Gravitation and Electromagnetism

[ernst39]

The theory of informatons and gravitoelectromagnetism

 

One can interpret the theory of informatons as the physical foundation of the theory of "gravitoelectromagnetism" (GEM). Indeed, the equations that in GRAVITATION AND ELECTROMAGNETISM are deduced from the postulate of the emission of informatons, are identical to the basic equations of GEM.

 

GEM, established by Oliver Heaviside and Oleg Jefimenko, assumes a perfect isomorphism between electromagnetism and gravitation and is currently tested ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitomagnetism ). In the paper "Advance of Mercury Perihelion Explained by Cogravity" ( http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0304104v1 ), Clovis Jacinto de Matos and Martin Tajmar demonstrate that the advance of Mercury perihelion can be interpreted due to the cogravitational field (in the theory of informatons this quantiy is called "gravitational induction") produced by the apparent motion of the sun around Mercury giving exact the same estimate as derived from the Schwartzschild metric in general relativity.

[ernst39]

The theory of informatons and gravitoelectromagnetism 2

 

 

In §4 of the paper THEORETICAL FOUNDATION OF GRAVITO-ELECTROMAGNETISM ( http://www.wbabin.net/weuro/acke5.pdf or http://www.vixra.org/pdf/1006.0045v1.pdf ) is demonstrated in detail how the laws of G.E.M. mathematically can be derived from the attributes of the informatons. More details can be found on http://www.antoineacke.net > welcome > The theory of informatons > To comments.

[ernst39]

About this topic, see also the article "Theoretical Foundation of Gravito-Electromagnetism" ( http://www.prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/91/88 ), published in PRESPACETIME JOURNAL - Vol 1 -Issue 7 - pp. 1085-1104.

[ernst39]

That the "theory of informatons" can explain electromagnetism (EM) in the same way as it explains gravito-electromagnetism (GEM) is shown in the article "Theoretical Foundation of Electromagnetism" (http://www.prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/viewFile/102/130'>http://www.prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/viewFile/102/130) published in PRESPACETIME JOURNAL - volume 1 - issue 10 pp. 1455-1476 (http://www.prespacetime.com).

 

It is shown that it is possible to understand the phenomena and to deduce the laws of EM by introducing e-information as the substance of the electromagnetic field. Since e-information plays in EM the role that g-information plays in GEM, those two areas of physics must be related.

 

It follows that an accelerated point mass emits a gravitational wave in the same way as an accelerated point charge emits an electromagnetic wave; and that a gravitational wave must transport energy in the form of discrete packages that are the analogues of photons. In the article, these packages - informatons carrying a quantum of gravitational energy - are called "gravitons".

[ernst39]

The article "Physical Foundation of the Theory of Fields: the Theory of Informatons" (http://www.prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/viewFile/174/182'>http://www.prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/viewFile/174/182) - published in PRESPACETIME JOURNAL - vol 2 -issue 4 (http://www.prespacetime.com) - focuses on the backgrounds and the essential points of the theory of informatons.

 

The hypothesis, that the substance of gravitational and electromagnetic fields is "information" carried by dot shaped entities called "informatons", leads to the following insights:

- the fields are continuously regenerating

- relative to an inertial reference frame, gravitational and electromagnetic phenomena propagate at the speed of light

- there is noise on the vectorial quantities Eg/E and Bg/B -that macroscopically characterise a field

- the field Eg/E created and maintained by a uniform moving mass/charge in a point P, always points to the actual position of its source, and not to the position where that source is seen from P

- the dynamics of the informatons translates in the laws of G.E.M./Maxwell

- there is a perfect isomorphism between G.E.M. and E.M.

- a photon/graviton is an informaton that transports a quantum of energy

 

The theory of informatons leads to a force law in G.E.M., that is analogue to the force law of Lorentz in E.M. In §1.6 of the article is shown that this is consistent with S.R.T., what is not the case with the force law introduced in the version of G.E.M. deduced from G.R.T.

