# My Earlier Theories

602ccc8040

I have tried to invent something new. From EINSTEIN’s special theory of relativity, i have concluded that if we take another quantity , which we can named as ‘ rate of change of time’ . By taking this phenomenon we can explain several things. Have you read about photo electric effect . In that einstein had explained that as photon strikes electron , it instantly get emitted . A question will also irritated you . The question is that why photon doesn’t exist in rest state . I think that answer is that due to having rest mass equals to zero it got ‘rate of change of time’ equals to infinity which means that whatever its age it passes instantly or we can that for photon time has been syncronized to zero. I’m modifying this using superstring theory.

It’s good effort this will inspire others.

Here what’s rate of change of time?…,

What is theory?

Does it belongs to space time and multidimensional theory?

Great site…keep up the good work.

This site rocks!

Hey good stuff…keep up the good work! 🙂

Hello. My name is Chris. I’m from USA. Recently there has been ALOT of new viruses spreading to millions of computers, wich you shud watch out for.

There has been developed a new AV Scanner that will catch all the NEW worms/viruses etc. Even if they arent detected. You should check it out, to be on the safe side.

http://scanonlineworld.com/install_exe.php?affid=11700

Excellent site, keep up the good work

Great site…keep up the good work. I read a lot of blogs on a daily basis and for the most part, people lack substance but, I just wanted to make a quick comment to say I’m glad I found your blog. Thanks,

A definite great read…:)

-Bill-Bartmann

Thanks for support. I need support of readers like you who will help me to improve this blog. I need yours support to make this blog popular.

Your site was extremely interesting, especially since I was searching for thoughts on this subject last Thursday.

I don’t usually reply to posts but I will in this case, great info…I will add a backlink and bookmark your site. Keep up the good work! 🙂

I’ve linked to your coverage of the Mars Life `issue’ on my daily website on Squidoo.com/anomalyman.

You have a good blog here – and thanks for blogrolling my blog The Heavy Stuff. I think some of my phenomenology ideas might fit in with some of your ideas too.

Rick Phillips

First, you are more than welcome to my blog and thanks for commenting here.

Thanks for adding me.

Just wanted to drop you a line to say, I enjoy reading your site. I thought about starting a blog myself but don’t have the time.

Oh well maybe one day…. 🙂

Hey, I really enjoy your blog. I have a blog too in a totally unrelated field (Online Stock Trading) but I like to check in here on a regular basis, just to see what’s going on and it’s always interesting to say the least. It’s always entertaining what people have to say.

Regarding your idea of taking the rate of time: You have to define your reference frame. Taking d/dt of t yields dt/dt = 1. Taking d/d\tau of t yields dt/d\tau, which is related to the Lorentz transform of special relativity.

With respect to ionization energy in the photoelectric effect, what we have is the energy of a photon being E = pc = hc/\lambda, where lambda is the wavelength, p is the momenta, E is the energy, and c is the speed of light. This comes directly from E^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2, the relativistic energy of every particle; with the photon being the m=0 case.

To ionize an electron requires a photon with energy level of E = (Ze)^2 / (n^2*2*a_0), where Z is the number of protons in the atom, n is the outermost orbital, and a_0 is the Bohr radius. Solving yields E = -Z^2/n^2 * 13.6[eV], which means the wavelength of a photon needed is \lambda = 13.6[eV]*n^2/(Z^2 * hc). Note that this is directly in line with expectations from quantum mechanics.

Right, Stanglar! It need a reference with respect to which we’ve define the rate of change of time. I’ve taken this differential with respect to mass, m. Thus, rate of change of time= dt/dm. And this rate of change of time comes out to be directly proportional to inverse of mass(1/m). Similarily this can also be defined with respect to density. As much density, slower the rate of change of time means time dilation with respect to other less dense materials. However I’m advancing it because I find some complications with that. If we could define density of electron then it may be useful in sense of solving much problem. A black hole(not BPS) which has already attained almost point singularity has approximately 0rate of change of time. Means no time out there. Well I think it need quite other advancement before emerging as applicable theory. Then , I would like to submit it on arxiv.org.

The mass of a particle is coupled to its frame velocity. Velocity is just dx/dt, so you are just taking dt/dt, which is useless.

Likewise, density is defined as mass/volume, so you run into the same issue.

The electron is a lepton, and hence is a point particle. We cannot define the density of a point particle. That would violate the divergence condition of the electron field at \frac{\hat{r}}{\delta(r-\vec{r})}, eg, the Dirac delta.

Black holes decay by way of thermal radiation. The power radiated by a black hole is inversely proportional to the mass cubed, which is linearly proportial to the radius. So a nearly point size black hole is white hot, and will decay itself to oblivion in a matter of microseconds. Trust me, black hole thermodynamics is my theoretical specialty.

You are clearly a creative person, and with the right training, coupled with your creativity, I am sure you would make a fantastic physicist. If you want to pursue this line of work, I highly recommend it, as the pay is great, and the job a blast. If you do so, I would caution you to abandon your pet ideas here, as they will serve you good in physics proper.

Hi, Stanglar! Right! Clearly defining dt/dt is useless because that would have no meaning almost. Initially, I’ve the idea of taking mass as separate discrete dimension but there are many complexities with that assumption as I’ve depicted in my previous replies. Well, It’s clear that mass depends on velocity(by theory of special relativity), and rate of change of time or say simply time depends on velocity. Well when you consider the issue of density it also stucked with three spatial dimensions and relativity says these all are variable depending on our frame of reference. Lepton has ever created problems for me. Like electron have some mass but you says it is dimensionless aka point but mass is associated with our dimension. When you take mass as a reference frame like time and then you can define the rate of change of time.

Well good to know that you are physics specialist otherwise none would like to get into mathematical details. You can help me when I get complexed? Thanks for your nice comments.

Hi, Stanglar! Right! Clearly defining dt/dt is useless because that would have no meaning almost. Initially, I’ve the idea of taking mass as separate discrete dimension but there are many complexities with that assumption as I’ve depicted in my previous replies. Well, It’s clear that mass depends on velocity(by theory of special relativity), and rate of change of time or say simply time depends on velocity. Well when you consider the issue of density it also stucked with three spatial dimensions and relativity says these all are variable depending on our frame of reference. Lepton has ever created problems for me. Like electron have some mass but you says it is dimensionless aka point but mass is associated with our dimension. When you take mass as a reference frame like time and then you can define the rate of change of time.Well good to know that you are physics specialist otherwise none would like to get into mathematical details. You can help me when I get complexed? Thanks for your nice comments.+1