Explaining Time - The Dynamic Present

There is nothing special about me. I have been working at sea for most of my life. I became interested in how time might work back in 1976 and I have no formal education in physics apart from a couple of simple university courses. All attended in the hope of understanding a little more about our universe and about time.
If you have seen the cloudless night sky, something a sailor at the bridge does almost every night when he or she is at watch, you need not ask where my interest in the subject came from.
Being interested, like anyone else supporting an interest, I had to try to understand what is actually going on. In the process i started using my own head to work on the information, so now, having ideas of my own, I suppose I am just another notch on the [[crackpot index|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crackpot_index]].
If you want to ask about something, send me an email. The address is: bn@spacetime.nu
I'll do my best to reply as soon as possible.
You could also use the [[comments|http://spacetime.bloggo.nu]] link if you want.

[[Welcome]]

From December 2006.
About thirty years ago I realized that time could very well be discontinuous without us knowing. That is because we need time in order to measure time. If time should stop then there would be no time to find out about it. Not being able to stop speculating about what traces there would be to look for if this were a fundamental aspect of time, or try to figure out how it could work, I eventually found an answer a few years back that also may explain some remaining questions concerning relativity and quantum mechanics.
In view of later developments in physics where a growing number of physicists now look for a way to quantize time, I feel obliged to communicate my ideas on the subject.
If time is discontinuous we need to reconsider our understanding of the time dimension.
So, what is time, when and why do we need it and how does it work?
The standard model treat time as if it were an extra 4th dimension, one that presents an additional degree of freedom along with the usual three. This may be needed in order to make sense of situations that involve movement, but the way I see it, time, as we usually think about it in the sense of a steady flow from the past to the future does not exist other then in our mind.
The reason we regard time as real is probably due to the fact that we have a memory which allows our brain to use the input from our senses to maintain our bodies. This is how we operate ourselves, using the remembered input from a previous moment to act during the present one.
With our comparably slow mind we do however need the input from many moments before reacting, thus bringing about a sense of continuity which, in turn, would be interpreted as a flow of time.
In other words, I think time is just a remembered diagram of the status of what goes on. It has no real physical existence apart from what in discontinuous time would be a dynamic transformation of the present moment during the course of its - probably very brief - duration.
The speculations below hopefully illustrate how space itself could serve as a memory that brings about the dynamics of our universe due to the type of discontinuity I have in mind. While it may be easy to understand the need of time when one think about a moving object, the need of time in empty space is not so obvious since we do not see anything that move. However, if space itself is elastic, then time would be needed for its elastic properties to work. You cannot have elasticity without time. Or… could it be the other way around so that the elasticity of space is the cause of what we experience as time?
Let’s see what could come out of this idea.
No one should be surprised about space being elastic. It was Einstein with his theory of general relativity who taught us that.
According to general relativity we live in a four dimensional universe with three space- and one time coordinate where gravity is explained to be a topographic phenomenon with moving bodies that follow geodetic tracks in the four dimensions of space time while bending and altering the metric of the same space as they are proceeding.
Neither special nor general relativity does however reveal anything about what makes time tick, so discontinuous time may well lurk under the cover of general relativity.
How can that be? Well, assume that time would stop. Would we notice? -Could we notice?
The answer, of course, is no. When time eventually starts ticking again we would be none the wiser, living on as usual. As far as concern what we know of physics up till now, nothing prevents time from behaving like that.
When one try to figure out what might be the cause of quantum physics the possibility that time is discontinuous is even more obvious.
To my eyes the quantum of action looks suspiciously much like a manifestation of elastic force in a space that is oscillating some way. That would account for the discontinuity of quantum physics and its quanta. It would also account for the phenomena of non-locality. The question then is why and how space oscillates?
Answering the first question, the why, is impossible. Let me only say that whatever event it was that induced enough energy into space to overcome the elastic stiffness required in order to account for the speed of light must have made a big bang indeed…Perhaps it was a collision with another universe..? Anyway, those who maintain that time were born the moment the Big Bing happened are probably right although the present ideas about time and how it works need some refinement.
The second question is easier. One only has to find out what mode of oscillation would cause the physical phenomena we see around us. That is the subject of this document.
About 20 years ago I had settled for a mode of oscillation that promised to work. The only problem was whether it was physically possible. Then I learned about acoustic pressure waves in the sun and about sonoluminescence. That gave me some confidence about my model. Working out the details took some time since this was- and is- a hobby project. However, after having retired in august 05 I decided to dedicate a little more time to the project, so in order to refresh my knowledge on the subject I decided to sign up for some short courses at GU. One of which was “Modern Cosmology“with Marek Abramowicz and Gustaf Rydbeck. When Professor Abramovicz held his first lecture I was reminded about MOND. Remembering I had read about MOdified Newtonian Dynamics in Scientific American back in 1983 when Professor Mordehai Milgrom proposed this correction as an alternative to the Dark Matter model, I now realized that my ideas about the dynamics of discontinuous time could eventually provide the missing foundation for MOND.
As a consequence I feel that also from this point of view I have an obligation to bring my ideas to attention. The mode I propose has the form of a spherical oscillation similar to that of a standing longitudinal sound wave where the fabric of space rapidly oscillates in a pulsating way between rarefaction and compression. Discontinuous time would then be the full cycle from maximum compression past rarefaction and back to maximum compression. That is, actually a “live” and reusable variable to the three space dimensions that affect all of space simultaneously.
If this is true then it seems we live in a reoccurring moment which, it appears, contain the only “time” that actually exists. -A discontinuous and elastic present, the size of which would encompass the entire known universe.
The duration of that moment, the period of the bulk oscillations of space, would presumably equal the 5.4 x 10ˉ⁴⁴ s time span known as Planck-time. According to present understanding this is also the shortest possible duration of time. Why the spherical pulsating oscillation mode? Apart from providing a possible answer to the questions of the arrow of time and the flow of time, there are at least two other reasons. One is the ability of particles and waves to move in any direction and the other is the properties of matter.
Louis de Broglie introduced the concept of matter waves. If matter is a manifestation of the elasticity of space, then E=mc² suddenly make sense. It does not require much imagination to realize that if space itself oscillates in a way that allows for standing spherical matter waves to resonate with those oscillations they will pack a lot of energy. The spherical wave of the fabric of space that constitutes the particle will slosh back and forth during each cycle of the universal space oscillation at the speed of light. The number and amplitude of such oscillations during one second is the same that would bring a transverse wave the distance covered at the speed of light. Hence the c² in E=mc². What about the mass, m?
Again the spherical oscillation mode provides an explanation. A spherical particle wave, resonating with the bulk oscillation mode of space will not move relative to the oscillating background as long as it is truly spherical. This is because the elastic wave that makes up the particle has equal distance to travel between turnaround each “slosh” between the circumference and the centre. Since the wave front is moving at the speed of light due to the elastic properties of space the act of pushing the particle in order to accelerate it in a certain direction is instead a matter of blocking the expansion of the part of the particle’s wave front that is moving in the counter-direction. In order to do so one has to overcome the elasticity of space. That is the origin of Planck’s constant – the Quantum of Action – the least force sufficient to overcome the elasticity of the fabric of space.
Given that the blocking applied is firm enough, this part of the wave front will now contain more elastic energy then the other parts of the wave, thereby allowing it to reach a new centre a small distance past the original. The rest of the elastic wave making up the particle will adjust accordingly and eventually all of the now not quite spherical wave front will be sloshing back and forth towards this new constantly displaced centre.
A mental picture would be that of a football being kicked by a player with the wave front represented by the spherical surface and the blocking positioned where the foot hits the ball. Since all parts of the wave still move at the speed of light, the centre of the particle wave can never be displaced past the distance covered at the speed of light. This is why the speed of light is a universal speed limit not only for transverse waves, but also for particles of matter. In the light of the above I guess nobody will be surprised to learn that mass consequently appears to be the “grip on space” exerted by the spherical waves of the particle. No surprise either that relativistic mass growth apparently is due to the firmer grip on space that is a result from the elastic energy added to the particle when it is accelerated….Or that inertia also is due to the same grip on space, making the particle harder to accelerate in any direction the more of this grip on space or mass it has. At this point if not earlier, I imagine the reader have at least one very large objection to all of this. Suggesting that discontinuous time has the form of a very brief reoccurring universal moment with the duration of about 10ˉ⁴⁴ s would seemingly contradict both special and general relativity. According to these theories there is no such thing as simultaneity since time runs at different rates depending on the velocity of the reference frame. This makes it more or less impossible to agree between frames about eventually simultaneous events. I can only agree about the difficulties between different frames to pinpoint a simultaneous event, but this difficulty is due to traditional ideas of time which require the use of different frames of reference. Instead the idea of discontinuous time makes it possible to explain the relativistic effect that is being used to reject the idea of simultaneity - why clocks run slower when they move faster.
At the point of maximum compression in the cycle of universal oscillation all movement has stopped due to the elastic resistance against further compression of the fabric of space. As the cycle continue, the energy stored during the compression phase now makes the universe “bounce” and expand outwards along with the longitudinal waves of matter and the transverse oscillations of light as the cycle accelerate towards a state of maximum rarefaction. At this point the strain in the fabric of space will reverse the process and force space to rebound back towards the state of maximum compression where the cycle is completed only to proceed into a new present in the same manner.
The clock used in the relativist examples is running slow when moving at higher speed because it must spend a larger portion then otherwise out of the 10ˉ⁴⁴ s long universal cycle of oscillation in order to first accelerate and then to decelerate its speed in the direction of travel during each cycle of compression and rarefaction. Since this acceleration and deceleration will stretch the fabric of space each cycle the force delivered from the springs and gears of a clock, or from chemical reactions will diminish in relative effectiveness the faster the system moves. As a consequence a larger number of cycles of oscillation are needed to do the same job in order to complete chemical reactions or to turn the arms of a clock in a faster system the same angle as a clock in a slower system would need.
A clock that could be locked to the background oscillations of space would keep the time no matter what the speed of the observer happen to be. If he travels fast the clock would run fast in his travelling frame of reference, making it possible for him or her to trace any simultaneous event that occurs in another frame of reference.
Does this mean that there is anything wrong with the principle of relativity? Not at all! What needs to be reconsidered is only our concept of time.
Before returning to the properties of a particle something should first be said about gravitation. I referred above to the elastic deformation of space exerted by the spherical wave of a particle as the particle’s “grip on space”, or mass. The very same “grip” would also be responsible for gravitation as it pulls the surrounding space towards the particle during each oscillation. For a mental picture of the effect, think of what would happen if you pull upward on the centre of a tablecloth. If there is a hole at the centre of the table as might be the case in a garden table where you can place an umbrella type sunshade, pushing the centre of the sheet down in the hole with a rod will give the same effect, pulling the surrounding cloth toward the centre. The equality between the outcomes of the two methods is to illustrate that anti matter, which I suspect differs from matter only by its phase of oscillation in space, would cause the same type of gravitation as matter.
The gravitation caused by the “grip” or mass of only one particle would be tiny to say the least, but the effect of many particles pulling in unison on the surrounding space would of cause accumulate. This has two consequences. The first is obvious. Space itself within a sphere centred on the congregation of particles will stretch during every universal oscillation towards that centre so that a particle that enters this sphere finds itself oscillating on a fabric of space whose background universal oscillations are directed towards that centre.
The result will be that the particle’s centre is displaced an increasing distance each oscillation in the same direction without any need to overcome the elasticity of the fabric of space by pushing the particle against its “grip” on space. That is why the particle “feels” no force of acceleration as its speed increases.
However, since the particle is incorporating the background oscillations with its own original oscillation, stopping it is a matter of using force against the background induced displacement of its centre. This is why we experience acceleration forces when we stand on the surface of a planet.
The next consequence is not so obvious. The space in the sphere of gravity resulting from a large aggregation of matter will have its elastic properties somewhat altered by the fact that it stretches during each universal oscillation. Similar to a string instrument giving off higher tones when fretted up the neck. At the end of the day this effect could perhaps turn out to be responsible for some of the missing energy that our cosmologists are doing their best to find. The rest, the proposed effect from the mysterious dark matter is probably due to one or perhaps two other not so obvious consequences. Vera Rubin was the first person to systematically investigate the effect. She showed that the angular speed of orbiting stars in galaxies did not drop quite as one should have reason to expect from a measure of the mass that is supposed to control their orbits. Instead it seems the stars in the galaxies rotate around the centre of the galaxy almost as if they were sitting on a wheel.
The MOND effect as proposed by Mordehai Milgrom in 1983 is one way of evading the need for dark matter to account for her observations. It is a correction to Newtonian dynamics that introduces a basic universal constant of acceleration of the size approximately one angstrom per second per second. What could motivate that? I think the best candidate would be the “bounce” when the oscillating fabric of space enters the expanding phase. That is the point when space and everything it contains is accelerated outward. If the reverse process when the strain in the fabric of space later pulls everything back is a little less effective then the bounce one might have a small difference that could account for the size and existence of MOND.
Below is however a slightly different effect that also might exist.
That is the acceleration induced by moving spheres of gravity.
The stretching of space within the sphere of gravity is an instant elastic phenomenon that originates with the various aggregations of matter and takes place every 10ˉ⁴⁴ s. If this matter is moving in any direction, then the local stretch everywhere inside the sphere will have a component of direction every 10ˉ⁴⁴ s pointing the same way and moving at the same speed as the matter is travelling. This is because the complete oscillating sphere of gravity moves as fast as does the matter it originates from. It follows then that the field of gravity within the sphere does not point directly at the aggregation of moving matter, but towards a resultant direction in the future path of the matter aggregation. As a consequence, any body within the sphere of gravity will also be partly accelerated towards the direction that the aggregation of mass is moving.
The accumulated effect from a large number of such aggregations of matter, like the orbiting stars of a galaxy, or the individual members of a galaxy group with a common centre of orbit, could therefore simulate a rotating background, making it appear that space itself is rotating. Or, rather, that the stars we see has a more or less common angular speed around their centre of orbit almost as if they were in a sense nailed onto a wheel.
Before returning to particles I would like to mention quasars. These objects are among the earliest artefacts of our universe as may be understood from the Hubble redskift involved.
They are also the most energetic so far discovered delivering far more energy then can be easily explained in the context of the standard model. In the scenario on hand they may however have a place. The way I see it quasars could explain the large, mainly spherical regions of empty space along the surfaces of which one find filaments of galaxy clusters.
Suppose that the Big Bang happened as I have suggested with energy being introduced as violent vibrations of the fabric of space. One might then imagine that violently oscillating spots could have formed here and there throughout the universe, akin to the phenomenon of sonoluminescense. Suppose further that these “hot-spots” are the quasars and that the energy we now see them produce is the dispersion of their vibrations, then one might think that after a long, long time, these vibrations could have met up with other vibrations from neighbouring quasars, in the process forming the filaments we now observe. When the quasars eventually were fully dispersed they could have left the voids of empty space behind.
According to string theory particles may be seen as small vibrating strings. Their mode of vibration then decides what particle they represent. Regarding this I would only like to point out that a string theorist would be well suited to explore the mathematical consequences of the above since the ideas outlined also build on vibrations. There is a slight difference however. There are only three spatial dimensions in this version of discontinuous time. -Three simultaneously vibrating background dimensions that drive the oscillation of the waves making up matter by resonance. This resonance effect will keep the matter waves oscillating until the background vibrations die out as they eventually must. What makes me think the universe would stop oscillate some time in the future?
If our universe started out with a Big Bang as we already is pretty certain it did, and if this Big Bang happened more or less according to the ideas presented above, with a cataclysmic event that induced a lot of energy in the form of elastic oscillations, then the stiffness of the oscillating fabric of space would eventually damp the oscillations. This would have some consequences that we can observe. With a very stiff fabric of space, the damping of the initial oscillations would bring these down in amplitude at a speed that could well be in parity with the supposed speed of inflation. The continuing damping of the amplitude of the oscillations would then show as a relative expansion of the fabric of space to the observing denizens. Why? The reason is that the diminishing amplitude of the universal oscillations also happens to double as our measuring rod. This is because as I understand it, things cannot move any farther during one oscillation then a distance that is twice the amplitude, which in a way is what we do when we take a measure.
So, in other words, the universe is really not expanding. Instead it appears that we and the rest of the content of the universe are shrinking.
The property of spin has a simple explanation in the context of this type of pulsating universe. It is due to relative phase and frequency differences between the modes of oscillation of the various particles in question and the pulsating background oscillations of space itself. To be more specific - there is a systematic difference between the resulting oscillations of transverse and longitudinal waves when they are overlaid on the longitudinal background oscillations. This difference is what we measure as spin.
Finally, if time really does consist of sequential elastic transformations of a universal moment with a periodic duration of 5.4 x 10ˉ⁴⁴ s as I propose, then the frequency of this fundamental oscillation of our universe would be about 1.85 x 10⁴³ p/s. No wonder we never noticed.

