[vacuum-mechanics]

Originally Posted by vacuum-mechanics

Dear AntonioLao and friends,

Return to your first post “…..Einstein never explains why masses could ever affect empty space-time….”. Einstein is genius; he could create an “abstract” geometry of space-time via Einstein tensor. And then changing it to a “physically” one, by equating it to the “physically” energy-momentum tensor of the existing mass and energy, in his famous field equation!

But we are not as smart as Einstein, which could imagine something abstractly, so let us try to grasp his idea physically. By analogy to the earth affect the surrounding atmosphere (which acts as a physical space-time) and bending the passing light ray!

Now we have the consequent problem about the nature of vacuum space, which then lead us return to the problem of the existence of the old aether! But let us first assumed that there is “something” (mass or energy) in vacuum space, and then we have a medium for handing gravitation force. Anyway, even we now know how mass affect light or “how masses attract each other”, we still have another problem that is “why masses attract each other”!

Next, let us assumed (again) that “gravity is the property of mass or energy”, and we know that mass is composed of proton and electron. Here, let us assume further that both particles are the “condense of the “something” which existing in vacuum space, so both of them would have a strong gravity property, i.e. they act like tiny black holes! Then all material masses would attract each other via the physical surrounding space!

By the way, we have left the problem of the “three assumptions”, so these have to be solved later.

Sincerely,
Nimit

Dear AntonioLao and friends,

Let us now talking about the first “something” mentioned in the third paragraph, which acts as the medium for handing gravitation force in vacuum space, and we will call it as “vacuum medium space”.

First of all, “vacuum medium space” is not the same concept as the aether which filled the “empty” vacuum space, but it is vacuum space itself!It is the uniform geometrical structural gravitational potential energy; the energy that each of its infinitesimal part holds each other together by its internal gravitational force, and forming to be the “physical fabric structure of our space”!

A simple scientific experiment proves is easy to be done.Two nearly identical solenoids (with equal number of turns but one of them is slightly small enough to insert in the bigger one) were feed with the same amount of direct currents. Now if the feeding currents have the same polarity, then the sum of the generated magnetic field is double.

Now, if the feeding currents are different polarity, then the sum of the generated magnetic field is “zero”. But according to the “law of conservation of energy”, the generated magnetic field energy cannot be destroyed! Then where is the generated energy gone? The only one sensible explanation is that there is a cancellation of the opposite phase of internal rotational stress in the vacuum medium. So this would mean thatvacuum medium is existed, won’t it?

Nimit

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by vacuum-mechanics

Two nearly identical solenoids

Thanks. I would like to do this experiment myself if I have the time, money, and other needed resources.

[vacuum-mechanics]

Originally Posted by vacuum-mechanics

Dear AntonioLao and friends,

Let us now talking about the first “something” mentioned in the third paragraph, which acts as the medium for handing gravitation force in vacuum space, and we will call it as “vacuum medium space”.

First of all, “vacuum medium space” is not the same concept as the aether which filled the “empty” vacuum space, but it is vacuum space itself!It is the uniform geometrical structural gravitational potential energy; the energy that each of its infinitesimal part holds each other together by its internal gravitational force, and forming to be the “physical fabric structure of our space”!

A simple scientific experiment proves is easy to be done.Two nearly identical solenoids (with equal number of turns but one of them is slightly small enough to insert in the bigger one) were feed with the same amount of direct currents. Now if the feeding currents have the same polarity, then the sum of the generated magnetic field is double.

Now, if the feeding currents are different polarity, then the sum of the generated magnetic field is “zero”. But according to the “law of conservation of energy”, the generated magnetic field energy cannot be destroyed! Then where is the generated energy gone? The only one sensible explanation is that there is a cancellation of the opposite phase of internal rotational stress in the vacuum medium. So this would mean thatvacuum medium is existed, won’t it?

Nimit

Dear AntonioLao and friends,

Now let us continue talking about the second assumption; “gravity” is the property of vacuum medium, but how and why?

We have said that the “fabric structure of vacuum space” was formed and created with “vacuum medium energy” (as the raw material) which is a positive energy, while vacuum medium gravity property was interpret as negative energy, and then the total energy of the universe is zero. So we could see that our universe was created from nothing without violation to the law of “conservation of energy”!

Someone who familiar with Einstein field equation in general theory of relativity would found that the theory has said that there must has dark matter and dark energy which is the main part of the total energy in the universe. To visualize the dark matter and energy, it is something analogous to the earth atmosphere which is transparent and dilute in density. What difference is that it is much more dilute in density than the breathing air.

Actually, the mentioned dark matter or energy is responsible for the “cosmological constant” term in the field equation. It is acting as the “ambient mass (or energy)” which is pervade across the entire universe. And the most prominent and special property of this ambient mass (or energy) is that it has a negative pressure, i.e. it has the internal gravitational force. Then we could see that indeed this ambient mass (or energy) is our vacuum medium which we are talking!

