Thanks Anthony!

Of course I thank fqxi for the forum and the time and effort--and even the stated intent--but I gotta call 'em as I see 'em.

I am not "dissatisifed with the process and results" at all. They are what they are--entertaining. It would be like being dissatisfied when a two-headed coin comes up heads.

You write, "In terms of the results, we were pleased to see...

view entire post

Thanks Anthony!

Of course I thank fqxi for the forum and the time and effort--and even the stated intent--but I gotta call 'em as I see 'em.

I am not "dissatisifed with the process and results" at all. They are what they are--entertaining. It would be like being dissatisfied when a two-headed coin comes up heads.

You write, "In terms of the results, we were pleased to see that some 'non-professionals' did do well in the contest. But it is, I would say, neither surprising nor concerning that the top prizes were taken by known professionals, and even FQXi members. There is a *reason* these people are at the top of their field, and FQXI works hard to identify and invite as members just the same sort of people who are likely to win such contests. "

So the point was to award all the top prizes to insider antitheorists/fqxi members repurposing old research, while also handing out some cash prizes to non-Ph.D.'s, so as to absolve the stacked contest of criticism? Basically you are saying it was a sweep by equationless, postulateless antitheories and non-theories, both establsished/professional and new/non-professional, both exalting and denying time.

All that this accomplishes is the absoulte exile of novel ideas from Ph.D. physicists. So congrats!

Yes--I am now finally beginning to see the wisdom of the anthropic principle which has frozen progress in theoretical physics over the past thirty years.

"We are fqxi members because we are the best and brightest, and thus we deserve the cash in all fqxi contests for repurposing our non-original research pertaining to decades-old antitheories in papers far-extending beyond the allowed number of words. If you were one of us, you would be one of us, but you are not so you cannot be, and thus we will be anonymous while you must put your name on your new ideas, so we can ignore them, as you are not one of us. Because you are not one of us we will not read nor comment on your theories which present simple postulates and novel equations unifying physical phenomena in quantum mechanics and relativity: the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, or dx4/dt=ic--a postualte and euqation which unfreezes time, liberates us from the block universe, underlies relativty and entanglement, and unifies all the dualities with a simple *physical* model."

Of course I thank fqxi for the forum and the time and effort, but I gotta call 'em as I see 'em. As that is what physics has ever been and will ever be all about, long after the age of anitheories is over, and the heroic age again rises in a renaissance in physics and culture.

MOVING DIMENSIONS THEORY: EXALTING EINSTEIN’S ELEMENTARY FOUNDATIONS OF RELATIVITY & SCHRODENGER’S CHARACTERISTIC TRAIT OF QUANTUM MECHANICS

by Dr. Elliot McGucken

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/238

"A physical theory can be satisfactory only if its structures are composed of elementary foundations. The theory of relativity is ultimately as little satisfactory as, for example, classical thermodynamics was before Boltzmann had interpreted the entropy as probability. –Einstein in a letter to Arnold Sommerfield on January 14th, 1908. CPAE, Vol. 5, Doc. 73:" "When two systems, of which we know the states by their respective representatives, enter into temporary physical interaction due to known forces between them, and when after a time of mutual influence the systems separate again, then they can no longer be described in the same way as before, viz. by endowing each of them with a representative of its own. I would not call that one but rather the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics, the one that enforces its entire departure from classical lines of thought. By the interaction the two representatives [the quantum states] have become entangled." –Schrödinger

Moving Dimensions Theory’s simple postulate, physical model, and equation account for both “relativity’s elementary foundations,” which Einstein stated we yet needed, and Schrödinger’s “characteristic trait” of quantum mechanics—entanglement.

MDT: The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, or dx4/dt=ic.

MDT, by treating physical reality as *real,* has found the mechanism for time and its arrows that Feynman had been seeking: “Now if the world of nature is made of atoms, and we too are made of atoms and obey physical laws, the most obvious interpretation of this evident distinction between past and future, and this irreversibility of all phenomena, would be that some laws, some of the motion laws of the atoms, are going one way – that the atom laws are not such that they can go either way. There should be somewhere in the works some kind of principle that uxles only make wuxles, and never vice versa, and so the world is turning away from uxley character to wuxley character all the time – and this one-way business of the interactions of things should be the thing that makes the whole phenomena of the world seem to go one way.”

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

view post as summary

reply to this thread

“Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito—-Do not yield to the bad, but always oppose it with courage.” --Virgil

On page 66 of the attached document, please find a list of the fifty or so "foundational questions" MDT both asks and answers.

Long ago, Galileo accounted for the pre-ordained awards papers on string theory, LQG, and timelessnes in describing the character of the...

view entire post

“Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito—-Do not yield to the bad, but always oppose it with courage.” --Virgil

On page 66 of the attached document, please find a list of the fifty or so "foundational questions" MDT both asks and answers.

Long ago, Galileo accounted for the pre-ordained awards papers on string theory, LQG, and timelessnes in describing the character of the groupthink religions which oft replace science and *physical* reality: "In the long run my observations have convinced me that some men, reasoning preposterously, first establish some conclusion in their minds which, either because of its being their own or because of their having received it from some person who has their entire confidence, impresses them so deeply that one finds it impossible ever to get it out of their heads. Such arguments in support of their fixed idea ... gain their instant acceptance and applause. On the other hand whatever is brought forward against it, however ingenious and conclusive, they receive with disdain or with hot rage - if indeed it does not make them ill. Beside themselves with passion, some of them would not be backward even about scheming to suppress and silence their adversaries. I have had some experience of this myself. ... No good can come of dealing with such people, especially to the extent that their company may be not only unpleasant but dangerous."--(Galileo Galilei)"

Yes Cristi,

It would be one thing if all the insider FQXI winners were the "next Einsteins" with novel postulates and equations based on logic and *physical* reality, celebrating hitherto unsung features of the universe such as dx4/dt=ic. But none of their papers advance physics. None of the winners' papers contain novel equations nor new postualtes, unlike the MDT paper. Rovelli defends this reappropriation of decades-old research which has lead nowhere with "physics needs wrong directions, wasted time, and wasted money." Yes--but should that be one's goal just because it pays better? For physics also needs simple postualtes and equations such as "The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, or dx4/dt=ic," which provides the bedrock principle that Einstein stated relativity yet needed, as well as a *physical* model for Schrodinger's entanglement, time and all its arrows, and entropy.

"A physical theory can be satisfactory only if its structures are composed of elementary foundations. The theory of relativity is ultimately as little satisfactory as, for example, classical thermodynamics was before Boltzmann had interpreted the entropy as probability. --Einstein in a letter to Arnold Sommerfield on January 14th, 1908. CPAE, Vol. 5, Doc. 73:"

"When two systems, of which we know the states by their respective representatives, enter into temporary physical interaction due to known forces between them, and when after a time of mutual influence the systems separate again, then they can no longer be described in the same way as before, viz. by endowing each of them with a representative of its own. I would not call that one but rather the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics, the one that enforces its entire departure from classical lines of thought. By the interaction the two representatives [the quantum states] have become entangled." ⁺Schrödinger Moving Dimensions Theory’s simple postulate, physical model, and equation account for both “relativity’s elementary foundations,” which Einstein stated we yet needed, and Schrödinger’s “characteristic trait” of quantum mechanics—entanglement.

MDT: The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, or dx4/dt=ic.

Now I know that all the fqxi cash empowers the antitheory insiders to surf Hawaii and ski Aspen, but in-between all the jet-setting, somebody, someday, will find a moment to comment on MDT; and if not, that is fine too, as "Yet it moves! dx4/dt=ic." And a new generation will come along whose truth cannot be trumped by cash, tenure, and titles.

Another interesting facet of the competition is that none of the pre-ordained insider fqxi winners ever ventured beyond their own forum to comment, nor discuss, nor share in the common journey, nor "community." The "community" was defined by a snarky caste system, where those who questioned the prevaling untestable religions of multiverses, parallel universes, tiny, vibrating strings, block universes, frozen time, and time's unreality, were placed into the lower caste, where their thoughts, ideas, and papers, postulating novel physical features of the universe fully supporting Einstein's relativity and Schrodenger's entanglement, were deemed "untouchable." For decades String Theorists have been ignoring the bending, warping, curving of dimensions; and as Moving Dimensions Theory embraced this reality, as well as time's reality and entanglement's reality--which neither ST, nor LQG, nor Platonia provide a *physical* model for; it was ignored.

It would be one thing if they were Feynmans or even Schwingers or Glashows. But again, it is not as if the insider fqxiers are Einstein, nor Galileo, nor Bohr, nor Fermi, nor Dirac, nor Pauli--who all made lasting contributions to physics, but rather, they are primarily antitheorists yet following well-worn paths that have lead absolutely nowhere for decades, justifying this with "well, physics needs wrong directions, wasted time, and wasted money. And thus you had better look like us and mimic us and serve us and kneel before our anti-greatness and never, never question it in a public forum--otherwise you will be a crackpot."

And that brings us to John Baez's state-funded crackpot index which is probably what he is most famous for. He seems like a nice "playful" guy here and there, but truth be told, serious physicists such as Einstein, Fermi, Wheeler, Dirac, Pauli, Feynman, Brillouin, Maxwell, Faraday, Galileo, Newton, Thompson, and Bohr never had crackpot indexes. This is because they did not hail from a day and age of massive funding was proudly justified by the aging groupthink antitheory regimes with "physics needs wrong directions, wasted time, and wasted money." Physics back then was not a sociological exercise in which the main point was to keep the funding in the family for untestable non-theories and antitheories, but rather it was an heroic act conducted in the spirit of apprehdning the *physical* truth.

A well-known physicist once said, "A man creates and maintains crackpot indexes in direct proportion to the degree he believes he just might be a crackpot." Ad-hominem attacks and behind-the-scenes politicing better suit their nature; as it is easier to gain funding by setting up groupthink regimes and kneeling before the false anti-physics/untestable gods of the multiverse, the anthropic principle, parallel universes, time travel, and space-time atoms, than it is to earn a living by advancing physics with novel equations which provide for quantum entanglement and entropy; from which all of relativity naturally emerges: dx4/dt=ic.

Contrast Galileo's spirit to the arrogant, dismissive, aloof actions of the insider-fqxi prize recipients:



"I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him." --Galileo Galilei

Of course fqxi hands out tiny, little awards to non-professionals and geometric mystics, but again, this is also performed as a calculated political maneuver so as to serve their greater goals of keeping the funding in the family, while simultaneously keeping serious physics from interfering with their decades-old untestable, postulateless, equationless, antitheory regimes based on tiny, vibrating strings, parallel universe, ever-receding quantum grvaity theories, multiverses, insider snarkiness, and timelessness.

Despite all this, the contest was a success; and again, I thank fqxi for the forum. For despite their best efforts, the stated intent of the contest yet prevailed. The true winners of the contest were all those who actually participated in it, and thus it was all us "crackpots" and "outsiders" who exalted the spirit of physics--it was we who ran away with that higher victory that cannot be counted down in dollars from the mint, but which is gained via honoarable, exalted dialogue and truthful, trusting, conscientious interaction. It was we who won the higehr battle here--it was we who exalted the *heroic* spirit and gave value and meaning to the fqxi contest--not those traditional antitheorists whose pre-ordained victories allowed them to submit thier essays and then go off and surf and ski while ignoring the greater community's contributions and rugged, exalting debates; but it was us--that merry band of brothers who read through the essays, asked questions, commented, and tried their best to elaborate on their ideas and explain their *novel* physical theories in *words*, in the spirit of James Clerk Maxwell, Einstein, Faraday, and Bohr--none of whom exalted in crackpot indexes, snarky, secretive-insider-awards, and antitheory groupthink regimes founded upon indecipherable, meaningless maths.

The true winners were those who walked in with honrable, nobel postualtes and equations reflecting hitherto unsung aspects of the universe; and after diligently explaining and defedning them, walked away with those very same postulates and equations further forged by the dialogue and bolstered by the words of the Greats:

"Mathematicians may flatter themselves that they possess new ideas which mere human language is as yet unable to express. Let them make the effort to express these ideas in appropriate words without the aid of symbols, and if they succeed they will not only lay us laymen under a lasting obligation, but, we venture to say, they will find themselves very much enlightened during the process, and will even be doubtful whether the ideas as expressed in symbols had ever quite found their way out of the equations into their minds." –James Clerk Maxwell

"Books on physics are full of complicated mathematical formulae. But thought and ideas, not formulae, are the beginning of every physical theory." –Einstein/Infeld, The Evolution of Physics

"I don't believe in mathematics." -- Albert Einstein.

"Do not worry about your difficulties in mathematics, I assure you that mine are greater." --Einstein

"Mathematics are well and good but nature keeps dragging us around by the nose."" --Einstein

"Geometry is not true, it is advantageous." --Jules H. Poincare

"Born described the weak point in Einstein's work in those final years: ". . . now he tried to do without any empirical facts, by pure thinking. He believed in the power of reason to guess the laws according to which God built the world." --Einstein's Mistakes, Hans C. Ohanian

Einstein, "But before mankind could be ripe for a science which takes in the whole of reality, a second fundamental truth was needed, which only became common property among philosophers with the advent of Kepler and Galileo. Pure logical thinking cannot yield us any knowledge of the empirical world; all knowledge of reality starts form experience and ends in it. Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality. Because Galileo saw this, and particularly because he drummed it into the scientific world, he is the father of modern physics -- indeed, of modern science altogether. (Albert Einstein, Ideas and Opinions)"

"Mathematics are well and good but nature keeps dragging us around by the nose." --Albert Einstein

In Disturbing the Universe, Freeman Dyson writes, "Dick [Richard Feynman] fought back against my skepticism, arguing that Einstein had failed because he stopped thinking in concrete physicalimages and became a manipulator of equations. I had to admit that was true. The great discoveries of Einstein's earlier years were all based on direct physical intuition. Einstein's later unified theories failed because they were only sets of equations without physical meaning. Dick's sumover-histories theory was in the spirit of the young Einstein, not of the old Einstein. It was solidly rooted in physical reality." --Freeman Dyson

Smolin writes in TTWP that Bohr was not a Feynman "shut up and calculate" physicist, and from the above Dyson quote, it appears that Feynman wasn't either:

"Mara Beller, a historian who has studied his [Bohr's] work in detail, points out that there was not a single calculation in his research notebooks, which were all verbal argument and pictures." --Smolin's The Trouble With Physics

"I have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning."--Plato

Plato’s quote is hanging in the Boston Museum of Science, and it seems to agree with Albert

Einstein, Galileo, and Max Born:

http://www.ilfilosofo.com/blog/2008/04/12/plato-mathema
tician-quote/

"I personally like to regard a probability wave as a real thing, certainly as more than a tool for mathematical calculations. ... how could we rely on probability predictions if we do not refer to something real and objective? (Max Born on Quantum Theory)"

Max Born wrote, "All great discoveries in experimental physics have been made due to the intuition of men who made free use of models which for them were not products of the imagination but representations of real things."

"Gradually the conviction gained recognition that all knowledge about things is exclusively a working-over of the raw material furnished by the senses. ... Galileo and Hume first upheld this principle with full clarity and decisiveness." --(Albert Einstein, Ideas and Opinions)

To reject *physical* intuition and replace it with the nonsensical block universe MDT does away with seems to go exactly against the spirit by which physics has ever advanced, according to Galileo, Einstein, and other noble physicists. It seems a preposterous conclusion that quantum mechanics, which works so very well, must be thrown out and reformulated for something which MDT shows there is no need for--the block universe.

"In the long run my observations have convinced me that some men, reasoning preposterously, first establish some conclusion in their minds which, either because of its being their own or because of their having received it from some person who has their entire confidence, impresses

them so deeply that one finds it impossible ever to get it out of their heads. Such arguments in support of their fixed idea ... gain their instant acceptance and applause. On the other hand whatever is brought forward against it, however ingenious and conclusive, they receive with disdain or with hot rage - if indeed it does not make them ill. Beside themselves with passion, some of them would not be backward even about scheming to suppress and silence their adversaries. I have had some experience of this myself. ... No good can come of dealing with such people, especially to the extent that their company may be not only unpleasant but dangerous."--(Galileo Galilei)

"my dear Kepler, what do you think of the foremost philosophers of this University? In spite of my oft-repeated efforts and invitations, they have refused, with the obstinacy of a glutted adder, to look at the planets or Moon or my telescope." --Galileo Galilei

We must forever keep physical reality in the front and center, along with logic and reason and *physical* intuition--otherwise progress in physics will grind to a halt, as it has for the past thirty years.

"But before mankind could be ripe for a science which takes in the whole of reality, a second fundamental truth was needed, which only became common property among philosophers with the advent of Kepler and Galileo. Pure logical thinking cannot yield us any knowledge of the empirical world; all knowledge of reality starts form experience and ends in it. Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality. Because Galileo saw this, and particularly because he drummed it into the scientific world, he is the father of modern physics -- indeed, of modern science altogether." --Albert Einstein, Ideas and Opinions

In Dark Matters, Dr. Percy Seymour writes, "Albert Einstein was a great admirer of Newton, Faraday, and Maxwell. In his office he had framed copies of portraits of these scientists. He had this to say about Faraday and Maxwell, in "Maxwell's Influence on the Development of the Concept of Physical Reality": "The greatest change in the axiomatic basis of physics--in other words, of our conception of the structure--since Newton laid the foundation of theoretical physics was brought about by Faraday's and Maxwell's work on electromagenetic phenomena" --p. 33-34, DARK MATTERS

In his book Einstein, Banesh Hoffman tells us: "Meanwhile, however, the English experimenter Michael Farady was making outstanding experimental discoveries in electricity and magnetism.

Being largely self-taught and lacking mathematical facility, he could not interpret his results in the manner of Ampere. And this was fortunate, since it led to a revolution in science. . . Ampere and others had concentrated their attention on the visible hardware--magnets, current-carrying wires, and the like--and on the numbers of centimeters separating the pieces of hardware. In so doing they were following the action-at-a-distance tradition that had developed from the enormous success of the Newtonian system of mechanics and law of gravitation. . .But Faraday regarded the hardware as secondary. For him the important physical events took place in the surrounding space--the filed. This, in his mind, he filled with tentacles that by their pulls and thrusts and motions gave rise to the electromagnetic effects observed. Although he could thus interpret his electromagnetic experiments with excellent precision and surprising simplicity, most physicists adept at mathematics thought his concepts mathematically naive."--BANESH

HOFFMAN, EINSTEIN

It is interesting that Einstein introduced relativity as a principle--as a primary law not deduced from anything else.

Well, I guess I was dumb enough to even ask, "why relativity?"

And I found the answer in a more fundamental invariance--the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, or dx4/dt = ic. Change is fundamentally embedded in space-time. And not only can all of relativity be derived from this, but suddenly we have a *physical* model for entropy, time and its arrows and asymmetries in all realms, free will, and quantum nonlocality and entanglement. MDT accounts for the constant speed of light c--both its independence of the source and its independence of the velocity of the observer, while establishing it as the fastest, slowest, and *only* velocity for all entities and objects moving through space-time, as well as the maximum velocity that anything is measured to move. And suddenly we see a *physical* basis for E=mc^2. Energy and mass are the same thing--it's just that energy is mass caught upon the fourth expanding dimension, and thus it surfs along at "c."

On page 37 of "Einstein's Mistakes, The Failings of Human Genius," by Hans Ochanian, we read,

"Einstein acknowledged hid debt to Newton and to Maxwell, but he was not fully aware of the extent of Galileo's fatherhood. In an introduction he wrote for Galileo's celebrated Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, he faults Galileo for failing to produce a general mathematical proof. Galileo regarded relativity as an empirical, observational fact, that is, a law of nature, and Einstein's own formulation of the Principle of Relativity three hundred years later imitated Galileo's in treating this principle as a law of nature and not as a mathematical deduction from anything else."

Well, MDT provides a more fundamental law with an equation: dx4/dt = ic, from which relativity is derived in my paper. And an added benefit are all the other entities dx4/dt=ic accounts for with a *physical* model, from entropy, to qm's entanglement and nonlocality, to time and all its arrows.

MDT accomplishes several things right off the bat:

1) unfreezes time & liberates us from the block universe, shwoing that we have free will

2) weaves change into the fundamental fabric of spacetime

3) derives relativity from a more fundamental universal invariant: dx4/dt=ic

4) provides a *physical* model for entropy

5) provides a *physical model for quantum entanglement

6) provides a *physical* mechanism for nonlocality--the fourth expanding dimension distributes nonlocality

7) provides a physical model unifying the dualities--space/time, energy/mass, wave/particle, E/B

8) provides a *physical* model for the invariance of c--both its independence of the source and its independence of the observer

9) provides a *physical* model for the spherically- symmetric expanding wavefront of probability that defines a photon's path

10) offers a resolution for both the EPR Paradox and Godel's problems with the block universe relativity implied

11) offers a physical model for why nothing can move faster than c.

12) offers an intuitive model for the length-contraction can accompanies all motion

13) accounts for both the agelessness (from relativity) and the nonlocality (from quantum mechanics) of the photon

14) accounts for the gravitational slowing of time and light, as well as the gravitational redshift

15) provides a unique physical model underlying wide ranging phenomena in quantum mechanics, relativity, statistical mechanics.

Surely MDT offers a brand new way and a new day! And when you factor in how little MDT has cost so far, compared to the hundreds of millions of dollars which have gone into quantum gravity/string theory religions/regimes and the creation of crackpot indexes to suppress the bold, new ideas by the corporate-state Matrix, surely MDT is worth pursuing!

Moving Dimensions Theory—which regards time as an emergent phenomena—was inspired in part by Einstein's words pertaining to the higher purpose of physical theories--words which ought be nailed above the door of every physics department, so as to liberate us from frozen time and frozen physics: "Before I enter upon a critique of mechanics as a foundation of physics, something of a broadly general nature will first have to be said concerning the points of view according to which it is possible to criticize physical theories at all. The first point of view is obvious: The theory must not contradict empirical facts. . . The second point of view is not concerned with the relation to the material of observation but with the premises of the theory itself, with what may briefly but vaguely be characterized as the "naturalness" or "logical simplicity" of the premises (of the basic concepts and of the relations between these which are taken as a basis). This point of view, an exact formulation of which meets with great difficulties, has played an important role in the selection and evaluation of theories since time immemorial."

And so we march. For honor, for glory, for truth.

For physics we march.

All the best!

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

"E pur si muove!" "And yet it does move! dx4/dt=ic!"

“Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito—-Do not yield to the bad, but always oppose it with courage.” --Virgil (Ludwig von Mises' favorite quote)

view post as summary

reply to this thread

Hello Cristi,

You write, "Is it much $100,000K + for Lisi? Compared to the investments in ST and even LQG, I would say: “give the man the cash, and give him 4-5 good students (and good surfers) willing to explore this direction”. I mean, we can believe that string theory and quantum gravity are closer to the unification, so they receive much more founding and researchers, but we are still...

view entire post

Hello Cristi,

You write, "Is it much $100,000K + for Lisi? Compared to the investments in ST and even LQG, I would say: “give the man the cash, and give him 4-5 good students (and good surfers) willing to explore this direction”. I mean, we can believe that string theory and quantum gravity are closer to the unification, so they receive much more founding and researchers, but we are still far from this unification, so we cannot say for sure which one is true."

The above statement reflects the vast success that the corporate-state physics Matrix has had in redefining physics--both as that which is a groupthink effort, and as that which never advances and always requires more funding, decade after decade after decade. Neither String Theory nor LQG are "close" to any form of unification, as neither is defined by by the unifying, maverick individual.

Think about it. How many grad students did Feynman need to reformulate quantum mechanics? How many grad students and postdocs did Einstein need when he wrote his five papers which revolutionized physics in 1905? How many students did Bohr, Newton, Galileo, Bruno, and Copernicus need? How many students did Darwin have working for him? How many grad students did Boltzman have working for him? How many grad students did Maxwell and Farady have?

And when you think about it, string theorists/LQGers/Lisi require even less equipment than Maxwell and Farady had, as the former never deal with reality, but more generally in multiverses, parallel universes, spaceitme atoms, time travel, "geometric mysticism," and postulateless, equationless propositions which ultimately make no predictions and thus which will never be tested and will always be funded. Because MDT predicts all of relativity and because it can be tested, it is shunned, because individuals must never contribute to physics without permission from the antitheory elders who rose to prominence not by advancing physics, but by recreating physics in their own image--a political and sociological exercise. I mean I can see the need to hire PR specialists and apologists for contests that hand out the prizes to pre-ordained antitheory insiders, but then again, does this really advance physics or bestow upon us new ideas, postulates, and equations? Do not such machines do the very opposite, exiling new ideas, postulates, and equations?

Moving Dimensions Theory’s simple postulate, physical model, and equation account for both “relativity’s elementary foundations,” which Einstein stated we yet needed, and Schrödinger’s “characteristic trait” of quantum mechanics—entanglement.

MDT: The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, or dx4/dt=ic

Again and again, science comes from the indvidual--not the well-funded groupthink cartel from which derives groupthink, false PR/marching orders, and state-funded snark! Do not take my word for this:

"New scientific ideas never spring from a communal body, however organized, but rather from the head of an individually inspired researcher who struggles with his problems in lonely thought and unites all his thought on one single point which is his whole world for the moment." --Max Planck

And again we see the primacy of the honest individual in the classic, epic hero's journey!

"A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man." --Joseph Campbell

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth

And the Nobel Laureate eocnomist F.A. Hayek agrees!

"The tragedy of collectivist thought is that, while it starts out to make reason supreme, it ends by destroying reason because it misconceives the process on which the growth of reason depends. It may indeed be said that it is the paradox of all collectivist doctrine and its demands for “conscious” control or “conscious” planning that they necessarily lead to the demand that the mind of some individual should rule supreme—while only the individualist approach to social phenomena makes us recognize the superindividual forces which guide the growth of reason. Individualism is thus an attitude of humility before this social process and of tolerance to other opinions and is the exact opposite of that intellectual hubris which is at the root of the demand for comprehensive direction of social purpose." –F.A. Hayek, The End of Truth, The Road to Serfdom

Read that aagain, Cristi: "Individualism is thus an attitude of humility before this social process and of tolerance to other opinions and is the exact opposite of that intellectual hubris which is at the root of the demand for comprehensive direction of social purpose."

