Fleshing Out Wave-Particle Duality in the ISU

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by quantum_wave, Jul 29, 2015.

  1. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    The mystery of Dark Energy is explained in the ISU model based on the premise that we occupy an expanding Big Bang arena within a greater universe. Our home arena is a relatively high wave energy density portion of the universe, surrounded by lower energy density space; space still occupied by the remnants of the greatly expanded (old aged) and lower energy density space of our parent arenas.

    Given that, then the expansion is explained by the force of energy density equalization as mentioned in my last post, and the acceleration of expansion (dark energy) would be explained by the relative effect that the growing distance between galaxies and galaxy groups would have on the force of gravity. That relative motion would cause an imbalance between the two opposing forces since gravity has an inverse relationship to distance and would thus weaken relative to the separation momentum of the galaxies and galaxy groups as they move away from each other.

    As for the cosmological constant, also known as the vacuum energy density of the universe, it doesn't apply in the ISU which features a multiple Big Bang arena landscape. Every arena across that landscape will expand until its expansion is interrupted by intersecting and overlapping with other arenas, resulting in new arenas being formed as described by the process of "arena action".

    (380)
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    In the world of physics and cosmology, ideas tend to emerge slowly, giving the professional community the opportunity for peer review, comments, revisions ... the process works slowly and deliberately. They must address their work to the professional community.

    Note that I make no claims that the ISU model should be considered by the professional community. In fact, I recently posted this statement:

    It isn't surprising that there are many papers discussing the same things I speculate about, like in the referenced article where the premise is that the universe has always existed, there was no singularity, and quantum mechanics plays a role along side the Big Bang.

    The ISU includes, speculatively and hypothetically, the mechanics of quantum action and arena action. I hypothesize a version of quantum gravity in my model, with the wave mechanics that are consistent with my hypothesis that everything in the universe is composed of wave energy traversing the medium of space.

    However, the professionals have a significant barrier as to the speculative content of their papers that a hobbyist like myself does not have; I am set free, so to speak

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    . Being able to incorporate speculation and hypothesis, without the mathematical tie in to existing theories, and without the proofs written in the mathematical language of science, lets me be flowery with my "word salad", even outrageous relative to the mainstream theories, as long as I post in the appropriate sub-forums.

    Thanks for linking to the article, "Big Bang not the start? Quantum theory suggests universe has existed forever"
    By Hannah Osborne

    My feeling is that they imply some of the things I state in my model, but because they are professionals, and know what is required of their papers, i.e. what to say and not to say in order to be taken seriously, they have taken a bold step in the right direction.

    (400)
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Resourcing the CMBR

    The ISU Model keeps evolving because each differentiation from standard theory has ramifications as it fits into the internal consistency of the model. My hobby brings me to contemplate those ramifications, giving me new material to propose. I have included the hypothesis that the CMBR is present in all space, i.e. it fills the infinite medium of space across the greater universe as the result of an infinite history of big bangs and Big Bang arena action. This post is about the ramifications of that hypothesis.

    In a steady state multiple Big Bang arena model like mine, though the CMBR temperature is affected by our own Big Bang, the effect diminishes quickly; the arena cooled much more quickly than predicted by the standard model. In the current consensus model, the CMB must be causally connected to one Big Bang event, the singularity. In the ISU model, our arena expanded into already much cooler surrounding space occupied by the expanding parent arenas.

    That means that there is a temperature gradient in any multiple arena patch of space that would reveal much about the history of the local multiple Big Bang arena action in that patch of space. One gradient, caused by our local Big Bang, makes our arena warmer than in the parent arenas, and the gradient in the parent arenas slightly warmer than in the space that they are expanding into, i.e. in our grand parent arenas.

