Universe E, m and D.

[Dov]

Universe E, m and D.

 

Hoping to get some comments on the rationale of the following

relationship between the universal energy-mass-expansion:

 

For the total universe energy E on the left side of an equation

let the right side of the equation be the sum of values of m(1+D),

where D is the Distance from point of Big Bang and the sum is for

all (spatial) values of D from D=0 to D=selected value.

 

Both m and D vary continuously. From D=0, singular m decreases

continuously as D increases with expansion ( and vice versa?).

This appears rational and true-to-universe, and implies that

eventually nearly all mass will be so diminished (and also diluted

localy) that it would practically be zero by our reckonning.

 

 

Is'nt it possible that such a relationship may offer plausible solutions

to some presently puzzling cosmological questions ?!

[Dov]

What do you think about the plausible possibility that "frame dragging", the warping of space/time by a spinning mass, is in fact warping of a form of the continuously diminishing m as it is becoming-a-form-of-energy as D (distance mass travelled since big bang) is increasing ?

[Dov]

My posting "Universal Fractal Approach" refers to the possibility of "a fractal link between the sought unified theory and the presently known state of the universe and the behavior of quarks according to Quantum ChromoDynamics, i.e. that as the distance between two quarks decreases, the magnitude of the color force between them also decreases. Thus, if quarks are close enough together, they can behave as free particles, and conversely, the color force becomes stronger between two quarks as they move farther apart..."

 

The QCD phenomenon involves strong interactions based on the exchange of mass-less gluons.

 

Is there a fractal link between QCD and cosmic frame dragging ?

 

And between mass-less gluons and the "space-time" frame around a large spinninig mass ?

 

And between gluons entanglement and space-time entanglements ?

 

And I still think that cosmologically the term "distance" is preferred to "time", since it is "distance" that effects the universal energy/mass (E/m) relationship and not time, that happens to be a special local (milky way/our solar system) living organism term, proportional to time.

[Dov]

I wish to elaborate a little further about Frame Dragging, as I note a posting by Playmaker03 about "Frame Shifting":

 

You can find an intelligent explanation of Frame Dragging at :

http://www.micromike.com/framedragger.htm

 

However, I am going a step further than this recommended explanation, by suggesting that the dragged/twisted "frame" is indeed a "field-like" envelope of energy which is continuously generated by the mass of a spinning big mass as it is continuously travelling away from the big-bang point and as its this travel inherently involves conversion of some of the mass into energy in accordance with the relationship I suggest, i.e. E(universal) is proportional to m(universal) (1+ D) where D is distance of the mass from the big-bang point.

[Dov]

One personal reason for looking at frame dragging is that it is not clear to me if/what is the relationship between frame dragging and microlensing. Another thing that drives me to understand better what these two terms entail is that I have always mistrusted the term and description of "fabric of space", suspecting that it is one of these terms that like in the "emperor's new clothes" are in use without a plain and simple understanding, hiding behind a mathematical conception of "spacetime". I read and reread the following two items but have not become more enlightened about the two above matters.

 

http://colossus.chem.umass.edu/chandler/ch111/spacetime.htm

 

http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/frame_dragging_confirmed.html