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 e-mail noel@noelhodson.com
4th April 2018: NATURE Dark Matter Disappears: Studies of galaxy surveys in the context of the cold dark matter paradigm have shown that the mass of the dark matter halo and the total stellar mass are coupled through a function that varies smoothly with mass. Their average ratio Mhalo/Mstars has a minimum of about 30 for galaxies with stellar masses near that of the Milky Way (approximately 5 × 1010 solar masses) and increases both towards lower masses and towards higher masses1,2. The scatter in this relation is not well known; it is generally thought to be less than a factor of two for massive galaxies but much larger for dwarf galaxies3,4. Here we report the radial velocities of ten luminous globular-cluster-like objects in the ultra-diffuse galaxy5 NGC1052–DF2, which has a stellar mass of approximately 2 × 108 solar masses. We infer that its velocity dispersion is less than 10.5 kilometres per second with 90 per cent confidence, and we determine from this that its total mass within a radius of 7.6 kiloparsecs is less than 3.4 × 108 solar masses. This implies that the ratio Mhalo/Mstars is of order unity (and consistent with zero), a factor of at least 400 lower than expected2. NGC1052–DF2 demonstrates that dark matter is not always coupled with baryonic matter on galactic scales.
As Dark Matter and Dark Energy have been calculated to comprise 80% to 90% of mass and therefore of Gravity, this "missing" Dark Matter is relevant to theories of gravity. Several times in these gravity essays I have suggested that physicists should look for the lack of something - rather than extra mass - in my idea that lack is the Casimir Shadow cast by matter. The matter is illuminated by the radiation of the entire Universe on the "outside" and the shadow is "inside" matter where some wavelengths cannot manifest. This galaxy is described as Ultra-Diffuse, which may fit with my thought experiment (below) of expanding the Earth into millions of jigsaw pieces spread over a globe radius of 500,000 km; each jigsaw piece would have very little gravity - because, I conjecture, the universal radiation (all wavelengths) is able to fully manifest "behind" or around each small jigsaw piece. Each piece is supported or impacted by almost all wavelengths, in the universal ocean of light /electromagnetic radiation - so the gravity of each piece is far less than on our non-expanded compact Earth. I would like to think that this Ultra-Diffuse galaxy is demonstrating the same characteristic; where the total mass remains the same but the diffuse matter lacks Dark Matter. (is this logic correct?)
29 Jan 2018: THE AETHER: I am undoubtedly repeating myself but for my current WiP book, The Alchemist's Lad - The Perils of Entanglement, I need to figure out how radio waves (electromagnetic waves) propagate across the universe, and, however weak they become, how they transmit coherent, consistent data from sender to receiver. Part of the mechanical answer is the use of the Deep Space Network, all the largest radio-dishes on Earth working together to send and receive radio signals, and NASA's latest signal boosting tools that use super-cooled combinations of metals to multiply the energy of signals without distorting them. Hence we can still communicate with Voyager 1, more than a trillion miles away, whose signals reach us with the power of one millionth of a billionth of one watt - yet remain legible. ("For their amplifier, NASA researchers at JPL are using titanium nitride and niobium titanium nitride, which have just the right properties to allow the pump signal to amplify the weak signal.")
9 Jan 2018 - To date there have been 5,426 page views to this article and the previous linked article. There is probably a similar number of visitors to the other ten or so linked articles. One day I will count them accurately. So say, 10,000 page views, so far. Only one, a single one, email discussion has ensued. Is the concept utterly risible, or perhaps too complex? Is there anybody out there - noel@noelhodson.com.
21 Oct 2017 - DARK SUN New Scientist No. 3148, What's wrong with the sun? by Shannon Palus, reports that 9 x 10 to the power of 24 tonnes of "metals" are missing from the interior of the sun. This recent controversial theory perhaps provides an argument for my statement above "...the centre of the Sun is very dark." In turn, this dark interior might be an example of
LETTER TO NEW SCIENTIST - 12th April 2018 - In
his article Law & disorder (NS 7 April 2018) on Quantum-thermodynamics,
Vlatko Vedral risks scientific heresy saying “Living things constantly strive
against the second law of thermodynamics, sucking in energy to maintain the
order within”. He could be bolder and say that there is much evidence that all
life forms persistently organise energy; as do all galaxies, stars, planets,
molecules, atoms – indeed all objects. Might we today imagine that order and
disorder are circular – linked by a feed-back system - and that the cold, dark,
featureless, soup death of the universe, following the 2nd Law is
not necessarily so? I’ve read that several scientists have committed
suicide through brooding about the 2nd Law and thus our pointless
existence. Is it time to move on from the lessons of the steam-engine?
Perhaps there are five fundamental forces: Gravity, Electromagnetism,
Weak-nuclear, Strong nuclear and the Lifeforce, which is the 5th Law of
Thermodynamics.
Noel HODSON - Author
4th April 2018: NATURE Dark Matter Disappears: Studies of galaxy surveys in the context of the cold dark matter paradigm have shown that the mass of the dark matter halo and the total stellar mass are coupled through a function that varies smoothly with mass. Their average ratio Mhalo/Mstars has a minimum of about 30 for galaxies with stellar masses near that of the Milky Way (approximately 5 × 1010 solar masses) and increases both towards lower masses and towards higher masses1,2. The scatter in this relation is not well known; it is generally thought to be less than a factor of two for massive galaxies but much larger for dwarf galaxies3,4. Here we report the radial velocities of ten luminous globular-cluster-like objects in the ultra-diffuse galaxy5 NGC1052–DF2, which has a stellar mass of approximately 2 × 108 solar masses. We infer that its velocity dispersion is less than 10.5 kilometres per second with 90 per cent confidence, and we determine from this that its total mass within a radius of 7.6 kiloparsecs is less than 3.4 × 108 solar masses. This implies that the ratio Mhalo/Mstars is of order unity (and consistent with zero), a factor of at least 400 lower than expected2. NGC1052–DF2 demonstrates that dark matter is not always coupled with baryonic matter on galactic scales.
As Dark Matter and Dark Energy have been calculated to comprise 80% to 90% of mass and therefore of Gravity, this "missing" Dark Matter is relevant to theories of gravity. Several times in these gravity essays I have suggested that physicists should look for the lack of something - rather than extra mass - in my idea that lack is the Casimir Shadow cast by matter. The matter is illuminated by the radiation of the entire Universe on the "outside" and the shadow is "inside" matter where some wavelengths cannot manifest. This galaxy is described as Ultra-Diffuse, which may fit with my thought experiment (below) of expanding the Earth into millions of jigsaw pieces spread over a globe radius of 500,000 km; each jigsaw piece would have very little gravity - because, I conjecture, the universal radiation (all wavelengths) is able to fully manifest "behind" or around each small jigsaw piece. Each piece is supported or impacted by almost all wavelengths, in the universal ocean of light /electromagnetic radiation - so the gravity of each piece is far less than on our non-expanded compact Earth. I would like to think that this Ultra-Diffuse galaxy is demonstrating the same characteristic; where the total mass remains the same but the diffuse matter lacks Dark Matter. (is this logic correct?)
29 Jan 2018: THE AETHER: I am undoubtedly repeating myself but for my current WiP book, The Alchemist's Lad - The Perils of Entanglement, I need to figure out how radio waves (electromagnetic waves) propagate across the universe, and, however weak they become, how they transmit coherent, consistent data from sender to receiver. Part of the mechanical answer is the use of the Deep Space Network, all the largest radio-dishes on Earth working together to send and receive radio signals, and NASA's latest signal boosting tools that use super-cooled combinations of metals to multiply the energy of signals without distorting them. Hence we can still communicate with Voyager 1, more than a trillion miles away, whose signals reach us with the power of one millionth of a billionth of one watt - yet remain legible. ("For their amplifier, NASA researchers at JPL are using titanium nitride and niobium titanium nitride, which have just the right properties to allow the pump signal to amplify the weak signal.")
My idea of how this can be goes right back, or down, to the mystery of how the universe spins straw into gold - or more prosaically - how "pure" energy is compressed to form matter. One of my earlier TOEs, Expansion is Gravity, sketches out a theory of light colliding with light forming a spinning vortex, being the smallest particle; from which several particles combine to form quarks, then up the chain to atoms, etc. These vortices exist in our limitless space-time which in turn at every point, e.g. the size of an eyeball, contain images of the whole universe. These myriad images each contains immense amounts of data - energy and mass are interchangeable - thus space is not empty, but crowded with mass-energy-data. Thus we resurrect the Aether; capable of carrying signals across space. So - back to wavelengths. A very old idea I had was that from an energetic event/source a signal radiates outwards in waves (waves in the Aether) and each wave rolls in situ, say head over heels - it triggers another wave to roll heels over head, in situ, etc. and thus propagates across the universe; but nothing "travels". These waves consist of the very smallest vortices (equivalent to drops of water in ocean waves). The waves do diminish as they distance themselves from the source - which has imparted their level of energy and wavelength. Where waves intersect in the complex ocean of waves, we detect photons, electrons etc. being packets of the fundamental vortices. These movements are vibrations that we measure in Hertz and wavelengths and/or wave-height. The energy and data is held in the number and size of vortices - which are nearly impossible to disrupt due to their minuscule size. So data is maintained.
