HOME

 

Churinga Publishing

 

V

 

 

Books and publications on the interaction of systems in real time by A. C. Sturt
Economics, politics, science, archaeology. Page uploaded 13 March 2007

 





PDF PRINT VERSION

The Dilation of Time?

 

 

by A. C. Sturt

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

SUMMARY

Definition of SI unit of time

Electromagnetic phenomenon

Redshift

Argument point by point

Radioactive clock

Particle theories of light

Frequency change in transit

Huygens’ waves

ABSOLUTE time-interval

Relativity - a misinterpretation

Resonance

 

References

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 











SUMMARY

Definition of SI unit of time

Electromagnetic phenomenon

Redshift

Argument point by point

Radioactive clock

Particle theories of light

Frequency change in transit

Huygens’ waves

ABSOLUTE time-interval

Relativity - a misinterpretation

Resonance

 

References

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SUMMARY

Definition of SI unit of time

Electromagnetic phenomenon

Redshift

Argument point by point

Radioactive clock

Particle theories of light

Frequency change in transit

Huygens’ waves

ABSOLUTE time-interval

Relativity - a misinterpretation

Resonance

 

References

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SUMMARY

Definition of SI unit of time

Electromagnetic phenomenon

Redshift

Argument point by point

Radioactive clock

Particle theories of light

Frequency change in transit

Huygens’ waves

ABSOLUTE time-interval

Relativity - a misinterpretation

Resonance

 

References

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

____________________________________________________________________

 

Summary

 

The length of atomic clock time-intervals may not be the same everywhere. This is already known from GPS satellites, where differences are ascribed to relativistic “time-dilation”, and from “redshifted” light from stars, where increased wavelength is ascribed to their motion.  This paper proposes that these are in fact the same phenomenon: the frequency of electromagnetic radiation is reduced by travel through space.

 

Supporting analysis shows that “time-dilation” is a meaningless concept. A radioactive clock as proposed here cannot show time-dilation, because there is nothing between decay-events to dilate. The same is true of photons of light, where emission is the event. If an increase of wavelength occurs, it must be within, not between photons.

 

This paper proposes that light “particles” are not photons but induced rotating electromagnetic dipoles. The mechanism of light absorption and emission is the interaction of these dipoles with atomic orbits. Light is always observed to have a constant velocity because the translational velocity of atoms relative to light plays no part in the mechanism. Redshift is then the slowing down of rotation of the dipoles on transmission through space.

 

These propositions can be verified by measurement, and if confirmed, some reappraisal of physical phenomena will be needed. There may also be new phenomena awaiting discovery.

 

The Dilation of Time?

 

The second is being defined with ever increasing precision, using the time-interval associated with a particular transition of the caesium atom. Much progress has been made in the precision and reproducibility obtained with this transition, and moving to optical frequencies brings the possibility of even greater improvements. However, this paper is not concerned with advances in metrology, but rather the possibility of a significant new phenomenon.

 

The proposition here is that the actual length of time-intervals based on electromagnetic phenomena itself depends on the atom’s position in and velocity through space at any particular time. The analysis refers to space and the Universe rather than the Earth as the frame of reference. The Earth’s surface would be only one such location. The proposed phenomenon affects both the generation and detection of electromagnetic radiation, and its transmission through space. Any variation in electromagnetic phenomena in space could not be detected by a clock based on those very same phenomena. However, other phenomena may not be affected in the same way. One possibility is to use a clock based on radioactive decay.

 

There is no doubt that the light from stars is redshifted i.e. its frequency is reduced. Astronomers attribute this to the movement of stars, according to Hubble’s equation. The implication is that stars can recede from the wavefront of light which they have emitted, a phenomenon which is not observed on Earth. As Einstein said, the velocity of light in vacuo is independent of any motion of the body emitting the light.

 

However, it makes no sense to assume that redshift applies only to stars. Redshift has been observed with satellites on the other side of the Solar System, and there is no reason to believe that it does not apply to GPS satellites much closer to Earth. For man-made satellites, redshift appears to be attributed to Relativity. But is not the slowing down of atomic clocks in space another way of describing redshift?

 

To test this hypothesis a simple experiment is proposed which may show whether the redshift of electromagnetic radiation from stars occurs simply as a result of passage through space i.e. without the confusion introduced by relative motion. In this experiment pulses from a ruby laser are aimed at the reflectors left on the Moon, and the reflected beam is detected. This procedure is already done routinely to calculate the distance of the Moon from the Earth by elapsed time.