    Additionally, given that the age of the parent arenas is likely to have varied by billions of years, the background temperature in each might have been measurably different. That heredity would affect the background in our arena, giving it a dipole bias, and that is exactly what we observe; a CMB dipole anisotropy.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    From Wiki: CMBR dipole anisotropy
    From the CMB data it is seen that our local group of galaxies (the galactic cluster that includes the Solar System's Milky Way Galaxy) appears to be moving at 627±22 km/s relative to the reference frame of the CMB (also called the CMB rest frame, or the frame of reference in which there is no motion through the CMB) in the direction of galactic longitude l = 276°±3°, b = 30°±3°.[107][108] This motion results in an anisotropy of the data (CMB appearing slightly warmer in the direction of movement than in the opposite direction).[109] From a theoretical point of view, the existence of a CMB rest frame breaks Lorentz invariance even in empty space far away from any galaxy.[110] The standard interpretation of this temperature variation is a simple velocity red shift and blue shift due to motion relative to the CMB, but alternative cosmological models can explain some fraction of the observed dipole temperature distribution in the CMB.[111]

    (421)
     
  8. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    This is simply to follow up on the last post where I speculated that the CMB dipole anisotropy is caused by the CMB differential existing in the backgrounds of our two parent arenas. That is an idea that is consistent with the hypothetical preconditions to our Big Bang mentioned already, i.e. the process of Arena Action that perpetuates the multiple Big Bang arena landscape of the greater universe.

    That speculation has further ramifications in regard to the standard view that says everything is causally connected to one implied Big Bang, the Singularity. See what the Wiki link about CMBR dipole anisotropy says, based on that theoretical causal connection: "From the CMB data it is seen that our local group of galaxies (the galactic cluster that includes the Solar System's Milky Way Galaxy) appears to be moving at 627±22 km/s relative to the reference frame of the CMB (also called the CMB rest frame, or the frame of reference in which there is no motion through the CMB) in the direction of galactic longitude l = 276°±3°, b = 30°±3°.[107][108] This motion results in an anisotropy of the data (CMB appearing slightly warmer in the direction of movement than in the opposite direction)."

    If you do some layman level research on how they calculate the motion of our local group of galaxies, known as Laniakea, relative to the CMB rest frame, you find that it is the data mostly from the WMAP and Planck sky surveys. They take the CMB temperature readings in all directions, and then using our location as a point in the CMB rest frame, they determine what velocity we must be moving through the CMB, relative to the rest frame, in order to experience the higher temperatures in the direction that they conclude we must be moving. Yikes, 627 kilometers per second; dizzying.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Image source: http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblo...-immense-supercluster-of-100000-galaxies.html

    In the ISU model, the CMB temperatures observed and measured by the sky surveys are considered appropriate and correct. They show that the background appears warmer in one direction. However, that is not because we are zipping through the rest frame toward the Great Attractor at .2% of the speed of light, but because of the dipole bias "born" into our arena's CMB from the differential in background temperatures in our parent arenas. The CMB really is warmer in one direction and cooler in the other, in the ISU.

    (456)
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2015
  9. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Infinitely old vs. 13.7 billion years old suggests more rapid cooling in our Big Bang arena

    Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN) does a pretty good job of accounting for the abundances of elements, especially hydrogen and helium. Though there seems to be an abundance of lithium 6 and an dearth of lithium 7, new findings related to the production of lithium 7 in supernovae seems to have found some that might have been overlooked, i.e. lithium 7 spewing from supernovae.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Perhaps supernovae production of lithium 7 over billions of years solves that problem because we were looking for it in all the wrong places

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    .
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/bridain...olve-the-mystery-of-lithium-in-the-milky-way/

    But what about the lithium 6 problem; why so much of it? If our Big Bang arena cooled more quickly than predicted by current theory, what effect would that have on the abundances of various elements and isotopes? Lithium 6 decays over time, but the levels detected are 1000 times more than predicted by BBN, given the predicted decay rate.
    https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327246-700-13-more-things-the-lithium-problem/

    What if the amount of lithium 6 predicted by BBN is a function of temperatures and the cooling rate of the infant Big Bang arena. For example, if there is a temperature component, and a thermal duration during the earliest moments of the universe that determines the predicted amount in current theory, a small variance in that cooling profile changes the thermal dynamics of those earliest moments. Maybe the timeframe for the decay of helium 6 was shorter than predicted, and so more was produced by the big bang :shrug:.

    My layman level abilities to understand professional level issues like this are certainly lacking, but it seems possible that the over abundance of lithium 6 could be explained by the predicted more rapid cooling in the ISU model.

