Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Light may arise from relativity violations
Indiana University ^ | 22 March 2005 | Press release

Posted on 03/22/2005 3:40:06 PM PST by PatrickHenry

Light as we know it may be a direct result of small violations of relativity, according to new research scheduled for publication online Tuesday (March 22) in the journal Physical Review D. [Preprint is here.]

In discussing the work, physics professor Alan Kostelecky of Indiana University described light as "a shimmering of ever-present vectors in empty space" and compared it to waves propagating across a field of grain. This description is markedly different from existing theories of light, in which scientists believe space is without direction and the properties of light are a result of an underlying symmetry of nature.

Instead the report, co-authored by Kostelecky with physics professor Robert Bluhm of Colby College, discusses the possibility that light arises from the breaking of a symmetry of relativity. "Nature's beauty is more subtle than perfect symmetry," Kostelecky said. "The underlying origin of light may be another example of this subtlety."

The new results show that this description of light is a general feature of relativity violations and holds both in empty space and in the presence of gravity. "In this picture, light has a strange beauty, and its origin is tied into minuscule violations of Einstein's relativity in a profound and general way," Kostelecky said.

The report also points out that this new view of light can be tested experimentally by studying the properties of light and its interactions with matter and gravity. All these have behavior that is predicted to deviate from conventional expectations in tiny but important ways.

"This is an alternative, viable way of understanding light with potential experimental implications. That's what makes it exciting," Kostelecky said.

Possible detectable effects include asymmetries between properties of certain particles and antiparticles, and cyclic variations in their behavior as Earth rotates. The effects can be sought using various experimental equipment ranging from giant particle colliders, such as the one at Fermilab in Illinois, to "tabletop" experiments with atomic clocks or resonant cavities. A number of such experiments are now under way.

[The original article, at the end, lists the people involved in this work, and their contact information.]


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: light; physics; relativity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 next last
To: PatrickHenry

A better title would seem to be "Light may arise from relativity aberrations" or maybe "Light may arise from relativity exceptions" or perhaps "Light may arise from relativity distortions"..

Whatever the means by which light arises it cannot be a 'violation' of something which doesn't exist, even if it were recently thought to exist. That assumes the experiments bear out this theory.


21 posted on 03/22/2005 4:24:36 PM PST by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Hmmm.. I think "relativity fluctuations" would work best of all. Yup!

Although some while ago I was very sternly told there could be no such thing..

Will be quite intriguing to see how the experiments turn out.


22 posted on 03/22/2005 4:35:23 PM PST by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; hchutch
Light may arise from relativity violations

"Intergalactic Physics Patrol. Do you know why I pulled you over, sir? You made a relativity violation going past that wormhole over yonder. Boy, yo's in a heap'o trouble."

23 posted on 03/22/2005 4:37:38 PM PST by Poohbah (If it's called "collateral damage," how come I can't use it to secure a loan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
PS. When it comes to downright stupid titles, this should get some kind of award: Light Spotted From Beyond Solar System.
24 posted on 03/22/2005 4:53:10 PM PST by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Hmmm, that kind of puts a bit of daring in an otherwise mundane activity when now I will be sending out my monthly violations of relativity payment instead of the light bill ;-)
25 posted on 03/22/2005 4:57:21 PM PST by varon (Allegiance to the constitution, always. Allegiance to a political party, never.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

A little light reading, huh?


26 posted on 03/22/2005 5:02:53 PM PST by Junior (FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
ooooohhhhhh Kaaaayyyy

So then my lamp which is sitting right next to me is just one continuous string of infinitesimal relativity violations giving rise to my ability to see my keyboard as I type.

Also, when my cellphone rings and lights up indicating that it's ringing, the light emitted is also a relativity violation.

Well.

It's all relative.
27 posted on 03/22/2005 5:21:19 PM PST by roaddog727 (The marginal propensity to save is 1 minus the marginal propensity to consume.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
A timely article for me. I'm in the middle of an engineering physics II class and we were discussing the nature of light just a few days ago. I actually laughed out load (LOL) when the professor gave a lecture on the quantum theory of light "generation". I'll answer appropriately on the test but I'm not buying any ridiculous theories about anti-electrons traveling backwards through time and interacting with "regular" electrons traveling forwards through time. God I love college...
28 posted on 03/22/2005 5:24:32 PM PST by IYAAYAS (Live free or die trying)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Heavy, man!


