Theoria Motus Gravitatis Finalem

[Dubbelosix]

Your final link has lots of interesting links to string theory and additional dimensions opening up at low temperatures, which is going to distract me for a while :)

 

 

 

You may be going of the rails here, numerous tests show the speed of light is a constant even under Lorentz ether theory, introducing extra variables to make your theory work, sounds a bit dodgy also. 

 

If light could get out of black holes, they would not be black holes. One theory you are probably aware of is that the inside of a black hole is supported by radiation, and via hawking radiation evaporating the black hole, the black hole could in theory explode when the radiation reaches the surface.

 

 

Which theories do you think have failed, and on what basis :) The HUP predicts quantum fluctuations, the casimir effect proves them. The casmir efffect is a physical effect caused by  quantum fluctuations from the vacuum.

 

 

I would of thought it self evident the gravitational waves move with the mass, why would they not.  Interesting partially related question when Ligo detected gravitational waves from the recent black hole merger, did those gravitational waves carry the equivalent amount of energy in radiation. If it is argued that gravitational waves coexist with energy it seems reasonable, that one could not exist without the other.

 

Partially related fact Hossenfelder using Verlindes work showed that space can be viewed as a Vector field which drags on baryonic matter. Would a vector field better represent your ether ?

 

PS Like this quote from Carl Sagan from the forum page 

 

"It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." 

 

 

Off the rails? Here is the alternative, we stick with the model we are using, ignore that relativity is unthinkable without an aether (Einstein quote) and deal with the strange paradox of nothing being able to escape the black hole which has caused a lot of attention with no universal acceptance to any approach to solve this information paradox; see, the gravitational aether was in fact the only aether Einstein properly entertained that complimented general relativity in a natural way. What he didn't realize at the time was that this aether is described by two parameters, which [have] to vary in space, to make sense of why the speed of light can slow down in gravitational fields. But because of the relationships between electromagnetism and this aether, the speed of light can never actually approach zero (which contradicts quantum mechanics) as then the photon isn't moving anywhere and would have some kind of predictable position. These are things I cannot accept with current model, it seems to be all hinting that it could be wrong, this idea that nothing can escape black holes. In the gravitational aether, the speed of light can only approach zero, but never reach it. 

[Dubbelosix]

''I would of thought it self evident the gravitational waves move with the mass, why would they not.  Interesting partially related question when Ligo detected gravitational waves from the recent black hole merger, did those gravitational waves carry the equivalent amount of energy in radiation. If it is argued that gravitational waves coexist with energy it seems reasonable, that one could not exist without the other.''

 

 

As for this, those waves were found to move at light speed, which means the gravitational field must be given by permittivity and permeability just as electromagnetism is. This new idea is that they must vary to compliment different densities in the universe; this extension to a vector field is not something I have looked at yet, 

[Dubbelosix]

As for gravitational waves becoming ''in phase'' with some matter, this is a new idea, even if it is obvious at first. But it's not so obvious from classical mechanics which means this idea has to be a type of quantum correction to gravitational waves in the phase space. 

[Dubbelosix]

The quantum leap is not superluminal, as I stated in my model, the gravitational wave could perturb the electron very slightly, meaning that I am advocating in this sense they tend to travel at the speed of light. Nothing can travel superluminally, not within any current model which is widely accepted. The whole idea is that these waves exist on a very small scale and somehow their ''spreading through space'' can be disturbed by interaction of the system with say a photon. This does hint at a new kind of idea for the ''resurrection'' for my interest in the wave function as gravitational waves, because the solution for say the empty wave in the double slit experiment predicted by my model, as the gravitational wave itself, since within the gravitational aether model, there can be no particle associated to the permittivity or permeability of space from first principles, even though there are a number of authors who have identified such a model but not much success. The empty wave, does carry energy, as it is not nothing, but it is something fundamental to the spacetime fabric itself. In the quantum range, I suspect gravitational wave guidance implies a deviation from classical physics, in perhaps a number of ways. For instance, for a gravitational wave function to be allowed, required that the empty wave [is connected] to the particle system. One way to describe it, would be to say the wave and the particle are ''in phase'' - the alternative interpretation is that particle and the wave are connected more fundamentally to a quantum entanglement role, in which the particle has become entangled with a feature of spacetime (the gravitational wave). This entanglement does mean there is a connection to the information contained in a particle, and a new concept, ''empty information'' which is really misnomer within our model, because while we tend to use the terminology of ''empty'' all we really mean here is that a particle is absent, but not the wave.

 

Because I do not like the idea of gravitation being quantized into spin-2 gravitons (for good reasons) I have been forced to think of gravity purely in classical terms - so much so, I have become fond of the idea that there is no such true particle concept transformation even in the phase space, as gravity could have acted purely classical (which seems to be actually supported by current experiments as gravity appears to act on particles all in the same way. The surprising feature was that it even acted on clouds of atoms in different energy levels, even in the same way)!

