Mike Smith Cosmos Posted December 3, 2014 Author Share Posted December 3, 2014 (edited) This is why you need to have an actual model, because this hand-waving doesn't actually convey any useful information. How else do you get curvature of spacetime, other than by having a large amount of mass (or energy)?The energy from the electron change of orbit , from then on the internal energy of the grid . Superconductor . As far as I can understand it the grid has a large amount of internal potential energy . Vacuum energy link :- http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy . Link to Wiczek grid :- http://frankwilczek.com/Wilczek_Q_and_A.pdf Edited December 3, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 (edited) The main reason i have not jumped at the ' black hole ' that a couple of you have suggested ,is that although i accept that this can be very miniature, I associate black holes with concentrated, relatively large amounts of mass in say a singularity at its center , and again being an entity, particle of thing separate from the metric or grid A couple of points. The important point is "relatively large amounts of mass". You are talking about very small volumes and therefore very small masses. Secondly, there is no "grid" as a physical thing. So talking of things being separate from it doesn't really make sense. Arguably, a black hole is purely a result of [the curvature of] that notional "grid". Edited December 3, 2014 by Strange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted December 3, 2014 Author Share Posted December 3, 2014 (edited) A couple of points. The important point is "relatively large amounts of mass". You are talking about very small volumes and therefore very small masses. Secondly, there is no "grid" as a physical thing. So talking of things being separate from it doesn't really make sense. Arguably, a black hole is purely a result of [the curvature of] that notional "grid". I thought the photon was supposed to be a massless or zero mass object ? The grid I thought somehow included the vacuum energy ( with its cosmological constant / dark energy content ) that I can't get to the bottom of whether it is either end of some large orders of magnitude different ( in energy content , something like 120 orders of magnitude different ) I am still struggling with the notion , that however small a black hole is ! It is still a thing. Whereas I am trying to propose the photon on the move is an effect on the move . And the other attributes are maintained in the grid with all its vacuum energy and everything else . And move through the grid at the speed of light. Other attributes being , spin, momentum , energy , electro- magnetism . So rather than transporting a micro mini black hole ( as a thing ) across space at the speed of light , an effect ( of no substance ) , yet surmounting to ( energy and the other attributes ) are transported through the grid at the speed of light to the destination. Much like the waves in the ocean , but as a three dimensional bubble rather than a two dimensional wave . The springiness of the grid being caused by all the Tensors of general relativity. ( I do hope this does not sound gobble de goop , as that is not the intension) A sort of micro black hole without the singularity with mass in the middle . The stirings in the grid being the vehicle of the baggage of energy and other attributes . . On arrival all the contents are deposited. As illustrated :- Mike Edited December 3, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 I thought the photon was supposed to be a massless or zero mass object ? It still has energy (e=mc2). So you could (in principle) create a black hole just from getting photons into less than the Schwarzschild radius. The grid I thought somehow included the vacuum energy that I can't get to the bottom of whether it is either end of some large orders of magnitude different ( in energy content , something lie 120 orders of magnitude different ) Then you seem to mean something different by the "grid" than I assumed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted December 3, 2014 Author Share Posted December 3, 2014 (edited) It still has energy (e=mc2). So you could (in principle) create a black hole just from getting photons into less than the Schwarzschild radius. Then you seem to mean something different by the "grid" than I assumed. If that is possible by compression from the outside by the grid , rather than mass from the inside pulling in ! Then Bingo ! We might have our baby ! ( there is enough energy floating about in the vacuum with all this dark energy ) The grid I need to somehow get hold of Frank Wilczec description of the grid . It's in my book in Italy . I will try and find it on the net . See link :- http://www.sackett.net/WilczekLightnessNotes.pdf Mike Edited December 3, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 The energy from the electron change of orbit , from then on the internal energy of the grid . Superconductor . As far as I can understand it the grid has a large amount of internal potential energy . Vacuum energy link :- http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy .image.jpg Link to Wiczek grid :- http://frankwilczek.com/Wilczek_Q_and_A.pdf OK, let me rephrase: where IN THE EXISTING THEORY do you get this curvature? i.e. give me the equation for the curvature. Or are you proposing some new theory, where the curvature comes from somewhere else? i.e. there is some new equation. If so, what is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted December 3, 2014 Author Share Posted December 3, 2014 (edited) OK, let me rephrase: where IN THE EXISTING THEORY do you get this curvature? i.e. give me the equation for the curvature. Or are you proposing some new theory, where the curvature comes from somewhere else? i.e. there is some new equation. If so, what is it? PulsationWhen bubbles are disturbed, they pulsate (that is, they oscillate in size) at their natural frequency. Large bubbles (negligible surface tension and thermal conductivity) undergo adiabatic pulsations, which means that no heat is transferred either from the liquid to the gas or vice versa. The natural frequency of such bubbles is determined by the equation:[4][5] where: is the specific heat ratio of the gas is the steady state radius is the steady state pressure is the mass density of the surrounding liquid Smaller bubbles undergo isothermal pulsations. The corresponding equation for small bubbles of surface tension σ (and negligible liquid viscosity) is[5] Excited bubbles trapped underwater are the major source of liquid sounds, such as when a rain droplet impacts a surface of water.