It is a humility and understanding that science does not come from over-the-top-funded groupthink regimes which have frozen physics for the past thirty years and hired a plethora of grad-students/postdocs/professors to enforce the order, but rather science comes from indivduals who must stand upon the shoulders of giants, not deconstruct them.

Thus, Critsi, every single equation in physics has an individual's name associated with it.

Because LQG and String Theory are groupthink projects, they thus have no equations nor even postualtes. Because Lisi's paper mimics this approach of exalting indecipherable and ultimately meaningless math via handwaving, press releases, and empty promises of testability, he was brought on board. Indeed he has received almost nothing compared to the hundreds of millions invested in the former dead-end antitheories, but this is no reason to suppose that he will unify anything with even millions of dollars.

If one is looking for unification, one must turn to the individual physicist who rides into town at high noon with his simple postulate and equation with far-reaching consequences--an equation and *physical* premise which provides the foundations for relativity that Einstein sought, as well as for Schrodenger's characteristic trait.

MOVING DIMENSIONS THEORY: EXALTING EINSTEIN’S ELEMENTARY FOUNDATIONS & SCHRODENGER’S CHARACTERISTIC TRAIT

"A physical theory can be satisfactory only if its structures are composed of elementary foundations. The theory of relativity is ultimately as little satisfactory as, for example, classical thermodynamics was before Boltzmann had interpreted the entropy as probability. –Einstein in a letter to Arnold Sommerfield on January 14th, 1908. CPAE, Vol. 5, Doc. 73:"

"When two systems, of which we know the states by their respective representatives, enter into temporary physical interaction due to known forces between them, and when after a time of mutual influence the systems separate again, then they can no longer be described in the same way as before, viz. by endowing each of them with a representative of its own. I would not call that one but rather the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics, the one that enforces its entire departure from classical lines of thought. By the interaction the two representatives [the quantum states] have become entangled." --Schrödinger

Moving Dimensions Theory’s simple postulate, physical model, and equation account for both “relativity’s elementary foundations,” which Einstein stated we yet needed, and Schrödinger’s “characteristic trait” of quantum mechanics—entanglement.

MDT: The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, or dx4/dt=ic.

I would argue, Cristi, that an element more important than funding to hire students, cash to hire PR teams, and prizes to hire postdocs is the heroic, honorable, individualistic spirit that we need to bring on back--"If we are to go forward, we must go back and rediscover those precious values - that all reality hinges on moral foundations and that all reality has spiritual control." –Martin Luther King Jr.

Physics has ever been driven and advanced by physicists contemplating *physical* reality and presenting *physical* models, in the rugged pursuit of fundamental *physical* principles such as dx4/dt=ic.

"My interest in science was always essentially limited to the study of principles.... That I have published so little is due to this same circumstance, as the great need to grasp principles has caused me to spend most of my time on fruitless pursuits." --Einstein

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

view post as summary

reply to this thread

Thanks for all that Michael Sherbon,

Soon this post will be placed under review/edited/censored by anonymous FQXI judges and then it will be deleted by anonymous FQXI members. So enjoy it while you can. And yes, I am saving all these for the book; for while FQXI gets the millions of dollars to bolster antitheory bureaucracies, we get the Truth and new Physics. 'Tis a fair deal, so go...

view entire post

Thanks for all that Michael Sherbon,

Soon this post will be placed under review/edited/censored by anonymous FQXI judges and then it will be deleted by anonymous FQXI members. So enjoy it while you can. And yes, I am saving all these for the book; for while FQXI gets the millions of dollars to bolster antitheory bureaucracies, we get the Truth and new Physics. 'Tis a fair deal, so go ahead and make my day. Pull that delete trigger all you want, but it won't stop the fourth dimension from expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions: dx4/dt=ic. :)

We have triumphed in this FQXI conest, for which is worth more--a few thousand dollars and empty insider rewards/trophies which can only tarnish Carroll's/Anthony's/Barbour's/Rovelli's names when placed on the mantlepiece beside their decades-old, reappropriated, postulateless, equationless antitheories, or new theories with postulates and equations from which all of relativity, time, entropy, and entanglement may be derived? I maintain that novel physical theories are worth more to physics than cash prizes in stacked competitions: dx4/dt=ic: the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimesnions at c.

Since this FQXI contest has been judged to be corrupt by many, and since many more would likely agree (even in parallel universes), I would thus propose that all future winners of FQXI essay contests also be afforded anonimity, in addition to the judges, so that they too can have/keep the money without being tarnished by their association with an insider-antitheorist-stacked contest.

Is this not the chief reason the judges wish to retain anonimity? Let the victors share in the secrecy too!

Checkmate I say to Anthony!! How come he never participated in the community, but to belittle and scold all the non-FQXI outsiders? How come he never asked, nor answered any *physical* questions? What's he going to do to defend FQXI's corruption? Personalize it and cut down all the contestants who really, truly defined the contest via *physical* exertion? Anthony could have met us on the abstract playing field of physical insights, math, and ideas, but he prefers to operate on more personal/political/PR levels where he doesn't have to think about physics, writing, "Dr. E, I'm sorry you are so dissatisfied with the process and results. In terms of not disclosing the referees or their deliberations, I really do understand your (and many other entrants') desire to get feedback from the jury. I would feel the same way. But FQXi does not have the capability to field these requests, nor deal with the inevitable slew of complaints etc. that would ensue if we simply published comments of the referees. We had hoped that feedback from the community would serve a similar purpose, and I am sorry that this did not suffice for you." Anthony--there was *no* feedback from any FQXI members of the "community"--there was no participation from all the people who walked away with all the pre-ordained big money awards beyond their own forums.

Note how Anthony takes all of FQXI's antitheory corruption and snarky insiderism and lack of participation in the community of their own contest, and instead of admitting to and apologizing for the glaring insider antitheory corruption which opposes the higher spirit of physics and MDT's novel *physical* postulate and equation, he tries to chalk it up to our mere "dissatisfaction," as it is *our* falt we do not get satisfaction from insider corruption, with, "Dr. E, I'm sorry you are so dissatisfied with the process and results." What--did he get his Ph.D. from customer-service-training at Circuit City? And then he goes on to say that the referees don't want to deal with "the inevitable slew of complaints etc. that would ensue if we simply published comments of the referees." That's insulting to everyone who participated--a slap in the face for sure--stating that the antitheory judges don't want to deal with all the whining and complaining and crying that all the non-FQXI "losers" will be sure to direct at them, and thus they will have to remain anonymous while giving all the big money prizes to the pre-ordained, decades-old, postulateless, progressless, equationless anitheories of their good friends and fqxi associates (who both support and deny time).

The funny thing is how transparent all this is.

Throughout the contest, I posted several hundred posts with MDT's meaningful postulates and equations from which all of relativity may be derived and from which time, entropy, and entanglement all naturally emerge. So Anthony, perhaps finally now you can get on the right path, man up, and talk physics instead of providing condescending PR for a corrupt competition. What do you think of MDT? I would be happy to direct you to my paper if you do not yet know where it is.

Time and again I backed up my paper and novel, unheralded theory with solid logic and reason. Time and again I showed how MDT provides both the foundational physical reality underlying both quantum mechanics and relativity which Einstein sought, and never, never did Anthony, nor any of the anti-theory FQXI insiders/pre-ordained victors, ever comment on one word of anything I wrote. I provided scores of quotes, equations, and reasoning from the Greats--from the very giants of physics and philosophy supporting my theory, approach, and general philosophy of science; and never once did Anthony et al. ever respond in any way, shape, manner, or form. Never once did they use any logic nor reason in asking a question nor rebutting any one of my *physical* claims. Instead, they all just used the pre-ordained FQXI money to surf and ski while we did all the work.

Was my paper even read? Were there even judges? Were the judges FQXI members such as Carroll/Rovelli/et al.?

FQXI received millions to supposedly correct the perceived problems of the snarky dominance of groupthink regimes which have halted progress in physics, and to open up the field of physics to those who most naturally advance it--fiercely independent, rugged researchers.

Insetad they are succeeding in demononstarting that they are the problem.

There is a vast, obvious, and entertaining condencension in Anthony's words which he is likely not even aware of; as if he were, would he truly speak that way? One must wonder how much he is getting paid to not only apologize for a fundamentally corrupt competition and institution, but to also try and belittle others. I imagine it is several hundred grand, but even then, surely no amount of money can be worth such behavior.

All the gold which is under or upon the earth is not enough to give in exchange for virtue. --Plato

Astronomy compels the soul to look upwards and leads us from this world to another. --Plato

Truth at last cannot be hidden. Dissimulation is of no avail. Dissimulation is to no purpose before so great a judge. Falsehood puts on a mask. Nothing is hidden under the sun. --da Vinci

To lie is so vile, that even if it were in speaking well of godly things it would take off something from God's grace; and Truth is so excellent, that if it praises but small things they become noble. --da Vinci

Beyond a doubt truth bears the same relation to falsehood as light to darkness; and this truth is in itself so excellent that, even when it dwells on humble and lowly matters, it is still infinitely above uncertainty and lies, disguised in high and lofty discourses; because in our minds, even if lying should be their fifth element, this does not prevent that the truth of things is the chief nutriment of superior intellects, though not of wandering wits. But you who live in dreams are better pleased by the sophistical reasons and frauds of wits in great and uncertain things, than by those reasons which are certain and natural and not so far above us. --da Vinci

Yes--I will have to stand by enternity's equations:

On Ludwig Boltzmann's tombstone is s=klogw

Of Max Born's is xp-px = ih

I will be happy that FQXI is not on mine, but instead dx4/dt=ic.

Avoid studies of which the result dies with the worker. --da Vinci

“Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity.” Albert Einstein

dx4/dt=ic

"Eppur si muove! And yet it moves!"

"In his 1912 Manuscript on Relativity, Einstein never stated that time is the fourth dimension, but rather he wrote x4 = ict. The fourth dimension is not time, but ict. Despite this, prominent physicists have oft equated time and the fourth dimension, leading to un-resolvable paradoxes and confusion regarding time’s physical nature, as physicists mistakenly projected properties of the three spatial dimensions onto a time dimension, resulting in curious concepts including frozen time and block universes in which the past and future are omni-present, thusly denying free will, while implying the possibility of time travel into the past, which visitors from the future have yet to verify. Beginning with the postulate that time is an emergent phenomenon resulting from a fourth dimension expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, diverse phenomena from relativity, quantum mechanics, and statistical mechanics are accounted for. Time dilation, the equivalence of mass and energy, nonlocality, wave-particle duality, and entropy are shown to arise from a common, deeper physical reality expressed with dx4/dt=ic. This postulate and equation, from which Einstein’s relativity is derived, presents a fundamental model accounting for the emergence of time, the constant velocity of light, the fact that the maximum velocity is c, and the fact that c is independent of the velocity of the source, as photons are but matter surfing a fourth expanding dimension. In general relativity, Einstein showed that the dimensions themselves could bend, curve, and move. The present theory extends this principle, postulating that the fourth dimension is moving independently of the three spatial dimensions, distributing locality and fathering time. This physical model underlies and accounts for time in quantum mechanics, relativity, and statistical mechanics, as well as entropy, the universe’s expansion, and time’s arrows"

--http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/238

view post as summary

reply to this thread

Thanks Julian!

A great thing about MDT is that it shows that both Einstein's relativity and quantum entanglement derive from a common, deeper source; thusly solving the dilemma posed in the current Scientific American (Feb. 2009) cover story:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=was-einstein-wrong
-about-relativity

Please see the attached paper which shows how MDT's simple...

view entire post

Thanks Julian!

A great thing about MDT is that it shows that both Einstein's relativity and quantum entanglement derive from a common, deeper source; thusly solving the dilemma posed in the current Scientific American (Feb. 2009) cover story:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=was-einstein-wrong
-about-relativity

Please see the attached paper which shows how MDT's simple euqation accounts for both the photon's nonlocality in relativity (agelessness) and nonlocality in quantum mechanics (entanglement). Right now I am offering all this to FQXI for free, in the spirit of science, but someday I may start charging for the definitive, groundbreaking content. I utilize attachments to keep these posts short--"pre-collapsed" if you will.

Yes--I added that Einstein quote--"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results," as it seems to describe the machinations of the multiverse mafia/landscapers/string theorists who have been exalting snarky, indecipherable math/antiphysics for forty years now, and building baseless antitheory regimes, while theoretical physics remains frozen in a block universe held together alternatively by tiny, vibrating strings and little loops; for which there is no proof.

Yes--sorry FQXI deleted that--I believe that FQXI is deleting my posts and placing them in that "giant void" they fund. When real theories and antitheorists collide, the real theories are annihilated while the antitheorists are funded. It is a most interesting phenomenon which has more to do with the nature of groupthink than group theory. Orginal equations and postulates come from individuals, and thus they are what the group most opposes, while uniting in their various forms of handwaving, and defending one-another'a antitheories, which both reject and accept time, via anonymous machinations.

A great thing about MDT is that it immediately springs us into a brand new day with its simple postualte and equation: the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, or dx4/dt=ic.

"Behind it all is surely an idea so simple, so beautiful, that when we grasp it - in a decade, a century, or a millennium - we will all say to each other, how could it have been otherwise? How could we have been so stupid?" --John A. Wheeler

Any fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage - to move in the opposite direction. --Albert Einstein

Now I know Anthony's trigger finger is itchin' to pull that deletion trigger upon seeing the maverick, new, bulletproof equation which none can now deny, as dx4/dt=ic serves to remind him that the multiverse-quantum-gravity-antitheories lack both fundamental equations and postualtes presenting hitherto unsung physical models of our deeper reality. But then, that is the problem with FQXI. For they give $130,00+ to Garret Lisi for a theory, rooted in "geometric mysticism"--which has been demonstrated to be going nowhere by serious Ph.D.'s across the entire internet, and then they simultaneously (in their inertial frame) set about deleting posts critical of this absurdity, as well as of their stacked insider contests where their very own members participate the least in their "community" and then make off with the greatest cash prizes for papers lacking novel research, postulates, and equations; while also exceding the word count. While exiling simple postulates and equations underlying all of relativity and quantum entanglement, they send tens of thousands towards postmodern research which mentions "ontology," "multiverse," "landscape," and "giant void," but which does not seem to contain any equations nor postulates, let alone novel ones:

"We believe our universe started with high energy inflation. We also know it is inflating again at present. Both events seem extremely unlikely with our current understanding of physics. This disturbing fundamental issue seem to guide us to a picture where the missing piece in the puzzle is an extension of our theories to the multiverse framework and where the dynamics of gravity plays a crucial role. Three important theories predict a multiverse. Yet only one can correspond to physical reality. We thus need a better understanding of the ontology of the multiverse; its background space-time; and, potential observational imprints. We proposed to study the selection of the initial conditions by taking the multiverse to be the landscape of (3+1) dimensional worlds predicted by string theory. In this picture matter content in each initial patch tries to crunch the domain to a point while the energy of the vacuum (inflaton energy) tries to blow it apart. Thus the only way for our universe to grow large and to survive the pull of matter is by starting at high energies. One of our predictions here, the existence of a giant void was confirmed by observations only 7 months later." --http://fqxi.org/large-grants/awardee/details/2008/mersini-
houghton



The above research lead to the following exchange on Peter Woit's blog: --http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=762

Physics
Professor says:

August 7, 2008 at 2:02 pm

Does anyone know what the “giant void” is that is mentioned here?

http://www.fqxi.org/large-grants/awardee/details/2008/m
ersini-houghton:

“One of our predictions here, the existence of a giant void was confirmed by observations only 7 months later. ”

Where was this giant void observed? When was it predicted?

Peter Woit says:

August 7, 2008 at 2:15 pm

Physics Professor,

That claim was covered in an edition here of “This Week’s Hype”

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=621

Phys
ics Professor says:

August 7, 2008 at 3:57 pm

Thanks Peter,

Now it all makes sense.

The giant void and multiverses were created to contain the FQXI funding and protect physicists from it.

--http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=762

Pete
r Woit writes, "The cover story of this week’s issue is The void: imprint of another universe?, which features claims by Laura Mersini-Houghton about a feature observed in the WMAP data that vindicates string theory. According to her:

It is the unmistakable imprint of another universe beyond the edge of our own.

and

I think our evidence points to string theory being on the right track.

" --http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=621

While FQXI sends tens of thousands of dollars towards claims stating, "It is the unmistakable imprint of another universe beyond the edge of our own," they are simultaneoulsy developing advanced, patent-pending "collapse" technology to collapse all comments criticizing these glaring absurdities and the snarky-insider-groupthink corruption exemplified by their most recent contest where pre-existing FQXI members won the big prizes for decades-old antitheories, while the judges (their friends) remained anonymous.

Best,

Dr. E (The Real Mccoy)

P.S. In the attached paper (which I attch to keep this post short/pre-collapsed/etc.), please see how the latest cover story in Scientfic American is resolved via MDT!!!

Was Einstein Wrong?: A Quantum Threat to Special Relativity. Entanglement, like many quantum effects, violates some of our deepest intuitions about the world. It may also undermine Einstein's special theory of relativity. By David Z Albert and Rivka Galchen

--http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=was-einstein-wrong-abo
ut-relativity

Both entanglement and relativity walk hand-in-hand in MDT, just as they do in our physical reality. See the attached paper.

MOVING DIMENSIONS THEORY SOLVES DILEMMA IN FEB. 2009’s SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN COVER STORY. MDT: UNITING EINSTEIN’S ELEMENTARY FOUNDATIONS OF RELATIVITY & SCHRODENGER’S CHARACTERISTIC TRAIT OF QUANTUM MECHANICS

view post as summary

reply to this thread

Hello Lawrence,

You write, "I couldn't help but concur with the dx4/ct = ic comment Aguirre made. All this tells us is that everthing is moving at the speed of light! Even while sitting down we are all moving along the 4th coordinate direction at the speed of light, times i = sqrt{-1}. Something I remember from undergraduate study."

Nowhere in any physics text does it state that...

view entire post

Hello Lawrence,

You write, "I couldn't help but concur with the dx4/ct = ic comment Aguirre made. All this tells us is that everthing is moving at the speed of light! Even while sitting down we are all moving along the 4th coordinate direction at the speed of light, times i = sqrt{-1}. Something I remember from undergraduate study."

Nowhere in any physics text does it state that dx4/dt=ic, and yet you say you remember it from undergraduate study!

My theory is now simultaneously both utterly rejected by the FQXI experts and common knowledge in undergraduate physics programs!!

I guess FQXI can use this as proof of parallel universes. Finally MDT will be embraced by the anonymous FQXI judges in a new paper entitled "dx4/dt=ic: The Ontological Proof of Parallel Universes in The Landscape: MDT is Both Common Undergad Knowledge and Crackpottery in The Multiverse."



"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." --Arthur Schopenhauer German philosopher (1788 - 1860)

Moving Dimensions Theory’s simple postulate, physical model, and equation account for both “relativity’s elementary foundations,” which Einstein stated we yet needed, and Schrödinger’s “characteristic trait” of quantum mechanics—entanglement.

MDT: The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, or dx4/dt=ic.

So which undergrad institution teaches this? Perhaps someone hopped on one of Kaku's/Davies' time machines and traveled on back in this frozen, block universe to that physics department to tell them about MDT!

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

P.S. Lawrence--please read up about MDT so I don't have to repeat myslef:

MDT accomplishes several things right off the bat:

1) unfreezes time & liberates us from the block universe, shwoing that we have free will

2) weaves change into the fundamental fabric of spacetime

3) derives relativity from a more fundamental universal invariant: dx4/dt=ic

4) provides a *physical* model for entropy

5) provides a *physical model for quantum entanglement

6) provides a *physical* mechanism for nonlocality--the fourth expanding dimension distributes nonlocality

7) provides a physical model unifying the dualities--space/time, energy/mass, wave/particle, E/B

8) provides a *physical* model for the invariance of c--both its independence of the source and its independence of the observer

9) provides a *physical* model for the spherically- symmetric expanding wavefront of probability that defines a photon's path

10) offers a resolution for both the EPR Paradox and Godel's problems with the block universe relativity implied

11) offers a physical model for why nothing can move faster than c.

12) offers an intuitive model for the length-contraction can accompanies all motion

13) accounts for both the agelessness (from relativity) and the nonlocality (from quantum mechanics) of the photon

14) accounts for the gravitational slowing of time and light, as well as the gravitational redshift

15) provides a unique physical model underlying wide ranging phenomena in quantum mechanics, relativity, statistical mechanics.

Surely MDT offers a brand new way and a new day! And when you factor in how little MDT has cost so far, compared to the hundreds of millions of dollars which have gone into quantum gravity/string theory religions/regimes and the creation of crackpot indexes to suppress the bold, new ideas by the corporate-state Matrix, surely MDT is worth pursuing!

view post as summary

reply to this thread

Yes Lawrence,

There is but one velocity for all entities through space-time, and that is c.

MDT takes us one step deeper and tell us *why* this is, providing a novel postulate of a fourth expanding dimension and simple equation reflecting this hitherto unsung universal invarinat: dx4/dt=ic. The very same postulate and simple equation provide a *physical* model for quantum...

view entire post

Yes Lawrence,

There is but one velocity for all entities through space-time, and that is c.

MDT takes us one step deeper and tell us *why* this is, providing a novel postulate of a fourth expanding dimension and simple equation reflecting this hitherto unsung universal invarinat: dx4/dt=ic. The very same postulate and simple equation provide a *physical* model for quantum nonlocality and entanglement, entropy, and time and all its arrows and assymetries, offering a physical unification of hitherto disparate arenas. The silence from the snarky antitheorists, who receive tens of thousands for fake "proofs"--for the fallacious "unmistakable imprint of another universe beyond the edge of our own"--is quite deafening. It's almost starting toi get on my nerves.

It speaks volumes that Anthony would rather accept imprints of other universes as real, while snarking MDT's simple beauty which embraces the reality of both quantum mehcnaics and relativity, and which comes with proofs:

Allow me to define "proof" in a more exalting manner.

Simple proofs of MDT:

PROOF#1:

Relativity tells us that a timeless, ageless photon remains in one place in the fourth dimension.

Quantum mechanics tells us that a photon propagates as a spherically-symmetric expanding wavefront at the velocity of c.

Ergo, the fourth dimension must be expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, in a spherically-symmetric manner.

The expansion of the fourth dimension is the source of nonlocality, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, c, relativity, entropy, free will, and all motion, change, and measurement, for no measurement can be made without change.

For the first time in the history of relativity, change has been wedded to the fundamental fabric of spacetime in MDT.

PROOF#2:

Einstein and Minkowski wrote x4=ict

Ergo dx4/dt=ic.

PROOF#3:

The only way to stay stationary in the three spatial dimensions is to move at c through the fourth dimension. The only way to stay stationary in the fourth dimension is to move at c through the three spatial dimensions. Ergo the fourth dimension is moving at c relative to the three spatial dimensions.

As Brian Greene points out in the Appendix to Chapter 2 of The Elegant Universe, we note that from the space-time position 4-vector x=(ct,x1,x2,x3), we can create the velocity 4-vector u=dx/d(tau), where tau is the proper time defined by d(tau)^2=dt^2-c^-2(dx1^2+dx2^2+dx3^2). Then the "speed through space-time" is the magnitude of the 4-vector u, ((c^2dt^2-dx^2)/(dt^2-c^-2dx^2))^(1/2), which is identically the speed of light c. Now, we can rearrange the equation c^2(dt/d(tau))^2-(dx/d(tau))^2=c^2 to be c^2(d(tau)/dt))^2+(dx/d(tau))^2=c^2. This shows that an increase of an object's speed through space, (dx/d(tau))^2)^(1/2)= dx/d(tau) must be accompanied by a decrease in d(tau)/dt which is the object's speed through time, which also may be considered the rate at which time elapses on it's own clock d(tau) or the proper time, as compared with that on our stationary clock dt.

Ergo the faster an object moves through space, the slower it moves through time; but all objects always move at c through the four dimensions; and light has all of its movement through space, and thus is can have none of it through the fourth dimension.

In An Elegant Universe, Brian Greene almost characterizes Moving Dimensions Theory’s deeper reality:

“Einstein found that precisely this idea—the sharing of motion between different dimensions—underlies all of the remarkable physics of special relativity, so long as we realize that not only can spatial dimensions share an object’s motion, but the time dimension can share this motion as well. In fact, in the majority of circumstances, most of an object’s motion is through time, not space. Let’s see what this means.” Space, Time, and the Eye of the Beholder, An Elegant Universe, Brian Greene, p. 49

Right here Brian almost grasps MDT. But time is not a dimension. Time is an emergent phenomenon that arises because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c. Let’s rewrite Brian’s paragraph with MDT's insights:

“Einstein found that precisely this idea—the sharing of motion between different dimensions—underlies all of the remarkable physics of special relativity, so long as we realize that not only can the three spatial dimensions share an object’s motion, but the fourth dimension, which is moving relative to the three spatial dimensions, can share this motion as well. In fact, in the majority of circumstances, most of an object’s motion is through the fourth dimension, not the three spatial dimensions. Let’s see what this means.” Space, Time, and the Eye of the Beholder, An Elegant Universe, Brian Greene, p. 49

Most objects are traveling far less than c through the three spatial dimensions. Thus most objects are traveling close to the rate of c through the fourth dimension. To be stationary in the three spatial dimensions implies a velocity of c through the fourth dimension. Ergo the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions. To be stationary in the fourth expandning dimension, as is the timeless, ageless, nonlocal photon, implies a velocity of c through the three spatial dimensions. Ergo the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions.

dx(4)/dt = ic

Brian Greene continues:

“Motion through space is a concept we learn about early in life. Although we often don’t think of things in such terms, we also learn that we, our friends, our belongings, and so forth all move through time, as well. When we look at a clock or a wristwatch, even while we idly sit and watch TV, the reading on the watch is constantly changing, constantly “moving forward in time.” We and everything around us are aging, inevitably passing from one moment of time to the next. In fact, the mathematician Hermann Minkowski, and ultimately Einstein as well, advocated thinking about time as another dimension of the universe—the fourth dimension—in some ways quite similar to the three spatial dimensions in which we find ourselves immersed.” Space, Time, and the Eye of the Beholder, An Elegant Universe, Brian Greene, p. 49

What Greene misses is that the time measured on your watch—the ticking seconds—is not the fourth dimension, but it is a phenomenon that emerges because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions. The time measured on a clock or watch relies on the emission and propagation of photons, be it in the context of an unwinding clock spring or an oscillating quartz crystal, or even the beating of a heart. And photons are matter that surf the fourth expanding dimension. As time is so inextricably wed to the emission and propagation of photons, and as photons are matter caught in the fourth expanding dimension, our notion of “time” inherits properties of the fourth expanding dimension. But the fact is that time emerges from a deeper physical reality—a fourth dimension that is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions.

