• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
3/3 • ERA • Relativistic Flow and Aberration - illustrated RobertE�araldsenRobert E� araldsen
3/3 • ERA • Relativistic Flow and Aberration - illustrated
Consequences of Extreme Relativistic Aberration, by Robert E. Haraldsen
1) The problems of cosmic ination theory
 The idea that the universe is expanding is built onthe observation that the further away cosmologicalobjects are, the faster they seem to be receding� Thisin turn has led to the conclusion that the universe is
expanding from an almost innitely dense state 13.7
billion years ago—but if so, it is a paradox that lightfrom that time is still on its way� This is called thehorizon problem� For the same reason there is also anisotropy problem relating to the cosmic microwavebackground radiation� Furthermore, the objects we
see 13.7 billion light-years away from us in opposite
directions may seem to be separated from each otherby twice this span�
To solve the enigma it has been suggested that there was a short extreme inationary periodfollowing the big bang. The reason for proposing a big bang in the rst place was the discovery of 
the galactic red-shift which led to the theory that the further away galaxies are, the faster they aremoving away from us� An alternative to big bang theory is the steady state theory that proposes thateven if expanding, the universe continuously creates new matter� After the discovery of the cosmicmicrowave background radiation, this theory has been largely abandoned since the radiation seemsto be well explained as a result of the presumed big bang, at least if one to some extent ignores theinformation problem�If the universe at the large scale is evenly curved by ‘primeval’ gravity, this would implythat any direction we choose will be towards the Big Bang, obviously implying that there are no‘opposite directions’ in the usual sense� This resembles the situation within the Schwarzschildradius of a black hole where there is no way out, and all events tend toward what is perceived of 
as its innitesimally small center called the space-time singularity. However, we shall see why this
may be an illusive focal point related to relativistic aberration�
2) Relativity
In all relativistic equations extreme velocities, i.e. ‘innitely’ close to the speed of light‘innitesimal’ and its reciprocal ‘innity’ appear as solutions. As innity is not well denedmathematically neither can an equation giving innity as a result be considered to be more than an
approximation at some level producing incomplete answers:For two observers accelerating with almost light speed from a common origin in oppositedirections, let’s say with nine tenths the speed of light (
c)
, their relative speed is not simply the onevelocity (
v =
0,9
c
 )
added to the other (
u =
0,9
c
 )
giving 0�9
c
+ 0�9
c
= �8
c
as would be the case inNewtonian mechanics� The
relativistic addition
formula shows that these two speeds,
v
and
u
sumup to less than the speed of light; approximately
s
= 0,9945
c
The formula is
The consequence is that the speed limit of light can, in this very special perspective, be exceeded byobservers parting, if measured purely as acceleration—while measured toward each others image they
 
3/3 • ERA • Relativistic Flow and Aberration - illustrated RobertE�araldsenRobert E� araldsen
can not� So, what is the
true
perspective? The simple answer is that truth of measurement is only a matter
of reference to subjectively dened space-time parameters. Just like
time
has no
absolute
meaning inrelativity theory, neither can an objects
 position
be dened objectively from differently moving observers!
owever, if we use acceleration as the sole reference, we can measure time intervals of theongoing acceleration, and we may say that we have broken the ‘speed limit’� From a relativistic space-time perspective we never return to the same point, as in spacetime there is no such point (unless we
nd ‘wormholes’ leading back in time). We might think that the Earth rotating around the Sun each year
returns to the same place in space� Nonetheless, the movement is a spiral in spacetime�The
equivalence principle
suggests that gravity is acceleration, and thus we can even say we arecontinuously breaking the speed limit once a year since we are accelerating with g on the surface of theEarth� Relativistic aberration, together with quantum effects, warps spacetime giving the ‘illusion’ of acircular orbit around what we call ‘Sun’� This must be the case if the equivalence principle is correct andquantum effects apply to the way we perceive macrocosmos�
3) Relativistic time
For two observer’s velocities increasing as they are parting from each other, relativity theorygives us a formula that shows how time,
, is affected, as measured by the each observer’s clock:Any short period of time,
, for any two co-moving observes will be measured as extremelyprolonged (
t´ 
) when measured as their relative velocities
v
approach the speed of light
c
As an example, this would mean that an observer accelerating with only g (which is the
same as the gravity ‘push’ we feel from the earth) would reach the speed of light in a year.
4) Relativistic aberration of light
Now we have a look at the
relativistic aberration
 
