Any Physics Enthusiasts?
 

I have published a new theory of Relativity, called the Quantum Angular Offset Theory of Relativity.

It's quite complicated, but here are a few key points and summary. If anyone enjoys popular physics and wants to challenge themselves, I invite you to read the document. I'm currently working with some mathematicians on the final geometry proofs, but the math isn't necessary to understand the theory from the layman's perspective.

LINK WHERE YOU CAN DOWNLOAD QAO Theory of Relativity

What is the speed of light from the perspective of a photon of light? It is infinite. It has moved the entire distance through space with the passage of zero time.

Einstein's Relativity relies on the premise that light in a vacuum is a constant for all observers regardless of the motion of the light source.

There is an exception to this rule that Einstein did not note: Light itself will measure it's speed to be different from all normal matter. This leads me to the following notions:

Exceptional Relativity:

1- All normal mass with identical Event Counts will observe the speed of light in a vacuum to be a constant, and;
2- A photon in a vacuum will always measure its own speed to be infinite.

The question that needs to be answered is that if light measures the speed of light to be infinity, then why isn't the speed of light always infinite for other observers?

A short answer is that the speed of light is both infinite and finite - and this is a result of what I call the Quantum Angular Offset - which basically means that geometric angles are subject to the same uncertainty principle as other measurements. This means that when light moves away from a source, it is moving at an angle that is known only within a margin of error.

Here is my preface, and from here, I invite anyone who is interested to take a read. I wrote this Theory to be accessible to people who are science enthusiasts as well as actual physicists, but nevertheless, it does get a bit complicated :)


â??The Universe is woven together by two equivalent types of dimensions: Spatial and Temporal. The dimensions are distinguished by the property that â??Passageâ?? through a Temporal dimension is a function of mass, whereas â??Movementâ?? through a Spatial dimension is a function of energy. Though the Spatial and Temporal dimensions are closely (but not perfectly) bound together at the quantum level by gravity, the dimensions exist in very different forms from each other. Spatial dimensions can be thought of as energy dimensions, and Temporal dimensions as mass dimensions.

Gravity is a charged force that is expressed by the dimension themselves - attracting unlike dimension-types to each other, and repelling like dimension types away from one-another. It is this force that collapses the three spatial dimensions into the shape of lines, and orients those lines at right-angles to one another (by like-charge repulsion) while holding them â??in-orbitâ?� (by dislike-charge attraction) close-to, but not on top of, each other and the Time dimension (i.e. within a Quantum Sphere).

There is an absolute compass to the universe which sets out a specific Root set of axes - aligning the Time dimension uniformly, everywhere throughout spacetime. This compass is validly reestablished at every Event in spacetime. In the absence of mass, the three Spatial dimensions are offset from each other at right angles due to the repulsive like-force of gravity; however, the Spatial axes themselves have no set universal orientation, only relative orientation, and thus the spatial-axes system is freely rotated.

All particles must be able to determine a distinct location for themselves in spacetime in order to exist in spacetime; and particles must be able do to this with only the information they have about themselves.â?�

I like the sensation of money entering my bank account

That's the extent of my interest in physics

So confusing. Please explain through song.

Re: photons of light, just like they don't experience time, they don't experience movement either right?

Also, isn't your quantum angular offset answered by perspective? Time and speed depend on from where and what perspwctive it's measured from right?

Just asking.

Used to love math and physics in college. But reading that now just hurts my brain.

Not quite. Photons don't experience time, but they do "experience" movement. From the perspective of a photon of light, it will move the entire distance from its origination to its final destination as "X number of light years travelled" in zero time. That instantaneous movement through space is infinite speed.

The QAO is not answered by perspective. This is much harder to summarize in a paragraph, since I have a dozen pages devoted to explaining it, but the simple notion is that in four dimensional spacetime, everything moves at a relative angle to everything else. If you measure two objects, they will have a definite perspective. From that measurement, things are absolute (according to current physics) but I contend that they are absolute subject to uncertainty, which means we can never actually measure their relative motion with certainty. This means that even infinite speed is not able to be calculated with certainty, and that uncertainty is what gives light a finite speed when measured by mass. (lol, best I could do in the space provided).

I think I see what you're stating now. Your qao accounts for the uncertainty in perspective?

Yes, that is one aspect of what I've put forward. And when you realize that it is from this QAO that light gets its measurable, constant speed, then the mystery is solved and all kinds of other answers - the true nature of gravity for example - become very clear.