Brian Green continues on, heading off in the wrong direction that just misses the central postulate of MDT:

“Although it sounds abstract, the notion of time as a dimension is actually concrete.”

But it is not. Can you move to where your watch reads three seconds back in time? Or can you move to where your watch reads an hour back in time? We can walk left or right. We can climb up or down. We can move forwards or backwards. But we can’t move through time like we can through the three spatial dimensions. This is because time, as measured on our watch, is not the fourth dimension, but it is a construct we have devised which is based on the fundamental fact that the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, governing the emission and propagation of photons, by which time is known and measured on our watches.

Brian Green continues on,

“When we want to meet someone, we tell them where “in space” we will expect to see them—for instance, the 9th floor of the building on the corner of 53rd Street and 7th avenue. There are three pieces of information here (9th floor, 53rd Street, 7th avenue) reflecting a particular location in the three spatial dimensions of the universe. Equally important, however, is our expectation of when we expect to meet them—for instance, at 3 PM. This piece of information tells us where “in time” our meeting will take place. Events are therefore specified by four pieces of information: three in space and one in time. Such data, it is said, specifies the location of the event in space and in time, or in spacetime, for short. In this sense, time is another dimension.”

But again, time is different from the three spatial dimensions. Time is inextricably wed to our sense of the past—the order stored in our memory, long with our ability to imagine and dream of future events. The present is where we put our dreams into action. However, the time defined by past, present, and future is not a dimension akin to the three spatial dimensions, but rather it is a phenomenon that emerges because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions.

MDT agrees 100% with all of relativity. In fact, relativity is derived from MDT in my paper, as MDT provides the fundamental *physical* reality which Einstein yet sought, while also providing a *physical* model for entanglement--the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics.

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

Welcome to our new forum!

And thanks to FQXI/Anthony for this honor!

To celebrate our liberation from the block universe and our newfound free will, everyone is invited to our First Annual "Einstein E Pur Si Muove dx4/dt=ic St. Patrick's Day Dance Party" tomorrow!

Einstein: "We dance for laughter, we dance for tears, we dance for madness, we dance for fears, we dance for...

view entire post

Welcome to our new forum!

And thanks to FQXI/Anthony for this honor!

To celebrate our liberation from the block universe and our newfound free will, everyone is invited to our First Annual "Einstein E Pur Si Muove dx4/dt=ic St. Patrick's Day Dance Party" tomorrow!

Einstein: "We dance for laughter, we dance for tears, we dance for madness, we dance for fears, we dance for hopes, we dance for screams, we are the dancers, we create the dreams."

March 17th, St. Patyrick's Day @ http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/432

There will be no cover chrge for those who answer the following question correctly:

"Which novel theory--(which proposes a novel postulate and equation reflecting a hitherto unsung primary universal invariant)--provides both the elementary foundations of relativity that Einstein sought and a physical model for Schrodenger's characteristic trait of quantum mechanics, while also answering the following foundational questions?

0. Why time? Why time’s arrows and asymmetries?

0.1 Why relativity? Why the principle of relativity? What deeper physical reality underlies relativity?

0.2 Why entanglement and nonlocality?

1. Why is light’s velocity a constant c? Why relativity's postulates?

2. Why is light’s velocity c independent of its source?

3. Why is it that nothing can travel faster than c?

4. Why does a photon, which travels at c, not age?

5. Why does a photon’s spherically-symmetric probablistic wavefront define simultaneity—a locality in the fourth dimension?

6. Why are energy and mass equivalent? Why E=mc^2?

7. Why do all of time’s arrows point in the same direction—towards dissipation, decoherence, and entropy?

8. Why do so many physicists say time is the fourth dimension, when Einstein never said x4 is time, but instead said x4 = ict?

9. Why can matter can appear as energy or mass?

10. Why is it that when matter appears as pure energy, it propagates at c through space?

11. Why does all matter have particle—local—and wave—nonlocal—properties?

12. Why does all energy have particle—local—and wave—nonlocal—properties?

13. Why is it that when matter appears as stationary mass it propagates at c through the fourth dimension?

14. Why is it that when matter appears as energy, it propagates at c through the three spatial dimensions?

15. Why is it that to move at c through space is to stand still in the fourth dimension?

16. Why is it that to move at c through the fourth dimension is to stand still in space?

17. Why is it that all objects move at but one speed through space-time—c?

18. Why is the universe expanding?

19. Why does radiation expand outwards, but not inwards?

20. Why do we see retarded waves, but not advanced?

21. Why is it that entropy imitates the general motion of all radiation and the universe’s expansion—a spherically-symmetric expanding wave?

22. Why is it that Huygens’ Principle, which underlies all reality ranging from QED to Feynman’s many-paths, to classical physics, state that every point of a spherically-expanding wavefront is in turn a spherically-expanding wavefront?

23. Why are all photons described by a spherically-expanding wavefront propagating at c?

24. Why is it that two initially-interacting photons remain entangled, no matter how far they travel apart?

25. Why is it that two initially-interacting photons remain the exact same age, no matter how far they travel apart?

26. Why is it that Young’s double-slit experiments show that both mass and energy have nonlocal wave properties?

27. Why is it that the collapse of the wave function is immediate in the photoelectric effect, and all other experiments?

28. Why is there no way for an object to gain velocity without being reduced in length via relativistic length contraction?

29. Why does a photon trace out a null vector through space-time? How can movement across the universe describe a path of zero length?

30. Why does time’s arrow point in a definitive direction?

21. Why does entropy increase?

32. Why do moving clocks run slow?

33. Why is time travel into the past impossible?

34. Why does free will exist?

35. Why is it that time is not frozen—-how come the block universe does not exist? Why do we have free will?

36. Why does a photon’s probabilistic wavefront travel at c?

37. Why is the velocity of quantum entanglement c? Why is it that only initially interacting particles can yet be entangled? Why is it that they must first share a common locality or origin, in order to share an entangled nonlocality when they are separated?

38. Why is it that in Schrodenger's equation, the first derivative with respect to the fourth dimension is proportional to the second derivative with the respect to the three spatial dimensions? Any change in position in the fourth expanding dimension is an acceleration in the three spatial dimensions.

39. Why is it that a photon emitted from the sun is red-shifted as it travels away? It's wavelength appears longer as it is measured against space that is less-stretched. A photon inherits the local geometry of the space-time where it was emitted.

40. Why do clocks in gravitational fields run slow?

41. Why are photons red-shifted as they move away from massive objects, and blue-shifted as they move towards them?

42. Why the conservation laws? Why does an object maintain its rotation in space-time, unless acted upon by an exterior force?

43. Why is the velocity of every object through space-time c?

44. Why is it that the only way to stay stationary in the fourth dimension is to move at c through the three spatial dimensions?

45. Why is it that the only way to remain stationary in the three spatial dimensions is to move at c relative to the fourth dimension?

46. Why does a photon have zero rest mass, and how does zero rest mass imply the velocity of light? None of the object’s matter exists in the three spatial dimensions, but only in the fourth expanding dimension.

47. Why time's arrows?

48. Why time's asymmetries?

49. Why entropy?

50. Why is there an i in x4=ict?

51. Why is the velocity of light both independent of the velocity of the source and the velocity of the observer?

52. Why are light, time, and measurement so fundamentally related?

53. Why the - sign in-front of x4 in the space-time metric? What is different about x4?"

No cover charge for all who answer correctly--that goes for antitheorists and theorists alike!

Join us tomorrow for our First Annual "Einstein E Pur Si Muove dx4/dt=ic St. Patrick's Day Dance Party!"

Einstein: "We dance for laughter, we dance for tears, we dance for madness, we dance for fears, we dance for hopes, we dance for screams, we are the dancers, we create the dreams."

March 17th, St. Patyrick's Day @ http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/432

view post as summary

reply to this thread

Filling some gaps from the 14th:

Dr. E (The Real McCoy) wrote on Mar. 14, 2009 @ 14:59 GMT



Hello Anthony,

Thanks for the dx4/dt=ic reference! I feel we have made great progress today, as you are the first antitheorist insider to ever mention the MDT equation in public (at least in this universe). I hope they do not cut your funding and exile you from the quantum...

view entire post

Filling some gaps from the 14th:

Dr. E (The Real McCoy) wrote on Mar. 14, 2009 @ 14:59 GMT



Hello Anthony,

Thanks for the dx4/dt=ic reference! I feel we have made great progress today, as you are the first antitheorist insider to ever mention the MDT equation in public (at least in this universe). I hope they do not cut your funding and exile you from the quantum gravity summer camps in Aspen and Hawaii.

It is sad that you continue to snark the equation and accuse me of "rambling" and "tirades" while I am merely defending physics and criticizing the stacked-insider FQXI antitheory contest, but if you haven't noticed, the antitheory empire is crumbling. Do you think it is in Templeton's interest to associate their brand with inherently corrupt contests and systems which not only hand all the big prizes to their own members for reapporpriated decades-old failed research (the contest said that the research was supposed to be novel), but which also actively castigates and belittles independent Ph.D. physicists, while completely ignoring their novel physical theories and exiling the heroic spirit of Einstein, Maxwell, Faraday, Bohr, and Planck?

It is actually the insiders, who have millions of dollars, who are conducting an active campaign and "tirade" against physics. Why so much effort and funding spent on belittling, supressing, "collapsing," and ignoring the indie physicist and their novel postulates and equations--the true wellspring of all physics? Was not FQXI conceived as an organisation to return physics to its true owners and innovators?

"New scientific ideas never spring from a communal body, however organized, but rather from the head of an individually inspired researcher who struggles with his problems in lonely thought and unites all his thought on one single point which is his whole world for the moment." --Max Planck

And again we see the primacy of the honest individual in the classic, epic hero's journey!

"A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man." --Joseph Campbell

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth

And the Nobel Laureate economist F.A. Hayek agrees!

"The tragedy of collectivist thought is that, while it starts out to make reason supreme, it ends by destroying reason because it misconceives the process on which the growth of reason depends. It may indeed be said that it is the paradox of all collectivist doctrine and its demands for “conscious” control or “conscious” planning that they necessarily lead to the demand that the mind of some individual should rule supreme—while only the individualist approach to social phenomena makes us recognize the superindividual forces which guide the growth of reason. Individualism is thus an attitude of humility before this social process and of tolerance to other opinions and is the exact opposite of that intellectual hubris which is at the root of the demand for comprehensive direction of social purpose." –F.A. Hayek, The End of Truth, The Road to Serfdom

In order to make the judging simpler in future FQXI contests, why not a) heed to the stated FQXI rules (papers should represent novel research/deadlines/etc.) and b) also employ Einstein's criterion for a good theory?

Einstein writes, "Before I enter upon a critique of mechanics as a foundation of physics, something of a broadly general nature will first have to be said concerning the points of view according to which it is possible to criticize physical theories at all. The first point of view is obvious: The theory must not contradict empirical facts. . . (there goes timelessness and string theory!) The second point of view is not concerned with the relation to the material of observation but with the premises of the theory itself, with what may briefly but vaguely be characterized as the "naturalness" or "logical simplicity" of the premises (of the basic concepts and of the relations between these which are taken as a basis). This point of view, an exact formulation of which meets with great difficulties, has played an important role in the selection and evaluation of theories since time immemorial."

MDT's simple postulate and equation dx4/dt=ic, from which all of relativity naturally arises, are "natural and logically simple." And MDT embraces all empirical facts across all realms, providing a *physical* model for the emergence of relativity, quantum mechanics' nonlocality and entanglement, entropy, and time and all its arrows. While String Theory ignores the fact that dimensions can bend and move as well as quantum entanglement, and while LQG ignores entanglement; and while neither provides the fundamental reality underlying relativity that Einstein stated we yet needed, MDT provides an underlying *physical* model for both relativity and entanglement (naturally implying qm's probablistic, nonlocal behavior); as well as for all of time's arrows and assymetries across all realms.

MDT asks and answers fifty or so foundational questions, as shown around page 66 in the attached document. Please do not delete the document again. I use attachments to shorten my posts and then an anonymous fqxi somebody deletes my attachments. So I put it in my posts and then they state that they need collapse buttons. If only they had collapse button technology, then fqxi would be absolved of ethical lapses and insider antitheorist corruption. As a terabyte hard drive costs $99 these days, and as fqxi has millions of dollars, why not just get a 100 gig drive for twenty bucks or so? That way you will have room for the few megabytes of data for novel physical theories, along with all the gigabytes of antitheory data.

In this BBC video, Lee Smolin states, "Einstein taught us that space is not a background that things move in. Space is a network of relationships that are ever dynamical, ever evolving, part of the world. The geometry of space evolves and changes--WIGGLES--just like anything else--just like electromegnetism, just like particles."--Lee Smolin, BBC, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bLwqnIfLRA&feature=related

So
it is that dimensions move.

All that my theory--Moving Dimensions Theory--does is note that the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, as attested to by the photon which is ageless via relativity and nonlocal via quantum mechanics.

It is the wiggle in the fundamental fabric of spacetime that gives rise to all quantum mechanical, wavelike behavior. It is the expansion of the fourth dimension that gives rise to all of relativity and nonlocality, as shown in my paper.

From MDT's simple postulate and equation dx4/dt=ic, all of relativity is derived.

Give me a universe wherein we have four dimensions x1, x2, x3, x4 and the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, or dx4/dt=ic, and all of relativity arises.

This is a simple, beautiful postulate and principle--indeed, Einstein's principle of relativity descends from MDT's postulate. And MDT is more succinct than relativity, for from MDT's single postulate and equation comes both of relativity's postulates.

Also from MDT's simple postulate and equation comes a natural *physical* model for time and all its arrows and assymetries, as well as entropy, quantum nonlocality and entanglement, all the dualities--space/time, mass/energy, wave/particle--and both Heisenbergs' and Huygens' principles.

dx4/dt=ic (MDT's equation underlying relativity) suggests that the fourth dimension is expandingh at c.

xp-px = ih (underlying quantum mechanics) suggests that the wavelength of this expansion is Planck's length.

So it is that MDT sets both Planck's constant and the velocity of light, while also maintaining the constancy of the velocity of light by giving rise to all of relativity.

Lee Smolin also states in the video, "We've forgotten how audacious science is and how it rages sometime -- how the ideas that turn out to be true are so often outrageous... we've forgotten the lessons of the people like Einstein, who come from the outside but have exactly the right insight and right idea." --http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bLwqnIfLRA&feature=related
BBC Hard Talk

"Openness, the inclusion of different points of view, like in anything else, is essential to progress." --Lee Smolin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bLwqnIfLRA&feature=related BBC Hard Talk

This contest has demonstarted that too, too many established professors and researchers refuse to partake in dialogue, and this grates against the spirit of greats such as Wheeler, Einstein, and Galileo.

"I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him." --Galileo Galilei

"Curiosity is more important than knowledge." --Einstein

Lee Smolin also says that a theory should "come in a coherent whole--it should start with a beautiful principle, like the principle of indeterminacy of quantum mechanics or the principle of relativity, and there then should be a beautiful equation that flows out form that principle to a myriad of consequnces." --Lee Smolin

MDT's beautiful principle: The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at c with a wavelength of the Planck Length.

MDT's beautiful equation: dx4/dt=ic

MDT's myriad of consequences: all of relativity, time and all its arrows and assymetries, entropy, quantum nonlocality and entanglement, wave-particle/space-time/mass-energy duality, the gravitational slowing of light and time, and the single velocity for all entities through spacetime--c.

The resounidng silence from the establishment on MDT (after having promised to read the paper) has lead me to believe that they see nothing wrong with MDT, as unlike LQG and Sring Theory, MDT passes Dr. Smolin's criterion for a good theory. And too, MDT predicts all of relativity along with quantum nonlocality and entanglement, as well as entropy, by proposing a novel, deeper feature of our *physical* reality.

So anthony--once you develop your collapsing-comment technology, I would suggest you send it to arxiv.org as there are tens of thousands of papers there on string theory/lqg/e8 which ramble on and on sans postulates and equations, sans logic and reason, sans *physical* models underlying *physical* reality. Just as the firemen burned the books in Farenheit 411, you are suggesting that you would use the button to collapse both criticism of the stacked insider antitheory contest as well as novel postulates and equations representing a hitherto unsung universal invariant: the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial diemsnions: dx4/dt=ic.

It is a sign of our antitheory times that the only time Anthony, or any FQXI member, mentions dx4/dt=ic is to snark it. Novel, meaningful postulates and equations are rare, and they have ever come from individuals, and thus they are the first objects to be ignored and slandered by groupthink antitheory regimes--the best-funded regimes in the history of physics, which also happen to be the regimes which have advanced physics the least.

"Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity." --Albert Einstein

Again, Anthony tries to defelect the sensible, widespread criticism of the stacked-antitheory-insider FQXI contest by using words such as "ramble" and "rant," instead of engaging on an intellectual level in the realm of physics. It is curious that neither Anthony nor any of his FQXI colleagues who walked away with the big prizes for their postulateless papers ever stepped forth to criticize Moving Dimensions Theory in any rational manner. While handing themslves hundreds of thousands of dollars or antitheories and non-theories which have the Founding Fathers of Physics spinning in theri graves, they refuse to discuss a simple postualte and equation with far-reaching consequences across all of physics.

Instead, they ignore it in post after post after post exlating the spirits of the greats from Farady to Maxwell to Einstein to Bohr to Born.

Anthony complains that my posts are too long. Well, to shorten them I also use attachments which anonymous insiders also delete, as they did above in the post dated "Dr. E (The Real McCoy) wrote on Mar. 11, 2009 @ 14:50 GMT."

The glaring question is "why so much funding spent on snark and censorship? Why all the hate directed towards truly independent researchers asking and answering foundational questions? Why so many resources and man hours spent on PR releases for nontheories and postulateless, equationsless insider antitheories? Why is the regime run by anonymous judges and enforced by anonymous fanboys? In light of the devastating failures of theoretical physics over the past forty years, why is so much effort being spent to snark, slander, and suppress the simple postulate and equation that is our best hope for a new dawn?"

Galileo provides the answer with his insight into the antitheorists' psychology: "In the long run my observations have convinced me that some men, reasoning preposterously, first establish some conclusion in their minds (E8/string theory/LQG/quantum gravity) which, either because of its being their own or because of their having received it from some person who has their entire confidence, impresses them so deeply that one finds it impossible ever to get it out of their heads. Such arguments in support of their fixed idea ... gain their instant acceptance and applause. On the other hand whatever is brought forward against it, however ingenious and conclusive, they receive with disdain or with hot rage - if indeed it does not make them ill. Beside themselves with passion, some of them would not be backward even about scheming to suppress and silence their adversaries. I have had some experience of this myself. ... No good can come of dealing with such people, especially to the extent that their company may be not only unpleasant but dangerous. --(Galileo Galilei)"

attachments:

view post as summary

reply to this thread

Filling some gaps (2 of 2) from the 14th:

Dr. E (The Real McCoy) wrote on Mar. 14, 2009 @ 15:42 GMT



Hello Anthony,

While you and the anti-theory FQXI insiders completely ignored MDT's simple postulate and elegant equation for seven+ months, forcing me to repeat myslef over and over, you readily hand top prizes to untestable non-theories.

At...

view entire post

Filling some gaps (2 of 2) from the 14th:

Dr. E (The Real McCoy) wrote on Mar. 14, 2009 @ 15:42 GMT



Hello Anthony,

While you and the anti-theory FQXI insiders completely ignored MDT's simple postulate and elegant equation for seven+ months, forcing me to repeat myslef over and over, you readily hand top prizes to untestable non-theories.

At http://kim.oyhus.no/TheEndOfTime.html, it is written, "First of all, Julian Barbours claim, is not a scientific theory, just a point of view, marked by excessive hubris.

What he claims, is that time does not exist, but is just an illusion.

Take a look on page 355, where Dowker points out that Barbours view is not a falsifiable theory, and thus not science, and Barbour admits he is right:

"...there is no way to make predictions about the results of our observations."

Falsification is the process of dropping theories that fail when tested. Theories that cannot fail are not scientific, and quite useless."

Now as MDT predicts all of relativity, it is a theory that has been tested time and again. As it predicts quantum entanglement and nonlocality too, it is perhaps the best-tested theory around these days.

MDT provides a fundamental, bedrock *physical* model from which entropy, relativity, nonlocality, entanglement, and time and all its arrows and assymetries naturally emerge. MDT adheres to Eisntein's criterion for a good theory; and it provides a *physical* model for Einstein's foundations of relativity (which he stated we yet needed) and Schrodenger's characteristic trait of qm--entanglement.

Anthony--why was MDT ignored and ignored and then finally acknowledged and snarked?

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." --Gandhi

It seems that human nature never changes, no matter how much funding the antitheory insiders get:

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

So far MDT has been ignored (for seven months) and then ridiculed (by Anthony above).

We are making vast and reosunding progress!

Next comes the violent deletions of my posts, and lastly, string theorists/quantum gravity regimists/antitheory insiders will take credit for MDT's simple beauty, foundational postulate, and elegant mathematical equation dx4/dt=ic, bolsterd by cash prizes, PR releases, book deals, coferences in Aspen and Hawaii, artmies of postdocs, and foundation-sponsored PBS miniseries.

I know I will not be invited, as the ruels do not allow true innovators and indie physicists to join in the festivities and cash prizes, but only do all the work, so please tell everyone I said hello and "E pur si muove" during the evening's dance parties! I will be with you all in spirit, dancing the night away, celebrating our liberation from frozen time and the block universe as well as the unification of qm and relativity with a simple model. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REElUors1pQ.

All the Best!

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

view post as summary

reply to this thread

Testing:

0. Why time? Why time’s arrows and asymmetries?

It's cofounded with motion. There is no arrow, it's an abstraction, like a counting direction. The apparent asymmetry is because negative motion can't exist.

0.1 Why relativity? Why the principle of relativity? What deeper physical reality underlies relativity?

We are made of light.

0.2 Why entanglement...

view entire post

Testing:

0. Why time? Why time’s arrows and asymmetries?

It's cofounded with motion. There is no arrow, it's an abstraction, like a counting direction. The apparent asymmetry is because negative motion can't exist.

0.1 Why relativity? Why the principle of relativity? What deeper physical reality underlies relativity?

We are made of light.

0.2 Why entanglement and nonlocality?

Particles are extended entities.

1. Why is light’s velocity a constant c? Why relativity's postulates?

It isn't constant. Ask Einstein.

2. Why is light’s velocity c independent of its source?

Because it's a wave in space.

3. Why is it that nothing can travel faster than c?

Because matter is made of light. See pair production.

4. Why does a photon, which travels at c, not age?

Because it experiences no loal motion.

5. Why does a photon’s spherically-symmetric probablistic wavefront define simultaneity—a locality in the fourth dimension?

It's in mathematical space, it isn't a locality in real space.

6. Why are energy and mass equivalent? Why E=mc^2?

Because mass is just a measure for the amount of energy that's going nowhere fast.

7. Why do all of time’s arrows point in the same direction—towards dissipation, decoherence, and entropy?

Because energy spreads.

8. Why do so many physicists say time is the fourth dimension, when Einstein never said x4 is time, but instead said x4 = ict?

Because relativity has undergone a gradual re-interpretation that Einstein wouldn't agree with.

9. Why can matter can appear as energy or mass?

Wrong question. Energy can appear as energy or matter.

10. Why is it that when matter appears as pure energy, it propagates at c through space?

Because there's only one tool in the box to hold it in place, and when you do, you call it matter.

11. Why does all matter have particle—local—and wave—nonlocal—properties?

Because it's a knotted wave.

12. Why does all energy have particle—local—and wave—nonlocal—properties?

Because you detect them with more of the same.

13. Why is it that when matter appears as stationary mass it propagates at c through the fourth dimension?

Huh? It's stationary.



14. Why is it that when matter appears as energy, it propagates at c through the three spatial dimensions?

See 10.

15. Why is it that to move at c through space is to stand still in the fourth dimension?

What fourth dimension? You're moving through space. That's it.

16. Why is it that to move at c through the fourth dimension is to stand still in space?

See 13.

17. Why is it that all objects move at but one speed through space-time—c?

They don't. They move through space. Because we are made of light, and light is energy, and space and energy are the same thing. It moves at c. But c varies.

18. Why is the universe expanding?

Because it's like a ghostly elastic under pressure only there's nothing beyond it to hold it in.

19. Why does radiation expand outwards, but not inwards?

As above.

20. Why do we see retarded waves, but not advanced?

Because time is counfounded with motin, and there is no negative motion.

21. Why is it that entropy imitates the general motion of all radiation and the universe’s expansion—a spherically-symmetric expanding wave?

Because space spreads. It's elastic.

22. Why is it that Huygens’ Principle, which underlies all reality ranging from QED to Feynman’s many-paths, to classical physics, state that every point of a spherically-expanding wavefront is in turn a spherically-expanding wavefront?

Pass. Feynman's many paths is because the photon is a bulge.

23. Why are all photons described by a spherically-expanding wavefront propagating at c?

Pass.

24. Why is it that two initially-interacting photons remain entangled, no matter how far they travel apart?

I'm not a fan of entanglement. No answer.

25. Why is it that two initially-interacting photons remain the exact same age, no matter how far they travel apart?

Age is just a measure of cumulative local motion. Photons don't experience any.

26. Why is it that Young’s double-slit experiments show that both mass and energy have nonlocal wave properties?

Because matter is made of solitons. Or vortons if you prefer.

27. Why is it that the collapse of the wave function is immediate in the photoelectric effect, and all other experiments?

There is no collapse of the wave function. It's an artifice.

28. Why is there no way for an object to gain velocity without being reduced in length via relativistic length contraction?

It's not real. If you zip past a planet, it isn't flattened to a disk.



29. Why does a photon trace out a null vector through space-time? How can movement across the universe describe a path of zero length?

A photon moves through space.



30. Why does time’s arrow point in a definitive direction?

It doesn't. That's just your counting direction.

21. Why does entropy increase?

Because energy spreads.

32. Why do moving clocks run slow?

Because the lateral motion steals from local motion.

33. Why is time travel into the past impossible?

Because you can't travel through motion. We are not travelling forward through time. We and our components move through space.

