tar

Maybe Migl, but maybe not. I have done some reading and musing over the years and thought about the spacetime diagram and what it represents. I have a different take on reality than you do. You think the horizontal line implies faster than light or instant communication. I assume it shows NOW in a location separated from here by distance.\ Regards, TAR\ I am still working on it. Not ready for release. But everything we see has already happened. that is what I learned by reading an thinking about Enstien's theory of relativity. But we don't have to think just about what is real to us a a single observer, we can think about what is real to a second observer, separated by space, right now. As you can see the flash and smoke from the distant explosion before you hear it and you hear it feel the shock before you feel the heat, and you feel the heat before you smell the gunpowder. You can KNOW that Alpha Proxima is doing something right now that you will not see for 4.2 years or whatever. And the light coming in from Alpha Proxima is continual. That is there are photons in space halfway here, 3/4 here etc. All that stuff in between, the cosmic rays, the particles the magnetic waves are ALL real. It does not just become real when it hits our equipment. I was only using Bondi to express the idea that it was ok to invoke common sense when talking about space time. I agree that I do not adhere to current thinking. I seem to have wandered off the beaten path a bit. I won't argue the point. I will just try and solidify my thinking and put some math to it so you can compare it with what you've got. I am working on it. Well I am wondering if spooky action at a distance might be because something happened that affected both here and there at the same time. That is, the world existed continuously from time T to time T plus 1 in BOTH location A and B. Almost like a reflection. Consider when you raise your right hand the image in the mirror raises his left hand immediately yet the two are separated by a distance. Thread, I have heard you all and have dropped the unreformable media idea. I agree that no impulse can propagate faster than C.T Thank you for your instruction.

Thread, It takes a while for me to build each truncated octagon, but finally today I finished the first level buildout. 14 truncated octagons touching the 14 faces of a central truncated octagon. I have not studied it much yet. Just built it, but I was intrigued at the fact that when you look at each diamond shaped foursome it is arranged exactly like the 12 diamonds of the rhombic dodecahedron. However, it does not seem to be arranged in the same lattice structure as the rhombic dodecahedron. Although there are four hex planes and 3 square planes. Have not figured it yet. In any case it is very interesting to me, in terms of the unit volume idea I am working on because it seems to have identical symmetries and angles even though one is 14 faces and the other 12. Sort a dualness about these two figures, the rhombic dodecahedron and the truncated octagon. As you can tell looking at the toothpicks with the red tips and the plain toothpicks in exactly the same angle positions in each figure, one the one the faces correspond to the apexes and vice a versa. Excited to build out the next level...but I am figuring it will take 42 to build out the next level so I may just do an octant. and imagine what shape is developing. The rhombic dodecahedra build out to a cuboctahedron and I was guessing the truncated octagon would build out to an octagon, but now, seeing the first layer looking like a rhombic dodecahedra...i wonder. The eight hex sides point exactly though the middle of each octant of the cartesian coordinate system, xyz and the square sides point right down each axis.