[6][7] ] Link :- http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_bubble Mike Edited December 3, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Pulsation When bubbles are disturbed, they pulsate (that is, they oscillate in size) at their natural frequency. Large bubbles (negligible surface tension and thermal conductivity) undergo adiabatic pulsations, which means that no heat is transferred either from the liquid to the gas or vice versa. The natural frequency of such bubbles is determined by the equation:[4][5] where: image.jpg is the specific heat ratio of the gas is the steady state radius is the steady state pressure is the mass density of the surrounding liquid Smaller bubbles undergo isothermal pulsations. The corresponding equation for small bubbles of surface tension σ (and negligible liquid viscosity) is[5] Excited bubbles trapped underwater are the major source of liquid sounds, such as when a rain droplet impacts a surface of water.[6][7] ]image.jpg Link :- http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_bubble Mike I'm missing where gravity appears in this model. And what the gas and surrounding liquid is, and how specific heat and pressure come in. Looks to me like you're throwing darts in the dark and hoping something hits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted December 3, 2014 Author Share Posted December 3, 2014 (edited) I'm missing where gravity appears in this model. And what the gas and surrounding liquid is, and how specific heat and pressure come in. Looks to me like you're throwing darts in the dark and hoping something hits. Everything has a preferred trajectory which is a strait line. This would include light and photons. Gravity can distort space according to Einsteins theory of General relativity under the influence of massive bodies. Finding themselves in the vicinity of masses light or photons will have their trajectory influenced. The quotation and formula on bubbles is a generalized statement for bubbles in fluids . True, I feel that the Formula for Photons moving through the Grid will be far more Specific. It is significant that :- A sheet of card is NOT transparent to photons . Yet :- Photons move transparently through a block of glass , ( and yet a block of glass is very solid) . Photons move transparently through air, (yet we know the atmosphere is full of atoms of many types and numbers. ) . Photons move transparently through water, (yet we know water is packed with atoms of many types and numbers. ) Photons move transparently through Space ,( yet we now know ,rather than empty the Grid of Space is brimming with fields, particles and energy and appears as a superconductor for photons . The fact that space is Transparent and photons move through space at an immense speed, is evidence indeed that , the structure of Space is highly conducive, resonant and efficient for the transfer of photons. What remains is the structure of photons ,such that they move like in a superconductor through the structure of ' The Metric or the Grid ' It has been shown so far that there are similarities between the Maths of General Relativity and the Maths of Bubbles. So the above quoted text and Formula relating to bubbles in fluid is not without relevance. Mike Edited December 3, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Everything has a preferred trajectory which is a strait line. This would include light and photons. Gravity can distort space according to Einsteins theory of General relativity under the influence of massive bodies. Finding themselves in the vicinity of masses light or photons will have their trajectory influenced. For photons it's a geodesic. For that to be a closed circle, it would mean you have a black hole. And yet you insist that this is different. The quotation and formula on bubbles is a generalized statement for bubbles in fluids . True, I feel that the Formula for Photons moving through the Grid will be far more Specific. It is significant that :- A sheet of card is NOT transparent to photons . Yet :- Photons move transparently through a block of glass , ( and yet a block of glass is very solid) . Photons move transparently through air, (yet we know the atmosphere is full of atoms of many types and numbers. ) . Photons move transparently through water, (yet we know water is packed with atoms of many types and numbers. ) Photons move transparently through Space ,( yet we now know ,rather than empty the Grid of Space is brimming with fields, particles and energy and appears as a superconductor for photons . The fact that space is Transparent and photons move through space at an immense speed, is evidence indeed that , the structure of Space is highly conducive, resonant and efficient for the transfer of photons. What remains is the structure of photons ,such that they move like in a superconductor through the structure of ' The Metric or the Grid ' It has been shown so far that there are similarities between the Maths of General Relativity and the Maths of Bubbles. So the above quoted text and Formula relating to bubbles in fluid is not without relevance. Mike You have a claim that these so-called bubbles are caused by gravity, but you haven't presented anything to support that specific notion. You aren't fulfilling the requirements of the speculation section. You get to be the first to be asked to read our guidelines for speculations This falls under the "if you make a claim you must back it up" (point 1) and "what problem with accepted theory does this address" (point 4) also applies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elfmotat Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 It has been shown so far that there are similarities between the Maths of General Relativity and the Maths of Bubbles. So the above quoted text and Formula relating to bubbles in fluid is not without relevance. Okay, so can you relate those equations to some sort of "gravitational bubble solution" to the EFE's? Just at first glance, the bubble frequency varies as a