---- Original Message -----
From: "Remi Cornwall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 3:23 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]: faster than light speeds, CBR etc.
There must be a chance of seeing a frame 0 we have been accelerated from
whose time is running fast, not just blue shifted because it is coming
towards us but because we are the moving twin in the paradox and
ultimately
this must be the original rest frame of the universe if one believes the
Big
Bang or even Steady State, no?
Do a search for the paradox of the equally accelerated twins, aka the
"other" twin paradox, and you will find the conventional explanation for
what is going on.
While you will likely not hear it presented quite this way, an implication
of relativity of simultaneity is that time, in a sense, "propagates" at v =
c. It then follows that any effect exceeding c, that is with spacelike
separation, is acausal, at least in some frames of reference.
It should be noted that there is absolutely no way to determine whether or
not there is true relativity of simultaneity or whether there exists
absolute simultaneity with any signalling system limited to c. It is only
presumed, based on taking the simpler of two explanations, that simultaneity
is relative. You will no doubt find in many of the standard texts (probably
all in fact) 'spacetime diagrams' which show the student why everything is
only relatively simultaneous, and why the paradox of the equally accelerated
twins happens. What no one seems to be taught is that almost the entire area
of the spacetime diagram of events is completely meaningless! The only way
one observer would be able to tell if indeed simultaneity was truly relative
with the other observer would be to use a signal travelling at v = infinity.
The only communication which can take place between the two observers (or
twins in this case) is when they are at the exact same location. If they are
separated by any distance, they can only communicate at a speed less than or
equal to c, and as such can never determine the nature of the vast area of
the spacetime diagram. And yet this completely untestable portion of an X/T
chart, charmingly taught as the spacetime diagram, can never be proven to be
correct with anything limited to c.
When I realized that, there wasn't any going back. The magic of relativity
was lost, and now I ask the kinds of questions that the residents of
sci.physics.relativity say are the wrong questions to ask. It makes
excellent predictions, yes, and has so far been unfalsified. But these self
same predictions can be had by dropping the relativity of simultaneity, and
establishing that it is absolute. Tangherlini, Selleri, etc. have given
different transforms which work identically to special relativity at
velocities up to c; where they differ is in the realm beyond c, and in the
meaning behind the numbers.
In a nutshell: with relativity of simultaneity, if you go faster than light,
you end up with time travel, at least in some reference frames. (and in fact
you can do some tricks to make it happen in all reference frames, those
nasty irresolvable paradoxes). If instead you assume absolute simultaneity
(which by definition means there is a preferred reference frame) if you go
faster than light, you just get there faster. Time travel is impossible, the
arrow of time irreversible.
When one considers EPR, Nimtz's experiments, and others of a somewhat
similar nature, Occam's Razor begins to dull.
I read somewhere that they (?) can detect absolute motion relative to the
cosmic background radiation because it appears Doppler shifted.
Roughly 370km/sec in the direction of the constellation Virgo, if I remember
correctly. Some say 600km/sec, but I do not recall where that came from.
Though pops into my head, if the CBR is homogeneous and isotropic and
universal it must have a lot of mass, might that be what EMPROP devices
could be pushing against? 'xcuse the pun, I know its tenuous. Seems to me
that if one has a cavity one could be shielding against it. I dunno, need
to
figure. Anyway I will ask permission to see if I can scan in the article
debunking ZPE from I think the astrophysical journal.
<begin speculation>
Assuming (big assumption because nobody* was there) that the universe began
with an explosion at a single point, one could reason that the frame of
reference occupied by that point, the part of which did not explode outwards
in all directions, is the cosmic rest frame. If so, the CBR (CMB, COB, CIB,
etc.) could very well be that same frame of reference. It would be
interesting then, I think, to test any possible reactionless drive for
efficiency changes depending on its orientation with respect to the
direction of our travel against this CBR frame.
One other thought, off the deep end: since you mentioned the dreaded ether:
if a supposed ether is the cosmic rest frame, and therefore preferred, what
happens if somehow a part of that ether were dragged along by "something"?
Does that part of the ether now have a separate, non-preferred frame? Or do
rulers and clocks behave the exact same way in both the non-dragged and
dragged parts? I have wondered about this because the CBR is not entirely
homogenous.
<end speculation>
*Nobody human at least.
--Kyle
