Noel Hodson, Oxford. 8 Mar 15.
19 FEB 2016 - Read a new very short summary at NEW GRAVITY - SUMMARY
Gravity is the relative absence or reduction of the pressure of the radiation that fills the universal ocean of radiation, which is from 13.7 to 43.7 billion-light-years deep. Contemplate "The ever tightening knot of gravity, ultimately resulting in black-holes" and "Counter-intuitively, the centre of the Sun is very dark" because the centre is most "shaded" or protected from or excludes the universal radiation. (NB between masses as per Casimir). The external radiation is the PUSH and the internal partial absence of radiation is the PULL of gravity. NCH March 2015
12 Feb 2016 -
LIGO & Gravity Waves - How does the demonstration of gravitational waves affect this theory?
Having slept on it, some points occur to me:
My theory envisages every gravitational object, all things, being pressed on every point of their surface by the ocean of light, which is the "stuff of the universe". It is fundamental to my theory that light has some mass (see below). The surfaces include all areas that light can penetrate; many surfaces being to our eyes "inside" objects e.g the spaces within atoms. This pressure is ubiquitous and surrounds all objects. Gravity starts when there are two objects in close proximity where the Casimir Effect excludes some wavelengths, creating a "shadow" or partial vacuum of wavelengths, between the objects. The two forces, the push of the external pressure and the pull of the internal shadow, combine to create a gravitational object.
Applying this to planet Earth, I visualize the external pressure as an infinite number of very long spines across space, bearing down at right-angles to the centre of gravity of the planet. Think of a curled hedgehog with regular spines. If Earth was the only gravitational object in the probably infinite ocean of light, the spines would connect the horizon, 43.7 billion light years distant, of the observable universe, with the surfaces of the planet. The single object, Earth, formed from the contents of a large surrounding globe of the energy of the stuff of the universe, would be held in place by these spines - which is inertia.
But, the universe has trillions of stars and planets and our solar system has numbers of gravitational objects, so the imagined spines to or from each object cross and intermingle. Each object also broadcasts its presence with light (electromagnetic) and nuclear waves emitted or reflected in perfect spheres, which forces also intermingle and distort the perfect spheres. This infinite ocean is riddled with near-light-speed waves of neutrinos, billions per square metre which pass through all matter with barely any interaction - but which are now thought to have slight mass. So, the ocean of light is complex, with many currents and is very, very deep. This possibly infinite complex ocean of light is the Aether-Matrix.
So, what have the exceptionally brilliant, exceptionally cooperative, exceptionally persistent, 1,000 theorists and engineers measured with the LIGO and earlier instruments, created over the past 45 years to demonstrate the validity of the 100 year old predictions of Einstein? It seems they have seen and heard the collision and merging of two black-holes, massive objects, 1.3 billion light years distant - and, as gravity signals travel at the speed of light, the event is deemed to have happened 1.3 billion light years ago.
Falling back on analogy, I liken the gravity waves to the ringing of two great bells. Their music fills the universe. The waves broadcast the presence of the two black holes and the energetic event of their merger, through a medium, called Space-Time. This morning, I hope that Einsteins' Space-Time is my, and the Victorian's, Aether-Matrix ocean. I suspect that it is. " A rose by any other name would smell as sweet".
Imagine if it were two Earth size planets colliding, nearby. We would see, feel and "hear" through space the energetic event. After a few hundred million years the core/s and the debris would be pulled and pushed by gravity into an orb to create a double sized planet, orbiting the sun. The net force of gravity would not change much (bits would probably be rendered to plasma and race away as heat and radio signals). Compared to the Sept 2015 LIGO event, of merging 60 times the mass of the sun, our two little planets would not distort Space-Time much. The gravitational waves would be barely detectable and would distort the space around the Earth hardly at all.
But the very small distortion is distorting what? In my theory the imagined spines (light neatly stacked up 43.7 billion light years deep) to and from the Earth's centre of gravity are being vibrated by the passing gravitational waves. These waves move the Aether-Matrix. All such movements cause the centre of gravity, of all affected objects to shift, and so all the spines, intermingled across space, shift their orientation to be at right-angles to the new centres. These shifts are occurring in all locations at all times.
From my knee-jerk reaction this morning, to the LIGO discovery of gravitational waves, I think I can shoe-horn my theory of what causes gravity to marry-up with gravitational waves ringing out across the universe and throughout all time.
Exciting times ! I need to live another 100 years to see what comes next.
************
11 Feb 2016. 3.30pm London time. PRESS CONFERENCE - LIGO has detected gravity waves from 2 black holes each of about 150 km diameter and 30 solar masses, merging 1.3 billion years ago, at half the speed of light. The process of the black holes colliding took billions of years, the moment of collision sent a gravity wave signal lasting 20 milliseconds, which has been translated into a sound within our hearing range. The distortion or stretching (strain in space-time) of the LIGO interferometers was measured as less than 1/1,000th of the size of a proton (see next para.) As an aside, the data might confirm the mass of a graviton as 10-55 grams - if gravitons exist. LIGO directors said it has taken 45 years of science to detect gravity waves and that LIGO and other detectors will "see" many more gravity wave producing collisions per year. This collision is not a rare event. It opens up an entirely new 4th window on observing the universe - alongside visual light, X-Rays and radio waves - that will bring a new perspective. LIGO is currently operating at 1/3rd of its sensitivity. This confirms Einstein's theory of General Relativity & gravity published in 1915.The signal was calculated theoretically on super-computers using Einstein's equations - and the real signal mapped on top; and they matched. The panel does not think LIGO has taken us nearer to understanding quantum-gravity. So - how does this affect my theory? I'll go away and think about it. Watch this space. (NB from Q & A s on physics 1 photon might have a mass of 10-33 grams)
10 Feb 2016 - And LIGO again. A press release will be issued tomorrow - 11th February. New Scientist on this finding says: This time its probably real. "The LIGO detectors, located 3000 kilometres apart in Hanford, Washington and Livingston, Louisiana, can pick up passing gravitational waves by measuring how space-time stretches and contracts – by as little as one ten-thousandth the diameter of a proton." Or, again, maybe not. Science has pegged the proton at 0.8768 femtometers in radius (a femtometer is a millionth of a billionth of a meter)A diameter is double a radius, so 1.7 fentometers. LIGO is measuring one or two ten-thousandth-of-one-millionth-of-one-billionth of a meter; of events billions of light-years distant. That's pretty small.
19 FEB 2016 - Read a new very short summary at NEW GRAVITY - SUMMARY
Gravity is the relative absence or reduction of the pressure of the radiation that fills the universal ocean of radiation, which is from 13.7 to 43.7 billion-light-years deep. Contemplate "The ever tightening knot of gravity, ultimately resulting in black-holes" and "Counter-intuitively, the centre of the Sun is very dark" because the centre is most "shaded" or protected from or excludes the universal radiation. (NB between masses as per Casimir). The external radiation is the PUSH and the internal partial absence of radiation is the PULL of gravity. NCH March 2015
12 Feb 2016 -
LIGO & Gravity Waves - How does the demonstration of gravitational waves affect this theory?
Having slept on it, some points occur to me:
My theory envisages every gravitational object, all things, being pressed on every point of their surface by the ocean of light, which is the "stuff of the universe". It is fundamental to my theory that light has some mass (see below). The surfaces include all areas that light can penetrate; many surfaces being to our eyes "inside" objects e.g the spaces within atoms. This pressure is ubiquitous and surrounds all objects. Gravity starts when there are two objects in close proximity where the Casimir Effect excludes some wavelengths, creating a "shadow" or partial vacuum of wavelengths, between the objects. The two forces, the push of the external pressure and the pull of the internal shadow, combine to create a gravitational object.
Applying this to planet Earth, I visualize the external pressure as an infinite number of very long spines across space, bearing down at right-angles to the centre of gravity of the planet. Think of a curled hedgehog with regular spines. If Earth was the only gravitational object in the probably infinite ocean of light, the spines would connect the horizon, 43.7 billion light years distant, of the observable universe, with the surfaces of the planet. The single object, Earth, formed from the contents of a large surrounding globe of the energy of the stuff of the universe, would be held in place by these spines - which is inertia.
