Naked Science Forum

On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: jeffreyH on 16/01/2016 18:26:53

Title: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 16/01/2016 18:26:53
Is there a vector space that can be used with linear combinations that is representative of a non-linear space such as that of the gravitational field? If this exists can it be formulated as an energy vector space?
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: MichaelMD on 19/01/2016 13:59:50
Rather than trying to explain linear energy transmissions like light and electromagnetism with new theories about space, I believe it would be better to invoke a new theory of how individual energy units could act in a linear fashion.

In my model, elemental ether units which are of matching size (inasmuch as they are all "elemental,") acting via a vibrational resonating mechanism, and in intimate proximity to each other, is the best model to explain linear transmissions.

My ether model starts with original space (space prior to the first appearance of any forces) in which point-localities of space oscillated in perfect symmetry, Then oscillational fatigue caused adjacent "points" to combine in "Yin and Yang" fashion., Then, these point-pairs reversibly re-equilibrated with the initial oscillational setting, reverting to elemental singleton units, which broke the perfect symmetry of space, producing an ether matrix where matching-size elemental ether units resonate with each other vibrationally (as derived from the oscillational.)

Certainly present energy theory, where quantum units of varying sizes are acting via spin and across vectors of space, cannot rationally explain linear transmissions.

I believe quantum "waves" represent a "shoreline" effect, where the ether matrix, composed of elemental ether units, vibrating together with slightly larger "etheroidal" units, finally transitions fully to our quantum energy system, i.e., a "wavy line" zone where the vibrational etheric units all become spin/vector quantum units.

Occasionally, a vibrating etheroidal unit "escapes" from its vibrational mechanism and unexpectedly appears in an unusually designed quantum energy system. -This model would be able to account for the phenomenon called "Quasiparticles."
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 19/01/2016 18:27:33
When I posed the questions I certainly didn't expect an answer. What you have described has nothing at all to do with what I am attempting so is irrelevant. I didn't understand most of it as it made no sense anyway.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: guest39538 on 19/01/2016 19:34:19
When I posed the questions I certainly didn't expect an answer. What you have described has nothing at all to do with what I am attempting so is irrelevant. I didn't understand most of it as it made no sense anyway.
Not sure if this relevant to you Jeff, but when I read your question my first though was a bow and arrow.

Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 19/01/2016 19:49:44
When I posed the questions I certainly didn't expect an answer. What you have described has nothing at all to do with what I am attempting so is irrelevant. I didn't understand most of it as it made no sense anyway.
Not sure if this relevant to you Jeff, but when I read your question my first though was a bow and arrow.

If you were to fire one arrow directly upwards and another at an angle then you would start to see the issues. If you are using exactly the same force to launch all arrows then you can propel an arrow the furthest distance by launching it at a 45 degree angle with respect to the ground. If you consider how fast and therefore how much energy an arrow would need to be able to sustain an orbit or escape the earth altogether then you can reach some interesting conclusions.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: guest39538 on 19/01/2016 19:53:55
When I posed the questions I certainly didn't expect an answer. What you have described has nothing at all to do with what I am attempting so is irrelevant. I didn't understand most of it as it made no sense anyway.
Not sure if this relevant to you Jeff, but when I read your question my first though was a bow and arrow.

If you were to fire one arrow directly upwards and another at an angle then you would start to see the issues. If you are using exactly the same force to launch all arrows then you can propel an arrow the furthest distance by launching it at a 45 degree angle with respect to the ground. If you consider how fast and therefore how much energy an arrow would need to be able to sustain an orbit or escape the earth altogether then you can reach some interesting conclusions.

A bit like the Cannon ball idea and escape velocity.

I should hope the one at 45 degrees would travel further, the arrow fired vertically up will eventually slow , then turn, then travel back down vertically , excluding weather and air of course.

added - i drew it for you Jeff , It may help you

 [ Invalid Attachment ]

I added atmosphere to it

 [ Invalid Attachment ]

Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 19/01/2016 21:36:08
When I posed the questions I certainly didn't expect an answer. What you have described has nothing at all to do with what I am attempting so is irrelevant. I didn't understand most of it as it made no sense anyway.
Not sure if this relevant to you Jeff, but when I read your question my first though was a bow and arrow.

If you were to fire one arrow directly upwards and another at an angle then you would start to see the issues. If you are using exactly the same force to launch all arrows then you can propel an arrow the furthest distance by launching it at a 45 degree angle with respect to the ground. If you consider how fast and therefore how much energy an arrow would need to be able to sustain an orbit or escape the earth altogether then you can reach some interesting conclusions.

A bit like the Cannon ball idea and escape velocity.

I should hope the one at 45 degrees would travel further, the arrow fired vertically up will eventually slow , then turn, then travel back down vertically , excluding weather and air of course.

added - i drew it for you Jeff , It may help you

 [ Invalid Attachment ]

I added atmosphere to it

 [ Invalid Attachment ]

I will get back to you on this. I don't have the time at the moment.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 23/01/2016 20:17:01
Thebox's diagrams are suitable for the purpose and I will come back to them. For now what is needed is a linearly independent solution to the equation Ax = 0 for the energy space. That is that the only solution is the trivial solution where all scalars are zero. Once we have a span and basis for the set of vectors then maybe something interesting will reveal itself.

However there has been no definition yet of the format of the space equations.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: guest39538 on 24/01/2016 06:59:00
Thebox's diagrams are suitable for the purpose and I will come back to them. For now what is needed is a linearly independent solution to the equation Ax = 0 for the energy space. That is that the only solution is the trivial solution where all scalars are zero. Once we have a span and basis for the set of vectors then maybe something interesting will reveal itself.

However there has been no definition yet of the format of the space equations.

What do you mean by a linearly equation? explaining what a straight line?

0r² =1  does this not rep a straight line?

What are you trying to rep with the equation ?
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: guest39538 on 25/01/2016 23:25:37
Jef this just came to me while I was sleeping, don't ask.


0+0=00=x

are you working on something like this?

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/quantum-histories-get-all-tangled
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 29/01/2016 02:22:11
Jef this just came to me while I was sleeping, don't ask.


0+0=00=x

are you working on something like this?

