- Thank you received: 0
Might all forces propagate at speed of gravity?
- Larry Burford
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
15 years 5 months ago #22844
by Larry Burford
Reply from Larry Burford was created by Larry Burford
From the Home page (there is a link at the top of this page) follow tab "Cosmology", then tab "Quantum Physics", then check out the article titled "The Structure of Matter in the Meta Model"
The physical models that one uses to do physics are, IMO, more important than the mathematical models one uses. I'm not saying the math is not important. Just that it needs to come from the physics, not lead to it.
See if this article gives you any ideas. This article does not describe a finished, ready to explain everything physical model. It is more of a starting point, and is leading us to begin thinking of Meta Model cosmology as a stepping stone to a more general scientific perspective that we have begun calling Deep Reality Physics.
Another article that might be of interest in this context is at "Cosmology", "Gravity", title "The Meta Cycle"
LB
The physical models that one uses to do physics are, IMO, more important than the mathematical models one uses. I'm not saying the math is not important. Just that it needs to come from the physics, not lead to it.
See if this article gives you any ideas. This article does not describe a finished, ready to explain everything physical model. It is more of a starting point, and is leading us to begin thinking of Meta Model cosmology as a stepping stone to a more general scientific perspective that we have begun calling Deep Reality Physics.
Another article that might be of interest in this context is at "Cosmology", "Gravity", title "The Meta Cycle"
LB
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
15 years 5 months ago #23686
by PhilJ
Replied by PhilJ on topic Reply from Philip Janes
[Edit: 20 Jun 2009: Apologies to anyone joining this thread late. My exchange of ideas with JAaronNicholson are jumbled out of order as they have been brought over here from an unrelated thread. We shall try to tidy up a bit.]
In A different take on gravity , JAaronNicholson wrote:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">But if there is a force traveling around the cosmos at such fantastic speeds, shouldn't it push or accelerate particles or such to at least a fraction of this speed, well above the observed speed limit of light. Is there any evidence of this? There should be, I think.
--Aaron
Phil:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Not if I am right about ethereal pressure waves and ethereal shear waves. There is no reason for exchange of momentum between speed-of-gravity pressure waves and speed-of-light shear waves to alter the speed of either. Perhaps the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether, while the speed of shear waves is determined by the inertial density and shear modulus of the ether. There might be an equivalency between the properties of density and modulus and the properties of permitivity and permeability---perhaps in the sense that x & y are equivalent to r & theta.
Massive particles are limitted by the speed of shear waves because they consist of shear waves orbiting one another under the influence of LeSage-type forces. The LeSage-type forces result from exchange of momentum between shear waves and pressure waves. Relative motion of the particle's center is necessarily slower than the speed of the constituent shear waves because the shear waves must follow a longer path than the center around which they orbit one another. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
It sounds like you are proposing that Gravitational pressure waves could somehow have no influence what so ever with matter or photons while traversing the great distances of space but, then, for some reason when they reach planets or stars, suddenly, they do, in order for them (the Gravitational pressure waves) to be "felt" and compress energy into matter (my model) and put pressure on the air and water etc, when they had no interaction over the long distance with any light speed or slower matter or energies.
So, tell me, how is it that you envision the mechanism of Gravitational pressure waves determining when to interact with matter and when not to interact with matter?
Am I understanding you correctly that when you refer to ". . . the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether." that you are making reference to the 20X10^9 c that Larry made mention of as the possible minimum velocity for the--what should we call it--transmission speed of Gravity.
Whereas in my model, the "ether" is, itself, made up from the actual expanding field(s) of actual quantitative, countable (in theory) particles and photons thrown off by stars, I would like to know more about what is the mechanism or material working transmuter for the ether that you picture as supporting your Waves, both Gravity pressure waves and speed-of-light shear waves.
Maybe, to help us (me for sure) better understand what you are proposing, could you expand and clarify this portion of your statement:
Phil:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether, while the speed of shear waves is determined by the inertial density and shear modulus of the ether.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Are "pressure waves" the Fast gravity effect and "shear waves" the light speed or slower effects. Are there frequency ranges or anything that can be associated with these two classes of ethereal waves?
I am very curious about the exact mechanism of transmission behind these amazing velocities of Gravity to which the Meta model is referring, proposing or suggesting.
Oh, yeah, and how are the shear waves orbiting each other? I don't understand what you mean by that at all.
I eagerly await your response, Aaron<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
<hr noshade size="1"><hr noshade size="1">
To avoid taking that discussion off on a tangent, I respond to Aaron here:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Am I understanding you correctly that when you refer to ". . . the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether." that you are making reference to the 20X10^9 c that Larry made mention of as the possible minimum velocity for the--what should we call it--transmission speed of Gravity.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Yes, I am proposing that ethereal pressure waves propagate at the speed of gravity. VanFlandern's estimate, at least 20 billion c, sounds reasonable to me, though my mind has trouble imagining how pressure waves can be that much faster than shear waves. Perhaps pressure waves go directly across the voids of the ether foam, while shear waves follow the walls of the foam. These are directly analogous to acoustic waves in a solid. The forces that give the solid its shear and compressive moduli are poorly understood. Similar forces in the cosmos will offer clues to the forces in the ether---when astronomers discover what those forces really are.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">It sounds like you are proposing that Gravitational pressure waves could somehow have no influence what so ever with matter or photons while traversing the great distances of space but, then, for some reason when they reach planets or stars, suddenly, they do, in order for them (the Gravitational pressure waves) to be "felt" and compress energy into matter (my model) and put pressure on the air and water etc, when they had no interaction over the long distance with any light speed or slower matter or energies.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
No, I am not saying that, at all. Whenever, a pressure wave passes thru a shear wave there is an exchange of momentum between them. This is true regardless of whether the shear wave is a free photon or part of a massive particle.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">So, tell me, how is it that you envision the mechanism of Gravitational pressure waves determining when to interact with matter and when not to interact with matter? <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Where the pressure waves are completely random, no net force results; but proximity to a large mass makes a gravity field (an imbalance in the flux of pressure waves) which affects both massive particles and photons. Much closer proximity between two massive particles alters the average phase and polarity of pressure waves, and that results in weak & strong forces, as well as electrostatic & magnetic forces. I need your help determining exactly how that works. The math is beyond me.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Whereas in my model, the "ether" is, itself, made up from the actual expanding field(s) of actual quantitative, countable (in theory) particles and photons thrown off by stars, I would like to know more about what is the mechanism or material working transmuter for the ether that you picture as supporting your Waves, both Gravity pressure waves and speed-of-light shear waves. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The cosmic foam of our universe is the ether foam of a super-universe, and the ether foam of our universe is the cosmic foam of a sub-unvierse. So each cubic meter of our ether may contain googols of sub-universe galaxies. The medium of gravity has no gravity, itself, but it has a tremendous amount of inertia. It is an ultra-hard and ultra-dense solid, and everything in our universe consists of shear waves in that solid. The shear waves are shepherded by dark-energy pressure waves, and chaotic attractors produce all the forms that we see.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Are "pressure waves" the Fast gravity effect and "shear waves" the light speed or slower effects. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Yes.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Are there frequency ranges or anything that can be associated with these two classes of ethereal waves?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The pressure waves result from ether-foam bubbles popping as sub-universe space expands (just as cosmic-foam bubbles are popping in because of the expansion of space in our universe). The age of the pressure wave may alter its wave length and intensity---just guessing. Shear waves may have any wavelength down to a Planck length, but chaotic attractors determine which wave lengths may pair up to form massive particles. Is there a chaos theorist in the house?