Thread, Here the third figure over from the left in the front is the 12 balls arranged around the center ball in the 7 axis configuration. Works out to put a pearl in every location that was NOT where the 8 pearl arrangement on the cuboctahedron to the left of it had a pearl. There are 18 pearls that found a nice nest in between spheres. From left to right you have a sensible arrangement where electrons are trying to stay away from each other at the same time they are attracted to the nucleus. from left to right in the front row you have 2,6,18,32 the same way the elemental shells work out. Nice. I have a somewhat smaller sphere behind and to the right of the 85.4g sphere with the ring around it. It is the sphere that inscribes the 85.4g rhombic dodecahedron, the 85.5g cuboctahedron and the 85.5g cube. It is, for my purposes the unit sphere in the 7 axis coordinate system I am developing. This however is not the unit volume for the system. The unit volume is the dodecahedron with distance of 1 between the center of dodecahedron and any of its 12 faces. Also it appears the unit sphere inscribes the 85.5 gram cuboctahedron and cube as well so it appears mathematically things will work out nicely.. I am not yet ready to set the units though because the clay I am using seems to have a density of about 1.75 so I can not use a cubic centerment = a gram conversion. I would need a polyetheline dodecaheron or some other ideal material with the density of 1 to true everything up. However, the scheme is looking good. Still have work to do but it makes sense that the unit circle would not equal the unit volume as the sphere does not completely fill space but leaves space, even in the close packed arrangement. My measurements might be a bit off because it does not make any sense that the unit cuboctahedron would have the same volume as the unit cube because a cuboctocheron is cure with its corners cut off....anyway, I have work to do, but it looks promising. It looks like you might be able to put a unit sphere in the unit cube, and put 8 such spheres around the origin, one in each octant. I am hoping this works because then you could just shift the unit sphere to the center of any rhombic dodecahedron in the 6 d matrix of dodecahedra for figuring purposes. OR make measurements in the direction of woe of the six axis going through the 12 faces of the rhombic dodecahedron. You could measure out x number of radii in any of the six directions, which will get you to an exact location in space that is the center of another rhombic dodecahedron from which you could again measure out exactly in any of 11 directions to the center of another rhombic dodecahedron. You could use simple integer and fractional distance and simple and exact angles. Although you might still be able to use trig and radians and such, it would not be essential to get you to the area in space where you want to be. I am thinking there are some advantages to using a volume because you are not really starting at a point, you are starting at a volume and you are ending at a volume so approximations are never required and Pi is never absolutely necessary to use. And the whole system is completely scalable. You could make your unit rhombic dodecandrian you are using as the origin any size you want. tiny or huge. So whatever precision you need could determine what unit radius/distance from center to face of origin rhombic dodecahedra, you start with. I have not designed the procedure yet for getting to an area in space but there are nice possibilities since every rhombic dodecahedra in space is unique, yet identical and can be reached by numerous routes. Regards TAR Sorry forgot the picture Thread Actually the center of your dodecahedra are, not in the next octant they are in the next dodecant There are 4 nothern dedahdra, four suuthern a four equatorial. Each axis x.y.z rims throgh the cornern of a diamond on the long diaganal of each diamond the ends of diamonds along the short diagnal make the three poing in the middle of the octant. So the center of the face is not centered in the cartesian octant. It is centered midway between two axis, talking about the xyz remembering that if you are in the center of a cube the axis that are normal to your twelve faces are running through the center of the twelve edges of the cube

I don't think you are saying anything I don't agree with, I am in full support of Maxwell's equations and Lorentz transforms and Einsteins equations. I just think the "reason" the equations work might be different that the reasons you think they work. Something you consider as real I might consider just an image. Something you consider imaginary I might consider actual. Something might be viewed and measured but be the image of a star that super navaed a thousand years ago. Is it REAL? it is acually an image, so its imaginary. There are two areas in the Universe where things could be considered imaginary. One is all those OLD images coming in for everywhere. The other imaginary take is that right now the stars that sent the photons we are seeing now are putting out photons right now that we will see later. Imaginary but actual. We really will see Alpha Proxima in our skies in 4.24 years. That means the electeromagnetic waves and photons it sent out toward us 4.24 years ago are RIGHT NOW inhabiting the space between here and Alpha. Probably the photons we will see every night as we look at Alpha Proxima are in a curved train starting at Alpha headed out ahead of us at first, as someone would aim in front of a moving object to hit it. Those are all the photons that will hit our equipment in the future. Actually every photon from Alpha that hits our equipment HAS to be part of a spherical shell of photons sent out by Alpha 4.24years prior the photons illuminating our here and now. What this leads me to posit, in relation to this thread Swansont, is that the space between us and Alpha is not empty. It is loaded with photons coming from every visible object in the visible Universe at every possible frequency, long radio wave to high energy Gamma waves. Perhaps since the space is filled, we are already directly connected to Alpha and there is some way to swing a ball into the row and have the ball at the other end of the row, pop out. Einstein saw some spooky action at a distance when contemplating entangled particles. If there is such thing as spooky action at a distance, it must have a mechanism. I am just looking for what that mechanism might be. Regards, TAR In terms of a comprehensive math to put up against the current model., I do not have it. But I am working on it.