    (500)
     
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2015
  10. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Earlier in the thread, when I listed various aspects of the ISU, Wellwisher came along and instructed me about water waves in a tank and pointed out the waves don't converge if there is a separating partition, and he theorized that was what was happening in wave mechanics. The distinction that Wellwisher overlooked was the difference between surface waves and spherical waves.

    It turns out that some of the aspects of the ISU that I had listed address that same distinction, so I can move on through the list and address Wellwisher's argument at the same time:

    From the list:
    The medium of space hosts spherical waves; an arena wave is nature's ultimate spherical wave
    Spherical waves traversing the medium of space carry energy
    Waves carry energy on a vast size/amount scale from the tiny [foundational] wave energy at the quantum level to the big bang arena wave energy at the macro level

    Wellwisher's posts mentioned his model several times, saying everything is happening at light speed, or as I interpret that to mean, from the perspective of riding on a photon. And that is fine, you can in my model too. In the ISU, everything is composed of wave energy traversing the medium of space at the speed of light. But wouldn't you lose all perspective if you are riding on a photon :shrug:.

    The differentiating factor between the ISU model and the Light Speed model, if I may coin that name for what Wellwisher is talking about, is that the speed of light, and gravity for that matter, is energy density dependent in the ISU. That means that the speed of light in the local space varies with the wave energy density of that space. A single photon slows down or speeds up relative to the energy density of the medium it is passing through.

    For example, when they cool atoms to a tiny fraction of a degree above absolute zero, you get a Bose Einstein Condensate (BEC), a condensate of particles that act as one; they occupy the same space in a kind of mutual quantum state, so that no individual particle is independent of the condensate, and no individual particle in the condensate can act alone, only as part of the whole condensate. It is weird, but that is what I was talking about when I replied to Wellwisher's claim that no two particles can occupy the same space. They can, at near absolute zero. The nobel prizes have been awarded to confirm it

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    .

    http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/the-coldest-place-in-the-universe-8121922/

    I mention the BEC because the wave energy of the particles slows down to the point that they trend toward synchronization among all the particles in the condensate. From the ISU perspective, the inflowing wave energy and out flowing wave energy of the group of particles becomes so slow that they loose their individual identity and the group of particles condenses (merges) into a fraction of the original space that they had occupied before cooling. They effectively become one particle with a very high internal wave energy density in a very confined space, and the waves traversing that space are way slow.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    You can point a laser light at the condensate and the light slows down too, and can even be stopped, and held, and examined within the condensate, at almost absolute zero, in the lab.

    That just gives some insight into how the BEC, IMHO, is compatible with the ISU model where everything is composed of wave energy traversing the medium of space, and how the speed of light is governed by the energy density of the local environment.

    Note: I have 7 likes

    (532)
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2015
  11. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Sameness at macro and micro scales

    Note: This post is documentation of some detail to accompany the ISU model discussions. I consider it to be quite difficult to follow for the casual reader, since it is the result research and contemplation done during what would have to be characterized as a singular journey; not rare or unique in its rigor or conclusions, but never-the-less very individual, shaped by the things that caught my interest along the way. Please forgive the complex sentence structures and seemingly rambling layman babble; its my hobby.

    I have come to a point where I want to revisit and recognize, for the sake of documentation, the striking mechanical similarity between, 1) big crunches that form in the landscape of the greater universe, which collapse/bang to hypothetically produce the ISU's, and speculatively, nature's biggest energy waves, called Big Bang arenas, and, 2) high density "spots" that form within the particle space, which hypothetically compress the medium of space, and out of that compression emerges the ISU's, and speculatively, nature's smallest energy waves, called quantum waves. That postulated phenomenon of similarity between the wave action at the macro and micro levels is perhaps one of the greatest examples of "sameness" in the ISU model.

    That paragraph implies there is a potentially infinite "greater universe" beyond our "extended Hubble space", and that there is a compressible medium of space that hosts waves that compress that medium as they traverse it; the compression relating to the amount of energy carried by the wave. Multiple waves traversing the same space cause the medium to contain an energy density gradient, where each point in space has the energy of the sum of all of the individual waves traversing that spot form all directions, up to nature's maximum density; the ever-changing wave energy density of the individual points blends into an ever-changing gradient in any and every volume of space that you wish to identify.