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I am very curious about the exact mechanism of transmission behind these amazing velocities of Gravity to which the Meta model is referring, proposing or suggesting.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
As am I. Perhaps pressure waves propagate thru the ether of the sub-universe, the sub-sub-universe, etc., <i>ad infinitum</i>. That way, they could cross the voids of the ether foam. Meanwhile shear waves must be transmitted from sub-universe galaxy to the next sub-universe galaxy around the walls of the voids. If I could discuss this with someone other than myself, it might start to make sense.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Oh, yeah, and how are the shear waves orbiting each other? I don't understand what you mean by that at all.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The forces between shear waves are more complex than those described by LeSage. The magnitude and direction of the momentum exchanged between a shear wave and a pressure wave depends on the phase and polarity relationship between them, as well as the wave lengths. I have no experimental proof that this occurs, at all. I don't know if anyone has even attempted to observe such a phenomenon in ordinary chemical foams. I can only imagine that motion of the medium in the shear wave advances one side of the pressure wave while retarding the other side, and that causes an infinitessimal change in the pressure wave's direction. Since the shear wave is so much slower, its direction must be altered that much more.
To calculate the attractive and repulsive forces between two shear waves, you would have to solve the statistical 3D distribution of effects on an otherwise uniform background of pressure waves. You would have to consider not just overall flux density, but flux density at every phase angle and polarity relative to each shear wave. And I am no mathematician.
In A different take on gravity , JAaronNicholson wrote:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">But if there is a force traveling around the cosmos at such fantastic speeds, shouldn't it push or accelerate particles or such to at least a fraction of this speed, well above the observed speed limit of light. Is there any evidence of this? There should be, I think.
--Aaron
Phil:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Not if I am right about ethereal pressure waves and ethereal shear waves. There is no reason for exchange of momentum between speed-of-gravity pressure waves and speed-of-light shear waves to alter the speed of either. Perhaps the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether, while the speed of shear waves is determined by the inertial density and shear modulus of the ether. There might be an equivalency between the properties of density and modulus and the properties of permitivity and permeability---perhaps in the sense that x & y are equivalent to r & theta.
Massive particles are limitted by the speed of shear waves because they consist of shear waves orbiting one another under the influence of LeSage-type forces. The LeSage-type forces result from exchange of momentum between shear waves and pressure waves. Relative motion of the particle's center is necessarily slower than the speed of the constituent shear waves because the shear waves must follow a longer path than the center around which they orbit one another. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
It sounds like you are proposing that Gravitational pressure waves could somehow have no influence what so ever with matter or photons while traversing the great distances of space but, then, for some reason when they reach planets or stars, suddenly, they do, in order for them (the Gravitational pressure waves) to be "felt" and compress energy into matter (my model) and put pressure on the air and water etc, when they had no interaction over the long distance with any light speed or slower matter or energies.
So, tell me, how is it that you envision the mechanism of Gravitational pressure waves determining when to interact with matter and when not to interact with matter?
Am I understanding you correctly that when you refer to ". . . the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether." that you are making reference to the 20X10^9 c that Larry made mention of as the possible minimum velocity for the--what should we call it--transmission speed of Gravity.
Whereas in my model, the "ether" is, itself, made up from the actual expanding field(s) of actual quantitative, countable (in theory) particles and photons thrown off by stars, I would like to know more about what is the mechanism or material working transmuter for the ether that you picture as supporting your Waves, both Gravity pressure waves and speed-of-light shear waves.
Maybe, to help us (me for sure) better understand what you are proposing, could you expand and clarify this portion of your statement:
Phil:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether, while the speed of shear waves is determined by the inertial density and shear modulus of the ether.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Are "pressure waves" the Fast gravity effect and "shear waves" the light speed or slower effects. Are there frequency ranges or anything that can be associated with these two classes of ethereal waves?
I am very curious about the exact mechanism of transmission behind these amazing velocities of Gravity to which the Meta model is referring, proposing or suggesting.
Oh, yeah, and how are the shear waves orbiting each other? I don't understand what you mean by that at all.
I eagerly await your response, Aaron<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
<hr noshade size="1"><hr noshade size="1">
To avoid taking that discussion off on a tangent, I respond to Aaron here:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Am I understanding you correctly that when you refer to ". . . the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether." that you are making reference to the 20X10^9 c that Larry made mention of as the possible minimum velocity for the--what should we call it--transmission speed of Gravity.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Yes, I am proposing that ethereal pressure waves propagate at the speed of gravity. VanFlandern's estimate, at least 20 billion c, sounds reasonable to me, though my mind has trouble imagining how pressure waves can be that much faster than shear waves. Perhaps pressure waves go directly across the voids of the ether foam, while shear waves follow the walls of the foam. These are directly analogous to acoustic waves in a solid. The forces that give the solid its shear and compressive moduli are poorly understood. Similar forces in the cosmos will offer clues to the forces in the ether---when astronomers discover what those forces really are.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">It sounds like you are proposing that Gravitational pressure waves could somehow have no influence what so ever with matter or photons while traversing the great distances of space but, then, for some reason when they reach planets or stars, suddenly, they do, in order for them (the Gravitational pressure waves) to be "felt" and compress energy into matter (my model) and put pressure on the air and water etc, when they had no interaction over the long distance with any light speed or slower matter or energies.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
No, I am not saying that, at all. Whenever, a pressure wave passes thru a shear wave there is an exchange of momentum between them. This is true regardless of whether the shear wave is a free photon or part of a massive particle.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">So, tell me, how is it that you envision the mechanism of Gravitational pressure waves determining when to interact with matter and when not to interact with matter? <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Where the pressure waves are completely random, no net force results; but proximity to a large mass makes a gravity field (an imbalance in the flux of pressure waves) which affects both massive particles and photons. Much closer proximity between two massive particles alters the average phase and polarity of pressure waves, and that results in weak & strong forces, as well as electrostatic & magnetic forces. I need your help determining exactly how that works. The math is beyond me.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Whereas in my model, the "ether" is, itself, made up from the actual expanding field(s) of actual quantitative, countable (in theory) particles and photons thrown off by stars, I would like to know more about what is the mechanism or material working transmuter for the ether that you picture as supporting your Waves, both Gravity pressure waves and speed-of-light shear waves. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The cosmic foam of our universe is the ether foam of a super-universe, and the ether foam of our universe is the cosmic foam of a sub-unvierse. So each cubic meter of our ether may contain googols of sub-universe galaxies. The medium of gravity has no gravity, itself, but it has a tremendous amount of inertia. It is an ultra-hard and ultra-dense solid, and everything in our universe consists of shear waves in that solid. The shear waves are shepherded by dark-energy pressure waves, and chaotic attractors produce all the forms that we see.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Are "pressure waves" the Fast gravity effect and "shear waves" the light speed or slower effects. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Yes.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Are there frequency ranges or anything that can be associated with these two classes of ethereal waves?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The pressure waves result from ether-foam bubbles popping as sub-universe space expands (just as cosmic-foam bubbles are popping in because of the expansion of space in our universe). The age of the pressure wave may alter its wave length and intensity---just guessing. Shear waves may have any wavelength down to a Planck length, but chaotic attractors determine which wave lengths may pair up to form massive particles. Is there a chaos theorist in the house?
