The Noise of Gravitons

Steve(s)

The Dark Debate, matter and energy, has revived questions on the reverse engineering of GR as it now stands. It is worthy of note that GR is recognized to be an incomplete theory, even Einstein acknowledged so. While the current census argues for red-shifting in an expanding universe, there is also Hoyle who had gracefully bowed out of the socio-politically inspired embrace of 'The Big Bang'. But I think it is only proper to hold the door open for Hoyle's hypothesis that existence is continuously coming into being and that includes the creation of more space, time and energy driving the expansion. The Bondi, Gold, Hoyle continuous creation universe has been calculated to estimate that to match observation, only one hydrogen atom per year would need to condensed in a billion liters of space. That would be highly probabilistic to detect. But it could model as that condensation being a contraction of space but less than the expansion driven by the tension of spacetime being the origin of energy. jrc

A pure classicist...this is fun. Usually people invoke some semiclassical axioms about particles and waves, but a purely classical description of a particle is vary rare.

Quantum matter definitions are very straightforward as wavefunctions, but the classical edge of a particle is an infinitesimal singularity that makes no sense at all. Even billiard balls are not perfectly smooth and atoms are not smooth and electrons do not even have a classical radius at all, just a charge radius.

Matter action observable matter begins at the CMB when a small fraction of the aether condenses into electrons and protons and then atoms. This freeze out is kinetic and occurs when charge force reaches a limit, which differentiates gravity from charge in the CMB. More sensitive CMB polarization phase measurements in the future at wider angles should better show the collapse of aether into atoms.

Each matter-action matter particle is not really static and undergoes continous exchange with the aether that is the mass of about 97% of the universe. Note that aether does not really fill space, but rather space emerges from the action of observable matter.

It is not clear how you explain neutrinos classically at all, but maybe you do have a way. Neutrinos are really perturbations of aether that comprise a background along with gravity waves, which are just another perturbation of aether. We are also bathed in the CMB background of 2.7 K photons, which of course are also just a perturbation of aether.

Thanks Doc,

This is kind of fun. Permit me to use a familiar moniker to distinguish between Steve Dufourny and yourself. We have drifted out of sight of the article's arguments which I personally find more mathematical for the sake of math, than physical.

As for "the classical edge of a particle is an infinitesimal singularity"; that is true enough for the usual models which actually invariably result in a wave model of matter, rather than a static (unperturbed) Zero to 2.76K rest state. But from what I've seen, that is the result of attempting to account for the distribution of (aether) energy in accord with inverse square law using differential calculus which results in a feedback loop at the edge boundary. Its also a messy, cumbersome and ultimately arbitrary way of limiting iterations. My own classical particle edge finds a finite limit on a single pole of exponential rate of density variation within upper and lower bounds, and reaches an inertially bound minimum that is equal to the aetherial density, So we actually find independent agreement in paradigms where the quantized particle is continuously interactive with the greater aetherial space. jrc

Interesting that you use aether exchange to fuzz particles, which is very similar to matter action.

An atom in an excited state has an oscillating EM field that is as you say dipolar, not spherical of course. There are states that are quadrupolar and even higher polar, but just keep it dipolar. The only meaning to a free photon is one that binds that atom to another atom in a coherent superposition. You are right when you say this is circular in the sense that that excited state can collapse back to the precursor or to the outcome atom. However, that excited atom is not going to stay excited and eventually will collapse.

You are also right to wonder about when momentum transfer occurs, but that is equivalent to worrying about when wavefunction collapse occurs.

Ground state atoms still oscillate and that is the source of dispersive force, which is dipole-induced dipole. Dispersive em force has good classical meaning, but falls off as 1/R^6. Beyond a certain radius, the 1/r^2 dispersive force of gravity then takes over, which is the source of graviton noise.

Now we are back to the theme of this article. The oscillation of a ground-state atom is normally incoherent except for the very important creation photon. The phase of the creation photon is still anticorrelated with the ground-state atom oscillation, but the creation photon is now at the universe radius and so gravity dispersion is only 1e-39th of that of charge.

Doc

1^-39th is in my ballpark also. What are your thoughts on my posts to Ulla's query about Near Field effects, down a couple threads.

