Essay Abstract
Referring to special theory of relativity led by Albert Einstein, we define some properties of gravitons derived by the motion of mass. Based on this concept, we define the geometrical description of mass. Furthermore, we consider the wave function of energy by following these definitions and conclude the eternal universe.
Author Bio
An amateur physicist, born 1974 in Himeji, Japan. http://ryoji.info
Dear readers,
Thank you for reading my essay, actually it is my full page paper taking over 10 years ;) I should add this comments on my author bio however let me post here as I cannot edit it anymore.
You must easily find that my paper is not reviewed by any professional physicists nor anyone from any of aspects. There should be more process before submitting to this contest however it was not archived well regardless my efforts. So the reasoning or any of descriptions at any part of paper might be confused and impossible to follow. So I deeply appreciate your patience if you read it through and give me any of your comments.
At the end, I would appreciate that I could have this occasion to share my ideas as a part of this contest's goals & intent.
Regards,
Ryoji Furui
Ryoji,
Perhaps I can offer some direction for you on the mail points of your paper.
1. Gravitons - don't exist [they are a consequence of Math without Models]
2. The origin of mass - important point you bring up here - great care must be taken to clearly define and distinguish EM mass [E/c^2] from Matter [E/c^4]
[you can find a clear definition of theses terms and much more in my paper - Tetryonics]
EM mass is a 2D planar radiant energy waveform reflecting the energy density of the wave per unit of time [npi E/c^2]
Matter is a 3D Tetrahedral standing-wave energy geometry that has volume and a mass-Energy density [4npi E/c^4]
3. Wave-functions of Energy - can all be easily visualised and geometrically represented with equilateral Energy quanta [with Photons being 2pi geometries]
[see attached]
4. There are boundaries of Time - as Time is actually the measurement of equilateral quantised angular momentum [QAM]found within all physical systems - this QAM along with EM mass is what we call Planck's constant [kg.[m^2/s]. Its two 'directions' result in the physical property we call Charge and it is charge that is the source of 'broken'symmetry in QM. In fact charge results from the equilateral geometry of energy quanta. [see attached]
Is the balance between the Forces created by radiant EM masses [heat, light EM waves] and the gravitational Matter [Planets, Stars, Galaxies] that creates the eternal Universe you are attempting to describe with GravitonsAttachment #1: Figure_38.12__Wavefunctions_explained_800x600.jpgAttachment #2: Figure_61.03__Time_800x600.jpg
ABRAHAM,
Thank you for your comments to each section of my paper.
It would still difficult to say anything before I understand your theory but it seems geometrical assumptions covers the region I described in the paper. It should be great to look further comparisons.
Right now, I got a brand new image of linear approximation of graviton's geometry, please see the attached file. It is very simple compared yours so it should be so easy for you about what the gravitons are, I hope.
Regards,
Here I'd like to add an additional idea here about graviton's which could be added to next paper update.I defined two properties of gravitons which is equation (3) and (6). (In equation (3), it set $m_0=1$ already)
It is intuitive perspective yet, but when I try to apply these properties to metric tensor $\eta_{\mu\nu}$, I guess equation (6) will applied to diagonal element $\mu=\nu$. As well as I defined mass (=energy) as contraction of time axis in section 2, I think spatial axis can be applied to energy element of gravitons. on the other hand, equation (3) would be applied to component $\mu\neq\nu$.
Thanks,
Ryoji
Here I made a comparision sheet on attached. Compared with gravitation (my thesis) and electromagnetic.Attachment #1: comparision.pdf
I just keep self posting but just had an update for the previous sheet, update is just split diagonal elements to spacial one and time. So now comparision of gravitation and electromagnetism is like attached,
Can this be a part of gravitational structure?Attachment #1: 1_comparision.pdf
Here, I got update again by introducing potential energy derived by Ernst Fischer to my graviton energy. Here Fischer's radius parameter $r$ to convert to my velocity $v$ as $v=1/r$ (still relativistic?) and put it to my graviton's energy as,
[math](\gamma-1)\sqrt{1-v}[/math].
Here is brand new graviton energy which will be no longer infinite,
[math]g_F=\frac{\gamma-1}{\gamma}[/math].
And comparison with light would be attached.Attachment #1: comparison.pdf
A correction here, the previous post was when set $v^2=1/r$ and then if we set $v=1/r$, gravitation energy with potential energy is below,
[math]g_F=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+v}}-\sqrt{1-v}[/math].
It is getting similar look to momentum?
And again, attached file is the complete gravitation properties!Attachment #1: 1_comparison.pdf
This should be the final correction regarding a solution of graviton's infinite problem. Applying $1/r=\sqrt{v}$ to fischer's $\sqrt{1-1/r}$ then, energy of graviton is simply,
[math]g_F=(\gamma-1)\sqrt{1-\sqrt{v}}[/math]
I've no idea to simplify this equation anymore. so done?
Thank you for reading many posts ;)Attachment #1: 2_comparison.pdf
Dear Ryoji,
You can see how to deduce the Newton law of gravitation in the concept of gravitons in the paper: Fedosin S.G. Model of Gravitational Interaction in the Concept of Gravitons. // Journal of Vectorial Relativity, March 2009, Vol. 4, No. 1, P.1-24. The concept of gravitons in the framework of Le Sage approach leads then to Covariant theory of gravitation and determination of energy and mass. By the way you can evaluate my essay.
Sergey,
Thank you for your comment.
It would still be difficult to say anything before I understand your theory which is also exceeded my knowledge.
I remember someone told me Le Sage's model is similar to mine quite a long ago. What I agreed with it was that his graviton is falling from the sky to the ground beside gravitons lead from general relativity are running opposite direction as we accelerated upward. That is one of the different points from common perspective. And if these could be discussed here, I would like to explain why I think as they are.
Well, pushing or pulling difference will effect just plus or minus so it won't make so serious difference anyway.
Regards,
Ryoji
Dear hoang cao hai,
Thank you for your comment to my postings.I would be glad to hear positive opinions to mine?
If I can answer to some of your questions, it would be the first one that the difference of gravitation (acceleration) of moon and earth. I noted acceleration as velocity "v" in my paper as it is already quantized. So in the weaker field (moon), you get weaker acceleration as gravitational energy expressed as, (\gamma-1)\sqrt{1-\sqrt{v}}. (applied Ernst Fischer's curve)
you may understand it easier with my attached graph. What I am curious is that it converges to 1/2 and then turn to zero when v=1. These should be explained with actual mechanism of mass energy conversions. time has 1 dimension and space has three. these fact would be the key of this 1/2 value.
regards,
After studying about 250 essays in this contest, I realize now, how can I assess the level of each submitted work. Accordingly, I rated some essays, including yours.
Cood luck.
Dear Sergey G Fedosin, Hoang Cao Hai,
Thank you for your messages.
I couldn't read any of others essays so many like you regardless I could have much time. And most of them are too difficult for me to understand within this limited period. So I will take more time to read through what has been discussed in this essay contest. I may get contact to you again when I find the subjects I would like to share. I really had a good time being here.
Thank you again,
Ryoji Furui
If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is [math]R_1 [/math] and [math]N_1 [/math] was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have [math]S_1=R_1 N_1 [/math] of points. After it anyone give you [math]dS [/math] of points so you have [math]S_2=S_1+ dS [/math] of points and [math]N_2=N_1+1 [/math] is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have [math]S_2=R_2 N_2 [/math] of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be: [math]S_2/ N_2>S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] (S_1+ dS) / (N_1+1) >S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] dS >S_1/ N_1 =R_1[/math] In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points [math]dS [/math] then the participant`s rating [math]R_1 [/math] was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process. I hope the FQXI community will change the rating process.
Dear Ryoji Furui,
A very impressive essay. Thank you for contributing it. I hope you can read my essay "Rethink the Double Slit Experiment," which also discuss the energy of particle with space time.
Yours,
Ke Xiao
Dear Ryoji Furui,
I have just seen your essay. After 10 years of work on it I can understand how important it must be for you and how much you would like constructive feedback or appreciation of it. I'm sorry your entry hasn't had more attention. I don't feel qualified to comment on the mathematics myself, so I have not studied it but extend my good wishes to you. Georgina
Dear Sergey Fedosin,
What I have been curious about infinite density at massive point (on the surface of Schwarzschild radius) is that infinite field covers a certain finite mass. Like photons had confirmed the limited and constant speed by the experiment, I was expecting it could be let the limit as observation data but now I guess it can be solved by some modifications within thesis itself.
Regards,
Ryoji
Dear Ke Xiao
Thank you for your comment.
If I try to mention about quantum mechanics for further inspect from gravitational (non compactified dimensions) interactions, I would imagine (with no math nor strict understanding of the matters) the whole view could be a certain math framework like lie algebra, e7 which can be the minimalistic framework with standard model plus gravitation whose symmetry is possibly renormalized within 4D spacetime framework. And I wonder if wave function of equation 9 in my paper can be applied to multidimensional (D>4) world as the hidden value.
Regards,
Ryoji
