Is This Correct About Gravity, The Hubble Shift, Galactic Rotation Velocities and the Origins of Spacetime?

[captcass]

Does the quantum continuum have holes in it, empty spaces?

[Mordred]

There is space between particles if that's what you mean 

[captcass]

14 minutes ago, Mordred said:

There is space between particles if that's what you mean 

So the quantum continuum is not continuous?

Edited August 9, 2019 by captcass

[Mordred]

The quantum continuum includes the field coordinates of spacetime.

[captcass]

So, is it continuous? What else does in "include"?

[Mordred]

Are you deliberately being obtuse ?  Spacetime doesn't have to be filled at every coordinate. It isn't some materialistic fabric.

[captcass]

The continuum, by definition, is continuous, hence continuum.

Space is filled with the energy of the CMB and the radiation from all the stars.

There are no null zones. There can be no holes.....

There can be no "separate" particles...

It is a continuum.....

 

[Mordred]

Energy isn't a substance either.

Energy is the ability to perform work. It is a property defined by that definition.

Not a thing it is a property

There is no continuum under physics that is sci Fi

Edited August 9, 2019 by Mordred

[captcass]

1 minute ago, Mordred said:

Energy isn't a substance either.

But it is what all things are made from....can't define it as a thing, but all things are made of it

Is all of space filled with starlight. Or are there actually dark areas?

 

[Mordred]

See Olber's paradox. A photon is a quantum of energy in a finite locality. So yes you can have space without light in quantum localities. 

Energy is a property it does not make anything. It is a property that equates the ability to perform work.

All forms of matter simply has the ability to perform work but solid is an illusion. 

 

Edited August 9, 2019 by Mordred

[captcass]

2 minutes ago, Mordred said:

space without light in quantum localities

So a null gravitational field is then possible? A place with no energy?

[Mordred]

The correct term is Einstein vacuum. Which is a GR solution devoid of all particles including virtual. QM however states it isnt a possible state due to Heisenberg uncertainty principle. See zero point energy. 

An Einstein vacuum would be zero K. Zero point energy however states zero K is impossible to obtain. However that is a density value over a region of volume. At the quantum level one can only equate observable quantities which require a minimal a quanta of action. Anything below the Planck scale is anyone's guess. A hypothetical perfect detector will never be able to detect below a quanta of action. 

That is the same reason individual virtual particles are undetectable. It takes an ensemble of VP to cause action.

Edited August 9, 2019 by Mordred

[captcass]

30 minutes ago, Mordred said:

The correct term is Einstein vacuum. Which is a GR solution devoid of all particles including virtual. QM however states it isnt a possible state due to Heisenberg uncertainty principle. See zero point energy. 

An Einstein vacuum would be zero K. Zero point energy however states zero K is impossible to obtain.

EXACTLY what I said earlier.  Einstein said he didn't believe such a metric as his Fundamental Metric (with GR coordintes) could exist: i.e., spacetime is always energetic in a finite space.

So,........

What I see here is that we have a space(time) continuum filled with energy: visible light, invisible light, mass (if you will) and potential.

The spatial aspect, and all it "contains" is evolving forward in the forward direction of time, which has no depth in space.

And in my paper I also say it is due to the Heisenberg.

I begin with time evolving space forward in the vacuum, but that state doesn't exist in finite space.

Then I add dilation......

Edited August 9, 2019 by captcass
addition

[Mordred]

Your still missing it aren't you. Energy isn't a thing. It doesn't fill space. Light is simply a collection of photons.

Mass isn't a thing it is a property that means resistance to inertia change 

Spacetime doesn't need to be filled like some continuum. It isn't some fabric to be stretched twisted etc etc etc.

The term continuum is a sci-fi imagination. There is nothing wrong with having absolute voids between quantum particles.

If every coordinate was filled what happens when two particles annihilate ? Energy isn't a substance that radiates away mass as a resistance to inertia that radiates away.

You are trying to apply the illusion of some substance like thing you can equate to but solid is an illusion taught to us by our macro world perceptions.

[captcass]

17 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Energy isn't a thing.

I agreed with that, but it is what every "thing" is manifested by. Spacetime is perceptually infinite, which means it is filled with an infinite "potential" gravitational energy. That potential is everywhere throughout the spatial aspect. It is not a thing, but it fills the spatial aspect.

Time evolving space forward is itself "energetic" as it results in motion in the forward direction of time. As I noted earlier, if I am correct this will allow us to create gravity drives if we can create a focused dilation gradient. In that case we will be using the evolution of time as energy.

You keep seeing "separate" events rather than events that are part of a whole. It is an evolving whole. It has no separate parts. I mean, it does in such a way we can manipulate it, etc., but it is a single spatial field. 

If GR is based in spacetime coordinates, how can spacetime not be the energetic quantum continuum?

Edited August 9, 2019 by captcass
addition

[Mordred]

Am event is defined by a frame of reference  under GR. It specifies all frames are inertial.

You know it's funny one of the most common arguments for DE is that spacetime is never truly empty. You disagree with DE but ate now  arguing the same argument commonly used for DE.

Rather ironic 

[captcass]

5 minutes ago, Mordred said:

You disagree with DE

I do. Mine is not Dark energy. I explain its origin and show how it is translated from potential to kinetic to thermal...Nothing Dark about it....