But, the universe has trillions of stars and planets and our solar system has numbers of gravitational objects, so the imagined spines to or from each object cross and intermingle. Each object also broadcasts its presence with light (electromagnetic) and nuclear waves emitted or reflected in perfect spheres, which forces also intermingle and distort the perfect spheres. This infinite ocean is riddled with near-light-speed waves of neutrinos, billions per square metre which pass through all matter with barely any interaction - but which are now thought to have slight mass. So, the ocean of light is complex, with many currents and is very, very deep. This possibly infinite complex ocean of light is the Aether-Matrix.
So, what have the exceptionally brilliant, exceptionally cooperative, exceptionally persistent, 1,000 theorists and engineers measured with the LIGO and earlier instruments, created over the past 45 years to demonstrate the validity of the 100 year old predictions of Einstein? It seems they have seen and heard the collision and merging of two black-holes, massive objects, 1.3 billion light years distant - and, as gravity signals travel at the speed of light, the event is deemed to have happened 1.3 billion light years ago.
Falling back on analogy, I liken the gravity waves to the ringing of two great bells. Their music fills the universe. The waves broadcast the presence of the two black holes and the energetic event of their merger, through a medium, called Space-Time. This morning, I hope that Einsteins' Space-Time is my, and the Victorian's, Aether-Matrix ocean. I suspect that it is. " A rose by any other name would smell as sweet".
Imagine if it were two Earth size planets colliding, nearby. We would see, feel and "hear" through space the energetic event. After a few hundred million years the core/s and the debris would be pulled and pushed by gravity into an orb to create a double sized planet, orbiting the sun. The net force of gravity would not change much (bits would probably be rendered to plasma and race away as heat and radio signals). Compared to the Sept 2015 LIGO event, of merging 60 times the mass of the sun, our two little planets would not distort Space-Time much. The gravitational waves would be barely detectable and would distort the space around the Earth hardly at all.
But the very small distortion is distorting what? In my theory the imagined spines (light neatly stacked up 43.7 billion light years deep) to and from the Earth's centre of gravity are being vibrated by the passing gravitational waves. These waves move the Aether-Matrix. All such movements cause the centre of gravity, of all affected objects to shift, and so all the spines, intermingled across space, shift their orientation to be at right-angles to the new centres. These shifts are occurring in all locations at all times.
From my knee-jerk reaction this morning, to the LIGO discovery of gravitational waves, I think I can shoe-horn my theory of what causes gravity to marry-up with gravitational waves ringing out across the universe and throughout all time.
Exciting times ! I need to live another 100 years to see what comes next.
************
11 Feb 2016. 3.30pm London time. PRESS CONFERENCE - LIGO has detected gravity waves from 2 black holes each of about 150 km diameter and 30 solar masses, merging 1.3 billion years ago, at half the speed of light. The process of the black holes colliding took billions of years, the moment of collision sent a gravity wave signal lasting 20 milliseconds, which has been translated into a sound within our hearing range. The distortion or stretching (strain in space-time) of the LIGO interferometers was measured as less than 1/1,000th of the size of a proton (see next para.) As an aside, the data might confirm the mass of a graviton as 10-55 grams - if gravitons exist. LIGO directors said it has taken 45 years of science to detect gravity waves and that LIGO and other detectors will "see" many more gravity wave producing collisions per year. This collision is not a rare event. It opens up an entirely new 4th window on observing the universe - alongside visual light, X-Rays and radio waves - that will bring a new perspective. LIGO is currently operating at 1/3rd of its sensitivity. This confirms Einstein's theory of General Relativity & gravity published in 1915.The signal was calculated theoretically on super-computers using Einstein's equations - and the real signal mapped on top; and they matched. The panel does not think LIGO has taken us nearer to understanding quantum-gravity. So - how does this affect my theory? I'll go away and think about it. Watch this space. (NB from Q & A s on physics 1 photon might have a mass of 10-33 grams)
10 Feb 2016 - And LIGO again. A press release will be issued tomorrow - 11th February. New Scientist on this finding says: This time its probably real. "The LIGO detectors, located 3000 kilometres apart in Hanford, Washington and Livingston, Louisiana, can pick up passing gravitational waves by measuring how space-time stretches and contracts – by as little as one ten-thousandth the diameter of a proton." Or, again, maybe not. Science has pegged the proton at 0.8768 femtometers in radius (a femtometer is a millionth of a billionth of a meter)A diameter is double a radius, so 1.7 fentometers. LIGO is measuring one or two ten-thousandth-of-one-millionth-of-one-billionth of a meter; of events billions of light-years distant. That's pretty small.
What will LIGO success mean for this New-Theory? LIGO is measuring an effect of gravity - not the cause/s. So this theory of the main cause will remain valid. Until gravity waves are validated, have LIGO folk factored in a mass for photons/light? Watch this space.
11 Jan 2016 - LIGO waves again. Perhaps. Maybe. Possibly. Could be. Or maybe not. They must need more funding. (This theory makes more sense of the mechanism of gravity, black holes, dark matter and dark energy).
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jan/12/gravitation-waves-signal-rumoured-science
5 Jan 2016 - Happy New Year.
NS "Primordial black holes are generally tiny, isolated objects, their size fixed at their birth, shortly after the big bang... ...will explode earlier in cosmic history" (if the theory that black holes explode into white holes is OK). Applicable to my theory of gravity is that the very very early universe was, science still assumes, minuscule - hence the ocean of light would be small, hence the pressure of light would be small, hence any gravitational black holes formed would have to mirror the smallness of the then observable universe - and be small. Hence tiny black holes at the beginning of time.
NB - next note. I was given a Crookes Radiometer for Christmas. Is it driven by light-with-mass - or by heat fluctuations in the partial vacuum. I'll keep an eye on it...
17 DEC 2015: This month, there is a surfeit of media coverage about space travel - presumably its an anniversary of the first manned space-station or moon-landing. It includes films of men doing space-walks, extra-vehicular-activity, floating in black space not very far above the Earth. Also, I watched THE HIDDEN UNIVERSE on IMAX at The Science Museum, London - which wonderfully illustrates the inconceivable immensity of the observable universe. There are thousands of billions of galaxies, each with thousands of billions of stars, each star having planets - needing so many noughts that most of us - who have difficulty assessing numbers over 7 of people standing at a bus-stop - cannot conceive of the numbers. All these gravitational objects are in turn made from trillions of trillions photons, which are whorls in all the wavelengths that occupy the entire electromagnetic spectrum, which we refer to as "light". It is the pressure of this light that causes gravity.
Analogy - We all know that a sail on a yacht fills with wind (concave), tugs on the mast and drags the boat across the water. What we think less about is that on the convex side of the sail, the pressure of air has to be lower. If both sides are the same pressure, the boat won't move - it will have flat sails. In this theory of gravity, the convex side is in "shadow" from the push of the wind. The shadow is the pull. This is equally valid for light.
We now know that sunlight, for example, has mass and can propel objects. In the universe, far out in deep space, the light from all galaxies acts equally on all objects or things. There is little or no "shadow" and the object is defined as free-floating. This equal pressure of light eventually makes all objects into globes. It is also a force that pushes all objects away from each other (dark energy?). Other forces pull them back together.
If I were a brave space-walking astronaut, in say, geosynchronous Earth orbit, about 33,000 km above the surface and orbiting at about 11,000 kph (staying above the same spot on Earth), I would be free-floating and, with a slight shove, I might fly off into deep-space, never to be seen again. The gravitational pull between me and the Earth would be very small. I would have to get very much closer to Earth before its gravity would "grab" me and condemn me to re-entry and being burned to a cinder by air friction. What is actually happening here?
My theory is that out in deep-space, I am surrounded equally by the pressure of the ocean of light, which is the stuff of the universe. Nowhere, except perhaps in black-holes, is without these waves and particles, which impinge on my surface and in which I "float". I have very little electromagnetic shadow. Left floating for a few million millennia, the equal pressure would make me globular.
