Quantum gravity simplified.

[MJ kihara]

26 minutes ago, Mordred said:

It is not some substance that can spontaneously create particles.

With due respect,what am dealing with should give us the source of time,space, information in essence everything we see around....it should tell us what time is.

Spacetime particles with spin 2....it has four degrees of freedom that is energy density, energy flux, momentum density and momentum flux  therefore, =4/2= 2 to get 2.
As the spacetime particles will be moving from source of mass as gravitational waves to become part of spacetime fabric it will be undergoing change of basis among it's four degrees of freedom whereby at the peek of the amplitude it's either energy density or momentum density dorminating on the wave as shown on diagram.

 

1 hour ago, Mordred said:

doesn't work that way you can't simply state too tiny to see or measure and expect it to have effective measurable action.

cummulatively eventually leads to effective measurable action...forming fields and particles.

1 hour ago, Mordred said:

are coordinates, coordinates do not create particles nor are they themselves particles

Nor can you measure a coordinate you can only mathematically assign a coordinate or coordinate system (geometric assignment)

I think we can consider coordinate as information of what we are looking for.

[Mordred]

With due respect there is no such thing as spacetime particles. That would further imply a Lorentz type eather. M&M type experiments show that as being invalid. 

Spacetime is just geometry. A set of coordinates. Gravitational waves affect all force and matter fields of the standard model where spacetime is simply the geometric distribution of those fields.

Edited June 1, 2023 by Mordred

[MJ kihara]

3 hours ago, Mordred said:

With due respect there is no such thing as spacetime particles. That would further imply a Lorentz type eather. M&M type experiments show that as being invalid.

I prefer referring spacetime particles as virtual particles as they are fundamental to the structure of 'spacetime fabric' and so 'tiny' they are emitted by everything.. including the instruments used in M&M experiments, therefore,such arrangements is difficult to detect them.

The analogy 'brooklyn is not expanding' in this case doesn't apply since every thing is expanding  and contributing to expansion of the universe.

Being in a galaxy which has of course a Blackhole leads to this expansion not being profound....since as stated earlier in the diagram pressure increase towards source of mass due to increase in virtual particles(spacetime particles) concentration leading to increase in their entanglement.

Also stable and partially stable virtual particles(spacetime particles) move at speed of light, therefore, the issue of aether is not applicable here.

[Genady]

No respect to the meaningless blabbering.

[Mordred]

The spacetime fabric is nothing more than a useful analogy. There is no medium or corpuscular or particle composition to spacetime itself. It is not a rubber sheet or any other form of medium.

Expansion is just a reduction in density over a larger volume of the standard model of particles. We simply use commoving coordinates as a convenience to maintain symmetry relations.

Virtual particles are off shell particles that have insufficient mass to be a real particle of the specific type ie an offshell photon has less than a quanta of action.

All particles add to the blackbody  temperature both relativistic and non relativistic. This includes quasi and virtual particles (example zero point energy due to uncertainty principle)

So your use of virtual particles would do the same more so if the are relativistic.

Edited June 1, 2023 by Mordred

[MJ kihara]

4 hours ago, Mordred said:

Spacetime is just geometry. A set of coordinates. Gravitational waves affect all force and matter fields of the standard model where spacetime is simply the geometric distribution of those fields.

Am not refuting that but rather than being 'just a geometry' it's something dynamic that is evolving...the issue is us separating ourselves from 'spacetime fabric'..we are just part of it... therefore,by assigning a set of coordinate we are extracting information out of it.

[MJ kihara]

1 hour ago, Mordred said:

The spacetime fabric is nothing more than a useful analogy. There is no medium or corpuscular or particle composition to spacetime itself. It is not a rubber sheet or any other form of medium.

In another thread I had to clear the issue by settling to use basic framework of the universe as synonymous to spacetime fabric...am not referring to rubber sheet analogy with that in mind it's difficult to get the concept am trying to layout.

 

1 hour ago, Mordred said:

Virtual particles are off shell particles that have insufficient mass to be a real particle of the specific type ie an offshell photon has less than a quanta of action.

 

On 5/24/2023 at 4:09 PM, MJ kihara said:

The conventional virtual particles and virtual photons,I explain their source and properties according to electrodynamics as derived from this concept,which I haven't yet talked about them here.

 

1 hour ago, Mordred said:

So your use of virtual particles would do the same more so if the are relativistic.

The difference comes when spacetime particle (virtual particle) disintergrate...they move in time or in space that is i.e instantaneously.

2 hours ago, Genady said:

No respect to the meaningless blabbering.

I have to work on the mathematics...I think all this has something to do with 1,0 &-1.

[Mordred]

Well your correct on needing the mathematics. When you do that you will better understand the coordinate aspects.

[Genady]

39 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

I have to work on the mathematics

Please, do.

 

39 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

I think all this has something to do with 1,0 &-1.

This is just another meaningless statement.

[Mordred]

2 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

In another thread I had to clear the issue by settling to use basic framework of the universe as synonymous to spacetime fabric...am not referring to rubber sheet analogy with that in mind it's difficult to get the concept am trying to layout.

The difference comes when spacetime particle (virtual particle) disintergrate...they move in time or in space that is i.e instantaneously.

Try getting any indication of a spacetime particle out of your thoughts...

Then adopt the terminology spacetime field. Now it's clear your dealing with a mathematical field describing geometry.

Keep all forms of particle fields separate and separate into individual fields.

Mathematically you can then connect the other fields example christoffel connections.

You can individually describe any particle in its own field ie its common to hear of photon field in your case perhaps graviton field.

 

Edited June 1, 2023 by Mordred

[Mordred]

Here is a few details to consider. The mathematics I provided above show the following.

1) spacetime field

2) spin 2 statistics derived via gravitational waves of the graviton

3) the propagator equation of the graviton field (aka virtual gravitons as virtual particles reside on the internal lines of a Feymann diagram just as does the field propogator.) 

4)The GR related details provided is in the weak field limit of GR which may surprise you also work with the Schwartzchild metric.

albiet QFT uses the field as an operator where all particles are field excitations whereas virtual particles are field fluctuations. So you have your wavefunctions included. The Langrangian equations include the uncertainty principle, the harmonic oscillator as well the probability functions for all possible paths.

So in essence I provide all the essential details needed to describe accurately a graviton using QFT. (granted we don't have a cross section) to derive a mass term.

What most people do not realize is physics already has an effective quantum gravity model. (numerous of them). However none of the effective quantum gravity models will function at all scales. They are only effective up to \(10^{19} \) GeV without divergences. This coincides with the singularity condition of a BH as well as the \(10^{-43} \) singularity limit of the BB model.

This is often described as a problem with no- renormalization. However we can normalize gravity without divergences up to that point on one loop integrals. 2 loop integrals are still problematic, however its very rare for any field theory to be renormalizable beyond 2 loop in the first place.

 it is these reasons why quantum gravity is considered an effective field theory as opposed to a fundamental field theory.

Unfortunately very few forum members have a chance to understand the equations involved in renormalization. So my posting them wouldn't help explain how the regulator operator is used for renormalization. No fault to any member, one has to have a solid understanding of Feymann integrals and QFT to have a hope in understanding the relevant equation.

this is a very basic coverage

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renormalization_group

Edited June 2, 2023 by Mordred

[MJ kihara]

6 hours ago, Mordred said:

spacetime particle out of your thoughts...

I referred spacetime particles ( virtual particles) to be the least possible formation, something with it's periphery being just time and space...in the concept without it,there is no concept.

2 hours ago, Mordred said:

where all particles are field excitation

To conform to the above explanations, spacetime particles ( virtual particles) in this case will be analogously to consciousness 'field' excitation.

 

2 hours ago, Mordred said:

They are only effective up to 1019 GeV without divergences. This coincides with the singularity condition of a BH as well as the 10−43 singularity limit of the BB model.

This concept go beyond the limit by stating that,speculating that, assuming that beyond those limits consciousness exist that initiate formation of virtual particles aka spacetime particles that becomes the  basic unit of universe framework (spacetime fabric).

 

2 hours ago, Mordred said:

renormalization

In this concept movement of space time particles renormalise first via formation of dark matter,then dark photons,photons, neutrinos,up the hierarchy up to graviton in case of ablackhole up to event horizon then finally to the periphery of the universe which in our case(human)seems to be infinitely away.

[Genady]

8 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

beyond those limits consciousness exist that initiate formation of virtual particles aka spacetime particles that becomes the  basic unit of universe framework

Here comes the GOD.

[Mordred]

59 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

I referred spacetime particles ( virtual particles) to be the least possible formation, something with it's periphery being just time and space...in the concept without it,there is no concept.

To conform to the above explanations, spacetime particles ( virtual particles) in this case will be analogously to consciousness 'field' excitation.

 

This concept go beyond the limit by stating that,speculating that, assuming that beyond those limits consciousness exist that initiate formation of virtual particles aka spacetime particles that becomes the  basic unit of universe framework (spacetime fabric).

 

In this concept movement of space time particles renormalise first via formation of dark matter,then dark photons,photons, neutrinos,up the hierarchy up to graviton in case of ablackhole up to event horizon then finally to the periphery of the universe which in our case(human)seems to be infinitely away.

You need to mathematically show you can model the above with well tested physics.

Not merely claim such....no relevant math to make testable predictions equals no theory. How would you mathematically define consciousness ?

 

 

Edited June 2, 2023 by Mordred

[MJ kihara]

1 hour ago, Mordred said:

testable predictions

The concept reproduces already developed math e.g f=ma,E=mc^2 ,EFE as shown in on the initial diagram e.t.c e.t.c we can't be in the business of repeating ourselves when we want to progress from the point we are already in....I think the predictions that matters is being able to explain new discoveries and deciphering the unknowns.....

[Mordred]

You still need the mathematics they are essential claiming those equations are in your diagrams isn't proving that they are.

Edited June 2, 2023 by Mordred

[MJ kihara]

33 minutes ago, Mordred said:

You still need the mathematics they are essential claiming those equations are in your diagrams isn't proving that they are.

I think this is what i have partially been explaining in this thread;

6 hours ago, Mordred said:

provided above show the following.

1) spacetime field

2) spin 2 statistics derived via gravitational waves of the graviton

3) the propagator equation of the graviton field (aka virtual gravitons as virtual particles reside on the internal lines of a Feymann diagram just as does the field propogator.) 

4)The GR related details provided is in the weak field limit of GR which may surprise you also work with the Schwartzchild metric.

If particles are excitation of fields...what do you get when spacetime field is excited?

[Genady]

4 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

I think this is what i have partially been explaining in this thread;

Your thinking is mistaken. You have never explained it, partially or fully. You have only declared it.

 

4 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

If particles are excitation of fields...what do you get when spacetime field is excited?

Nothing. You get nothing.

Do you understand the logic: "particles are excitations of something" does not mean that "excitations of something are particles"?

On 5/19/2023 at 12:46 PM, MJ kihara said:

that is the explanation,very correct.....I have just explained exactly about that according to the concepts that are outlined in the diagrams.....just look at my answer again

I have looked at your answer again. You have not explained what you say you have. You are not discussing in a good faith. You violate the rules of discussions on this forum.

[Mordred]

5 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

I think this is what i have partially been explaining in this thread;

Verbal declarations and descriptions through poorly used terminology doesn't explain anything.

 If you apply mathematics you would provide have a far more exacting  answer

[Genady]

8 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

This concept go beyond the limit by stating that,speculating that, assuming that beyond those limits consciousness exist that initiate formation of virtual particles aka spacetime particles that becomes the  basic unit of universe framework (spacetime fabric).

Here, the OP is trying to sneak their religious believes into the science discussion. 

[Bufofrog]

3 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Verbal declarations and descriptions through poorly used terminology doesn't explain anything.

Agreed.  Isn't about time to send this thread to the Trash Can or close it?  The author of the thread certainly has not met the requirements of the speculation section.

I would like to see the mathematics describing the consciousness field, but I don't think that is going to happen...

[MJ kihara]

On 6/1/2023 at 9:04 AM, MJ kihara said:

Spacetime particles with spin 2....it has four degrees of freedom that is energy density, energy flux, momentum density and momentum flux  therefore, =4/2= 2 to get 2.

This is math.... simple math.

Talking of consciousness is off topic,outside this thread remember it was quantum gravity ''simplified"...I talked of gravity, through gravitational waves from massive graviton decaying to massless spin 2 spacetime particles(virtual particles)...I said since it's massive and cause of E=mc^2, energy conservation the energy released becomes gravitational potential energy carried by gravitational waves...I showed through a diagram how  components of Einstein fields equation relate to those diagrams giving an overview of spacetime curvature...my mission of simplifying I have already talked about it....the intention was not to complicate the already complicated issues of gravity.

The discussions here is just one component of my overall agenda, where consciousness comes into place, meaning it belong to another thread..... Anyway you can't keep doing the same thing in exactly the same manner and expect different results otherwise I could have opened a thread to start doing exactly what has already been done.

[Genady]

19 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

On 6/1/2023 at 2:04 AM, MJ kihara said:

Spacetime particles with spin 2....it has four degrees of freedom that is energy density, energy flux, momentum density and momentum flux  therefore, =4/2= 2 to get 2.

This is math.... simple math.

Pointing to 4/2 = 2 as math in this thread is one more evidence that OP doesn't discuss in a good faith.

Edited June 2, 2023 by Genady

[MJ kihara]

3 minutes ago, Genady said:

OP doesn't discus in a good faith.

The issue is that anything new, stones are thrown to it....can you speculate about old already proven fact...there seems to be a taste of how things should be.

[Genady]

Just now, MJ kihara said:

The issue is that anything new, stones are thrown to it....can you speculate about old already proven fact...there seems to be a taste of how things should be.

I can speculate in good faith. You don't do it in good faith, this is a point. You are playing, not discussing.