BUT - with all this activity, from every object in the universe, in the "void" of space, I cannot conceive of how a particular wave, e.g. from Voyager 1, maintains its identity and its data. Or, do we only "see" or detect a tiny percentage of waves that survive the turbulence. Perhaps of all the events that occur, we detect a minute percentage - we detect the ones that get through to us?
"AETHER: Einstein eventually published a complete explanation that would reconcile his apparently contradictory perspectives on the Aether, first by asserting that Special Relativity does not explicitly negate the existence of an Aether, suggesting only that it didn’t explicitly need an Aether to explain the relative properties of electromagnetism and movement. He then clarified and explained the essential importance of the Aether (ether) to General Relativity:
To deny the ether is ultimately to assume that empty space has no physical qualities whatever. The fundamental facts of mechanics do not harmonize with this view. For the mechanical behaviour of a corporeal system hovering freely in empty space depends not only on relative positions (distances) and relative velocities, but also on its state of rotation, which physically may be taken as a characteristic not appertaining to the system in itself. In order to be able to look upon the rotation of the system, at least formally, as something real, Newton objectivises space. Since he classes his absolute space together with real things, for him rotation relative to an absolute space is also something real. Newton might no less well have called his absolute space "Ether"; what is essential is merely that besides observable objects, another thing, which is not perceptible, must be looked upon as real, to enable acceleration or rotation to be looked upon as something real.15
This description, and the rest of his paper published in 1920, suggests that Einstein saw spacetime itself as the “new Aether.” However, this perspective was never popularized and the Aether was slowly forgotten as a “metaphysical” artifact of a previous scientific era.
To clarify Einstein’s meaning further, he is basically suggesting that if an object rotates, there must be a source for that rotation. If the source propelling an object to spin is not the object itself, then it must be the space around the object.
In reviewing this brief history of the Aether, we might inquire as to whether it was appropriate to completely remove it from science and all subsequent science education."
9 Jan 2018 - To date there have been 5,426 page views to this article and the previous linked article. There is probably a similar number of visitors to the other ten or so linked articles. One day I will count them accurately. So say, 10,000 page views, so far. Only one, a single one, email discussion has ensued. Is the concept utterly risible, or perhaps too complex? Is there anybody out there - noel@noelhodson.com.
Photon energy - Wikipedia
"However, the claim that photons are massless is based on the crisis arising with other theories in quantum mechanics. In order for other math, such as gauge invariance and so-called "renormalization" to survive without considerable revision, photons must be kept massless in the realm of current equations. [1] The claim is also contested by other circles."
(Maxwell: 0.0000047 Newtons (1 Newton = 102 gm) spread over one square-metre)
Pressure of sunlight (Maxwell-Bartoli) is 0.4 mg on a black surface and 0.8 mg on a mirror.
19 DEC 2017: A little more thought on Dark Matter, which, according to some theories based on observations and calculations, outweighs ordinary matter, and ordinary gravity by 4 to 5 times, or more; but no-one has found any of it. At a Carol Concert last week, at New College, Oxford, UK, it again occurred to me that each second that ticked by added another layer of history to that ancient chapel, and to all of us and to all objects in the chapel. The analogy of a 3D-Printer again came to mind, building fine layer upon layer each millisecond; adding to our history. As the familiar robust singing and orchestrations rang through the atmosphere in sound waves, then left the planet as electromagnetic vibrations, to be broadcast at the speed of light to the perimeter of the observable universe; despite Feynman's diagrams, we cannot yet go back through time, even for, say, half-a-second. If we take Relativity at its word, we might shrink the time dimension to zero - and substitute, say length instead, but the candle-holder before my eyes would, in half-a-second, have receded (into the past) by 150,000 kilometres, and be unreachable to me, in the present moment. Questions of the speed of thought and the how quickly the human brain assembles and holds impressions, in the present and in our memories, arise. However, as far as we understand reality, in the real world, the candle-holder and myself, are real in the present moment and were real in the past moments. I can even remember being "real" at the start of the choral. My present presence is a complex pattern of electromagnetic energy, which manifests as mass and occasional glimmers of consciousness. My past self, half-a-second ago, was a similar pattern and mass. My history was real and is real. It adds to my existence and in-forms my present. Dark Matter could be that history - adding gravitas, layer by layer, to present existence. Are these layers the mathematicians' multi-verses and multi-dimensions, which are as unreachable as the past?
19 DEC 2017: A little more thought on Dark Matter, which, according to some theories based on observations and calculations, outweighs ordinary matter, and ordinary gravity by 4 to 5 times, or more; but no-one has found any of it. At a Carol Concert last week, at New College, Oxford, UK, it again occurred to me that each second that ticked by added another layer of history to that ancient chapel, and to all of us and to all objects in the chapel. The analogy of a 3D-Printer again came to mind, building fine layer upon layer each millisecond; adding to our history. As the familiar robust singing and orchestrations rang through the atmosphere in sound waves, then left the planet as electromagnetic vibrations, to be broadcast at the speed of light to the perimeter of the observable universe; despite Feynman's diagrams, we cannot yet go back through time, even for, say, half-a-second. If we take Relativity at its word, we might shrink the time dimension to zero - and substitute, say length instead, but the candle-holder before my eyes would, in half-a-second, have receded (into the past) by 150,000 kilometres, and be unreachable to me, in the present moment. Questions of the speed of thought and the how quickly the human brain assembles and holds impressions, in the present and in our memories, arise. However, as far as we understand reality, in the real world, the candle-holder and myself, are real in the present moment and were real in the past moments. I can even remember being "real" at the start of the choral. My present presence is a complex pattern of electromagnetic energy, which manifests as mass and occasional glimmers of consciousness. My past self, half-a-second ago, was a similar pattern and mass. My history was real and is real. It adds to my existence and in-forms my present. Dark Matter could be that history - adding gravitas, layer by layer, to present existence. Are these layers the mathematicians' multi-verses and multi-dimensions, which are as unreachable as the past?
23 NOV 17 Author: Dimensions of light? Green light-waves have a wave-height or "depth" of 500 nanometres, 10-6 metres. Green sits near the centre of the known electromagnetic spectrum that ranges from 10+8 metres to 10-18 metres. 500 nanometres (billionth of a metre) is a useful average "height" to apply when considering waves stacked - say, several billion light years "above" (i.e. surrounding) the Earth. In due course, I should be able to calculate what it means in terms of the pressure of light outside our planet. Pressure which is reduced by matter as we delve inside (Casimir). Such external pressure will be varied by the matter in the surrounding space being calculated - by, I guess, the centres of gravity of other objects. - Next time. (When will Google blogs include fonts capable of typing plus and minus powers of?)
CALCULATION - HERE GOES: Which is 8.136E+33 (8136202468322821800000000000000000 stacked green wavelengths)
At, say, pressure on a dark surface, 0.4 micrograms (millionth) per sq metre. So multiply by 0.4 = 3.254E+33 325, 400,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. (three-hundred-and-twenty-five-point-four, million, billion, billion) 3.2E+26 tonnes per square metre. Is that enough to make a black-hole? Adjusted, of course by the multitude of cross currents and energetic-events between centres of gravity. Like creatures at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, objects in the electromagnetic ocean are supported by wavicles within their/our structures. When such counter-pressure is blocked (Casimir) - the structure collapses. My arithmetic may be a few decimal places adrift - but you can adjust it.
CALCULATION - HERE GOES: Which is 8.136E+33 (8136202468322821800000000000000000 stacked green wavelengths)
At, say, pressure on a dark surface, 0.4 micrograms (millionth) per sq metre. So multiply by 0.4 = 3.254E+33 325, 400,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. (three-hundred-and-twenty-five-point-four, million, billion, billion) 3.2E+26 tonnes per square metre. Is that enough to make a black-hole? Adjusted, of course by the multitude of cross currents and energetic-events between centres of gravity. Like creatures at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, objects in the electromagnetic ocean are supported by wavicles within their/our structures. When such counter-pressure is blocked (Casimir) - the structure collapses. My arithmetic may be a few decimal places adrift - but you can adjust it.
