Re: Sensation in der Physik : Nimtz Experiment wird durch Theorie des komplexen Brechungsindex bestätigt.

On 15 Nov., 14:30, "Josef Matz" <josefm...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
we are talking about signal transport. Signals have front velocities.
So please state the front velocity.

Right. But a constant signal is also a signal. You just do not transport
information.

so, who cares? If we do not transport information, there's nothing we
need to be excited about.

Antwort: Superluminal energy transport is exciting too i think. Its the same
mechanism.
After getting the fundamental relationships you can take any signal.

to take any signal, I at first need to know front velocity. If you do
not calculate front velocity, you are not able to consider arbitrary
signals.


for that out of Index theory. So i just do not considering signaling at this
stage.

and this is a decisive lack of your consideration.


Take the formula i gave you already.

which one?

Place in k`* = - k, then you find that the magnetic energy density is
exactly opposite to the electric.

you mean E^2 = -B^2? However, both are positive numbers.

I mean the Interference flux between two waves. The energy there is not
positive quadratic form..

you mean terms like E E' or E*'?
However, these are no the only terms. Evaluating E^2 to (E + E')^2
results in E^2 + 2 E E' + E'^2. The terms E^2 and E'^2 are always
positive.

Answer:

Yes two wave interference terms. All one wave terms are as you said. But all
these deliver no contribution
to energy flows through the gap.

so, what you wanna do is some connection between terms of energy flux
and terms of energy density? In a way that each term of energy flux
has a corresponding term of energy density? So that that one term in
energy flux that you elect as being the flux buildung up the tunnel
flux, has a corresponding term in energy density that is zero? And
because of this, you claim that tunnel energy density is zero?

This is complete nonsense. You always have to consider coomplete flux
and complete density. Identifying a term in flux with a term in
density does not make sense.

Especially, your "tunnel flux" is an interference term of a wave E
propagating in tunnel direction, and a wave E' propagating in opposite
direction. So, this term is surely not the term that makes tunnel
flux. The term that makes tunnel flux originates from the wave that
tunnels, and this is the wave that propagates in tunnel direction.
Contributions from a wave in oppositde direction have virtually
nothing left in the tunnel term, neither of flux nor of density.

Your argument, that the term of wave E in tunnel direction is zero,
and the interference term of E and E' is the only one the remains, is
wrong. The term is zero if you do time averaging AND assume infinite
width of the tunnel. As soon as the tunnel width becomes finite
(finite distance to second prism), the term of E becomes non-zero,
even time averaged.


the opportunity to indicate time dilation in units of absolute time
does not exclude that time dilation is because the time passing for a
clock is given by the arc length of the clock's world line in
spacetime.

All those isnt needed anymore.

we're not talking about what is needed.

Antwort: Now i  still do not understand. Changed causality results in
changed views of occurings too.
The point is: Time delay is not defined relative anymore. Its absolute now.
If you have thousand mass points goin from point A to point B at different
paths and velocities, you have 1000 clocks showing different times at the
end.
But the universal time is the same for all of them.

the opportunity to indicate time dilation in units of absolute time
does not exclude that time dilation is because the time passing for a
clock is given by the arc length of the clock's world line in
spacetime.


There are no world lines anymore.

why not?

Answer: Thats not needed anymore.

we are not talking about what is needed. We ware talking about what
is. There are many things that are not needed, but that are anyway.
So, need being needed is not an argument for not existing.


But thats in my opinion the only thing that must
bechanged in SR. Length contraction does not take place.

why?

Because there are no local Lorentz transforms necessary any more.

are you crazy? What the hell does Lorentz contraction have to do with
your feeling for a need of doing a Lorentz transform?

Antwort:

Now i think that there are no other inertial systems anymore except the
preferred.

that's wrong. The existence of preferred inertial system does not
exlude the existence of other inertial systems.


If you construct those, the physical laws are different from the preferred
space in rest.

that's why the preferred is preferred. So, if you say, there no other
coordinate system except the preferred one, you loose the ability to
consider the preferred one as being in any way preferred.


demonstrated falseness of the Einstein - Causality destroys the base
(the
first page in each GR book ) of GR.

you already told that. But you did not tell the reason.

t`= t G(4,4)=1

that's wrong. If t is the absolute time and t' some coordinate time, t
does not need to be t'. Introducing a preferred coordinate system
(x,y) to some 2D-space does not exclude other coordinate systems
(x',y') with x' != x, y' != y. It simply means, among all coordinates
constructable in the 2D space, (x,y) is the preferred one.

Antwort: If Einstein causality is wrong its over with GR.

so, you do not wanna bring a argument?


Cosmic time is everywhere the same.

but cosmic time is only t, not t'.

Antwort:
You dont need t´.

we're not talking about what we need. Curvature of earth surface is
not removed by the fact that the generally used coordinate system
where north pole has theta = 0° and Greenwich in Londen has phi = 0°
is the only coordinate system we need.