As I move closer to the Earth, the light, which travels in straight lines (curved space and multitudinous complex reflections and refraction excepted) is intercepted by the bulk of the planet (line-of-sight-transmission) and part of the spectrum of wavelengths between me and Earth is diminished. On my deep-space side (concave) I am subject to the universal-ocean-of-light-pressure (43.7 billion light years deep) while on my Earth side (convex) there is relative electromagnetic shadow following the vertical lines of force to the centre of gravity. Some wavelengths are excluded (Casimir) and I start to "fall" to Earth. The planet is a conglomerate of matter, say atoms or molecules, which also have a light and dark side. The dark side is in shadow which excludes some wavelengths, and the deeper we look into the Earth, the darker the shadow of each particle becomes. The globe, formed by the equal pressure from the 43.7 billion light years deep ocean, is tending to become a black-hole; whose nearly infinite density mirrors the nearly infinite pressure of the universal light. All things, all objects in the universe are potential black-holes, or gravity sinks.
Centre of Earth to the surface (radius) is 6,371 kilometers (3,959 mi) : A person weighing 62.5 kilograms on the surface, who moves 19,013 kilometres from the surface (4 radii from the planet's centre) will weigh the equivalent of 7 kilograms (science converts this weight into units of 39 Newtons (one Newton is the weight of a small apple - Yes, really). His or her MASS doesn't change, but our Earth weight is mass x distance from the center of Earth x change of speed. (or substitute Moon, Mars, other planet etc). So, at only 7kg, a small push will send the space-walker into deep space - probably never to be seen again. I guess that although the space-walker is relatively near the huge Earth, he is now surrounded by and separated from the planet by most of the universal electromagnetic spectrum of waves (light); which now press in on him from all directions.
http://www.astronomynotes.com/gravappl/s5.htm -
Finally, for this note, the lines of force towards the centre of the Earth from deep-space come in straight lines. They are all "vertical" to the centre of gravity of the planet. As I race at 11,000 km per hour at an angle (orbit) through these invisible lines of force, I will experience G-Forces or inertia. Let's remove the hot-air which would burn me up, and say do this on the airless Moon at 17% of Earth gravity; because I am defying nature and orbiting through the lines of force, I experience the universal inertia of the ocean of light, which in-tends, in straight lines, to the centre of gravity of the Moon. However, Newton's laws about the force changing by the square of distance (very feeble even at short distances) allows me to live at the required orbital speed - the inertia I feel is very slight. If I speed up a million times, in the same orbit, my defiance of the vertical lines of force will give me great discomfort, probably dismemberment - unless, which is most likely, I spin away from the gravitational body and its lines of force (light) making for its centre.
26 November 2015. INERTIA - Does it fit with this theory?
I was recently struck by reports of fighter pilots, astronauts and Wall-of-Death riders experiencing G-forces, as they accelerate, decelerate and take curves and bends. The G-force stress on humans caused by such manoeuvres mostly occur within the Earth's atmosphere and gravitational field; both of which are hardly detectable a few miles up from the surface. Leave the planet's gravity and you all but escape the G-force. We primates, water based life-forms, inside our thin skins, creatures formed by and in Earth's gravity, intuitively understand G-force and its companion, the Center of Gravity. Simply swinging ourselves at the end of a rope tied to a high branch, informs us that countering the direct vertical downward pull of gravity, even slightly off 90 degrees, requires much energy. The most stable stance using least energy is to stay on one spot on the surface and stand straight - that is to stand at 90 degrees to the planet's center of gravity. Or, to adopt our most natural stance and shape as a sphere resting on the surface.
Giant Californian Redwoods do the vertical stance very well. Our tall buildings also stand straight - one brick precisely and directly above the other (Pisa excepted). When we playful humans defy the straight up and down force; when we swing at an angle through the gravity field - we could be, and I suspect we are, crossing the columns of light (waves, particles or wavicles, as you like) that press down on every square centimeter of surface, the pressure from the light of the observable universe, and are also pulled in equally straight vertical lines, by the partial vacuum, caused by the dark side of light, beneath our feet, down to the center of the Earth. This is "the relentless ever tightening knot of gravity" that ultimately creates black holes. These precisely vertical columns of dynamic light-force, above and below us manifest in an organised field - like infinitely long straws - the energy and inertia of which we and our machines challenge when we go for the G-force. Few, if any machines rise exactly vertically from the surface, but even if they do, they have to counter the ever in-falling light from above and the ever suicidal urge of every particle, every thing, to follow its shadow and reach the dark (less light pressure) center below. QED
17 September 2015: TESTING, TESTING, TESTING. IF there is any merit in this idea of the mass of the universal ocean of light causing gravity - then it should be possible, by applying the Laws of Gravity and working from known gravitational masses - The Earth for example - to measure the depth of the ocean and thus the size of the universe. For example: if Black Holes are thought to have infinite gravity, then the pressure of the ocean of light which causes the Black Holes is likely to also be infinite. At the other end of the scale, a tiny atomic or sub-atomic particle will always be surrounded by and subject to the ocean of light, pressing equally on its circumference, casting little or no gravitational "shadow" and will thus have hardly any discernible mass. I am daily increasingly inclined to believe that this idea does have merit.
A SHORT SUMMARY OF HOW GRAVITY WORKS AND WHAT IT IS:
20 July 2015. - What you need to believe or know the science of to grasp this novel theory.
Firstly, that the stuff of the universe is light (the electromagnetic spectrum) which propagates at every possible wavelength throughout the entire universe at a maximum rate of 300,000 km per second. These intersecting waves or particles comprise the Aether-Matrix or deep ocean of cross-hatched light that is the fundamental-material of the universe. The energetic broadcast of these waves enable us to see or detect all the phenomena that we know of, from sub-atomic particles, to people, to galaxies.
Secondly, that light is not weightless; it has a slight but perceptible mass. This is a fairly recent scientific discovery; previously science believed that light had no mass. Thus in the ocean of light that fills our immense "observable" universe (as far as we can see or reliably calculate), the mass of light creates pressure. Gravitational bodies (all things large & small) are congregations of light. These congregations of waves /particles (matter) are compressed by the pressure of the deep ocean of light on the "outside" while the matter shields or casts a shadow on the "inside" of the gravitational body. "Counter-intuitively the centre of the Sun is very dark"
Thirdly, that the well observed Hubble Expansion is most probably real and is a primary driver of cosmic events.
Fourthly, that the universally detected Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) which manifests at 3 degrees above absolute zero, is most probably real and demonstrates that nowhere in the observable universe is there "empty space". Light is some-thing not no-thing. There is no empty space.
Fifthly, that the geniuses Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein, and the hundreds of brilliant mathematicians and engineers who have and do accurately apply their formulas, are reliable and correct; that the Laws of Gravity and our observations of how gravity behaves, are correct.
NB 1 - note to self - Is time the dimension that holds the 80% of missing mass from protons, neutrons etc; the past & future energetic activity as in DISSIPATIVE PHENOMENA (2)
NB 2 - Bubbles in liquids form by energetic events, and after a time they implode as the universe presses in. Do bubbles form in "pure" energy? How? Bubbles have an inside and outside dimension, which mirrors this theory of gravity. Are they precursors of the so far unknown process of creating matter from energy - spinning straw into gold? If so, then gravity could be the fundamental, subtle and gentle force that makes matter. From ephemeral, delicate bubbles to destroyers of galaxies - Black Holes. The inexorable "ever tightening knot". Think on't.
NB 3 - If the first particles precipitated from "the searing hot plasma of the Big Bang" as it spread out and cooled, would light waves passing today through - CMB "empty" space at 3 degrees Kelvin - still precipitate such particles? Nowhere in the universe is shielded from the light from all universal phenomena; we can "see" the entire universe from anywhere.
NB 4 - Wireless Flyte lightbulbs float on magnets. Does such a human constructed magnetic field insert wavelengths otherwise excluded by this rheory's Casimir type effect?
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730371-200-is-the-universe-infinite-or-just-very-big/
Infinite Universe? New Scientist 12 Sep 2015
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730380-500-modern-day-alchemy-is-putting-the-periodic-table-under-pressure/
NB 5 - Immense Pressure at Earth's Centre - The centre of gravity - New Scientist 12 Sep 2015.
Why do ALL particles drill down to the centre of all gravitational objects - even to their own destruction?
NB 6 - Neutrinos - 2015 Nobel Prize awarded for experiments that discovered the "flips" across the three types, demonstrating neutrinos have mass. (?? are the 3 types related to the 3 quarks? Are they quarks in free flight?). This adds weight to the idea of the pressure of light.
9th March 2015 - What is Gravity?
5 Jan 2016 - Happy New Year.
NS "Primordial black holes are generally tiny, isolated objects, their size fixed at their birth, shortly after the big bang... ...will explode earlier in cosmic history" (if the theory that black holes explode into white holes is OK). Applicable to my theory of gravity is that the very very early universe was, science still assumes, minuscule - hence the ocean of light would be small, hence the pressure of light would be small, hence any gravitational black holes formed would have to mirror the smallness of the then observable universe - and be small. Hence tiny black holes at the beginning of time.
NB - next note. I was given a Crookes Radiometer for Christmas. Is it driven by light-with-mass - or by heat fluctuations in the partial vacuum. I'll keep an eye on it...
17 DEC 2015: This month, there is a surfeit of media coverage about space travel - presumably its an anniversary of the first manned space-station or moon-landing. It includes films of men doing space-walks, extra-vehicular-activity, floating in black space not very far above the Earth. Also, I watched THE HIDDEN UNIVERSE on IMAX at The Science Museum, London - which wonderfully illustrates the inconceivable immensity of the observable universe. There are thousands of billions of galaxies, each with thousands of billions of stars, each star having planets - needing so many noughts that most of us - who have difficulty assessing numbers over 7 of people standing at a bus-stop - cannot conceive of the numbers. All these gravitational objects are in turn made from trillions of trillions photons, which are whorls in all the wavelengths that occupy the entire electromagnetic spectrum, which we refer to as "light". It is the pressure of this light that causes gravity.
Analogy - We all know that a sail on a yacht fills with wind (concave), tugs on the mast and drags the boat across the water. What we think less about is that on the convex side of the sail, the pressure of air has to be lower. If both sides are the same pressure, the boat won't move - it will have flat sails. In this theory of gravity, the convex side is in "shadow" from the push of the wind. The shadow is the pull. This is equally valid for light.
We now know that sunlight, for example, has mass and can propel objects. In the universe, far out in deep space, the light from all galaxies acts equally on all objects or things. There is little or no "shadow" and the object is defined as free-floating. This equal pressure of light eventually makes all objects into globes. It is also a force that pushes all objects away from each other (dark energy?). Other forces pull them back together.
If I were a brave space-walking astronaut, in say, geosynchronous Earth orbit, about 33,000 km above the surface and orbiting at about 11,000 kph (staying above the same spot on Earth), I would be free-floating and, with a slight shove, I might fly off into deep-space, never to be seen again. The gravitational pull between me and the Earth would be very small. I would have to get very much closer to Earth before its gravity would "grab" me and condemn me to re-entry and being burned to a cinder by air friction. What is actually happening here?
As I move closer to the Earth, the light, which travels in straight lines (curved space and multitudinous complex reflections and refraction excepted) is intercepted by the bulk of the planet (line-of-sight-transmission) and part of the spectrum of wavelengths between me and Earth is diminished. On my deep-space side (concave) I am subject to the universal-ocean-of-light-pressure (43.7 billion light years deep) while on my Earth side (convex) there is relative electromagnetic shadow following the vertical lines of force to the centre of gravity. Some wavelengths are excluded (Casimir) and I start to "fall" to Earth. The planet is a conglomerate of matter, say atoms or molecules, which also have a light and dark side. The dark side is in shadow which excludes some wavelengths, and the deeper we look into the Earth, the darker the shadow of each particle becomes. The globe, formed by the equal pressure from the 43.7 billion light years deep ocean, is tending to become a black-hole; whose nearly infinite density mirrors the nearly infinite pressure of the universal light. All things, all objects in the universe are potential black-holes, or gravity sinks.
Centre of Earth to the surface (radius) is 6,371 kilometers (3,959 mi) : A person weighing 62.5 kilograms on the surface, who moves 19,013 kilometres from the surface (4 radii from the planet's centre) will weigh the equivalent of 7 kilograms (science converts this weight into units of 39 Newtons (one Newton is the weight of a small apple - Yes, really). His or her MASS doesn't change, but our Earth weight is mass x distance from the center of Earth x change of speed. (or substitute Moon, Mars, other planet etc). So, at only 7kg, a small push will send the space-walker into deep space - probably never to be seen again. I guess that although the space-walker is relatively near the huge Earth, he is now surrounded by and separated from the planet by most of the universal electromagnetic spectrum of waves (light); which now press in on him from all directions.
http://www.astronomynotes.com/gravappl/s5.htm -
Finally, for this note, the lines of force towards the centre of the Earth from deep-space come in straight lines. They are all "vertical" to the centre of gravity of the planet. As I race at 11,000 km per hour at an angle (orbit) through these invisible lines of force, I will experience G-Forces or inertia. Let's remove the hot-air which would burn me up, and say do this on the airless Moon at 17% of Earth gravity; because I am defying nature and orbiting through the lines of force, I experience the universal inertia of the ocean of light, which in-tends, in straight lines, to the centre of gravity of the Moon. However, Newton's laws about the force changing by the square of distance (very feeble even at short distances) allows me to live at the required orbital speed - the inertia I feel is very slight. If I speed up a million times, in the same orbit, my defiance of the vertical lines of force will give me great discomfort, probably dismemberment - unless, which is most likely, I spin away from the gravitational body and its lines of force (light) making for its centre.
26 November 2015. INERTIA - Does it fit with this theory?
I was recently struck by reports of fighter pilots, astronauts and Wall-of-Death riders experiencing G-forces, as they accelerate, decelerate and take curves and bends. The G-force stress on humans caused by such manoeuvres mostly occur within the Earth's atmosphere and gravitational field; both of which are hardly detectable a few miles up from the surface. Leave the planet's gravity and you all but escape the G-force. We primates, water based life-forms, inside our thin skins, creatures formed by and in Earth's gravity, intuitively understand G-force and its companion, the Center of Gravity. Simply swinging ourselves at the end of a rope tied to a high branch, informs us that countering the direct vertical downward pull of gravity, even slightly off 90 degrees, requires much energy. The most stable stance using least energy is to stay on one spot on the surface and stand straight - that is to stand at 90 degrees to the planet's center of gravity. Or, to adopt our most natural stance and shape as a sphere resting on the surface.
Giant Californian Redwoods do the vertical stance very well. Our tall buildings also stand straight - one brick precisely and directly above the other (Pisa excepted). When we playful humans defy the straight up and down force; when we swing at an angle through the gravity field - we could be, and I suspect we are, crossing the columns of light (waves, particles or wavicles, as you like) that press down on every square centimeter of surface, the pressure from the light of the observable universe, and are also pulled in equally straight vertical lines, by the partial vacuum, caused by the dark side of light, beneath our feet, down to the center of the Earth. This is "the relentless ever tightening knot of gravity" that ultimately creates black holes. These precisely vertical columns of dynamic light-force, above and below us manifest in an organised field - like infinitely long straws - the energy and inertia of which we and our machines challenge when we go for the G-force. Few, if any machines rise exactly vertically from the surface, but even if they do, they have to counter the ever in-falling light from above and the ever suicidal urge of every particle, every thing, to follow its shadow and reach the dark (less light pressure) center below. QED
17 September 2015: TESTING, TESTING, TESTING. IF there is any merit in this idea of the mass of the universal ocean of light causing gravity - then it should be possible, by applying the Laws of Gravity and working from known gravitational masses - The Earth for example - to measure the depth of the ocean and thus the size of the universe. For example: if Black Holes are thought to have infinite gravity, then the pressure of the ocean of light which causes the Black Holes is likely to also be infinite. At the other end of the scale, a tiny atomic or sub-atomic particle will always be surrounded by and subject to the ocean of light, pressing equally on its circumference, casting little or no gravitational "shadow" and will thus have hardly any discernible mass. I am daily increasingly inclined to believe that this idea does have merit.
