A crazy idea about inertial motion

[Le Repteux]

Hi RP, thanks for the swift response!

I never hid that I forgot about my maths lessons. I liked maths, but I took architecture after a first degree in engineering, and there was no maths on the program. I will study your equations until I understand them thoroughly, meanwhile, your doppler effect changes the given, because to me, this effect is the real cause of the small steps. I changed my OP this time and added the cars' mind experiment because I had too many critics about atoms not producing light pulses when part of molecules, and they refused to talk of the small steps before having elucidated that question. If the signal from the cars is a wave instead of a speed information, how does that change the formulas? At first sight, do you think that the cars would behave as I described?

The claim about paradoxes from SR was only a teaser to talk about the relativistic properties of the small steps.

 

[origin]

The claim about paradoxes from SR was only a teaser to talk about the relativistic properties of the small steps.

Oh, that's great. We are suppose to have to guess what parts your conjectures are purposefully dishonest? I will assume you are being dishonest about the entire OP, which means you are just trolling to try and get on peoples nerves and do not deserve any attention.

 

[Le Repteux]

Relax Origin or you will get an attack. I just do my best to be understood, thats all. If you don't like what I say, don't read it. Discussions about SR are all over the web, and they give no evidence to solve the paradoxes, only opinions, so why start another one here? We need new propositions, and mine is one of them.

 

[krash661]

Oh, that's great. We are suppose to have to guess what parts your conjectures are purposefully dishonest? I will assume you are being dishonest about the entire OP, which means you are just trolling to try and get on peoples nerves and do not deserve any attention.

it was obvious from the beginning.
sorry, the beginning for me was on the other forum.
it's always the individuals who presume they are intelligent, when in fact they never took a physics 101 coarse. or probably any science coarse above high school.
i wonder where they get the notion they are intelligent.
what's funny is, if they were actually intelligent, then they would not bother with claiming BASIC PHYSICS is incorrect/ flawed or what ever such.
they would be touching higher levels of science.
it's ridiculous, for me anyways.
to be honest, i have a hard time believing that there is this many pathetic individuals out there.
ok, sorry, i apologize for my ranting.

 

[Le Repteux]

Here is my good old Krash crashing in again. Got the wrong floor again? Time for a drink, what are you taking? Sit down and lets drink to those crazy folks you're ranting at.

 

[krash661]

the amusing thing is, if they were actually intelligent, then they would not bother with BASIC PHYSICS .
they would be pursuing higher levels of science.

 

[Le Repteux]

Intelligence, what an interesting topic! High five those who think they are intelligent around the table!

 

[Le Repteux]

After having revisited Wiki about heliocentrisim, I revive the debate on the small steps.

Without an improved telescope, nothing could prove that heliocentrism was the solution, and nobody could suspect that it would help us understand gravitation. Heliocentrism became evident only when Galileo saw that the moon was irregular, that Venus had phases, that Jupiter had moons, that the size of the planets were changing with time, etc. Because of that lack of technology, it took 100 years before heliocentrism was accepted as a fact. Einstein was luckier, it took only a couple of years before the next eclipse showed the bending of starlight by the sun's mass. How long will the small steps stay unexamined? Bets are opened!

I said that the small steps were unobservable since we had to use light from the atoms to observe them, and that we already know it is impossible to observe the inertial rotation of the earth this way. Trying to detect earth's rotation while observing the small steps that produce it would resume to repeat the Michelson/Morley experiment. But if this rotation is really due to the small steps, then it seems to me that the null result of the M/M experiment could be explained by the steps, thus giving some credit to the hypothesis.

For instance, if we detect a light ray actually traveling in the direction of earth's rotation, the atoms that we use to detect that light would actually be making their steps away from that light, which would retard its detection, and if the light ray that we detect would be going against the rotation, the steps would be going against the light, which would advance its detection. But since light would be emitted by atoms that are actually making the same steps as the ones that detect it, the retard from one atom would be nulled by the advance from the other and vice-versa, making it impossible to observe earth's rotation.

The small steps would have implications on the relativity principle if they were real, because SR has been developed from the null result of the M/M experiment, but what if they were? Even if you are convicted that relativity is true, can you imagine these implications? Would you still conclude that time is slowing for molecules on relative motion one before the other for instance? And if so, can you imagine how the small steps from their atoms would justify that slowing?

 

[origin]

No, sorry but the month long silence has not made any of your conjectures more palatable.

 

[Russ_Watters]

...making it impossible to observe earth's rotation.

The small steps would have implications on the relativity principle if they were real, because SR has been developed from the null result of the M/M experiment, but what if they were? Even if you are convicted that relativity is true, can you imagine these implications? Would you still conclude that time is slowing for molecules on relative motion one before the other for instance? And if so, can you imagine how the small steps from their atoms would justify that slowing?

