# The Naked Scientists Forum

### Author Topic: Examining gravity  (Read 1069 times)

#### jeffreyH

• Global Moderator
• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 3916
• Thanked: 53 times
• The graviton sucks
##### Examining gravity
« on: 23/09/2015 00:27:54 »
The gravitational constant G can be expressed as where lP = the Planck length, mP is the Planck mass and tP the Planck time. Since c can be expressed as we can state that where L is a distance of 1 light second. Now we have scaled up the equation. We can go further and scale up G by using the unitless factor that when multiplied with G will give a scaled up value. Since we then need to find m we can rearrange the equation with the new G value to be . This scale then relates directly to the Planck scale but one that we can work with having units that are on the macroscopic scale. This should make it easier to work with energies that would be applicable to the Planck scale without any of the difficulties.
« Last Edit: 23/09/2015 00:43:55 by jeffreyH »

#### jeffreyH

• Global Moderator
• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 3916
• Thanked: 53 times
• The graviton sucks
##### Re: Examining gravity
« Reply #1 on: 04/11/2015 19:55:44 »
It is stated that a gravitational field will shift the wavelength of a particle. How true is this? If we look at the equation then simply increasing momentum will shorten a wavelength and increase the frequency and therefore the energy of a particle. The acceleration induced by gravitation, both positive and negative, may be the only reason that the wavelength is altered at all. A change in wavelength may then be divorced from the action of gravitation and be thought of as a side effect of the action of the field on momentum.

#### jeffreyH

• Global Moderator
• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 3916
• Thanked: 53 times
• The graviton sucks
##### Re: Examining gravity
« Reply #2 on: 04/11/2015 21:16:11 »
It should be noted that the above statements cannot be applied to massless particles.

#### GoC

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 339
• Thanked: 51 times
##### Re: Examining gravity
« Reply #3 on: 07/11/2015 15:07:20 »
It seems to me that acceleration has nothing to do with changes in wavelength. If we consider the dilation in relativity increasing (gamma factor) as we descend a gravity well the wavelength might be part of the space dilation by position. Using the atomic clock tick rate to determine the wavelength energy may be of some use in understanding ones wavelength energy position. In SR, clock tick rate is the relative speed between two clocks and the velocity of light. So on the Earth's surface we could claim we are in an inertial ship not accelerating. As we descend a gravity well we increase our speed relative to an SR speed increase. In a sense with both SR and GR we approach the speed limit of the constant c. SR in inertial speed and GR down a gravity well. A lower energy position could be an increase in distance (dilation of space) light has to travel for its frequency. This has a corresponding distance light would travel in SR for inertial frequency of light creation. Dilation and speed being a relative reduction of available c.

#### Thebox

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 3157
• Thanked: 44 times
##### Re: Examining gravity
« Reply #4 on: 07/11/2015 15:12:39 »
It seems to me that acceleration has nothing to do with changes in wavelength.

Say that to a bow wave

#### GoC

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 339
• Thanked: 51 times
##### Re: Examining gravity
« Reply #5 on: 07/11/2015 15:44:46 »
Say that to a bow wave
That is the trouble with thinking of relativity in the known physical sense. Energy c of space could be looked at as more of a submarine. What is a bow wave to a submarine. Energy is more like temperature of the water with a limit of 100 degrees c for the dilation aspect. There is no physical analogy with mass to capture the understanding of c the universe speed limit or why it is constant. Math of the observed effect is a good tool for hypostasizing a cause. Wave on the bow. Wave of what?

In a sense with both SR and GR we approach the speed limit of the constant c. SR in inertial speed and GR down a gravity well. A lower energy position could be an increase in distance (dilation of space) light has to travel for its frequency. This has a corresponding distance light would travel in SR for inertial frequency of light creation. Dilation and speed being a relative reduction of available c.

By using tick rate for energy used relative to c that would make it appear acceleration in GR is towards a more dilated least energy position. In this sense it could be said that GR acceleration is caused by a difference in dilated positions always being attracted to the greatest dilated position of least available energy, c.

#### Thebox

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 3157
• Thanked: 44 times
##### Re: Examining gravity
« Reply #6 on: 07/11/2015 16:36:36 »

That is the trouble with thinking of relativity in the known physical sense. Energy c of space could be looked at as more of a submarine.

Energy c  of space could be looked upon as being a ''virtual rubber ball''   or submerged in an ocean, the submarine passes through the ocean or the ''virtual rubber ball'' stretching the ''fabric'' of c, a still pond only has ripples if it encounters a force.

Fn(c)  propagating through space is equal to zero which is equal to zero net charge

Fn(c) in a medium is not equal to zero which is equal to amplitude

Fn(c)  reflecting off matter and absorbed by matter is not equal to zero which is equal to wavelength.

« Last Edit: 07/11/2015 16:57:31 by Thebox »

#### GoC

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 339
• Thanked: 51 times
##### Re: Examining gravity
« Reply #7 on: 07/11/2015 19:08:09 »

The most interesting part of science is speculation
There is only rotation and velocity in our universe. All things are created using only these two motions. The movement of electrons can be no different in its cause. Some sort of uniform spin must create channels for electrons to move through or electrons would not move in the first place. All forms of energy must originate from spin propagation to be consistent otherwise there would be no speed limit to be relative to. Gravity, magnetism, EM propagation, weak and strong force must be different aspects of fundamental spin motion at c.

#### Thebox

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 3157
• Thanked: 44 times
##### Re: Examining gravity
« Reply #8 on: 07/11/2015 19:32:58 »

There is only rotation and velocity in our universe.

Not true, rotation and velocity are cause of effect, you are correct in thinking that only two things matter, the two things being -

1. attraction equalling contraction

2.repulsion equalling expansion

Everything else is a product of the work done by these two elementary processes.

#### jeffreyH

• Global Moderator
• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 3916
• Thanked: 53 times
• The graviton sucks
##### Re: Examining gravity
« Reply #9 on: 07/11/2015 20:34:38 »
It seems to me that acceleration has nothing to do with changes in wavelength. If we consider the dilation in relativity increasing (gamma factor) as we descend a gravity well the wavelength might be part of the space dilation by position. Using the atomic clock tick rate to determine the wavelength energy may be of some use in understanding ones wavelength energy position. In SR, clock tick rate is the relative speed between two clocks and the velocity of light. So on the Earth's surface we could claim we are in an inertial ship not accelerating. As we descend a gravity well we increase our speed relative to an SR speed increase. In a sense with both SR and GR we approach the speed limit of the constant c. SR in inertial speed and GR down a gravity well. A lower energy position could be an increase in distance (dilation of space) light has to travel for its frequency. This has a corresponding distance light would travel in SR for inertial frequency of light creation. Dilation and speed being a relative reduction of available c.

This is interesting. I have been thinking along similar lines but have had no time to develop any mathematics yet. I may post any equations i derive here in this thread.

#### The Naked Scientists Forum

##### Re: Examining gravity
« Reply #9 on: 07/11/2015 20:34:38 »