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/quantum-histories-get-all-tangled

No. However, your diagrams above are interesting because they show straight line inertial paths. Whereas gravity will deflect this path. This may sound strange but is it possible to quantize the deflection? Certainly there is considered a smallest unit of length, the Planck length. Yet that is far too small to apply to particles. So is there a larger scale at which this could apply.

I will be posting matrix and vector maths here so if you get lost tell me.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 29/01/2016 02:26:31
A final thought for anyone to ponder. Gravity can be thought of as adding or removing kinetic energy and imparting acceleration. However, in a perfectly circular orbit with constant velocity this is not the case. If there is no increase or decrease in velocity then the only reason this can be called acceleration is due to the change in path of an object. In which case the amount of deflection from a straight line is the only thing that can be measured to show any change. Hence the idea of quantization of deflection.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: alysdexia on 30/01/2016 10:38:28
The velocity components increase and decrease.  Gravity stratifies matter like any other centrifuge.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 31/01/2016 17:35:23
Except the kinetic energy is a property of the orbiting object and not the central mass. The central mass may deflect the path but has no other effect on a perfectly circular orbit in an idealized system. This is theoretical and is in no way a true reflection of nature.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: guest39538 on 02/02/2016 08:01:18
The velocity components increase and decrease.  Gravity stratifies matter like any other centrifuge.

mass is ghost particles
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 02/02/2016 19:41:41
Consider, for a moment, a set of points at varying radial distances from a source. It may be a planet, a sun or other. At each of these points a particular escape velocity would be required to move away to infinity. As long as the path does not intersect the surface of the central object, that is. Say we start an object on a course that will collide with the central object. What happens to tidal forces if the initial velocity exceeds ascape velocity right down to the surface? If this were a compact, dense object, with a relativistic escape velocity at the surface, could the tidal forces be canceled if the velocity starts at surface escape velocity? Isn't that an interesting question?
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 04/02/2016 00:04:43
If we consider the red vector in thebox's diagram this can describe the idealized path of an object. At the apex of this path the kinetic energy is zero and all the energy is then gravitational potential energy. Like the orbit described previously this path can be said to suffer a deflection. In this case a negative deflection. Unlike the perfect circular orbit the kinetic energy in this case does change. Both situations can be described as vector spaces as long as they can be scaled linearly.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 18/02/2016 18:53:51
We can consider 3 situations in newton's version of gravity. 1. Free fall, 2 Orbit and 3 Escape. We can also arrange for each value to be orthogonal so we could have 1 on the x-axis, 2 on the y-axis and 3 on the z-axis. If we are considering kinetic energies we have 3 energy values E_1, E_2 and E_3. These can then be written as vectors. E_1 = [Ke_1 0 0], E_2 = [0 Ke_2 0] and E_3 = [0 0 Ke_3]. These are then the rows of 3 by 3 matrix. It can then be investigated as to whether or not a scalar modification of an identity matrix when applied to this matrix will give reasonable values. That is will they scale with equal radial distances from the source. These are simple newtonian equations. I will post these later.

EDIT: These will all be proper values. No coordinate values will be used.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 18/02/2016 22:45:42
I just want to post a conclusion without immediate justification. Gravity MUST increase the relativistic mass of any object under its influence. Justification to follow.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 19/02/2016 09:24:09
We can write out the scalar matrix as such:

656c6ad911dd35bc917955b9cdba2978.gif

Only if all the lambda values, when multiplied by the energy matrix, scale each energy value proportionally will we have a vector space. I will show that this is only the case for escape and orbital energy as would be expected. I will also show why relativistic mass is an issue and the problems it brings with it.

EDIT: The above assumes we are considering lambda_1 = lambda_2 = lambda_3. Which will not be the case for all 3 energy values.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: guest39538 on 19/02/2016 13:56:06
We can write out the scalar matrix as such:

656c6ad911dd35bc917955b9cdba2978.gif

Only if all the lambda values, when multiplied by the energy matrix, scale each energy value proportionally will we have a vector space. I will show that this is only the case for escape and orbital energy as would be expected. I will also show why relativistic mass is an issue and the problems it brings with it.

EDIT: The above assumes we are considering lambda_1 = lambda_2 = lambda_3. Which will not be the case for all 3 energy values.

Wow Jeffrey you are putting in a lot of effort, I have no idea what you are on about but it looks some real cool thought just by your diagram matrix, hope you get a scientist give this some attention, good luck.

P.s although I do not understand what you are on about, I think the center value of your matrix should be zero extending to zero. And also turned into a 3d matrix .

I don't know if this helps you but the visual universe is a bit like this

X=∞λ0λ1λ0λ1λ0

Y=∞ λ0λ1λ0λ1λ0

Z=∞λ0λ1λ0λ1λ0

t= ∞λ0λ1λ0λ1λ0

G=∞λ0λ1λ0λ1λ0

But of course the length of amounts of λ0 can be greater or less(λ0λ0λ0), and of course this is a uniform matrix where the real matrix would show a contorted shape and X≠Y etc .

Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 19/02/2016 19:57:42
Well, Thebox, I don't know what that was all about but look at the attached graph. There are 4 functions plotted. Three are the result of multiplying the initial calculated values of orbital, escape and free fall kinetic energies. Where the lambda multipliers range between 1 and 10 in steps of 1. As the energy increases then the radial distance from the source will decrease.

The equations used were

1 - Free fall Ke = mGMd/r^2

2 - Escape Ke = GMm/r

3 - Orbital Ke = GMm/(2r)

Immediately it can be seen that both escape and orbital are of the same basic form and will scale in direct proportion but that freefall Ke won't.

On the graph the blue, red and green plots represent lambda scaled versions of escape, orbital and free fall ke respectively. The pink line shows the actual values for free fall Ke at the same radial distances as the escape and orbital Kes.

Where the pink line crosses the orbital line is the light like orbit outside the event horizon. Where the pink line crosses the blue line we find the event horizon.

However, because these calculations are all Newtonian, no account has been taken of relativistic mass. This should increase exponentially, reaching an infinite amount at the event horizon. Which means the kinetic energy is also infinite. Meaning that the gravitational energy ALSO has to become infinite. Otherwise it will not intercept either the blue or red lines and the black hole will no longer trap light. This is where the mathematics breaks down. Or is it?

Now that gravitational waves have been detected I aim to show exactly why it doesn't break down.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 20/02/2016 14:09:29
If we organize our data so that the energy values for free fall, orbit and escape are E_1, E_2 and E_3 respectively then we can actually describe 3 linear vector spaces.