So....this effect, if real, would not be observable, yet would have notable implications? Seems incongruous...

In any case, go ahead, don't make us wait! What are these implicaitons that you are imagining? How, exactly would we observe them?

 

[wellwisher]

The small steps would have implications on the relativity principle if they were real, because SR has been developed from the null result of the M/M experiment, but what if they were? Even if you are convicted that relativity is true, can you imagine these implications? Would you still conclude that time is slowing for molecules on relative motion one before the other for instance? And if so, can you imagine how the small steps from their atoms would justify that slowing?

There is an area of study called relativistic quantum chemistry, where the SR of outer electrons is used to explain discrepancies between observations and the results of the Schrödinger's equations for larger atoms. For example, the outer electrons of gold move at relativistic velocity. These electrons will time shift all the reflected light, so yellow is always added to reflections. Gold and Platinum are very inert to chemical reactions, even at high temperature, because their outer electrons are in a different reference, than the orbitals of reactive atoms like oxygen.

Hydrogen gas absorbs into platinum metal like water into a sponge. There are gaps between atoms as well as two different electron references separated by an SR reference barrier. Cold fusion may not always be fusion, but can sometimes be due to electrons crossing between the references.

 

[Le Repteux]

Here is how the small steps would produce mass increase.

The steps follow the information carried by light, and they are made of accelerations from rest followed by decelerations to rest (rest here means no doppler effect to account for), which means that their speed increases to a top and decreases to zero. Their length and their direction can change, but not their frequency, thus for a molecule accelerated in the same direction, only their length can change. For that molecule to gain the same final speed, that length increases constantly if the acceleration is low but constant, and it increases abruptly if the acceleration is high. The more a step is long, the faster its top speed will be if atoms cannot change the time it takes to make their steps. When the molecule would get to a certain speed close enough to the speed of light, the top speed of the steps would thus exceed the speed of light, which is impossible because they depend on light's information, and which means that the molecule would resist to be accelerated more and more, what we interpret as a mass increase for particles in an accelerator.

Now, if the frequency of the steps could change, atoms could increase it instead of resisting more to acceleration, which means that if it was an atomic clock that was accelerated, it would run faster instead of running slower, which unfortunately contradicts SR. Since we can measure mass increase each time we accelerate a particle, I am incline to believe that, if they really exist, the frequency of the steps would not change, but it also means that we would have to interpret SR experiments differently.

(Errata: due to english being my second language, I used the word "convicted" instead of "convinced" in my precedent post. Promised, I won't make the same mistake twice!)

 

[Le Repteux]

So....this effect, if real, would not be observable, yet would have notable implications? Seems incongruous...

The small steps might not be observable for a body on inertial movement, but since they would resist a change in frequency, they would be the cause for mass, which is not a light implication, if I can say. Moreover, the way a step from one atom would be made of the smaller steps from its components explain at the same time the mass default of its bonding, and the increase in mass with the increase in frequency of a particle. Since it is the light that escapes from the bond between their components that produces the steps between the atoms, and that the distance between the components is much smaller than the one between the atoms, this light will produce much more resistance if it stays between the components than if it escapes to bond the atoms, because light loses a lot of its intensity with distance.

 

[Le Repteux]

There is an area of study called relativistic quantum chemistry, where the SR of outer electrons is used to explain discrepancies between observations and the results of the Schrödinger's equations for larger atoms. For example, the outer electrons of gold move at relativistic velocity. These electrons will time shift all the reflected light, so yellow is always added to reflections. Gold and Platinum are very inert to chemical reactions, even at high temperature, because their outer electrons are in a different reference, than the orbitals of reactive atoms like oxygen.

Hydrogen gas absorbs into platinum metal like water into a sponge. There are gaps between atoms as well as two different electron references separated by an SR reference barrier. Cold fusion may not always be fusion, but can sometimes be due to electrons crossing between the references.

With the small steps, the mass of an individual particle is due to the steps between its components resisting to change their frequency, but the electron is not supposed to have components, so how could it carry a mass? On the other hand, electrons carry wave properties that could produce mass just as light can do for the steps: they could act as mediators between nuclei and produce their bonds as well as their mass loss when they bond, a loss that we attribute to the bonding energy, which would be escaping from the bonding between nuclei components in the form of electrons in the case of the small steps.

As I explained in the precedent post, with the small steps, the mediator that bonds the atoms escapes from the steps between their components, and since it is the properties of the mediator that produces the resistance to acceleration of the steps at any scale, during a bonding, a loss of energy at the scale of the quarks will produce less resistance to the acceleration of their steps, and a new resistance to the acceleration of the new atoms' steps, but since the atoms are much farther away from one another than quarks, and that the mediator looses a lot of its intensity with distance, the net result will be a loss in resistance to acceleration for the molecules, thus a loss of mass.