Unification Theory draft - DFT

[michel123456]

I hope you are correct.

As much as I can understand you have expressed existing theory under some new POV, where time is not constant but under dilation (acceleration). IOW we are living in an accelerated world. Is that it?

 

In this perspective gravity is described by omnipresent scalar field equal

to gravitational time dilation factor 1/γ acting on flat spacetime.

from your link.

 

And I liked

3.1.1. Conclusion

We have just seen that the following are all related:

gravitational acceleration is related to gravitational gamma

redshift is related to timelike Killing field

Above relationship will appear very usefull for farther reasoning.

 

But I missed the explanation of why massive objects are attracted to each other. It's a bit over my head.

[michel123456]

Oh. did you pay 300$ to be published? in the Journal of Modern Physics of SCIRP

 

See

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/charleston/chadv/2012/00000013/00000004/art00005?token=00481470d37539412f415d7670347070742b4542736a432530482972715a614f6d4e227a

 

http://docserver.ingentaconnect.com/deliver/connect/charleston/15254011/v13n4/s5.pdf?expires=1352904789&id=71468144&titleid=75002231&accname=Guest+User&checksum=07526F85892CDC8A158053BD2FDDFA1C

Edited November 14, 2012 by michel123456

[pogono]

Hello michel123456.

Thank you for your posts.

 

I had to pay for my publication to get valuable review and publish my work. My problem is quite similar to one described here:

http://www.ptep-onli...es/PP-04-10.PDF

 

I had problems with publication (nobody treated me serious), because I am unknown and suddenly I propose new explanation for few well established beliefs. For example I show, that Newton potential that we use as limit while deriving Shwarzschild metric, it is only approximation! So, Schwarzschild radius may be derived without this approximation. Sounds obvious, but it breaks some stereotype.

 

But it was worth. For now, I have invitations for two scientific conferences and I have many confirmations, that I may be right.

F.e.

- In some ironworks company they have obtained strange metal structures by irradiation on metal with high energetic beams. Some local physicist explained it using my formulas showing relation between strong light beam and time dilation effect, that delayed chemical reaction...

- Some physicist had calculated shrinking and exploding universe using my rest energy and photon energy formulas. It seems that thanks to my formula behavior in high energies, he has found theoretical explanation for the reason of cosmological inflation (it is not well explained in present cosmological theories why we had inflation phase).

- Some physicist emailed me with the proof of my idea. He did not believe I may be right, so he sited down to prove me, that I am wrong. But instead I have nice, three pages long, covariant confirmation for my idea.

- etc.

 

I hope it is not the end.

 

Regards

pogono

[michel123456]

Hello michel123456.

Thank you for your posts.

 

I had to pay for my publication to get valuable review and publish my work. My problem is quite similar to one described here:

http://www.ptep-onli...es/PP-04-10.PDF

 

Looks very interesting. You should post a thread about that.

 

 

I had problems with publication (nobody treated me serious), because I am unknown and suddenly I propose new explanation for few well established beliefs. For example I show, that Newton potential that we use as limit while deriving Shwarzschild metric, it is only approximation! So, Schwarzschild radius may be derived without this approximation. Sounds obvious, but it breaks some stereotype.

 

But it was worth. For now, I have invitations for two scientific conferences and I have many confirmations, that I may be right.

F.e.

- In some ironworks company they have obtained strange metal structures by irradiation on metal with high energetic beams. Some local physicist explained it using my formulas showing relation between strong light beam and time dilation effect, that delayed chemical reaction...

- Some physicist had calculated shrinking and exploding universe using my rest energy and photon energy formulas. It seems that thanks to my formula behavior in high energies, he has found theoretical explanation for the reason of cosmological inflation (it is not well explained in present cosmological theories why we had inflation phase).

- Some physicist emailed me with the proof of my idea. He did not believe I may be right, so he sited down to prove me, that I am wrong. But instead I have nice, three pages long, covariant confirmation for my idea.

- etc.

 

I hope it is not the end.

 

Regards

pogono

 

It sounds good. I hope you will be able to put a name under "some physicist' some day.

 

And you din't answer my question: I missed the explanation of why massive objects are attracted to each other (It was a question).

M.

