Galactic Dark Matter Distribution

TVF: However, Pushing Gravity explains why the inverse square law must change character at some range. In brief, when a graviton has traveled its mean free path between collisions with other gravitons, it will become scattered and no longer carry its inverse square message.

I understand the graviton "losing the inverse square message", a figure of speach I gather. But, I don't understand how the "message", if lost, it is transformed to an "inverse linear message".

Gravitons that go through a planet or start, must convey no information about the presence of that planet or mass, simply because they fail to make contact. It is my understanding that pushing gravity is only due to a differential pressure produced by a uniform material flux on bodies. Then, if some gravitons that fo through an object are then scattered, other gravitons could take their place to preserve the inverse squarred property of gravity. I think there is a certain confusion here with the notion of the graviton carrying some type of information about gravity. The way I see it, pushing gravity is a differential pressure and if the graviton flux is uniform, then we don't care which gravitons specifically do the job and free gravitons carry no information at all. The "message carrier" hypothesis could only make sense if there are gravitons that lose part of their momentum when they strike a planet and then continue on at reduced speeds. But this possibility leads to some obvious problems.

But again I may be missing something as it seems there is a mutlitude of equivalent hypotheses that although not deduced directly from the phenomena, they can nevertheless describe such phenomena mathematically.

Enrico,

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><b>The "message carrier" hypothesis could only make sense if there are gravitons that lose part of their momentum when they strike a planet and then continue on at reduced speeds.</b><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

In UniKEF some "inelastic" actions do take place and the energy loss is reflected in some heating (i.e. of the earth, measured correlation between core heat rising to the surfacd and gravity detected by NASA in 1964). But it is a very minor %.

I believe MM support that view "some inelastic" reactions. That % can be corrlated (I believe) to the AU range of loss of the inverse square function.


Knowing to believe only half of what you hear is a sign of intelligence. Knowing which half to believe can make you a genius.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Enrico</i>
<br />The way I see it, pushing gravity is a differential pressure and if the graviton flux is uniform, then we don't care which gravitons specifically do the job and free gravitons carry no information at all.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The presence of a mass blocks some of the graviton flux in the direction toward another mass. So the "information" is in the form of a reduced density of the graviton flux between bodies, making the graviton flux surrounding each body non-isotropic.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">if some gravitons that go through an object are then scattered, other gravitons could take their place to preserve the inverse squarred property of gravity.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

If the graviton flux between bodies is reduced, it remains reduced even in the presence of the universal flux because the two bodies cast graviton shadows on one another.

However, once graviton-graviton collisions are allowed, then random field gravitons can collide and scatter into the shadow to fill it. This is analogous to using a flashlight in a darkened house to make a ball cast a shadow, then carrying the flashlight and ball out into the sunlight. The ball's flashlight shadow disappears pretty quickly because of the solar photons entering the shadow.

In the real world, graviton-graviton collisions seem to become an important factor at an rms collision distance of 1-2 kpc.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I understand the graviton "losing the inverse square message", a figure of speach I gather. But, I don't understand how the "message", if lost, it is transformed to an "inverse linear message".<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I explained this a few messages back, and in full detail with equations in PG. To repeat: "the Sun feels no force from our Galactic center because it is too far away and all graviton shadows are filled with scattered gravitons. However, the Sun does feel force from stars within 1-2 kpc of the Sun, of which there are more interior to the Sun's distance from the Galaxy center than exterior to it. This results in a net force toward the center that keeps the Sun in orbit. This differential force, present at any distance from the center of any galaxy, is inverse linear with distance, consistent with observations." -|Tom|-

Tom,

I do believe I saw once before in another thread your mention of the proportion of "Inelastic" vs "Elastic" action. Could you re-post that information. I meant to record it and didn't but can't find it now.

Thaks.

Knowing to believe only half of what you hear is a sign of intelligence. Knowing which half to believe can make you a genius.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mac</i>
<br />I do believe I saw once before in another thread your mention of the proportion of "Inelastic" vs "Elastic" action. Could you re-post that information. I meant to record it and didn't but can't find it now.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

In Slabinski's article in PG, he derives that the scattering cross-section for gravitons by "matter ingredients" is roughly 30 orders of magnitude greater than the absorption cross-section. Is that what you were remembering? (Scattering and absorption are rough analogs of elastic and inelastic.) -|Tom|-

Tom.

Yes thanks. HAs anyone tried to dorrelate that to the MOND Range for inverse Qwuare gravity?



Knowing to believe only half of what you hear is a sign of intelligence. Knowing which half to believe can make you a genius.