swansont, on 31 December 2011 - 11:57 AM, said:
Repeated assertions are not evidence, and nature has no obligation to be understandable.
Honorable Swansont, Respected ladies & gentlemen.
Here is the evidence in the form of “
explanation based on logic.”
I am trying to give this explanation to the best of my knowledge and ability which I know are not adequate to take up such a major task. I present this Explanation to the Scientific world for their perusal. I am aware that it certainly needs a touch by the hands of expert Logicians & Mathematicians.
I shall begin my explanation by reiterating, that the conclusion by the Relativists that
Mass tells space how to curve, and that curved space tells Matter how to move;
Is a terribly bad conclusion. [With all due respect.]
It is bad conclusion because;
Mass does not affect Space at all [I repeat, except occupying it].
Space cannot be affected at all [I repeat, except being occupied].
Space cannot affect Matter at all [I repeat, except allowing itself to be occupied by it].
[There is a reasonable cause for my repeated use of the word ‘Relativists’. I do not intend to demean anybody. If there is anybody I respect the most in my life; it is the knowledge-seeker. In fact the Relativists are the Scientists; who apart from being knowledge-seekers they are also the Knowledge-givers, thanks to whom we know so much about this universe. But here I use the word ‘Relativists’ because I strongly believe, that there is a difference between what the GR [or the mathematics of GR] says and what Relativists say. There are logical reasons to support what I am saying. By this I don’t mean GR is wrong. No, GR is not wrong. Its interpretation is wrong. So to distinguish between what GR actually says and what Relativists have concluded from it; I sometimes need to use the words – ‘The Relativists say . . .’. Please kindly be sympathetic with me for raising this issue. I beg before you. I do not intend to demean anybody. There is a need to establish the fact.
The GR does not demand ‘Space warp’. It does not deny the existence of Space. It does not say that Gravity is an abstraction. It does not say space is a notion.]
So before going into the bowels of the mathematics of GR, it’s necessary to discuss Space & Gravitational field which will be of help to us in comprehending this matter.
Now let us take up the issue, as to why;
Mass does not affect Space at all [I repeat, except occupying it],
Space cannot be affected at all [I repeat, except being occupied], and
Space cannot affect Matter at all [I repeat, except allowing itself to be occupied by it]?
It is so because [I have said these things in my earlier posts, but I find it necessary to repeat them here to make this Explanation comprehensive]
The definition of Space doesn’t permit it. So what is Space? [I will try to portray it to the best of my knowledge.]
Space is a Fundamental entity, which is the vast infinite empty vacancy in which all the Matter of the Universe is placed. It is the basic state of Space that it give occupancy or allow itself to be occupied and so be Empty. Anything that is inside Space is not Space or a part of it. To place anything inside it – there should be emptiness. And emptiness cannot be acted upon, except filling it. Emptiness cannot have any properties, as there is nothing inside it to have any properties. Only properties are the ones that can be acted upon. Absence of properties cannot be acted upon. Space is the absence of any properties, presence of vacancy i.e. emptiness.
It is the basic requirement of this Universe. It is necessary for placing all the Matter of the Universe. Its existence is Fundamental.
If we say Space is a notion or an Idea, then where is this Universe placed?
Is it placed in an idea?
Are we living in an idea?
This is illogical.
Now why do the Relativists say so?
I say with all due respect and utmost humility that they have suffered a misconception.
We need to discuss Gravitational field before discussing the misconception.
What is Gravitational field?
Is it just Acceleration?
Impossible.
It cannot be merely acceleration. Acceleration is just a characteristic of Gravitational field.
I will try to explain Gravitational field.
Firstly what is a field? [Everyone knows this; but as this explanation is contextual of this matter, I find it necessary to present the context.]
A field is a name given to the phenomenon called ‘Action at a distance’. The matter acts on Matter, like Magnet acts on magnetic materials, Electric charge acts on electric charge, at a distance. It is the influence or a condition created/generated by that material in the area around it.
Gravitational field is the influence or a condition created/generated by Matter around itself.
Just like the condition created/generated by magnets around themselves for magnetic materials,
like the condition created/generated by electric charge around itself for charged particles.
Gravitational field is condition created/generated by Matter around itself for other Matter [be it light, energy, object or any other manifestation of Matter].
How does this affect matter?
When any particle of matter or its manifestation enters the area of influence of a massive body it creates a disturbance in the ‘condition’ around it. And as a result there is a reaction. And that reaction in turn affects the particle that created the disturbance, similar to the effect on a charged particle when it enters the electric field of another particle & similar to the effect on a magnetic material when it enters the magnetic field of a magnet.
I am saying the Gravitational field is an entity, though not in the fundamental sense, but because it is the product of the Matter [in proportion to its mass]. Like a proton & it’s positive charge. Properties of matter do not have separate existence from their Matter.
When we equate Gravitational field to only Acceleration, we are leaving out the Matter’s ability to react at a distance on other matter. This is one of the reasons for the spacetime curvature proposal to come into being. It forced the Relativists to invent SPACE WARP to account for the action at a distance, because they had left out the Gravitational field and took into consideration only one characteristic of it, the Acceleration. What made them fall upon Space and say it warps? It is their misinterpretation of the mathematics of GR. We will discuss about it later. But now let us see why we can’t accept spacetime curvature and why we should consider the Gravitational field?
By saying ‘Matter/mass affects Space, and the Space affects motion of Matter’;
We are assuming that Matter/mass needs a mediator to convey itself to other Matter.
Matter can act on Matter directly without any mediation, through Gravity.
Whereas, Space is not capable of becoming that mediator, and
Matter does not need a mediator when the Gravitational field as a ‘condition’ or ‘action at a distance’ is considered.
The Gravitational field is an established fact like the other fields [Electric and Magnetic].
And Space being emptiness, does not have any structure to warp.
Now what do the stress-energy tensors and the Einstein field equations depict?
They do not describe the spacetime curvature. There is nothing in it to get deformed there. But the Einstein field equations actually describe the PHYSICAL GRAVITATIONAL FIELD like the other field theory equations of the Electric & Magnetic Fields, do.
Then why did the relativists claim spacetime curvature?
It is the misinterpretation of the mathematics.
How/why does GR work then?
There are three aspects of GR.
The theory, the equations/solutions, & the conclusion.
The theory - It is the creation of the most extraordinary mind mankind has ever produced.
The equations/solutions – It is the impeccable mathematics.
These two make it work.
The interpretation/conclusions – It is the human work, based on the fact that the above two are working. But this has nothing to do with the two.
Now let us come to misinterpretation part.
What is the misinterpretation?
Here is the excerpt from the collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Volume-6: The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity.
Quote
We understand from the above that
Einstein suggests;
“The Gravitational field of Empty space should be zero”.
There is nothing wrong with this proposition.
Mathematically it is absolutely correct.
And with this inherent proposition itself the field equations/solutions and the theory are immensely successful.
But at the same time,
This very proposition has led to the misconception.
This proposition has created an unrealistic relationship.
This proposition projects or builds a mathematical relationship between Gravitational field & Space.
By assuming, in the absence of matter, the Gravitational Field to be zero, it renders that Gravitational field comes from Space.
It builds a relationship between Gravitational field and Space.
This is not the result of the Mathematics.
This is the result of the assumption.
The mathematics does not pronounce that the Gravitational field is linked to Space.
The assumption builds that link.
The Relativists overlooked this fact, moreover instead of considering this as the consequence of the assumption and countering this illicit relation by counter-assuming that the Field equations actually do not describe the spacetime curvature, as there is nothing in it to get deformed there, but instead the Field equations actually describe the PHYSICAL GRAVITATIONAL FIELD like the other field theory equations of the Electric & Magnetic Fields do, they compensated by giving curvature to space. And so consequently, as the Space being an empty place could not be curved, i.e. the definition does not permit it, they ruled out its existence and declared it a notion, and kept it as spatial distances and said Space exists only as the spatial distances because the spatial distances were necessary for depicting the curvature in the form of geometry.
This is my humble opinion. I have no other intentions other than expressing what I felt about spacetime curvature. Now it is here for your valuable scrutiny.
Thank you and, Regards.
Help
Sign In »
Register Now!
MultiQuote