Edited November 14, 2012 by michel123456

[pogono]

And you din't answer my question: I missed the explanation of why massive objects are attracted to each other (It was a question).

M.

 

Ok,

just look at my "Like-Maxwell Equations" for space-time phenomena.

You will see, there is some rotation with c/gamma velocity.

 

If you consider such move there mus exist some radial acceleration - in this case: gravitational acceleration.

I show, that it is all related:

- by some rotation in additional axis light acts as it would be accelerated in radial distance

- so, it has local and instantaneous additional velocity responsible for spacetime curvature

- curved spacetime force bodies to act like they would be attracted

 

The same Like-Maxwell equations explains, that electromagnetism IT IS spacetime.

I show that if we consider time flow as some rotary field to spatial axis, there must be wave acting as local disturbance in spacetime isometry moving inside this spacetime.

So, light is just moving, local spacetime anizometry.

 

Above very good explains why in Minkowski metric we have imaginary axis.

Rotary field may be presented as imaginary axis. It is enough to look at [math]e^{ix}[/math] - it is helix.

 

So gravity is the same phenomena then electromagnetism, but on the higher level of abstraction.

In gravity phenomena - light is rotating (radially accelerated from our perspective).

Edited November 14, 2012 by pogono

[michel123456]

Ok,

just look at my "Like-Maxwell Equations" for space-time phenomena.

You will see, there is some rotation with c/gamma velocity.

 

If you consider such move there mus exist some radial acceleration - in this case: gravitational acceleration.

I show, that it is all related:

- by some rotation in additional axis light acts as it would be accelerated in radial distance

- so, it has local and instantaneous additional velocity responsible for spacetime curvature

- curved spacetime force bodies to act like they would be attracted

 

The same Like-Maxwell equations explains, that electromagnetism IT IS spacetime.

I show that if we consider time flow as some rotary field to spatial axis, there must be wave acting as local disturbance in spacetime isometry moving inside this spacetime.

So, light is just moving, local spacetime anizometry.

 

Above very good explains why in Minkowski metric we have imaginary axis.

Rotary field may be presented as imaginary axis. It is enough to look at [math]e^{ix}[/math] - it is helix.

 

So gravity is the same phenomena then electromagnetism, but on the higher level of abstraction.

In gravity phenomena - light is rotating (radially accelerated from our perspective).

Now correct me if i understand badly:

 

1. you made the supposition that there is a radial acceleration and this supposition gives you the correct mathematical results.

2. You made the supposition that this radial acceleration is caused by rotation.

 

Is that correct so far?

[pogono]

Now correct me if i understand badly:

 

1. you made the supposition that there is a radial acceleration and this supposition gives you the correct mathematical results.

2. You made the supposition that this radial acceleration is caused by rotation.

 

Is that correct so far?

 

Field equations do not work as one way cause-effect relation. You can not say what is caused by what. It is all related with all in a circle differential relations.

 

Below I put image with my fields definition. As you see, it is just self-reinforcing, universal mechanism.

You may explain light, gravity (by substituting l_planck wit r_Schwarschild), but you may also try to use it to explain expansion of the universe as some strange kid of "wave" (just like the man who used my equations to try to explain inflation phase in cosmology).

 

[michel123456]

Field equations do not work as one way cause-effect relation. You can not say what is caused by what. It is all related with all in a circle differential relations.

(...)

My question was more about your way of thinking. The process in your mind.

Edited November 21, 2012 by michel123456

[pogono]

My question was more about your way of thinking. The process in your mind.

 

O, no.

Better not ask for it :-D :-D

My way of thinking was so twisted and messed up, that It is kind of miracle that I have something so valuable at the end. :-D

 

As you may see, above field equations looks rather strange and unusual.

And believe me, for me, it was very hard to understand what exactly I am thinking about. :-D :-D

Edited November 21, 2012 by pogono

[michel123456]

O, no.

Better not ask for it :-D :-D

My way of thinking was so twisted and messed up, that It is kind of miracle that I have something so valuable at the end. :-D

 

As you may see, above field equations looks rather strange and unusual.

And believe me, for me, it was very hard to understand what exactly I am thinking about. :-D :-D

(bolded mine)

It is far above my head.

 

What I am really interested in is the following:

You have put into mathematical form what happens if photons were in a state of acceleration, right?

[pogono]

You have put into mathematical form what happens if photons were in a state of acceleration, right?

You may say so.

 

To be very concrete I have shown what would happen if we try to accelerate photon.

He will not accelerate. We will increase spacetime curvature instead, where photons are still moving with "c" speed.

[michel123456]

You may say so.

 

To be very concrete I have shown what would happen if we try to accelerate photon.

He will not accelerate. We will increase spacetime curvature instead, where photons are still moving with "c" speed.

Isn't that gravity?

[pogono]

Isn't that gravity?

 

exactly!

Formulas that we have obtained following my reasoning are just General Relativity formulas.

 

As I wrote few posts ago - it is very uncommon GR derivation. Starting with assumption what would hypothetically happen if we accelerate photons - we obtain GR in result.

[michel123456]

exactly!

Formulas that we have obtained following my reasoning are just General Relativity formulas.

 

As I wrote few posts ago - it is very uncommon GR derivation. Starting with assumption what would hypothetically happen if we accelerate photons - we obtain GR in result.

 

What does that mean?

What is your conclusion?

[pogono]

What does that mean?

What is your conclusion?

 

Every scientist working at quantum field theory knows, that present QFT framework in not final, but it is only approximation of some higher lever theory. (f.e. read it in preface to S. Weinberg, Quantum Theory of Fields, 1995)

 

Take a look at my newest article. In subsections of section 4.2 you will see, that presently used formulas for: rest mass, elementary charge and photon energy are just approximations (for small energies) of the formulas I propose. My formulas works fine for high energies, and then, suddenly...

- field quanta phenomena has simple explanation (formula's limits for Planck's scales)

- inflation phase appears to be obvious

- we may at least understand why elementary particles behaves as they are (not only count it's properties like in QM, but understand)

- and so on...

 

I do not know if you know Standard Model (SM) and 19 parameters standing behind it.

We may now recalculate SM with my field idea. All we need is transforming my formulas to Lie Algebra and count angle dilations.

 

A lot of work to do. A lot to discover.

[pogono]

Hello Everybody

 

I recommend you my newest article in the subject: http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.2758

 

Have a good lecture.

[eytan_il]

Hello all,

here you may find article draft http://tp-theory.net/tpt_eng.pdf where I prove that:

 

1) light has always "c" speed for any observer and there is no ether, but...

2) photon is explained as disturbance in time-space structure, traveling through this time-space with field equations exchanging Maxwell equations

3) Schwarzschild metric is recapitulated with proper time increment related to field, that works for any field

4) I define Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics for generalized field

5) Minkowski Metric is explained as the result of keeping constant light speed for rotating reference frames

 

I appreciate if you validate it.

 

P.S. I am looking for reviewers for peer review publication. Would anyone come forward?

 

Regards

pogono

Hi, why didn't you write 73 in the covariant form. The 4-speed is (c,0,0,sqrt(R/r)) * Gamma. Gamma = 1/Sqrt(1-v^2/c^2).

Then the divergence has to be zero.

 

Hi, why didn't you write 73 in the covariant form. The 4-speed is (c,0,0,sqrt(R/r)) * Gamma. Gamma = 1/Sqrt(1-v^2/c^2).

Then the divergence has to be zero.

Forgot to tell you that in the calculation of the divergence you must use the metric tensor because differentiation

is done by coordinates. These cope with the projection of local coordinates on the coordinate system of a far

observer because you use the Schwarzschild metric tensor.

[pogono]

Hi, why didn't you write 73 in the covariant form. The 4-speed is (c,0,0,sqrt(R/r)) * Gamma. Gamma = 1/Sqrt(1-v^2/c^2).

Then the divergence has to be zero.

 

Forgot to tell you that in the calculation of the divergence you must use the metric tensor because differentiation

is done by coordinates. These cope with the projection of local coordinates on the coordinate system of a far

observer because you use the Schwarzschild metric tensor.

Hi eytan_il,

I understand you refer to my first article.

 

Then I have to point, that 73 is not under Schwarzschild metric, but it is for plane Minkowski.

So, the formula is ok.

 

I recommend you to read my newest article: http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.2758

There you may find 3 vesions of the field equations, when 2 of them are covariant.

Edited January 24, 2013 by pogono

[pogono]

Hi everybody,

I have just put on arXiv my 4th version of the article (after 2 reviews)

http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.2758

 

You my find there, that gravity and electromagnetism acts as two different consequences of one filed equation describing spacetime disturbances.

 

If you would like to discuss the idea in real live - come to my seminars.

I was invited to give open speech at Moscov Lemonosov Universtity (may 14th).

I also wait for confirmation of my speech at GR20 conference in Warsaw (July).

 

For those who are interested in my idea - I put news page at my webpage:

http://www.dilationasfield.net/eng

[PureGenius]

Time dilation and the aproxximate variables for the measurement of its modulation are plentiful einstein was always in search of a universal constant he found this in the speed of light it is not a subject of study so much as a reference point for further investigation. Time is actually a definable movement of energy and its immediate affects on things within its field. The calculation we must accertain is the modulationary effect of speed and mass on the object and or field of influence.

[swansont]

Time dilation and the aproxximate variables for the measurement of its modulation are plentiful einstein was always in search of a universal constant he found this in the speed of light it is not a subject of study so much as a reference point for further investigation. Time is actually a definable movement of energy and its immediate affects on things within its field. The calculation we must accertain is the modulationary effect of speed and mass on the object and or field of influence.

 

!

Moderator Note

PureGenius, please restrict responses to discussion of the proposal and any conflicts there might be with mainstream physics. responding with your own personal conjecture is against the rules (specifically rule 2.10). As would responding to this modnote in the thread, being off-topic to the discussion. If you must respond, you can use the report post function.

[pogono]

Hi,
I have prepared a presentation for one of my seminar that explains the article:
http://dilationasfield.net/Seminar.pdf

Take a look if you are curious how is it possible to:
- consider photon acceleration
- explain light as disturbances of spacetime structure

Edited April 28, 2013 by pogono

[pogono]

Ufff, generalization to General Relativity finished!
In the way to arXiv.

I will appreciate your remarks and comments.

Title: Maxwell-like General Relativity formulation in the Planck limit

 

File: http://www.dilationasfield.net/gaf.pdf

Abstract: We show that Geroch decomposition leads us to Maxwell-like representation of gravity in (3+1) metrics decomposition. For such decomposition we derive four-potential [math]V^\mu[/math] and gravitational field tensor [math]F^{\mu\nu}[/math] that may be associated with gravitational interaction. Next we introduce valid Lagrangian and equations of motion. Then we show that gravitational four-current [math]J^\mu[/math] derived for introduced four-potential produce energy-stress tensor and generalize main General Relativity formula. At the end we introduce new approach to quantization of gravity that results in proper quantum values and is open to further generalization.

[pogono]

Hi,

I have prepared brief explanation of DaF framework ended with GR generalization for gravitational field.

Introduction

Thanks to Geroch's decomposition applied for Schwarzschild solution of the General Relativity one obtains metric in (3+1) decomposition (space + time). In this picture curved spacetime is equivalent to the flat space-like manifold minimally coupled to a scalar field [math]\Phi[/math], where [math]\Phi[/math] is equal to inversed gravitational time dilation factor.

In obtained picture gravity is described as regular field with Maxwell-like equations on flat spacetime as follows.

We define scalar fields as follows:
[math] \Phi=\frac{1}{\gamma_r}=\frac{d\tau_r}{dt}= \sqrt{1-\frac{r_s}{r}}[/math]
[math] \Theta= r \cdot \beta_r = r\sqrt{\frac{r_s}{r}} [/math]
where:
[math] t [/math] is the time coordinate (measured by a stationary clock located infinitely far from the massive body)
[math] \tau_r [/math] is the proper time of stationary observer located in distance r to the massive body
[math] r [/math] is the radial coordinate
[math] r_s [/math] is the Schwarzschild radius

As we know mass relation to Schwarzschild radius is:
[math]M=\frac{c^2r_s}{2G}[/math]

Therefore (assuming c=1) one may easy calculate that the gradient of the scalar field [math]\Phi[/math] is equal to proper gravitational acceleration "g" for Schwarzschild solution.
[math] \nabla \Phi = \frac{r_s}{2r^2} \gamma_r = \frac{GM}{r^2} \gamma_r = g[/math]

Above "g" acceleration is measured for the reference frame of the stationary observer located at distance "r" to the massive body.

Using introduced above scalar fields one defines vector fields as below (we assume c=1 and [math]\hat{e}[/math] as directional versors).
Vector field responsible for gravitational acceleration is denoted as “G”.

[math] \vec{T} = \Phi \cdot \hat{e}_y [/math]
[math] \vec{G} = -\nabla \Phi \times \hat{e}_y = -\nabla \times \vec{T} [/math]
[math] \vec{V} = \nabla \Theta \times \hat{e}_x [/math]
[math] \vec{B } = \nabla \times \vec{V} [/math]

Utilizing relations between above fields, one obtains Maxwell-like equations for gravitation:
[math] \nabla \cdot \vec{G} = 0 [/math]
[math] \nabla \cdot \vec{B} = 0 [/math]
[math] \nabla \times \vec{G} = \gamma_{r} \cdot \frac{\partial \vec{B }}{\partial t} [/math]

[math] \nabla \times \vec{B} = - \gamma_{r} \cdot \frac{\partial \vec{G}}{\partial t} [/math]

Therefore by analogy to electromagnetism we may introduce four-potential V in form of:

[math]V^\mu=(\Phi,\vec{V}) [/math]

and related gravitational field tensor:

[math]F_{\mu\nu}=\partial_\mu V_\nu - \partial_\nu V_\mu [/math]
After simple transformations one derives wave equation (d’Alembertian) as follows:

[math] \gamma^2_r \cdot \frac{\partial ^{ 2}\vec{G} }{ \partial t^{2}} - \nabla^2 \vec{G} = 0 [/math]

Above d’Alembertian describes the wave propagating in the flat spacetime with speed equal to:
[math]v_{light}=c/\gamma_r=c \cdot \sqrt{1-\frac{r_s}{r}} [/math]

In result, in considered case curved spacetime is physically equivalent to the flat spacetime with variable speed of light, where refracting index for light is equal to
[math]\eta=\frac{c}{v_{light}}=\gamma_r=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{r_s}{r}}} [/math].

It should not surprise us, that in above picture, spacetime around the mass behaves as gravitational lens.

Lagrangian and Hamiltonian

Analyzing Einstein-Hilbert action for considered case one may derive proper Lagrangian and Hamiltonian for gravity on flat spacetime with refracting index for light speed.

For the stationary observer with rest mas 'm' that keeps his position against gravitation we obtain Lagrangian and Hamiltonian in the form of:
[math] \mathcal{L}= mc^2 \frac{1}{\gamma_r}[/math]
[math] \mathcal{H}= mc^2 \gamma_r [/math]

Thanks to superposition principle for some test body with rest mass 'm'' and four-velocity
[math]U^\mu=\gamma(c,\vec{v})[/math]
we obtain proper Lagrangian and Hamiltonian in form of:
[math] \mathcal{L}= mc^2 \frac {1}{\gamma_r} - mc^2 \frac {1}{\gamma} [/math]
[math] \mathcal{H}= mc^2 \gamma - mc^2 \gamma_r [/math]

To comply with the Newtonian approximation:

 

[math] \mathcal{H}=mc^2 (\gamma - 1) - V \left ( r \right ) [/math]

 

where:

 

[math]V \left ( r \right ) =mc^2(\gamma_r-1)[/math]

 

Classic Newtonian approximation we obtain using Maclaurin expansion of above Hamiltonian, the same way that we do it for Kinetic energy approximation:
[math]\mathcal{H}= mc^2 (\gamma-1) - mc^2 (\gamma_r-1) \approx mc^2 \frac{\beta^2}{2} - mc^2 \frac{\beta_r^2}{2} = \frac{mv^2}{2} - m \frac{c^2 r_s}{2r} =\frac{mv^2}{2} - G\frac{mM}{r} [/math]

If we consider above field V in the Planck limits, we obtain proper quanta equal to rest energy value.
For [math]r_s << l_{P}[/math] we calculate:

 

[math] \lim_{m \to m_P; r \to l_P} V \left ( r \right ) = m_{P}c^2 \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{r_{s} }{l_P} } } -1\right) \approx m_{P} \cdot \frac{c^2 r_{s} }{2l_{P} } =\frac{c^{ 4}r_{s} }{2G}=Mc^2 [/math]

Obtained quanta may be treated as some rest energy (some rest mass M) related to given radius [math]r_s [/math] (Schwarzschild radius).


Equations of motion and relation to Newton-Cartan theory

The introduced Lagrangian locally satisfies the Euler-Lagrange condition:

[math]\frac{d \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial v}}{d\tau_r}= \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial r}[/math]

what yields to:

[math]\frac{d (mv\gamma)}{d\tau_r}= mc^2 \cdot \frac{r_s}{2r^2} \gamma_r [/math]

where LHS is relativistic force and RHS is just equivalent to "gravitational force" in Schwarzschild solution.
Using introduced scalar field [math]\Phi[/math] we may rewrite it as:

[math]RHS=mc^{2}\cdot \nabla \Phi[/math]

Considering above we see, that equations of motion should fulfill transitional condition (assuming c=1 to facilitate):

[math] \frac{d(v\gamma)}{d\tau_r}= \nabla \Phi [/math]

Therefore equations of motion for considered case are in the form of:

[math] \frac{d^2\vec{x}}{d\tau d\tau_r}= \nabla \Phi [/math]

where:
[math] \tau [/math] is the proper time of the test body
[math] \tau_r [/math] is the proper time of stationary observer located in distance r to the massive body
[math] \gamma=d\tau_r / d\tau [/math]

Above equations may be explained as relativistic form of Newton-Cartan theory equations of motion. In DaF, the proper times were taken in place of coordinate time "t".

The equations of motion in terms of four-velocity U and four-acceleration A may be rewritten for stationary observer reference frame as:

[math] \frac{d U^\mu}{d\tau_r}= \partial_\mu \Phi [/math]

and for the test body reference frame as just:

[math] A^\mu = \partial_\mu \Phi [/math]


General Relativity generalized for gravitational field

In the Lorentz gauge equation of motion may be rewritten as:
[math]A^\mu=\frac{\partial V^\mu}{\partial \tau}[/math]

Above formula says, that gravitational acceleration is equal to derivative of the gravitational four-potential. Reversed it also says, that any move is the source of gravitational acceleration. It means, that any body with four velocity [math]U^\mu[/math] is at the same time the source of gravitational potential [math]V^\mu[/math]:

[math] U^{\mu}= \left ( \gamma , \gamma \vec{v} \right ) \to V^{\mu}= \left ( \frac{1}{\gamma}, \vec{V} \right ) [/math]

Four-acceleration A may be generalized to the tensor in the form of:
[math]A^{\mu\nu}=\partial_\nu V^\mu [/math]

showing it is equal to the first element of introduced gravitational field tensor:
[math]F_{\mu\nu}=\partial_\nu V_\mu - \partial_\mu V_\nu[/math]

where the second part is the acceleration for the other bodies.

If we introduce gravitation four-current by analogy to electromagnetism:
[math]J^\mu=\partial_\nu F^{\mu\nu}=\frac{2\pi r_s}{V}\cdot(\gamma_r,\gamma_r\vec{v_r})[/math]

and generalize to the tensor multiplying by four-velocity U of the source of gravity:
[math]J^{\mu\nu}=J^{\mu} \cdot U^{\nu} [/math]

we obtain stress-energy tensor T with respect to the constant
[math]J^{\mu\nu}=\frac{4 \pi G}{c^4} T^{\mu\nu}[/math]

what drives to General Relativity main formula in the form of:
[math]G_{\mu\nu}=2 \cdot J_{\mu\nu}[/math]

This way we have created General Relativity main equation equivalence as wave-based formulation that might help us with explaining the wave nature of mater.

[pogono]

Ok,
it has been published this night.

I invite you to read something, what we are looking for last 100 years - General Relativity for waves of matter.
The road to quantum gravity is now wide open.

Maxwell-like picture of General Relativity and its Planck limit
http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.2758

Have a good read ;-)
It is an article draft, so if you have any questions or remarks - you know how to find me ;-)