1) The free fall, orbital space.
5c14adf1d0e74dc390102b096f2344dd.gif

2) The free fall, escape space.
48c3d283ed77fc24cbf31a6d29f86ee0.gif

3) The orbital, escape space.
146698d461c41b036f5428f3c7f6d533.gif

These will all scale using the following scalar matrix.
0295eb97f9ca6c1e832c5ed3131ff981.gif

For all the spaces the radial distance of each energy value must be identical. Vector space 1 will scale to show the light-like surface of any viable black hole. Vector space 2 describes the surface of the event horizon of any viable black hole. Vector space 3 shows the energy difference between escape and orbit at any radial distance from the source.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 20/02/2016 16:01:45
As a starting point for a set of relativistic vector spaces this would be good.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_Lagrangian_mechanics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_Lagrangian_mechanics)

In the first instance for special relativity but especially for the section "Lagrangian formulation in general relativity".

EDIT: In the above cases lambda is a function of the Lorentz transformation.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 21/02/2016 19:25:01
The next step in the formulation of the vector spaces starts with this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theoretical_motivation_for_general_relativity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theoretical_motivation_for_general_relativity)

Specifically the concept of a Lorentz scalar.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 22/02/2016 00:29:24
For a step by step introduction to the Einstein field equations visit youtube and search for "Einstein field equations for beginners" by DrPhysicsA.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: jeffreyH on 22/02/2016 17:48:26
If we go back to the 3 vector spaces.

1) The free fall, orbital space.
5c14adf1d0e74dc390102b096f2344dd.gif

2) The free fall, escape space.
48c3d283ed77fc24cbf31a6d29f86ee0.gif

3) The orbital, escape space.
146698d461c41b036f5428f3c7f6d533.gif

Then in each case the lambda scalar can take on any value we choose. If it is zero then we can equate that with no energy and no mass. So we end up with an absolutely flat spacetime. We can set it to a value between 0 and 1 or we can even set it to an imaginary or complex value.

Whatever the scale region of most interest lies between the energy surface of the event horizon and the light-like energy surface. At very small scales this is not a tenable environment. The tidal gradients fall withing the radius of elementary particles. As the region is scaled up particles have much more freedom to move as long as the motion is not perpendicular to the field. There has to come a point in the scaling operation where a boundary is reached that brings the surfaces described into the quantum domain.
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: MichaelMD on 27/03/2017 14:45:59
Using the term "elementary" in association with quantum-scale, measurable, energy "particle" units (I believe falsely) assumes that our structured world of quantum units and atoms is connected to elemental units in ways we can detect and measure using our usual methods, which employ quantally-structured instrumentations, and quantally-mediated forces. 

If an unstructured ether matrix exists which operates via a linear, vibrational, energic mechanism (derived from a first causal point-oscillational world), it would not be possible to detect such an ether using our present quantum technology. An indirect method would be needed.

(Physics denies the existence of an ether matrix on the basis of the old experiments of Michelson and others, which measured the behavior of light under different ambient conditions, using their assumption at the time that any kind of ether would function purely as a medium for transmission of light. However, the kind of ether just mentioned would consist of elemental units which constitute the elemental building blocks of everything, and such ether units would thus be a fundamental part and parcel of light itself, not just a medium for transmitting observable photonic scale units.)
Title: Re: Linear vector spaces and gravity
Post by: MichaelMD on 28/03/2017 12:52:22
I just wanted to post a basically-different approach to gravity.I believe worth considering.

Energy waves, as we observe them in our quantally-mediated observational experience, actually represent a transition zone, where undetected etheroidal (non-elemental ether) units are responding to some sort of change in the ambient energy setting, and transitioning to subquantal units. In turn, there may occur in this "transition zone" wave, the (possibly transient) appearance of observable photons. The appearance of waveforms may appear to suggest the existence of a fluidic underlying medium, but the smoothness of the waveforms' appearance actually relates to certain properties of the underlying ether, whose energy is mediated by elemental, uniform, etheric units, which make up an underlying, purring, perfectly-linear vibrational matrix. "Wave" processes, therefore, would not be fluidic, but electric.

In my ether model, gravity results from a constriction of the ether in an "auric" zone existing between two solid bodies. In this intervening zone, elemental ether units, extending from the bodies into an elemental-ether continuum in space, are resonating with each other, amidst the energy fields of the bodies, at a higher energy level (forming more connections, as their outward vibrations make contact), so that slight spaces between the vibrating elemental units closes, which constricts the ether in the auric zone, compared to the state of the ether outside of this zone, and producing a gravity effect.

The inertial gravitational pull between the bodies would then be accompanied by a wide-spread field effect (much more diffused than in the case of magnetic fields.) -The inertial gravity effect could be thought of as a "minor" one, in this broader cosmological sense.

That an underlying etheric matrix, composed of elemental units resonating in a perfectly-linear fashion, does exist, is quite apparent by looking at the phenomenon of quantum entanglement. This phenomenon is only made understandable by using a model in which quantum units communicate linearly through an underlying matrix. 
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: MichaelMD on 30/03/2017 16:29:12
It might clarify the ether-model described in my last two posts if I explain what I meant by the term "etheroidal."

In my ether model, the ether matrix consists of a universal, unstructured, sea of elemental ether units, units which are uniform and identical to each other, which interact through a vibrational mechanism, and which were derived from a first-causal world which was point-oscillational. As the elemental units vibrate outwardly, they form loose connections, and as multiple elemental units interact, they form entrainments, which produces larger and larger energy units - "etheroidal" units, and still larger quantum and atomic units. Atomic-scale units interact with each other through energy mechanisms familiar to physics, like spin, vectors, waves, and the like, but they also retain the ability to interact vibrationally with ether units, since they were built up from elemental ether units (see the phenomenon of quantum entanglement.) The quantum-scale energy units are, of course, what make up our atomically-structured world. What evidence is there of contact of our quantum world with the ether?

In my recent posts, I mentioned the idea that the wave effects seen in physics represent zones of transition, between unseen etheroidal ether units, and observable sub-quantal units of our observable world. -Such etheroidal units would be transitioning, between an underlying etheric/vibratory realm, and our structured quantum-atomic realm.

Another possible piece of evidence of contact having been made between etheroidal units, from the ether, and sub-quantal units comes from a field of research in particle physics into mysterious "particle-like" moieties, called Quasiparticles.

Quasiparticles represent moieties which form when tiny subquantal units, like fermions or bosons, are subjected to highly-unusual conditions in a particle-physics laboratory, and form as-yet-undefined combinations with unknown or unseen forces, producing what are being called quasiparticles. Quasiparticles have been referred to as "collective states of excitation," but their exact nature is unknown.

I submit that quasiparticles represent etheroidal units "escaping" their vibratory energy realm, and loosely combining with the sub-quantal particles being observed, producing moieties that are undefinable using our present methodologies.



.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 30/03/2017 18:55:36
I have no idea what you are talking about. I guess you have no knowledge of linear algebra.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: GoC on 31/03/2017 14:17:26
There is nothing linear about the combination of mass and light. Math can go where physics dare not follow.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 31/03/2017 18:47:41
I guess you have no idea about linear algebra either.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: MichaelMD on 01/04/2017 12:27:11
Basically my ether model claims that our perceptible quantum atomically-structured world of quantal spin/vector/wave - mediated forces has an unstructured ether matrix underlying it, mediated by vibrational etheric elemental forces, derived from a first-causal point-oscillational world. I claim that this is the only kind of model that can rationally account for quantum entanglement.

Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 01/04/2017 14:20:31
What does any of that have to do with linear vector spaces? It is word salad.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: GoC on 01/04/2017 15:02:48
I guess you have no idea about linear algebra either.

Math cannot prove a theory correct. It can only prove one incorrect. The sun sets below the horizon and we view it above the horizon. Linearity is meaningless with light in a universe with mass. So no a linear vector space cannot be used with gravitational fields. This has nothing to do with your straw man argument about linear algebra. I would expect more from a Moderator.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 01/04/2017 18:17:45
I can't answer your OP question Jeff, but I am curious as to this concept of vector spaces and can at least stay 'near' topic...

Quote
: Wiki
Vector spaces are the subject of linear algebra and are well characterized by their dimension, which, roughly speaking, specifies the number of independent directions in the space. Infinite-dimensional vector spaces arise naturally in mathematical analysis, as function spaces, whose vectors are functions. These vector spaces are generally endowed with additional structure, which may be a topology, allowing the consideration of issues of proximity and continuity. Among these topologies, those that are defined by a norm or inner product are more commonly used, as having a notion of distance between two vectors. This is particularly the case of Banach spacesand Hilbert spaces, which are fundamental in mathematical analysis.
...and
Quote
: Wiki
Euclidean vectors are an example of a vector space. They represent physicalquantities such as forces: any two forces (of the same type) can be added to yield a third, and the multiplication of a force vector by a real multiplier is another force vector. In the same vein, but in a more geometric sense, vectors representing displacements in the plane or in three-dimensional space also form vector spaces.

Could g (gravity) and a (acceleration) be described as force vectors of the same type?
Or is a (acceleration) a 'real multiplier'?
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 01/04/2017 18:46:44
I can't answer your OP question Jeff, but I am curious as to this concept of vector spaces and can at least stay 'near' topic...

Quote
: Wiki
Vector spaces are the subject of linear algebra and are well characterized by their dimension, which, roughly speaking, specifies the number of independent directions in the space. Infinite-dimensional vector spaces arise naturally in mathematical analysis, as function spaces, whose vectors are functions. These vector spaces are generally endowed with additional structure, which may be a topology, allowing the consideration of issues of proximity and continuity. Among these topologies, those that are defined by a norm or inner product are more commonly used, as having a notion of distance between two vectors. This is particularly the case of Banach spacesand Hilbert spaces, which are fundamental in mathematical analysis.
...and
Quote
: Wiki
Euclidean vectors are an example of a vector space. They represent physicalquantities such as forces: any two forces (of the same type) can be added to yield a third, and the multiplication of a force vector by a real multiplier is another force vector. In the same vein, but in a more geometric sense, vectors representing displacements in the plane or in three-dimensional space also form vector spaces.

Could g (gravity) and a (acceleration) be described as force vectors of the same type?
Or is a (acceleration) a 'real multiplier'?

The values of g and a are of the same units. Acceleration is a vector so multiplying it by mass, a scalar, gives a force vector. I am not sure what you mean by the term real multiplier. Can you elaborate please?
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 01/04/2017 18:49:03
It's in the Wiki quote:

Quote
: Wiki
Euclidean vectors are an example of a vector space. They represent physicalquantities such as forces: any two forces (of the same type) can be added to yield a third, and the multiplication of a force vector by a real multiplier is another force vector
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 01/04/2017 19:22:25
http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/gravity_of_gravity

This gives clear indication as to why you might be asking such a question...
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 01/04/2017 20:03:05
It's in the Wiki quote:

Quote
: Wiki
Euclidean vectors are an example of a vector space. They represent physicalquantities such as forces: any two forces (of the same type) can be added to yield a third, and the multiplication of a force vector by a real multiplier is another force vector

It just means multiplying by a real number. Rather than say a complex number.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 01/04/2017 20:09:53
http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/gravity_of_gravity

This gives clear indication as to why you might be asking such a question...

You are correct.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: guest39538 on 01/04/2017 21:17:53
Is there a vector space that can be used with linear combinations that is representative of a non-linear space such as that of the gravitational field? If this exists can it be formulated as an energy vector space?
Jeffrey, gravity fields and curvature of space is only curved relative to ''flat'' space/background being linear.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 01/04/2017 21:21:30
Is there a vector space that can be used with linear combinations that is representative of a non-linear space such as that of the gravitational field? If this exists can it be formulated as an energy vector space?
Jeffrey, gravity fields and curvature of space is only curved relative to ''flat'' space/background being linear.

Yes. That is very perceptive.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: guest39538 on 01/04/2017 21:25:50
Is there a vector space that can be used with linear combinations that is representative of a non-linear space such as that of the gravitational field? If this exists can it be formulated as an energy vector space?
Jeffrey, gravity fields and curvature of space is only curved relative to ''flat'' space/background being linear.