To get started with this blank [[TiddlyWiki]], you'll need to modify the following tiddlers:
* [[SiteTitle]] & [[SiteSubtitle]]: The title and subtitle of the site, as shown above (after saving, they will also appear in the browser title bar)
* [[MainMenu]]: The menu (usually on the left)
* [[DefaultTiddlers]]: Contains the names of the tiddlers that you want to appear when the TiddlyWiki is opened
You'll also need to enter your username for signing your edits: <<option txtUserName>>

The links in this tiddly will open on a new tab.
This link will take you to the official wiki about [[time|http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time]]. And this to the wiki about [[elasticity|http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elasticity]].
[[The Big Bang|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang]], which connects my aether model to the standard model has its own wiki.
So also [[String theory|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory]] which desperately need a touch of common sense!
A link to the [[HyperPhysics pages|http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html]] at Georgia State University might come in handy....
[[ECT|https://sites.google.com/a/fundamentalphysics.info/book/]] is short for Elastic Continuum Theory. This link will bring you to the site of Mr G S Sandhu who will point out the significance of the permittivity and permeability of the vacuum.
[[Blaze Labs|http://www.blazelabs.com/index.htm]]. Found this site when I was trying to point you to some information about [[sonoluminescence|http://www.blazelabs.com/f-p-sono.asp]].
Another support for your imagination is to be found somewhere on this google searchpage for [[sound oscillations of the sun|http://www.google.se/search?q=Sound+oscillations+of+the+sun&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a]]
Finally, this link will bring you to Australia and the F.A.Q about [[Aether|http://www.mountainman.com.au/aeth_faq.htm]] at Mountain Man Dot Com.

[[Welcome]]
[[The Change Stream]]
[[The Dynamic Present]]
[[Tid och Eter]]
[[Quantum Aether]]
[[Discontinuous Time]]
[[Links]]
[[Blog & Comments|http://spacetime.bloggo.nu/]]

