Relativity & Quantum Theory

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

I was reading up again on quantum theory, and a thought struck me that
I'd like to share and get feedback from those with a better
understanding of quantum theory and relativity than I. So, it occurred to
me that certain aspects of quantum theory would be much more explicable
if space-time doesn't shrink _along the axis of motion_ as current theory
has it, but _along all axis_.

How does this help?

Consider the universe from the perspective of a photon. If travel at the
speed of light shrinks all dimensions, then the universe appears to be a
point. Spreading this out a little to give it a human perspective, we
can picture the photon existing in a room where it can make a single
change, but then the room and the photon cease to exist. Now to the
photon, there's only a single room, but to an observer outside the room
the changes the photon might make occur in different areas of both space
and time. From the photon's perspective, however, the room is timeless
and it is "free to wander" until it makes a change.

I hope that was more clarifying than confusing. Anyway, since this
thought occurred to me I need to ask two things.

First, do we know that the current theory is correct and space-time
doesn't shrink in all directions? What experiments have been done that
bear on this?

Second, if we know that current theory is correct, what would a universe
look like where space-time _did_ shrink in all dimensions with motion?

Jefferson
http://www.picotech.net/~jeff_wilson63/rpg/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

Thanks for the responses. They were very useful. Since I made my last
post, however, my thoughts have gelled into a full hypothesis which doesn't
require any alteration in existing theories. Here it is:

Hypothesis: Quantum events are spaceless and timeless, occurring when the
local scale of an event is smaller than the "informational grain" (based
on plank length) of spacetime.

Prediction: Send protons at a variety of speeds through the double slit
experiment. At some relatively abrupt speed the protons will cease to
display quantum behavior and display classic behavior.

Now -- what needs clarifying?

Jefferson
http://www.picotech.net/~jeff_wilson63/rpg/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.gurps (More info?)

In article <1183656t2e58u36@corp.supernews.com>,
Jefferson <Jeff_Wilson63@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>I was reading up again on quantum theory, and a thought struck me that
>I'd like to share and get feedback from those with a better
>understanding of quantum theory and relativity than I. So, it occurred to
>me that certain aspects of quantum theory would be much more explicable
>if space-time doesn't shrink _along the axis of motion_ as current theory
>has it, but _along all axis_.

Quantum mechanics, in itself, is agnostic towards the transformation
rules, which is what relativity covers. Most of the quantum mechanics
that is done (e.g. solid state and condensed matter physics) are done with
good old Galilean relativity.

Quantum mechanics is weird, but I can't think of a way that shrinking
along all axes will make it explicable. It would just be weird in a
smaller volume.

>
>How does this help?
>
>Consider the universe from the perspective of a photon. If travel at the
>speed of light shrinks all dimensions, then the universe appears to be a
>point. Spreading this out a little to give it a human perspective, we
>can picture the photon existing in a room where it can make a single
>change, but then the room and the photon cease to exist. Now to the
>photon, there's only a single room, but to an observer outside the room
>the changes the photon might make occur in different areas of both space
>and time. From the photon's perspective, however, the room is timeless
>and it is "free to wander" until it makes a change.
>
>I hope that was more clarifying than confusing. Anyway, since this
>thought occurred to me I need to ask two things.
>
>First, do we know that the current theory is correct and space-time
>doesn't shrink in all directions? What experiments have been done that
>bear on this?

First, any theory is correct WITHIN ITS REGIME if it makes correct
predictions. The philosophers of science gave up on trying to read the
Cosmic Blueprints before they left the 19th century. But relativistic
quantum mechanics is a well validated (not verified) theory with a regime
that seems to cover all phenomena excluding gravity. It doesn't follow
that it's The True Description of Nature, but it works well.

In the lab frame, a particle has momentum

p = mv/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

If it's accelerated in a circle, the magnitude of the velocity doesn't
change, and it's related to an accelerating force (like an electric or
magnetic field) by

F = dp/dt = ma/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

If accelerated along the direction of motion, v^2 changes, giving

F = ma/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) + v^2 / c^2 (1-v^2/c^2)^(3/2)

A clear direction dependence that is seen in accelerators.

The Lorentz transformations of special relativity are one of the few sets
of transformation rules that form a group in the mathematical sense. The
characteristics of a group are:

(1) There is an identity element that doesn't change anything.
(2) Every element has an inverse that returns the identity.
(3) Associativity A(BC) = (AB)C.
(3) Every combination of elements in the group is another element of the
group: if A and B are elements of the group, then AB=C is an element of he
group.

Those are nice properties for a transformation because:

(1) It's possible to sit still.
(2) You can go back where you started.
(3) A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
(4) You can't go somewhere that doesn't exist.

Length contraction is a conclusion, not a postulate. I'm not sure what
kind of rules would lead to length contraction in all directions, but the
transformations probably wouldn't form a group.

>
>Second, if we know that current theory is correct, what would a universe
>look like where space-time _did_ shrink in all dimensions with motion?

You could run the pole-in-barn paradox with the pole turned ninety degrees
from its usual orientation.


--
"Did you know that most people use ten percent of their brains? I am now
one of them." -- Bart Simpson