boboe

Density: Time dilation due to velocity = (the Lorentz-Fitzgerald equation) Let's look at density as it pertains to, let's say, a rug occupying an area inside a room, in order to see what percentage of the room the rug does NOT occupy. Density = sqrt (1 - area of rug / area of room) Assuming that the length and width are always equal: D = sqrt (1 - Length of Rug^2 / Length of Room^2) Of course, to get this to pertain to time dilation due to velocity, we can simply replace "Length" with measurements of spacetime - velocities. (Any object which occupies 'x' amount of space, also occupies 'x' amount of time - they are equal) So we can make the conclusion that measuring the relative velocity of an object is measuring it's occupation of spacetime - a form of density where c (the speed of light) is the maximum. Having a maximum velocity allows us to use any form of measurement of velocities- kilometers/hr, miles/hr, meters/hr, etc. etc. etc. The universe understands these measurements because they can all be compared to a maximum value - c. I'm well aware of the equation: And to be brutally honest, this equation can, in no way, shape or form exist with the Lorentz-Fitzgerald equation above. That is, either one of the equations is wrong, or the Equivalence Principle is wrong. So examining the equation I have severe problems with Mass. Mass has no maximum value. So what is mass? An objects occupation of spacetime - compared to what? Nothing. It's some arbitrary measurement - how does the universe know what 1 kilogram is, whereas, it knows what 1 mile is, because 1 mile is some fraction of 186,282 miles. In the Lorentz-Fitzgerald equation, results which change an object's mass are based on a percentage change, so results have been accurate, however we are using our arbitrary value of mass in this equation to define gravity. How were units of mass derived? Was the occupation of spacetime taken into consideration at their creation? The only forms of measurement which the universe understands deal with the occupation of spacetime in distances. Mass can, and should, be a measurement of spacetime but it needs to relate to distance, not the weight of a grain or whatever. What I'm saying is that gravity, like velocity, should be based on a measure of the density (occupation) of spacetime. (As I believe the Equivalence Principle is correct) If you have an object moving the speed of light relative to you, the object is calculated to have 0 length; HOWEVER, if you were that object which was moving that speed of light, you wouldn't measure any change in your length. So in a gravitational field where time is dilated to 0, observers outside would measure the body as having 0 length, whereas someone inside that body would measure everything as it's proper size. If we take our lesson from the Lorentz-Fitzgerald equation, we should find that a black hole is merely 100% dense. I'm neither mathematician nor physicist by trade. I have no equation to explain gravity, though I'm certain it will be easily discovered with changed perspectives about mass. This is a small piece of a much larger picture, which I may be willing to discuss, but for now, this will do.