We understand from Special Relativity that the speed of light is an upper limit on the relative speed between moving objects. This concerns the rate of change of position, and constant momentum.
Is it a useful question to ask: Why is there no upper limit on angular speed; concerning the rate of change of orientation, and constant angular momentum?
Steve Faulkner I would say there is an upper limit on angular speed and this corresponds to the neutron and the proton which are considered to be looped waves in spacetime of three wavelengths. The speed of the wave in the loop is c and the radius of the loop is around 0.630929 x 10^-15 m. This is rather like the limit described by Francesco Caravelli
which can not be made arbitrarily small as it is constrained by the size of the matter particles themselves.For background see:
Data Prerecording of Conference Presentation on the Unification of Physics
For objects larger than a single particle I would suggest just using the outer end of the rotating rod as being limited by the speed of light.
A good point to raise - thank you.
Richard
Francesco Caravelli
I agree that there is no minimum length but there is a minimum size to matter particles and this is characterised by the proton and the neutron.I have explained in my paper the cause of the quantisation of angular momentum in the particular case of the electron. (see Appendix 7)
Conference Paper THE UNIFICATION OF PHYSICS (Conference Paper)
Richard
I think it is 3.7097x10^43 rad/s. I consider a sphere of Planck diameter to be the smallest object describable by quantum theory. If such a sphere spins at the speed of light (special relativity limit), an angular frequency of 2c/l_p is obtained.
An extremely small angle of rotation was found in the work: Nastasenko, V.
(2021) Quantum of Space of the Un iverse — Correction of Previous Mistakes.
Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics, 9, 565-576.
Its magnitude is 1 / (18.549x10^42) rad.
@Preston Guynn
I took a look at your Thomas Precession structure paper. One major problem that leaps out is that you calculate a proton radius of 3x10^-14 m, which is more than 30 times too large. Your value is inconsistent with measured charge radii of both protons and atomic nuclei.
When the outer rim of whatever you are rotating exceeds the speed of light,
you can suspect something irregular happens.
Actually if you use the spin value of elementary particles with usual estimates of the radius, you get into these faster than light (relativistic) issues.
@Juan Weisz
Suppose a particle's mass energy circulates on a smaller circle than its charge. I have developed a proton model based on this concept. This model precisely explains proton charge radius and magnetic moment:
https://uwlax-edu.zoom.us/rec/share/MaBpbXa2eGnAOjgq2N3V7KJ5TI5wf4PkuP5qmmveOswgIzPoKFT7N_Y1wNJmU0CZ.mjg0P1fM8Ds9fANH
Here is the Rindler wave inertia presentation:
https://youtu.be/LDCyxXR7xks
Dear Steve Faulkner
The fixed amount of energy of the electric field – Planck’s constant – has only one velocity, the constant speed of light. In other words, it is impossible that a quantum of energy has a local velocity of e.g. ½ c or 1½ c.
Quanta transfer in a loop – angular motion (like spin) – has the same constant velocity c. The confusion is caused by our use of different points of view. In phenomenological physics we tend to reason like phenomenological reality is the all-inclusive point of view. But that’s not correct. The properties of the observable and detectable phenomena originate from the underlying structure of the “back ground” basic quantum fields (Higgs field, electric field and magnetic field).
In other words, the constant speed of light is the velocity of quanta transfer within the structure of space itself. Because the underlying structure of the “back ground” basic quantum fields is the manifestation of the properties of discrete space/quantized space.
With kind regards, Sydney
- Badges
- Science topic