Notices
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Mass repels space-time - edited for understandability agian

  1. #1 Mass repels space-time - edited for understandability agian 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    7
    The Mechanics of Gravity

    An essay by Benjamin R. Brown,



    Let me apologize beforehand for the proceeding dialog. It is writ in the mind set of a fevered mad man trying to convince the world of an unseen abomination, also let me apologize for the rigorous mental gymnastics course, I have set before you, the reader.

    This essay is about the fundamental mechanic of gravity that cannot be experienced, like Newton’s apple is so readily demonstrated to the general populace. To those who are not familiar with the theory of relativity or of general and special relativity, I suggest you read through them at least once, even if you have to read past the more complicated math, or the context to which I heavily pull from, will be lost to you.

    Anything that has a measurable quantity of mass bends the space-time “fabric” of the universe. The idea is not new, for many have surely read the papers and pondered over the equations, to know without doubt or ignorance, that empirically the statement is said to be "true". How much more true, I ask you, could this statement be? We see by observance, that the orbit of Mercury falls neatly under those famous laws of nature penned by those giants of science and theory. Also those unmistakable deviations of star light passing close to the sun, photographed during the solar eclipse that changed the way we thought about the universe. Have we really applied this perspective to its limits?

    Let me simply get on with the show and if I may, allow me to set the stage. Imagine an empty place far removed from any source of gravity, a smooth place devoid of imperfection or ripple. Let us place directly in the center and as to disturb the fabric of space as little as possible, we would instantly pop into existence, a proton right there in the middle of all that smooth space. How we do this is not important. We are only concerned with observing the difference of potential applied to the fabric of space, by the proton.

    So, tell me what effect the proton has on the shape of the space-time it now inhabits? Some will surely say the effect would obviously be too small to account for anything significant. But after you consider our Sun and the accumulate effect of all those protons and neutrons, you would stand by your assumption that the effect would be very small indeed. Yes, but an effect none the less.

    In what way, is the shape of space-time distorted by the proton? If I may, let me borrow a thought experiment from a famous paper for this next example. Let us remove the proton and in its place an old familiar chest be suspended by a rope from its top. And inside put that same occupant from before. Once again have the heavenly being pull the chest on the rope with the person in it. The occupant is translated in a direction toward the bottom of the chest, and feels the sensation of gravity pulling them toward the floor. What is happening to space-time as the occupant and chest are accelerated? Isn’t any one point in space flowing past the person inside the box, from the top towards the bottom? Traveling from, what is considered by the occupant, the top of the chest down past the center and finally down and through the floor of the chest, as the chest is accelerated through space.

    Now, instead of pulling the chest though space, let the rope just be held firmly in one place. So that the chest and occupant, float freely more or less, but remain tethered to the all powerful hand gripping the rope. And beneath the chest let us use our imagination and bend or warp the space-time fabric away from a point, some hundreds of meters below the chest. Again how this magnificent feat is accomplished is not the highlight of this exercise. We simply want to know the effect of the displaced space-time on the chest and occupant. Place the warped space-time beneath the occupant in the chest, so that the direction of the space-time being displaced, is toward the up direction when orientated with the occupant inside the chest. What physical sensation do you think will be perceived by the occupant?


    The forum does not preserve spaces or tabs so periods were substituted please try to ignore them.

    ................=.......................< Chest
    .............____
    .......___........___
    ____..................____........< Space-time-field


    Some of you are surely thinking the chest and occupant will be pushed away from the displaced space-time below them, going with the flow in a sense, of the space-time coming up from below them. This is a commendable effort, but for that to happen would entirely and absolutely depend on an aether like property of space-time that has been shown time and again not to exist.

    Lastly, have the rope with chest in tow, tied to a perch upon a cliff here on Earth. So the person and chest are suspended mid air by the rope. The sensation of gravity would be blatantly obvious to anyone in the chest. What of the space-time around the chest? “It would be at rest” some would say, but thinking twice about aether most would conclusively say, and rightly so, that it doesn't matter, as long as we have one frame of reference in which all relative transformations concerning distance, mass and time can be calculated, and they would be correct for the most part.

    I intend to argue that the occupant in all three circumstances would feel the sensation of gravity pulling them toward the bottom of the chest each time. Was it not proven to us that mass warps space and in effect creates gravity?

    Consider this, when the being pulls the rope tied to the chest through space. +Y is the direction the person in the chest is accelerated. Even though the occupant perceives a force accelerating them toward the -Y direction, at the bottom of the chest. And -Y is the direction space-time is considered to be moving, by the occupant relative to the chest, as it is pulled about in the outer spaces. Now when standing on Earth -Y is the direction we are accelerated, also we perceive to be accelerated to the -Y direction. If gravity is equal to acceleration, which direction should space-time be said to accelerate as we stand still here on Earth? It would have be the +Y direction.

    +Y -Y -Y <-accelerated through space
    -Y -Y +Y <-pulled by gravity


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    7
    Let us go back to the empty place with the single proton in it. Considering my previous demonstration, let me ask you once more. In what physical way is the proton acting on the space-time constituent? If you say pushing it out or away, I would not hold you in error. But how can this be? What is this invisible thing that “supposedly” exists? Where is the proof? We would all demand to see it!

    Most arrive at error like this; here on earth gravity pulls me down, it is said mass curves space, and therefore gravity must bend space inward, indeed a great error. Gravity has never been shown or will ever have an effect on space, it is an effect of space caused by bending it. I see it as, mass curves space-time in a way somewhat akin to a super conductor expelling magnetic flux from its interior. If only in the most minimal way.