function of 1/R. It seems like you could probably relate bubble frequency to gravitational potential in some way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted December 3, 2014 Author Share Posted December 3, 2014 (edited) For photons it's a geodesic. For that to be a closed circle, it would mean you have a black hole. And yet you insist that this is different. You have a claim that these so-called bubbles are caused by gravity, but you haven't presented anything to support that specific notion. You aren't fulfilling the requirements of the speculation section. You get to be the first to be asked to read our guidelines for speculations This falls under the "if you make a claim you must back it up" (point 1) and "what problem with accepted theory does this address" (point 4) also applies I don't remember saying that I make " a claim that these so-called bubbles are caused by gravity," . I thought I was making the point that it invoked 'Einsteins general theory of relativity' which of course relates to the various formulae that help explain gravity and its distortions. Did I actually claim Gravity made bubbles. Maybe i did . I thought I was saying, that there is a possibility that general relativity can cause distortions in the 'Grid'. Bubble like in shape ,which carries all the features of a photon [ spin, energy, Electro Magnetism , momentum , frequency ] that shapes a bubble like void , which travels across the grid at the speed of light, transferring from spot to spot ,as an effect , BUT NOT as an actual thing,.The void, moves . The 'negative' of the bubble like void , ripples through the GRID with all its cargo of [ spin, energy, Electro Magnetism , momentum , frequency ]. A bit like a ball [void ] moving under and between two thin pieces of material [GRID]. The mass of the grid stays still , the energy ,E-M, spin, moves like a spherical bubble like wave through the grid . I suppose I am saying General relativities version of gravitational fields is what I am proposing create these bubbles ONLY When the Grid ( seathing with vitual particles comming into and out of existance ), is NOW stimulated by a decaying electron orbit. NOT the Gravity of some nearby sun or body or by the gravity of the electron, just the OUTPUT from the electron orbit decay, stimulating the GRID, which itself has Gravity fields as a contribution, if not a major player. That is probably why I have not been responding too much to this Micro Black hole suggestion which must have mass as its singularity to produce the Black hole by Gravity. I am saying , or claiming , Gravity has already done its bit in the universe, and the GRID is the net result of all mass all charge , all energy, all electo magnetic fields, gravitational fields. The Grid is sitting there in some sort of balance , equilibrium , like a still, yet sheathing quantum sea, in balance. When one of these micro bubbles is induced or created by the energy of a decaying electron ,in the quiescent Grid, a wave like bubble effect sets off at the speed of light across the grid. mike Maybe its not a spherical bubble, It can not be a wave, like on the sea, as its 3 dimension, could be carrot shaped, could be jelly potato shape as it oscillates , or as my illustrations . Okay, so can you relate those equations to some sort of "gravitational bubble solution" to the EFE's? Just at first glance, the bubble frequency varies as a function of 1/R. It seems like you could probably relate bubble frequency to gravitational potential in some way.Which of the general relativity formulae do you think I should put the inverse radius 1/R . I suppose the R wants to be a quarter of a wave length . Making it a half wave for a diameter . say 200 nano meters making complete wavelength 800 nano meters ( in visible spectrum ) just . So R = 200nm. Mike Edited December 3, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 I don't remember saying that I make " a claim that these so-called bubbles are caused by gravity," . I thought I was making the point that it invoked 'Einsteins general theory of relativity' which of course relates to the various formulae that help explain gravity and its distortions. Did I actually claim Gravity made bubbles. Maybe i did . Maybe? The advantage of an online forum is that everything is recorded. Go back and read your first post. "The photon is a bubble of sufficiently small radius , that the curvature of space time at that radius has completely curved in on itself to make a gravitational bubble." I don't know how you can appear at this point and say that gravity isn't involved here. I thought I was saying, that there is a possibility that general relativity can cause distortions in the 'Grid'. Bubble like in shape ,which carries all the features of a photon [ spin, energy, Electro Magnetism , momentum , frequency ] that shapes a bubble like void , GENERAL RELATIVITY IS A THEORY OF GRAVITY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 Owww... Not so loud ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted December 3, 2014 Author Share Posted December 3, 2014 (edited) Maybe? The advantage of an online forum is that everything is recorded. Go back and read your first post. "The photon is a bubble of sufficiently small radius , that the curvature of space time at that radius has completely curved in on itself to make a gravitational bubble." I don't know how you can appear at this point and say that gravity isn't involved here. GENERAL RELATIVITY IS A THEORY OF GRAVITY! Sorry . ! Yes I do know this. I wanted Gravity to be involved. Hence my saying this might lead to a resolution of Quantum Gravity . But, I am saying it comes through the Grid. Gravity is the Big shape making device. Gravity coming from the very Big , through the Grid to the Photon. Quantum coming up from the very (Wave ) small electron to the Photon . The ultimate Link in Quantum Gravity Mike Edited December 3, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 But, I am saying it comes through the Grid. That's absolutely meaningless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypervalent_iodine Posted December 3, 2014 Share Posted December 3, 2014 ! Moderator Note Aaaaannnnndd, we're done here. Thread closed and Mike, please don't message me to ask for it to be reopened. The answer is no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts