PLANCK UNITS AND EXTENDED SPECIAL RELATIVITY

2020 ◽  
pp. 65-67
Author(s):  
Oleg Sharupov

The Planck length is an object of the relativistic quantum-gravitational theory, therefore, a more general and consistent direction of the special relativity extension, seems to be the use of the postulate of the relativistically invariant and limiting nature of all Planck units, that was introduced by V.V. Korukhov at the end of the 90s. One of the examples of the implementation of this postulate in its methodological meaning is the model of a vacuum-like medium, the physical properties of which are characterized by relativistically invariant values, which qualita-tively distinguishes it from the known types of matter –matter and field.

1988 ◽  
Vol 43 (12) ◽  
pp. 1131-1150
Author(s):  
F. Winterberg

If special relativity is a dynamic symmetry caused by true physical deformations of bodies in absolute motion through a substratum or ether, the question if all interactions and elementary particles arc excitations of this ether must be raised. The ether being the cause of all the observed relativistic effects should then obey an exactly nonrelativistic law of motion, and which permits it to consist of positive and negative masses. The fundamental constants of nature, which according to Planck are 1) Newton's constant (G), 2) the velocity of light (c) and 3) Planck’s constant (ћ), suggest that the ether is made up of densely packed positive and negative Planck masses (Planckions), each with a diameter equaling the Planck length. Symmetry demands that the number of positive and negative Planck masses should be equal, making the cosmological constant equal to zero. Because the Planckions are nonrelativistic spin-zero bosons, the ether would therefore consist of two super­fluids, one for the positive mass Planckions, and the other one for the negative mass Planckions. By spontaneous symmetry breaking this superfluid ether can in its ground state form a lattice of small vortex rings, with the vortex core radius equaling the Planck length. Force fields of massless vector gauge bosons can be interpreted as quantized transverse vortex waves propagating through this lattice. Because the smallest wave length would be about equal the ring radius of the circular vortices, the ring radius would assume the role of a unification scale. The ring radius is estimated to be about 103 times the Planck length, in fairly good agreement with the empirical evidence for the value of the grand unification scale of the standard model.Charge is explained by the zero point fluctuations of the Planckions attached to the vortex rings, wrhich thereby become the source of virtual phonons. Charge quantization is explained as the result of circulation quantization. Spinors result from bound states of the positive and negative masses of the substratum, and special relativity as a dynamic symmetry would be valid for all those objects. Quantum electrodynamics is derived as a low energy approximationIf spinors are made up from the positive and negative masses of the vortex ring resonance energy, whereby the spinors would assume the character of excitons, the spinor mass can be computed in terms of the Planck mass. Vice versa, with the lowest quark mass m given, a value for the gravitation­al constant in terms of m, ћ, and c can be obtained. The existence of different particle families can be understood by internal excitations of the spinors, and parity violation may find its explanation in a small nonzero vorticity of the ether. Bacause of its simple fundamental symmetry the theory is unique, it is always finite and has no anomalies.In the proposed theory all fields and interactions are explained in a completely mechanistic way by the Planck masses and their contact interactions. With special relativity as a derived dynamic symmetry and space remaining euclidean, the proposed approach can be seen as an alternative to Einstein’s program to explain all fields and their interactions by symmetries and singularities of a noneuclidean spacetime manifold.In Part I, the fundamental equation for the substratum, which has the form of a nonrelativistic nonlinear Heisenberg equation, is formulated. It is shown how it leads to a Maxwell-type set of equations for the gauge bosons. In Part II, Dirac-type spinors and quantum electrodynamics are derived. These results are then applied to obtain the lowest quark mass in terms of the Planck mass.


Author(s):  
Jeffrey A. Barrett

Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen (EPR) argued that quantum mechanics was incomplete. We consider their argument and the physical and philosophical intuitions that motivated it. Among their intuitions was a commitment to real physical properties and to local properties and interactions. For his part, Einstein’s commitment to locality was closely related to how he understood special relativity. We show why the standard collapse formulation of quantum mechanics is flatly incompatible with special relativity. Following Bell, we then see why no physical theory that satisfies EPR’s commonsense and philosophical intuitions can be empirically adequate over quantum phenomena.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
W. M. Stuckey ◽  
Michael Silberstein ◽  
Timothy McDevitt ◽  
T. D. Le

Abstract In 1981, Mermin published a now famous paper titled, “Bringing home the atomic world: Quantum mysteries for anybody” that Feynman called, “One of the most beautiful papers in physics that I know.” Therein, he presented the “Mermin device” that illustrates the conundrum of quantum entanglement per the Bell spin states for the “general reader.” He then challenged the “physicist reader” to explain the way the device works “in terms meaningful to a general reader struggling with the dilemma raised by the device.” Herein, we show how “conservation per no preferred reference frame (NPRF)” answers that challenge. In short, the explicit conservation that obtains for Alice and Bob’s Stern-Gerlach spin measurement outcomes in the same reference frame holds only on average in different reference frames, not on a trial-by-trial basis. This conservation is SO(3) invariant in the relevant symmetry plane in real space per the SU(2) invariance of its corresponding Bell spin state in Hilbert space. Since NPRF is also responsible for the postulates of special relativity, and therefore its counterintuitive aspects of time dilation and length contraction, we see that the symmetry group relating non-relativistic quantum mechanics and special relativity via their “mysteries” is the restricted Lorentz group.