From August 2000.
The universe may seem to be very complicated but the way it works is really quite simple.
It is all a matter of elasticity.
To understand what is going on some idea about how time could operate turn out to be very important.
When I started contemplating all of this back in –76, the idea that set me off was the insight that if time were to stop no one would ever notice.
This implies that time could well be discontinuous without us knowing about it.
If that is the case, then what would the consequences be?
Trying to figure out an answer I eventually discovered that most of our present knowledge about the universe fits well within the dynamics of an elastic aether.
The classic aether concept was however deserted by mainstream physics about 100 years ago.
This happened partly because experiments by [[Michelson-Morley|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson%E2%80%93Morley_experiment]] and others had failed to detect the relative difference in the speed of light that according to the classic aether theories would exist due to the earth’s own movement as she passed through the aether on her way around the sun.
Mainly, however, Einstein’s theory of special relativity arriving in 1905 is considered the decisive turning point. By regarding the speed of light constant to all frames of reference Einstein was able to predict effects that were novel to physics and which were soon to be confirmed. As a result the aether idea was rejected and reduced to “crank status”.
This crank status may now perhaps be subject to change. The very latest popular account of the professional ideas about space and time by the respected American physicist Brian Greene, also author of “The Elegant Universe”, is titled ”The Fabric of Cosmos – Space, Time, and the Texture of Reality.”.
Call the substance that make up our universe the “Fabric of Cosmos” if you like, but this is only a play with names. The name Aether has the advantage to be well defined by some of the sharpest minds that has tried to understand how things work. Maxwell and Lorenz were two of these that could be named as an example, but there are many more.
However, aether theories have problems. Apart from the difficulties hinted at above, those problems are essentially the same today as they were in the past. You can find an account of the main problems in Sir Edmund Whittaker’s book “A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity”; Part one, “The Classical Theories”.
Essentially, but not exclusively, the problems relate to the fact that longitudinal and transverse waves move at different speed in the elastic-solid type of aether and that the ideal-gas type of aether cannot support transversal waves at all.
Due to this, difficulties arise to identify what type of aether it may be that is hosting our universe if, indeed, the aether exist at all.
However, evidence shows that light is a wave phenomenon of some kind, and because waves need something in which to “wave”, the intuitive picture provided by the aether idea has prompted many a “crank” to keep searching for a way past all the obstacles.
The reason we have a problem with the different speeds of longitudinal and transverse waves is because if light is a transverse wave as the polarisation of light seem to imply, then the aether has to be the elastic-solid type that can support transverse waves.
In that case, where are the longitudinal waves? They should whisk past us at speeds faster then light if our theories regarding elasticity are correct.
On the other hand, if it could be shown that a mechanism exists that would permit light waves to be longitudinal, still accounting for the polarisation of light, then the aether could be of the ideal-gas type and we would not have to worry about transverse waves at all.
Exploring the different possibilities took some time, but in 1998 I realized that the problem with the fast longitudinal waves in the elastic-solid type of aether would under certain conditions simply disappear. This type of aether can then account for all known effects precisely because it is still able to support longitudinal as well as transverse waves. Below follows an account of what I think would best be named “QuantumAether” or “QE” for short.
QE is a try to make sense out of time, quantum effects and their relation to relativity and gravitation.
I am sure it is possible to translate QE on to mathematics footing without too much effort, but I will make no attempt to do so here.
There certainly remain other insights to arrive at, besides those that I am going to describe here, but for a start, this is how I see things:
The universe we live in has only one component. This is the substance that historically has been named “Aether”.
QuantumAether is a speculation about how this substance would behave under the “certain conditions” referred to above.
Similar to some of the examples Sir Edmund Whittaker is presenting in his book, this aether substance is elastic and can support transverse as well as longitudinal waves. Its normal (ground-)state is probably that of a complete rest without internal stress or strain.
The properties of this aether are in other words mainly the same as those one finds in any ordinary elastic solid.
With regard as to how the aether substance is composed, what makes it elastic; I do not think that we are able to specify that. For our purpose we may as well consider it to be continuous and completely featureless. The “fabric” of the aether has to remain open to speculation, and the same goes for the mechanism behind the elastic properties.
So, to summarise, in QE, the proposed aether is just a three-dimensional elastic-solid substance that is completely feature-less and inherently inert with unknown elastic constants, composition and size.
However, compared to what we find in the real universe some things are missing.
First we need to have a scale. Since the aether as described above is completely featureless it could as well be a dot. We are missing a yardstick to measure the dimensions.
The second thing missing is time. There is a general tendency to take time for granted. It seems not necessary to define. I think that is a mistake. In my view time is as much a consequence of what made a universe out of this lump of aether as is the scale that was introduced in the same process.
In the spirit of Einstein, time has been viewed as the fourth dimension. The definition of this fourth dimension, however, was never as straightforward and intuitive as the definition of the basic three. With the addition of our tendency to take time for granted and our way of regarding the past and the future as occasions in the fourth dimension, possible to visit if you only know how, confusion about reality, and time, is unavoidable.
Long ago the philosopher Aristotle had ideas about time.
He put them forward in the form of a paradox:
"Think of time as divided into the past, the present and the future, and then think about the present.
The present is just the limit between the past and the future.
Because the past is something that no longer exists, the present has yet to come and so does not yet exist we have a paradox; a limit between two entities that does not exist should also not exist." I have edited my version of this statement somewhat. You may be able to find a proper quote in the literature.
Now, if Aristotle is correct about the past and the future in the sense that they do not exist, but wrong in his derived assumption about the non-existence of the present, the next question is; how long is the present, and how wide?
The mechanics of QE propose that the present moment is as wide as the universe and reoccurring elastically. According to QE time is only a dynamic consequence of an elastic aether. There is a saying that some people only live in the present, but it seems everyone does just that.
At first this may seem contradicting the special theory of relativity, but to my mind it only contradicts part of the traditional interpretation of SR. QE requires this part and a few others to be reconsidered.
As has been shown by the Michelson-Morley experiment, the existence of the aether does not introduce any practically discriminate reference system. It appears to be quite undetectable.
Because of this it does not invalidate SR. Instead, the role QE could play in physics is more akin to that of the theory about the quarks which by their very nature forbid direct observation. The aether “exists” at the same level the quarks do. It has arrived again only to bring sense to our observations. If aether theory in the shape of QE manages to do that we will find that some things, like e.g. simultaneity and SR and a few other things work a little different from the way we used to think they do.
If Aristotle was right about the past and the future, then the present moment is the only time that exists and all physical theories must obey a general principle that could well be called “The principle of simultaneity.” It simply states that “All physical events in the universe occur simultaneously.”
This principle provides the missing link between quantum physics and relativity and alongside with the constancy of the speed of light it describes another fundamental property of our universe.
To some effect the principle of simultaneity reinstates Newton’s universe, but it also reduces time-dependant events to become a dynamic phenomenon that is a consequence of the elastic properties of the aether.
The “certain conditions”:
To account for the presence of a scale and of time in the elastic-solid aether universe, the inert aether must sometime in the past have become subjected to a cataclysmic event. This event, however it came about, forced the aether substance to enter into a state of violent vibrations.
These vibrations eventually settled down to a state of somewhat damped simple harmonic oscillations between compression and rarefaction in the way of longitudinal bulk displacements like very large standing sound waves in the elastic-solid. Perhaps so big that the part of the universe we live in could consist of just one of these oscillating sound-waves.
This is the state of the universe now.
What actually happened to start the oscillations is beyond me, but the result is that the substance of the elastic-solid due to its unknown but elastic properties has stayed oscillating in this pulsating way ever since the event occurred.
The damped character of the oscillations may be inferred from the apparent expansion of the universe.
This oscillation between compression and rarefaction has some basic consequences:
1. The “extra” volume added to the volume of the compressed aether as it oscillates towards rarefaction accounts for the scale. As may be understood this “extra” volume will be evenly distributed in the substance as the aether radius grows, and may thus serve as a yardstick.
Finding out the size of this yardstick is a different story because we have no idea about the size of the compressed aether “ball”, nor do we know how much volume is being added as a result of the rarefaction when the aether radius grows.
However, by measuring everything with the yardstick provided this way the interesting effect will be that to an observer outside the universe, all distances will seem to grow by the square as the aether oscillate from compression to rarefaction.
The relative character of the yardstick funny enough also makes it absolute to the user inside the universe, since he cannot detect variations to the amplitude of the bulk aether oscillations.
2. The full period of oscillation between compression-rarefaction-compression corresponds to the duration of the present moment, what we call time.
It is due to the simultaneous pace at which this change in the “universal pressure” occurs over the whole of the standing wave that we have the principle of simultaneity.
As you can see, this picture does not include, nor does it allow for any past or future time.
None the less, a mechanism must exist to “record” the events of a present moment in order for the aether substance to “know” how future moments should “behave”.
This is provided by the elasticity of the substance during the oscillating cycle. A moving object will be subject to acceleration as the aether oscillates from compression to rarefaction. When the acceleration works the other way as the aether oscillates from rarefaction to compression, the moving object will be braked by the aether in the line of transit until the oscillating cycle moves into the rarefaction phase again.
As a consequence the aether substance will be a little “extra” compressed in the direction of movement. The direction and magnitude of this induced “extra” compression will serve to allow the object an “early start” in the correct direction as the cycle of compression-rarefaction-compression continues the next moment, and “ad infinitum”. The braking effect described above is one part of the mechanism behind inertia.
3. The compression-rarefaction-compression cycle takes care of the problem with longitudinal waves in a simple way.
It turns out that any longitudinal wave will become a standing longitudinal wave when it tries to oscillate in this already oscillating environment.
They will wind up in a state of resonance with the bulk compression-rarefaction-compression cycle, and this resonance will keep them going for as long as the bulk oscillation cycle may continue.
They are still able to move, but the speed they are allowed is dictated by the bulk oscillations rather then by the properties of the elastic-solid. This has the effect to keep them at speeds that may approach, but never reach the speed of light in the substance.
Being longitudinal spherical oscillations the half sphere pointing backwards from the line of transit will serve as a cannonball shackled by a chain to the leg of a convict.
This is the other part of the mechanism behind inertia. And, as you have probably guessed by now, the longitudinal waves referred to above are the fermions.
There still remains to explain the constituent members of most of the fermions, the quarks.
My guess is that a mathematical exploration will show the quarks to be more violent longitudinal vibrations that vibrate as a sort of overtone. To account for the three families of quarks, perhaps in the shape of a first, second and third harmonic to the base oscillations of the aether.
4. The standing longitudinal wave of a fermion will cause the aether substance to compress-rarefy-compress again at a much smaller scale but to some extent in the same way as the bulk oscillation cycle does. The difference is that these oscillations will vary in size between the largest amplitude in the focus of the wave and a zero at the border to the unaffected, surrounding aether. Due to this, the aether substance within reach will be stretched in the direction of the focus.
The stretching will cause all other oscillations arriving in this area to accelerate by “sliding along” with the stretching substance in the direction towards the focus.
This is the mechanism behind gravity.
5. QE stands for QuantumAether, and the “Quantum” in the name is motivated by the short duration of the basic aether oscillations. The short duration of the present if you want. A quantum of time.
This serves to “chop up” all phenomena that we experience to become a sequence of equally spaced events. During these very brief moments the aether is only able to “handle”, or “record” events as under (2) above, to the limit provided by the unknown elastic properties of the aether substance.
This, in turn, will serve to limit the “size” of the dynamic impulse that can be “recorded” from one moment to the next. It also defines the “size” of the yardstick (1), above. The yardstick may be identified as “Plancks constant” and this is the mechanism behind quantum physics.
6. The existence of a “universal moment” in QE brings back Newton’s absolute time in a way. This is because moving objects all must experience the same number of moments even if they are moving with different speed.
However, the “dynamic record”, (2 and 5) above, will differ between those moving at high speed and those moving at slower speed. The faster objects will cause larger “extra compression” to the aether substance. As a consequence they will spend a larger part of the oscillating cycle, the moment, just accelerating. This will reduce the part of the “universal moment” left to the faster object to interact with co-moving objects like the internals of a clock or the chemical reactions of a living body, or, for that matter, atomic level reactions. A larger number of moments will thus be required to complete any specific reaction in the faster object. This is the mechanism behind relativistic time dilation.
7. The longitudinal oscillation of a fermion is a state of oscillation of a local area of the aether substance itself. As such it may be considered to be in balance for as long as it is not disturbed. This balance includes the advance component of the fermion oscillations through the aether. Similar to the oscillations of the fermion itself this component of directed oscillations is also in a state of resonance with the universal bulk oscillations. They do in fact become part of the fermion. These directed parts of the fermion’s oscillation correspond to the “dynamic record” in (5) and (6), above.
This accounts for the relativistic addition of mass due to velocity.
Any activity that causes the fermion to accelerate to a higher or a lower speed, or to alter the direction it travels will however produce more or reduce the existing extra longitudinal compression in the surrounding elastic-solid aether substance as a reaction to the induced acceleration.
Because the accelerating activity persists in the same direction throughout the duration of the full cycle of bulk oscillation of the aether, this altering of the extra compression will continue for a corresponding time, that is, for a complete universal moment.
The rarefaction recoil that follows when the fermion leaves the area at the new speed acquired will be of the same duration, a complete universal moment.
In other words, this oscillation, which is essentially longitudinal and circular but not spherical, will need two moments to complete a full cycle and will be left behind as the fermion move on into the next moment.
The circular edges to this type of longitudinal oscillation will induce transverse waves in the surrounding elastic-solid substance. The waves will spread at whatever speed the unknown elastic properties of the aether allow. This is the speed of light in the aether substance.
As the waves spread outward each oscillation of the waves also carries away energy from the longitudinal oscillations at the centre, which for this reason eventually will calm down and die.
Except for the last wave, which carries the balance in the train of oscillations, all other waves will carry an equal part of the original amount of oscillatory energy being dispersed from the centre. The magnitude of each of these parts will be a consequence of (5), above.
The vibrating cycle of the transverse waves will have the same duration as the forced excess compression during the full compression-rarefaction-compression cycle, that is, including the following recoil it will require two moments for a full cycle.
As the transverse circular wave spread away from the point of origin it would be expected to drop in amplitude due to the circular growth.
However, the compression-rarefaction-compression cycle of the universal bulk oscillations will not allow this. Instead the component of bulk oscillation acting in the direction of the tangent to the wave-front will serve to split the wave at intervals along the perimeter.
The distance from the point of origin and the positions around the perimeter where this split occur will be guided by the “limitation to size”; see (5), above.
As a result the original amount of energy contained in the whole of the wave front will be conserved and directed into evenly spread discrete “corridors”, each guiding a train of transverse oscillations. This is the mechanism behind bosons, including the photons and all other electromagnetic waves.
8. The universal bulk oscillations are hidden to us because we, as well as our yardstick participate in the oscillations. As a consequence we cannot measure the rapid oscillation of the three dimensions by observing the aether directly.
However, the longitudinal oscillation of the resonating fermions and the transverse electromagnetic oscillations of the bosons are not hidden from detection.
Because of their resonance with the bulk oscillations of the universe, the period of the fermions and the bosons must show as a measure that is relative to these basic oscillations.
Since the boson require two full moments to complete one period of oscillation but the fermion need only one, this measure will display a systematic difference between the periods of the possible modes of oscillation that allow them to stay in resonance with the bulk oscillations.
This difference between fermions and bosons with respect to the possible modes of oscillation was discovered long ago.
Contemporary physics refer to it as the property of spin.
Finally:
As the reader probably realise, the account above does not exhaust the subject. I choose to quit at this point simply because I think I have covered enough parts of physics to show that the aether concept is viable and would help to explain things in much the same way as the idea about the quarks.
If QE is the correct theory still remains to be seen. In fact the work to complete the task is of such magnitude that I don’t see how I would ever be able to do it on my own. Not only do I lack command of the necessary mathematical tools, it also turns out that I am not much of a writer, so trying to trace my line of thought through this account may not be as easy as I would have wanted it to be.
One last thing, with respect to the expansion of the universe the QE explanation is very simple. As the damping of the simple harmonic universal bulk oscillations proceed, the amplitude of these oscillations diminishes. Because of this our yardstick is becoming smaller.
In other words, it is not the universe that is expanding but rather you and me who are shrinking! However, it’s hard to tell the difference, isn’t it?
Bo Nyberg, August 13th 2000.