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I am very curious about the exact mechanism of transmission behind these amazing velocities of Gravity to which the Meta model is referring, proposing or suggesting.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
As am I. Perhaps pressure waves propagate thru the ether of the sub-universe, the sub-sub-universe, etc., <i>ad infinitum</i>. That way, they could cross the voids of the ether foam. Meanwhile shear waves must be transmitted from sub-universe galaxy to the next sub-universe galaxy around the walls of the voids. If I could discuss this with someone other than myself, it might start to make sense.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Oh, yeah, and how are the shear waves orbiting each other? I don't understand what you mean by that at all.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The forces between shear waves are more complex than those described by LeSage. The magnitude and direction of the momentum exchanged between a shear wave and a pressure wave depends on the phase and polarity relationship between them, as well as the wave lengths. I have no experimental proof that this occurs, at all. I don't know if anyone has even attempted to observe such a phenomenon in ordinary chemical foams. I can only imagine that motion of the medium in the shear wave advances one side of the pressure wave while retarding the other side, and that causes an infinitessimal change in the pressure wave's direction. Since the shear wave is so much slower, its direction must be altered that much more.
To calculate the attractive and repulsive forces between two shear waves, you would have to solve the statistical 3D distribution of effects on an otherwise uniform background of pressure waves. You would have to consider not just overall flux density, but flux density at every phase angle and polarity relative to each shear wave. And I am no mathematician.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
15 years 5 months ago #22861
by PhilJ
Replied by PhilJ on topic Reply from Philip Janes
JAaronNicholson has asked more questions about my model at "
A different take on gravity
". Here are his latest questions and my responses:
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What force is/was responsible for this stretching of space?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Our space grows by approximately one cubic Planck length (10^-105 m^3) when pressure waves (dark energy) converge in such a way that an ether-foam bubble un-pops. The pressure waves were caused by the popping of a cosmic-foam bubble in the sub-universe; the sub-universe cosmic-foam bubble is our ether-foam bubble. In sub-universe time, the pressure waves radiate outward from the popping bubble; in our time the pressure waves converge toward the un-popping bubble; so from our perspective, the effect precedes the cause. Sub-universe cosmic-foam bubbles pop because of the expansion of sub-universe space, which is caused by the expansion of sub-sub-universe space, and so on, <i>ad infinitum</i>. If there is an ultimate cause of expansion, it is the cause of everything; it is lost to us in the infinite past and infinite future. I cannot rule out the possibility that it is God.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What "walls of galaxies" are you talking about?
What do you mean by Cosmic foam?
What bubbles? Do you picture "balloons" enclosing the galaxies.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The walls of galaxies in our cosmic foam are the ones recently discovered by the Sloan Digital Sky Survey . See " Astronomers Construct Largest-Ever 3D Map of Galaxies and Their Motions Over the Entire Sky ". This picture of the visible universe could just as well be a picture of a piece of our ether a trillion times narrower than an electron.
In my model, the sub-universe has a similar cosmic foam which is our ether foam; so there are walls of sub-universe galaxies in, around and thru us---perhaps a googol of sub-universe galaxies per cubic meter of our ether.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What pops? What makes them Pop?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Are you a beer drinker? If so, you're familiar with the sound that emminates from the head on a glass of good brew. That is the sound of pressure waves generated by popping bubbles in the foam. Those bubble pop because gravity is draining the beer out of them, making them thinner and weaker.
Cosmic-foam bubbles pop because the expansion of space is moving the galaxies farther apart. The forces between galaxies are mostly unknown. If gravity, alone, is holding the cosmic foam together, we should expect the galaxy walls to experience less stress as the strain increases. I doubt if that is the case; perhaps they are attracted by magnetic forces due to rotating electrically charged galaxies. There is a program under weigh to study such forces in a super-computer model of a portion of the cosmic foam. Cosmos Supercomputer Consortium . Astrophysics: Computing a Model of Cosmos
When we're talking about our own cosmic foam, the word "pop" may seem inappropriate; it may take billions of years for a cosmic-foam bubble to pop. The sub-universe operates on a different time scale; its time runs not only backwards, but also much faster---maybe a googol times faster.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What exactly would be the 'middle' of such a wall. What wall?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
A foam consists of bubble walls (membranes) surrounding individual bubbles (voids). Suppose you contaminate your wife's bubblebath with a fine powder of phosporescent markers and illuminate it with ultraviolet. You make a video of a magnified bubble wall as it pops. Somewhere near the middle of the bubble wall, a rupture occurs and grows. Your video played back in slow motion will show the phosphorescent markers accelerating toward the edges of the ruptured bubble wall. When those markers reach the edges of the ruptured bubble wall, they have energy and momentum which are transferred to the surrounding foam; you hear that energy as a "pop".
In my model, those phosphorescent markers are galaxies; the galaxies are the substance of the bubble walls. They can be galaxies in our own cosmic foam, taking billions of years to reach the edges of the bubble, or they can be sub-universe galaxies taking a fraction of a Planck time interval to get there (in reverse time).
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Is there some evidence of galaxies suddenly accelerating? Or Crashing into walls?
What surrounding walls? The "walls" of the other distant galaxies?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
"Suddenly" is a relative term. We're talking about two vastly different time scales. In our cosmic foam, the process is so slow that the movement may not be apparent in the lifetime of the human species. We can only infer it, perhaps, from variations in red shift among a group of galaxies. Unfortunately, we have no way to measure relative motion of galaxies except in the radial direction from Earth. The best evidence we have is the well known fact that many galaxies are colliding with one another. My best guess is that we should be able to see several walls of galaxies within a billion light years of us in the process of popping right now.
What are you talking about?
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Super-universe? Sub-universe? Our universe?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
You didn't really expect me to explain my whole model in a thread about Panteltje's model, did you?
