1 - The gravitational oscillator 

(Hole through the center of the Earth - http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Mechanics/earthole.html)

gravitational potential energy - kinetic energy = 0 

"If you drilled a hole through the axis of the Earth from pole to pole, and put a long thin vacuum chamber in it then dropped an object into one end of that chamber, it would fall down the hole, picking up speed. And it would be moving very fast when it reached the centre of the Earth so it would carry on going until it reached the other pole where it would stop, and then fall back down again. It would "bounce" back and to. If the density of the Earth was constant (rather than increasing as you go down) the body would exhibit simple harmonic motion." (Author -  Bored chemist)

 

 

2 - The singularity avoidance

At x = 0 when the particle is going faster (don't rely on GIF for speed), its kinetic energy allows it not to fall into the singularity.

Kinetics of the particle at the bottom of the potential well, and avoidance of the singularity:

 

 

I must specify that the avoidance of the sigularity, by the kinetics of the particle at the bottom of the potential well, also occurs when the particle is at rest in the false vacuum, namely the ZPE; And which corresponds to the same celestial mechanics of the orbit of the planets around the star. In other words when the particle is at rest at the bottom of the well and it undergoes the ZPE disturbance of the false vacuum, then we understand that the particle orbiting around the gravitational singularity, rather than a vibratory disturbance. Indeed for an observer the reproduction of the path of the particle is expressed by a sinusoidal signal in time or elliptical by its magnitude. True vacuum is total collapse.

 

3 - The Higgs field

The kinetics of the particle make it possible to avoid the singularity through the Higgs field. The Higgs field corresponds to the path taken by the particle. In other words, the Higgs field corresponds to the path taken by the particle thanks to the kinetic energy and makes it possible to avoid the singularity. If the kinetic energy of the particle is sufficient and if the range of the energy condition allows to pass the potential barrier the singularity avoidance occurs, but during the attenuation of the kinetics of the particle, this causes by the quantity of lower energy to fall towards the singularity and to reach the true vacuum. In conclusion, the metastability of the vacuum is shifted and is represented in three parts. The first corresponds to the false vacuum of the Higgs field at the level of Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking, follows in two the true vacuum of the Higgs field which is in fact the Zero Point Energy and is therefore not the true vacuum since in three we have the true absolute vacuum which corresponds to the total collapse. Without any kinetic energy the contour of the potential barrier corresponds to the path of the orbit of the particle in Zero Point Energy in relation to its inertia.

 

 

Application of conventional physics. Namely the kinetic energy of the particle for the harmonic or anharmonic oscillator, and inertia to simulate the orbiting motion of the particle or mass around a more massive object. According to the oscillator model that I propose, the orbit(s) is located at approximately at x=0 in the potential well of the oscillator, and corresponds to the Zero Point Energy. The initial Zero Point Energy disturbance (ZPE) corresponds to the movement of the particle located in the false vacuum in orbit around the gravitational singularity.

The idea now is that the inertia of an orbiting body would correspond to the movement of its mass occurring by the force of gravity, but by an avoidance of the gravitational singularity thanks to the barrier of potential. In other words the particle slides along the barrier of potential and corresponds to the motion of inertia following the orbit in relation to the object with the greatest gravity at the center of the system. Indeed in the conventional illustration, the orbit is the closed curve representing the trajectory that a celestial object draws under the effect of gravitation and inertial forces. It should therefore be remembered that the own deformation by sinking of the celestial object in the curvature of spacetime creates all around it a barrier of energy potential from higher edges.

 

 

The Higgs field and potential are also used well to be able to represent the metastability of the universe, as well as the quantum particle. Being able to make the link between GR and QM through the gravitational oscillator by explaining the Higgs mechanism becomes very interesting, even important. If we were to make the jump of a massive object over the potential barrier and the gravitational singularity, then we would draw through the particle, the curve of the Higgs field. It is therefore understood that in order to do this, the kinetic energy must be accordingly. We would therefore tend to believe that for a quantum particle that the step of crossing a black hole would become easier. I guess that its avoidance is related to the electromagnetic force. 

In a more speculative definition and given our knowledge of the gravitational sigularity followed by the time dilation, we could associate the center of the earth as such. Indeed for the quantum particle it becomes easier to imagine the avoidance of the singularity at the level of the terrestrial core through the gravitational oscillator.

 

4 - References:

Black Hole singularity avoidance by the Higgs scalar field Einstein gravitation is known to give rise to the formation of singularities at high densities unless the dominant energy condition is made invalid by the occurrence of new physics: we show that such a new physics can be the already present Higgs sector of the standard model of particle physics. https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.05295

Black holes and Higgs stability We study the effect of primordial black holes on the classical rate of nucleation of AdS regions within the standard electroweak vacuum. We find that the energy barrier for transitions to the new vacuum, which characterizes the exponential suppression of the nucleation rate, can be reduced significantly in the black-hole background. A precise analysis is required in order to determine whether the the existence of primordial black holes is compatible with the form of the Higgs potential at high temperature or density in the Standard Model or its extensions. https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.04018

Unification of gravity and the harmonic oscillator on a quantum black hole horizon II: Perturbative particle scattering and Feynman amplitudes n Article I, a harmonic-oscillator model of a universe of n quarks is infinitesimally modified to eliminate the background reference frame. As a result, quark trajectories exhibit the unification of gravity and the harmonic oscillator near the horizon of a quantum black hole, a region that is approximately flat in space-time. Constituent quarks are confined to composite particles by cluster decomposition rather than a binding force. Here, the composite-particles are input for a perturbation model of particle-exchange interactions. https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0307136

Gravitational and harmonic oscillator potentials on surfaces of revolution In this paper, we consider the motion of a particle on a surface of revolution under the influence of a central force field. We prove that there are at most two analytic central potentials for which all the bounded, nonsingular orbits are closed and that there are exactly two on some surfaces with constant Gaussian curvature. The two potentials leading to closed orbits are suitable generalizations of the gravitational and harmonic oscillator potential. We also show that there could be surfaces admitting only one potential that leads to closed orbits. In this case, the potential is a generalized harmonic oscillator. In the special case of surfaces of revolution with constant Gaussian curvature, we prove a generalization of the well-known Bertrand theorem. https://arxiv.org/abs/1305.3930
 

41 minutes ago, Kartazion said:

At x = 0 when the particle is going faster (don't rely on GIF for speed), its kinetic energy allows it not to fall into the singularity.

What singularity?

Why does the particle turn into an antiparticle when it goes south of the equator?

Quote

I must specify that the avoidance of the sigularity, by the kinetics of the particle at the bottom of the potential well, also occurs when the particle is at rest in the false vacuum, namely the ZPE

What does ZPE have to do with this? You have described a purely classical problem. Same for the Higgs field.

I see no math to speak of that would allow one to draw any conclusions.

 

13 minutes ago, swansont said:

What singularity?

Supermassive black hole - Big bang

13 minutes ago, swansont said:

Why does the particle turn into an antiparticle when it goes south of the equator?

For balance. After rotating up to 180° it is from the south to the north antiparticle.

14 minutes ago, swansont said:

What does ZPE have to do with this?

The ZPE corresponds to the inertia of the mass. Either orbit. The perturbation is the motion of inertia of orbit.

15 minutes ago, swansont said:

You have described a purely classical problem. Same for the Higgs field.

It is the goal to be able to explain it in physics 101.

16 minutes ago, swansont said:

I see no math to speak of that would allow one to draw any conclusions.

I'm working on it.

Postscripts:

59 minutes ago, Kartazion said:

In a more speculative definition and given our knowledge of the gravitational sigularity followed by the time dilation, we could associate the center of the earth as such. 

 

47 minutes ago, Kartazion said:

Supermassive black hole - Big bang

You link to and describe "Hole through the center of the Earth "

The earth is not a black hole. You don't even mention a black hole until. the end of your post.

47 minutes ago, Kartazion said:

For balance. After rotating up to 180° it is from the south to the north antiparticle.

Sorry, I was looking for a legitimate physics reason. Silly me.

Is "balance" an accepted phenomenon? What is the actual mechanism for changing the particle into its antiparticle, using only a gravitational interaction?

 

47 minutes ago, Kartazion said:

The ZPE corresponds to the inertia of the mass. Either orbit. The perturbation is the motion of inertia of orbit.

ZPE is the inertia of the mass? Sorry, that's gibberish.

 

47 minutes ago, Kartazion said:

It is the goal to be able to explain it in physics 101.

Maybe you should take physics 101 first.

47 minutes ago, Kartazion said:

I'm working on it.

Postscripts:

In a more speculative definition and given our knowledge of the gravitational sigularity followed by the time dilation, we could associate the center of the earth as such. 

More gibberish.

Need less handwave, more rigor.

1 hour ago, Kartazion said:

For balance.

For balance of what?

In the standard model, the Higgs field is a constant, which corresponds to a possible vacuum.

The famous sombrero curve is not the field; it's the Higgs potential, which depends of the field. The X-axis is the field variable, and the Y-axis is the potential energy. Space doesn't even appear in the picture unless you excite the field locally.

And, as Swansont said, what singularity? The sombrero potential has no singularity.

The gravitational field of the Earth has no singularity either.

And so on, and so on...

12 hours ago, swansont said:

You link to and describe "Hole through the center of the Earth "

And? It is a link among the other published references.

12 hours ago, swansont said:

The earth is not a black hole. You don't even mention a black hole until. the end of your post.

On the one hand you say that the center of the earth is not a black hole, and then you say that I am not talking about it. Yes ...  No ... Maybe ...

I don't answer the rest cause I know you and you never gonna understand.

 

11 hours ago, joigus said:

For balance of what?

It is for the continuity of kinetic energy after x=0.

11 hours ago, joigus said:

In the standard model, the Higgs field is a constant, which corresponds to a possible vacuum.

The famous sombrero curve is not the field; it's the Higgs potential, which depends of the field. The X-axis is the field variable, and the Y-axis is the potential energy. Space doesn't even appear in the picture unless you excite the field locally.

Correct. 

11 hours ago, joigus said:

And, as Swansont said, what singularity?

The same singularity that Einstein talks about. "Einstein gravitation is known to give rise to the formation of singularities at high densities unless the dominant energy condition is made invalid by the occurrence of new physics: we show that such a new physics can be the already present Higgs sector of the standard model of particle physics." https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.05295

11 hours ago, joigus said:

The sombrero potential has no singularity.

Yes, the sombrero potential is the sombrero potential and the singularity is the singularity.

13 hours ago, swansont said:

ZPE is the inertia of the mass? Sorry, that's gibberish.

Gibberish? ... Yes ... No ... Maybe ...

Physics of the zero-point field: implications for inertia, gravitation and mass Physics of the zero-point field: implications for inertia, gravitation and mass | SpringerLink

Yes swansont, physics of the zero-point field = implications for inertia, gravitation and mass.

The term zero-point energy (ZPE) is sometimes used interchangeably with it are the terms zero-point radiation and ground state energy. The term zero-point field (ZPF) can be used when referring to a specific vacuum field. 

13 hours ago, joigus said:

In the standard model, the Higgs field is a constant, which corresponds to a possible vacuum.

Specific vacuum?  Possible vacuum? This is exactly what the title of the OP is about.

So?

And so on, and so on...

Are you going to close this thread now? As usual ?

16 hours ago, swansont said:

Maybe you should take physics 101 first.

Loved this ...

4 hours ago, Kartazion said:

I don't answer the rest cause I know you and you never gonna understand.

Nobody else understands either.

4 hours ago, Kartazion said:

Yes, the sombrero potential is the sombrero potential and the singularity is the singularity.

That's why your depiction of a sombrero potential superimposed to a gravitational singularity doesn't make any sense: One makes sense with the spatial radius, \( r \) as a variable; the other with the 'radius' of the field variable \( \left| \varphi \right| \).

Unless I've misunderstood you really badly, but as I see no equations...

 

 

Edited August 18, 20214 yr by joigus

4 hours ago, MigL said:

Nobody else understands either.

How can you know before I publish it? 
 

3 hours ago, joigus said:

That's why your depiction of a sombrero potential superimposed to a gravitational singularity doesn't make any sense:

... Unless I've misunderstood you really badly, ...

Precisely. It is all the interest of the gravitational potential energy of the mass to be above a gravitational attraction.

Einstein gravitation appears to be affected by the Penrose-Hawking theorem, stating that if the dominant energy condition holds then the high density gravitationally-induced formation of singularities is inevitable; in turn this means that the avoidance of singularity formation due to gravity can be done only by invalidating the condition on the energy... Just the same, Higgs physics can change the energy tensor in its structure, so to make the dominant energy condition invalid, and therefore to have the gravitationally-induced singularity avoided. 1901.05295.pdf (arxiv.org)
 

3 hours ago, joigus said:

... but as I see no equations...

A few basics on Lagrangians will be enough:  L = T(kinetic) − V(potential)  I have already published:

23 hours ago, Kartazion said:

gravitational potential energy - kinetic energy = 0 

 

A tale of two disciplines. Physics can be a source of inspiration, with theoretical concepts such as general relativity and quantum theory providing an impetus for mathematicians to develop new tools. https://penntoday.upenn.edu/news/where-math-meets-physics

 

PostScript: I do have an account on arXiv. I know it takes a lot of corrections, but we must get an endorsement from another user to submit an article to category physics. Can any of you sponsor me? I just wish publishing the basis of the gravitational oscillator adding to gravitational singularity avoidance. Thanks.

3 hours ago, Kartazion said:

Can any of you sponsor me?

No, but if you tell me your approximate location I could research some schools where you could take a physics course or two.

3 hours ago, Kartazion said:

A few basics on Lagrangians will be enough:  L = T(kinetic) − V(potential)  I have already published:

That's not general. That's only true in non-relativistic classical mechanics and in gauge field theory. Not in GR, not in relativistic particle mechanics.

 

12 hours ago, Kartazion said:

Are you going to close this thread now? As usual ?

!

Moderator Note

As per the rules. This science discussion forum has them so we don't waste time on WAGs, and they specifically require you to support your assertions and give meaning and clarity to your arguments, yet you continue to post vague guesswork with no evidence.

There are other forums where they don't care that you simply wave your hands instead of supporting your science. You should check them out, because if you continue to post here, we will continue to enforce the rules the site's owners have asked us to. Thread closed.