Jump to content

JohnSSM

Senior Members
  • Posts

    495
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JohnSSM

  1. Ya...the math itself is like a different dimension of understanding this stuff...I just know results of tests and experiments and what others have proved...But it does seem that the guys who dream stuff up are not always the ones who also prove that it's true. And even though Einstein had some outrageous math in quantum mechanics that could be explained to others, did anyone know he was right until experimentation proved it? We even had to get the experiments correct to get the results out of the experiment to match the math that was made...we keep getting the experiments closer and closer...but if relativity exists, it surely exists in these experiments we use as proof too...we cant judge spatial events without worry of relativistic error, we cant judge time without worry of relativistic error..Completing equations has never been proof of anything...proof beyond the equations was always sought...or created...I think uncertainty exists all over the place...certainly in my existence and thoughts...so I spit them out...its all we can do yknow...communicate... Ive been dying for someone to explain general relativity in their own words since I was in middle school....Everyone agrees that it describes the effects of a geometric distortion of spacetime...you may say it is nothing, but how does nothing have a name? and how do you warp something that is not anything? You cant warp nothing...You can in math, with theories...But you're gonna be hard pressed to show me the act of warping nothing...It kinda seems like a physical impossibility...but its happening all around us in this physical world? We have this dark matter that we cant detect and we theorize that it is further changing the geometry of spacetime, which IS nothing, because GR does NOT work in humongous galaxy clusters and such...so we have to find something else to make it work...instead of theorizing that spacetime is the corresponding trait to massenergy, and it actually contains energy, which makes it something and not nothing...and can now be bent...even though bending something by definition is compressing parts of it..and we may as well replace warp and bent with compress because that is the impetus of the gravitational geometrical effects called gravity...or, that is my theory... The dark matter, warping nothingness doesn't sit well with me...Which does not mean its wrong...If you can explain it without dark energy and warping nothingness, why not give it a serious look? I knew the gravity increased and the mass did not. I had mentioned it early in my writtings. You made the statement about mass being increased by compression. But since I cant figure out how to quote and respond with those little boxes, youll just have to scroll up to see your error. So you were wrong in your first statement?
  2. Robbity...You cannot effect time without effecting space...this is the space-time continuum...Space and time differ only as much as energy and matter...they are,in effect, 2 different dimensions of the same thing...If you have slowed time, you have also shrunk space...of course, that's my theory...
  3. I know of the conservation laws...You kinda don't make it to studying the gluon field without lots of understudy... I do not believe that mass increases as you compress mass. Compressing something adds energy, but in my studies, it does not effect mass. Its does effect gravity.
  4. resistance to acceleration, momentum...I was pretty close!
  5. All such questions are tough...what is heat, what is electricity, etc...My best off the cuff definition of mass would be "that which can carry momentum", or the property of energy that allows the transfer of momentum.
  6. NO robbity, that was for the folks who recommended the book...I answered you above...starting with "my latest idea"
  7. My latest idea of what is being compressed, I did discuss for a moment...In my theory, Its the gluon field. The gluon field exists in a vacuum. It is vacuum energy. Spacetime is never void of it. That's what some folks are claiming at this point. The gluon field is the medium for hadron reactions, namely quarks. As I discussed, the gluon field has a certain energy, and when it is excited by the presence of lots of quarks, of lots of protons and neutrons, of lots of matter, is it possible that they gluon energy is used from the surrounding space whish isn't supporting any matter? So, around really massive and compressed objects, the gluon field is being sucked into the massive object, which is really a matter of decreasing values of the gluon wavefield...those descreasing values of the field create regions that not only operate slower...(it seems the speed of everything slows down, to the speed of electron orbits)...and also lose their potential to support space...objects within this field of decreased gluon energies would not take up as much space, just as they do not use as much time...and the same effect occurs when you travel through spacetime...because as you travel though it, you experience less of it...its interesting for the loss of space, because it is always inline with the vector of the motion or gravity...as if its being crushed...time feels the full effect of compression because it only exists on one dimension...and space also feels it only in one dimension. Remember what you're old computer used to do with the graphics card had too much information than could be processed? slow down and loss of information...Im saying the gluon field can only support the reactions between so many hadrons...and as certain areas need more, it is taken from the surrounding areas...the areas that need more are areas of more matter...and interesting point about gravity...the same mass of matter will have a stronger gravitational pull when it is contained in a smaller area of space...indeed, earth, or your finger could be a black hole if you could only smash the particles together tight enough...with massive objects, the effects of gravity build up enough and create the compression from sheer gravitational forces...with your finger, or even earth, we would need some other massive force to smash all that matter small enough to do what? To completey drain the edges of the object from having gluon energy at all...effectively smashed from interacting with the rest of the grid...and a break in the gluon field doesn't exactly explain why light couldn't get out...unless photons interact with the gluon field in ways that we don't know...
  8. I don't think im ignorant of basic science, although its a good point. I just made a quick read of some of the lightandmatter book. Ive seen and studied much of what they have covered. The math eludes me, but the explanations with the little pictures make sense, almost. It really seems that einsteins spacetime becomes something that could not be modeled. It's ripping and pulling all over the place, in every direction until you find a point in it and create a relative center...And you experience space and time and motion differently from a different relative center. But, the Universe is that model...We all see the same moon doing the same thing... Ill do more reading...I saw more books out there...I really enjoy watching old lectures on youtube...and I think I have learned a lot from watching them...Mostly Feynman.... I did come here to see if anyone could answer these questions themselves. Id appreciate any commentary on anything Ive said.
  9. Here are my points. The energy of momentum and the energy of matter have the same effect on space-time in regards to time and length dilation. What impetus links gravity to motion? IS the same cause, causing that same effect? Must there not be a physical effect in physics? What effect exists without a cause? So im looking for the cause of these two effects and how they may be linked. I guess my points are questions. IF all anyone can tell me is "go read an introductory book on general relativity" or "learn the math" then there must not be anything left to say. If you toy with only what is known and proven about anything, when could you ever create a theory?
  10. The current theories suggest that space is just a feasible mathematical volume. IF they can suggest that dark matter exists with no proof besides holes in their equations, I think Im suggesting that space time does have "substance". That which could be warped. Although electromagnetic fields are not a substance, they are there. But we don't talk about electromagnetic fields warping space-time. But with gravity, it seems, that's exactly what they are talking about. And we can also ration why electro-magnetic fields exist. If we are leaving a world where observation of physical objects is worthless and considered only a mathematical possibility, I wont be much good there...I guess what I ask myself is, did Einstein find mathematical proof for the equivalence principle before or after he thought about the guy free falling in an elevator? It was observations he made in his head about physical objects and how they act and interact... Without a doubt, I know I need to understand the math before I can truly grasp what is going on with general relativity. I have a tough time understanding all the different geometrical models to space. At 45 years old, Im thinking about going back to college to study such subjects. But I understand the effects of general relativity. Space and time are literally mapped out before us, without senses, Newton never could have observed the objects falling at the same speed. We have wickedly deep and powerful tests happening every month and there are a few happening right now that Im dying to hear the results of. Experimental physical tests are what confirms math. Im just really excited to be here, talking about this at all...and some of the harsher comments do make a very valid point. But I only suggested that the latex grid model was essentially ridiculous and they still put it on the front of physics books. I don't question general relativity. Im going for the connection between quantum gravity and general relativity.
  11. I do have a theory about what is being compressed. The gluon field. Neutrons and protons need those gluons firing away to keep up with their quark swapping demands. What if the gluon field could only support a certain number of quark interactions within a certain amount of spacetime? What if you compressed more and more matter (and more quarks) into a certain amount of spacetime that did not have the gluon field energy to support that many hadron reactions? Perhaps it would rob its neighboring spacetime of it's gluon field energy? and by neighboring, I mean all the space time around it, from all directions...Perhaps the gluon field is what is being changed by the presence of matter. Effectively sucked in by huge energy demands, like huge amounts of compressed matter. That thinking kinda leads right into my theory of spherical compression of spacetime by matter. By the way, we don't need dark energy or dark matter anymore. They aren't going to find it anyway. Because space-time is not homogenous. Whether bent or compressed, it cannot be uniform. IF so, I need to hear that explanation. Light travels only in a straight line and it is spacetime that is warped? If that's true, show me the warping of an object where it's internal geometry is not changed. So many very smart folks cant see around that one at all. The math has already been done. We know about time dilation and length dilation. Have you tried envisioning the model or is your imagination a waste to you? Its pretty strange that one of Einstein's most famous quotes is "imagination is more important that knowledge" and we still have guys thinking that equations can solve these issues without their own creativity.
  12. E=mc2 would show the relationship between energy and matter. I don't challenge this equation as it has been tested very accurately, I simply use it as the basis for how energy becomes matter. I see it essentially like a single slit experiment where the slit is not there already. The amount of energy required to create a slit and "break into" space-time to become a mass, would be represented by E=mc2. I think I mostly complained that the analogy doesn't really work at all and they still use it. Is this because they have not envisioned it another way? I think it's hilarious that they moved this entry to speculation. Since no one has a complete answer for gravity yet, it would all be speculation at this point. What the compression model does best, aside from just making physical sense, is explain time dilation as well as size distortions. In my theory, while next to a massive, dense object, one would be in a region of compressed space-time. Meaning that there is actually "less" of it in those compressed regions. Less space and less time. If you visualize the spherical compression model well, you will see that the only direction that the grids get smashed is towards the center of the gravitational mass. Only 1 dimension gets compressed and altered. If standing on a gravitational object, that dimension would be the dimension of height. The length of width of your body would remain the same,. Now lets just mention that the same effect happens while traveling in any direction. You shrink in the reverse direction of your motion. It's less talked about than time dilation but just as much a part of Einstein's work. I mentioned "space" dilation or length dilation first because I wanted to make a point. When you encounter time dilation either from motion or from a gravitational force you also encounter space dilation. You cant have one without the other. Its kinda like energy and mass to me. So, while near a massive object, you are existing within a region of spacetime that has less spacetime. It has been compressed by gravity. Clocks run slower as you get closer and you shrink in one dimension. And this also happens during motion. As you go faster through spacetime, you experience less of it. As if your own motion is creating the same compressive effect as a gravitational object. But only in one dimension, just like the gravitational object. The one you are travelling in. Why would this happen? Ive many thought experiments to ration it out well, but the easiest is simply imagining yourself on a highway driving by yellow pylons that are spaced 10 meters apart. If you go faster, the pylons seem to get closer together. Its a relative effect caused by your motion. And the shrinking of space and time is also a relative effect caused by your motion. I hope that does explain it well. I hope I haven't embarrassed myself again. Ha...scientists shall know no embarrassment!
  13. I'm sure everyone is familiar with the popularized model of gravity and general relativity that features a "latex grid" with a round object "sitting" on it, presumably being pulled down by gravity, stretching the latex and changing the geometry of the grid. The first question that pops into mind is, if this effect is creating gravity, what effect is pulling the ball down into the latex sheet? It would take gravity to make gravity. The second question would be, What is the latex representing? Or, if you are bending something, what is being bent in space-time? The statement "you cannot bend something without it being some thing" does seem to make sense. So we have a model that takes gravity to make gravity and one which does nothing to discuss the "something" of space-time. I thought on this for many years and always searched for info about gravity and it's causes. The first model I envisioned was more like this. You have a huge chunk of foam and it has grid-lines as well, but they are in 3 dimensions. A big foam block that holds it's own balance of symmetry. Just imagine a 10x10 room filled with memory foam. You've got to make it clear to see the grid running perfectly within it, creating boxes. Now we need a magic balloon that inflates on it's own and starts out insignificantly small. We insert the un-inflated balloon into the center of our foam grid an we hit the magic, remote controlled, inflate button. Our balloon inflates to 1 foot in diameter. What happens to the foam? It compresses, with the area of most compression near the wall of the magic balloon. The compression of the foam would dissipate as you get farther away from the balloon, just as gravity dissipates as you get farther away from massive objects. This really seemed to be a better model for gravity and general relativity in every way. I simply added another dimension to the experiment and came up with a mechanism that would actually bend and change the nature and geometry of space-time. And Im left with why. It seemed that space-time and energy-matter could not "mix" within the same dimensions. Which is to say, in one possible dimensional perspective, they do not mix, and in that dimension, you experience gravity and the effects of general relativity. My ideas on the subject go much farther. Space-time essentially becomes an inherently perfectly uniform dimension, that is interrupted but the occurrence of matter and energy. Energy becomes a different chaotic dimension that bursts into space-time, giving matter a shape and form. E=mc2 tells us how much energy it takes that chaotic dimension of energy to burst through into the space-time foam to create subatomic particles. Creating tiny dents in that foam which result in the nuclear strong force. Imagine cereal in a bowl of milk. What keeps those Cherios together? It's a wave like effect where the slope of both cherios creates a tiny area of strong attraction. On a larger scale, this is the same effect that creates gravity. Space-time really becomes a gel-like database that tracks every piece of energy, which is nothing other than information. Not a crystalline based storage structure, more like plasma with a memory and that memory is time. What makes a black hole? Is it lots of mass? It seems to be lots of mass compressed together very tightly. You can have all the matter in the universe, but you wont have a black hole until it is compressed. Until it mashes down the walls of space-time foam, literally removing time and space from time and space. Which is why light cannot back through it without jumping through some amazing and still unknown hoops. I do believe compression is the key to bending. Since when can you even bend anything without changing it's internal geometry? Even motion seems to be a state of compression. From 10 miles per hour to 30 miles per hour, just keep smashing those miles in. Any thoughts on just the example of the model which ends after the second paragraph? The rest would take much more explanation.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.