Sincerely
Nimit

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by vacuum-mechanics

it has a negative pressure

Is this the same as antigravity? or it could be the force that prevents the quantum vacuum from collapsing on itself?

[baudrunner]

It is not surprising that gravity can be described mathematically without a profound explanation of just how it works. That lack of understanding points to a flaw in the ostensible model on which the calculations are based. Perhaps we need to re-examine how gravity could be explained to satisfy the numbers. Here's one way to explain it...

1. space is displaced by matter - after all, space is something, and therefore its component constituents therefore are allowed to have orientation. The component constituents of space have a mutable property, that is - they can reconfigure their volume, which is their primary attribute

2. orientation of the displaced space causes the space's component constituents around a mass to 'cancel' out the component constituents of another mass' spatial field because of their 180 degree phase relationship, effectively reducing their volume

3. the net effect of the reduction of volume between separate masses due to the 'cancellation' of their spatial fields is that they are brought closer together - that's logical

4. the result of that interaction is that the laws of physical reality step in to offer motion and momentum to satisfy that net effect, and we have what we call gravity

There is no gravity particle. Gravity is an esoteric phenomenon which manifests in the physical world as an 'attractive force', which it is really not.

[Play_Dough]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao

edited....
Einstein’s theory of general relativity with all its successes: predictions, verifications, and applications still failed to achieve the original question posted by Sir Isaac Newton in the 17th century: why masses attract and in light of Maxwell’s electromagnetism in the 19th century: why masses cannot repel since electric charges are capable of both effects. Einstein never explained why masses could ever affect spacetime (as pure empty vacuum) if he already removed all attractive forces from his geometric field equations. They described accurately but provided no plausible reason why the spacetime curvature depended on the local density of the energy-momentum tensor.

I have formulated a theory addressing this issue.
The theory is called "The Displacement Theory of Gravity"©

It is based upon the hypothesis that we do not, as yet, understand fully, the nature of 'space'.

"The Displacement Theory of Gravity" © states that objects do NOT occupy space but, rather, objects 'displace' space.
As such, 'space' is not 'an empty distance' but, is rather, a 'fabric'.

When 'matter' is introduced into 'space', the 'space' is 'displaced' and stretched by the presence of matter. It (the matter) warps the nearby space and the 'warp' of space (space/time) is actually what gravity is (as compared to what gravity 'does').

So... 'gravity', according to the theory, is the result of the manipulation of space (space/time) and that manipulation creates the 'apparent' attracting force. How-so-ever, it also creates an 'apparent' repelling force.
Here's how.... the 'space' near matter is stretched (creating an apparent attracting force - a rock 'falls' to the ground) and the space between objects is compressed (creating an 'apparent' repelling force determined by relative mass).

All matter, like a 'blackhole', has an 'event horizon'. The 'event horizon' is the line where 'space' changes from being 'stretched' to where it is 'compressed'. The 'space' within the Earth's atmosphere is 'stretched' and the 'space' between the Earth and the Moon is 'compressed.

So, gravity, according to the theory, is both an apparent 'attracting' and 'apparent 'repelling' force..... depending upon which side of the event horizon we are on.

This leaves (in my thinking) one unanswered question (how ridiculously pretentious!).
The 'question' is that 'gravity' is dependent upon 'mass' (density of matter) and not 'area/volume'. So a brick would produce greater gravity that an inflated baloon, despite the fact that the baloon covers a greater area of space. Why is this?
The only reasonable answer is 'atomic density'.
We know that atoms are mostly 'space'.... as such, on a quantum level, 'space' is inherent in atoms..... when matter has a greater density (mass) the gravitational effect is magnified.... so... rushing to an extreme... we have a teaspoon full of 'blackhole' matter with a near-infinite density... and it warps nearby 'space'.... then why is the 'warp' dependent upon 'mass'?
Answer (hypothesis): There is a property of 'space' that we do not, as yet, understand (or have not, as yet detected).
Einstein linked space with time as an inseparable 'unity'...... the general rule is that 'time' is always 'flowing' (from present to future), so, perhaps, space is also 'always flowing' and the 'flow' of space is constricted by the presence of matter and the greater the density of that matter the greater the restriction to the 'flow' of 'space-time', resulting in increased gravity. .... the 'space-time' is still 'flowing' but is 'flowing' at a slower rate (compared to the normal flow (?) when matter is not present).
The extreme end of the flow of 'space-time' is within a blackhole wherein both space and time 'stop' and infinite gravity and infinite mass are present.

Anyhow.. that is the theory...... 'space' is a 'fabric' and not just an 'empty' distance and the presence of matter 'displaces' space/time and 'gravity' is one of the results (as stated above).

