Physics ForumPhysics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.

Could a Theroy Of Moving Dimensions Unify Quantumn Mechanics and Relativity? Please Comment

Could a Theroy Of Moving Dimensions Unify Quantumn Mechanics and Relativity? Please Comment - Physics Forum

Could a Theroy Of Moving Dimensions Unify Quantumn Mechanics and Relativity? Please Comment - Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.

Could a Theroy Of Moving Dimensions Unify Quantumn Mechanics and Relativity? Please Comment

I'm treating this as an open-source physics project, if anyone would
like to join me at

[Only registered users see links. ]

The Theory of Moving Dimensions
Dr. Elliot McGucken [Only registered users see links. ]
In this paper I propose that the time dimension is moving
relative to the three spatial dimensions. Such a concept may be used to explain
physical phenomena encountered in relativity and quantum mechanics,
while offering a path for the unification of Quantum Mechanics and
Relativity.

Simply put, it is not possible to rotate an object into the time
dimension without that object gaining a velocity. Thus the time
dimension itself must be expanding relative to the three spatial
dimensions. Another way of looking at this is asking, "Why does
something always move when it is rotated out of the three spatial
dimensions and into the time dimension?" If someone can conduct a
Lorentz transformation on a ruler, and rotate it into the time
dimension without it moving through the three spatial dimensions, I
would very much like to hear about it.

Einstein's two postulates of relativity state:

I. The laws of physical phenomena are the same in all inertial frames.
II. The velocity of light in free space is a universal constant,
independendent of any relative motion of teh source and teh observer.

I propose that the two postulates may be expressed in an alternative
manner, by stating the following law of moving dimensions:

I. The time dimension is moving relative to the three spatial
dimensions.

This can be shown illustrated in several ways: Consider an expression
for the space-time interval of zero length, or of the null vector,
which traces a photon's path through space-time:

x^2+y^2+z^2-c^2t^2=0
or
x^2+y^2+z^2=c^2t^2

Which for one spatial dimension becomes
x^2=c^2t^2

or x=ct

by taking the derivative of both sides with respect to t, we get

dx/dt = d/dt (ct) = c

so

dx/dt = c

And hence the time rate of change of the spatial dimension relative to
the time rate of change of the time dimension is equal to the velocity
of light.

ct| /
| /
| /
| /
| /
|/_______________
x

Also, if we trace the path of a photon on a space-time diagram, the
only way for a photon to remain stationary in space time is to move at
the speed of light, or to keep up with the expanding time dimension.
The null vector, which represents a vector of zero length in
space-time, can only imply zero movement through space-time. Even
though a photon moves through space at a velocity equal to C, it stays
stationary in space-time. Is it not strange at first that in order to
remain stationary in space time, a photon appears move at the speed of
light through space? This is only because the time dimension itself is
moving relative to space.

Einstein proclaimed that all objects travel through space-time at c.
Even though we perceive a ruler along the x axis to be stationary, it
is yet traveling through space-time at the fixed speed of c, implying
that time is moving through it. Rotate it towards the y axis, and its
projection upon the x axis shortens, yet it still appears to be
stationary, and it is still traveling through space-time at the rate
of c. Rotate it into the time dimension, and it's projection along
the x axis still shortens, but now it begins to move through the three
spatial dimensions, while maintaining the fixed speed of c through
space-time. Again, we see it move through the three spatial
dimensions as it is rotated into the time dimension because the time
dimension is moving relative to the three spatial dimensions.

As Brian Greene points out in the Appendix to Chapter 2 of The Elegant
Universe, we note that from the space-time position 4-vector
x=(ct,x1,x2,x3), we can create the velocity 4-vector u=dx/d(tau),
where tau is the proper time defined by
d(tau)^2=dt^2-c^-2(dx1^2+dx2^2+dx3^2). Then the "speed through
space-time" is the magnitude of the 4-vector u,
((c^2dt^2-dx^2)/(dt^2-c^-2dx^2))^(1/2), which is identically the speed
of light c. Now, we can rearrange the equation
c^2(dt/d(tau))^2-(dx/d(tau))^2=c^2 to be c^2(d(tau)/dt))^2
+(dx/d(tau))^2=c^2. This shows that an increase of an object's speed
through space, (dx/d(tau))^2)^(1/2)= dx/d(tau) must be accompanied by
a decrease in d(tau)/dt which is the object's speed through time,
which also may be considered the rate at which time elapses on it's
own clock d(tau) or the proper time, as compared with that on our
stationary clock dt.

As an object moves through space, it is rotated into the time
dimension, and less wave fronts of time are allowed to pass through it
relative to a stationary object, which bears the full brunt of wave
fronts. Thus a moving clock will run slower, as all clocks are based
on the probabilistic emission and propagation of photons, and as a
moving clock catches up with the expanding wavefront of time, the
chance that a photon will be emitted without being reabsorbed is
diminished.
Thus it is shown that the spatial and temporal dimensions are moving
relative to one-another. The laws and equations of relativity and
quantum mechanics rest upon this fundamental nature of physical
reality.

Relativistic and quantum mechanical phenomena can be accounted for by
the underlying nature of the relatively moving dimensions. Time
dialation, relativistic length contraction, and the equivalence of
mass and energy can all be seen to derive from this concept of moving
dimensions. The statistical wave nature of matter and energy also
rests upon the relative motion of the underlying dimensions.

As one rotates into the time dimension, one becomes more orthogonal to
the spatial dimensions, and thus one's length contracts. And too, as
the time dimension is moving relative to the spatial dimensions, one
begins to move.

Wave-particle duality and quantum mechanical probabilistic behavior
can be accounted for by the relative motion between the dimensions, in
which both particles and waves exist. Feynman's many-paths integrals,
reflecting the notion that a particle travels all paths, can be
accounted for by the fact that until it interacts with other matter in
the three spatial dimensions, there is a probability that a particle
or photon may exist as a pure wave, rotated into the fourth dimension,
moving along with expanding time, independent of the spatial
dimensions. So it is that radiowaves may pass through walls, carrying
energy and thus mass.

The second law of thermodynamics (increasing entropy) can be accounted
for with the fact that all particles and matter have a chance of
existing in a dimension expanding at a constant rate, equally in all
dimensions, relative to the rest. The spherical symmetry of a photon's
wavefront may be viewed as the result of matter having been rotated
into the time dimension--the matter has become orthogonal to the
spatial dimensions, and it is now expanding along with time, equally
in all directions.

Einstein's second postulate, stating that the velocity of light is a
universal constant, holds to be true because the velocity of light is
merely the rate of propagation of a dimension relative to the other
dimensions. Although this relative rate of propagations between
dimensions may vary, we shall always interpret it as a constant,
because we are used to measuring the velocity of the propagation of
energy relative to the velocity of the propagation of energy, which we
write as c.

Relativistic time dialation occurs because as an object approaches the
speed of light, the object approaches the speed of the propagation of
energy. As time is measured with regards to the propagation of energy,
such as the emission of a photon (in an electrical circuit or a
mechanical spring) or or the occurence of a random event which
liberates energy, less time will pass for an entity which is
propagating at a rate which is close to the propagation of energy
itself. As an entity gains velocity, it is roated into the moving time
dimension, and it in a sense it catches up with the dimension.

Relativistic length contraction is always accompanied by an increase
in velocity, as the probability that each quantum of the object
resides in the time dimension is increased. Relativistic length
contraction can be accounted for by the fact that as an object gains
velocity its probabilistic wave function, or its essence, is rotated
into the time dimension, and thus it appears shorter from the
persepective of the three spatial dimensions. At the speed of light
the object would have to be a photon, so as to be completely absent
from the spatial dimension, as any presence or probability that a
particle is in the spatial dimnsion means that there is a probability
that the time dimension will expand without carrying it along, in
essence leaving it behind for that moment it exists in the spatial
dimension.

Any material entity gains more energy as its velocity increases, and
relativity demonstrates that the entity also gains more mass. When
energy is added to an entity, it may also appears as mass, as that
energy has a finite chance of interacting with the spatial dimensions.

All matter has a spatial component, or a probability of interacting
with space, whereas a photon only interacts with that which is in the
time dimension.

In order to cause an entity to move, quanta of energy must be added to
it, and the entity will thus gain a new probabilities for existing in
the space and time dimensions, as its overall wavefunction, including
its mass and energy, is rotated out of the spatial dimension and into
the time dimension. This rotation into the time dimension will be
proportional to the amount of energy that has been added.

As only photons can exist purely in the spatial dimension, no entities
but for photons can ever reach the speed of light, as all matter has a
finite chance of existing purely in the spatial dimension. This
property gives rise to the concept of mass, as to exist in the spatial
dimension curves the fabric of space-time about the existence.

An entity moves through space-time according to its probability of
existing in space and time. The more energy a given entity has, the
more likely it is to exist in the time dimension, or be moving along
in the dimension which is expanding relative to the spatial
dimensions. Hence its greater velocity, and also its augmented chance
of interacting with matter over a fixed distance. This increased
chance of interacting with matter over a given distance can be
associated with a shorter deBroglie wavelength or a higher frequency.
A more energetic photon has a higher frequency, as it is composed of
more substance, and more momenergy must pass a given point at any
given time. A less energetic photon carries less momenergy, and thus
there is a smaller chance of it interacting with matter as it passes
on by. A more energetic photon has a higher probability of interacting
with matter as it passes it by, as its shorter wavelngth and higher
frequency represent a greater, more persistant existence in
space-time.

A photon has no spatial dimensions, as it is matter rotated into the
time dimension. Einstein's famous equation which expresses the
equivalnce between matter and energy:

E=mc^2

holds true because radiative energy, consisting of photons, is merely
matter which has been rotaed tinto the expanding time dimension.

In quantum mechanics energy is accounted for by the operator which
represents the infinitesimal change with respect to time, while
momentum is accounted for by an operator which represents the
infinitesimal change with respect to space. Both momentum and energy
are defined with the concept of change and probability. And too,
inherent in all waves are the concepts of motion and probability.

Einstein's postulates derive from the fact that in all inertial
reference frames, the relative motions between the dimensions is fixed
at a constant rate, because the relative motion between the dimensions
is measured relative to the relative motion. Thus the laws of physics,
and all physical concepts, which are all fundamentally based on the
concept of motion or change with respect to time, are also fixed in
all interial frames, and the speed of light is constant in all
inertail frames.

As physics concerns itself at all levels with changes relative to both
space and time, it makes sense that all physics, time, motion,
reality, life, and consciousness itself are founded upon a stage which
is endowed with intrinsic motion.

The underlying fabric of all reality, the dimensions themselves, are
moving relative to one another.

I'm treating this as an open-source physics project, if anyone would
like to join me at

Could a Theroy Of Moving Dimensions Unify Quantumn Mechanics and Relativity? Please Comment

"Ranger West" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:c4449572.0401190543.28d872c4@posting.google.c om...
explain

Simply put? What the hell are you babbling about? Exactly how
do you propose to do this?
Maybe you would like to rotate yourself into the time dimension,
maybe you will disappear altogether

Could a Theroy Of Moving Dimensions Unify Quantumn Mechanics andRelativity? Please Comment

Ranger West wrote:

What do you mean by "rotate ... into the time dimension"? Do you
use the idea here that Lorentz transformation can be viewed as
generalized rotations in Minkowski space or what?

How on earth does this follow???

[snip strange stuff]

Obviously right.

How on earth do you get to this interpretation of the equation above???
It says nothing like that. It says simply that the rate of change of the
*position* of the particle per time is equal to c. It says *nothing*
about changes of dimensions!

Could a Theroy Of Moving Dimensions Unify Quantumn Mechanics andRelativity? Please Comment

Ranger West wrote:

[snip]

How many times must your face be rubbed in your own shit before you
learn to squat outside? Your spew is ludicrous. It violates
empirical observation. The first time you trolled it we all thought
"half-wit." Now you are psychotically pursuing the geometric
progression.

Could a Theroy Of Moving Dimensions Unify Quantumn Mechanics and Relativity? Please Comment

"Ranger West" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:c4449572.0401190543.28d872c4@posting.google.c om...

You got a serious comment on
http://groups.google.com/groups?&as_umsgid=fA_Mb.10955$ta5.3395652@phobos.t elenet-ops.be
Are you autistic and does it run in the family?

Could a Theroy Of Moving Dimensions Unify Quantumn Mechanics and Relativity? Please Comment

"Dirk Van de moortel" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:<hCWOb.20297$[Only registered users see links. ]>...

Hi

One of my favorite movies is the Time Machine
starring Rod Taylor, his explanation of time is
thought provoking.

Anyway, if I set a watch on my desk for a minute
it's commonly regarded to have moved 186,000 mps
x 60 seconds in the direction of time in one minute.

Normally that's no big deal. But when that speed
threw time hit's something that deflects that speed into
space then *duck and cover*, because the result is a
nuclear explosion using E=mc^2.

If your watch was to hit some fat thing that's not
moving in time, and deflects into kinetic energy it
would mess up you're day.

I've even wondered if it's possible if objects
could be placed stationary in space-time, and then
stuff moving threw time - at the speed of light - hits
these objects and make a big explosion, of course
this is sci-fi, at least right now.

I think QM is a combined *data* prediction/intrepretation
theory, and isn't so interested in what's *really* happening,
the argument about what's "real" is ongoing, and usually
becomes meta-physical, ie. undefined and semantic.

Ken S. Tucker
PS: Do any of my comments qualify to be placed into
Dr. McGucken's physics board? (I can do better).

Could a Theroy Of Moving Dimensions Unify Quantumn Mechanics and Relativity? Please Comment

"Ken S. Tucker" <[Only registered users see links. ].ca> wrote in message
news:2202379a.0401191641.79dc9fa1@posting.google.c om...

If all massive entities 'move' in the direction of time at an 'equivalent'
velocity of c which is constant, then we would require an additional degree
of freedom which doesn't exist or of which we are unaware. (not saying this
is true, just considering it)

If you can consider a change in spatial speed as a change in direction in
space-time, (acceleration as a rotation), then would an extra macroscopic
dimension be necessary to change space-time speed?

I realize that acceleration is the second derivative of position with
respect to time and an extra dimension isn't implicit in this description.
But when considering space-time, I can't help but wonder if the ability to
accelerate necessitates a fourth dimension, an added degree of freedom in
which we can move. I've considered the possible circularity of my thinking
but I'm unable to come to a definite conclusion.

That all said, what would the implications of being able to change c as it
relates to E=mc^2? or m=E/c^2 for that matter.

Could a Theroy Of Moving Dimensions Unify Quantumn Mechanics and Relativity? Please Comment

"Jim Roberts" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:<bun7ap$j7rn2$[Only registered users see links. ].uni-berlin.de>...
Hi Jim Roberts, haven't see you post for awhile.

I would say no. In a gravitational field, such as we are in,
the speed of light and the rate of time are less than a
person at rest but not in a g-field. This is governed by
the *time* metric g00. I do recall you did an excellent
essay on GR, but I don't recall if your familiar with
tensors at all.
There's always a danger in being superficial in GR,
so this answer is *off-the-cuff*.

Well I think what you said up top (*) is fine. I've never
found any fault in that concept, in fact the opposite. The
more I study it the better it seems to get.

