Master Theory (edition 2)

[Masterov]

The mathematical expression:

$$x^2-(ct)^2=(x')^2-(ct')^2=0$$

is not a consequence of the universality of the speed of light.

So the result is the following expression:

$$x^2-(ct)^2=(x'-vt')^2-(ct')^2=0$$

Look at the following animation to see this:

You should see that the transit time of red spots are different in different directions, despite the fact that the rate of red spots is equal(same) in both directions. The first expression allege that these times are identical.

Let solve one a school's puzzle:

1. Two travelers do walking on the road with equal speed ($$v$$) in one direction at a distance ($$L$$) from each other.

2. Between them runs a dog (speed of it $$c$$).

QUESTION: How much time a dog runs forward, and how many - back?

ANSWER: $$T_1=L/(c+v)$$ and $$T_2=L/(c-v)$$

But Einstein, Lorentz, Minkowski and others (who entrust to them) say that time will be the same. So is was alleged by the first expression.

 

[Masterov]

Let talk about an electron-neutrino and an electron-antineutrino.

The latter occurs in a pair with a positron. (A first - in a pair with an electron.)

But those neutrinos (and antineutrinos) are not some separate particles.

When paired with an electron positron born. And nothing else. What is called the electron neutrino is a positron, whose rate is greater than the speed of light. Well, the electronic antineutrino is - an electron whose velocity is greater than the speed of light.

The mass of both are 0.5 MeV (0.28 eV obtained by SRT-formulas, when the mass of the speed dependent). But mass no depend on a speed today.

These neutrinos and antineutrinos are produced as a result of common (cascading) decay, when an particle decays into a pair of electron + positron. In some cases, the electron flies in the same direction, which gave birth to it. In this case, the electron (speed of which > c) is called the electron antineutrino.

If the positron flew forward (the electron - back) then the positron called by electron neutrino.

In those cases where the electron and positron fly away (to broadside direction), and result of their speed does not exceed the speed of light, we are witnessing the birth of an pair of electron+positron.

It would be strange to call the bus, which moves in some other way (not, as we call the bus, which stoped). But physics have it. We called neutrino all elementary particles (whose velocity is greater than the speed of light).

 

[Tach]

1. Two travelers do walking on the road with equal speed ($$v$$) in one direction at a distance ($$L$$) from each other.

2. Between them runs a dog (speed of it $$c$$).

QUESTION: How much time a dog runs forward, and how many - back?

ANSWER: $$T_1=L/(c+v)$$ and $$T_2=L/(c-v)$$

But Einstein, Lorentz, Minkowski and others (who entrust to them) say that time will be the same. So is was alleged by the first expression.

No, none of them says such an idiocy, only YOU claim that they do. Big difference.

 

[Masterov]

My elucidations:

The observer at rest:
$$ x_1 $$ - it's path of light from right to left = distance between the mirrors.
$$ x_2 $$ - it's path of return.
$$ -x_2 $$ - the distance between the mirrors. ($$ x_2=-x_1 $$)
$$ path_1 = -path_2 = x_1 $$

The observer move ($$ v>0 $$) for Master Theory:
$$ x_1' $$ - distance between the mirrors for moving observer. ($$ x_1'=x_1(1-v^2/c^2) $$)
$$ path_1' = x_1'/(1-v/c) $$ - it's path of light from right to left for moving observer.
$$ path_2' = -x_1'/(1+v/c) $$ - it's path of return.

Tese pathes is roots of this equation: $$(path'-vt)^2-(ct)^2=0$$ and $$ path_1' \neq -path_2' $$

SRT pathes is roots of this equation: $$(path')^2-(ct')^2=0$$ and $$ path_1' = -path_2' $$. (It's not correct.)

 

[AlphaNumeric]

QUESTION: How much time a dog runs forward, and how many - back?

ANSWER: $$T_1=L/(c+v)$$ and $$T_2=L/(c-v)$$

But Einstein, Lorentz, Minkowski and others (who entrust to them) say that time will be the same. So is was alleged by the first expression.

Einstein et al don't use the transformations you do. You use the following :

$$x' = x-vt$$ and $$t' = t$$

They use the following :

$$x' = \gamma(x-vt)$$ and $$t' = \gamma(t-vx)$$

If you put their expressions into $$x^{2}-t^{2}$$ you indeed get $$(x')^{2}-(t')^{2}$$. The transformation rules you use, the Galilean ones, are demonstrably not how the universe works. Your entire argument is "Relativity is wrong because it isn't what I claim".

 

[Masterov]

Slowing down time can not change the fact: $$T_1\neq T_2$$.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

It depends on your frame. In the frame where the box is moving, no the times are different. In the frame where the box is stationary the times are the same, since in that frame v=0.

 

[Masterov]

...

 

[Masterov]

This is gibberish.

Look at the following animation to see this:

You should see that the transit time of red spots are different in different directions, despite the fact that the rate of red spots is equal(same) in both directions.
Slowing down time can not change the fact: $$T_1\neq T_2$$.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

Yes, in the frame where the box moves the transition times are different. But if someone is inside the box, moving along with it, then they are in the box's rest frame and in that frame the transition times are equal. Do the Lorentz transform and you'll see.

Different frames will not necessarily agree on transit times. Some will see $$T_{1}=T_{2}$$ and some will see $$T_{1} \neq T_{2}$$.

 

[Masterov]

I think that a neutrino detector can be constructed from a balloon with compressed hydrogen. (The mass of the hydrogen atom is 28 times lighter than the nitrogen molecule and 32 times lighter than oxygen, which means that hydrogen is more than five faster than any of them.)

This balloon should be lowered to great depths in the ocean. (Near Mariana Trench.) At 11 km depth, under pressure of 1,100 atmospheres, the density of hydrogen would be 1,000 times more. (100kg/m3)

In this case, hydrogen can be obtained (by electrolysis of distillate) directly into the cylinder, while immersing the container into the depths. (This - as an option.)

Can be in a different way: using a cascade of pumps at different depths.

And it is possible: instead of pumps can be used with a balloon+plunger. Hanging on the ropes these balloons (in the form of two garlands), dropping and picking up by turns - you compel them inject hydrogen into the depths.

And you can still way: Balon Dewar (with liquid hydrogen) set cylinder. The hydrogen to do evaporation - balon go down. (This option seems most appropriate.)


Let me explain:

Neutrinos with matter should not have to interact with, and (if their rate significantly greater than the speed of light) - so be it.

Methods which try to detect neutrinos today, you can catch those neutrinos, whose rate is only slightly greater than the speed of light (more on the rate of Brownian motion).

Of the neutrino flux filtered out by those whose speed exceeds the speed of light is greater than the rate of Brownian motion of granite. Therefore, the number of neutrinos passing through the Earth increases sharply if their speed exceeds the speed of light is greater than the rate of Brownian motion in the interior of the earth.


Water molecules are lighter molecules granite. Therefore, the velocity of the Brownian motion of water molecules in two - two and a half times (the square root of mass ratio) of greater. Therefore, water molecules move twice (at least) faster than the molecules of granite. This means that there is a chance to catch the water in those neutrinos which are not extinguished in the interior of the earth, but the speed is (still) not much greater than the speed of light.

If used as a medium for hydrogen, the sensitivity will increase many times, since the rate of Brownian motion of the atoms of hydrogen is ten times higher than that of granite. Hence: the hydrogen is able to catch those neutrinos, which are almost not able to catch the granite (and water). Should be a lot of neutrinos (for which the thickness of the Earth is transparent).

And in Baykal lake to catch a cosmic neutrinos is even more difficult, because Brownian speed of motion of atmosphere much more than in water. Atmosphere do swallow up those neutrinos which could be fixed in the lake.

 

[Masterov]

Yes, in the frame where the box moves the transition times are different. But if someone is inside the box, moving along with it, then they are in the box's rest frame and in that frame the transition times are equal. Do the Lorentz transform and you'll see.

Different frames will not necessarily agree on transit times. Some will see $$T_{1}=T_{2}$$ and some will see $$T_{1} \neq T_{2}$$.

$$T_{1}=T_{2}$$ for $$v=0$$ only.

If $$v \neq 0$$ then $$T_{1}\neq T_{2}$$.

 

[Masterov]

Electron neutrino is a positron, whose rate is higher than the speed of light. And an electron antineutrino is an electron whose velocity is greater than the speed of light.
We can calculate the velocity of neutrinos, since the mass of the electron and positron are known.

 

[origin]

Electron neutrino is a positron, whose rate is higher than the speed of light. And an electron antineutrino is an electron whose velocity is greater than the speed of light.

Really? What do you base this on. One would think that if a neutrino had a charge that it would readily interact with matter.

 

[Tach]

$$T_{1}=T_{2}$$ for $$v=0$$ only.

If $$v \neq 0$$ then $$T_{1}\neq T_{2}$$.

You have been TOLD the above about 50 times already. Now you come back by telling us the same thing we've been telling you? What sort of twisted brain do you have? You aren't only ignorant, you are also utterly dishonest.

 

[OnlyMe]

You have been TOLD the above about 50 times already. Now you come back by telling us the same thing we've been telling you? What sort of twisted brain do you have?

Maybe he has learned.., without recognizing he has!

 

[Masterov]

Really? What do you base this on. One would think that if a neutrino had a charge that it would readily interact with matter.

No.
1. Electron is born in a pair with a positron.
2. Mass on the velocity-independent.
3. Neutrinos move faster than the speed of light (otherwise it would not neutrinos).

 

[origin]

No.
1. Electron is born in a pair with a positron.
2. Mass on the velocity-independent.
3. Neutrinos move faster than the speed of light (otherwise it would not neutrinos).

Huh? You said:

Electron neutrino is a positron

So if the neutrino is a positron (has a charge), shouldn't it interact rather easily with matter?

As far as #3, you seem to be very skeptical of scientific data - but you are accepting this preliminary finding as a fact. Seems rather ironic to me.

 

[Masterov]

So if the neutrino is a positron (has a charge), shouldn't it interact rather easily with matter?

Matter, whose speed is greater than the speed of light does not interact with EMF, if the source field is static. More than that, the matter (whose speed is greater than the speed of light) does not interact with a static matter. Positron seems neutral, since his speed than the speed of light. Positron does not interact with static EMF and a static matter, since has speed greater than the speed of light.

As far as #3, you seem to be very skeptical of scientific data - but you are accepting this preliminary finding as a fact. Seems rather ironic to me.

I suggest you discuss these facts.

 

[origin]

Matter, whose speed is greater than the speed of light does not interact with EMF, if the source field is static. More than that, the matter (whose speed is greater than the speed of light) does not interact with a static matter. Positron seems neutral, since his speed than the speed of light. Positron does not interact with static EMF and a static matter, since has speed greater than the speed of light.I suggest you discuss these facts.

For my degree I only needed 3 semesters of physics so I a may not have all of the facts, but I am fairly certain I recall that in physics you cannot just make shit up to support your position.