Gravity waves and the aether

[swansont]

Namely the electro magnetic field needed to be present , held within some form of spacial medium , so as once the universe had cooled sufficiently for free energetic electrons to recombine with nuclear protons and thus make atoms . The medium would be transparent enough , and very importantly

CONTAINED an ELECTRO-MAGNETIC FIELD . The photons could then propagate across this field , being electro magnetic waves in there own right .

 

I hope this sounds roughly right ?

No, it doesn't. You still have a medium.

 

Maybe you should stop trying to force nature to conform to your ideas.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

No, it doesn't. You still have a medium.Maybe you should stop trying to force nature to conform to your ideas.

..

 

Ok I am trying to get my handle on what is happening.

 

I have listened closely to Mordreds explanations , and maybe I am picking up this wrongly . Or as someone said "this is semantics ".

 

I appreciate I have a preconceived leaning toward ' something ' being present to maintain the electro magnetic field ' locally ' through a cloud like medium rather than some 100 quad trillion volt field being held from either end of space .

 

Here are a couple of quotes , that indicate a local solution.

 

MORDRED QUOTE "

Now lets look at a massive particle. For simplicity this particle only binds to one field. This binding causes a resistance to inertia change.

Some particles interact with several fields and gain invariant mass from each field interaction.

 

So in the above thinking a field can have " medium like characteristics. " . ( my inverted commas). However as energy is a property and doesnt exist on its own its more accurate to state that the particles that mediate and interact with the " field topography form the medium." ( my inverted commas ). Unquote "

 

This discussion brought up this ' topology ' bump which caused a reaction , or interaction .

So something has a Topological distortion , I can not see how this is not a distortion in ' something '

 

ALSO another quote

Quote "

So in the above thinking a field can have medium like characteristics. However as energy is a property and doesnt exist on its own its more accurate to state that the particles that mediate and interact with the field topography form the medium. " Unquote

 

Ok. This 'something' could be all the other fields , and bits, and pieces, all the general junk in space , or something totally unknown to us , but not ' Nothing ' you cannot trip over a nothing , but you can trip over a bump in a topology? But it's bump must be in something , surely .

 

Mike

Edited June 26, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mordred]

It seems to me you tend to think objects instead of relations.

 

When you measure field strength at any particular point your not measuring a field as per some object. What your measuring is how much influence that field has upon objects or particles.

 

Lets take for example spacetime curvature. Many people get confused into thinking this is shape of spacetime near a mass. However it is a descriptive of relations between the stress energy tensor vs geometric change due to time dilation and length contraction.

 

I've watched your posts for quite some time. The dependancy you have on visual objects tends to extremely limit your comprehension.

 

Unfortunately the only way to truly understand field theory is to understand what relations are being mathematically modelled and how differential geometry models those relations into a coordinate system. Or in the case of tensors a coordinate independent system.

 

For example the term topography doesn't necessarily describe some physical object.

 

It can and does describe physical relations and interactions

Edited June 26, 2016 by Mordred

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

.

It seems to me you tend to think objects instead of relations.

When you measure field strength at any particular point your not measuring a field as per some object. What your measuring is how much influence that field has upon objects or particles.

Lets take for example spacetime curvature. Many people get confused into thinking this is shape of spacetime near a mass. However it is a descriptive of relations between the stress energy tensor vs geometric change due to time dilation and length contraction.

Yes, I can agree with what you are saying . As a high value pulse of acceleration , might make you think you have been ' hit 'with something (mass) , when it might only be an artificial turbine acceleration or snatch , with no mass present .

 

But surely all this other ( stuff) , including fields , photons , dust , whatever . Do they not constitute a medium .

How can a field exist , ? Unless it exists IN SOMETHING so as to have a reaction with another electro magnetic fields. Light , radio waves ,

 

Am I right you are describing two fields.

 

1) The electro -magnetic field ( throughout universe )

 

2) the electro magnetic fields passing through eg , photons , radio waves , etc

 

Mike

 

Ps

I have heard expressions like " photons mediate the Electro Magnetic field " , is this what you are getting at , . If that is the case , I find it difficult to think of this , as it sounds like

 

" picking yourself up by your own bootstraps "

Edited June 26, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mordred]

Yes, I can agree with what you are saying . As a high value pulse of acceleration , might make you think you have been ' hit 'with something (mass) , when it might only be an artificial turbine acceleration or snatch , with no mass present .

 

But surely all this other ( stuff) , including fields , photons , dust , whatever . Do they not constitute a medium .

How can a field exist , ? Unless it exists IN SOMETHING so as to have a reaction with another electro magnetic fields. Light , radio waves ,

 

Am I right you are describing two fields.

 

1) The electro -magnetic field ( throughout universe )

 

2) the electro magnetic fields passing through eg , photons , radio waves , etc

 

Mike

No spacetime curvature isnt describing the electromagnetic field. As per se. Though the electromagnetic field as well all other fields are influenced by spacetime curvature.

 

One thing to clarify here on the scale of the universe the electromagnet field is considered neutral. Its influence on average is insignificant and neglibible.

 

 

I can see this is still going over top your head. Lets try this angle.

 

Lets say I want to describe and model amount of influence of some random influence has without naming that influence.

 

The first step is to find some way to describe the geometry of that influence.

 

So I assign points of reference or coordinates at points in a given volume.

Now that we have a baseline map we can add the influence.

 

A handy tool is a vector field. So prior to adding the influence we assign a baseline vector component to our assigned coordinates.

 

The influence we add will affect each of those vectors. The strength of influence will most likely be strongest closer you get to interaction source.

 

Any field involving force can be modelled via a vector field.

 

Temperature in a given volume however is more convenient to use a scalar field.

 

This should make it clear that a field is more akin to a map. The particles that interact with that field map is your medium. Not the map itself

Edited June 26, 2016 by Mordred

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

No spacetime curvature isnt describing the electromagnetic field. As per se. Though the electromagnetic field as well all other fields are influenced by spacetime curvature.

One thing to clarify here on the scale of the universe the electromagnet field is considered neutral. Its influence on average is insignificant and neglibible.

I can see this is still going over top your head. Lets try this angle.

Lets say I want to describe and model amount of influence of some random influence has without naming that influence.

The first step is to find some way to describe the geometry of that influence.

So I assign points of reference or coordinates at points in a given volume.

Now that we have a baseline map we can add the influence.

A handy tool is a vector field. So prior to adding the influence we assign a baseline vector component to our assigned coordinates.

The influence we add will affect each of those vectors. The strength of influence will most likely be strongest closer you get to interaction source.

Any field involving force can be modelled via a vector field.

Temperature in a given volume however is more convenient to use a scalar field.

This should make it clear that a field is more akin to a map. The particles that interact with that field map is your medium. Not the map itself

O.k.Spacetime curvature can influence everything else. ( any exceptions ) .

Where does Higgs field , dark energy , dark matter fit into the picture ( if at all ) ?

 

Can you tell me if my picture has any truth in it . Or corrections needed. Or something fundamentally wrong in it. I tried to piece together things discussed as best I could . I just get a total block when " nothing " is there . Unless some long distance force is acting across vast reaches of space , holding everything apart or pulled together ?

 

Mike

[Mordred]

 

 

So here is a home experiment for you. Take a graph paper. Assign a coordinate system to said graph. Now take a magnet place it at the center of that graph.

 

Take another magnet attached to a Newtonian scale. At each coordinate assign the amount of force between the two magnets at each coordinate.

 

Youve just modelled the magnetic field

O.k.Spacetime curvature can influence everything else. ( any exceptions ) .

Where does Higgs field , dark energy , dark matter fit into the picture ( if at all ) ?

 

Can you tell me if my picture has any truth in it . Or corrections needed. Or something fundamentally wrong in it. I tried to piece together things discussed as best I could . I just get a total block when " nothing " is there . Unless some long distance force is acting across vast reaches of space , holding everything apart or pulled together ?

 

Mike

Yes you keep thinking the influence from a to b requires a medium to travel to.

 

This incorrect. This is precisely what Relativity taught us as being incorrect. Particles can travel from a to b without any medium or fluid.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

So here is a home experiment for you. Take a graph paper. Assign a coordinate system to said graph. Now take a magnet place it at the center of that graph.

Take another magnet attached to a Newtonian scale. At each coordinate assign the amount of force between the two magnets at each coordinate.

Youve just modelled the magnetic field

O.k. I appreciate the concept and possible experiments. Yes I will get a set of values that describe this magnetic field , and of course I could do the same with a charged van de graph electrostatic generator .

 

But in both these cases , we have a source of both the electric field and the magnetic field . Attached to something , like the table .

 

What has been the quest in this thread is where is and what produced the electro-magnetic field across space .? And can this field plus other fields constitute a ' medium ' and as such does it act as a vehicle for light and radio waves to cross empty space . Of course if space is not empty , but filled with some ' other ' ' something ' then all is right . Unless of course you are saying gazillion of photons act as a medium ? Maybe you are saying that ?

 

 

In fact I could ask , are you trying to tell me that the electro magnetic field is there, and it acts as the so called medium or framework , or if you don't like the word medium , for connotations with aether. I am happy it came out of the early symmetry breaking universe , but what supports it ?

 

 

Mike

Edited June 26, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mordred]

The strength of the field from source to reciever is transmitted by virtual guage photons in units of quanta. For electromagnetic force or any electromagnetic interaction.

