Butch

Can someone show the math that describes light being trapped at the event horizon? Perhaps link? Googling this does not provide good mathematical descriptions.

You are correct sir! I began this thread with an inquiry and let things get out of hand. When I make such inquiries in the future, I will be more careful. Thank you. Thank you, actually I am aware of this, however awarness is not competence... I may need some help. Right now I need to resolve the issue of scale. How "big" is my particle... That is to say how does the gravitational profile of this point particle compare to the earth or a black hole??

Working on it...

Sorry you misunderstood, I am saying that x=1 on my chart is a very large number in terms of n. I think there may be a connection... Do you recall my statement in another topic "photons are wave packets in a gravitational field."? Swansont said I would have to show that, that is my endeavor. Just keep beating on me Strange, you are one of my favorite guideposts!

X=distance Y=gravitation I am speculating that very near a particle gravity could be a much stronger force than we have given credit. 1 in terms of Newtons would be close to the gravitational force at the event horizon of a black hole, actually, it could be much stronger... And as the value of x falls below 1 it is very much stronger. At these levels gravity would be a very strong force rivaling the other known forces, even perhaps unifying them. The real problem I am having with this model, is describing charge in terms of gravitational force. This was an attempt at doing so, it failed and so I move on. The tasks in front of me now are resolving my units and determining how a particle as a gravity well can exhibit charge. You are correct, I will drop this until I have made progress on those tasks. Thank you, Strange! Thank you all!

How so? Here is a chart showing that if my particles were perturbed as shown in my earlier charts, the perturbation would not represent charge of the particle. This is a representation of two "positively charged" particles. Note that the gravitational force between them is above 0 on the y axis, this would represent negative g, a repulsive force... Ergo this cannot represent charge. OOPS!!! They should repel... Just a moment and I will post the chart for 2 negative particles... Here the gravitational force between them is amplified and attractive, two negatively charged particles should repel.

My statements are speculations, that is why they are prepositioned with words like "might be", "could be" and "if". As far as gravity is weaker than gravity... I am saying that gravitational force at very close proximity to x=1 or within that horizon is much stronger than in our normal experience. I am working on what x=1 is, I will need to do a comparison of mass densities between the Earth and a particle. See my response to your last reply... Give me a few minutes and I will post the charts.

If you will observe the plot of my gravity well particle not that in the proximity of the particle, gravitational force is much greater than what we would expect from experience. For those of you who took notice of my charged particle plots and say that this does not demonstrate charge... You are correct. I plotted my "charged" particles as they relate to one another in proximity. I found that the positive repelled the positive, the negative attracted the negative and unlike charges had no influence. I do believe that my particles could be perturbed in this way, however it certainly does not represent charge... perhaps color? At any rate it has lead me to some ideas on spin as relates to my particle, I will present this in a new topic, when I can. I do not think you people realize what a great help you are to me, I know I thank you all the time, I am not trying to placate you... You really are that helpful! Thank you... again and again!

I agree, having trouble determining the gravitational force at x=1...

My positively charged particle: My negatively charged particle: My neutral particle: I do apologise for the lack of units, I produced these charts with: -1/x^2 + abs(1/x) -1/x^2 - abs(1/x) -1/x^2 Perhaps someone could help me out with charge as applies to elementary particles? I have chosen abs(1/x) as my charge because I believe it represents a quantum. Not sure what x=1 is in units of N, it should be a relatively large number as gravitational force at x=1 is very much greater than that at sea level on earth... Much greater!

Newtons! Absolutely! Thank you! I had not thought about it, but since "normal" gravity is so weak in comparison to that in my graph... Newtons should work just fine! I just assumed the units would be to large! Thank you, Thank you, Thank you! My model is a particle that is isolated, but if it is influenced y might fall below 0. Gravitational force at a distance could also be influenced to become much more attractive than the "norm". Patience please sir? I am building ideas and taking critiques. I am not trying to convince or state fact that is not in evidence... I am not an academic (perhaps I should have been), I do have a great abstract mind! I see things and investigate, however I cannot do it without the guidance of all of you... Einstein did not do it alone, he was in constant communication with colleagues. The wonderful folks on this forumn are the only colleagues I have and I do appreciate you greatly! Einstein threw Euclid to the wind... Imagine what that was like for him! I am sure that many of his closest friends told him he was full of poppy cock and was certainly wasting his time and theirs! In em f1 and f2 result in f1, f2, f1+f2,f1-f2. Is this self interaction?

As the Buddhists say, "everything is connected".

Any elastic entity is a spring isn't it? Electrons, atoms, molecules, rubber bands?

Thx! Strange, you should note that the spring in the pendulum example is not needed. You can easily demonstrate this, suspend two pendulums from a rod and anchor the rod any way you wish. Start one pendulum swinging and it will transfer its energy to the other. Moral of the story is, if there is any way for an oscillating entity to transfer its energy it will.

So, it would not raise the temperature of atoms? I was demonstrating the increase in gravitational force, certainly a "well" is more familiar. What happens when y crosses 0? I am working on units, any suggestions greatly appreciated... For now just small, very small! I am thinking something like hbar not clear however on π or 2π. I suppose the way to proceed is to try both, I need to collide a photon with my particle.

Not we control gravity... If a gravitational wave can be created then the curvature in my graph can certainly be modified! Not by us, by nature. We can do experiments to observe the phenomenon. Sometimes nature presents the experiment for us and we can observe the evidence, as has been the recent case with gravitational waves. I guess I could have stuck with y=spin if I had a tremendous fear of being wrong. Success comes from failure. When I presented this graph originally, I was not sure what the field was, I am convinced now that the field is gravitation(reference "particles as excitation in a field" to see my reasoning.), y is not spin, it is gravitational force, x is distance. I am not certain what this particle is, I am leaning toward neutrino, neutrinos oscillate ergo they have mass and thus a gravitational field... that oscillates. What is your opinion on the mind experiment I suggested? Please reference the mind experiment in my earlier post, do not get too complicated! As gravitation in proximity of the origin curves time/space the reference frame only comes into play for an outside observer. If a very dense massive body were oscillating strongly, in density, very close to you(assuming somehow the gravitational field did not rip you apart) would it cook you like a microwave? At the quantum level does this occur? If gravitational waves were at the frequency of microwaves would they differ? Gravitational force. Just a matter of graphics, " normal" gravitational force, that is gravitational force at distances magnitudes greater cannot be displayed on this graph, they are too weak.

At this level, what is structure?

I see lots of views, but no response... The two pendulums would exchange energy regardless their makeup, however the periods of oscillation would differ. If the spring were not connected to another pendulum there would be no interaction and nothing would change... Should be the same whether we are talking pendulums or neutrinos. As far as mass goes, do we separate mass and energy? The energy transfer between the pendulums could as easily be mass transfer between neutrinos. Wow, Strange, you cannot help but assist me! This goes well with my last post in my latest topic! Thx!

Reflection and/or attenuation of gravitational waves. If they can be reflected or attenuated then phenomena such as those in em fields could be mimicked by gravitational phenomena... A unification of the two. Please view the earlier discussions. What about charge? This is my direction of thought... You are familiar with my plot of a particle well. In this y(gravitational force) is always greater than 0. What happens if the particle is perturbed or a wave peak in the field pushes y below 0? The spin label of course is incorrect, x is distance, y gravitation. Note that this represents a point particle, the gravitation we classically experience is indistinguishable from 0 on this graph. Once I have determined my units of measurement, as well as the influence of a photon, I believe it will be demonstrated that such perturbation of y will be quantised. In order to picture this in your mind at some distance (x) place a gravitational wave packet... What happens as it approaches x=0?

Again, not a conclusion. It seems, we could produce such phenomena in a lab environment. Such things could be tested?

It is not a conclusion, it is a speculation and waits upon deduction... I am exploring the differences and similarities... I have lacked units of measurement and thus have lacked math. I believe I am close to defining my units of measurement however.

So, em et al could be a subset of gravitation. Ordinary matter meaning matter as we perceive it, what of a point particle? I have given this some thought... It seems that photons, Planck and the "event horizon" may give me a path to the units and math I am seeking, more on this later... Agreed, while gravitation cannot be shielded, phenomenon within the field might.

Deleted meaningless babble, I am fatigued...

Not gravity, waves in a gravitational field as relates to attenuation. For example a particle being "shaken" by a gravitational wave might absorb its energy and re-emit it in another form that redistributes it... refraction? Gravitational force is a matter of mass density and proximity at any level... Does a particle have an event horizon? Could be that classical gravity is very weak, however perhaps there is a horizon beyond which gravity is precipitously stronger? And enlightening!

Yes, I've got that... But, can waves in a gravity field be attenuated or reflected?