I know I can't assume I am correct swansont. That is why I am floating my scheme. To see if it does fit with what we know. In the light cone diagram of spacetime you are at the foci in the middle of the cone, with relative past and present outside the cone, your image going up and out into the future on the upward cone and light illumininating your present is coming in from the downward light cone. Everything inside the upward cone is your absolute present, everything in the downward cone is your absolute past. And here we seem to leave each other. I have, in my model a horizontal plane going through the foci, on which you can find every particle, and every body and every wave and object and location in the universe, right now. In my model this plane that includes the whole universe moves upward, matching exactly the progress of time. Every point in the universe progresses in lockstep, taking its light cone with it. My model matches yours in every way, I believe. Where we differ is in our assumptions in terms of what we hold variant and invariant. And from whose lighcone we are taking measurement. In your take you require length contraction and time dilation. In my model you can explain everything, with the same math but holding length and time invariant and looking at only blue shift and red shift,, measuring the change in wavelength and frequency and leaving space and time unmodified. MigL, I consider any separation in space a separation in time per the theory of relativity, because separate observers will order events differently, but consider motion through space as changing your position in respect to another. The speed of the change does not matter to me as much as the actual positional differential. Because the positional differential puts you out in the other observers future light cone. The farther you go out, the longer it will take for your present image to illuminate the other observers here and now. Same with his image. As you move away the image takes longer to get to you. As you look at each other you see his clock slow and he sees your clock slow, but in actuality neither clock has slowed. Both are ticking along just fine. So you don't have to stretch space or dilate time to explain the time it takes the tick to reach the other. You can just measure the redshift of light coming from the other and know how fast you are separating. When you stop separating the image will be neither red or blue shifted, but now you will be farther away from each other. Your light cones are seperated by distance but your clocks are both fine. They have both ticked of a week but the other clock reads 22 mins slow because you are on Mars and his clock is on Earth. You are both in the same time, just separated by distance. My answer to the traveling twin thought experiment is have both twins set their clock to a pulsar and have their clock tick off a tick at every pulsar pulse. When you get to Mars, you would have counted off the same number of ticks as the Earth clock plus or minus the ticks you would gain or lose depending on whether you were getting closer to the pulsar or further away on your trip to mars. Even though you will see each other's count of the other's pulsar ticks as 22minutes worth of ticks short, if you return to Earth, your ticks of the pulsar will exactly match. Regards, TAR

Thead. Major breakthroughs' this morning over the past couple hours. My mind is going a mile a minute in 6 different directions but I will try and put into words what has "clicked" for me this morning. First the rhombic dodecahedron DOES build out into the seven axis spherical close packing arrangement of 4 intersecting hex planes and 3 intersecting square planes. Second realization, the spheres build out in this pattern to the shape of a cuboctahedron and so does the rhombic dodecahedron. Third aha moment for me this morning. If you inscribe a unit sphere within a rhombic dodecahedron the distance from the center of the sphere to its surface is 1 r and the distance from the center of any of the 12 faces of the dodecahedron is 1 r. The implications of this are many and my mind is off on a number of tracks that I will try and flesh out on this thread as I build models and descriptions and flesh out the math and relationships with the Cartesian coordinate system. The center of the twelve faces, of a dodecahedron centered on the origin, in no particular oder would be 1,0,0 0,1,0 -1,0,0 0,-1,0 making center points of the four equatorial faces and the four north polar faces would be at 1,1,1 1,-1,1 -1,-1, 1 and -1,1,1. Southern four would be the center of the negative Z octants. I will work on some figures showing the build out of the layers of these "unit dodecahedral volumes".. One adjustment I have to make is the 85.5g unit volume I am working with is NOT the volume of the unit sphere. The volume of the unit sphere is less than the volume of the unit dodecahedra because the unit sphere dense packs but leaves spaces between the spheres that the corners of the dodecahedrons fill. So I have not yet found the relationship between the sphere that, inscribes a 85.5g dodecahedra, the 85.5g sphere that fits inside the 2 inch diameter outside dimension ring, and the sphere that circumscribes the 85.5g dodecahedron. I suppose it is going to be a matter of determining the distance from the center of a dodecahedron to any of its faces. That is equal to the r of the inscribed sphere.

