Saturday, October 1, 2011

Faster than the Speed of Light Neutrinos exactly as Predicted by Quantum-Geometry Dynamics

-UPDATE- since the following article was posted in September 2011, new data appears to indicate that neutrinos have not measured speeds in excess of the speed of light. But the article Icarus Measures Superluminal Neutrinos underlines that is that the actual data shows measurements of neutrinos speeds in excess of the speed of light and that only the theoretically biased interpretation refutes relative superluminal measurements. -UPDATE-

When the news of the results of the OPERA group indicating that they had measured neutrinos that were travelling faster than the speed of light and that Einstein may be proven wrong, enthusiastic friends and family emailed or called to let me know that what I had predicted over a year ago was now being confirmed.

The news about the superluminal neutrinos caught the scientific world by surprise. None of the dominant theories had predicted, much less can explain the results. As for myself, though I was surprised by the unexpected news, the results of the OPERA group didn’t find me unprepared. The reason is that I had specifically predicted such superluminal speeds in my treatise on quantum-geometry dynamics well over a year ago (see ). Not only did QGD predict superluminal speeds but it also explains why neutrinos are more likely than other particles to achieve such relative speeds.

I will explain here what the results of the OPERA group mean according to QGD, but before I do I will ask for a bit of your time in order to introduce you to the basic but distinctive ideas that set quantum-geometry dynamics apart from current dominant theories.

First axiom of QGD: space is discrete, finite and dimensionalized by preons(-)

We all have been taught that space is infinite and continuous (that is, it can be infinitely divided into smaller and smaller regions). Continuity of space implies that between any two points in space, however close they may be, there lies an infinite number of points. QGD predicts the opposite by suggesting that space is finite and discrete (that is, there is a limit beyond which space cannot be subdivided). Therefore, there is a minimum physical distance between two points of space (the fundamental unit of distance) so that, according to QGD, the number of points between any two points in space must be finite. So you can’t subdivide space in segments that are smaller than the fundamental distance.

Another distinctive prediction of QGD is that space is emergent. That is, the dimensions of space result from the interaction between preons(-); which are one of only two types of fundamental of particles predicted by the theory. The dimensionalization of space results from the repulsive force acting between preons(-). That repulsive force, n-gravity, which is discussed in detail my introduction to quantum-geometry dynamics, is one of only two fundamental forces; each of which is carried by on type of fundamental particles. Hence preons(-) being the fundamental particles of space, we define the fundamental distance as that between two adjacent preons(-). You will also note that what exists between two adjacent preons(-) is not space but the unit n-gravity field. No physical object can exist in between preons(-).

Second axiom of QGD: all matter is composed of preons(+).

QGD predicts that all matter is made from the second type of fundamental particles called preons(+). By matter we include all particles, including those which current theories hold as fundamental. So according to QGD, electrons, positrons, neutrinos and even photons are composite particles made of preons(+) and since mass is a fundamental property of preons(+), then even photons have mass (QGD predicts that the Universe evolved from an isotropic state in which preons(+) were evenly distributed through the quantum-geometrical space. This primal state was followed by the formation of photons, the simplest preonic structures, and created what we know as the cosmic microwave background radiation).

Preons(+) travel through space by leaping from preons(-) to preons(-). Since the preon(+) can only make on leap at the time and since the leap is the fundamental unit of distance, then preons(+) move at the fastest possible speed. Light, or photons to be specific, travels at the speed of preons(+). So do neutrinos.

Time is a purely mathematical dimension

This is not an axiom of the theory, but rather a consequence of the first and second axioms; a theorem. From the axioms, the constancy of the speed of light is determined by the structure of space. Photons can move by leaping from preon(-) to preon(-). The leap becomes not only the fundamental unit of distance, but also the fundamental unit of time and their ratio the fundamental unit of speed. Since the constancy of the speed of light relative to quantum-geometrical space is a consequence of the structure of space alone, it does not necessitate the use of the notion of time dilatation.

Time, as understood by QGD, is a pure relational concept which allows comparison between phenomena and periodic and cyclic events (clocks). Time is a mathematical dimension and because it has no physicality, it can’t be unified with spatial dimensions which are undeniably physical. It follows that the concept of space-time and event horizons do not represent physical reality.

Absolute versus Relative Speed

If QGD is correct, then quantum-geometrical space forms a static structure that is physical in the same way that matter is physical. Quantum-geometrical is static but not amorphous. It dynamically interacts with matter. It also forms a background with which and in which matter interacts. Each individual preon(-) is distinct, occupies a specific position relative to other preons(-). Quantum-geometrical space thus as structure and we can define absolute motion as the change in position within it.

Since time is non-physical, we need to have definition of speed that is does not make use of it. We will define the absolute speed of an object as the ratio of the distance it travels over the distance light would travel simultaneously. Photon and neutrinos, for example, travel at the absolute speed of 1. Everything else travels at absolute speeds that are less than one.

Since there is no time and no time dilatation, and since we have taken time out of the definition for speed, we can define the notion of relative speed as follows:

Relative speed is the speed of a structure relative to another structure. The relative speed between two objects is equal to the sum of their absolute speeds along the axis that connects them. For example, if a photon moves towards an object that moves in its direction, then the relative speed between the photon and the object is equal to, where is the speed of light and, the speed of the object. If two photons are on collision course and are coming from diametrically opposite directions, their relative speed is equal to. Notice that though the relative speed between two objects can exceed the speed of light, their absolute speeds cannot exceed it.

