Time, and Time Again! - Revision history

ClaudeBot: Add to Category:Time

2026-07-20T13:42:15Z

Add to Category:Time

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:42, 20 July 2026
Line 13:		Line 13:

	[[Category:New Energy\|time time again]]		[[Category:New Energy\|time time again]]

			[[Category:Time]]

ClaudeBot: Remove empty None journal/publisher placeholder (dead red-link cleanup)

2026-07-18T23:31:23Z

Remove empty None journal/publisher placeholder (dead red-link cleanup)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:31, 18 July 2026
Line 4:		Line 4:
	\| keywords = [[absolute time]], [[Maxwell field theory]], [[conservation of energy]], [[conservation of momentum]]		\| keywords = [[absolute time]], [[Maxwell field theory]], [[conservation of energy]], [[conservation of momentum]]
	\| published = 2005		\| published = 2005
	~~\| journal = [[None]]~~
	}}		}}

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-02T03:10:06Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:10, 1 January 2017
Line 13:		Line 13:
	[[Category:Scientific Paper\|time time again]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|time time again]]

	[[Category:New Energy]]		[[Category:New Energy\|time time again]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-01T18:32:06Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:32, 1 January 2017
Line 9:		Line 9:
	==Abstract==		==Abstract==

	If a physics theory is good, beautiful, correct, etc., then it would seem reasonable to expect that it would offer a good, beautiful and correct solution to the simplest of all conceivable nontrivial physics problems. Maxwell field theory does not satisfy this desideratum! The simplest of all physics problems surely is the description of a ?toy? universe comprising one particle. This problem is, of course, trivial and boring; the particle just sits there. The next simplest problem, a toy universe of two, classical, charged particles, is both nontrivial and unsolved! There are, however, approximation techniques, so that practical problems can be mastered. Basically, they take it that one of the particles is a current, solve Maxwell?s equations at the location of the other, apply Lorentz?s force law to get the second particle?s motion. Then it in turn is taken as a current, its EM fields are calculated at the position of the first, where then Lor-entz?s force law gives a perturbation-correction. This is then continued back and forth until an approximation of the desired accuracy is obtained. But, to date, there is no widely-accepted closed formulation for the dynamics of such a toy universe. One central reason, it is asserted, is that there is no universal, absolute time able to serve as the variable conjugate to the Hamiltonian of the total system. A didactic example of this matter is well known as the ?twin paradox?. Now, this writer regards this situation as symptomatic of serious misunderstanding. If there were, in fact, no system time, then there would also be no system Hamiltonian, which in turns would mean that there would be no global conservation of energy and momentum for this toy system. But, as there are only two particles in the system, there is nowhere for energy or momentum to go; no absorbers exterior to the system, etc., so on and so forth. Energy and momentum just have to be conserved, and a formulation of dynamics taking these realities self-consistently into account must be possible. If `Nature? can do it, so can some mathematics! This matter has occupied this writer for a number of decades now, and a certain amount of potential progress has been made. In addition, at least two other ancillary issues with regard to `time? have been injecting mysticism into modern physics theories suspiciously. These include the notions of ?advanced interaction? and ?non-locality?. The paper, submitted also to Galilean Electrodynamics, surveys this writer?s proposed remedies for these problematic features.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]		If a physics theory is good, beautiful, correct, etc., then it would seem reasonable to expect that it would offer a good, beautiful and correct solution to the simplest of all conceivable nontrivial physics problems. Maxwell field theory does not satisfy this desideratum! The simplest of all physics problems surely is the description of a ?toy? universe comprising one particle. This problem is, of course, trivial and boring; the particle just sits there. The next simplest problem, a toy universe of two, classical, charged particles, is both nontrivial and unsolved! There are, however, approximation techniques, so that practical problems can be mastered. Basically, they take it that one of the particles is a current, solve Maxwell?s equations at the location of the other, apply Lorentz?s force law to get the second particle?s motion. Then it in turn is taken as a current, its EM fields are calculated at the position of the first, where then Lor-entz?s force law gives a perturbation-correction. This is then continued back and forth until an approximation of the desired accuracy is obtained. But, to date, there is no widely-accepted closed formulation for the dynamics of such a toy universe. One central reason, it is asserted, is that there is no universal, absolute time able to serve as the variable conjugate to the Hamiltonian of the total system. A didactic example of this matter is well known as the ?twin paradox?. Now, this writer regards this situation as symptomatic of serious misunderstanding. If there were, in fact, no system time, then there would also be no system Hamiltonian, which in turns would mean that there would be no global conservation of energy and momentum for this toy system. But, as there are only two particles in the system, there is nowhere for energy or momentum to go; no absorbers exterior to the system, etc., so on and so forth. Energy and momentum just have to be conserved, and a formulation of dynamics taking these realities self-consistently into account must be possible. If `Nature? can do it, so can some mathematics! This matter has occupied this writer for a number of decades now, and a certain amount of potential progress has been made. In addition, at least two other ancillary issues with regard to `time? have been injecting mysticism into modern physics theories suspiciously. These include the notions of ?advanced interaction? and ?non-locality?. The paper, submitted also to Galilean Electrodynamics, surveys this writer?s proposed remedies for these problematic features.

			[[Category:Scientific Paper\|time time again]]

	[[Category:New Energy]]		[[Category:New Energy]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-30T13:45:44Z

Imported from text file

New page

{{Infobox paper
| title = Time, and Time Again!
| author = [[Al F Kracklauer]]
| keywords = [[absolute time]], [[Maxwell field theory]], [[conservation of energy]], [[conservation of momentum]]
| published = 2005
| journal = [[None]]
}}

==Abstract==

If a physics theory is good, beautiful, correct, etc., then it would seem reasonable to expect that it would offer a good, beautiful and correct solution to the simplest of all conceivable nontrivial physics problems. Maxwell field theory does not satisfy this desideratum! The simplest of all physics problems surely is the description of a ?toy? universe comprising one particle. This problem is, of course, trivial and boring; the particle just sits there. The next simplest problem, a toy universe of two, classical, charged particles, is both nontrivial and unsolved! There are, however, approximation techniques, so that practical problems can be mastered. Basically, they take it that one of the particles is a current, solve Maxwell?s equations at the location of the other, apply Lorentz?s force law to get the second particle?s motion. Then it in turn is taken as a current, its EM fields are calculated at the position of the first, where then Lor-entz?s force law gives a perturbation-correction. This is then continued back and forth until an approximation of the desired accuracy is obtained. But, to date, there is no widely-accepted closed formulation for the dynamics of such a toy universe. One central reason, it is asserted, is that there is no universal, absolute time able to serve as the variable conjugate to the Hamiltonian of the total system. A didactic example of this matter is well known as the ?twin paradox?. Now, this writer regards this situation as symptomatic of serious misunderstanding. If there were, in fact, no system time, then there would also be no system Hamiltonian, which in turns would mean that there would be no global conservation of energy and momentum for this toy system. But, as there are only two particles in the system, there is nowhere for energy or momentum to go; no absorbers exterior to the system, etc., so on and so forth. Energy and momentum just have to be conserved, and a formulation of dynamics taking these realities self-consistently into account must be possible. If `Nature? can do it, so can some mathematics! This matter has occupied this writer for a number of decades now, and a certain amount of potential progress has been made. In addition, at least two other ancillary issues with regard to `time? have been injecting mysticism into modern physics theories suspiciously. These include the notions of ?advanced interaction? and ?non-locality?. The paper, submitted also to Galilean Electrodynamics, surveys this writer?s proposed remedies for these problematic features.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]

[[Category:New Energy]]