And you can improve it by introducing a gravitomagnetic field. Its obvious
that Saturn has a gravitomagnetic field (the rings)

what do the rings have to do with a gravitomagnetic field?

I think that it is obvious, Exact circling in one plane. I doubt that this
is just a result of  normal
gravity laws.

did you calculate that you doubt is correct?


If you place in Newtons gravity law the velocity dependent masses too,
you
get Mercurys perihelion the
same in 1st order than in GR.

you calculated this?

I just calculated the sign change.

little few.

Antwort: Theres no coming out anything different.

you calculated it now?


So forget on black holes.

if earth mass increases, gravity increases, resulting in escape
velocity increasing. At some earth masse, escape velocity reaches
velocity of light, so light can't escape earth gravity any more. No
matter if you use the word black hole to describe this or not.

Antwort: There are heavy objects that red shift light extremely yes. But
this light still comes out.

so, if escape velocity vecomes bigger than c, light still comes out?


Your own mass is increased too yes.

I talked about earth mass.

Antwort: The earth mass is the same.

when I'm traveling towards earth with a velocity near c, earth mass
increases. And you said: heavy mass = moved mass, so earth gravity
increases.


You overestimate the effects.

For a big relativistic mass you need a big force to make small effect.

no idea what you wanna tell me.

In a gravity field all bodies fwith sam velocity all the same.

do not unterstand the sentence.


Antwort: Right: Absolute time alone not. Instant processes,
superluminal
processes, not obeying Einstein Causality destroy GR.

why?

t´= t G(4,4) =1 no GR anymore

this is wrong, as we have seen above.

Answer: You always tell what is wrong.

yes, I do.


 In my opinion thats resulting from
the existence of instant processes.

then your opinion is wrong.


But ok i accept if you have another opinion. I do not say you are wrong,
well knowing you are wrong because
you do not believe in intant processes.

I really do not understand what makes you believe I wouldn't believe
in instant processes.


You can formulate the laws of mechanics using the cosmic time not the
eigentimes.

curvature of spacetime is not erased by my opportunites to formulate
laws in absolute time.

Antwort: Oh yes it is.

earth surface becomes flat just because I can use standard coordinate
system where north pole is at theta = 0° and Greenwich at phi = 0°? I
don't believe that.


don't understand. If spacetime is curved, you have GR, not SR. The
existence of an absolute time does not erase spacetime curvature and
therefore does not change GR to SR.

The existence of an absolute time which is everywhere the same does
destroy
GR.

why?

Answer: Because you can take this absolute  time.

I don't think that earth surface becomes flat just because I can use
standard coordinate system on it.


G(4,4) is in Einsteins low gravity limit the only that changes.

and dt' = sqrt(g_44) dt does not become dt' = dt just because t is the
absolute time.
The property of (phi, theta) being the preferred coordinate system on
a bullet's surface due to rotation of the bullet does not exclude
other coordinate systems (phi', theta') with phi' != phi, theta' !=
theta.

Answer: I think different. dt`= dt because both is absolute time.

if t' is absolute time, too, t' does not fullfill

dt' = sqrt(g_44) dt

A t' fullfilling this is not absolute time.


Then from
your formula follows g_44 =1

no, because assuming t' is absolute time as well as t, results in that
you cannot apply

dt' = sqrt(g_44) dt

So, from t' = t does not follow anything about g_44.


Forbitten by GR by the way.

why?

Because light bending in GR is caused by spacetime curvatures.

this does not forbid to consider the energy of a photon, divided by
c^2, as the photon's mass. It simply means that there's no need for a
photon mass.

Antwort: Yes: But if GR is wrong there is need for.

depends on the theory that replaces GR.
Maybe you should have a look on Ilja Schmelzer's General Ether Theory.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Sensation in der Physik : Nimtz Experiment wird durch Theorie des komplexen Brechungsindex bestä
    ... So please state the front velocity. ... Superluminal energy transport is exciting too i think. ... In a way that each term of energy flux ... energy flux that you elect as being the flux buildung up the tunnel ...
    (de.sci.physik)
  • Re: E = mc^2 VIOLATES Conservation of Energy Law.
    ... of energy never changes. ... converted to energy, or energy to mass, but the total energy and mass ... as the result of an increase in the velocity of a mass. ... from the middle of the bridge, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: JE and MMX
    ... do with the ether. ... An ether not at rest would require a velocity of ether term. ... >> c is relatie to anything but the stationary EM source described. ... the bullet bounce/kinetic energy c+v model was contrasted with the ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: JE and MMX
    ... do with the ether. ... An ether not at rest would require a velocity of ether term. ... >> c is relatie to anything but the stationary EM source described. ... the bullet bounce/kinetic energy c+v model was contrasted with the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Obliterating the Rocket Equation with a Torusail
    ... >> some unexpected science breakthrough (ala Cold Fusion), ... >>sum of the kinetic energy and potential energy per kg ... >>two and take the square root to get the exhaust velocity ... >Trip dynamics are governed by the power of the rocket. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.science)
Loading