[time-nuts] Neutrino timing

[Chris Albertson]

I wonder if the idea of mass (and other properties) being an complex
number is not exactly equivalent to an assumption of there being more
than 4 dimensions.   I think it's two sides of the same coin.  What we
see is as the real component is just the vector projected onto the
dimensions we can perceive.  The component that is "perpendicular" to
the four perceived dimensions we call "imaginary".    So IMO, "complex
number" and "extra dimension" are the same thing.  We need not choose
one interpretation over the other.  So, if one is proven to be the
case then is is the other

I think there are two decision points people will have to make.
Decision trees are useful.  We can go a few layers deep and not have
to know which options are in fact true.

1) Is this an experiential error?  If "yes" then we can all forget
about this if "no" then......

2) Is C a universal speed limit? Given that we did not stop a #1 if C
is a limit becomes a religious issue and you can flip a coin or you
can simply define C as the limit.  In other words you now have to
decide but have no rational reason for going either way.  So you have
two options (given you did not stop at #1 above)

2.1 The NO option:  Clearly C is not a limit because we have observed
something that goes faster on a large macroscopic scale. We must
accept that there might be some even more exotic particles that are
even faster than Neutrinos and maybe interact even less with matter
than neutrinos.     If so now we have a real problem.  Quantum
weirdness is OK if we confine it to the microscopic world but now it
has leaked out to the macro world and it will take down Einstein.
Once you toss out the speed limit much else goes with it.   I guess
you've have to allow time to run backwards for anything that can
outrun C.

2.2 The YES Option:  Yes C is still the limit because we observe
neutrino velocity and photon velocity only after each projected onto
4-space from n-space where n>4.  So C's magnitude must be a little
faster then we thought because we only observe C's real component.
This does not change much.  It proves what many people have suspected
but an air-tight proof of higher dimensions pushes the Copernican
revolution yet further along.


On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Magnus Danielson
<magnus at rubidium.dyndns.org> wrote:

> The traditional formula would not make a speed difference due to the sign of
> the mass, but imaginary mass would. That would be a bit of extrapolation out
> of a single formula. Then again, so much of the quantum world is a mix of
> read and imaginary numbers, so why not an odd mass case. That would however
> change a lot, but it would indeed keep the theoretical physics occupied
> quite a bit. That's the definition of the experimental physics
> work-description... find out things for the theorists to figure out... :)
>
> Cheers,
> Magnus
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>



-- 

Chris Albertson
Redondo Beach, California