The Universe Solved

 


Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Ramifications of Lense-Thirring Effect Options
jdlaw
Posted: Thursday, January 27, 2011 11:35:43 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2008
Posts: 435
Points: 1,132
Location: USA
I introduced the concept of "frame dragging" in another topic thread, but I really think it deserves its own topic.

Here is a January 2010 update article I found online http://th-www.if.uj.edu.pl/acta/vol41/pdf/v41p0753.pdf

So, to catch you up -- the concept for "frame dragging" is nothing new. The Lense-Thirring effect was first posited by Josef Lense and Hans Thirring in 1918 who then heavily relied upon Einstein's 1915 publications on General Relativity. Some call it the Einstein-Lense-Thirring effect. Basically, both relativity and frame-dragging must agree (or at least align in some respects) with Ernst Mach's interpretation that "absolute" space does not exist. Or, it may exist, but at least it doesn't exist absolutely.

In other words, this would be the generally accepted "Newtonian" notion that if you have a one meter yard stick here and a one meter yard stick somewhere billions of light years away, that they will both still be one meter. Also that if you measure the click of 1 second here in time -- that billions of light years away, the 1 second click in time is the same. i.e. space-time is space-time absolutely here, there, and everywhere in our observable Universe.

But, that word "observable" is certainly at the heart of this discussion.

Guillermo
Posted: Thursday, January 27, 2011 9:25:41 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 8/17/2010
Posts: 92
Points: 188
Location: Mexico City
Quote:
But, that word "observable" is certainly at the heart of this discussion


If we look at this issue through the lenses of the programmed reality paradigm it all makes sense, I mean, if all this universe it's just a simulation, it's all just some kind of "illusion" (amit goswami would say "maya"), so one meter yard stick is the same than other meter one billion years away, I guess that all this is created as we observe anyway ...

"We are living in a computer programmed reality."
- Philip K. Dick, 1977
RedDog
Posted: Saturday, January 29, 2011 5:25:16 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/1/2009
Posts: 52
Points: 156
Location: Washington
What happens if time is slower there, than here? Would dimension measured via time also be off from the opposite perspective?
In a programmed reality, I don't think time is a true constant is it?
jdlaw
Posted: Thursday, February 3, 2011 5:07:46 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2008
Posts: 435
Points: 1,132
Location: USA
Part of NASA's "Juno" mission will be to test for the Lense-Thirring effect for time-space around Jupiter:

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/juno/main/index.html

I don't think that actually confirming the Lense-Thirring effect for time-space warping around large rotating objects necessarily gives us anything new to contemplate directly as it has always been a large part of the General Relativity theories -- which have found pretty good support.

But, simply answering the question about "absolute" time-space (Isaac Newton) versus inertial frame (Albert Einstein) -- could open the door to the theoretical physicists predicting the "programmed" reality.



jdlaw
Posted: Sunday, February 20, 2011 8:03:41 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2008
Posts: 435
Points: 1,132
Location: USA
Have we mentioned elsewhere in this forum about the various Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatories (LIGO)?

http://ligo.org/

Huge amounts of money have been spent in US, Europe, Australia, and now one to be built in space.

Essentially, LIGO is an extremely large (several kilometers long) L-shaped laser interferometer. It sends laser light simultaneously down the two legs of the L -- which lengths (of the leg) have been precisely calibrated to be exactly the same. The light is reflected off of mirrors at either end and when the laser light returns to the apex of the L-shaped legs, if the length of the legs has remained constant the two laser light streams (split of the same wavelength, period and propagation -but aligned with "crest" and "trough" in transverse) should theoretically always cancel each other.


The theory is that if gravitational waves from anywhere in the universe (such as super-nova and other naturally occurring disturbances) should cause the legs of the LIGO devices to first contact and then stretch -- causing an interference to be detected in these devices.

While slightly different than the lense-thirring "dragging" effect, both theories require that both matter and empty space can be "warped."
jdlaw
Posted: Friday, February 25, 2011 12:47:21 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/30/2008
Posts: 435
Points: 1,132
Location: USA
The thing that always bothered me about LIGO was this: if large gravity waves can bend ("warp") space-time, then they would also bend ("warp") the laser light. In other words, the interferometer would not detect any change in the lengths of the arms of the LIGO because all would compress and expand together -- including the laser light wave speed, propagation, period, and wave length.

This idea, of course would only appear to be contrary to "light speed" being constant in all "observable" spatial reference frames. But the Lense-Thirring effect, by its very nature, suggests that there are reference frames which are not "observable" by us -- i.e. extra dimensional or non-locality. If large gravity waves do warp time-space, then the "warpage" would appear entirely invisible to someone within the warped time-space.

It's been a pretty big project as far as I can tell -- with others in Europe and one in Australia -- all trying to measure time-space distortion. Yet, it is not clear to me exactly what any have measured to date. They may actually have a quantum entanglement problem, i.e. if time-space is actually distorted by these so-called waves (the size of the LIGO device) -- would not the laser light waves (amplitude, frequency, propagation) also be affected so that the changes could not even be measured?

The funny thing about "measurements" is that they are always confined to some form of messenger substratum (light, sound, gamma rays, etc.) which is in turn confined to our reality (things capable of being detected). It's like quantum entanglement. We know its there, but can't really measure it. e.g. take a coin and using a finely calibrated saw, cut right down the middle, separating heads and tails. Send the heads side off in the mail -- and no matter where it goes, the one you keep will stay tails and the one you sent can only be heads. They are entangled forever, no matter how far apart you send them.

If I were a scientist running a super large laser interferometer, like the ones at the Louisiana and Washington LIGO, I would try sending a "dispersion wave" rather than a non-dispersed laser light wave. Princeton physicists, at the NEC laboratories in the year 2000, had already demonstrated that dispersion waves (group velocities) are known to "travel" faster than light. LIGO might be more readily capable of detecting these time-space distortions if testing for FTL distortions in the dispersed group velocity.




The above graphic shows how a group wave propagation (red dot speed) can differ from the carrier wave propagation (green dot speed). The above group wave was graphically created by inputing multiple dispersion waves where the frequencies and amplitudes added together to create the distorted group velocity. That is how the Princeton physicists demonstrated faster than light propagation -- and how I would believe the LIGO experimenters could better detect time-space distortions using FTL wave measurements.

Should I tell them? Or do you think they already know?
jim
Posted: Friday, February 25, 2011 7:38:37 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 971
Points: 2,919
I think the idea is that one arm of the LIGO would warp more or less than the other due to the different phases of the wave passing through at the same time. As a result the lasers, previously synchronized, should generate an interference pattern.

I like the little animated gif showing group velocity. I have always thought of the model of a pair of scissors when thinking of group velocity. If you move the two handles together at the speed of light, one would think that the intersection of the two blades would move faster than light speed, and hence that disturbance could propagate at FTL speeds. The longer the scissor blades, the more parallel they tend to be, and the greater the ratio between the disturbance and the handle speed. And yet it is impractical because a (molecular) disturbance still has to traverse the blades to make the end of the blade follow the handle, and can't do so at FTL. In an analogous way, group velocity is meaningless as a means of transmitting information.

And yet, entanglement works like a charm.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Universe Solved Theme Created by Jim Elvidge (Universe Solved)
Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.2 (NET v4.0) - 9/27/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.
This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.