Gravity : An alternative approach

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by RajeshTrivedi, Sep 27, 2016.

  1. RajeshTrivedi Valued Senior Member

    GR rules the roost in explaining the gravity. It is the most successful theory of gravity and despite the presence of many alternatives, the supremacy of GR rules. But there are certain issues like singularity and reconciliation with quantum mechanics which either require some changes in GR or search for a new theory.

    An attempt is being made here, the maths for the same is to be worked out which may take quite sometime.

      • The universe is full of isotropic stretchable energy field.
    1. The detailed properties of this field is to be worked out
      • This energy field gets stretched in presence of matter.
    1. It is to be worked out if the matter comes from this field itself or not. Equivalence principle suggests that it comes from this energy filed only.
    2. Since it is a 3 Dimensional phenomenon more akin to fluid analysis, and hence Tensor based stress/strain maths is required. Development of required maths is in process.
      • This energy field gets stretched in presence of matter, as the energy density of the matter is higher than that of this field.
      • In case the matter is isolated, not connected to any other matter object, some kind of stability is formed, with energy field getting relaxed around it, in non stretchable form. This may not happen in reality.
      • As soon as other material object is present, this stretching on either side causes Gravity. The gravitational force is dependent on the normal stretching of this field.
      • The stretch force is variable, depending on the stretch.
      • This makes the Gravity variable that is gravitational constant is no longer constant; it is variable depending on the stretch?

    Strong Interaction between quarks

    Is Gravitational Attraction with very high G, as the stretch caused between two quarks is very large.

    Nuclear Force between Neutrons & Protons

    Is Gravitational Attraction with reduced G, as the stretching reduces due to increase in volume.

    Force at Macro Scale between Stars /Galaxies/Planets

    Is Gravitational Attraction with very very reduced G, as the stretching is quite relaxed.

    Some other points
    1. The relationship of Gravitaional Constant Vs stretching is to be worked out, it appears to be a dumb bell shaped curve which peaks just about quark-quark level with reduction on either side.
    2. The light can only traverse a path as guided by this energy field.
    3. Between two objects however apart they are, the light can only traverse if they are connected through this stretched energy field. The stretch has relevance only if two or more particles are interacting.
    1. The question mark, why the value of permittivity is constant? Why only G changes?
    The observational Evidence
    1. The Quark – Quark Bonding for Neutrons / Protons
    The structure of a Hadron (in this case Proton and Neutron) is UUD or UDD, the forces present are Electrostatic Force and Gravitational force as caused due to stretching. Sidestepping the rigorous analysis of spin. The electrostatic force between two quarks tries to keep them apart while Gravitational force as caused due to stretching attempts to bring them closer and an equilibrium is formed. Since it is a 3 quarks structure so some kind of rigorous equilibrium condition is required to be established to enable spin etc.
    1. The Neutrons - Protons Bonding in nucleus
    The stretching is much lesser now, so the gravitational force is reduced.
    1. Why upper limit on the element nucleus ?
    Beyond certain number of nucleons, as the stretch gets reduced, the proton may not be able to attach due to Gravitational attraction.
    1. The atom – atom Bonding
    The stretching is too less, as the energy density is too less, causing very small value of G.

    What all it resolves
    1. Strong Interaction.
    2. Strong Nuclear Force.
    3. Gravity.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. wellwisher Banned Banned

    If you look at the impact gravity, besides space-time contracting, gravity also generates pressure. Pressure creates affects that do not follow the direction of contracting space-time. With pressure, physical distances contract; bond length get smaller, similar to distance in space-time. However, time speeds up; frequencies increase. The time attributes connected to pressure, go opposite to the time direction connected to space-time.

    For example, in the core of stars, where time in space-time runs slowest, this is where we get the highest frequency energy quanta and nuclear vibrations. Time, due to pressure, runs contrary to GR time, which slows down. This is expected, since acceleration due to gravity is d/t/t, or one part distance and two parts time. Therefore one would expect an extra time parameter to appear in space-time; d-t, t.

    Another connected consideration, not talked about, is the three forces of nature give off energy when they lower potential. If an electron drops one energy level, a quanta of energy is released. Gravity also generates pressure, which is force/area. There should be layer of exothermic output.

    A release of energy, due to gravity lowering potential can be inferred from affect. For example, a gravity induced rotation will generated a centrifugal force whose vector is opposite the direction to the center of gravity. A vector opposite gravity, is what one would expect of an energy output from lowering gravitational potential.

    In my opinion, the energy output due to gravity, is the source of dark energy. Neither have been seen in the lab, while both can be inferred from affect, with the output of gravity easier to investigate, since we don't have to depend on observations we can never reach.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Ha, ha thanks for the laugh!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    So close! Space-time does not run slower, TIME runs slower as compared to a lower gravitational field.
    You have some very confused notions of what time is.
    Time is unaffected by pressure. Actually even frequency is unaffected by pressure. What you are talking about is temperature as an increased vibrations of atoms. The temperature of a material generally increases with pressure. However, if I compress a mass by applying pressure the temperature will increase which is a way to measure the increase in the vibrational energy of the atoms. If the pressure is maintained the temperature will decrease to the ambient temperature so the vibrational energy will decrease - even though the pressure remains high.
    So the bottom line is that if I apply heat from a source or if the heat comes from an increase in pressure the vibrational energy is from temperature NOT pressure.
    You don't think the bottom of the ocean is the hottest area of the ocean, do you?
    Now for the biggest misconception. An increase in vibrational motion does not mean there is an increase in the rate of the passage of time. Do you seriously think that if you heat up a piece of metal that time passes more quickly for that metal than it does for you? This is not the first time you have stated this crazy idea - I find it mind boggling that with the help you have been given on understanding time-pressure-temperature that you have not altered your belief at all.
  8. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Only three?
    Which one of the four currently known have you eliminated?
  9. The God Valued Senior Member


    Wow, what is this ? As if that black hole elimination was not sufficient !

    Wow, what is this? As if that 'no black hole' was not sufficient. You seem to be hell bent on displacing GR. Let me get a full hang of what you are saying.
  10. Ultron Registered Senior Member

    Im somehow missing some more specific predictions, which are different from current theories and which could be discussed and potentially confirmed by experiment/observation. You know, like GR is predicting double bending of light around Sun compared to Newton.
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  12. wellwisher Banned Banned

    GR does not explain why, although time slows in terms of space-time, time; frequencies, speed up in terms of material phases.

    In other words, gravity causes pressure, and pressure causes material phases to change. For example, water increases density by a factor or 2-3 within the earth, which is more that the contraction of distance in space-time due to GR. This amount of distance change is not the same for all minerals. Distance contraction in space-time and distance contraction due to pressure, both contract, but they do not always equate.

    Time, on the other hand, goes in the opposite direction, with respect to space-time and matter. Time in space-time slows in the core of the earth. While, the energy and material transitions in the core of the earth, show increased frequencies and not slowed frequencies. GR is useful for space-time, but it is incomplete when it comes to matter. GR does not do a good job for tangible things, but seems to work better for abstract things. Maybe someone can address these observations.

    Newtonian gravity can actually deal much better with matter than can GR. In Newtonian Gravity, gravity is considered a force of nature and not a space-time thing. The observed material transitions are induced by pressure; pressure equals force/area.

    GR is an approximation for Newtonian gravity when it comes to matter. While Newtonian is an approximation for GR when it comes to space-time. A better theory should be able to unify both. All you need to do, is make the speed of light the ground state and all forces combine with space-time.
  13. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    No it doesn't.


    You've already been told that equating pressure to time dilation is nonsense.

    Citation needed.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Absolute boll*cks.
  14. The God Valued Senior Member

    basically you are saying is that both the sub nuclear (strong) and nuclear (weak) forces are nothing but gravitational force. Out of four, you have combined three, making the grand unification exercise almost redundant?
  15. wellwisher Banned Banned

    You seem to need a lot of remedial help. I have patience.

    Explain to all of us, since you are the self proclaimed critic/expert, how does GR predicts a solid iron core in the center of the earth?

    With Newtonian gravity, gravity generates pressure due to the weight (mg) of the mass (m) induced by gravity. While iron under the conditions of temperature and pressure assumed for the core, will form a solid phase. This has nothing do with space-time, since one can generate such phases of iron, on the surface of the earth, in the lab, which is in a different part of the earth's space-time well.

    GR is more useful for looking at things that are far away, when all you have is an energy signal, from which we infer the matter. When you start to look at materials in a direct way; iron core, GR does not apply as well. Gravitational pressure unites all the forces of nature, since they all can come into play, during various levels of phase change; condensation of water to nuclear fusion.

    Your problem is you don't seem to be able to apply knowledge. You depend too much on memorizing and seem to confuse applications as instant taboo, because they are not written down in a text book. One has to know the subject, beyond memorizing, to be good at applications. You should take a refresher course and they try to extrapolate theory so you can get an appreciation of the skill it takes.

    GR has a useful niche, but it is not a do-all.

    As far as high density water, this is written down and could have been memorized. You may need to practice your research skills so you can memory properly.

    The two researchers used density functional theory to calculate from first principles the ionic and electronic conductivity of water across a temperature range of 2000–70,000 K and a density range of 1–3.7 g/cm3. Their calculations showed that as the pressure increases, molecular water turns into an ionic liquid, which at higher temperatures is electronically conducting, in particular above 4000 K and 100 GPa. This is in contrast to previous studies that indicated a transition to a metallic fluid above 7000 K and 250 GPa. Interestingly, this metallic phase is predicted to lie just next to insulating "superionic" ice, in which the oxygen atoms are locked into place but all the hydrogen atoms are free to move around.
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2016
  16. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Is that a goalpost moving?
    Does Newton predict that?

    Too lazy to provide a link?
    Too lazy to READ what it actually says?
    The paper states 0.1-3.7 g/ cm3 - a factor of 37.
    Could you also please quote the part that states such water exists in the Earth.
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2016
  17. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    This is a very, very fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship of GR to Newtonian gravity. GR does better than Newtonian gravity in every case. Every result from Newtonian gravity can be redone in GR, including every attribution of pressure.
  18. sweetpea Valued Senior Member

  19. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    No problems...still although he and his hypothetical nonsense is being torn asunder over there, we must give him at least some praise for undertaking that position, unlike his compatriots/brothers/friends in expletive deleted and the god.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    sweetpea likes this.
  20. RajeshTrivedi Valued Senior Member

    The proposed alternative has two revolutionary points.

    1. The variable nature of Gravity (G).

    Although in theories like MOND etc the variable nature of Gravity is proposed to account for Galaxy Speed Distribution curves, but this proposal does that from the very basic Quark Quark bond to cosmological level. The difference is that it falls rapidly from Sub Nucleonic to Nucleonic to Atomic, to an extent that at atomic level the electromagnetic force takes over. It depends on the stretch factor between two objects.

    2. Upper Limit on Gravity (G)

    The largest value of G appears at sub Nucleonic level, between Q-Q bond. The gravity (G) between two quarks is almost at the peak point (almost?), bringing them closer will result into reduction in gravity.

    This will make the Balck Hole problem vanish as no infinite forces or pressure can be produced by Gravity.

    If you cannot win against a bully*, then soften it. (We the people do it in our relationships, so does the nature).

    *Bully = Gravity during BH collapse.
  21. RajeshTrivedi Valued Senior Member

    Thank you.
  22. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Not needed thank you. I believe for the many reasons given over at Cosmoquest, that it will be as per all those that seek to promote some alternative nonsense from a science forum. a waste of cyber space, here and over there.
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    The forces of the formation of a BH are in no way infinite.
    Most physicists do not believe that any Singularity with infinite quantities will ever form.
    Which means a surface or unknown state of mass/energy of sorts, should exist between the quantum/Planck level and below.
    That is total unmitigated bullshit, and again a reminder that your two so far red pennings over at Cosmoquest and the total avoidance of the issues put to you over there, will see nothing new once it is closed: In other words just another amateurish anti mainstream, fabricated attempt to invalidate that which will never be invalidated and/or falsified from any science forum, here, or over there.

Share This Page