I'm now mired in the math proofs, but everything does balance, so I'm getting close to sending this out to the physics journals for publication :)

Help! I'm lost. If Photons don't experience time, then how can they move? And since we know that light can travel 186,000 miles in 1 second, doesn't that 1 second count as time?

Excellent thread and this is Impressive!All I know is the Moon doesn't exist and in reality is just a giant mirror reflecting the sun.

BUT ...Great stuff and I hope you get published! :thumbsup

Hey, good luck. Is there a non-pdf version, I'd be interested in reading it.

I'm curious, what is the highest level of formal physics and math education you studied at?

You should post this same post on Stack Exchange Physics Stack Exchange You'll get honest knowledgeable feedback there

I like to read about physics but it's way over my head, I am thrilled when I just get the gist of things like gravitational waves thanks to good science writers who can explain concepts in a way an average person can understand.

Oh, that's a good suggestion. I'm so used to just posting stuff here on GFY that I wasn't really thinking about putting it on Stack Exchange. I shall do it!

That's the beauty. For all observers that are not moving at the speed of light, they will agree with you that light will always move ~186,000 miles in one second. But from the perspective of the photon itself, it will not experience any time passage. If it had a clock, the clock would show no time at all transpires for it from the "time" it's born until the "time" it dies, zero time passes.

One other way to think about it is like this: when we look through a telescope, we see an image that is made up of photons that have travelled the universe. If we look very far away, we can see back in time - like a billion years ago for example - by looking at a system a billion light-years distant. We observe the photons just at they were when they were created. They "believe" they are giving current information to our telescope because no time has passed for them.

wow... crazy shit.

I think what really intrigued me was the cone graph with y being space, x being time, and any vertex going in any direction... so what's z? Time space perspective?

But why a cone then? If some travel 5 million miles in 1 second, and others travel 30 million miles in 1 second... at the bottom of the cone you can have zero travelling anywhere. It has to have no cone for concept to work.

Edit: Nevermind, you cited that as flaws in your theory.

"There are multiple inherent flaws in this representation; however, the most obvious of
these is that we have assigned arbitrary units of measurement to the two axes: Space is
measured in terms of distance per second (d/t) and Time is measured in terms of seconds
(thus always yielding one second of distance in one second, which is totally meaningless
– producing a 45-degree angle). "

Where did you get your education from? I will read the full thesis at some point.

this is sounding eerily like my understanding of my life accomplishments vs my parents understanding of my life accomplishments.

I did undergraduate at UCLA, but my theoretical physics education is all informal. It's been a passion of mine for the past decade or so.

So my stab:

Space is infinite.
Stars are center of gravity for each solar system.
All time is dependant on center of star/sun/gravity
All x, y, and z components are time.
The 4th dimension is space.
You can leave center of sun and return 4 billion years later and no time elapsed because you returned to 0,0,0,0 point.
All solar systems (i.e. ours), revolves around the sun/star. We have a gravitational pull within. Any solar system adjacent has same qualities.
Black Holes also exist between.
You can travel between solar systems by gravitational pull from sun to break out of solar system and be injected into another solar system (through black hole if lucky).
Time only matters at the center of each solar system though. Because time goes in x, y, z and direction. Space is a function of time and the z' function.

Time is complicated to calculate on earth because we are a distance from center of gravity, sun, so it really doesn't work except for what has been accepted.

What do you think?

I like physics, but it doesn't like me...

So when can I see you accept the Nobel Prize in physics?

Keep it up :thumbsup

Pussy filled with honey viscosity 8-10 Pa.s in cP 8k-10 have a cock approaching with speed of 6,8988m/s which is covered with chocolate syrup cP 22k-24k .Cock touches the A spot of the pussy at 12:46:98 what time will cock reach its end destination if length of a cock is 23cm and pressure outside is 1007,0 mb ?
And what will be the highest speed of a cock before it reaches the end?

So then are you postulating that, within the light cone of an event, that from the photon's perspective, it exists at all possible points in the light cone simultaneously?




.

How the universe works doesn't really interest me ...

Loving the far fetched possibility that a history changing scientific theory may be first published in the GFY Journal Main Forum rather than one of those old stodgy peer reviewed academic publications ;)

Gravity sucks!

No, not to my knowledge. Have you looked up the yellow pages?

