PHYSICS OF OPTICS AND TIME
Any corrections, different point of view and criticism will be appreciated pls.
ABSTRACT: A brief proposition on the nature of light waves and how it affects the measurement of observers. For example, when a disturbance is created in the waves of light due to the motion of an object, this disturbance does not just die out of existence. It goes on to affect the observation and measurements of all observers who depend on the light waves for their observation and measurement. This change in the physical property of the light waves can make physical measurements of different frames to appear relative depending on the magnitude of the disturbance produced in the waves of light.
In this proposition on light waves and time, I wish to explain how the light waves surrounding a moving object affect the physical information about the motion of the object as measured by observers of different frames. According to Doppler's effect, during the motion of an object, the light waves reflected/emitted from the moving object either gets closer or further apart from each other and this results in changes, for example, the Blue or Red shift of a fast moving source of light. On the other hand, this change imposed on the physical properties of the surrounding light waves due to the motion of an object results in a phenomenon which I will summarize below.
"In a given system of an observable experiment, A change in the physical properties (E.g. Wavelength, Period etc) of the motion of the light waves emitted/reflected by an object due to motion, Results in change in the physical properties (E.g. Time, Distance etc) of the motion of the object as measured by observers of different frames."
Simply, change in the physical properties of the motion of the surrounding light waves, Results in the Relativistic Effects we observe in our measurements.
Every light source which emits light waves, has a series of light waves spreading out from its vicinity and likewise a body in an illuminated region of space, has a series of light waves spreading out from its vicinity. Light waves act as a medium by which some information about an object, either at rest or in motion, propagate from one region of space to another. Observation of most events is possible because of the ability of light waves to transmit information about an event to an observer located at a distance in space.
Imagine an isolated region of space with just one light source that emits uniform light waves strong enough to illuminate all regions of that space. let's have a stationary observer located somewhere on a plane surface in that region, and an object (car) of velocity V, located at a distance D, away from the stationary observer. Any observer located within this region of space who wishes to observe the motion of the car will depend on the light waves (either visible or non visible electromagnetic waves) emitted/reflected by the moving object for information about the motion of the object.
To the stationary observer who is at a distance of D, behind the car, let us analyze his observation and measurement of the time of motion of the car through a distance d. Let us take that the speed of light in this thought experiment is C.
Light waves propagates information about an event from one region of space to another and it takes some time for light to propagate information about an event. During the measurement of the time of motion of the car by the stationary observer, the surrounding light waves also takes some little time to propagate information about the motion of the car to the stationary observer. This propagation of information by light waves matters most at the point when the car is just about to start its motion and at the point when the car immediately comes to rest.
Let us assume that the car has a clock attached to it which will record the time of its motion through the distance d and let us use the time, t, as the time measured by the clock attached to the car, for the motion of the car through the distance d.
Let us assume that the stationary observer is also provided with a clock that will enable him to time the motion of the car through the distance d, and let the time he measures for the motion of the car through the distance d, be T.
At the start of motion of the car, when the stationary observer starts his clock, the stationary observer DELAYS in starting his timing on the motion of the car by a time delay of amount equal to D/C, which is the time for light signal to travel from the car to the stationary observer and inform him of the departure of the car, which means that the stationary observer starts his timing at the time t - D/C. Also, at the end of motion of the car, through the distance of d, the stationary observer will require another light signal to travel from the final point of motion of the car to the point of the stationary observer to inform him about the coming to rest of the car. The time for this last light signal to get to the observer is d/C + D/C . This means that the stationary observer EXCEEDED in his measurement by the amount of time d/C + D/C . The total time resulting from the light propagation effect is D/C + d/C + D/C.
Therefore the total time T, of motion of the car as recorded by the clock of the stationary observer is T = t - D/C + d/C + D/C. The propagation time of information by light can be removed in the above equation of time as below, -D/C + (+D/C) = 0.
Simplifying the equation gives:
T = t + d/C
d/C = T - t ……………….......................................................... 1
The factor d/C is not a light propagation time but a change in the physical property (Period/time) of the surrounding light waves. and I will prove further the origin of the factor d/C.
The above equation simply says that: "Change in the physical property of the motion of the surrounding light waves equals (=) Change in the measurements of observers of different frames, that's the Relativistic Effects we observe in our physical measurements"
Since d = vt, where v is the velocity of the car.
T = t + vt/C
T = t (1+v/C)…………................................................................... 2
To prove further that the factor d/C is a change in the physical property of light waves, precisely, a change in the period of the light waves, let's consider the below analysis using the Doppler's Effect.
Now, imagine a car that emits light of wavelength ƛ , when it is at rest but when it is in motion, it emits light pulse of wavelength ʎ . Let's take that the car is to travel away at a speed of v on a straight line from a stationary observer located at a distance of D behind the car and this car emits a pulse of light at a period of t when in motion. If at the beginning of the motion when the car is just about to move, it emits a pulse of light and after a time, t, it emits another pulse of light and comes to rest immediately, then it will be clear that the car travels a distance, d, during the t period of emission of the pulse of light.
Mathematically, the period t, of emission of the light pulse is the same as the time (t) of motion of the car through the distance, d. The distance, d, travelled by the car during the period of emission of the light pulse is:
d = vt
Also, the change in the wavelength of the light waves brought about by the motion of the car is expressed as:
ƛ - ʎ = d = vt ......................................................................................... 3
From equation 3,
ƛ - ʎ = d = Vt
d = ƛ - ʎ
substituting d in equation 1 gives:
T - t = d/c
T - t = ƛ - ʎ /C
ƛ - ʎ /C = T - t = d/C .......................................................................4
The above equation shows that "In any given system of an observable experiment, change in the physical information about the motion of light waves, due to motion of an object, results in change in the physical measurement of the information about the motion of that object as measured by observers of different frames." That is to say; changes in the physical properties of light waves results to the Relativistic Effects we observe in our physical measurements.
THE CORRESPONDING DISTANCE EQUATION;
The corresponding distance can be derived through a more detailed form but let me use this short cut. From equation 1
T = t + d/C
since t = d/v
T = do /v
Therefore: do /v = d/v + d/C
do = d (1+v/C) ........................................………………5
T and do is the respective time and distance travelled by the car, as measured by the stationary observer.
t and d is the respective time and distance travelled by the car as measured by the car or a clock attached to the car.
d/C is the change in the physical property of the light wave, which is also a change in the period of the light waves that were emitted when the car is at rest and when it is in motion..
This effect has been misinterpreted by other writers who claim that light travels a longer distance in a moving frame and thereby causing time to run differently in different frames. But it is very clear from the above derivation of time and distance that light travels through the same distance in all frames and time also runs the same in all frames. But what happens is that, when a disturbance is created in the waves of light due to the motion of an object, this disturbance does not just die out of existence. It goes on to affect the observation and measurements of all observers who depend on the light waves for their observation and measurement. This change in the physical property of the light waves can make physical measurements of different frames to appear relative depending on the magnitude of the disturbance produced in the waves of light..
The laws of physics are very absolute in the sense that in reality, light travels the same distance relative to every frame BUT the laws of physics could be relative in the sense that in measurement, observers of different frames might measure different values for the distance travelled by the light waves as a result of the behavior of light waves which I explained above.
Also, the measurements of some frames are better/more valid than the measurement of other frames, depending on the resultant change in the physical property of the light waves from both the system of the observer and the event being observed. It seems from the derived mathematical equations that the measurements recorded by a person attached to the frame of the event are always more accurate, and this must be because of the fact that the person attached to the frame of event does not depend on the surrounding light waves for its measurement. Of course, no one needs light waves to walk from point A to point B but someone surely needs light waves to know that an object has moved from point A to point B.
It does follow that (The motion of the Car results in changes in the physical properties of the waves (Doppler's Effect); The changes in the physical properties of the light waves results in changes/Relativistic Effects in the measurements of observers of different frames). In the earlier version of this proposition, this, I was referring to as "Nwobu's Effect" ( T - t = ƛ - ʎ /C = d/C ).
From the above derivations, the below conclusions can be deducted.
1. The velocity of any matter travelling through space is independent of any frame observing and measuring its motion.
2. Some matters can travel faster than the speed of light.
3. Some frames are better than others in the measurement of physical quantities.
4. Time runs the same in all frames even though our measuring devices may record otherwise.
5. Relative and absoluteness co-exist.
6. Between two or more inertial reference frames, an event which is present tense to one frame may not be present tense to other frames but may be past or future tense to other frames
7. Optical observation of our past time/world and its mathematical estimation is perfectly possible.
8. The future is not optically visible but is mathematically solvable.
For further reading on the complete article, kindle visit the blog:
I've been reading some of his writings
he is big on phase symmetry
I know RS says frequency is derived from s/t units and not the bottom line
similar to Mathis's charge isn't the bottom line
but if we consider writing the universe program in "cobal" instread of 0101010"s or (0,1,0),(0,1,1)etc
then it's just a translation problem
and he might be bringing some new or helping to flesh out RS
i do like his styleForums:
I post a comment on Google+ to the following post:
Is Einstein's Relativity a Political Ideology?
In the real world, the speed of light (relative to the observer) does depend on the speed of the light source, as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light. Unfortunately we all live in Einstein's world where the speed of light is, by postulation, independent of the speed of the light source, and space and time are disfigured so as to form an efficient "protecive belt" around the false postulate:
"Lakatos distinguished between two parts of a scientific theory: its "hard core" which contains its basic assumptions (or axioms, when set out formally and explicitly), and its "protective belt", a surrounding defensive set of "ad hoc" (produced for the occasion) hypotheses. (...) In Lakatos' model, we have to explicitly take into account the "ad hoc hypotheses" which serve as the protective belt. The protective belt serves to deflect "refuting" propositions from the core assumptions..."
Imre Lakatos, Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes: "All scientific research programmes may be characterized by their 'hard core'. The negative heuristic of the programme forbids us to direct the modus tollens at this 'hard core'. Instead, we must use our ingenuity to articulate or even invent 'auxiliary hypotheses', which form a protective belt around this core, and we must redirect the modus tollens to these. It is this protective belt of auxiliary hypotheses which has to bear the brunt of tests and get adjusted and readjusted, or even completely replaced, to defend the thus-hardened core."
Banesh Hoffmann is quite clear: the Michelson-Morley experiment confirms the variable speed of light predicted by Newton's emission theory of light unless there is a protective belt ("contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations") that deflects the refuting experimental evidence from the false constant-speed-of-light postulate:
"Relativity and Its Roots", Banesh Hoffmann, p.92: "Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether."
See also the following two texts:
Albert Einstein Institute: "One of the three classical tests for general relativity is the gravitational redshift of light or other forms of electromagnetic radiation. However, in contrast to the other two tests - the gravitational deflection of light and the relativistic perihelion shift -, you do not need general relativity to derive the correct prediction for the gravitational redshift. A combination of Newtonian gravity, a particle theory of light, and the weak equivalence principle (gravitating mass equals inertial mass) suffices. (...) The gravitational redshift was first measured on earth in 1960-65 by Pound, Rebka, and Snider at Harvard University..."
Richard Feynman, "QED: The strange theory of light and matter", p. 15: "I want to emphasize that light comes in this form - particles. It is very important to know that light behaves like particles, especially for those of you who have gone to school, where you probably learned something about light behaving like waves. I'm telling you the way it does behave - like particles. You might say that it's just the photomultiplier that detects light as particles, but no, every instrument that has been designed to be sensitive enough to detect weak light has always ended up discovering the same thing: light is made of particles."
my comment was simply "check out Dewey B. Larson's 'Reciprocal System of Theory' " with a link to a youtube video of Dewey's 1978 Conference Keynote Address, and someone else posted a link to RationalWiki's view of Larson. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Reciprocal_Theory
It disturbs me on how much mainstream scientists can not see what we see in Larson's theories. Have anyone here seen this, tried to edit these pages?Forums:
I have changed from a CAPTCHA to a registration code system for creating new accounts, both here and on rstheory, to try to reduce all the bogus account creation by spambots and comment spammers. You can just copy and past this registration code into the registration form:
RS2 Registration Code: ogtczyctezyqjylgForums: