[vacuum-mechanics]

Originally Posted by vacuum-mechanics

Dear AntonioLao and friends,



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

Dear AntonioLao and friends,

Now we will talk about the third assumption in which we have stated that the two elementary charged particles (electron and proton) are “the condensed vacuum medium”. These two charged particles acting as something like “tiny black holes”, the reason is because vacuum medium has gravity property, so the condensed vacuum medium will has much more strong gravity (which was manifested as Coulomb force)!

Talking about the mechanism for “electron as a tiny black hole”, first, we start with “Reissner-Nordstrom solution” which is a solution of Einstein-Maxwell equation that was used to find electron’s model in the old time. And it is the solution which considered the effect of curved space due to electromagnetic field of electron charged particle. Anyway, it had “failed” because lacking of “understanding the mechanism of electromagnetic field”!

Armed with the new concept of “vacuum medium space”, it is easy to understand the mechanism of electric field created around an electron, i. e. it is the manifest of internal stress in vacuum medium surrounding the electron! So there is a balancing force between electron black hole force and the internal stress created in vacuum medium around. This is the reason explaining why electron could be stable as a tiny black hole. And indeed, after some calculation in Reissner-Nordstrom solution, we will found that the balancing force occurred at a distance of electron’s radius, which is the same value found by experiment!

Conventionally, one of the most serious problems about electron is that its calculated mass is only one haft of which was predicted by Einstein’s mass-energy relation. What it was done for finding electron mass is by calculating the energy of electric field created by an electron, which was found to be only a haft of the total energy of an electron. The problem is where is the remaining haft part of energy gone?

Again, based on the concept of “vacuum medium space”, the energy of electric field created by an electron must be equal to the energy of electron black hole itself! The reason is that “the energy created from any source must equal to the energy of that source”, otherwise the energy is not conserved. Then this black hole energy (which was normally called as electron self energy) plus electric field energy is the total energy of an electron. Finally, we would found that electron energy and mass is corresponding to Einstein’s mass-energy relation, so this should be the theoretical proved for “electron as tiny black hole”, shouldn’t it?

Sincerely

[AntonioLao]

vacuum-mechanics,

If I understand you correctly that an electron is a blackhole but the problem is that it does not have enough mass to warp the spacetime structure for creating an event horizon according to the equations.

[vacuum-mechanics]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao

vacuum-mechanics,

If I understand you correctly that an electron is a blackhole but the problem is that it does not have enough mass to warp the spacetime structure for creating an event horizon according to the equations.

Dear AntonioLao and friends,

You are right, but only for the concept of conventional black hole in which gravity of the mass have to overcome its Coulomb force (in its molecular structure) before becoming to be a black hole. Anyway, under the new concept of “tiny black holes”, thing is different because “vacuum medium” is a continuous medium in nature, so there is no Coulomb force (only gravity) within. It is something looks like the primordial black holes which aroused from strong radiation in the early universe!

By the way, it is interesting to note that Einstein himself believed that electron structure was formed by its own gravity force, which was explained in his electron theory! Of course, it was ignored because gravity is very weak compare to Coulomb force. Please detail in W. Pauli’s book “Theory of Relativity”, p. 202-205.

Sincerely

[AntonioLao]

The Chandrasekhar limit has already won the Nobel Prize for blackhole formations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrasekhar_limit and http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/phys...kharLimit.html

[dipayankar]

Two silly quetions

1) Does gravity act at such subatomic levels?
2) Isnt the electron further divisible?

Originally Posted by vacuum-mechanics

Dear AntonioLao and friends,

You are right, but only for the concept of conventional black hole in which gravity of the mass have to overcome its Coulomb force (in its molecular structure) before becoming to be a black hole. Anyway, under the new concept of “tiny black holes”, thing is different because “vacuum medium” is a continuous medium in nature, so there is no Coulomb force (only gravity) within. It is something looks like the primordial black holes which aroused from strong radiation in the early universe!

By the way, it is interesting to note that Einstein himself believed that electron structure was formed by its own gravity force, which was explained in his electron theory! Of course, it was ignored because gravity is very weak compare to Coulomb force. Please detail in W. Pauli’s book “Theory of Relativity”, p. 202-205.

Sincerely

[baudrunner]

Of course gravity acts at the atomic scale. How many times must it be told?

"In physics, the terms particle and object are interchangeable."

Please read the following: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/p...04/public.html

Gravity is explained as being extremely weak at the subatomic scale, but very strong for large masses. "The three interactions that govern the microcosmos are all much stronger than gravity and have been unified through the Standard Model." The Standard Model works, "..it is the only mathematical description which takes into account both Einstein’s theory of relativity and quantum mechanics". What you are attempting to explain has already been explained, vacuum.

[vacuum-mechanics]

Originally Posted by AntonioLao

The Chandrasekhar limit has already won the Nobel Prize for blackhole formations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrasekhar_limit and http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/phys...kharLimit.html

Dear AntonioLao and friends,

Thanks for your information. We have to accept the genius of S. Chandrasekhar especially he is the first man who could solve Einstein field equation (which was thought before that no one could do that) and then open the door for using Einstein equation in cosmology.

Anyway, up to now it seems that his concept about black hole is still in doubt. What which was thought to be the most prominent evidence about the existing of black hole is the famous X-ray binary, Cygnus X-1. But there is no conclusive proof that Cyg X-1 is a black hole!

Let us referred to some detail about the opposition to the idea of conventional black hole by British astrophysicist Arthur Stanley Eddington mentioned in Wikipedia. He was aware that the existence of black hole was theoretical possible, and also realize that the existence of the limit made their formation possible.

He said “The star has to go on radiating and radiating and contracting until, I suppose, it get down to a few km. radius, when gravity become strong enough to hold in the radiation, and the star can at last find peace….. I think there should be a law of nature to prevent a star from behaving in this absurd way [24]”.

For me, I agree with Einstein, who did not believe in the concept of black hole even it is the product followed from his field equation. My point is that we can not understand how a huge mass could collapse in to nothing; there is no physics a bout this crazy thing!

Sincerely

[dipayankar]

If it works at the sub atomic level, it is not effective. How will it be of any consequence at this level?

Originally Posted by baudrunner

Of course gravity acts at the atomic scale. How many times must it be told?



Please read the following: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/p...04/public.html

Gravity is explained as being extremely weak at the subatomic scale, but very strong for large masses. "The three interactions that govern the microcosmos are all much stronger than gravity and have been unified through the Standard Model." The Standard Model works, "..it is the only mathematical description which takes into account both Einstein’s theory of relativity and quantum mechanics". What you are attempting to explain has already been explained, vacuum.

[MJA]

Originally Posted by baudrunner

What you are attempting to explain has already been explained, vacuum.

Black Holes

A vacuum is a great explaination for not only gravity but also the force of a black hole.
Imagine the vacuum created by the energy of a star that suddenly implodes.
As the extict stars' past energy races away in infinite directions at light speed a vacuum is created.
Any and all energy from any other source that came within this vacuum would be gravitated away with the energy force of motion of the extict star that still radiates away.
It is also true to say that the thought energies of Socrates and other such great minds has had much the same gravitational vacuum effect on me as well as many others.
But lets not get to far away from the energy of a star, or did I?
Black holes are nothing more than energy vacuums, the gravity of energy, by energy itself.
Unity is another word for this.

=
MJA

[AntonioLao]

vacuum-mechanics,

Chandrasekhar and Eddington were professional antagonists for much of their careers. But I still could not understand what was the fuzz about?