non-inertial (where someone makes a velocity change) STD depiction can be treated independently to resolve total age difference. I have not yet been able to resolve how to keep the two legs together and use light signals in 1. above to correctly calculate age difference. This is not a big deal as I have an alternate method in 3. to do this.

 

3. I showed how to use half speed perspective lines of simultaneity (which give the same answers as causal lines of simultaneity) to determine age difference. I have completed examples using different durations and speeds of the first leg with all the choices of possible speeds from -c to +c for the 2nd leg and confirmed this method consistently works for determining proper age difference. I just need to confirm it can deliver the same results for equivalent depictions when both Alice and Bob make causally simultaneous velocity changes as discussed in 1. above.

 

4. I have resolved my understanding of how time works for return legs at near c for Alice and the difference how time works  between objects going at near c and light going at c.

 

5. Since 4 was resolved, the math trick I used to remove infinity from the equation for gamma is no longer needed. It did not result in giving me a tool to force the age difference between Bob and Alice returning at near c off of Alice and onto Bob. Bob was 8 and Alice was 4 at reunification and I couldn't use the 4 year difference to conclude Alice was 8 and Bob was 12. This looked like it would give really elegant math results but that elegance only potentially existed for the .6c outbound leg example and fell apart of other ourbound leg velocities so it was a dead end.

 

So all that is now water under the bridge. I can continue with the math that works and make sure the 3 remaining tools can be combined for all possible examples to prove relativity has wrongly constrained the determination of age difference to only be valid at re-unification of the parties. I'm out to prove any change in relative velocity results in permanent age difference without re-unification being a necessity.

 

Relativity says it is a necessity because it believes that time is subjective and subject to perspective hence any separation that remains between the two parties after a velocity change  results in disagreements between perspectives of what the actual age difference is between the two. I usel proper time to arrive at a result and perspective opinions do exist but don't matter to the result of age difference between the two. Their true age difference exists and unfurls in proper time and the velocity change determines who gets the time equivalent of the distance separation permanently removed from their perspective. This is how to resolve age difference, not with relativity's method of shying away from a resolution because of reciprocal time dilation. When a velocity change is made, time dilation is no longer reciprocal until they can re-establish a new relative velocity between them. Even though neither agree on the time dilation or doppler shift ratio between them during this time of mismatch, their subjective views of the time dilation remain valid. This is important for GPS satellites to work with SR (despite what Moronium keeps insisting).

 

I know it's going to be difficult for relativists and non-relativists to understand what I just said because it involves points with very subtle differences from what they would assume I just said. You certainly won't understand it without making an effort or by remaining unaware that there is a conflict of understanding the difference between reciprocal time dilation and proper age difference in relativity.

Edited December 20, 2019 by ralfcis

[ralfcis]

Here's the answer to reciprocal time dilation.

 

The twin paradox was never a paradox, it was a solution to the real paradox of reciprocal time dilation. Each participant isn't ageing slower than his counterpart in an objective sense but  in the subjective sense from the others perspective. (Moronium lacks the ability to see that different circumstances have different results and different formulae that apply to them. He often compares apples to oranges.)  But since relativity made perspective the reality, it came up with the ridiculous idea that both are  right objectively. No they are both right subjectively. The twin paradox gets rid of this subjective ambiguity by making a change in relative velocity the deciding factor on making an objective call of who was actually ageing slower all along. But then it further blunders by adding a second rule that they must re-unite in order to prevent multiple subjective realities  from not agreeing again. Who cares? You only care if you made the blunder that there is no underlying reality that is not subjective. If you have that, you can accommodate that all these perspectives are the illusion perspective is supposed to be. 

 

That underlying reality is proper time which is not absolute time. Proper time is  unchanged by relative velocity so it is not subjective or reciprocally different. When there is a change in velocity it creates an imbalance in proper time that results in proper age difference. The duration of the imbalance is from the time a velocity change is made until the news of that change reaches the other party. Normally the time at both ends of a line of proper simultaneity are equal but during the imbalance, they are not. The perspective lines of simultaneity are also different during the imbalance from what they were/are before and after the imbalance. 

