Notices
Results 1 to 50 of 50

Thread: Non-Critical Mass

  1. #1 Non-Critical Mass 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    The popular description of the concieved interior of a BH usually involves the phrase, "a place where matter is broken down to it's constituents" or something similar. It has occurred to me that this might be very wrong.


    a) a particle that is in freefall is at rest,


    b) the supposed travel time between event horizon and singularity is elongated so that a particle making that journey is effectively permanently at rest


    This would leave FoR effects as the only thing acting on involved particles, possibly. It may present particles an environment in which they sustain alignment. I was reading about electron hole compression recently and can imagine something similar.

    Is there a more constructive concept of what occurs beyond the EH?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    KJW
    KJW is offline
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1,561
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    b) the supposed travel time between event horizon and singularity is elongated so that a particle making that journey is effectively permanently at rest
    No, the proper time between the event horizon and the central singularity is finite.


    There are no paradoxes in relativity, just people's misunderstandings of it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    I appreciate the correction but it does little to clarify the question. Even with a finite travel time, the particle's basic element is still simply it's spin. It might be a very simple order, but even the singularity must retain qualities that give it definable form.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by KJW View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    b) the supposed travel time between event horizon and singularity is elongated so that a particle making that journey is effectively permanently at rest
    No, the proper time between the event horizon and the central singularity is finite.
    I appreciate the correction but it does little to clarify the question. Even with a finite travel time, the particle's basic element is still simply it's spin. It might be a very simple order, but even the singularity must retain qualities that give it definable form.

    I can only see a condition that might be analogous to the alignment of zero state helium
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    The popular description of the concieved interior of a BH usually involves the phrase, "a place where matter is broken down to it's constituents" or something similar. It has occurred to me that this might be very wrong.
    I don't remember coming across a description like that. It doesn't seem terribly meaningful or helpful. I wouldn't bother arguing against it. Just ignore it.

    Our currently best theory (General Relativity) simply says that whatever falls into a black hole will be crushed to infinite density. I don't think anyone thinks that is physically realistic; it just reflects a shortcoming of our current theories.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by KJW View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    b) the supposed travel time between event horizon and singularity is elongated so that a particle making that journey is effectively permanently at rest
    No, the proper time between the event horizon and the central singularity is finite.
    That forces me to question the nature of finite for a particle in this context?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Even with a finite travel time, the particle's basic element is still simply it's spin.
    Particles have a number of other basic attributes such as charge and mass. These are conserved by the black hole. Other quantum states are (perhaps) lost, or at least inaccessible.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    The popular description of the concieved interior of a BH usually involves the phrase, "a place where matter is broken down to it's constituents" or something similar. It has occurred to me that this might be very wrong.
    I don't remember coming across a description like that. It doesn't seem terribly meaningful or helpful. I wouldn't bother arguing against it. Just ignore it.

    Our currently best theory (General Relativity) simply says that whatever falls into a black hole will be crushed to infinite density. I don't think anyone thinks that is physically realistic; it just reflects a shortcoming of our current theories.

    I am starting to think a mechanical description of a BH would be "Spin Simplex". Exclusion and spin must take some form of order
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Even with a finite travel time, the particle's basic element is still simply it's spin.
    Particles have a number of other basic attributes such as charge and mass. These are conserved by the black hole. Other quantum states are (perhaps) lost, or at least inaccessible.
    but do they have charge and mass within that FoR or is that inferred on the body as a whole by the surrounding universe? If they are stripped down to anything it should be the spin components, within that FoR. What does that leave?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Even with a finite travel time, the particle's basic element is still simply it's spin.
    Particles have a number of other basic attributes such as charge and mass. These are conserved by the black hole. Other quantum states are (perhaps) lost, or at least inaccessible.
    but do they have charge and mass within that FoR or is that inferred on the body as a whole by the surrounding universe? If they are stripped down to anything it should be the spin components, within that FoR. What does that leave?
    Does the BH infer it's charge and mass on it's immediate environment rather than retain it internally?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    within the BH there is a uniformity of FoR. FoR disparity only exists between either side of the EH. If inside is a gravity well, outside should be a mass well
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    That forces me to question the nature of finite for a particle in this context?
    Proper time corresponds to the length of the world line between two fixed events - that works for a particle just as it does for an elephant falling into the black hole. In both cases, if you were to attach a clock to the object, that clock will record a finite and well defined amount of time.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    That forces me to question the nature of finite for a particle in this context?
    Proper time corresponds to the length of the world line between two fixed events - that works for a particle just as it does for an elephant falling into the black hole. In both cases, if you were to attach a clock to the object, that clock will record a finite and well defined amount of time.
    do clocks work in a BH?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    do clocks work in a BH?
    Of course. They work until such time when they are torn apart by tidal forces.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    do clocks work in a BH?
    Of course. They work until such time when they are torn apart by tidal forces.
    This is this what I am referring to. How can the tidal forces act on the particles inside the BH? Shouldn't they act on the environment outside the EH?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    This is this what I am referring to. How can the tidal forces act on the particles inside the BH? Shouldn't they act on the environment outside the EH?
    They are present in both regions; there is nothing special about space-time at the event horizon, it is just as smooth and continuous there as it is everywhere else outside the singularity. The tidal forces depend on the mass of the black hole - if it is very massive, tidal forces outside the EH are small, and become important only very far inside the interior. For small, not very massive BHs the tidal forces might obliterate you long before you even reach the event horizon.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    This is this what I am referring to. How can the tidal forces act on the particles inside the BH? Shouldn't they act on the environment outside the EH?
    They are present in both regions; there is nothing special about space-time at the event horizon, it is just as smooth and continuous there as it is everywhere else outside the singularity. The tidal forces depend on the mass of the black hole - if it is very massive, tidal forces outside the EH are small, and become important only very far inside the interior. For small, not very massive BHs the tidal forces might obliterate you long before you even reach the event horizon.
    The point is the condition of the particle once it has entered a purely gravetic FoR. All particles within that FoR are aligned and in unison. Charge and mass are features of disparity which are only present outside the singularity region(if you prefer that to EH).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    but do they have charge and mass within that FoR or is that inferred on the body as a whole by the surrounding universe?
    As far as I know, mass and charge (and spin) are intrinsic properties of particles and nothing to do with the rest of the universe. They are also conserved (well, mass-energy, rather than just mass) so that if, for example, a charged particle falls into a black hole, the black hole will gain that much charge.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    within the BH there is a uniformity of FoR.
    I'm not sure that is true (Markus may be able to comment). I assume the frame of reference will vary continuously as you move closer to the singularity. (Is "frame of reference" even the right term in this context?)

    FoR disparity only exists between either side of the EH.
    There is no disparity between the insdie and outside of the event horizon.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    The point is the condition of the particle once it has entered a purely gravetic FoR. All particles within that FoR are aligned and in unison.
    Are they? What do you base that on? (And what does "aligned and in unison" mean?)

    Charge and mass are features of disparity which are only present outside the singularity region(if you prefer that to EH).
    How do you know that?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    The point is the condition of the particle once it has entered a purely gravetic FoR.
    That state will be free fall along a geodesic in space-time; the thing is that there is relative acceleration between these geodesics themselves. That is where gravitational time dilation and tidal forces originate ( see the equation in my signature ).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    All particles within that FoR are aligned and in unison.
    I have a vision of a host of particles holding hands and singing in harmony as they fall to their doom!
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    All particles within that FoR are aligned and in unison.
    I have a vision of a host of particles holding hands and singing in harmony as they fall to their doom!
    Stop assuming doom. If the BH is there so are the particles.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    The point is the condition of the particle once it has entered a purely gravetic FoR.
    That state will be free fall along a geodesic in space-time; the thing is that there is relative acceleration between these geodesics themselves. That is where gravitational time dilation and tidal forces originate ( see the equation in my signature ).
    I'm not convinced the interior has space-time. This is a good part of what I am saying. By being in an aligned state, space is left at the door and only the time features of the particles operate beyond the singularity. I would need evidence that spacetime is the same inside as out and would see that area as analagous to the interior of a proton or neutron.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    The point is the condition of the particle once it has entered a purely gravetic FoR.
    That state will be free fall along a geodesic in space-time; the thing is that there is relative acceleration between these geodesics themselves. That is where gravitational time dilation and tidal forces originate ( see the equation in my signature ).
    I'm not convinced the interior has space-time. This is a good part of what I am saying. By being in an aligned state, space is left at the door and only the time features of the particles operate beyond the singularity. I would need evidence that spacetime is the same inside as out and would see that area as analagous to the interior of a proton or neutron.
    Mass and charge are expressions between particles, of geodesic disparity. Within the singularity this disparity is not present, though I don't believe that it is no longer a factor. That factor should be expressed entirely without the singularity in my estimation.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Mass and charge are expressions between particles, of geodesic disparity.
    Where did that come from?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Mass and charge are expressions between particles, of geodesic disparity.
    Where did that come from?
    I am trying to illustrate exactly where that came from. Now that you prompt me to greater explanation I will concentrate on better illustrating this description and get back to you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    I am trying to illustrate exactly where that came from. Now that you prompt me to greater explanation I will concentrate on better illustrating this description and get back to you.
    So I assume it is something you have made up, rather than some established science?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Within the singularity this disparity is not present
    I don't think there is any such thing as "within the singularity". A singularity isn't a thing and almost certainly doesn't exist.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Mass and charge are expressions between particles, of geodesic disparity.
    Where did that come from?
    I am trying to illustrate exactly where that came from. Now that you prompt me to greater explanation I will concentrate on better illustrating this description and get back to you.
    I have errands to run and am not sure if this clarifies the subject the way I intend, but at this point I would say that mass is the property of the geodesic a particle follows and the particles charge is it's expression of this disparity. I totally haven't had time to be sure that is an accurate description but it gives me something to structure my contemplation around.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Within the singularity this disparity is not present
    I don't think there is any such thing as "within the singularity". A singularity isn't a thing and almost certainly doesn't exist.
    Singularity, is an english word we assign meaning to. There is most certainly something at the center of a massive gravity well.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    I am trying to illustrate exactly where that came from. Now that you prompt me to greater explanation I will concentrate on better illustrating this description and get back to you.
    So I assume it is something you have made up, rather than some established science?
    Made up? I have followed a train of logic for many years. I am trying to describe a conceptual mechanism accurately. If I were simply making it up I would include what I wished rather than seeking to accurately describe a system.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    I am trying to illustrate exactly where that came from. Now that you prompt me to greater explanation I will concentrate on better illustrating this description and get back to you.
    So I assume it is something you have made up, rather than some established science?
    What I think I may have struck on is already available in the material but not with the current limitations of specific terms like singularity. It is a trick of the perception(FoR), rather than a new mechanism/system. Trying to define the perceptual misdirection is not simple.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Singularity, is an english word we assign meaning to.
    It has a very specific, mathematical meaning. As I'm sure you know.