Yes. That is very perceptive.
Is there a vector space that can be used with linear combinations that is representative of a non-linear space such as that of the gravitational field? If this exists can it be formulated as an energy vector space?
Jeffrey, gravity fields and curvature of space is only curved relative to ''flat'' space/background being linear.

Yes. That is very perceptive.
Any fields or waves from (a) to (b) exist in the present.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: guest39538 on 01/04/2017 21:37:05
Jeffrey, will you please go over to my speed of time thread, as to not spoil this thread.  Discuss how 3.24cm is between emit and detect in atomic clock.  The wavelengths/frequencies between points occupy the present.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 02/04/2017 01:02:24
Is there a vector space that can be used with linear combinations that is representative of a non-linear space such as that of the gravitational field? If this exists can it be formulated as an energy vector space?
Jeffrey, gravity fields and curvature of space is only curved relative to ''flat'' space/background being linear.

Yes. That is very perceptive.

I too am appreciating that one Box...

So - If gravity fields and curvature of space is only curved relative to ''flat'' space/background being linear, then if we can somehow keep the linear flatness, distance wise, but describe the extra distance associated with describing curvature by an alternative means that corresponds directly to the energy/acceleration involved in the gravity field, then would this suffice to describe an energy vector space using linear combinations that is representative of the non linear space of the gravity field?
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 04/04/2017 12:22:28
Am I way off left side with this notion of an energy vector space Jeff?
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 04/04/2017 17:56:31
Am I way off left side with this notion of an energy vector space Jeff?

Energy is a scalar but can be expressed as a vector if you modify the mathematics. There has to be a good reason to do this. If you gain no advantage over other methods then it isn't worth the effort.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 04/04/2017 18:50:40
...and what is it that would constitute an 'advantage' in your opinion?
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 04/04/2017 20:32:31
Efficiency and simplification.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 04/04/2017 20:55:33
If the nonlinearity of curved space can be described linearly via attributing a means that directly relates to the energy of the acceleration caused by the gravity field to describe the extra distance associated with a curved space relative to a flat space, wouldn't this constitute a more simple and efficient means of describing the curvature of space?
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 04/04/2017 21:30:38
No.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 04/04/2017 23:28:14
What do you mean 'No' -  clearly that quite simply is not true.

If one attributes the acceleration of gravity with a physical cause that describes curvature of space, i.e the path that light travels in space between masses, but describes the extra distance associated with this curve as a flat distance that took extra time to travel in the weaker field, then Einstein's GR equations will describe Newtonian geometry as per the linearity of Newtonian gravity and GR will be able to describe a test particle in relation to more than one mass by summing up the gravity fields.

This is indeed a radical simplification, and indeed a much more efficient description of multiple fields - that in being compatible with Newtonian gravity will also be compatible with electrodynamics.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 05/04/2017 12:33:23
What do you mean 'No' -  clearly that quite simply is not true.

If one attributes the acceleration of gravity with a physical cause that describes curvature of space, i.e the path that light travels in space between masses, but describes the extra distance associated with this curve as a flat distance that took extra time to travel in the weaker field, then Einstein's GR equations will describe Newtonian geometry as per the linearity of Newtonian gravity and GR will be able to describe a test particle in relation to more than one mass by summing up the gravity fields.

This is indeed a radical simplification, and indeed a much more efficient description of multiple fields - that in being compatible with Newtonian gravity will also be compatible with electrodynamics.

I said no because your first post was incomprehensible and I couldn't be bothered to decipher it. Your second post had much better clarity.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 05/04/2017 13:31:06
In that case I am pretty sure that the answer to your original question in the thread title is:
"Yes, there is."
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 05/04/2017 19:18:06
So how would you cater for the gravity of gravity due to changes in energy.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: guest39538 on 05/04/2017 19:47:22
So how would you cater for the gravity of gravity due to changes in energy.

Jeff , try considering that all gravity is isotropic and linear.    Then consider rotation and orbits are created by the force creating ''linear twist'' (torque). 

Imagine pushing down on a spinning top, where you push the bar down and it causes the base to spin.   Consider that if space was spinning, then the satellites would spin.

ADDED-Imagine pushing two bars/rods tips together at high pressure, the bars/rods will curve.

q+ versus q+  and q- versus q- is  one of the retainer ''rods''.


''Charge'' stops things compressing. A ''spring'' that pushes outwards.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 05/04/2017 22:23:17
So how would you cater for the gravity of gravity due to changes in energy.

Well Jeff nobody really understands what gravity is or how it does what it does - but that is ok because this gives us a certain freedom regarding interpretation.

http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/gravity_of_gravity

In this link the author explains the difference between Newtonian gravity and GR gravity...
Where Newtonian gravity is concerned: multiple fields can be added for a corresponding sum total...
Where GR gravity is concerned: If you add up two gravitational fields, including their sources, where each field-source-combination obeys Einstein's equations, then the sum will not be another combination of fields and sources compatible with Einstein's laws of gravity...

In GR's case, the gravity of gravity is a consequence of the mass/energy equivalence where energy is a source of gravity.
By attributing the energy of the gravity field itself as being caused by the source body/s M, where this energy causes a time dilation that is the physical cause for observed gravitational acceleration in the field, we now have a scenario where adding up 2 or more gravitational fields and their sources under the remit of Einstein's equation will result in a sum total that will be compatible to Einstein's law of gravity under this remit.

This being because now that we can consider that the energy contained in the distances between masses is causing the test particle to take a longer, or shorter amount of time to travel a metre of this distance dependent on proximity to mass...
Add more gravitational fields and their sources to the equations, the additional energy doesn't alter distance of curvature, it just increases the rate of time in the field itself.
Take away gravitational fields and their sources, the subtraction of energy doesn't alter distance of curvature, it just decreases the rate of time in the field itself.

Where the link starts discussing the binding energy of rejoining the left hemisphere with the right hemisphere is very interesting, and leads me straight to the doorstep of GR time dilation, this being the other half of this scenario that I'm discussing on 'is there a discrepancy with the equivalence principle' thread...
...and a comment that a physicist Kip Thorpe (think I got name right) made in a recent program by physics professor Jim Al-Khalilli called 'gravity and me: the force that shapes our lives', where Kip suggests that the test particle always seeks the location where it is of least energy.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 06/04/2017 01:13:56
I am sure Kip Thorne will be thrilled you goy his name right.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 06/04/2017 01:14:07
" a 45 degree angle with respect to the (ground)."
  From local perspective, I believe the answer to be yes.
 When considering it from "space", the example seems to have no real application.
  The existence of the very ground itself changed the rules by offering a point of reference for the arrow.
 Without that reference (earth) no angle is possible to be achieved.

