Gravitation
Gravitation
- Destruction of space by mass
And now we come to the main reason for this article … GRAVITY. Man, this concept has bugged me forever and has driven me to invent Local Galactic Inflation which has formed the main part of the discussion so far. Somehow, gravity had to be seen from a different perspective and at the same time had to agree with my hero Einstein’s observation that gravity was not a true “force” but a state of space. Well, I think that I got more than I bargained for because I have ended up redefining virtually all the concepts like inflation, space, force and mass. I am wondering at this stage whether I am vaguely near reality and the truth. Anyway, we’ve come this far…
I would like to start the discussion by postulating that the inflationary discussion we had in the earlier sections does not only happen with black holes and neutron stars, but is a feature of all mass. The reason I chose those examples was to demonstrate the point by using really massive objects and the associated slogan “even light cannot escape a black hole” to demonstrate the general acceptance of the fact that gravity can withhold electromagnetic waves from propagation. My contention is that this contraction of space happens around all mass regardless of size (even a proton for example). Let’s look at this holding back a bit more closely. I have stated previously that one characteristic of mass is the absorption of electromagnetic waves, incorporating this energy into its structure and “deciding” whether to get rid of it or not. Obviously a proton would emit the extra energy immediately. A larger mass could store the energy in the form of heat or angular momentum and emit it at a later stage. When we discussed black body radiation we saw that any body will radiate energy (electromagnetic waves) which was characterised by the heat of the body. Hotter body – higher frequency. The frequency is not the point here but the radiation is. ALL mass is constantly radiating electromagnetic waves.
A quick summary: Energy is integral to and inherent in electromagnetic waves and constitutes the very nature of space. Space in turn is the stage upon which the interplay of the two major “forces” of Inflation and Gravity play. These two states of space are the driving force behind the dissipation and eventual concentration of energy in the galactic energy cycle. On the low energy side (after inflationary energy dissipation and tuning) the process of primordial synthesis of sub-atomic “particles” takes place, creating the first three dimensional object called mass. This “phase change” of energy into the space efficient three dimensional standing wave knot (mass) is a configuration of energy that can absorb electromagnetic wave energy into its structure. If you consider Einstein’s famous formula (E = mc2) and solve it for mass (m = E/c2) it is obvious that with such a large denominator an enormous amount of energy has to go into creating this wave knot or mass. But there is an enormous amount of energy available in space. Many and probably most electromagnetic waves forming and propagating through space are continuous waves or a continuous string of photons which constantly “feed” the mass. The reality is that mass is absorbing space from all directions of 3D space and even one photon contributes not only to space but gets absorbed the same as a long continuous waveset. As this mass absorbs the energy of space the concentration or aggregation of energy part of the cycle begins.
This energy absorption of mass should be seen as:
- virtually the opposite of Inflation and
- destruction of the fabric of space and thus
- the cause of the “holding back” of emission that we discussed in the chapter on inflation.
Inflation and gravitation both employ the status of surrounding space to manifest their perceived “force” which is the main topic of this paper. When we discussed the inflationary force, we contended that the essence of the “force” involved was the tendency of the wave to attain a lower energy status by converting its amplitudinal energy into wavelength or space. In fact, I postulate that all “forces” are based on the innate tendency of electromagnetic waves to achieve stability (given the specific characteristics of the nature of each set of circumstances). Of course this view does not simplify the mathematics or physics governing the interplay, but to me it demystifies concepts like “fields” and “forces” in a similar way that electromagnetic wave densities demystify “space”. To stay with the thought process we will discuss the other forces later.
Remember that unless the energy is being used to consolidate the mass via some form of synthesis or being used to establish a balanced angular momentum within the greater structure of the system, the energy has to be radiated away again … also in all directions of 3D space around the mass. If the mass is small (like a proton for instance) the radiation will be virtually immediate.
When we discussed molecular clouds we saw that dispersed matter is cold because absorbed waves (OK, I’m going to say absorbed space) is immediately radiated (emitted) again. As the particles in these clouds move closer due to turbulence the density of particles becomes so high that more and more of the re-radiated energy is in turn absorbed by neighbouring particles and energy is trapped in the conglomerate of the potential proto-star. Of course the increased “oscillation of the particles” and new higher energy wave forms are reflected as an increased temperature. The space (waves) in between the “particles” becomes trapped and re-absorbed and the exchange becomes a proto-form of conduction. Of course the incoming wave energy becomes entrapped to a greater and greater extent, thus increasing the temperature even more. The mass “particles” or standing wave knots are brought closer together due to this absorption of the internal, trapped space. This is the beginning of gravitation. The energy reflected as increased temperature has been ascribed to gravitation.
It is critical at this stage to differentiate this increased temperature due to gravitation from the compression of a gas where the temperature increases as result of the actual waves forming space being squashed and their amplitudes increasing. In the case of gravitation there is no external pressure being applied … the internal space is being absorbed into the wave knot. This is a characteristic of mass.
The ability to retain the energy obviously increases with size of the mass and when the density of our protostar becomes sufficient the energy is transferred away from its surface inwards by the conduction of heat. I am sure that convection also plays a role, but this is incidental to the purpose of this discussion. When the mass is still a gas like our sun the internal pressure increases due to the radiation from within not reaching the surface. In the case of the sun the size of the star is sufficient to trap enough energy to increase the temperature (and co-incidentally the pressure) enough to initiate the nuclear fusion process which is the first step in the nucleosynthesis process. The point I am trying to make here is that the gravitational pressure is not from outside, but from inside.
When the mass absorbing space is a solid like the earth the trapped energy is conducted inward away from the surface. Gazillions of electromagnetic waves (space) are streaming in and being removed from the “structural support” that is sustaining space. Think back of how inflation created space like a raisin cake busy rising in an oven. Each wave is exerting a “pressure” on the one in front of it because it is creating space behind it, supporting it as well as inflating. Now, when this space that has been created is absorbed by mass, that piece of space no longer exists as a wave, but is now wrapped up into this “space efficient” thing called mass. This collapsing of space around a mass is GRAVITY.
Let’s get back to the first step in the energy cycle when I asked you to bear with me by accepting the notion that the radiating waves were being “held back” by gravity. We had to start the cycle somewhere and I decided that gravity would be the easiest to explain only after the rest of the cycle had been discussed. Well here we are. Could collapsing space around a mass cause “withholding” of wavelength? Could collapsing space around mass cause two masses to be attracted toward each other?
I am convinced that the answer to both these questions is a resounding YES.
Let’s look at each one more carefully. First the more obvious of the two: the two masses. If the two masses are relatively close together it seems evident that space between them disappearing would cause them to move closer to each other .This may seem obvious but allow me to state the obvious to accentuate a special feature of gravity. Gravity is immediate action at a distance. OK, virtually immediate. Picture two coins on a table with ten matchsticks glued end to end separating the coins. If these matchsticks were responsible for holding the two coins apart (for that matter together as well) and one was suddenly removed, the whole length would be reduced and the coins will come closer together. If one was removed from both ends nearest each coin it would happen twice as fast. The same applies to the two masses. Each mass absorbs a wave in its entirety (a quantum). The interlinking space is immediately two wavelengths shorter. If there are only ten wavelengths, removing two is quite dramatic, but if there are a gazillion wavelengths the effect is a lot less dramatic, but immediate anyway. This characteristic of immediate action becomes important when gravitational attraction is holding masses in orbit like the earth around the sun. If the effect were not immediate the time lag would cause the force to act behind the rotating mass and slow it down with disastrous consequences.
The point I am making here is that the effect of gravity is felt right there where it is being absorbed … it doesn’t have to wait for the wave to travel the distance between the objects to have an effect.
The second question of whether collapsing space could distort electromagnetic waves being emitted from the mass is not only more tricky but probably even more important because of General Relativity being based upon this warping of space. For this explanation we need to go back to the concept of inflation again. Let’s first look at the waves that are “a priori” creating space as opposed to the “later” waves that actually propagate through the fabric of space that has been created by their predecessors. (I must hasten to add that this distinction is irrelevant to the nature of the wave, but helps to analyse our problem more acutely). When inflation drives the creation of space the effect is cumulative because as space is being created it is pushing or sustaining the space ahead of it.
The same effect of “support” has to be visualised when understanding the warping caused by gravity.
The energy which is inherent in the space being absorbed has to be transferred to the mass if it is to be absorbed. To do this the energy gradient has to be increased in some way for the transfer process to take place. The removal of the energy by conduction can only take place down the energy gradient. Space has thus to find a way of increasing the energy of the waves to meet this criterion. The only way is to pile the waves up … shorter wavelength and larger amplitude. Wavelength is the measure of distance in space and this energy increase is seen as increased space density around the mass. This is where we started the cycle with gravity holding back wavelength and starting inflation all over again. The interesting thing is that relativity once again tells us that this wave is “normal” and travelling at the speed of light locally, but this is not how it is seen from another observer from a massive distance. If we were observing earth’s warp for instance from earth or even a distant position with the same gravitational potential we would see this wave as normal because the set of “rods and clocks” we are using are affected by “rod shortening and time dilation” of relativity. The space around the earth is more dense because of this shortening of wavelength and it also has a higher energy density because of the larger amplitude. More of this later.
Gravity is thus merely the absorption of space by mass. This would not be possible if the resultant radiation was equal to the incoming energy, but the processes inherent to the energy cycle (like angular momentum, temperature increase, molecule formation, molecular structure, phase changes, conduction and nuclear fusion and nucleosynthesis) sustain the uptake of energy and thus sustain gravitation through the gobbling of space and thus energy. Mass is the ultimate space gobbler. (We will discuss other means like angular momentum of utilising the incoming energy shortly)
It is interesting to note that gravity only starts acting when the energy balance of absorbed and radiated waves starts becoming unbalanced by the radiation being re-absorbed or conducted inward from the radiating surface. Does this mean that a proton or even an atom has no gravity?? It would seem at first glance not, but beside the fact that other forces are so much stronger at that level that it would not matter anyhow, things like angular momentum have to be considered.
Another fascination to me is the amount of energy required to create mass. Remember how we solved E = mc2 for mass m = E/ c2. With such a large denominator the energy needed to create a unit of mass is indeed enormous (as we found out at Hiroshima) and the number of electromagnetic waves or amount of space that needs to be eaten or gobbled by mass to proceed with the energy cycle is unbelievable. This flux of space into mass must resemble a wind blowing into a cave at 300 000 km per second that simply carries on sucking the air in. Wow, gravity seems like this insidious pacman that just gobbles till it bursts. Imagine a square kilometre of earth absorbing the space above it … this space is actually electromagnetic waves travelling at 300 000 km per second. Does this mean the 300 000 km of space above our square kilometre of earth is being gobbled every second?!!!!!!!! OK, I’m going to be naughty and answer this question now and only explain properly later. No, not 300 000km per second … this would apply to the space being gobbled by a black hole. Earth would gobble space much slower (say at about 100 000 km per second). The reason for this will be discussed under Relativity later where I propose an equivalence principle relating to this issue. This speed would also relate to the “free falling” observer.
This seems like a reasonable assumption when the incoming energy exceeds the outgoing energy, but what happens when the energy of the radiation emitted SEEMINGLY exceeds the incoming energy of space, eg. the Sun? or even the situation where there is SEEMINGLY a balance of incoming and outgoing energy, eg. the Earth or a neutron star These bodies still display the characteristic gravitational influence. What now? THIS IS HOWEVER NOT THE CASE.
There are other ways of distributing energy beside radiation. Let’s not even discuss the obvious collision forces which transfer energy except to observe that NOTHING exists in isolation. We have artificially isolated the galaxy as a unit because I think that the galaxy is the most basic functional unit, but this does not mean that it is impervious to external influence … not by a long shot. Anyway, to come back to our discussion, the main energy consumer in the cycle that becomes evident at this stage is angular momentum. Think of the classic case of someone sitting on a spinning chair with weights in his hands. We all know that if he draws in his arms he will rotate faster – conservation of angular momentum right? How did this situation come about? Let’s pretend that there are only two masses in space and one is large. Without getting complicated we consider that it is standing still. Along comes a smaller mass travelling for whatever reason in a straight line. It has linear momentum. As it passes the larger mass the space between them starts disappearing in the direction of the large mass. This is experienced as a force called gravity at right angles to its path. Of course the linear momentum combines with the “force” to impose an angular momentum that will only persist if the force is applied constantly. We know however that the “force” is actually space in the form of electromagnetic waves being gobbled. This energy is now being gobbled constantly to maintain this angular momentum. The mere maintenance of angular momentum requires an insidious and continuous gobbling of space.
In this regard, I would like to suggest that Inflation also NOT be seen as an acceleration. When one refers to Einstein’s “cosmological constant” or even Dark Energy it is the closest thing to what I refer to as “Inflation”. Although these are only words, it is important to me that I do not contradict Einstein’s thoughts. This whole concept of the energy cycle is designed around his thoughts of space and relativity. Hopefully the last section on relativity is also seen as a bumbling attempt of a tribute to his genius.
A mass then has yet another way of getting rid of the incoming energy … it goes into the system. Let’s first restrict the concept to our solar system for instance, but the ultimate local cycle is the galactic system and you can use your own imagination to extrapolate that extension of thought. When we talk about maintenance I really mean it on a local basis because the main galactic drive is not to maintain any stage of the cycle. It may look to us like it is being “maintained”, but in reality energy is slowly being packed into these “mass systems” in an eventual endeavour to draw it back into the galactic black hole to start the energy cycle again. This is a slow process in our terms and galaxies may look as if they are relatively stable but inside the galactic cell energy is zooming about at speeds and in quantities that we can’t pretend to grasp. Do a practical experiment. Look at a star like Alpha Centauri about 4.5 light years away and imagine a light wave travelling toward you. If you move a meter to the right the same star is visible; another meter … same thing. But this light is being emitted radially and the waves should be getting further apart the further you are away from the star. The number of light waves that must be emitted to still be a meter apart (or a centimetre or a kilometre) must be virtually countless. Now close your eyes for a second and when you open them again that train of photons is still coming that was 300 000km away when you closed your eyes. And this occurs around the star in all directions, constantly. What I am saying is that the enormity of the cumulative energy in space is inconceivable.
Lets get back to the “free falling” observer. Space is being absorbed by all the mass in the universe. Obviously the larger masses have a much larger effect and space is “flowing” toward these masses. This flow is directed by the sum of flows toward all the masses in the universe and it is in this context that the free falling observer must be seen. Space is flowing in the same way that water flows: from a high gravitational potential but lower density to a low gravitational potential with a higher density. Just like being in a flowing river the “free falling ” observer would not experience any forcesonce he reaches the same speed as the flowing space. The acceleration he may experience would only be if he started from an inertial state. This would be like jumping into a fast flowing river. As soon as he reached the same speed as the flowing space (theoretically) he would feel the faster moving space dragging him. The force we experience when we “feel” gravity is really an inertial issue. Imagine floating down a river with no feeling of an external force acting on you. Now suddenly you float into a fishing net that some locals have spanned across the river. The water is going through the net but you are being prevented from going with the flow. You now say that you are experiencing a force holding you against the net. Well, this is what is happening with the way in which we experience gravity. We are prevented by the earth’s surface from penetrating into the crust, but the flux of the space absorption is into the earth’s crust … just like the water going through the net. Our inertia is what we are feeling and it is continuous. Not like a bus that hits a building that is a once off inertial impact, but a constant impact that is experienced as a continuous force …Gravity as we know it. Remember that space is infinitely less dense than water. This begs a few more words on gravitational acceleration. Under most circumstances the reference frame is the mass (let’s say Earth) If you start at nil with reference to earth, you will accelerate at 9.8 m/sec/sec until you reach the speed of the space being absorbed. From the earth observer point of view you will accelerate till you reach the speed of light … not possible, but theoretically. When you reach this speed the “force” (and thus the acceleration) you experienced when you started falling will disappear, but it will return when you reach the surface. The force will remain the same as the inertia that you felt when you were prevented from accelerating by being on the earth’s surface or held in the “net” in the river. When we discuss relativity later this “free falling observer” will be identified as the only valid benchmark observation platform.
To bring this back to what we know about gravity. Acceleration requires a constant “force” and gravity itself is thus a constant energy sink. As such it is not like other subatomic “forces” that do not require an energy feed to sustain them because they are energy waves or patterns within themselves. Gravity gets this energy from the gobbling of electromagnetic waves (space). Another reason that an earth observer would measure an acceleration is the exponential shortening of the gap between the iso-density lines as earth is approached. A free falling body itself would feel NO acceleration as it approaches the surface of the large mass. (This observation is key to the discussion on relativity which will be discussed in detail later.) The observer on the surface would however measure an acceleration of the body falling to the surface. If the free falling observer had to use the surface as his reference point, he would also measure an acceleration. This seems contradictory at first, but when you realise that the iso-density rings get exponentially closer as the surface is approached and the falling observer is using shorter and shorter rods to measure with. His clock is also ticking slower as he falls. The net result of his experience is that he is free falling … NOT ACCELERATING. The classical experiment of dropping an object and measuring it’s acceleration as it falls is valid initially because when we hold the item ready to do the test drop the body is standing still relative to the surface and not in free fall. As the dropped item picks up speed to become free falling it accelerates and this is the part of the process that we observe. All it is doing is catching up with space along the geodesic line toward the earth. Once again the inertial example of being held by a net in the river is valid. When you get released from the net you will accelerate to catch up to the speed of the water. I am going to repeat this paragraph under the heading of relativity (when we eventually reach that discussion) because of it’s importance in the equivalence principle that we will discuss at that point.
|
Summary of Postulates relating to this Section
|
- Density of space
Does energy being emitted just get pushed back at the same speed that it is being propagated? Well if you consider the generally accepted view that “even light cannot escape” from a black hole, then this is the case. However, as discussed in the first section on inflation this is not the reality. Let’s do a thought experiment using something a bit closer to our experience like the earth. When energy is absorbed by the surface the immediate energy sink is represented by the relatively low density outer crust. This excites the molecules to oscillate at a rate that represents the energy or heat status. Some energy gets re-radiated, but most gets transferred to the next layer below the surface. The heat is transferred through this relatively loose molecular structure by the process of conduction. Obviously the rate of conduction is relatively slow process compared to the speed of light. Not only is the process itself slower but the characteristics of the medium due to the low density and type of crust material make the heat transfer even slower. The main factor affecting the heat transfer however is the heat differential between layers. This means that the surface has to heat up before it can be conducted to the next layer. This slow removal of energy inhibits the speed of absorption but not the total capacity of absorption. What I mean by capacity is that the ground gets quite hot due to the increased oscillations of molecules directly as well as the trapping of re-radiation below the surface. This accumulation of energy increases the gradient and speeds up the conduction. This all sounds OK under the ground, but what happens to the incoming waves. To be absorbed the energy has to be transferred to a lower energy level by definition. How can the waves exceed the increased energy in the crust? Well, the incoming waves have to slow up (reduce their wavelength) and increase their energy density (increased amplitude) to represent a higher energy density to effect the transfer to the surface’s relatively higher energy density. Yes, they have to bunch up their wavelength and increase their amplitude. This increases the density of the space in contact with the earth’s crust merely because of the fact that the space approaching at the speed of light can’t be absorbed at that speed because its energy density is too low in its “normal” wave form. The energy gradient would be uphill. Solution? Bunch up and reduce speed … hey, the wave has to actually slow to meet the mass that is by definition stationary anyway. This piling up of the wavelength that increases the energy density to enable conduction to transport the energy away down an energy gradient doesn’t stop at the contiguous space to the surface. This is like a traffic pile-up. Each successive wave exponentially has to slow to adjust its energy density to the position it holds in the pile-up. The result is the density “staggering” of the space around the object (earth).
This even carries on in a way underground where the more dense outer core under the crust conducts energy more efficiently to be able to carry the incoming radiation energy away from the surface to maintain the energy gradient. The more dense the object or mass is, the more easily the energy is removed from the surface. This seems like a contradiction because the increased conductivity should keep the surface cold and thus not need the observed denser space around the object. This is however not the case because the higher conduction rate of a denser object (eg. neutron star) makes the internal gradient less and the surface stays hotter thus requiring a denser space to increase the wave energy to the level necessary to ensure a energy gradient for absorption. Large low density objects (eg. proto-star or hot molecular cloud) blur the definition of “surface” and the convection of the energy by the wave may penetrate the surface and thus not display the same wave densities as a more concentrated mass.
Now that we have a basic explanation for gravity and space density near a masive object, we have to go back to the first section of inflation again where we made the assumption that the concentric layers of density around the mass was due to the “holding back of the electromagnetic waves by gravity”. Our new view of gravity paints the picture the other way around! The space around the massive object displays concentrically and exponentially reducing densities as the distance from the object increases due to the need to increase its energy transferring ability or gradient. The “holding back” is thus explained by the emitting radiation assuming the wave form enforced on it by the gravitational piling up of energy density close to the mass and the inflationary “force” becomes the natural dissipation of energy as the wave gets nearer the back of the energy pile-up. An analogy here could be vehicles entering and leaving a city. As they near the city they progressively go slower and more vehicles per road length are accommodated. Once the city congestion has been relieved, the vehicles can speed up again as they leave the city. As they speed up their separation distances increase again and the density per kilometre of road decreases again. With gravity it seems to be a “chicken or egg” situation at first glance but it is essential to grasp that both processes are happening at the same time. Inflation and gravity are acting in the same space (as is characteristic of waves) but in opposite directions. In our analogy this is like the vehicles entering and leaving along the same highway … but this is allowed in the bosonic world of waves. It is however not correct to think that they do not influence each other as they travel in opposite directions because these are the waves that ARE space. The density and shape of space is dependent on these distorted waves and consequently space is distorted in these areas. It is thus correct to refer to this space as warped or curved by the presence of mass. This local interplay of inflation and gravity around the various heavenly masses is essential to sustain the centripetal balance of the solar systems that make up our galaxy. They are the means by which the galaxy is regenerated constantly and the essence of dimensionality, distance and time in space. They are also the explanation for Einstein’s general relativity observations and the key to his astronomical conclusions.
The fact that we know that light and electromagnetic waves in general travel SLOWER through a dense medium is also explained. Another conclusion is that the space density layers also explain the increasing “red shift” observed as galaxies become more distant. The differential speeds of various wavelengths are core to this understanding and will also be addressed later. More of this under the section on cosmology.
One of the main misconceptions of inflation is that everyone expects it to be a “force” that exerts its effect equally in every square cm of space. This idea is promoted by the misunderstood link to Einstein’s Cosmological Constant. The common usage of the words “Inflation” and “Gravity” are both local accelerations caused by a “force” that results from the phenomenon of Inflation or Gravitation. In the case of gravity the “force” is proportional to the product of the two masses involved and inversely proportional to the squared distance between them. The constant, empirically determined, Newton called the Universal Gravitational Constant. Inflation is similar in many respects in that it is also proportional to mass (only one mass) and inversely proportional to the squared distance from that mass. The constant that would have to be empirically determined in this case I propose is Einstein’s Cosmological Constant. Because the gravitational force is between two masses the empirical calculations were possible. With inflation however I suspect the task would be more of a challenge, but allow me to return to this issue under the section on the Cosmological Constant.
- Exponential Space curvature
General Relativity is a natural outflow of the gravitational effect on space density and thus it’s curvature. The main player in this regard is “gravitational potential” which becomes synonymous to “space density” and supplies us with an awesome tool (curvature) to view the effects of General relativity. With all of the conceptual thinking up to this point I have left relativity out of the discussion, but space curvature can hardly be discussed without it. BUT, I am going to try to do exactly that and leave relativity until the one of the last sections of this article.
I am not going to harp on this too long because of the complexity of the image that space curvature brings. Any density differences within the galaxy will lead to the 3 dimensional image of density isobars. Something like isobars of pressure on a weather forecast or contour lines on a ortho-photo map depicting altitude. Imagine these lines of density in three dimensions. This would result in a series of exponentially increasing radius concentric rings of iso-density or iso-gravitational potential around any massive object. The concept of Spherical Standing Waves has been raised often in literature … yes, maybe something like that. Close to the object this is quite simple, but the image becomes more complicated once another mass becomes involved. Imagine the two dimensional weather isobars to get some image in your mind. Areas of high pressure are merged in a smooth way by the isobars. This is the image of space curvature that I would like to paint. Unluckily the current image of space curvature has built on the basis of geodesics which attempts to depict the concept of space curvature by indicating the route or movement of objects through space. I contend that our iso-density view of space curvature is much more productive and this will form the basis of our discussions on relativity later. It is interesting to note that mass moving through space would tend to move TOWARDS areas of HIGH density. Intuitively this feels wrong until we recall that gravity is the streaming of space TOWARD a mass and the increased density is a product of the piling up of waves at the bottom of the fall. This increased density actually speeds up the fall due to space being “shorter” where space is denser. I am sure that a more elegant description of what I have just said is possible but I hope that you get the picture. Perhaps the use of the “gravitational potential energy” could be used to grasp the movement of objects between these iso-density layers which would dissipate as you approach the mass. An object will naturally move in the direction of lower potential energy and thus require external energy to move from a higher to a lower density and will always retain the potential energy thus gained enabling it to move to a higher density contour by somehow emitting the energy. The movement of all heavenly bodies are in concert with this principle and although the concept has no primary function in our discussion, it is a useful tool to predict the path of objects moving through space.
I assume that Schrödinger’s equation would describe the simple wave forms that I have described early in the discussion, but to attempt to define a point in space with a single formula seems to me totally impossible because of the gazillions of electromagnetic waves from all directions that can be described in the three dimensional context that would have to be individually described before superimposing their combined effects describing the “point” in space. Einstein, however, spent years working on what he called “God’s Equation” to describe a point in space.
Rμν – ½ gμνR – λμν = – 8π G Tμν
Where λ = cosmological constant
G = gravitational constant
Rμν = Ricci Tensor (Relates to curvature of spacetime)
R = trace of Ricci Tensor
gμν = metric tensor of the geometry of curved space (measure of distance)
T uv = Tensor capturing the properties of energy, momentum and matter
The formula he came up with included concepts like tensors describing the curvature of space, metric tensors as measures of distance in the geometry of space, the gravitational constant that we have discussed under the section on gravity and finally the cosmological constant. This cosmological constant was a source of embarrassment for Einstein because he did not have a suitable explanation for it and it didn’t fit the Big Bang model. I am cautiously hoping that the Inflation model that I have described in this article can cast some light on the cosmological constant. The constant has been described as an anti-gravity force. My conviction is that it is exactly that and also an acceleration like gravity. The interesting aspect about these two “forces” is exactly the fact that they are both acceleratory in nature. This implies that an insidious renewed force that is constantly consuming energy. This characteristic puts these two phenomena outside the description of the other three natural forces as discussed under the section on forces. I hope that this formula (God’s Equation) can one day become understood properly to become a tribute to this wonderful brain and by being proven, bringing obvious and general acceptance of Einstein’s genius. HOWEVER, this formula means nothing to my image of space curvature … it is way overboard.
Back to the reality of our simplistic view. Remember that this same space density pattern occurs around galaxies and virtually no space is free from this curvature even if it is slight. See the later discussion under cosmology.
I would like to introduce another concept at this stage. That is the compliance or conformance of electromagnetic radiation to the density of space at that specific point in space. I have spent most of this article trying to get across the concept of inflation and gravity and have ignored the actual propagation of electromagnetic radiation to a large extent. Although space and time are constantly being created from the energy incorporated in the mass of the black hole, these main driving forces are responsible for the creation and destruction of space. These radiation waves are no different from any other waves but the creation integrity and support of space depends on them. They did not propagate through anything to create space. They simply are space. The inflationary drive does not propagate, it actually extends the wave which gets supported from behind by the next wave. This push or inflation is not propagation …it is a priori space creation. This process is also responsible for the warping of space to the densities surrounding large masses. HOWEVER, there are gazillions of waves that do propagate through this newly created fabric of space in the true sense of propagation which needs a background medium. The medium is electromagnetic waves and electromagnetic waves propagate through it. Each wave conforms to the density imposed by gravitation at the same time as propagating through it.
|
Summary of Postulates relating to this Section
|