The Dynamic Present

Explaining Time

In [[thisistime|http://www.thisistime.co.uk]], Simon Morley suggests that "Time" is only an abstract because it does not actually exist. Change events, on the other hand are real. His arguments are different from mine but our conclusions agree. Time is not as fundamental as it is supposed to be. What is truly fundamental is change.
These days most scientists agree that our universe does have a kind of substance at some level. This is very often referred to as "the fabric of space". What I claim to have worked out is how this "fabric of space" may be the single cause of all physical phenomena due to a probable property of elasticity which made space itself oscillate when "the big bang" went off.
Please understand that I do not claim to know what caused the big bang. Only what came out as a result of that event. The "ignition" of the big bang is, as far as I understand, the only event in physics which, along with the ultimate origin of the fabric of the universe, may be open for religious speculation. Most of the rest was possible to account for in the four original tiddlers.
Here I will only try to concentrate on showing what is the cause of change and of the individual change streams. Even so, a few other fundamental details also need to be explained. A more complete account may be found in the other tiddlers.

There is no way at the moment to know for certain in what state the fabric of the universe was before the big bang happened or if it it even existed before that. After the event we know a bit more but still need to guess what properties the elusive fabric of the universe might have. My guess is that it is elastic and I will shortly explain why I think so.
One might also pick an effect to see what eventual property might cause it. In my case I had the idea that time might be discrete, so I set out to try and find a mechanism by which the property of elasticity might give cause for discrete time.
Why would I think that the fabric of the universe is elastic? That is because most of the arguments that were used to undermine the old aether ideas are still valid today and will need to be addressed before the idea of an aether-like fabric of space and universe may be considered again. Elasticity takes care of the foremost objection to any and all aether models by explaining how planets and objects can move in space without slowing down.
Also, the polarization of light indicates that it is a transverse wave in an elastic solid. That would presumably be our fabric of space.
Speaking of light, does time pass in a light-wave? No? Is it because time stand still when the light-wave move at the speed of light or could it be because time does not exist?
How can planets and other objects of matter pass through an elastic solid without being slowed to a standstill? Because matter is also a wave in the elastic solid, similar to light but different. Longitudinal instead of transverse, just like a sound-wave. They do not push their way through anything. They move in the fabric of space as an integrated local oscillation.

The big bang left behind one other effect besides also creating a lot of sound- and light-waves.
The tremendous blow to the elastic solid caused it to oscillate, an oscillation which probably as a consequence of the way the big bang happened, soon settled down to a pulsating mode where the total volume of space rapidly oscillates in volume between being large and being small around a mean volume, in the process also driving the matter and light oscillations by resonance. These rapid bulk oscillations are a consequence of the elastic properties of the fabric of space and are the reason the transverse light-waves move at the speed of light. The elastic interior of the longitudinal matter-waves also move at the speed of light.
These pulsating oscillations brings us back to the question of time and change because each such oscillation may be regarded as a moment when change can occur. To us this is simply the present moment.
The duration of the present moment is presumably identical to Planck time. Very short but not zero, and instantly recurring as it has ever since the big bang. A periodic change of the volume of space.

So the present moment is actually more like a dimension of change in the spirit of Simon Morley. Because what happens? The total volume of space alters size in a controlled cyclic and synchronized way, driven by the stress/strain energy injected into the elastic solid by the big bang, and so does also the waves of matter as well as those of light. To the transverse waves nothing remarkable happens. They will happily wave on. In their case the resonance with the oscillations of space will stop them from spreading out sideways, keeping them concentrated as well as driving them at the speed of light. We call them photons.
However that is not the case for the longitudinal matter-waves because they have a spherical wavefront and their resonance with the oscillations of space itself makes the wavefront of each matter-wave turn around every oscillation and head for its own center, in effect making the wave of matter oscillate in the same pulsating way the fabric of space does.
We already have a name for effects originating with these oscillations of the fabric of space. We call them quantum effects, and the oscillations of the matter-wave is what brings about the property of spin.

Okay, but if the matter-waves turn around like that they will surely never get anywhere? Not if the internal distribution of stress and strain between different parts of the matter-wave is completely symmetric, that is true, but otherwise when this distribution is non-symmetric after the matter-wave has been accelerated by for instance a collision with another matter-wave, it would move stepwise in the non-symmetric direction each oscillation and continue to do so until another collision sends it elsewhere. The explanation we have for this behavior is that inertia keeps the matter going. What happens is that the non-symmetric part of the matter-wave is pushing and pulling the wave in the non-symmetric direction due to the resonance to the oscillations of the fabric of space, at the same time as this resonance keeps the wave "waving". If the lack of symmetry of the matter-wave is large, it will move fast. The larger the faster, but the wavefront will still turn around every oscillation and head for its own center. As a consequence it can never be accelerated to reach the speed of light. Arriving at the center the wave will bounce. That is the best description I have for what happens. It bounces and turn around to head outwards again, still driven by its resonance with the space-oscillations. The part of the elastic wavefront that belong to the original matter-wave would more or less have the shape of a a sphere, but it may also store directed elastic energy, similar to a bouncing ball. That is the non-symmetric part of the wave which will make it bounce in the direction this elastic energy is stored.

Thanks to Einstein everyone know by now that the faster an object is moving, the slower time passes on that object. The reason is somewhat subtle but at the same time quite simple. It involve realizing that [["time is what clocks measure"|http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time]], first paragraph, and also to understand that the hands of a clock are re-positioned little by little during the course of each recurring present moment, which brings us back to the idea of change. Change is what happens when the fabric of space oscillates and it is space itself, due to the volume oscillations, that change. As a result every wave of matter in space also may change during each present moment due to the resonance between space and matter-wave. Every bouncing matter-wave carries its own "change stream" to guide it in the form of the internal distribution of stress and strain in the wave. When a non-symmetric matter-wave bounce between its own outer perimeter and its focus any new change to its distribution of stress and strain will require more energy to be effected then it would need if the wave was more symmetric. Because the amount of energy available for change during each moment is limited by what we call the "quantum of action", more moments will be required for the same amount of change to take place in the non-symmetric case as would be required when the matter-wave is more symmetric. Since more moments are needed for the job the eventual observer will think that time has slowed down.

As you can see it is all a matter of change. The duration of the elastic present moment, one full cycle of the pulsating mode of oscillation of the fabric of the universe, is also change. A cyclic altering of volume from small past a mean size to large and then back past mean size to small again. This altering of volume is cyclic, so why did I pick the small size as the start of the cycle? That is because the expanding space allow the change stream of each bouncing wave of matter to expand in whichever direction its internal distribution of stress and strain is pointing which, incidentally, also is where the "arrow of time" is pointing. In the direction of expansion.

To my mind the idea of change and change stream as proposed by Simon Morley in [[thisistime|http://www.thisistime.co.uk]] allows for a more intuitive picture of the causal connections between the various physical phenomena and their origin.
Thanks Simon!

