Download Welcome [www.worldsci.org]

A Brief Self-Introduction
Thanks go to Mr. Volk, Mr. Harrison,
Mr. Acheson and all other organizers
• Name: Guangjun (广军) Cao (曹)
• Employer：Georgian College，Ontario，
Canada
• Date and place of birth： June 15，
1966 in China’s Henan Province
• Citizenship: Canadian
• Interest: Mathematics, physics,
religion, and philosophy
A New Non-locality Feature
and Some of Its Physical
Implications
• Background information
• Theoretical assumptions
• Experimental evidences
• Major conclusions
• Physical & philosophical
implications
• Further discussions
• The question of scientific attitude
Background Information
light speed (constancy); principle
of relativity; non-locality; ECI;
SSBCI or SCI.
• Light speed (constancy)
(1) c=1/√(ε0*μ0); ε0 permittivity and
μ0 permeability of the vacuum; and
c=299792.458 m/s.
(2) As a medium property; its
independence of source motion yet
dependence on observer motion.
Background Information
• Light speed (constancy) (cont’d)
Equation of light propagation; 1D idealized situation:
|𝑅𝑟 (𝑡𝑟 )-𝑅𝑠 (𝑡𝑠 )|=c|𝑡𝑟 -𝑡𝑠 |; 𝑡𝑠 ,𝑡𝑟 signal
emitting and observing times, 𝑅𝑠 ,𝑅𝑟
source and observer positions.
(4) A direct consequence of (3): A
measured light speed of c±v
relative to observer.
(5) Dynamic simulations: Cases 1
(alternative 1), 2 (alternative 2).
(3)
Background Information
• The principle of relativity
Formulation: Uniform motion is
not detectable if (a) the inertial
frame in concern is a means of
transportation and (b) if the
experiment used is strictly confined
within this frame.
(2) Examples
Example 1: Radio signals sent
between two planets in the solar
system do not reveal this system’s
motion relative to the Milky Way.
(1)
Background Information
• The principle of relativity (cont’d)
Example 2: Radio signals sent
between an Earth-born antenna and an
Earth-born receiver do not reveal
the Earth’s motion relative to the
Sun.
(3) Other equivalent formulations:
Motion is purely relative; the laws
of nature are the same in all
inertial frames of reference; there
is no preferred inertial frames, etc.
Background Information
• Non-locality
Definition: An interaction or
influence that goes beyond a local
space-time region; existence of
superluminal influence.
(2) Examples: (a) quantum
correlations of entangled particles;
(b) interference patterns in a
double-slit experiment; (c) the way
how objects are physically connected.
(3) Comment: Non-locality directly
contradicts special relativity.
(1)
Background Information
• ECI: Earth centered inertial; the
revolving (around the Sun) but not
rotating (around its own axis)
Earth; associated with GPS range
measurement equation (GPS-RME)
• SSBCI: Solar system barycenter
inertial; occasionally approximated
by the Sun centered inertial
(SCI);associated with the
Interplanetary range measurement
equation (IP-RME)
Theoretical Assumptions
• If each of the GPS-RME and IP-RME
can be true, then they can be true
at the same time
A non-trivial assumption; an example
• Absolute simultaneity
An implicit assumption, also a
disproof of relativity simultaneity.
• Newton’s law of gravity, plus
potential second & higher order
revisions
Basis for fundamental ephemerides of
Sun, Moon, and all planets.
Experimental Evidences
• GPS range measurement equation
(GPS-RME), simpl. & ref. to ECI:
|𝑅𝑟 (𝑡𝑟 ) -𝑅𝑠 (𝑡𝑠 )|=c|𝑡𝑟 -𝑡𝑠 |
(1)
• Interplanetary range measurement
equation (IP-RME), simpl. & ref. to
SSBCI, or approximately to SCI:
u=|𝑅𝐵 (𝑡𝑟 -d)-𝑅𝐴 (𝑡𝑟 -d-u)|/c
(2a)
d=|𝑅𝐴 (𝑡𝑟 )-𝑅𝐵 (𝑡𝑟 -d)|/c
(2b)
• Sagnac effect in the GPS (GPS-SE)
Non-detectable orbital motion but
detectable self-rotational motion
Experimental Evidences
• Comment 1:
The GPS-RME explains the null result
of the MMX within first order
accuracy (referred to Sagnac effect).
• Comment 2:
The IP-RME explains the astronomical
phenomenon of stellar aberration.
• Comment 3:
GPS-SE and traditional SEs are
believed to be of the same origin
and nature.
Major Conclusions
• GPS-RME & IP-RME  non-locality
or equivalently
• light speed’s independence of
source motion & principle of
relativity in its modified form 
non-locality
Simulation 1 (alternative 1)
• If GPS-RME represents a physical
law, then GPS-RME & GPS-SE  nonlocality
Simulation 2 (alternative 2)
Physical Implications
Principle of relativity; apparent
conflict between stellar aberration
and MMX; the origin of Moon; ether.