The near field versus far field for a photon is very interesting and quite complex as you so aptly show and the Wiki pic also shows. At long radio wavelengths, single photons are quite large but radio waves usually come from a coherent motion of electrons in a macroscopic antenna. So the near field is a superposition of a very large number of electron fields and therefore photons and the antenna radiation is not yet "free". In the far field, the antenna becomes a point source and the waves then coherent and dipolar.

The near field is simply affected by multipoles and not yet a dipole field.

It is better to focus on a nice radiowave like the hydrogen atom 21 cm line at 1.4 GHz. This is a spin-flip transition that is highly forbidden and has a 10 million year half-life. How can such a large 21 cm single photon come from such a tini-tiny hydrogen atom 0.1 nm and yet the radiowave comes from 4.8e-9 size electron cloud.

The near field for a hydrogen is now defined relative to the size of the hydrogen atom and there are also multipolar effects for this near field. This transition can be observed as part of a maser and so the near field can actually be measured in a hydrogen maser.

Gravity is due to the far field effects of single photons, so once again, the far field gets us back to graviton noise. Graviton noise is the noise of ground-state atom oscillations ever since CMB creation...Attachment #1: nearFieldFarField.JPG

All good points,

Perhaps we have to look in gravitational aggregate for the genesis of the 21 cm photon, which generally is classed in the microwave range. And perhaps this would go to Brownian Motion in the granular size of magnetic domains that tend to isolate to a degree that in ferrous substrates they can be macroscopically measured.

I'm continuing to get a better handle on your 'contracting model' and see how you would correlate space as the emergent condition from aether (which I treat as the lowest density range of energy). Once you study the geometric properties of an idealized sphere incorporating a continuous variation of density distribution, rather than some variation of sphere packing, you quickly find that without postulating an upper density bound proportional to the total quantity of aether inertially frozen out of coherence, the density would go to infinity at zero point center and at some mathematical singularity require the whole isolate total quantity to constitute that singular material point. There-in lies the incompleteness of GR which treats mass density as a simple average of the whole. ergo; Big Bang, Black Holes etc.

However, an empirical upper density bound limits that condition and we find that if the greatest density goes to zero point center, it will require a small but significantly greater amount of the total quantity in distribution, than would be required if the greatest density was constant across a theoretically derived tiny core volume. Hence, the lower limit boundary would be slightly larger for a condensate with a finite constant density core, than for one modeled on a zero point center density. That seems backwards, but the quantitative analysis is really cool. jrc

I just checked. The reactive region of a 21cm near field wavelength would be in the ballpark of the gravitational diameter on an excited free electron modeled on the exponential density distribution rationale I use, So the conventional rationale of the ground state electron in superposition on the proton in a hydrogen atom producing a 21cm photon may not be that physically inexplicable. jrc

A black hole is a matter-action transformation to pure quantum phase. Of course, the BH has all of the original gravity of its matter, but all of the information of that matter is now encoded as quantum phase. This includes the quantum phase of each atom's photon exchange bond, which still correlates with each atom's CMB creation photon.

Of course, gravity as a scalar force is a matter-action scalar monopole just like charge, but in matter action with radiation, gravity is also a vector force as well, just like magnetism is due to moving charge. Vector gravitism is responsible for galaxy rotation without the need to invoke any dark matter mysteries. Likewise, gravitism is also responsible for galaxy motion in clusters and gravity lensing of light, not dark matter.

Hi dear fqxi community, very cool this discussion, thanks, Steve great also this attachment , near field far field, regards

Hi Friends,

Electromagnetism is a field theory, Because of that, the result of QED was a quantum field theory - a quantum theory that contains a value at every point in space

in QED two particles communicate their electromagnetic information by emitting and absorbing a photon. A photon that acts in this manner is called a virtual photon or a messenger photon, because it is created solely for the purpose of exchanging this information

https://mxplank.com/Quantum-Physics%20-%20Quantum-Electro-Dynamics-QED.php

Can somebody elaborate on QED , Please ?

Regards

Raghunath Tiruvaipati

Raghunath.Tiruvaipati@MXPlank.com

good to read this post

I have been looking for this information for quite some time. Will look around your website.

