Tony Bermanseder <PACIFICAP@hotmail.com> wrote:
The Lorentz Contraction applied to a 3D-Volume
results
in a 2D-dimensional reduction
under c-invariance.
=============…
My opinion.
1.
Lorentz Contraction / Transformation / applied
to a 3D-Volume
A 3D-Volume belong to particle.
It means all parameters of particle simultaneously
changed
according the Lorentz Contraction / Transformation
/.
2.
In a 2D-dimensional space .
It means in Vacuum.
3.
Reduction under c-invariance.
It means under the c-invariance, c-lagrangian
this transformation with particle is happen.
4.
What is reason of the c – Lagrange function
?
I think that the reason is SPIN.
Hi Israel.
I can see, that I did not express this clearly. There
is NO actual physical change of anything under the Lorentz Transformation. Both, Lorentz and Fitzgerald thought such an actual
physical change to explain the Null-Result of the Michelson-Moreley experiment. They thought, that allowing a change in the
length of the interferometer arms by the Lorentz-factor (the gamma in SR), would resurrect the Maxwellian ether.
Einstein's c-invariance does away with any need for such
an ether, in fundamentally reforming the ideas of what space and time actually DO, under the postulates for a frame independent
constancy for the lightspeed.
And what space and time DO under those postulates, is
to limit the coordinate delta function, in say taking the difference in measurement events in a stationary frame and showing
that this measurement behaves as the Lorentz transformation under the auspices of the simultaneity of events, i.e. the 'ticking
of clocks' defining spacetime intervals applied to the uniform motion in SR's inertial frames of reference.
It is interesting to challenge SR in one way however.
If Quantum Relativity is correct, then the Lorentz-Contraction must allow a minimum 'width', namely the wormhole perimeter.
If so, then, then a maximum speed, somewhat less than
c should be definable.
L=Lo√(1-[v/c]²)=Wormhole-Lambda=Constant
say.
For Constant=10-24 centimeters; vmax=c.√{1-(10-22)}.
Then, the bigger the object in uniform motion is in its
proper length Lo, the smaller would be the actual deviation from c.
So taking the size of the universe in its wavefunction
with wavelength 2π.RHubble~1027 meters; would effectively give c in a deviation of 10-49
(being the timeinstanton multiplied by the Hubble-frequency as n=Ho/fmax=[c/Rmax][L/c])and as the elementary frequency ratio for the Big Bang).
A macroscopic object of say Lo=10
meters, would give the factor c.√{1-10-23} as the calculations of SR predict and with velocities limited
in a lightspeed correct to 23 decimal places.
A microscopic (say subatomic particles like nucleons
and electrons) object on the nuclear femtometer scale of 10-15 meters would give a velocity maximised in so c.√{1-10-7}.
This of course means that it will be exceedingly difficult to measure length contraction of the actual sizes of subatomic
particles and their internal structures, as the quantisation of spacetimematter will become ever closer approximated as the
wormhole scale itself.
Of course taking the minimum size itself, must result
in the complete cessation of a dynamical universe moving THROUGH SPACE altogether.
Then vmax=c.√{1-1}=0 and
the universe so described is one moving THROUGH TIME only.
You can think of it as a 4-vector velocity decomposed
into 3-spacial and 1 temporal coordinate axis. The 3-Vector for space is 0 and does not contribute then; whilst dynamics through
space requires decompopsition into Pythagoraen components in the Minkowski metric, given in the norm s2 in:
x2+y2+z2-(ct)2=s2.
Here then is the reason for my claim, that the lightmatrix
defines an ether, in which one can postulate a 'unified light' background with light not moving at all (i.e. light does not
travel through space under the described boundary condition, but through time only.
Tony B.
