The Vacuum and Special Relativity Theory

The Vacuum and Special Relativity Theory. 
Israel Sadovnik

Zitat:

Special Relativity Theory examines the behaviour of a quantum of light in the vacuum.

1)The First law of SRT – the speed of a quantum of light in vacuo has a maximal magnitude (constant, absolute) of (c=1) .
2)SRT is not considered a gravitational field. For this reason, Einstein created General Relativity Theory in 1915. The field in which there is no gravitation is a vacuum.
3)This asserts that action in SRT occurs witho particles in negative four-dimensional (Minkowski) space. This space is absolute.

Mathematicians have constructed its model and speak of this negative space as completely abstract. Nobody sees that it has no connection to real existence. This is similar to a sad joke. For 100 years everyone has admired SRT. Millions of articles, reviews and books have been written and the United Nations has decided to establish 2005 as the centennial year of SRT. Consider that all that is clear in this theory is that negative four-dimensional space is abstract and has no real existence.

My God! There does not appear to be anyone to laugh at this joke!

Everyone searches for complex models of four-dimensional space, but truth lies in simplicity. All is very simple.

We meet the negative characteristic of space only in the vacuum, and in the vacuum, space is merged with time (negative four-dimensional space). According to the first law, the speed of light is absolute and movement occurs in the absolute vacuum. So why does everyone speak and write that there is no absolute movement; that only relative movement v =s/t is real? Why does everyone say that there is no absolute reference system?

Here we have one of the paradoxes in human intelligence.

(Zitatende)

Israel Sadovik’s home page – http://www.socratus.com

Kommentare

Einen eigenen Kommentar schreiben

  1. Gerhard Klose 15. Mai 2009 (17:46 Uhr)

    Sehr geehrter Herr Ekkehard Friebe, ich danke Ihnen für Ihre unermüdliche Aufklärung und heute besonders für die Home Page von ISRAEL SADOVIK.

    Seine Philosophie über Gott und das All stimmt weitgehend mit meiner überein.
    Wir können mit größter Wahrscheinlichkeit die göttlich/geistige Einflussnahme auf das Weltgeschehen niemals ganz ergründen und verstehen.
    Ich verstehe die geistige Einflussnahme als Programm über die Materie.

    Ich vergleiche dieses Weltprogramm mit unserem Computer. Dieser kann zumindest anfänglich nicht ohne Programm und Programmierer auskommen.
    Unser Computerprogramm beruht auf dem binären Zahlensystem. Die Grundelemente sind 0 und 1 oder einfach zwei Gegensätze wie Plus-und Minusladung.

    MEINE PHILOSOPHIE: Ich sehe unsere Welt auch binär aus zwei Gegensätzen zusammengebaut und sind von geistiger Fähigkeit gesteuert.
    All mein Wissen und meine Erfahrungen über die zwei gegensätzlichen Ladungsträger führten mich zu der Überzeugung,
    dass alles auf dieser Welt — Materie und elektromagnetische Wellen tragende Medium ( auch Äther genannt)—aus nur
    zwei Gegensätzen zusammengesetzt ist.

    DIESE ZWEI GEGENSÄTZE SIND DIE ELEKTRONEN UND POSITRONEN

    Keiner weiß wie diese aussehen und was Elektro- und Kraftfeld ist, was von diesen geheimnisvollen Teilchen (Gottesbausteine) aus geht.
    Immerhin die alten Griechen kannten schon die Wirkung von Elektronen (Bernstein reiben).

    Unsere Physikkoryphäen stemmen sich mit allen erdenklichen Mitteln gegen diese Theorie.
    Das verborgene Positron, der Gegensatz zum Elektron wurde erst spät in der Höhenstrahlung von dem dänischen Wissenschaftler CARL ANDERSON 1932 aus dem spontanen Zerfall entdeckt.
    Normalerweise ist es im Äther oder in der Materie gebunden. Heute ist es kein Problem aus künstlicher Beta-Strahlung aus den Atomkernen die Positronen frei zu setzen .
    Da diese aus dem spontanen Zerfall der Atom-Kernbausteine kommen, bringen diese eine gewaltige Bindungsenergie mit. Diese entlädt sich an den Valenzelektronen mit Gamma-Strahlung.

    Hier bei diesem Vorgang (Standardmodell) wird heute behauptet, dass sich die Positronen total zerstrahlen-also Teilchen in Strahlung wandelt.

    DIE POSITRONEN WERDEN ALSO HEUTE NOCH ALS ANTIMATERIE VERTEUFELT—-DAS IST DER JAHRHUNDERT-IRRTUM

    MEINE THEORIE: Die Positronen geben nur ihre gewaltige Bindungsenergie ab und verbinden sich mit Elektronen im Äther. Da beide Arten von Beta-Strahlung beim Atomzerfall entstehen,
    können wir davon ausgehen, dass die Grundelemente der Atomkerne (Proton/Neutron) nur die Elektronen und Positronen sind.

