[deleted]
Hi Peter,
So it comes down to one simple proposition: is redshift equivalent to gravity?
Hi Peter,
So it comes down to one simple proposition: is redshift equivalent to gravity?
Interesting question Jason.
I would have said, "certainly not always", but there's another link I hadn't considered.
I'm now quite sure that the extra mass atributable to bodies in motion due to momentum/inertia does propagate the equivalent additional gravity. Particles in accelerators propagate a cloud of oscillators which hold the additional momentum, reducing to zero at rest. This would mean our galaxy edge Halo may reduce if we stopped moving through deep space, but anyway;
As Doppler shift also depends on speed; It gives a direct relationship between gravity and wavelength. So light from a lump of mass approaching us would be increasingly blue shifted proportionally to it's speed, but the light would also be increasingly red shifted proportionally to it's increasing gravitational mass.
Does that make any sense to you?
Peter
Hi Peter,
Great to hear from you.
The stress-energy part of the Einstein equations tells us what is included in (what causes) gravity, by virtue of "curving space". This includes energy density, momentum density, energy flux, sheer stress, pressure and momentum flux. These are all of the different kinds of energy that act to curve space-time. I'm not sure if that was helpful...
"As Doppler shift also depends on speed; It gives a direct relationship between gravity and wavelength. " I'm going to reword that in a way that is familiar to me; you can tell me what you think. The change in gravitational potential is proportional to the change in frequency. This much I know.
Peter,
You keep mentioning that there are halos around fast moving particles, when they travel close to the speed of light. I believe that everything is implemented with photons (virtual/real) including inertia. The idea of halos kind of fits with my idea that every particle(every thing) is immersed in an ocean of virtual photons.
What do you think?
Jason
Thanx, I agree, but I've discovered a telling thing about the wavelength frequency relationship; If refraction into a moving medium conserves frequency and energy by changing wavelength (Doppler shift) angle and light speed between frames (the same as into different refractive index media), then we've found the problem with SR, resolved it and unified physics with Huygens-Fresnel, even without a background matter field. Can you see how?
"Every particle immersed in an ocean of virtual photons" I feel you're on the wrong track, until you add the relative motion function. With no motion wrt a surrounding field its surrounded by 1/137th fine structure, at 0.999%c it fills the LHC tube at 1013/m-3. oscillating at gamma.
That's linked with para 1, and frequency modulation with conserved spin axis. it resolves the paradox of the constancy of 'c' irrespective...etc. It's right under your nose, just follow Braggs advice. (my Nobel winning paper is almost done!).
Best of luck with that
Peter
Hi Peter,
Sorry I haven't gotten back sooner. You present a lot to think about. I do wish you the best with your Nobel Winning paper; I'd like to read it, even if it's not finished.
I've been thinking about photons, light, and high frequency circuits. I was thinking about how phase lock loops work.
Sorry, my break is over. I'll continue later.
Hi Peter,
So every photon is received with velocity c. That probably just means that the phase velocity c = lamda*f, always occurs. In other words, the measured frequency and wavelegth of a photon will alway adhere to c = lamda*f. This would be true no matter what. It doesn't matter if the photon frequency has to be increased or descreased to account for gravity or relativistic motion.
It is true that we really have no idea what gravity is. We do know that gravitational potentials exist. We also know that photons that have to climb out of a potential well will lose energy and frequency. It is also true that light can follow a curved path due to gravity.
"If refraction into a moving medium conserves frequency and energy by changing wavelength (Doppler shift) angle and light speed between frames (the same as into different refractive index media), then we've found the problem with SR, resolved it and unified physics with Huygens-Fresnel, even without a background matter field. "
If the medium/frame is moving, then won't it be at a higher energy? Now, energy and frequency are conserved, of course. If you shine a laser on a spaceship moving away at 0.2c, the received frequency, measured on the spaceship, has less energy because the waves come less frequently.
Likewise if you shine a laser on a spaceship travelling towards you, at 0.2c, the spaceship crosses each wave more quickly, so the frequency goes up.
Yes, I know that length contraction and time dialation effects might contribute. Uh, er... what do you think?
What happened to the font?
Bizzzare. I think we're now communicating in superscript!
Perhaps that suits us.
"So every photon is received with velocity c."
