Wrinkles in Spacetime

John Rennie: "The variation of the velocity of light with distance from the black hole looks like:

http://i.stack.imgur.com/XlKh0.gif

At large distances (large r) the velocity tends to 1 (i.e. c) but close to the black hole it decreases, and falls to zero at the event horizon." [end of quotation]

Idiotic isn't it? It can be shown that the absurd DECREASE of the speed of light as photons approach the source of gravity is a consequence of Einstein's 1911 equally absurd fabrication called gravitational time dilation.

Pentcho Valev

I am thanking you John,it is nice.I am asking me how I can utilise the newtonian mechanic and the 3 motions of sphères and the harmonical oscillators.Quantum gravitation can perhaps be found with simple the quantity of movements.The différences is about the E of a spheron and so the planck constant is Under the stadard model, so a bridge is necessary simply with the newtonian mechanic more the spherical volumes.The primes can be inserted.We could insert this new constant intead of h for the fine structure constant considering the particlesof gravitation encoded.The elementary charge also socan be extrapolated for this gravity but differently than with our electromagnetism, it is there that the volumes and the 3 motions become relevant for the different stepsof stability.If the dark matter is also encoded but it is not baryonic, so it becomes relevant to consider if they are correct my humbleintuitive équations.That tends towards infinity this gravitation, it is logic because the central sphere produces the speedest and smallest spherons.The linear velocities of different spherons in function of their spherical quantum volumes and correlated BH.The method can be superimposed and sorted for the gravitation in inserting BH and dark matter even in our standard model.An other constant must appear like alpha the fine structure constant but not with e²/hc4piEo we insert instead of the fréquences of photons, the fréquences of spherons.The relevance is their paradoxal infinite number.The weakest force so is in the same time the strongest considering thecentral singularities.E=m²+ml² seems relevant if it is correct because we can calculate the entire entropy in evolution, increasing furthermore and paradoxally infinite due to this link physicality and infinity above the walls of thissaid physicality.A real puzzle John :)Regards

I am persuaded that a boson photon cannot pass c but a spheron yes.I don't see why this infinite entropy has created a physicality with a prison due to our relativity.It is just that we are still Young and that our technology is limited.In all case, fortunally that we do not check these particles, already that on earth, we are not able to harmonise globally this pale blue dot like said Carl Sagan.It is better like that for this moment.In the future it is necessary for thecivilisations to travel Inside the galaxies and even between the galaxies.But not with our relativity, it is not possible.The spherons permit to communicate also at a kind of present with extraterrestrial lifes.If a civilisation tries to communicate, it utilisees these waves , not our lectromagnetic waves Under our specialrelativity.The future is the gravitation,this universal natural equilibrium purelly correlated with rotating sphères.The centralcosmological BH is the secret of all in fact.

Banesh Hoffmann: No gravitational time dilation. The gravitational redshift "arises from what befalls light signals as they traverse space and time in the presence of gravitation":

"Relativity and Its Roots", Banesh Hoffmann: "In an accelerated sky laboratory, and therefore also in the corresponding earth laboratory, the frequence of arrival of light pulses is lower than the ticking rate of the upper clocks even though all the clocks go at the same rate. (...) As a result the experimenter at the ceiling of the sky laboratory will see with his own eyes that the floor clock is going at a slower rate than the ceiling clock - even though, as I have stressed, both are going at the same rate. (...) The gravitational red shift does not arise from changes in the intrinsic rates of clocks. It arises from what befalls light signals as they traverse space and time in the presence of gravitation."

What befalls light signals as they traverse space and time in the presence of gravitation, Einsteinians? Do they accelerate?

"Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity."

Pentcho Valev

Why Is Flat Earth Society Thriving?

"Our new website includes the Flat Earth Society forums (a thriving online community since 2004) as well as..."

