• [deleted]

Marcel, Einstein's theory of gravity does not even allow for distance in space.

The relative constancy of electromagnetic energy/light balances attraction and repulsion, and this gives us distance in space. Einstein's collapsing OR expanding space isn't cutting it.

The unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light is proven by balancing scale (i.e., demonstrating what is BOTH a larger and smaller space, invisible AND visible) by making gravity attractive and repulsive as electromagnetic energy/light.

A space that is BOTH invisible and visible demonstrates wave-particle duality necessarily.

This...

The unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light is proven by balancing scale (i.e., demonstrating what is BOTH a larger and smaller space, invisible AND visible) by making gravity attractive and repulsive as electromagnetic energy/light.

...demonstrates particle-wave.

Observer, particle/wave, gravity, electromagnetism/light, balanced/truly extended scale, visible/invisible -- Dreams include all of this.

  • [deleted]

Great point Superman. Real "Quantum gravity" demands a union of gravity and electro. to go with it.

    12 days later
    • [deleted]

    "Who is the master who makes the grass green?"

    I'm just a composer but I've enjoyed this exchange very much. I've always pondered the mathematical significance of the natural harmonic. Could the resulting tones be mapped a some sort of universal reference point?

    We just need a really really really long string.

    How can it be that mathematics, being after all a product of human thought which is independent of experience, is so admirably appropriate to the objects of reality? -- Albert Einstein

    • [deleted]

    small minds

    12 days later
    • [deleted]

    Scientists depend on experiments, analyses, inferences, logics, etc., to formulate any of their theories. Unfortunately, the very tools that are used are defective, in the sense that they cannot help one to find the underlying Great Force governing all components of the world. As long as these defective tools are not dispensed with, one will only conclude that there is some unknown Force governing all cosmic laws. That is, whatever law is made or discovered, it can only be a pointer to the secondary cause at the most. The cause for all secondary causes is the Primary Cause which should be independent of all factors. This Primary Cause is Brahman and is beyond all known and unknown things. It is beyond the reach of human mind and speech. However, It reveals Itself to one who is able to keep his mind free of all impurities. It will be futile to find a cause for this Primary cause, for it will only lead to infinite regress. Only the admission of such a causeless Cause can avoid an infinite regress in our search for an ultimate cause.

    • [deleted]

    There are indeed some experimental hints that gravity is not fundamental.

    The physicist Francis Farley well-known by his ultra precise measurements of the muon has published a paper that does strengthen this view:

    Does gravity operate between galaxies? Observational evidence re-examined

    Authors: Francis J. M. Farley

    (Submitted on 27 May 2010)

    Abstract: The redshifts and luminosities of Type 1A supernovae are conventionally fitted with the current paradigm, which holds that the galaxies are locally stationary in an expanding metric. The fit fails unless the expansion is accelerating; driven perhaps by "dark energy". Is the recession of the galaxies slowed down by gravity or speeded up by some repulsive force? To shed light on this question the redshifts and apparent magnitudes of type 1A supernovae are re-analysed in a cartesian frame of reference omitting gravitational effects. The redshift is ascribed to the relativistic Doppler effect which gives the recession velocity when the light was emitted; if this has not changed, the distance reached and the luminosity follow immediately. This simple concept fits the observations surprisingly well. It appears that the galaxies recede at unchanging velocities, so on the largest scale there is no significant intergalactic force. Reasons for the apparent absence of an intergalactic force are discussed.

    Regards

    Helmut

    25 days later
    • [deleted]

    The idea that there is an accelerating expansion of the universe is based on faulty reasoning due to confusion of relative time with time as a dimension. With relative time distant events are considered to occur at the time the affect earth. Any attempt to explain something like the current location of objects in the universe must look at time as a dimension.

    If we do this then it is apparent that if the red shift indicates motion away from earth, rather than something like a change in wavelength due to passage through a transparent aether, then any expansion slowed over time.

    To plot the rate of explosion: at time T objects were moving away at velocity V; At T 1(billion years) light left closer objects that were moving away at V - x; At T 2 light left still closer objects at V - x - y... From this example we can conclude that if the red shift does indicate movement of objects away from earth, then at T velocity of expansion was V, at T 1 velocity was V - x, at T 2 velocity was V - x - y, etc. This information would indicate that any expansion of the universe slowed over time rather than increased.

    a month later
    • [deleted]

    Gravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos

    Stars' energy fuels the cosmos expansion

    All spin arrays fuel the cosmos expansion

    Gravity Simplified

    Gravity Is The Other Side Of Inflation

    Again: Dark Energy And Dark Matter YOK

    A. E=Total[m(1 D)]

    Is the relationship between the cosmic energy(E), mass(m), and spatial expansion distance(D) of travel of the galactic clusters since the cataclysmic E/m superposition resolution.

