Enter the content which will be displayed in sticky bar
Witold Nawrot
local time: 2024-04-24 04:20 (+01:00 )
Witold Nawrot (Abstracts)
Titles Abstracts Details
  • Explanation of twin paradox according to the Euclidean Reality model (2013) [Updated 7 years ago]
    by Witold Nawrot   read the paper:

    The Four dimensional Euclidean Reality model clearly explains why during the uniform, rectilinear motion, the time dilation effect is symmetrical for both twins, and why and when the time dilation is eventually measured in a system of one of the travelling twin.

  • New philosophy of Aether in Euclidean Reality model and interpretation of indications of Sagnac and MM interferometers. (2013) [Updated 7 years ago]
    by Witold Nawrot   read the paper:

    According to the new model of Four dimensional Euclidean Reality, motion of bodies in relation to Aether and relative motion of bodies are two separate phenomena, therefore there is no necessity for introducing the idea of “entrained Aether”. According to this model, the MM and Sagnac interferometers are not able to detect any motion in relation to Aether, however the rule of propagation of light, introduced by the new model, explains the difference between indications of these two interferometers.

  • Conclusions from the Model of Euclidean Reality (2012) [Updated 7 years ago]
    by Witold Nawrot   read the paper:

    The new model of Euclidean Reality changes the picture of the true reality. The velocity is not a physical value but only an observed value. The time of travel is not a function of the velocity but it becomes a function of the trajectory. It is possible to accelerate the particle to the velocity interpreted as the velocity of light and it is probably possible to pass a certain distance in time shorter than the light. The recession of galaxies is the consequence of the manner of performing observation and not the real acceleration of galaxies. The Lorentz transformation is mathematically correct but it is non-physical. The separation of the idea of motion of bodies in relation to the reality from the idea of relative motion of bodies allows us to come back to the concept of Ether and to describe particles as waves. These and many other conclusions simplify the classical and Quantum mechanics and open many new ways of developing physics.

  • Proof that Earth Does Not Revolve around the Sun: and Consequences for Special Relativity Theory (2012) [Updated 6 years ago]
    by Witold Nawrot   read the paper:

    In 1971, Hafele and Keating performed the experiment in which they proved the time dilation effect with a help of macroscopic clocks. By consistently applying their reasoning we come to the absurd conclusion that the Earth is not rotating around the Sun. Such a paradox is the result of the fact that Hafele and Keating performed their reasoning with the help of SRT, while the correct solution of this problem is possible only on base of GRT. In fact, Hafele and Keating proved GRT while their intention was proving SRT. If we take a closer look at other experiments confirming SRT we can see that all the experiments are the repetition of the mistake made by Hafele and Keating; however only their experiment allows for deriving such a spectacular conclusion. Therefore, one could question if is it possible to perform any experiments proving Special Relativity Theory at all.

  • Is Reality Euclidean? (2012) [Updated 1 decade ago]
    by Witold Nawrot   read the paper:

    The fact that the reality is observed by us as the Lorentzian space time does not mean that the true reality must be Lorentzian, just as the fact that the complicated routes of heavenly bodies we observe on the firmament does not mean that the heavenly bodies really are performing such complicated motions. In this paper I present the model of reality where the true reality is four dimensional and Euclidean but we can observe it as the four dimensional Lorentzian space time. Description of physical phenomena is much simpler in the Euclidean model than in the Lorentzian one, while the process of observation becomes slightly more complicated.

  • Is the Lorentz Transformation a Physically Correct Solution of the Spacetime Interval Equation? (2009) [Updated 7 years ago]

    In Special Relativity Theory (SRT), equations are written in a form that conserves the value of the space-time interval in the transition from one observer?s system to another. The Lorentz Transformation (LT) is a generally known solution of the space-time interval equation such that the equations of SRT are invariant in relation to this transformation. According to the Four-dimensional Euclidean Reality (FER) model, there is an-other solution of this equation, and this solution allows one to draw some conclusions other than the conclusions obtained on the grounds of the LT. Derivation of the LT according to the FER model is still possible, but the derivation can be performed only at the cost of breaking certain physical laws. Therefore, although the Lorentz Transformation is mathematically correct, it is not correct from the physical point of view.

  • The Recession of Galaxies (2009) [Updated 1 decade ago]

    Recent papers show that ?space-time' can be described with the ?Four-dimensional Euclidean Reality' (FER), in which all dimensions have identical properties. According to the new model, the dimensions of time and space that we are able to observe are not the dimensions that create the reality. They are only certain di-rections in FER, which are interpreted by us as the dimensions of time and space. The directions so interpreted by us depend on the choice of an observed body and an observer; that is to say, the directions are different for every such pair: observer and observed body. According to the new model of reality, observers that move in FER along trajectories having a common origin ? as takes place in case of the galaxies ? observe other bodies/observers as moving with recessional velocity proportional to the distance from the observer. The observed velocity proportional to the distance is thus the result of the observation only, and has nothing to do with any cosmic acceleration.