No, not at all - you missed the point, which cantains the answer to life, the universe and everything! It's this;
Every photons is EMITTED at 'c'. - but will be received at any speed subject to the relative velocity of the medium.
Just think carefully about that for the moment. The fine structure at the boundaries of our eyes and all our measuring instruments is electrons. If we jump on our jet bike and shoot off towards some light at 0.2c, our fine 'boundary' structure will receive the photons at 1.2c, but pass them on to us at 'c', (blue shifted). If we go the other way? They arrive at 0.8c but we still get them passed on to us (red shifted to conserve the energy) by our fine structure, at 'c'. Simple my dear Watson.
Do please for Pete's sake tell me you can now see the implications on SR of a quantum mechanism for constancy of 'c' !!
Ohterwise I shall consider abandoning my search for intelligent life.
Peter
Please fix the script!!!
sadfdf a;lfdja;ljfdk
hey I think I fixed it.
Maybe just one more time
Peter,
I think you were right about the frequency modulation stuff. For any inertial frame, the frequency will vary from f=0Hz (DC) to f = 10^19Hz (gamma rays). I think my idea makes more sense, photons are both emitted and absorbed with velocity c.
[math]c = \lambda f[/math]
There is no infinite universal Cartesian coordinate system that we can't find. Space-time results because photons are being transmitted and received, even if we don't directly see them, they're there. The frequency and wavelength can and will change to accommodate differences in velocity and gravity. Spatial relationships have to be enforced by the fixed velocity of light. However, gravitational red/blue shifting as well as Doppler frequency shifting can occur to accommodate these circumstances. This is what ties together gravitational potential energy and momentum.
I have to disagree with you about the idea of an underlying medium. If it exists, it cannot be measured. The Michelson-Morley experiment proved that. More likely, it is an ocean of virtual photons that across the full range of frequencies from f = 0 to gamma rays. I would entertain the idea that this ocean of photons is not filled with energy, but that would be speculation on my part.
I hope this helps. Or if you disagree, tell me where I've gone astray.
Best wishes,
Jason
Hmm.
"..tell me where I've gone astray."
You need to heed Braggs advice "its not new facts but the way we think about facts that's important", and Einsteins; "We can't solve our problems with the same way of thinking that created them". Take a step back and re think;
"photons are both emitted and absorbed with velocity c."
Imagine a person has a rocket bike, and the fine structure boundary electrons of his eyes. If he is at rest, the electron will both receive and emitt the photon at 'c'. (on the same vector - as HFP) so the signal is passed into his eye at 'c'. However;
If he then shoots off on his bike towards the source, the photons will be absorbed at c v, but still emitted into his eye at 'c'. He therefore sees them at 'c', but Doppler shifted.
If he heads away from the source, they'll be absobed at c - v, but still of course emitted at 'c'. So he sees them at 'c', but further apart (red shifted).
That is exactly how Frequency Modulation works. The wavelength is altered back to the original by a preset oscillator frequency, emitting at 'c' whatever relative speed the signal is absorbed at!
The fine structure (constant at rest) electrons of measuring instruments does exactly the same.
That's how energy and frequency are conserved in Huygens Principle and Fourier Optics - by changing the speed and wavelength, refracting the wavefront angle.
Ergo; CSL is explained with a quantum process, unifying physics and removing all the paradox from Special Relativity.
If you still dont see it, take Bragg and Einsteins advice; Clear your mind of preconception, take 3 steps back in your mind for a better 'overview' and visualise it, picture it in your mind, as you read through it again really slowly.
Does that work?
Peter
Hi Peter,
What do you think of this?
Since the idea that rapid and repeating frequency shifting generates an acceleration field is based upon the Equivalence Principle, how does one describe the Equivalence Principle in mathematical format? My conclusion is reasoned with logic, not mathematics.
I can say that the final photon energy equals the initial photon energy less the gravitational potential energy changed.
(1) [math]E_f = E_i - U_{grav}[/math]
From this, I could say that the change in photon energy equals a change in the gravitational potential.