21 Oct 2017 - DARK SUN New Scientist No. 3148, What's wrong with the sun? by Shannon Palus, reports that 9 x 10 to the power of 24 tonnes of "metals" are missing from the interior of the sun. This recent controversial theory perhaps provides an argument for my statement above "...the centre of the Sun is very dark." In turn, this dark interior might be an example of
Missing mass from sun's interior?
Casimir Exclusion of part of the electromagnetic spectrum between masses, "the pull" which my idea of gravity relies on. How Helioseismologists and Spectroscopists measure the "sound" and light-spectrum from the sun, and calculate "missing" mass is beyond my understanding - but several notable observers agree that something is wrong with our analyses of how the sun (and all stars) function. Is my new gravity theory correct? Perhaps.
12 Oct 2017 - Shoulders of Giants
In my years of astro- and particle- physics evening classes, I was always running to catch up on self-evident scientific truths that the other, experienced students "knew", and which underpinned the tuition. Misunderstanding one or another of these obvious "facts" or formulations could mislead me for weeks. Readers of this idea for gravity might not "know" what I have read and absorbed over 70 years - and that I take for granted - which I assume you all know. But you might not understand how I got here - and so cannot evaluate if what I am saying has any merit (it has). To recap:
What gravity does, was set out in Isaac Newton's arithmetic, which is astonishingly accurate. His equations reliably measure the force of gravity between objects, in fact between the very centres of objects, between what we now know to be the centres-of-gravity, with astonishing accuracy. Newton studied the tables drawn by earlier observers of planetary movements and studied the tables of experiments of dropped and rolling weights and fired canon balls, and he took the earlier theories of the orbits of planets (around the sun) - and he calculated their masses and motions. Look him up on Wikipedia and plug in numbers to his algorithms - and you can work out the precise orbit or crash-landing of say, a cricket ball, fired around or at the sun - measuring precisely from the centres of those two objects. He worked with the three dimensions of height, length and breadth (Euclid's geometry) and co-invented calculus (e.g. measuring and using tiny slices of a curve of an orbit). Newton wasn't alone in such speculations and calculations - but he was by far the best. Newton told us what gravity does.
Einstein (and others of his time) noted from the observations of astro-physics that certain planets did not exactly match Newton's equations. There were and are slight distortions in the orbits of some planets which buck the Newton system.
Einstein had earlier constructed his theory of Special Relativity which proved that the three dimensions of height, length and breadth were not fixed in immutable time, as was then the scientific consensus, but were relative to each other when considered as four dimensions - height, length, breadth and time. At very, very high speeds, near light-speed, time might perceptibly shrink or grow and as it does so, the "fixed" geometry dimensions also change. They are relative to each other. What is fixed, he assumed, is the speed of light (usually named "C" - about 300,000 km per second in a vacuum). So light-speed became the fixed measure of Relativity. It was and is essential to the arithmetic that light (photons) always propagate at "C" without acceleration; as soon as created photons move at C. They are always moving at C. To move like this, they must be weightless (no mass). We use C to measure the size of the universe (BLY Billion-Light-Years).
Einstein solved the anomalies in observed planetary orbits in his next theory, General Relativity. Measures that work on the Earth's surface are perfectly sufficient to use to make precision instruments and machines and "flat" surfaces. In fact the curvature of the Earth means that all flat surfaces, with say, a stationary ball-bearing at the middle of a tile, are in fact curved. Basic geometry and gravity work well enough to build safe vertical skyscrapers and heavy bridges. But as we leave the Earth, gravity changes and at a distance, gravity almost entirely disappears - we can space-walk out in "space". Actually "weightless" astronauts are suspended between centres of gravity and forces of motion. But gravity is never entirely absent, so in considering universal theories, Einstein had to grapple with it. He retained mass-less light at light-speed, as his fixed dimension, factor or measure and realised that in his four-dimension space, Space-Time, gravity's role is to curve the flight of light and curve Space-Time. His calculations predicted that light, which until then was agreed by science to always travel in straight lines, would be found to curve around large objects. This was proved by observing light from distant stars in total lunar-solar eclipses. Light does bend around gravitational objects. This curve precisely corrected Newton's Three Laws of Gravity, to fit the observed paths of planets. Space-Time and General Relativity heralded the reliable navigation of space-ships.
What Newton and Einstein did not explain is why, say, a cricket ball, falling onto the Earth, then spends the rest of its existence trying to reach Earth's centre of gravity. See my perpetual-motion below. I pondered that allegedly massless (weightless) light is probably not massless, and that a large amount of it, collected into a sphere, will form a black-hole. Could "curved-space" be a work-around necessary to retain the alleged weightlessness of light? If light has mass, we don't need to cite curved-space. The bending of light is then simply a very small object, a photon (or other electromagnetic particle) being attracted to a very large object by Newtonian Gravity. And so... onto my theory of what gravity is... or might be.
3rd August 2017 - PERPETUAL
MOTION:
Last night at a piano concert at Merton College, Oxford, UK, I again
contemplated that all of us gathered in Merton Chapel, the grey, elderly and
young music lovers alike were whirling around the Sun on a blue-green planet,
for three-score-years-and-ten, to who knows where or why. It also struck me,
aged 74, that before I leave I should pass-on to my silent, assumed, possibly
non-existent audience, what triggered this theory of gravity.
It was perpetual motion. Not the perpetual motion of mad inventors but the
tangible, demonstrable perpetual motion of gravity. Einstein gave us the
analogy of a man in a rising lift feeling the same pressure under his feet as
he does standing on the surface of our planet - being pulled down by gravity.
That pull never ceases. It is a perpetual motion. Or as perpetual as science
definitions will allow.
We and every object on our planet, and on every celestial body in the universe,
are relentlessly, ceaselessly and eternally pulled towards the or a centre of
gravity. To cut a many years-long story short, the idea came to me that this
downwards force is caused by an equally infinite, perpetual energy; which has
to be the "stuff of the universe"; which another very long story persuades
me is "light" or electromagnetic energy. This stuff surrounds us to a
scientifically calculated depth of 43.7 b.l.y. (billion light years) being the
horizon of the "visible universe". This horizon is as near infinity
as we humans need to know of. From perpetual-motion and the infinite
Ocean-of-Light, I had to ascribe a slight mass to light - and then add-in the
Casimir-Shadow where light does not reach, inside every gravitational object.
The light presses and the absence of light, the shadow, pulls.
The idea still hangs together, after several years of keeping up to date with
scientific ideas and discoveries. So - there it is. ...And we keep being pulled
towards the centre - in eternal, perpetual-motion. Black Holes beckon us all -
and beyond the black-holes...?
 |
| Missing mass from sun's interior? |
12 Oct 2017 - Shoulders of Giants
In my years of astro- and particle- physics evening classes, I was always running to catch up on self-evident scientific truths that the other, experienced students "knew", and which underpinned the tuition. Misunderstanding one or another of these obvious "facts" or formulations could mislead me for weeks. Readers of this idea for gravity might not "know" what I have read and absorbed over 70 years - and that I take for granted - which I assume you all know. But you might not understand how I got here - and so cannot evaluate if what I am saying has any merit (it has). To recap:
What gravity does, was set out in Isaac Newton's arithmetic, which is astonishingly accurate. His equations reliably measure the force of gravity between objects, in fact between the very centres of objects, between what we now know to be the centres-of-gravity, with astonishing accuracy. Newton studied the tables drawn by earlier observers of planetary movements and studied the tables of experiments of dropped and rolling weights and fired canon balls, and he took the earlier theories of the orbits of planets (around the sun) - and he calculated their masses and motions. Look him up on Wikipedia and plug in numbers to his algorithms - and you can work out the precise orbit or crash-landing of say, a cricket ball, fired around or at the sun - measuring precisely from the centres of those two objects. He worked with the three dimensions of height, length and breadth (Euclid's geometry) and co-invented calculus (e.g. measuring and using tiny slices of a curve of an orbit). Newton wasn't alone in such speculations and calculations - but he was by far the best. Newton told us what gravity does.
Einstein (and others of his time) noted from the observations of astro-physics that certain planets did not exactly match Newton's equations. There were and are slight distortions in the orbits of some planets which buck the Newton system.
