[Mr. Scientist]

That last one was a little over my head; I didn't quite grasp the meaning of it.  []

Sometimes vern, it even goes past mine

[Vern (OP)]

We should forget Quantum theory in any quest to develop a Reality theory. Quantum theory is philosophically unsound at its foundation. It corrupts the mind making it unable to recognize reality. Keep all observations; forget all theories; develop new hypothesis to explain the observations.

 

[Nizzle]

Hi, sorry to barge in in your dialog thread here. I just wanna vent an opinion, stupid or not...
Higher up in the thread I read that gravity comes from bent photon paths and thus 'deforming' the EM fields.

Could it be that gravity is arising from the bending as heat is arising from (mechanical) friction?
I have this picture in my head, of gravity fitting in your EM-fields-only universe, but these are the best words I find for the picture...

[Vern (OP)]

I think you may have misread the mechanism for gravity.

Gravity develops from the property of space that limits the amount of electric and magnetic amplitude that any point in space can support. All photons naturally contain two points at this electric and magnetic amplitude. The two points are caused by and are supported and are driven through space by the changing amplitude of electric and magnetic fields that surround the points and extend outward forever through space.

Photon points moving through the fields of other photons reach their maximum amplitude with the help of the the fields of other photons. The result is that maximum amplitude occurs at an offset toward increasing field strength of the fields of other photons.

It is hard to get your mind around it. But once you see it, it is obvious that it must happen given the postulates we have so far proposed.

[Nizzle]

Photon points moving through the fields of other photons reach their maximum amplitude with the help of the the fields of other photons. The result is that maximum amplitude occurs at an offset toward increasing field strength of the fields of other photons.

Please help me understand Vern []

So a photon exists of two points of field saturation (1 electrical and 1 magnetic, coupled and moving together).
When these two points move through a field of another photon (with relative amplitude somewhere between -1 and 1 i guess??), the sum of the field strength at this location exceeds the maximum allowed amplitude for a satured photon point, and the excess EM amplitude translates to gravity?

Or what exactly do you mean with maximum amplitude occurs at an offset ... ?
Do you mean a spatial offset, like an angle change?

[Vern (OP)]

It's not one point magnetic and one point electric. The electric and magnetic fields occupy planes situated ninety degrees apart. The two planes cross at the centre line of the photon's path. Saturation of both fields occur at two places in a photon wave. Each half cycle of the wave has a point of maximum amplitude. Two half cycles make a whole photon.

Electric and magnetic fields extend outward forever from the points. The fields diminish as the square of distance from their points of origin. However weak the fields, they still contribute toward the saturation amplitude of photon points moving through them. This contribution toward saturation makes the point of saturation happen at an offset toward increasing field strength of the diminished fields.

This is the action of gravity. It is the only cause of gravity. There is not two mysterious kinds of gravity such that one applies to photons and one applies to massive objects. All gravity is of this photon flavour.

[Butterworthd]

Can I join in?  Instead of a light-only view of the universe I've been proposing a different view using subspace (OK I'm a Star Trek fan).  A subspace is a dark matter particle that exists in two dimension, smaller on the outside and larger on the inside.  A particle of matter is made out of two subspaces perpendicular to each other.  They create space between them with the perpendicular feature shown in the diagram provided above.
On your model building you forgot to list the givens:  You are thinking that space exists even if matter and light are absence from the universe.  In truth without matter or light, space would not exist.  They are all connected.
 
When given a choice Always take the theory that's easier to understand.

[Mr. Scientist]

Subspace is a buzz word. Even i could use the word to describe consciousness as a dimension which is sub or hyper to those we physically-recognize and of those we consciously-experience.

[Ethos]

  In truth without matter or light, space would not exist.  They are all connected.

I respectfully disagree my friend. And, BTW, how in heavens name can one ever prove that discription of space/time without the presence of matter and light? I personally think that is the only reason that this particular view is held by any physicist, it's called lazyness.

IMHO, space is just a place where things can be put. And the universe is just that, an infinite place, a void, where matter, energy, and information reside.

[Vern (OP)]

My view exactly Ethos.