Inbox

x

S4

x

zulfikar.ahmed@gmail.com <zulfikar.ahmed@gmail.com>

8:16 AM (11 minutes ago)

to harrington, jharris, jhp, jhricko_4, jianjunp, jinha, jjbrehm, jlind, jlondon, jlw, jmateo, jmerseth, jmetcalf, jmg, jmogel, joel, joelms, john.aldrich, john.beatty, johncrawford53, jose.oliveira, josesoto, josue, jpadgett, jpbalz

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Special relativity is one of the most highly confirmed physical theories and so it might seem outlandish to question it. But since S4 model gives us a unification of space and EM phase in a compact static cosmos with actual measurement of cosmological constant reproducing Planck’s constant and quantization of energy and matter in the model as a derived quantity from static space geometry the most parsimonious description of time is a global time because we have here an ether-substitute. Ether in the late nineteenth century was considered some substance in the physical universe through which EM waves propagated. My model tells me that Ether of this type is wrong but we should consider the entire universe as ether including an electromagnetic phase direction. What are the correct Maxwell’s equations for a static S4 cosmos (scaled so it’s curvature is the measured cosmological constant Lambda=1.11 x 10^(-52) m^(-2))?

This is how we can get the correct Maxwell’s equations: let A be a differential 1-form on a round four-sphere. We are considering classical electromagnetism and in a moment I will tell you why this is sensible and also why our results on special relativity that are highly confirmed may be set aside for absolute time. The Maxwell’s equations in this case will simply be the wave equation D’Alembertian(A)=0 for 1-forms A on S4. This is an equation for the EM 4-potential in standard quantum field theory for example but without any relativistic correction. If you restrict this A to a hypersurface of S4, i.e. the physical universe, you can verify that the restricted A will satisfy the standard Maxwell’s equations on the hypersurface but you won’t need a gauge condition because this is not a U(1) gauge invariant description of electromagnetism. Now using this I can ask — what is a photon? A photon can be described in my model as a component of eigenspace decomposition of the 1-form A in terms of the Laplace operator acting on 1-forms on a round four sphere. Thus we will have discretization of photons by frequency as we all know from early 20th century discoveries forming the basis of Planck and Einstein’s original quantum discoveries. But I will claim that a photon is a global object on S4 with wave particle qualities observed locally. The wave qualities are obvious and the particle qualities will be described from mathematical examination of the eigen 1-forms of the Laplace operator on a 4-sphere.

We have a similar description of fermions as solutions of a classical Dirac wave equation.

Now let me explain why Special Relativity (SR) might be true in terms of new concepts with Absolute Time. You can consider Absolute Time as time as seen from Light’s reference frame where light is global on S4. Then you can ask whether local time frames of two massive bodies in inertial motion in the physical universe will have their own local time and the answer is sure, and SR is the theory of how from one reference frame to another the laws of kinematics are adjusted to ensure speed of light is constant in their local reference frames. But these laws are not necessary in the presence of an absolute time and existence of an ether where photons have classical description.

Now let me move on to the issue of quantum field theory and standard model of electroweak and strong interactions. This is one of the most successful theories in modern physics but it faces an enormous problem with explaining the energy of a vacuum which is the cosmological constant: the estimates of energy of vacuum by quantum field theories are 120 orders of magnitude off from the measured value. My simple model can serve as the basis for a modification of standard model where quantum fields may not be necessary because these classical solutions have the wave-particle duality and necessary to re-examine the quantum field theories in due time. The cosmological constant problem may seem like a small crisis at a moment when so many of the internal consistency issue of standard model have been resolved but a re-examination of the basis of quantum theory in a static eternal cosmos offers us possibilities of quantum physics that is much more clear and coherent and might be the right way to both simplify the approaches of quantum field theory as well as produce a classical theory of the same phenomena without losing the achievements and insight of quantum field theory. My model is a good starting point that auto-resolves the cosmological constant problem and it is one where we do not have classical ether but we have a nice substitute – an extremely beautiful 4-dimensional spherical model.

Thanks for your time.

Zulf Ahmed