On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Magnus Danielson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Once the imaginary axis is introduced, you can also expect complex numbers > for mass. But really, it is not the explanation I would expect to turn out > true. I suspect it IS true. I too don't like the idea of a complex number value for physical qualities like mass. I'd rather accept that mass and so on is a "normal" vector with components that are all "real". I suspect that the imaginary component does in fact exist in nature and in this case is not just a mathematical construct. There is an "easy" way for these complex numbers to physically exist without radically changing our view of the universe or tossing out known physics. The simplest change is this: Let the three dimensions of space be i, j, k. Each has an axis that is a line with huge length, possibly infinite. So far Issac Newton agrees. But now what if there is a fourth axis "l" but it's not a line. It is a circle. A circle with radius far to small to detect with current methods. All particles now have four spacial coordinates but the value of the fourth hardly matters because we really don't care where in the universe you are if the universe is a only (say) 1E-1000 meters across. Next we argue if the extra dimension is a trick to avoid the unpleasantness of complex physical values or if complex physical values are a trick to avoid having to accept the existence of higher dimensions. If you accept the "l" dimension as real it also might explains why neutrinos don't interact with matter much. The answer is they do if they happen to bump into any matter but that seldom happens. Chris Albertson Redondo Beach, California _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
