Gravitation

[Norman Albers]

I have achieved the first part of a paper in which my ideas of polarization of the vacuum lead to a new understanding of General Relativity. It is not yet sufficiently finished to post at my URL but people may e-mail me for PDF.

[ajb]

Vacuum polarisation effects for quantum fields on curved space-times are very interesting. They lead to violations of various energy conditions.

 

Also the work of I.T. Drummond & S.J. Hathrell and later G. M. Shore on QED vacuum polarisation on curved space-times is interesting. Vacuum polarisation effects can allow for a photon to propagate at a speed greater than c!

 

I'm not sure if any of thsi is related to what you have written Norman?

[Norman Albers]

Thank you, ajb. I need to learn quantum theory of polarizations in the vacuum; I am not there yet. I am at a place of taking electrodynamics further and dialing more than I ever thought I would. I sneaked into the basement and am wreaking some glorious havoc. . . . . .In my work on electrons and photons I show how vacuum polarization is necessary to create a limited wave packet. Also, the electron may be understood as nothing but dipoles. I do not know yet how this relates to present theory. My construction requires from the vacuum regions of diverging E-field (I simply allow them to exist) of 'infinitesimal' nature compared with what we are talking about. Can the current theory supply this? There is in my electron model, significant curvature only in a near range which does not contain much energy inside it. In photons, I have not yet reached for the high energy range.

[Norman Albers]

My prior work shows that the mechanism which localizes E&M energy does not sense the total energy of a wave packet, and on these grounds I have challenged the quantum theory of the radiative vacuum: it is not intrinsically quantized. I have to be more sympathetic to Q polarization theory because I agree there that electrons are the only stable state cooked out of the vacuum at this level. However, I have already trashed the idea that only units of charge exist in the fields. If I am shown that Q polarizations with brief existence fill the bill, I will reconsider. Do you see I am at the nexus of energy density becoming localized and am seeking and finding further possibilities in field mathematics, and trying to let these results tell us what the vacuum theory has to be? One of the blue-stars here already admitted that QM does not talk of the kind of currents I do. For me this was wonderful news.

[Norman Albers]

More clearly: I have discounted our tenet that the radiation field only carries quantized bundles. I am working with 'infinitesimal' inhomogeneity (regions of diverging E or charge) but admit above that this is the question, really.

[CPL.Luke]

norman albe is your work based off any of the currently accepted theories?

 

or did you strike out on your own making up the math as you went?

[Norman Albers]

I struck out on my own (either way!) by letting electrodynamics be inhomogeneous. Now this concept of polarization is as a runaway locomotive, and seems to offer a deep new perspective on GR. . . . . Sorry, I lose track of the point and forget what's been said where. I can explain the thrust of the idea is that the behavior of light (null geodesics) is equally explained by a medium of increasing dielectric constant. This is offered by the vacuum polarization, in two degrees: radial and transverse. To my amazement there is a very nice equivalence here and the algebra of dielectric runaway explains the event horizon and the whole shot. Are you ready for this? When the "thickened vacuum" reaches a polarization density of R=3epsilon-nought, you have a horizon. Inside, behavior is fascinating and analytic! I say we can picture a Euclidean manifold with dielectric stuff and enjoy exactly the differential geometry given to us. We said, "There shall be a Reimannian geometry where space and time are such and such." We are speaking about the backdrop of both energy and mass since mass is energy basically in circles. In a stronger dielectric waves are compressed in outside coordinate measure, but space and time are as they should be for travelers in it. Can the two be distinguished? I suggest not, and that we've found the darned rubber sheet!

[Norman Albers]

I have equated the appropriate metric terms with the square root of a local permittivity/dielectric field. Don't tell anyone.

[CPL.Luke]

how can you be sure that your theory is correct then as it doesn't seem to have a basis in the other laws of physics. If its not based in those than its most likely not consistent with osther theories and is wrong.

[Norman Albers]

I disagree. I am speaking about light bending in a medium of higher permittivity, in this case smoothly increasing toward a gravitational mass. I am letting the vacuum polarization field, whatever that is, supply this. In my electron paper I showed that angular permittivity goes to infinity at the center. That's what set the stage for this realization. My perspective is that of an electrodynamicist allowing mathematics to speak to physics to derive from clear phenomenologic needs what the vacuum has to be cooking up. I don't yet even know the quantum formulations here but expect to be faced with them real soon! I am conversant in general relativity tensor theory, and the great news is that it's quite cool and that this is interpretable as the 'rubber sheet'. It works; I'd be happy to e-mail you two pdf pages.

[Norman Albers]

My cache at http://laps.noaa.gov/albers/physics/na now has the 2-page pdf.

[Norman Albers]

I have submitted this paper to Nature Physics and to JETP.

[Norman Albers]

This is the eighth day of editorial review on this two-page paper on gravitation at the Journal of Mathematical Physics (AIP). Too bad folks are afraid to think outside the box that holds us back.

[Norman Albers]

I have realized the first important result from my theorization of Gravitation and Vacuum Polarization. Permittivity for light propagation on a transverse path inside a black hole is negative, meaning that an imaginary square root speaks of absorption of transverse waves. Radial propagation is as we had pictured it. http://laps.noaa.gov/albers/physics/na

[Norman Albers]

This is day 29 of "editorial evaluation" at Journal of Mathematical Physics after peer review. I am a very lonely man, though it is greatly satisfying to Google on "gravitation vacuum polarization".

[Norman Albers]

Check out 'anisotropic vacuum polarization'.

[Norman Albers]

I am just beginning to study possible vacuum physics of magnetic permeability. All of my work has centered on polarizability as prime mover for the phenomena of electrons, photons, and now gravitation. I encounter now the need to statistically model the vacuum. I have already made statements about fluctuations of electromagnetic fields and of charge density. If one includes rotations in the vacuum virtual manifestations, as in rotating virtual pairs, even if not of the same origin of local fluctuation, then there is the germ of permeability theory. At the moment I am most concerned about interpreting possibilities inside the BH. If permeability remains positive while electric permittivity becomes negative, then there are no transverse radiation modes here. I welcome help to understand our modelling of the vacuum, and of the basic construction of Fock space. I feel all questions lie here. I start with a picture of electrons, or other charges, being a resonance of the vacuum field and affecting its conformation. Most of the papers I read seem to speak of a scalar permittivity field "in a Schwarschild metric space", and I need to know if I am arguing differently from the bottom up, given that basic metric properties are shown in my charge fields.

[Norman Albers]

If it is so that there are no transverse modes propagated then we may say these two dimensions are curled up, no? Permittivity near an event horizon is asymptotically large, so absorption lengths will be short. Curiously this is not the case in toward the singularity.

[Norman Albers]

This says there are only strings. Lisa Randall, where are you?

[Norman Albers]

I am enjoying discussion with H. Puthoff on gravitation and vacuum polarizability. He published the isotropic case, and I elucidate the Schwarzschild case of distinct radial and transverse permittivity. These are seemingly the two possible ways to go with the GR differential setup. Previously this is called "PV" theory. Most others put a scalar permittivity into the Schwarzschild metric; I seek to construct this anisotropic metric from fundamental thoughts of vacuum physics in the particle scale. Given the isotropic assumption, Puthoff derives "dark gray holes", or no event horizon save the central singularity. The same tweaky relationship between radius and circumference does apply, as we are used to, exterior to a BH.