  • Euclidean Model of the Spacetime: Is the Reality Exactly as We Can Observe It? (2009) [Updated 1 decade ago]
    by Witold Nawrot   read the paper:

    The new model of Four dimensional Euclidean Reality (FER), which recently, more and more often, appears in publications, can significantly change the manner in which we interpret the reality surrounding us. According to the approach presented here, the reality we are able to observe differs from the ?true? reality. Living, in fact, in the Four dimensional Euclidean Reality, we get an impression that we are living in the four dimensional Lorentzian Reality. The impression is a consequence of the seemingly obvious assumption that the space and time distances that we are able to observe are the actual dimensions creating the reality. However, an assumption saying that the distances we measure during the observation of surrounding objects are describing the true dimension of the reality can be similar to the assumption, accepted through centuries, saying that the motions of heavenly bodies, observed by us on the firmament from the Earth, are the motions that the bodies are actually performing. Perhaps it is just the improper model of the reality that is the source of all the troubles, misunderstandings and complications of the models based on the Relativity Theory, which, although correctly describing a wide class of phenomena, did not lead to solutions which at the beginning of the XX-th century seemed to be just a step away, e.g. unification of the electromagnetic and gravitational interactions.

    It should be noted that a few hundred years ago, the geocentric theory, though complicated, was describing motions of heavenly bodies in a more accurate way than the later heliocentric theory; however, the progress of science and, for instance, planning cosmic travels, would not be possible with the geocentric model.

    The new, Euclidean model of reality allows us to answer the questions asked already in my other paper concerning SRT: is the slowing of time, in a frame of body in motion, actual slowing or it is only a result of mutual observation, and why registering of the shortening of the time requires the change of velocity of the observed body.

    An additional argument for the necessity of more serious treatment of new models, alternative to the hitherto ones, would be the recently observed anomalies of motions of satellites which are impossible to explain with the help of the Relativity Theory.

  • Critical Reflections on the Hafele and Keating Experiment (2009) [Updated 1 decade ago]
    by Witold Nawrot   read the paper:

    In 1971 Hafele and Keating performed their famous experiment which confirmed the time dilation predicted by SRT by use of macroscopic clocks.

    As it had already been shown [1], the continuation of reasoning applied by Hafele and Keating leads to the absurd conclusion that the Earth is not rotating around the Sun. Hafele and Keating derived a proper formula starting from false reasoning and this is the origin of the paradox. They tried to derive the formula from SRT, while the proper derivation can only be obtained from GRT [2]. There were also serious doubts concerning the experimental part of their work [4,5], but it does not matter now because today the GPS system confirms what H&K wanted to prove. Finally, H&K wanted to confirm SRT but their experiment confirmed, in fact, the GRT.

    If we take a closer look at other experiments confirming SRT, we will come to the conclusion that all the experiments in fact confirm GRT similarly to the H&K experiment, because in order to compare times in two reference frames we have to disturb motion of one of the frames and this brings the problem to problems described by GRT. The pure inertial motion makes observation from two observed each other frames fully symmetrical, and we are not able to define in which of the frames the time flies slower. In this case we can draw the conclusion that the slowing of time in pure inertial motion can be only an observational effect. Only the change of speed of one of the participants transforms the observed time dilation into the real one. Therefore we can ask the questions ? are there any serious experimental evidences confirming SRT? And - if in order to register the shortening of time the change of speed is necessary ? can we assume, as it is done in SRT, that time slows down as a function of velocity.? Maybe the slowing of the time is rather a function of the change in velocity than the velocity itself?

  • Proposal for a Simpler Description of SRT (2007) [Updated 1 decade ago]

    A new concept of four-dimensional reality is presented. The fourth dimension of this reality is now described with a dimension different from the time of the observer. Consequently, the Euclidean model of reality is obtained, the description of phenomena is simplified in relation to the four-dimensional Lorentzian space-time, and the singularities taking place in the description of the reality become now an effect of performing the observation, and are no longer the property of reality itself. The new model also predicts certain new experimental effects that can be a reliable test for the new model.

  • The Structure of Time and the Wave Structure of Matter (2007) [Updated 7 years ago]

    This paper presents a new concept of time called "the SUPERTIME". It is a time that is identical for all bodies, independent of their relative motion. The SUPERTIME, together with the "Four-dimensional Euclidean Reality" model presented earlier, justifies in a simple way the wave structure of matter, and allows introduction of a new method of finding functions that describe particles as waves. The new approach also greatly extends the class of these functions.

  • The Hafele and Keating Paradox (2004) [Updated 1 decade ago]

    The results of the Hafele and Keating experiment prove that Earth does not rotate around the Sun.