Michael C. Duffy
& Joseph Levy, Introduction
László
Székely, Relativity in Terms of Measurement and Ether
Lajos Jánosssy's Ether-Based Reformulation of Relativity Theory
Joseph
Levy, Relativity and aether theory, a crucial distinction
Tuomo
Suntola, The Dynamic Universe Zero-energy balance restores
absolute time and space
Reginald
T. Cahill, Dynamical 3-space: a review
F.
Selleri, Relativistic physics from paradoxes to good sense
- 1
John
Carroll, Joseph Beals IV, and Ruth Thompson, Photon-like
solutions of Maxwell's equations
James
G. Gilson, Cosmological Coincidence and Dark Mass Problems
in Einstein Universe and Friedman Dust Universe with Einstein's Lambda
James
E. Beichler, The space-curvature theory of matter and
ether 1870-1920
Volodymyr
Krasnoholovets, On microscopic interpretation of the
phenomena predicted by the formalism of general relativity
José B. Almeida, Can physics laws be derived from monogenic
functions
Abstracts
László Székely
Institute for
Philosophical Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Postal
address: HU-1398 Budapest, Post Box: 594
In his monograph Theory of Relativity
Based on Physical Reality, Hungarian physicist Lajos Jánossy develops
the complete Einsteinian formalism of relativity theory by analysing
the process of measurement, the systems of measures created in this
process and experimental data expressed in terms of measures. He
demonstrates that based on a simple principle (which he calls the
Lorentz principle) and its generalization the whole formalism of the
original theory may be developed in conformity with the notions of
common sense without mathematizing physical reality, so that the new
way of development is of the same heuristic power as the original one.
His analysis makes it clear that the allegedly revolutionary new
notions of space and time follow not from physical experiences but from
Einstein's positivist philosophical commitments. Having established the
place and role of a privileged (but not absolute) reference system, at
the second level of his theory Jánossy connects this system to the
carrier of electromagnetic phenomena which he also assumes to be the
carrier of the gravitational and other physical fields. Although he
uses the term 'ether', he explicitly rejects the old theories of this
entity and attributes to it dynamic properties. In the last section of
the paper Einstein's and Jánossy's ether concepts are compared and it
is argued that despite the parallelism between the two concepts, from
Jánossy's point of view Einstein's ether is too mathematical to cure
the inverted relation between mathematics and physics characteristic
for Einstein's relativity.
Return to
Contents
AETHER
THEORY CLOCK RETARDATION vs. SPECIAL RELATIVITY TIME DILATION
Joseph Levy
4 Square Anatole France, 91250, St Germain-lès-Corbeil, France
Assuming a model of aether
non-entrained by the motion of celestial bodies, one can provide a
rational explanation of the experimental processes affecting the
measurement of time when clocks are in motion. Contrary to special
relativity, aether theory does not assume that the time itself is
affected by motion; the reading displayed by the moving clocks results
from two facts: 1/ Due to their movement through the aether, they tick
at a slower rate than in the aether frame. 2/ The usual synchronization
procedures generate a synchronism discrepancy effect. These facts give
rise to an alteration of the measurement of time which, as we shall
show, exactly explains the experimental results. In particular, they
enable to solve an apparent paradox that special relativity cannot
explain (see chapter 4). When the measurement distortions are
corrected, the time proves to be the same in all co-ordinate systems
moving away from one another with rectilinear uniform motion. These
considerations strongly support the existence of a privileged aether
frame. The consequences concern special relativity (SR) as well as
general relativity (GR) which is an extension of SR. We should note
that Einstein himself became conscious of the necessity of the aether
from 1916, in contrast with conventional relativity. Yet the model of
aether presented here differs from Einsein's in that it assumes the
existence of an aether drift, in agreement with the discoveries of G.F.
Smoot and his co-workers listed in Smoot's Nobel Lecture, December 8th
2006. Although it makes reference to previous studies, this text
remains self-sufficient.
