Not a theory but an idea.

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by Xelasnave.1947, Oct 26, 2019.

  1. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    From a closed thread...I posted this...

    I often wonder about neutrinos and think of them travelling without ever "stopping" and so when I hold out my finger as I described above believe that it is reasonable to expect that a little piece of every part of the universe along every trajectory is passing thru the countless points you could find in just the tip...and so it would seem reasonable to assume that such is so for every point in the universe...including those points found in the most less dense regions of space...and as you say their ages could be millions of years and perhaps, indeed almost certainly billions of years old...think background radiation..we think of it relating it firstly to the visable spectrum but what other electromagnetic radiation may have set out at that time...I don't know as I have never considered that aspect until now...but why would things be limited to the small part of the spectrum humans can see...what else set out I wonder...

    My idea, not a theory, perhaps not even a hypothisis in the scientific sense....however I spent years in the bush developing rather thinking of reasonable projections of the most basic approach to conveying information, which I think I'd basically a pool ball bump me I move in a direction determined by the bump.. trying to work out how gravity must work..I reasoned it could not be an information exchange along the lines of bodies saying I am here where are you..if you understand my meaning...I could only conclude a particle would have to go out interact and return with the information about the body it had encountered and as this would contradicte the nothing can go faster than light( if particles had to go out and back gravity would be observed at twice the speed of light..I am not sure the speed of gravity my comment is to have you understand why the simple bump information exchange seemed logical at the time.

    And so after years I came up with push gravity only to find the idea had been around since 1745..why didn't someone tell me. Le Sage gravity..put down because it requires particles we can not observe but my thoughts given the realisation with the finger is all this stuff out there may create the pressure I think of with a push gravity approach.
    But thinking about it what it boils down to is it should not offend GR although clearly it does, which is odd because it is a co ordinate system ..why should it care...what's the difference..well the pool ball approach, or push gravity, realises there can be no such force of attraction..the need for two way communication suggests to me attraction can not exist and when we see attraction between two bodies it is more likely ( in my reasoning) that they are not attracted but being "pushed" together.

    Now where push gravity should help is to explain observations is particularly interesting with galactic rotation curves..their speed according to our sums needs more matter than observed, much more than seems logical and as we don't know what it is not can we find any recall it "dark matter" which is a placeholder until we can work out this invisable matter...dark matter.
    However my thought, or idea, and certainly not a theory is that if gravity works in a push type machinery or basically a form of universal pressure then one could reasonably expect the outter stars of a gallaxy to travell faster than our sums tell us they should..reason the outter regions would get more "push" than the inner regions .the inner regions being somewhat shielded by the outter bodies. I wonder would it be possible to build a computer model to see if what I imagine would be expected by analysis of a computer model.

    I know the reason why push gravity won't work but these problems may be fixable..remember the big bang was ready for the garbage bin until the major problem threatening it's rejection was presented..let's believe the problems could be worked out and for the purpose a chat let's consider the effect of gravity pushing the outter stars rather than attraction at play.
    And I think our central black holes are incapable of causing the stars to follow it by attraction even if huge it's effect drops off rather rapidly ..however if we have external pressure such could control my view.

    What do you think of the idea.
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2019
    Dennis Tate and Ethernos D Grace like this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    a physics person would need to explain to me how expansion effects mass and consequential relative gravitational force as a relationship to relative gravitational absolutes on our ability to measure light...
    which is a little further past my current ability to currently compute

    though i would be very keen to read it when i am in the right frame of mind.

    quantum questions in an analog language ...
    NancyLouise likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Thanks for contributing.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Stupid thinking about this really.
  8. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    no such thing

    some if not a equal to large proportion (maybe 40%)
    of new technology is an adaptation of existing concepts
    being able to think and look at the same concepts from a different functional thought process has resulted in vast steps forward in science.

    analog language is models of human thinking processes and how we communicate those ideas
    quantum questions is our perception to quantify ideas of possible creation (the wonder aspect of the scientific inquiring mind...)

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    my currently stumbling block on push gravity is the idea of force vectors in a box on orbs inside the box and how the gravitational waves effect force vectors in that box form
    where is the angular trade off to the uni directional vectors ?(im not pondering on this currently as i have some personal & work stuff that requires more of my mind for a few months)
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2019
    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  9. Oblivionspace Registered Member

    The neutrino momentum can be contributed to mass energy transition from point to point . All spacial points that are unoccupied by atomic matter have less energy than atomic matter and as a consequence of this , the mass energy is always attracted to ''colder space'' as the laws of transition applies .
  10. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Questions for you:

    1. Please define the term "mass energy transition".
    2. Please explain how momentum contributes to "mass energy transition", as defined.
    3. Please explain how you are measuring the energy of spatial points unoccupied by atomic matter.
    4. Please explain the physical origin of the force of attraction that you refer to. That is, what kind of force it is, and what causes it?
    5. Briefly describe/explain the "laws of transition".

  11. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member


    I don't know what you mean by "a little piece of every part of the universe".

    It is true that lots of neutrinos pass through you all the time. A lot of them come from the Sun. But they are just particles, like other kinds of particles. They aren't magical things that travel instantly across the entire universe.

    The peak of the cosmic microwave background radiation is not in the visible region; it is in the microwave region - hence the name.

    There are lots of different things that hit the Earth from outer space, including photons and lots of other kinds of particles. Our detection is in no way limited to detecting only visible light.

    You may well speculate that there are other kinds of particles that are not yet recognised by science. The thing is, we can only ever confirm the existence of a type of particle by detecting it - either directly or by its effects on something else. If we can't see the thing directly and it has no observable effects on anything else, then saying it exists is like saying the invisible undetectable dragon in my garage exists.

    You know we already have one good theory about how gravity works? It's called general relativity.

    There are also unconfirmed ideas tied to quantum theory about how we suspect gravity will ultimately be determined to work, in a quantum sense. That idea involves an exchange of virtual gravitons between massive objects. In other words, the gravitational "force" or interaction is assumed to be caused in a similar way to the forces we're more confident about, such as electromagnetism and the weak nuclear force.

    I don't know what you mean by "push gravity", exactly.

    Physics doesn't really distinguish between pushes and pulls. Both of those are forces. What's important about forces is that they involve an interaction between two objects. Sometimes that interaction results in an attractive force; sometimes it results in a repulsive force. Whether you want to describe the interaction as a push or a pull doesn't make much difference.

    One common problem people have with visualising how forces work in the standard model of particle physics, for instance, is that they can't see how one particle hitting another one could possibly result in an attractive force. Thinking about billiard balls, when one billiard ball hits another it always knocks it away. It doesn't attract. But in the quantum picture, an exchange of virtual particles between two objects can produce an attractive force between them.

    So whatever it is that is causing this "pressure" doesn't exist inside galaxies? Why not?

    The thing is, it's impossible to dismiss or debunk your idea because at this level of description there's nothing we can test about it. You could be right (who knows?) but you'd need as first step to develop your idea to the extent of making testable predictions that might result in the falsification of your theory.

    It sounds like you're asking other people to work out the details of your theory for you. I suggest that it is you who needs to put in some hard yards in getting it to a point where it can be tested against actual data.
  12. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    This is/was my idea of how push gravity would/should/maybe works

    Keep it simple just looking at a two body sample Earth - Moon

    Currently Moon orbiting Earth configuration applies, Moon moving fast enough not to fall to Earth

    Now think of Earth and Moon made with a solid core and thinning closer to the surface. At the surface transition to air and further out, in effect, vacuum

    Gravity mirrors this thinning out from the core but as a pushing force, not attractive

    As noted the Moon is moving fast enough not to fall to Earth

    In the push gravity model the outer limits of Earth / Moon the push effect is almost zero. This leads to the two rolling around each other

    If the Moon is nudged closer, the area of contact between push gravity fields neutralise each other

    A dead/weak/neutralised spot. In my mind I picture it as a flat spot

    As the two become closer the flat spot becomes larger. This is the falling action

    At the edge of the expanded spot more neutralising takes place and the two move closer

    At some point the smaller body's gravity field becomes totally within the larger body. The mass of each become one mass and the push gravity fields merge increasing the range of the field

    Just a thought

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  13. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    My question to you is: what is gained through adopting this "push" model of gravity, compared to the current model? Can your "push" idea explain anything that current theory cannot? Does the push theory make any quantitative predictions?

    If you're interested in pursuing this, maybe a good place to start would be with the basics. What is the "push" force between two point masses? Is it the same as in our current theories, or different? If different, then what is its mathematical form?

    The rubber has to meet the road at some point.
  14. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Consider our most distant (or rather) something within the forty plus dia of the observable universe, say just a star like our Sun. may be that a part or parts of that object arrives before us...a neutrino perhaps, a "packet of light" or wiggly piece of string ...there is presumably something from it to us.
    And my suspicion is that every body may be connected by that miniscule unestablished flow of something descret in effect...
    Not instantly but obeying the speed limit.
    There is a great deal of something that reaches us from M31 for far does the something go be it light at what ver spectrum or even individual electrons or any part that may get a ticket.
    CBR is a little part of where is came from.
    Yes I started out in the visable spectrum and is shifted to micro wave now.
    The speculation I try to confine is to considering the effect of what we are reasonably sure is out there...perhaps tweak the knobs with what we have and see if such an environment could produce any effect.
    Yes I agree. But maybe as I said consider the environment of space as to what is there..a physical approach and perhaps would, well does, clash with thinking of space as something that works without treating gravity as a force...that no problem GR is a model it could be describing the behaviour of this stuff from everywhere environment.
    Models can work with a miss on more exact reality...that model of the solar system with Earth at the center has reality wrong but is nevertheless a scientific makes testable has the right to still be called a scientific model.

    Yes I know of course.
    However what if dark matter is something not accounted for in the equations and it is not there for example would that destroy GR or would it be useful for stuff it does well.
    Yes I suppose I like that approach better...what I think may be a problem is if these ideas require a message out and message back approach.
    Short version and there are a few still being presented by non mainstream youtubers...but LeSage gravity in effect.
    Well in my way I think it must be significant if gravity is an external pressure as to how it could behave on rotational curves...the push gravity acts on the outter arms perhaps more producing the rotation curves we don't expect.
    That is the best at we see it under the model and I both understand and accept such.
    Just because an explanation is on the table it won't stop me thinking about it...and when I think about it I see space as so full of stuff from everywhere I can imagine a machinery that certainly won't fit the current model...One can't mention an ether but that I guess is what I see in my imagination...I know GR does not need an ether but I also understand the ether was assumed to construct much science that help lead to GR....And I know the MM experiment. And generally the arguments against the ether so I understand that push gravity would not be popular, I know popularity is not relevant, but I am speaking very casualty and recognise I am not a scientists boot lace...but as I said I like to try and visualise what is taking place.
    Let's limit it to known stuff from everywhere..the speculated force can be a push effect, which should diminish as it encounters and passed thru or by the outter gallaxies so outside gets pushed more...that is as simple as I can suggest it.
    It's like stirring some laundry..stir from the center produces different patterns to stirring on the outside. Could the galaxy behave like laundry ...
    The wonderful thing thinking about this and talking about it .I was introduced to Relativity so many people have not even heard about it ..but I think I have some sort of understanding..but as important I learnt what way a theory is presented..and of course what a scientific theory is...few get to understand that strangely.
    I have no illusions.
    Just trying to share the glory.
    There are folk way ahead of me who actually know what they are talking's interesting is all.
    I have devised an experiment actually involving passing light thru a lens that is spinning at high revs. If there is anything to the pressure idea the focal length should shorten as revs increase...or maybe increase no point in doing it unless I can predict the result.

    Thanks James hope you are well.
  15. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    As has been said, the force of gravity remains the same and predictions would all be same

    It would I think do away with gravitons which do what?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  16. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    "colder" = state of energy ?
  17. Oblivionspace Registered Member

    That is correct .
  18. Oblivionspace Registered Member

    Thermodynamic momentum via retained spectral properties . (Similar to spectral emissions except the retained properties of energy rather than emitted light energy) .

    As above , ''hot'' to ''cold''

    Where p is density


    A single spatial point has no mechanism to retain energy , it is ''point passive'' .

    The force is gravity ! There is no cause , it is a natural property of space .

    I'll get back to you on this as the laws need to be written and worded accurately .
  19. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    I see Theorist is back again...
    exchemist likes this.
  20. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Not any more.
    exchemist likes this.
  21. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    If there is a pressure style of gravity, push gravity LeSage gravity etc it would suggest the voyagers should slow down in time I do not know by how much unfortunately. I wonder how long we will keep in touch.
    All I can see when I imagine it is a pressure of space even outside galaxies and gallaxy groups such that it holds a gallaxy in place like a small bubble in the ocean..the bubble is controlled from outside and one could think something similar at a galactic level. And such an approach would fit with expansion at a varying or increasing rate of expansion.
    The idea isn't that wild is it when you consider how dark energy is viewed.
  22. Ethernos D Grace Registered Senior Member

    I also have an idea or its more of a belief on how universe work and same as ur thought pattern. If something doesn't work out or there is a plot hole i try to find it. I don't know if its the same but i see universe as wave and particle. There is this sea of particle or wave surrounding us and inside us. Smaller than quark and every know particle. Then there is bigger wave particles . the samaller particle are affected by bigger wave and form a sphere Which is actually a vibration. Then that particle itself has a vibration which reacts with surrounding wave and form another particle. The vibration on smallest particle sea there is no loss of energy. When we observe loss in energy it returns to that sea and form a new what i am saying is string theory and quantum world is a world where there is vibration inside vibration and so on. But i don't know how small the smallest vibration or particle is. The einstein's maximum speed of light and quantum entanglement seem different but it is not. The light also need medium to travel and when that medium itself is conneting the two particle, information travels faster than take take a guitar string which is separated by a stick between two. Each string is of equal length. When u vibrate the two string at the same time with equal strength so that it produces same same wavelength. Before the sound reach each other the wave inside the string will reach each other.
    Note: vibration can have wavelength, frequency and geometry in quantum world. Which will determine how it interact with each. Eg, The matter and anti matter will have same wavelength of opposing nature.When we observe entangled particle it may cease to be because the bridge between two particle collapses.
  23. Dennis Tate Valued Senior Member


    Would you like to be put in contact with the writings of an online friend who claims to be working on an all new Multiverse Theory but... he wrote that neutrinos were causing him and his buddies serious problems.

    If you do a search for the following title you will find him... he goes by the name "AboveAlpha."
    What he wrote impressed me.... but mostly for philosophical reasons in my own case.

    "The Philosophical implications of Multiverse Theory?"

Share This Page