My obsession with [[time|http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time]] started back in 1976 when it dawned on me that time could be discontinuous without us knowing. At that time I was working on a small tanker and we were half-ways between Houston Texas and Khark Island in the Persian Gulf.
Luckily we had a nice ship's library where i found a book about physics, but reading that book raised even more questions. I did for instance find out that [[simultaneity|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simultaneity]] did not exist [[thanks to Einstein and Relativity|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_of_simultaneity]]. This is something I completely had missed in school. Was I sleeping in class? Anyway, according to what I was reading, [[common sense|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_sense]] was not to be trusted anymore.
I did not like that at all so having left the vessel I started collecting literature about physics. Reading the books below as well as everything else I came by about time and space I tried to understand how discontinuous time might work in order to see if this idea would help to reinstate common sense. At the end of the day and very much to my surprise, I really think it did.
Physics and man by Tor Ragnar Gerholm
Gravitation by Misner, Thorne & Wheeler Astronomy and Cosmology – A Modern Course by Fred Hoyle
The Grip of Gravity by Prabhakar Gondhalekar.
E=MC² by David Bodanis
Galaxies and Quasars by William J. Kaufmann, III.
The Elegant Universe & The Fabric of the Cosmos by Brian Greene
Hyperspace by Michio Kaku and Beyond Einstein by Michio Kaku and Jennifer Thompson
Quintessence by Lawrence M. Krauss
History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity by Sir Edmund Whittaker
The world within the world & The Book of Nothing by John D Barrow
Speakable and unspeakable in quantum mechanics by J. S. Bell
The fist three minutes & Dreams of a Final Theory by Steven Weinberg
Wholeness and the Implicate Order by David Bohm
Where does the weirdness go? By David Lindley
Einstein & Cranks, Quarks, and the Cosmos & A Theory for Everything by Jeremy Bernstein
Cosmos by Stephen Hawking
The Emperor’s New Mind by Roger Penrose
Masters of Time by John Boslough
The Nature of Space and Time by Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose
The Arrow of Time by Peter Coveny and Roger Highfield
Time’s Arrow and Archimedes’ Point by Huw Price
About Time by Paul Davies
The River of Time by Igor D. Novikov
The End of Time by Julian Barbour Three Roads to Quantum Gravity by Lee Smolin
Various books and essays by and about Einstein
Scientific American Special Issue Sept 2004 & Special Edition Vol. 16 Number 1, 2006.
These and other books and scientific journals like for instance Science and Scientific American has let me see the shortcomings of the present [[physics paradigm|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm]]. I have no problem to understand the theories of [[relativity|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativity]] and, building on the idea of discontinuous time, also explain how and why they work. However, that a [[layman|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Layperson]] is able to do this in his spare time using the well known and intuitive physics of [[elasticity|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elasticity]] only confirms that the relativist picture of our universe in the form of the standard model is rather incomplete. Some updating is needed.
Physics and man is the book I found in the library on the tanker Helfrid Billner.
The idea of discontinuous time was mentioned in the book but was, according to the author, very advanced. It was not decided if this was a line of reasoning to pursue. Well, I think it is and that is what I have done ever since the idea first struck my mind.
The other books are not placed in any special order. The textbooks are a bit heavy on the mathematical side, but there's not much need to be an expert of mathematics in order to understand, for instance, how a car works and, trust me, time is a lot less complicated then a car once you see the light.
It is all a matter of elasticity, and I bet you have some intuitive sense of how balls bounce, swings operate and vibrations might intensify due to resonance. That background, some imagination and the text and links on this site is actually all you need to understand time. As a bonus you will find out a few other things as well.
If you follow [[The Big Bang|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang]] link to its wikipage you will find that the Big Bang Theory is "the prevailing cosmological model that explains the early development of the universe". I certainly agree with this statement but have a different explanation regarding the initial state and the mechanism driving the subsequent expansion. It does however involve reinstating the idea of an [[aether|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories]]. If you do not like this idea, all the more reason for you to keep on reading, perhaps starting with a visit to the [[F.A.Q about Aether|http://www.mountainman.com.au/aeth_faq.htm]] at the Australian site mountainman.com.
The initial state was not any singularity. Our universe already had a definite physical size: the unknown volume of the aether. We do not know the true size of it because the very elastic fabric it consists of appears to be [[continuous|http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/continuous]] (as opposed to particulate) at the best resolution we can manage and for this reason the volume cannot be measured. (Since there is no discernible scale to measure it by.) The incident of the Big Bang however introduced violent bulk oscillations into the aether. The [[amplitude|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amplitude]] of these oscillations works as a kind of [[yardstick|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yardstick]] making relative measurements possible.
In the beginning the amplitude was large and violent. Now, 13.7 or so billion years later the oscillations has calmed down so the amplitude is much smaller then it was at the beginning. This also makes our yardstick smaller. Since we do not know that the yardstick was bigger in the past we instead think that the universe has expanded and is larger today, which is true in a relative way only.
Regarding inflation: The initial, very large amplitude that was a direct result of the big bang could have shrunk dramatically in just a few oscillations, making the yardstick exponentially shorter in the process. -Or since inflation was invented to explain the "flatness" and conformity of the universe, it might not even be required given the continuous fabric of the aether.
Last year a Nobel prize was awarded to the scientists who discovered that the expansion of our universe has been accelerating rather then slowing down as was expected.
That is, the rate by which the amplitude get smaller is increasing as that same amplitude gets smaller.
This might possibly happen when bulk oscillations of an elastic solid like that of the aether are damped and I would just love to show you how, but the mechanics of this is quite beyond my competence to work out. Mathematics...! I am just a dreamer anyway...
I very much hope that someone reading this might be able to check it out and provide an answer.
Perhaps Mr G S Sandhu, who also has ideas about the aether.
As far as I understand it, Mr Sandhu has not followed quite the same line of reasoning regarding the Big Bang and the consequences of that event, but he has certainly a better grip on the mathematical side of things. I think he is quite right about the significance of the parameters of [[permittivity|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_permittivity]], [[permeability|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_permeability]] and [[intrinsic impedance Z|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impedance_of_free_space]].
If you are mathematically inclined check out his ideas at [[ECT|https://sites.google.com/a/fundamentalphysics.info/book/]], short for Elastic Continuum Theory.
The most intuitive picture of the dynamics of the aether would be to think of it as a large, standing sound-wave, bulk oscillating around the volume it would occupy had it been inert. Some support for the idea of large sound-waves might be found on this google search-page for [[sound oscillations of the sun|http://www.google.se/search?q=Sound+oscillations+of+the+sun&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a]].
The frequency of the oscillations would of cause be governed by the elasticity characteristics of the aether fabric, given by the equations of Mr Sandhu.
So what was it that caused the Big Bang to happen and how come it produced the result I just described? To be honest, I have no idea. I am however certain that it did not involve any "[[Quantum fluktuation|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_fluctuation]]". Why? Because the hereby demystified "[[quanta|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_constant]]" is actually our yardstick and when you come to understand the very simple mechanism responsible for it, you also understand how it works.
The mechanism is this: The rapid oscillations of the aether about it's inert volume is a rapid oscillation of the total volume between a smaller volume, a little less in size then the inert volume, and a larger volume a little bigger then the inert one.
The quanta is the very dynamic local difference in volume due to the oscillations. To imagine how this effect may serve as a relative yardstick, think of a point in the aether as it oscillates from the smaller volume to the larger one and then back again. That would give you a picture of the immediate surroundings of the point growing to a sphere and then shrinking back again towards the point. The radius of this sphere depend on the amplitude of the oscillations. Large amplitude, large sphere. Smaller amplitude, smaller sphere and smaller yardstick.. The volume of the sphere also represent the maximum degree of freedom a moving object would have access to depending on its speed.
Here's one example to give you an idea of the dynamics involved when objects move: An object moving close to the speed of light would almost reach the surface of the bubble. An object at half light-speed would get half-ways. Another, not moving at all, would stay at the center. As the phase of the aether oscillation reverse, the objects will "bounce" back towards the center where they will "bounce" again in resonance with the ether oscillations. etc.etc.... Why not call it "the slingshot effect"? It reminds a little of shooting pellets with a condom.
As the example above indicates, another effect of the aether oscillations is to drive other, smaller local oscillations, be they longitudinal or transverse, by resonance. That is the reason the oscillations do not fade away and it is also the mechanism responsible for the transverse wave-packets, the [[photons|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon]]. If the elastic aether was not providing an oscillating background for the transverse waves to wave on, keeping them concentrated in the process, they would be diluted by the inverse square rule and would not have energy to arrive here from any distant origins. The oscillation is also the "tick" of time and, as you already may guess, each repeated tick is all time there is. -Which, by the way, also brings back simultaneity into the common sense notion. The funny thing is that this was unknowingly(?) experimentally confirmed by [[Alain Aspect|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alain_Aspect]] already back in 1980. Einsteins "spooky action at a distance" is easier to understand in the light of simultaneity.
At this stage we can already see the need for a few corrections to the standard-model. Since the duration of the longest existing time-span, each "tick", is just one [[planck time|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_time]], we do not need the notion of the [[Block Time|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternalism_%28philosophy_of_time%29]] universe anymore. It should be substituted by the [[presentist|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_%28philosophy_of_time%29]] view.
Likewise the notion of four-dimensional space-time may be good for mathematical calculations but in the light of the above, it does not seem to have any physical existence.
Regarding extra dimensions all I have to say is this: Any dimension above the three obvious ones is only a local state of freedom, by which I mean that the longitudinal oscillations of an object at the end of its three dimensional coordinates may be subject to several nested local oscillations ([[overtones|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtone]]). The degree to which this may apply would be given by the elasticity characteristics of the aether.
Regarding [[string theory|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory]] I am sure the standard model will be replaced by a theory of this type that has been adapted to the ideas here presented. The reason I think so is because it is all about oscillations, which, as I am trying to explain, is all our universe contains. Oscillating aether.
The adaption might perhaps be a little awkward for the proponents of string theory because the strings will not be strings anymore. Instead they are mini-copies of the aether oscillations. That is, they are three-dimensional longitudinal sound-waves, resonating with the aether oscillations. Their "rolled up dimensions" are just some more longitudinal oscillations on top of the original one. However, if the string theorists decide to try it out I am sure they will prosper from the shift. The vibrations of their strings- or, perhaps more appropriate- their "aether solitons" will then automatically be mapped to a driving source by resonance and the suspicious (to the layman) and unconfirmed (to everyone) dimensions would be replaced by quite ordinary elastic overtones.
So why and how does time "slow down" when you travel fast?
First of all, remember that the present moment is all time there is. This moment is about 5.4 x 10ˉ⁴⁴ s long and presumably encompassing all of the universe. As a result simultaneity is universal rather then non-existing as we were thinking special relativity required.
Because of the all encompassing simultaneity every clock in the universe live through the same number of present moments. However, what might differ between the clocks is their speed. This is not a big deal you might think, but what if they have to accelerate from a standstill up to whatever speed they are doing, directly followed by braking down to a standstill again, all within the span of a present moment? As far as I understand, this is what actually happens, and the faster you travel the more intense the acceleration and the braking will become. This has the effect that the part of the cycle of oscillation available to move the arms of a clock will become shorter and shorter as you move closer to the speed of light.
So, the why is: because you are constantly accelerating. Also between moments when you think you are just coasting along. (This constant acceleration and braking each oscillation is also the cause of [[Inertia|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia]] and [[relativistic mass|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity]].)
And the how is: due to this acceleration the part of the moment available to do effective work is shorter at higher speed then at slower speed, so more moments are needed to move the hands of the clock if you travel fast or else is subject to more acceleration like you for instance would be in a gravitational pit. (Like on the surface of a planet.)
This also brings about some insights about gravitation:
The general theory of relativity describes gravitation as the effects of the metrics of a space whose curvature is dictated and set by the matter it contains. That is certainly true in some sense which is the reason the equations work, but the details of the mechanism responsible for the effects need some explanations:
As a longitudinal matter-wave resonates with the oscillating background it stretches up the aether a little by its own oscillations. From a maximum at the center of these oscillations the pull at the aether fabric drops by the inverse square rule with the distance to the center. That is, points lined up between the center and the perimeter will all be displaced each oscillation towards the center a distance which is larger the closer to the center the point is. By picturing a [[gravity well|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_well]] you'll get a good idea of what this would look like. To complete the picture also let the well oscillate with a period of 5.4 x 10ˉ⁴⁴ s. Any other oscillation in the aether fabric -longitudinal or transverse, entering the area being stretched up this way by the gravity well will be redirected and accelerated little by little each oscillation towards the center of the well, and that is about all there is to say about gravitation.
As you can see, the dynamic present and simultaneity still allow Einstein to be right about relativity, Newton about [[absolute time and space|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_time_and_space]] and Maxwell about the existence of an aether as the medium for his electromagnetic waves. The question then is: does this bring back common sense? Well, yes, I think it does. In my opinion common sense was abandoned because the lack of a proper model of the universe dropped the curtains on reality.
I trust the dynamic present is the embryo of a model that will lift those curtains again. It does quantize space in a rather unsuspected way using three-dimensional "bits" the size of the universe that has a cyclic life of about 5.4 x 10ˉ⁴⁴ s. Which in reality makes our universe the ultimate recycle system - reusing both space and time. This is the nature of the "fine-grain structure of space" that eventually is going to be detected by Craig Hogan with his [[Holometer|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holometer]] experiment as long as his laser interferometer has the necessary sensitivity.