Return to
Contents
Joseph Levy
4 square Anatole France, 91250
St Germain-lès-Corbeil, France
IWe study the case of two rockets
which meet at a point O of an 'inertial co-ordinate system' S, and are
scheduled to move at constant speed, in opposite directions, toward two
targets placed at equal distances from point O. At the instant they
meet, the clocks inside the rockets are set to zero. When they reach
the targets the rockets meet two clocks A and B whose reading is
identical. This question which was tackled in ref [1] is studied here
in depth. Assuming the existence of a preferred aether frame in which
the one-way speed of light is isotropic, and the anisotropy of this
speed in the other frames, we show that, if the equal reading of the
clocks A and B results from an exact synchronization, the clocks inside
the rockets will display different readings when they reach A and B in
contradiction with the relativity principle. Conversely, if the clocks
A and B, which display an equal reading, have been synchronized by
means of the Einstein-Poincaré procedure, the inboard clocks will also
display the same reading, a fact which seems in agreement with the
relativity principle. But this synchronization method presupposes the
invariance of the one-way speed of light, in contradiction with the
assumptions made, and, therefore, introduces a measurement error. This
demonstrates that if we assume the existence of an aether frame, the
apparent relativity principle is not a fundamental principle; it
depends on an arbitrary synchronization. In any case, this is an
example of an experimental measurement which can be explained by aether
theory without the assumption of the invariance of the one-way speed of
light in all 'inertial frames'.
Return to
Contents
Tuomo Suntola
Vasamatie 25, 02630 Espoo, Finland
The Dynamic Universe is a holistic
model of physical reality starting from whole space as a spherically
closed zero-energy system of motion and gravitation. Instead of
extrapolating the cosmological appearance of space from locally defined
field equations, locally observed phenomena are derived from the
conservation of the zeroenergy balance of motion and gravitation in
whole space. The energy structure of space is described in terms of
nested energy frames starting from hypothetical homogeneous space as
the universal reference and proceeding down to local frames in space.
Time is decoupled from space - the fourth dimension has a geometrical
meaning as the radius of the sphere closing the three-dimensional
space. Relativity in the Dynamic Universe is the measure of the locally
available share of total energy -
clocks in fast motion or in a strong gravitational field do not lose
time because of slower flow of time but because more energy is bound
into interactions in space. For
local observations, the DU predictions are essentially identical to the
corresponding predictions derived from the theory of relativity. At the
extremes, at cosmological
distances and in the vicinity of local singularities in space however,
differences become remarkable - e.g. galactic space in the DU appears
in Euclidean geometry, and
the magnitudes of high redshift supernovae are explained without
assumptions of dark energy or accelerating expansion. Black holes in DU
space have stable orbits down to the critical radius. Instead of a
sudden Big Bang, the energy buildup in Dynamic Universe is seen as a
continuous process from infinity in the past to infinity in the future.
The Dynamic Universe means a major step in the unification in physics
and cosmology. Electromagnetic energy is linked to the rest energy of
matter and the effects of motion and gravitation in local frames and in
the relevant parent frames are inherently included in the expressions
of energy states and characteristic emission frequencies of atomic
objects.
Return to
Contents
Reginald T. Cahill
School of Chemistry, Physics and Earth Sciences, Flinders University,
Adelaide 5001, Australia
For some 100 years physics has
modelled space and time via the spacetime concept, with space being
merely an observer dependent perspective effect of that spacetime -
space itself had no observer independent existence - it had no
ontological status, and it certainly had no dynamical description. In
recent years this has all changed. In 2002 it was discovered that a
dynamical 3-space had been detected many times, including the
Michelson-Morley 1887 light-speed anisotropy experiment. Here we review
the dynamics of this 3-space, tracing its evolution from that of an
emergent phenomena in the information-theoretic Process Physics to the
phenomenological description in terms of a velocity field describing
the relative internal motion of the structured 3-space. The new physics
of the dynamical 3-space is extensively tested against experimental and
astronomical observations, including the necessary generalisation of
the Maxwell, Schr¨odinger and Dirac equations, leading to a derivation
and explanation of gravity as a refraction effect of the quantum matter
waves. Phenomena now explainable include the bore hole anomaly, the
systematics of black hole masses, the flat rotation curves of spiral
galaxies, gravitational light bending and lensing, and the supernova
and gamma-ray bursts magnitude-redshift data, for the dynamical 3-space
possesses a Hubble expanding 3-space solution. Most importantly none of
these phenomena now require dark matter nor dark energy. The flat and
curved spacetime formalism is derived from the new physics, so
explaining the apparent many successes of those formalisms, but which
have now proven to be ontologically and experimentally flawed.
