Here is a clearer essay.
INVESTIGATING A NEW FRAME OF REFERENCE
This is truly hypothetical – how about a force that is dragged by a body moving in a linear direction?
Recently I have had problems in realizing the non-physical spin of an electron. Since spin is recognized neither as a spinning classical system nor a system that is spinning whatsoever, then how is magnetism a fundamental subject for an electron when a spinning sphere causes a magnetic moment?
To be really simple over the spin of a fermion ( a ½ spin particle), or half-integer, no fermion can have a 360 degree spin cycle simply because you need to rotate it another 360 degrees to get to the original position. I suggest that a moving object in a linear momentum through spacetime without a spin is suffice in causing a magnetic force.
This is basically an extension of frame-dragging saying that solid fluctuations drag the very fabric of spacetime around with it. In such the same sense, matter which moves through spacetime is also found to leave a stronger resonance behind the object, much like a ‘’thing’’ moving through a pool leaving behind stronger or longer frequencies of ripples than what is in front of it. This is of course also linked to Doppler Effect (1) and the theory of Red Shift.
In effect, a moving objects forces will experience a stronger force as it passed you, but rather towards you. This would mean mostly the gravitational and electromagnetic forces.
Since the Doppler Effect allows for, as I say below in the notes ‘’the emitted frequency (increases) for objects moving toward the observer, the source's velocity must be subtracted when motion is moving toward the observer,’’ must be the same when concerning the forces – again, namely magnetism, electric and gravity.
Once you apply the same math to gravitational forces, as such described to result from spinning bodies, the same could be said about the ‘’tail whip’’ (or such cause) from a solid object moving through spacetime. A very small and negligible effect could also be produced from massless systems.
Is there ways to test this? Maybe. Can we detect a stronger electromagnetic field as a tail-whip from a moving body?
I don’t really see a problem, other than someone saying that the effect wouldn’t happen because things are uniformly or homogenously expanding, so it’s not really like moving a boat through a water, allowing a tail-whip of force to expand before it. But to this I would reply that planets, for instance, are moving through spacetime, even if spacetime is moving faster in a linear directionality.
Naturally, a stream moving faster than a thing moving through it will still experience a wind, or tail-whip effect… But this whip would be gravitational ripples left behind a distorted spacetime behind the object moving slower, simply because the wind behind it is equivalent to curvature, and curvature is equivalent to gravity… so I think we should try and measure a stronger gravitational or electromagnetic field produced from a moving body that is considered ‘’dominant’’ of one side.
Notes
(1) – In fact, I believe the same processes of math concerning the Doppler Effect can be applied to this theory. Doppler Effect
The effect was named after Christian Doppler.
Have you ever stood by a train as it is approaching you, blowing its horn to eventually pass you? If you have, then you will know that the noise sounded louder as it was approaching you and much quieter as it passed... This is the Doppler Effect.
Christian Doppler first proposed the effect in 1842 in the monograph, ''Über das farbige Licht der Doppelsterne und einige andere Gestirne des Himmels - Versuch einer das Bradleysche Theorem als integrirenden Theil in sich schliessenden allgemeineren Theorie'' - a mouthful i know if you don't speak German, but it means, (On the coloured light of the binary refracted stars and other celestial bodies - Attempt of a more general theory including Bradley's theorem as an integral part).
Since the emitted frequency (increases) for objects moving toward the observer, the source's velocity must be subtracted when motion is moving toward the observer. We say this is because the source's velocity is in the denominator. And since this is true, then the rule swaps and the frequency decreases when the source moves away, and so the source's velocity is added when the motion is away.
f'= (v/v*pm*v_s)f
Where v is the speed of waves in a medium (This is does not count for light waves or gravitational waves, since they require no medium.)
and v_s is for the speed of the source of the waves... If we are sticking to the train analogy, then the train is the source.
The speed of the emitted waves in air at T degrees Celsius is found to be 332(1 + T/273)^(1/2) m/s. We say that the waves moving towards the reciever/observer are (+) positive, whilst receding waves are (-) negative.
As explained above, not all waves require a medium. This goes for gravitational waves, and all types of electromagnetic waves, which come ins several forms. These are ultraviolet, visible, x-ray, radio, microwaves and gamma rays. For these types of waves, the relationship between the source (radio, for radio waves - f') and the emitted frequency (f) are found in these two equations:
f'= f+fv/c (measured frequency)
Delta*f = fv/c = v/lambda (change in frequency)
where f is for the emitted frequency
c is for the constant speed of light, which is around 186,350 mps
Lambda, after the Greek letter is for the wavelength
and v is for the velocity of the emitter relative to the receiver/observer
Another major use for the Doppler Effect is found in astrophysics, and it is able to estimate temperatures of gasses at very long distences which are called ''spectral lines''. These are basically darkly coloured or otherwise a brightly coloured line in a uniform spectrum and is caused strangely enough by a lack of photons in very narrow frequency ranges.
