What should I do with my spacetime model?

AI Thread Summary
A user has developed a new model of spacetime that extends the principle of relativity, resulting in unique coordinate transformations that maintain the speed of light across all frames, differing from the Lorentz transformation. The model yields energy and momentum equations that align with classical mechanics at low speeds, confirms the rest energy as mc^2, and accurately describes photon momentum. The user is uncertain about publishing this work due to concerns about being perceived as a crank. Responses indicate skepticism regarding the validity of the model, suggesting it may not contribute anything new to existing physics theories. Additionally, the forum guidelines discourage discussions on personal theories without prior publication, emphasizing that the user should consider formal publication if they wish for their work to be taken seriously. The thread has been locked for moderation.
Ahmed1029
Messages
109
Reaction score
40
I created a model of spacetime based on an extension I added to the principle of relativity. I then derived the coordinate transformations which preserve the speed of light in all frames, which are different from the Lorentz transformation. I worked out the formulae for energy and momentum, and what's strange is that they become classical mechanics at low speeds, predict that the rest energy of a body is mc^2 just like relativity, and the momentum of the photon turns out to be correct, out of totally different eauations. Should I publish it at this point, or will I be thought of as a crank? What should I do now?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For homogeneous and isotropic space and time, there are only three possibilities: Newtonian space and time , Minkowski spacetime, or a Euclidean spacetime. See the link below. I'm sceptical you have found anything additionally valid.

http://www2.physics.umd.edu/~yakovenk/teaching/Lorentz.pdf
 
  • Like
Likes topsquark, berkeman and Ahmed1029
I didn't include any assumptions about the nature of space in my formation, just that newly hypothesised premise and worked out the rest. What do you suggest I do to make sure that it's not just some fool's babble? I was ready to get rid of it in case it gave me wrong answers about fundemental values, but up till now the momentum of the photon and the rest energy are okay.
 
The model however makes time necessraily the same in all frames, yet length behaves in some weird fashion that depends on direction. This is all weird but the formulae turn out to be true in the regimes I'm familiar with.
 
Ahmed1029 said:
The model however makes time necessraily the same in all frames, yet length behaves in some weird fashion that depends on direction.
If your mathematics is valid, the you might have a mathematical curiosity.
 
  • Like
Likes topsquark
PeroK said:
If your mathematics is valid, the you might have a mathematical curiosity.
The math is actually too simple to be wrong
 
Thread locked for Moderation...
 
  • Like
Likes topsquark
Ahmed1029 said:
I created a model of spacetime based on an extension I added to the principle of relativity. I then derived the coordinate transformations which preserve the speed of light in all frames, which are different from the Lorentz transformation. I worked out the formulae for energy and momentum, and what's strange is that they become classical mechanics at low speeds, predict that the rest energy of a body is mc^2 just like relativity, and the momentum of the photon turns out to be correct, out of totally different eauations. Should I publish it at this point, or will I be thought of as a crank? What should I do now?
This is not something we at PF can help with. PF is not for discussion of personal theories or personal research. If you want your model to be discussed here at PF, you need to get it published first. I do not think that will happen because, just from your description, it sounds like your model is not even wrong. But ultimately the decision of whether to try to get it published or not is up to you.

As for the question of whether you will be thought of as a crank, I think so after reading your description, because, as above, it sounds like your model is not even wrong. I suspect a lot of other people will agree.

Thread will remain closed.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes topsquark, russ_watters and Bystander
Back
Top