Our universe is that portion of the greater fractal universe which exists between the scale of our ether and the scale of our cosmos. A super-univers electron is about a trillion times wider than our visible universe (Hubble sphere). So what goes on on the super-universe does not exist, as far as we're concerned, except as a concept that we might use to explain our own existence. Likewise, googols of sub-universe Hubble spheres pass thru us (and we thru them) every second, with a relative speed of hundreds of kilometers per second. So the sub-universe is equally beyond our knowability.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Pressure waves in 'our' ether? Do you mean like sound waves or something else?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Like sound waves in a solid. From a human perspective, the ether is an ultra-dense and ultra-hard solid. Such past physicists as Fresnel and Maxwell talked about an ether with the hardness and density of steel; I suspect it may be harder and denser by a hundred orders of magnitude. The greatest mystery to me is how pressure waves can be at least 20 billion times faster than shear waves in the same medium.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Now, you have bubbles "un-popping" when they get to their "cause." Where is that, exactly? Give me an example, at least.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I mean "when they get to the time of their cause". In forward time, bubbles pop; bubbles don't unpop in forward time because that would violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics. The expansion of sub-universe space causes the bubbles to pop in sub-universe time. There is no cause for a bubble to un-pop in our forward time. So, in our time, the cause (stretching bubble walls) has to come after the effect (pressure waves).
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">If: "The total number of bubbles in the cosmos is infinite", then, wouldn't they have to be increasing endlessly, else, the number would be fiinite. Not that I can grasp how you could ascertain whether either case is the right one . . . <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
That's why I specified, "...the number of cosmic-foam bubbles in the region". I try to avoid speaking of the expansion of the universe; every region of the universe (bounded by specific atoms, galaxies, etc.) is expanding. When an ether-foam bubble un-pops within an atom or galaxy, that region of space expands without stretching the atom or galaxy. Infinity plus one is still infinity, so the total number of ether-foam bubbles in the universe increases without getting bigger.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What is the process for two bubbles becoming one and, then, for one becoming two?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
In forward time, a wall between two bubbles pops; since that wall is no longer there, what had been two bubbles is now one bubble. In reverse time, a new wall appears across the middle of a bubble, dividing that one bubble into two bubbles. Ether-foam bubbles un-pop, and the result is an increase in the total number of bubbles in the region of space; and that represents an increase in the amount of space. I am presuming that that space can be measured in ether-foam bubbles. The simplest assumption, in keeping with Occam's razor, is that the measure of space is constant in terms of median-size ether-foam bubbles. (Half the volume is contained in bubbles larger than the median-size>) In other words, a cubic meter will always contain about 10^105 median-size ether-foam bubbles. So that is my working assumption. If my model ever gains acceptance and gets refined, it might turn out that the median size bubble changes with cosmological time.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Can you define what you mean by shear waves. It sounds like these are waves that have the ability to cut across something or what? Does shearing or cutting have anything to do with how they act or interact with matter or with energy or with gravity? Are your shear waves and pressure waves made of different stuff or traversing separate frequencies or overlapping in different hidden dimensions? Is it just a size distinction, speed difference. I don't quite get what you are trying to describe.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
"Shear wave" is synonymous with "transverse wave"; "pressure wave" is synonymous with "longitudinal wave". Look at Wikipedia's animations of shear waves and pressure waves . They are both made of the same stuff, i.e., stress and strain within the medium. Shear waves involve shear stress and shear strain; pressure waves involve compressive stress and compressive strain.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">So, is it "blobs" that give rise (the force or energy) to shear waves when they are "out of equilibrium"? How does that work?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The blob is just a random variation of bubble size. Maybe there just happens to be a group of a thousand bubbles---10x10x10---in a space which would normally contain two thousand bubbles. The blob is in equilibrium with its surroundings, so it is not moving. A pressure wave passing thru that blob will knock it out of equilibrium---maybe a fraction of a Planck length in the direction of the pressure wave's motion. Now, shear forces in the surrounding bubble walls want to pull the blob back to its equilibrium position. The shear forces from the surroundings pull the blob back toward where it was before; that's the action; the reaction is the blob pulling the surrounding bubbles the other way. So the stress at the edges of the blob is transferred to the surroundings as shear waves spreading at the speed of light perpendicular to the path of the pressure wave.
quote: Me
"My suspicion is that both shear and pressure waves at the smallest scale spread in the manner of macroscopic acoustic waves. In fractal universes with both macro and quantum scales, there must be two transitions between those scales per universe. There must be a scale smaller than the quantum scale in which waves behave like macro waves."
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Do you mean one going up scale and one going down scale for each level, sub-atomic, atomic, human, cosmic?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I mean two transitions per scalewise universe. We know there is a transition around the scale of atoms. Smaller than atoms is a quantum scale where waves exhibit particle-like properties in their interaction with matter, but they propagate like probability waves. Larger than atoms is a macro scale where waves spread like ripples on a pond. This macro scale continues, as far as we know, all the way to the scale of the cosmic foam and beyond. Somewhere in the next larger-scale universe there is a transition from our macro scale to the super-universe's quantum scale. Likewise, there must be a transition between our quantum scale and the sub-universe's macro scale.
I have not yet envisioned any mechanism by which the smallest, most energetic pressure and shear waves can become quantized.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">That is unclear especially the part about pressure waves caused by cosmic-foam bubble popping events which lie in our future and the sub-universe past.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
As our clocks tick forward, our universe is getting older and the sub-universe is getting younger; our space is expanding while sub-universe space is shrinking. As sub-universe clocks tick forward, the sub-universe is getting older and our universe is getting younger; sub-universe space is expanding while our space is shrinking. Expansion of space determines the direction of the arrow of time.
From our perspective, pressure waves converge and an ether-foam bubble un-pops. We "know" that cause must precede effect; so we might conclude that the pressure waves cause the bubble to un-pop. However, that would violate the second law of thermodynamics. Bubbles have a strong tendency to pop, but it takes some doing to make a bubble un-pop. An unpopped bubble has lower entropy than a popped bubble. So I conclude that the pressure waves are caused by the bubble un-popping, even though the pressure waves exist earlier in our time line than the fact of the bubble un-popping.
Is it just coincidence that the Schrodinger equation has reverse-time waves? Does anyone know at what speed Schrodinger's reverse-time waves propagate? Wouldn't it be interesting if they propagate at least 20 billion times faster than light!
Fractal Foam Model of Universes: Creator
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What force is/was responsible for this stretching of space?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Our space grows by approximately one cubic Planck length (10^-105 m^3) when pressure waves (dark energy) converge in such a way that an ether-foam bubble un-pops. The pressure waves were caused by the popping of a cosmic-foam bubble in the sub-universe; the sub-universe cosmic-foam bubble is our ether-foam bubble. In sub-universe time, the pressure waves radiate outward from the popping bubble; in our time the pressure waves converge toward the un-popping bubble; so from our perspective, the effect precedes the cause. Sub-universe cosmic-foam bubbles pop because of the expansion of sub-universe space, which is caused by the expansion of sub-sub-universe space, and so on, <i>ad infinitum</i>. If there is an ultimate cause of expansion, it is the cause of everything; it is lost to us in the infinite past and infinite future. I cannot rule out the possibility that it is God.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What "walls of galaxies" are you talking about?