This explanation was somewhat difficult because of the nature of the mind to experience 'space' as a void (an 'absence') rather than as a 'unique thing unto itself' and the total properties of which we do not, as yet, fully comprehend.

It s my belief that this theory fills in some of the remaining blanks.

.

[AntonioLao]

Originally Posted by Play_Dough

When 'matter' is introduced into 'space'

I'm working on introducing quanta of space-time into both matter and energy by using the math of Hadamard matrices as squares of energy of space-time quanta. In this sense, space-time quanta come first then either matter or energy comes next in line in the universal creation physicists called the big bang. The matter-energy configuration is now called the quark-gluon plasma and there are extensive experimental researches being done around the world as we speak.

[baudrunner]

Play_Dough,

This, "The Displacement Theory of Gravity", whereof you speak is something you cannot copyright. It is a development of my own thinking, which is many years old. I will recap for you, as I posted it yesterday..

It is not surprising that gravity can be described mathematically without a profound explanation of just how it works. That lack of understanding points to a flaw in the ostensible model on which the calculations are based. Perhaps we need to re-examine how gravity could be explained to satisfy the numbers. Here's one way to explain it...

1. space is displaced by matter - after all, space is something, and therefore its component constituents therefore are allowed to have orientation. The component constituents of space have a mutable property, that is - they can reconfigure their volume, which is their primary attribute

2. orientation of the displaced space causes the space's component constituents around a mass to 'cancel' out the component constituents of another mass' spatial field because of their 180 degree phase relationship, effectively reducing their volume

3. the net effect of the reduction of volume between separate masses due to the 'cancellation' of their spatial fields is that they are brought closer together - that's logical

4. the result of that interaction is that the laws of physical reality step in to offer motion and momentum to satisfy that net effect, and we have what we call gravity

There is no gravity particle. Gravity is an esoteric phenomenon which manifests in the physical world as an 'attractive force', which it is really not.

Interesting that you think that space is stretched through displacement, when it is actually compressed closer to the presence of a mass. This is the result of entropy, the tendency of a system to stabilize and return to a state of balance. All the component constituents of space want to occupy the displaced space and they are compressed "out of the way" by the mass. Therefore time is slower in compressed space because more space occupies less volume. The greater the mass, the greater the gravity, and the slower time progresses. We travel through more space in a greatly reduced volume on the surface of this planet. Get it? Crazy, huh?

[vacuum-mechanics]

Dear AntonioLao and friends,

Originally Posted by AntonioLao

Is this the same as antigravity? or it could be the force that prevents the quantum vacuum from collapsing on itself?

It is not “antigravity”, but it is indeed true “gravity”! Unfortunately, our familiar (definition of) gravity is the attraction force between material masses, so the people involved use “negative pressure” word, i.e. the contraction force within the ambient mass (vacuum medium) mentioned.

Anyway, the concept of “negative pressure” is a very strange because what we are familiar in nature is “positive pressure” or “repulsive force” such as the property of gas. So it was avoided to talk about in some textbooks, but some textbook such as “Basic Relativity” by Richard A. Mould has explained it as follow:

“The cosmological constant L behaves like a negative pressure. Although it is not apparent why a combination of positive ambient mass and negative pressure should cause long-range repulsion, it is clear that ordinary matter will not produce an effect of this kind. Therefore, the constant L cannot be thought as an ordinary mass density. It is influence on the universe can be learned only through solution of the field equations.”

By the way, we have to keep in mind that what we are talking here is involved with the new concept of the existing of “vacuum medium as the fabric structure of vacuum space” (not an empty vacuum space as we thought) mentioned early! We also learned that gravity is the intrinsic property of this vacuum medium. And this intrinsic property will responsible for explaining “why material masses attract each other”, in which it is my third assumption left since my first post, and it will be explained in next post!

P.S. I am not so happy with what which is involved with quantum vacuum. What we have to do first is to “understand” quantum mechanics; otherwise it will lead to something crazy (which we will talk it later)!

Sincerely

[dipayankar]

For a Toe we require to explain the 'fundamental substance'. Is it matter or energy?

Originally Posted by PoPpAScience

Hi Antonio;

I see Gravity as the flow of the fundamental substance, that is being drawn into the cores of all the nuclei that are contained in a given mass.

I imagine Gravity effecting me, to be like a river flowing down stream to an ocean and I am lying in the river facing up stream with my feet against a rock. I am being drawn and pushed upon by the flow of the fundamental substance, the same as if I was in the river.

Up to a few days ago I always thought of Gravity as a "Gravity Well", created by the curvature of space. But I was never comfortable with that. Even though I have stated many times in here and other forums that I felt that Gravity was a product of the other three main forces, it was not till I read Jimbo's "Fluid Energy Theory", that I finally see Gravity as a "Flow of Fundamental Substance" into the the hungry mouth of Mass. The larger the mouth of mass, the larger the flow, thus the larger the effect upon Entities like I.