Invalidating Relativistic Time Dilation: A Re-assessment of Time, Measurement Errors, and Cosmic Time.

Soumendra Nath Thakur 

ORCiD: 0000-0003-1871-7803

December 16, 2024

The explanation of time as presented in relativity is widely regarded as the best description of time, primarily due to its reliance on relativistic principles. This interpretation has remained influential and largely unchallenged since the publication of Einstein's theory of special relativity in 1905. However, recent research and advancements in scientific understanding challenge the relativistic notion of time.

Einstein's dismissal of the classical interpretation of time in favour of the relativistic framework went unopposed for decades. Yet, contemporary findings suggest that time does not dilate in the manner proposed by relativity. Instead, any perceived alteration in the natural progression of time should be treated as an error in time measurement rather than an actual dilation. Furthermore, the concept of time dilation inherently invites its counterpart—time contraction—when the influencing factors are reversed. This duality contradicts the fundamental principle that the scale of time (∆t) must remain constant. Any deviation, whether a dilation (t′) or contraction (-t′), leads to errors in time measurement, as standard clock mechanisms cannot accommodate these variations. A dilated time scale (∆t+t′) exceeds the standard scale, while a contracted time scale fails to complete it.

For instance, the clock face represents a fixed 360° cycle, symbolizing the uniform progression of time. A dilated time cannot fit within this 360° framework, while a contracted time would fall short of completing the cycle, resulting in measurement inaccuracies. Furthermore, while clock time is a representation of cosmic time, the relativistic interpretation focuses solely on clock time and violates the very essence of cosmic time.

Cosmic time is defined as the continuous and irreversible progression of existence and events through the past, present, and future, regarded as an integrated whole. It exists beyond spatial dimensions in the fourth dimension and progresses without reversal. Relativity, however, imposes an artificial ordering of events based on natural time, failing to recognize that existential events invoke conceptual time rather than natural time.

My research, supported by mathematical formulations and experimental evidence, challenges this relativistic perspective. I have explored time distortion through piezoelectric oscillator experiments, the human perception of time, and the role of entropy in defining time. These studies highlight flaws in the experiments supporting time dilation, which were biased and employed improper techniques. Instead of identifying the true cause of errors—namely, distortions in the wavelength of oscillations—these experiments prematurely concluded that time dilation was occurring.

Wavelength, being directly proportional to the time period, shows that errors in wavelength lead to errors in time measurement—not to time dilation. Relativistic time dilation fails to account for this fundamental relationship and overlooks the broader context of wavelength distortion, which is a more general phenomenon. Consequently, the concept of relativistic time dilation is fundamentally flawed in its understanding of time and its measurement. Time dilation is rather error in time reading.

Redefining 'Nothing': A Scientific Perspective on the Universe's Creation.

Soumendra Nath Thakur 

December 13, 2024

Religious individuals who strictly believe in divine creation often reject the idea that scientific laws, such as gravity, could spontaneously create the universe from nothing. Similarly, many philosophical thinkers argue that 'something' cannot emerge from 'nothing,' asserting that nothingness inherently lacks the capacity to produce existence.

However, both perspectives tend to overlook the nuanced interpretation of 'nothing' in an inter-dimensional context. As three-dimensional beings, our perception is inherently limited, and what we define as 'nothing' might merely reflect our inability to detect phenomena beyond our dimensional framework. For instance, dimensions below the Planck scale, imperceptible to human senses and instruments, might harbour vibrational energies, such as strings, which are mathematically plausible but empirically unverifiable due to our limitations.

This perspective is further supported by the understanding that the universe appears as a continuously fluctuating field of matter whose quanta are fermions, i.e., leptons and quarks, and a force field whose quanta are bosons, i.e., photons and gluons. All of these fields have zero-point energy. Even at absolute zero, atoms and molecules maintain some vibrational motion, known as zero-point energy. Moreover, the empty space of a vacuum also exhibits these properties. This suggests that what we perceive as 'nothing' is far from an empty void; instead, it is imbued with subtle, energetic fluctuations that could serve as the foundation for the emergence of existence.

In this light, the universe's creation from 'nothing,' as we perceive it, aligns with a scientific understanding that what appears as 'nothing' may, in fact, be a subtle, energetic substrate capable of generating existence.

"Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist. "It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the Universe going.

Stephen Hawking"

Exploring Energy, Existence, and Hypothetical Dimensions

December, 2024

Dear Mark Jagg,

Thank you for your intriguing perspective. Here's my opinion based on the points raised:

Existence as Vibration or Oscillation:

I agree with your assertion that all forms of existence, whether energetic or mass-based, inherently involve vibration or oscillation. This aligns with the fundamental principles of quantum mechanics, where oscillations and wave-like properties underpin reality. The Planck equation provides strong evidence for this energy-frequency relationship, reinforcing the notion of "existence vibration."