    There is most certainly something at the center of a massive gravity well.
    There may well be something. But we don't know what.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    I am trying to describe a conceptual mechanism accurately.
    Then perhaps you should show us the math?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    What I think I may have struck on is already available in the material but not with the current limitations of specific terms like singularity. It is a trick of the perception(FoR), rather than a new mechanism/system. Trying to define the perceptual misdirection is not simple.
    Do you want to try that again. In English.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    What I think I may have struck on is already available in the material but not with the current limitations of specific terms like singularity. It is a trick of the perception(FoR), rather than a new mechanism/system. Trying to define the perceptual misdirection is not simple.
    Do you want to try that again. In English.
    Do you want to try that again with enough respect to explain what you don't understand in that sentence? They are english words arranged conversationally.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    KJW
    KJW is offline
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1,561
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Does the BH infer it's charge and mass on it's immediate environment rather than retain it internally?
    A blackhole's mass, spin, and charge are properties that are imposed on the surrounding spacetime. This means that one can measure these properties of a blackhole by measuring the external spacetime. Personally, I think that it is the effect that a blackhole has on the surrounding spacetime that actually provides meaning to these quantities for a blackhole.
    There are no paradoxes in relativity, just people's misunderstandings of it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by KJW View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Does the BH infer it's charge and mass on it's immediate environment rather than retain it internally?
    A blackhole's mass, spin, and charge are properties that are imposed on the surrounding spacetime. This means that one can measure these properties of a blackhole by measuring the external spacetime. Personally, I think that it is the effect that a blackhole has on the surrounding spacetime that actually provides meaning to these quantities for a blackhole.
    That is pretty much what I have been trying to provide a clarity to. Spacetime as we percieve it is left outside the 'singularity zone'(for want of a better description) and what is within that is a single geodesic. If the geodesic is singular the particles involved do not act on each other.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    This might confuse things temporarily but a geodesic requires a point of origin and a trajectory/velocity. Within the EH zone both origin and destination are the same.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Singularity, is an english word we assign meaning to.
    It has a very specific, mathematical meaning. As I'm sure you know.