Well perhaps. MigL. I don't have the time or inclination to obtain and read "electrons (+ and -) , protons, photons, neutrons, mesons and comic rays." so I guess I am not that serious about this, and in that regard this is just a hobby. I llike running the thought experiments I have been running since I read the books on QED and Relativity that I did read years ago. I am not credentialed but I have read a little and have taken Physics at a University level. I am not a complete layman but I have been talking with you guys about this since I frequented the site years ago. I know some of lingo and the assumptions and to a certain degree I feel part of the community. I don't know that NONE of my thoughts and ideas and observations and perspectives have NOT been incorporated into your thinking over the years. My task here is to add something, not detract. I believe I am seeing the universe in a common sense way that explains our observations. Where I debate is in the conclusions people draw from certain measurements, in terms of what they MUST mean. In science, equations are often applied as if you see the whole experimental space at once. This can be done in your head, but that is NOT how reality works. I am thinking that people shift from one observers location to another observer's location, or take an imaginary position from which they can witness the whole experiment at the same time, without making the proper transforms of EVERYTHNG from the one perspectives, to true it with other perspectives. When unrealistic conclusions are drawn, you assume the universe is wired. I assume someone is starting with a false premise or failed to take all the variables into account and did not transform EVERY pertinent data point from all the observers into a common frame or perspective that would leave the universe intact and perfectly aligned with itself. You guys always want to teach me science. I always think I have something to add to the conversation but you don't consider me a peer. This is fine. I get it. I am not initiated into every niche, each with its own proven postulates. The body of work of science is huge. Sometimes I think people get hung up on the wrong thing. Trying to find PI to the next digit, rather than trying to figure out what PI is. We can calculate a lot based on the parameters that others have figured. But just because your equation works to describe the behavior of reality, it does not mean your equation controls the behavior of reality. Math is a series of symbols, one thing standing for another and the relationship between the symbols, and functions, variables and results from one set of functions plugged into another scheme for a particular purpose. If your conclusion at the end of your figuring is that space contracts and time dilates it raises the question of why other things happening around the dilation and contraction do not notice. My feeling, in all the reading I have done and all my attempts to understand the equations is that C is too often reduced to an identity of 1 to simplify the calculations and the reality of the situation has been simplified right out of the equation. C is distance/time. If C is 1 you can change the distance and change the time at the same time and still have one. But what have you done? If the shorten the distance light can cover it faster, which means the speed of light is not invariant, so you dilate time to make C an identity again. I say you can't mess with the universe that way. You have to instead mess with your assumptions.

live instructions It was not a problem, it was an observation. Mars exists now, only once. It is not in ANOTHER space and time. It is in this one, just removed from us by 22 light minutes. There is only one now that the whole universe is currently in. We just witness it later.

So any life instruction we send the rover does not get to the rover for 15 or 20 ninutes, or whatever it is now. At one point I remember we were 22 light minutes from Mars. But we KNOW the rover is doing something right now, even though we won't get the pictures for 20 minutes. When we get the pictures we will see what the rover was doing 20 minutes ago.

MigL, I was thinking about the Muon experiment and read a short paper on how they determined the speed of a Muon and the half life of a Muon and they then jumped to the question of how many Muons "should" hit the ground starting with a Muon flux of a million at 14km. They say that Newtonian physics can not explain why more Muons than expected reach the ground and you HAVE TO assume time dilation from the Muon's frame or Length Contraction from the Earth's frame. What they never give me is what the half life of a Muon was figured to be in 1952 or HOW they figured there was a million muon flux at 14km. I was expecting the experiment to compare a Muon Scintillator placed at sea level with a Muon Scintillator at 14km. I also thought good experimental procedure would place a collector at 7km for comparison. But no. The paper described NONE of my concerns. It talked about Muons at a rest state and about the methods used to determine speed and half life at the surface, but never talked about how they determined flux at 14km. I would suggest the same experiment be run at 14km, at 7 km and at sea level to truely evaluate the flux at each level and determine a realistic half life to begin with. As it was, just doing the sea level experiments they came up with unrealistic results for the velocity of a muon. "The result obtained from this trial was an average speed of 30.1±1.2cm/ns. This is greater than the speed of light c. Have we really found a particle that travels faster than light? It is believed there are perhaps some systematics at play1. 1 We are grateful to Professor Becker for this recommendation" I am thinking that there might be other ways to explain Muon Flux other than length contraction and time dilation. You cannot truly compare what happens at the same time 14km up and at sea level without an observer at 7km that sees the events as simultaneous. Regards, TAR What I am proposing, generally is that one can, with ALL observations of everything, ever, posit a Universe that consists of a connected plane of light cone foci, that includes EVERY here and now that there is, And ALL events can be explained without ANY time dilation or length contraction required. Every here and now on the plane can figure their relationship to every other here and now on the plane, based on distance alone and one can MOVE laterally on this plane, and in so doing move their whole light cone to have a foci at a different here. All locations in space proceed in time in unison. Future is straight up, past is straight down and as time progresses your absolute past widens out and includes the absolute past of more and more of your surrounding universe. This idea is scalable and can actually merge general relativity with special as it can be applied to event the tiniest of here and nows. With tiny stuff you can move the targets light cone laterally by just moving your experiment from your desk to the next desk, and in actuality just by sitting still your experiment's light cone is moving around the Earth's axis and the Sun, and the center of the galaxy at a certain vector.s All the heres and nows on Earth, tiny or big have a unique light cone but each is constantly moving literarily on the universal here and now plane. and with the spiral nature of our passage though space the lilght cones on Earth all shift around and merge and misalign and realign enough that you can easily considers the whole Earth as existing in the same here and now, and STILL retain the differences in light speed travel between the various light cones on Earth. Thread. Lets say something is ticking in a muon like a little bomb that is going to pop, as some undetermined number of ticks but the half life of the muon has been determined and half any population of Muons will "blow" in 30 micro seconds or whatever. Each muon is ticking like a clock and an observer at 14km would see the Muon ticking REAL slowly as it speeds away toward Earth because the wavelengths of the image is stretched out, the frequency of the ticks is slow, but the image is coming in at C. The observer at sea level, looking up into the muon flux is seeing the ticks WAY blue shifted. Still coming in at C but the ticks are all compressed together in terms of the wavelength. The math works out the same if you compress or expand the wavelengths or timing of the ticks as when you squish or expand space and time. I submit it is more realistic to view thee ticking differential as a frequency thing than as a mutilation and twisting of space and time. And this being the case (in my estimation) you should be able to transfer data in space, FTL because ALL of space is progressing in time in a parallel manner and you can move your light cone foci by physically moving. This allows you to send data out, like a program to the Mars rover, that will allow you to operate the rover in your future light cone, NOW.

Swansont, my point about the velocities was that if there is constant data coming from Earth to Alpha and a craft takes that constant data flow TO Alpha the ship will arrive with the data 4.24 years BEFORE the constant data flow arrives by light image. Regards, TAR Point being if you move a light cone to the location of another light cone the two light cones are now the same and the absolute past and the absolute future of both you and the guy on the planet going around Alpha are united. Now EARTH is in the relative past and future of Alpha AND you and the both of you see Earth as it was 4.24 years in the past. The light cone is a consequence of the theory of relativity you cannot ignore it in talking about relativity. Things are simultaneous to an observer if they enter his here and now at the same time. This simultaneity is of course RELATIVE depending on where and when you are because other locations in space have their own light cone that defines absolute past below and absolute future above and all the volume out to the sides is RELATIVE past and future. I have understood this for 35 years at least and have been musing about the implications. You act like I am trying to disprove Relativity. I am not, I am rather using relativity to inform my understanding of the Universe. I run my thought experiments knowing that a light flash from here and now goes into our future light cone and a light flash illuminating our here and now is on our past light cone. The cone shell boundry is the speed of light but stuff happening inside the cone can happen at lesser speeds and is part of our absolute past and absolute future. But the rest of the all the heres and nows that are outside our light cone are in our relative past and future. EVERY photon coming in is old news. It has been traveling from a past event to our eye or equipment for as long as the event was distant. This MEANS there are other photons from past events on their ways here NOW. They are on our future light cone. The ones leaving Alpha NOW will illuminate our here and now in 4.24 years.

