3. A spacetime ? (en)

By

Version française

a. The measure of time

After this overview about waves, let us come to cosmogony and cosmology more generally. In the official theory, they are talking about spacetime, it is the revelation of Einstein. Blah. Oh yes, they tell us, the clocks prove it! The time is changing with the space. The clocks are going more slowly away from the Earth, away from the gravity on Earth ; and they are going faster when they are in a moving vehicle! Blah.
Because the time is the clock?

And what if it was only the mechanism of the clock that was changed, not the time? Well, but it was measured with atomic clocks … So let’s see how one of these famous atomic clocks are working.

An atomic clock is working like that:
It is based on the type of light (or the frequency of the wave) transmitted by the change of state of an electron in an atom. For more clarity, let us come to the origin of the emission of a photon:

The photon is emitted when an electron in an atom moves from an outside orbit to an innermost orbit (closest to the nucleus). This can happen under the pressure of gravity, or as a result of energy (electricity) absorption by an electron. This electron, as it absorbs energy, is propelled to an orbit outside, in a higher energy level, and then it returns to its previous orbit, which is its natural place. During this last movement it emits a photon with a frequency or an energy equivalent to its displacement (an orbit = low energy and/or low frequency, two orbits = greater energy and/or greater frequency, three orbits = even more important energy and/or even more important frequency, etc.).

atome-photon

Etat fondamental = Original state
Absorption d’un photon = Absorption of a photon
Etat excité = Energized state
Retour à l’état fondamental = Return to the original state

Noyau = Nucleus
Changement de couche de l’électron = Orbital change of the electron
Libération d’un photon = Release of a photon

The atomic clock is based on this principle, but measure the time like that:
The clocks sends a gradually different energy (radiation) to several atom. Some atoms are changed (they emit a wave with a different frequency) and others do not. The clock counts these atoms. The more the energy increases, the more atoms become changed ; and when the radiation is equal to the energy required for each atom to make the transition (change in frequency), almost all the atoms are modified. When the radiation is exceeding this frequency, fewer atoms are doing the transition. Thus, we get a bell graph with the number of the changed atoms, and if we constantly reproduce this phenomenon, we obtain several identical bell graphs corresponding to the periods of radiation. Thus, a second contains 9,192,631,770 cycles (bell graphs) for a cesium (cesium atoms) atomic clock. In this way, the atomic clock is measuring time very precisely, in a space which is not changed.

horlogeatomique

A second = 9 192 631 770 cycles

http://www.futura-sciences.com/fr/definition/t/physique-2/d/horloge-atomique_12827/

However, the displayed results seem to clearly evoke that rather than time, it is the speed of this process which is changing depending of the speed and / or the gravity (thus depending on space).

Let us understand and try to explain first the phenomenon of gravitation:
If gravity just push the electron to the nucleus, or maintain it at the same position in the case of a precise macroscopic gravitational force (on Earth), it is quite logical to think that if the gravitational force decreases, its influence on the atom may also be different. Thus, the electrons will be e.g. less easily attracted by the nucleus of their atom. The atom will be dilated (and not the time!), away from Earth, compared to its state on Earth. It is a kind of atomic and microscopic weightlessness.

A disturbing but logical effect of weightlessnes :

ZéoltheNASAph_9804672

Zeolite crystals « grown » in Earth (above), and in weightlessness (below)

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impesanteur
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weightlessness

It is quite likely, in this case, that the atomic clock is measuring a longer time (less weightlessness cycles in one second than the terrestrial cycles ; or longer cycles, which gives a longer second in weightlessness) for this process wherein the electron must then move away and closer the nucleus. Gravity is lower or non-existent and the movement with the same energy is slower. The measured time is more important.

We get for example 7 (imaginary) time units instead of 5 (imaginary) time units on Earth.

Regarding the inverse phenomenon of “shortening of time” observed with speed in a moving vehicle, it can be understood as follows:
Speed ​​itself is energy, like the gravitationnal force. It gives energy to an electron. And what if these two energies were additive? More atoms would have been modified and the electron would have been “boosted” by the speed, and been projected more easily or quickly than we originally imagined.

There will be 4 (imaginary) time units measured with an atomic clock in a moving car, instead of 5 (imaginary) time units in a static condition on Earth.

Concerning a satellite which is both moving and more or less away from the Earth’s gravitational force, it will be affected by the two phenomena, and the measured time will be e.g. of 6 (imaginary) time units.

Obviously this is an image, but you get the idea. So is the time changed and/or dilated? No, but only its measure or the instruments (atoms) which are used to measure the time are changed and/or dilated, because of as all mass elements they are affected by both the gravitatinal force and speed.

b. The perspective of light

Another pseudo-truth stated by Einstein is often illustrated by the following image:
A motionless man on the ground sees a light pass at a certain speed (speed of light). A man in a jet sees the same light pass next to him, and moving in the same direction. He sees it moving slower than the man on the ground, we think. And if we could travel at the speed of light and if we was moving next to the same light (photons) and in the same direction, we would have seen, in a way motionless photons. Pure logic.

Well no, Einstein, has decided something else. He decided that, no matter our speed, the light will always move at the same speed relative to us. This is absurd. If we are moving at the speed of light, then we are a photon. Would a photon not move at the same speed as his friend photon? Absurd. We are told that this is because it is impossible that the light does not move… Perhaps it is indeed difficult to imagine, but this is precisely because we are not photons, and because we can not move at the speed of light… Einstein can imagine we are traveling at the speed of light, but not that the light can seem to be motionless if we do. Totally absurd.

You guessed it, my intuition challenges the theories of relativity by Einstein.

First, the first point. If I do not mix space and time, I will have to give you another model. In the universe, there is a strange phenomenon of which the explanation is essential to any attempt to cosmogony. This is the redshift. This is the redshift which is the origin of the Big Bang theory, the limited universe and its expansion.
To explain quickly : we can observe the elements of the universe through electromagnetic waves (including light) they emit or reflect. This light, which is composed of photons, massless elements, travel at a constant speed and, for me, this speed is not affected by the gravitational force. For the official theory, the gravitational force affects it a little, and I will return to this later.
So, can we see the so-called end of the universe? Yes. That is why it is said that the universe is finite. Can we see its expansion? Yes, or rather, we are translating an observable phenomenon by the expansion of the universe.

The end of the universe, or rather its infancy, as it is the observation of the first state of the universe (since the light has used all this time to travell and reach us), is marked by the cosmic background radiation, composed almost exclusively of microwaves. The universe was a kind of very dense gamma rays ball, and it would have exploded, sending to its four corners many photons, which, because of this expansion, which continued even thereafter, would have lost energy and reduced their frequency to microwave. These microwave (the cosmic background radiation) are observable today, as a kind of wall. Why not.

WMAP

The cosmic microwave background radiation

The redshift follows the same principle. It was observed that distant astronomical objects that emit or reflect visible light, emit or reflect a « red-shifted » light “. That means a light with a lower frequence than expected (or a light which has lost a part of its energy). As we know the Doppler effect, and as we have imagined that the universe was expanding, then the redshift is naturally a symptom of this expansion. Expanding universe: redshift and energy loss due to expansion, the light is, to the official theory, although red-shifted, as if its frequency was stretched by the expansion.

Some others have tried the tired light hypothesis, which assumed that the light had somewhat of a life time, and its (thus real) redshift was a symptom of old age. I studied this theory quite a lot, but it is actually not convincing.

Advertisements