A PICTORIAL MODEL OF UNIVERSAL EXISTENCE
In the third installment of this document an illustration was provided to help clarify the concept of relative units of measurement. The reader was reminded that the only portion of the illustration that actually represented reality was the current instantaneous distance and motion between the observer and observed point at the moment of observation (T=0). The relative unit of time was defined as that duration of time required for the object to move along the arc until the length of the arc was equal to the length of the radius. The illustration also included the imaginary projected future location of the object as it traveled along an arc of constant distance from the observer as a result of a projection of the motion during one unit of time. That illustration is repeated here:
This illustration demonstrates the two lowest level "space-time" frames. The most basic level exists when the only factor involved is the radial distance of separation, with no ongoing motion at the time of the observation. If there is no relative motion, time is not a factor of consideration. It is at this level that man perceives his current "fixed" surroundings such as the furniture within his room, or the current fixed landscape. At this level of space time, the observer and observed are in essence rotating together in unison on the face of a common clock.
If relative motion does exist, the space-time frame moves up to the second level, as shown in the illustration. This second level of space-time applies where man observes the existence of motion of another point, but does not perceive any difference in "elevation" between the object and himself. An example is the motion of an observed object along the surface of "level" earth. In this second level of space-time frame, any change in relative motion must automatically be matched by a proportional change in the length of arc so that the central angle (time factor) remains at a value of one relative unit when the arc length is equal to the radius. Because the central angle is always one radian when the unit of time is one (by definition of the terms), the angular rate of motion is always simply one radian per unit of time.
As the radial distance (and tangential arc length) increases, that factor which science refers to as "tangential velocity" increases when measured in fixed, irrelevant units of measurement currently used by the establishment. However, in terms of relative units of measure the tangential velocity remains constant because the relative unit of length (the radius) is always directly proportion to the the length of the arc.
The third level of space-time frame comes into affect if both the observer and the observed are mutually attracted to a third point (such as the center of the Earth). We normally refer to such a difference in terms of "elevation" or "altitude". However, in terms of space-time, this is simply a difference in the radial distances of the observer and the observed relative to the point of common attraction.
Such a difference can be considered a "potential" difference in velocity. That difference in altitude can be eliminated if the higher (greater radius) object "falls" to equal level as the lower object. During that process of "falling", the relative unit of length and time applicable to the "high" object will decrease from its original value (radius) to the final value (radius).
Based on current scientific concepts of fixed, irrelevant units of measurement the result of the "fall" is related to an increase in the "velocity" of the object. However, in terms of relevant units of measurement, there was no actual increase in velocity - only the relevant unit of length changed as a result of the "fall".
The change in elevation (radius) might be considered as a dissipation of the "potential velocity" difference which existed due to the original difference in elevation between observed and observer. When considered in that sense it becomes obvious that a mathematical difference in the ratio of radii in this third level of space-time frame is simply a reciprocal condition of a difference in the ratio of relative motion associated with the second level of space time frame. This reciprocal relationship is the same relationship which was initially indicated by Kepler’s first law which advised that the product of velocity times radius of a planets orbital path around the Sun is a constant mathematical value.
In the earlier section, the reader was advised that since motion is a scalar, rather than vector type factor, the illustration shown above, would have a complimentary motion perpendicular to the plane of the paper. The moving point would move outward perpendicular to the plane of the paper a distance equal to it's movement along the arc during the same unit of time.
We are ready now to attempt to illustrate that three dimensional affect, as the above diagram moves outward into the third dimension of space. We shall also extend the length of the prior arc from one radian of angle, to a continuing arc length of several radians - and therefore a duration of several units of relative time. The result is that the moving point traces through a helical path through space as the units of time pass.
SHADOWS OF REALITY
The intent is to show how the concepts science refers to as space and time can be directly related to electromagnetic concepts of wave length and frequency. This is done by depicting the motion of a sequence of particles (photons) as they move through space in a helical path around an imaginary center line. The situation is depicted here:
The model can be considered in either of two ways. One way is to envision the sequential location a single moving object (photon) as it moves through time during one unit segments of time. A second way is to envision a family of identical moving objects (photons) equally spaced at intervals of one unit of time ( and one unit of distance), and all members of the family following an identical helical shaped path (or "trail") through space.
The upper left portion of the illustration depicts the situation in three dimensional fashion. The colored dots represent the sequential location of equally spaced (in both distance and time) photons as they move along a helical path. The upper right hand portion of the illustration is a depiction of that same motion as it would appear from an end view in a plane perpendicular to the center line of the helical path. The colored dots here are the "shadows" of the same colored dots shown in the perspective view. The lower portion of the illustration depicts the side view, as that same helix would appear when projected as a shadow on a plane parallel to center line of the helix.
The end shadow of the helix would appear as a circle, and the photon would move through a central angle of one radian during one unit of relative time. The tangential velocity would therefore be one radian per unit of relative time, and also one unit of relative distance during one relative unit of time. Each photon would be undergoing one relative unit of centrifugal force (or would have a "mass" value of one relative unit) as a result of this projected circular motion. In this end projection, the photon has all the mathematical properties which science attributes to a planet in orbit around an imaginary center of rotation.
The side shadow of the motion of the photon would appear as a sine wave. Since the mathematical value of motion is a scalar value, the advance of the photon along the center line of the helix must be identical to the length of the (end view) arc - which by definition is equal to the length of the radius of the helix. The total length of one complete sine wave is therefore the same as the perimeter of the circle - or 2Pi times the radius of the helix. The total time involved for completion of either the circle or one complete sine wave is also simply 2PI relative units of time. If the model is considered to be composed of a family of identical photons, then the rate (or frequency) of arrival of family members at any given location along the center line (or through the end plane) would be one photon per relative unit of time. Based on that same relative unit of time, the "wave length" or distance between photons would be one relative unit (equal to one radial distance). The product of that relative frequency times that relative wave length would be simply 1.0, and the relative velocity would also be 1.0.
If we insist that the unit of time must be based on one complete sine wave, (not recommended, but follows conventional scientific thought about wave length to frequency relationships) then the resultant would be that there are 2PI photons per wave length.
The end shadow satisfies all the conventional concepts about space-time-force relationships which have been attributed to massive bodies. The side shadow satisfies all the conventional concepts about electromagnetic wave and photon flow motion. Yet both the end and the side shadows are representatives of the same object moving through space time.
The relative values of time and space are universally applicable to all possible photons. While the illustration is limited to depiction of a single family of photons, It does not limit the possible number of similar families flowing along the same center line. As the radius of each helix varies, there is a corresponding variation in all associated parameters. The end shadow of several families would appear as a series of concentric circles - not unlike our concept of a family of planets in motion around the Sun. The side view projection would be a tangle of sine waves of varying lengths and amplitudes. The tangle would be representative of what science refers to as "white noise" in radio transmission, or the color "white" in the spectrum man is able to physically percieve. That tangle of sine waves would contain all of the individual family frequencies, and any one family would be capable of being filtered out. Just as we use radio receivers or prisms to filter and separate selected parts of white noise or light.
Two final thoughts before closing.
Recall the prior discussion of the lateral and longitudinal vibration of a guitar string. During that discussion, it was recognized that during vibration in harmonic modes, both the lateral motion and longitudinal motion appear identical when the unit of measurement was based on the corresponding amplitude of the motion. It is quite possible that an identical behavior pattern may be in affect for the lateral and longitudinal motion of the string of photons depicted above. This possibility is certainly deserving of additional consideration. Could it be possible that the two ends of the helix depicted above may be located at the source and sensor ends of those "massive" objects which man is able to perceive? And if so, could it be possible that what man interprets as bodies of mass are mathematically equivalent to the location of "nodes" along the line of sight. How might that affect the scientific factor we call Hubble’s "red shift"? That same type of harmonic frequency pattern may explain the sequence of numbers (2^n) which appear in Bohr's theory (electron orbital radii), and in Bode's theory (planetary orbital radii). Are physical body locations related to the harmonic null points?
The last is that if it is determined that the system of "relative" units of measurement which have been presented in this document is the correct direction for future scientific activity, then we can forget our current concern about the when and if of the "big bang". For when we begin to think in terms of relative units of measurement, then we have laid aside the mistaken thought that mathematical numbers represent some kind of reality unto themselves. For when we think in relative units of measurement, every perceivable event and object is recognized only in terms of ratios of relativity. And in that mode of thought it must be realized that there are no absolute terminal values. The mathematical values of ratios are unbounded - ratio type values are simply "bigger" or "smaller" than other values. The effect is analogous to the concept of moving to a goal with ever decreasing length steps. One may eventually get very close to the goal - but final arrival at the destination is a mathematical impossibility. From that standpoint, the numbers do not relate a mathematical sequence, but rather a logarithmic relationship - for which there are no terminal points. In which case, there never was a zero moment of "universal time", nor a zero moment of universal space - nor any associated "big bang" event. For both time and space are unbounded factors, similar to the mathematical concept of a logarithmic curve.
CONCLUSION
I will conclude this document at this point. But hopefully, the conclusion of this document marks only the first step in a bright new future for scientific endeavors directed toward a true understanding of nature. The concept of relative units of measurement is very simply - but because it differs radically from the current path of the scientific establishment, many years may pass before the new concept gains acceptance. In recognition of that probability, it is the writers hope that this document will at least plant a seed of logical reason which can be nurtured by the readers to eventual fruitation. I hope to have opened the doorway, and broken away many chains which limit the thought of others. For there are an immeasurable number of hallways before science students to explore - if and when this concept of relativity is recognized.
In closing, my apologies to those members of the "scientific establishment" who may have been offended by the cutting remarks pertaining to scientific dogma. The problems of dogmatic resistance to new thought certainly is not unique to any single group, nor is it’s common existence unrecognized by all of us as individual human souls. The objective of the frank opinions expressed herein has not been to degrade any specific person or any specific establishment. The purpose has been to awaken and motivate those concerned into a state of awareness and needed action.
Back "to Modern Science"
Back to the Index
Your comments pertaining to improvements which may help to more clearly explain the material presented in this document are solicited. The writer is aware of his own limited knowledge in many areas of science. If there are technical considerations which negate the logic presented herein, your comments are more than welcome. However, comments intended simply to expound on the many obvious differences between currently accepted text books and the logic presented herein are unnecessary.
Get your own Free Home Page