The Flat Earth Society is a natural opposition in Einstein schizophrenic world, less insane than the science establishment. For instance, the flat-Earth idea sounds much less idiotic than this:

Introduction to Classical Mechanics With Problems and Solutions, David Morin, Chapter 11, p. 14: "Twin A stays on the earth, while twin B flies quickly to a distant star and back. (...) For the entire outward and return parts of the trip, B does observe A's clock running slow, but enough strangeness occurs during the turning-around period to make A end up older. Note, however, that a discussion of acceleration is not required to quantitatively understand the paradox..."

In moments of mental aberration, Einsteinians do admit that their world is schizophrenic:

John Baez: "One of the big problems in physics - perhaps the biggest! - is figuring out how our two current best theories fit together. On the one hand we have the Standard Model, which tries to explain all the forces except gravity, and takes quantum mechanics into account. On the other hand we have General Relativity, which tries to explain gravity, and does not take quantum mechanics into account. Both theories seem to be more or less on the right track - but until we somehow fit them together, or completely discard one or both, our picture of the world will be deeply schizophrenic."

Marc Lachièze-Rey: "La physique est schizophrène (...) ...relativiste le matin, quantique le soir... mais schizophrène lorsqu'il tente de concilier les deux visions. C'est là que réside le problème fondamental de la physique d'aujourd'hui."

Pentcho Valev

The dimensionless fine structure constant, alpha ~= 1/137, is indeed one of the important keys for unlocking the underlying nature of physical reality. Feynman's quantum field theory uses perturbation expansions based on factors of alpha and the gyromagnetic ratio calculated with such a QFE series is the most accurately known physical constant of nature.

The problem with alpha is not that there is no way to describe it...the problem is that there are any number of ways to describe alpha since it is dimensionless.

My favorites are as the product alpha x c is the average velocity of the electron for a hydrogen atom as well as alpha / c is the velocity of spin at the elementary charge radius of an electron or proton. That means that the charge velocity of the electron in hydrogen makes a magnet that interacts with the magnet that comes from the charge velocity of the electron spin. This spin-orbit coupling is what splits the s and p orbits of hydrogen, which have different average velocities, and that is what causes most of the spectral splitting of S and P states of hydrogen and other elements.

The constancy of alpha from spectral splittings in both distant galaxies and precision atomic clocks is the only argument for an expanding universe of unvarying constants. Any theory that supposes forces are different in distant galaxies must somehow explain why alpha appears to be constant for both distant galaxies as well as for precision atomic clocks.

In fact, it is not really alpha that appears to be constant, it is really alpha^2. In a shrinking universe, this key fact means that alpha does vary in distant galaxies and alpha^2 only varies as a second order. In fact, there are many reports of the second order variation of alpha^2 and atomic clocks are only now precise enough to begin showing these second order effects.

Hello Mr Agnew,I am thanking you very much.It is nice.It is a beautiful general explaination and Isee better now.I am going to learn more.mlosV if it is correct so can be relevant for the bridge with gravitation, dark matter(spherons.If l is the linear speed,so the samelogic can be made in superimposing the dark quantum matter and quantum BH.The standard model is encircled by BH and dark matter like our cosmological scale in logic.The same method can be made for spherons.An other alpha exists for this matter not baryonic it seems to me.What a puzzle:) Thanks still.

Oh blast it...c / alpha not alpha / c...

The dimensionless fine structure constant, alpha ~= 1/137, is indeed one of the important keys for unlocking the underlying nature of physical reality. Feynman's quantum field theory uses perturbation expansions based on factors of alpha and the gyromagnetic ratio calculated with such a QFE series is the most accurately known physical constant of nature.

The problem with alpha is not that there is no way to describe it...the problem is that there are any number of ways to describe alpha since it is dimensionless.