29 posted on 03/22/2005 5:32:28 PM PST by P.O.E.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
My knee-jerk reaction is that I don't buy it. Electromagnetism can be described by a quantum field, but there exist other forces that can also be described by different quantum fields. So what makes the undulation of the electromagnetic field--light, in a word--so "privileged" with respect to the Lorentz symmetry, but not the undulations of those other fields, which otherwise seem to be on an equal philosophical footing? It doesn't sound right.
30 posted on 03/22/2005 5:36:02 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Is light the absence of darkness?Or is darkness the absence of light?Are either physical or tangible?
Do I have any idea what I`m talking about?That is the only one I can answer.

No,but thought it might sound interesting.

31 posted on 03/22/2005 5:40:14 PM PST by carlr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Time to go back and review all four of Michaelson-Moreley's experiments. Differences in effects depending on which direction earth is headed?

Last time I even heard about ether was when I had my tonsils out.


32 posted on 03/22/2005 5:43:28 PM PST by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IYAAYAS
I'll answer appropriately on the test but I'm not buying any ridiculous theories about anti-electrons traveling backwards through time and interacting with "regular" electrons traveling forwards through time.

The universe is the way that it is, and not how you would wish it to be.

The idea can be made to sound ridiculous, but think of it this way. You have an electron going from point A to point B. You wish to calculate the measurable quantities associated with that propagation. So you do something very simple: you take every possible path from A to B, including those that go backwards in time, and you add them together with a very simple weighting scheme, and it gives you answers that are experimentally true to more than ten decimal places. You may not like it, but there's got to be something deep to it, for an idea that simple to work that well.

33 posted on 03/22/2005 5:46:27 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

. . . described light as "a shimmering of ever-present vectors in empty space" . . .
Vectors (and matrices) were ever-present in grad school and I never saw 'em shimmer.




Light is Jello?


34 posted on 03/22/2005 5:55:18 PM PST by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Physicist

Then could we use that interaction between backward flowing and forward flowing particles to peer into our future, or at least tease some information about the future out of it?


35 posted on 03/22/2005 5:59:32 PM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

I don't think I am stupid. But when I try to understand an article like this, I feel stupid.

In my tiny little brain, light has always just been the continuation of the electromagnetic scale that starts with ELF, goes up thru the AM band and FM band and through the microwave band to the infrared band and at some point the same sort of waves become visible to our eyes, then become ultraviolet, then gamma, etc.

That may or may not be accurate in any way, but it is what I have always thought.

Now I feel stupid. Maybe I should be voting Democrat.


36 posted on 03/22/2005 6:07:07 PM PST by spodefly (This is my tag line. There are many like it, but this one is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
Then could we use that interaction between backward flowing and forward flowing particles to peer into our future, or at least tease some information about the future out of it?

No, because information isn't contained in the particles themselves, but in the patterns in which they're arranged, and those patterns only travel forwards in time, from our point of view.

37 posted on 03/22/2005 6:09:10 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
If your electron is moving toward point B traveling at c the period of each possible path would have to vary between -infinity and +infinity assuming c is constant. It seems to me the probabilities would converge on the straight line path. I understand the calculus of the improper integral you're talking about, but I'm not sure about the premise of the function.
Thanks for explaining this in more detail. Is this the theory accepted by physicists right now? I assumed when I first heard this it was some off the wall new theory.
38 posted on 03/22/2005 6:12:23 PM PST by IYAAYAS (Live free or die trying)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Physicist

>No, because information isn't contained in the particles themselves, but in the patterns in which they're arranged, and those patterns only travel forwards in time, from our point of view.

As importantly, you all going to come down here on the 7th and explain this to us?


39 posted on 03/22/2005 6:13:50 PM PST by GopherIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
but there's got to be something deep to it, for an idea that simple to work that well..

Anything that gets your strings vibrating. ;o)

40 posted on 03/22/2005 6:18:53 PM PST by DeFault User
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson