Change Relativity? Is neutrino tailgating photon?

Is causality also relative, if that is so, son you hit a golden pot in physics, “that’s your causality man, that’s your problem. I don’t have a f** with that.” But you travel backwards in time. “Nay that’s how you see it, you speed blinded moron, I don’t give a damn about what you think of me. Even if I start late at home, I am gonna kick your ass man, I will reach work early. You will think I started now and came back last nanosecond but that’s because you have a sloppy watch hen hen hen”

Whats happening?

Last night I wrote a very long article and its now a featured blog on “physics” at this website. It has happened many times already. But there I told you that “speed of invariance” — invariance of speed also means speed of invariance, I changed linguistic grammar, not the physics, is broken when invariance of proper-time is broken. For photons we thought taking clue from its zero-mass we can also set the proper-time to be zero.

, for photons.

Also check the diagrams here.

What is the right hand side? It is an equation for circle, where the change in time and change in distance are the coordinates. We work in units where; .

That is we adjust everything so that this ratio is scaled to 1. Then everything becomes far more easier to compute, analyze, interpret and s-th. We have 1 light-second as distance, 1 second as time and the ratio is 1 light-speed, ( = 1 in speed-of-light units).

Note: when we take ratios the units vanish, as they cancel, when they are equal, this is an attribute of Physics, which is different from mathematics, math does not come in units or more superficially the name of these units which when equal cancel only in the equation, not in the nature of things, they give another unit, all physical quantities come in units, which is defined from the variables that go into it’s making.

The fact is new physics means discovering a new variable that was defining the attributes of the unit, but was escaping the calculations much in the same way units cancel when they are expressed equally. Nature is hideous even if we suppose its language is not.

The photon or light therefore keeps a circle while moving, so that the distance and time are equal, in this unit, 1 light-speed. When they go one over the other, the proper-time is no more zero.

If you read the gravitational fallout I described in my long article yesterday, I just mentioned at top, energy causes such a fallout hence having non-zero energy means having nonzero proper-time. In case of photons the proper-time was defined for photons having zero-mass or energy which is called rest-mass or rest energy but nobody is allowed to go to its rest frame, not even another photon, this is kind of superfluous and no theoretical physicist has ever explained this (to my knowledge).

So that is the sacred tomb where no-one goes. Well in worship as pertains to Hinduism only the priest goes inside the “tomb”. And the priest does not tell you what is there except “it” tells you there is a God and the God and the priest is “abiding” on all of us.

In Physics we can question such a moral, except I am pretty sure no-one has come with a good explanation ever. What happens when we go to the rest frame of photons. We are not allowed to go. OK the black-holes cause an extreme fallout to photon’s speed so that it can not escape. That means speed 1 drops to say 0.01. Large large fallout. Can we then go to it’s rest frame? Well if you are a larger mass you still suffer fallout and your speed is 0.0000001. But it does not answer why we can not go to it’s rest frame.

The problem with the equation of circle above is it is written in 1 frame of reference only, but we can not say the rest-frame. Because rest frame is by definition a frame where c = 0. That will make the equation a set of indeterminate points? Because dx/dt = 0 ⇒ dx = 0 and dt is not.

If one of them is not zero then how can we have an equation where the square of these is zero, irrespective of we add or subtract. For one thing one can point out there is a negative sign between distance and time squares, but then the complex numbers are good enough to describe these light circles.

The point remains, the square is not zero until they are equal and both of them non-zero. When one of them is non-zero the square is not zero although the ratio could be infinite or zero depending on our test. Ratio could not be infinite because nothing can move at infinite speed even infinitely higher than light, which has never happened.

But having a zero speed would be fine, then distance is not covered when time is spent. That would make the speed zero but the circle of light a circle of time only — which is what happens in a black-hole, but proper-time is not zero. In a black-hole the proper-time is maintained back to zero, by a 1 light-speed fallout?