Einstein had earlier constructed his theory of Special Relativity which proved that the three dimensions of height, length and breadth were not fixed in immutable time, as was then the scientific consensus, but were relative to each other when considered as four dimensions - height, length, breadth and time. At very, very high speeds, near light-speed, time might perceptibly shrink or grow and as it does so, the "fixed" geometry dimensions also change. They are relative to each other. What is fixed, he assumed, is the speed of light (usually named "C" - about 300,000 km per second in a vacuum). So light-speed became the fixed measure of Relativity. It was and is essential to the arithmetic that light (photons) always propagate at "C" without acceleration; as soon as created photons move at C. They are always moving at C. To move like this, they must be weightless (no mass). We use C to measure the size of the universe (BLY Billion-Light-Years).
Einstein solved the anomalies in observed planetary orbits in his next theory, General Relativity. Measures that work on the Earth's surface are perfectly sufficient to use to make precision instruments and machines and "flat" surfaces. In fact the curvature of the Earth means that all flat surfaces, with say, a stationary ball-bearing at the middle of a tile, are in fact curved. Basic geometry and gravity work well enough to build safe vertical skyscrapers and heavy bridges. But as we leave the Earth, gravity changes and at a distance, gravity almost entirely disappears - we can space-walk out in "space". Actually "weightless" astronauts are suspended between centres of gravity and forces of motion. But gravity is never entirely absent, so in considering universal theories, Einstein had to grapple with it. He retained mass-less light at light-speed, as his fixed dimension, factor or measure and realised that in his four-dimension space, Space-Time, gravity's role is to curve the flight of light and curve Space-Time. His calculations predicted that light, which until then was agreed by science to always travel in straight lines, would be found to curve around large objects. This was proved by observing light from distant stars in total lunar-solar eclipses. Light does bend around gravitational objects. This curve precisely corrected Newton's Three Laws of Gravity, to fit the observed paths of planets. Space-Time and General Relativity heralded the reliable navigation of space-ships.
What Newton and Einstein did not explain is why, say, a cricket ball, falling onto the Earth, then spends the rest of its existence trying to reach Earth's centre of gravity. See my perpetual-motion below. I pondered that allegedly massless (weightless) light is probably not massless, and that a large amount of it, collected into a sphere, will form a black-hole. Could "curved-space" be a work-around necessary to retain the alleged weightlessness of light? If light has mass, we don't need to cite curved-space. The bending of light is then simply a very small object, a photon (or other electromagnetic particle) being attracted to a very large object by Newtonian Gravity. And so... onto my theory of what gravity is... or might be.
3rd August 2017 - PERPETUAL MOTION:
Last night at a piano concert at Merton College, Oxford, UK, I again contemplated that all of us gathered in Merton Chapel, the grey, elderly and young music lovers alike were whirling around the Sun on a blue-green planet, for three-score-years-and-ten, to who knows where or why. It also struck me, aged 74, that before I leave I should pass-on to my silent, assumed, possibly non-existent audience, what triggered this theory of gravity.
It was perpetual motion. Not the perpetual motion of mad inventors but the tangible, demonstrable perpetual motion of gravity. Einstein gave us the analogy of a man in a rising lift feeling the same pressure under his feet as he does standing on the surface of our planet - being pulled down by gravity. That pull never ceases. It is a perpetual motion. Or as perpetual as science definitions will allow.
We and every object on our planet, and on every celestial body in the universe, are relentlessly, ceaselessly and eternally pulled towards the or a centre of gravity. To cut a many years-long story short, the idea came to me that this downwards force is caused by an equally infinite, perpetual energy; which has to be the "stuff of the universe"; which another very long story persuades me is "light" or electromagnetic energy. This stuff surrounds us to a scientifically calculated depth of 43.7 b.l.y. (billion light years) being the horizon of the "visible universe". This horizon is as near infinity as we humans need to know of. From perpetual-motion and the infinite Ocean-of-Light, I had to ascribe a slight mass to light - and then add-in the Casimir-Shadow where light does not reach, inside every gravitational object. The light presses and the absence of light, the shadow, pulls.
The idea still hangs together, after several years of keeping up to date with scientific ideas and discoveries. So - there it is. ...And we keep being pulled towards the centre - in eternal, perpetual-motion. Black Holes beckon us all - and beyond the black-holes...?
My previous 2,000 words note is at: GRAVITY - A NEW THEORY
*************
Back to gravity:-
In the simplest terms, gravity is the shadow of matter cast by light - the electromagnetic spectrum. The deepest such shadow is a Black Hole. Sail a few million light years from our galaxy, the Milky Way, into "empty" space. Give yourself plenty of elbow room. Take telescopes of every sort. Observe the universe that surrounds you, communicating its majesty and complexity to your new location. Set about building a sphere in which all of that information is excluded, a sphere that excludes all electromagnetic waves, particles and signals. Make the surface of the sphere of the most perfect mirror - that will turn away and exclude photons. But inside it will be full of other waves. Fill it with iron, one of the most plentiful heavy elements; that will rid it of many more wavelengths, unable to penetrate the sphere. In the centre of the sphere, the shadow deepens. But iron transmits electricity - your sphere is full of buzzing electrons. add internal coats of non-magnetic materials, such as ubiquitous silicon. That will cut out more wavelengths and further deepen the shadow. Keep going. I'm sure you are getting the picture ...as the shadow deepens. At some point in your sphere building, the external pressure from the universal waves of the electromagnetic spectrum will suddenly collapse the structure - in the blink of an eye. You have created a black-hole. It is very heavy and very dense. The pressure inside is zero. The external pressure of the ocean of the stuff of the universe is immense - almost infinite. Your sphere has been crushed by light.
The universal ocean, the stuff of the universe, is light - the electromagnetic spectrum.
Electromagnetic (light), and nuclear forces come first and form matter.
Gravity acts between matter. Gravity cannot be shielded but is countered by energy.
The entire universe is visible from any point. The light we see is data-rich & coherent.
Light is some-thing, not no-thing; it has information, mass and exerts pressure.
The Casimir-effect excludes some light-waves from between objects.
All gravitational bodies (objects) are externally pressed on every point by light.
All objects have internal "Casimir-Shadows", zones with reduced wavelengths.
The external pressure & internal shadows cause, indeed are, gravity.
These combined forces push & pull all particles to the centre of gravity.
This is the "ever tightening knot" of gravity.
The shadows increase, the deeper particles delve, & so density increases.
The relentless push & pull to the centre tends to form Black-Holes.
The centres of gravity change continuously as mass joins or quits objects.
All clusters of objects have common centres of gravity, which continually shift.
The multitude of centres of gravity constitute universal inertia.
The pressure in a black hole equals the 43.7 b.l.y. or infinite universal pressure of light.
All objects tend to implode not explode. They are "bubbles" in the ocean of light.
We read data-rich light from 43.7 b.l.y away; light & its broadcast data are stable.
The broadcast light signals are informed & reformed by every event, large or small.
Our thoughts and actions are events, as broadcast & persistent as radio signals.
Every observation point in the universe gives a unique view of the universe.
The largest observation point/sphere is the whole universe, which allows the largest waves.
Smaller observation points or spheres exclude waves larger than the sphere. (Also Casimir).
The data-rich ocean (field) of light is coherent energy. It coheres.
Matter is formed from very large spheres of coherent light condensing into an object.
We do not know how this condensation (e=mc2) happens. It is not the Higgs.
We do know how to reverse the condensation & release the light, in nuclear explosions.
As condensation makes matter, the supplying light sphere experiences a brief partial vacuum.
These ephemeral vacuums in the coherent light occur continuously, (unreformed Hoyle).
Do light waves have mass that accumulates with "depth"? implying a "rigid" medium.
Light waves are persistently coherent and stable data carriers, even across 43.7 b.l.y.
Hubble Expansion is queried by some physicists. Is it a trick of the propagation of light?
All light propagates as spheres of waves from energetic events. Where spheres intersect, we detect bullet-like photons /electrons etc. moving away from the event. Thus photons are whorls of waves, moving apart on the surface of spheres. Affect the spherical wave-surface and it simultaneously affects all the photons; Action at a distance.
CMB consistency is queried by some cosmologists. Is the 3 Kelvin temperature patchy?
But light condensing to matter is proved - not least by exploding matter back to light.
Matter exists - and it is made from light - hence nuclear bomb electromagnetic flashes.
Pre-Big Bang, Hoyle thought energy condensed to make particles - throughout space.
Condensing light to matter attenuates the ocean and reduces the cohering force; this is dark-energy.
Hubble expansion continuously causes universal virtual partial vacuums at every point.
This expansion attenuates the coherent ocean, (infinite) light rushes in. This is dark-matter.
Nowhere is shielded from the universal light energy (CMB).
QED
February 2016 - GRAVITY WAVES discovered at last.
On the other hand.... a contrary view from Wal Thornhill. Einstein was wrong.
NEW GRAVITY - PROOF OF CONCEPT
Expand planet Earth into thousands of jigsaw pieces spaced across a 500,000 km sphere.
The whole would have the same mass, orbits and spin, and a centre of gravity..
Each piece would have very little gravity. So what has changed?
The separation and expansion has allowed most light waves to surround each piece.
These waves between objects reduces the Casimir Effect.
Each piece is floating in the 43.7 b.l.y. deep ocean of electromagnetism.
Will starlight bend around this expanded gravitational mass or object?
Probably not.
Is "curved space" a work-around to explain massless light?
(This expansion analogy is detailed in the previous longer article)
THE UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES
All objects are dissipative; most of what goes in comes out. Humans absorb 50 tonnes in 70 years.
The Earth is a dissipative gravitational object. Space dust and light continuously fall onto it.
All the mass tries to reach the centre of gravity. Dense masses reach the centre.
Why does the additional mass tend to the centre? How is most of it dissipated?
We can answer the second question but not the first, which we call gravity.
Light has mass. As do neutrinos and all particles.
http://dujs.dartmouth.edu/2002S/pressureoflight.pdf
BULLET CLUSTER - NS-18 March 2017 - New thoughts.
Mark Anderson writes in New Scientist 18 Mar 2017 "Strangely attractive - Fresh suspicions have reopened the case for a radical rethink of gravity"
Anderson re-visits the conundrum of galaxies and clusters of galaxies revolving at their perimeters more rapidly than Newton's and Einstein's gravity calculations for visible matter allow. Hence - invoking theories of Dark Matter and Dark Energy to add the "missing" mass; which is calculated at about 90% of the whole. In other words, we can only "see" about 10% of the gravitational mass of these astronomical bodies. How might this fit with my New Gravity?
These objects rotate and congregate as do wagon wheels, the hubs move round slowly, the end of the "spokes" on the outer rim move quickly. It is this speed at the extremities which puzzles astrophysics. Given the mass we can measure and therefore the gravity of the mass, the centripetal force outwards (like motor bikes on the Wall of Death) from the centre should throw off the outer objects - into the void. The galaxies rotate as if they are solid objects (wagon wheels or dinner plates) bonded together. Science "knows" them to be clusters of billions of independent, individual stars, bound together and held in place by the mysterious force of gravity. "Mysterious" because, while science knows what gravity does - we don't know what it is - except of course for my new theory - which is difficult to fit with the observations. Could Dark Matter be electrical forces?
Studying the NASA photograph of the Bullet Cluster shows dozens of visible and hundreds of almost invisible galaxies. We know they all rotate - individually, and rotate when they cluster. I think they rotate, from rotating primary particles upwards, when light-beams (which have mass) collide at light-speed, at angles. What this marvellous photograph tells me is that stars and galaxies are formed as proposed by my New Gravity theory and that they and all objects are formed from light - in the case of stars by massive amounts of light concentrated into dense bright stars. This concentration is drawn from the vicinity of the star (E=MC2), reducing the density of light (which has mass) around the star, or galaxy, etc.
This reduction of density allows the outer perimeter to move more rapidly than matter nearer the centre of the star - which is slowed by inertia; this coherence is the counter equivalent of pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. The common flying-saucer shape of the galaxies indicates to me that they are rotating in a medium which has friction - light has mass and it coheres - which shapes them. The galaxies appear to have random orientations - yet most assume the same shape. This indicates equal pressure from the universal medium at every point, regardless of orientation. The 43.7 b.l.y. deep ocean of light pressing in from every horizon.
We think we know that each galaxy has a Black-Hole at its centre. The shape of galaxies certainly indicates forces that look like swirling liquid going down a plughole (on Earth, very clearly an effect of gravity on Earth's rotation). Black Holes almost certainly suck in matter and ultimately spew out energy - which, I guess, recycles as sub-atomic particles are formed from the energy. These multitudes of massive black-holes, galaxies and clusters of galaxies will have common centres of gravity, which we might one day discern on astronomical scales. If the alleged Big-Bang theory holds, all the centres of gravity have a single centre of gravity - the centre of the universe. These or this centre are, I think, universal inertia. The similarly shaped wagon-wheel or plate shaped galaxies relate to universal inertia, which might confer their apparent rigidity (as wagon wheels or plates).
I set out a sketchy idea for dark-energy and dark matter in my original slides www.noelhodson.com/index_files/Life-Universe-Everything-8Mar2011.pdf ,which eventually gave rise to this New Gravity idea.
New note - 18th March 2017:
https://astrobites.org/2016/11/04/the-bullet-cluster-a-smoking-gun-for-dark-matter/BULLET CLUSTER - NS-18 March 2017 - New thoughts.
Mark Anderson writes in New Scientist 18 Mar 2017 "Strangely attractive - Fresh suspicions have reopened the case for a radical rethink of gravity"
 |
| Bullet Cluster - two galaxies colliding - NASA |
Anderson re-visits the conundrum of galaxies and clusters of galaxies revolving at their perimeters more rapidly than Newton's and Einstein's gravity calculations for visible matter allow. Hence - invoking theories of Dark Matter and Dark Energy to add the "missing" mass; which is calculated at about 90% of the whole. In other words, we can only "see" about 10% of the gravitational mass of these astronomical bodies. How might this fit with my New Gravity?
These objects rotate and congregate as do wagon wheels, the hubs move round slowly, the end of the "spokes" on the outer rim move quickly. It is this speed at the extremities which puzzles astrophysics. Given the mass we can measure and therefore the gravity of the mass, the centripetal force outwards (like motor bikes on the Wall of Death) from the centre should throw off the outer objects - into the void. The galaxies rotate as if they are solid objects (wagon wheels or dinner plates) bonded together. Science "knows" them to be clusters of billions of independent, individual stars, bound together and held in place by the mysterious force of gravity. "Mysterious" because, while science knows what gravity does - we don't know what it is - except of course for my new theory - which is difficult to fit with the observations. Could Dark Matter be electrical forces?
Studying the NASA photograph of the Bullet Cluster shows dozens of visible and hundreds of almost invisible galaxies. We know they all rotate - individually, and rotate when they cluster. I think they rotate, from rotating primary particles upwards, when light-beams (which have mass) collide at light-speed, at angles. What this marvellous photograph tells me is that stars and galaxies are formed as proposed by my New Gravity theory and that they and all objects are formed from light - in the case of stars by massive amounts of light concentrated into dense bright stars. This concentration is drawn from the vicinity of the star (E=MC2), reducing the density of light (which has mass) around the star, or galaxy, etc.
This reduction of density allows the outer perimeter to move more rapidly than matter nearer the centre of the star - which is slowed by inertia; this coherence is the counter equivalent of pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. The common flying-saucer shape of the galaxies indicates to me that they are rotating in a medium which has friction - light has mass and it coheres - which shapes them. The galaxies appear to have random orientations - yet most assume the same shape. This indicates equal pressure from the universal medium at every point, regardless of orientation. The 43.7 b.l.y. deep ocean of light pressing in from every horizon.
We think we know that each galaxy has a Black-Hole at its centre. The shape of galaxies certainly indicates forces that look like swirling liquid going down a plughole (on Earth, very clearly an effect of gravity on Earth's rotation). Black Holes almost certainly suck in matter and ultimately spew out energy - which, I guess, recycles as sub-atomic particles are formed from the energy. These multitudes of massive black-holes, galaxies and clusters of galaxies will have common centres of gravity, which we might one day discern on astronomical scales. If the alleged Big-Bang theory holds, all the centres of gravity have a single centre of gravity - the centre of the universe. These or this centre are, I think, universal inertia. The similarly shaped wagon-wheel or plate shaped galaxies relate to universal inertia, which might confer their apparent rigidity (as wagon wheels or plates).
I set out a sketchy idea for dark-energy and dark matter in my original slides www.noelhodson.com/index_files/Life-Universe-Everything-8Mar2011.pdf ,which eventually gave rise to this New Gravity idea.
*****
Note - from a conversation with Marilyn B 24 OCT 2017. The Aether-Matrix carries and is the totality of broadcasts of the energetic, coherent, data-rich waves and particles (in a hexagonal field/ocean EH) which are focused (in-tension) to form objects from "pure" energy (i.e. light) - e.g. formation of a planet or a star, or a human. All objects, all things, are such focused waves cohering. The objects tend to implode, not to explode, from the external, focused pressure of the ocean of light (e.g. black-holes). The diameter of the object dictates the size of waves any object or sphere can contain. The location of the object/sphere dictates the precise "view", angle of view, it has, or can record, of the universe. The wavelengths and locations are thus unique. Thus, every possible sphere is unique. The waves in the Aether-Matrix impart information (we can read them) of past, present (and future?) events. All such waves are changed moment-by-moment by every energetic event which re-form and in-form the Aether-Matrix; from which all things, objects, and next-events emerge.