Primordial Energy and Dimensionality:

The idea of primordial energy existing without spatial dimensions resonates with theoretical physics, particularly in models that describe the pre-Big Bang state. While this phase remains hypothetical due to the lack of direct evidence, it is not speculative. The suggestion that energy must have a minimum dimension (frequency) adds a logical foundation to this hypothesis.

Energy as Trans dimensional:

The concept of energy manifesting across dimensions, as suggested by its wave-particle duality, holds merit. This "trans dimensional" nature can be viewed metaphorically, reflecting energy's adaptability in different frameworks. However, this idea would benefit from further clarification and rigorous theoretical development.

Dimensional Hopping Between EM and Mass Spectra:

I must respectfully challenge this idea, as it lacks empirical support. The photon is not composed of quarks, and it does not contain mass in the way that matter does. The electromagnetic spectrum and the mass spectrum operate on distinct principles, with photons being massless and non-convertible to mass. This "hopping" concept appears to misrepresent energy's interaction between these spectra.

Electro-Evolution and Atomic Structure:

The role of electromagnetic processes in shaping atomic structures is well-supported by Big Bang nucleosynthesis. This idea aligns with our understanding of the early universe's chemistry and the formation of the first elements.

Hydrogen as the First Atomic Element:

This statement is scientifically consistent, as hydrogen is indeed the simplest and most abundant element in the universe, formed shortly after the Big Bang.

In summary, while some aspects of your hypothesis align with established scientific principles, others, like "dimensional hopping," require more substantial evidence to gain acceptance. The idea of energy's inherent vibration and its foundational role in existence is both compelling and scientifically plausible.

Warm regards,

Soumendra Nath Thakur

Clarification on Photon Mass and Energy Transfer in Atomic Absorption:

Photons are gauge bosons, not made of quarks, so they do not have rest mass. When a photon is absorbed by an electron in an atom, it transfers its energy to the electron, but the photon itself ceases to exist in its original form. However, the photon always remains as energy, even though it doesn't have mass in the traditional sense. A phonon, which is a quasiparticle representing quantized vibrations in a lattice, is also distinct from photons and doesn't have mass either.

Key Clarifications:

• Photon and mass: While photons have no rest mass, they do carry energy and momentum, which are related to their frequency and wavelength.
• Phonon: Phonons are not the same as photons. They are quasi-particles arising from lattice vibrations in a material and also do not have rest mass, but they are fundamentally different from photons.

Addressing the Question: "Is There a Reasonable Alternative to the Theory of the Expanding Universe?"

Soumendra Nath Thakur

ORCiD: 0000-0003-1871-7803

December 10, 2024

1. The Concept of a Static Universe

Historically, the static universe model was considered a viable alternative but was ultimately disproven by observational evidence. Albert Einstein initially proposed a static, isotropic, and homogeneous universe, introducing the cosmological constant (Λ) to counteract gravitational collapse and maintain stability. However, in 1929, Edwin Hubble's discovery of the redshift of galaxies provided definitive evidence of an expanding universe. Hubble's law demonstrated that the redshift of galaxies is proportional to their distance, signifying that galaxies are receding from each other at speeds increasing with distance.

In light of this discovery, Einstein abandoned the static universe model, calling his introduction of the cosmological constant "the biggest blunder of my life." Consequently, the expanding universe model became the cornerstone of modern cosmology, and no reasonable alternative to it has been validated since.

2. Mass Loss and Gravitational Redshift

The claim that mass loss from stars or galaxies should result in a decreasing gravitational redshift is not scientifically accurate. Gravitational redshift, also known as the Einstein shift, depends on the gravitational potential of the source and the intrinsic and interactional energy of the photon at the point of emission, not on gradual mass changes over time.

3. Photon energy is a key parameter influenced by gravitational and cosmological phenomena during its journey through space. At emission, a photon’s total energy includes:

Eₜₒₜₐₗ,ₚₕₒₜₒₙ = E + Eg

 

• Intrinsic Energy (E): The inherent energy of the photon, proportional to its frequency.

• Interactional Energy (Eg): The energy gained from gravitational interaction with the source's gravitational potential.

Within the gravitational influence of massive bodies, photons expend Eg to escape the gravitational well, leading to gravitational redshift. However, the intrinsic energy (E) of the photon remains intact, as this component is unaffected by gravitational interactions.

Therefore, as the photon escapes the gravitational influence of the source, it does not lose its intrinsic energy (E); instead, it expends its interactional energy (Eg). The observed gravitational redshift arises from this expenditure, leading to a decrease in the total energy (Eₜₒₜₐₗ,ₚₕₒₜₒₙ) of the photon as it climbs out of the gravitational well.