My favorites are as the product alpha x c (or c / 137) is the average velocity of the electron for a hydrogen atom as well as c / alpha (or 137c, 137 times the speed of light) is the velocity of spin at the elementary charge radius of an electron or proton. That means that the charge velocity of the electron in hydrogen makes a magnet that interacts with the magnet that comes from the superluminous charge velocity of the electron spin. This spin-orbit coupling is what splits the s and p orbits of hydrogen, which have different average velocities, and that is what causes most of the spectral splitting of S and P states of hydrogen and other elements.

The constancy of alpha from spectral splittings in both distant galaxies and precision atomic clocks is the only argument for an expanding universe of unvarying constants. Any theory that supposes forces are different in distant galaxies must somehow explain why alpha appears to be constant for both distant galaxies as well as for precision atomic clocks.

In fact, it is not really alpha that appears to be constant, it is really alpha^2. In a shrinking universe, this key fact means that alpha does vary in distant galaxies and alpha^2 only varies as a second order. In fact, there are many reports of the second order variation of alpha^2 and atomic clocks are only now precise enough to begin showing these second order effects.

Question to All .....

I understand that QM and GR are both 4-D models. Presumably, they both share the same three spatial dimensions.

What is the basis for the belief that they also share the same 4'th dimension?

Regards,

Gary Simpson

Hello Gary,

You can learn the lagrangian and the Minkowski space time.In fact it is just model of evolutive metric to see the evolution in time.So time is considered like a relativistic tool which permits to class and analyse the intrinsic dynamics.You can also learn more about the maxwell's équations.The works of Lorentz are relevant also considering the time dilation and lenght contraction.The relevance is to link with the special and the general relativity.You can also see that general relativity islinked with sphères acting on the space time considering the curvature of our space time.The spherisation appears naturally due to this mass curving.They are just Tools to analyse our quantum scale and cosmological scale.It permits to have correct results considering the evolution and the encodings.Hope that helps.Best Regards

James,

I think you have correctly identified the ambiguity that has pervaded attempts to account for the fine structure constant. The physical significance of the proportionate value cannot be found without a rational model of what constitutes matter and what constitutes the light which is displayed in the interaction between the two. It is only the response of the detection system that we can observe, no one has ever observed a photon. And to parameterize the velocity of an electron in the assumed ground state of a hydrogen atom is meaningless without answering the question Einstein posed; "I just want to know what an electron is." The Quantum model is non-realistic and we have literally no explanation of the Transition Zone and the peculiar measured proportionate rates of change of field strengths observed in the Near Field. jrc

Yet another way to express alpha is with the Rydberg energy, Ry. The Rydberg energy comes from the energies of the hydrogen lines and represents a very solid constant for mainstream science.

alpha^2 = Ry / (me c^2)

So, the mass of the electron, me, times c^2 is the electron's relativistic energy and somehow Ry, the energy of the light that hydrogen emits, is just some small fraction of the electron relativistic energy.

Guess what? That fraction is exactly alpha^2 ~= 1/137^2. Once again, it is not that there is no way to define alpha, the difficulty is that there are many ways to define the dimensionless alpha.

My proposition for aethertime is that there is a phase factor for alpha that is normally ignored and that phase factor means that alpha^2 does not appear to vary except in second order. This explains why neither galaxy light nor precision clocks show a variation in alpha^2 except to second order and yet alpha in first order does therefore vary along with c and it is c / alpha that is constant.

In a shrinking universe, both c and alpha vary together and that decoherence rate is what defines all force in aethertime.

Qunantum is relativistic, but not 4D in the same sense as GR...

Gary D. Simpson wrote on May. 1, 2016 @ 05:26 GMT as "I understand that QM and GR are both 4-D models. Presumably, they both share the same three spatial dimensions. What is the basis for the belief that they also share the same 4'th dimension?"

While GR is clearly 4D with time as a spatial dimension, Quantum uses mass-energy equivalence, E=mc^2, and therefore an exchange particle, the photon, to make things relativistic.

