There is only one law in physics - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

There is only one law in physics
in Science

By IANVSIANVS 23 Pts
I admit I’m no master of Physics concepts, but I’ve exhaustively researched commonly accepted ideas in the field and believe I’ve found a central theme shared by all physical phenomena. I’ll note also that this hypothesis of mine is very similar to general relativity, but doesn’t fail at the quantum level

The speed of light is often strictly defined in a vacuum to be ~300,000,000 m/s. It’s one of the most common ideas discussed in Physics. I certainly wouldn’t be the first to assume there exists a unifying theory somewhere in the realm of unsolved scientific mysteries, but I don’t ever hear much about how everything seems to obey and be a consequence of the law which determines how fast light transmits through space

Why did I word it that way? Because light, although often stated as such, isn’t ever actually constant. IF all other things in its reference frame medium were held constant at a constant distance from whatever origin it happens to be orbiting (only observed to orbit black holes to my knowledge) THEN maybe it’s speed might be a known constant if its medium were an absolute vacuum. But since all things are moving through space, including black holes, and there has yet to be an example of an isolated photon propagating through a determined absolutely empty volume of space, light never exists as the constant it’s described to be. Not to mention that the curvature of space time can actually make light appear to exceed its assumed maximum from a reference frame outside of the local curvature zone (I’m totally making up this terminology so I hope it’s understandable by whoever reads this)

So how does this all tie together and allegedly cause all other events? Simple. Information is transmitted through space time at the speed of light. Whatever that speed happens to be locally. It’s usually stated that light speed is a maximum speed in the universe, but no one ever seems to entertain the possibility that it’s the ONLY speed of information traveling through space time. Making it both a minimum AND maximum speed 

This one crucial detail could very well explain absolutely everything. Thermodynamics, for example. Superfluids behave in unexplained ways and display unpredictable motion near absolute zero. Why? My assumption (almost purely speculation, I admit) is that its individual particle components have “lost speed” by losing temperature. In order to satisfy the law of information transmission, they must start to move in some other way to compensate for the loss

It also explains why temperature increases near the center of a massive body. Movement of particle components in a core orbit at a shorter radial distance from the center so they must compensate by oscillating/vibrating while mostly stationary near the very center. Otherwise, the components and the “information” they are composed of would fail to satisfy light speed law.

It also explains even more bizarre situations like when motion is severely restricted by density in the case of collapsed stars like a neutron star. Motion is restricted so intensely that subatomic motion is needed to compensate for the lack of motion (or absence of atoms entirely) provided by the atoms, generating extraordinarily powerful fields associated with quantum units like magnetism and electricity 

All orbits of all massive objects are predictable and predetermined by gravitational forces which incidentally are transmitted at light speed. Anything not in accordance with gravitational law is usually swept under the “dark things rug” like dark matter and dark energy. Understandably so, since they have yet to be well understood and defined so why not clump them together into the same mystery box.

Am I wrong in my assumption that this one law has authority over everything else? Please feel free to educate or argue with me



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
11%
Margin

Details +



Arguments

  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1793 Pts
    The phenomenon you are pointing out is an illustration of the classical "spherical cow" idealisation. When we talk about fundamental laws in physics, we imply the presence of idealised conditions. When the conditions are not idealised, then the outcomes differ from what is prescribed by the laws - however, the entire body of physics is held on the assumption that any possible real life conditions can be deconstructed into a superposition of a large set of idealised conditions.
    The result of it is the speed of light never in practice actually equalling exactly its alleged value in vacuum. However, it can always be computed precisely, provided we know everything about the environment the light propagates through. So, it would not be mistaken to say that the speed of light in vacuum is constant, given we all agree on the context of idealised conditions.

    Regarding the speed of light possibly not being the only speed of information travelling through space-time, it would require our models to be fundamentally wrong to be true. The way we present the space-time mathematically through Minkowski space assumes that the speed of light, c, is a fundamental constant of that space. c is not just the fastest possible speed an object can have in the space-time; it is, rather, a value describing the structure of that space-time.

    In Minkowski space, the distance between any two points is called "interval". The mathematical expression for the interval makes it impossible for the object to travel faster than the speed of light, as in that case the distance to that object in the observer's frame would be implicit, which does not make a lot of sense physically.
    For that distance to be real, the mathematical expression for the interval must be modified. There has been a number of theories proposed with modified versions of the interval that allow for it to be the case, but those theories have never been confirmed observationally, as the new effects they suggest are too fine for the modern astronomical equipment to test.

    Finally, I do not think that talking about what law has authority over what other law is very sensible. Physical laws are simply our way of categorising the structure and behavior of the Universe. But the Universe itself does not care about laws, it just is. 
    In a way, every physical law that has been demonstrated to be consistent with observations has an absolute authority. You can sometimes derive one law from another law, but conversely you can derive the other law from the first law, if you start at a different point.