34. Why does free will exist?

To make life-saving decisions.

35. Why is it that time is not frozen—-how come the block universe does not exist? Why do we have free will?

Because what's out there is space plus motion through it. Not world lines, not light cones, and not a black universe. We have free will because we're self-programmed machines that have evolved this trait gradually.

36. Why does a photon’s probabilistic wavefront travel at c?

Because space moves at c.

37. Why is the velocity of quantum entanglement c? Why is it that only initially interacting particles can yet be entangled? Why is it that they must first share a common locality or origin, in order to share an entangled nonlocality when they are separated?

It would take me too long to respond to this one.

38. Why is it that in Schrodenger's equation, the first derivative with respect to the fourth dimension is proportional to the second derivative with the respect to the three spatial dimensions? Any change in position in the fourth expanding dimension is an acceleration in the three spatial dimensions.

Don't know. Must study.

39. Why is it that a photon emitted from the sun is red-shifted as it travels away? It's wavelength appears longer as it is measured against space that is less-stretched. A photon inherits the local geometry of the space-time where it was emitted.

Because its environment is changing.

40. Why do clocks in gravitational fields run slow?

because the speed of light is less.

41. Why are photons red-shifted as they move away from massive objects, and blue-shifted as they move towards them?

Because there's a gradient in the impedance of space. The blue-shifted photon has gained no energy, gravity is apseudoforce, no energy is being delivered.

42. Why the conservation laws? Why does an object maintain its rotation in space-time, unless acted upon by an exterior force?

Because a force is a cipher for a change in motion.

43. Why is the velocity of every object through space-time c?

Because every object is made of light, and light moves at c. Through space.



44. Why is it that the only way to stay stationary in the fourth dimension is to move at c through the three spatial dimensions?

We've ahd this one before.

45. Why is it that the only way to remain stationary in the three spatial dimensions is to move at c relative to the fourth dimension?

And this one.

46. Why does a photon have zero rest mass, and how does zero rest mass imply the velocity of light? None of the object’s matter exists in the three spatial dimensions, but only in the fourth expanding dimension.

Because a photon travels at c, and you can't make it go slower, so mass doesn't apply. When you employ pair production to make a photon go nowhere fast, then it has mass. But then we call it an electron.

47. Why time's arrows?

They're just in your head.

48. Why time's asymmetries?

No negative motion

49. Why entropy?

It's just sameness. the early universe was all the same.

50. Why is there an i in x4=ict?

Because it's imaginary.

51. Why is the velocity of light both independent of the velocity of the source and the velocity of the observer?

Because we are made of light.

52. Why are light, time, and measurement so fundamentally related?

Because we define the second using the motion of light.

53. Why the - sign in-front of x4 in the space-time metric? What is different about x4?"

It's derived from motion theought the dimensions of space. These offer freedom of motion. The time dimension is a dimension only in the sense of measure, and offers no freedom of movement.

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

Happy St. Patrick's Day!

Although FQXI received millions to further physics, perhaps they will end up making even greater contributions to the realm of anthropology that are even larger than the "giant void" into which they threw forty grand, as Carlos Rovelli stated that physics "needs wrong directions and wasted time and money."

A great opportunity exists for anthropologists...

view entire post

Happy St. Patrick's Day!

Although FQXI received millions to further physics, perhaps they will end up making even greater contributions to the realm of anthropology that are even larger than the "giant void" into which they threw forty grand, as Carlos Rovelli stated that physics "needs wrong directions and wasted time and money."

A great opportunity exists for anthropologists looking to study the adaptation and acceptance of bold new ideas. Before this can happen the innovator must of course first be marginalized/quarantined and his reputation and career in the field violently destroyed. Then, and only then, can his theory be accepted as "self-evident" by the corporate-state antitheorists controlling and maintaining the holy crackpot index. While all of this must certainly come to pass, it is difficult to assign an exact timeline to such events, and thus opportunity abounds for anthopoligists seeking to study the seasonal behavior of primates. For here we are, only a week after the insider-antitheorist winners were announced--just a few days before spring--and already MDT has its own FQXI forum! 'Tis an honor second only perhaps to winning the Nobel, but far, far above a mere Fields Medal!!

We're now "In da Club!" With our very own forum!

In da Club:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vXgpBVK24o

In order to celebrate this distinction and most triumphant victory, we are hosting our First Annual "Einstein E Pur Si Muove dx4/dt=ic St. Patrick's Day Dance Party!"

Throughout the day I will be playing my greatest hits from the FQXI contest--posts that were made in the fqxi-insiders forums--posts that were completely ignored by the fqxi antithoerist insiders who then walked way with all the top cash prizes, without a)defending their antitheories, b) ever venturing beyond their own forums, and c) ignoring all my erudite postings filled with the Einsteinian "gadfly" spirit in both their own forums and the MDT forum.

http://fqxi.org/members (Claus Kiefer)

Below is the post I shared in pre-existing FQXI member Claus Kiefer's forum, where his pre-ordained essay, having been penned by a pre-ordained FQXI member=victor, won a cash prize form his good friends--the anonymous FQXI judges whom he will likely pay back next year. Of course Claus completely ignored my post, as the handwaving, pre-ordained funding of the antitheory timeless quantum gravity regime is trumps time's physical reality and all scientific debate and simple principles such as dx4/dt=ic--the very sight of which stirs deep, primal emotions in Anthony.

Dr. E (The Real McCoy) wrote on Nov. 6, 2008 @ 18:42 GMT in pre-ordained insider FQXI Claus Kiefer's antitheory forum:

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/265

Hello Claus,

Thanks for the paper "Does time exist in quantum gravity?"!

But might not a better title be, "Does quantum gavity exist in time?"

I know it is fashionable to make the real unreal, and the unreal real, in the realm of fundraising, but after awhile money gets boring, and a man's soul yearns for truth, beauty, and physics!

I would have to agree with Ming, "It seems to me this essay is simply a rehash of the same ideas as those of Carlo Rovelli (see his essay here earlier), Julian Barbour and others, namely that if the Wheeler-DeWitt equation holds, then time is illusory in a very real sense. But does the Wheeler-DeWitt equation holds in reality, at least at scales larger than the Planck length, as the author claimed? Unfortunately, there's no experimental evidence one way or another, so the author's claim of the Wheeler-DeWitt equation being "the most reliable equation of quantum gravity, even if it is not the most fundamental one", must be taken with a large grain of salt. The unfortunate fact is that despite decades of research, quantum gravity is still a purely theoretical research with little or no connection to empirical evidence, and even its internal consistency cannot be demonstrated convincingly, so while researchers may have come up with formalisms and theories that are beautiful and elegant as mathematical theories, none of these theories can claim to be closer to reality than any other. It seems to me a bit premature to dictate the physical properties of Time using any of these untested theories."

It is curious that three out of the four papers receiving "restricted" votes deal with well-funded "quantum gravity" approaches that are a couple decades old, at least; and which have borne no fruit. I know some people argue that string theory is a forver-young theory deserving infinite funding, as it never succeeds at anything, but c'mon now--let's not go there. Let's get back to asking and answering foundational questions, while reading the foundational papers!

Furthmore, it is interesting that while there is no theoretical nor empirical evidence for quantum gravity, it is yet being used as a "tool" to explore time by "profssionals." This would be like conducting a heart-transplant with an imaginary scapel. All the doctors would stand around, talking and arguing about how beautiful and elegant their imaginary scapels are, and how each one is holding the best and desrves the most funding, while their patient died on the table. This is pretty much what has happened to physics over the past forty years, expect the imaginary theories haven't been elegant nor beeautiful. They have been non-finite, unwieldy, snarky, vast and confusing, obfuscating the subtle, convoluting the simple, confounding the honest soul, and exalting the illusionaist and hypester. This type of "beauty" is better relegated to postmodern literature departments.

Might it not be dangerous to let something that does not exist--quantum gravity--inspire and/or dictate our contemplations on time? I mean theoretical physics is hard enough, even when it is built on reality. But to build theoretical physics upon the unreal--is this not the very "Trouble With Physics" Lee Smolin writes about, which is better suited to building sociological movements, even when begun with the best intentions?

Do we have to quantize gravity? Could it be that nature is as it is, and that God or the Prime Mover/Creator came up with both QM and GR, which seem to coexist perfectly well in their current forms? For instance, this laptop computer is powered by quantum phenonema, and too, it is held on my lap by gravity. Each one has a role, and each seems perfectly content to play it. Perhaps both mathematical predictions and the experimental search for gravitons has fallen short because gravitons do not exist. Now this is no reason to stop looking, but too, it is not exactly a reason to keep looking, and it is certainly not a reason to get rid of time, which does seem to exist, as my laptop's clock tells me I am running late, yet again. :)

A book you would enjoy is Freeman Dyson's THE SCIENTIST AS REBEL. On page 219 Freeman Dyson writes,

"(Brian) Greene takes it for granted, and here the great majority of physicists agree with him, that the division of physics into seperate theories for large and small objects is unacceptable. General relativity is based on the idea that space-time is a flexible structure pulled and pushed by material objects. Quantum mechanics is based on the idea that space-time is a rigid framework within which observations are made. Greene believes there is an urgent need to find a theory of quantum gravity that works for large and small objects alike. . . As a conservative, I do not agree that a division of physics into separate theories for large and small is unacceptable. I am happy with the situation in which we have lived for the last eighty years . . . The question I am asking is if there is conceivable way we could detect the existence of individual gravitons. I propose as an hypothesis that it is impossible in principle to observe the existence of individual gravitons." --Freeman Dyson, THE SCIENTIST AS REBEL, pp 219-220

Perhaps we should found our contemplations on time not upon the unreality of quantum gravity, but on the reality of *physical* theories represnting *physical* phenomenon.

Instead of being built on the unreal, my simple theory--Moving Dimensions Theory--is built upon the rock-solid empirical evidence supporting widely-accepted theories of relativity, quantum mechanics, and statistical mechanics.

And MDT tells us a lot about time and its arrows across all realms, showing that they are phenomena that emerge from a common, deeper principle--a fundamental universal invariant--dx4/dt=ic.

MDT views time as a phenomenon that naturally emerges because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimenions at the rate of c. Change is fundamentally woven into the fabric of spacetime via dx4/dt = ic, which makes sense, because change is fundamentally woven into our everyday existence, empirical observations, and all branches of physics! Indeed--it would not be possible to make a measurement without change! A great thing about MDT is that it allows us to keep all of relativity while unfreezing time and liberating us from the block universe, which is yet a meaningful artefact that arises from certain interpretations of relativity. And who knows, perhaps MDT will tell us something about quantum time, which will tell us something about quantum gravity. For MDT also provides a *physical* framework for quantum entanglement and nonlocality, and thus it provides a *physical* model underlying qm's inherent nonlocal, probabilistic nature.

Think about MDT as a simple *physical* unification of relativity and QM--both entanglement and nonlocality can be accounted for via the same principle--the same hitherto unsung univeral invariant of dx4/dt=ic--that ensures a photon does not age, no matter how far it travels. A photon's timelessness, implied by relativity, represents a nonlocality in time. Both quantum entanglement and the agelessness of a photon descend from a common principle--a fundamenatl, universal invarinat: dx4/dt = ic. A photon is matter that "surfs" the fourth expanding dimension, and thus it remains in one place in the fourth dimension, while traveling through the three spatial dimensions at c. Ergo the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions. Perhaps this is MDT's simplest proof: The only way to remain stationary in the fourth dimension is to move at c through the three spatial dimensions: egro, the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions.

And a great thing about MDT is that it also presents a *physical* model for entropy, as briefly elaborated on in my paper:

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/238

MDT represents the kind of theory we have not seen for awhile--a simple postulate and a simple equation that present a novel, hitherto unsung aspect of the universe--the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimension: dx4/dt=ic. This fundamental invariance underlies the invariance of the speed of light--both the constant velocity of c meausred by all inertial observers and, the constancy of c that is independent of the source. MDT also underlies relativity's two postulates, and all of relativity may be derived from MDT's simple principle of a fourth expanding dimension.

When we look at Einstein's 1912 Manuscript, we see that time plays a different role from position. x1, x2, x3 represent the three spatial dimensions, which we generally use to demarcate position. And then along comes x4, which Einstein equates with ict. So as t progresses on our watches, x4 must progress. Time is very, very different from the three spatial dimensions! Perhaps it is not a dimension after all, but a parameter that emerges because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, as suggested by x4=ict.

MDT and dx4/dt=ic also underly time's thermodynamic arrow, and in my paper I account for and unify all of time's arrows and assymetries with MDT's simple postulate and equation. And in addition to this, all of relativity may be derived from MDT, while qm's entanglement and nonlocality are explained with a *physical* model, along with entropy.

Thanks for the paper! I just think it would be prudent to wait for a consistent theory of quantum gravity, or some experimental evidence, before using quantum gravity as a tool to probe time's great and vast mystery. It would be like hanging something on a sky hook, or shifting smoke with a left-handed smoke shifter.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=left%
20handed%20smoke%20shifter

As a new boy scout on my first campout back in sixth grade, I was sent forth to other campsites to go find a left-handed smoke shifter (to shift the smoke from the breakfast campfire) and a sky hook. Of course, this is a big inside joke to everyone but the youngest scouts, so people at the next campsite always smile and nod and say, "We just lent our sky hooks and left-handed smoke shifters to that troop down yonder." And so it would go, as we ran from campsite, to campsite, to campsite, looking for that which did not exist.

This pretty much sums up postmodern academia, where a postdoc might be sent from campus, to campus, to campus, looking for things that do not exist, as the elders get a good laugh. All the postdoc can really hope is that someday they'll be allowed to fund others to seek out their left-handed smoke shifters, to keep the cash flowing.

The big difference is that the joke only lasted a couple hours in boy scouts. When you returned to the campsite after running a few miles, scouting all the neighboring campsites for the left-handed smokeshifter, you were let in on it, and then taken on a snipe hunt that same night:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snipe_hunt

It was all good fun, but in academia we are talking about entire careers and hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars, so all this snipe hunting kindof loses its humor after a day or two.

I understand that you are probably receiving orders from the centralized Ministry of Curiosity to not discuss MDT, as it is not proper to ask foundational questions without an offical permit. But I have heard that the times are a changin', as MDT has liberated us from the Block Universe while unfreezing time and progress in theoretical physics!

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

--http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/265

Claus compeletely ignored this, but perhaps now he is ready to defend his theory and the FQXI insiders-only antitheorist corruption?

Happy St. Patrick's Day!

We're now "In da Club!" With our very own forum!

In da Club:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vXgpBVK24o

Happy First Annual "Einstein E Pur Si Muove dx4/dt=ic St. Patrick's Day Dance Party!"

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

Hello Georgina,

Yes! Einstein and Godel realized that relativity froze us in a block universe! MDT's simple equation dx4/dt=ic liberates us from that block universe while also providing the "elementary foundations" for relativity that Einstein sought! How cool is that? And too, it provides us with a *physical* model for quantum entanglement and nonlocality. And for the first time in...

view entire post

Hello Georgina,

Yes! Einstein and Godel realized that relativity froze us in a block universe! MDT's simple equation dx4/dt=ic liberates us from that block universe while also providing the "elementary foundations" for relativity that Einstein sought! How cool is that? And too, it provides us with a *physical* model for quantum entanglement and nonlocality. And for the first time in the history of relativity, change is wedded into the fundamental fabric of spacetime!

x4=ict has real, *physical* meaning that we must *not* ignore, no matter how many cash prizes await us in parallel universes and the giant voids!

I will try to find the exact quotes/resources for all this, but did you know that Planck never quite accepted his own theory and equation E=hv? He was reluctant to take it literally and see its deeper *physical* meaning:

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/373 reports:

"As (Planck) explained in a letter written in 1931, the introduction of energy quanta in 1900 was "a purely formal assumption and I really did not give it much thought except that no matter what the cost, I must bring about a positive result". Planck did not emphasize the discrete nature of energy processes and was unconcerned with the detailed behaviour of his abstract oscillators. Far more interesting than the quantum discontinuity (whatever it meant) was the impressive accuracy of the new radiation law and the constants of nature that appeared in it. "

The article goes on to state that although Planck was the first to write down the equation, it was Einstein who saw its deeper physical significance, by taking it literally: "If Planck did not introduce the hypothesis of energy quanta in 1900, who did? Lorentz and even Boltzmann have been mentioned as candidates, but a far stronger case can be made that it was Einstein who first recognized the essence of quantum theory. Einstein's remarkable contributions to the early phase of quantum theory are well known and beyond dispute. Most famous is his 1905 theory of light quanta (or photons), but he also made important contributions in 1907 on the quantum theory of the specific heats of solids and in 1909 on energy fluctuations.

There is no doubt that the young Einstein saw deeper than Planck, and that Einstein alone recognized that the quantum discontinuity was an essential part of Planck's theory of black-body radiation. Whether this makes Einstein "the true discoverer of the quantum discontinuity", as claimed by the French historian of physics Olivier Darrigol, is another matter. What is important is that Planck's role in the discovery of quantum theory was complex and somewhat ambiguous. To credit him alone with the discovery, as is done in some physics textbooks, is much too simplistic. Other physicists, and Einstein in particular, were crucially involved in the creation of quantum theory. The "discovery" should be seen as an extended process and not as a moment of insight communicated on a particular day in late 1900." --http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/373

And so it is that by taking x4=ict literally, and seeing it as an equation with physical significance, brand new doors have been opened as dx4/dt=ic unfreezes time and liberates us from the block universe. And too, a *physical* model and mechanism are provided for quantum mechanics' nonlocality, time and all its arrows and asymmetries and entropy, and entanglement--qm's characteristic trait! As all of relativity is naturally derived from MDT's fundamental universal invariant: dx4/dt=ic, finally we see the "elementary foundations" for relativity which Eisntein sought!

Suddenly time flows and we see the very source of nonlocality and thus quantum mechanics' probabilistic nature!

Again and again, I turn towards my simple, irrefutable proofs of MDT:

Simple proofs of MDT:

PROOF#1:

Relativity tells us that a timeless, ageless photon remains in one place in the fourth dimension.

Quantum mechanics tells us that a photon propagates as a spherically-symmetric expanding wavefront at the velocity of c.

Ergo, the fourth dimension must be expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, in a spherically-symmetric manner.

The expansion of the fourth dimension is the source of nonlocality, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, c, relativity, entropy, free will, and all motion, change, and measurement, for no measurement can be made without change.

For the first time in the history of relativity, change has been wedded to the fundamental fabric of spacetime in MDT.

PROOF#2:

Einstein and Minkowski wrote x4=ict

Ergo dx4/dt=ic.

PROOF#3:

The only way to stay stationary in the three spatial dimensions is to move at c through the fourth dimension. The only way to stay stationary in the fourth dimension is to move at c through the three spatial dimensions. Ergo the fourth dimension is moving at c relative to the three spatial dimensions.

Is this not what physics is and ought to be about?

More in the next post!

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

P.S. In the attached paper (which I attch to keep this post short/pre-collapsed/etc.), please see how the latest cover story in Scientfic American is resolved via MDT!!!

Was Einstein Wrong?: A Quantum Threat to Special Relativity. Entanglement, like many quantum effects, violates some of our deepest intuitions about the world. It may also undermine Einstein's special theory of relativity. By David Z Albert and Rivka Galchen

--http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=was-einstein-wrong-abo
ut-relativity

Both entanglement and relativity walk hand-in-hand in MDT, just as they do in our physical reality. See the attached paper.

MOVING DIMENSIONS THEORY SOLVES DILEMMA IN FEB. 2009’s SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN COVER STORY. MDT: UNITING EINSTEIN’S ELEMENTARY FOUNDATIONS OF RELATIVITY & SCHRODENGER’S CHARACTERISTIC TRAIT OF QUANTUM MECHANICS

view post as summary

reply to this thread

As I knew that MDT would first be violently rejected in our postmodern, antiphysics agae, and then ultimately claimed to be self-evident and obvious by the conscienceless, mere mathematicians, I made sure to keep a track record of its development, posting in immutable usenet groups. While anonymous antitheorists can play around with, delete, and edit my posts (preseting physical potsualtes and...

view entire post

As I knew that MDT would first be violently rejected in our postmodern, antiphysics agae, and then ultimately claimed to be self-evident and obvious by the conscienceless, mere mathematicians, I made sure to keep a track record of its development, posting in immutable usenet groups. While anonymous antitheorists can play around with, delete, and edit my posts (preseting physical potsualtes and equations dx4/dt=ic) here so as to protect the greater good of the groupthink funding for giant voids, parallel universe, and multiverses, they cannot touch them out on the usenet; at least not without far, far more effort.

Below is a post (now edited as I now see that the fourth dimension is not time, but time, as measured on our ticking watches, is an emergent phenomena because dx4/dt=ic) from 08-29-2006, 06:32 AM:

http://www.molecularstation.com/forum/physics-forum/38603
-simply-put-moving-dimensions-theory-new-model-http-physicsm
athforums-com.html

Moving Dimensions Theory & On The Advancement Of Physics

Physics has been furthered far more often by a rugged individual acknowledging the simple and obvious in a pursuit of the truth than book-keepers-in-training playing games in the abstruse in pursuit of tenure. The advancement of physics has ever depended far more on

logic, reason, and Truth than government grants, tenure, group think, peer-reviewed journals, and aging bureaucracies. The courage to state, "That is the way things are because that is the way things are," has lead to far more physics than the contemporary, "things can't be that way because the math dictates that we live in thirty-three dimensions and four are curled up, and that is what NSF is funding."

When nobody could measure nor detect the supposed ether, Einstein proclaimed, "there is no ether." When experiments showed that light existed only in quantized packets, Einstein proclaimed that light only existed in quantized packets, and he won the Nobel Prize. When spectra from atoms showed discreet energies, Niels Bohr proclaimed that

electrons orbits were quantized, and he received a Nobel Prize. When Maxwell's Equations had a recurring constant, Maxwell used c to denote it, and Einstein proclaimed that the speed of light must be constant for all observers--and so Special Relativity was born. (MDT now provides the elementary foundations from where Einstein's postulates come form). When Einstein juxtaposed objects falling towards the earth getting closer together with the fact that two people starting at the equator, walking on

originally parallel lines of longitude towards the North Pole, would come together because they were walking on a curved surface, Einstein proclaimed that the space-time around a massive object must also be curved. This simple, *physical* analogy, along with Einstein's realization that the force of gravity would be rendered null in free-fall, lead to General Relativity.

And so it is that in the above paragraph you have the roots of the greatest achievements of physics in the past 100+ years, dwarfing String Theory, Loop Quantum Gravity, and thousands of their Landscape/Multiversevariatons, which deal in the abstruse, complicated, muddled, and mythological worlds which are safe from physics simple rigor.

Moving Dimensions Theory (dx4/dt=ic)returns us to simpler times. It starts with the simple and keeps it simple. Light travels with a maximum velocity of c, because the fourth dimension is expanding at a rate relative to

the three spatial dimensions at the velocity of c. A photon expands through space in a spherically symmetric manner. This is because the fourth dimension expands through the three spatial dimensions in a spherically symmetric manner. Energy and mass are equivalent, expressed

by E=mc^2, because energy is nothing more than mass rotated into the expanding fourth dimension. The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen effect (EPR) effect, which calls instantaneous action at a distance "spooky," can be

accounted for by the expanding dimension-as a point expands, it is yet a single locale in that dimension, and hence though separated by distance in space, interacting particles may be in the same place in the time dimension, and hence connected. The null vector of the photon,

which remains 0 no matter how far the photon travels in space-time, may be accounted for by the fact that the fourth dimension is moving, and thus the only way to stay still in the four dimensions is to move with

along with the expanding dimension. In Lorentzian Transformations, there is no way for an object to be rotated into the time dimension without it moving-this can be explained by the fact that the time dimension is expanding. All wave-particle duality can be seen as the

result of the universe's existence upon a reality that has three stationary spatial dimensions and one expanding time dimension-when matter exists in the stationary dimensions, it is seen as mass, or a particle. When matter exists in the time dimension it is seen as wave, or a photon, or energy. Depending how we choose to observer matter

determines whether we observe its wave or particle properties. Photons are quantized bundles of energy that propagate at the velocity of c-this is because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions in a quantized manner, in units of Planck's

length at the rate of c. The Second Law of Thermodyamics, or the law of Entropy, states that the universe tends towards disorder. This is because the fourth dimension is expanding in a spherically symmetric manner, constantly carrying all photons and interacting particles away

from one another-thus a drop of food coloring in a pool will be carried outward and evenly distributed. In 1949 Godel published a paper showing that within the theory of relativity, time as we understand it, does not exist. Einstein recognized Godel's paper as "an important

contribution to the general theory of relativity," and since then physicists have not been able to find any logical shortcomings in Godel's work, and nobody has been able to account for the existence of time. But the Theory of Moving Dimensions accounts for time as we know

it by showing that it is an emergent property of the underlying dimension's intrinsic relative movement. Relativity becomes increasingly exact at long-length scales but fails at short ones because space-time itself is quantized, as the fourth dimension is expanding in units of the Planck length, giving rise to nonlocality and time and all its arrows and asymmetries.

The concept of general relativity's smooth geometry, at large scales, disappears on short-distance scales-this has been a problem to string theorists, but only because they were never bold enough to recognize that's the way it is because that's the way it is. Realizing this might have lead one of them to see that the fourth dimension is expanding at a rate of c relative to the three spatial dimensions. So it is seen that Moving Dimensions Theory offers a simple model upon which all known phenomena of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics may rest. And because the underlying architecture of the universe is quantized-because the fourth dimension expands at the rate of c in units of the Planck length relative to the three spatial dimensions, quantum mechanics works for the small, while general relativity works for the large. That is the way it is because that is the way it is-this was the realization that lead to the postulate of MDT: the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions.

Are New Ideas Important in Physics?

String theorists don't make predictions, they make excuses.

-Richard Feynman

An important scientific innovation rarely makes its way by gradually winning over and converting its opponents: What does happen is that the opponents gradually die out. -Max Planck

....I do feel strongly that this is nonsense! ...I think all this superstring stuff is crazy and is in the wrong direction. ... I don't like it that they're not calculating anything. ...why are the masses of the various particles such as quarks what they are? All these numbers ... have no explanations in these string theories - absolutely none! ... -Richard Feynman in Davies and Brown, Superstrings, Cambridge 1988, pp. 194-195.

String theory is the Enron of physics, and like Enron, it is but the tip of the iceberg of the widespread group-think decline. Where Enron and Worldcom and Global Crossing lied to plunder pensions and investors, String Theory lies to plunder tax, tenure, titles, and tuition dollars. With millions of NSF dollars at stake, and billions more in the way of tax and tuition, fashion and group-think are now held superior to logic and reason in physics. And as in all totalitarian systems which hold

themselves above logic, reason, truth, justice, and practicality, the worst are promoted, while the best are exiled. The group-think sycophants get the postdocs, while the indie physicists must forage on their own, as the sycophantic fanboys are sent forth to castigate and impugn the rugged, independent physicist.

Are new ideas important in physics as prominent physicists so often proclaim? If so, then why are young scientists with new ideas based in logic, reason, and reality, so often castigated, impugned, and crucified while those who quietly, passively, and uncreatively accept the nonsensical, none-physics, crackpot mythologies of String Theory and M-Theory rewarded with vast salaries, health benefits, TV shows, book deals, magazine covers, and tenure?

I would very much like to discuss my new theory here, but I am forbidden from even mentioning its name, as the String Theorists and other fashionistas do not approve of theories with postulates based in logic and reason. And so their multi-billion dollar myth is perpetuated at the expense of logic, reason, and physics.

But time is on our side. And what is time? I am not allowed to say, as my theory is banned for the moment.

The current state of physics has several Prominent Physicists and Great Thinkers spinning in their graves:

The world we have made as a result of the level of thinking we have done thus far creates problems we cannot solve at the same level of thinking at which we created them. -Albert Einstein

Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by the age of eighteen. -Albert Einstein

The mere formulation of a problem is far more often essential than its solution, which may be merely a matter of mathematical or experimental skill. To raise new questions, new possibilities, to regard old problems from a new angle requires creative imagination and marks real advances in science. -Albert Einstein

Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. -Albert Einstein

Albert Einstein's three rules of work:

1. Out of clutter, find simplicity. dx4/dt=ic!!

2. From discord, find harmony. dx4/dt=ic!!

3. In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity. dx4/dt=ic!!

Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.

-Albert Einstein

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious-it is the source of all true art and science. -Albert Einstein

Science and art belong to the whole world, and before them vanish the barriers of nationality. -Goethe

It is the tension between creativity and skepticism that has produced the stunning and unexpected findings of science. -Carl Sagan

Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development. -Julius Sextus Frontinus, Highly regarded engineer in Rome, 1st century A.D.

And if everybody says that you are wrong, then you are one step ahead. But there is one situation which is better still, when everyone begins to laugh about you, then you know you are two steps ahead. Albert

Szent-Gyorgi (Nobel-prize winning biochemist who discovered vitamin C)

One cannot step twice into the same river. -Heraclitus

While the rational mind is important, we gain a new perspective when we learn how many of the greatest scientific insights, discoveries, and revolutionary inventions appeared first to their creators as fantasies,

dreams, trances, lightening-flash insights, and other non-ordinary states of consciousness. -Willis Harman and Howard Rheingold

"Let us learn to dream, gentlemen." -Kekule, famous for his

dream-inspired scientific breakthrough-discovering the molecular structure of benzene, advised his fellow scientists:

Whenever you look at a piece of work and you think the fellow was crazy, then you want to pay some attention to that. One of you is likely to be, and you had better find out which one it is. It makes an awful lot of difference. -Charles Franklin Kettering (1876-1958)

U.S. engineer and inventor.

An essential aspect of creativity is not being afraid to fail. -Dr. Edwin Land

All sciences are now under the obligation to prepare the ground for then future task of the philosopher, which is to solve the problem of value, to determine the true hierarchy of values. -Friedrich Nietzsche

I wish to be at any time hereafter only a yea-sayer!

-Friedrich Nietzsche

We must be physicists in order to be creative since so far codes of values and ideals have been constructed in ignorance of physics or even in contradiction to physics. -Friedrich Nietzsche

A thinker sees his own actions as experiments and questions.. as attempts to find out something. Success and failure are for him answers above all. -Friedrich Nietzsche

There are no facts, only interpretations. -Friedrich Nietzsche

If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.

-Isaac Newton

Max Planck, the father of quantum theory, felt that the pioneer scientist must have a vivid intuitive imagination, for new ideas are not generated by deduction, but by "artistically creative imagination."

In "Shorter Bartlett's Familiar Quotations," by John Bartlett, 1937, 1980, 1992.

It is by intuition that we discover and by logic we prove. -Henri Poincaré, Mathematician

Knowledge has three degrees-opinion, science, and illumination. The means or instrument of the first is sense; of the second, dialectic; of the third, intuition. This last is absolute knowledge founded on the identity of the mind knowing with the object known. -Plotinus

If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it. -Albert Einstein

If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. -Isaac Newton

Max Planck, the father of quantum theory, felt that the pioneer scientist must have "a vivid intuitive imagination, for new ideas are not generated by deduction, but by artistically creative imagination."

An important scientific innovation rarely makes its way by gradually winning over and converting its opponents: What does happen is that the opponents gradually die out. -Max Planck

It was bad enough, they say, when string theorists treated nonbelievers as though they were a little slow-witted. Now, it seems, at least some superstring advocates are ready to abandon the essential definition of science itself on the basis that string theory is too important to be hampered by old-fashioned notions of experimental proof. - Michael Lemonick, Time Magazine, The Unraveling of String Theory, August 2006

In the mood for some no-holds-barred gossip or a nasty screed? Then start browsing the physics blogosphere, where some exceedingly smart people are spending an inordinate amount of time belittling one another. Alas, even this magazine has come under attack. The cause of all the commotion? Some nervy upstarts are questioning the validity of string theory, which is to physics what Wal-Mart is to retail: the biggest thing around, dominant for more than 20 years now. And woe unto anyone who doubts the orthodoxy.... Tim Folger, Tangled Up In Strings-Discover Magazine

The Scientific American review (of Peter Woit's Not Even Wrong) is by George Johnson and entitled The Inelegant Universe. Johnson notes one of his pieces for the New York Times six years ago carries what he now sees as an embarassing headline: "Physicists Finally Find a Way to

Test Superstring Theory" (in his defense, this kind of headline is still appearing in over-hyped articles about string theory to this day). I've been a bit surprised at how friendly a reception Smolin's book and mine have been getting so far from science writers. I think one reason for this is that many of them have repeatedly over the last twenty years written articles about string theory that repeat a lot of the hype promising imminent success in producing predictions. They've now been burned too many times and are very open to listening to the critics. -Peter Woit's Rockin' Blog Not Even Wrong,

In his autobiography Einstein said (I quotes this in the MDT paper which FQXI roundly snubbed/ignored,as they exiled that classical psirit of science and replaced it with science recreated in tehir own snarky, tyrannical, groupthink antitheorist image, as they prefer multiverses and giant voids over classical, epic physics):

Before I enter upon a critique of mechanics as a foundation of physics, something of a broadly general nature will first have to be said concerning the points of view according to which it is possible to

criticize physical theories at all. The first point of view is obvious: The theory must not contradict empirical facts. However evident this demand may in the first place appear, its application turns out to be quite delicate. For it is often, perhaps even always, possible to adhere to a general theoretical foundation by securing the adaption of the theory to the facts by means of artificial additional assumptions. In any case, however, this first point of view is concerned with the confirmation of the theoretical foundation by the available empirical

facts.

The second point of view is not concerned with the relation to the material of observation but with the premises of the theory itself, with what may briefly but vaguely be characterized as the "naturalness" or " logical simplicity" of the premises (of the basic concepts and of the relations between these which are taken as a basis). This point of view, an exact formulation of which meets with great difficulties, has played an important role in the selection and evaluation of theories since time immemorial. The problem here is not simply one of a kind of enumeration of the logically independent premises (if anything like this were at all unequivocally possible), but that of a kind of reciprocal weighing of incommeasurable qualities. Furthermore, among theories of equally "simple" foundation that one is to be taken as superior which most sharply delimits the qualities of system in the abstract (i.e., contains that most definite claims). Of the "realm" of theories I need not speak here, inasmuch as we are confining ourselves to such theories whose object is the totality of all physical appearances. The second point of view may briefly be characterized as concerning itself with the "inner perfection" of the theory, whereas the first point of view refers to the "external confirmation." The following I reckon as also belonging to the "inner perfection" of a theory: we prize a theory more highly if, from the logical standpoint, it is not the result of an arbitrary choice among theories which, among themselves, are of equal value and analogously constructed." --Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist, Volume One, 1949, Autobiographical Notes, p 21--23, Open Court, Cambridge University Press.

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

P.S. In the attached paper (which I attach yet again so as to demontrate how FQXI members constitently refuse to disucss Scientific American and the MDT theory which unifies Einstein/Entanglement), please see how the latest cover story in Scientfic American is resolved via MDT!!!

Was Einstein Wrong?: A Quantum Threat to Special Relativity. Entanglement, like many quantum effects, violates some of our deepest intuitions about the world. It may also undermine Einstein's special theory of relativity. By David Z Albert and Rivka Galchen

--http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=was-einstein-wrong-abo
ut-relativity

Both entanglement and relativity walk hand-in-hand in MDT, just as they do in our physical reality. See the attached paper. Finally qm and relativity are unified in our theories and physical philosophies with MDT's simple model.

MOVING DIMENSIONS THEORY SOLVES DILEMMA IN FEB. 2009’s SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN COVER STORY. MDT: UNITING EINSTEIN’S ELEMENTARY FOUNDATIONS OF RELATIVITY & SCHRODENGER’S CHARACTERISTIC TRAIT OF QUANTUM MECHANICS

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

Hello Chris!

Yes--I share your sentiments! It always bothered me that some physicists would insist there is a frame in which a photon experiences time. No. Photons are timeless and ageless. Time depends not just on relative measurements, but upon the absolute reality of the motion of an object.

Yes--MDT provides a physical mechanism for why only the twin in the frame that is...

view entire post

Hello Chris!

Yes--I share your sentiments! It always bothered me that some physicists would insist there is a frame in which a photon experiences time. No. Photons are timeless and ageless. Time depends not just on relative measurements, but upon the absolute reality of the motion of an object.

Yes--MDT provides a physical mechanism for why only the twin in the frame that is accelerated will actually age less.

Yes--it is so true that while although the twins might argue who is aging less while in motion, only one is *physically* aging less. One of them must undergo acceleration and deceleration if they are to be reunited.

A photon *physically* does not age. A photon exhibits no motion whatsoever through the fourth dimension as it is expanding right along with it.

However, in all our space-time diagrams where we have space on one axis and time on another, we depict the photon as advancing through space and time as time advances. So then people argue the photon is moving in both space and time.

However, the time axis is but defined by the ticking seconds on our watches in the lab frame, and this is not not the fourth dimension, but rather a phenomena that emerges because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions or dx4/dt=ic. Because light or energy is but matter cuaght upon the fourth moving dimension, and because our clocks and measurement are based on the propagation of energy, time inherits properties of the fourth dimension in relativity's math, but time is not the fourth dimension.

MDT agrees entirely with the math of Einstein's relativity, but it interprets it in a more fundamental manner.

There is an absolute rest, although it is impossible to measure absolutely, due to the tautological relationship between light and measurement, measurement and time, and light and time.

However, if one sends six different clocks off in six different directions (representing the + and - directions of the 3 spatial dimensions) from a central point at the same velocity, and all those clock readings are recorded at their furthest points and are again recorded upon their return, one will be able to apprehend one's absolute motion relative to the three fixed spatial dimensions. Only if all those clocks register the exact same time at both their furthest points, and then again agreee with one-anotehr upon their ultimate return, will one be able to conclude that one is in a stationary frame at absolute rest.

Yes! Einstein's math is right! Though some physicist's interpretations are wrong, as the block universe does not exist, and there is no frame where a photon ages.

http://books.google.com/books?id=9ZuP9JQzc00C&pg=PA54&l
pg=PA54&dq=clocks+flying+

opposite+directions+jets+tests+spec
ial+relativity&source=

bl&ots=Y0jok2QjaZ&sig=FTNpR24z_oS1eycj
TFndxQcwEsE&hl=en&ei=

EePDSZ_NCIKOsQPgn6HgBg&sa=X&oi=book_res
ult&resnum=1&ct=result

http://www.amazon.com/Was-Einstein-Rig
ht-2nd-Relativity/dp/0465090869

Yes--relativity is right! Although some physicists are wrong in arguing it "is all relative." For there is no frame in which a photon ages. A photon remains timeless and ageless in all frames. And thus *physical* aging depends not just on relative measurement alone, but on the *physical* reality of an object's history of motion and acceleration, as the experiments with atomic clocks demonstrated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele-Keating_exp
eriment

http://web.archive.org/web/20050411015134/http://www.
npl.co.uk/publications/metromnia/issue18/

Curious to hear more about your ideas/sentiments!

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

Yes Chris--your paper/sentiments should have won a prize! For you are showing how relativity is yet interpreted differently by great minds and its very founder!

You would enjoy the book "Einstein's Mistakes: The Human Failings of Genius" by Hans C. Ohanian! There is a great story in it on how a glaring discrepancy ion Eisntein's work--which everyone took for granted--literally helped...

view entire post

Yes Chris--your paper/sentiments should have won a prize! For you are showing how relativity is yet interpreted differently by great minds and its very founder!

You would enjoy the book "Einstein's Mistakes: The Human Failings of Genius" by Hans C. Ohanian! There is a great story in it on how a glaring discrepancy ion Eisntein's work--which everyone took for granted--literally helped drive a sailing captain insane and contributed to his tragic demise at sea.

You write, "They verify Einstein's predictions - but they, in no way, verify Einstein's reasoning for why time is relative in those two cases. If you understand the contradiction in Einstein's relativity - you would see why there is no way that they could."

Could you please elaborate on this/quote the contraidctions in Eisntein's relativity? Thanks!

You are asking true, foundational questions which FQXI was supposedly set up to support; but when you read the winers' papers/"giant void" research, one sees no curiosity! None of the glaring paradoxes and discrepencies bother them! The mystery is dead, and the mysterious beauty is gone! None of the papers discuss the EPR paradox nor the paradox of Godel's timeless/block uninverse, except for mine, which shows they both become non-paradoxical because dx4/dt=ic. :) I guess that is because all the winners were already FQXI members which means that they already have it all figured out & the pre-ordained cash prizes, whether they support time or deny it--whether they support the decades-old failed quantization of gravity via tiny, little strings or tiny, little loops for which there is no evidence but for an infinite array of meaningless, ugly, snarky, handwaving, non-finite maths.

Yes--the math of relativity is right, but the crux of the problem is that too many physicists think that there is no physical difference between inertial frames. There is, even though we cannot always measure it! And thus only the twin who was accelerated, decellerated, turned around, and accelerated on back will have aged less! So it is that although two inertial frames may indeed disagree about who's clock is running slower, only one of the clocks is *physically* running slower! MDT accounts for this as proposing a stationary three spatial dimensions upon which is superimposed a fourth dimension which is expanding at the rate of c (also accounting for entropy, time's arrows, nonlocality, entanglement). Hence there is an absolute rest, although it is impossible to measure in one's own inertial frame, due to the inextricable link between time and light, the propagation of light and changes in energy, and changes in energy and time.

dx4/dt=ic postulates that the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at c. Now an interesting aspect of this is that no matter how fast one's inertial frame is moving relative to the fixed 3D background, one will always measure c to be c, as light is but matter trapped upon the fourth expanding dimensions, and clocks, which depend on the propagation of light/energy, slow down in direct proportion to the degree with which they catch up to the fourth expanding dimension. Please see the attached document for a better treatment of light clocks and MDT's simple explanation of time dilation and the gravitational redshift.

Thanks for the dialogue Chris! I'll look forward to your answers!

Over the past seven months, not one, single "best and brightest" FQXI "master of the multiverse millionaire" has refuted any of the most natural, simple and logical proofs of MDT, nor even stopped by to say "hello!":

Simple proofs of MDT:

PROOF#1:

Relativity tells us that a timeless, ageless photon remains in one place in the fourth dimension.

Quantum mechanics tells us that a photon propagates as a spherically-symmetric expanding wavefront at the velocity of c.

Ergo, the fourth dimension must be expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, in a spherically-symmetric manner.

The expansion of the fourth dimension is the source of nonlocality, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, c, relativity, entropy, free will, and all motion, change, and measurement, for no measurement can be made without change.

For the first time in the history of relativity, change has been wedded to the fundamental fabric of spacetime in MDT.

PROOF#2:

Einstein and Minkowski wrote x4=ict

Ergo dx4/dt=ic.

PROOF#3:

The only way to stay stationary in the three spatial dimensions is to move at c through the fourth dimension. The only way to stay stationary in the fourth dimension is to move at c through the three spatial dimensions. Ergo the fourth dimension is moving at c relative to the three spatial dimensions.

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

Elliot,

I have pasted in a bunch of references at the bottom. You may already have the first three Einstein papers. If you don't, I think all of them can be found in a Dover book called "The Principle of Relativity."

The fourth, which is the 1918 article, I know is not in there but you can google it and find a translated wiki copy. The last time I looked, there was a spot or two in...

view entire post

Elliot,

I have pasted in a bunch of references at the bottom. You may already have the first three Einstein papers. If you don't, I think all of them can be found in a Dover book called "The Principle of Relativity."

The fourth, which is the 1918 article, I know is not in there but you can google it and find a translated wiki copy. The last time I looked, there was a spot or two in the article's translation that confused the U2 clock with the U1 clock which would make Einstein's point confusing - so look out for that. Otherwise it is pretty accurate.

Max born provides a mathematical proof of Einstein's 1918 article in his book I have listed below.

All of the research along with the unique analysis and conclusions are my own work. A long time ago, I set out on a quest to better understand Einstein's relativity. I figured that the paradox and inconsistencies must have been due to my own misunderstanding, so I assumed Einstein and the physics community were right and I was just missing something. After countless hours of research I began to uncover how different some of the interpretatins of relativity really were! I was struck that some said that it could not be explained without the GR component and others insisted it was a common error (or at least unnecessary) to include GR in the time dilation calculations. So I performed a combined detailed analysis of Einstein's 1905, 1911 and 1918 statements about time dilation and found that he was engaging in uniform circular discussion. What he did essentially was play a shell game with acceleration and gravity. Whether he did this intentionally - or was innocently but erroneously fishing for a resolution to his own paradox is anybody's guess?

So the analysis and conclusions are my own work. As you know there have been a million Einstein critics throughout the decades but none of them have been able to successfully bust through the "Science Police" (who protect us from cranks and crackpots) because their criticisms were too vague, erroneous or incomplete. I am the only one I know of who has demonstrated these specific inconsistencies and suggested why it is important to take the time to understand their implications - especially when we hypothesize about the nature of time.

When I submitted the essay - I decided that I wouldn't jump right out of the box with: HEY GUYS I DISPROVED EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY AND I SHOW WHY IT IS IMPORTANT IN OUR EXPLORATION OF WHAT TIME REALLY IS!

Instead, I trusted the process. Since "the Management" made assurances that all essays would be read by a juried panel and would be intelligently analyzed before deciding who to award recognition to. Although to be fair - with what I accomplished with my essay, I'm sure that if Max, Anthony and the fine folks who made up the FQXI jury had a 19th place, I probably would have gotten it :) Oh, well - better luck next time right?

Unnikrishnan (listed below) has an interesting paper. He uses a neat thought experiment that I think is his own idea that is a "clock freeze." But, where he leaves himself open for criticism is when he tries to disprove Einstein through a proposed "spooky action at a distance" that doesn't appear to take into account the "Time it takes for someone else's time to slow down"

I use GPS to demopnstrate the limits of Einstein's theory which is not a thought experiment but a modern day real world application. Also Unnikrishnan does not get into any comparrison of acceleration and gravity through a detailed analysis of the difference in frames used in 1911 and 1918 which is essential to the theory's deconstruction. Having said all of that - I do like his thought experiment and think he deserves some credit for that.

You mentioned Ohanian's book on an earlier post. Yes - I read it and enjoyed it. He also read my 45 page version of my relativity/time observations that I made available in March 2008. It is on the cheely.com link listed below. Ohanian and I emailed back and forth a couple of times about his book and my 45 page monster. He seems like a good guy. I definitely think he took an unfair beating by some people who reviewed his book. Most of them missed his entire point. If you go to my page you will see a review of his book that I posted.

Hope this helps and I hope you are enjoying life on the road!

Einstein, Albert On the electrodynamics of moving bodies Annalen der Physik, 17 1905

Einstein, Albert On the influence of gravitation on the propagation of light Annalen der Physik, 35, 1911

Einstein, Albert The foundation of the general theory of relativity Annalen der Physik, 49, 1916

Einstein, Albert Dialog about objections against the theory of relativity Die Naturwissenschaften November

29, 1918

Einstein, Albert, Infeld, Leopold The Evolution of Physics 1938 Touchstone – Simon & Schuster

Einstein, Albert Relativity 15th edition 1961 Crown

Einstein, Albert The Meaning of Relativity 5th edition, 1956 MJF Books by arrangement with Princeton

University Press

Pais, Abraham ‘Subtle is the Lord…’ 11th Ed. 1986 Oxford University Press

Born, Max Einstein’s Theory of Relativity 1962 Dover Publications

Taylor, E. F. and Wheeler, J. A. Spacetime Physics 1992 W. H. Freeman

Lasky, Ronald C. Time and the Twin Paradox Scientific American Special Edition, Feb. 2006 Vol. 16 No. 1

www.sciam.com

Mermin, N. David It’s About Time Understanding Einstein’s Relativity 2005 Princeton University Press

Unnikrishnan, C. S. On Einstein’s resolution of the twin clock paradox Current Science, Vol. 89, No. 12

December 25, 2005

Gron, O. G. Relativistic resolutions of the twin paradox Current Science, Vol. 92, No. 4, p. 416

February 25, 2007

Styer, Daniel F. How do two moving clocks fall out of sync? A tale of trucks, threads, and twins Am. J. Phys. 75

(9), Sept. 2007

Kennedy, Chris J. Second Thoughts March 2008 http://www.cheely.com/Science_Page.html

view post as summary

reply to this thread

Hello Chris!

Thanks for the references. I have some homework. :)

Yes--the funny thing is that the very name relativity suggests that measurements of time and space are all "relative." Thus one twin states that the other's clock is the one going slower and vice versa, and both are right.

This is funny when you think about it. If you want to stay forever young just put a...

view entire post

Hello Chris!

Thanks for the references. I have some homework. :)

Yes--the funny thing is that the very name relativity suggests that measurements of time and space are all "relative." Thus one twin states that the other's clock is the one going slower and vice versa, and both are right.

This is funny when you think about it. If you want to stay forever young just put a clock on a high-velocity spaceship and launch it at .99999999c. In its frame your watch will be running very slowly so you will stay much younger than if you had never launched the rocket.

What MDT does is shows that there is an absolute rest--the threee spatial dimensions. And there is an absolute motion--the expansion of the fourth dimension which expands at c: dx4/dt=ic. Ergo, the faster one goes the less one ages.

Consider this experiment:

You are standing here on earth.

Above you flies a rocket travelling at .999999999999999999c with a clock and you see that it is synchronized iwth yours. The rocket travels 186,000 miles to a marker in space, stationary in our frame. When it passes the marker the clock is read. The spaceship never slows down but just keeps going.

A stationary friend at the marker, whose clock is synchronized with yours, sends you the spaceship's clock's reading that it registered when it passed the marker. And you see that almost no time had elapsed on its clock (due to its high velocity and the standard equations for time dilation), while one full second had passed for you.

Ergo the clock on the moving spaceship *physically* ran slower. You could actually send him the results of the measurements, and while he will yet argue that your clock was running slower as he is receding from it, he will be able to agree with your setup and experiment--less time elapsed for him in a *physical* manner.

Now while it is true that the two could disagree as to who is length contracted and whose time is dilated while the inertial frames pass one another, time is going slower in one frame than the other.

This is because teh fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at c, and there is thus an absolute rest and absolut motion, though it is impossible to measure due to the tautological link between space, time, and light.

Now Einstein alayws stated that he wasn't satisfied with his principle of relativity. He stated it was yet unsatisfactory and needed more fundamental foundations.

"A physical theory can be satisfactory only if its structures are composed of elementary foundations. The theory of relativity is ultimately as little satisfactory as, for example, classical thermodynamics was before Boltzmann had interpreted the entropy as probability. –Einstein in a letter to Arnold Sommerfield on January 14th, 1908. CPAE, Vol. 5, Doc. 73:"

MDT provides those fundamental foundations with dx4/dt=ic.

Give me a 4D universe (X1,X2,X3,X4) wherein the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at c: dX4/dt=ic, and all of relativity naturally arises. The Minkowski spacetime metric pops right out of this simple, beuatiful postulate, naturally giving rise to Einstein's two postulates of relativity and granting us deeper insight into the twin paradox. The twin who travles faster relative to space travels slower relative to the fourth expanding dimension, and as their watch depends on changes in energy, and as energy travels relatively slower in relation to the fourth expanding dimension when it is emitted by moving objects, time also goes slower, and this tautology preserves the constancy of c. Where light slows down relative to high-speed objects, time slows down, and thus light's velocity is always c. I treat MDT and light clocks in the previosuly attached paper above:

http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/ 2_MDT_MOVING_DIMENSIONS_THEORY_EXAMINES_THE_GRAVITATIONAL_RE
DSHIFT_SLOWING_OF_CLOCKS.pdf

And of course, another vast advantage of MDT is that it provides a *physical* model for quantum mechanics' nonlocality and entangelment--qm's characteristic trait:

"When two systems, of which we know the states by their respective representatives, enter into temporary physical interaction due to known forces between them, and when after a time of mutual influence the systems separate again, then they can no longer be described in the same way as before, viz. by endowing each of them with a representative of its own. I would not call that one but rather the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics, the one that enforces its entire departure from classical lines of thought. By the interaction the two representatives [the quantum states] have become entangled." –Schrödinger

So there you have it folks--MDT provides a *physical* model for the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics while also providing the simple, elementary foundations of Einstein's Relativity. Einstein backed into x4=ict after proposing his two postualtes of relativity. He then never fully accepted quantum mechanics, and he brushed aside Godel's concerns about time travel into the past, frozen time, and the block universe, which physicists also ignore today.

A great thing about String Theory/antitheories is that it compeletely ignores all of these foundational questions and paradoxes which MDT resolves.

Chris--I hope that MDT might help shed some light on relativity and its interpretations. Relativity is right. Different frames will disagree about the exact times and places of events. But there is but one *physical* reality. There is but one clock that is *physically* running slow.

In a photon's frame time has stopped. Ergo, consider a photon that bounces back and forth beteen two mirrors at oposite ends of the universe. According to that photon, nothing ever happened. Now this is an extreme case, and many say that a photon's rest frame is undefined, so then let us consider a space traveller who travels across the universe at .999999999999999999999999999999 9999999999999999999999999999999999c according to their frame, nothing will have happened while thousands of years will have passed here on earth. Because they have almost cuaght up with the fourth expanding dimension, their own watch has *physically* slowed down, but in no way has this *physically* affected the flow of time anywhere in the universe. Ergo Einstein was right--his theory should have been called "The Theory of Invariance."

Had only Einstein accepted quantum mechanics' reality, then he might have moved beyond the block universe and seen the unification staring at him in the face, when Minkwoski wrote x4=ict, implying dx4/dt=ic.

Now a funny thing on the internet is that people are suddenly saying that Minkowski came up with MDT--not me. So MDT is both not worthy of an award from FQXI, and Minkowski also invented it (although he never published it, as I am the only one who has ever written the equation dx4/dt=ic and mined its *physical* meaning in MDT's postulate: the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions.)

Above Lawrence was also saying that MDT was common knowledge in his undergraduate physics curriculum, so I wrote to him:

"Hello Lawrence,

You write, "I couldn't help but concur with the dx4/ct = ic comment Aguirre made. All this tells us is that everthing is moving at the speed of light! Even while sitting down we are all moving along the 4th coordinate direction at the speed of light, times i = sqrt{-1}. Something I remember from undergraduate study."

Nowhere in any physics text (nor previosuly published papers) does it state that dx4/dt=ic, and yet you say you remember it from undergraduate study!

My theory is now simultaneously both utterly rejected by the FQXI experts and common knowledge in undergraduate physics programs!!

I guess FQXI can use this as proof of parallel universes. Finally MDT will be embraced by the anonymous FQXI judges in a new paper entitled "dx4/dt=ic: The Ontological Proof of Parallel Universes in The Landscape: MDT is Both Common Undergad Knowledge and Crackpottery in The Multiverse."

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." --Arthur Schopenhauer German philosopher (1788 - 1860)

My prediction over the next year is that a well-funded antitheorist will hype MDT to Fox News as "fabulous" whereupon Bill O'Reilly will interview them about how they came up with it on their own and how their career suffered and they were no longer invited to Antitheory/String Theory conferences in Aspen and Hawaii.

Well, I will be sleeping for a couple days Chris, but you are exactly right about all your investigations! Although the math in relativity works time and time again, the *physical* interpretation seems to vary and be inconsistent. I hope MDT can afford some consistency by postulating absolute rest--the three spatial dimensions--and absolute motion--the fourth expanding dimension. Ergo there is but one veclocity for all objects through spacetime--c--which is slaways split between the frame at absolute rest (rest mass) and the frame in absolute motion (photon/energy).

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

view post as summary

reply to this thread

Hello Chris,

Loved your review of the Ohanian book!

Everyone should read: http://www.cheely.com/BookReview.pdf

Loved the quote, "Ohanian's chapter on the E=mc2 saga provides an eye-opening experience for any who may have become acquainted with the Einstein story through the science entertainment industry."

Yes--so many people just crunch the numbers and never worry...

view entire post

Hello Chris,

Loved your review of the Ohanian book!

Everyone should read: http://www.cheely.com/BookReview.pdf

Loved the quote, "Ohanian's chapter on the E=mc2 saga provides an eye-opening experience for any who may have become acquainted with the Einstein story through the science entertainment industry."

Yes--so many people just crunch the numbers and never worry about the beuatiful mysteries and paradoxes--the subtleties and contradictions where all the opportunity lies! They actually think more opportunity lies in fabricating gian voids and multiverses, as opposed to physics!

The fun thing about MDT is that it fully supports Einstein's relativity while also supporting quantum mechanics (which Einstein was never quite happy with), while also lending some insight into the twin paradox, the EPR paradox, and the paradoxical nature of relativity's seeming want to freeze time and establish a block universe, thusly ridding the world of the flow of time. MDT unfreezes time, liberating us form the block uinverse with dx4/dt=ic! The block universe is a mathematical artefact when we draw time as fourth dimension on a piece of paper, but time, as measured on the ticking seconds on our watch, is not a dimension--rather it is a phenomena that arises because of energy propagating in the three spatial dimensions, as it is but matter cuaght in the fourth expanding dimension! Hence time inherits qualities of teh fourth dimension in relativity's math, but there is no time dimension--no past out there, and no established future. The fourth dimension is constantly expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at c, and the more one is roated into it, the shorter one's length/projection appears (like a rotation in any other dimension), as one approaches the speed of light.



There is a difference between inertial frames and time can flow at physically different rates in different frames.

A lot of the confusion stems from the interlinked nature of time and measurement and light.

Take a twin traveling at .999999999999c away from me. He will see my clock ticking slower and I will see his clock ticking slower. Now one of us, in order to get up to that speed, had to have undergone acceleration. And whoever that is will be the one who is truly aging more slowly, not because of the effects only during the acceleration, but because the acceleration increased one's velocity relative to the stationary three spatial dimensions, while also increasing one's velocity relative to the fourth dimension, which is moving relative to the three spatial dimensions at c. Moving light clocks run slow because a bouncing photon in a light clock will hit the mirrors less frequently, as the photon is traveling along with the fourth dimension, and the faster a light clock moves, the more it catches up with the expanding fourth dimension, and the longer it takes for the photon to reach the mirror.

One of the funniest things is that so many physicists will tell you that dimensions cannot move. They will take a whole year of differential geometry and still come away believing that dimensions cannot move.

Think about the words "differential" and "geometry." If they don't imply moving dimensions when combined, I don't know what does.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_geometry

And again, think about the word Geometrodynamics!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometrodynami
cs

The geometry of space and time are moving! That String Theorist have ignored this background-dependence for thirty+ years while hogging all the bookshelves and tenured faculty positions for an antitheory is a sin beyond belief!

And if dimensions can move, then by definition, they must be able to move relative to one another. And so it is no great leap of faith to suggest that the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at c, espeically when Minkowski wrote x=ict, naturally implying dx4/dt=ic.

These are historic times, and it is a great triumph for physics that MDT should have its very own forum for its simple postualte and equation that celebrates a hitherto unsung universal invariant: dx4/dt=ic.

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

Thanks Chris!

Firstoff, some twitter proofs of MDT (limited to 140 characters)!

SR: photon is stationary in 4th dimension. QM: photon is probability wave expanding @ c. Ergo: 4th dimension expands @ c & MDT: dx4/dt=ic

http://twitter.com/45surf

Yes--you write, "But again, your analysis does not agree with Einstein's relativity. Any preferential time dilation during...

view entire post

Thanks Chris!

Firstoff, some twitter proofs of MDT (limited to 140 characters)!

SR: photon is stationary in 4th dimension. QM: photon is probability wave expanding @ c. Ergo: 4th dimension expands @ c & MDT: dx4/dt=ic

http://twitter.com/45surf

Yes--you write, "But again, your analysis does not agree with Einstein's relativity. Any preferential time dilation during interial travel is in direct conflict with Einstein."

Yes--it is impossible for the inertial twins to ascertain whose digital clock is the one which is running slower due to the fact that each bases their measurement on the time they receive the light pulses from the other one's clock. Relativity's math shows this to be true. MDT agrees wholeheartedly with MDT's math, but it adds the fact that relativity's math arises from the deeper foundations--that of dx4/dt=ic. Although the two inertial twins are unable to measure their absolute motion relative to the three stationary spatial dimensions while in motion, the twin who underwent less acceleration is in fact traveling more slowly relative to the three spatial dimensions. This will be the one aging more.

MDT, by proposing that the three spatial dimensions are absolutely stationary, while the fourth dimension is moving relative to them at c, accounts for the fact that while two intertial twins can disagree on who is aging less due to the tautoligcal nature of light and time and time and light, one of them is actually againg lessm!

Because Einstein never saw that x4=ict and his two postualtes of relativity come from dx4/dt=ic, he never perceived existence of absolute rest (the three spatial dimensions) and absolute motion (the fourth expanding dimension).

In fact, this thought experiment proves MDT:

"Above you flies a rocket with your twin travelling at .999999999999999999c with a clock and you see that it is synchronized with yours as it passes just overhead. The rocket travels 186,000 miles to a marker in space, stationary in your frame. When it passes the marker the clock is read at the marker. The spaceship never slows down but just keeps going. The frames remain inertial throughout the entire experiment!!

A stationary friend at the marker, whose clock is synchronized with yours, sends you the spaceship's clock's reading that it registered when it passed the marker. And you see that almost no time had elapsed on its clock (due to its high velocity and the standard equations for time dilation), while one full second had passed for you.

Ergo the clock on the moving spaceship *physically* ran slower. You could actually send him the results of the measurements, and while he will yet argue that your clock is running slower as he is receding from it, he will be able to agree with your setup and experiment--less time elapsed for him in a *physical* manner.

Now while it is true that the two could disagree as to who is length contracted and whose time is dilated while the inertial frames pass one another, time is going slower in one frame than the other.

So yes! The above experiment agrees with relativity in the simple sense that each twin will see the other's clock running slower! But, the above experiment also shows that the twin's clock travelling at .9999999c was physically running slower! So the mathemtics of relativity presented a reality which obsucred the physical reality. This reflects the fact that:

1) light is how we measure things

2) time is linked to light because time is linked to change and all change derives from dx4/dt=ic or matter surfing the fourth dimension

The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at c, and there is thus an absolute rest and absolut motion, though it is impossible to measure due to the tautological link between space, time, and light.

So MDT can actually account for the above experimental results of the thought experiment, while relativity cannot. MDT proposes an absolute rest, however difficult it is to measure it due to the link bewteen measurement and light, light and time, and time and space.

Chris--I think these paradoxes you have focused on are a great opportunity!! I am currently tired but I am looking forward to spending the next few months working with you on this!

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

view post as summary

reply to this thread

wikipedia.org reports: "Special relativity predicts that atomic clocks moving at GPS orbital speeds will tick more slowly than stationary ground clocks by about 7.2 ìs per day." --http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gps#Relativity There we have it folks! Every day the "twins paradox" experiment is carried out, and it is shown that the moving clocks *physically* run slower! And finally MDT shows why...

view entire post

wikipedia.org reports: "Special relativity predicts that atomic clocks moving at GPS orbital speeds will tick more slowly than stationary ground clocks by about 7.2 ìs per day." --http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gps#Relativity There we have it folks! Every day the "twins paradox" experiment is carried out, and it is shown that the moving clocks *physically* run slower! And finally MDT shows why this is by proposing a frame of absolute rest--the three spatial dimensions--and a frame of absolute motion--the fourth expanding dimension: dx4/dt=ic. All of Einstein's/Minkowski's relativity naturally emerges from MDT, which also provides a *physical* model for entropy, quantum entanglement and nonlocality, and time and all its arrows and assymmetries, while also resolving the twin paradox, the EPR paradox, and liberating us from the paradoxical implications of Godel's block universe and frozen time. MDT provides both Eisntein's "elementary foundations" of relativity and Schrodenger's "characteristic trait of quantum mechanics." Please see the attached paper.

Hello Chris,

I read your longer paper on the treadmill last night. Great, humble, well-cited, and naturally curious research, cleary presented (with your trademark humor)!

MDT proposes a frame of absolute rest--the three spatial dimesnions. And too, MDT proposes a frame of absolute motion--the fourth expanding dimension, which expands at c, or dx4/dt=ic.

All of relativity naturally emerges from this. Begin with a four dimensional universe x1, x2, x3, x4 where dx4/dt=ic, and relativity emerges. MDT agrees 100% with relativity's math, while also resolving the twin paradox by showing that relativity's math derives from a more fundamental physical reality--dx4/dt=ic!

While it is impossible to measure absolute/relative rest/motion in any given inertial frame, one can certainly see absolute motion! All light has absolute motion--hence it has zero mass at rest, or zero rest mass. Now where light might seem to travel slower (gravitational fields, etc.), time also travels slower, ensuring the constancy of c! As clocks are fundamentally light clocks, as they depend on changes in energy, c is always measured relative to c! And hance it is always c! Please see the attached paper for MDT's treatment of light clocks.

Back to the twin paradox. Check out this paper:

http://arxiv1.library.cornell.edu/vc/physics/papers/0502/050
2007v2.pdf

It shows how the GPS clocks in the distant satellites conduct the "twin paradox" experiment every day! The authors write, "To resolve the twin paradox, we should adopt the reference frame at rest. In 1905, Einstein [2]

pointed out that we do not need the absolute space frame defined by ether; however, he did not state that special relativity denies the existence of the absolute space frame. In 1920 [3], he stated that the special relativity does not deny ether, and declared that general relativity requires ether [3]. We consider that special relativity is compatible with the absolute space frame, in that the Lorentz invariance does not require modification by the adoption of an absolute space frame. In this discussion, we refute Einstein’s 1905 hypothesis; however, the discussion is carried out on the basis of the special relativity theory. A tremendous amount of data concerning special relativity depends on Lorentz invariance; however, these data do not confirm or deny the existence of the absolute space frame. Thus special relativity with ether can be considered." --http://arxiv1.library.cornell.edu/vc/physics/papers/0502/0
502007v2.pdf (Oyamazuka, Oiwa-cho, Toyohashi, Aichi)

Now a great thing about MDT is that just like relativity, it has no need for an "ether." The fundamental difference between MDT and relativity is that MDT predicts all of relativity while also accounting for the twin paradox that is perceived each and every day in the GPS satellites.

Again, relativity is right, but MDT, by showing relativity's "elementary foundations" which Einstein yet sought, shows that all of relativity may be derived by postulating three stationary spatial dimensions and a fourth dimension expanidng at c. This allows a frame of absolute rest and a frame of absolute motion in the context of relativity. Although difficult (or impossible) to measure in any given inertial frame, the GPS satellites do in fact prove the existence of frames that are "more" stationary than others in an absolute manner. MDT shows why this is so--there is a frame of absolute rest--the three stationary spatial dimensions--and a frame of absolute motion--the fourth expanding dimension. All light and energy exist in the frame of absolute motion, caught upon the fourth expanding dimension: dx4/dt=ic.

view post as summary

reply to this thread

RE: ON THE PARADOCIXAL ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE & MDT'S RESOLUTION OF THE PARADOX OF THE TWINS PARADOX

Henceforth all physicists who do not agree with MDT ought not use GPS systems.

"How wonderful that we have met with a paradox. Now we have some hope of making progress." --Niels Bohr

In his 1905 paper on relativity, Einsetin wrote, "If there are two stationary clocks at point...

view entire post

RE: ON THE PARADOCIXAL ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE & MDT'S RESOLUTION OF THE PARADOX OF THE TWINS PARADOX

Henceforth all physicists who do not agree with MDT ought not use GPS systems.

"How wonderful that we have met with a paradox. Now we have some hope of making progress." --Niels Bohr

In his 1905 paper on relativity, Einsetin wrote, "If there are two stationary clocks at point A and point B and the clocks are synchronized, and the clock at point A moves to the clock at point B at a velocity v, upon its arrival at point B, the clocks will no longer be in sync. The clock in motion (A) will be lagging behind the stationary clock (B)." This is naturally supported by the daily GPS "twin paradox" experiments where the moving satellite clocks run slower by 7,000 us, and too it is natrually supported by MDT's postulate of a fourth dimension (in absolute motion) expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions (at absolute rest) at c: dx4/dt=ic.

Today paradoxes, curiosity, logic, and reason are oft swept under the table by the leading atitheorist/corporate CEO/physicists. In their place they establish a well-funded antitheory groupthink regime with fancy letterhead and a sycophantic PR/social media team dwarfing the size of the 1927 Solvay conference on Quantum Mechanics:

http://photos.dabydeen.com/2006/07/brain-power.html

But yet, paradoxes persist, calling us to adventure in their resolution!

MDT resovles:

1) The EPR Paradox (via the nonlocality of the expanding fourth dimension: dx4/dt=ic)

2) MDT resolves the paradox of block time/frozen time (via weaving change into the fundamental fabric of spacetime with dx4/dt=ic, and showing that block time is but a mathemtical artefact of treating time as a dimension, instead of as a phenomena which emerges because teh fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions)

3) MDT resolves the twins paradox (by proposing a frame of absolute rest--the trhee spatial dimension, and a frame of aboslute motion--the fourth expanding dimension).

To all those antitheorists working on decades-old dead-end nontehories who think the twin paradox was resolved, think again.

In his well-researched and reasoned, most eloquent paper, Chris Kennedy shows how leading physicists, form Born, to Wheeler, to Taylor, to Mermin, to Einstein fiercely disagree about the twin paradox (most of this can be found around p. 15 of http://www.cheely.com/second_T.pdf):

"In the 1962 edition of his book Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, world-renowned physicist Max Born explains the twin clock paradox by endorsing the Einstein 1918 version. He demonstrates mathematically how, during the constant velocity portion of the journey, clock A will see B run slower, while at the same time B will see A run slower. (This will be explained in detail later.) He shows how this is compensated for during the acceleration/ deceleration phases for the traveling clock – so that when they reunite, the clock that journeyed will be running behind the clock that remained stationary. He concludes by saying that “the clock paradox is due to a false application of the special theory of relativity, namely, to a case in which the methods of the general theory should be applied.” Is this the opinion of all physicists? Well, let’s continue. In the 1999 edition of their 300 page relativity book, Spacetime Physics, John Archibald Wheeler and Edwin F. Taylor, address the twin paradox by asking the question: Do we need general relativity? And they quickly answer, No. They further sum up the paradox by saying: “there is never any contradiction between a single clock in one frame and a single clock in any other frame. In this case special relativity can do the job just fine.” Wheeler should know, right? He coauthored a textbook on gravitation and if I’m not mistaken, was the one who coined the phrase “black hole.” So if there were anyone who was considered an expert in the areas of special relativity and general relativity, it would be Wheeler."

"Next we have Dartmouth College Professor Ronald C. Lasky. Professor Lasky describes his take on the twin paradox in a 2003 Scientific American article this way: When the paradox is addressed, it is usually done so only briefly, by saying that the one who feels the acceleration is the one who is younger at the end of the trip. While the result is correct, the explanation is misleading. Because of these types of incomplete explanations, to many partially informed people, the accelerations appear to be the issue. Therefore it is believed that the general theory of relativity is required to explain the paradox. Of course, this conclusion is based on yet another mistake, since we don’t need general relativity to handle the accelerations. The paradox can be unraveled by special relativity alone, and the accelerations incurred by the traveler are incidental. Lasky uses the concept of length contraction to justify the traveler’s clock lagging behind upon returning. As you can see, he makes it very clear that gravity and acceleration described in general relativity have no business in the explanation of clock

discrepancies. . . In recent years, however, Einstein’s 1918 version, endorsed by Max Born, has been making a comeback. In his 2005 book, It’s About Time, physicist N. David Mermin discusses general relativity as a solution to the paradox. Additionally, O. G. Gron, from the Institute of Physics at the University of Oslo, provides a very lengthy mathematical argument for why the general relativity portion of the journey is essential for resolving the paradox. This argument is presented in the February 2007 edition of Current Science as a critical response to a December 2005 paper published in the same journal by C. S. Unnikrishnan. In his paper, Unnikrishnan provides an in-depth look at relativity, including a thorough discussion of the differences between the Einstein of 1905 and the Einstein of 1918. Unnikrishnan provides an argument for why he thinks the Einstein 1918 version does not work and it is this point that Gron challenges in his response. Even more recently, in the American Journal of Physics, Physicist Dan Styer devotes a special section of his September 2007 paper to the twin paradox. Although his mathematical approach is different, he arrives at the same conclusion as Born, Mermin and Gron: The General Relativity/acceleration phase of the traveler is the necessary key to providing the solution to the paradox. And if you’re wondering what physics students have been taught during the past thirty years or so, we have submitted a stack of college physics textbooks as evidence which, upon review, will clearly show that there is no consensus there either. Second Thoughts 17 So apparently, what we have, unless my client and I have missed something, is a decades-old theory called relativity, developed by Albert Einstein, which to this day has no working explanation that all scientists can agree on. Now, I wonder what psychosis the pro-general relativists think the non-general relativists are suffering from? And do the scientists that don’t deem general relativity necessary, think the pro-general relativists are paranoid? Delusional? Overachievers? Too detail oriented? And they want to stop my client from teaching physics?" --Chris Kennedy, http://www.cheely.com/second_T.pdf

Chris actually performs a lot more physics in the above passage than all the tenured antitheorists combined, who are off skiing in Aspen and surfing in Hawaii.

Albert Einstein: "The mere formulation of a problem is far more often essential than its solution, which may be merely a matter of mathematical or experimental skill. To raise new questions, new possibilities, to regard old problems from a new angle requires creative imagination and marks real advances in science."

"Books on physics are full of complicated mathematical formulae. But thought and ideas, not formulae, are the beginning of every physical theory." --Einstein/Infeld, The Evolution of Physics

MDT's idea: the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at c, or dx4/dt=ic.

And MDT explains the twins paradox in a more fundamental way, by provding the "elementary foundations" of Einstein's relativity.

It is not every day that a new, fundamental universal invariant is proposed along with a new *physical* model of spacetime--the very stage for all of physics. Nor is it every day that a common *physical* principle is used to explain the following as emergent phenomena: time and all its arrows and assymetries, relativity (relativity derives from MDT), entropy, quantum entanglement and nonlocality, all the dualities, and Huygens' Principle and Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. It is the nonlocal wave character of the fourth dimensions' expansion that gives rise to nonlocality, entanglement, Huygens' Principle across all realms, the Heisenberg Uncertainity Principle, and all wave-particle (nonlocal/local) duality, as well as the dualities between space/time, mass/energy. Photons are but matter/momenergy surfing the fourth expanding dimension. And as they are timeless/ageless, they stay in but one place in teh ofurth dimension, as they propagate at c through our three spatial dimensions, defined by spherically-symmetric wavefronts of probability; which rests upon the physical expansion of the fourth dimension.

Towads the end of his paper, Chris Kennedy has an excellent, exalting, and illuminating dialogue regarding the Twins Paradox in the conetxt of the GPS System: http://www.cheely.com/second_T.pdf

The dialogue, penned in the tradition of Plato's Dialogues and Scorates' spirit, is pure genius. Finally MDT accounts for why GPS works by stipulating that there is indeed a frame of absolute rest--the three stationary spatial dimensions--and a frame in absolute motion--the fourth expanding dimension: dx4/dt=ic. All of the math of relativity naturally emerges, along with its proper interpretation that allows for GPS, which reveals the true anture of the twin paradox each and every day.

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

Henceforth all physicists who do not agree with MDT ought not use GPS systems. Or at least they ought not allow special relativity's 7,000 ns daily correction to the GPS clock, which would put them off by more than a mile every day, as light travels about 1 foot/ns. (I rememebr using this fact as a timing device in the labs at Princeton by adding and taking away the length of wire cables carrying signals! It was in the lifetime of the muon experiment. Nobel Laureate Joseph Taylor was teaching the class on experimental physics)

Wait a second! Maybe the GPS systems of the antitheory indisiders are off! Maybe that is why all the fqxi antitheorists can never seem to locate the cutting-edge fqxi MDT forums which provide Einstein's "elementary foundations" of relativity and a physical model for Schrodenger's "characteristic trait of quantum mechancis--entanglement" while also resolving the twins paradox, the EPR paradox, and unfreezing time! Perhaps the antitheorists are off by one more mile each and every day due to the anti-MDT GPS systems in their fqxi-funded BMWs which neglect the 7,000 ns corrections due to MDT's correct interpretation of relativity!

Albert Einstein, "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds."

Albert Einstein, "The world we have made as a result of the level of thinking we have done thus far creates problems we cannot solve at the same level of thinking at which we created them."

Max Planck, the father of quantum theory, felt that the pioneer scientist must have " a vivid intuitive imagination, for new ideas are not generated by deduction, but by artistically creative imagination."

It is by intuition that we discover and by logic we prove.

--Henri Poincaré, Mathematician

"I have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning." --Plato

It is hanging in the Boston Museum of Science, and it seems to agree with Albert Einstein, Galileo, and Max Born:

http://www.ilfilosofo.com/blog/2008/04/12/plato-mathema
tician-quote/

"I personally like to regard a probability wave as a real thing, certainly as more than a tool for mathematical calculations. ... how could we rely on probability predictions if we do not refer to something real and objective? (Max Born on Quantum Theory)"

Max Born wrote, "All great discoveries in experimental physics have been made due to the intuition of men who made free use of models which for them were not products of the imagination but representations of real things."

"Gradually the conviction gained recognition that all knowledge about things is exclusively a working-over of the raw material furnished by the senses. ... Galileo and Hume first upheld this principle with full clarity and decisiveness." --(Albert Einstein, Ideas and Opinions)

To reject *physical* intuition and the experimental reality of the GPS system and replace it with the nonsensical block universe MDT does away with seems to go exactly against the spirit by which physics has ever advanced, according to Galileo, Einstein, and other noble physicists.

Legend has it that Copernicus received his first hard copy of his book on his death bed.

"Despite urgings from many quarters, Copernicus delayed with the publication of his book, perhaps from fear of criticism — a fear delicately expressed in the subsequent Dedication of his masterpiece to Pope Paul III. Scholars disagree on whether Copernicus' concern was limited to physical and philosophical objections from other natural philosophers, or whether he was also concerned about religious objections from theologians." --http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus

"Copernicu
s died in Frombork on 24 May 1543. Legend has it that the first printed copy of De revolutionibus was placed in his hands on the very day that he died, allowing him to take farewell of his life's work. He is reputed to have wakened from a stroke-induced coma, looked at his book, and died peacefully." --http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus

Well, contrast that with the "publish or perish" here-and-now, short-term forces that drive our journals, which contain tens of thousands of papers that probably won't change the world as much as Copernicus's book--a book written not for tenure nor title nor grants--but for Truth.

And so I think, that if you are born with an idea (such as dx4/dt=ic), and the idea keeps haunting you, over time you ought respect and honor that idea. For it would be dishonorable to turn and run from what you see as Truth and join the antitheorist regimes, even if it were more profitable. I would imagine, that if you had any sense of honor, you would see that you really have no choice but to stick with logic and reason, with truth and beauty, with simplicity and common sense; even if they preach and teach otherwise.