    Für den Äther gibt es bereits das „ EPOLA-MODELL“ von Dr. MENAHEM SIMHONY , wobei „E“ für Elektron, „PO“ für Positron und „LA“ für Lattice ( Gitter )steht. Meine Äthervorstellung
    entspricht der von Simhony.

    Noch eine kurz gefasste Anmerkung zu den beiden Ladungsträgern:

    Die beiden Ladungsträger geben Kraft- und elektrische Wirkung instantan (quasi ohne Zeitdauer) weiter. Aber die Wirkung kommt nicht weit. Sie klingt exponentiell rasch ab. Das nennt man
    Tunneln . Die normale Weitergabe von Kraft und elektromagnetische Wellen erfolgt durch Umladung fast verlustlos über das Äther-bzw. Molekülgitter aber langsamer mit
    Lichtgeschwindigkeit C im Äther oder langsamer in Materie.

    ICH GEHE DAVON AUS, DASS DIE KRAFTWIRKUNG—–DIE GEGENSEITIGE ANZIEHUNG—- DER ELKTRONEN UND POSITRONEN DIE GRAVITATION ERZEUGEN UND ÜBER DEN ÄTHER ODER
    ÜBER DIE MOLEKÜLGITTER ÜBERTRAGEN WIRD.

  2. socratus 18. Mai 2009 (06:26 Uhr)

    Dear Mr. Ekkehard Friede.
    Thank you for posting my article.

    I think that SRT does not explain behavior of macrobodies ( trains, aeroplanes . . .
    twins . . . astronauts etc.
    I think that SRT is correct theory and explain behavior of Quantum of Light.
    ============ .

    Mathematics is not written for mathematicians.
    Mathematics is written for physics, for Nature.
    This simple fact has been forgotten in science.
    ==========..
    It began in 1905 when Einstein created SRT,
    (theory of photon/electron’s behaviour).
    Minkowski, tried to understand SRT using 4D space.
    Poor young Einstein, reading Minkowski’s interpretation,
    said, that now he couldn’t understand his own theory.
    “ Einstein, you are right, it is difficult to understand SRT
    using 4D space. But it is possible using my 5D space”
    – said Kaluza in 1921.
    This theory was tested and found insufficient.
    “Well”, said another mathematicians, – “maybe 6D, 7D,
    8D, 9D spaces will explain it”. And they had done it.
    But the doubts still remain.
    “OK”,they say, “we have only one way to solve this problem.
    We must create more complex D spaces”.
    And they do it, they use all their power, all their super intellects
    to solve this problem.
    Glory to these mathematicians !!!!
    But……….
    But there is one problem.
    To create new D space, mathematicians must add a new parameter.
    It is impossible to create new D space without a new parameter.
    And the mathematicians take this parameter arbitrarily
    (it fixed according to his opinion, not by objective rules).
    The physicist, R. Lipin explained this situation in such way:
    “Give me three parameters and I can fit an elephant.
    With four I can make him wiggle his trunk…”
    To this Lipin’s opinion it is possible to add:
    “with one more parameter the elephant will fly.”
    The mathematicians sell and we buy these theories.
    Where are our brains?
    Please remember, many D spaces were born as a wish
    to understand SRT (theory of photon/electron’s behaviour).
    But if someone wants to understand, for example, a bird
    (photon/electron)itself and for this he studies only
    its surroundings, will he be successful?
    ==============..
    ===========================
    I read what string theory acts in 11- D space.
    But if we don’t know what 1+1 = 2
    how can we know what 5+4 = 9 ?
    And if we don’t know what is 4-D negative space
    ( 4-D positive Mincowski space )
    how can we understand 11-D space ( string theory) ?
    =====================
    If I were a king, I would publish a law:
    every mathematician who takes part in the creation
    of 4D space and higher is to be awarded a medal
    “To the winner over common sense”.
    Why?
    Because they have won us over using the
    absurd ideas of Minkowski and Kaluza.
    ==========..
    P.S.
    I asked some mathematician:
    Are there many different D spaces in the math/physicist’s works.
    Are there limits to these D spaces?
    Maybe is 123 D spaces the last and final space?
    He answered:
    “I think there are as many opinions on this as there are people
    giving thought to the issue.” My own opinion is that since the more
    immediately obvious 123 D option
    (either parabolic, flat or hyperbolic) did not allow,
    despite all efforts, reconciling the various theories,
    then there is a need to try something else.
    Maybe the time has come to try something else.
    ============..
    And what is mathematical opinion about the photon itself?
    Here is one example how mathematician tries to solve the problem.
    Russian scientist professor V.P. Seleznev created a “toro model”
    of light quanta. According to this model, the light quanta is a constant
    volume ring (like bublik). The speed of it is different and this fact gives
    a possibility to understand all the natural phenomena of light,
    to overcome all contradictions in physics and to offer a new
    technology. So it is written in the book .
    The secrets of Universe, 1998, V.D. Demin. Page 377
    Glory to this scientist!
    Glory to this professor!
    But I have only one question – Can this toro volume ring model
    (like a bublik) have volume in the vacuum?
    The answer is NO.
    According to J. Charles law ( 1787), when the temperature falls down
    to 1 degree, the volume decreases on 1/273. And when the
    temperature reaches -273 degrees, the volume disappears
    and particles become flat figures. Charles law was confirmed by
    other physicists: Gay-Lussac, Planck, Nernst, Einstein.
    So, according to Charles law the “ toro volume ring model ”
    is only a mathematic illusion.
    There are many different models of photon.
    Some scientists say:
    “The darkest subject in the science is light quanta.”
    To choose the correct one, we needs to ask a question.
    Which geometrical form can a photon have in a vacuum?
    ===================..
    Now mathematics goes ahead of science and physics follows it.
    Mathematicians carry the posters
    “Forward to abstraction”, “Forward to the absurd”
    and we all follow them. We march bravely on the dinosaur’s path.
    ===============. .
    Best wishes.
    Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
    http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2548
    http://www.wbabin.net
    http://www.worldnpa.org/php2/index.php?tab0=Scientists&tab1=Display&id=1372

  3. Gerhard Klose 18. Mai 2009 (22:23 Uhr)

    Ich finde Mr. Israel Sadovnik ist Klasse.
    Als ich seinen Kommentar von heute früh gelesen hatte,
    kam ich teilweise laut zum Schmunzeln, obgleich ein ernster
    Hintergrund da ist.

    Besonders seine letzte Frage: Wie sehen die Photonen aus, „Which geometrical form can a photon have in a vakuum?“,hat mich gereizt,
    ein paar Worte darüber los zu werden.

    Ja, die Photonen geistern seit dem Urknall mit konstantem C durch den Weltenraum.
    Durch das Hubble Teleskop sehen wir weit hinaus, fast bis zum Ende der Welt- dank der Photonen.
    Doch wie die aussehen, weiß ich auch nicht.

    Für mich sind Photonen Geisterteile, also

    HIRNGESPINSTE

    Wieso dafür ein Nobelpreis vergeben wurde, ist mir ein Rätsel.

    Mit Photonen kann man zaubern. Aus Photonen werden Elektronen und Positronen und umgekehrt.

    Was für ein Unsinn!!!

    Bei Google fand ich mit dem Stichworten „positron im atomkern“ auf Seite1, Ergebnis 4 —Werner Heisenberg: Diskussion über Sprache, 1933—Da werden Positronen vielfach erwähnt, da diese kurz vorher entdeckt wurden.

  4. socratus 20. Mai 2009 (06:01 Uhr)

    Mr. Gerhard Klose wrote:

    Ja, die Photonen geistern . . . .

    Für mich sind Photonen Geisterteile, also
    HIRNGESPINSTE

    Mit Photonen kann man zaubern.
    ====================== . .

    The speed of Light quantum.
    =================….
    1.
    The speed of Light quantum is constant: c=1,
    no matter how the source or the observer moves.
    / Michelson’s experiment. 1881. SRT. 1905. /
    2.
    But .. .. in every book and textbook is written that
    there isn’t absolute speed.
    For example in the book
    “ Relative theory- actual” by Prof. Ernst Schmutzer.
    Part 3.2.2.page 122. and
    Part 3.2.4. page 130.

    Another book “Relativity for the layman”
    By James A. Coleman.
    Part 3 pages 47 -48

    Another book “The materialistic essence of Einstein’s
    Relative theory” by Mostepanenko M. B.
    Page 37.

    Another book “ Einstein and development of physical/
    mathematical thought.” by Science Academy of
    USSR. Article “ Physics and Relative theory”
    by M. Born. On the pages 74 and 81.

    And article “ Relative theory and some questions
    about the optic of moving bodies” by Francfurt U. I.
    and Frenk A.M. Page 224:
    “ Relative theory doesn’t know absolute moving”.
    etc….
    3.
    From the school days I cannot understand how
    it is possible to say that the speed of photon is
    absolute constant c=1 and in the same time to say :
    “ All motion is relative (hence ,the theory of relativity).
    We can never speak of absolute motion …..”…etc.
    Maybe somebody can explain me this paradox.
    ===============. .