I am into advanced math (even if not up to read string theory stuff in arXiv.org e-Print archive like it is gfy thread, but I do read arXiv.org e-Print archive daily) and... your 50+ pages document misses the math formulas. This make it more difficult to verify or understand the whole thing. You state "I am admittedly over my head when it comes to providing mathematical proof of the Theory from this point". Probably everyone else at GFY too.

So I also suggest you post that in Physics Stack Exchange and give us here the URL of the post so we can follow. Also, post here: Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community and http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/6-physics/ in the proper section, again give us the URL so we follow.

By the way, even with lots of math (correct one) it is difficult to understand stuff at times. For example Shinichi Mochizuki's Inter-universal Teichmüller theory (yes, I've read it, understood 1%):

http://www.nature.com/news/the-bigge...-proof-1.18509
https://www.quantamagazine.org/20151...for-abc-proof/
http://phys.org/news/2015-12-math-mi...ure-proof.html
https://www.reddit.com/r/math/commen...of_series_of/?

i bet this will go for Nobel prize!

here's an article about photons/light not experiencing time or distance Does Light Experience Time? - Universe Today

I don't understand it really, a photon has no mind, so it's impossible for it to know what time and distance are. The speed of light is a known fact and a constant in physics but that's light in a vacuum - we don't live in a vacuum down here on Earth, light also doesn't travel at that speed in different types of matter i.e. Water

"But for light itself, which is already moving at light speedâ?¦ You guessed it, the photons reach zero distance and zero time." :helpme

Einstein was such a freak, I don't even know how his mind asked the questions that led to his theories of special and general relativity. We hadn't even fired a rocket or anything into space at the time.

In fact when Einstein won the Nobel Prize we, including him, thought the Milky Way galaxy was the entire universe.

If you need help doing your graphing in three dimensions instead of two or just want to chat about infinity, hit me up.

I wasn't just asking for effect, I'm really interested!

:)




.

Post on physics stack exchange, you'll get real feedback there and they'll let you know.

Quora may be good too.

Little big dick video getting more popular as thread than this:

https://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...4754-dick.html

Bumping thread.

Bumping one more time, hoping to find out!



It's an interesting idea






.

sounds legit.

links pulled.

The space is the first 3 dimensions, actually: length, width, depth; all are qualities of the space, aren't they?

http://vomzi.com/wp-content/uploads/...loding-gif.gif

http://ng.se/sites/default/files/use...auq1r5f0tb.gif

https://media.giphy.com/media/l41lVA...0AsE/giphy.gif

for fucks sake

interesting. I did not get to analyze the details (and probably wont) but the spatial dimension is like studying the Coriolis effect at the quantum level

Were it but true that all posts here were as interesting as this post is.

What a remarkable jump from Serbian Nationalism (and why that's posted here never ceases to amaze me) to find this.

Sorry, I was away for a bit.

I'm not really saying that.

What I say about light in a light-cone is that current physics portrays light-cones as being the entirely of the universe upon which a photon of light can possibly interact. It also depicts light cones as 45-degree angles.

I think this is the biggest travesty in the history of physics, as it has indoctrinated generations of students into thinking of light having a large swath of "Other" or "unreal" space that can't be acted upon. It's total BS

The only reason light cones are depicted at 45-degree angels is because the units chosen for Time and Space are the same: "Light (seconds)" divided by "seconds" yields nonsense. It yields 1 unit of space per 1 unit of time always, thus a 45-degree angle.

In fact, I postulate that along the Temporal dimension, light "moves" (I call it Passes) infinitely quickly. In other words, it has no movement at all in that "direction." Thus, light cones should be properly represented at 90-degree angles.

Once that concept is understood, then we are left with a single question: Why do we not observe the speed of light to be infinite?

The answer to that is the basis of my theory. I postulate that light moves both infinitely quickly (in one respect) and at a constant speed in another respect. It is not easy to summarize how that can be so, other than to say that thinking in four dimensions, you can have a line that is perpendicular to one dimension and therefore only moves in the other three. For the perpendicular dimension, the speed would be measured to be infinite, but in the other three dimensions, you would be able to measure the speed.

Let me the first one to claim this theory is wrong, but, allow me some days to put in writing an (easy enough) explanation of why.

Fantastic answer. Thank you for the interesting clarification. Something for me to mull over.


:thumbsup




.

no physics but did take these:

Card Banging 101
Click Bots 101
Malware Injection 101 & 102
Browser Hijacking 101
Money Laundering 101
Tax Evasion, Offshore Corporations (By bro request only)
Video Theft 101

are my past classes

Bump (for interesting topic!)