What do you mean by Cosmic foam?
What bubbles? Do you picture "balloons" enclosing the galaxies.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The walls of galaxies in our cosmic foam are the ones recently discovered by the Sloan Digital Sky Survey . See " Astronomers Construct Largest-Ever 3D Map of Galaxies and Their Motions Over the Entire Sky ". This picture of the visible universe could just as well be a picture of a piece of our ether a trillion times narrower than an electron.
In my model, the sub-universe has a similar cosmic foam which is our ether foam; so there are walls of sub-universe galaxies in, around and thru us---perhaps a googol of sub-universe galaxies per cubic meter of our ether.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What pops? What makes them Pop?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Are you a beer drinker? If so, you're familiar with the sound that emminates from the head on a glass of good brew. That is the sound of pressure waves generated by popping bubbles in the foam. Those bubble pop because gravity is draining the beer out of them, making them thinner and weaker.
Cosmic-foam bubbles pop because the expansion of space is moving the galaxies farther apart. The forces between galaxies are mostly unknown. If gravity, alone, is holding the cosmic foam together, we should expect the galaxy walls to experience less stress as the strain increases. I doubt if that is the case; perhaps they are attracted by magnetic forces due to rotating electrically charged galaxies. There is a program under weigh to study such forces in a super-computer model of a portion of the cosmic foam. Cosmos Supercomputer Consortium . Astrophysics: Computing a Model of Cosmos
When we're talking about our own cosmic foam, the word "pop" may seem inappropriate; it may take billions of years for a cosmic-foam bubble to pop. The sub-universe operates on a different time scale; its time runs not only backwards, but also much faster---maybe a googol times faster.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What exactly would be the 'middle' of such a wall. What wall?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
A foam consists of bubble walls (membranes) surrounding individual bubbles (voids). Suppose you contaminate your wife's bubblebath with a fine powder of phosporescent markers and illuminate it with ultraviolet. You make a video of a magnified bubble wall as it pops. Somewhere near the middle of the bubble wall, a rupture occurs and grows. Your video played back in slow motion will show the phosphorescent markers accelerating toward the edges of the ruptured bubble wall. When those markers reach the edges of the ruptured bubble wall, they have energy and momentum which are transferred to the surrounding foam; you hear that energy as a "pop".
In my model, those phosphorescent markers are galaxies; the galaxies are the substance of the bubble walls. They can be galaxies in our own cosmic foam, taking billions of years to reach the edges of the bubble, or they can be sub-universe galaxies taking a fraction of a Planck time interval to get there (in reverse time).
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Is there some evidence of galaxies suddenly accelerating? Or Crashing into walls?
What surrounding walls? The "walls" of the other distant galaxies?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
"Suddenly" is a relative term. We're talking about two vastly different time scales. In our cosmic foam, the process is so slow that the movement may not be apparent in the lifetime of the human species. We can only infer it, perhaps, from variations in red shift among a group of galaxies. Unfortunately, we have no way to measure relative motion of galaxies except in the radial direction from Earth. The best evidence we have is the well known fact that many galaxies are colliding with one another. My best guess is that we should be able to see several walls of galaxies within a billion light years of us in the process of popping right now.
What are you talking about?
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Super-universe? Sub-universe? Our universe?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
You didn't really expect me to explain my whole model in a thread about Panteltje's model, did you?
Our universe is that portion of the greater fractal universe which exists between the scale of our ether and the scale of our cosmos. A super-univers electron is about a trillion times wider than our visible universe (Hubble sphere). So what goes on on the super-universe does not exist, as far as we're concerned, except as a concept that we might use to explain our own existence. Likewise, googols of sub-universe Hubble spheres pass thru us (and we thru them) every second, with a relative speed of hundreds of kilometers per second. So the sub-universe is equally beyond our knowability.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Pressure waves in 'our' ether? Do you mean like sound waves or something else?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Like sound waves in a solid. From a human perspective, the ether is an ultra-dense and ultra-hard solid. Such past physicists as Fresnel and Maxwell talked about an ether with the hardness and density of steel; I suspect it may be harder and denser by a hundred orders of magnitude. The greatest mystery to me is how pressure waves can be at least 20 billion times faster than shear waves in the same medium.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Now, you have bubbles "un-popping" when they get to their "cause." Where is that, exactly? Give me an example, at least.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I mean "when they get to the time of their cause". In forward time, bubbles pop; bubbles don't unpop in forward time because that would violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics. The expansion of sub-universe space causes the bubbles to pop in sub-universe time. There is no cause for a bubble to un-pop in our forward time. So, in our time, the cause (stretching bubble walls) has to come after the effect (pressure waves).
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">If: "The total number of bubbles in the cosmos is infinite", then, wouldn't they have to be increasing endlessly, else, the number would be fiinite. Not that I can grasp how you could ascertain whether either case is the right one . . . <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
That's why I specified, "...the number of cosmic-foam bubbles in the region". I try to avoid speaking of the expansion of the universe; every region of the universe (bounded by specific atoms, galaxies, etc.) is expanding. When an ether-foam bubble un-pops within an atom or galaxy, that region of space expands without stretching the atom or galaxy. Infinity plus one is still infinity, so the total number of ether-foam bubbles in the universe increases without getting bigger.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What is the process for two bubbles becoming one and, then, for one becoming two?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
In forward time, a wall between two bubbles pops; since that wall is no longer there, what had been two bubbles is now one bubble. In reverse time, a new wall appears across the middle of a bubble, dividing that one bubble into two bubbles. Ether-foam bubbles un-pop, and the result is an increase in the total number of bubbles in the region of space; and that represents an increase in the amount of space. I am presuming that that space can be measured in ether-foam bubbles. The simplest assumption, in keeping with Occam's razor, is that the measure of space is constant in terms of median-size ether-foam bubbles. (Half the volume is contained in bubbles larger than the median-size>) In other words, a cubic meter will always contain about 10^105 median-size ether-foam bubbles. So that is my working assumption. If my model ever gains acceptance and gets refined, it might turn out that the median size bubble changes with cosmological time.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Can you define what you mean by shear waves. It sounds like these are waves that have the ability to cut across something or what? Does shearing or cutting have anything to do with how they act or interact with matter or with energy or with gravity? Are your shear waves and pressure waves made of different stuff or traversing separate frequencies or overlapping in different hidden dimensions? Is it just a size distinction, speed difference. I don't quite get what you are trying to describe.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
"Shear wave" is synonymous with "transverse wave"; "pressure wave" is synonymous with "longitudinal wave". Look at Wikipedia's animations of shear waves and pressure waves . They are both made of the same stuff, i.e., stress and strain within the medium. Shear waves involve shear stress and shear strain; pressure waves involve compressive stress and compressive strain.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">So, is it "blobs" that give rise (the force or energy) to shear waves when they are "out of equilibrium"? How does that work?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
The blob is just a random variation of bubble size. Maybe there just happens to be a group of a thousand bubbles---10x10x10---in a space which would normally contain two thousand bubbles. The blob is in equilibrium with its surroundings, so it is not moving. A pressure wave passing thru that blob will knock it out of equilibrium---maybe a fraction of a Planck length in the direction of the pressure wave's motion. Now, shear forces in the surrounding bubble walls want to pull the blob back to its equilibrium position. The shear forces from the surroundings pull the blob back toward where it was before; that's the action; the reaction is the blob pulling the surrounding bubbles the other way. So the stress at the edges of the blob is transferred to the surroundings as shear waves spreading at the speed of light perpendicular to the path of the pressure wave.
quote: Me
"My suspicion is that both shear and pressure waves at the smallest scale spread in the manner of macroscopic acoustic waves. In fractal universes with both macro and quantum scales, there must be two transitions between those scales per universe. There must be a scale smaller than the quantum scale in which waves behave like macro waves."
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Do you mean one going up scale and one going down scale for each level, sub-atomic, atomic, human, cosmic?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I mean two transitions per scalewise universe. We know there is a transition around the scale of atoms. Smaller than atoms is a quantum scale where waves exhibit particle-like properties in their interaction with matter, but they propagate like probability waves. Larger than atoms is a macro scale where waves spread like ripples on a pond. This macro scale continues, as far as we know, all the way to the scale of the cosmic foam and beyond. Somewhere in the next larger-scale universe there is a transition from our macro scale to the super-universe's quantum scale. Likewise, there must be a transition between our quantum scale and the sub-universe's macro scale.
I have not yet envisioned any mechanism by which the smallest, most energetic pressure and shear waves can become quantized.
Aaron: Posted-19 Jun 2009: 08:04:02
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">That is unclear especially the part about pressure waves caused by cosmic-foam bubble popping events which lie in our future and the sub-universe past.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
As our clocks tick forward, our universe is getting older and the sub-universe is getting younger; our space is expanding while sub-universe space is shrinking. As sub-universe clocks tick forward, the sub-universe is getting older and our universe is getting younger; sub-universe space is expanding while our space is shrinking. Expansion of space determines the direction of the arrow of time.
From our perspective, pressure waves converge and an ether-foam bubble un-pops. We "know" that cause must precede effect; so we might conclude that the pressure waves cause the bubble to un-pop. However, that would violate the second law of thermodynamics. Bubbles have a strong tendency to pop, but it takes some doing to make a bubble un-pop. An unpopped bubble has lower entropy than a popped bubble. So I conclude that the pressure waves are caused by the bubble un-popping, even though the pressure waves exist earlier in our time line than the fact of the bubble un-popping.
Is it just coincidence that the Schrodinger equation has reverse-time waves? Does anyone know at what speed Schrodinger's reverse-time waves propagate? Wouldn't it be interesting if they propagate at least 20 billion times faster than light!
Fractal Foam Model of Universes: Creator
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- JAaronNicholson
- Offline
- Junior Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
15 years 5 months ago #23697
by JAaronNicholson
Phil, Okay I will bring my questions about your theory over here to your thread. This should have preceded your answer. Sorry--Aaron
In answering my question: Quote Aaron:
"In your Gravity/Sheer waves model, do you identify any sort of source for the creation of your two different kind of waves?"
Quoting Phil--
quote:
Yes. The expansion of our space stretches the bubble walls (walls of galaxies) in our cosmic foam. Ultimately, one by one, the bubble walls pop. A gap opens near the middle of the wall, and the galaxies accelerate toward the surrounding walls, eventually crashing into them. To conserve energy and momentum, pressure waves propagate outward thru our cosmic foam, which is the ether foam of a super-universe. The same happens in the cosmic foam of the sub-universe, which is the ether foam of our universe. So that is the source of the pressure waves in our ether.
So many questions!
What force is/was responsible for this stretching of space?
What "walls of galaxies" are you talking about?
What do you mean by Cosmic foam?
What bubbles? Do you picture "balloons" enclosing the galaxies.
What pops? What makes them Pop?
What exactly would be the 'middle' of such a wall. What wall?
quote:
. . . A gap opens near the middle of the wall, and the galaxies accelerate toward the surrounding walls, eventually crashing into them. . .
Is there some evidence of galaxies suddenly accelerating? Or Crashing into walls?
What surrounding walls? The "walls" of the other distant galaxies?
What are you talking about?
Super-universe? Sub-universe? Our universe?
Pressure waves in 'our' ether? Do you mean like sound waves or something else?
quote:
When a cosmic-foam bubble wall pops, two bubbles become one, which represents a decrease in the number of cosmic-foam bubbles in the region. (The total number of bubbles in the cosmos is infinite, so it can't increase). If space can be measured in bubbles, a decrease in bubbles represents shrinking space. To me, this strongly suggests that the arrow of time reverses from each universe to those above and below it in the dimension of scale. So from our perspective, the pressure waves in our ether converge toward their future cause. When they get to their cause, an ether-foam bubble wall unpops, and one bubble becomes two; so on average, a cubic Planck length (10^-105 cubic meter) of new space is added to our universe---approximately 10^52 times per second per cubic meter. Since the pressure waves are converted to space, they fill the role of dark energy.
Now, you have bubbles "un-popping" when they get to their "cause." Where is that, exactly? Give me an example, at least.
If: "The total number of bubbles in the cosmos is infinite", then, wouldn't they have to be increasing endlessly, else, the number would be fiinite. Not that I can grasp how you could ascertain whether either case is the right one . . .
What is the process for two bubbles becoming one and, then, for one becoming two?
quote:
The ultimate source of shear waves is a bit more puzzling and uncertain. I have one candidate source, as follows: Assuming that the bubble sizes in the ether foam are randomly distributed, there must be randomly occurring micro regions (call them blobs) in which the mean bubble size is significantly greater than the overall mean. If the distribution of bubble sizes is nonlinear, such blobs may be more common. A pressure wave passing thru such a blob should change speed going in and resume speed coming out. If the pressure wave slows going in, that imparts forward momentum to the blob; when the pressure wave leaves, it gets back its momentum but leaves the blob ever so slightly out of its equilibrium position. Shear forces return the blob to equilibrium, radiating shear waves perpendicular to the path of pressure wave.
Can you define what you mean by shear waves. It sounds like these are waves that have the ability to cut across something or what? Does shearing or cutting have anything to do with how they act or interact with matter or with energy or with gravity? Are your shear waves and pressure waves made of different stuff or traversing separate frequencies or overlapping in different hidden dimensions? Is it just a size distinction, speed difference. I don't quite get what you are trying to describe.
quote:
The main weakness in the above mechanism for forming shear waves is that pressure waves should be striking the blob from all sides so frequently that the blob doesn't remain out of equilibrium in any one direction long enough to generate shear waves.
So, is it "blobs" that give rise (the force or energy) to shear waves when they are "out of equilibrium"? How does that work?
quote:
Aaron:
And do you think that there is any geometric dispersion associated with their propagation? Such as getting weaker or less energetic per area as they move out from their source as all other waves appear to do?
quote:
My suspicion is that both shear and pressure waves at the smallest scale spread in the manner of macroscopic acoustic waves. In fractal universes with both macro and quantum scales, there must be two transitions between those scales per universe. There must be a scale smaller than the quantum scale in which waves behave like macro waves.
