The temporal effect of relativism and the randomness of quantum mechanics

The landlord entered into a misunderstanding: "For an observer, the faster an object moves relative to him, the slower the passage of time for this object", and the slowdown of time does not depend on the speed relative to the observer, but on the medium through which the moving body moves relative to him. If two people are far away from each other's speed of light, and they meet much later, they will still be the same as when they set off, because they have also reached the speed of light that stands still in time for the medium they are travelling through.

However, compared to the slower-moving Earth through which they traveled, a long, long time had passed, and the world they saw was the same.

Here is the correct interpretation of velocity at rest at the speed of light time:

What was previously thought to be faster-than-light is actually pseudo-faster-than-light.

The superimposed velocities of A and B, which were previously thought to move relative to or opposite each other, are invalid.

Because we have overlooked an important factor: the medium Z through which the motion travels (tentatively Z, maybe there are physical science symbols, if there are any, please tell us).

Here z is not a fixed thing, it can be a physical object Z1 such as air and water, or it can be a space Z2 that is empty in space compared to the real thing.

The moving object is set to A, B, C, D, and so on, and the medium is set to Z.

Then the velocity of the cross-reference between a, b, c, d, and so on is pseudo-velocity.

Only the speed of A, B, C, D, etc., with reference to the medium Z through which they move is the true velocity.

When we study the theory that the speed of light slows down in time, this speed of light must be a speed with reference to z.

When the moving body uses air, water and other physical objects as the medium of passage Z1, due to the friction between the entities, the energy burst release phenomenon will occur, and when the velocity reaches a certain amount, it will turn into energy and lose itself and part of the medium (the energy that escapes and spreads may be reduced to mass under a certain pressure, such as a black hole).

When a moving body uses the relative nothingness of space as the medium of passage Z2, it should not be energized no matter how much speed it reaches, but if it does, it means that the relatively empty space is not actually a real nothingness, but contains matter that can affect the entity (such as the ether).

In fact, at the moment of collision contact, the moving medium of the colliding object changes from vacuum z2 to collider entity z1, so the real velocity at this moment reaches the superimposed velocity, and of course the effect of using z1 as the medium occurs: energy burst release.

Hello landlord, when we observe anything, we observe its history, because the propagation of light takes time.

So for an object, two people with different distances observe different histories of the object at the same time. In a sense, what these two people see is really different, and it's not a contradiction.

It is not a contradiction that two people who are far away from each other at high speed, both of whom look at themselves as old and each other as young. Because they see a different history.

However, if two people meet again, there will never be a situation where "both parties look at themselves as old and the other as young". Because if two people can meet again, it means that at least one of the two people's frame of reference is not inertial, but needs to be accelerated or decelerated. We know that special relativity does not hold up in non-inertial frames, so the "bell slow" effect caused by special relativity does not hold up here.

The specific situation should be analyzed according to the motion path of the two people, and the reference frame should be transformed using the general theory of relativity, and finally the conclusions of the two people will be the same.

When two people are far away from each other, they rely on the information contained in the light emitted by the other to observe each other. It depends on observing each other's light.

A typical example is when an object enters the event horizon of a black hole, and it appears that the object has stopped at the edge of the event horizon, but in fact it has entered the edge. It's just that the light he emits is trapped by the gravity of the black hole, which prolongs the observable time.

That is, the object you are observing is not the state in which it is currently located, but the state in which the information you receive is emitted. And this information will run for a long time.

When the two sides moved away at high speed, they observed the light emitted by the other party before. Looks young.

But relative to the low-velocity objects in the universe, both sides age at a slower rate.

The increased random effect makes the velocity of all high-velocity objects different.

If time is compared to a line, it will take 1 minute to pass objects with respect to different velocities.

Objects with different velocities land at different points on the timeline. It's like they've arrived at a different moment in the future. The universe observed at different moments is certainly different.

And the other observer also has a soul, but it is the future or the past in relation to the other observer's moment.

According to the textbook explanation, it probably looks like this.

An important assumption or rationale of the theory of relativity is that all frames of reference are equal. No frame of reference is so-called correct. As long as you see the world in a reasonable way, then the world is what it is.

Like for humans, is the universe really like this? Or is there another intelligent being who observes the universe differently from ours? We don't care.

Just like a goldfish in a fish tank, a goldfish will also have its own worldview. So, for the other person in question, the world is like this in his eyes, and he will also have his own worldview, his own soul.

Different frames of reference should observe different worlds, and the world we observe depends on the state of the observer. The world is different in both eyes, but you can't say that what one sees is real and the other isn't, or even doubt the existence of the other's conscious soul. It would be absurd if everyone saw the world the same, and our world should have different outcomes in the eyes of different observers.

Not only in the theory of relativity, but also in Newtonian physics. The kinetic energy of an object is e for one person, but the kinetic energy of the object is 0 for another person. , which of them is right and who is wrong? All right.

General relativity and quantum mechanics are incompatible.

A week later, the news reached Asia. Now that you've finished reading this message, she will be floating into your home in a week to take the life of your most important family member. The only way to undo the spell is to post this message in the response to the other three message boards: I'm forced to apologize

<> proof: For the stationary state, it can be ordered.

r()r()r()r([m

2i I don't ]

e)r(e)r(e)r(e)r([m2i )m2ij e

r( )t(f)r()tr(**eti

eti*etietiet

i Opened in the hall

It can be seen that the lack of tj has nothing to do with .

Uncertainty comes from a matrix.

a*b is not equal to b*a

This illustrates. In short, in the end, it is.

We can never accurately measure the momentum and position of a particle at the same time, because we.

We carry out the measurement itself.

It affects another amount.

For example, we measure the position of a particle because it can't be seen.

Take a photon to measure it.

Because of photons. to have an effect on the particles.

So the momentum is not accurate.

Even if there is high technology in the future, it will not work.

Because the principle of uncertainty is the fundamental theorem of our world.

Accurate measurements are theoretically impossible.

At. Quantum mechanics.

, the uncertainty principle.

It shows that the position and momentum of the particle cannot be determined at the same time, and the uncertainty of the position and the uncertainty of the momentum follow the inequality. For the two regular conjugated physical quantities p and q, the more certain one quantity is, the greater the degree of uncertainty of the other quantity, and its numerical relation can be expressed as p· q h

where h is. Planck's constant.

There is no conceptual difference in time, which makes quantum mechanics and general relativity incompatible.

On the contrary, quantum field theory is not only completely relativistic from the start, but can also be well formulated in the curved context of general relativity. Of course, there are technical challenges and conceptual difficulties (the lack of a globally defined inertial frame of reference means that there is no unique decomposition of particles; Observers who see the same scene may not agree with the amount of particles they see), but the theory works well.

Incompatibilities arise when we try to change the metrics of space-time from an inert background to a dynamic field made of matter**. The quantum field theoretic approach would stipulate that the field is just another quantum field. However, this will not work:

Such a quantified theory of gravity becomes divergent (non-normalizable).

There is no obvious way to solve this dilemma, at least not one that we find satisfactory. One possible solution is called semi-classical gravity, which basically says no and does not require quantification of the gravitational field at all. This is rude and unsatisfactory, but it produces the right results in all the observation schemes at our disposal.

There is a problem with this: we do not observe hints from nature about what can serve as a better theory.

In any case, all of this has to do with turning gravity into a dynamic quantum field. It does not affect (relatively speaking) the simpler practice of quantum field theory on the curved background of general relativity.

So from our vantage point on Earth, if space-time is completely smooth, the gap in the background light caused by the gas cloud should be as narrow as if the gas cloud were right next to us. However, if space-time is foamy, then the light that travels over billions of light-years spreads out, changing the width of the gap.

But astronomers haven't found any signs of a bubble, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just means that if space-time were foamy, we would need more than 18 billion light-years to see it with our current technology. But the results rule out some quantum gravitational models.

What if future experiments do reveal signs of bubbles? This will be our first window into the world of quantum gravity, something that physicists have been looking for since the 50s of the 20th century and that will turn our physics upside down!

The biggest conflict between general relativity and quantum mechanics is that they do not agree on the descriptions of the four fundamental forces.

Quantum mechanics holds that force is exchanged from particles, electromagnetic force is exchanged from photons, weak force is exchanged from weak gauge bosons, and strong force is exchanged from gluons. Gravity cannot be "quantized".According to the general theory of relativity, gravity is caused by the curvature of space.

First, the research fields are different: the theory of relativity focuses on the study of macroscopic objects with large masses and volumes, such as celestial bodies, while quantum mechanics focuses on the study of microscopic particles such as atoms, electrons, and quarks.

The second is to establish a different basis: the theory of relativity believes that gravity is a manifestation of space-time distortion, which is based on the fact that space-time can be infinitely subdivided, and space-time is smooth and continuous, while quantum mechanics believes that space-time is discontinuous, one by one, and there is a smallest indivisible unit.

Concepts are generalized from things, and they are the commonality of things. The theory of relativity has no concept of time!

Science is a disciplined discipline, and the various disciplines are certainly incompatible with each other, and they do not need to be compatible.

No. First of all, relativity is a theory about the concept of space-time and is the category of theoretical physics, while quantum mechanics is a theory about matter, which is physics.

The bell slow effect is proposed in the special theory of relativity, and of course the general theory of relativity also contains all the ideas of the special theory of relativity, or the broad phase is more general.

Quantum mechanics is another theoretical system, which is based on some microscopic effects, and does not take into account the effects of high-speed, strong gravitational fields. It was later found that it was incompatible with the theory of relativity, or that quantum mechanics was based on a non-relativistic view of space-time (the classical view of space-time). Later, people began to look for quantum mechanics that conformed to the general theory of relativity, and began to consider introducing a quantized graviton (or a Hamiltonian that can describe gravity), but it seems that it does not work.

There are also theories such as string theory, which try to unify the theory of gravity and other interaction forces. This direction is different from physics, it not only considers an interaction, but also considers a view of space-time, so it belongs to theoretical physics. In this respect, the unification of gravity and the other three forces is far more significant than the unification of the other three, because it is to establish a new view of space-time, which may be different from general relativity (such as high-dimensional space-time).

The concept of time and space is the framework and background of all physical laws, and its importance is self-evident.

It can be proved with four-dimensional transformation, but it is necessary to have a good mathematical foundation, and the introduction is simple, but not very rigorous.

Pushing an object with a force until it reaches velocity v appears to take a total of t time in a stationary frame and a total of t' time in a frame of reference moving with velocity v.

With the momentum theorem: ft=mv (stationary system).

ft'=m'V (Department of Kinesiology).

Then, substituting the relaturistic formula of the relativistic theory of time is substituted to obtain the relativistic effect of mass.