Deceleration of particles with rest mass

[Coneys]

Hello everyone. I've been a member for a while now, but have never posted a new thread. I guess I wasn't sure what kind of a response I'd get. But here goes.

 

I am a physics enthusiast with no formal teaching/training. I have ready many books on the subject ranging from Quantum physics to Cosmology to Information science, etc. Anyway, I had some thoughts that I'm sure are thoroughly flawed, but was curious if you could help sort them out for me. Hopefully I can convey the idea properly, but unfortunately this might be long. Bare with me if you can. Don't be to hard on me, I'm a novice. Thanks in advance.

 

The idea is based on the idea that as objects approach the speed of light, their relative mass increases, time from the objects perspective slows down, and distances become shorter or closer together.

 

Well based on this I was thinking about the Big Bang and wondering if instead of all matter and energy, being compressed into a singularity, although at the time of the Big Bang I believe it was all just energy in the singularity, since no matter could stabilize. But anyway, what if all that energy was instead, traveling at the speed of light and each quanta of energy was everywhere in the universe at once? Meaning there was no singularity. I no this is kind of just another way of looking at a singularity. Instead of everything in one place, everything is every place.

 

So that's the start, now I was thinking if M theory is correct, maybe our Membrane/Universe collided with another and caused particles or quanta to pick one place(kind of like adding a light sensor in the double slit experiment). Suddenly certain quanta, chose a place and threw off balance, causing variations in energy density throughout the universe. Now over time matter started to form as things clumped due to gravity and slowed down. I haven't figured this all out, but there are many points here, so keep reading

 

Next matter would cluster more and more as it slowed down, and it would go from a soup into, clouds of gas and eventually compress enough to form stars. Now at no time has expansion of space been occuring. Only the warping and bending of space due to gravity caused by the clumping/clustering. However since the matter has been decelerating further and further from light speed, it's relative mass has been decreasing, time has been speeding up from it's perspective(not that it has one), and distances have been increasing.

 

I'll start with the distances. If distances are increasing from the decelerating matter's perspective, than objects not being pulled towards it fast enough by gravity, will appear to be moving away at an accelerated rate and the unaffected light(since it has no rest mass and is not decelerating) appears to be stretched as it crosses this increasing distance in space... appearing as a red shift(no need for dark energy). Now in this scenario the earth for instance would be on a balanced downward spiral towards the sun, but as they are both decelerating the effects of this stop them from reaching each other, because the distance appears to be increasing at a similar rate.

 

Now in the case of the galaxy, I think this can also take the place of dark matter. The center of the galaxy, thought to be a super massive black hole obviously has an enormous gravitational pull on it's spiral arms, however as I understand it, there isn't enough mass in the galaxy to keep the outer portions of those arms from tearing away and spinning off into space, but somehow they stay attached. Now if all particles with rest mass are decelerating and losing relative mass it follows that if the super massive blackhole at the center had a gravitational pull of X then as time went by and it decelerated more the pull would decrease let's say to x-1. Since Gravities speed, like all things is limited to the speed of light, the outer portions of the galaxy's arms might have a pull on them of X at the same time that the inner portions are receiving a pull of X-1, due to the deceleration. This would make it appear as though their was some mysterious extra mass/matter somewhere. But it doesn't seem like there needs to be.

 

This delay in gravity would be testable, if we had accurate enough tools. On a much much smaller scale, would should see what appears to be missing mass in our own solar system, due to the much smaller, but still evident delay in the time it would take gravitational changes to reach Mercury as opposed to Neptune. Although I believe the missing mass would be pretty minor and difficult to measure accurately.

 

The deceleration could also account for our perception of time, since it is a source of constant change, which is all we really need to have for a concept like time to persist.

 

Possibly even Gravity could be accounted for, although this is not full fleshed out either. It has been shown that the effects of gravity and the effects acceleration have on something are indistinguishable. So if I am in a constant rate of acceleration in a space ship and am at a proper rate to match the feel of Earth's gravity. The effects of the acceleration forces on me would be indistinguishable from the gravitational forces effects on me on Earth. Could this possibly work with the deceleration I have been describing? Maybe this is what gives objects their Gravitational effects.

 

Oh and I'm not really sure where this deceleration is occuring, possibly through a higher dimension.

 

There is more that I've thought of all based on this idea, but I think that is more than enough to start with. I know I have no math or fomulas, just thoughts, but as I said, I have no formal education in this field. I just love it.

 

I welcome your comments/criticisms, and am curious if any of this sounds good/plausible or if it is just horribly flawed.

Edited June 19, 2010 by Coneys

[Johanluus]

Your idea is very interesting to me

 

"I'll start with the distances. If distances are increasing from the decelerating matter's perspective, than objects not being pulled towards it fast enough by gravity, will appear to be moving away at an accelerated rate and the unaffected light(since it has no rest mass and is not decelerating) appears to be stretched as it crosses this increasing distance in space... appearing as a red shift(no need for dark energy). Now in this scenario the earth for instance would be on a balanced downward spiral towards the sun, but as they are both decelerating the effects of this stop them from reaching each other, because the distance appears to be increasing at a similar rate. "

 

When you say "but as they are both decelerating the effects of this stop them from reaching each other"

How do you define ( or percieve) this deceleration, is it only with respect to c(massless particles) ?