 

7 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Am event is defined by a frame of reference  under GR

Yes, because we are then focusing on an event in the quantum field, and I guess you know where we go from there....collapsing probabilities, etc....

[Mordred]

The term DE us simply  a placeholder. Quantum fluctuations has always  been one of the possibilities.

 However that in turn shows that you accept an accelerating expansion at its rudiments. Yet your paper argues against it.

 The main ingredient to the cosmological constant  is that spacetime is never truly empty. Fluctuations always occur. 

Edited August 9, 2019 by Mordred

[captcass]

35 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Fluctuations always occur. 

And that is back to Heisenberg. But fluctuations should not have catastrophic extremes like singularities and infinitely acclerating expansions. They are fluctuations, not illogical beginnings and endings.

My model can fluctuate. The Cosmological Horizon is determined by the acceleration in the rate of proper (in the invariant sense) time. The higher the acceleration, the closer the horizon.

Which is also what we see in GR, except it is the spatial aspect instead of the time aspect. At c it would go flat.

Mine is just the point of view from the time aspect. As it is "spacetime", there has to be one...

"Ahhhh, 'tis all just relative, you know?"

How many -points before I am kicked out of the forum, please?

Edited August 9, 2019 by captcass
addition

[Mordred]

The cosmological horizon was always measured in proper time. There is a formula for that. All cosmological distances are.

Infinities do occur  in nature of you don't believe me take a 1 cm square and divide by half then each portion  by half continue doing so to each portion.

Let me know when you can no longer divide a portion by half....

Cosmology never stated that spacetime cannot fluctuate.  The quantum harmonic oscillator is an example of that. 

I've already told you in the Hubble illusion thread there is no time dilation in the cosmological distance measures. It simply commoving coordinates  not time dilation. Time dilation doesn't occur in a homogeneous and isotropic (uniform) above 100 Mpc mass distribution.

You don't get kicked out on a point system. If you don't wish to participate on this forum simply stop posting. You can always PM a moderator to lock this thread.

PS that cosmological calculator posting I did earlier this thread is in proper distances.

 

Edited August 9, 2019 by Mordred

[captcass]

13 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Infinities do occur  in nature

The universal continuum appears as infinite if the event horizons shift when approached.

 

13 minutes ago, Mordred said:

cosmological horizon was always measured in proper time

I agree, but that time is accelerated in rate.

 

13 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Let me know when you can no longer divide a portion by half....

OMG! I an't beleive you are pulling this out! When does the arrow hit the target, when does the chair hit the wall.....

They hit when the electron events repel each other!

13 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Cosmology never stated that spacetime cannot fluctuate

You miss my point. you said it could fluctuate and I agreed....?????

13 minutes ago, Mordred said:

there is no time dilation in the cosmological distance measures

In YOUR model

13 minutes ago, Mordred said:

You don't get kicked out on a point system

WHEW! Figured I ws getting close! If I am fighting a juggernaut, I will probably incur a lot of those!

Time for dinner....

........MOM, I said, I'M coming!

I'm really only 12, don't tell the others.......

Edited August 9, 2019 by captcass

[Mordred]

That's the trick about Infinities you never do reach an end point.

The same occurs in the Lorentz curve. It's a mathematical consequence. So you pull math tricks.

Lets apply this to the set of Real numbers when does it end ? Now spacetime is [latex]\mathbb{R}^4 [/latex] no end to four dimensions. Four infinite sets. ..

 Redshift has the similar math consequence as an inverse curve it. You always approach the normalized  y axis but never reach it.

20 minutes ago, captcass said:

 

In YOUR model

 

Not my model in the LCDM model. My models never get posted or published. I always manage to prove my own models wrong. Grrr

Edited August 9, 2019 by Mordred

[captcass]

23 minutes ago, Mordred said:

the LCDM model.

is wrong. It is only a model, a theory, and it is just wrong...Just another attempt to make DE work. "I don't know, but this might be why..."

 

23 minutes ago, Mordred said:

but never reach it

An eternally evolving continuum....

We never get the carrot.....

We are evolving between two event horizons...

 

Edited August 9, 2019 by captcass

[Mordred]

Well to date LCDM is the strongest model  but then it adapts with research. The FRWL metric isn't in its original form today. There was a period when LCDM had competition from LHDM and LWDM.

Hot DM and warm DM (hot DM had relativistic DM) warm DM was non relativistic radiation.

 The BB model used also considered quintessence, there  were over 500 different inflationary models. We are narrowing that list down  now it's below 73 viable models.

Arxiv has a publication Inflationarus Encyclopedia. It has a listing of current viable. Higgs inflation is the new bench mark model replaced eternal chaotic eternal inflation.

My own dissertations are ancient history on quintessence. I don't even have a copy anymore quintessence was overturned. Parker radiation no longer exists in Cosmology applications 

Edited August 9, 2019 by Mordred

[captcass]

19 minutes ago, Mordred said:

strongest model 

Exactly, model...

 

19 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Arxiv has a publication Inflationarus Encyclopedia

LOL!

Of COURSE they do! No one KNOWS!

Mordred, you are so good at the maths, much more than I can ever hope to be now at my age, where I just don't want to spend the time becoming as proficient as you, I'd like to see you do some within my model, if you can imagine how, which I will wager you can.

 

 

Edited August 9, 2019 by captcass