Från Augusti 1998.
I slutet av 1800-talet gjorde två fysiker ett experiment som till deras förvåning indikerade att vår planet ligger helt stilla i världsrymden.
Fysikerna hette Michelson och Morley, och syftet med experimentet var att mäta jordens hastighet relativt etern genom att jämföra ljushastigheten i olika riktningar över två vinkelrät åtskilda banor.
Tidigare undersökningar av ljusets utbredning hade givit vid handen att ljus var en vågrörelse av samma typ som de elektromagnetiska vågor den skotska fysikern Maxwell´s ekvationer avsåg.
Dessa ekvationer beskriver vågrörelser i ett stillastående medium som man döpt till etern.
Eftersom utbredningshastigheten för Maxwell´s vågor stämde bra överens med den hastighet man uppmätt för ljuset, och då ljuset dessutom vid alla experiment hade visat sig ha egenskaper som man normalt förknippar med vågrörelser i ett medium, var man ganska säker på att ljuset också var en elektromagnetisk vågrörelse i en eter, ljusetern.
Man tänkte sig därför att det borde blåsa en ”etervind” över jorden när vår planet rör sig i sin bana runt solen, eftersom ju etern förmodades ligga still i universum. Det skulle medföra att mätningar av ljusets hastighet som utförs på jorden skulle ge olika värden beroende på åt vilket håll man gör dom. Det var sådana mätningar Michelson och Morely höll på med.
Resultatet av deras experiment var emellertid fullständigt oväntat, och det dröjde ända till år 1905, när Einstein presenterade sin Speciella Relativitetsteori innan man tyckte sig förstå varför den förväntade effekten uteblev.
Orsaken var, trodde man, att det inte finns någon eter.
Märklig slutsats, eftersom den Speciella Relativitetsteorin över huvud taget inte gör anspråk på att förklara hur ljuset transporteras. Teorin behandlar bara konsekvensen av att ljusets hastighet är konstant och kan följaktligen varken bekräfta eller förneka en eterhypotes.
Tvärt emot vad de flesta tror belyser den Speciella Relativitetsteorin inte heller tidens natur eller orsak. Den klarlägger emellertid vad som händer på grund av att tiden fungerar som den gör.
För att förstå vad tid är, hur den fungerar och varför den går långsammare när hastigheten ökar, måste man som jag skall visa i det följande, återinföra idén om en allomfattande eter.
Eterbegreppet har en lång historia bakom sig. Jag skall inte gå in i detalj på hur man trodde att det fungerade på den tiden det begav sig. Om någon vill veta mer får jag istället rekommendera Sir Edmund Whittaker´s ”bibel” i ämnet, ”History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity” del 1, ”The Classical Theories”.
Etern antogs förmedla ljusvågorna ungefär på samma sätt som ljud fortplantas i något elastiskt ämne som tex. luft eller vatten.
I en gas eller i en vätska sker transporten av ljudvågorna genom att ämnet ömsom förtätas och förtunnas longitudinellt i rörelseriktningen. Detta möjliggörs av att både gaser och vätskor är elastiska. Att tex luft är elastiskt är ju ingen nyhet, och att det dessutom är lätt att komprimera luft vet alla som blåst upp en ballong. Det är betydligt svårare att komprimera en vätska, fast det fungerar på samma sätt.
Till och med fasta ämnen går att komprimera på det här viset, men här förekommer det också andra krafter som beror på att ämnets molekyler är bundna till varandra på ett sätt som dom inte är i en gas eller i en vätska. Som en tumregel kan man säga att desto svårare det är att komprimera ett bestämt ämne, ju mer styvt och elastiskt det är, desto snabbare rör sig ljudet i detta ämne. Det är därför ljudet rör sig snabbare i vatten än i luft, och det är därför en eterteori medför vissa problem. Man måste nämligen förklara hur vår planet kan röra sig obehindrat i sin bana genom etern, samtidigt som detta ämne måste vara oerhört hårt, styvt och elastiskt för att kunna vidarebefordra ljusvågorna med den svindlande hastigheten av 300.000 km per sekund.
En tillkommande svårighet är att ljusvågor ibland är polariserade på ett sätt som tyder på att deras utbredning måste vara transversell.
Problemet med detta är att transversella vågor normalt bara återfinnes i fasta ämnen.
Det är kanske inte så konstigt i alla fall, att resultatet av Michelson-Morely´s experiment tolkades som ett bevis för att det inte finns någon eter.
Ungefär vid samma tid som Michelson & Morely höll på med sitt experiment råkade en annan fysiker vars namn var Max Planck hitta nyckeln till vad som är grunden för kvantfysiken.
Han upptäckte att vi lever i ett kvantiserat universum. Det innebär att alla mätetal avseende krafter, avstånd, tider osv, i grunden har en minsta gemensam nämnare, nämligen den konstant som efter sin upptäckare har döpts till Planck´s konstant.
Den här konstanten är en odelbar enhet, antingen har man en eller flera, eller också ingen alls. Man kan alltså inte ha en halv, eller en tredjedels, utan bara hela multipler av den här konstanten. Alla krafter utan undantag är hopsatta på det här viset. Man kan gott säga att det här är den mest fundamentala upptäckt som gjorts inom fysiken i modern tid, fast den nu har närmare hundra år på nacken.
I slutet av förra århundradet trodde man fortfarande att universum var statiskt. Det var den amerikanska astronomen Erwin Hubble´s upptäckt i början av 20-talet att universum expanderar, tillsammans med Einsteins allmänna relativitetsteori som ändrade på detta.
För att förklara expansionen antar man att hela universum föddes vid en ur-explosition, en Big Bang.
Den här teorin är numera en av grundstenarna i standardmodellen, och ganska väletablerad, bland annat som en följd av mätningarna med Cobe satelliten.
Man bör alltså kunna tro att någonting fundamentalt hände. Denna händelse har lämnat spår som vi kan se genom att mäta bakgrundsstrålningen, och vilka vi nu tyder på ett sådant sätt att vi tror att universum faktiskt började med en händelse i stil med den Fred Hoyle döpte till ”The Big Bang”.
Max Planck´s kvanta tillsammans med idén om Big Bang lämnar emellertid också ledtrådar till en modell av universum som trots att den är betydligt enklare än standardmodellen, ändå är mer omfattande.
Den här nya modellen är nära besläktad med de eterteorier som var på tapeten när Michelson och Morely gjorde sina mätningar, men till skillnad från dessa innefattar den även kvantmekaniska fenomen. Därför tänkte jag det vore passande att döpa den till kvantetermodellen.
Kvantat utgör som sagt själva grunden för kvantfysiken, men trots det har ingen under alla år som gått sedan Max Planck upptäckte kvantat kunnat lämna en godtagbar förklaring till varför det över huvud taget finns.
En sådan förklaring finns emellertid inbyggd i kvantetermodellen.
Det visar sig nämligen att ett ämne som har de elastiska egenskaper som krävs för att en våg skall kunna förflytta sig i det med ljusets hastighet, under vissa betingelser också ger upphov till alla andra fenomen som vi finner i vårt universum.
Denna eter, för att använda ett välbekant om något skamfilat namn, utgör så att säga den scen som allt i universum, inklusive fenomen som materia, kvanta, tidsdilation, gravitation, tröghetskrafter och allt annat som hör till, utspelas på.
Kvantetern är universums enda beståndsdel.
Kvantetermodellen är så pass okomplicerad att jag hoppas kunna förmedla grunderna till den i det följande utan att behöva krångla till begreppen genom att blanda in någon matematik. Den som önskar verifiera mina påståenden genom lite egna beräkningar kommer att finna att det mesta, om inte rentav allt, kan hanteras med ganska enkel matematik. Det rör sig om att förstå elasticitet.
Som de flesta redan vet, förmodligen också utan att jag egentligen behöver påpeka det, så fattas det något i vår världsbild. Trots de avsevärda framsteg inom fysiken som lett fram till standardmodellen så vet dom flesta inblandade sedan länge att denna inte räcker till för att beskriva och förklara hur universum fungerar. Beskrivningen är ju ganska bra, QED till exempel, är väl om inte jag misstar mig, en av dom mest framgångsrika teorier som någonsin kläckts fram. Den är exakt ner till otroligt många decimaler. Samma sak gäller, om kanske inte i lika hög grad, alla de andra teorierna som ingår i standardmodellen. Alla är framgångsrika när det gäller att beskriva vad som händer.
Gemensamt för alla dessa teorier är emellertid också det faktum att dom egentligen inte förklarar någonting.
Den främsta orsaken till detta är att vi inte har något logiskt koppling mellan makro- och mikrokosmos, eller med andra ord, mellan Einsteins Relativitetsteorier och kvantfysiken. Det stora och det lilla. De båda områdena är isolerade från varandra i standardmodellens tappning.
I kvantetermodellen är emellertid tid och kvanta kopplade till varandra genom att båda dessa fenomen har ett gemensamt ursprung i eterämnets dynamiska egenskaper.
Vad som skiljer kvantetern från andra etermodeller är alltså huvudsakligen dess dynamik.
Medan de traditionella etermodellerna beskriver ett ämne som är elastiskt, precis som kvantetern, så hör dom hemma i förra århundradet. Dom beskriver en eter som inte har råkat ut för någon Big Bang.
Kvantetermodellen handlar helt enkelt om det tillstånd en traditionell etermodell måste befinna sig i efter att den stora smällen har inträffat.
Den vibrerar, och det är just det sätt den vibrerar på som utgör den felande länken i vår världsbild, och som är de ”vissa betingelser” jag nämnde tidigare.
Som ett extra bonus visar det sig dessutom att kvantetermodellen har en del andra mycket tilltalande egenskaper. Man behöver tex. inte bekymra sig för dess fysiska dimensioner. Det beror på att storleken på allt som finns i den är relativ.
Detta gäller också för dess fysiska egenskaper, dvs. det räcker att den är elastisk. Den absoluta graden av elasticitet är emellertid ganska ointressant, eftersom även de fysiska effekterna av dess elasticitet är relativa för en inneboende observatör.
I stället är det en annan fråga som kan tänkas ha en viss betydelse.
Det är frågan om vad etern består av och hur det kommer sig att den är elastisk. Det tillstöter nämligen en del motstånd, filosofiskt sett, om man antar att den till exempel helt saknar struktur. Hur skulle i så fall de elastiska krafterna förmedlas?
Jag vet inte, och i avvaktan på att någon annan kan besvara den frågan får man helt enkelt nöja sig med att behandla etern som ett dynamiskt fält á lá Faraday och Maxwell.
Den elastiska egenskap som är en förutsättning för att etern skall kunna vidarebefordra transversella vibrationer i form av ljusvågor med en hastighet av 300.000 km/sek medför alltså att ämnet måste börja vibrera om det utsätts för en plötslig tryckförändring.
Det är förmodligen egentligen den här tryckförändringen som vi döpt till Big Bang. Vad som orsakade tryckförändringen, dvs. utlöste Big Bang, lär vi kanske aldrig få reda på, men i det följande skall jag försöka redovisa hur kvantetermodellen kan tänkas länka ihop Relativitet och Kvanta.
Av någon anledning, kanske som en följd av eterns struktur, eller dess eventuella brist på struktur, samt säkert också som en följd av det sätt på vilket ”The Big Bang” gick av stapeln, sker dessa vibrationer i form av volymvibrationer. Dvs, vid ”The Big Bang” bringades eterämnet att oscillera hastigt och rytmiskt runt en medelvolym som ungefär motsvarar den volym ämnet upptog just före smällen. Det är dessa volymvibrationer som orsakar kvanta och tid, och det är därför det ”Inte så tomma rummet”, för att citera rubriken på en artikel i Forskning och Framsteg härförleden, är potentiellt energirikt, och inte bara tomrum. Det rör ju på sig...
Vad är det då som händer när det rör på sig? –Jo, eftersom eterns volym under varje vibration kommer att variera mellan ett största och ett minsta värde, så kommer den relativa storleken av allt som finns i etern att förändras i samma mån och med samma hastighet. Eventuella observatörer i denna eter kommer därför inte att kunna märka något ovanligt när dom själva växer och avståndet mellan dom först ökar, varefter det sedan minskar, samtidigt som dom krymper igen. Deras egen storlek och därmed deras måttskala förändras ju i samma takt.
Under själva expansionen finns det emellertid möjlighet för observatörerna att ändra sitt relativa avstånd till varandra. Dom har då möjlighet att flytta sig med nästan samma hastighet som expansionen sker. När etern sedan krymper tillbaka igen kommer dom i så fall att ha ändrat sitt inbördes läge med ett avstånd som är nästan lika stort som etern expanderade. Denna förändring kan dom mäta.
Måttskalan dom hänvisas till att använda blir naturligtvis relativ eftersom den är relaterad till deras egen storlek, men har trots det en minsta enhet som inte är relativ i förhållande till observatörerna, nämligen den minsta möjliga förändringen i avstånd. Det vill säga det mått som döpts till plancklängd efter sin upptäckare.
Denna enhet motsvarar den töjning som etern utsättes för lokalt när volymen ändras. Det är med andra ord den lokala bråkdelen av den extra volym som tillkommer vid expansionen, och som fördelas i hela etern vid varje vibration. Det är också här som Max Planck´s kvanta håller till. Under förloppet av varje vibration lagras och förmedlas det dynamiska krafter i det här utrymmet.
Max Planck´s kvanta är alltså ett mått på hur mycket extra elastisk distorsion utöver expansionen som det tillkommande utrymmet kan innehålla under en normal oscillationscykel.
Etervibrationerna var naturligtvis häftigast och hade störst amplitud just efter att den stora smällen hade inträffat, men bör ha avtagit så småningom till följd av eterämnets styvhet. Fenomenet kallas för periodiskt dämpad svängning, och är orsak till att kvantat visserligen är en enhet som inte är relativ i förhållande till observatörerna ovan, men ändå måste anses vara ett relativt mått på grund av att dess storlek måste minska i takt med att etervibrationerna avtar.
Eftersom vi själva och våra tumstockar krymper i samma takt som kvantat får det plats fler och fler kvanta mellan fixa mätpunkter som tex mellan galaxer och stjärnor. Orsaken till att vi inte kan mäta den här effekten lokalt är just att den direkta tumstock vi använder här hemma i solsystemet, tex. radarpulser, blir allt mindre med tiden. Mätningen mellan galaxer och stjärnor sker emellertid indirekt, i princip genom att man jämför en äldre tumstock med dagens under antagandet att dom är lika långa. Relativt oss ser det därför ut som om rummet och därmed universum blir större allteftersom tiden går...
-Tiden ja, innan Big Bang, eller vad det nu var som hände hade skett, var eterns eventuella vibrationer i varje fall inte synkroniserade på samma sätt som efter. Det var först efter att denna händelse hade inträffat som hela etern började vibrera i takt så att säga. Det ledde till att vi fick kvantat, och även möjligheten till rörelse som en direkt följd av eterns vibrationer, och det är just detta, möjlighet till rörelse, som vi upplever som tid.
Under varje cykel av eterns vibrationer kommer dynamiskt upplagrade krafter i mediet i form av kvanta att förmedla rörelse. Ett exempel är tröghetskraften som håller en atom i rörelse även efter att den kraft som accelererat atomen upphört verka.
Eftersom etermediets cykliska oscillationer är symmetriska till sin natur kan man emellertid inte ange någon tidsriktning inom ramen för en enstaka cykel. Det är därför de grundläggande fysiska lagarna i universum saknar tidspil. När vi registrerar de rörelser som inträffat under tidigare cykler i vårt minne får vi möjlighet att beräkna vad som kan tänkas inträffa vid en kommande cykel. Det ger oss ett intryck av kontinuitet, riktning och fysisk påtaglighet vad tiden beträffar som jag tyvärr måste fastslå är en illusion. Det betyder att fysiskt sett existerar varken förfluten tid eller framtid. (Hemska tanke!)
Båda dessa begrepp är tankekonstruktioner. Det förflutna existerar endast i vårt minne och framtiden endast i våra förväntningar.
Tid, på det viset de flesta av oss föreställer sig den, finns helt enkelt inte. Aristoteles hade med andra ord helt rätt när han delade in tiden i: Det förflutna som inte längre existerar, nuet som vi lever i och framtiden som inte ännu existerar. Han lämnade sedan en gåta till eftervärlden: Hur långt är då nuet? Med hjälp av kvantetermodellen förstår man att nuets längd är detsamma som perioden för en av universums oscillationscykler.
Varaktigheten hos en sådan cykel, uttryckt i vår relativa tidsenhet, sekunden, motsvarar längden av den fundamentala tidsenhet som döpts till plancktid, = 5,4 x 10^-44 sek. Vad är det då som kan röra sig? I grund och botten vibrationer i etern. En elektron är således egentligen ingenting annat än en stående vibration som befinner sig i resonans med, och får sin energi från den omgivande eterns vibrationer. Samma gäller alla övriga partiklar. Även de som har en mer komplicerad struktur än elektronen och alltså innehåller kvarkar.
För mig verkar det troligt att kvarkarna består av vibrationer som svänger i någon överton till den frekvens som etern och elektronerna vibrerar med. En större kvark vibrerar förmodligen med högre överton än en mindre. Skillnaden i oscillationshastighet mellan kvarken och universum medför att kvarken alltid kommer att omges av ett område av eter som oscillerar i samma takt som universum i stort. Av den här orsaken kommer kvarkarna alltid att vara ”iklädda” partiklar.
Skillnaden mellan partiklar och antipartiklar består endast i att dom vibrerar i olika fas relativt varandra och relativt etern. Övervikten i förekomst av partiklar framför antipartiklar i vårt universum kan tänkas bero på att den händelse som orsakade Big Bang var riktad åt ett håll så att den orsakade en kompression av etermediet. Detta kan ha medfört att de partiklar som skapades vid själva smällen befinner sig i samma fas relativt etern och varandra. Vid det undertryck som uppstår när etern sedan börjar oscillera till följd av sina elastiska egenskaper bildas sedan ytterligare, kanske inte lika många partiklar. Dessa stående vibrationer blir emellertid fasförskjutna 180 grader i jämförelse med dom som bildades under kompressionsfasen
Partiklar av alla slag har en sak gemensamt. Dom är stående, lokala vibrationer som är i resonans med eterns oscillationer.
Det innebär att dom alltid befinner sig i samma fas av sin egen vibrationscykel vid början av varje ny volymvibration hos etern. Av den anledningen kommer dom att behålla sitt relativa vibrationstillstånd i etern från en volymvibration till en annan så länge dom inte blir störda av yttre krafter. Det innebär i sin tur också, att en partikel bibehåller den eventuella rörelseriktning och fart relativt etern som orsakas av dess vibrationstillstånd ända tills någon händelse inträffar som ändrar på detta.
Det här vibrationstillståndet kan emellertid variera. Oavsett vilken fas det är i relativt etern, kan partikelns vibration vara centrerad, så att den stående vågen efter varje vibration återfinnes i samma relativa läge som gången innan, men den kan också vara förskjuten i någon riktning, så att vågens centrum förflyttas något i denna riktning vid varje vibration.
Eftersom den stående vågen har samma period som eteroscillationerna har kan den inte töja etern åt det håll den eventuellt är förskjuten snabbare än vad som orsakas av expansionen. Dess relativa läge kan därför inte ändras med ett belopp som är riktigt lika stort som eterns expansion, utan blir som störst något mindre än så. Det medför att den stående vågen inte kan förflytta sig snabbare än andra vibrationer, som tex. en ljusvåg.
Ljushastigheten blir alltså av helt naturliga och fysiskt betingade orsaker en hastighetsbegränsning.
I det föregående har jag indikerat att partiklarnas stående våg förflyttar sig genom att töja etern i någon riktning. Varje partikel sträcker därför också upp den omgivande etern något i riktning mot sitt eget centrum. Den här effekten är kumulativ. Ju fler partiklar som befinner sig i ett område, desto mer sträcks etern åt det hållet vid varje vibration. Det saknar betydelse vilken relativ fas i förhållande till etern som partiklarna befinner sig i, så både partiklar och antipartiklar bidrar till denna töjning.
De partiklar som befinner sig åtskilda från varandra kommer att känna effekten av varandras töjning av etern på så sätt att deras respektive vibrationstillstånd blir något förskjutet i riktning mot grannen på grund av att det eterområde dom vibrerar i under expansionen sträcks lite åt det hållet. Därmed flyttas centrum för den stående våg som partikeln består av något i riktning mot grannen vid varje vibration.
Resultatet blir att partiklarna tenderar att glida ihop, eller som vi är vana vid att kalla det, graviterar mot varandra.
Partikelns stående våg består alltså av eter som vibrerar radiellt utåt från ett centrum. Om man inför begreppet tryck som stöd för fantasin skulle man kunna föreställa sig att centrum av den stående vågen ibland har ett tryck som är högre än trycket i den omgivande etern, och ibland är lägre än detta. Samtidigt varierar trycket i själva etern beroende på i vilken fas av sin oscillation den befinner sig. Trycket i etern försvinner tex två gånger per cykel i den del av förloppet när den spänningslösa medelvolymen passeras. Det sker dels när trycket sjunker då etern expanderar, och dels när trycket stiger då den krymper ihop igen. I samma takt varierar trycket i partikeln, som ju har samma svängningsperiod som etern.
Så länge som partikeln tillåts röra sig fritt kommer den inte att störa den omgivande etern på annat sätt än genom den tidigare beskrivna töjningen mot sitt eget centrum. Emellertid, om en yttre kraft stör den kommer den i sin tur att i lika mån påverka den omgivande etern. Om partikeln således pressas i någon riktning av en yttre kraft kommer etern till följd av sin elasticitet att pressas samman något där partikeln trycker mot den. Kraften kommer att orsaka att partikelns vibrationstillstånd förskjuts åt det hållet, så att den, när kraften upphör verka, kommer att fortsätta vilja röra sig i den nya riktningen. Vad som sker är att partikeln accelereras av kraften, och det motstånd som kraften övervinner när den pressar samman den elastiska etern är mer känt som tröghetskraft.
Låt oss titta närmare på en klocka som rör sig i en rätlinjig bana, endast pådriven av tröghetskraften.
Eftersom den utgör ett tröghetssystem är den naturligtvis ett fall för den Speciella Relativitetsteorin. Det innebär att visaren kommer att rör sig allt långsammare runt urtavlan relativt sitt tidigare rörelsetillstånd om klockan accelereras till en högre fart. Varför gör den det?
Med hjälp av kvantetermodellen går det nu att svara på den frågan.
Orsaken är det sätt på vilket den stående våg som varje partikel är uppbyggd av förflyttas i etermediet.
Som jag tidigare beskrivit expanderar en sådan stående våg radiellt ut från centrum under etermediets expansionsfas. Eftersom den stående vågen är i resonans med etermediets oscillationer expanderar den också åt alla håll i samma takt som etermediet. Det innebär som sagt att den inte kan röra sig snabbare än etermediet expanderar. Om partikeln därför rör sig i någon riktning innebär det att halva partikeln expanderar i färdriktningen och halva bakåt. Att accelerera partikeln medför att den hindras från att expandera bakåt tillsammans med etermediet. Eftersom partikelns skilda delar egentligen bara består av en vågrörelse i själva etermediet kommer vågrörelsen då att ändra form så att den främre halvan fortsätter att expandera med samma fart som etern, medan den bakre, beroende på den inducerade accelerationen expanderar mer eller mindre hastigt bakåt. Man kan säga att partikelns expansionscentrum, dvs. den punkt i etern som centrum för den stående vågen normalt sammanfaller med i en stillaliggande partikel, förskjuts framåt av accelerationen.
Om partikelns resulterande hastighet är lika stor som den hastighet mediet expanderar med kommer den främre halvan av partikeln därför att röra sig lika fort i färdriktningen som etern expanderar, och därmed ligga still relativt etern. Den bakre halvan av partikelns stående våg kommer emellertid att förflytta sig framåt i färdriktningen med ljusets hastighet relativt etern. Den kommer därför ikapp den främre halvan och resultatet blir att partikeln ”plattas ihop” i färdriktningen precis som förutsäges av relativitetsteorin.
Hela den här förflyttningen sker under själva eterns korta oscillationscykel. Det oscillerande ögonblick som i kvantetermodellen är den enda tid som existerar.
När klockan ligger stilla relativt etern är det ögonblick som urtavlan och som visaren hinner uppleva lika långt som för universum i övrigt.
Om klockan rör på sig relativt etern kommer det emellertid att gå allt trögare för visaren att komma runt urtavlan. Det beror på att de ögonblick som atomerna i klockan upplever kommer att ha kortare varaktighet. Visaren hinner därför inte lika långt varje ögonblick. Som jag beskrivit här ovan beror detta på att partiklarnas stående våg inte kan röra sig fortare än etermediet rör sig under expansionsfasen. Dvs. med ljusets hastighet. Vidare finns det redan från början en skillnad i hastighet mellan protonen och elektronen på grund av att den senare rör sig runt protonen. Det innebär att den kommer att närma sig ljushastigheten tidigare än protonen och därmed också att börja bromsas upp tidigare än protonen. När atomens hastighet ökats till strax under ljusets hastighet kommer därför skillnaden i hastighet mellan protonen och elektronen slutligen att vara nästan helt obefintlig.
Trots att varaktigheten av eterns oscillerande ögonblick är oförändrad kommer alltså varaktigheten av det ögonblick som atomen upplever nästan att ha krympt till noll. ”Tiden” står stilla.
Under varje etervibration som försiggår medan kraften verkar kommer den elastiska sammantryckningen av etern vid sidan av partikeln att fortplanta sig åt det håll kraften är riktad mot. Eftersom det här trycket endast är riktat åt ett håll kommer den resulterande vågen att fortplantas med samma hastighet som etern expanderar under sin oscillation. Den etervolym som berörs av sammantryckningen kommer att vibrera elastiskt på ungefär samma sätt som en partikel, men eftersom den blivit accelererad under hela eterns vibrationscykel blir dess svängningsperiod dubbelt så lång som den som etern och partikeln har.
Under varannan expansionsfas kommer därför trycket i den att vara större än den omgivande etern, och under varannan lägre.
Man får på det viset ett helt tåg av vibrationer innehållande små paket av eter som förflyttar sig synkront med universums rytmiska volymförändringar, och som alternerar mellan högre och lägre tryck än omgivningen.
Det var dom här paketen Max Planck upptäckte, och som Einstein senare använde för att utreda den fotoelektriska effekten, och till att inleda den utveckling som ledde fram till kvantfysiken.
För 111 år sedan, år 1887 var emellertid Michelson & Morely igång med att försöka använda dom här paketen till att fastställa hur det förhöll sig med jordens hastighet genom eterhavet. Man använde ett instrument som Michelson konstruerat, en så kallad Michelson interferometer.
Det här instrumentet var avsett att mäta skillnader i våglängd mellan ljuspulser som färdats lika långa sträckor via banor som placerats i rät vinkel i förhållande till varandra i interferometern. Ljuspulserna som kommer från en gemensam källa sammanlänkas i själva mätpunkten på ett sådant sätt att även mycket små skillnader i våglängd ger upphov till ett interferensmönster.
Storleken av den eventuella skillnaden i våglängd antogs bero på jordens hastighet genom etern och på mätanordningens riktning i förhållande till jordens bana. Därför var apparaten konstruerad så att man skulle kunna vrida på den. Interferensmönstret borde om antagandena om en stillaliggande eter var riktiga, förskjutas åt något håll och vara som störst när den ena banan pekade i rörelseriktningen och den andra var riktad i sidled.
Resultatet av det här experimentet blev i slutändan det mest berömda misslyckandet i fysikens historia, för något interferensmönster uppenbarade sig aldrig, trots nya försök med än mer förfinad utrustning.
Den enda vettiga förklaring man kunde komma på levererades av Lorentz & Fitzgerald och gick i princip ut på att föremål som rör sig genom etern förkortas i rörelseriktningen. På den tiden tyckte man ännu att bevisen för att ljuset var en vågrörelse i en eter var så övertygande att man inte ville bortse från dem. Därför försökte man fortfarande komma underfund med varför Michelson misslyckades. Genom att anta att etern påverkade längden av banorna kunde man alltså komma fram till ett slags förklaring.
Nu inträder Einstein på arenan. Han konstaterar helt sonika att ljusets natur är att alltid röra sig med ljushastigheten relativt en observatör oavsett dennes eget rörelsetillstånd. Det har han ju rätt i, även om den iakttagelsen knappast ger något besked om själva orsaken till att ljuset har denna natur. Vad han emellertid till skillnad från andra inser, är att detta har vissa konsekvenser som är mycket intressanta.
Så intressanta, faktiskt, att frågan om orsaken till att ljuset har denna natur läggs på hyllan tills vidare. Med ledning av dessa konsekvenser utvecklar han i stället den Speciella Relativitetsteorin, där han visar hur den konstanta ljushastigheten vänder upp och ned på vedertagna idéer om samtidighet och tidskeenden i icke accelererade koordinatsystem.
Tio år senare, 1915 presenterar han den Generella Relativitetsteorin som kopplar samman rum och tid i accelererade koordinatsystem.
Åttiotre år senare har vi fortfarande inte lyckats reda ut frågan om orsaken till ljusets natur.
Kan det vara så att detta till viss del beror på att vi, som Einstein tyckte vi kunde, har klarat oss utan etern?
Bevisen för att det finns något i tomrummet som inte har redovisats ordentligt är många fler idag än dom var vid tiden för sekelskiftet. Detta framgår bland annat av den artikel om ”Det inte så tomma rummet” i Nr 1 av Forskning och Framsteg 1997, som jag refererade till tidigare, men också av i stort sett alla artiklar och böcker i ämnet som publiceras nu för tiden.
Är det inte dags att ta reda på om Einstein möjligen hade fel?
Det kanske finns en eter i alla fall.
Fjärås 980804
Bo Nyberg