But If the proper-time is not zero in a black-hole, it is not zero for anything else either because there is a fallout howsoever tiny, and this fallout makes things maintained back to 1 light-speed. And we do see this by bending of light by solar gravity.

Even our planet-earth would cause about 1 cm in 1 light-second fallout, to light, which is an angle of , a very very small angle.

This is essentially what I had obtained for deflection of light by earth at perigee of Galileo-1, check diagrams, posted recently,  at 1 GHz would give 3.3 mm = 0.33 cm which is also why you see 3.92 mm fallout for Galileo-1 flyby, essentially infinitely away from perigee.

The slight changes come from actual trajectory etc, that is, exactly what path you take in the configuration of the earth and the greater-cosmos-suburbs. For light it will still be less than  3.3 mm because the 1 cm is an approximation of 9 mm, 1st of all, plus, the fallout decreases with separation, light would experience these fallout really fast but not really more or really less.

That is the difference between space and time. You can not say Relativity equated space to time, may be it “equated” but they are not the same. There is still differences, in speed of light, with actual speed of light units, even if c = 1, it is a ratio where space sits on top because it likes that position. Time on the other hand takes the pleasure from below, not a gravitational below but a mathematical notation.

Nobody has ever changed that notation, not even Einstein. The fallout for light as I had seen in that diagram was in the 2.25 region. So now we know it is 2.25 mm at infinite distance. Starting from about surface of earth where it was ~3.3 mm it has, due to lessening of earth’s torment come to a region where it is still deflecting by earth’s gravity by 2.25 mm but not zero, zero will be when it is still infinitely infinitely away, but you know how asymptotes go.

Then it will meet effect of mars, of sun, Jupiter, stars, galaxies and so on. It is lost in the cosmos like we are lost on our planet. Einstein made light a blinded person. You thought neon light is cool, but it can’t see much to your surprise, it is lost, that’s still news from 1920s. Hollaback.

Now back to .

1. If there is gravity there is a fallout in this equation — in general if there is energy there is a fallout.

So You can say proper-time (energy) even for light. Light speed invariance means this was considered a linear function, always zero, but nobody cared to ask or reply, why? There is “light=hope” that this is a different function in nature.

2. Once the proper-time is zero in one frame the Lorentz transformations can still make this zero in all frames. That’s suave, it has been made like that. Lorentz transformation were thought out to deal only to bring  the relativity of ether-space not eg of relativity of causality.

Causality itself might be relative, and photon might, like us, itself not equipped to see the greater causality or greater reality of neutrinos. The causality in nature is preserved to satisfy our intelligence because that’s all that we can make sense of. We do not make more sense so we should not talk about it? But the Physics community is more aware of the causality absoluteness or invariance in Lorentz transformation equations.

But one must note that it is not the Lorentz transformation of the special relativity but point 1 must remind us that Causality invariance is also true for effects of gravity which being only one form energy it must be generalized to all forms of energy.

To my knowledge no-one has ever generalized such a condition although we believe that such is true. That is my point, investigate all fractions of energy and all terms to see if we are missing something. Either way of OPERA anomaly we may be seeing a great achievement to make and proper-time may be redefined and readjusted to zero for mass-less particles.

One more point I would like to make is that the photon mass is not exactly zero and neutrino mass although quite far above photons is not so on a “pretext of scale”. That is, while neutrino may only be 9 order smaller than a proton and 18 orders above a photon, in the scale of things, as we see today the 18 orders above photon may actually come to rescue the photon theory or may not, nobody has studied this to great detail. eg the proper-time and energy function that one may construct may suitably show that 60 nano-sec early arrival of neutrinos was expected from a more generalized theory of Relativity if we followed our intuition and the line that had been carved out for us by the giants.

They did not work towards self glory even though they were scoffing and gasping in glory, they constructed a theory that was valid enough but made ways simpler enough that the invalidity would also be investigated with as much responsibility.

Thanks for reading;

Manmohan

A beautiful evening I must open up to the outside area of my house… The first thing I did is wrote this blog for you when I woke up this afternoon.

Hellow world.