About Me

My photo
I look at life with detachment and distance, like a window shopper. Not only I study the window but also my own reflections in it.

Icecream Cone

Sunday, March 27, 2005 3 comments

Judging simultaineity of two spatially separated events is depended on exchange of information between the two events. This exchange can happen not faster than speed of light. Hence the two events can be judged for simultaineity only if they are at such time and space - where the two can communicate with each other. In jargon of Relativity the two events must be within the World-cone of a photon. It is like saying that icecream can be found only inside of icecream cone.

On a graph of distance on x-axis(horizontal) and Time on t-axis(vertical), when we draw two lines (one on left and the other on rightof t-axis) representing the movement of a photons from the originating event - these will be called the world-lines - the slope representing the speed of light. These two world-lines would enclose a triangle between them. In a two dimentional-distance this triangle would become a cone . This is called the world-cone(green in diagram above) of the photon. This world-cone represents those distances and times where the information from the original event can reach. Outside of this cone the events cannot have information about each other and hence cannot be judged for simultaineity. Thus simultaineity can be judged only by events within the world cone.
In a three dimentional world - the world-cone will be a similar cone in Four dimentions - sorry more difficult to be imagined physically.
An example would clarify this. Suppose a supernova at a distance of 20 light-years away from us - bursts today, while I write this. (In cosmology, Distances are measured in terms of distance light would travel in a year - light-years). So my writing and the supernova burst are simultanious to our common-sense. But this simultaineity cannot be physically judged, because I am outside the world-cone of the photons emanating from the burst. I am at same time but the place is outside the cone. I am on the x-axis itself 20 light-years distance from the event. There is no way for me to know of this supernova burst today.
Me, twenty years later in time, sitting in the same chair, at the age of 75 - would come within the world cone and would see the event as simultaneous then.
Thus simultaineity in relativity is different from common-sense perception of simultaineity.
As I hinted earlier, the lining up and simultaineity require, some a-priory estimation of distance or time (that it is zero between the lined up things). So there is some approximation in these measurements - How much?
Don't leave my world-cone, till the next post!

Read full post >>

Extra Length for Extra Pleasure

Friday, March 25, 2005 2 comments

No! No! This was just an Advertisement for 'King Size' cigarettes, when these were introduced in '60s. But how do you measure the extra length (that extra pleasure)of king-size, over standard?

By comparison - put one end lined up and then measure the extra length by again lining up the zero of a scale. Or measure both separately by lining up one end with zero of scale.
This lining up is the crux of all measurements - whether its length or time. In time this lining up amounts to determining initial and final simultaneity.
This is one of the dilemmas of all scientific measurements. Simultaneity itself requires some indirect time interval assessment. Measurement of cigarettes also fudges this lining up - either by eye estimation or standing them on a flat surface - both of which require judgement of lengths itself. That's called begging the question in Science?
Ultimately upfront or hidden - we use our mental judgments - vision, ear or touch for this lining-up.
On a Quantum level at the smallest end, and Cosmological level at the other extreme, this lining up and simultaneity create immense problems - since our mental faculties fail on both these levels.
C U till next post!!

Read full post >>

Birth in reverse , is a form of Death

Sunday, March 20, 2005 4 comments

Laws of Physics are time reversible. A series of snapshots of a Mass starting from rest pushed by a force - can as well be seen in reverse as a moving mass being brought to rest by an opposing force. Would then any law be violated if a dead man rises from his grave, becomes younger by the day and ends up back in womb? I think the person would have as humdrum a life - as us mortals. Birth in reverse is another form of Death.
This property of Time-reversibilty of Laws is called Time-Invariance or T-invariance in short. The example of mass above is a bit too simplistic - but not very much off. But Thermodynamics does have a arrow of time embedded in its second law - that entropy (another name for disorder)would increase with time. Thus dead man rising from grave would violate law of increasing entropy.
At sub-atomic level even if this law of thermodynamics gets violated, it does not violate any law of physics - only in reality this normally doesn't happen. This is called Weak-T-Invariance.
T-Invariance-Violation is reported to have been observed in decay of a particle called Neutral Kaons. But I don't agree with this. I would tell you why in my next post!