Return to
Contents
F. Selleri
Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Bari, INFN, Sezione di Bari
The present paper reviews the results
obtained in recent years by the author in relativistic physics.
Historically the two theories of relativity were born from the clash of
positivism and realism. The former current of thought used relativism
as a weapon against ideas of realistic inclination, like Lorentz's.
Paradoxes were the consequence in the new relativistic paradigm of
emarginating realism. The recent understanding of the role of the
conventional definition of simultaneity in relativistic physics has
opened the doors to new lines of thought. Epistemologists have stressed
that the coefficient of the space variable x in the Lorentz
transformation of time (we call it e1) has a nonphysical
("conventional") nature. Therefore, it should be possible to modify e1
without touching the empirical predictions of the theory. Given that
Einstein's principle of relativity leads necessarily to the Lorentz
transformations, such a modification implies however a reformulation of
the relativistic idea itself. With respect to this ideal picture, the
concrete development of the research has produced some exciting
surprises. Nature does not seem to be so indifferent about the value of
e1, given that several phenomena, in particular those taking place on a
rotating platform (Sagnac effect, and all that) converge in a strong
indication of the value e1 = 0 .This implies absolute simultaneity and
a new type of space and time transformations which we call "inertial".
Today we count on six proofs of absolute simultaneity, which are
essentially independent of one another (three are contained in the
second part of the paper). The cosmological consequences of the new
structure of space and time go against the big bang model. After our
results relativism, although weakened, is not dead and keeps proposing
itself under milder forms.
Return to
Contents
John Carroll,
Joseph Beals IV, Ruth Thompson
Centre for Advanced Photonics and Electronics, Engineering Department,
University of Cambridge, 9 JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge, CB3 0FA, UK
Novel photon-like solutions of
Maxwell's equations in free-space are constructed where transverse
fields, propagating at frequency ? with phase (group) velocities vp
(vg), possess local helical rotations at a frequency ? over the whole
crosssection. These are referred to as distributed spin rotations. The
frequencies ? and ? are independent with the helical
modulation propagating at vg, unlike single frequency classical
solutions with helical phase fronts. These novel solutions are
accessible only with vector formalisms although the axial fields
satisfy the standard scalar wave-equation. The theory is outlined using
the compact Riemann Silberstein formulation of Maxwell's equations with
a field vector F = E + icB. Light-cone coordinates facilitate a
manifestly Lorentz invariant theory. Appropriately chosen distributed
spin rotations provide a wide variety of Lorentz invariant packets that
envelope the classical fields and contain energy that is proportional
to the total helical rotation over the length of the packet. The
requirement that both transverse and axial fields are enveloped
together leads to quantisation of the rotational energy in integer
units, N. Solutions with different N are orthogonal. Operators
can be formed, which increase (decrease) the rate of helical rotation
and hence increase (decrease) the energy, and behave as promotion and
demotion operators of standard quantum theory supporting a view that
these new solutions form a photon-analogue. The paper concludes with a
review of single-photon experiments that are in keeping with this
model. Appendices contain detailed mathematics, speculative material
and theorise on quantum-like features of the photon-analogue with
regard to interference, polarisation and entanglement.
Return to
Contents
Cosmological Coincidence
and Dark Mass Problems in Einstein Universe and Friedman Dust Universe
with Einstein's Lambda
James G. Gilson
School of Mathematical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, Mile
End Road London E14NS
In this paper, it is shown that the
cosmological model that was introduced in a sequence of three earlier
papers under the title A Dust Universe Solution to the Dark Energy
Problem can be used to analyse and solve the Cosmological Coincidence
Problem. The generic coincidence problem that appears in the original
Einstein universe model is shown to arise from a misunderstandingabout
the magnitude of dark energy density and the epoch time governing the
appearance of the integer relation between dark energy and normal
energy density. The solution to the generic case then clearly points to
the source of the time coincidence integer problem in the Friedman dust
universe model. It is then possible to eliminate this coincidence by
removing a degeneracy between different measurement epoch times. In
this paper's first appendix, a fundamental time dependent relation
between dark mass and dark energy is derived with suggestions how this
relation could explain cosmological voids and the clumping of dark mass
to become visible matter. In this paper's second appendix, it is shown
that that dark energy is a conserved with time substance that is
everywhere and for all time permeable to the dark mass and visible mass
of which the contracting or expanding universe is composed. There are
more detailed abstracts given with both appendices.