 As for the question itself the way it is, I believe the answer to be yes...
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 06/04/2017 01:24:31
The problem with the gravity of gravity arise because of increasing relativistic mass. If a test particle approaches a black hole from infinity and its instantaneous velocity gets very near to light speed then its relativistic mass tends towards infinite. This means that it surpasses the strength of the central mass. In this situation even a single particle could generate a field capable of canceling that of the black hole and effectively move the black hole. If mass were in falling from all directions this should destroy the black hole by negating its field.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 06/04/2017 01:28:35
There is, however, a solution to the above problem  8)
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 06/04/2017 01:29:34
There is, however, a solution to the above problem  8)

BH firewall. A frozen frame (not solid) of sppinging +C that's now diverging the particle trajectory from towards the virtual center into a straing line towards "still" infinite trajectory "Around" the firewall(horizon) and by doing so all it's relativistic mass of the very particle is now being atributed to the BH by "gravity" but I sugest that the horizon is reducing gravity at the center and not increasing it, which for its turn is converting the knetic energy into motion?
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 06/04/2017 02:34:55
The problem with the gravity of gravity arise because of increasing relativistic mass. If a test particle approaches a black hole from infinity and its instantaneous velocity gets very near to light speed then its relativistic mass tends towards infinite. This means that it surpasses the strength of the central mass. In this situation even a single particle could generate a field capable of canceling that of the black hole and effectively move the black hole. If mass were in falling from all directions this should destroy the black hole by negating its field.

This is why physicists such as Wheeler use 4 momentum where kinetic energy isn't considered as part of the mechanics of the mass itself and the concept of relativistic mass is not changing the properties of mass, but you may suit yourself.

Under the remit of the vector energy space that I suggest no body of mass could ever obtain the speed of light under any circumstance of gravitational acceleration because the speed of light would be being held relative to the g-field coordinate 3rd time dilation, the 3rd time dilation being the physical cause of the acceleration

However as said before, you may suit yourself about relativistic mass, and I will respectfully leave you to it.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 06/04/2017 06:25:15
I'm afraid it contains gamma and therefore relativistic mass.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-momentum
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: nilak on 06/04/2017 07:11:16
I'm afraid it contains gamma and therefore relativistic mass.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-momentum

Relativistic mass is not so used anymore. You could simply say the particle aquires kinetic energy and because it has more energy the gravity force increases. I suppose you can explain better.

There is also another thing you need to take into account I guess. Can a particle  accelerate from infinity towards the massive body? Gravitational field of the massive body doesn't act instantaneously at infinity. You need an infinite amount of time for the field to reach infinity.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 06/04/2017 12:27:40
The use of infinity is to establish some limit. It is not meant to represent a physical location.
@Thebox You are beginning to think more clearly.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 06/04/2017 13:02:30
I'm afraid it contains gamma and therefore relativistic mass.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-momentum


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity

Quote
: Wiki
Many contemporary authors such as Taylor and Wheeler avoid using the concept of relativistic mass altogether:

"The concept of "relativistic mass" is subject to misunderstanding. That's why we don't use it. First, it applies the name mass - belonging to the magnitude of a 4-vector - to a very different concept, the time component of a 4-vector. Second, it makes increase of energy of an object with velocity or momentum appear to be connected with some change in internal structure of the object. In reality, the increase of energy with velocity originates not in the object but in the geometric properties of spacetime itself."

***In reality the increase of energy with velocity originates not in the object but in the geometric properties of spacetime itself***

Which, if you think about it Jeff, is exactly the approach that my suggested energy vector space is employing within its attributing a physical cause for the acceleration.

If you read the link through it will tell you that relativistic mass is not a derivation of GR.  That Einstein himself disapproved of the convention, and that there are already differing interpretations as to 'where' the 'value of' the gamma is held relevant.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 06/04/2017 18:23:44
The inertia of the object increases. Therefore the force required to move it increases. This normally means an increase in mass. I don't know how you can get around that by ignoring it.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 06/04/2017 18:37:55
By doing exactly as Taylor and Wheeler suggest:
Instead of stating the force as a property of the mass the force is exerted upon, one states the force as a property of the spacetime the mass is located in.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 06/04/2017 18:43:23
That is a cop out. Gravity is a force which acts upon mass.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 06/04/2017 18:52:35
http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys150/lectures/ke_rel/ke_rel.html
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 06/04/2017 19:25:46
That is a cop out. Gravity is a force which acts upon mass.

I could understand your stance if I were not giving a physical cause for this force that is a property of spacetime, but I am.

And given that no-one has ever managed to give the force of gravity a physical cause, the premise I suggest is hardly a cop out.
It's actually a radical improvement on current physics that describes space curvature and the path light takes through space within Newtonian geometry without the necessity for SR.

It results in the fact that when you ask:
"Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?"
I can answer:
"Yes there is, and this vector space will be compatible with Einstein's laws of gravity, and Newtonian gravity, and will also be compatible with electrodynamics."

As to to the KE link...  There are many ways to skin a cat Jeff, but the means of doing so in that link does not give the gravitational force that results in the KE a physical cause.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 06/04/2017 19:29:21
It is adequate to describe what is going on in particle accelerators. So does everyone at CERN need a lesson from timey?
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 06/04/2017 19:35:29
Here are the guys doing practical physics and not just piddling around on a forum.
https://lhc-machine-outreach.web.cern.ch/lhc-machine-outreach/lhc-machine-outreach-faq.htm
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 06/04/2017 19:45:23
Why do you have to be sarcastic?

The people at CERN are looking for truths about physics.
Most physicists are quite openly stating that new ideas are required.

What I suggest is describing exactly what SR describes, it just gets there by differing means.

CERN are investigating particle physics...
The Standard Model has so far not been united with gravity.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 06/04/2017 19:48:45
Ok let's take you at face value. How does your vector space operate with respect to the gravitational field? Even simple equations will do.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 06/04/2017 20:04:48
The force of gravity is caused by the length of the second causing a in the g-field at r from M.
And the g-field is caused by M.

