Mordred

if you include the energy/momentum tensor. Which follows from the full EFE.

What all fields describes is a distribution of whatever objects/events/coordinates etc you are describing. This is true in relativity as well. Your describing geometric freefall (in essence mass) distribution. Universe spacetime curvature (expansion history due to thermodynamic relations) in essence temp/pressure distribution. Thats all a field is, a means to make mathematical sense of any distribution usually under a coordinate system but coordinates are not a requirement. ie tensors. GR maps freefall motion a geodesic/ Worldline is a type of mathematical treatment describing the freefall motion between two events at each coordinate. This relationship is the curved part. Spacetime curvature does not mean spacetime is its own substance. Its simply describing specified relations into a coordinate system. An electron can both interact with other multiparticle fields as well as have its own field. This however doesn't mean the field is contained of some substance. The last example is describing the possible interaction range with geometry Ie a single electron has infinite range in which it can potentially interact with another electron. The field strength may be zero but the possibility of interaction is still present. Once that single electron interacts the field becomes charged. Note the field is still present whether charged or not. (A field being the abstract system being described under geometry) [Latex]\frac {1}{2}|V\phi\rangle(x,t)[/latex] here is your single electron in field treatment. Remember QFT treats all particles as field excitations. The field in this case being comprised of potential oscillations [latex]\phi [/latex] x in this case is a complex variable [latex]x=(x_1,x_2,x_3)= (x,y,z)[/latex] The reason behind the last nomenclature is that the last equation is describing potential interaction strength between any two points. So we only need to identify any other point and draw a line between those two points. This line becomes x In QFT a scalar field defined as [latex]\phi (x,t)[/latex] x is still the three dimensional complex variable I described above. So we can see from this last equation I am simply mapping the oscillator potentials under geometry. If we take the above a non interacting free field in QFT treatment that is identical to your Minkowskii metric is [latex]V\phi=\frac{1}{2}m^2\phi^2 [/latex] where m is your mass term, the fraction is your harmonic oscillator (Heiesnburg uncertianty) V is volume

Well to demonstrate Studiots last reply lets name a few different fields. scalar field Vector field Spinor field Boson field (force field) Fermion field (matter field) Event field (relativity) Tensor field etc etc. A field is as stated an abstract device to describe any collection of objects. (objects can be nearly anything as long as its the same type)

Objects can be events/coordinates physical objects etc. Even strictly mathematical objects such as vectors/spinors etc

A field is an abstract device to mathematically model any collection of objects. Typically with geometric coordinates.

I agree with Swansont

Joule

Anger as it is the strongest emotion that places you at odds with one's self. Thus lending self confidence once you overcome those anger triggers. To persevere against the adverse nature of the uncontrolled nature of anger and learn from its diverse lessons (depending on triggers) and continue to do so

Also considering relativity is increbibly well tested. Which includes relativity of simultaneity

Would it surprise you to know what your in essence is describing is the zero energy universe model? This model is based on the Heisenburg uncertainty principle and QM's zero point energy VeV (vacuum expectation value) which under QM is the true vacuum minima. It is the only viable universe from nothing model it is often coined the term "Ultimate free lunch" and still considered viable today. Though you should replace your little big bangs with particle/antiparticle annihilations. False vacuum via Guth in early 80's in essence included this mechanism by using quantum tunneling which is rather complex to properly describe in a heuristic manner. A good portion of the many viable inflationary models today 74+ according to Encyclopedia inflationaris (ASPIC Library) use a form of quantum tunneling. Some still consider it an option for dark energy. I have some good papers on it as I've been tracking developments of this model for several years (Its the only viable universe from Nothing model still viable). Other models are cyclic universe or bounce universe. Of these latter categories I lost count on variations. http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=&ved=0ahUKEwj28Z2nvOLRAhUU0GMKHTWBBeAQFggaMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fenergy.nobelprize.org%2Fpresentations%2Flinde.pdf&usg=AFQjCNE_StOMiBfekN2NMu-T96x2tLVOrg&sig2=UTLBdme9W6R_3LUsKpjXIw http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=&ved=0ahUKEwj28Z2nvOLRAhUU0GMKHTWBBeAQFggiMAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fpdf%2Fphysics%2F0506017&usg=AFQjCNGHOQ2UCshslY2uSKQ0pW4tzZCy4g&sig2=cuRmTpv3FgfNNaE7T3U44g The second is an arxiv paper on the DE aspects. The first is a lecture from Andrei Linde. I have a far better detailed pdf that I will have to dig up.