 

Relativity has a much more complex explanation of a switch from the Minkowski metric to the Rindler metric resolves age difference. But their explanation still requires re-unification to make a final call on objective and permanent age difference which is not required in my explanation. A physical experiment could be set up to determine who is right.

 

Relativity also states you can't make a call on BoB or Alice's actual age if they are engaged in constant relative velocity. Poppycock. In proper time they are both the same age but carry around a type of time that is banked by velocity into the distance separation between them and it doesn't appear on their clocks. Relativity also recognizes this uncounted time in relativity of perspective simultaneity. Perspective time can only be physically resolved by re-unification which is the same as proper time with no distance separation. But in order to re-unite, someone has to make a velocity change and travel some more distance which increases time that doesn't appear on the initiator's clock and does on the others clock. Knowing this, you can post-process what their proper time was. You can also pre-process it by having an agreement on when in proper time one is going to make a change. Both making a change at the same pre-agreed proper time is proper simultaneity. If they pre-agreed to make a change in perspective time  that would be relativity of perspective simultaneity and the times would be different on both ends of that line.

Edited December 20, 2019 by ralfcis

[ralfcis]

Ok, I think I've scraped off a lot of barnacles and am ready to proceed with how far my honed tools can take me. So far we have seen the half speed lines of perspective simultaneity (which overlap the lines of proper simultaneity) and their intersection with Alice's return velocity lines between 0c and -c, gives us a new method to determine proper age difference that agrees with relativity's results. Now let's expand that method outside of relativity's allowed realm. We are going to extend the velocity choices Alice can make to stopping (0c), slowing down and not returning to Bob (between 0c and +6c) and even speeding up away from Bob at velocities beyond +.6c to +c where Alice will no longer age slower than Bob but will begin to age faster. Here is the STD for that:

 

http://www.sciencechatforum.com/download/file.php?id=6160&mode=view

 

Here is the part of the STD where Alice's speed choices are greater than .6c away from Bob:

 

http://www.sciencechatforum.com/download/file.php?id=6162&mode=view

 

 

We will also explore another realm forbidden to relativity which is how age difference progresses during the time of relative velocity imbalance between the two. Here is the STD for everything combined:

 

http://www.sciencechatforum.com/download/file.php?id=6166&mode=view

 

 

  In the first STD we can see a hyperbola forming. That hyperbola will eventually extend from Bob's - c to Alice's +c. With Bob depicted as stationary, Alice is limited to a small section of the hyperbola between Bob's 0c where she re-unites with Bob and her near 0c. Relativity does not allow her to come to a full stop wrt Bob because it doesn't qualify as a re-unification with him even though the math is obvious that she ages 1 yr less than Bob. 

 

What's also obvious is that there are no discontinuities in the hyperbola when Alice decides to slow down to +.2 c and +5/13 c or even continue going at +6c away from Bob. The results we get for age difference are (8-7.3=.7), .4 and 0 between Bob older and Alice younger. So according to this method, if Alice maintains her constant relative velocity with Bob, there will be no age difference between them.

 

This is where relativity disagrees because it says you can't make a call on proper age difference for 2 reasons; Alice and Bob haven't re-united and reciprocal time dilation means both perspectives see the other as ageing slower. However there is a half speed perspective from 1/3 c that sees them ageing at the same rate year for year. This is where I introduce the lines of proper simultaneity which are identical to the lines of half speed perspective simultaneity for constant relative velocity. 

 

During the time of imbalance, when Alice makes a change and Bob hasn't received news of it, the lines of proper simultaneity will begin to change slope. This is where Alice's lines of proper simultaneity begin to diverge at an accelerated rate from her lines of perspective simultaneity. On Alice's outbound leg, from Alice's perspective, her lines of proper simultaneity have had the same numbers on both ends but her lines of perspective simultaneity have had Bob's numbers decreasing at the rate of .2 Bob yr per Alice year. (Bob has also seen Alice's numbers decreasing at the  rate of .2 Alice yr per Bob yr which is reciprocal time dilation.)