Law Assignments Help

Hi , what is this law assigments help lol we are on a platform of theoretical physics , not about laws , that said the laws in physics are important and and connot the most of the time be violated, regards

Returning about these gravitons. We know that we have this problem of renormalisation with the GR. The QFT and the self similar geometric structures imply problems of quantization of these gravitons. The problem is to consider these gravitons massless like foundamental strings in fact at my opinion. The problem comes from the fact to consider them travelling at c, and so it is still this philosophical problem of the oririn primary of the universe, if we consider the photons and the GR alone to explain the emergent QM and baryonic matter, that does not solve.

It is there that we must think beyond the box , the massless spin-2 field wich would couple to the stress-energy tensor need a deeper logic superimposed. If now we just consider that the 3 known forces are just due to photons encoded but different in number , that is why the photon creates this ekectromagnmetism and after more photons create the weak interaction and after more photons so the gluons create the nuclear forces.

Now this logic implies so a relativistic bridge after this electromagnetism and if my resoning is correct about the fact that this space vacuum of the DE possesses the main codes and so encodes the photons and the cold dark matter, it becomes easier because in fact the standard model is encircled by this ravitation and we have so in respecting newton the auantum gravitation appearing with a force different weaker and we have too a fith force farer than this nuclear force , a stronger gravitational force. This reasoning permits to reduce to Newton's law of gravitation in the weak-field limit.

The planck scale too is problematic and it is still due to this GR alone taken into account and these strings, now if you take these series of 3D spheres and the 3 spacetimes, that solves in all humility. It is not about strings or branes at low-energy vibrational states, no but about 3D spheres occillating and in motions and 3 spacetimes. Furthermore in this reasoning that solves the constant cosmological problem too because they are not massless dear friends.

The main problem for me humbly is our GR .If we take the GR we know that the gravitation is not vectorial at the difference of 3

l'interaction gravitationnelle n'a pas une représentation vectorielle, comme les trois autres forces. En effet, elle se fond alors avec la membrane de l'espace-temps : dans le paradigme de la relativité générale, les masses ne s'attirent plus : elles suivent simplement les géodésiques d'un espace-temps ordonné par le tenseur énergie-impulsion réparti dans l'univers. Dans ce cadre, il n'y a nul besoin d'une particule pour transmettre la gravitation, celle-ci étant inhérente à la 'forme' même de l'univers, ou plus exactement à ses déformations locales. Ceci justifie que, en un endroit précis de l'espace, des corps de masses différentes suivront strictement la même trajectoire (en l'absence de l'intervention de forces extérieures : électromagnétiques, par exemple, ou chocs).

sorry , The main problem for me humbly is our GR .If we take the GR we know that the gravitation is not vectorial at the difference of 3 other forces. so we have a gravitation where the mass don t attract and it is there the problem .

I have put my post under review because I wrote in french lol, sorry.

But retruning at all this, this reasoning can too improve the broken symmetry and the properties of Higgs bosons, it is not only with this broken symmetry that the mass appears but in fact this broken symmetry activates a process and permit the distribution of the mass of this cold dark matter encoded. An other point too wich can be considered in this logic where the space vaccuum of the DE possesses the main codes and informations is so that these photons have more energy than mass and the cold dark matter it is the opposite.

Se that this reasoning can solve many problems , due to the 3 main systems merging together to create our baryonic matter . The stings or points in 1D at this planck scale and the fact to consider the GR and photons alone like primary essence imply too much problems that we cannot solve. The vibrational states and differenmt energies of these strings inside these photons connected with this GR and the EFE have created a kind of philosophical prison.The problem is that we can actually only observe this GR and photons, but the two other spacetimes are relevant to consider . See too that these broken symmetries too are relevant for the spheres and the transformations considering the 3 main series of 3D spheres.

If the matter antimatter broken symmetry has explained the mass , it is not that the mass appears like this but is under a deeper logic of this cold dark matter.

All this implies a better understanding of whjat is the matter and antimatter and why we have not only photons but the DE and DM too to consider. That solves the constant cosmological rpoblem and we have a deeper logic to add to this BB .

It is there that we can unify all , the matter , the antimatter, the photons,the cold dark matter, the DE and the Spheres like primary essence , like foundamental objects. There are matrix and probablilities for all this puzzle and rankings , we must just think beyond this relativistic bridge .