Declan

I have uploaded the cause of gravitational acceleration paper: 452-1952-1-PB.pdf

In my Ref 1 in Post #11, I define the space-filling field. Essentially it is a field whose density is determined by the (positive rather than negative) Gravitational potential. Around mass, the field is more dense, which affects waves travelling through it by causing them to propagate more slowly. This is the cause of Gravitational Time Dilation and Gravitational Lensing. The slowing of waves also causes the standard Gravitational acceleration due to its effects on 3D standing waves (as in my paper in Ref 2) - I have a paper explaining this process on GJP too. The energy of this field is the sum of the energies from all of the quantum particles in the causally connected Universe. Each quanta is a 3D standing wave that extends to infinity, but with ever diminishing amplitude. The thin halo of energy surrounding each quantum particle is what contributes to the gravitational potential field. As far as making changes to GR goes, I don't think it changes at all, just that the curvature is interpreted as due to the variable density Gravitational Potential field that I described above. Except that for the Schwartzchild Metric for Black Holes I need to introduce a term expressing the constant inward flow (as I suggested in Post #38). That is the only change.

Please see my peer-reviewed paper on GJP (see Ref 2 in my post #11 earlier) showing how electron/positron are made from waves. (For some reason my browser won't let me past the link to the paper into my reply - hence the reference to Post #11).

I think the main reason we are having trouble agreeing with each other is that the GR wave equations have been interpreted as defining space-time as a variable geometry coordinate system, rather than having a fixed coordinate system and the wave equation defining test particle's motion within that fixed coordinate system. If the coordinate system is fixed, but is filled with a field of variable density that defines the Gravitational potential at each point in space, then our differences melt away. The coordinate system is not consumed by the BH, and the field with is made of energy waves, just like normal matter, can flow & get consumed by the BH.

sub-quantum = small than quanta (quanta are made of such waves: 3D standing waves).

Ok - now we are getting somewhere. The field's intensity defines the gravitational potential (curvature) present in the coordinate system - so I behaves just like gravity in GR. The higher the density of the field, the slower time is in the field (which is determined by the speed at which waves travel through the medium - all physical objects are made of waves and so all physical processes are slowed down when the propagation speed through the medium is slowed). Light/matter waves move through this field as if it were a medium (something like water waves) at the speed if light. When a particle (3D standing wave) is accelerated in this medium, the wave components of the particle's standing wave are either flowing upstream or downstream wrt the medium. Thus they get Doppler shifted - this is the cause of length contraction and mass increase (Due to the sum of the upstream and downstream wave components). The field is not made of quasi-particles, apart from virtual particles that form when the essentially random wave activity temporarily forms a quasi-particle structure (like passing water waves adding to form a big wave). The Field/Medium has energy (as does the gravitational field) and is in fact the sum of the wave functions of real quantum particles (each are well defined 3D wave functions that are added together). All mass generates this energy field, but only black holes are able to consume it due to gravitational collapse. In effect when a black hole consumes it, it is actually consuming normal matter, but only the thin cloud of this matter/energy that extends into space around a quantum particle. Are you understanding me so far?

There is no need to get personal. I jumped straight into the Forum & haven't had time to familiarize myself with all the controls yet. There might be assumptions (about the masses of star and/or black hole) being made in the analysis based on current theory - I don't know the details. Incidentally, I did a calculation on the extra inflow acceleration that is required to explain the Orbital Velocity for a star at a distance of 15000 light years away from the center of the M33 galaxy (travelling at 100 km/sec). The acceleration comes out to 7.04669x10^-11 m/sec^2. So for a star close to the black hole, this tiny acceleration would make very little difference to the star's orbit due to Newtonian gravity. Well within the error bars I would guess.

Why couldn't you still retain the coordinate system, yet allow the energy field that is defining the curvature of the coordindate system to flow into the black hole - that way we are both happy & the energy field is being treated in the same way as normal mass/energy? You are still thinking of the energy field as a radiation field made from quanta of energy - it is not, the waves are sub-quantum waves. They are the extended fields from real quanta that exist elsewhere in the Universe. Every particle/quantum has infinite extent (it is a 3D wave function), but most of its energy exists within the Classical particle diameter.