    There is most certainly something at the center of a massive gravity well.
    There may well be something. But we don't know what.
    I say there is a geodesic that has a common origin and destination. I will attempt to clarify this assumption when I have attended to todays chores. Thanks for the feedback. It has provided progress.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    DEFINITIONS:

    particle= an event

    geodesic= state a particle exists in between events

    singularity= geodesic bereft of events
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    DEFINITIONS:

    particle= an event

    geodesic= state a particle exists in between events

    singularity= geodesic bereft of events
    boson geodesic= state in which both ends of a path are a point of origin

    fermion geodesic= state in which both ends of a path are a point of destination

    neutron geodesic= state in which the nature of either end of a path are determined by the event
    Last edited by 3SwordBunny; December 17th, 2013 at 04:09 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    DEFINITIONS:

    particle= an event

    geodesic= state a particle exists in between events

    singularity= geodesic bereft of events
    proton geodesic= state in which both ends of a path are a point of origin

    fermion geodesic= state in which both ends of a path are a point of destination

    boson geodesic= state in which the nature of either end of a path are determined by the event
    mass= disparity between point of origin and point of destination

    charge= disparity between point of destination and point of origin
    Last edited by 3SwordBunny; December 17th, 2013 at 04:08 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    DEFINITIONS:

    particle= an event

    geodesic= state a particle exists in between events

    singularity= geodesic bereft of events
    boson geodesic= state in which both ends of a path are a point of origin

    fermion geodesic= state in which both ends of a path are a point of destination

    neutron geodesic= state in which the nature of either end of a path are determined by the event
    mass= disparity between point of origin and point of destination

    charge= disparity between point of destination and point of origin
    This represents what I am attempting to define algebraically. My experience is far less with math than with definitions. I would appreciate any effort to entertain this exercise.
    Last edited by 3SwordBunny; December 17th, 2013 at 04:08 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    I am trying to describe a conceptual mechanism accurately.
    Then perhaps you should show us the math?
    DEFINITIONS:

    particle= an event

    geodesic= state a particle exists in between events

    singularity= geodesic bereft of events[/QUOTE]

    boson geodesic= state in which both ends of a path are a point of origin

    fermion geodesic= state in which both ends of a path are a point of destination

    neutron geodesic= state in which the nature of either end of a path are determined by the event

    mass= disparity between point of origin and point of destination

    charge= disparity between point of destination and point of origin

    This represents what I am attempting to define algebraically. My experience is far less with math than with definitions. I would appreciate any effort to entertain this exercise.
    Last edited by 3SwordBunny; December 17th, 2013 at 04:07 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Within the Schwarzschild radius should be an open ended geodesic, ie, no events.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    I am trying to describe a conceptual mechanism accurately.
    Then perhaps you should show us the math?
    DEFINITIONS:

    particle= an event

    geodesic= state a particle exists in between events

    singularity= geodesic bereft of events
    boson geodesic= state in which both ends of a path are a point of origin

    fermion geodesic= state in which both ends of a path are a point of destination

    neutron geodesic= state in which the nature of either end of a path are determined by the event

    mass= disparity between point of origin and point of destination

    charge= disparity between point of destination and point of origin

    This represents what I am attempting to define algebraically. My experience is far less with math than with definitions. I would appreciate any effort to entertain this exercise.[/QUOTE]

    fermion event= resolution of interval disparity

    boson event= resolution of spatial disparity
    Last edited by 3SwordBunny; December 17th, 2013 at 04:05 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    I am trying to describe a conceptual mechanism accurately.
    Then perhaps you should show us the math?
    DEFINITIONS:

    particle= an event

    geodesic= state a particle exists in between events

    singularity= geodesic bereft of events
    boson geodesic= state in which both ends of a path are a point of origin

    fermion geodesic= state in which both ends of a path are a point of destination

    neutron geodesic= state in which the nature of either end of a path are determined by the event

    mass= disparity between point of origin and point of destination

    charge= disparity between point of destination and point of origin
    fermion event= resolution of interval disparity

    boson event= resolution of spatial disparity[/QUOTE]


    In explanation of the above, the definitions provided are those I would apply to defining the theory of gravity and mass. Does this substitute enough work to be an idea or hypotheses or is it simply an approach to defining a question efficiently?
    Last edited by 3SwordBunny; December 17th, 2013 at 04:06 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Sorry, but none of what you wrote here makes any sense to me. A geodesic is a ( parametrised ) curve in space-time, the defining property of which is that it parallel-transports its tangent vector along itself at every point; in other words :



    where u denotes a tangent vector field. This is a purely geometric concept in differential geometry, so I don't see the connection to fermions and bosons.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. The Next Shortage- Critical
    By jocular in forum Environmental Issues
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: August 28th, 2013, 01:41 AM
  2. Critical errors
    By Paleoichneum in forum Site Feedback
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: January 23rd, 2010, 12:53 AM
  3. relativistic mass, rest mass, invariant mass...
    By someguy22 in forum Physics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: May 30th, 2009, 12:49 AM
  4. Critical Self-Consciousness
    By coberst in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: November 13th, 2007, 07:34 AM
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
  •