Do you mean one going up scale and one going down scale for each level, sub-atomic, atomic, human, cosmic?
quote:
Perhaps wave-particle duality is best explained by some sort of multiverse theory. Pressure waves are the ultimate source of energy in our universe, and they are caused by cosmic-foam bubble popping events which lie in our future and the sub-universe past. So each of our possible futures must have already taken place from a sub-universe persepctive. This leaves only two possibilities; either our future is predestined, or all possible futures exist---and continue to exist even if we don't go there.
So the probability waves of the Schrodinger equation represent the probability that we shall experience a particular convergence of dispersed actual waves. Sorry if that is unclear; I haven't had much opportunity (none, actually) to debate these views.
Yes. That is unclear especially the part about pressure waves caused by cosmic-foam bubble popping events which lie in our future and the sub-universe past. Where is that coming from? Give me some background or some logic to this temporal connection. But I still want to know what "bubbles" are you referring to?
Curiously, Aaron
Replied by JAaronNicholson on topic Reply from James Nicholson
Phil, Okay I will bring my questions about your theory over here to your thread. This should have preceded your answer. Sorry--Aaron
In answering my question: Quote Aaron:
"In your Gravity/Sheer waves model, do you identify any sort of source for the creation of your two different kind of waves?"
Quoting Phil--
quote:
Yes. The expansion of our space stretches the bubble walls (walls of galaxies) in our cosmic foam. Ultimately, one by one, the bubble walls pop. A gap opens near the middle of the wall, and the galaxies accelerate toward the surrounding walls, eventually crashing into them. To conserve energy and momentum, pressure waves propagate outward thru our cosmic foam, which is the ether foam of a super-universe. The same happens in the cosmic foam of the sub-universe, which is the ether foam of our universe. So that is the source of the pressure waves in our ether.
So many questions!
What force is/was responsible for this stretching of space?
What "walls of galaxies" are you talking about?
What do you mean by Cosmic foam?
What bubbles? Do you picture "balloons" enclosing the galaxies.
What pops? What makes them Pop?
What exactly would be the 'middle' of such a wall. What wall?
quote:
. . . A gap opens near the middle of the wall, and the galaxies accelerate toward the surrounding walls, eventually crashing into them. . .
Is there some evidence of galaxies suddenly accelerating? Or Crashing into walls?
What surrounding walls? The "walls" of the other distant galaxies?
What are you talking about?
Super-universe? Sub-universe? Our universe?
Pressure waves in 'our' ether? Do you mean like sound waves or something else?
quote:
When a cosmic-foam bubble wall pops, two bubbles become one, which represents a decrease in the number of cosmic-foam bubbles in the region. (The total number of bubbles in the cosmos is infinite, so it can't increase). If space can be measured in bubbles, a decrease in bubbles represents shrinking space. To me, this strongly suggests that the arrow of time reverses from each universe to those above and below it in the dimension of scale. So from our perspective, the pressure waves in our ether converge toward their future cause. When they get to their cause, an ether-foam bubble wall unpops, and one bubble becomes two; so on average, a cubic Planck length (10^-105 cubic meter) of new space is added to our universe---approximately 10^52 times per second per cubic meter. Since the pressure waves are converted to space, they fill the role of dark energy.
Now, you have bubbles "un-popping" when they get to their "cause." Where is that, exactly? Give me an example, at least.
If: "The total number of bubbles in the cosmos is infinite", then, wouldn't they have to be increasing endlessly, else, the number would be fiinite. Not that I can grasp how you could ascertain whether either case is the right one . . .
What is the process for two bubbles becoming one and, then, for one becoming two?
quote:
The ultimate source of shear waves is a bit more puzzling and uncertain. I have one candidate source, as follows: Assuming that the bubble sizes in the ether foam are randomly distributed, there must be randomly occurring micro regions (call them blobs) in which the mean bubble size is significantly greater than the overall mean. If the distribution of bubble sizes is nonlinear, such blobs may be more common. A pressure wave passing thru such a blob should change speed going in and resume speed coming out. If the pressure wave slows going in, that imparts forward momentum to the blob; when the pressure wave leaves, it gets back its momentum but leaves the blob ever so slightly out of its equilibrium position. Shear forces return the blob to equilibrium, radiating shear waves perpendicular to the path of pressure wave.
Can you define what you mean by shear waves. It sounds like these are waves that have the ability to cut across something or what? Does shearing or cutting have anything to do with how they act or interact with matter or with energy or with gravity? Are your shear waves and pressure waves made of different stuff or traversing separate frequencies or overlapping in different hidden dimensions? Is it just a size distinction, speed difference. I don't quite get what you are trying to describe.
quote:
The main weakness in the above mechanism for forming shear waves is that pressure waves should be striking the blob from all sides so frequently that the blob doesn't remain out of equilibrium in any one direction long enough to generate shear waves.
So, is it "blobs" that give rise (the force or energy) to shear waves when they are "out of equilibrium"? How does that work?
quote:
Aaron:
And do you think that there is any geometric dispersion associated with their propagation? Such as getting weaker or less energetic per area as they move out from their source as all other waves appear to do?
quote:
My suspicion is that both shear and pressure waves at the smallest scale spread in the manner of macroscopic acoustic waves. In fractal universes with both macro and quantum scales, there must be two transitions between those scales per universe. There must be a scale smaller than the quantum scale in which waves behave like macro waves.
Do you mean one going up scale and one going down scale for each level, sub-atomic, atomic, human, cosmic?
quote:
Perhaps wave-particle duality is best explained by some sort of multiverse theory. Pressure waves are the ultimate source of energy in our universe, and they are caused by cosmic-foam bubble popping events which lie in our future and the sub-universe past. So each of our possible futures must have already taken place from a sub-universe persepctive. This leaves only two possibilities; either our future is predestined, or all possible futures exist---and continue to exist even if we don't go there.
So the probability waves of the Schrodinger equation represent the probability that we shall experience a particular convergence of dispersed actual waves. Sorry if that is unclear; I haven't had much opportunity (none, actually) to debate these views.
Yes. That is unclear especially the part about pressure waves caused by cosmic-foam bubble popping events which lie in our future and the sub-universe past. Where is that coming from? Give me some background or some logic to this temporal connection. But I still want to know what "bubbles" are you referring to?
Curiously, Aaron
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- JAaronNicholson
- Offline
- Junior Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
15 years 5 months ago #23794
by JAaronNicholson
Replied by JAaronNicholson on topic Reply from James Nicholson
From 17 Jun 2009, here is more of my inquiry about your theory, Phil, from the "A different take of Gravity" thread. Maybe you could bring all of your comments and replies over here too, then and we can give panteltje back his thread.
Phil,
In your Gravity/Sheer waves model, do you identify any sort of source for the creation of your two different kind of waves?