Explanation of the OPERA results

According to QGD, neutrinos are composite particles which share structural characteristics with photons which made them travel at the speed of light and only at the speed of light. Based on this and the above discussion, we know that since neutrinos move at the speed of light that the measurement of their speed by the OPERA group is not their absolute speed of the relative speed between the neutrinos and their target. And the target being a point on Earth, we can assume from the definition of relative speed, that the difference between the measured speed of the superluminal neutrinos and the speed of light (the absolute speed of all neutrinos) must be the absolute speed of the Earth along the axis connecting CERN to Gran Sasso (the target).

So what the OPERA team unexpectedly measured is not the absolute speed of neutrinos but indirectly, the absolute speed of the Earth along the CERN-Gran Sasso axis. If this discovery is confirmed, then the OPERA results will indirectly support the existence of quantum-geometrical space.

Implications of the OPERA results

If the OPERA results are confirmed, much of what the dominant theories hold as true will be put into question. The three pillars of physics, special relativity, quantum-mechanics and the Big Bang theory will have to be retrofitted to fit the experimental results or, more likely, will have to make way for new theories.

Special relativity, which provides the foundation for most of current theories, is already put in question. For instance, the theory implies that the mass of an object approaches infinity as it approaches the speed of light and that infinite energy would be required to achieve. In other words, it would take the entire energy of the Universe times infinity to accelerate even a single neutrino to the speed of light. And a neutrino traveling at the speed of light should have infinite mass. So, if the OPERA measurements are confirmed, then the neutrinos evidently not having been supplied with infinite energy and not having infinite mass, special relativity would be showed to be flawed (to say the least).

Other flaws in the theory are also made evident by the OPERA results. Particles traveling faster than the speed of light would travel back in time (if special relativity is correct) which would violate causality (what we understand commonly as a time paradox). To illustrate this, imagine a system made of two devices; one that emits luminal neutrinos and one that emit superluminal neutrinos. Let’s call them device A and device B.

Let device A be triggered by a timer and let this timer be equipped with a neutrino detector that will stop the countdown if it detects a neutrino.

Let device B be equipped with a particle detector which is linked to its trigger so that, when if it detects a neutrino coming from device A, it will shot a superluminal neutrino back at it.

Now with the experiment.

The timer counts down to zero and trigger device A which shots a neutrino toward device B. Device B detects the neutrino from Device A and shots a superluminal neutrinos at back at it. The superluminal neutrino, travelling back in time, reaches device A before the timer triggers the emission of the neutrino and aborts the countdown.

Hence, device A will not emit the neutrino that will trigger device B. But if it doesn’t, then device B will not shot the superluminal neutrinos that will stop the timer. And if device B doesn’t emit the superluminal neutrino then the timer will count down to zero and device will emit the neutrino which will prevent that same neutrino to be emitted. You see the problem. This time paradox is an unavoidable consequence of the idea that time is physical.

Paradoxes emerging from theories always point to inconsistencies in them. QGD, being a consistent axiomatic system does not give rise to such paradoxes. In fact, because QGD follows the principle of strict causality (see chapter 6 of Introduction to Quantum-Geometry Dynamics), it doesn’t give rise to any paradox whatsoever.

With time being understood as a purely relational concept, that is, time a mathematical dimension, not a physical dimension, superluminal neutrinos travel only through the three dimensions of quantum-geometrical space. So using in the experiment above, superluminal neutrinos do not violate causality. QGD also shows causality to be a series of events where each event triggers the next one. According to QGD, the superluminal neutrino from device B cannot arrive at device A before it emits a luminal neutrinos.

Predictions regarding the duplication of the OPERA results

The test of any theory is not how well it fits with dominant theories (QGD makes no effort to do so), but whether or not the original predictions it makes are experimentally confirmed. If this is true, then quantum-geometry dynamics is doing good. Not only did QGD predict and explain superluminal speed over a year ago (see page 46 of Introduction to Quantum-Geometry Dynamics), but it implies the exclusion of the Higgs boson (chapters 6 and 15) and the non-existence of extra-dimensions (chapters 3, 11 and 15). QGD also makes a number of other predictions which will be discussed in the next post, but for now, we’ll conclude with the predictions QGD makes for experiments that will attempt to replicate the results from the OPERA group.

QGD proposes that the difference between the speed of the relative superluminal neutrinos and the speed of light corresponds to the absolute speed of the Earth along the axis that joins the source and target of the neutrinos. Therefore, the speed of neutrinos in future experiments will be a function of the angle between the source-target axis and the plane of motion of the Earth around the centre of the galaxy.

Future experiments will show that neutrinos’ speed will vary slightly depending on the orientation of the axis between the source and target of neutrinos. The relative speed of the neutrinos will be exactly the speed of light when the axis is perpendicular to the absolute direction of the Earth (it’s important here to insist that we’re not talking about the speed of the Earth relative to the Sun, the centre of the galaxy or relative to any other object). The speed of the neutrinos will be at its minimum and less than c when the axis between the source and target is parallel to the axis of absolute direction of the Earth with neutrinos moving in the same direction as the Earth. And the maximum relative superluminal speed will be achieve when the axis between source and target is parallel with the absolute direction of the Earth and the neutrinos move in opposite direction from that of the Earth. The difference between this maximum relative speed and the speed of light will be approximately 220km/sec plus or minus adjustments to take into account the difference between geometric and quantum-geometric distances.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Particular Interpretation of Double-Slit Experiments

  Following the failure of classical physics theories to explain the interference patterns observed in double slit experiments and other lig...