How force is carried?

[illuusio]

If we think gravitation, strong interaction and electromagnetism how you would describe delivery mechanism? What is the essence of different fields? What makes fields?

 

I think there must be some kind of medium matter (ether?).

[swansont]

All of the interactions other than gravity have force carriers whose existence has been confirmed. EM interactions, for example, are mediated by photons.

[EMField]

Polorization of the dielectric ether. Two choices are available: 1) ether, or 2) action at a distance. A dielectric transfers energy with only a shift in axis required and does not require particle transfer as a mechanism. This explains why gravity appears to act faster than light as no particle transfer is needed, merely an alignment of axis in the dielectric medium (ether).

 

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Dielectric

 

 

 

Which is why light travels at c and not faster:

 

The electric susceptibility χ_e of a dielectric material is a measure of how easily it polarizes in response to an electric field. This, in turn, determines the electric permittivity of the material and thus influences many other phenomena in that medium, from the capacitance of capacitors to the speed of light.

 

All of the interactions other than gravity have force carriers whose existence has been confirmed. EM interactions, for example, are mediated by photons.

 

 

Wrong, photons are byproducts of energy transfer. According to science charges moved from point A to point B require x amount of energy. Charges moved from point A to point A in a closed loop require no energy. Charges moving in a closed loop generate electric charge (see magnetic induction). Are not the same photons interacting with charges moving in closed loops as well as charges moving in straight lines? So why do only charges in closed loops seem to require no energy expenditure and generate charge if the same photons are the force carriers of the EM force and interact with both charges in closed loops and straight lines?

Edited September 12, 2012 by EMField

[illuusio]

All of the interactions other than gravity have force carriers whose existence has been confirmed. EM interactions, for example, are mediated by photons.

 

Force carriers? How do they function?

 

Magnetism is mediated with photons? How that is possible?

 

Polorization of the dielectric ether. Two choices are available: 1) ether, or 2) action at a distance. A dielectric transfers energy with only a shift in axis required and does not require particle transfer as a mechanism. This explains why gravity appears to act faster than light as no particle transfer is needed, merely an alignment of axis in the dielectric medium (ether).

 

 

Well, gravitation effect doesn't act faster than light if object is moving. Actually it effects app. speed of light.

[Nobrainer]

If we think gravitation, strong interaction and electromagnetism how you would describe delivery mechanism? What is the essence of different fields? What makes fields?

 

I think there must be some kind of medium matter (ether?).

 

Although I do not disagree with experimentation on Force carriers, I do believe a different mechanism of force. I believe attractive force is a dipole to dipole alignment through constructive wave alignment and repulsive force is a non alignment due to destructive wave interference. This is with strong, weak and electromagnetic fields an the force carriers are as stated, photons for electromagnetic fields, etc.

I believe Gravity, dark matter and dark energy, the aether, are related the same way but with a monopole field.

Imagine the big bang was like a nuclear explosion creating three types of matter, mass, energy and space, the gravitational wave. The gravitational wave is the fabric of space, the aether. As unused uranium still decays after a nuclear explosion each piece of mass and energy still decay into aether, the gravitational wave, adding to space. See the result of the 1993 Nobel Prize for gravitational energy loss in a closed system. Gravity is then also a constructive wave interference like the other forces, not an energy exchange that sets up the parameters of dipole constructive wave interference but a monopole constructive wave interference with force carriers acting a contact force in all circumstances. Remember, this is my opinion but I believe it to be correct. What this concept means is that Einstein's equations need to be propertly expanded to include F=MxA and the Huygens Principle's reaction to wave front formation.

 

 

I think it is the best explanation of why Michelson and Morley could not find an aether, they never looked that it might be generated from within mass and energy and thereby creating the laws of physics to be mostly local.

-CMT

[illuusio]

Although I do not disagree with experimentation on Force carriers, I do believe a different mechanism of force. I believe attractive force is a dipole to dipole alignment through constructive wave alignment and repulsive force is a non alignment due to destructive wave interference. This is with strong, weak and electromagnetic fields an the force carriers are as stated, photons for electromagnetic fields, etc.

 

dipole to dipole alignment through constructive wave alignment, what that means? What is wavelength of this magnetic field force carrier photons?

 

 

I think it is the best explanation of why Michelson and Morley could not find an aether, they never looked that it might be generated from within mass and energy and thereby creating the laws of physics to be mostly local.

-CMT

 

This part I agree totally.

[Nobrainer]

If you understand constructive or destructive wave interference, imagine the waves are attached, point A to point B. Science considers wave forces non-contact forces so the rules of Newton's laws of motion do not apply, or so they think... Imagine that waves that connect dipole to dipole act as solids to each other and either stack, magnetic attraction or bounce off, magnetic repulsion.

Although photons are considered the force carrier of electromagnetic fields, I think that either photons only carry the electric current of the electromagneitc field or both and they decay into gravitons (gravitational waves forming fields) or the magnetic field are fundamentally gravitons used as the force carrier. I think that photons decay in a way that is hard to detect. As long as photons are connected to a continuously generated source, they do not seem to decay becuse the magnetic field is always being filled in by continuous generation from the source . If on the other hand, you could isolate a photon and observe it without changing it, I believe it would show decay into gravitational waves. I think of a gravitational wave as gravitons interconnecting as the least potential form of energy, binding into an "irreversible wave".

 

Essentially, I believe the universe's actions are based on constructive wave interference as a contact force, emitted from all mass and energy creating the actions of time, expanding space, dark energy, dark matter, black hole evaporation and gravity--- but that is just me... Haha.

 

My personal rational

A magnetic is a dipole and if a field is attached at both ends and two fields combine constructively, the increase in amplitude, or stacking the waves, pulls the magnet's mass together. To me this is how a magnetic works. And the repulsive force is the magnetic's fields not able to align, instead they bounce off each other because positionally the two fields are NOT in sync.

 

Now with continuously generated monopole fields, only one attached end, the waves generated from different sources still constructively align, stack but the actions and reactions are much weaker. As with two magnetic's, the action is wave to wave increase in amplitude, the reaction is that the magnetics come together and touch. With monopole wave alignment from different sources the action is the increase in amplitude but the reaction is also the same, the masses try to come together and touch.

This concept of wave interaction as a contact force and the cumulative "wave aspect" of force carriers being the real reason forces exist helped me to understand everything that current theorys have absent. I

I traced the mistake to two events, one is the Michelson and Morley experiment, they never took into account that mass and energy could decay into the aether and then that would explain the reason they could not find an external aether. The second problem I traced to the Huygen's principle, wavelets at every point forming wavefronts but a wavelet is 360 degrees and when two waves combine into one larger wave we only see a wave going outward, none inward. Hugyens ignored the back action of wavefront formation. Imagine two waves colliding creating one wavefront, in a way you have created a dipole, both masses that generated the waves are connected via the wavefront creating a dipole, a weak dipole but as the masses with magnetic's come together so to do the masses generating gravitational waves come together and that is gravity. Time, space and gravity are actions of mass and energy decay, creating the expanding universe.

So everything is made of one thing, compact space, and time space and gravity are physical ways to quantize a measure the effects of this process.

 

You may disagree, doesn't bother me, I just had to know for myself, and I think I do.

 

To add an assuming thought

What if;

The universe's singularity was a 100% particle and it transitioned to three aspects of matter;

Mass- mostly particle behavior

Energy- particle/ wave duality

Space- 100% wave created at the big bang as the gravitational wave forming wavefronts and continues to be generated by each piece of mass and energy decay into gravitational waves forming more and more wavefronts with gravity, dark matter, dark energy, etc.

Edited September 12, 2012 by Nobrainer

[swansont]

Force carriers? How do they function?

 

Magnetism is mediated with photons? How that is possible?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_carrier

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particle

[illuusio]

http://en.wikipedia....i/Force_carrier

http://en.wikipedia....irtual_particle

 

How attractive force is carried with force carriers?

 

Well, virtual particle sounds like a hand waving to me http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1orMXD_Ijbs

Edited September 13, 2012 by illuusio

[Nobrainer]

"In particle physics forces between particles arise from the exchange of other particles. These force carrier particles are bundles of energy (quanta) of various fields. There is one kind of field for every species of elementary particle. For instance, there is an electron field whose quanta are electrons, and an electromagnetic field whose quanta are photons[1]. The force carrier particles that mediate the electromagnetic, strong, and weak interactions are gauge Bosons."- Wikipedia

[illuusio]

"In particle physics forces between particles arise from the exchange of other particles. These force carrier particles are bundles of energy (quanta) of various fields. There is one kind of field for every species of elementary particle. For instance, there is an electron field whose quanta are electrons, and an electromagnetic field whose quanta are photons[1]. The force carrier particles that mediate the electromagnetic, strong, and weak interactions are gauge Bosons."- Wikipedia

 

And the mechanism with these gauge Bosons is?