For instance, most waves that we are somewhat familiar with all have a 'point' source or cause, sound waves, radio waves, a pebble in the pond, etc. My model clearly points to the individual stars as the source/s for the particles/waves (photons et. al.) that eventually re-coalesce in geometry as the phenomenon of Gravity where they compress into the associated Mass. So, where do you envision your waves originating? And do you think that there is any geometric dispersion associated with their propagation? Such as getting weaker or less energetic per area as they move out from their source as all other waves appear to do? Are tsunamis an exception, gaining power as they progress?
Warm regards, Aaron
Phil,
In your Gravity/Sheer waves model, do you identify any sort of source for the creation of your two different kind of waves?
For instance, most waves that we are somewhat familiar with all have a 'point' source or cause, sound waves, radio waves, a pebble in the pond, etc. My model clearly points to the individual stars as the source/s for the particles/waves (photons et. al.) that eventually re-coalesce in geometry as the phenomenon of Gravity where they compress into the associated Mass. So, where do you envision your waves originating? And do you think that there is any geometric dispersion associated with their propagation? Such as getting weaker or less energetic per area as they move out from their source as all other waves appear to do? Are tsunamis an exception, gaining power as they progress?
Warm regards, Aaron
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- JAaronNicholson
- Offline
- Junior Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
15 years 5 months ago #23604
by JAaronNicholson
Replied by JAaronNicholson on topic Reply from James Nicholson
More brought over from June 1, 2009
But if there is a force traveling around the cosmos at such fantastic speeds, shouldn't it push or accelerate particles or such to at least a fraction of this speed, well above the observed speed limit of light. Is there any evidence of this? There should be, I think.
--Aaron
Phil:
quote:
Not if I am right about ethereal pressure waves and ethereal shear waves. There is no reason for exchange of momentum between speed-of-gravity pressure waves and speed-of-light shear waves to alter the speed of either. Perhaps the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether, while the speed of shear waves is determined by the inertial density and shear modulus of the ether. There might be an equivalency between the properties of density and modulus and the properties of permitivity and permeability---perhaps in the sense that x & y are equivalent to r & theta.
Massive particles are limitted by the speed of shear waves because they consist of shear waves orbiting one another under the influence of LeSage-type forces. The LeSage-type forces result from exchange of momentum between shear waves and pressure waves. Relative motion of the particle's center is necessarily slower than the speed of the constituent shear waves because the shear waves must follow a longer path than the center around which they orbit one another.
It sounds like you are proposing that Gravitational pressure waves could somehow have no influence what so ever with matter or photons while traversing the great distances of space but, then, for some reason when they reach planets or stars, suddenly, they do, in order for them (the Gravitational pressure waves) to be "felt" and compress energy into matter (my model) and put pressure on the air and water etc, when they had no interaction over the long distance with any light speed or slower matter or energies.
So, tell me, how is it that you envision the mechanism of Gravitational pressure waves determining when to interact with matter and when not to interact with matter?
Am I understanding you correctly that when you refer to ". . . the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether." that you are making reference to the 20X10^9 c that Larry made mention of as the possible minimum velocity for the--what should we call it--transmission speed of Gravity.
Whereas in my model, the "ether" is, itself, made up from the actual expanding field(s) of actual quantitative, countable (in theory) particles and photons thrown off by stars, I would like to know more about what is the mechanism or material working transmuter for the ether that you picture as supporting your Waves, both Gravity pressure waves and speed-of-light shear waves.
Maybe, to help us (me for sure) better understand what you are proposing, could you expand and clarify this portion of your statement:
Phil:
quote:
Perhaps the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether, while the speed of shear waves is determined by the inertial density and shear modulus of the ether.
Are "pressure waves" the Fast gravity effect and "shear waves" the light speed or slower effects. Are there frequency ranges or anything that can be associated with these two classes of ethereal waves?
I am very curious about the exact mechanism of transmission behind these amazing velocities of Gravity to which the Meta model is referring, proposing or suggesting.
Oh, yeah, and how are the shear waves orbiting each other? I don't understand what you mean by that at all.
I eagerly await your response, Aaron
Edited by - JAaronNicholson on 01 Jun 2009 07:35:09
But if there is a force traveling around the cosmos at such fantastic speeds, shouldn't it push or accelerate particles or such to at least a fraction of this speed, well above the observed speed limit of light. Is there any evidence of this? There should be, I think.
--Aaron
Phil:
quote:
Not if I am right about ethereal pressure waves and ethereal shear waves. There is no reason for exchange of momentum between speed-of-gravity pressure waves and speed-of-light shear waves to alter the speed of either. Perhaps the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether, while the speed of shear waves is determined by the inertial density and shear modulus of the ether. There might be an equivalency between the properties of density and modulus and the properties of permitivity and permeability---perhaps in the sense that x & y are equivalent to r & theta.
Massive particles are limitted by the speed of shear waves because they consist of shear waves orbiting one another under the influence of LeSage-type forces. The LeSage-type forces result from exchange of momentum between shear waves and pressure waves. Relative motion of the particle's center is necessarily slower than the speed of the constituent shear waves because the shear waves must follow a longer path than the center around which they orbit one another.
It sounds like you are proposing that Gravitational pressure waves could somehow have no influence what so ever with matter or photons while traversing the great distances of space but, then, for some reason when they reach planets or stars, suddenly, they do, in order for them (the Gravitational pressure waves) to be "felt" and compress energy into matter (my model) and put pressure on the air and water etc, when they had no interaction over the long distance with any light speed or slower matter or energies.
So, tell me, how is it that you envision the mechanism of Gravitational pressure waves determining when to interact with matter and when not to interact with matter?
Am I understanding you correctly that when you refer to ". . . the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether." that you are making reference to the 20X10^9 c that Larry made mention of as the possible minimum velocity for the--what should we call it--transmission speed of Gravity.
Whereas in my model, the "ether" is, itself, made up from the actual expanding field(s) of actual quantitative, countable (in theory) particles and photons thrown off by stars, I would like to know more about what is the mechanism or material working transmuter for the ether that you picture as supporting your Waves, both Gravity pressure waves and speed-of-light shear waves.
Maybe, to help us (me for sure) better understand what you are proposing, could you expand and clarify this portion of your statement:
Phil:
quote:
Perhaps the speed of pressure waves is determined by the inertial density and compressive modulus of the ether, while the speed of shear waves is determined by the inertial density and shear modulus of the ether.
Are "pressure waves" the Fast gravity effect and "shear waves" the light speed or slower effects. Are there frequency ranges or anything that can be associated with these two classes of ethereal waves?
I am very curious about the exact mechanism of transmission behind these amazing velocities of Gravity to which the Meta model is referring, proposing or suggesting.
Oh, yeah, and how are the shear waves orbiting each other? I don't understand what you mean by that at all.
I eagerly await your response, Aaron
Edited by - JAaronNicholson on 01 Jun 2009 07:35:09
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.387 seconds