(2) [math]E_f - E_i = -U_{grav}[/math]
Since the photon energy equals the frequency multiplied by the Planck constant, I can write,
(3) [math]E_f - E_i = h(f_f - f_i)[/math]
Then it follows that a change in gravitational potential energy must equal a change in frequency if I substitute (3) into (2) to get,
(4)[math]h(f_f - f_i) = -\Delta U_{grav}[/math]
I can rewrite equation (4) to get an equation for the Planck constant,
(5) [math]h = -\frac{\Delta U_{grav}}{\Delta f}[/math]
Equation (5) states that the Planck constant equals the change in gravitational potential energy with respect to the photon's change in frequency. If we check the units, Planck constant is in joule-sec and the frequency derivative of the gravitational potential energy has units of joules/Hz= joule-sec.
In effect, I have the frequency derivative of a gravitational potential equal to the Planck constant.
Does this move us any closer to a unified physics theory?
Peter,
I think there exists an available bandwidth everywhere in space. This bandwidth is 10^19Hz. I think gravity might be a frequency shift, but the details are still vague right now.
Peter,
Are you still there?
Hi Jason
Sorry, very busy, finishing my paper, designing stuff and working on boats. I also couldn't get a handle on the possible importance of your equation.
You've also missed the relavance of mine. Can you do some imagining for me for a moment?;
A spacecraft with a large solar panel is doing 'v' on it's way to Mercury. On the face of the solar panel is the normal fine structure of electrons.
As it heads towards the sun it closes with the photons (or waves if you like) at c v, they're absorbed by the electrons and re emitted on the same path into the panels (refracted and Doppler [blue] shifted as appropriate), at 'c' wrt the electrons.
The 'c' is of course the new local 'c' of the Solar panels.
Ifthe laws of physics are the same for all mass and all electrons, anything with mass will therefore always measure all light at 'c' no matter how fast it's going and in which direction.
On it's way back to earth going away from the sun the waves/photons will be red shifted by the process but still be sent on into the solar panels (or any measuring instrument) at the local 'c' of the instrument.
Is it really only me, a handful of others and kids under 8yrs old who can see that this finally removes all paradox and unifies SR and QFT!??
If you're interested (which the PR journals of course were not without even a glance; http://vixra.org/abs/1007.0022
Do please let me know how you get on, and do ask any questions. I'm having athink about where your standard Planck gravitational frequency might fit in.
Very best wishes
Peter
Dear Peter,
You and I are both doing the same thing. We each see something that is so blatantly obvious that we are dumbfounded that other people can't see it. I am confident that you wrote this blog and your paper as concisely and articulately as is ever possible. From the point of view of someone reading it for the first time and/or from another point of view, it is like drinking from the fire hydrant where every drop takes thought. I am grateful to see my reflection.
First, it sounds like you are challenging the Michelson-Morley experiment. Frame dragging, which I'm not sure if they proved it or not, but it's probably true; frame dragging would explain the Michelson-Morely result which wrongfully struck down the aether theory. Stuff about normal fine structure of electrons; what does that do? Blue shift occurs and then everything is ok.
Next, spacecraft with solar panel moves at velocity v, light strikes solar panel from the sun. Electrons detect sun's photons to travel at c+v velocity.
On the way back from the sun, photons arrive at c-v, normal fine structure of electrons stuff happens, red-shift and electrons arrive at velocity c.
Question: how would the electrons know how fast the light is moving? How do they measure it? Do they carry stopwatches and rulers?
If I really can trust my ruler and stopwatch, then why do black holes take forever to swallow up debris? What I mean is why does time dilation occur? Why does length contraction occur? Why do atomic clocks on airplanes run faster than atomic clocks down here on earth? How do I know that any star, planet or galaxy is as far away as cosmologists tell me it is? There is only one velocity that I trust. It is the velocity of light. I believe that c is absolute and is an inherent characteristic of every photon. A photon is like an email with information content. It leaves something and it arrives somewhere. Can information travel FTL? Sure! Yes! Can it do so without requiring a hyper-space? Uh! Can the universe give contradictory results about how far away a planet or galaxy is? Yes.
In my opinion, the aether is an invisible ocean of virtual photons, all of which are moving at the speed of light c, but in all directions. Did the super black hole of M87 spit out a jet that traveled superluminally? The small angle explanation sounds really lame and stupid. But it's 100 million light years away; it's hard to be sure.
Why is the normal fine structure of electrons so important to you're theory? I'll wager a guess. These are the natural characteristics of virtual photons, super-strings and/or the wiggly objects out of which physics and the universe are constructed. When they bubble up from the aether, the universe is implemented with those characteristics.
Does this help?