[Nobrainer]

How is force carried?

I suggest force is a wave alignment with dipole and monopole waves.

[illuusio]

How is force carried?

I suggest force is a wave alignment with dipole and monopole waves.

 

Ok, that's your theory. I respect that you have your own ideas! What is the explanation of the main stream science? Anyone?

[swansont]

What is the explanation of the main stream science? Anyone?

Links have been posted. The ball is now in your court.

[Nobrainer]

Ok, that's your theory. I respect that you have your own ideas! What is the explanation of the main stream science? Anyone?

You are correct. That is my theory, I look at a mechanism and dissect it, analyze it and reconstruct it in a way that encompasses all observations and experimentation because that is how creative people have original ideas.

For example Einstein's general theory of relativity does not take into accountt dark energy or dark matter, it is incomplete. The standard model of physics does not take into account gravity. I take it all in and it fits perfect in my mind. It is just a fun hobby for me that I get a little oh a little obsessive, and FUN is the goal.

 

Normal force carriers create a force according to Physicists by particle exchange.

"

Physicists think that all forces are caused by the exchange of particles. Imagine two jugglers playing on a frozen lake. When they start throwing their batons at each other, they will be pushed apart. The batons carry momentum and energy from one juggler to the other and as they are caught this momentum pushes each juggler away from the other across the slippery ice." - Internet

I disagree, Same result but different mechanism. I believe that ALL OF PHYSICS made a big mistake when they called wave interaction a non- contact force. If you assume that wave interaction, particles aligning in energy patterns, eventually decay into the smallest, least potential form of fundamental matter, indistinguishable from a continuously generated wave of aether. Mass and energy contain the three related forces, constructive and destructive wave patterns, waves aligning or bumping yet interconnected each giving off a by-product, the aether, the gravitational wave, a monopole wave in-phase, forming constructive wave interference wavefronts with reaction feedback through stress and tension th the generating sources. Time, space, gravity are generated locally as a forward coalescing process.

Someday if I ever look back at this I think I will have one of two reactions. The first reaction is not flattering but kinda belly laughing funny.. It is What a total BS artist you were and totally waisted your time. Or it is about time everyone else caught on to something so easy we should have known about this 100 years ago. I am no great scientist but because of who I am, sometimes a loaner, always a thinker, problem solver, hard worker, dreamer persistent I pieced together a good model of the governing actions of universe.

Did you ever wonder how is it possible that the speed of light can not be influenced by the speed of the source or the observer?

Why is light always the same speed?

How is it possible that time can change between two objects and it is the smaller object that always slows? Or is it?

Edited September 14, 2012 by Nobrainer

[illuusio]

Links have been posted. The ball is now in your court.

 

Eh, really? Pure virtual particle hand waving won't do it. Virtual particles... how you can believe that ****? Same thing if I believe that all forces are carried out by tiny elves. Ball is in your court. I need more detailed mechanism.

[ajb]

Eh, really? Pure virtual particle hand waving won't do it. Virtual particles... how you can believe that ****? Same thing if I believe that all forces are carried out by tiny elves. Ball is in your court. I need more detailed mechanism.

 

You are going to need to get to grips with quantum field theory to start to really understand this. Virtual particles arise (like all particles really) in perturbative quantum field theory.

 

How much to say next depends on your current knowledge...

 

Books I recommend include Ryder and Kaku. I also like the old book by Nash, "Relativistic quantum fields", which deals with renormalisation in a very clear way.

[illuusio]

You are going to need to get to grips with quantum field theory to start to really understand this. Virtual particles arise (like all particles really) in perturbative quantum field theory.

 

How much to say next depends on your current knowledge...

 

Books I recommend include Ryder and Kaku. I also like the old book by Nash, "Relativistic quantum fields", which deals with renormalisation in a very clear way.

 

I'm not looking for abstract theory. I know that quantum theories works fine where applied. THE problem is, that those theories are limited. If we try to overcome limitations, we must know the mechanism behind force carriers. For example my own theory works just fine with same force carrier mechanism. But at the moment I want to know how you guys think how forces are carried, mechanism behind quantum fields.

[ajb]

THE problem is, that those theories are limited.

 

In what way?

 

If we try to overcome limitations, we must know the mechanism behind force carriers.

 

The way this is understood is in terms of the perturbative quantum field theory of gauge fields.

 

But at the moment I want to know how you guys think how forces are carried, mechanism behind quantum fields.

 

Do you have specific questions here?

[illuusio]

In what way?

 

 

 

The way this is understood is in terms of the perturbative quantum field theory of gauge fields.

 

 

 

Do you have specific questions here?

 

Limited in many ways. Gravitation can't be explained with it. Still the mechanism is open question with gauge fields. Quantum theories are at the wrong side of curtain, only shadows are visible and therefore theories are abstract. Science should take a look to the other side. There is the mechanism AND it's applies to ALL forces.

 

Why Occam's razor doesn't apply these days in science? Wave function crashes and electrons taking a trip around Moon is biggest hand waving ever

 

aaa... the question. What is the actual physical mechanism with force carriers?

[ajb]

Gravitation can't be explained with it.

 

What is clear is that quantum general relativity and close relatives cannot be quantised using standard perturbative methods that work well for the other forces.

 

There is evidence that gravity maybe asymptotically safe, meaning that it maybe well defined in quantum field theory, but not in terms of gravitons.

 

 

Still the mechanism is open question with gauge fields. Quantum theories are at the wrong side of curtain, only shadows are visible and therefore theories are abstract. Science should take a look to the other side. There is the mechanism AND it's applies to ALL forces.

 

Yes theories are mathematical models and so abstract. This is true of all theories and nothing special to quantum field theory.

 

What is the actual physical mechanism with force carriers?

 

As I have said, the current understanding of the forces of nature is classical and quantum field theory, in particular gauge theories. I am not sure what else to say here.

[illuusio]

What is clear is that quantum general relativity and close relatives cannot be quantised using standard perturbative methods that work well for the other forces.

 

There is evidence that gravity maybe asymptotically safe, meaning that it maybe well defined in quantum field theory, but not in terms of gravitons.

 

 

 

 

Yes theories are mathematical models and so abstract. This is true of all theories and nothing special to quantum field theory.

 

 

 

As I have said, the current understanding of the forces of nature is classical and quantum field theory, in particular gauge theories. I am not sure what else to say here.

 

Good solid answers, thank you. I agree that theories are mathematical and should be ( I have masters in math), I'm pro math. What is specially interesting, is the mechanism, the essence, behind all math, naked nature so to speak. I have this same topic active in Finnish science forum (tiede.fi) and here. It's interesting to see how "deep" each thread is digging in

[ajb]

Good solid answers, thank you. I agree that theories are mathematical and should be ( I have masters in math), I'm pro math. What is specially interesting, is the mechanism, the essence, behind all math, naked nature so to speak.

 

My opinion is at this level "mechanisms" are really the same as "interpretations". That is we want to describe the mathematics in terms we are more comfortable with.

[illuusio]

My opinion is at this level "mechanisms" are really the same as "interpretations". That is we want to describe the mathematics in terms we are more comfortable with.

 

Well, I ain't satisfied with interpretation, I want the mechanism. I have my version of it (interpretation), but I want to know for sure. One way to do it, is by explaining everything with my interpretation. So far so good.

[Nobrainer]

Limited in many ways. Gravitation can't be explained with it. Still the mechanism is open question with gauge fields. Quantum theories are at the wrong side of curtain, only shadows are visible and therefore theories are abstract. Science should take a look to the other side. There is the mechanism AND it's applies to ALL forces.

 

Why Occam's razor doesn't apply these days in science? Wave function crashes and electrons taking a trip around Moon is biggest hand waving ever

 

aaa... the question. What is the actual physical mechanism with force carriers?

At the point of being redundant, I believe I logically told you the mechanism of force between objects. Outside of my understanding there is no straight forward explanation, just alot of "you know" or "look it up".

If you use your imagination and knowledge and observation you may come to the same conclusion that I have arrived. In my opinion, an attractive force as in Magnets is a wave aligning (constructive wave interference) where the objects generating the waves come together as a path of least tension. You see current and past Theoritical physicists concentrate on how particles can cause force. It never occured to them that particles may generate stable waves and it is the structure of the wave and how waves align that create attractive and repulsive forces. Gravity is a monopole wave, not a dipole and therefore it is much weaker but still a wave aligning reaction.

Imagine the universe is finite, started at the big bang with space included in the singularity and space is the aether that is expanding. (If, on a place on earth humidity is increasing and water is finite that means that water in liquid or solid form is decreasing so that humidity, water in gas form can increase.) Well is mass, energy and space are three forms of the same substance and space is increasing then mass and energy should be decreasing.