0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Ain't but one thing you gotta know to get it nailed down just exactly how it is that gravity works. First off, you gotta have a universe made out of photons like showed in How The Universe Is Built. Then pay close attention to Planck's Constant. Can't be no other way; Planck's Constant makes gravity happen.When you get down to figuring real hard on just exactly what Planck's Constant really is, things start to click. That constant is something a photon has, but what exactly is it? First off; we already know photons have gravity attraction for each other; mainstream physics tells us that. What we're doing here is showing how come that is.Photons are made out of electromagnetic change. Ain't nothing else to'um. So, Planck's Constant gotta be contained somehow in electromagnetic change. This change that is a photon swings from a peak on the negative side then to a peak on the positive side as a photon moves past. Don't matter which comes first; might be positive that starts it off just as easy.The arithmetic you use to figure the Planck's Constant number don't need nothing but the speed of the change from peak to peak. It don't use or need the amplitude value of the peak. The only way that can happen is the peak amplitude is always the same constant amount. The reason that has to be so is that photons have peaks and the arithmetic don't use them. And that means that the constant amplitude of photons is the seat root cause of Planck's Constant.Think on that for awhile. Make sure you see that this is so. Because, if that is so, it demands and predicts that all photons must move toward each other. Sounds kinda like gravity; don't it?Think of a photon as it ripples through space and concentrate on the peak amplitude point. As that point swims through the remnient fields of other photons, them remnient fields gotta be part of peak amplitude. If the remnient fields are stronger in one direction the swimming point must be slightly offset toward that stronger direction bacause of the contribution from the remnient fields.
If you have bulges you would see repulsion rather than attraction. I don't see how this leads to satisfying the observations that imply the presence of dark matter. The theory that there must be more matter than we can see is primarily based on observations of galaxies. The mean potential energy and the mean kinetic energy of all objects in a closed system (thought to be a good approximation for a galaxy) are related by the "virial theorem". The calculations have been done based on various models for various types of galaxy and, no matter the galaxy type, one conclusion is that that galaxies have much more mass than can be observed.There are many other competing theories, some of which, deserve more consideration. In particular there are several involving a non-constant value for the Gravitational "constant" G. One of these theories looks at the inconsistency of the measurements of G and suggest that the value may depend on the closeness of other masses (on both a very large scale and close by masses) and others suggest a change of G with time. Google - gravitational constant varying - and read some of the resulting websites.
There are many other competing theories, some of which, deserve more consideration. In particular there are several involving a non-constant value for the Gravitational "constant" G. One of these theories looks at the inconsistency of the measurements of G and suggest that the value may depend on the closeness of other masses (on both a very large scale and close by masses) and others suggest a change of G with time. Google - gravitational constant varying - and read some of the resulting websites.
I have looked up the websites that you suggest, so far I haven't seen anything that doesn't go way over my head. But I will keep looking and try to make some sense of the concept