Fair enough, lets play toy model. Lets assume a condition with no Heisenburg uncertainty principle. No field excitations/particles. (lets be 100% clear on below I am not trying to describe how a Universe is created or a Universe from Nothing model) so don't even go there I am strictly describing known physics in a heuristic manner. (specifically space-time under GR) The only thing left is strictly volume. In GR this volume which is assigned coordinates as the volume is 3 dimensional that volume requires 3 coordinates. x,y and z. We can include time as the fourth coordinate t. this is literally Space-time. Space being the three spatial coordinates with time as the fourth coordinate. As we have nothing to interact with the effective energy of this Space-time is literally zero. Now lets include some basic physics definitions. Energy: The ability to perform work. Mass: Resistance to inertia change potential energy: the energy possessed by a body by virtue of its position relative to others, stresses within itself, electric charge, and other factors. Field: An abstract device to describe any collection of objects/coordinates/events. So using the definition of a field I can describe the space-time coordinates as a field. However as I have no interactions involved the field energy is precisely zero. There is literally no stress tensor as coordinates are not moving without an interaction. All I have defined thus far is the metric tensor [latex]g_{\mu\nu}[/latex]. Now as I have no stress tensor, nor any anistropy ( differences in potential energy) Our Space-time is Euclidean (flat) there is no curvature in distribution. [latex]\eta_{\mu\nu}=g_{\mu\nu}[/latex] Now if I add a single particle the particle doesn't interact with coordinates. Coordinates are strictly an abstract construct. So our potential energy still remains zero. Analogy Time: lets use an everyday example. The electromagnetic field. Lets take your Voltmeter and in a vacuum move the + and - prongs onto two points of a bare wire ( assume the wire is a perfect conductor). You will measure zero volts. GR is no different if you have no potential difference {resistance} you have no voltage. A magnet itself however is a charged field. It has an inherent difference between the south and North pole. Think of Space-time itself with no interactions as an Uncharged field. There is no potential difference in any coordinate as we have no particles as of yet. Once I add two or more particles this is where things get interesting. Now I have interactions, I can now assign those coordinates to each particle and call these individual events. As we have interactions between two or more objects I now have potential energy. My space-time field is now charged. However the charge is strictly the interactions between the particles not the geometry itself. In GR however we can assign each particle as an event and assign those event coordinates to the particles. Now the above electromagnetic field is described by the Maxwell equations. Those Maxwell equations also can be described as as tensor (electromagnetic stress tensor) The stress tensor for GR is the exact same principle. In both cases the stress tensor is describing your kinematic vectors. ie flux. curl,div etc. They are identical in principle the only difference lies in the particular differences between gravity and the electromagnetic field ie Gravity only attracts while the electromagnetic field can attract and repel. In essence you stress tensor is a means to organize your different momentum vectors. We can equally assign different coordinates to different points in your electro-magnetic field however that doesn't mean those coordinates gain a medium quality. The electromagnetic field itself not its coordinate field is what exhibit the medium qualities. So Spacetime curvature under GR is the collection of vector relations where we set the geometry as the free-fall motion. A geodesic is describing a free fall motion at every coordinate with the use of vectors via the stress tensor between two points. This is what space-time curvature (under GR) is describing a collection of vectors at each coordinate. In accordance to the Principle of least action (kinematic motion under free fall). This is also why we use inertial frames in SR (key word inertial) Now a medium induces further delays in the kinematic motion of two particles. So if space-time was a medium we would have further delays. It would be the same as placing additional resistance to the electromagnetic example above. Recall the word Impedance in your electromagnetic theory. Mass is a form of impedance it is impedance to kinematic motion. impedance=resistance. Now using the electromagnetic field once again. You may recall that two circuits with two electromagnetic fields can induce impedance upon each other (propogation delay) we can describe these delays via coordinate time if we assign coordinates to each point of each field. See where I am going with in time dilation ? If every particle is a field excitation then time dilation itself is by analogy a form of propagation delay. Just as it is in the electromagnetic field theory. (keep in mind the above is a simpification) A heuristic rudimentary means to understand space-time under familiar terms. I won't try to show that gravity is not a force under GR using kinematic action as I know your not ready for that level of mathematical detail. However it does include everything I described above in particular the principle of least action under space-time curvature

no you have it right. The mass remains unchanged so the amount of gravity will remain unchanged. The Schwartzchild radius is what changes. Assuming the situation where the radius of your phone condenses below its Schwartzchild radius. It will become a BH however the strength of the gravity field from your phone to you remain unchanged as your still at the same radius from your phone.

lol my wife is the same so know what your saying lol

No I don't expect you to get everything right away. That would be unreasonable. Take your time. There is no time limit on this thread. By the way good article I already have it in my collection. There is still lots in QFT treatment I myself am currently studying. By the way there is far easier books on QFT than the above as you need a strong lie Algebra understanding in group theory to even get past the first chapter. I've always been more classical in my Cosmology studies. I found this is an invaluable aid regardless of physics topic. https://www.amazon.ca/Mathematical-Methods-Physicists-Comprehensive-Guide/dp/0123846544 If you can do the math in this book there is literally no physics topic or article where you won't be able to figure out.

Pretty good your getting the picture now congrats I know how troublesome thats been for you +1

Good answer not sure I could have said it better myself. Lets look at another basic definition. Potential energy: the energy possessed by a body by virtue of its position relative to others So how many objects do you need to define potential energy? Now think about that definition when the second objects undergoes kinetic motion. What happens to the potential energy in going towards or away from the other object? Then equate that back to your conservation laws. Keep in mind the definition of energy. Ability to perform work forget fundamental just focus on the above definitions. The answer everyone should arrive at is that energy doesn't need to come from anywhere. It is a consequence of relations between two or more objects/events/mass etc. This is precisely why energy is defined as a property. In order to define this property you need to define the system. If you have no interaction between two objects/events etc energy=0 Potential or otherwise. Lol mass itself is an interaction. Now lets take the above one step further mass and energy relations... both are literally due to interactions. In other words they are two properties describing interaction between two or more objects/events etc. Now apply time.definition Rate of change or duration. So time isn't fundamental either but a property. Lol how many forum threads did I just kill ? using nothing more than the Physics definitions?

that is definitely related and the main reason why Quantum field theory has difficulty with relativity. I used a basic example for the above equations with the intention of as simple as possible in order to show a basic example of how a particle is defined. Here try this from another thread and it relates to the above equations Now what I didn't include in the above is the i is a planewave used for HUP itself. ie your virtual particles and internal ziggly lines on Feyman diagrams. This is the portion that has insufficient momentum to perform action. So i is called imaginary as in virtual

Of course, spacetime is incorperated in very deifinition of a particle itself when you get into the QFT treatment of a particle. You literally cannot describe a particles wavefunction without spacetime

Start with defining states under QM. Pay close attention to terms such as eugenvalues and eugenstates. You need to define these first before you try tackling QFT. Another key study is the Dirac notation and Dirac Delta function. I will spend some time digging up key lessons for you.