    At the macro level, the compression of the medium of space, caused by the Big Bang arena waves occurring throughout the greater universe, reaches its maximum at the point where the big crunches collapse/bang, generating new Big Bang arena waves, that expand spherically relative to the local CMB "rest" frame surrounding the Big Bang action event. As they expand they incorporate the background energy within the expanding arena wave.

    Similarly, at the micro level, the compression of the medium of space, caused by the quantum waves occurring within a particle's space, reaches its maximum at the point where the high density spots compress the medium and generate new quantum waves, that expand spherically relative to the particle boundary surrounding the high density "spot" action event. As they expand, they intersect and cause new high density spots within the particle. At the particle surface, the high density spots expel a portion of their energy into the surrounding medium of space.

    OK, now you see why I put the note at the beginning, lol. I have read and re-read, revised and re-revised these paragraphs, and they faithfully convey what I wanted to document in this post, for my own future reference.

    (548)
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2015
  12. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    And now more documentation of ISU model detail as I go back to Wellwisher's comment that particles cannot occupy the same space. That statement seems to be contradicted by the Bose Einstein Condensate (BEC) mentioned two posts ago. In my model, at the other end of the temperature scale we have the other case that contradicts his statement, i.e. when a Big Crunch collapse/bangs.

    In the ISU, the temperature of a Big Crunch at the collapse/bang reaches nature's maximum as the wave energy density at the core of the crunch builds up. There are particles in the crunch, and in my model, particles are composed of inflowing and out flowing gravitational wave energy. In order to maintain that functioning, they require their individual space. As the compression of gravity increases, the internal compression builds toward the maximum, and the crunch approaches "critical capacity".

    It is at critical capacity that gravitational compression defeats the ability of particles to maintain that individual space, and they cease to function individually. The normal inflowing and out flowing components of their standing wave nature ceases as the particles give up their individual space.

    That is cataclysmic. The presence of the particle was established, and gravity functioned, because there was inflow and out flow of wave energy, the standing wave pattern. Cut off that flow, and a series of things occur. The internal wave energy structure that produced the high density spots within the complex standing wave pattern begins to break down; the spherical out flow meets with a surrounding density so great that it cannot expand spherically from the surface.The surrounding particles also fail to produce that out flow, and so the normal inflow to surrounding particles also ceases. The wave energy momentarily becomes completely contained with the particles's boundary.

    As the cataclysm plays out, the particle boundaries are beginning to fail. The particles are compressed so tightly that the internal process of quantum action now fails, and soon after they have given up their individual external space, the particles are forced to give up their internal space as well.

    Now you get the real collapse/bang. The densely packed particles, who's boundaries have now failed, give up all of their complex standing wave structure, and the space that they occupied as individual particles, and that space is reduced to its minimum but finite size, at nature's maximum but finite energy density.

    In the ISU, we have reached a rare state of matter/energy called "dense state wave energy". It is very volatile, and decays by bursting into expansion to invade surrounding low energy density space. That action marks the end of a collapse/bang, and is the transition point between gravity's maximum compression as it yields to nature's opposing force, energy density equalization, at its extreme.

    Technically, the collapse of a Big Crunch is a grand inflowing wave of energy toward the core of the crunch, and the "bang" is the grand out flowing wave from the core of the crunch. It is characterized as a case where, at the instant the wave energy density reaches maximum, it "bounces" off of the allowed maximum and into expansion. That event marks the birth of a new Big Bang arena. Note that the crunch become nature's greatest "high density spot", at the peak of the process of arena action.

    There is a characteristic of sameness here, mentioned again. As the crunch/bang in the landscape of the greater universe can be characterized as one grand inflowing wave that produces one grand out flowing wave during the process of arena action. The "sameness" refers to the similarity at the quantum level where the processes of quantum action produces high density spots within the particle space. The sameness is in the respect that both processes produce their own version of high density spots.

    I have 7 likes.

    (581)
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2015
  13. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    About life and the eternal intent of nature:

    In the ISU model it is said that the universe has always existed, as opposed to either of the other popular explanations like "God did it", or "Something from nothing". We know there is bountiful life on Earth, and we know that the Earth hasn't always existed. Where did life come from? Did it evolve here on Earth, or did it fly in on an asteroid, or was it seeded here by some intelligent life form? All three of those possibilities are speculatively valid.