4. Why Mass Loss Does Not Affect Gravitational Redshift:

• Gravitational redshift is determined by the gravitational potential at the point of photon emission. For a star or galaxy, this potential remains effectively constant over short timescales compared to the gradual mass loss caused by electromagnetic radiation or particle emissions.

• A photon's interaction with gravity is independent of the source's gradual mass changes, as long as the emission conditions remain unchanged.

5. Doppler and Relativistic Contributions:

Gravitational redshift is distinct from the relativistic Doppler effect, which arises due to the relative motion between the photon source and the observer. The Doppler factor, which relates the source and observed frequencies, is given by:

Doppler Factor = √(1−β)/(1+β), β = v/c 

Here, v is the relative velocity of the source, and c is the speed of light. The Doppler effect affects photon frequency (f) and wavelength (λ) based on relative motion, whereas gravitational redshift results solely from energy interactions with the gravitational potential.

Illustration:

For a typical photon with intrinsic energy E = 4.0 × 10⁻¹⁹ J, its emission frequency corresponds to f = 6.0368 × 10¹⁴ Hz. The gravitational redshift arises as the photon expends its interactional energy (Eg) while escaping the gravitational field, leading to an observed decrease in frequency (fr) and a proportional increase in wavelength (λr).

In summary, a photon retains its intrinsic energy (E) as it escapes the gravitational influence of a massive object, while the redshift results from the loss of interactional energy (Eg). Gradual mass loss from stars or galaxies has no direct impact on this process, as gravitational redshift is governed by the gravitational potential at the point of emission and the photon's total energy interaction with that potential.

6. Photon Behaviour in Dark-Energy-Dominated Cosmic Space

As a photon exits the zero-gravity sphere of gravitationally bound systems and enters dark-energy-dominated intergalactic space, its energy behaviour changes due to the increasing distances between receding galaxies. In this interpretation, the increased separation of galaxies is treated as a physical increment of distances rather than an expansion of the natural spacetime fabric. The implications for photon energy are as follows:

• Loss of Intrinsic Energy (E):

In contrast to its behaviour within gravitationally bound regions, a photon traveling through intergalactic space experiences a permanent loss of intrinsic energy (E). This energy loss is caused by the photon having to traverse additional physical distances created by the increasing separation of galaxies. The longer the photon’s journey, the greater the energy it expends to cover these growing distances, manifesting as a reduction in frequency (cosmological redshift).

• Physical Increment of Distance:

Rather than attributing this phenomenon to the relativistic expansion of spacetime, the interpretation focuses on the physical increase in distances between galaxies driven by dark energy. The receding galaxies contribute to a lengthening of the photon’s travel path, resulting in greater energy expenditure.

Comparison with Gravitational Redshift:

• Gravitational Redshift: Results from a photon expending Eg while escaping a gravitational well, with E remaining unaffected.

• Cosmological Redshift (Revised): Results from the photon losing intrinsic energy (E) due to the extended physical travel distance required in intergalactic space dominated by dark energy.

7. Implications for Photon Energy Dynamics

This interpretation of distance increment between galaxies provides an alternative framework for understanding cosmological redshift. It underscores that the photon's energy loss during its journey is linked to the physical realities of increasing galaxy separations rather than the relativistic notion of spacetime fabric expansion. The observed redshift is thus a direct consequence of the photon's traversal of additional, physically real distances, reinforcing the role of dark energy in driving the universe's large-scale structure.

Conclusion

In summary, photons retain their intrinsic energy (E) within the gravitational influence of massive bodies, expending only their interactional energy (Eg) to escape gravitational wells. This ensures that the photon’s inherent properties remain intact. However, in dark-energy-dominated intergalactic space, the photon loses intrinsic energy due to the physical increment of distances between receding galaxies. This energy loss, observed as cosmological redshift, arises not from a relativistic expansion of spacetime but from the tangible elongation of the photon’s travel path in an evolving universe.

Addressing the broader question, "Is there a reasonable alternative to the theory of the expanding universe?"—the overwhelming observational evidence, including the cosmic microwave background (CMB), large-scale galaxy distributions, and redshift-distance relationships, firmly supports the theory of increasing distances between galaxies driven by dark energy. The notion of a static universe, previously proposed as an alternative, has been empirically invalidated by Hubble’s discoveries and subsequent advancements in astrophysical observations.

While interpretations of cosmic expansion may vary, such as the preference for framing the phenomenon as physical distance increments rather than spacetime fabric expansion, these distinctions do not undermine the fundamental premise of an evolving, dynamic cosmos. As of now, no alternative model has provided a comparable explanatory and predictive framework for the observable universe. Thus, while scientific exploration should always remain open to novel ideas, the theory of increasing distances between galaxies—whether interpreted as spacetime expansion or physical separation—remains the most reasonable and well-supported explanation for the universe’s large-scale behaviour.