Read full post >>

Question Time

Saturday, March 19, 2005 0 comments

Questions beget answers.
Answers beget Science.
Science begets more questions.
If you have some time for questions;
Here are some questions about Time!

  • Is there an Absolute Time somewhere or all time is relative?

  • Is there an origin and end; or is it cyclic - eating its own tail?

  • Is it local if its not Absolute; or is it universal if its not relative?

  • Is it continuous or discrete?

  • Is there an arrow of time?

  • Can simultaneity be measured?

  • Is there a quanta or particle associated with it?

  • If its discrete - what is the least count of time?

  • How is time related to space or distance?

  • How is time related to matter?

  • Gravity or Mass causes curvature of Space-time - does it affect time also?

  • Mass gets converted to energy on destruction. If mass and time are related - what happens to time - when mass is destroyed?

  • Can energy distort Time. Can any Field affect Time?

  • If its relative then can 'cause and effect' get violated?

  • What is the relation between 'Cause and Effect" and the above question on Time?

Read full post >>

I only have fraction of a second to live!

Thursday, March 17, 2005 2 comments

The most taken-for-granted of but most elusive of concept is "Time". All that is sure is this present instance of blink - rest of time - past or future is a creation of our mental circuits.
Read Further on ...
Buddhism teaches us to savour the present instant intensely - with total mindfulness - because that alone is reality - rest is Maya (virtual reality). Its surprising that 3-D Space can be physically seen, but linearity of Arrow of Time relies on Memory. For a persons who has lost Memory - there is only "Now" without any arrow of Time.
Hey! Hey! The same is true for a person who has lost his eyesight - he cannot see 3-D space. He can experience the spot he is in - rest is a mental construct stored in Memory.
So both Time and Space are totally local - a 4-D Time-space is a conceptual construct.
I have lot of questions about Time. Please see next post.

Read full post >>

Archimedes cries 'Eureka' no more!

Sunday, March 13, 2005 1 comments

Why Physics is in such doldrums that breakthroughs are now so few and far in-between? Why are its theories of frontiers of Physics so outlandish - as to get compared with mumbo-jumbo - 'Tao of Physics' ; 'Dance of Shiva' etc? Why has it come to such a pass? Has this to be so? Is there something fundamentally wrong?

Look at Tribal Philosophies. They start from false premises and are able to explain simple phenomenon quite effectively to begin with. But explanations become quainter and less plausible as it goes to slightly more complicated things. It becomes 'Voodoo' and only a handful in society claim to understand it. Is Physics in similar situation?
Physics builds its magnificent edifice of theories over the foundation of a premise that reality could be described by using 3 primary units of Length; Mass and Time - like three basic colours in Painting : Red; Blue and Green. All other units and theories are derived from these.
As we go along the mathematics becomes harder and harder. At the frontiers of Physics - Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and Particle Physics for instance need mathematics which is beyond well educated intelligensia. People now look to Frontiers of Physics - as commom man used to look at Voodoo or "Palm Reading" - without the spirit of enquiry.
There would no more be naked Archimedes springing out of bath-tub crying "Eureka".
I believe that the fundamental units (Length, Mass and Time) on which the whole edifice of Science stands - may be only derived units after all - that's why the Mathematics and Physics become so quaint as we get near its frontiers.
Time, as I brought out earlier gets derived from velocity of the fabric of Space moving around us. Could it be that Velocity and Energy are the real Fundamental Units!!!
Anyway attempting to rewrite whole physics in terms of velocity and energy could an interesting exercise in itself.
Good Luck to those who may like to try.