    I personally like the concept that life originates throughout new young arenas from non-living elements via an iterative process where particles and molecules come together here and there under varying environmental conditions, until a self replicating molecule happens to form, and get a foothold.

    In the ISU, that happens by chance in any one given hospitable environment, but I speculate that the probability of it happening time and time again throughout our arena, and every arena, is 100%. In other words, in an infinite universe there are always hospitable environments where life has a chance to be generated and to evolve, then the universe has never been lifeless. Given the right circumstances for the iterative process to play out, life will begin, and if it gets a foothold, will evolve.

    If there is any possibility that there is a natural "intent" behind things that are certainties of nature, then in the ISU model it would be that the eternal intent of the universe is to generate, evolve, and host life.

    (612)
     
  14. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Wave-particle duality conclusion about photons for discussion:

    Photons are wave-particles in the ISU model. They are emitted at the speed of light, and are composed of standing waves with inflowing and out flowing gravitational wave energy components, like all particles in the model. Moving at the speed of light means that they can only get their inflowing wave energy component from the direction of motion, and it means their out flowing spherical wave energy component causes them to have a flattened and broaden curved wave front.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    (638)
     
  15. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    The Photon as a Wave-Particle, and Two Slits Ahead

    The reason the photon gets all of its inflowing gravitational wave energy from the direction of motion is that the gravitational waves in the medium of space are also traveling at the speed of light, and so in the ISU model, no wave energy can catch the photon from behind.

    I'm not sure if anyone would argue that, if the physics are the same in all frames, then the out flowing gravitational wave energy would speed out in front of the photon's path at the speed of light, as if, from the reference frame of the photon, it could be at rest. In the ISU, the out flowing gravitational wave energy just keeps up with the speeding photon, and causes that flattened and broadened wave front to exist. That is what makes it a wave-particle. It is the broadened wave front that allows photon energy to go through two slits and cause an interference pattern, while the particle only goes through one slit to cause a spot on he screen.

    (662)
     
  16. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    In that last post, and throughout the thread, I use the phrase, "the medium of space". I should explain it, because its presence is central to the ISU model.

    It is different than the Wiki definition of the Interstellar medium (here) which describes it as space containing particles and molecules, gases and dust clouds, stray objects, etc., within the vacuum of space. Wiki also points out the distinction between the interstellar medium of space, and the concept of an aether that, by definition, is a hypothetical medium that fills all space. See a good discussion of ether/aether here, and more reading of some interest here.

    In my layman level model, the medium of space has some aether-like characteristics that differentiate it from the contents that the Wiki includes in intergalactic space. The big difference is that in the ISU, the medium of space contains gravitational waves; they continually traverse the medium at all points and from all directions, and account for the energy of space. In that sense, the aether is gravitational wave energy emitted at the speed of light, and that travels at the speed of light, coming and going everywhere in all directions.

    We can't yet observe them, but gravitational waves are theorized in various professional level models. Gravitational waves are often referred to in regard to cataclysmic events like the death spiral of black holes or the supernovae that produce neutron stars, etc.; huge cosmic events that result in gravitational energy being sent off on an endless spherical path throughout space. Science has several active experiments in place looking for signs of them.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    http://www.caltech.edu/news/advanced-ligo-begin-operations-47898

    In the ISU, it isn't just major cosmic events that produce gravitational waves though; every particle interaction produces gravitational waves that traverse the medium of space between all particles and objects.

    In my model those gravitational waves also make up the composition of all particles and objects that occupy the medium of space, because they are the wave energy that establishes and maintains the presence of particles and objects. So gravitational waves are continually being emitted by all particles and objects, not just from cataclysmic events.

    In my hypothesis of gravitational wave energy, everything is composed of wave energy, consisting of a wide range from tiny amounts of energy within particles, to massive amounts of energy in the Big Bang arena waves that fill the landscape of the greater universe.

    (685)
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2015
  17. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    No special gravitational waves are produced by cataclysmic events in the ISU model, aside from the normal on-going, out flowing gravitational wave energy component associated with the mass of all objects.