• The principle of relativity
(a) The need of revising the concept
of inertial frame to properly
formulate it ([Cao11]);
(b) The need of introducing the
concept of physical connection to
understand it ([Cao11]).
Physical Implications
• The apparent conflict between
stellar aberration and the null
result of MMX
According to earlier Comment 2, IPRME explains stellar aberration,
while according to Comment 1, GPSRME explains the null result of MMX,
thus non-locality explains both
phenomena at the same time.
Physical Implications
• The origin of Moon (theories)
Pure fission; capture; giant impact.
Key observations: (a) If Earth and
moon formed separately and then came
together into their common orbit
around the Sun, then this orbital
information is discernible through
radio signals sent between them; and
(b) if Earth and Moon formed
together as a physically connected
whole in their common orbit around
Physical Implications
• The origin of Moon (cont’d)
the Sun and then somehow separated
(fission, impact, etc.), then this
orbital information is not
discernible through radio signals
sent between them. So from the nonlocality perspective, the capture
theory is clearly favored.
• Ether
If the argument in this presentation
is sound, then ether is nothing less
and nothing more than vacuum itself.
Philosophical Implications
• Matter works on matter, but not
directly on space (vacuum); however,
the interaction between material
objects could be preserved as
information as a result of this
interaction
• The world in its profound nature is
informational as well as material
Example 1: All planets within the
solar system carry the same orbital
information around the Milky Way as
Philosophical Implications
(Example 1 cont’d) the Sun, and
that’s why radio signals sent
between any two of them could not
reveal this orbital information.
Example 2: All Earth-originated,
Earth-orbiting artificial satellites
carry the same orbital information
as the Earth, and that’s why radio
signals sent between any two of them
could not reveal this orbital motion
around the Sun.
Philosophical Implications
Example 3: When antenna A sits on
Earth and spaceship S on the Moon,
radio signals sent between them do
reveal their common orbital motion
around the Sun; but when spaceship S
departs from the Moon and comes to
and descends on Earth, radio signals
between A and S can no longer reveal
this orbital motion, since now both
and A and S carry the same orbital
information of the Earth.
Further Discussions
• What happens if the GPS-RME and IPRME cannot be simultaneously true
in the sense defined in this paper?
Not a problem, if we allow two
adjacent groups of scientists to
successfully test GPS-RME and IP-RME,
separately and along roughly the
same direction.
• Could the experimenter(s) have a
role in choosing which one of the
ECI and SSBCI ranging equations
come into play?
Further Discussions
In Reference [26] it implicitly
assumes that the IP-RME applies to
an Earth-born antenna and an Earthoriginated but Moon- or planetmissioned spaceship; however,
according to this paper, either this
assumption is wrong or it is true
but the experimenter has a role in
setting which one of the ranging
equations into effect. Note that
non-locality is still true in the
latter case but the role of the
experimenter has to be summoned.
Further Discussions
• Could the idea of ether explain the
ranging data mentioned in this
paper?
This author believes not; challenges
include:
(1) What evidence unequivocally
supports an ether that is more than
just vacuum?
Note: The classical idea of inertia
or the modern idea of non-locality
successfully explains all current
light speed data.
Further Discussions
If ether is assumed to remain
stationary relative to a local
gravitational field or an inertial
frame that is associated with such a
field, then why do radio signals
sent between the Earth and Moon
reveal instead their common orbital
motion around the Sun? See here for
what Moon-Earth ranging data say.
(3) How does the idea of ether
explains the (envisioned) fact that
the Moon and an Earth-originated,
(2)
Further Discussions
Earth-orbiting satellite of roughly
the same height show fundamentally
different quantum properties?
(4) Assume that the GPS-SE had never
been known to you, would you still
predict that the ether is carried by
the Earth’s orbital motion but not
by self-rotation?
(5) How does the idea of ether
explain the simultaneous
truthfulness of both the GPS-RME and
IP-RME?
Scientific Attitude
• Dedicate to truth itself, not to
dogma or self-interest or anything
else
If we serve the wrong “guy”, we are
almost certain to end up with the
wrong destinies.
• Be open and objective-minded enough
to be able to evaluate both the
pros and cons of anything
If we allow prejudice and/or
stubbornness dominate us, we are
sure to miss many subtle truths.
Scientific Attitude
• Be courageous and forthright enough
to admit making a mistake and to
correct it.
If we are not willing, and able, to
challenge ourselves by admitting and
correcting a mistake, then there is
no effective way to make sure that
we are on the right track.
• Whenever possible, see things as
they actually are, not as what we
believe them to be
Facts are the life of science.
Scientific Attitude
• When we criticize others, have we
upheld the same academic and moral
standards as have been demanded of
those being criticized?
And lastly
• When I derive the conclusions in
this paper, I followed all the
above guidelines; so if you want to
challenge me, would you do the same
please?
Reference: [Cao11] Guangjun Cao,
Physics Essays 24, pp. 381-394 (2011)