This being why, despite the equation of F=ma, all value m is accelerated at same rate towards M.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 06/04/2017 20:41:56
The force of gravity is caused by the length of the second causing a in the g-field at r from M.

That doesn't make sense to me.

Quote
And the g-field is caused by M.

This being why, despite the equation of F=ma, all value m is accelerated at same rate towards M.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 06/04/2017 21:17:29
If you have a test particle at location 2 radii from centre M (Earth) where the acceleration of gravity is (off top of head) in the region of 4.25m/s^2...
...where you see /s^2, what length of second^2 is that?
The answer is:
/standard second^2...
...where a standard second is a measure of time derived at ground level Earth.

My suggestion of a 3rd time dilation of the g-field - that affects the time directly for m=0 only, but has an indirect affect upon m by affecting m's motions in the m=0 space of the g-field - has longer seconds at r=2radii.

Instead of calculating acceleration held relative to the standard second, if one were to calculate the acceleration at r=2radii held relative to the 3rd time dilation length of second at r=2radii then the measure of acceleration held relative to that longer second would be in the region of 9.807m/s^2, as opposed to holding the acceleration at r=2radii relative to the standard second where the acceleration would be 4.25m/s^2.

The acceleration at any r from M (Earth), as measured held relative to the length of second at that r, will always be in the region of 9.807m/s^2.

So - when one takes the measure of acceleration at each r from M as per held relative to the standard second, where near Earth is 9.807m/s^2, and by r=2radii the acceleration has decreased to 4.25m/s^2, this can tell one by how much a 3rd time dilation second has become longer at each r.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 06/04/2017 21:36:51
If you have a test particle at location 2 radii from centre M (Earth) where the acceleration of gravity is (off top of head) in the region of 4.25m/s^2...
...where you see /s^2, what length of second^2 is that?
The answer is:
/standard second^2...
...where a standard second is a measure of time derived at ground level Earth.

My suggestion of a 3rd time dilation of the g-field - that affects the time directly for m=0 only, but has an indirect affect upon m by affecting m's motions in the m=0 space of the g-field - has longer seconds at r=2radii.

Instead of calculating acceleration held relative to the standard second, if one were to calculate the acceleration at r=2radii held relative to the 3rd time dilation length of second at r=2radii then the measure of acceleration held relative to that longer second would be in the region of 9.807m/s^2, as opposed to holding the acceleration at r=2radii relative to the standard second where the acceleration would be 4.25m/s^2.

The acceleration at any r from M (Earth), as measured held relative to the length of second at that r, will always be in the region of 9.807m/s^2.

So - when one takes the measure of acceleration at each r from M as per held relative to the standard second, where near Earth is 9.807m/s^2, and by r=2radii the acceleration has decreased to 4.25m/s^2, this can tell one by how much a 3rd time dilation second has become longer at each r.

I'm not even going to try to unpick that lot.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 06/04/2017 22:10:16
Why not?

It's not as though the concept is difficult Jeff...
If m is travelling metres of space towards M where at every radius seconds are becoming progressively shorter, m will experience acceleration.

All I have outlined is a means of converting the physics measurement of m/s^2 acceleration of the g-field into a time dilation related phenomenon.

The only difficulty you will no doubt encounter within this simple mathematical conversion - 'cos let's face it, the maths of that conversation, although beyond my capabilities, are not difficult - is related to your pre-conceived understanding of time dilation.
...where taking on board new ideas is more difficult for some than others...
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 06/04/2017 23:23:46
In addition to post above:
I might not be able to remember names well, but I remember the details of all the conversations I take part in...

Please see below where I have interjected my suggestion into your own method of thinking in brackets.

Consider a sine wave. Nothing to do with light or gravity. Forget those. If the wave length (second length) is constant we can move (at constant speed) along the wave (metres of distance) marking it off at regular intervals. Everything will be constant and cyclic. Now if we start again but this time continuously vary the intervals (seconds) at which we mark off the wave (metres of distance) using a function (3rd time dilation) to determine the increase or decrease in the steps (length of seconds) we can see how this can make it appear that something (acceleration) has changed. If we were blissfully unaware that our function (3rd time dilation) existed then we may come to the conclusion that it was the wave (metres of distance) that was changing.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 07/04/2017 12:52:50
You have modified my original post to suit your own purposes. I never wrote the words in the brackets. Don't put words into my mouth. It won't help your cause.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 07/04/2017 12:54:46
Why not?

It's not as though the concept is difficult Jeff...
If m is travelling metres of space towards M where at every radius seconds are becoming progressively shorter, m will experience acceleration.

All I have outlined is a means of converting the physics measurement of m/s^2 acceleration of the g-field into a time dilation related phenomenon.

The only difficulty you will no doubt encounter within this simple mathematical conversion - 'cos let's face it, the maths of that conversation, although beyond my capabilities, are not difficult - is related to your pre-conceived understanding of time dilation.
...where taking on board new ideas is more difficult for some than others...

The answer to that is stop making it difficult by inventing unscientific terminology.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 07/04/2017 13:14:48
Post: 84
Yes - I quite clearly stated that I had added my suggestion in brackets to your method of thinking, therefore I have not put words in your mouth.
I have placed my suggestion into a context that I had hoped would be on familiar ground to you within your own understanding.

Post: 85
That's exactly what everyone said about Einstein's terminology 'relative'...
One cannot describe a 'new idea' without invoking 'new terminology'.  I just don't know how I would describe a 3rd time dilation without distinguishing this time dilation from SR and GR time dilations.
Since you are the critique here, taking on board that no-one has ever tried to describe a 3rd time dilation before, have you any suggestion as to the scientific terminology I may use to describe this 'extra phenomenon' of time dilation that would then be acceptable to you?

