Time as the result of the observer’s measurement

Since the beginning of physics, time is the duration of material changes. We measure time with clocks. The notion of time in Newton physics, Einstein’s relativity, and quantum physics are different despite we always measure the same time with the same apparatuses that are clocks. We showed in this article that the act of the measurement done by the observer is generating duration. Time as duration is the result of the interaction between the observer and physical reality via clocks. In the universe, only changes exist. Changes have no duration on their own. Time as duration is born with the measurement done by the observer. Duration is relative and depends on the variable energy density of time-invariant superfluid quantum space that is the carrier of EPR-type entanglement.

Discretization and degeometrization: A new relational quantum physics and an alternate path to quantum gravity

A novel quantum mechanical framework in discrete space and time leads to the derivation of the relativistic energy equation and a potential path toward quantum gravity. A unique approach to geometry is also derived where pregeometric points containing intrinsic compactified geometries generate a topologically 4D cosmos with a local dynamical 3D geometry. An interpretation of the quantum mechanics wavefunction is considered as longitudinal density waves traveling through dynamical pregeometric points. Similarly, general relativity can be described as density variations of the pregeometric points caused by matter-energy distribution. A primordial quantum (Higgs) field emerging at the big bang that generates all the other quantum fields is considered. A four-dimensional structure of black holes, and dark matter and energy are discussed.

Bell tests explained by classical optics without quantum entanglement

A polarized photon interacts with a polarizer through the component of the photon’s electric field which is aligned with the polarizer. This component varies as the cosine of the angle through which the polarizer is rotated, explaining the cosine observed in Bell test data. Quantum mechanics is unnecessary and plays no role.

New full relativistic escape velocity and new Hubble related equation for the universe

The escape velocity derived from general relativity coincides with the Newtonian one. However, the Newtonian escape velocity can only be a good approximation when v ≪ c is sufficient to break free of the gravitational field of a massive body, as it ignores higher-order terms of the relativistic kinetic energy Taylor series expansion. Consequently, it does not work for a gravitational body with a radius at which v is close to c such as a black hole. To address this problem, we revisit the concept of relativistic mass, abandoned by Einstein, and derive what we call a full relativistic escape velocity. This approach leads to a new escape radius, where ve = c equal to a half of the Schwarzschild radius. Furthermore, we show that one can derive the Friedmann equation for a critical universe from the escape velocity formula from general relativity theory. We also derive a new equation for a flat universe based on our full relativistic escape velocity formula. Our alternative to the Friedmann formula predicts exactly twice the mass density in our (critical) universe as the Friedmann equation after it is calibrated to the observed cosmological redshift. Our full relativistic escape velocity formula also appears more consistent with the uniqueness of the Planck mass (particle) than the general relativity theory: whereas the general relativity theory predicts an escape velocity above c for the Planck mass at a radius equal to the Planck length, our model predicts an escape velocity c in this case.

In a holistic perspective, time is absolute and relativity a direct consequence of the conservation of total energy

We are taught to think that the description of relativistic phenomena requires distorted time and distance. The message of this essay is that, in a holistic perspective, time and distance are universal coordinate quantities, and relativity is a direct consequence of the conservation of energy. Instead of the kinematics/metrics-based approach of the theory of relativity, the dynamic universe (DU) approach starts from the dynamics of space as a whole and expresses relativity in terms of locally available energy instead of locally distorted time and distance. In such an approach, e.g., the frequency of atomic clocks at different states of motion and gravitation is obtained from the quantum mechanical solution of the characteristic frequencies, and the unique status of the velocity of light becomes understood via its linkage to the rest of space. In the kinematic/metrics-based theory of relativity, we postulate the principle of relativity, Lorentz covariance, the equivalence principle, the constancy of the speed of light, and the rest energy of mass objects. The conservation of momentum and energy is honored in local frames of reference, and time and distance are parameters in frame-to-frame observations. In the dynamics-based DU, the whole space is studied as a closed energy system and the energy in local structures is derived conserving the overall energy balance. Any local state of motion and gravitation in space is related, through a system of nested energy frames, to the state of rest in hypothetical homogeneous space, which serves as the universal frame of reference. Relativity of observations appears as a direct consequence of the overall energy balance and the linkage of local to the whole—with time and distance as universal coordinate quantities. DU postulates spherically closed space and zero-energy balance of motion and gravitation. DU does not need the relativity principle or any other postulates of the theory of relativity. Primarily, the theory of relativity is an empirically driven mathematical description of observations, with postulates formulated to support the mathematics. DU relies on mathematics built on the conservation of an overall zero-energy balance as the primary law of nature, which makes DU more like a metaphysically driven theory. Both approaches produce precise predictions. The choice is philosophical—nature is not dependent on the way we describe it.

The expression E = h × f is misleading because it implies the distribution of a photon quantum over 299 792 458 m, while the expression E = (h × c)/λ enables us to explain the particle-wave duality

The two equations E = h × f and E = (h × c)/λ for the quantum of energy of electromagnetic radiation provide the same result but describe electromagnetic radiation very differently. E = (h × c)/λ describes the quantum of energy of electromagnetic radiation to be located already in one wavelength and therefore like a particle. E = h × f describes the quantum of energy distributed over 299 792 458 m and therefore like a wave. To obtain h × f for the quantum of energy, we have to refer the quantum of energy to 299 792 458 m. Only then we obtain from E = (h × c)/(299 792 458 m), as the distance of 299 792 458 m of the velocity c is cancelling out now, E = h × 1/s = h × Hz, which is the precondition to obtain the correct value for the quantum of energy by multiplying Planck’s constant h by the frequency f. This already indicates the necessity of today's physics to have to speak of a particle-wave duality. It turns out that electromagnetic radiation consists of the first wavelength that carries the quantum of energy and behaves like a particle, which today is called “photon,” and a few following wavelengths that do not carry a further quantum of energy and behave like a wave, which today is called “electromagnetic wave.” By this knowledge, the particle-wave duality vanishes, and we obtain one single physical phenomenon, which I call “photon-wave.” The strange behavior of quantum objects at a single slit, at double-slits, and at beam splitters can now be understood in a causal way. “God does not play dice!” Einstein was right.

Falsification of Einstein’s relativity

In 1915, Einstein published general relativity. In 1916, he published a German language book about relativity, which contained his marble table thought experiment for explaining a continuum. Without realizing it, Einstein introduced a quantized two-dimensional discontinuum geometry and inadvertently falsified the marble table thought experiment continuum, which falsified relativity. The foundations of physics do not now (and never did) include a fundamentally sound relativistic theory to account for macroscopic phenomena. It is well known the success of relativity and its singularity problem indicate general relativity is a first approximation of a more fundamental theory. Combine that indication with the falsification of relativity and it is apparent, without speculation, that relativity is now and always was a first approximation of a more fundamental theory. A possible way forward to the more fundamental theory is developing a discontinuum physics based on the quantized two-dimensional discontinuum geometry or an algebraic version of it. Such discontinuum physics is not presented, because it is beyond the scope of this paper.

Theory of spacetime impetus

This article introduces the theory of spacetime impetus (SI). The theory unites Newtonian theory (NT) and the theory of general relativity (GR). To develop SI, we reformulated NT in spacetime and replaced the particle primitive in NT with the fragment of energy primitive in field theory. SI replaces Newton’s second law F = ma governing the motion of particles, where F, m, and a are, respectively, interaction force, mass, and acceleration, with the change equation P = k governing the motion of fragments of energy, where P and k are, respectively, action force and the curvature of a path in spacetime. To verify SI, we conducted three tests: Test 1 predicted the precession angles of Mercury and Jupiter, test 2 predicted the bending angle of light as it grazes the surface of the sun, and test 3 predicted the radius of the photon sphere. All three tests were in agreement with GR, the third corresponding to strong Riemannian curvature in GR. The equations of motion in SI are in terms of Cartesian coordinates and time and are relatively simple to solve. Undergraduate students in science and engineering and others with similar mathematical skills can validate the results for themselves.

The misunderstood Sagnac effect

The Sagnac effect of first order (in one-way light) is shown to explain the aberration observed in the very long base interferometry tests. This fact is also consistent with Sagnac’s results and with the observed stellar aberration. The Sagnac effect of second order (in two-way light) is shown to be real, but not observable, in the experiments that were done by Michelson and Morley. However, it is also shown that the same second order effect is observable in the Pioneer anomaly. The Doppler effect of second order is also demonstrated to explain the cosmic red shift, due to a radial ether wind.

Experimental support for the flowing aether concept of gravity

The article of Apffel et al. [Nature 585, 48 (2020)] reported on an experiment that produced the sight of two miniature sailboats floating upside down to each other on the two sides of a layer of glycerol that was levitated by high frequency vibrations. The vessel on the underside of the glycerol is a remarkable display of the results of simulated gravity caused by vibrations. The present article considers this and other experiments on simulated gravity and finds that they provide support for the flowing aether concept of the cause of gravity.