    Though I talk about a layman level Multiple Big Bang Arena Model of Cosmology, and discuss claims about hypothetical mechanics that "explain" the preconditions to big bangs, the collapse/bang of the associated big crunches at the macro level, and quantum gravity at the micro level, I acknowledge that the model has little depth into particles as to individual types or charges, or electromagnetism, beyond the fact that in this model particles all have mass.

    They get their mass from the high energy density spots that form at the intersections and overlaps of gravitational energy waves within the "particle space". The particle space is bounded by, and consists of a standing wave pattern of gravitational wave energy composed of inflowing and out flowing waves that traverse the medium of space at the speed of light. In this model those gravitational waves significantly slow down relative to that external velocity as they enter the relative high wave energy density within the particle space. Thus particles and objects are said to "contain" wave energy.

    The particle has continuous momentum due to the wave nature of particles and their inflowing and out flowing wave energy components, and the particle or object has momentary location at each instant due to the internal process of high energy density spot formation. Those momentary "spots" repetitively form and subsequently expand, thus disbursing their wave energy spherically into the surrounding space within and around the particle space. The out flowing wave energy from one spot supplies the inflowing wave energy for surrounding spots, perpetuating the internal process. Accordingly, the accumulated out flowing wave energy from particles or objects supplies the inflowing wave energy component for the surrounding particles and objects, perpetuating the ever changing gravitational wave energy gradient of the medium of space. The particle or object moves in the direction of the net highest inflowing gravitational wave energy in the gradient because that directional high energy inflow causes more momentary high energy density spots to form within and around the particle space in that direction.

    Based on those on-going characteristics, over time, objects composed of particles sometimes enter into cataclysmic events like supernovae and collisions between neutron stars, but those events don't produce the kind of gravitational wave "ripples" that would stand out as they traverse the medium of space. There are no special gravity waves produced by those events that would, as described in GR, theoretically cause a detectible change in the distance between mirrors positioned at the end of the arms of the interferometer devices like Ligo.

    In other words, this model does not invoke spacetime in the GR sense. Instead, there is an aether-like medium of space that carries gravitational wave energy. Those waves do not cause a momentary shift or displacement of particles or objects that they encounter. They are simply a continuation of the gravitational wave energy that the encountered particles and objects have already been being subjected to and influenced by, because the same amount of gravitational wave energy has been continually emitted by the source (neutron stars for example) all along, and has been since those objects came into existence.

    The cataclysm of collisions and or collapses associated with major cosmic events are rapid massive reconfigurations of the same local gravitational potential of the matter/energy that existed in that event location before the cataclysm, and so the out flowing wave energy is continuous, before, during, and after the cataclysm; hypothetically.

    Clear as mud?

    (902)
     
  18. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Generally this is it, meaning what I post here stays here; I do very little spamming of my ISU model, and there no revenue to be had, no book to push, no request for funding, etc. True, I occasionally run a thread at various other science forums to test new ideas and invite comments, I posted a YouTube video that has about 500 views, and I have a Twitter address that I sometimes use to post links to my threads when I am getting no response from the local membership. Generally none of that "outreach" gets any more response than I get here, lol. No one pays much attention because of my disclaimers that there isn't anything science-like about my model. It is presented as layman science enthusiast speculations and hypotheses, for discussion, without any new evidence to support it. It is merely a hobby, not to be taken seriously, and when I post about it, it is only because I have set a personal standard, a sort of a commitment, saying that before I post, the material must satisfy me as being internally consistent with the current version of my model, or it is meant to be an update to that model. I certainly don't want you, the reader, to be finding internal inconsistencies. As a related comment, one guideline I sometimes mention to readers is that if anyone were to want to grow their understanding of the ISU, they should work backwards through my threads, because new material supersedes older material.

    Case in point, that last post pertains to the "prediction" that interferometers won't be able to detect gravitational waves; I am betting on "no pass", which is always an unpopular bet on the casino craps tables. Certainly no professional would care what I think, nor should they. Enough of my disclaimers.