MigL, But in everyday experience we think of the front of the car moving instantaneously as the tires roll on the pavement. The whole car is already connected by molecular forces and magnetic forces and gravitational forces. It is already all in the same time. Existing in the same moment. When the back of the car goes a mile in a minute the front of the car goes a mile in a minute. I understand that there will be a lag time for light to go from the back of the car to the front, as there would take time for a sound to go from the back to the front or the vibration as I tap on the frame, but normally we don't consider that we have to add these femto or nano secs to the "time" it is at the front of the car and the back of the car, we include the whole car or the whole spaceship. Don't we? I am thinking we can do that because the car is already connected. Regards, TAR SwansonT, I was not adding velocity to the speed of light. I was adding the speed of light together with the speed of the craft to show that information could be moved faster than the speed of light. In we carried information to Alpha Proxima, which is currently4.24 years away by light we will NOT be 4.24 years away anymore. We will be there. However the Earth is STILL 4.24 lyrs away. Regards, TAR Swansont, I am speculating that if we start two digital clocks and leave one here and take one with us to Alpha Proxima, and look back at Earth with a powerful telescope once we get there, the time we read on the Earth clock will be 4.24 years before the time we read on our traveling clock EVEN THOUGH the two clocks are actually still in sync and reading the same time to people next to clocks. If we then sync set a digital clock on Alpha and return home, when we get home both our clocks will still be in sync and the one on Alpha will read, from Earth, 4.24 years slow. Regards, TAR

Hear we have 32 pearls added in the cradles between the axis in the manner I suggested before 8 in the triangular cradles provided at the poles and 8 in the diamond shaped cradles provided above the equator and 8 below. Total 32. Leaves room for a nice symmetrical 120th element 2,8.18,32,32,18,8,2. We can name it dodecaium when we make it.

Thread, Uranium is spaced out in shells, 2,8,18,32,21,9,2 fpr a total of 92 electron clouds. Oganesson is spaced out in shells of 2,8,18,32,32,18,8 for a total of 118 electrons. Interestingly if you inspect the above figures derived by the close packing of the 12 spheres around a central sphere, that builds out to a matrix of 4 intersecting hexagon planes and 3 intersecting square planes and you combine the 6 axis of the 12 segments of the sphere with the 4 axis of the intersecting hex planes and the three axis of the intersecting square planes you get the toothpick arrangement shown above with 14 plain toothpicks and 12 red tipped toothpicks nicely spaced around the center voluume.. You have eight around the equator, one at the top and 8 spaced around the sphere midish beween the North pole and the equator, Same arragement opposite in the south pole since each toothpick represents one end of the same axis. as belongs to its opposite toothpick. Interestingly when you look at this arrangement you see that you have spaces between the toothpicks that could hold a sphere, either between three neighboring toothpicks in q triangle formation or 4 neighboring toothpicks in a diamond arrangement. Counting these spaces we have 8 triangular spaces around the North pole, 8 diamond shaped spaces between the mid range toothpicks and the equator and the exact same opposite structure on the South end of the Truncated OCTOGON, Totaling 32. Regards, TAR

Thread, This morning I was looking at the tuncated octagon with the toothpicks spinning it in my hand and noticed that were 8 toothpicks spaced around the equator, eight midway between the equator and the poles, one at each pole and another 8 spaced around the area between the south pole and the equator. I found this interesting because both the 7 plain toothpick axis and the 6 red tipped axis are derived from the spacing of equal sized spheres around a center sphere. Much the same type of thing you might find when an electron cloud is looking for a "volume" to inhabit. I then looked up a few shell arrangement of some of the elements and the numbers 1 and 2 and 8 and 16 come up a lot. Also 10 which is 8 and two. Thought it interesting enough to mention here. Just another neat discovery looking at the 12 sections of the sphere. Lots of neat symmetries you get with the four intersecting hexagonal planes and the three intersecting square planes. Regards, TAR