That it's a hard question :-). It's difficult to understand
because c is an invariant. In other words if c where to
instanteously double throughout the universe it shouldn't
be measurable.
However suppose we're looking at the surface of a
neutron star where the speed of light (I'll call this C) is
less than our c, then would E = mC^2 ?
At the edge of a hypothetical Black Hole where
C=>0 that becomes very strange. And the reverse
m = E/C^2 also becomes strange, like a tiny bit of
energy makes a huge amount of mass!
Maybe this would be a good question to post.

Could a Theroy Of Moving Dimensions Unify Quantumn Mechanics and Relativity? Please Comment

"Ken S. Tucker" <[Only registered users see links. ].ca> wrote in message
news:2202379a.0401230831.784d24ce@posting.google.c om...
news:<bun7ap$j7rn2$[Only registered users see links. ].uni-berlin.de>...
description.
to
thinking
it
Hello Ken,

Thanks for your response. In regards to what I mentioned earlier:

'equivalent'
degree
this

I think saying that the magnitude of the 4-velocity for all massive bodies
is C is probably more appropriate. I might get myself into trouble speaking
of equivalent velocities and motions in time comparable to space. Anyway,
I'm curious how this relates to C in E=mC^2. If we are considering the
equivalent energy of a particular mass, doesn't C represent the 4-Velocity
magnitude of the mass in question rather than the speed of light? Is this
equivalence of mass and energy really related to the speed of light or the
speed of matter, or both? I realize they are the same but why is that? Is
the relationship between space and time what sets this constant C? Will
altering the speed of a photon require some fundamental change in this
relationship between space and time? Will this also affect the speed of
matter? Sorry for so many questions.

The reason I'm asking is because of your original idea:

I was considering that the 4-velocity magnitude (C) would need to be altered
to slow or stop an object in the manner you suggest. I was thinking that
changing C in this case would not be the same as changing light speed. I
realize I could be way off base here.

Could a Theroy Of Moving Dimensions Unify Quantumn Mechanics and Relativity? Please Comment

Hi Jim et all...

"Jim Roberts" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:<butkom$lhke8$[Only registered users see links. ].uni-berlin.de>...

Snip as you wish. My respose isn't worth a thanks,
it's just fluff, mainly to try a breach the topic in ways
I've never thought in before.

An observer O in a free-falling elevator (a.k.a. an inertial frame),
in a powerful g-field, will certainly find E=mc^2 in his
CS.
But when this energy E is transmitted to an observer O'
floating distantly from any masses, this energy E' relative
to O' will be *red-shifted*.
This *red shift* depends on the relative rates of O and
O' clocks.
So O' can decide the speed of matter going threw time
where O is, is going more slowly.

From what I figure, the concept E=mC^2 is DOA,
((I introduced this as a spectulative gedanken, but I
have found the transformation from c^2 to C^2, be
quite complicated)), because E'/m' = E/m. IOW's
one can choose c=1, and maintain this. The quantity
C refers to the co-ordinate velocity of c.

Well to say a quantity of matter moved a
length x4 = c*time really interdefines

length units/time units = c = invariant.
(in an inertial frame).

I think one of the greatest achievements of theoretical
physics was the unification of the Conservation of
Mass Law and the Conservation of Energy Law.

The potential energy of mass required E=mc^2
to conserve Momentum in SR, specifically under
the Lorentz transformation. I'd recommend you
find someone who can suggest a good book on
SR, because my dingbat explanation of this
compared to professional authors would be a
relative screw-up.

I think it's the other way around, space and time are
relative, it's c that's invariant.

Yes, in a g-field (like the sun's) the velocity of light
does alter, (deflects and slows down), as a
consequence of a subtle redefinition of spacetime,
sometimes called (ugh) spacetime curvature.

Not in inertial frames of course. And as I understand
GR a frame subject to acceleration retains E=mc^2 too.

Well I posted this in response to the OP's
(rangerwest)'s prolonged essay).

Ok, me too, but sometimes thinking nonsensically
can render insight into why reality is real....

Have you studied the effect of g-fields on the
speed of light?