In GR, things always happen along geodesics ever since the universe was set in motion from the big bang. In quantum, the universe moves by exchange of photons and so there are no completely certain geodesics. Since gravity and charge differ by 1e39 power, these differences can be ignored for most all objects and action.

The quantum phase coherence of photon exchange entangles objects throughout the universe with each other but GR has no such quantum phase coherence. While GR is a very good representation of most objects of the universe, GR utterly fails to represent objects inside of black holes and other event horizons. GR also fails to represent dark matter and dark energy, which are simply quantum exchange forces working at very large scale.

However, a quantum gravity will represent objects inside of event horizons as well as the quantum exchange forces called dark matter and dark energy...but mainstream science does not yet have a quantum gravity. I am glad that I do because it is silly not to have a quantum gravity in a quantum universe...

Hi Jonh,James,Mr Agnew,

That rocks :) thanks for all these informations and reasonings.It is relevant.Regards and don't stop dear thinkers to think of course....

Steve D,

Thanks for the input. I am generally familiar with most of the major mathematical tools presently used. This includes the Lagrangian and Minkowski. But it does not explain why I should believe that dimension number 4 in GR (ict) is the same as dimension number 4 in QM (also ict sort of).

Steve A,

Thanks for the input also. So, if I read between the lines you are implying that QM and GR do not share the precise same 4'th dimension. The fourth dimension of each model is based upon time but is operated upon differently. I agree. If the next essay topic is agreeable, I will have some interesting mathematics to present. It might be of interest to you.

Best Regards,

Gary Simpson

You are welcome.the explaination of Mr Agnew permits to see the whole.I learn in the same time.I wait also your essays about mathematical plays.ps to both of you ....How can we consider time at these two different scales? Is it purelly correlated like the gravitation witht the rotations of sphères implying clocks? What are your points of vue please?Best Regards

Gary,

Tom Ray is the one whom is best equipped to explain the distinctive difference of measurement space vis-à-vis QM and GR in terms of the general consensus among the practioners of both disciplines, and without prejudicing the discussion with preferrences to support an agenda promoting a presumed *discovery* in a theoretical hypothesis based on some personal equation. While he does champion Dr. Joy Christian's topological framework as a means of protracting a local realistic measurement space consistent with relativistic spacetime, and works towards a topological extrapolation of GR, he is one of the few whom holds fast to scientific discipline in respecting the professional conventions of limitation on definition of terms in both Quantum and Relativistic mechanics and is knowledgable and appreciative of the historical origin and evolution of the modern divergent theoretical regimes. He is my vote for Chief Quality Control Inspector. I just don't think he wants to be subjected to much more of the Chat Room Hazzards seeking fifteen minutes of fame whom cling to this blogspace like it was flypaper. He has taken down his own blogpage due to the common privacy problems these days, but if you care to risk posting your own email address if or when he posts a comment, he would probably appreciate your own strictly scholarly intents and engage in some private exchange. Onward through the fog!!! jrc

John R. Cox,

Very good response! You addressed the problem directly. I don't presume that you agree with what I will now say. My opinion is that lack of complex knowledge prevents a scientifically sophisticated explanation for that equation. However, I am certain that on the Bohr model level, there should already be an elementary level explanation for converting between the two sides of the equation. There isn't and I suggest that that is pointing us to an error in the left side expression. I don't mean a mathematical error. I mean a theoretical error. I have addressed this problem concerning the fine structure constant in far more detail here in the past. It is one of several theoretical conundrums that are sidestepped with indirect responses or bypassed altogether with changes of subject by theoretical physicists. There is another similar to it that involves the force of gravity equation.

James Putnam

You have a lot of energy on the topic of objects and change, but you do not like the word time. You say that there is no evidence that time gets delayed, but that makes time an object, which you agreed before time was not an object. Time delay is a property and that is what we measure.

You measure a change in an object and one of those measurements I call time delay. You do not want to call it time delay, but we both agree that we can measure change.

I am afraid that we are arguing about the definitions of words and not about any physical principles...