"Some one will say: And are you not ashamed, Socrates, of a course of life which is likely to bring you to an untimely end? To him I may fairly answer: There you are mistaken: a man who is good for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living or dying; he ought only to consider whether in doing anything he is doing right or wrong, acting the part of a good man or of a bad. Whereas, upon your view, the heroes who fell at Troy were not good for much, and the son of Thetis above all, who altogether despised danger in comparison with disgrace; and when he was so eager to slay Hector, his goddess mother said to him, that if he avenged his companion Patroclus, and slew Hector, he would die himself, "Fate," she said, in these or the like words, "waits for you next after Hector;" he, receiving this warning, utterly despised danger and death, and instead of fearing them, feared rather to live in dishonor, and not to avenge his friend. "Let me die forthwith," he replies, "and be avenged of my enemy, rather than abide here by the beaked ships, a laughing-stock and a burden of the earth." Had Achilles any thought of death and danger? For wherever a man's place is, whether the place which he has chosen or that in which he has been placed by a commander, there he ought to remain in the hour of danger; he should not think of death or of anything but of disgrace. And this, O men of Athens, is a true saying." –The Apology

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

E pur si muove!! dx4/dt=ic!!

view post as summary

reply to this thread

Elliot,

Thanks for taking the time to read "the monster" and thank you for posting some of the finer points of my arguement. It seems that what we have in common is our recognition that the general direction mainstream physics has been going in has not been very productive lately. Years ago, I became so disgusted with physicists trying to pile fantasy on top of fiction and sell it as...

view entire post

Elliot,

Thanks for taking the time to read "the monster" and thank you for posting some of the finer points of my arguement. It seems that what we have in common is our recognition that the general direction mainstream physics has been going in has not been very productive lately. Years ago, I became so disgusted with physicists trying to pile fantasy on top of fiction and sell it as credible - I walked away for awhile.

I became reinvigorated when Woit's book, and to a much greater extent, Smolin's Trouble w/Physics book came out. I finally saw some people making an honest effort to acknowledge the insanity that has been brewing for the past 20 years or so and I became interested again. The sad and ironic thing is that sticking to the facts and responsibly hypothesizing about missing or incomplete pieces of the cosmological puzzle is waaaaaay more interesting than the nonsense that many mainstreamers are engaging in. They are arguing over ultra-fine details in attempt to better describe fictitious theories. I liken it to a mathematician arguing over whether a number is 0.0328814 or 0.0328815 on a calculation that, at best only has 3 legitimate significant figures.

You and I - dissatisfied with present attempts to explain "what is" have each tried to make a contribution by proposing new theories. From where I sit, the first half of my theory is scientifically sound. Which is that Einstein's complete explanation for why time dilates is impossible. After one realizes that upon review of the facts, It is impossible not to see that that discovery would drastically impact how we view the nature of "time" in the universe. The second part of my theory seems like a next logical step but as you can see, I have no specific interactions among particles, forces and fields that serve as definitive mechanisms which explain both the nature of time and the relative nature of time. I am pretty sure I'm going down the right road - I'm just not sure what house # I'm looking for. I am working on that as we type and hope to have more on that soon.

As for MDT: It sounds intriguing. It's one of those theories that, if you are correct - It would fill in a lot of missing pieces of the puzzle at once. If there is something that would allow me to endorse this as a likely explanation to our cosmological mysteries that haunt us - I would support you 100%. Who knows - that might happen in a week or in a year. But if there is something that makes MDT impossible then I will have to make you aware of that too. It takes me longer to process information because I assume and accept nothing without evidence. That's not how many physicists treat string theory and relativity but I can't help that. Everyone has got their own way of drawing conclusions and I prefer to keep my methods as scientific as possible - even if it means that many "scientists" disagree with me. Having said that - I don't even know what a 4th dimension is? Nor do I know what it means for it to expand exactly. I can see that your version of a 4th dimension is different than what most physicists think of it as. Is your theory self-consistent? If it is then at least you have got Einstein beat! If it is and does not conflict with any experimental evidence - does that alone prove MDT? Could there be alternative theories that may explain all of our unknowns without the need for a 4th expanding dimension? If MDT is correct - then it will be self-consistent and agree with some sort of experimental evidence that makes it uniquely correct while competing theories break down. I have no idea what it will take to determine the fate of MDT one way or the other. I will spend some time on it this week (and the supplemental attachments) and see if I can come up with something.

By the way - I did try to past in the link on that twin paradox paper and didn't come up with anything and searched the names. Is there another way to link it?

Oh, and - the next time you are on the treadmill, ask a stationary observer if they consider you in motion!

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

RE: MDT & Kaluza Klein Theory:

MDT & Kaluza Klein Theory

The illustrations of Kaluza Klein Theory immediately bring MDT’s fourth expanding dimension to mind. Imagine if every point of the fourth dimension is continually expanding, underlying all manifestations of Huygens' Principle throughout all of nature, as well as Kaluza Klein's extra dimension. A frozen snapshot of the...

view entire post

RE: MDT & Kaluza Klein Theory:

MDT & Kaluza Klein Theory

The illustrations of Kaluza Klein Theory immediately bring MDT’s fourth expanding dimension to mind. Imagine if every point of the fourth dimension is continually expanding, underlying all manifestations of Huygens' Principle throughout all of nature, as well as Kaluza Klein's extra dimension. A frozen snapshot of the fundamental fabric of spacetime in MDT's universe would look something like this:

http://jac_leon.club.fr/gravitation/images/kaluza-klein
.gif

Again and again throughout nature we see MDT’s fundamental action—-local points becoming nonlocal spheres (underlying Huygens' Principle, entanglement, nonlocality, entropy), wherein every point on the surface, while distributed evenly throughout the three spatial dimensions, are yet at the same singular point in the fourth expanding dimension. dx4/dt = ic.

Or like this:



http://www.vcharkarn.com/uploads/17/17494.gif

Again and again throughout nature we see MDT’s fundamental action--local points becoming nonlocal spheres (underlying Huygens' Principle, entanglement, nonlocality, entropy), wherein every point on the surface, while distributed evenly throughout the three spatial dimensions, are yet at the same singular point in the fourth expanding dimension. Dx4/dt = ic.

Wikipedia reports: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaluza%E2%80%93Klein_theory

"In physics, Kaluza–Klein theory (or KK theory, for short) is a model that seeks to unify the two fundamental forces of gravitation and electromagnetism. The theory was first published in 1921 and was discovered by the mathematician Theodor Kaluza who extended general relativity to a five-dimensional spacetime. The resulting equations can be separated out into further sets of equations, one of which is equivalent to Einstein field equations, another set equivalent to Maxwell’s equations for the electromagnetic field and the final part an extra scalar field now termed the “radion”." --wikipedia

Kaluza-Klein theory posited that gravity and electromagnetism can be unified by adding a fifth dimension of compactified space, and MDT provides this compactified space. The novelty of MDT is that it proposes that this compactified space is not static, but that it is constantly appearing, as the fourth dimension expands. Thus MDT underlies all string theories. String Theory ignores Einstein’s insight that space and time can move, warp, and bend. MDT acknowledges that dimensions can move, and that the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions.

Brian Greeene et al are always worrying about their calculations blowing up at small distances. Well, via the nonlocality of the fourth expanding dimenson, from where all wavelike behavior arises, all this is resolved.

Gravity, based on general relativity, freezes the fourth expanding dimension. Electromagnetism, based on the quantum mechanical properties of photons, treats the fourth expanding dimension as an entity in constant flux.

Below again is a figure depicting the compactified dimensions of Kaluza Klein—not that it is very similar to the earlier figures depicting MDT in terms of a dimension that is expanding in a spherically-symmetric manner.

http://jac_leon.club.fr/gravitation/images/kaluza-klein.gif

A
gain and again throughout nature we see MDT’s fundamental action—local points becoming nonlocal spheres, wherein every point on the surface, while distributed evenly throughout the three spatial dimensions, are yet at the same singular point in the fourth expanding dimension. dx4/dt = ic.

Wikipedia reports on Kaluza Klein’s limitations:

"As an approach to the unification of the forces, it is straightforward to apply the Kaluza-Klein theory in an attempt to unify gravity with the strong and electroweak forces by using the symmetry group of the Standard Model, SU(3) × SU(2) × U(1). However, an attempt to convert this interesting geometrical construction into a bona-fide model of reality founders on a number of issues, including the fact that the fermions must be introduced in an artificial way (in nonsupersymmetric models). A less problematic approach to the unification of the forces is taken by modern string theory and M-theory. Nonetheless, KK remains an important touchstone in theoretical physics and is often embedded in more sophisticated theories. It is studied in its own right as an object of geometric interest in K-theory.

Perhaps MDT, and the new, emergent picture of time, will provide a means for introducing fermions in a more natural manner. The exact nature and radius of the expanding fourth dimension could determine physical constants. Wikipedia reports:

Even in the absence of a completely satisfying theoretical physics framework, the idea of exploring extra, compactified, dimensions is of considerable interest in the experimental physics and astrophysics communities. A variety of predictions, with real experimental consequences, can be made (in the case of large extra dimensions/warped models). For example, on the simplest of principles, one might expect to have standing waves in the extra compactified dimension(s). If an extra dimension is of radius R, the energy of such a standing wave would be E = nhc / R with n an integer, h being Planck’s constant and c the speed of light. This set of possible energy values is often called the Kaluza–Klein tower.

It is indeed interesting that M Theory and String Theory have 10 or 11 dimensions. MDT can account for these extra dimensions, starting with a three dimensional world. Every time a point expands in the fourth expanding dimension, it does so in an orthogonal manner, just as all radii of a sphere are orthogonal to its surface. Thus numerous dimensionalities can emerge; but always brought back to the reality and context of our three spatial dimensions.

Wikipeida reports: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_10_dimensions%3F#Number_of_
dimensions

Number of dimensions

One intriguing feature of string theory is that it involves the prediction of extra dimensions. The number of dimensions is not fixed by any consistency criterion, but flat spacetime solutions do exist in the so-called “critical dimension.” Cosmological solutions exist in a wider variety of dimensionalities, and these different dimensions—more precisely different values of the “effective central charge,” a count of degrees of freedom which reduces to dimensionality in weakly curved regimes—are related by dynamical transitions.[15]

Nothing in Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetism or

Einstein’s theory of relativity makes this kind of prediction; these theories require physicists to insert the number of dimensions “by hand,” and this number is fixed and independent of potential energy. String theory allows one to relate the number of dimensions to scalar potential energy. Technically, this happens because a gauge anomaly exists for every separate number of predicted dimensions, and the gauge anomaly can be counteracted by including nontrivial potential energy into equations to solve motion. Furthermore, the absence of potential energy in the “critical dimension” explains why flat spacetime solutions are possible.

This can be better understood by noting that a photon included in a consistent theory (technically, a particle carrying a force related to an unbroken gauge symmetry) must be massless. The mass of the photon which is predicted by string theory depends on the energy of the string mode which represents the photon. This energy includes a contribution from the Casimir effect, namely from quantum fluctuations in the string. The size of this contribution depends on the number of dimensions since for a larger number of dimensions, there are more possible fluctuations in the string position. Therefore, the photon in flat spacetime will be massless—and the theory consistent—only for a particular number of dimensions.[16]

When the calculation is done, the critical dimensionality is not four as one may expect (three axes of space and one of time). Flat space string theories are 26-dimensional in the bosonic case, while superstring and M-theories turn out to involve 10 or 11 dimensions for flat solutions. In bosonic string theories, the 26 dimensions come from the Polyakov equation.[17] Starting from any dimension greater than four, it is necessary to consider how these are --reduced to four dimensional space-time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_10_dimensions%3F
#Number_of_dimensions

Picture a fourth expanding dimension. It would appear as a sphere in three stationary dimensions. Now if each point on the sphere is always expanding, just as each point on a spherically-symmetric wavefront is always expanding as a spherically symmetric wavefront, six new, linearly independent compactified dimensions will be introduced, as there are six degrees of freedom, resulting in a total of ten dimensions.

So it is that MDT easily accounts for the extra six dimensions, as the nature of the compactified, spherically-symmetric dimension is to be perpendicular to the point from which it emanated. That perpendicularity is implied by the that in MDT’s fundamental equation:



Again, the expansion of a point into a sphere centered about that point results in a surface that as perpendicular to all radii. And that shows up in calculations whenever there is an inherent perpendicularity.

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

Thank you for your reply. I do appreciate that you must be very busy reading all of the posts on your thread.

I should explain a misunderstanding of the Prime Quaternion model.

Dr. E said "Are these truly three different dimensions? Or are they simply the same dimension, but related via linear, non-linear, or quantum relations? Personally, IF there was another time dimension, I...

view entire post

Thank you for your reply. I do appreciate that you must be very busy reading all of the posts on your thread.

I should explain a misunderstanding of the Prime Quaternion model.

Dr. E said "Are these truly three different dimensions? Or are they simply the same dimension, but related via linear, non-linear, or quantum relations? Personally, IF there was another time dimension, I would expect it to involve complex numbers (imaginary time). Also, a true Quaternion is four dimensional, and is not large enough to contain extra time dimensions - if you have manipulated equations to say something different, then those equations defy common sense."

I am not saying that there is another time dimension. I am saying that there are 3 vector spatio-energetic dimensions and one scalar spatio-energetic dimension.That is all.This is the quaternion space.Motion along the 4th spatio-energetic dimension gives subjective time, as a continuous motion observed in 3D vector space is related to an assumed continuous change in time.

There are 3 different mental constructs and abstract mathematical time, all recognised as ways that time is interpreted but not actually existing in objective reality. These are not part of the objective reality of quaternion space but the way it is interpreted to form subjective reality. For example Historical time which is past, present and future spread along a time line. These are all imaginary concepts formed by the mind to deal with sequential spatial change. The grandfather paradox and other time travel paradoxes occur because historical time is not objective physical reality.Subjective time is another assumption already explained above. Positional time imagines the 4th dimension as a time dimension along which matter progresses.This works as an approximation for motion of macroscopic objects but not sub atomic particles which move differently.

Afore and aft along the 4th dimension is more 3 dimensional space (not time). This is because it is not a time dimension but another spatio-energetic dimension. This "other space" on either side of visible 3D space does not form a part of that visible 3D space until the matter of the universe passes through it. Here are the extra degrees of freedom available to sub atomic particles.

A sub atomic particle oscillates into afore space and back to visible space. From our 3D perspective the afore space exists within the particle.If 3D space is flattened so that the 4th dimension can be visualised, the particle is leaving the plane of visible 3D space and entering space outside of that 3D space and then returning.Materialising and de-materializing in visible 3D space.

I think that this alternative model also is able to explain many fundamental questions but has some very significant differences from your own. The objections I have read to it so far on this web site seem to be based on misunderstanding of the model (perhaps due to my inadequate explanation) rather than to inadequacy the model itself.

We both see the 4th dimension and its understanding as a crucial element. We both involve motion with that dimension.You suggesting that the dimension itself is expanding carrying matter and light with it and I am suggesting that matter and light are passing along the static dimension.I think that we are both correct in identifying that lack of adequate comprehension of that dimension is the cause of current misunderstandings in physics. Also in identifying that motion of all matter and light is intimately involved with that dimension. I think it is significant that we have independently come to these conclusions.Obviously whether the universe is expanding or contracting are big differences of opinion that will not be easily changed since they are integral to our own models. Therefore I do not see these as rival models but belong to very different theoretical scenarios explaining the universe.The similarity between them, pointed out previously, is however interesting and I think significant.

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

Hello Dr Cosmic Ray ,

You know Ray ,I prefer when people contacts me .I wait nothing of people you know.But I d like Some collaborations to improve my theory but in my optic of course ,I can accept some extrapolations or works but I insist on one thing ,my research is my research in complementarity of course but it's my theory .I am conscious that many people are going to be jealous and...

view entire post

Hello Dr Cosmic Ray ,

You know Ray ,I prefer when people contacts me .I wait nothing of people you know.But I d like Some collaborations to improve my theory but in my optic of course ,I can accept some extrapolations or works but I insist on one thing ,my research is my research in complementarity of course but it's my theory .I am conscious that many people are going to be jealous and nervous against me ,it's not important .The most important is my humanistic sciences center ...the love is the only spiritual truth .And this love is everywhere .

If Mr Malinowski wants some details ,he can contact me if he want ,if he is in his work ,me too and the time is precious.

It s sad someone hijacked his email ...always the human nature ,I know but don't forget one thing ,the truth will be always one day on the road ,the good ,the well winw always .....thus don't worry Mr Malinowski ,you are going to find who hijacked your mail .It's always like that the ultim balance .

When my sciences center will be created ,all are welcome for synergies .

I don't wait anything ,my life has been so difficult since my birthday ,a crazy story ,I am a man now and I see the life differently ,indeed in the past I was too too nice ....of course many people have utilized me for profits ,I thank them ....

my theory is foundamental and will be knew because it's as that simply .

dear Ray ,I repeat but the fractal kissings spheres is not infinite and furthermore is specific in the number and the volume ....I have post many ideas ,and I hope it will be used by some people ....but I say one thing ,if some people try to copy ...I go immediately on media ,because it's my theory ,and I am going to laugh if someone try that .The spherization Theory is global ,math quantum...physic....chem....biology....astronomy ,philosophy..spirituality.....Unified Sphere ....EUREKA .It's too late for the TOE .....THE SPHERIZATION AND ITS ROTATIONS OF SPHERES IS THIS TOE ....BUT WE CAN IMPROVE IT IN COMPLEMENTARITY AND COLLABORATIONS ....

You know Ray ,you are very intelligent ,and I lijke your works because you are a very creative mind and it's the most important with the universal love .

My point of vue to evolve quickly is this one .

The complementarity is better than the individualism and its economic system more the vanity .

Thus implies a spherical collaboration to learn still and still .....if we want change this sad world ,it's in this complementarity .....like in all things.

Hope my universal message will be understood ....I am not better than an other ,I try just to unite people to change this chaotic world .The social responjsability is essential for a scientist because scientists have solutions simply.

Be sure I am going to arrive to create this center and centralize organisms and interesting people....ant act on ground for the third world .That's why I am in several humanist projects ....my friends are numerous and their hearts and ideas are exeptionals .....exeptional like my theory lol ...oh my god ,father of all things ,help me to accept my vanity .....lol

Still one thing for all ,I am not a doctor or a professor ,I have frequented several universities but I stopped before the title.The most important is to learn foundamental works and understand the dynamic around us .

Friendly Dr cosmic Ray ,it's well ,you have your doctorate you ....congratulations .Me I am a crazy man on Earth... lol

Steve

Universal Love and spherization .

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

Hello All,

There is a wonderful book entitled Entanglement by Amir D. Aczel: Entanglement: The Unlikely Story of How Scientists, Mathematicians, and Philosphers Proved Einstein's Spookiest Theory.

At the beginning of each chapter he has quotes which all remind me of MDT's simple beauty, prfound contribution, novel utility, and deep significance:

"Alas, to wear the mantle of...

view entire post

Hello All,

There is a wonderful book entitled Entanglement by Amir D. Aczel: Entanglement: The Unlikely Story of How Scientists, Mathematicians, and Philosphers Proved Einstein's Spookiest Theory.

At the beginning of each chapter he has quotes which all remind me of MDT's simple beauty, prfound contribution, novel utility, and deep significance:

"Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment, you must also be right." --Robert Park

"The mathematics of quantum mechanics is straightforward, but making the connection between the mathematics and an intuitive picture of the physical world is very hard." --Tannoudji

MDT's simple postualte and equation provide a new physical model which exalts an intuitive undertsanding of nonlocality, entanglement, and relativity.

"We choose to examine a phenomenon (teh double-slit experiment) that is imppossible, absoluetly impossible to expalin in any classical way, and which has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality, it contains the only mystery." --Feynman

(MDT's physical model and equation dx4/dt=ic accounts for the double slit mystery, rooted in nonlocality.)

Planck had put forward a new, previously unimagined thought, the thought of the atomistic structure of energy. --Albert Einstein

(By postulating that the expansion of the 4th dimension has a fundamental wavelength of Planck's length, MDT offers a physical model for the quantization of light and energy. Light is but matter surfing the expansion of the fourth dimension)

"The conclusions from Bell's theorem are philosophically startling; either one must totally abandon the realistic philosophy of most working scientists or dramatically revise our concept of space-time." --Abner Shimony and John Clauser

Moving Dimensions Theory provides this new concept of space-time. http://physicsmathforums.com

The underlying expanding fourth dimension gives rise to non-local phenomena.

"For me, then, this is the real problem with quantum theory: the apparently essential conflict between any sharp formulation and fundamental relativity. It may be that a real synthesis of quantum and relativity theories requires not just technical developments but radical conceptual renewal." --John Bell

Moving Dimensions Theory provides this radical conceptual renewal. http://physicsmathforums.com

"Entanglement is not one but rather the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics." --Erwin Schrodinger

MDT provides a physical model for qm's characteristic trait. The fourth dimension's expansion distributes locality; so that two photons separated in the three spatial dimensions may yet be connected in the fourth dimension, provided they were locally connected in the three spatial dimensions to begin with. For all entanglement must derive from a common locality in 3D in the past. And too, it is no mystery that photons never age, as they yet retain a locality in the fourth expanding dimension, where they are yet stationary, as they propagate at c through the three spatial dimensions.

"The discovery of the quantum of action shows us not only the natural limitation of classical physics, but, by throwing a new light upon the old philsophical problem of the objective existence of phenomena indepedently of our observations, confronts us with a situation hitherto unknown in natural science." --Niels Bohr

It is not our observations so much as the independent collapse of wavefunctions that define reality. The fourth dimension distributes locality, and matter caught in this appears as photons. When a photon is measured, or when it blackens a spot on a photographic plate, or when it hits a wall, it is localized as it is no longer in the fourth expanding dimension. There is no need for us to participate in this.

"After long reflection in solitude and meditation, I suddenly had the idea, during the year 1923, that the discovery made by Einstein in 1905 should be generalised by extending it to all material particles and notably to electrons." --de Broglie

As the fourth dimension pervades all, all matter interacts with it, thusly inheriting wavelike properties. Indeed, all movement derives from momenergy's existence, at least in part, in the fourth expanding dimension. Photons alone exist entirely in the fourth expanding dimension,

exhibiting zero rest mass.

“The properties of elementary processes....make it seem almost inevitaebleto formulate a truly quantized theory of radiation”. --Einstein

This is because all radiation is but matter caught upon the fourth expanding dimension which also distributes locality, exalting probabilistic measurementments via the creation of nonlocal probability ditsributions that expand at the rate of c, determined by dx4/dt=ic.

"For me, then, this is the real problem with quantum theory: the apparently essential conflict between any sharp formulation and fundamental relativity. It may be that a real synthesis of quantum and relativity theories requires not just technical developments but radical conceptual renewal." -John Bell

MDT is based upon the radical conceptual renewal, derived straight from Einstein's 1912 Manuscript. Time is not the fourth dimension, but rather a phenomenon that arises because dx4/dt=ic--because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, which aslo accounts for entanglement, thusly uniting relativity and quantum mechanics with a common physical model, while also provideing a physical model for entropy and time and all its arrows and assymmetries.

"The conclusions from Bell's theorem are philosophically startling; either one must totally abandon the realistic philosophy of most working scientists or dramatically revise our concept of space-time." -Abner Shimony and John Clauser

Moving Dimensions Theory provides this new concept of space-time. The vast ambitions of most tenure-track physicists, including string theorists and LQG hypers, causes them to focus on irrelevant, minute questions, and thus, though funded by millions for over thirty years, have not yet been able to string the bow. Deeper, true physicists, such as Abner Shimony and John Clauser are alert to the fact that physics need news ideas.

The expanding fourth dimension gives rise to non-local phenomena and quantum entanglement, as the expanding fourth dimension means that two events separated in the three spatial dimensions can yet appear to be at the exact same place in the fourth dimension. MDT thus provides the new concept of space-time.



"Bohr had an intuitive feeling that Einstein's position, taken serioulsy, would conflict with qunatum mechanics. Buyt it was Bell's theorem which materialized this contradiction." --Alain Aspect

MDT resolves the contradiction. dx4/dt=ic distributes locality, thusly causing qm's nonlocality.

More to come!

Best,

Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

The mathematics of relativity, which has been verified quite extensivesly via experiments, demonstrates that there are four dimensions.

x1=x, x2=y, x3=z, x4=ict

Ergo dx4/dt=ic .

I agree that there is no need for higher dimensions.

Math can be very pretty, but Einstein reminds us that physicists ought pursue *physics,* founded in a physical reality--”Mathematics are well...

view entire post

The mathematics of relativity, which has been verified quite extensivesly via experiments, demonstrates that there are four dimensions.

x1=x, x2=y, x3=z, x4=ict

Ergo dx4/dt=ic .

I agree that there is no need for higher dimensions.

Math can be very pretty, but Einstein reminds us that physicists ought pursue *physics,* founded in a physical reality--”Mathematics are well and good but nature keeps dragging us around by the nose.”“ “It is anomalous to replace the four-dimensional continuum by a five-dimensional one and then subsequently to tie up artificially one of those five dimensions in order to account for the fact that it does not manifest itself.” –Einstein to Paul Ehrenfest. Just think what Einstein would have said about entire parallel universes/muliverses/landscapes we cannot see! With an heroic spirit, MDT takes us back to origin of modern physics--to the original papers on relativity and QM, and it humbles itself upon thatmountaintop. And when it comes on down, off the shoulders of relativity and QM's giants, MDT presents us with a fundamental view of reality that conforms to all experimental evidence, while not only resolving the paradoxes of the non-locality of the EPR effect and seemingly frozen time in Godel’s block universe, but also unifying the resolution of both physical curiosities within a simple physical postulate--the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, or dx4/dt = ic.