 

The difference is that in this experiment tests are made for a reduction of frequency of the returned pulse by mixing it with the original transmission and looking for a beat. Any beat frequency would probably be in the microwave region. The distances involved are minute in astronomical terms, but they might just be sufficient to demonstrate the effect. If any reduction occurs, it can result only from transit through the space between Earth and the Moon (twice – there and back). It could not be a relativistic effect, because the radial velocity of the Moon relative to the Earth is walking pace. If it can happen with the Moon, it can happen with any geostationary satellite.

 

It is possible that a different phenomenon such as radioactive decay might not redshift, or else might follow some other pattern. A clock based entirely on radioactive decay as described in (1) would detect the difference. If radioactive decay behaves differently, this would lend credence to the proposition that so called relativistic effects apply only to electromagnetic phenomena. This could be settled by making actual measurements.

 

In fact time-dilation does not seem to be a meaningful concept on close examination. If anything dilates, it must be the time-interval. If time-intervals are found not to dilate, neither do distance-intervals. Nor for that matter can mass increase with velocity. The whole of Relativity would be at stake, and the way open for a return to a deterministic alternative. Such a deterministic model has been proposed which uses a hyperbola with the velocity of light as the asymptote (2). The Lorentz equations on which relativistic change is based are also a form of hyperbola.

 

The line of argument is as follows:

 

·        Time is nothing without an event to mark it (Einstein).

 

·        Time cannot be a variable for a single, isolated event.

 

·        A radioactive clock counts decay events.

 

·        Decay events are stochastic and independent i.e. each is a single, isolated event, occurring at random and uninfluenced by other decay events.

 

·        The number of decay events which occur in any interval of time in a population of a radioactive species, depends only on the number of radioactive nuclei present at the time of each decay, whatever clock is used. Hence the exponential equation for decay of the population with respect to time.

 

·        Between decay events nothing happens. Decay events can be plotted on a historical time-line like wars or influenza outbreaks, but that does not mean that there is any interaction between them. The only connection between events on a time-line is that each one occurs after the one on its left and before the one on its right.

 

·        Since nothing happens between decay events, the corollary is that time-dilation, which is an increase of length of the time-interval between such events, simply cannot happen. There is nothing to dilate or shrink.

 

The same argument applies to a “particle” theory of light, in which emission of a photon is an event.

 

·          Photons from a truly point source of light are emitted in stochastic, radial directions. They may appear to us as candlelight, but that is because we only ever see them en masse (as populations?).

 

·          Photons are also emitted stochastically with respect to time, unless there is some way of achieving simultaneity at the level of individual atoms. (There is no such thing as simultaneity – also Einstein!).

 

·          The consequence of this is that photons emitted from a point source never interact, because they never meet. They are travelling along radii away from each other at identical speeds. They never meet, even if they happen to be on the same radius, because of their constant velocity.

 

·          Any information on frequency in light must therefore be contained within each individual photon and realised again at the detector. This is also exactly in accordance with the Theory of Light as Rotating Electromagnetic Dipoles (3).

 

·          Any change of frequency as in redshift must therefore occur within the photon.

 

·          Since there is no interaction between individual photons, there is nothing between photons to dilate or shrink. Thus electromagnetic radiation cannot undergo time-dilation. The time between photons does not change, even if the frequency within photons slows down. So if wavelengths increase, there must be another cause.

 

The concept of time-dilation would appear to be more feasible with Huygens’ wave theory of light than with Einstein’s particle theory, because waves imply a continuous medium. The theory of light as induced Rotating Electromagnetic Dipoles or REDs accounts for both particle and wave behaviour.

 

Nothing can match the precision of time-intervals available from electromagnetic radiation, simply because of the enormous velocity of light compared with its wavelength. However, that is not the same as accuracy in the sense of being Universally the same. Hence the suggestion in (1) that the term ABSOLUTE should be used for a time-interval which has the property of measuring the same length everywhere at all times under all conditions.

 

The precision of measurement of the second, may or may not be a deficiency of a radioactive clock compared with atomic oscillations. Certainly the second is a very convenient time-interval for many (though not all) applications, where that is the principal concern. But dividing the day into twenty four hours and subdivision of hours into units of sixty happens to have come down to us from Mesopotamia via the Ancient Greeks and the Arabs. Thus we have inherited our definitions of time-intervals from the Sumerians of 3000BC, who counted in sixes, twelves and sixties.

 

There is no reason why we could not choose a much longer standard time-interval than the second for particular uses, for example the hour, day or month. This would mean that precision might be obtained with a count of, say, 105 per second perhaps for a period of a week or so to define a time-interval of the required statistical precision. The number of counts during that period would define the ABSOLUTE interval of time.

 

The radioactive clock requires precise measurement of Avogadro’s number to obtain the number of nuclei in a quantity of radioactive material. This is desirable, because it would permit independent construction of identical radioactive clocks. However, a small error is not a fatal flaw for the purposes of comparison. If necessary, it could be overcome by definition of an agreed standard, like the platinum kilo which has proved so useful, and there may be other ways around the problem e.g. using techniques which can be arranged to count numbers of species e.g. mass spectrometry. In any case it need ever be done only once to provide a Universal reference against which all other radioactive clocks could be calibrated.

 

Such ideas are foreign to the great majority of physicists. (As a matter of interest, most physicists still accept the concept of light as both wave and particle, which is surprising). That is why direct measurements are proposed to substantiate a deterministic model.

 

Einstein seems to have based his Theory of Relativity on a misinterpretation of the measurements made by others. The velocity of light in vacuo is constant; when we measure the velocity of light in vacuo, we always get this constant value irrespective of the motion of the source or the detector. The reason for this is nothing to do with dilation of time and distance, if the theory of light as rotating electromagnetic dipoles holds good.

 

According to this theory (4) the processes of emission/reception of light depend on the resonance between REDs and the electrons orbiting the atoms. This form of interaction is independent of the relative velocity of light “particles” and atoms, because it depends only on the frequency of rotation of the RED and the orbiting of an electron in the atomic structure. It is not a mechanical, billiard-ball type of collision. If they interact and resonate, we see light, the characteristics of which depend on energy changes in the atom, not its translational velocity. If they do not interact, but just pass by, we do not detect light. Thus the velocities of source and detector have no bearing on what is observed.

 

The deterministic model of physics referred to above stemmed from consideration of the cosmological Big Bang as a system, because in system terms the Big Bang model seems to be unsustainable. That, of course, is equally heretical to cosmologists and astrophysicists, though forty years ago their views were quite different. However, there is a steady accumulation of measurements reported in the literature which are consistent with the view that the Universe is regenerated part by part by explosions happening stochastically both in time and space (5).

 

If time-dilation is found not to occur, say by use of a clock based on radioactivity, there may be some big discovery waiting to made just out there in space, namely, the phenomenon which causes redshifts. A radioactive clock would have to be entirely divorced from electromagnetic time-intervals to detect any effect. It may be necessary  to go and look for such a phenomenon, because it needs an environment which is different from the Earth’s surface to make comparative measurements. ABSOLUTE measurements of time-intervals are a vital part of unravelling the complex interactions. If the analysis stands up, the implications reach well beyond the measurement of time-intervals.

 

A.C. Sturt

11 May 2005

 

 

References

 

  1. A.C. Sturt 2003 Radioactive Clocks – A Basis for the Absolute Measurement of Time www.churingapublishing.com/radio_1.htm (and pdf file)

 

  1. A.C. Sturt  2003 Mass in the Universal Inertial Field – A Revised Version www.churingapublishing.com/numass_1.htm (and pdf file).

 

  1. A.C. Sturt  2003 The Nature of Light – A Unified Theory of Rotating Electromagnetic Dipoles, www.churingapublishing.com/relite_1.htm (and pdf file).

 

  1. A.C. Sturt 2003 On the Nature of Things – A Time and Space Odyssey www.churingapublishing.com/oduss_1.htm (and pdf file).

 

  1. A.C. Sturt 2001 The Timeless Universe I. A Model of Stochastic Regeneration and Redistribution, www.churingapublishing.com/timeless_1.htm  (and pdf file).

 

 


 

 



 




 


time dilation meaningless concept


for particulate theories of light
 

essentially an electromagnetic phenomenon
 


measurements required

 

 

 

SI time-interval

 

precision
 

 

electromagnetic effect varies in space?
 

other phenomena not so vary?


 

redshift






not just stars





test of redshift made in space

ruby laser Moon reflection






beat frequencies





radioactive clock





time dilation not meaningful
 
 







 

 

 

 

 

 

 

clock based on independent events

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

nothing happens between events

 

 

nothing to dilate

 

 

 

same argument

 

particle theories of light

 

 

 

photons

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

rotating electromagnetic dipoles (REDs)

 

 

redshift within photon

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Huygens

 

 

 

 

 

ABSOLUTE time-intervals

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mesopotamian units!

 

 

 

 

 

other standards?

 

 

 

 

Avogadro’s number

 

number of radioactive nuclei

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Einstein

 

Theory of Relativity - a misinterpretation of observations

 

 

REDs and resonance

 

orbital interactions

 

not translation

 

 

result is a deterministic model of physics

 

no Big Bang either!

 

 

 

need for measurements in space?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Copyright A. C. Sturt 11 May 2005

 

 

 

Churinga Publishing

^