2011/9/24 Kyle Mcallister <[email protected]>:
> If an assumed absolute frame is present, these do not happen, you simply
> arrive quicker,
> but the speed in different directions is varied. It would be, I think, an
> interesting
> experiment, if possible, to measure the speed of these (if they are)
> superluminal neutrinos
> at various times of year, or with travel paths oriented in particular
> directions. Points of
> interest might be in the constellations Leo/Crater, Aquarius, Octans, and in
> the vicinity of
> Ursa Major. I am speculating based on our apparent motion WRT the CMBR.
>
Absolute reference frame does not necessarily mean that we could
observe velocities in respect of something classical absolute frame of
reference, but velocity is rather the property of moving body itself.
It does not matter in which direction we are moving, but only thing
that matters is when we are changing the velocity. I.e. when we can
observe Δv while accelerating. It does not matter into what direction
satellite is orbiting the Earth, but both have the same intrinsic
velocity that is ca. 8 km/s greater than ours. Therefore both
satellites that are orbiting Earth into opposite directions measure
for their internal clocks the same pace, although their relative speed
is different in respect of our frame of reference due to Earth's
rotation.
It might be difficult to understand this perspective, because we are
so used to think velocities as relative value in respect of other
bodies, but it is no more difficult than understanding rotational
motion. We can define rotation in respect of some absolute frame of
reference or surrounding stars, but we can also define rotation in
respect of the object itself. Similarly we can define the velocity of
object in respect of the object itself. Therefore the absolute frame
of reference is nothing that is external for the moving object itself,
but it is the similar to angular momentum, that is the property of
rotational body itself.
Although on Earth we travel very fast around the sun and towards
Andromeda, but we do not observe any Δv's. Therefore every observation
we have made, have been made without changing our own velocity.
Therefore the rate of our clocks has remained always constant although
we have observed change of pace in clocks that have been moved faster
than us. Such as myons or airplanes.
If we are to test this hypothesis, we should leave Earth's low orbit.
We cannot observe probably time dilation itself, but if time
dilatation is realistic and is depended on our absolute speed, then we
should be able to measure different value for speed of light, because
speed of light is not affected by our local time dilatation. Too bad
that we can measure the speed of light only within the accuracy of
±1m/s, therefore we may not get accurate enough measurements at low
Earth orbit, but if we go to Venus' orbit or fly fast to Mars, we
should get total Δv more than 15 km/s, therefore we should be able to
measure the greater value for speed of light, if time dilatation
happens in real time and is depended on intrinsic velocity of
observer.
Anyways this kind of absolute velocity is extremely difficult to
understand, because there is no change of absolute velocity in
circular orbital motion. But orbital motion is no different that
rotational motion in general. It was also from Newton very insightful
observation when he noticed the problem that do we need to define
rotational motion in respect of absolute frame of reference? Same
logic will apply also for steady motion! Do we need to really define
steady motion in respect of some frame of reference?
Note also that this interpretation of absolute motion is
mathematically identical to special theory of relativity, if we are
making observations from the frame what's Δv is close to zero, i.e.
±10 km/s. Therefore we have not seen this effect in our scientific
tests. But from logical point of view this is radically different,
because it allows superluminal transfer of information in principle.
And indeed I do believe that quantum mechanics does predict that in
teleportation, there is information exchanged instantly over arbitrary
distance.
I was so confident for this theory that I have bet €100 to support my
theory. And also I was 19 years old when I invented this, and I have
not needed to change it's core principles and also I have not seen any
scientific observation that would be in conflict with this
interpretation, but it neatly explains everything from GPS to pulsars.
And now I am very sure that we have first indirect evidence that
supports this kind of absolute motion.
–Jouni