2018 ◽  
Vol 182 ◽  
pp. 02108
Author(s):  
Mohammed Sanduk

The Three Wave Hypothesis (TWH) has been proposed by Horodecki in 1981. Sanduk attributed TWH to a classical kinematical model of two rolling circles in 2007. In a previous project in 2012, it is shown that the position vector of a point in a system of two rolling circles can be transformed to a complex vector under the effect of partial observation. The present work tries to develop this concept of transformation. Under this transformation, it is found that the kinematical equations of the motion of point can be transformed to equations analogise the relativistic quantum mechanics equations. Many analogies have been found and are listed in a comparison table. These analogies may sagest that both of the quantum mechanics and the special relativity are emergent, and are of the same origin.


Author(s):  
Kenneth G. Dyall ◽  
Knut Faegri

Special relativity is a fascinating and challenging branch of physics. It describes the physics of the high velocity/high energy regime, frequently turning up phenomena that appear paradoxical in view of our everyday experience. In this book we will be quite selective in our presentation of the theory of special relativity: we will concentrate on those features that we consider necessary for the later applications to relativistic quantum chemistry. We do this in good conscience, knowing that there is a vast literature on the subject, catering to a wide range of audiences—from the quite elementary to the very sophisticated. A few examples are listed in the reference list, but a visit to any nearby physics library will provide an ample selection of reading material for those wishing to delve deeper into the matter. In the present chapter we adopt a minimalist approach. We develop some of the basic concepts and formulas of special relativity, building on a rather elementary level of basic physics. The aim is to provide a sufficient foundation for those who want to proceed as quickly as possible to the more quantum chemical parts of the text. In later chapters we will introduce more advanced tools of physics and revisit some of the subjects treated here. The theory of special relativity deals with the description of physical phenomena in frames that move at constant velocity relative to each other. The classroom is one such frame, the car passing at constant speed outside the classroom is another. The trajectory of a ball being thrown up vertically in the car will look quite different whether we describe it relative to the interior of the car or relative to the interior of the classroom. In particular we will be concerned with inertial frames. We define an inertial frame as a frame where spatial relations are Euclidean and where there is a universal time such that free particles move with constant velocities. In classical Newtonian mechanics, relations between the spatial parameters and time in two inertial frames S and S’ are expressed in terms of the Galilean transformations.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Espen Gaarder Haug

In gravity theory, there is a well-known trans-Planckian problem, which is that general relativity theory leads to a shorter than Planck length and shorter than Planck time in relation to so-called black holes. However, there has been little focus on the fact that special relativity also leads to a trans-Planckian problem, something we will demonstrate here. According to special relativity, an object with mass must move slower than light, but special relativity has no limits on how close to the speed of light something with mass can move. This leads to a scenario where objects can undergo so much length contraction that they will become shorter than the Planck length as measured from another frame, and we can also have shorter time intervals than the Planck time. The trans-Planckian problem is easily solved by a small modification that assumes Haug’s maximum velocity for matter is the ultimate speed limit for something with mass. This speed limit depends on the Planck length, which can be measured without any knowledge of Newton’s gravitational constant or the Planck constant.


Author(s):  
Espen Haug

In gravity theory, there is a well-known trans-Planckian problem, which is that general relativity theory leads to a shorter than Planck length and shorter than Planck time in relation to so-called black holes. However, there has been little focus on the fact that special relativity also leads to a trans-Planckian problem, something we will demonstrate here. According to special relativity, an object with mass must move slower than light, but special relativity has no limits on how close to the speed of light something with mass can move. This leads to a scenario where objects can undergo so much length contraction that they will become shorter than the Planck length as measured from another frame, and we can also have shorter time intervals than the Planck time. The trans-Planckian problem is easily solved by a small modication that assumes Haug's maximum velocity for matter is the ultimate speed limit for something with mass. This speed limit depends on the Planck length, which can be measured without any knowledge of Newton's gravitational constant or the Planck constant. After a long period of slow progress in theoretical physics, we are now in a Klondike "gold rush" period where many of the essential pieces are falling in place.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document