Absolutely its best to address the parts you don't fully understand first and foremost. From what I've seen thus far this could very well be the very problem between your speculation and what is already described under QM/QFT. I'm almost willing to wager that this is truly the case. I know you won't fully understand this math but lets take an important equation and well known equation. [latex]E=\pm\sqrt{m^2+p^2}[/latex] now we need to define the wave portion that equates to our point-like characteristic for this we need to add the Dirac Delta function I won't fully detail this function but it is a matrix.[latex]\delta_{i,j}[/latex] set c=1 [latex]\int d^4p\delta(p^2-m^2)f(p)[/latex] now a particle is on shell when its mass and four momentum [latex]p^u=(P_o,P)[/latex] because [latex] p^2=m^2[/latex] this is just another way to distinquish between a virtual particle/fluctuation to an excitation (real particle) the delta function itself describes a waveform. see animation image here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_delta_function when the peak reaches a quanta you have a real particle.

This statement is accurate we do treat the Wave-particle duality at the same time. That truth is this dual nature doesn't seperate after interference. This detail is often misimplied in heuristic descriptions. For example after the slit interference the photon doesn't stop being both a wave and particle. The slit interference doesn't change the wave-particle duality nature. This is one of the artifacts of trying to explain complex objects such as a particle in heuristic terms. The particle knowing the final location ahead of time is another heuristic artifact. I like to use the term myth. The paper I posted "There are no particles only fields" mathematically describes this. The quanta portion of the wave [latex]E=\hbar w [/latex] is the portion that exhibits the pointlike characteristic. From what I have read so far is that you are getting into some very advanced details beyond the heuristic descriptions. This is good and rather refreshing lol. Truthfully from what I have read so far the only details lacking is how to describe these advanced descriptives. This is nearly impossible to fully describe accurately with strictly verbal descriptions. The most appropriate arena mathematically speaking to describe the above is QFT. This is a rather intense study as you have to be clear on the term "boundary confinement" of the above formula. The boundary confined region of quanta above will start spreading out after it passes the slit. The other key note is that the slits cause interference. There is two types of interference constructive and destructive. Loosely put in QFT this would be described by creation/annihilation operators. (careful there is lots more involved) ie again boundary confinement. Now lets define the boundary condition for a pointlike characteristic. I can do this simply with a key statement. Without dropping into QFT math the Compton wavelength is the distance at which the concept of a single pointlike particle breaks down completely. in other words the Compton wavelength defines the boundary of an excitation where the wavefunction will exhibit pointlike characteristics.

lol very true

Sure you can use those terms. The majority of the textbooks though on GR and Cosmology will use the term fluid to denote the perfect fluid equations. A full study will reveal that that the majority of your advanced equations have a thermodynamic basis. Mike those terms are used once you have a stress tensor. Space by itself with all excitations/particles removed is just your metric tensor. Your geometry . The metric tensor being [latex]g_{\mu\nu}[/latex] in the above conditions there is no active stress tensor [latex]T_{\mu\nu}=0 [/latex] In your other thread you wanted to apply an ether or medium to space itself which is false as that is just your geometry. You have no medium like properties unless you have other fields other than just geometry. This is an incredibly important distinction. ie there is no Div,Grad or Curl if the stress tensor is zero. The key distinction is that space all by itself isn't a medium,fluid or ether. It is just the geometry. Once you add other fields such as force fields/particles you now have a stress tensor involved and can have medium like characteristics.

I seriously doubt you need to rewrite all of physics. Start with where your speculation becomes distinct. Figure out what math you need to describe the deviation from the mainstream viewpoints. If done properly I'll bet current mathematics and techniques can describe any valid dynamic etc. If you can't get your variation to work under the math then chances are its not valid. Though if your not ready for the math end yet. I would suggest studying the mainstream math first. Good model building requires such. Math being the lanquage of physics. Though we also don't expect an immediate "Standards of a full scientific paper" only that we follow guidelined steps towards such ie some mathematical rigor.

Speculations that follow the required rigor as described by the rules are allowed. We have a few examples of seemingly wrong threads still open as the posters are following the rules. The truth is learning the math to properly support a speculation is a good training aid in and of itself. Though more often than one ends up proving themselves wrong. Which in and of itself is instructive. From your last set of descriptives one would have a hard time with distinquishing your speculation from the QFT treatments already in place. This is probably where the math details will become necessary