Simply put, there is no force acting upon objects with mass, causing them to move, but rather, there's shifting of space itself causing the objects to appear to move. This actually sounds quite a lot like the the current view that mass bends space-time. My view is that it's not a single event of distorting the space-time, but a continuous process. In addition to stretching the space-time, there should be a portion of space-time being "consumed" by the mass. I'm not saying "object with mass" because I want to redefine what we call object as well. (Quite bold - I know). I view what we call particle as a knot of space-time. Name it folding up in a higher dimension if you will, but that know constitutes the mass, and it's the wrapping/further entangling of that knot that "sucks in" the surrounding space-time. The rate for single subatomic particle would be very small, but the combined effect of all the particles in a planet will give the distortion perceived as gravity. The overall distortion of the entire universe gives out what we observe as the expansion of the universe.
I'm yet to fit in the wave-particle duality, but thinking in the lines of unraveling the knot to ripples and then re-wrapping it again when/during interaction. Technically the ripples of the original knot would be acting upon another knot, which will either re-entangle in a new way and/or cause it to unravel thus creating some ripples.
Two key points I what to get clear for myself:
a) the stretching of ST (space-time) is ideal - infinite and has no resistance. This accommodates the the falling of an asteroid on the sun at great speeds, while keeping the planets in orbit. The speed of the falling asteroid is the speed of stretching - so yeah stretching is fast and a lot. Seems like the space the Earth is in now, was as far as the orbit of mars a year ago. Or something of that scope.
b) the "consumption" of ST, is tiny. It only constitutes the "span" of what it took to make the knot for the particle. In other words the expansion of the universe is summary of the existence of all knots i.e. all mass. As this implies this is individual event on particle scale, but on universal scale it increasingly growing phenomenon.
a) the stretching of ST (space-time) is ideal - infinite and has no resistance. This accommodates the the falling of an asteroid on the sun at great speeds, while keeping the planets in orbit. The speed of the falling asteroid is the speed of stretching - so yeah stretching is fast and a lot. Seems like the space the Earth is in now, was as far as the orbit of mars a year ago. Or something of that scope.
b) the "consumption" of ST, is tiny. It only constitutes the "span" of what it took to make the knot for the particle. In other words the expansion of the universe is summary of the existence of all knots i.e. all mass. As this implies this is individual event on particle scale, but on universal scale it increasingly growing phenomenon.
c) the speed of stretching, two body stretching, and where the stretched material is?
- stretch speed is small at the edge and gradually speeds up towards the mass center
- stretch speed is small at the edge and gradually speeds up towards the mass center
- stretch of two bodies related should be ...
there is really no proper analogy. Lets consider the Sun and the Earth - in some sense the Earth is like a marble moving in a straight line on a ice plane, while the ice plane is being constantly pulled in towards the sun, thus creating the circular orbit. But that's only the half of it because to get the orbit you need to illustrate the effect of the Earth. So more descriptive view of the combined effect is an infinite lake, with two holes in its bottom, through witch the water flows down. The whirlpools created upon the water represent the distortion of the ST by the massive objects. However this second view does not illustrate the combined motion of the two objects as a result of the distortion they create. It must look like a big whirlpool that catches in it's motion a smaller one that would have continued to move in straight line across if the big one wasn't there. The big one shouldn't be stationary either.
- the stretched ST needs to pile somewhere to make room for new stretching. i.e. the water falling through the whirlpool needs to get somewhere. For now let's assume that it gets infinitely compressed within the volume of the massive object or it's particles with mass - within the knots. At the edge of the knots, because if we let it further entangle the knots, that will make the particles more massive. That will mean there's a lot of ST between the edge of a particle and it's core. If stretching ST constitutes gravity, wouldn't compressing ST constitute anti-gravity?
- the stretched ST needs to pile somewhere to make room for new stretching. i.e. the water falling through the whirlpool needs to get somewhere. For now let's assume that it gets infinitely compressed within the volume of the massive object or it's particles with mass - within the knots. At the edge of the knots, because if we let it further entangle the knots, that will make the particles more massive. That will mean there's a lot of ST between the edge of a particle and it's core. If stretching ST constitutes gravity, wouldn't compressing ST constitute anti-gravity?
No comments:
Post a Comment