|
Published by HydrogenBond 05-05-2008
| ||
| ||
 | ||
|
#2
By
HydrogenBond
on
05-05-2008
|
| Re: relativity and chaos I am not an expert with chaos. It seems to have a connection to Murphy's law. But unlike Murphy' law which is based on a negative outcome, chaos it can also do the opposite and gives us the outcome we hope for. Murphy's law sort of messes up the logic, while chaos can do the same thing, using both a negative or enhanced positive outcome. This keeps additional options opens. It has a connection to statistics and probability never allowing it to reach 1. The point I was making is if either Murphy or Chaos was in affect in the moving relativistic reference, with a statistical reliability, the time dilation affect should make it appear like it is happening less often, relative to fixed reference. What it sort of suggests is this random occurrence seems to follow rational principles at least when it comes to relativity. If either Murphy or Chaos are more independent than that, then maybe Einstein's postulate of the laws of physics are the same in all references needs to be looked at closer. |
 |
|
#3
By
freeztar
on
05-05-2008
|
| Re: relativity and chaos I think I see what you are saying HB. If so... Only when you use statistics in the time domain would time dilation make a difference. In other words, if you and I are sitting on two different spacecraft and you zoom by me at 0.9c and flip a coin in the instance in which you traverse some arbitrary point in space, we would both still calculate the same odds of it landing on heads or tails. The difference would be the amount of time we both observed for the coin to fall, but for both of us, the end result would remain the same. Conversely, if we sat a beacon in space and let it blink every second, at the end of my (stationary reference frame) minute, I would have counted exactly 60 blinks, whereas your number (0.9c reference frame) would vary considerably from mine. Here's a better example perhaps. Let's say you took a lottery machine on board your space craft. As you were traveling along at your relativistic speed, you set the balls floating around and suctioned out six random numbers. For the sake of the experiment, let's say that I was able to witness the drawing from my stationary reference frame. When you came back to compare results, I might greet you with, "What took you so long?". You would shrug and show me your results. They would match, only the time it took to come to them would appear to vary. |
| |
|
#4
By
HydrogenBond
on
05-05-2008
|
| Re: relativity and chaos Instead of coins, say we use genetic defects or mutations. On the stationary reference, say these occur once every day, with our bacteria. In the moving reference, these appear to occur only once per week, relative to stationary reference. At the speed of light, there would appear to be none, since we have complete time dilation. Relative to the stationary reference, chaos and defects would not appear to occur at C. The C reference would seem perfect without chaos or defects. But as we slow back toward the stationary reference the frequency of chaos continues to increase until we max out, back to one genetic defect per day at the stationary reference. I am not trying to be theological but this creates a scientific way to address the philosophical dilemma of the perfect God making a defective world. At C all is perfect. But slowing down from there enters finite reference and the realm of increasing chaos per time. This was just for fun in terms of solving this philosophical dilemma with science. Use it for conversation. |
| |
|
#6
By
HydrogenBond
on
05-10-2008
|
| Re: relativity and chaos There is another consideration, within relativistic reference, that has to do with relativistic mass. Relativistic mass is not the same thing as particle mass but is an addendum to particle mass, sort of like heat. In other words, if we started with a proton and doubled its mass using velocity and relativistic mass and then carefully slowed it down we end up with only one proton. One will not end up with two protons. The analogy with heat is we heat the proton and let it cool, it returns to the same starting state. My gut tells me that relativistic mass may be a virtual affect that is added to the particle. Being virtual it may be subject to the laws of chaos. It could also follow logical principles but may not yet understood such that chaos is a good first approximation. I often picture the people in the relativity rocket seeing the air in the rocket twinkle and the people sort of virtual glowing as the virtual mass is trying to balance within the rocket. This is getting science fiction but my reasoning is the relativistic mass is defined by the entire rocket, but there is also open space within the living quarters, with some virtual balancing occurring. Being virtual there is nothing to say it can't shift about. |
| |
|
#7
By
Qfwfq
on
05-12-2008
| |
| Re: relativity and chaos Quote:
The principle of relativity has nothing to do with statistics, and wasn't Einstein's claim either; it has a longer history than that. In any case, one may write plenty of things in a way that isn't Lorentz-covariant, this doesn't refute SR. If otoh one defines a statistic which is covariant, it can be applied to define quantities which are covariant. It's a plain matter of doing things properly.  | |
| |
|
#8
By
Overdog
on
06-10-2008
|
| Re: relativity and chaos Here are a couple good links that explains chaos theory. Chaos Theory: A Brief Introduction | IMHO Chaos - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Based on the information in these links, I'd say the question is whether the laws of physics governing the behavior of complex systems would apply in all frames of reference. Which I think they do. |
| |
|
#9
By
Jon13
on
06-10-2008
|
| Re: relativity and chaos chaos i believe is not a measurable energy, or in any actual form of measurable substance. it is, in, theory, just a zone of unpridictable nothingness, where the laws of physics doesn't apply, anything can happen. there is no up, there is no down, there is not any direction. the space between dimensions ,or is it realities?, is the "void" or "chaos" in speaking. |
| |
 |
| Bookmarks |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Article: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Article Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Article | Article Starter | Category | Comments | Last Post |
| Nothingness and chaos | HydrogenBond | Physics and Mathematics | 5 | 10-31-2007 04:32 PM |
| Chaos as mathematics | Pyrotex | Physics and Mathematics | 11 | 05-26-2006 01:24 AM |
| The Chaos Theory | Edge | Physics and Mathematics | 10 | 11-27-2005 04:49 AM |
| Chaos Theory | Jonahtan | Physics and Mathematics | 9 | 12-13-2004 09:01 AM |
| Chaos theory question | Kelddath | Physics and Mathematics | 5 | 12-08-2002 11:49 PM |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:28 PM.