...and Jeff, I am not piddling around on a forum, I am posting on this forum in search of a mathematician to calculate my model, and I'm very serious about my mission.
So when you say:
Quote
Ok let's take you at face value. How does your vector space operate with respect to the gravitational field? Even simple equations will do.
I am taking you at face value, as a person who is NOT 'piddling about'...
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 07/04/2017 18:00:46
Ok. So SR is concerned with inertial frames with no acceleration. The time dilation is the consequence of the velocity. GR is concerned with both non inertial frames, those supported against gravity, and the inertial frames of freefall. Even though accelerating in freefall no force is felt. Which is the same as in an SR frame with no acceleration. You have to first determine why the free-fall frame is inertial. It is thought that the effect of mass on spacetime is the cause. Consider this. There cannot be quanta in the gravitational field if it is simply a case of mass curving spacetime that causes acceleration. This would imply a continuum. A continuum cannot be quantised. There are other considerations which I won't go into now.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 07/04/2017 18:48:53
I am talking with Mike about GR and SR on my 'is there a discrepancy with the equivalency principle' thread in the context of Jim Al-Kahlilli's Relativity mobile phone app that calculates the phone's altitude and relative speed telling one by how much faster or slower they have aged due to their daily routines.
(This app and gravity itself is discussed on this program "Gravity and Me: The force that shapes us", is available on BBC Iplayer, and is well worth a watch.)

My post 488 is using the premise of that app to illustrate that SR and GR time dilations are a physical reaction for mass 'in' the local, and that these time dilation effects bear no consequence on the sequential events of the local.

The great thing about this consideration is that it is using a real life experiment that is using GR and SR calculations to deduce a physical reality.  I'd be happy for you to join the conversation there, where the discussion has developed from the consideration of applying a time dilation factor to the increase in the frequency of electron transitions causing the black body to emit higher frequency photons when +temperature energy is added, where the mission is then to recalculate the ultraviolet catastrophe under the remit of variable seconds where +energy=shorter seconds.  Under this remit the quantum nature of the energy relation to frequency is negated for a continuum which is then compatible with gravity.

Quote
Consider this. There cannot be quanta in the gravitational field if it is simply a case of mass curving spacetime that causes acceleration. This would imply a continuum.

My suggestion states that it is the acceleration that is causing the 'appearance' of space curvature.  The acceleration is caused by the fact of the length of seconds at decreasing radius to M becoming shorter in length, and that this 3rd time dilation factor is caused by the gravity field of M.
m moving in this gravity field will be subject to both GR and SR time dilations, but the open space of the g-field surrounding M will not be affected by the GR and SR time dilations for the reason that open space is m=0...
This notion is making a clear distinction between mass energy, and g-field energy.

I have made a full study on the considerations one must make if one is constructing a theory of everything Jeff.
The purpose of my mission is to unite the standard model with gravity where the point particle model and the wave function model are both described as one within the premiss of a uniting theory.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 07/04/2017 19:11:39
What on earth this '3rd time dilation' is I can't fathom. As far as I know there is only one time dilation. It is always related to a velocity. Whether that be a constant velocity or an instantaneous velocity derived from an acceleration. This depends upon inertia which in turn depends upon a quantity of mass. Why complicate a straightforward situation with no benefit to be had?
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 07/04/2017 19:40:31
Jeff - in conventional physics there are 2 time dilations.
One is GR time dilation that is observed of a clock at altitude.
And the other is SR time dilation that is observed of a clock in relative motion.

Watch the program I suggested.  Listen to what they say about the Relativity app, inclusive of Jim's admission of a mistake in his calculations.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 07/04/2017 19:47:03
The time dilation of SR is a special case of the time dilation of GR hence why it I called special relativity. It simply omits the gravitational field and uses flat spacetime exclusively. This is contained within the framework of general relativity. They are only distinguished to show differences caused by the presence or absence of a gravitational field. To make them distinct entities is an artificial device.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 07/04/2017 19:53:39
Tell that to NIST who have conducted tests and found that SR effects are observed at speeds of less than 30mph.
And GR effects at 1 metre altitude.

As said you'd be advised to watch the program I suggest and listen to what the professionals say before proceeding with this line of discussion.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: jeffreyH on 07/04/2017 19:58:43
Tell that to NIST who have conducted tests and found that SR effects are observed at speeds of less than 30mph.
And GR effects at 1 metre altitude.

As said you'd be advised to watch the program I suggest and listen to what the professionals say before proceeding with this line of discussion.

Being held at 1 metre altitude the object is being held against gravity and therefore is subject to a force and this results in acceleration. From this you can determine an instantaneous velocity. An object moving at 30mph has a non zero velocity. Therefore both have a time dilation caused by velocity. It is the same difference.
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: timey on 07/04/2017 21:34:39
... And what about the circumstance of your clock being held at altitude, and moving at 30mph?
... What about the equatorial bulge where an observer at sea level is subject to an increased GR time dilation relative to an observer at polar sea level, that is cancelled out exactly by the SR time dilation caused by the increased centripetal acceleration at the equator relative to the decreased centripetal acceleration of the polar location?
...Seriously Jeff, you should watch the program that I suggest and listen to what professionals such as Professor of Physics Jim Al-Khalilli and Kip Thorne are saying.
... Or are you posting on the basis that your education surpasses that of these professionals in the field?
Title: Re: Is there a linear vector space that can be used with gravitational fields?
Post by: kymere on 08/04/2017 00:42:08
Is there a vector space that can be used with linear combinations that is representative of a non-linear space such as that of the gravitational field? If this exists can it be formulated as an energy vector space?

As gravitation increases at a single point in the three dimensional space-time fabric of the universe, the tension on this fabric will increase causing a "stretch" in the fabric, but not the three dimensional space (measurable distance). Knowing that light is a mass-less form of energy, when light travels through the stretched fabric of space-time caused by the intense gravitation, more light is able to fit in a point of three dimensional space. In theory, the amount of light perceived is the rate at which information and time moves. Gravitation, hypothetically, is a four dimensional force that acts in the plane of the three dimensional reality. Gravitation can directly affect the amount of energy and wavelengths that fit in three dimensional space. Light and the rest of the electromagnetic spectrum can act in the fourth dimension of reality as it gives reality movement, perception, information and time.  When a hole forms in this fabric of space-time due to intense gravitation in a single point (black hole), all of time and possible future information that can be perceived from space at a distance will occur at the singularity simultaneously. Likewise, as one were to observe matter enter the singularity and event horizon, they will appear to freeze in time relative to the observer. The general theory of relativity states that an observer must perceive light at the constant speed in measurable three dimensional distance. Entering the singularity must punch another linear timeline through the space-time fabric of reality because the information that enters this hole completely disappears from the universe.

In short, gravitation and mass-less electromagnetic energy may very well be four dimensional forces that influence one another directly.