프로그래밍과 경제

This post will be the first step to the ultimate one theory which will unify Quantum mechanics and Relativity. The two great principles in modern physics work well when they are separate from each others domain but when we try to study the case both should be considered at the same time, for example behavior of black hole and big bang, they conflict each other and physicists failed to produce a solid consistent explanation. The most difficulty in marrying both principles come from the difference of the notion of time and space, the most fundamental ingredients of our universe.

Current understanding of time and space was available when Einstein introduces Special relativity and general relativity in the early decades of twentieth century. In his theories, he reconceptualized the notion of time and space by revealing their relativistic nature instead of absolutivity of time and space which Isaac Newton proposed. But Einstein's relativistic view of time and space is not useful to explain the microscopic scale movements which are understood fairly enough with the help of Quantum mechanics. So it is obvious that we need to redefine clearly the notion of time and space playing as a common base in every scale universe. That is why I revisited Special Relativity(SR) which is the starting point in formulating current understanding of time and space. Here I focus to explain why SR is incomplete and propose a way view to solve the incompatibility of time and space.

I argue that two postulates used in Special relativity is not enough to make it a consistent theory and it must be modified to be perfect. Why? Because in SR, there is no way to figure out whether any Inertial Reference Frame(IRF) is moving or stationary. SR can talk only about the relative motion of other inertial reference frame compared to my IRF. Let suppose that in the empty space there exist only two objects, me and you, and each can see the position of other with help of light, let say we are getting closer in time and there is no change in IRF to both which means both are in the motion with constant velocity. In this case, we cannot tell who is moving and stationary if we are given only two postulates (see below quote) which Einstein proposed in SR. There are three possible cases: 1) me stationary and you moving 2) me moving and you stationary 3) both moving. Depending on the cases listed here, as predicted by SR and verified in every experimental result, i will have different experience about aging. 

From wiki, two postulates are as follows:

This logical deduction above contradicts with the first postulate, principle of relativity. In result 1), I is getting older than you but in 2) you are getting older than me. If we live in a single universe and there is only one event happening and we are ruled by the law of physics, there should be only one result observed by both me and you. But depending on our choice on the view points listed above which are all equally valid within the view point of SR, it is unavoidable to observe different results instead of the same result in all inertial frames of reference. We can notice that, in Einstein's 1905 paper, he assumed he know which IRF is stationary but knowing whether any IRF is stationary or moving is not an easy task and we need to be very careful to do so. This means that SR is incomplete and need to be complemented or modified to produce no contradiction. 

Note: The definition of IRF used here is the coordinate system of which origin is always sticking to the center of any rigid body or particle including photon in unchanging motion.  As long as object is in the motion of constant velocity, then there is no change in the Inertial Reference Frame of it.

In the next post, I will propose a new way to complement SR.