31 Jan 2017 - A diversion into dark-matter & dark energy. A note for later expansion. I am speculating that the 80% to 90% missing mass is the history of the object. e.g. A man is the sum of sub-atomic, atomic, molecular and chemical parts; but is also informed by his life and experience to date. This track record is visible to all who care to look. We refer to it as character, or charisma, or authority - and a thousand other terms. A man's history comes with him and immediately determines his status the moment he meets other humans. We can and do all read this information - First impressions count and are made by us in a micro-second. So we are made of mass and energy and our unique time-line or history. We are organisms on time-lines that date back to the earliest organisms, billions of years ago. I will resist the temptation to expand our past and present into the future. The past, history is real energy which has identifiable presence and impact which can be scientifically analysed.
Our histories add gravity, or the opposite, to our person. Most other humans can read the signals that our histories broadcast. History carries mass and energy.
Similarly, all objects have history. It is worth revisiting the fact that all particles are unique and occupy a unique location in the universe. The long lived, almost eternal, (I know that's a scientific heresy) average proton carries a very long history, of many billions of years. In theory, we could track back from this moment, to the previous moment etc and understand a proton's life-story. It does bring its history with it to the present moment. More later
17 FEB 2017 - Later. - Last night at the Sheldonian, I watched and heard The Oxford Philharmonic Orchestra, soloist Janice Jansen, play Brahms Violin concerto - and play it brilliantly. Examining humans, which we all know and that we are (apart from DJ Trump), and using one-second as a popular handy historic time unit, confirms for me that history, the past, accumulates with each passing second. Janice Jansen's skills have been acquired from inheritance, honed by practice, to produce a superior, integrated organism; which can be tracked back to the first life forms on this planet - and earlier, back to the formation of the solar system etc. Second by second, time knits another layer of organised (chaotic layers would evaporate) entangled particles, which includes the life-time-line of the remarkable violinist. Each layer incorporates the entanglement of the electromagnetic presence of all particles - the entire universe - one second ago, laid on two seconds ago, laid on three seconds ago - etc. These organised layers (fields) are cumulatively organised - for example evolving to enable intelligence - and cumulatively energetic. Certainly the immediate visible presence of the particles (and underlying electromagnetism and nuclear energies) which we recognise as the present form - the NOW - of Ms Jansen, which is communicating itself to us and to the universe, is an energetic ephemeral ghost, a feeble fading phantom, if the accumulated history is ignored. We are incapable of relating to the NOW surface - look! its gone already - but we do relate to the highly organised organism that is built from, that evolves from, whose foundations depend on, the beginning of time. These past layers have energy; energy is equivalent to mass. We recognise and admire the power and depths of that organised and wilfully directed energy. e.g. "Shallow" people, lacking coherence and depth, unwind and fade away. The same is true of of all phenomena in the universe. Protons have great historic depths. The analogy is 3D printers, laying down atoms and molecules in organised patterns skin upon skin - second by second; they evolve into useful forms. Each layer is energetic, each layers depends on history, each communicates across the entire surface (visible universe). What we "see" is a surface image - containing 5% of the mass-energy, built on the very real 95% mass of the past. This might be what mathematics discovers when it finds multiple - even infinite - dimensions; and missing mass. Gravity probably runs deep. Earlier speculation on the same theme: DISSIPATIVE PHENOMENA (2)
27 Feb 2017 - Another note. FERMI'S PARADOX. If the universe is so old and so big there must be many advanced civilisations. So, Where Are all the Aliens? I would turn the question around. We are the only civilisation we know; we evolved over about 2 billion years; When will we be able to visit other civilisations and how? On the how question - given the light-years distances we can't travel there but might be able to scatter our hardened DNA which when it lands recruits elements and recreates us. But more effectively - the DNA is an expression of electromagnetic patterns (all things broadcast their presence via electromagnetic waves) so broadcast the patterns, programmed to re-create us upon landing on fertile planets. Or we can sit and wait for flying saucers.
Our histories add gravity, or the opposite, to our person. Most other humans can read the signals that our histories broadcast. History carries mass and energy.
Similarly, all objects have history. It is worth revisiting the fact that all particles are unique and occupy a unique location in the universe. The long lived, almost eternal, (I know that's a scientific heresy) average proton carries a very long history, of many billions of years. In theory, we could track back from this moment, to the previous moment etc and understand a proton's life-story. It does bring its history with it to the present moment. More later
17 FEB 2017 - Later. - Last night at the Sheldonian, I watched and heard The Oxford Philharmonic Orchestra, soloist Janice Jansen, play Brahms Violin concerto - and play it brilliantly. Examining humans, which we all know and that we are (apart from DJ Trump), and using one-second as a popular handy historic time unit, confirms for me that history, the past, accumulates with each passing second. Janice Jansen's skills have been acquired from inheritance, honed by practice, to produce a superior, integrated organism; which can be tracked back to the first life forms on this planet - and earlier, back to the formation of the solar system etc. Second by second, time knits another layer of organised (chaotic layers would evaporate) entangled particles, which includes the life-time-line of the remarkable violinist. Each layer incorporates the entanglement of the electromagnetic presence of all particles - the entire universe - one second ago, laid on two seconds ago, laid on three seconds ago - etc. These organised layers (fields) are cumulatively organised - for example evolving to enable intelligence - and cumulatively energetic. Certainly the immediate visible presence of the particles (and underlying electromagnetism and nuclear energies) which we recognise as the present form - the NOW - of Ms Jansen, which is communicating itself to us and to the universe, is an energetic ephemeral ghost, a feeble fading phantom, if the accumulated history is ignored. We are incapable of relating to the NOW surface - look! its gone already - but we do relate to the highly organised organism that is built from, that evolves from, whose foundations depend on, the beginning of time. These past layers have energy; energy is equivalent to mass. We recognise and admire the power and depths of that organised and wilfully directed energy. e.g. "Shallow" people, lacking coherence and depth, unwind and fade away. The same is true of of all phenomena in the universe. Protons have great historic depths. The analogy is 3D printers, laying down atoms and molecules in organised patterns skin upon skin - second by second; they evolve into useful forms. Each layer is energetic, each layers depends on history, each communicates across the entire surface (visible universe). What we "see" is a surface image - containing 5% of the mass-energy, built on the very real 95% mass of the past. This might be what mathematics discovers when it finds multiple - even infinite - dimensions; and missing mass. Gravity probably runs deep. Earlier speculation on the same theme: DISSIPATIVE PHENOMENA (2)
27 Feb 2017 - Another note. FERMI'S PARADOX. If the universe is so old and so big there must be many advanced civilisations. So, Where Are all the Aliens? I would turn the question around. We are the only civilisation we know; we evolved over about 2 billion years; When will we be able to visit other civilisations and how? On the how question - given the light-years distances we can't travel there but might be able to scatter our hardened DNA which when it lands recruits elements and recreates us. But more effectively - the DNA is an expression of electromagnetic patterns (all things broadcast their presence via electromagnetic waves) so broadcast the patterns, programmed to re-create us upon landing on fertile planets. Or we can sit and wait for flying saucers.
25 Oct 2016 - 2 notes: NS 22nd Oct 2016:
1) Ulf Meissner, University of Bonn, shows that certain light (light in mass) nuclei exist in a quantum transition state, similar to the phase transition state between e.g. liquid water - steam - ice. "State One being a strange gas-like state of matter, in which the particles hardly interact, and the other, more like a liquid, in which they do (interact)."
Is Ulf Meissner "seeing" the transition from waves to particles and back again; as discussed in the paragraph below?
2) Fluffy ducky: "Rosetta's comet is as weak as fluffy snow. Images from the probe show comet 67P is cracking under seismic stresses. That suggests its tensile strength is very low, and its distinctive duck shape will probably change in a few hundred years."
I visited and part predicted this lightweight-comets factoid a year or two ago in these blog essays on gravity, after puzzling about all matter being determined to reach the centre of gravity of a large object. "The ever tightening knot of gravity, ultimately resulting in black-holes". I wondered if new objects, forming from Fred Hoyle's creation of particles throughout space, i.e. my vortexes of light; (unreformed pre-big-bang Hoyle); would simply link loosely together as atoms in gas do, impelled by electromagnetism and nuclear forces, and form lace-like networks (in the almost infinite ocean of light). As the loose networks grow, the matter has more Casimir-Shadows on the "inside", compared to the full glare of light on the "outside"; which is gravity. If so, then it makes sense that gas in space forms shapeless "fluffy" comets, which eventually combine until the mass is 700 km diameter and becomes ball-shaped (I think, due to Casimir forces) - on its way to becoming planet or star like (see Mike Follows, NS Letters, below)
(13 Oct 16 NB - Sunlight crosses space in an ocean of coherent electromagnetic waves (light). Whenever and wherever the waves encounter matter or resistance, however dense or ephemeral, the waves break into (quanta) particles. Simile - water trickling onto a dry dusty surface forming droplets through surface tension. Think about telephone and electric cables transmitting energy, propagating, within and around (magnetic field) the cables. We can never "see" light waves without our physicality "interfering with the waves; which causes the particles - photons. - Think on it - 20th Oct 16 - Science likes to isolate elements and study them individually. So, for example, we might study only visible light arriving from the Sun and striking the Earth's atmosphere and magnetic field. However, the universe is very complex and from the complexity emerge baffling and delicate organisations, such as the human brain and consciousness. So, in considering light waves crossing the space between the Sun and Earth and striking, say, human skin as photons, it is sensible to consider the whole of sunlight - which has many constituent parts, including for example neutrinos. We define neutrinos as particles, almost massless, propagating at near the speed of light, which penetrate not merely our bodies but the whole planet, without colliding with existing atoms or sub-atomic particles. Do neutrinos carry data? It is reasonable to suppose that neutrinos "travel" in waves, which at the slightest interference break into particles. We cannot "see" neutrinos in their wave state, because the act of looking interferes and creates the particle "foam" or particles that we do occasionally detect. The point of this paragraph is to relate it to Casimir and the blocking by matter of sunlight, starlight, galaxy-light etc, creating greater pressure on the outside than on the inside - which is gravity. The waves and particles pressure and absence, is complex. It is conceivable that gravitational objects, formed in "pure" streams of parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, vary from the gravitational-constant. Such "pure" streams or beams might occur from specialised regions of space - e.g. from extraordinary galaxies, black-holes, or other astrophysical phenomena - NB Light waves divide into photons, light-quanta, like water molecules; what sticks the photons together to make a wave?).
What I did on my holidays: August 2016 - I observed inflatable toys and balls on an absolutely still swimming pool. They were propelled by the slightest breeze, making interesting wakes that were magnified visually on the bottom of the pool, as in Hockney - and more pertinently, as in Casimir (fully exposed behind, sheltered in complex patterns ahead, thus with a partial vacuum ahead). The large and small objects always clustered to one spot, usually one of the corners of the pool. It occurred to me that given the Big Bang theory, and Hubble expansion and the CMB of 3 Kelvin, then those energetic events might constitute a wind or current, within the universal ocean (3 dimensional) which could be the driver of objects of any size into clusters. And thus the beginning of the formation of a gravitational body.
1) Ulf Meissner, University of Bonn, shows that certain light (light in mass) nuclei exist in a quantum transition state, similar to the phase transition state between e.g. liquid water - steam - ice. "State One being a strange gas-like state of matter, in which the particles hardly interact, and the other, more like a liquid, in which they do (interact)."
Is Ulf Meissner "seeing" the transition from waves to particles and back again; as discussed in the paragraph below?
2) Fluffy ducky: "Rosetta's comet is as weak as fluffy snow. Images from the probe show comet 67P is cracking under seismic stresses. That suggests its tensile strength is very low, and its distinctive duck shape will probably change in a few hundred years."
I visited and part predicted this lightweight-comets factoid a year or two ago in these blog essays on gravity, after puzzling about all matter being determined to reach the centre of gravity of a large object. "The ever tightening knot of gravity, ultimately resulting in black-holes". I wondered if new objects, forming from Fred Hoyle's creation of particles throughout space, i.e. my vortexes of light; (unreformed pre-big-bang Hoyle); would simply link loosely together as atoms in gas do, impelled by electromagnetism and nuclear forces, and form lace-like networks (in the almost infinite ocean of light). As the loose networks grow, the matter has more Casimir-Shadows on the "inside", compared to the full glare of light on the "outside"; which is gravity. If so, then it makes sense that gas in space forms shapeless "fluffy" comets, which eventually combine until the mass is 700 km diameter and becomes ball-shaped (I think, due to Casimir forces) - on its way to becoming planet or star like (see Mike Follows, NS Letters, below)
(13 Oct 16 NB - Sunlight crosses space in an ocean of coherent electromagnetic waves (light). Whenever and wherever the waves encounter matter or resistance, however dense or ephemeral, the waves break into (quanta) particles. Simile - water trickling onto a dry dusty surface forming droplets through surface tension. Think about telephone and electric cables transmitting energy, propagating, within and around (magnetic field) the cables. We can never "see" light waves without our physicality "interfering with the waves; which causes the particles - photons. - Think on it - 20th Oct 16 - Science likes to isolate elements and study them individually. So, for example, we might study only visible light arriving from the Sun and striking the Earth's atmosphere and magnetic field. However, the universe is very complex and from the complexity emerge baffling and delicate organisations, such as the human brain and consciousness. So, in considering light waves crossing the space between the Sun and Earth and striking, say, human skin as photons, it is sensible to consider the whole of sunlight - which has many constituent parts, including for example neutrinos. We define neutrinos as particles, almost massless, propagating at near the speed of light, which penetrate not merely our bodies but the whole planet, without colliding with existing atoms or sub-atomic particles. Do neutrinos carry data? It is reasonable to suppose that neutrinos "travel" in waves, which at the slightest interference break into particles. We cannot "see" neutrinos in their wave state, because the act of looking interferes and creates the particle "foam" or particles that we do occasionally detect. The point of this paragraph is to relate it to Casimir and the blocking by matter of sunlight, starlight, galaxy-light etc, creating greater pressure on the outside than on the inside - which is gravity. The waves and particles pressure and absence, is complex. It is conceivable that gravitational objects, formed in "pure" streams of parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, vary from the gravitational-constant. Such "pure" streams or beams might occur from specialised regions of space - e.g. from extraordinary galaxies, black-holes, or other astrophysical phenomena - NB Light waves divide into photons, light-quanta, like water molecules; what sticks the photons together to make a wave?).
What I did on my holidays: August 2016 - I observed inflatable toys and balls on an absolutely still swimming pool. They were propelled by the slightest breeze, making interesting wakes that were magnified visually on the bottom of the pool, as in Hockney - and more pertinently, as in Casimir (fully exposed behind, sheltered in complex patterns ahead, thus with a partial vacuum ahead). The large and small objects always clustered to one spot, usually one of the corners of the pool. It occurred to me that given the Big Bang theory, and Hubble expansion and the CMB of 3 Kelvin, then those energetic events might constitute a wind or current, within the universal ocean (3 dimensional) which could be the driver of objects of any size into clusters. And thus the beginning of the formation of a gravitational body.
The gravity analogy is that the
sailing of real objects, of any size across the surface are planets, stars,
molecules and atoms etc. are the real moving things we experience. The wakes on
the water surface are the, almost impossible to see, signs of the (endless
almost eternal) push and pull of gravity. The magnification of the wakes that
we can readily see, though ephemeral, on the bottom of the pool, are tantamount
to our measuring instruments, which enable us to know what gravity does (not
what it is); as is the clustering of the objects as they form larger
gravitational bodies (analogous to the Casimir effect). The invisible, light
breeze is the cosmic wind, as near as damn it eternal, driven by the Big Bang
(which here is taken as fact not theory), which has multiple causes and which
is greatly more complicated than Earth’s weather systems. It is the cosmic wind
that pushes (pressure on the windward side) and pulls (partial vacuum on the
leeward side) all objects. Now imagine the cosmic wind as undersea currents –
in three dimensions. Does the cosmic wind/ current exist? Light –
Electromagnetic energy – has mass and is ubiquitous – and is everywhere. It is
the stuff of the universe. This is what gravity is – not what it does.
(pressure
required to overcome repulsion between protons)
NS The last word Mike Follows 10 Sep 16 - NB - Density of asteroids etc "Any rocky object with a diameter of more than 700 kilometres, should be spherical" low gravity/density allows taller structures; hence Olympus Mons on Mars is twice the height of Mount Everest. - This fits with the thought that small asteroids are bits clinging together in irregular shapes with spaces between that allow light to penetrate - so, less push and pull, less gravity, less density. As objects grow by accretion, more and more light is excluded until the parts collapse into all the spaces, and increase the density and the gravity.