 

If Alice makes a change at t'=4, her age is locked at 4 and while the slope of her line of proper simultaneity still points to Bob at t=4, her line of perspective simultaneity swings from Bob at 3.2 to Bob at a time between t=2, if Alice chooses to speed away from him at +c, and t=8 if Alice chooses to return to him at -c. This STD shows all of Bob's times from Alice's perspective for any change in velocity from +c to -c. Notice if she doesn't make a change, Bob's age from her perspective remains at t=3.2.

 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/yYiQcdrK5aCkmRfc7

 

Now things get more complicated after Alice makes a change. Her lines of simultaneity swing as shown in the last STD but her lines of proper simultaneity swing differently. For example, if she returns to Bob at .6c, the slope of her line of perspective simultaneity only changes sign and Bob's lines don't change so the reciprocal time dilation (which exists in perspective time) remains unchanged from before the change. But look what happens to the lines of proper simultaneity during the imbalance time at .6c return:

 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/rF7ZDyNKLeFuGW1n9

 

The blue lines are the lines of proper simultaneity. Notice how their slopes slowly shift from +1/3 before Alice makes the change to -1/3 after Bob receives the news of Alice's change. The slope continues at -1/3 which means no more proper age difference is accumulating because they are now engaged in a new constant relative velocity which is different from the one they started with. During the time of imbalance, their lines of proper simultaneity no longer have the same numbers on both ends. This is where the time vanishes at the rate of .5 yr per proper time yr between them in the proper time realm which they can only experience together simultaneously once they re-unite. This is how proper age difference accumulates and it is quite a different concept from reciprocal time dilation even though most people use the terms interchangeably. 

 

So you may think I'm mercifully finished; I've come up with a purely algebraic derivation for howproper  age difference happens. Oh no, there's much more to come. I have to extend the range of my method far beyond the range of Alice's velocity changes to include giving Bob velocity choices. Then hopefully I can see a method to use light signals to find the right time between them without breaking up the STD into independent legs.

 

I have never made it this far on any other forum before getting banned. Algebra and geometry really upset people.

Edited December 20, 2019 by ralfcis

[ralfcis]

I explore the following idea for a while until it fizzles out. Please skip this.

 

I can see mathematically that in the .6c return trip example, v changes from +.6c to -.6c but I can see the proper relative velocity that will give me the correct values for age difference during the time of imbalance is .866c which is sqrt(Yv). I need to see if this holds true for all of Alice's velocity choices. It could lead to a very simplified diagram of age difference and reciprocal time dilation.

Edited December 20, 2019 by ralfcis

[ralfcis]

Skip this.

 

Nope my last post must have been wrong, I'm getting the correct results at .8c return but I'm also getting time travel into the past so I need to rethink this simplified diagram of age diff and reciprocal time dilation.

Edited December 20, 2019 by ralfcis

[ralfcis]

Skip this.

 

Ok, finally got this problem resolved and the math is really simple and elegant. I will be back with the details later tonight.

Edited December 20, 2019 by ralfcis

[Moronium]

Try reading the maths link I gave you to the page refuting Dingle, you ignorant dumb ***. 

 

This poster is new, and apparently joined just to sneer at posts made in this thread.  Insofar as this thread is concerned, he appears to be just another poseur.  A blustering, bombastic blowhard who is quite long on assertion and quite short on understanding.  Like the rest of them, he simply backs away and refuses to return when his bluff is called.

Edited March 8, 2019 by Moronium

[ralfcis]

Moronium I may not think much of what you bring to the table but I don't dislike you. Sometimes you do help me out because always in the back of my mind I'm thinking how can I explain this so even Moronium can understand. This is a math thread. It has the word algebra right in the title. You're math skills are close to zero. So why don't you take all your wiki articles, arrange them in some coherent order and start your own thread instead of sitting on my head. You could call it Moronativity. Just explain it there not on every relativity thread in the forum, over and over. That's just spam. I like the fact the moderator doesn't like to be bothered so he leaves us alone to explore but you are making it very unpleasant for everyone who wants to have a real physics discussion judging by how many threads were closed because of you. If I continue engaging with you, there is some danger that this thread will also be shut down. 

