Comments on: Questioning the Foundations of Physics to Achieve Interstellar Travel: Part 3 https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/09/questioning-the-foundations-of-physics-to-achieve-interstellar-travel-part-3 Safeguarding Humanity Mon, 17 Apr 2017 05:27:36 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.6.1 By: Benjamin T. Solomon https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/09/questioning-the-foundations-of-physics-to-achieve-interstellar-travel-part-3#comment-154237 Sat, 22 Sep 2012 21:28:05 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=4827#comment-154237 Peter McKenna, there are 5 steps in science, (1) belief, (2) conceptualization, (3) hypothesis, (4) experimental validation & (5) theory. Usually, but not always in that order.

You are at (1). How would you get to (2)?

This is an important exercise, not just for you but for our readership, too.

]]> By: dhimo kritis https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/09/questioning-the-foundations-of-physics-to-achieve-interstellar-travel-part-3#comment-153959 Tue, 18 Sep 2012 16:33:30 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=4827#comment-153959 Nobody know the structure of electron and photon.The ‘unique particle’ and the spherical trajectories is the answer for both. Will this help for interstellar trip, i am sure —not.

]]> By: Peter McKenna https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/09/questioning-the-foundations-of-physics-to-achieve-interstellar-travel-part-3#comment-153772 Sun, 16 Sep 2012 02:15:55 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=4827#comment-153772 Sorry, but I do not believe photons experience time dilation. The premise appears flawed.

]]> By: Benjamin T. Solomon https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/09/questioning-the-foundations-of-physics-to-achieve-interstellar-travel-part-3#comment-153010 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 22:47:19 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=4827#comment-153010 Too many, don’t bother. Go make some money and give me some to complete the research into the prototype development.

]]> By: Peter McKenna https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/09/questioning-the-foundations-of-physics-to-achieve-interstellar-travel-part-3#comment-153005 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 22:40:02 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=4827#comment-153005 Sorry, damn smartphone is buggy. All I have is physics textbook. Can you recommend book?

]]> By: Benjamin T. Solomon https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/09/questioning-the-foundations-of-physics-to-achieve-interstellar-travel-part-3#comment-153004 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 22:36:14 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=4827#comment-153004 Don’t understand your second comment.

]]> By: Peter McKenna https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/09/questioning-the-foundations-of-physics-to-achieve-interstellar-travel-part-3#comment-153002 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 22:33:21 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=4827#comment-153002 I imagine though that the time dilation can be determined through backfitting measured gravitational effects, however this would be the photon’s relative mass

]]> By: Benjamin T. Solomon https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/09/questioning-the-foundations-of-physics-to-achieve-interstellar-travel-part-3#comment-153000 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 22:32:20 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=4827#comment-153000 Peter McKenna, interesting. First the photon has no mass, and there is an error in your statement. Read the book.

Summary: Wave function is the effect of the photon on spacetime, but not the photon itself.

]]> By: Peter McKenna https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/09/questioning-the-foundations-of-physics-to-achieve-interstellar-travel-part-3#comment-152990 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 22:17:36 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=4827#comment-152990 Time dilation for a photon — which according to Lorentz must be massless, since v = c, resulting in division by zero — seems also to be relativistically nonlinear (infinite?). How would you expect local spatial field effects (eg gravity, quantum field effects) to alter a photon’s force relative to your schema, since it would seem the photon would have no (relative) calculable time dilation?

]]> By: Benjamin T. Solomon https://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/09/questioning-the-foundations-of-physics-to-achieve-interstellar-travel-part-3#comment-152734 Sat, 08 Sep 2012 14:46:41 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=4827#comment-152734 Peter McKenna, nice. Re “If quantum foam does not exist … “, the problem may be more fundamental that physicists suspect.

They said it will set quantum mechanics back several decades. 30? 50? 70? If the problem pointed out by Robert Nemiroff is more fundamental that it is closer to 70 years, if not may be 30 years.

Actually, the fact that quantum foam may not exists is a major fundamental breakthrough. The more I think about it the more I have to say ‘wow’. Some physicists have proposed that they can achieve 1,000+ the velocity of light with theoretical work based on quantum foam. Wow! It is gone! Robert Nemiroff just disproved them.

The reason why I say the problems maybe more fundamental than physicists suspect is that (see point 4, 5 & 6 of my previous comment) I showed that the photon probability is not Gaussian. It is a new probability distribution I discovered and named Var-Gamma. FYI there are only 32 known probability distributions, and therefore this is a big deal.

Coming back to your question, “ … the bevsvior of the photons should not be exclusive to photons … ”.

Narrow your scope, because a generic term like ‘behavior’ opens up the discussion to subject matters I have no interested in. If we look at double slit experiments, there is no difference between the behavior of photons and mass particles like electrons and neutrons. So the answer would be ‘yes’.

But … mass based particles have charge and mass and are therefore open to ‘disturbances’ that would not affect photons. So the answer is ‘no’.

]]>