formula that describes how an object’sapparent angle of view changes, as seen from an accelerating observer: The relativistic shift of theangle, , is conditioned by the ratio through the relation: The formula shows that for any measured original angle relative to an observer, when, this angle is shifted towards
= π, as measured in radians. Plainly the equation shows that all
objects surrounding an observer at rest, shift to a direct frontal position relative to the observer
approaching the speed of light (see more relating to this below).
From the viewpoint of each observer parting with accelerating speed, the image of the othergets stretched in space and time over the celestial sphere of the former—and vice versa� This canalso be described as one being inside the other� Such a description obviously may seem strange—but by substituting the observers for photons it may be somewhat easier to accept� As we will seethere is also an important difference between objects with and without rest-mass�It is an experimentally tested fact that when a photon-pair are shot off in opposite directionsthey are shown to act as one entity - no matter how far they are separated when measured; adisturbance applied to one can immediately be registered in its twin, as if there has been an exchangeof information travelling faster than light� This is a remarkable and experimentally tested qualityabout the real world�
 
3
3/3 • ERA • Relativistic Flow and Aberration - illustrated RobertE�araldsenRobert E� araldsen
The photon-pair will always be one and the same undivided oscillating entity as seen within itsown point of reference, while the outside observer in the laboratory has a different space-timeperspective� As described, there are several factors that can warp the outside observer’s impressionof simultaneity� Now, one can turn that observation around and say that if two simultaneous instantsseem to occur one must also take into account the possibility of a space-like distortion� From thisexample we may conclude that this distortion is manifested as the photon appearing at severalplaces at the ‘same time’�So far the examples have focused on equal and opposite acceleration, in which case theclocked time-span between separation and reunion of the two objects will be the same for both�
If we should compare the electromagnetic eld to a water surface, there is a lower energy-
limit for a wave to occur—even when the mass is very much smaller than the proven upper limit of the photon mass—so far not proven to be absolutely zero—but only to be less than �×0
−52
kg� Toput this another way: a wave at rest has no associated mass, while, on the other hand, some energy
is needed to create it. The main point is that space-time is much more exible than we can perceive
from within our relativistically moving inertial rigid frame of reference�
5) Primeval state image
If we suppose that the universe is expanding homogeneously, and, thus, also its horizon aswe perceive it, there will be no time difference between all of its clocks on the larger scale, due tothe fact that there are no differently moving reference points� This does not mean that they see eachothers clocks showing the same pace, it just means that the difference is equal to all observers atequal distances from each other� Even if we regard a primeval state like a space-time singularityas a reference point, all clocks will be synchronized in this special sense� But it seems that space-
time is not homogenous, and local accelerations or gravity elds cause clocks to run differently in
different frames� This causes a time-delayed mirroring of the primeval image state, making it appearas different objects in space-time� From this description one can understand that, like in a hall of 
mirrors, even an innitesimal uctuation causes the ultimate reection to diverge reciprocally. Inaddition the mirrors are not perfectly at, and this causes the reections to be unrecognizable. (Sealso optical feedback).
6) Illustrating relativistic effects
Relativistic aberration and Doppler-shift�
In the gure below
the all yellow section illustrates the universe perceived by an observer at rest
seeing two stars 90° towards each side, and two stars at some angle behind. The middle gure, at
half light-speed, shows how the observer sees the stars moved forward, and in the third section thespeed has increased to about nine tenths of the speed of light, and illustrates how the distant starsshift to toward the frontal direction of motion�
1 From Wikipedia
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...