Read full post >>

On a Hot Greasy Skillet

Friday, March 11, 2005 0 comments

Matter is an aberration in the universe dominated by space. The Nuclei amidts Space, behave like a drop of water on a greasy hot skillet. There is constant churning and turmoil at the boundary of space and nuclei. The electron orbits around the Nuclei is not part of the atom but is a result of violent interaction between Space and Matter. Electron could be more of a space entity than matter. It has mass and charge but size wise it is but a point. Its perhaps just a knot in the fabric of space and a device to insulate matter from space or vice-a-versa.

Read full post >>

Grains of Time and Territory

Tuesday, March 08, 2005 2 comments

To locate one's position and for measuring speed - ancient mariners depended on the position of stars. Position or velocity cannot be measured in a featureless backdrop. In fact it requires three features (ship, earth and the pole star) for positioning and to measure velocity.
Then how do we say that Sub-space particle are moving around us at the speed of light.
I think it is the grainy sub-space structure which enables measurement of velocity. So the space or distance is a grainy thing. There must a minimum distance, below which distance cannot be measured or conceived.
Since the velocity of sub-space structure gives rise to perception of time - time itself should be grainy, because distance is grainy. There must be a minimum time interval, less than that cannot be measured or contemplated.
So, the time is grainy.
It moves in jerks.
My rough calculations put this least count of time to be of the order of 10-32 seconds(10 raised to power minus 32 seconds).

Read full post >>

Give Me Your Time Please

Monday, March 07, 2005 0 comments

Time is a big enigma. The yardstick we measure it with are Clocks or movement of earth around the sun - or now even by radioactive decay of some isotopes. But all these are such gross a phenomenon that these cannot be the basis for such a fundamental metric as Time. These are at best derived yardsticks. The real yardstick of time should be more fundamental and perhaps embedded in the very Space-Time continuum or in a thing even finer than that.
A bigger nut to crack is the direction of the arrow of time. Time flows only forward - most of other phenomena in nature are symmetric about directions. This breaking of symmetry must have an explanation.
Please recall my post "My Hypothesis in Nut-shell". We the material beings stand in a sea of space (made up of sub-space particles) moving around us at the speed of light.
This flow of the backcloth of Space around us - is the fundamental yardstick of time. All other yardsticks of time - mechanical movements of clocks or earth and the decay of radioactive isoptopes are measured against this flow of "Nothing".
This flow also explains - why Time flows only in one direction.

Next questions are : -
>Is time grainy or continuous?
>Does time flow in jerks?
>Is their a smallest least count of time?
Happy contemplation. Please do leave a comment here and in my Guest-book puhleeze.

Read full post >>

Einstein's Relativity; Riemann Geometry and our World-view

Sunday, March 06, 2005 1 comments

This post was unrelated to present blog.
It has been moved to my other blog.

Read full post >>

Rehash Mishmash

Friday, March 04, 2005 0 comments

Nature is miserly and parsimonious. It creates or comes across a structure/construct. Then it applies it's same old structures/constructs to solve new challenges of creation again and again. It never discards anything that worked once.

Lets take the genes. On 23 human chromosome, we carry millions of genes. It is seen that many of these genes are copies from early form of life like - single cell creatures or early fish-forms. Our genes is only a patchwork quilt made up of many borrowed pieces from many other species. Chimpanzee is not the only father of man.
In physics also such rehashing of old models happens. The initial structure of atom was uncanily like model planetary system. Since atomic structure would have come first - nature must have copied an approximation of atomic model for creating a planetary system.
That's why I raised the internet of souls concept to highlight its similarity with sub-space structure.

Read full post >>

An Internet of Souls

Wednesday, March 02, 2005 0 comments

This post was unrelated to present blog. It has been moved to my other blog:
Thoughts And Trivia

Read full post >>


Tuesday, March 01, 2005 0 comments

This post was unrelated to present blog. It has been moved to my other blog:
Thoughts And Trivia

Read full post >>