[Moronium]

you are making it very unpleasant for everyone who wants to have a real physics discussion 

 

Ralf, you're in the same class as Amp.  You wouldn't know a "real physics" discussion from a turtle.  I have no further comment to make on your pathetic floundering about, playing with numbers willy-nilly. This is not a math thread either.  It just displays your ignorance about both the math and the physics.

 

Forget science and take up numerology.   No logic or common sense required for that, ya know?

Edited March 8, 2019 by Moronium

[ralfcis]

I would worry more if you agreed with me. It's true, all people who know nothing about math would agree with you. Some of those might actually be reading this thread to learn some. Not likely, so I wonder why anyone is reading this thread. I notice that when you post, the readership goes up. I wonder what that's all about. Let me see if I can figure that out in an STD.

Edited March 8, 2019 by ralfcis

[ralfcis]

Physics is the correlation of patterns in physical phenomena to mathematical pattern recognition resulting in mathematical formulae. Here is a depiction of time dilation from Alice's perspective using her lines of perspective simultaneity at .6c.

 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/w6XgCn3gYwjugbCJ7

 

You'll notice the turnaround point causes a sweep of lines while the slope of the lines of perspective simultaneity changes. You'll also notice the top is the mirror image of the bottom. 

 

Here is a depiction of age difference using lines of proper simultaneity.

 

I've changed this STD in future posts.

 

Proper time has no perspective; there's no ambiguity of what event happened first. It may join all the same sync'd proper times but it is not a universal or absolute or Newtonian time but it is instantaneous with the speed of light delays stripped away and time laid bare. When one initiates a change in relative velocity, proper time is disturbed between the two parties. The result of the disturbance is that the purple lines of causal simultaneity do not change the sign of their slope between the bottom and top halves. (The green half speed lines of perspective simultaneity are drawn in to show they are the same as the purple lines in the bottom half but flip their sign and retain their spacing in the top half.) Their spacing changes during the time of relative velocity imbalance and changes again after a new constant relative velocity is established between the parties. The changes in spacing between the lines corresponds to shifts in the rate of proper time due to Alice's change in relative velocity and then Bob and Alice later agreeing on that change. A change in rate of time is a change in velocity through time but people have a real problem in understanding that time has a rate or velocity through time (ct'/ct). They just can't get that looking at a movie in fast forward or slow motion is looking at it through 2 different velocities through time and that the normal rate of time (pressing the play button) is c through time.

 

The numbering of Bob's time line is not affected by  the disturbance in proper time so reciprocal time dilation is unaffected. But proper time uses a distorted numbering (purple numbers) of Bob's time line. It starts out the same but the change in relative velocity by Alice causes Bob's time numbers to change according to what was seen in the large STD using half speed lines of reciprocal simultaneity to determine proper age difference. 

 

I'll do some more examples using different relative velocity changes to show the pattern is consistent.

Edited December 20, 2019 by ralfcis

[ralfcis]

Skip this dead end.

 

Here's a depiction of age difference using proper simultaneity on Alice going out at .6c but coming back at .8c. Alice will age 2.5 yrs less than Bob. Bob will know this as soon as he hits the blue 8 where he gets the news Alice has made a velocity change at .8c back to him when she was 4. In causal time they were both 4 but they are no longer the same age once Alice changed her velocity. When Bob is 8, Alice is 5.5 in causal time but her perspective time from Bob's perspective is  5.8 as is seen by the 2 blue lines. (The thin blue line's slope is the half speed of Bob's .8c which is .5c)

 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/EhNBBnpdS393EnFz5

Edited December 20, 2019 by ralfcis

[ralfcis]

Skip this.

 

Here is a picture of Alice returning at near c.

 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/ZLN2PQsTYZBw39DF9

 

Next I'll be posting pictures of Alice by the pool on vacation as probably most of you wish I'd take.

Edited December 20, 2019 by ralfcis