    If anyone has any evidence that falsifies my "no pass prediction" about the detection of gravitational waves, say so soon, because Lisa Pathfinder is being readied for launch, and it will certainly be a real test for the presence of gravitation waves, if they are in fact ripples in spacetime, as predicted by GR.

    http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/LISA_Pathfinder_overview

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    (916)
     
  19. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Gravitational_waves_dents_in_spacetime
    An article explaining, in simple terms, the case for Gravitational Waves
    From the European Space Agency

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    From link:
    Gravitational Waves: "Dents" in Spacetime

    Gravitational waves are fundamentally different from, for example, electromagnetic waves. The acceleration of electric charges creates electromagnetic waves, propagating in space and time. However, gravitational waves, created by the acceleration of mass, are waves of the spacetime ‘fabric’ itself.

    According to Newton’s theory of gravity, the gravitational interaction between two bodies is instantaneous. However, Einstein’s Special Relativity says nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. If an object changes shape as a result of a mass pulling on it, the resulting change in the force field would spread outwards at the speed of light.

    In 1805, Laplace said that if gravity propagates with finite speed, the force in a binary star system should not point along the line connecting the stars, and the angular momentum of the system must slowly decrease with time.

    Proof of gravity waves found

    Albert Einstein, 1879 - 1955
    Today’s scientists would say that binary stars lose energy and angular momentum by emitting ‘gravitational waves’. In the late 1970s, indirect proof was found for the existence of gravitational waves by observing the binary pulsar PSR 1913+16. However, scientists are still waiting to detect gravitational waves directly.

    Forty years after Einstein’s work on gravitational waves, relativity theorists like H. Bondi proved that gravitational radiation was physically observable, that gravitational waves carry energy, and that a system emitting gravitational waves should lose energy. End.

    Rebuttal from the perspective of my ISU model is in the dual wave energy components of gravity, i.e. particles and objects "contain" wave energy, and that level of energy is sustained by a balance of both inflowing and out flowing gravitational wave energy. Sure, there is energy out flow in the form of gravitational wave energy radiation, but instead of depleting the energy content of the radiating objects, there is inflowing gravitational wave energy continually replacing the out flow, coming to the object in the form of the out flow from other surrounding objects. In the ISU model, all particles and objects emit gravitational wave energy at all times, and it is continually replaced by inflowing wave energy.[/quote]

    (938)
     
  20. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Layman talk about GR

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    When I go talking about GR, since my understanding is layman level, I can easily say things that simply are not true about it. But if I say them often enough, someone usually corrects me. So when it comes to gravitational waves in GR, here is what they are as I understand it. They are the ripples in spacetime caused by special events, often related to cataclysmic and high energy events involving relativistic velocities, like the collision of two neutron stars or a supernova, i.e. interruptions of an object (or objects) that was otherwise following a geodesic. A geodesic is otherwise known as the shortest distance an object can travel from point A to point B through curved spacetime.

    Unless there is an interruption in the path of an object which causes a break in momentum, and therefore throws the particle or object off the previously established geodesic, there is no gravitational wave energy radiated in the General Theory of Relativity. If an event like that occurs then the conservation of momentum kicks in to cause a ripple in spacetime.

    Further, all that is necessary for an object to curve the spacetime that surrounds it is mass; that makes the presence of matter the mechanism of curved spacetime, i.e. matter/energy tells spacetime how to curve. Spacetime does all the work, and since work is energy, spacetime therefore represent a potential energy, and the amount of curvature in spacetime is capable of telling objects how to move through it on a geodesic. The mechanism then for the path of an object is the presence of a geodesic. As long as that particle or object stays on its geodesic, there is no gravitational wave energy radiation in General Relativity.

    However, if there is one of those remarkable events, an event that causes a "dent in spacetime" as the European Space Agency phrases it, then that "dent" or ripple in spacetime traverses space at the speed of light. That dent or ripple is what Ligo, and the upcoming Lisa Pathfinder, a Lagrange point positioned experiment, are designed to detect; they will simply wait for such a ripple, detect it, record it, and report it, if all goes as theory and engineering predict.

    My ISU model has a different take on it:

    To be continued ...

    (1044)
     
  21. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
  22. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Given the above interpretation of a gravitational wave according to General Relativity, there are a few differences between GR and the ISU. I have elaborated on them in my ISU model to distinguish between the professional GR model, and the layman ISU model. Those elaborations allow me to differentiate between GR and the ISU, both in regard to the nature of gravitational waves, and the difference between spacetime in GR, and the medium of space in the ISU.