    At singularity all cosmic energy was in mass format. The Big Bang was the start of reconversion of mass into energy. At 10^-35 seconds since big bang, D was already a fraction of a second above zero. This is when gravity started. This is what started gravity. At this instance started the energy space texture, the straining of space texture, and started the space-texture-memory, gravity, that most probably will eventually overcome expansion and initiate impansion back to singularity, again.

    The clusters of galaxies behave as accelerating classical Newtonian bodies. Their motion is fueled with energy from myriads of mass-to-energy reconversions, in intertwined evolutions WITHIN the clusters.

    B. The mass-to-energy reconversions continuously diminish m, as D continuously increases

    The energy spent on increasing D, the clusters expansion, becomes the potential impansion energy that will eventually re-form singularity. This is gravity. This is the striving of the resolved-from-energy mass to return to its singularity wholeness.

    m are ALL cosmic formats of mass, regardless of size and complexity, including astronomic-to-smallest-particle bodies and all energy-mass organizations such as black holes environs, biospheres-lifes, all sizes and varieties of spin-arrays.

    "No Dark Matter, No Maybe"

    http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/240/122.page#4545

    C. Mass is destined to dis-exist. It attempts to postpone-survive this by ingesting of energy

    The cosmic expansion will eventually nearly run out of fuel-energy m, when at some value of D it will be overcome by gravity and impansion will thus set in. The universe will then revert towards singularity. D will go on a diminishing course and m will enter a growing course of evolution, very different from the present cosmic evolution course.

    D. Gravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos

    The present universe came into being with inflation, with the onset of gravity. Gravity has been setting the course and nature of all the aspects of its evolution. Gravity will eventually terminate cosmic expansion and reverse the course of cosmic evolution.

    Gravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos

    Dov Henis

    (Comments From The 22nd Century)

    http://www.the-scientist.com/community/user/profile/1655.page

    28Dec09 Implications Of E=Total[m(1 D)]

    http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/184.page#4587

    Cosmic Evolution Simplified

    http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/240/122.page#4427

      • [deleted]

      Hi dear Dov Henis,

      Nice to know you, and happy to see a rational vue of our Universe and its evolving lifes and creations.

      you say"Gravity will eventually terminate cosmic expansion and reverse the course of cosmic evolution"

      Very relevant about the point of contraction, afetr this maximum volume of the universal sphere, the density continues to increase due to evolution and the contraction will go towards the ultim equilibrium between all physical spheres, quantic or cosmologics.

      Dear Don Hen,the singularity....is 1 for the main central sphere(quantic or cosmologic,the number is the same it seems to me) and the other 1 singularity is this Universal sphere.Thus we have the real singularity because the serie is between 1 and 1, like an unique oscillation.

      Best Regards

      Steve

      a month later
      • [deleted]

      not so new ideas, about gravity like not a fundamental force............

      andrei sakharov.

      http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0204/0204062v1.pdf

      http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~akempf/sakharov.pdf

      a month later
      • [deleted]

      Tom wrote: "what is true for clock dilation/contraction is also true for rod dilation/contraction -- they are different ways to measure the same phenomenon;"

      In general relativity this is not true for the interior of a material body. General relativity predicts that, at the center of the body, time dilation is a local maximum, whereas length contraction is a local minimum (space is flat at the center). This is relevant since Tom was responding to Steve's request for clarification concerning these effects in gravitational fields.

      As implied by Tom's answer, the intuitive assumption is that the effects should be of the same magnitude, as "different ways to measure the same phenomenon." I agree with this. Yet general relativity contradicts it for interior fields.

      Though a range of clock rates has been measured in exterior gravitational fields (in agreement with general relativity), for practical reasons there are no measurements for interior gravitational fields. So we do not really know whether the general relativity prediction is correct or not. Note, however that an indirect, yet convincing, test is possible. The local minimum clock rate prediction corresponds to the prediction that a test object dropped into a hole through the center of a larger massive body will oscillate from one end of the hole to the other. Of course this is a very commonly discussed prediction of both general relativity and Newtonian gravity ("hole to China" problem). Curiously, we have no empirical evidence to back up the prediction.

      An overlooked possibility is that, instead of having a local minimum rate, the central clock has a local maximum rate (corresponding to flat space). If this were true, then the dropped object would not oscillate in the hole.

      The latter possibility (among other things) is discussed in:

      http://www.gravitationlab.com/Grav%20Lab%20Links/MaximumForce-Jan-6-2010b.pdf

      • [deleted]

      When does a force is pushing or pulling something? It is a pulling force if the force is infront of the object it is acting , It is leading the object towards its direction. A pushing force on the otherhand , the force is behind the object it is acting upon. Although the object is infront of the force, it is still the force which has the say to which direction the object will go.

