Authors: Ramzi Suleiman
Einstein's theory of special relativity (SR) theory dictates, as a force majeure, an ontic view, according to which relativity is a true state of nature. For example, the theory’s solution to the famous twin paradox prescribes the "traveling" twin returns truly and verifiably younger than the "staying" twin, thereby implying the “traveling” twin returns to the future. I propose an epistemic view of relativity, according to which relativity results from difference in Information about Nature between observers who are in motion relative to each other. The proposed theory, termed Information Relativity (IR) theory is based on two axioms: 1. the laws of physics are the same in all inertial frames of reference (SR's first axiom); 2. All translations of information from one frame of reference to another are carried by light or by another carrier with equal velocity (information-carrier axiom). For the case of constant relative velocities, I derive the theory's time and distance transformations and compare them with the corresponding SR's transformations. I show that despite IR's contradiction with Lorentz's Invariance Principle, it accounts as good as SR for the results of a class of time measurement experiments, including Michelson-Morley's type of experiments as well as the time dilation detected in muon decay and in "around-the-world atomic clocks" experiments. More important, the theory accounts for the linear Sagnac effect, which starkly disobeys LI and SR. It also predicts with precision the (v-c)⁄c values reported in several neutrino velocity experiments, conducted by OPERA and other collaborations. I outline the necessary conditions for a stringent comparative test between IR and SR, and explain why the experimental designs of the linear Sagnac and the neutrino velocity experiments qualify as stringent tests of both theories.
Comments: 22 Pages.
Unique-IP document downloads: 345 times
Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.