Gravitation and virtual particles (split from speed of gravitational waves)

[hoola]

I have been thinking that gravitation is caused by distortions in the orbits of the virtual particles, and that they are not just in space, but are space. They "make and break" at a certain frequency, just as light goes electric and then magnetic at a certain frequency, but somehow mass elongates virtual pair orbits so that they are in existence slightly longer than when not proximate to mass. That extra duration of existence manifests itself as the warpage issue with an actual geometric change of orbits. If pair A disappear in one certain geometric area of space, pair B might occur within the spatial boundary area of the prior A particle's orbital area...and when a third pair, pair C attempt to position near the A orbital boundary as well, with pair B haven't collapsed as of yet, this causes a repulsive force as these things "elbow to elbow their way into existence", leading to the dark energy. The longer a particular pair "hang around", the more likely it will have time to bump into the new arrivals, hence dark energy as averaged on the grand scale, and as gravitation on the local. With this I think the force of gravitation is not due to particle exchange, and information from gravity waves is due to variations within the internal pressures of space caused by unequal dark energy local expressions, with the gravity waves themselves as strictly mathematical constructs and have no physical or "particle" form. The pairs respond to "inputs" from their neighbors, and that input changes the equations that describe particle properties. They are after all called "virtual" particles, so the idea seems rather natural. The speed at which they exchange information does seem to be equivalent to C, and could point to a common harmonic oscillator driving both functions...of course, the main question is why are the pairs showing up in the first place, regardless if they have much to do with the gravity function.

Edited January 10, 2016 by hoola

[ajb]

I have been thinking that gravitation is caused by distortions in the orbits of the virtual particles, and that they are not just in space, but are space.

This is not the usual meaning of a virtual particle. Thus it is impossible to really say much about your line of thought, that is unless you can show some calculations here that show that you get close to GR in that way.

[hoola]

I am not sure how well defined the idea of a virtual particle is. I see the pairs as artifacts from a competing logic system(s), one in which sq.rt -1 has some functionality. I see our universe as based on a more durable form of logic, along with many less durable logic systems organized from a "central white noise generator", or chaos, that allows various realities to exist within a common universe. Ours having enough "durability" for a stable math structure to evolve within our "logic boundary", and allowing enough time for interactions within that structure to take place. In places these boundaries may intersect in certain ways, and that is what I see as allowing the appearance of the particle pairs, and of quantum properties in general. In this way I see a multi-reality occurring in a common universe, instead of the multi-universe idea.

Edited January 10, 2016 by hoola

[ajb]

I am not sure how well fixed the meaning of virtual particle is at this time...

They appear as particular terms in a formal expansion of the action functional of a quantum field theory. In terms of Feynman diagrams they appear as internal vertices. As such they do not have to obey the classical equations of motion.

 

I see them as constructs based upon competing logic systems, one of which enables the sq.rt -1 to have a temporary functionality that we can measure in our classic world..I see these competing logic systems springing from the same well, the chaos, that constructed our logic system, and that we share the universe with, and can measure some elements of these alien systems. The fact that these particle pairs occur and collapse so quickly is a measure of one particular alien logic system's "durability" (or lack therof). The fact that the disappearing pairs are constantly replenished, points to the idea of a "central white-noise generator", or chaos . I see this same information as available to all the various logic types, but one random system offers a retention of that information for a longer period, offering a "persistent mathematics". Descriptions of stable structures can assemble, and have enough time for those structures to interact. Each reality will have the lifespan and character that is offered by it's logic system's parameters.

Please see above.

[Strange]

I am not sure how well defined the idea of a virtual particle is.

 

In which case, it would be a good idea for you to spend a little time finding out what they are, rather than guessing.

[hoola]

I apologize for the OT issue, as the detailed original post I was "cleaning up" with a series of edits suddenly turned blue and disappeared...and that included a conclusionary statement as to the "speed of gravitation waves". The, rather long post was a set up for my my more detailed concluding remark as to the speed issue. Pardon, but it was 3am and I had worked on the lost post for 2 hrs, and I forgot to include the conclusion in my haste to rewrite the central ideas : The speed issue, based upon the fundamentals I propose, is a function of the speed of calculations involved with the quantum phenomena, which having a common genesis to the classic world, shares that speed, hence the speed of light and the speed of gravity are alike. Plus, in post #1, I did address the speed issue with the concluding sentence stating a "common harmonic oscillator generator driving both functions". The original post# 3 was an amplification of that particular "speed equivalency" issue that I was, and still am, attempting to address. And yes, I am trying to figure out virtual particles. I see we know a little about how they function, but nothing as to why they do so, as a subset of the "why anything" question.

Edited January 10, 2016 by hoola

[ajb]

I see we know a little about how they function, but nothing as to why they do so, as a subset of the "why anything" question.

We know how to use them in our calculations, which in the context of the standard model match nature to a ridiculously high level of accuracy. As with regards to the question 'why', there is no answer the world is just the way it is.