[Coneys]

If I understand what you're question is; In my scenario, as the Earth gets pulled towards the Sun it is spiraling in towards it. It is not be traveling around it in the ellipse we currently perceive, however since both the Earth and the Sun both contain rest mass(which is what I believe to be decelerating, not mass-less particles, but particles with rest mass), the effects of the deceleration cause the distance between the two to expand. So even though they are getting closer to each other, because of the spiraling, space is actually appearing to grow in between them. They are in a balance which makes it appear that the Earth is traveling in an elliptical path.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Sorry, forgot to specify what the deceleration is in relation too. This part is still fuzzy. I guess it would be in relation to C, however since we don't perceive the motion other than through it's effects on our perception(example: the apparent accelerated expansion of space), I would have to guess at this point that the deceleration of the rest mass particles is only occurring in higher dimensions.

[Johanluus]

I think I follow your reasoning , I like the idea of decellerating mass , causing a "time" and "Length" expansion , which follows from special relativity.

 

 

I always however have a problem percieving " rest mass". To me rest mass can only have meaning , when the two objects ( observer/ object with mass) are in the same inhertial frame.More precicely the distance between them is constant.

If the objects are say moving apart each object will percieve the other object to have different masses due to relativity . And both will be right in their inhertial frame!

 

"however since both the Earth and the Sun both contain rest mass(which is what I believe to be decelerating, not mass-less particles, but particles with rest mass).

the effects of the deceleration cause the distance between the two to expand"

 

This would only be with respect to eachother(sun -earth) , again same inhertial frame.

 

When we introduce another observer say on Halleys comet , their perception will be totally different.

 

And again if we introduce another observer , say on a photon propergating through space at c . All events and time are simoultaneous and at the same place WRT the photon.But WRT us it has travelled for billions of years.

 

Perhaps your "decelleration" is the wrong choice of word.

Rather the creation of energy levels that cannot overlap(fermions- requiring individual spaces) from Bosons (massless and at constant speed - at all points in space).

[Coneys]

I see what your saying about the same inertial frame and how perception changes, but I think this theory agrees with your description. The Earth and the Sun are in the same inertial frame with respect to orbit, but they may or may not be in their deceleration through higher dimensions. This means that as the Earth spirals towards the Sun, it's deceleration might be making it appear as though the space in between it and the Sun are expanding, which gives us the sense that it is in orbit around the Sun and not getting any closer.

 

A comet outside the frame would not perceive this expansion and would instead see the Earth spiraling in towards the Sun, getting closer with each revolution.

 

We may have evidence of this spiraling already. The most common type of Galaxy as far as I know is a Spiral Galaxy.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

And as far as using the term deceleration... That I could change, but decelerating away from C(light speed) is what causes all of the changes in perception to work. So for now, it seems like the right description.

[Johanluus]

"A comet outside the frame would not perceive this expansion and would instead see the Earth spiraling in towards the Sun, getting closer with each revolution.

We may have evidence of this spiraling already. The most common type of Galaxy as far as I know is a Spiral Galaxy."

 

 

Would your theory imply then ,that the Andromeda Galaxy to US here on earth , is spiraling into its black hole .

But to An Alien on some planet relatively close to the centre of Andromeda , be in a constant elliptical orbit around its centre?

[Coneys]

Yes, if there was an alien on a planet close to the center and it had the proper balance between the pull of the blackhole to it's perception of the space between them expanding(due to this deceleration theory)... it would measure itself as orbiting the blackhole and not falling in.

[Martin]

...

 

The idea is based on the idea that as objects approach the speed of light, their relative mass increases, time from the objects perspective slows down, and distances become shorter or closer together.

 

...

 

... Now over time matter started to form as things clumped due to gravity and slowed down. I haven't figured this all out, but there are many points here, so keep reading

 

Next matter would cluster more and more as it slowed down, ...However since the matter has been decelerating further and further from light speed, it's relative mass has been decreasing, time has been speeding up from it's perspective(not that it has one), and distances have been increasing.

 

... am curious if any of this sounds good/plausible or if it is just horribly flawed.

 

Hopefully other people will comment. Just for starters I think you need to define some reference frame from which you are looking at the early universe matter. Have to go. May be able to get back later.

[Johanluus]

"Yes, if there was an alien on a planet close to the center and it had the proper balance between the pull of the blackhole to it's perception of the space between them expanding(due to this deceleration theory)... it would measure itself as orbiting the blackhole and not falling in."

 

So assuming we have just witnessed (with our new super telescope ) the Aliens planet falling into the black hole and being pulled apart , with our Super telescope today.

Theoretically the Alien from his perspective on his planet, is still orbiting that black hole?