    First, gravitational waves are referred to as ripples in space time in GR, and in the ISU, gravitational waves are said to carry energy as they traverse the medium of space. That seemingly simple distinction goes deeper when the operative mechanics of GR are compared to the mechanistic nature of particles, gravity, and the wave energy density of the medium of space, in the ISU.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    In GR, two objects on a collision course are both following geodesics, and there are usually no gravitational waves being emitted by either object as they speed toward the point of collision (with the exception of revolving in-swirling objects which may emit ripples in spacetime). At the point of collision though, a ripple in spacetime occurs.

    In the ISU, two objects on a collision course are following the gravitational wave energy density gradient of the medium of space. Both objects, regardless of their relative velocity, are continually absorbing gravitational waves with a bias from the direction of motion, and both objects are continually emitting spherical gravitational waves back into the medium of space in all directions at the speed of light; they are thus imprinting their motion and relative mass in the gradient as they move.

    When the collision occurs in GR it causes a ripple in spacetime which expands spherically at the speed of light. The energy of the ripple theoretically arises from the conservation of the momentum of the objects formerly following geodesics that were abruptly interrupted by the collision. That ripple, along with the mass and motion of the new physical pieces that come out of the collision, immediately establish the new geodesics of each emerging part (particles and objects) in the local spacetime. In addition, the gravitational ripple can be considered an energy wave expanding spherically at the speed of light that has particular mathematical characteristics as it travels, i.e. the characteristic that earns it the name, a "dent" in spacetime that can be detected as a dislocation of mirrors by an interferometer. ISU gravitational waves will not be detected by an interferometer I don't think, because there is no dent or ripple in spacetime in the ISU.

    Though in the ISU, there is no ripple, as such, when the collision occurs, there is an elaborate and energetic light show. The conversion (and conservation) of energy results in various forms of particles morphing to other forms. Much of the energy is converted from slower moving atomic particles of the original objects to other types of particles and objects emerging from the collision at various speeds, as well as to high energy electromagnetic radiation at the speed of light. This EM would be the energy equivalent to GR's ripple, and the other slower than light speed particles and objects would be the same in both models.


    Note: To someone thinking this through, it is appropriate to note that all particles in the ISU have mass, including all electromagnetic radiation; low and high energy photons, including x-rays and gamma rays. Also, all such particles therefore absorb and emit gravitational wave energy at the speed of light. The net energy result of a collision/cataclysm, gravitationally, in the ISU, is the same as is the combined motions of surviving particles following geodesics after the collision, plus the corresponding energy of ripple in spacetime in GR.

    (1092)
     
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2015
  23. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    A "dent or ripple in spacetime" vs. "energy waves in the medium of space"

    The payoff, for the ISU anyway, of the discussion above about the gravitational wave issue, is that new doors could be opened beyond the constraints of a spacetime model, if I am right. I predict (regretfully) that the current interferometer experiments will not detect ripples in spacetime because they aren't there. The wave energy density model is much more explanatory in regard to gravitational wave energy, and in many other ways, as I have proposed throughout this thread, and in my previous Infinite Spongy Universe threads.

    The universe didn't have to start from a singularity, or what would be even worse in my view, didn't have to have a beginning consisting of something from nothing. There is no plausible scientific explanation for that, but it is just that which we are lead to conclude by the current Big Bang Theory, consisting of General Relativity and Inflation.

    Instead, the concept of an eternal and infinite universe is in line with the Perfect Cosmological Principle (PCP), which expands upon the Cosmological Principle. The PCP can be said to be predicted in the Infinite Spongy Universe model.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Here is the Wiki:
    Perfect Cosmological Principle
    The Perfect Cosmological Principle states that the Universe is homogeneous and isotropic in space and time (on a sufficiently large scale). In this view the universe looks the same everywhere on a large scale, the same as it always has and always will (i.e., in my words, the big bang arena landscape of the greater universe).

    Invoking the Perfect Cosmological Principle (PCP) in the ISU comes with some stipulations that differentiate it from the Wiki page when it comes to footnotes, but I won't go there in this post except to say that the Cosmological Principle describes the universe as homogeneous and isotropic in time, but not in space. The PCP extends that to include in space as well.

    (1151)
     

Share This Page