To Strange: Eccentric orbits are still possible, the gradient in the gravitational field still remains, just that an extra acceleration that is constant with distance from the black hole is added on too. The inflowing doesn't cause a black hole, the other way around: when a black hole forms, the inflowing starts. The density of the energy field is higher closer to the black hole than further away (by the same proportion as the surface area of the shell changes) - Thus the same amount of energy is flowing into the black hole at each shell of distance r from it. The gradient in the energy field is the Newtonian gravitational acceleration. To ajb: Absolutely mathematics is essential, but if it comes to choosing between a known mathematical model versus real-world observations, we must believe the real world observations and modify the mathematical model to match it. To Mordred: Post 1: Then you haven't, or don't want to, understand it. The presence of the field is what explains Time Dilation, Length contraction, mass increase, and yes stellar aberration. People who believe in ether like theories often use stellar aberration as an example proving that a field exists as without it there is no explanation for stellar aberration. Post2: There are a number of different ether theories. There is no ether dragging in my model (unless you mean frame-dragging due to moving mass). I already suggested a minor change to the Schwartzchild metric to account for inflow around black holes (see post #38). Quite the opposite, the redshift occurs because light is flowing through the space-time energy field as if through a medium, and the medium is either being stretched (expansion) or the source/detector is approaching/receding (Doppler shift). The space-time energy field (call it ether if you like) is far from undetectable and affecting nothing: it is the cause for Time dilation, length contraction, mass increase, stellar aberration, gravitation etc. Nothing you have said makes me think the idea is foolish. Just out of interest: if the coordinate system derives is source from mass/energy in GR, what happens when that mass/energy falls into a black hole? Doesn't it get gobbled up just the same? I'm guessing you will say it just adds to the curvature around the black hole - well if that is the case, the same can be said for the energy in the inflowing field that gets gobbled up too. To MigL: Normal gravitational acceleration still applies as this is due to the gradient in the energy field, it is just that the entire field is moving towards the black hole. However, as it moves towards the black hole the energy field increases in density (due to the decreasing area of each shell closer to the black hole) - so the gradient in the field doesn't change over time. Close to a large black hole, the normal gravitational acceleration (due to field gradient) would be the dominant effect, and any 'offset' in acceleration levels due to inflow could have been mis-interpreted as the black hole having a larger mass than it actually has.

To Swansont: I have posted another image: https://s32.postimg.org/c4n999efp/Vector_Addition.png This shows vector addition: The first triangle shows the velocity vector of a star in orbit (V1) and the added vector due to Newtonian acceleration for a unit of time (V2) to give the new star's velocity vector (V3). The second triangle (with the first triangle overlayed) shows the starting velocity vector (V4), plus the vector due to Newtonian acceleration (V5) plus the additional inward flow vector (V6), resulting in the new star's velocity vector (V7). As you can see, the star's orbit has curved inwards more given the same starting velocity. If the starting velocity was higher in the case of the second triangle (with inward flow) the star could achieve the same orbit as the first triangle (without inward flow), but its orbital velocity would be higher. The key thing about black holes is gravitational collapse - the gravitational field cannot escape in the same way light cannot, so the space-time field begins to flow into the black hole. To Strange: The space-time flow rate into the black hole is constant with distance, so it acts as a constant acceleration force to objects in orbit around the galaxy, but over very large distances the expansion of the Universe will diminish and then eventually reverse the flow to expansion.

Reply to Mordred, Why do you say there is no ether? Is it because of the Michelson Morley result? This can easily be explained and proven to work if there is an ether, as I have done. All of the effects of Relativity can be explained and proven, as I have done, BECAUSE there is an ether. If you don't believe me read my Energy Field Theory paper (or the FQXi essay contest paper that I posted the link to earlier) carefully, with an open mind. Reply to ajb: Geometry isn't everything, it just indicates how space affects matter, there are real mechanistic reasons for the forces that cause the matter to move - that comes down to energy in some sort. It is the mathematicians tool for expressing what is happening in the real world. To Mordred: Thanks for the tip on what to look at. My main point about the NFW profile was to indicate that the orbital velocity curves that result from it and my idea are almost identical & the differences could be accounted for by details about mass distribution in galaxies. The other lines in the graph are only relevant if Dark Matter actually exists.

The thing is all quanta (particles etc) are made from these waves, so it takes an organized structure of these waves (i.e. a particle wave function) to interact with other quanta in the way we are used to (the examples you have given). There are effects from virtual particles on condensed matter particles that are know to occur - this is when these energy waves momentarily become organized enough to look like a real particle, but are not of sufficient energy to become real particles, so they soon disintegrate back into the essentially random wave activity again. I Just entered example data into Excel to help visualize the Navarro Frenk White profile. Here is what I got (don't worry about the actual numbers or size of the curves relative to one another - just the shapes). See picture at this URL: https://s32.postimg.org/u63om9rat/Navarro_Frenk_White.png The Purple line is the Orbital velocity profile from NFW profile, the Blue line is the Orbital velocity profile from constant centripetal acceleration (i.e. inward space-time flow). The Density, Mass and Acceleration curves are what comes out from working backwards from the observed Orbital Velocity profile, assuming that Dark Matter exists.

But you said I am replacing matter with radiation - not at all, the wave activity I am referring to is matter waves. The 3D standing waves that are particles of matter extend into space although most of the energy is within the classical diameter of the particle. Another way to think about it is the Quantum machanical interpretation of the probability of finding the particle at a certain location away from the center. The actual mass/energy distribution has not changed.

Reply to Swansont: It doesn't have to 'know' if it's in orbit - it just comes about that way. Think about it, if you are in orbit around something where the medium through which you are traveling is moving with a constant velocity towards the center, then the effect it will have on you is to consistently change your velocity towards the center. In circular motion this is the same effect as a centripetal acceleration. The flowing effect would only apply to black holes, although any mass that is moving will have its own gravity field moving with it - so as the space-time field is the sum of all gravity fields of all masses, a percentage of the space-time field flows with the mass that is in motion. This is evident in frame-dragging for example. Reply to Mordred: I think you are mis-understanding what I am saying. The shape of space-time remains unaltered from GR except that the flow into black holes is introduced. Apart from that I am saying that the energy present in the gravitational field (I.e. Space-time) is in the form of wave activity in the form of the sum of the wave functions of all the condensed matter particles in the Universe. This does not change any energy distribution or curvature, it is simply an interpretation of the existing GR model of the Universe.

You get two photons, momentum etc are conserved, sure. The frequency of the gamma rays emitted during annihilation is the same as that of the waves comprising the 3D standing waves of the electron/positron. The two 3D structures 'undo' each other's stable wave functions, allowing the energy waves to no longer be standing waves, but to shoot off as traveling light waves. See my paper on Wave Functions for the Electron & Positron for the wave functions, structure & computed wave frequencies. ---- It isn't constant acceleration unless you are in circular motion around the black hole, where the inward flow tends to shift the orbiting star inwards continually as it orbits (i.e. constantly changes the orbiting star's velocity, as a Newtonian gravitational acceleration does). Otherwise for objects not in orbit, the inward flowing space imparts a constant velocity to objects. Also as the Universe is constantly expanding - the total amount of which depends how far away two objects are - this expansion flow will be the bigger effect over huge distances rather than the fixed flow from any given black hole.

Matter (electron and positron) annihilating to become a wave of energy (gamma ray).

I understand the shell theorem applies to normal gravitational inverse-square law fields, but a similar notion would apply to flow into black holes as they move behind you as you get closer to the galactic center.

This is part of the problem with current physics - the Universe is real, not just coordinates on a mathematicians graph - the fields are made from real energy waves. Everything is made from energy - it is not just a property - it is the fundamental substance from which everything is made (sure it might be possible to analyze & break down the wave activity into something even more fundamental). Energy is wave based, and matter particles are made from these waves in a 3D standing wave configuration - I have modeled this & it works, and have worked out the wave functions for the electron & positron with all the right properties. A Galaxy is made up of a whole lot of black holes (as well as stars) at different distances from the center, not just the one at the center, so the shell theorem still applies.

Everything that is anything real in the Universe is made from energy & thus a source of gravitation. I think the GR field equations have the non-linearity built into them so that gravity's own gravitation does not have to be identified as a distribution if matter/energy it is already taken care of by the self-referential non-linearity.

Well if the gravitational field is space-time & has energy (as is does - see the link I posted 2 posts ago) then it will be consumed by the black hole. Thus space-time will be flowing into the black hole - there will be a negative divergence in the space-time field in the space occupied by the black hole. ajb: The link to that page says: "An important property of gravity in Einstein's theory is that it can create more gravity. The result is "non-linearity" - the gravitational influence of two bodies isn't just the sum of their separate influences! " Thus as the stress-momentum Tensor would tell you the curvature of space-time is caused by where energy resides: in this case the gravitational field itself - causing more gravity. So the gravitational field is a field of energy.

The thing that is special about black holes is that they have undergone gravitational collapse, so not even the gravitational field can escape its own gravity. This is different to every other object in the Universe.

ajb: See this link about gravity's gravity: http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/gravity_of_gravity

In a finite Universe the expansion can be considered flowing outwards as there would be a center to the Universe somewhere. If the Universe was truly infinite there would be no preferred direction - but then there would be other problems such as Olber's paradox. Black hole mass has been included, but still the Galaxy rotation rates are unexplained as is the acceleration of the expansion over time - so I think GR still has a bit to account for that it doesn't yet. I wasn't referring to frame dragging (except for an example of space-time flowing around in a circle). Remind me - what was the NFW profile?

What could be simpler: The space-time of the Universe as a whole is expanding/flowing outwards & black holes within it are regions where space-time is contracting/flowing inwards.

Reply to Strange: It was in post #38 In my Energy Field Theory paper or better still, this more recent re-write which contains additional mathematical proofs: http://fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Traill_FQXi_Essay_Declan_Tr_1.pdf There all the odd effects of Relativity (Time dilation, Mass increase, length contraction) are shown to be as a result of an energy field that fills space & particles modeled as 3D standing waves. I have not addressed the GR field equations, but the gravitational field definitions have not changed, so they would stay the same. Further Reply to Swansont: At far distances, the expansion of the Universe would negate the inward flow into the black holes in distant galaxies - hence only the nearby ones would exhibit the additional flow towards them.