 

Here this wiki will help

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauge_boson

Edited June 26, 2016 by Mordred

[swansont]

..

 

Ok I am trying to get my handle on what is happening.

 

I have listened closely to Mordreds explanations , and maybe I am picking up this wrongly . Or as someone said "this is semantics ".

 

 

A few people said that it wouldn't be too horrible if you looked at the field as a medium. And now you've stated that the field exists in a medium, which is not what's going on.

 

If there is a physical medium, we have to be able to measure things about it, and measure our motion with respect to it. Now, this has already happened. Back 300-400 years ago, folks noticed that the apparent position of a star changes over the course of a year owing to our motion; this is called stellar aberration. One explanation (Bradley) of this is that we are moving through a medium. Fast-forward a few hundred years: Michelson and Morley figured out another way to measure this speed using an interferometer. Except instead of getting ~30 km/sec, they got ~0. Two very different and incompatible results. How can you be at rest with respect to something and also be moving with respect to it?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

The strength of the field from source to reciever is transmitted by virtual guage photons in units of quanta. For electromagnetic force or any electromagnetic interaction.

Here this wiki will helphttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauge_boson

.

 

Where/ what is the source , in the above ? And what is the receiver ?

 

Mike

[Mordred]

In the magnet example source is the magnet in the center. The magnet your measuring the interaction is the reciever. Between those two magnets the interaction is mediated by the transmition of guage photons. Your field is the mapping of the interaction influence. In this exampke the amount of transmitted force. Which if you do it correctly can be assigned a vector value at each measurement coordinate.

Edited June 26, 2016 by Mordred

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

A few people said that it wouldn't be too horrible if you looked at the field as a medium. And now you've stated that the field exists in a medium, which is not what's going on.

 

.

 

Yes you are right , I think for a while I have gone ' field crazy ' . ( it's sort of like ' cabin fever ' but worse. )

Ok the electro magnetic field , loosely as a medium . I can go with that as a model , as it rests much easier with me . As I have needed that field structure as a sort of medium for : photons to move in , radio waves to move in , and other EM. waves . And since I have sort of pinned down the source of those EM FIELDS . I feel happier with that too.

 

Now I need to contend with these gauge bosons . I need to think on that !

 

Your comment :-

If there is a physical medium, we have to be able to measure things about it, and measure our motion with respect to it. Now, this has already happened. Back 300-400 years ago, folks noticed that the apparent position of a star changes over the course of a year owing to our motion; this is called stellar aberration. One explanation (Bradley) of this is that we are moving through a medium. Fast-forward a few hundred years: Michelson and Morley figured out another way to measure this speed using an interferometer. Except instead of getting ~30 km/sec, they got ~0. Two very different and incompatible results. How can you be at rest with respect to something and also be moving with respect to it?.

 

I think this has to left for a while , until we see what's really going on with these gauge bosons , photons. , etc in association with this ELECTRO - MAGNETIC FIELD . ( which may or may not be a medium as we know it )

 

You see I think of a EM field as being fixed by something that is causing the field . I can not at this moment understand WHAT is setting up this EM field .I have tracked down WHERE it could possibly have been set up . Now this field Is in the massive expanse of space , setting up the field ? Or is it zillions of local charges perhaps vibrating setting up ELECTRO -MAGNETIC FIELDS ?

 

Can anyone answer that for me ?

 

After that , it is all this interchange with photons and gauge particles ?

 

Mike

Edited June 26, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mordred]

Cross posted see my last reply.

 

However lets add statement to hopefully help on guage bosons.

 

First we will use the magnet as the source of the field you mapped. You mapped the interaction strength at each field coordinate. That interaction is mediated by a transmitted guage boson.

 

Now replace the Newtonian scale magnet with some object that doesnt interact with magnets.

 

In this last example there is no interaction. This means that no guage bosons are being transmitted from source to measuring reciever. The field you mapped on the previous example now has a zero value at each point.

 

See the danger in thinking of tbe field itself as a medium?

Edited June 26, 2016 by Mordred

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

I need to get my head around all this . I think my i pad is going to catch fire ! Or was it my brain?

 

Mike

[Mordred]

Lol no prob. I'm going to add one other concept to think about.

 

Take neutrinos which are weakly interactive. Neutrinos can travel through a thousand light years of solid lead without a single interaction.

 

Now the lead certainly counts as a medium but to the neutrino that medium essentially doesnt exist.

 

Same thing applies to fields. If a particle doesn't interact to type of force. Example the neutrino which doesn't interact with the electromagnetic force. The electromagnetic field doesn't exist to the neutrino.

 

A field is an interaction map

Edited June 26, 2016 by Mordred

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Lol no prob. I'm going to add one other concept to think about.

Take neutrinos which are weakly interactive. Neutrinos can travel through a thousand light years of solid lead without a single interaction.

Now the lead certainly counts as a medium but to the neutrino that medium essentially doesnt exist.

Same thing applies to fields. If a particle doesn't interact to type of force. Example the neutrino which doesn't interact with the electromagnetic force. The electromagnetic field doesn't exist to the neutrino.

A field is an interaction map

Interaction map and possibly interaction trap !

 

Sleeping on this medium and interaction business .

I must say I am happier with the Electro Magnetic Field being a Medium .

Although as you say not to all. But to photons and RF waves the electro magnetic field is a medium . I am a Happy Bunny .

 

Good Night

 

 

But I have woken up with a start , and re-read your last few posts. I thought I had it , that the Electro Magnetic field could be thought of as a medium , yet you have just pointed out the dangers of an example where it can NOT be treated as a medium . So can the Electro Magnetic field be called a Medium or not ?

 

Mike

Edited June 26, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[MigL]

Not in the strict ( or accurate ) sense.

It is a 'medium' for the interaction, but not for the transmission.

You keep thinking that there needs to be a transmission for an interaction to occur, but that's not the case.

 

You also keep thinking that EM waves require a medium of some sort, and you are struggling to find anything that can be considered a medium.

I would abandon this pursuit, Mike.

One of the foundations of relativity IS the fact that light does NOT require a medium.

Are you willing to be responsible for the scrapping of relativity just so you can sleep ?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Not in the strict ( or accurate ) sense.

It is a 'medium' for the interaction, but not for the transmission.

You keep thinking that there needs to be a transmission for an interaction to occur, but that's not the case.

 

You also keep thinking that EM waves require a medium of some sort, and you are struggling to find anything that can be considered a medium.

I would abandon this pursuit, Mike.

One of the foundations of relativity IS the fact that light does NOT require a medium.

Are you willing to be responsible for the scrapping of relativity just so you can sleep ?

.

O.k. If the word medium is as offensive as aether , then I have to think of another word like 'Field .'

I am of the understanding that light and Radio waves DO REQUIRE a FIELD to propagate through? Is that not so ? That field as far as I can work out is The Electromagnetic Field which permeates all of space. Which I am of the belief I have spent the last week tracking down to the pre recombination times to symmetry breaking . Then identifying it coming out across all space-time ( as space and time itself expanded) to be there is all space? What I am not sure of , is it held there by dint of local charge or because of a massive potential field . And if there are topological bends in that field or bumps , a photon or electro magnetic Radio frequency wave will interact so as to change projectors accordingly ?

 

I can imagine the field being there , everywhere ,in space , but I have the sneaking feeling you are going to tell me ( there is nothing there ) at that point I start crying .

 

Surely there has got to be something there ( not matter ,but electro magnetic field with all its topological contortions and bumps ) so that when a photon comes by it has something to interact with ( if necessary) ?

 

Please tell me that is true ?

 

Mike

Edited June 27, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[MigL]

Yes, according to the QED model, the field is there , permeates all of space, and gives rise to its associated particles.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Yes, according to the QED model, the field is there , permeates all of space, and gives rise to its associated particles.

.

 

Thanks for that !

 

Would you be so kind as to give me a list of the associated particles .

 

Mike

[MigL]

Quantum particles involved are charged, spin 1/2 particles that are solutions to the Dirac equation such as the electron/positron, and photons, which I believe are solutions to the Klein-Gordon equation.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Quantum particles involved are charged, spin 1/2 particles that are solutions to the Dirac equation such as the electron/positron, and photons, which I believe are solutions to the Klein-Gordon equation.

.

 

Well there we go then " charged quantum particles " mostly .

 

So we have an electro -magnetic field , spread out across all of space , sprinkled with charged particles .

 

A quantum foam . No wonder it is an ideal mmmmmnnnnn ( facility ) for electro magnetic waves to travel through .

 

 

Mike

Edited June 28, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

.

Well there we go then " charged quantum particles " mostly .

So we have an electro -magnetic field , spread out across all of space , sprinkled with charged particles .

A quantum foam . No wonder it is an ideal mmmmmnnnnn ( facility ) for electro magnetic waves to travel through .

image.jpeg

Mike

O.k. If this is what is roughly what is present for

 

The Electro- Magnetic-Field and the propagation of Electro Magnetic WAVES.

 

What is the equivalent for

 

The Gravitational-Field and the propagation of Gravitational WAVES ?

 

Mike

[Strange]

O.k. If this is what is roughly what is present for

 

The Electro- Magnetic-Field and the propagation of Electro Magnetic WAVES.

 

What is the equivalent for

 

The Gravitational-Field and the propagation of Gravitational WAVES ?

 

Mike

 

The (changing) geometry of space and time.