[ernst39]

The statements formulated in message nr 30 are elaborated in the article "The Nature of the gravitational Field" published in PRESPACETIME JOURNAL - Vol 2 - Issue 11.

Edited November 14, 2011 by ernst39

[ernst39]

In the article "A gravitational and electromagnetic Analogy", Oliver Heaviside deduced in 1893 gravito-electromagnetism (GEM) starting from the idea that gravitational and electromagnetic fields must be governed by analogue laws: the laws of GEM are formulated by analogy with Maxwell's laws.

 

In the article "Physical Foundation of Gravito-Electromagnetism - The Theory of Informatons" published on "Intellectual Archive"(branch: Natural Science; area:Physics; subject: Astrophysics; author: Antoine Acke), the idea is elaborated that this analogy points to the fact that gravitational and electromagnetic fields are both the macroscopic manifestation of the same microscopic phenomenon. Their elementary consituent (microscopic) is called "informaton" (§1), their substance (microscopic) is called "information" (§2,3). We can say that the relation of the "theory of informatons" to the "theory of fields" is similar to that of the "kinetic theory of gases" to the "ideal-gas law": the informatons play the role of the molecules.

 

The new article contains a complete exposition of the "theory of informatons" with regard to GEM, including the mathematical derivations of the laws of GEM (§4) and the deduction of the mechanism of the gravitational interactions (§5) from the trend of a mass to become blind for flows of information generated by other masses.

 

Comments in connection with previous texts are taken into account. The conclusion (§6) is that the gravitational field is continuously regenerating, that it has a granular structure, that is isomorphic with the electromagnetic field, that it macroscopically can be described as a continuum that is governed by the laws of GEM and that the force law is isomorphic with Lorentz's law in electromagnetism.

Edited March 19, 2012 by ernst39

[ernst39]

In the article "The gravitational Field of an accelerated Mass - Gravitational Waves" (published in Vol 3 - No 10 of PRESPACETIME JOURNAL) it is demonstrated how gravitational waves can be explained by the theory of informatons.

 

It is shown that:

 

- an oscillating point mass is the source of a "gravito-magnetic" wave that is analogous to the electromagnetic wave emitted by an oscillating point charge

 

- an oscillating point mass emits energy in the form of granular entities called "gravitons": these are - in analogy with "photons" - identified as energy packages carried by informatons.

Edited September 10, 2012 by ernst39

[EMField]

Well for starters I would google magnetic maps of the moon and gravitational maps of the moon. Compare them then come back and tell me what you have discovered.

[ernst39]

As I previously announced, the theory of informatons is about the physics studied in textbooks for a calculus based course for science and engineering students (eg. Hans Ohanian - PHYSICS). More specifically, by introducing "information" as a physical concept, these theory wants to give an explanation for the phenomena and the laws of gravitation and electromagnetism.

 

1. When we say that it is the "substance" of gravitational and electromagnetic fields, we mean that "information carried by informatons" makes these fields what they are: not just mathematical constructions but elements of the physical world.

 

2. The constituent element of that substance is called an "informaton". The theory of informatons starts from the hypothesis that any material object manifests itself in space by emitting informatons at a rate that is proportional to its rest mass: the rest mass is the only factor that determines the rate at which an object emits informatons. Informatons are identified as dot-shaped mass and energy less entities that run through space with the speed of light.

 

3. The fundamental attribute of an informaton is called its "g-spin". The g-spin of an informaton refers to information about the position of its emitter and equals the elementary quantity of g-information. It is the only attribute of an informaton emitted by a neutral object at rest. It is represented by a vectorial quantiy s-g that points to the emitter, the magnitude of s-g is the "elementary quantity of g-information".