A SHORT SUMMARY OF HOW GRAVITY WORKS AND WHAT IT IS:
20 July 2015. - What you need to believe or know the science of to grasp this novel theory.
Firstly, that the stuff of the universe is light (the electromagnetic spectrum) which propagates at every possible wavelength throughout the entire universe at a maximum rate of 300,000 km per second. These intersecting waves or particles comprise the Aether-Matrix or deep ocean of cross-hatched light that is the fundamental-material of the universe. The energetic broadcast of these waves enable us to see or detect all the phenomena that we know of, from sub-atomic particles, to people, to galaxies.
Secondly, that light is not weightless; it has a slight but perceptible mass. This is a fairly recent scientific discovery; previously science believed that light had no mass. Thus in the ocean of light that fills our immense "observable" universe (as far as we can see or reliably calculate), the mass of light creates pressure. Gravitational bodies (all things large & small) are congregations of light. These congregations of waves /particles (matter) are compressed by the pressure of the deep ocean of light on the "outside" while the matter shields or casts a shadow on the "inside" of the gravitational body. "Counter-intuitively the centre of the Sun is very dark"
Thirdly, that the well observed Hubble Expansion is most probably real and is a primary driver of cosmic events.
Fourthly, that the universally detected Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) which manifests at 3 degrees above absolute zero, is most probably real and demonstrates that nowhere in the observable universe is there "empty space". Light is some-thing not no-thing. There is no empty space.
Fifthly, that the geniuses Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein, and the hundreds of brilliant mathematicians and engineers who have and do accurately apply their formulas, are reliable and correct; that the Laws of Gravity and our observations of how gravity behaves, are correct.
 |
| New Scientist Sep 2015. Journey to the Centre of the Earth |
NB 1 - note to self - Is time the dimension that holds the 80% of missing mass from protons, neutrons etc; the past & future energetic activity as in DISSIPATIVE PHENOMENA (2)
NB 2 - Bubbles in liquids form by energetic events, and after a time they implode as the universe presses in. Do bubbles form in "pure" energy? How? Bubbles have an inside and outside dimension, which mirrors this theory of gravity. Are they precursors of the so far unknown process of creating matter from energy - spinning straw into gold? If so, then gravity could be the fundamental, subtle and gentle force that makes matter. From ephemeral, delicate bubbles to destroyers of galaxies - Black Holes. The inexorable "ever tightening knot". Think on't.
NB 3 - If the first particles precipitated from "the searing hot plasma of the Big Bang" as it spread out and cooled, would light waves passing today through - CMB "empty" space at 3 degrees Kelvin - still precipitate such particles? Nowhere in the universe is shielded from the light from all universal phenomena; we can "see" the entire universe from anywhere.
NB 4 - Wireless Flyte lightbulbs float on magnets. Does such a human constructed magnetic field insert wavelengths otherwise excluded by this rheory's Casimir type effect?
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730371-200-is-the-universe-infinite-or-just-very-big/
Infinite Universe? New Scientist 12 Sep 2015
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730380-500-modern-day-alchemy-is-putting-the-periodic-table-under-pressure/
NB 5 - Immense Pressure at Earth's Centre - The centre of gravity - New Scientist 12 Sep 2015.
Why do ALL particles drill down to the centre of all gravitational objects - even to their own destruction?
NB 6 - Neutrinos - 2015 Nobel Prize awarded for experiments that discovered the "flips" across the three types, demonstrating neutrinos have mass. (?? are the 3 types related to the 3 quarks? Are they quarks in free flight?). This adds weight to the idea of the pressure of light.
9th March 2015 - What is Gravity?
The basic stuff of the universe is an energy field of electro-magnetic waves, radio waves, or in brief, light. By, reverse-engineering Hubble Expansion, the age of the universe is calculated to be 13.7 billion years. However, from astronomy observations, the horizon of the sphere of the visible or observable universe is calculated as 43.7 billion light years – which implies that the horizon has expanded faster than the speed of light; otherwise the horizon would be 13.7 billion light years away. If the calculations are awry or incomplete, the universe might be infinite in size and in age.
The calculations are possible because we can see to the edge of
the "observable" universe by looking at the light being broadcast by distant and near
objects, such as galaxies and planets. We can see objects in our immediate
vicinity, and see each other, because all objects broadcast their presence. We
infer the existence of non-visible objects such as the alleged black holes,
from the behaviour of nearby visible objects – such as atomic particles, gas
clouds or whole galaxies “falling into” black holes. All phenomena, on every
scale, of every size and time duration, broadcasts its presence – and thus we
see them.
These light broadcasts are spherical waves which propagate
from the phenomena at the speed of light “C” which is about 300,000 km per
second (300,000 km /sec in a vacuum. Light is
slowed in denser media). We
are able to see and understand the phenomena because the expanding spherical
light waves, or radio waves if you prefer, carry coherent and stable data to
us. Wherever we position ourselves in the universe, we can see the entire
universe as the multitude of light waves carry data to us. If we move our
location, we see the entire universe from a different angle. The largest sphere is the visible universe, which contains the longest possible wavelengths. I envision that where the almost infinite number of electromagnetic (light) waves intersect, turbulence occurs which we see as photons or other particles.
Such intersections occur at every point in the universal field; an energetic event, such as a source of light, vibrates the intersection particles, as the light waves propagate through the field, at the speed of light. We interpret what we see as moving "bullet like" particles - but just as in electric and telephone cables the in-cable-electrons do not travel but are excited in-situ - hence power sockets do not "leak" electricity - so the photons are not travelling; the waves are propagating. All broadcasts are natural spheres of waves - even laser-light, once it escapes far enough from the restricting confines of its crystalline source. Every thing, item, object, phenomena we "see" or detect is broadcasting its presence, its existence as a sphere of waves, either by internal or reflected energy.
Such intersections occur at every point in the universal field; an energetic event, such as a source of light, vibrates the intersection particles, as the light waves propagate through the field, at the speed of light. We interpret what we see as moving "bullet like" particles - but just as in electric and telephone cables the in-cable-electrons do not travel but are excited in-situ - hence power sockets do not "leak" electricity - so the photons are not travelling; the waves are propagating. All broadcasts are natural spheres of waves - even laser-light, once it escapes far enough from the restricting confines of its crystalline source. Every thing, item, object, phenomena we "see" or detect is broadcasting its presence, its existence as a sphere of waves, either by internal or reflected energy.
Each viewing
sphere we might occupy is filled with the coherent data from the entire universe,
excluding light waves that are too large to fit into our viewing sphere. Every
possible viewing sphere in the universe contains all the information about the
universe, except wavelengths too large to fit the sphere. I call these spheres holograms. The data in
the holograms is real, is unique, is perceptible, and is stable. The broadcast data changes moment by moment, mirroring
all the events in the universe from sub-atomic to galactic. But, on human time
scales, the appearance of the whole universe, of the visible universe, remains
reassuringly stable. I believe this overall stability in the light field where at
a detailed level everything is changing, is inertia.
The almost infinite in number, spherical, coherent, data-rich
broadcasts of waves intersect each other in the light field, and yet retain
their unique information and identities, creating a matrix of interwoven,
cross-hatched light waves. I believe this is The Aether, proposed in Victorian
times as the medium that carries light. Einstein did not deny the existence of The Aether, he said that he didn't need it in his calculations. I call it the Aether-Matrix.
It is the
essence of the universe and it is a field. There are now several discoveries
about light that demonstrate that light has some mass – in contradiction to
long-held scientific dogma that light is weightless /massless. Light does exert
slight pressure on matter.
We know with a high degree of probability that Hubble
Expansion is real. The light-field is continuously expanding, marked by the
movements of galaxies. This expansion might be attenuating the basic energy
field, which in turn seeks homogeneity and balance and so moves, at the speed
of light, to balance the attenuated zones. Thus, at every point in the universe
there is movement and a pulse, driven by expansion.
Equally probable is that CMB, the cosmic microwave background,
is ubiquitous, it is everywhere, between the galaxies, manifesting a bitterly
cold temperature of just 3 degrees above absolute zero; three degrees Kelvin
which is -270 degrees Celsius or Centigrade.
This extreme cold, which is close to freezing even the movement of all
subatomic particles, nevertheless signals its existence to us, as the “snow” on
old TV screens. The nearly frozen CMB light-waves are still energetic enough to
jiggle the electrons in the cathode-ray tubes of old TV screens on Earth. Light
has some mass.
Light is not “no-thing”
it is “something”. Scientists are
planning to use light’s momentum to power solar sails through outer-space.
Light has mass. The Aether-Matrix has mass.
Conceiving the Aether-Matrix as an ocean of active, data-rich
waves of light; a spherical ocean that is at least 43.7 billion light years
deep, the total amount of light in the ocean is heavy – light is some-thing not
no-thing. If a person could be placed at
the “bottom” of this ocean, the almost infinite weight of the light would crush
them out of existence. Fortunately, oceans of light don’t behave towards humans
as a very deep ocean of water does to frail air breathing creatures. The light, and therefore the pressure it
exerts is everywhere. It surrounds us; it is within us e.g. we can see through
a human with X-Rays, a child can see through its finger with a bright torch, we
are not impervious to light; it forms the most fundamental particles which form
matter. The infinite pressure of light is in balance in all universal
phenomena. And thus it does not crush
objects out of existence, except perhaps the alleged black-holes.
When younger and more arithmetically adept, I applied the infamous E=MC2 and other algorithms to explore why light is limited to 300,000 km per sec. Even a gram of matter, approaching or at the speed of propagation of light becomes "infinitely" heavy. And so is impenetrable to light waves or particles. Waves of light hit a brick wall at light-speed. They cannot go faster. This limit demonstrates the pressure of the ocean of light.
When younger and more arithmetically adept, I applied the infamous E=MC2 and other algorithms to explore why light is limited to 300,000 km per sec. Even a gram of matter, approaching or at the speed of propagation of light becomes "infinitely" heavy. And so is impenetrable to light waves or particles. Waves of light hit a brick wall at light-speed. They cannot go faster. This limit demonstrates the pressure of the ocean of light.
Casimir 1909 - 2000, a Dutch scientist, is famous for placing
two entirely flat, non-magnetic plates together side by side, separated by tiny
wedges, where the plates stuck together. He found that the light waves between
the plates were less energetic than the waves outside, because the tiny space inside
and between the plates was less than some wavelengths of light and so excluded
those waves.
The same Casimir effect occurs between two tall sided ships close together
at sea. The gap between the ships imposes a size restriction on the waves in
the gap, while the waves outside are those of the whole ocean and are larger.
The ships are pushed together. The space between the ships or plates is shaded
from some of the external waves; the external waves “cast a shadow” in the gap.
Instead of plates, imagine atoms of hydrogen, “floating” in a
vast cloud in space. Each atom is equally surrounded by the deep ocean of light
waves, and the light pressure, measured from the horizon of the universe, is
the same on every point of an atom’s circumference. Forces, such as the Hubble
Expansion “stirring” (above), along with chemical and atomic bonds, bring atoms into close
proximity. Between the atoms, the Casimir Effect operates and casts a shadow “inside”,
as compared to “outside”. There is less light pressure inside than outside as
one or more wavelengths of light are excluded from the gaps. Inside is
sheltered, is in shadow; is a subtle, partial vacuum. Outside is the full
pressure of all the universal light waves stacked up to a depth of 43.7 billion
light-years. Just as with the plates and the ships, the atoms are pressed
together and pulled together. This is gravity.
I arrived at this concept by puzzling about "The ever tightening knot at the centre of gravitational objects - which all particles and mass seem intent to reach, even at the cost of their existence, in cases where they disappear into Black Holes."
As atoms, or primary sub-atomic particles, clump, through the same processes as in the previous paragraph, the shadow between them deepens as more longer light waves are excluded. The largest waves cannot manifest or exist between the atoms. Initially, the pressure differential is almost undetectable. Other forces will break the delicate hold exercised between the masses of the phenomena, and they will drift apart. But in time, masses do clump together and are joined by other masses. The cloud of trillions of 3 degrees Kelvin freezing cold hydrogen atoms starts to coalesce. The masses cast deeper shadows, excluding more light waves from the “inside”, creating a relative low pressure zone internally, compared to the inexorable, almost infinite external pressure. A gravitational object is forming.
As atoms, or primary sub-atomic particles, clump, through the same processes as in the previous paragraph, the shadow between them deepens as more longer light waves are excluded. The largest waves cannot manifest or exist between the atoms. Initially, the pressure differential is almost undetectable. Other forces will break the delicate hold exercised between the masses of the phenomena, and they will drift apart. But in time, masses do clump together and are joined by other masses. The cloud of trillions of 3 degrees Kelvin freezing cold hydrogen atoms starts to coalesce. The masses cast deeper shadows, excluding more light waves from the “inside”, creating a relative low pressure zone internally, compared to the inexorable, almost infinite external pressure. A gravitational object is forming.
As it forms, the particles inside are pulled closer by the
partial inner vacuum and are pressed together by the full force of all the
light waves in the universal field. Each minute particle is observed or
calculated, by us, to be trying to make its way to the centre, to the region of
maximum shadow, minimum pressure and the centre of gravity.
If enough matter is continually attracted to the gravitational
object, it grows large enough for the ever increasing pressure differential to create
enough heat to ignite the previously freezing hydrogen. It becomes a star.
Counter-intuitively, it becomes a bright star because in its centre some light waves
are excluded, compared to the universal pressure from all light waves. The
centre of the Sun is very dark.
All gravitational objects, all masses are dissipative. The
mass and energy that is added to them, that continually "falls" onto an object, is mostly dissipated in heat, light and surface
eruptions. But the processes of in-falling and outgoing energy are not always
equal; and objects do retain in-falling mass and do grow.
Unchecked growth makes ever larger objects, with an ever greater pressure differential; until a black hole is formed. Does a black hole exert such external pressure on gravitational matter that the matter implodes back to its original electromagnetic non-material wave form. Think of the immense, powerful jets of radiation observed escaping from some astronomical objects. (nb spinning quasars etc).
Unchecked growth makes ever larger objects, with an ever greater pressure differential; until a black hole is formed. Does a black hole exert such external pressure on gravitational matter that the matter implodes back to its original electromagnetic non-material wave form. Think of the immense, powerful jets of radiation observed escaping from some astronomical objects. (nb spinning quasars etc).
Noel Hodson – Oxford – An original concept created from 1992 to 2015.
As
far as I know, from my reading of science magazines and books since 1959, this is an
original idea. Plagiarize this work at your greatest peril.
(NB - 3 June 2015. Can this idea be tested? Take many thousands of Casimir plates into gravity-free space - Lagrange points will do well enough - and bring two together so they stick. Introduce a pressure gauge & a wavelength reading sensor between the plates. These two plates might demonstrate the principle that excluding light waves creates a wavelength partial vacuum compared to the external pressure from the universal ocean of light. If so, add plates to the stack. Logically they should also stick. Add plates to the sides of the stack (square plates make this easier). If this theory has any merit, as thousands of plates are added to this growing structure - the internal pressure will increase; the internal "shadow" will grow darker; more wavelengths will be excluded. A gravitational object will have started to form.)
( NB - 29 May 2015. New Scientist Page 12. Spacecraft may fly on graphene wings by Jacob Aron. This is another indication that light has mass; evidence for the "weight" of the universal ocean of light (electromagnetic radiation) stacked up to 43.7 billion light years - which I see as the the force for the "ever tightening knot of gravity".
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22630235.400-spacecraft-built-from-graphene-could-run-on-nothing-but-sunlight.html#.VWiTONJVhHw )
(NB - 23 June 2015 - A lot of material but low gravity "18 NOV 14 - If we reverse-engineer a large gravitational body, say The Earth, by imagining it has 10,000 shells that make its 8,000 mile - 12,700 km diameter; each shell is 1.27 km deep. Ignoring all forces & factors except gravity - if we carefully separated the shells by 50 km - breaking them as necessary to retain a globe like shape, like widely scattered, curved jig-saw pieces - the outer shell of widely separated pieces would be 51.27 km x 10,000 shells = 512,700 km (radius)" This scenario - from Casimir Gravity - could be applied to The Oort Cloud of rocks, ice and pebbles orbiting at the outer perimeter of the solar system. Logic tells us that each rock will have low gravity, each pebble will have almost undetectable gravity, and yet the total mass is ...massive. Each individual piece is separated far enough from others to not have a significant Casimir Shadow. The universal light presses equally on all points of their surfaces. Imagine the pebbles replaced by sub-atomic particles - its is understandable that particle-physicists ignore gravity, which will have almost zero effect at that scale. But, pack them together, Casimir Shadows form - and the whole mass would make a sizeable planet; a solid, heavy gravitational body. I think this idea /theory has wings.)
(NB - 3 June 2015. Can this idea be tested? Take many thousands of Casimir plates into gravity-free space - Lagrange points will do well enough - and bring two together so they stick. Introduce a pressure gauge & a wavelength reading sensor between the plates. These two plates might demonstrate the principle that excluding light waves creates a wavelength partial vacuum compared to the external pressure from the universal ocean of light. If so, add plates to the stack. Logically they should also stick. Add plates to the sides of the stack (square plates make this easier). If this theory has any merit, as thousands of plates are added to this growing structure - the internal pressure will increase; the internal "shadow" will grow darker; more wavelengths will be excluded. A gravitational object will have started to form.)
( NB - 29 May 2015. New Scientist Page 12. Spacecraft may fly on graphene wings by Jacob Aron. This is another indication that light has mass; evidence for the "weight" of the universal ocean of light (electromagnetic radiation) stacked up to 43.7 billion light years - which I see as the the force for the "ever tightening knot of gravity".
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22630235.400-spacecraft-built-from-graphene-could-run-on-nothing-but-sunlight.html#.VWiTONJVhHw )
(NB - 23 June 2015 - A lot of material but low gravity "18 NOV 14 - If we reverse-engineer a large gravitational body, say The Earth, by imagining it has 10,000 shells that make its 8,000 mile - 12,700 km diameter; each shell is 1.27 km deep. Ignoring all forces & factors except gravity - if we carefully separated the shells by 50 km - breaking them as necessary to retain a globe like shape, like widely scattered, curved jig-saw pieces - the outer shell of widely separated pieces would be 51.27 km x 10,000 shells = 512,700 km (radius)" This scenario - from Casimir Gravity - could be applied to The Oort Cloud of rocks, ice and pebbles orbiting at the outer perimeter of the solar system. Logic tells us that each rock will have low gravity, each pebble will have almost undetectable gravity, and yet the total mass is ...massive. Each individual piece is separated far enough from others to not have a significant Casimir Shadow. The universal light presses equally on all points of their surfaces. Imagine the pebbles replaced by sub-atomic particles - its is understandable that particle-physicists ignore gravity, which will have almost zero effect at that scale. But, pack them together, Casimir Shadows form - and the whole mass would make a sizeable planet; a solid, heavy gravitational body. I think this idea /theory has wings.)
********
100 Years of General Relativity - New Scientist 10 October 2015.
https://www.newscientist.com/round-up/general-relativity-100/
19 Oct 2015 - Generally, relatively speaking, this is a good round up of the major factors in astro- and particle- physics from 1915 to 2015 - in accessible language. Well worth reading. I'll come back to this note again at a later date; for now I want to comment on information in Matthew Chalmers' The Missing Piece (page 40) in which he tracks Gravitational Waves. If my theory here has merit, then Gravity Waves as described by Einstein and searched for in the Cosmos don't exist. Science needs to search for the absence of something - Casimir Shadows as above - rather than the presence of as yet undetected waves. One clue to the existence of Gravity Waves cited by Chalmers is the observation of the precisely predicted slowing of the spin of binary pulsars - a reduction in speed of spin ascribed to gravity waves. This slowing is assumed to be due to loss of energy as the binary pulsars broadcast gravitational waves - a process that requires energy. If the observed slowing is real, if confirmed, then it is surely only to be expected of all and any object with mass in the universe. Our planet Earth is slowing. Our moon tugs on the oceans and slows our rotation. Without invoking gravity waves, my Casimir Shadow and the weight and depth of 43.7 billion light years of light, which causes Inertia and Gravity, is an oceanic medium with measurable mass that will slow any speeding object. To maintain a rate of spin, the object needs to receive a kick of energy from time to time. It is likely that all universal phenomena spin or speed through the ocean of light, which however ephemeral slows the object. New propulsive forces such as imploding stars and galaxies (not exploding but imploding as proposed here) will accelerate objects - Inertia, the ocean of light, will slow them. We may be saying the same thing in two languages but we do not need to invoke gravitational waves to explain the slowing of binary pulsars; which might be slowed by the slightest of friction from the ocean of light. General Relativity isn't so much explaining what gravity is - but observes what gravity does. Yes - it attracts and bends light - but give light some slight mass, which recent science allows - and light becomes another object that gravity pulls down to earth. - Not my clearest thoughts - at the end of a long day - so I'll return to it another time.
17 Jan 2016 - LIGHT PRESSURE. My Crookes Radiometer is a wonderfully crafted delicate glass instrument. The inner 4 paddles attach to a glass tube which is their axle. The axle balances over a steel pin. Another larger tube depends from the top without touching the axle - but close enough to prevent the axle and paddles from falling off their steel point if the instrument is turned upside down. I'm told, and must believe that the surrounding globe is partially evacuated, is a partial vacuum. I've observed that the glass axle finds its center of gravity on its steel fulcrum after the instrument is moved - this can take a few minutes during which the paddles might turn clockwise.
Otherwise, in any light, whether from a 100 watt bulb, a small LED (cool) torch, direct sunlight or the dreary winter daylight that filters through the Oxford clouds, the paddles turn anti-clockwise. The speed of the paddles is directly dictated by the power of the light. The temperature around the globe seems to have no effect on the rotation speed; in today's dreary northern daylight, the paddles move slowly anti-clockwise on my centrally heated warm office window sill. With the window open, admitting winter air at 2C, the rotation speed does not change (these measurements are by eye - I have no scientific measures). Using a small LED torch, which seems to have little or no heat, placed directly above the paddles it speeds the rotation a little; directed from the side onto the paddles, they speed up significantly (if there were no friction or gases in the globe would the rotation reach the speed of light?). Turning on my old fashioned 100 watt incandescent desk lamp set within six inches of the globe - the paddles whiz around at great speed. By various stealthy sneak attacks from this light and cold winter air, I think I have ascertained that it is the light and not the heat that drives the paddles.
My observations seem to inform me that the black side of the four paddles push the paddles around. Or, do the silver sides of the paddles pull them round? This seems to me to be counter intuitive; I had assumed the light bouncing off the silvered side would drive the paddles. But it is definitely not so. As several frustrated teachers of particle physics have long tried to drive into my thick skull, it seems that the black sides absorb photons (hence we see black) and this adds energy to the black side which in turn push the paddle-wheel anti-clockwise.
However, this Gravity - a New Theory, does not depend on the dark versus reflective sides of matter joining and adhering to a gravitational body; but on the Casimir effect of some of the universal wavelengths being excluded on the "inside" between the Casimir Plates (or atoms or molecules etc.) PHEW!
It does however heavily depend on light (the entire electromagnetic spectrum) having mass. If light has mass it can drive solar sails - and Crookes Radiometer paddle-wheels. If light has mass - stacked up in an ocean 43.7 billion light years deep, it has the mass to create a black hole. It is this weight x acceleration or mass, which I conjecture is the mechanism that creates gravitational bodies (all objects in the universe); as ultimately imploding, inverted "bubbles" in the vast universal ocean.
I will keep an eye on the paddle-wheel and report any aberrant behavior. Watch this space.
14 Jan 2016
100 Years of General Relativity - New Scientist 10 October 2015.
https://www.newscientist.com/round-up/general-relativity-100/
19 Oct 2015 - Generally, relatively speaking, this is a good round up of the major factors in astro- and particle- physics from 1915 to 2015 - in accessible language. Well worth reading. I'll come back to this note again at a later date; for now I want to comment on information in Matthew Chalmers' The Missing Piece (page 40) in which he tracks Gravitational Waves. If my theory here has merit, then Gravity Waves as described by Einstein and searched for in the Cosmos don't exist. Science needs to search for the absence of something - Casimir Shadows as above - rather than the presence of as yet undetected waves. One clue to the existence of Gravity Waves cited by Chalmers is the observation of the precisely predicted slowing of the spin of binary pulsars - a reduction in speed of spin ascribed to gravity waves. This slowing is assumed to be due to loss of energy as the binary pulsars broadcast gravitational waves - a process that requires energy. If the observed slowing is real, if confirmed, then it is surely only to be expected of all and any object with mass in the universe. Our planet Earth is slowing. Our moon tugs on the oceans and slows our rotation. Without invoking gravity waves, my Casimir Shadow and the weight and depth of 43.7 billion light years of light, which causes Inertia and Gravity, is an oceanic medium with measurable mass that will slow any speeding object. To maintain a rate of spin, the object needs to receive a kick of energy from time to time. It is likely that all universal phenomena spin or speed through the ocean of light, which however ephemeral slows the object. New propulsive forces such as imploding stars and galaxies (not exploding but imploding as proposed here) will accelerate objects - Inertia, the ocean of light, will slow them. We may be saying the same thing in two languages but we do not need to invoke gravitational waves to explain the slowing of binary pulsars; which might be slowed by the slightest of friction from the ocean of light. General Relativity isn't so much explaining what gravity is - but observes what gravity does. Yes - it attracts and bends light - but give light some slight mass, which recent science allows - and light becomes another object that gravity pulls down to earth. - Not my clearest thoughts - at the end of a long day - so I'll return to it another time.
17 Jan 2016 - LIGHT PRESSURE. My Crookes Radiometer is a wonderfully crafted delicate glass instrument. The inner 4 paddles attach to a glass tube which is their axle. The axle balances over a steel pin. Another larger tube depends from the top without touching the axle - but close enough to prevent the axle and paddles from falling off their steel point if the instrument is turned upside down. I'm told, and must believe that the surrounding globe is partially evacuated, is a partial vacuum. I've observed that the glass axle finds its center of gravity on its steel fulcrum after the instrument is moved - this can take a few minutes during which the paddles might turn clockwise.
Otherwise, in any light, whether from a 100 watt bulb, a small LED (cool) torch, direct sunlight or the dreary winter daylight that filters through the Oxford clouds, the paddles turn anti-clockwise. The speed of the paddles is directly dictated by the power of the light. The temperature around the globe seems to have no effect on the rotation speed; in today's dreary northern daylight, the paddles move slowly anti-clockwise on my centrally heated warm office window sill. With the window open, admitting winter air at 2C, the rotation speed does not change (these measurements are by eye - I have no scientific measures). Using a small LED torch, which seems to have little or no heat, placed directly above the paddles it speeds the rotation a little; directed from the side onto the paddles, they speed up significantly (if there were no friction or gases in the globe would the rotation reach the speed of light?). Turning on my old fashioned 100 watt incandescent desk lamp set within six inches of the globe - the paddles whiz around at great speed. By various stealthy sneak attacks from this light and cold winter air, I think I have ascertained that it is the light and not the heat that drives the paddles.
My observations seem to inform me that the black side of the four paddles push the paddles around. Or, do the silver sides of the paddles pull them round? This seems to me to be counter intuitive; I had assumed the light bouncing off the silvered side would drive the paddles. But it is definitely not so. As several frustrated teachers of particle physics have long tried to drive into my thick skull, it seems that the black sides absorb photons (hence we see black) and this adds energy to the black side which in turn push the paddle-wheel anti-clockwise.
However, this Gravity - a New Theory, does not depend on the dark versus reflective sides of matter joining and adhering to a gravitational body; but on the Casimir effect of some of the universal wavelengths being excluded on the "inside" between the Casimir Plates (or atoms or molecules etc.) PHEW!
It does however heavily depend on light (the entire electromagnetic spectrum) having mass. If light has mass it can drive solar sails - and Crookes Radiometer paddle-wheels. If light has mass - stacked up in an ocean 43.7 billion light years deep, it has the mass to create a black hole. It is this weight x acceleration or mass, which I conjecture is the mechanism that creates gravitational bodies (all objects in the universe); as ultimately imploding, inverted "bubbles" in the vast universal ocean.
I will keep an eye on the paddle-wheel and report any aberrant behavior. Watch this space.
I think that turning clockwise only happens when it has been still and a large human hand moves the instrument from one place to another – when it tends to get tilted and the paddles turn any-which-way. After settling and with any light source from any direction the paddles only turn anti-clockwise – so far. However – freezing the instrument allegedly creates clockwise rotation:
“If the glass is cooled quickly in the absence of a strong light source by putting ice on the glass or placing it in the freezer with the door almost closed, it turns backwards (i.e. the silver sides trail). This demonstrates black-body radiation from the black sides of the vanes rather than black-body absorption. The wheel turns backwards because the net exchange of heat between the black sides and the environment initially cools the black sides faster than the white sides. Upon reaching equilibrium, typically after a minute or two, reverse rotation ceases. This contrasts with sunlight, with which forward rotation can be maintained all day.” (PS – I don’t mind which way it turns as long as light is shown to have slight mass)
A later version allowed the internal vacuum to be altered:
The scientific consensus is not yet conclusive though it has been studied by some of the most famous physicists. Despite every effort to avoid saying that light has mass; and to conform with the establishment view that light is massless, authors find it difficult to report results without saying “the pressure of photons” etc. In the meantime, my radiometer is sitting quietly on my north facing windowsill, turning very, very slowly anti-clockwise – driven by what we optimistically call daylight, filtering through miles of Oxford winter clouds. And, however, …space scientists are designing solar sails to be driven billions of miles by sunlight through “empty” space. I suppose it depends on how we define “light” – because sunlight comprises all sorts of particles, neutrinos and waves.
In 1901, various labs measured light-pressure
“…The final measurement was the most accurate ever recorded, and the calculated pressure deviated just ten percent from Maxwell’s theoretical value of 4.7 x 10-6 N/m2. This disparity was well within the experimental error” (N stands for Newtons, used in gravity calcs – being 102 grams, the weight of a small apple – 0.0000047N spread over one square metre is pretty small)
For my Gravity theory, it requires only that the entire electromagnetic spectrum has some mass, and that a small part of that spectrum is excluded from the “inside” (centre of gravity facing) and “between” particles and pieces or plates (Casimir) that comprise gravitational bodies.
More examples of “light” making an impact are needed to persuade the cynics.
PPS - 19 Jan 2016. This very cold bright morning, the paddles were not turning. I cupped my hands around the bowl, shading it but warming it - and the paddles started to turn (anti-clockwise). Since, they have been turning due to the light through the window. What does this "warming" tell us?
14 Jan 2016
Hi John - LIGO
I'm not wholly convinced that "gravity waves" in "space-time" exist. The LIGO experiments have prematurely announced signs, of shadows, of ghosts, of vague patterns, of 13.7 billion year old gravity-waves - several times in the last 15 years - and then withdrawn.
 |
| Crookes Radiometer |
My theory does not contradict the known effects of gravity - both Newton's and Einstein's observations and predictions. Newton did not attempt to find the source of gravity - It seems to me that Einstein created a complex route to forecast (correctly) that light would be bent by large gravitational objects such as the Sun and the Earth; which he ascribed to "curved space-time" (the infamous stretched rubber sheet with a cannonball in the centre) because, I think, it was then believed that light was massless (no weight x no acceleration) and so could not be affected by ordinary gravity. Curved-Space-Time explained how massless light could be affected by gravitational masses.
Both these geniuses figured out what gravity does - but not how it does it.
Both these geniuses figured out what gravity does - but not how it does it.
BUT - since then, there is growing practical evidence that light has some mass (it is some-thing, not no-thing). If so, then light itself, not gravity, will be the primary energy and wave form of the universe. I think gravity is a secondary effect of light. I'm unwell today - but tomorrow I'll continue my observations of my Crookes Radiometer, which so far seems to move/spin from the impact of light - not heat molecules dashing about (which is an alternative explanation).
My earlier
concept – A slide show – EiG - Expansion is Gravity (Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Sentient
Universe)
My
previous blog notes on this theme, building to this theory of gravity:
************
No comments:
Post a Comment