 

We do retrieve though some room to move [if] we conjecture the wave function itself is related to gravity as true gravitational waves - then we can find a deviation as I said before, from classical predictions of gravitational waves, in which they can couple to matter through entanglement forming what can only be called, ''in phase, empty waves.'' This would suggest more directly, that the quantum gravitational wave does not always move at the speed of light. This is a strange prediction but very possible within the gravitational aether theory, since it must accommodate for gravitational waves both classically and quantum mechanically - without the need of introduction to any graviton in nature.

 

The real question  I am asking now is, ''is a gravitational wave strong enough to answer for a quantum leap?''

 

Personally I do not accept the current idea of what a quantum leap is, that is, a discontinuous jump from one energy level to another - discontinuous would imply random behaviour, but such randomness is key to the Copenhagen interpretation and the measurement problem. One thing is for sure, if we ever tried to look at the system, it is no surprise we cannot ''see'' the wave function, if gravity is not only acting classically, but also as a wave function governing the system, because they would be too weak and too small to detect directly due to other forces at work. The issue with the perturbation of an electron from one energy level to another via some distortion from a gravitational wave, is that the wave surely cannot compare to the attractive electromagnetic forces between the electron and the proton?

 

I try to be as pragmatic as possible, even always thinking outside the box in terms of physics that I have already learned. We need to look closely at the mechanism being suggested, so we will take an example of an electron absorbing the photon inside the atom, disturbing it so that it jumps an energy level. It turns out, the gravitational wave function would also have to be proportional to the jump it takes inside of the atom, (like it temporarily rides a wave moving at the speed of light) - but instead of being distorted back into place, it has found stability in a new energy level; in a sense it has increased the kinetic energy of the atom. So to understand how the wave can be sufficient, would be on the scale of the electron kinetic energy (added with) the kinetic energy of the photon - which if we interpreted as being guided by a gravitational wave function, becomes the gravitational energy contained in the wave for the process of moving it from one energy level to another. The idea that absorption of two systems releasing gravitational waves, is of course analogous to neutron star collisions with black holes, or black holes merging with black holes.... It's interesting to note, is that as massive as they are, they still emit a very small amount of gravitational energy in the form of metric radiation which gives some idea how ''weak'' a gravitational wave function would generally have to be. But the issue may not be so simple. 

 

For instance, the electron does not have a true orbit, so does not have a true (acceleration) around the nucleus, because if it had a true acceleration it would radiate away electromagnetic radiation and fall to the nucleus destroying the atom. Since this does not happen, how does a gravitational wave function explain the absence of radiation from particles guided in a definite and curved path through space?! Remember, a particle experiences intrinsic acceleration when it experiences a curvature and the main idea of pilot waves, is that you cannot speak of a wave without locally defining a particle simultaneously. This means, the particle does not smear through space but is accompanied by a wave which guides it through space. And as stated, if that wave directs an electron into a curved path, it should from the principles of quantum mechanics experience electromagnetic radiation, so something prevents this, or, the pilot wave model cannot make sense of it. 

 

 

 

 

 

As for the rest, you know fine well I am not going to reply.

[Dubbelosix]

Lorentz ether theory gives the same answers as Special Relativity, they both have time dilation. Some one on the edge of a black hole will experience a different time to someone in free space. But for both persons life goes on as normal and they will not notice a difference in the flow of time or speed of light until they observe each other. Do you have a citation that shows the speed of light has been proven to be not constant in free space?

 

 

Late night speculation:

If a Photon had enough energy to escape a black hole it would be red shifted ie the Photon would lose its energy inertia frequency, E=hf =pv if it was red shifted enough it would cease to exist. What energy level do you think a photon would have to escape a singularity, or are you thinking more along the lines of at the event horizon.

 

Late night speculation not thought through:

Huge Gamma ray bursts happen in the universe is this analogous at the noddy level to an electron taking a lower orbit in an atom and giving of a photon ie losing its inertia, or more likely due to stars collapsing, as explained by wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma-ray_burst. There is no consensus of opinion. 

 

 

 

Well, the problem is that free space is a medium with nothing in it. This is not a realistic fact of the vacuum, in which the speed of light in the frame of reference of an observer can vary [in space]. There surely will be material out there that support the contention that speed of light varies in a vacuum, depending on the gravitational field strength. In fact two such references are here:

 

https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0011/0011003.pdf

 

https://arxiv.org/vc/arxiv/papers/0704/0704.1942v3.pdf

 

Also more references and information can be found at this link to my blog: https://blackholeradiation.quora.com/ - the work is for now still in production, but there is some lengthly passages in there about some of the implications to be found. 

[Dubbelosix]

huh? We're told all the time about situations in which light varies in gravitational fields, to say this is not supported by experimentation is very misleading. 

 

 

 

Me thinks your theory is based on a belief and not backed up by observation, ie it is flawed :)

[Dubbelosix]

In fact, the refractive index of gravity can be proven quite easily, since it deflects light. Bends it, can even slow it down. But a consequence is that the speed of light can never reach zero. 

[Dubbelosix]

I felt like I should come back and explain, that deBroglies pilot wave is in fact one such interpretation of quantum physics, which is just as good as any other interpretation. Pilot waves do indeed, predict empty waves, and the double slit experiment is in justification of this. 

[OceanBreeze]

In fact, the refractive index of gravity can be proven quite easily, since it deflects light. Bends it, can even slow it down. But a consequence is that the speed of light can never reach zero. 

 

Gravity bends light and can change the frequency of light but it can't slow it down.

[Dubbelosix]

Gravity bends light and can change the frequency of light but it can't slow it down.

This statement is a contradiction to what gravity wells predict to effect light to some observer just sitting away at a fair distance from the horizon of a black hole. Gravity not only bends light, it slows it down in a dynamic medium which depends on varying gravitational field strengths throughout the universe. In the gravitational aether theory, in which my own theory has been based on a lot of literature concerning a mechanical explanation for gravity, does predict the speed of light is in fact capable of escaping black holes, avoiding a lot of what can be considered, ''strange paradoxes''... like how an in-falling machine just about to pass the event horizon, will never appear to do so and may appear to last for eternity. This is because the models we work with haven't taken into consideration that the medium is governed by a gravitational permittivity and permeability, which it is now agreed, must exist with the discovery of gravitational waves. 

[Dubbelosix]

And in fact, I cannot stress it enough, the gravitational aether theory which has literature spanning back to Einstein, suggests now that it can explain the information paradox in a very natural, logical and acceptable way. It destroys the paradoxes mentioned in the last post, which are anomalies of equations that didn't make sense within the model we work with, but the most important paradox it solves is the infamous information paradox, which has led to all sorts of exotic models, like firewalls (which the community has largely rejected), to quantum entanglement maybe playing a role, uysing the concept that the information can be stored on the boundary according to the hologhraphic principle. All these exotic conjectures are avoided if we just accept light can escape a black hole.... perhaps at a very slow velocity. It is akin to how it takes a photon to travel 40,000 years from the inner core of the sun, but magnify that to many powers. 

[Dubbelosix]

At least some one has a grasp on reality. 

 

Since you insist on being arrogant about what I claim, I want you to know physics is not exchemists speciality. And you show only a little knowledge of physics yourself, I think its quite safe for me to say I have read plenty material and understand math to a certain degree of competency that I understand the proposals with greatly more clarity than yourself. Especially exchemist, since it is quite evidence from an observers point of view, that a photon slows down in gravity wells. My post 59 exposes the problems with the idea that the speed of light is constant when this is not true in gravitational fields in which current model is capable of producing unacceptable paradoxes.

Edited December 12, 2018 by Dubbelosix

[Dubbelosix]

As I also said, the speed of light is a special case in an empty vacuum. It's only a special case and must not be taken as an absolutist statement.

[OceanBreeze]

Hey Dubbel, I think Popeye aka Flummox Alt, is broken. It's repeating the comprehension of yesteryear!

 

NASA and I are very interested in hearing all about the New Physics you are espousing, wherein gravity slows down light!

 

 

From the link:

 

"Yes, light is affected by gravity, but not in its speed. General Relativity (our best guess as to how the Universe works) gives two effects of gravity on light. It can bend light (which includes effects such as gravitational lensing), and it can change the energy of light. But it changes the energy by shifting the frequency of the light (gravitational redshift) not by changing light speed. Gravity bends light by warping space so that what the light beam sees as "straight" is not straight to an outside observer. The speed of light is still constant"

[Dubbelosix]

The speed of light is a relative term, and since a photon does not have a frame of reference, who can say it always travels at the speed of light? The paradox is simple, a ray of light can appear not to move at all in a strong enough gravitational field. The problem is models cannot have it both ways, either the speed of light is variable to an observer, or we just put up with all the paradoxes, from frozen light to the information paradox. Aether theory has negative connotations, but there are quite a number of physicists who have embraced the gravitational aether, because as I said, the math works and it makes sense. It's usual for science to progress and it usually progresses from studying paradoxes and anomalies of our models.

[Dubbelosix]

Also, I keep saying this and it seems generally ignored, the speed of light is only a [special case] in a vacuum. We do know for a fact that the speed of light varies in a gravitational field. But it is well-argued this is not a general case when gravity is involved. 

[Dubbelosix]

Gravity bends light and can change the frequency of light but it can't slow it down.

 

The problem is interpretation. In fact, no system can technically be slowed down to no motion, everything has motion. However, I would advice you to read into gravitational aether and why it is not  the same thing as a ''photon passing through a material,'' we are talking about something more fundamental than even the photon... we elude to the gravitational field. Just as general relativity surpassed special relativity because the latter had an absence of gravity, the same applies to the motion of a photon as it tries to pass through the thickness of a gravitational field. You can argue it has to always travel at the speed of light to counteract gravity and this is probably true - but the constancy of light is still a relative term and it only moves at the speed of light when there is an absence of gravity. This is a special medium, not like when a photon passes through some material.

Edited December 12, 2018 by Dubbelosix