NS 10 Sep 16 - NB - Phonons, Magnons, Excitons, Majoranas, Weyl Fermions: Holes in Reality. Particles that don't exist but do affect other particles. Relevant to my thought that all particles are whirlpools /tornados on spherical waves of globes moving to or from energetic events. These ephemeral particles are too small to be interfered with - thus they persist as does the Jovian Red Spot; they appear to be moving apart faster than light (being on opposite sides of the spheres whose waves propagate at C).
NS The last word Mike Follows 10 Sep 16 - NB - Density of asteroids etc "Any rocky object with a diameter of more than 700 kilometres, should be spherical" low gravity/density allows taller structures; hence Olympus Mons on Mars is twice the height of Mount Everest. - This fits with the thought that small asteroids are bits clinging together in irregular shapes with spaces between that allow light to penetrate - so, less push and pull, less gravity, less density. As objects grow by accretion, more and more light is excluded until the parts collapse into all the spaces, and increase the density and the gravity.
NS 10 Sep 16 - NB - Phonons, Magnons, Excitons, Majoranas, Weyl Fermions: Holes in Reality. Particles that don't exist but do affect other particles. Relevant to my thought that all particles are whirlpools /tornados on spherical waves of globes moving to or from energetic events. These ephemeral particles are too small to be interfered with - thus they persist as does the Jovian Red Spot; they appear to be moving apart faster than light (being on opposite sides of the spheres whose waves propagate at C).
THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL REQUIREMENT FOR THIS THEORY IS THAT LIGHT HAS MASS.
13
April 2016 - Propelled by light from a laser beam on Earth, a feather-weight Breakthrough
Starshot craft is being
designed to go on a 40 trillion km, 20 year flight to Alpha Centauri, at 1/5th
light-speed; 60,000 km per second. BREAKTHROUGH FOUNDATION
In 1901, various
labs measured light-pressure
LIGHT HAS MASS - “…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 calculations – being 102 grams, the weight of a small apple – 0.0000047N spread over one square-metre is pretty small)
MASS OF LIGHT - WIKIPEDIA SAYS:
Radiation pressure is the pressure exerted upon any surface exposed to electromagnetic radiation. Radiation
pressure implies an interaction between electromagnetic radiation and bodies of
various types, including clouds of particles or gases. The interactions can be absorption, reflection, or some of both (the common case).
Bodies also emit radiation and thereby experience a resulting pressure.
The
forces generated by radiation pressure are generally too small to be detected
under everyday circumstances; however, they do play a crucial role in some
settings, such as astronomy and astrodynamics.
For example, had the effects of the sun's radiation pressure on the spacecraft
of the Viking program been ignored, the spacecraft would
have missed Mars orbit by about 15,000 kilometers.[1]
This
article addresses the macroscopic aspects of radiation pressure. Detailed
quantum mechanical aspects of interactions are addressed in specialized
articles on the subject. The details of how photons of various wavelengths
interact with atoms can be explored through links in the See also section.
Solar
sails[edit]
Main
article: Solar sail
Solar
sailing, an experimental method of spacecraft propulsion,
uses radiation pressure from the Sun as a motive force. The idea of
interplanetary travel by light was mentioned by Jules Verne in From the Earth to the Moon.
A sail
reflects about 90% of the incident radiation. The 10% that is absorbed is
radiated away from both surfaces, with the proportion radiated from the unlit
surface depending on the thermal conductivity of the sail. A sail has
curvature, surface irregularities, and other minor factors that affect its
performance.
The
Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) has successfully
unfurled a solar sail in space which has already succeeded in propelling its
payload with theIKAROS project.
Cosmic
effects of radiation pressure[edit]
*************
The
misapprehension is the statement light has no mass. The true
statement is "a photon has no mass" .
Two
photons can very well carry a mass, the measure of the added four vectors.
There exists an invariant mass even for mass less particles,
this is for two photons with an angle theta in their direction of motion:
And this
is just for two photons. An electromagnetic wave will always diverge, there is a 1/r**2 (laser light diverges less)
fall in the energy density of the wave, and there will be angles between the
multitude of photons. Thus an electromagnetic wave can be characterized by a
total mass, but that has nothing to do with information of course. The
Heisenberg uncertainty principle will also ensure that there will always be
some divergence.
(16 Jun 2016 - AN ALTERNATIVE IMAGE OF THE ATOMIC MODEL)
All electromagnetic waves are globe shaped emissions from or to an energetic event. If all sub-atomic particles, e.g. Quarks, are vortexes in or on a wave and the vortexes are spinning (real spin) at C or C squared then:
Disturbing the wave will affect all particles on that wave (action at a distance);
Collisions will either merge, break or bounce the vortexes /Quarks /particles depending on the direction of their spinning surfaces and speed of impact (as in Rutherford's and CERN's collisions):
As all particles are made of the same stuff, some more tightly wound than others, there is no contradiction with the observed "billiard ball" concepts of the atomic structure:
The direction of spin and angle of collision might confer positive or negative charge:
Particular combinations of spinning vortexes, such as say three Quarks up and down, might form almost indestructible groups, such as protons, which we can only probe or collide with other similarly constructed particles, thus we perceive almost impenetrable "solid" surfaces:
Given wave-forms, such vortexes could be formed where waves cross:
Once formed, only another particle /vortex could disturb the complex (inertia and permanence):
To form a "particle" from a wave, the vortexes would wind-in large amounts of energy E=MC2.
Because the EM waves intersect at all points as their globes expand and rebound, it seems likely that all information is exchanged continuously.
Particles would manifest a multitude of different wavelengths:
This idea does not contradict observations of The Standard Model.)
********
16th July 2016 - OBJECTIVE COLLAPSE MODELS - NS "Quantum of Solitude" Volume 231 No 3082. by Jon Cartwright.
Still puzzling about Schrodinger's Cat, and the Double-Slit conundrum, and whether human or other observation is a fundamental requirement for wave-function-"collapse"(collapse into our reality) at sub-atomic scales, this New Scientist article puts Daniel Sudarsky, National Autonomous University of Mexico, and team in the frame for continuing with 1970's work to circumvent the need for an observer to trigger fuzzy, indeterminate wave forms into "choosing" a role or identity in the macroscopic world - and thus to make the real world as we know it. The idea is Random Objective Collapse; i.e. without an observer, or without the fantastic idea of multiverses, wavering wave forms naturally collapse into the firm reality that we experience. The alternative Copenhagen convention, human observer idea is here justified as a person's billion, billion, billion atoms, multiplied by their number of sub-atomic particles, each of which is a waveform or wave-particle, becoming entangled with the particle-wave under observation and causing the "collapse".
What is not addressed here, the missing piece of the puzzle, is the sentient life-force, which we animals and blades of grass indisputably possess; which logically must emerge from the universal collapsing wave-forms, alongside the physical forces, and which counteracts the ever increasing entropy of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (the cold dark soup allegedly at the end of our doomed universe - Doom, Doom, Doom). Our billion, billion, billion atoms are somehow organised to form organisms that collect, concentrate, utilize and channel energy and to occasionally produce sentience and intelligence, sufficient to write articles in the New Scientist - and transmit them across the Internet - defying inevitable entropy.
Put more simply, my idea is that the Lifeforce creates our brains and nervous systems being "the most complex object we know of" which operates on about 10 watts, which transmits coherent data-rich readable brain-waves; and which we intentionally concentrate and direct at puzzling, fuzzy waveforms; either discerning their reality or with sufficient power to determine their reality. I guess it is a dynamic, ceaseless, two way relationship - between random creation of subatomic particles from "collapsing" energy waves (light) and deliberate, willful, sentient, unconscious, receiving and broadcasting life-energy waveforms.
Would objects exist without life to observe them? Probably, for a time, but without sentient feed-back and constant re-organisation, the objects would become barren and would indeed end in the cold dark soup of perpetual oblivion under the 2nd Law. Fortunately - the universe is organised by the Lifeforce which confers purpose, identity and meaning - and possibly eternal life.
http://www.noelhodson.com/index_files/Life-Universe-Everything-8Mar2011.pdf
BRIAN COX AND TALES OF DOOM JAN 2013
GRAVITY AND IMMORTALITY OCT 2012
READ MORE - MY NEW GRAVITY ARTICLES:
GRAVITY - A NEW THEORY MAR 2015
CASIMIR-GRAVITY NOV 2014
GRAVITY MASS HIGGS AND BABIES SEP 2013
WHAT IS GRAVITY? FEB 2013
FUSION, GRAVITY, INERTIA, LIFEFORCE. JAN 2013
HIGGS BOSON DIES OCT 2012
HIGGS BOSON AND CUSTARD JUL 2012
GRAVITY AND MOONSHINE - JAN 2012
EIG - Expansion is Gravity MAR 2011