    Once again about Diogenes.

    They say that Diogenes illuminated faces of passers- by
    with his lantern when there was bright light, speaking that
    he is searching for a man.
    I am – Diogenes.
    I search for the person.
    I search for the reasonable person and to each I set a question:
    “ Listen!
    Speed of a light quantum in Vacuum is a constant,
    maximum, absolute quantity !
    Why does everyone say that there is no absolute speed of motion?
    The speed of this light quantum can be absolute only in Vacuum,
    in absolute Vacuum !
    Why does everyone say that there is no absolute reference system? ”
    Diogenes sets a question, and nobody can understand him, as always, in all times.
    I realize a reason of this bewilderment.
    You see nobody perceives, what is VACUUM.
    You see nobody perceives, what is a Quantum of light.
    =============== . .

    Quantum of light is a privileged particle.

    Only light quantum in Vacuum has
    a maximal, constant, absolute speed: c=1.
    No other particle can travel with the speed c = 1.
    1.
    According to the Michelson-Morley experiment, light
    quanta move with constant speed: c=1.
    The physicists say that constant speed ( c=1) is a
    result of the lack of mass of light quanta.
    2.
    According to GRT gravitation bends light quanta.
    This fact was tested by experiment and showed that
    Einstein was right.
    But to be bent from a straight line, light quanta
    must have a mass.
    3.
    If light quanta have mass, then according to SRT,
    moving with constant speed c=1, its mass becomes
    infinite. That is impossible.
    4.
    School’s question:
    What is Quantum of Light ?
    ======================= . .
    P.S.
    On my opinion without to understand what “ The Law
    of Conservation and Transformation of Energy/ Mass“
    means according to single light quanta this question
    connot be solved.
    ( And , please, don’t forget about dualism of light quanta:
    as a particle with or without mass ( ?), and a wave as a – ? )
    ================= . .
    P.S.
    A New Limit on Photon Mass.
    http://www.aip.org/pnu/2003/split/625-2.html

    A new limit on photon mass, less than 10-51 grams or 7 x 10-19 electron volts,
    has been established by an experiment in which light is aimed at a sensitive
    torsion balance; if light had mass, the rotating balance would suffer an
    additional tiny torque. This represents a 20-fold improvement over previous
    limits on photon mass.
    Photon mass is expected to be zero by most physicists, but this is an
    assumption which must be checked experimentally. A nonzero mass
    would make trouble for special relativity, Maxwell’s equations, and for
    Coulomb’s inverse-square law for electrical attraction.
    The work was carried out by Jun Luo and his colleagues at Huazhong
    University of Science and Technology in Wuhan, China
    ( junluo@mail.hust.edu.cn , 86-27-8755-6653). They have also carried
    out a measurement of the universal gravitational constant G (Luo et al.,
    Physical Review D, 15 February 1999) and are currently measuring the
    force of gravity at the sub-millimeter range (a departure from Newton’s
    inverse-square law might suggest the existence of extra spatial dimensions)
    and are studying the Casimir force, a quantum effect in which nearby
    parallel plates are drawn together.
    ============= . .
    #
    Some ideas by Richard Gauthier, Ph.D
    a)
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6510382465200639493
    b)
    Superluminal Quantum Models of the Electron and the Photon
    http://www.superluminalquantum.org/
    #
    ‚Light‘ is the Subject, not the Object!

    http://www.worldnpa.org/php2/index.php?tab0=Abstracts&tab1=Display&id=1598&tab=2
    / Dr. Cynthia Kolb Whitney /
    #
    Max Planck
    Nobel Lecture, June 2, 1920

    „There is in particular one problem whose exhaustive
    solution could provide considerable elucidation.
    What becomes of the energy of a photon after complete emission?“

    This question still waits for its answer.
    ===============. .
    Vacuum and Light quanta.

    All stars and planets move into the Outer space without
    friction. Therefore Newton and Huygens were sure that
    the Cosmic space, Aether /Vacuum was an empty space.
    In that time Newton gave preference to corpuscular
    light theory and Huygens to the waves theory.
    But later A.J. Fresnel and Th. Young discovered that
    light was transverse waves. And the transverse waves can
    propagate only in the firm and spring space as the steel.
    Can Aether/ Vacuum be empty and steel at the same time?
    Many theories were written to explain this problem. All of
    them are covered with dust and maybe only historians of
    science remember them.
    Now somebody wrote:
    “ It is necessary to explain not the Aether/ Vacuum
    but to explain that Quantum of Light is.“
    In my opinion we still don’t know what Vacuum and
    Quantum of Light are.
    ====================== . .

Einen eigenen Kommentar schreiben

Hinterlassen Sie eine Antwort

Erlaubter XHTML-Code: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>