Return to
Contents
James
E. Beichler
Nearly a half century before Einstein
developed his general theory of relativity, the Cambridge geometer
William Kingdon Clifford announced that matter might be nothing more
than small hills of space curvature and matter in motion no more than
variations in that curvature. Clifford assumed the reality of a fourth
dimension of space according to the new non-Euclidean geometries. In
this respect, Clifford merely followed the common assumption that
geometry modeled physical reality, so the new non-Euclidean geometries
represented real possibilities that space could be curved rather than
Euclidean flat. These ideas were further elaborated in Clifford's
Common Sense of the Exact Sciences of 1885,1 partially
written and edited by Karl Pearson six years after Clifford's
unfortunate death from consumption.
The short abstract of 1870 in which
Clifford explained his model of space, "On the Space-Theory of Matter,"
2 has long been recognized in studies on general relativity
and its history, but Clifford's concepts of space and their
relationship to physics have been limited to the role of "anticipation"
3 of Einstein's theory. Within this context, Clifford's model
has been branded a "speculation" 4 that was "untenable"
5 during his brief professional career. E.T. Bell has gone so
far as to liken Clifford's "brief prophecy" 6 to hitting "the
side of a barn at forty yards with a charge of buckshot." 7 Yet these
opinions of Clifford's contributions are completely inaccurate within
the context of Clifford's time period era as well as when more recent
trends in physics are taken into account. Clifford's work should now be
regarded as the first significant step toward a unification theory in
physics, rather than a simple 'precursor' to general relativity.
Return to Contents
Volodymyr Krasnoholovets
Indra Scientific bvba, Square du Solbosch 26 B-1050, Brussels, Belgium
The main macroscopic phenomena
predicted by general relativity (the motion of Mercury's perihelion,
the bending of light in the vicinity of the sun, and the gravitational
red shift of spectral lines) are studied in the framework of the
submicroscopic concept that has recently been developed by the author.
The concept is based on the dynamic inerton field that is induced by an
object in the
surrounding space considered as a tessellation lattice of primary balls
(superparticles) of Nature. Submicroscopic mechanics says that the
gravitational interaction between objects must consist of two terms:
(i) the radial inerton interaction between two masses M and
m, which results in classical Newton's gravitational law U = - GMm/r ,
and (ii) the tangential inerton interaction between the masses, which
is caused by the tangential
component of the motion of the test mass m and which is characterized
by the correction -G(Mm/r)(r2&
2 )/c2 . It is shown it is precisely this correction that is
responsible for the three aforementioned macroscopic phenomena and the
derived equations exactly coincide with those derived in the framework
of the formalism of general relativity, which means that the latter
must be reinterpreted as follows: the gravitational field of the
resting central mass is flat, but the emergence of a test mass
disturbs the field and its distribution exactly looks like the
Schwarzschild metric prescribes.
Return to
Contents
José B. Almeida
Universidade do Minho, Physics Department, Braga, Portugal
This is a paper about geometry and how
one can derive several fundamental laws of physics from a simple
postulate of geometrical nature. The method uses monogenic functions
analysed in the algebra of 5-dimensional spacetime, exploring the
4-dimensional waves that they generate. With this method one is able to
arrive at equations of relativistic dynamics, quantum mechanics and
electromagnetism. Fields as disparate as cosmology and particle physics
will be influenced by this approach in a way that the paper only
suggests. The paper provides an introduction to a formalism which shows
prospects of one day leading to a theory of everything and suggests
several
areas of future development.
Return to
Contents