    One could say that an electron is more fundamental than an atom, but what would that statement really mean? The electron can be a structural component of an atom, indeed, but just like the atom does not exist without the electron, the electron without the atom is a different entity than the electron within the atom.
    Physics is different from mathematics in this regard. In mathematics, we formulate a series of axioms and then derive everything from them: the axioms have authority over everything else in a sense that they are the basis behind everything else. But in physics, there are no strict axioms, there are just theories describing the observations, and the building block of those theories depends on the approach taken - and, in theory, an infinite number of such approaches can be viable.
  • IANVSIANVS 23 Pts
    Well said. I won’t argue with you about Minkowski space because you’re probably much more educated on it than I am. But what I meant by law with authority wasn’t so literal. I sort of meant that light speed somehow acts as the fundamental source of all activity occurring in much more complicated systems 

    It’s nature (to me) seems to be what every other phenomenon is built upon, and what every system reduces down to. The activity of any physical system, when deconstructed down to its most fundamental structural components, would therefore be the “information” obeying the law that says information must maintain a precise velocity which is called c. This isn’t obvious in most situations. I could ask you how fast an atom is moving on the surface of earth and the correct answer would be mind boggling and highly variable moment to moment since it has numerous orbital velocities to consider and likely some unknown ones as well. Not to mention that atoms aren’t simply tangled up light beams. They’re constructed out of fields that have the same essence as light. There’d be no simple calculation to determine the exact speed required of an atom at any given point in time without knowing so many other variables that it would be nearly impossible for us to do in the present. Not to mention that it might be rotating and contain rotating subatomic particles, making the calculation even more frightening to consider

    Also, I believe my argument on c never being a constant still stands. We can only calculate it within a negligible margin of error from our reference frame. Venture too far away from the origin of reference and the expected calculation becomes unrecognizable or requires modifications to maintain its accuracy. If you have to modify the parameters associated with a constant to make it a constant, you’re not dealing with a constant. The universe is not uniformly shaped. I DO however believe that the speed of light can only be one value at any infinitely precise position in space, but not obtainable absolutely through calculation due to uncertainty 

    In other words I agree that light is a constant but only if you multiply it by a variable, which when combined into a single value produces a variable. Semantics

    It could also be said that c is a variable and the universe is a constant shape. Depends on perspective. It’s my understanding that the shape of the universe is not constant though, making light speed constant  everywhere when multiplied by a variable that makes it correct if, like you said, we know everything else about its environment. To assume a light beam in the far reaches of the most rarefied region of the universe is traveling at ~300,000,000 m/s would be inaccurate though since one meter of space there might be equivalent to ten meters in our reference frame. That’d make the speed of light there ~3 billion m/s as observed from our reference frame (if my math checks out). Still true of course that if you were there locally it’d be moving at near c as expected

    Also, there is no such thing as an absolute vacuum. The contents of any volume of space are what define its curvature and tells information traveling through it how to behave. To have no instructions isn’t possible or it would reduce the volume in question down to zero, making its analysis pointless to begin with

    To claim that we know how light would behave in a region of space which at any volume other than zero doesn’t  exist (to my knowledge) is like saying you know how it would behave in any other hypothetical scenario. Sure, I can’t say I know you’re incorrect, but I don’t know that you are either 

    I agree with your take on fundamental components too. But my point is that there must be a driving force which causes all things to behave the way they do. Electrons can drive the motion of atoms just as much as atoms can drive the motion of electrons, but why do either drive anything anywhere? Why are there phase changes in materials? Why do so many things follow c? There must be an explanation no?

     
  • @IANVS ;

    There is no such thing as space-time. Time is a mathematic principle which is simply plagiarized by most often by science. A second is a distance which is set by scientific method and attached to an object in relationship to a uniform scale. Time is a mathematic transition made on area as space is a mathematic translation made on area. They are either proportioned to the same area or they are not. Can space-time exist? Yes, I believe so the process of setting the proportional scale would cost around 5.2 billion dollars. The value of the navigational time in space is around 2 - 4 trillion dollars. The cost is opening a significate area for exploration, an area much larger than  the new world was for many Spanish, Asian, French, English, Russian, etc. explorers. 
    piloteerPlaffelvohfen
  • AkhenatenAkhenaten 104 Pts
    The speed of light is created in the galactic jets which shoot out a right angles to the galactic plane on either side. The aether or dark matter particles spin in opposite directions on either side. They then go around in a circle and come back to the centre plane where they annihilate each other to create tiny black holes or more commonly known as neutrons. Thus, are formed stars and matter.
  • John_C_87John_C_87 204 Pts
    How are you mathematically writing light. (E = light ) Correct? We already know the speed of energy moves faster then light as radiation outside the visible spectrum humans can see. Thus, we use mechanical instruments for detection or observation. vacuum sets speed by manipulation of energy on a scale in the energies proportional state.

    The truth is light does not have a constant speed as energy, nor does gravity have a constant speed as force, and force does not have a constant speed as energy.

    Not that I am committing to a magmatically proof as correct.

  • AkhenatenAkhenaten 104 Pts
    The speed of light is created by galactic jets which shoot out at the speed of light. This is the cosmos's power source. This creates spin energy which is equal to the speed of light. These jets shoot out in both north and south directions at 90 degrees to the galactic rotation which creates left and right spin particles. These particles go around in a large circle and come back to the galactic centre plane where they fuse together to make matter, heat and light.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch