[vacuum-mechanics]

What is Lorentz transformation?
Everyone who is familiar with Einstein special theory of relativity (STR) would know that what the Lorentz transformation is. But what we knew is only the mathematical formulas which were used to solve problem with relative motion! What we do not know is what its physical meaning is? The reason is because there is no background mechanism for them. Einstein used the two postulates (principle of relativity and constancy of light speed for any inertial reference frame) for derivation.
Armed with “Vacuum mechanics” concept, we could also derive the Lorentz transformation. Beside that we could understand its physical meaning. But the most important point is that we could solve the philosophical problems of STR; the increasing mass, length contraction and time dilation of the moving object! Please see detail in “Completed Einstein special theory of relativity” which is now presenting in www.vacuum-mechanics.com .

[dleviwing]

VM;
It may be a minor point, but I think GTR (General Theory of Relativity) incorporated the function of "mass", not STR.

[mkirkpatrick]

To the observer and the observed things seem to differ,what then is the key to
unifying this apparent discrepancy,we are told by science and many learned men,that all things move!which of course they certainly appear to do so.But what about the Thing that does not move,Lorentz,and Enstein,if I am correct,
and if I am not I am sure this will be pointed out to me very soon! did not mention-Motionless,logic would dictate that back of all this here motion,there is
a causeless-cause,where the state of motionless exists in an eternal-now.
Where being is everywhere-ominipresent,and motion would be unthinkable because if you are All-where-then there is No-where to go,because you are already there in the first place?I wonder what Lorentz would make of that Transformation?


kind regards,michael.

[vacuum-mechanics]

Dear David, Michael,

-Learning from your reply posts, I concluded that both of you believe in the concept of “the increasing mass, length contraction and time dilation of the moving object”, didn’t you? For me it is a serious misinterpreted, this is the reason why we have to know “the physical meaning of Lorentz transformation”! Because it means that we could able to understand and consider whether is it right or wrong?

- David, do you really think that “relativistic mass” concept arise from GTR, if so how?

Sincerely yours,

Nimit Th.

[dleviwing]

Nimit;
If you have read my posts, you know that I do not view mass as a quantitative measure of a physical substance. You should also know that I do not view time dilation as a change in "Absolute Time", but only a perceived slowing of the device used to measure time. (a clock)

Since mass is a function of inertia, it will increase in value as an object acquires uniform motion.
Length will contract only due to the condensing of the physical substance as its quantity of uniform motion increases.

Lorentz transformation is the mathematical solution to define the behavior of the motions of matter. To understand them and the concepts of Relativity (STR and GTR) you must understand the nature of motion and its affects on the nature and behavior of the fundamental substance of the universe.

Using mathematical gauge theories to interpret reality only make the interpretation as abstract as the math. You should not view these interpretations as true paradigms for real scientific philosophy. These theories only define the science of measure.

Until you achieve this understanding you will only believe you know or only know without understanding; like so many others do.

- David, do you really think that “relativistic mass” concept arise from GTR, if so how?

Relativistic Mass is the consequence of the equation for the mass of a particle. Since light is presumed to have zero "rest mass", the momentum function (p) of the equation is removed and thus you have relativistic mass as defined by E=mc^2. What I actually think, is that rest mass and relativistic mass are the result of the same phenomena; uniform motion. Rest mass is primarily uniform angular motion were as relativistic mass is produced by uniform motion in the form of linear velocity (in the case of EM it is "c")

Best wishes;
Dave

PS: You already have many of the solutions for a TOE, I believe you only need a better understanding of motion.

[vacuum-mechanics]

Dear Dave and friends,

-“Until you achieve this understanding you will only believe you know or only know without understanding; like so many others do”.- I have to make clear here that “I never believe or say that I know, what I believe is that one who has a better understandable reason”.

- “Mass is a function of inertia”- okay, “it will increase when an object acquires a uniform motion”, how and why?

- “Time dilation is a perceived of slowing of the measuring clock”, how and why?

- “Length contraction is due to the condensing of the physical substance when its uniform motion increases”, how and why?

-“Relativistic Mass is the consequence of the equation for the mass of a particle”, what is that equation?

Sincerely yours,

Nimit Th.

[dleviwing]

- "Mass is a function of inertia"- okay, "it will increase when an object acquires a uniform motion", how and why? - "Time dilation is a perceived of slowing of the measuring clock", how and why? - "Length contraction is due to the condensing of the physical substance when its uniform motion increases", how and why?

Hi Nimit;
Fundamental Matter adheres to itself; self-affinity. Randomized wave motion disrupts this bonding (matter expands) were as uniform motion allows it to strengthen (matter condenses).
Thus:
Inertia increases, clocks run slower, and physical structures contract as uniform motion increases.

-"Relativistic Mass is the consequence of the equation for the mass of a particle", what is that equation?

REST MASS ENERGY EQUATION
E^2 =p^2 c^2 + m^2 c^4
Since EM radiation has no apparent "rest mass", the p^2 c^2 function is removed.

[vacuum-mechanics]

Dear Dave and friends,

-Talking about equation E²=p²c²+m²c^4. It was derived in relativistic dynamics part of special theory of relativity (STR). I could not found in any textbook which derived the equation. By the way general theory of relativity (GTR) is the extend theory from STR by including gravity. How could the equation was derived from GTR?

- Sorry I am not so clear about your explanation for the increasing of mass, length contraction and time dilation of the moving object. Anyway everyone who familiar with STR would know them. The crucial point about them is that there is no explanation why it is so (what is their cause)? But if we know the physical meaning of Lorentz transformation (which was used for their derivation), then we could understand why it is so (and we would see that it is misinterpretation).

Sincerely yours,

Nimit Th.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by vacuum-mechanics What is Lorentz transformation? Everyone who is familiar with Einstein special theory of relativity (STR) would know that what the Lorentz transformation is. But what we knew is only the mathematical formulas which were used to solve problem with relative motion! What we do not know is what its physical meaning is? The reason is because there is no background mechanism for them. Einstein used the two postulates (principle of relativity and constancy of light speed for any inertial reference frame) for derivation. Armed with “Vacuum mechanics” concept, we could also derive the Lorentz transformation. Beside that we could understand its physical meaning. But the most important point is that we could solve the philosophical problems of STR; the increasing mass, length contraction and time dilation of the moving object! Please see detail in “Completed Einstein special theory of relativity” which is now presenting in www.vacuum-mechanics.com .

VM, the physical ideas of Lorentz transformation math can be traced back to Newton's original work on mass changes. They are actually quite close to grt___not as complete, but close.

Regards,
Lloyd

[vacuum-mechanics]

Dear Lloyd Gillespie and friends,

Thank you for the information. And I fell that anyone who read the old day’s science text books would found that scientists in the old day had said something which is useful for the progression of today’s science toward tomorrow. The reason is that their idea was based on “the reality of the nature”, not on an imaginary thinking!

By the way, in my opinion any mathematical formula in science was used for explaining natural phenomena, it is not physics itself! It must be able to understand in reality; otherwise it may lead to be interpreted to be something crazy. Like in the case of Lorentz transformation which was used (in Einstein special theory of relativity) without understanding of its physical meaning, what we got is the wrong interpretation of “the increasing of mass, time dilation and length contraction”!

Another best example is the wave equation in quantum mechanics which is very important and very useful, but was interpreted to be some thing which could not be imagine by human being! Instead if we could understand its physical meaning, then what we will get is something realistic and explainable. And its physical meaning will be given in my next paper “completed quantum mechanical theory”, please wait to see.

Sincerely,
Nimit Th.