Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #450332

Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4

From Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Newsgroups sci.physics.relativity
Subject Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4
Date 2018-02-18 19:00 +0100
Message-ID <fett9sFn8s9U1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References <caf52c8a-289c-424d-a567-01e901990dc5@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

Am 17.02.2018 um 09:07 schrieb Pentcho Valev:
> "The effort to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity means reconciling totally different notions of time. In quantum mechanics, time is universal and absolute; its steady ticks dictate the evolving entanglements between particles. But in general relativity (Albert Einstein's theory of gravity), time is relative and dynamical, a dimension that's inextricably interwoven with directions X, Y and Z into a four-dimensional "space-time" fabric."

This is in fact true.
There are other incompatible concepts about material objects, too.

Quantum mechanics is mainly about particles, while GR and SRT assume 
something called 'length-contraction'. And this does not square well 
with assumed features of material objects.

But who is right?

Actually I assume, that GR is right and QM provides only a local 
approximation, which is valid under the assumption of a constant and 
universal time.

This 'universal' refers to 'universe'. But: This universe is actually 
not universal, but our own specific impression we have from a more 
difficult reality.

'The universe' is actually our own past light cone, hence kind of 
optical illusion.

To show the validity of this assumption I had used various examples.

My favorite example is 'Growing Earth'. But also possible are comets or 
the impact of the probe on Temple I.

TH


ps

here you find a more elaborate version of this concept:

https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dd8jz2tx_3gfzvqgd6

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-17 00:07 -0800
  Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-02-17 15:27 -0800
  Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-02-18 01:21 -0800
  Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-18 19:00 +0100
    Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-18 19:31 +0100
      Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-20 22:01 +0100
        Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-20 22:07 +0100
          Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-20 22:35 +0100
            Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-20 22:55 +0100
              Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-21 15:06 +0100
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-21 19:09 +0100
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-02-21 11:19 -0800
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-22 12:49 +0100
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-22 21:38 +0100
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Evonne Lamarr <rairi@liwowa.ar> - 2018-02-22 20:40 +0000
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-22 21:43 +0100
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-24 19:39 +0100
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-25 20:27 +0100
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Eveline Hurst <rutu@rwsrnlv.ee> - 2018-02-25 21:08 +0000
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-26 07:05 +0100
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Eveline Hurst <rutu@rwsrnlv.ee> - 2018-02-26 13:11 +0000
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-26 11:47 +0100
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Ický Bezdrátovì <ikbe@wmkfre.np> - 2018-02-28 12:47 +0000
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-02-22 21:23 -0800
                Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-26 18:40 +0100
    Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-02-18 18:57 -0600
      Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-19 15:21 +0000
        Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-25 23:24 +0100

csiph-web