      In 1687, English mathematician Sir Isaac Newton published Principia, which hypothesizes the inverse-square law of universal gravitation. In his own words, "I deduced that the forces which keep the planets in their orbs must [be] reciprocally as the squares of their distances from the centers about which they revolve: and thereby compared the force requisite to keep the Moon in her Orb with the force of gravity at the surface of the Earth; and found them answer pretty nearly. He theorized that every mass in the universe pulls each other. The bigger the mass the bigger the pull. In our planet, that pull is called gravity.

      In the General Relativity theory of Einstein, he proposed that gravitation is caused by the curvature of space-time. It is like placing a ball on a stretched cloth. The bigger the ball, the bigger the curvature, the bigger the gravitational effect. Yet it failed to distinguish whether the gravitational effect is a pulling effect or a pushing effect. It simply pointed out that it has a falling effect.

      Einstein was partially right when he said that gravitation is caused by the curvature of space-time. He did not go beyond that. I think however that gravitation is caused by the crumpling of the space-time plane, not stretching it. It is an opposite concept but with the same apparent general effect on us. Thus, I believe that gravity is caused by the crumpled space-time trying to restore to its original state. All the smaller objects between the crumpled space-time and the massive object are pushed towards that massive object. Just like a coiled spring which when compressed will try to return to its original state. The more massive the object, the tighter the space-time is being compressed. Remember Newton's law on Inertia.

      In general relativity theory, space-time is curved by the presence of mass. He predicted that a light passing thru a curved space-time will also bend or will follow the curvature of space-time. During a total solar eclipse, experiments were conducted to see if light really bended or curved. After the solar eclipse, the experiments proved that indeed light curved or follow the curvature of space time. In my own analysis, the space-time was curved indeed by the presence of a massive object. The curvature was not stretched but rather compressed. When do we know that the curvature was stretched or curved? If the light that passes around the object became dimmer because the light was dispersed or it travelled through a longer/wider space-time field then the curvature was stretched. If the light that passes around the object became brighter as the light travelled through a narrower/shorter space-time then one can assume that the curvature was compressed. The results of the experiment failed to show or discuss this. Why is this important? From here we can determine if gravity is pulling us or pushing us towards the center of the mass. One should start at the correct presumption...

      21 days later
      • [deleted]

      Quantum theory of gravity.

      Convert a circular 360 day earth orbit in 11 dimensions to an eliptical 365 day orbit in Einstiens 4D space/Time.

      And reverse the equation to convert EInsteins thoery to string theory..........

      Sine string theory is compatable with quantum theory.

      YOu need to define time as the robit of the earth not like Einstein defines time.

      And you need to convert 4 Dimensions to 11 with the formula for time.

      Steve.

      have fun. HA HA.

      • [deleted]

      You can ask COSMOS for a copy of EInsteins dice or email me on aircloudenator@gmail.com and I will send them to you.

      The dice obey the rules 1 ODD THROW 1 EVEN THROW= 2 ODD THROWS.

      and 2 ODD THROWS 2 EVEN THROWS=4 EVEN THROWS.

      And you can program a supercomputer with a virtual quauntum universe that is determined.

      The maths is very good but it does not approximate our universe which may be detemrined 53% or soemthing like that by ESP.

      You can make rules to predict the throws of real random dice based on EInsteins dice.

      You can make yourself a copy of Einsteins dice in C..........

      These dice put quantum and classical theories together.

      Joe

      • [deleted]

      Sorry, quantum gravity occurs in/as dream experience, as dreams make thought more like sensory experience in general. Here is EXACTLY why and how this is so:

      Inertia and gravity may be unified -- and a smaller space made larger, and a larger space made smaller -- if we are semi-weightless/semi-mobile. This makes space manifest in/as the middle distance in/of space in conjunction with half gravity and half inertia. Gravity attaches space, and inertia detaches space. Accordingly, space is then semi-detached from touch, as it manifests in/as the middle distance in/of space in conjunction with half gravity and half inertia, and space is contracted/flattened and stretched/expanded in keeping therewith. A smaller space is then made larger, and a larger space is then made smaller. This gives us quantum gravity and balanced/equivalent attraction and repulsion in keeping with equivalent/balanced inertia and gravity, as this all relates to/involves the middle distance in/of space.

      15 days later
      • [deleted]

      http://www.answerbag.com/a_view/9702997

      Explains what gravity is.

      5 days later
      • [deleted]

      GRAVITY AND SPACE

      When a body accelerates in space, creating the effect of inertia in the direction opposite where you accelerate, called center of gravity.

      If space that accelerates, will create the same effect. (gravity)

      Example, in the first second of the universe, the universal sphere would measure 300,000 kilometers in radius, at 2 º second 600,000 in the 3 rd second 900,000-kilometer radius, with the mass the same, in an area that increases in volume to the cube in negative density . It is therefore an acceleration into space. vacuum is not constant, and is accelerated by the universal sphere radius at all times. The vacuum is accelerated outward, and the effect goes in from each club. (gravity)

      Principle of cause, effect.

      Do not want to elaborate more. If you are interested I can explain a lot more Thank you for your attention Julián Luque c / escuelas nº 24, cp, 14550 Montilla (Córdoba) Spain

      mobile 638017324, phone 957651734

      ( MORE). the effect of inertia is constant as long as you accelerate, as if desaceramos always opposite to the direction.

      (Gravity is an effect of inertia) due to the constant volume of the universe, the ability of the universal sphere increases with the cube in each, time. Mathematics is an accelerated equation. (The acceleration is equal to inertia). (inertia is equal to gravity)

      Vacuum the entire volume of the universe is spread in more than half empty, otherwise it will shrink.

      14 days later
      • [deleted]

      Hello Erik,

      Simply Congratulations on your out of the box work...

      The arena you have chosen to explore with you open approach to ideas and intuition, along with the science of our finite truth through mathematics, bodes well for the future of knowledge. Which needs new ideas to move us forward to a more universal community of cultures, through science.

      Cheers, and good journey to you,

      Russ

      7 days later
      • [deleted]

      The gravity is dependent on the mass and the ultimate source of the mass is the electromagnetic force. The only attracting force between same electric charges is the magnetic force if they are moving in the same direction. Probably the Big Bang caused accelerating Universe gives this parallel motion and the general magnetic attraction - we intercepting as gravitation.Attachment #1: 2_PhysicsUnified.tif

      • [deleted]

      The Nature of Spatial Content:

      As a result of experiment and observation we are predisposed to thinking that nature abhors a vacuum, vacuum being unfilled void or space. By nature we mean the totality of all phenomena that exhibit behaviour. Vacuum, which we consider to be devoid of behaviour, we conclude to be hostile and unnatural. We take this position because our immediate environment is almost totally natural. It teems with phenomena exhibiting behaviour. But if we take the larger, God-like view of all there is, we find that vacuum is the dominant condition. What is common to our experience is that forces tend to flow towards matter. The God-like view of all there is would logically reverse polarities and hold that vacuum is natural, and what we call nature to be an imperfection of vacuum. To illustrate this distinction, consider vacuum to be at its most concentrated condition furthest removed from matter.

      As we approach matter there is a gradual dilution of vacuum, in the case of the earth an atmospheric layer polluting the vacuum. As we reach the surface of solid matter, there is an abrupt paucity of vacuum, void remaining only in the interstitial spaces between conglomerate matter, between atomic particles, and at the smaller scale within atomic structures separating electrons from nuclei. So in matter we find an exhibition of defiance against vacuum, the exception that proves the rule. What is the rule? The rule is that vacuum (unfilled void or space) abhors nature, and flows to fill its absence. It is the energy of the flow of vacuum, attracted like water or air to areas of low resistance, that Newton called gravity and Einstein attributed to dimples in space. Newtons magnetic theory and Einsteins space-time curvature are metaphors describing their conclusions regarding a general tendency of matter to move and accelerate towards matter. Gravity is viewed as an attractive force because it impinges upon the observer as a matter of fact. Both Newton and Einstein are substantially correct; the mathematics works for them as indeed it has to for the thesis of this proposition, the difference being that, if one is truly attempting to describe the cosmos objectively, one must not take oneself or ones home planet as being the normal environment or natural condition in space, but rather an aberration of the dominant medium of the cosmos, vacuum. It is only by externalizing the observer from the event that he can view it objectively. A river is not a river when viewed from the centre of its action, it is an environment. The logic of the situation demands that, as in biology, one should establish the physiology of normality against which one can then compare departures from the norm. Newtons and Einsteins theories when measured by these standards are upside down. They still work, just as a good thermometer measures cold as efficiently as it measures heat; it is simply calibrated the wrong way since cold is the predominant and therefore normal condition and heat merely a reduction of cold, as an aberration. Logically what we call gravity is antigravity; matter is low-density, denatured (or natured if you prefer) vacuum, and what we call nature is the exception. We tend to think of vacuum as suction.

      In the world of logical reality we, that matter, are the suckers struggling not to be blown away by the flow of vacuum. That flow is Nirvana from the Sanskrit nir, meaning out, and vati, meaning it blows. Small clues in accounting for the antagonism between science and religion!

      [Abstracted from 'It: The Architecture of Existence'. ISBN 9781857566680. pp. 285-6.]