    I have found it exceedingly difficult to convey the ideas in my mind to a degree that satisfies my own scrutiny, let alone to stand before your scrutiny. At last I fear we cannot detect nor see this thing I say is there in any sense, without the aid of a second mass to measure it. A proton or neutron would be too heavy, to do any delicate work. A photon too light to do any at all. But an electron, well that may prove just what we are looking for.

    Let us go back again to the single proton in our empty place. Let us imagine an electron into existence somewhat close to the proton but well enough away, so that the proton can still be considered just a proton and the electron just an electron. The proton and the very small electron are accelerated toward each other. As the electron is accelerated toward the proton it must somehow according to some calculations, increase its velocity to half the speed of light to stay in orbit. When we try to think of these things in terms of gravity alone.

    According to the classical sense of Gravity the mass of the proton would be insufficient to achieve the amazing feat of becoming a stable hydrogen atom, but yet it still does. What if the “centre” of the space-time being displaced by the proton, is in fact the layer of space-time that the first electron shell sits above. So that the electron can fall no closer to the proton without more energy than it inherently has by itself.

    What of the electromotive force? Well from what I gather as of yet, the properties of the particle depend solely on the properties of it's constituents. Namely those quarks and gluon that zip and pop just inside their surface, each having mass and momentum. Of course, I neglect the electromotive force, in this writing, which others understand and expound to great lengths. That is beyond the scope of this essay, but by no means do I belittle the magnitude of it's importance.

    What would be the effect on the universe as a whole, if indeed space-time is pushed out of the way by mass, even ever so slightly? To demonstrate let us use “(x)” to represent galaxies, and “--” will represent space displaced by the mass of each galaxy. So that one galaxy along with its displaced or accelerated space-time would look like figure A,

    fig. A

    -(x)-

    Now let us start constructing a small part of the universe. Let us start with our own milky way, we can call it “m”.

    -(m)-

    Then let us add some neighboring galaxies, the distance between can be neglected for this exercise. Let us just assume an average distance between them.

    -(l)--(m)--(n)-

    and a few more.

    -(i)--(j)--(k)--(l)--(m)--(n)--(o)--(p)--(q)-

    Now we have a piece of the universe large enough to show you my next example. What do you think the measured velocity of galaxy (q) would be compared to (o) when measured from (m), in terms of “mushed out space time”?

    -(m)----(o)-

    -(m)--------(q)-

    It should be about twice a fast, as it is twice as far, just as Hubble noted. If space-time is accelerated outward from each galaxy, the universe may look like this in each direction from our perspective.

    -(h)------(i)-----(j)----(k)---(l)--(m)--(n)---(o)----(p)-----(q)------(r)-

    With the apparent velocities accruing as we look farther and farther away from our home into the universe. What if our vantage point was the (p) galaxy? What do you think the universe would look like from there?

    -(k)------(l)-----(m)----(n)---(o)--(p)--(q)---(r)----(s)-----(t)------(u)-

    Of course, throwing a fudge factor into Newton's law of universal gravitation gives the appropriate idea concerning dark energy. I believe by referencing these mental experiments we should have reason to consider the idea that gravity must include a property that pushes the Universe apart. If I may, let me suggest that we have not seen this thing up close because, I believe we are trying to “see” a standing gravity wave or shock boundary. Which itself is just the space-time-field that has become displaced.

    So if we find that somehow these suggestions are true. So that we believe mass displaces the space-time constituent even in the slightest degree, producing in effect gravity and all those consequences thereof. Should we then think of a simple mathematical description for the force of gravity between two masses as equaling the gravity constant G, multiplied by the first mass, multiplied by the second mass, divided by the distance between their centers of momentum squared, times the cosmological constant lambda. Let it be noted that lambda may in fact be variable, perhaps having another force driving it's value, this would give the cosmos a slurry, wavy structure as gravity oscillates between a minimum and maximum lambda value.

    This would give appropriate push and pull forces like we observe in the far reaches of the cosmos. And as I suggest, may help to govern the very small. All depending on the magnitude of the masses and the distances between them. In this light, I feel dark energy or the cosmological constant that gave Einstein so much to worry over, is not so mysterious after all, he only would have had to wait about a century until enough data was available to scrutinize over.

    I only hope to prove or disprove this idea, nothing more and nothing less. There is much more to be said of the force gravity may exert at the atomic level, but unless this idea is examined in mathematical proofs, there is no need to speculate just yet what those consequences could be. I, at the time I write this, have not the mathematical apparatus to examine these ideas with pen and paper.
    ____________

    This is, of course, a very rough idea still swimming delightfully among my thoughts. If one day I find this very same idea silly and preposterous, I shall not feel remorse or shame, for I must have gained knowledge, and truly obtained a great treasure in the end.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    7
    reserved
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Waveman28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally Posted by foolsh
    The lack of response after two days, even though I admit is not that long but 50 or so views later, I would have at least half settled for a "thank you captain obvious" comment in the least.

    So this leads me to two possible realities:
    1. I am the biggest idiot to post any such nonsensical trite.
    or..
    2. I am not the biggest idiot to post such nonsensical trite.

    jk.. I would welcome any and all criticisms.
    I have skimmed over your posts, I must say that at first glance, it is a little bit jumpy. It's difficult to interpret what you are trying to get at sometimes. I will go over it again at some point in the near future in more detail and give you my opinions of it.
    "Doubt is the origin of Wisdom" - Rene Descartes
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    7
    My apologizes for sounding vague, and I fear I am still stuck in that mind set. I merely wanted the reader to come to their own conclusion to as to what my conclusions might be. Because if I was to anounce firstly that I had the greatest theory in the world, one finds that it leads to much more riticule than critisism.

    If I can convince the reader first that the fundamentals are clearly defined the greater consequences would easily follow. Again I apologize for being vague once more.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    7
    Bumping this thread, as it was updated. Any speculative thoughts anyone?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •