What's Gravity, Time, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Gravitational Waves, Inertia etc etc

Community Blog
1

So I wrote a theory one night back in 2015 about what is gravity and how it links to time and all that stuff… kinda forgot about it until now.

Upon rethinking I was able to expand it quite a lot so I thought I’ll share here…
Bear in mind, I do not have any expertise on science maths and all that stuff… I am just a creative guy…

Anyways, here’s my theory/hypothesis.
Einstein’s general theory of relativity predicts that space is like a fabric that stretch and warp under influence of mass, this theory argues that space isn’t stretching or warping instead propagating. And the propagation rate is influenced wherever matter is present. It basically means that new space popup and disappear at a rate and this process occurs everywhere all the time. And this process mimics stretching and contracting of space-time as predicted by relativity. I call this propagation rate as “SPG rate”…

So think space is made of all particles. These particles don’t interact electromagnetically. These are very light particles, probably many magnitude lighter than electron. So if SPG Rate is 1:1 then in 1t, 1 space particle appears and 1 disappears… Which means a state of equilibrium. Under the influence of mass, the SPG Rate is magnitudelly affected by distance depending the structure and density of mass.

So what is Gravity?

Imagine a closed system 1 X 1 X 1. The box contains n number of particles with each particle SPG rate is 1:1. Space in the box maintains the state of equilibrium due to SPG rate is 1:1 which means pressure is equal at every point this the box.

Now introduce Mass M1 with size and density as in S * D. SPG rate of each space particle is magnitudally affected in proportion to distance from M1. Assuming M1 is perfect sphere with radius 2 x density 2. SPG rate is increased near mass magnitudelly all the way to the core of the sphere.

Which creates pressure around this sphere. This pressure is basically an inverse of matter based pressure like air. Meaning unlike air pressure which pushes, higher SPG rate or pressure will attract objects closer.

Basically this theory predicts that the SPG pressure is the Gravity.

What is time?

Spinning of each atom is inversely proportional to on SPG rate. So more the pressure the slower the atoms spin and lower pressure is opposite. And this process is what the passing of time is. This explains why aging is slower near higher SPG rate / high pressure areas such as black-hole.

What’s Dark Matter and Dark Energy?

I don’t think Dark Matter and Dark Energy exist… they are just feature of SPG rate… So near multiple masses, the overall SPG rate is higher than SPG rate of sum of all normal matter present. Because propagation rate of Space particles are affected by themselves also…

This creates additional pressure in the system and this additional pressure is what Dark matter is. Dark energy is basically space where SPG rate is lower in absence of mass, space with low SPG rate has low pressure. Since we know that this pressure is inverse of matter pressure, it pushes the matter objects apart. And that’s what the Dark Energy is.

Connecting Classical and Quantum Physics.

Probably this can also be explained through quantum mechanics since space itself is quantized and can be thought as probability zones. So near mass is higher probability zone which accumulates and substantiates into real effects we observe.

Characteristics of inertia and other things through SPG rate.

For example, SPG rate depends on the object’s mass, density and structure. A uneven semi hollow structure will behave differently producing different inertial motion than a sphere of same density and mass. This happens because space particles are propagating differently depending on interaction with structures.

Ok, I am not sure of anything… It’s just a thought experiment for me…

I have also tried to created basic simulation in Unity, propagation methods seems to produce gravitational waves and basic planetary movements seems to be possible. However due to limited hardware resources, I am unable to simulate large scale system in 3 axis in high enough resolution.

here’s the repo… https://github.com/meta-machine/Gravity
Also here’s the video of SPG simulation from unity… https://youtu.be/9k3xSyB59Hk

Please weight in your thoughts… also @anotherriddle what do you think?

Thanks…

5 Likes
2

Aha, the Achilles heel rears its head.

Time isn’t real and Einstein was wrong.
Space is chaos.

I think the study of quantum mechanics, and particle colliders will provide us with new knowledge in the next 20 years.

Hoping we can come up with a master theory before I die.

3 Likes
3

Work in quantum electrodynamics? Part of that supposes that particle/antiparticle pairs pop into and out of existing extremely fast. Vacuum energy and all that.

3 Likes
4

you may be waiting for nothing

2 Likes
5

I’m not sure about QED. But I’m trying to understand it. It seems very difficult though…

1 Like
6

Since no one has found any Weakly Interacting Massive Particles or Massive Compact Halo Objects the whole theory looks Macho Wimpy
I just love really really bad puns :slight_smile:

2 Likes
7

We invented dark matter cause without it the theory of general relativity doesn’t work.

1 Like
8

There is always MOND, about 15 years ago there was like 10% believed in Modified Newtonian dynamics. S and T did a story on it back then, people were triggered over it

I kinda lost interest in it shortly after

2 Likes
9
3 Likes
10

Whawas it Feynman said back in the day? :upside_down_face:

1 Like
11

I’m looking forward to Zero Point Module power

1 Like
12

This is really interesting.

It’s difficult for me to wrap my head around time. I like the notion of “spacetime”; because it suggests that the interaction between matter and space produces the experience of time in matter. This of course would include our experience of time. The difficulty is that I keep wanting (with my human brain) to correlate the experience of time with what ever time is empirically. So, I try to stick to what the physical evidence suggests without embellishment.

For instance, the atomic clock experiment only showed how the decaying particle was effected by super sonic speed in the Earths’ gravity field. It did suggest relativity in the experience of time for the decaying particle; due to a change in the conditions it was under. It seems to suggest that there is some kind of friction with a field that is effecting its’ half-life in a positive manner. It may also suggest that such conditions have a positive net effect on coherence.

There is a large problem with particle physics simulations in three dimensions. The problem is mathematical. There is always one axis that is influencing the other two. This isn’t accounted for in the rotation matricies. This is probably a consequence of the addition of a third, chaotic component. The rotation matricies do serve their function if they are rendered in two dimensions. Maybe chaos math can solve the problem; but it hasn’t yet.

1 Like
13

I’ll expand on it with some visuals tomorrow… I think I have few compelling scenarios regarding time…

14

“If you think you understand quantum mechanics , you don’t understand quantum mechanics .”
Google is evil, but so convenient

1 Like
15

Maby it’s because I’m a faithless contrarian, but I think astronomy researchers have trapped themselves into an intellectual corner and are spewing a lot of bullshit. Gravity is the only hammer they have, and boy do they smash everything they observe with it.

While it’s unwise to become emotionally attached to any theory, I’ve become rather fond of what is coming out of plasma cosmology. This is also referred to as “the electric universe”, which is frankly a terrible name that initially repelled me from this line of thinking for a few years because it smells like schizo bait and my initial experience was with the overenthusiastic and goofy sounding proponents of it.

However I eventually came across Donald Scott (a grumpy electrical engineer turned astronomer) and he definitely speaks in a language I’m receptive to. What he is putting out in regards to Birkeland Currents is really interesting, especially in regards to their potential for them to be responsible for how most cosmic structures are formed, instead of gravity.

Donald start talking 1 minute in.

2 Likes
16

:thinking:

I value input to the field I love so much, wherever it comes from. I’ll keep an open mind.

Like all analogies this one also has it’s pitfalls but it can help thinking of space(time) like that. Allways keep in mind though that it is an analogy of one part of the whole theory.

I could argue the opposite case but it heavily depends on how detailed your “what exactly” is.

Depending on conservation on your source and sink this can work as an analog. There is leeway in interpreting what you have written but it is similar in concept to a field in physics

…

hmm … you have a lot of individual pieces there that might work, however just from what you have written I can not really make out the connections. The problem with everyday human language is that it is hard to convey hard, consitent concepts. I’d need to pack this into an equation system.
Not wanting to disourage you, but the key thing that I am missing here is somthing your concept can explain better than existing theory. :thinking: At least from how I interpret your theory.

that is … ambitious. This is also a colossal undertaking in simulations of galaxies and galaxy clusters. Many processors have been sacrificed for this noble cause :wink:.

yep, and it even creates a force! :sunglasses:

indeed

:grin:

well, it kind of was “invented” as a placeholder because it makes the maths check out … until you start running into problems with the energy transfer

3 Likes
17

Can you explain this paragraph?

Yeah… it is just too lazy… But I’ll create a detailed graphics explaining it all probably on Friday… Thanks for your input…

1 Like
18

Sure! One property that your concept must fullfill is conservation of energy along any closed path through your space (although there are some asterisks there). Either that or you have to explain the discrepancy some other way. However, what you are up against is a theory with relatively little assumptions and incredibly well proved predictions. How I interpret your theory, on an abstract level it has parallels to many properties of conservative vector fields and a couple of other concepts. (not sure if that was your intention)

not at all. These things take a lot of time and work. However, in my experience it is essentially impossible to create a verifyable scientific theory using classic human language. It is not precise enough, this is why we have strict “rules” in mathematics and Logic. You can use words for the initial concept but at this point you are moving past that stage.

2 Likes
19

Yeah… It’s like a simulation on my mind but it’s really hard to translate into words… I think I can explain what I mean by making few drawings… I’ll do that asap… :slightly_smiling_face:

Also remember that time encoding quantum algorithm and all that we were discussing few months back… So I came across something very similar… Time reversal using quantum algorithm… Do you know anything about this? https://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/13580/researchers-demonstrate-time-reversal-with-quantum-computer

2 Likes
20

I do, althoug I have to admit I didn’t look further into it. Too much interesting stuff out there that’s even more interesting to me personally.

I learned the basics at Uni but that was definitely not my strong module.

1 Like