Secondary Knowledge

What is the connection with schrodinger's cat and Wheeler's delayed choice experiment. In the first the secondary knowledge is blocked, until the box is opened to see whether the cat is alive or dead. In the second the secondary knowledge is cooked up, or forcibly confirmed.

27 May 2018
Leave aside the above statement. Primary knowledge is the detection of the evidence of an event by our senses. Light photon entering your eye. A sound phonon entering the ear. something like th e wind brushes your skin. The more important part is a photon entering your eye.
Primary knowledge is no knowledge. It will tell us nothing about the environment around us. To be knowledge others should also know what I knew. Others also should experience the same experience I had. So primary knowledge is almost useless, without supporting structure. Even in a court of law someone giving evidence of seeing something is doubted in the first instance. The doubt need to be cleared by showing that the witness is an expert witness, or pass the cross examination by the opposition lawyer. Someone saying something is not accepted in a court of law.

Real knowledge need secondary knowledge. Knowledge of an event is mostly, receipt of a photon resulting from the event. (Other events will have similar interactions). But it seems that, that is not enough. Secondary knowledge is other things that happen around the event. Evidence of a candle light  in existence is stream of photons emitted by it. Not one photon. The structure of the candle, the appearance of the flame, the shape of the flame, the colour of the flame, how long it was light. Many people could see it light. Then there should be a structure in the receiving end. It should be able to analyse the picture of the flame(this is done by our brain). If we take a photograph of it for others to see later, it need a camera. Also some sort of evidence should be provided that the photo is actually of that candle(not a photo of some other candle taken before). If a renowened scientist say he saw the candle light people will except his word. There is a similarity of evidence given by an expert witness. The court trust the witness. The world at large should trust the expert. Evidence to prove he is an expert should also be provided.

Therefore proof of an event is not primary knowledge. I feel both in schrodinger's cat and Wheeler's delayed choice experiment tries to use the primary knowledge to prove an event. Putting the cat in a box shut out all interaction with the environment of the experiment. Using one single photon to do the delayed choice experiment, only primary knowledge is used.

Observer

In special relativity there is no traveling observer. They is only stationary observer. Traveling observer leads to twin paradox. Special relativity treats the twin paradox trivially. This is a mistake. Because of this mistake, all sorts of mythology has crept into science, or rather physics. It's like alchemy to chemistry. Time travel, many worlds theory etc. These leads to lot of contradictions. It may be good for fiction but not for science. What we need are good solid answers, these concepts are really flimsy. They are not practical no experiential proof is available.

Special Relativity treats both stationary observer and traveling observer as same. That they have same qualities, this is done without any proof. For instance first proof of special relativity mu-meson falling from the sky, it trys to treat that their is an observer in mu-meson, as well as the stationary observer sitting on earth. This is not practical, there is no clock that falls with mu-meson.

Special relativity treats as there are clocks everywhere, each point do space have a different clock and worse than that these clocks are all synchronised. Then the traveling observer also have a different set of clocks that travels with him, and each point in space has a different clock and they are all synchronised with the traveling observer. These assumptions are not practical, and don't have experimental proof, which results in twin paradox.

According to quantum theory when an observer is present things behave very differently. Photons when we observe behave like particles, when not behaves like waves. Special relativity is based on velocity of light, so, the same theory should be applied. Moving observer with a light clock, observing the stationary observer, will not see the same as the, stationary observer. One observer sees waves - with special relativity, other observer sees particles - without relativity. Therefore traveling clock will run slower to a stationary observer. But when the traveling clock also have an observer, either light behaves completely like a particle and light will not have constant velocity to both observers or to one of the observer (more study necessary to find out the circumstances) it behaves like a wave and particle to the other observer. Another important factor is it is known that doplar effect is seen in living light sources. This also should be taken into account.

This explanation can explain twin paradox.

What is TIME 2

Time exists because clocks exist.

A clock can be defined as: when there exists two (or more) mechanisms (or systems) that produce specific identifiable results in such a way, where one mechanism always produce exact specific number of results when the other mechanism produce one result.

Spin, it's an integral part of the concept of time. When something spins recurrence of a state takes place.most mechanical clocks are made from this principal.

But you easily forget that without memory there is no way to identify spin or any other repetitive event. We need to memorize the original position, then there should be a system to compare the present, repeated system with the original. Then there should be a counter to identify how many times the event is repeated. Then there should be a logical system to assume if there is no outside interference that repetition will carry on indefinitely or reasonable enough duration so that we can say it is a continued occurrence. This shows the high degree of logic necessary to identify a repeated event.

It is the same for electromagnetic oscillator, or even the cesium clock. Similarly it is the same for a pulsar, star that rotate and produce an exact frequency. Without an observer how do you know it has the same frequency? The argument is the same for earth rotating on itself or travels around the sun and moon rotating around earth.

Without logic and thinking of man no clock can be made.

These mechanisms can be natural or man made.

Since there exists natural such mechanisms we assume that TIME is a natural phenomena.

There are almost infinite (or near to infinite) number of natural phenomena. Out of the universe set of phenomena we identify a specific subset, and define time.

Therefore TIME is a phenomena created by man.

Man is capable of even creating systems that have phenomena which is slightly different but analogous to TIME, and have some characteristics of TIME. One such is the blockchain in cryptocurrency. When transactions are accepted and included in a blockchain there is no way to change it. It is fixed, like we cannot change what happen in the past. Like chronology or the epoch of time, blockchain fix the history of transactions.

Change is a universal fact. But not flow of change. The flow is a man made concept to keep track of change.

Time has two properties. Sometimes we confuse and use these two interchangeably. One is the recurring event the other is the flow of time. These two are independent. Clock, has two parts one a repeater and then a counter. So to be a clock we needs to take flow also into account.

The two properties of time, can be shown by different phenomena. Time needs an event that repeats. The pendulum swings. The quarts crystal makes electromagnetic circuit flow electrons alternatively.

Then flow of time do not need a repetitive event. It has past, present and future. It is a record keeping process.

Peculiarly this flow always needs an observer. Without observer no flow. The flow may record evidence of events without human observer. Good example is  fossil records. past history is recorded in it.

Reason for traveling clocks to run slower is, there is a difference between it and a stationary clock. The reason for the twin paradox is we think there is an observer inside a traveling clock. Which cannot be.