Special Relativity - plus

It is an expected assumption that velocity of light is constant to all observers, irrespective of the fact they move at different velocities with respect to each other.
Special relativity was introduced to solve the anomalies that arise from the fact of constant speed of light. This solution incorporates controversial principals like, time dilation, length contraction etc. This also leads to more controversial predictions like time travel etc. But Special Relativity gives rise to many contradictions, one is twin paradox, another is, if moving clocks runs slower, when two clocks moves relative to each other, which one is slow relative to the other?

There are other explanations that could explain consistency of speed of light without Special Relativity. Further in the light of new thought experiments,   Wheeler's delayed choice experiment and Bell's inequalities, and after having experimental proof of these, I also have some thought experiments that can give other dimensions to this question.

Carefully consider the consistency of speed of light. Say there is a source of light and there are two observers. One observer is stationary to the source of light and the other is moving towards the source. One important fact ignored in special relativity experiments is that each observer will see a different set of photons from the same source of light. These two sets are fully independent and we cannot draw conclusions based in correlating the observations of each different observer. Having said that, it should be pointed that special relativity treats light only as waves. Most of the predictions of special relativity can be accepted if we treat light as electromagnetic waves not photons as in quantum theory. Now both observers, the stationary one and the moving one, should see that speed of light from the source as the constant c. This is strange, how can this happen? The photon needs to know the velocity of the observer! The photon needs to know it at the time it leaves the source. But at the time the photon leaves the source, it definitely don't know which observer it will be observed. In fact it will have to know the velocity of all potential observers. But it cannot move with multiple velocities to suit each observer. Stranger than that what will happen when an observer change it's velocity. To change velocity acceleration will come into the scene. This, I presume, is related to General Relativity. Then each photon in the universe will need to know all velocities of the observers and on top of that will have to know all accelerations of the observers.

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.

Future Education of mathematics

Subjects taught at school to children should change to suit current time. Specially mathematics. My son wanted help in calculating square root, I have completely forgotten how to do it, whenever necessity I use the calculator. Even some of the multiplication table are forgotten, long division can vaguely remember but able to guess out hire to do it.

We use modern calculators to do these. Even solving liner equations, finding x and y when two equations of x and y are given, is trivial four modern calculators.

We need to change how we teach maths to students. My son is dyslexic he need a calculator to do maths, we didn't force him, strangely enough he is getting a special interest in maths(the only subject he is interested in). Like that there will be lot of students who will learn maths if calculators are given at tender age.

Since the future is electronic calculators let them learn how it works. Binary numbers and mathematics by binary numbers. What are binary, digital, hexadecimal numbers and how to convert.

Another important field for future is cryptography. For four ordinary level you can teach what are hash functions. There uses and how to calculate. Then fit advance level, public and private keys and introduction for bitcoin. At degree level crypto currencies and blockchain technologies. Then smart contracts. How crypto currency nodes operate.

Entropy Time data compression

If only one of anything or everything exist then nothing exist! Existent needs many. Then only verification of existence can be done. If the many is 100% uniform, then again nothing exist. For existence there should be information, there should be data. If it is uniform there is no data.

The same lack of information and data is shown when everything is 100% random.

Therefore the physical world should exist between these two extremes. In any system entropy can only increase. Randomness and disorder increases then entropy increases.

Imagine two sides one side completely uniform and the other side completely random. There exists a border between these two. This border is the real world. Time is the movement of this border.This border will move from uniform to the side of random.

In the border towards random side the percentage of randomness increases. Towards uniform side uniformness increases.

Suppose the real world consists of only partials and there are no energy waves like photons or electromagnetic waves that travel at c. Then we see the border of real world and uniform part, moves towards the the uniform part. Kinetic energy of particles will spread towards the uniform part, keeping the total energy constant, but high energy particles reduce and low energy particles will not only increase but add more particles from static to moving.

Bell's inequalities indicates that true randomness exist. In true random there are no information. Information when it exist can be compressed by removing duplicates.When everything is uniform then again there is no information. When a harddisk is formatted there is no information in it and all particles are aligned in a single direction. The other extreme is randomising all particles of the disk-this also results in no information.

Mistake and Certainty

Wittgenstein speaks a lot about a mistake in his notes about Certainty. May be the German to English translation is not so good, if took sometime for me to see what is ment by it.

2+2=4 is a rule, you cannot prove it.We are taught that it is correct. Wittgenstein speaks about "war would be a mistake here like?" We find 2+2=4 is always true and never wrong. It is difficult to understand, what is this mistake all about. This example will show it: 2+2=5, well it is wrong, but how do you know it is wrong? If it's a rule we can't prove it, also we can't disprove it. Here is how mistake will come, say we give this formula as correct to a math student to remember. Say he don't know whether it is true or false. He will try it in real life. Here finds each time when he appalys this rule a mistake is made.  He adds two apples to another two apples he should get 5 as per rule but in reality he gets 4. This is the mistake referred by Wittgenstein. When we think wrong rules as correct we get mistakes.

World is made up with rules like 2+2=4, not only mathematical but also physical, like length and time. These rules cannot be proved. It is a build up in the human brain, from birth onwards. So qualities like space and time are made up by us. These cannot be said to be made up 100% by our brains. Suppose we want some quality that we want but don't physically exist, we can't create it in the mind and feel those qualities. So there is a fine difference. We cannot create qualities, but the qualities that exist are created by us. These qualities have a consensus among everyone. So, is it correct to say some quality that don't exist if everyone except, it becomes real? Another thing is you should not forget this"everyone" should include nonhuman entities - observers.

Knowledge and observer consensus

On certainty by Wittgenstein, a similar idea is put forward. When everyone accepts a certain fact as true, it it's true. By logic you can't prove that a fact is true. Because there will be train of facts. One is true because some other fact is true, that fact this fact is true because even another fact is true. So there is no end(some say God is the end-but that is not logic). For instance how do you know that 2+2=4? We can't prove it, by experience know it. We are taught it is correct, when we are small. In Wittgenstein's words we have never made a mistake, 2+2=4 was always correct never wrong. So we know that it is correct.

TIME is the same. It is artificial, man made, when everyone comes to a conscientious, we all accept the flow of time.

This is very similar to the conscientious of crypto miners regarding accepting transactions to be inserted in the blockchain. They will reject transactions that are not in conformity with standards created by the crypto community. This is very similar to a scientist reading some new idea in the internet, if the idea is mostly in conformity with the accepted norms he will accept the idea provisionally, and read more on the matter to check what other scientists think about it. Only after coming to a conscientious, he will accept the idea. It is important to understand that everyone is not going to build a practical accelerator, to verify the results printed in experiments done in one practical accelerator. May be several other practical accelerators will check and publish the results. People at large will accept the results.

09.07.2018
Philosophical investigations: interesting remark: suppose a man from childhood lives in a cave without no interactions of any other human being from birth, hunts and sleep in the cave. Say to hunt he need to get up at dawn or he has to be hungry that day. One day he gets up late and cannot hunt. What will be the mental status of him. Does he ponder about his failure of getting up late and determine to get up early next day? Or he won't think anything just go hungry and sleep a bit more. Without language he can't think! The animals will just do that.