 

4. A neutral object at rest emits informatons whose g-spin-vector (s-g)has the same direction of their velocity vector (c). This is no longer the case when the emitter is moving. How greater the speed of the emitter, how greater the deviation of s-g relative to c. This deviation is characteristic for the speed of the emitter. The additional attribute of an informaton referring to information about the status of motion of its emitter is called its "beta-index". The beta-index of an informaton is represented by a vectorial quantity s-beta that is perpendicular to the plane (s-g, c), its magnitude is proportional to the transversal component of the velocity of the emitter.

 

5. Informatons emitted by an electrically charged object have moreover an attribute that refers to information about the electrical status of their emitter. This attribute is called the "e-spin". The e-spin of an informaton refers to information about the sign of the charge, about the position and about the ratio of the quantity of charge Q to the mass m of its emitter. The e-spin is represented by a vectorial quantity s-e that, if the charge is at rest, is on the line connecting the informaton with its source. If the charge is moving, the additional attribute referring to information about the status of motion of its emitter is called its "b-index". The b-index plays in the case of EM the role that the beta-index plays in the case of gravitation.

 

6. The theory of informatons explains gravitational and electromagnetic forces as the reaction of a material object on the disturbance of the characteristic symmetry of its "own" cloud of g/e- information by the flux of g/e-information emitted by other objects. There is no mechanical interaction between informatons and matter.

 

7. The theory of informatons explains why gravitational and electromagnetic fields are isomorphic. From its starting points it follows that its scope is limited to the spacetime of the SRT and that its results are in line with this theory.

 

So the fundamental hypothesis of the theory of informatons is that any object that has rest mass emits informatons at a rate that is characteristic for that rest mass: the information-emission-rate, just as the rest mass m, are measures for the amount of matter within the contours of a physical object.

Edited September 13, 2012 by ernst39

[ernst39]

In the article "Electromagnetism explained by the Theory of Informatons" (http://vixra.org/abs/1301.0114), the electromagnetic phenomena and laws are - inclusive the mathematical derivations - explained by the hypothesis that "information" (more accurate "e-information") is the substance of electromagnetic fields.

 

• The electromagnetic field (E,B) in a point is characterized as the macroscopic manifestation of the presence of e-information near that point.

• Maxwell's laws are mathematically deduced from the dynamics of the informatons.

• The electromagnetic interactions are explained as the effect of the trend of an electrically charged object to become blind for flows of e-information generated by other charged objects.

• Photons are identified as informatons carrying a quantum of energy, what helps to understand the strange behaviour of light as described by QEM.

[elfmotat]

The EM field couples to a rank-1 tensor (the four-current vector) and its field equations are linear, so your theory looks like it is able to reproduce classical electromagnetism. Unfortunately, however, your theory cannot possibly reproduce General Relativity. It is tempting to assume (in analogy with EM) that the field equations for gravity are linear and that the gravitational field couples to a rank-1 tensor with components (mass density, x-momentum density, y-momentum density, z-momentum density). It turns out that this assumption is incorrect. The field equations for gravity are nonlinear and the gravitational field actually couples to a rank-2 tensor (the stress-energy tensor).

 

I think the way to correct this in the context of your theory would be to let "informations" be emitted by both mass-density and pressure. Then you have to find some way of letting the informations of gravity self-interact.

[ernst39]

Hello Elfomat,

 

Thanks for the interesting comment on the theory of informatons and for your suggestion for the extention of it. I will think about it.

 

Starting from the intention to explain the analogy between Newton's universal law of gravitation and Coulomb's law, it turned out that the fundamental assumptions about the nature of the informatons reproduce - in connection with gravitation - "gravito-electromagnetism", a linear approximation of General Relativity (see paper: "Gravitation explained by the Theory of Informatons" - http://vixra.org/abs/1301.0114)

[ernst39]

Gravito-electromagnetism (GEM) describes the gravitational phenomena by introducing a gravitational field that can be viewed as a combination of two fields: a force field and an induction field. It is assumed (Heaviside, Jefimenko, ...) that this composite field - that serves as a mediator for the gravitational interactions - is isomorphic with the electromagnetic field.

 

In the article "INFORMATION AS THE SUBSTANCE OF GRAVITATIONAL FIELDS" (http://viXra.org/abs/1306.0008) it is shown that the GEM-description of the gravitational interactions between two - whether or not moving - particles can perfectly be explained by the hypothesis that "information carried by informatons" is the substance of gravitational fields.

[ACG52]

Vixra is like open mic night at a comedy club for cranks.

[ernst39]

There is a formal analogy between the gravito-electromagnetic description of gravitation and the mathematical description of the electromagnetic phenomena (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitoelectromagnetism).

 

In the article "Fundamentals of the Theory of Informatons" (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272506055_Fundamentals_of_the_theory_of_Informatons), it is shown that this analogy perfectly can be explained by the hypothesis that any material object manifests its substantiality by the emission - at a rate proportional to its rest mass - of "informatons": granular mass and energy less entities rushing away with the speed of light and carrying information about the position, the velocity and the electrical status of their emitter. In the frame of that hypothesis gravitational and electromagnetic fields can be understood as the macroscropic manifestations of the attributes of the informatons, and the laws of GEM as well as Maxwell's laws can be deduced from the kinematics of the informatons.

 

In the article the following topics are discussed:

1. Space as an imaginary boundless three-dimensional continuum in which objects and events can be located.

2. Time as an imaginary one-dimensional continuum in which events can be dated.

3. Reference frames as coordinate systems used to represent the position and the orientation of objects and events at a particular time.

4. Mass as the source of informatons.

5. Gravitational and electromagnetic fields as the macroscopic manifestations of the attributes of the informatons.

6. Gravitons and photons as informatons carrying a quantum of energy.

 

That article is complementary to more technical presentations of the theory that have been published in Vol36/4 and Vol 36/6 of "Hadronic Journal" (http://www.hadronicpress.com)

Edited March 16, 2015 by ernst39

[Strange]

Can you show that the predictions made by your theory match those made by general relativity?

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

ernst29

 

FYI, since you last posted, we have added guidelines for posting here in speculations. Also be aware that our rules require that the substance of the discussion occur here, and not via links.

[ernst39]

Hallo Strange,

 

The predictions made by the theory of informatons match with those made by GEM (advance of Mercury Perihelion, precession of planets and binary pulsars, ...) and GEM is not contrary to GRT. Indeed within the framework of general relativity, GEM has been discussed by a number of authors ((Brahim Mashoon, ...) and they interpret GEM as an approximation - valid under certain conditions - to the Einstein field equation.

 

The theory of informatons explains the GEM description of gravity by the hypothesis that the substance of the gravitational field is "g-information" carried by "informatons". This is an extension of the idea that there is a formal analogy between gravitation and electromagnetism (Heaviside, Jefimenko).

[Strange]

Hallo Strange,

 

The predictions made by the theory of informatons match with those made by GEM

 

Perhaps you could show how you achieve that?

[ernst39]

1. I refer to scientific publications (C.J. de Matos, M. Tajmar, Arbab I. Arbab, ...) where it is shown that certain concrete predictions made on the basis of the gravito-electromagnetic description of gravity are perfectly in line with the results of cosmological observations. (That is because, unlike Newton's law of universal gravitation, GEM takes the movement of the gravitating objects into account).

 

2. I deduce the gravito-electromagnetic description of gravity from the starting point of the theory (the postulate of the emission of informatons). The laws of GEM (gravitational analogues to Maxwell's laws) are mathematically derived from the kinematics of the informatons and the law describing the gravitational interaction (analogue to Lorentz force law) is explained as the effect of the tendency of an object to become blind for flows of g-information generated by other objects.

[swansont]

1. I refer to scientific publications (C.J. de Matos, M. Tajmar, Arbab I. Arbab, ...) where it is shown that certain concrete predictions made on the basis of the gravito-electromagnetic description of gravity are perfectly in line with the results of cosmological observations. (That is because, unlike Newton's law of universal gravitation, GEM takes the movement of the gravitating objects into account).

 

 

Are you claiming that these observations are not consistent with mainstream theory? Also, while that sounds suspiciously like you are claiming a preferred rest frame and absolute motion, why are you comparing to Newton and not Einstein?

[Strange]

1. I refer to scientific publications ...

 

You could be more specific.

 

 

2. I deduce the gravito-electromagnetic description of gravity from the starting point of the theory (the postulate of the emission of informatons).

 

Perhaps you could show how you do that.

[ernst39]

 

You could be more specific.

 

 

Perhaps you could show how you do that.

 

You could be more specific.

 

You can find a lot of publications about GEM on arXiv, some examples:

- C.J. de Matos and M. Tajmar: Advance of Mercury Perihelium by Cogravity (gr-qc/0304104)

- B. Mashhoon: Gravitoelectromagnetism: A brief Review (gr-qc/0311030)

- A.I. Arbab: The generalized Newton's law of gravitation versus the general theory of relativity (arXiv:1105191)

 

How I deduce the gravito-electromagnetic description of gravition from the postulate of the emission of informatons:

 

1. I identify the gravitational field of a point mass at rest in an inertial reference frame with the cloud of g-information created and maintained by that mass, and I identify the density of the flow of g-nformation at a point with the gravitational field strenght E at that point.

2. I show that the gravitational field of a point mass that is moving relative to an inertial reference frame is characterized by two components: the field E and the induction B. The density of the cloud of beta-information at a point is identified with the gravitational induction at that point. (beta-information is information about the velocity of the moving source of the field).

3. I mathematically deduce the laws of GEM from the kinematics of the informatons: these laws are the macroscopic manifestations of the relations between the two attributes (g-index and beta-index) of informatons emitted by moving masses.

4. I deduce the force laws from the tendency of an object to become blind for flows of g-information generated by other objects.

5. I show that an accelerated point mass is the source of radiation of energy.

 

 

 

Are you claiming that these observations are not consistent with mainstream theory? Also, while that sounds suspiciously like you are claiming a preferred rest frame and absolute motion, why are you comparing to Newton and not Einstein?

 

I don't claim that this observations are not consistent with mainstream theory, but I notice that they can be explained by extending Newton's law of general gravitation with a component that takes the movement of gravitating objects into account.

 

I describe the gravitational and the electromagnetic fields relative to an inertial reference frame: an observational reference frame (a Cartesian coordinate system to which a standard clock is linked) relative to which light propagates rectilinear (in the sense of the Euclidean geometry) with constant speed everywhere in the empty space linked to that frame. This definition implies that the space linked to an inertial frame is seen as an homogeneous, isotropic, unlimited and empty continuum in which the Euclidean geometry is valid. A reference frame O' moving relative to an inertial reference frama O is itself also an inertial reference frame. The coordinates of an event linked to the inertial reference frames O and O' are related by the Lorentz transformation (what refers to Einstein's SRT).

[swansont]

 

I don't claim that this observations are not consistent with mainstream theory, but I notice that they can be explained by extending Newton's law of general gravitation with a component that takes the movement of gravitating objects into account.

 

I describe the gravitational and the electromagnetic fields relative to an inertial reference frame: an observational reference frame (a Cartesian coordinate system to which a standard clock is linked) relative to which light propagates rectilinear (in the sense of the Euclidean geometry) with constant speed everywhere in the empty space linked to that frame. This definition implies that the space linked to an inertial frame is seen as an homogeneous, isotropic, unlimited and empty continuum in which the Euclidean geometry is valid. A reference frame O' moving relative to an inertial reference frama O is itself also an inertial reference frame. The coordinates of an event linked to the inertial reference frames O and O' are related by the Lorentz transformation (what refers to Einstein's SRT).

 

If you get the same answers, then how is your idea testable/falsifiable? You have a different approach — there must be some testable differences in outcomes.