If you arrived here looking for information about time and space you have come to the right place. Suggesting a possible mechanism by wich time may "tick" is what this site is all about.
The theories of relativity do little to explain what is going on behind the curtains. In some sense they actually are the curtains. Not because they are wrong, but because they are right.
The aim of the ideas here presented is to lift the curtains a little to let you have a peek at what might be hidden behind. Don't worry about the lack of mathematical formalism. It is not needed at this stage and when that day arrives I am sure proper scientists will take care of that.
I am no scientist. Just an old sailor who by navigating the idea of discontinuous time found some unexpected answers witch I hereby will do my best to present and explain.
That an increase of speed slows down time was Einsteins news a little over one hundred years ago.
The mechanism involved that cause this effect is my news today and the subject of this site.
"The Dynamic Present" is written for this homepage while "Tid och Eter" is from 1998 (In Swedish), "Quantum Aether" from 2000 and "Discontinuous Time from 2006. Between them they should hopefully cover most of what I've found out about time and space.
Just let common sense and imagination be the judge when you evaluate what you are about to learn, and please realize that without the mathematical dress, these ideas are just....ideas...
I hope you still will find that your curiosity was worth wile.
Should it so happen that you are able to verify any of the mathematics hiding behind the ideas presented or want to criticize them you are welcome to post a comment in the blog.

April 13th 2013:
This site has now been up and running for more then a year without attracting any attention.
It is admittedly rather unprofessional, but does in spite of that claim to present a more or less complete account of how our universe works. Not only time, but the rest as well, actually showing how gravitation, inertia, the quantum of action - in short - the lot - may originate from proposed elastic properties of the fabric of our universe.
These speculations are presented without any mathematical evidence because the emerging picture is simple enough to visualize and evaluate in order to allow for that.

A week ago I stumbled over a site, [[thisistime|http://www.thisistime.co.uk]], where the owner, Simon Morley, express views about time that coincides with mine. Amongst other ideas he also suggest that time may not exist at all. His arguments are different from mine and tackles the problem of time from a viewing angle that might present a better start-point for the explanations that so far does not seem to catch on with my visitors. Perhaps a new tiddler from that angle will do the trick.
I suggest however that you first head over to [[thisistime|http://www.thisistime.co.uk]] to see what Simon Morley has to say. After digesting that, try [[The Change Stream]] where I seek to show how Simon's ideas of change may fit into the picture.

Thanks for visiting
and welcome back!
Bo Nyberg