In a sense, this is the first theory to predict QM's nonlocality and entanglement, by postulating that the fourth dimension is inherently nonlocal via its expansion--an empirical fact that the timeless, ageless, nonlocal photon agrees with, as the photon surfs the fourth expanding dimension. And not only does MDT predict this, but it also provides a *physical* model for entropy and time and all its arrows and assymetries throughout all realms. And finally, all of relativity may be derived from MDT's simple postulate, as it is inmy paper--the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatialdimensions--dx4/dt = ic. A postulate and an equation representing a novel *physical* feature of our universe--a fourth expanding dimension--and the natural, subsequent prediction of all of relativity, qm's nonlocality, entropy,time's arrows and assymetries in all realms, and quantum entanglement. “I don't believe in mathematics.” Quoted in Carl Seelig. Albert Einstein. “Do not worry about your difficulties in mathematics, I assure you that mine are greater.” --Einstein “Geometry is not true, it is advantageous.” --Jules H. Poincare MDT’s Confession/Apology I was hoping for a bit of a dialogue, but too, the lack of dialogue will be useful to historians of science in understanding and characterizing why our era has seen no progress in theoretical physics, despite unprecedented funding and resources. Never before have so many been paid so much to advance physics so little.Indeed, future historians will see that overfunding tends to lead to sociological constructs that exalt consensus building rooted not in logic, reason, and physics--not in foundational questions; but in fashion and politics which obscure the foundational spirits, papers, and questions. So it is that the Anthropic Principle and tiny, little vibrating strings are exaltedover *physical* contemplations and questions, *physical* principles, and*physical* models such as MDT: the fourth dimension is expanding relative tothree spatial dimensions, or dx4/dt=ic. For the first time in the history of relativity, change is woven into the fundamental fabric of spacetime; and a deeper physical invariant is shown to underlie relativity and quantum entanglement and nonlocality, in addition to time and all its arrows and asymmetries, and entropy, as well as Huygens' and Heisenbergs' principles. In many ways Galileo had it easy, because at least the Inquisition in his day wasn't posing as physicists interested in science. And Max Planck had it easy too, as he noted, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but ratherbecause its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that isfamiliar with it.”

But in Plancks' time, the opponents were generally a generation of successfulscientists who had risen to the pinnacles of their profession via science--not bypolitics. So today's non-opponents of MDT are anti-theorists bolstered by state-funded crackpot indexes and anthropic principle politics--”we havetenure/funding because we are smarter than you because if we weren't smarter than you, we wouldn't have tenure/funding. Ergo we are smarter than you,” iswhat they announce at their lavish conferences, reformulating the anthropic principle to fit the latest “flavor of the week” of their unchanging anti-theory regimes, which have frozen physics in a block universe. Max Born wrote, “All great discoveries in experimental physics have been made due to the intuition of men who made free use of models which for them were not products of the imagination but representations of real things.” And yet, today, the quantum gravity regimes have rejected simple physical models along with the belief that the math ought represent *real* things. And now, they are even willing to forget time, space, reason, words, dialogue,physics, and physicists--to keep their perpetual motion funding apparati moving--even as time remains frozen. And thus, despite hundreds of millions in funding, there is no quantum gravity. There is no graviton, nor any consistent theory of quantum gravity. Instead, there are literally an infinite number of string theories,and a fair amount of loop-quantum theories, none of which quantize gravity in any finite, consistent way; let alone in any way that makes predictions that can betested. There is no proof whatsover for tiny, vibrating strings, nor atoms of space and time, nor twistors, nor tiny little loops, nor multiverses, nor hyperspace, nor parallel universes, nor bouncing universes--all of which grace the cover of Scientific American as sycophant students are trained to call true physicists seeking *physical* models and *physical* truths crackpots. And the Greats themselves--Nobel Laureates--both living and dead, have spoken out against such pseudo-science and snarky mathematical handwaving, which has become a religion that has replaced physics, thusly bringing progress to a halt. “Books on physics are full of complicated mathematical formulae. But thoughtand ideas, not formulae, are the beginning of every physical theory.” --Einstein/Infeld, The Evolution of Physics Instead of classical, rugged physics on the higher plain of physical reality, we get communal, political efforts which end up opposing progress in physics, as they oppose the individual heroic spirit by which all higher physical truths are ultimately apprehended. Science is more of an art than a science, and it always seems to advance inmanners never before anticipated by the establishment, as Planck stated. Onecannot legislate, nor vote on, nor dictate the advancement of science by fiat. Donot take my word for it. “One cannot pray a lie,” as Mark Twain once said. “New scientific ideas never spring from a communal body, however organized, but rather from the head of an individually inspired researcher who struggles with his problems in lonely thought and unites all his thought on one single pointwhich is his whole world for the moment.” --Max Planck And again we see the primacy of the honest individual in the classic, epic hero's journey!“A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man.” --Joseph Campbell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth And the Nobel Laureate economist F.A. Hayek agrees! “The tragedy of collectivist thought is that, while it starts out to make reasonsupreme, it ends by destroying reason because it misconceives the process on which the growth of reason depends. It may indeed be said that it is the paradox of all collectivist doctrine and its demands for “conscious” control or “conscious”planning that they necessarily lead to the demand that the mind of some individual should rule supreme—while only the individualist approach to social phenomena makes us recognize the superindividual forces which guide the growth of reason. Individualism is thus an attitude of humility before this socialprocess and of tolerance to other opinions and is the exact opposite of that intellectual hubris which is at the root of the demand for comprehensive directionof social purpose.” –F.A. Hayek, The End of Truth, The Road to SerfdomAlong comes a scientist who agrees with the philosophy of Einstein and Max Born and Planck. Along comes a physicist who agrees with Wheeler, and Feynman, and Glashow, and Godel, and Bohr, and Gamow--wishing that he could watch old Westerns with Bohr and Gamow. Along comes a scientist whoagrees with Nobel Laureate Robert Laughlin and Nobel Laureate F.A. Hayek, with Newton and Dirac, with Heisenberg and Minkowski, with the great mythologist Joseph Campbell. Along comes a scientist with simple theory that has a simple postulate and equation from which all of relativity may be derived; from which entropy naturally arises, and which accounts for time and all its arrows and assymetries across all realms, while also providing a *physical* model for entanglement and nonlocality, as well as a *physical* model for Huygens' principle and the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle. Not only does the multi-billion-dollar physics establishment ignore it, but they have so much funding, that they can hire grad students and professors to snark the theory, so asto defend their perpetual-motion NSF money machines and religions ofwormholes, time warps, quantum gravity, multiverses, tiny, vibrating strings, and geometric mysticism/PR/hype, which Moving Dimensions Theory has no needfor, as it concerns itself with physics and physical reality--with logic, reason, and simple postulates and equations that represent a hitherto unsung universalinvariant--the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at c. What we have here is a modern-day Inquisition, except that it is even more dangerous, as at least Galileo's Inquisition weren't claiming science's throne.

Check out: http://www.jklarsen.com/myblog/index.php?blog=6&title=confes
sion_of_galileo_galilei&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1 Where it is reported:

“In 1633, physicist Galileo

Galilei was brought before the Roman Inquisition. Tried on “vehement suspicion of heresy,” Galileo was forced to swear that he “abjured, cursed and detested” the errors of his work, whichextended the findings of the Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus that the Earth Moves.” Now I have postulated that the fourth dimension expands relative to the three spatial dimensions, and not one person in the entire quantum gravity regime has ever, ever, taken the time to comment on my theory. It's not like MDT is a secret,so their silence puzzles the will. It would be one thing if quantum gravity/string theory were smashing successes--then, naturally, Rovelli/Carol et al. would all be busy partying like rock stars and flying to conferences and awards ceremonies in Aspen and Hawaii. But with the utter failure of the anti-theory regimes, for decade after decade, surely they oughthave a few moments to assess the great and natural success of the brand new directions proposed by MDT. “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” --Albert Einstein But I realize, that with tenure and titles to worry about in their aging anti-theoryregimes; perhaps before commenting on MDT, they are all waiting for a confession, so as to make the theory “safe” for discussion in polite circles. I even thought of emailing Ed Witten and asking him to come out with a press release in which he states that the M in M-Theory stands for Moving Dimensions. Well, here is my confession, based on Galileo's, which can be enjoyed here:

http://www.jklarsen.com/myblog/index.php?blog=6&title=confes
sion_of_galileo_galilei&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

I, Dr. E, son of the late Vincenzio Galilei of Florence, aged 70 years, tried personally by this court, and kneeling before You, the most Eminent Antitheorists and Reverend Lord Cardinals of M-Theory Multiverses,Inquisitors-General throughout the Quantum Gravity Republic against heretical depravity, having before my eyes the Most Holy Gospels of an Elegant Universe,Not Even Wrong, and The Trouble With Physics, and laying on them my own hands; I swear that I have always believed, I believe now, and with Ed Witten's help I will in future believe all which the Holy Quantum Gravity and M-Theory Church doth hold, preach, teach, and hype to the press, including E-8 and next year's E-9 anti-theory. But since I, after having been admonished by this Holy Office entirely to abandon the false opinion that the fourth dimension expands relative to the three spatial dimensions, and that quantum mechanics' entanglement, nonlocality,entropy, relativity itself, time and all its arrows and assymetries across all realms, the gravitational slowing of clocks and time, Huygens' Principle, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, probability, and all the dualities (space-time, wave-particle, mass-energy) derive from this simple principle of MDT and its equation dx4/dt=ic, and that I was neither to hold, defend, nor teach in any manner whatever, either orally or in writing, the said false doctrine; and after having received a notification that the said doctrine is contrary to the Holy Writ of Hyperspace, I did write and cause to be printed a blog and forum in which I treatof the said already condemned MDT doctrine, and bring forward arguments of much efficacy in its favour, without arriving at any solution: I have been judgedvehemently suspected of heresy, that is, of having held and believed that the fourth dimension's expansion is the universe's fundamental invariant and the cause of all time and motion, and that the block universe does not exist and time is not the fourth dimension, but that time is a parameter that emerges because thefourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at c, thatchange is and ought be woven into the fundamental fabric of space-time with dx4/dt=ic, and that the fourth dimension, like the earth, does move. Nevertheless, wishing to remove from the minds of your Tenured Eminences and all faithful LQGers and String Theorists this vehement suspicion reasonablyconceived against me, I abjure with sincere heart and unfeigned faith, I curse and detest the said errors and heresies, and generally all and every error and sect contrary to the Holy Quantum Gravity Regimes, and I am ready to forget time,forget space, and forget physical reality, while embracing multiverses and tiny, vibrating strings. And I swear that for the future I will neither say nor assert in speaking or writing such things as may bring upon me similar suspicion; and if I know any heretic who speaks out against tiny, vibrating branes, anti-theories, or atoms of space and time, or one suspected of heresy, I will denounce him to this Holy Office of Time Travel, or to the Inquisitor of Wormholes and Ordinary of the place in which I may be, which will of course be in the block universe, whichMDT falsely liberated us from, while falsely granting us free will and freethought, as it falsely unfroze time. I hereby remit all future free will, as I return to the block universe with the hopes of receiving the funding that is a part of my pre-Ordained future, as a member of the Quantum Gravity Church in this multiverse--this subset of the landscape--that the Gods of the Anthropic Principle granted us, while declaring that we should receive infinite funding for our fortitude in service to the Lords of the Landscape. I also swear and promise to adopt and observe entirely all the penances whichhave been or may be by this Holy Office of Loops imposed on me. And if I contravene any of these said promises, protests, or oaths, (which Ed Wittenforbid!) I submit myself to all the pains and penalties which by the SacredCanons of String Theory and other Decrees of D-branes general and particular are against such offenders imposed and promulgated. So help me God and the Holy Warped Passages/The Trouble With Physics/10^99 indecipherablearxiv.org papers--which I touch with my own hands. I, Dr. E, aforesaid have abjured, sworn, and promised, and hold myself bound asabove; and in token of the truth, with my own hand have subscribed the present schedule of my abjuration, and have recited it word by word. In America, at the Convent della M-Theory, this 8th day of December, 2008, in this parallel universe. I, Dr. E, have abjured as above, with my own hand.” And as I'm walking away to serve out my house arrest and exile form the academy after this confession, I turn to the crowd that had gathered to hear meread it and smile. And I say, “And yet it--the fourth dimension--moves! Eppur si muove!”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_pur_si_muove Best, Dr. E (The Real McCoy)

“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.” –Galileo Galilei

“Books on physics are full of complicated mathematical formulae. But thought and ideas, not formulae, are the beginning of every physicaltheory.” --Einstein/Infeld, The Evolution of Physics

Best,

Dr. E

There is no stopping an idea whose time has come: dx4/dt=ic.

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

Hello!

The new essay contest "What is possible and impossible in physics?" suggests an essay titled:

"What is possible in physics? Physics!"

Or "Physics is possible in physics."

Or "Physics: The New Frontier of Physics!"

Right away the essay, by devoting itself to physics and physical reality, would debunk strings, lqg, wormholes, time machines, multiverses, the...

view entire post

Hello!

The new essay contest "What is possible and impossible in physics?" suggests an essay titled:

"What is possible in physics? Physics!"

Or "Physics is possible in physics."

Or "Physics: The New Frontier of Physics!"

Right away the essay, by devoting itself to physics and physical reality, would debunk strings, lqg, wormholes, time machines, multiverses, the anthropic principle, the gravitgon, giant voids which are unmistakable imprints of universes just beyond our own, and geometric langlands, amongst other well-funded "proifessional" research.

What would be left?

Physics!

*Physical* theories celebrating hitherto unsung *physical* features of the universe such as a fourth expanding dimension, unifying disparate physical phenomena in simple physical model, would become the focus, as all the flotsam and jetsam sank away into time's grey.

"A physical theory can be satisfactory only if its structures are composed of elementary foundations. The theory of relativity is ultimately as little satisfactory as, for example, classical thermodynamics was before Boltzmann had interpreted the entropy as probability. –Einstein in a letter to Arnold Sommerfield on January 14th, 1908. CPAE, Vol. 5, Doc. 73:" "When two systems, of which we know the states by their respective representatives, enter into temporary physical interaction due to known forces between them, and when after a time of mutual influence the systems separate again, then they can no longer be described in the same way as before, viz. by endowing each of them with a representative of its own. I would not call that one but rather the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics, the one that enforces its entire departure from classical lines of thought. By the interaction the two representatives [the quantum states] have become entangled." –Schrödinger

Moving Dimensions Theory’s simple postulate, physical model, and equation account for both “relativity’s elementary foundations,” which Einstein stated we yet needed, and Schrödinger’s “characteristic trait” of quantum mechanics—entanglement.

MDT: The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, or dx4/dt=ic.

"Entanglement is not one but rather the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics." --Erwin Schrodinger

MDT provides a physical model for qm's characteristic trait. The fourth dimension's expansion distributes locality; so that two photons separated in the three spatial dimensions may yet be connected in the fourth dimension, provided they were locally connected in the three spatial dimensions to begin with. For all entanglement must derive from a common locality in 3D in the past. And too, it is no mystery that photons never age, as they yet retain a locality in the fourth expanding dimension, where they are yet stationary, as they propagate at c through the three spatial dimensions.

"The discovery of the quantum of action shows us not only the natural limitation of classical physics, but, by throwing a new light upon the old philsophical problem of the objective existence of phenomena indepedently of our observations, confronts us with a situation hitherto unknown in natural science." --Niels Bohr

It is not our observations so much as the independent collapse of wavefunctions that define reality. The fourth dimension distributes locality, and matter caught in this appears as photons. When a photon is measured, or when it blackens a spot on a photographic plate, or when it hits a wall, it is localized as it is no longer in the fourth expanding dimension. There is no need for us to participate in this.

"After long reflection in solitude and meditation, I suddenly had the idea, during the year 1923, that the discovery made by Einstein in 1905 should be generalised by extending it to all material particles and notably to electrons." --de Broglie

As the fourth dimension pervades all, all matter interacts with it, thusly inheriting wavelike properties. Indeed, all movement derives from momenergy's existence, at least in part, in the fourth expanding dimension. Photons alone exist entirely in the fourth expanding dimension,

exhibiting zero rest mass.

“The properties of elementary processes....make it seem almost inevitaebleto formulate a truly quantized theory of radiation”. --Einstein

This is because all radiation is but matter caught upon the fourth expanding dimension which also distributes locality, exalting probabilistic measurementments via the creation of nonlocal probability ditsributions that expand at the rate of c, determined by dx4/dt=ic.

"For me, then, this is the real problem with quantum theory: the apparently essential conflict between any sharp formulation and fundamental relativity. It may be that a real synthesis of quantum and relativity theories requires not just technical developments but radical conceptual renewal." -John Bell

MDT is based upon the radical conceptual renewal, derived straight from Einstein's 1912 Manuscript. Time is not the fourth dimension, but rather a phenomenon that arises because dx4/dt=ic--because the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions, which aslo accounts for entanglement, thusly uniting relativity and quantum mechanics with a common physical model, while also provideing a physical model for entropy and time and all its arrows and assymmetries.

"The conclusions from Bell's theorem are philosophically startling; either one must totally abandon the realistic philosophy of most working scientists or dramatically revise our concept of space-time." -Abner Shimony and John Clauser

Moving Dimensions Theory provides this new concept of space-time. The vast ambitions of most tenure-track physicists, including string theorists and LQG hypers, causes them to focus on irrelevant, minute questions, and thus, though funded by millions for over thirty years, have not yet been able to string the bow. Deeper, true physicists, such as Abner Shimony and John Clauser are alert to the fact that physics need news ideas.

The expanding fourth dimension gives rise to non-local phenomena and quantum entanglement, as the expanding fourth dimension means that two events separated in the three spatial dimensions can yet appear to be at the exact same place in the fourth dimension. MDT thus provides the new concept of space-time.

"Bohr had an intuitive feeling that Einstein's position, taken serioulsy, would conflict with qunatum mechanics. Buyt it was Bell's theorem which materialized this contradiction." --Alain Aspect

MDT resolves the contradiction. dx4/dt=ic distributes locality, thusly causing qm's nonlocality and probabilistic nature, while also underlying time and all its arrows and assymetries, entropy, the contsancy of c, entanglement, relativity; while also being the foundational cause of all motion; and limiting all motion to but one velocity of c through space-time.

In the next 300 years of fqxi contests, the hopes are that one fqxi insider may read and comment on MDT, instead of exalting multiverses, anti-theories, and giant voids (which suck in funding) which suppodedly offer "unmistakable imprints" of universes just beyond the edge of our own.

The new MDT paper will also focus on how MDT accounts for the time dilation in GPS--something which Chris Kennedy has shown is yet to be accomplished.

Everyone should read Chris Kennedy's awesome paper and discuss! http://www.cheely.com/second_T.pdf

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

Please see attached paper!

“More intellectual curiosity, versatility and yen for physics than Elliot McGucken’s I have never seen in any senior or graduate student. . . .” –John Archibald Wheeler, Princeton University

On Deriving Relativity & Entanglement from MDT’s Fundamental Physical Reality: dx4/dt=ic

What is Ultimately Possible in Physics? Physics! A Hero’s Journey with...

view entire post

Please see attached paper!

“More intellectual curiosity, versatility and yen for physics than Elliot McGucken’s I have never seen in any senior or graduate student. . . .” –John Archibald Wheeler, Princeton University

On Deriving Relativity & Entanglement from MDT’s Fundamental Physical Reality: dx4/dt=ic

What is Ultimately Possible in Physics? Physics! A Hero’s Journey with Galileo, Newton, Faraday, Maxwell, Planck, Einstein, Schrodinger, Bohr, and the Greats towards Moving Dimensions Theory’s dx4/dt=ic. E pur si muove!

by Dr. Elliot McGucken

dx4/dt=ic

“Equations are more important to me, because politics is for the present, but an equation is something for eternity.” –Albert Einstein

ABSTRACT:

Over the past few decades prominent physicists have noted that physics has diverged away from its classical, heroic journey traditionally defined by describing, fathoming, and characterizing foundational truths of physical reality via simple, elegant, logically-consistent postulates and equations humbling themselves before empirical reality. Herein the spirit of physics is again exalted by the heroic words of the Greats—by Galileo, Newton, Faraday, Maxwell, Planck, Einstein, Bohr, and Schrodinger—the Founding Fathers upon whose shoulders physics stands. And from that pinnacle, a novel physical theory is proposed, complete with a novel physical model celebrating a hitherto unsung universal invariant and an equation reflecting the foundational physical reality of a fourth dimension expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, or dx4/dt=ic, providing both the “elementary foundations” for relativity which Einstein yet sought and QM’s “characteristic trait”—entanglement, and its nonlocal, probabilistic nature. From MDT’s experimentally-verified equation relativity is derived while time is unfrozen and free will exalted, while a physical model accounting for quantum nonlocality is presented. Entropy, Huygens’ Principle; the wave/particle, energy/mass, space/time, and E/B dualities; and time and all its arrows and asymmetries emerge from a common, foundational physical model. MDT exalts Einstein’s “empirical facts,” “naturalness,” and “logical simplicity.” For the first time in the history of relativity, change is woven into the fabric of space-time, and the timeless, ageless, massless, nonlocal photon of Galileo’s/Einstein’s “empirical world” is explained via a foundational physical model, alongside the fact that c is constant, independent of the source, and the maximum velocity in the universe, as well as the only velocity through space-time. The empirical GPS clocks’ time dilation/twins paradox is resolved by proposing a frame of absolute rest—the three spatial dimensions, and a frame of absolute motion—the fourth expanding dimension upon which ageless photons of zero rest mass surf; which underlie and give rise to Einstein’s Principle of Relativity.

When the solution is simple, God is answering. –Einstein

Galileo, Newton, and Einstein: The Heroic Physicists

Time as an Emergent Phenomenon & Deriving Einstein’s Relativity from Moving Dimensions Theory’s dx4/dt=ic: Traveling Back to the Heroic Age of Physics

In Memory of John Archibald Wheeler

by Dr. Elliot McGucken

MDT’s postulate: The fourth dimensions is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at c. MDT’s equation: dx4/dt=ic.

Simple, logical proofs of MDT:

MDT PROOF#1: Relativity tells us that a timeless, ageless photon remains in one place in the fourth dimension. Quantum mechanics tells us that a photon propagates as a spherically-symmetric expanding wavefront at the velocity of c. Ergo, the fourth dimension must be expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, in a spherically-symmetric manner. The expansion of the fourth dimension is the source of nonlocality, entanglement, time and all its arrows and asymmetries, c, relativity, entropy, free will, and all motion, change, and measurement, for no measurement can be made without change. For the first time in the history of relativity, change has been wedded to the fundamental fabric of spacetime in MDT.

MDT PROOF#2: Einstein (1912 Man. on Rel.) and Minkowski wrote x4=ict. Ergo dx4/dt=ic.

MDT PROOF#3: The only way to stay stationary in the three spatial dimensions is to move at c through the fourth dimension. The only way to stay stationary in the fourth dimension is to move at c through the three spatial dimensions. Ergo the fourth dimension is moving at c relative to the three spatial dimensions.

MDT twitter proof (limited to 140 characters): SR: photon is stationary in 4th dimension. QM: photon is probability wave expanding @ c. Ergo: 4th dimension expands @ c & MDT: dx4/dt=ic –from http://twitter.com/45surf

ABSTRACT

In his 1912 Manuscript on Relativity, Einstein never stated that time is the fourth dimension, but rather he wrote x4 = ict. The fourth dimension is not time, but ict. Despite this, prominent physicists have oft equated time and the fourth dimension, leading to un-resolvable paradoxes and confusion regarding time’s physical nature, as physicists mistakenly projected properties of the three spatial dimensions onto a time dimension, resulting in curious concepts including frozen time and block universes in which the past and future are omni-present, thusly denying free will, while implying the possibility of time travel into the past, which visitors from the future have yet to verify. Beginning with the postulate that time is an emergent phenomenon resulting from a fourth dimension expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions at the rate of c, diverse phenomena from relativity, quantum mechanics, and statistical mechanics are accounted for and unified with a hitherto unsung universal invariant dx4/dt=ic. Time dilation, the equivalence of mass and energy, quantum entanglement, nonlocality, wave-particle duality, and entropy are shown to arise from a common, deeper physical reality expressed with dx4/dt=ic. This postulate and equation, from which Einstein’s relativity is derived, presents a fundamental model accounting for the emergence of time, the constant velocity of light, the fact that the maximum velocity is c, and the fact that c is independent of the velocity of the source, as photons are but matter surfing a fourth expanding dimension. In general relativity, Einstein showed that the dimensions themselves could bend, curve, and move. The present theory extends this principle, postulating that the fourth dimension is moving independently of the three spatial dimensions, distributing locality and fathering time. This physical model underlies and accounts for time in quantum mechanics, relativity, and statistical mechanics, as well as entropy, the universe’s expansion, and time’s arrows and asymmetries in all arenas.

“More intellectual curiosity, versatility and yen for physics than Elliot McGucken’s I have never seen in any senior or graduate student. . . Originality, powerful motivation, and a can-do spirit make me think that McGucken is a top bet for graduate school in physics. . . I say this on the basis of close contacts with him over the past year and a half. . . I gave him as an independent task to figure out the time factor in the standard Schwarzchild expression around a spherically- symmetric center of attraction. I gave him the proofs of my new general-audience, calculus-free book on general relativity, A Journey Into Gravity and Space Time. There the space part of the Schwarzchild geometric is worked out by purely geometric methods. “Can you, by poor-man’s reasoning, derive what I never have, the time part?” He could and did, and wrote it all up in a beautifully clear account. . . .his second junior paper . . .entitled Within a Context, was done with another advisor, and dealt with an entirely different part of physics, the Einstein-Rosen-Podolsky experiment and delayed choice experiments in general. . . this paper was so outstanding. . . I am absolutely delighted that this semester McGucken is doing a project with the cyclotron group on time reversal asymmetry. Electronics, machine-shop work and making equipment function are things in which he now revels. But he revels in Shakespeare, too. Acting the part of Prospero in the Tempest. . . ” --John Archibald Wheeler, Princeton University, Recommendation for Elliot McGucken for Admission to Graduate School of Physics

Dr. Elliot McGucken’s Biography: “Dr. E” received a B.A. in physics from Princeton University and a Ph.D. in physics from UNC Chapel Hill, where his research on an artificial retina, which is now helping the blind see, appeared in Business Week and Popular Science and was awarded a Merrill Lynch Innovations Grant. While at Princeton, McGucken worked on projects concerning quantum mechanics and general relativity with the late John A. Wheeler, and the projects combined to form an appendix treating time as an emergent phenomenon in his dissertation. McGucken is writing a book for the Artistic Entrepreneurship & Technology (artsentrepreneurship.com) curriculum he created.

Please see attached paper!

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

show all replies (1 not shown)

hide replies

show all replies (5 not shown)