Special Relativity breaks down in matter?

Mr.GaGa
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Special Relativity breaks down in matter?

The same idea was proposed by several authors( Ravndal arXiv:0810.1872v1, Crenshaw arXiv:0812.3348v2 , Wang arXiv:0909.1856v2, et al ) to study Abraham-Minkowski controversy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham–Minkowski_controversy). They pointed out light speed c of special relativity should be replaced by c/n (n is refractive index) within a medium. That is, the theory of relativity is not universal and extended theory will reduce to the old one in case of n=1(vacuum). See Wiki, an experimental report "Crucial experiment to resolve Abraham-Minkowski controversy" published by Optik just now supports their argument.

Are they reasonable? If wrong, how to explain "Abraham-Minkowski Controversy"?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


atyy said:

Thanks.But this is a review and not to introduce any new idea. Above three papers are important although they were not collected by arxiv0710.0461. For example, the speed of a neutrino is unnecessary to be c which is useful to understand the newest report of CERN (arXiv:1109.4897v1). The neutrino has a zero rest mass and two components provided the speed is a constant,no matter it is subluminal,c or superluminal. The apparent non-zero rest mass(or imaginary) given by other experiments should originate from the difference between the constant and c.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top