[jeffreyH]

To find the speed of gravity you need to determine why the dimension of the entropy of a black hole does not change with the radius of the event horizon. Then you need to relate this to a Planck mass sized black hole. Otherwise you are using wild speculation.

[GoC]

Black holes are not governed by relativity. Consider a star that grows beyond 300,000 km/sec attraction at the surface. This creates the condition of energy not being able to keep atoms apart any longer. So a black hole is the ultimate element or an electron in a different size dimension that considers us their Aether. No movement inside would be the ultimate entropy. Dilation of space would start at the surface of the black hole by the inverse square of the distance. How would that affect planks length?

Everything is speculation. Even what you think you know for certain.

[Phractality]

To find the speed of gravity you need to determine why the dimension of the entropy of a black hole does not change with the radius of the event horizon. Then you need to relate this to a Planck mass sized black hole. Otherwise you are using wild speculation.

VanFlandern calculated a lower limit on the speed of gravity based on the lack of parallax in planetary systems. If gravity propagated at the speed of light, Earth would be pulled toward the direction where we see the Sun now, not where we saw the Sun 8 minutes ago. With the Sun's gravity pulling us forward, our orbit would move farther and farther out until we lose sight of the Sun. The existence of planetary systems proves that gravity is many times faster than light.

I realize that some of VanFlandern's theories, like spontaneously exploding planets, are pretty wild, but his reasoning on the speed of gravity is not wild speculation. I believe he got this one right.

[jeffreyH]

I am not unhappy with superluminal gravity but within reason. There has to be a logical basis for any proposed speed and it HAS to be related to black hole entropy. It is within such an environment as the event horizon of a black hole that gravitational waves will be generated. If the waves travel faster than c then detection may well be impossible as the effects on the CMBR may be too weak to detect. If it can be determined what the magnitude of the waves are likely to be, an amplitude so to speak, then we will have a better idea of how to tune detectors.

[jeffreyH]

Considering that the wavelengths associated with gravitation are longer than the wavelengths of light then we can take c as the speed of light and g as the speed of gravitation.

Then we should be able to formulate the following equation.



Here lambda_0 is a specific wavelength of light and lambda_1 is a specific wavelength of gravitation. Finding the correct ratio will then give the speed of gravitation. Not easy. Not all the factors are taken into account by this simplistic relationship.

[jeffreyH]

Of course a lowest and highest reasonable wavelength for both gravitation and photons would have to be assumed to get a ball park estimate from two applications of the equation.

EDIT: Then it would be reasonable to reformulate as

Since the relative strengths of the electromagnetic an gravitational fields are known approximately the equation could be cross checked via energy differences.

[GoC]

While the equivalence in clock speed has a crossover the mechanism of gravity and velocity for attraction may not. Gravity may be a static field that creates entropy. Mass creating a dilation field in space.

[jeffreyH]

I am afraid that doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever.

[GoC]

It was very vague I can understand your confusion. I was discussing the equivalence principle between SR and GR. GR being a dilation of space as a mechanism and Simultaneity of Relativity the mechanism of visual contraction. While the distances light travels has equivalency between GR and SR trying to use them in math other than distance for light traveled is inconsistent. Gravity is a static gradient of dilation to the center of mass. It is the gradient itself that most likely causes attraction to the center of mass and not some type of energy flow that terminates in the center of mass. Dilation, volume, sight, magnetism and gravity follows the inverse square law. Energy appears to be consistent. To me a photon wave is proof energy is of space and not mass. If it were of mass, mass would evaporate when used for spectrum propagation. Also what is moving the electrons in the first place?

[guest39538]

''GRAVITY IS: A force... False''

Just no....

[guest39538]

Considering that the wavelengths associated with gravitation are longer than the wavelengths of light then we can take c as the speed of light and g as the speed of gravitation.

Then we should be able to formulate the following equation.



Here lambda_0 is a specific wavelength of light and lambda_1 is a specific wavelength of gravitation. Finding the correct ratio will then give the speed of gravitation. Not easy. Not all the factors are taken into account by this simplistic relationship.

λ(y_c)=σλ(x_c)

Because the timing cross correlation synchronisation is constant the ''clear'' is not.

[jeffreyH]

What exactly is a timing cross correlation synchronisation? I would really like to know because it confuses the hell out of me. It might sound like a very scientific thing to say but not if it doesn't make sense.

[GoC]

Gravity position where light is created has its own dilation. We generally equate energy to red shift of the photon. The dilation increase closer to the center of mass would create a photon red shifted compared to one further out from the center. Photons do not change frequency once created or they change by position. If the detector is dilated in cell length than the results cannot be used to determine whether photons change frequency or energy density changes by position in a gravity well. That is the conundrum of both time and energy. If dilation of space is to be taken as fact than it is the space that controls red shift for GR. Since time and  energy are both affected equally we must consider time is energy of motion.

[guest39538]

What exactly is a timing cross correlation synchronisation? I would really like to know because it confuses the hell out of me. It might sound like a very scientific thing to say but not if it doesn't make sense.

Think an upside down capital ''T'',   an intersection where Y meets X,  this timing cross correlation is how spectral constants are created.  Each  different ''colour'' being a timing lag by the interactions ''permeable''/reflective properties of mass.

All mass is actually ''black''  and only black and Em radiation ''exist'' , colour is a perception in your brain distinguishing the constant cross correlation from the variance of ''clear'' light. 


Y = variable

X = constant

added - I drew it for you.


 [ Invalid Attachment ]

 [ Invalid Attachment ]

and yes , time dilation, etc , all a part of this.

And the sky is blue like plasma, because the compression is by this -

''The ionosphere /aɪˈɒnɵˌsfɪər/ is a region of Earth's upper atmosphere, from about 60 km (37 mi) to 1,000 km (620 mi) altitude,[1] and includes the thermosphere and parts of the mesosphere and exosphere. It is ionized by solar radiation, plays an important part in atmospheric electricity and forms the inner edge of the magnetosphere. It has practical importance because, among other functions, it influences radio propagation to distant places on the Earth.[2]''


It is a 'plasma layer''  that is why it repels emr and protects us.

[Kenyonm]

Consider being a mass of completly uniform density, a gas, liquid or solid. Next consider being surrounded by a medium of exactly the same material stretching out in all directions infinately. Would there be any force imposed on you? if the answer to this is no, why is this? If the answer to this is yes, where is the force coming from?

[Space Flow (OP)]

Consider being a mass of completly uniform density, a gas, liquid or solid. Next consider being surrounded by a medium of exactly the same material stretching out in all directions infinately. Would there be any force imposed on you? if the answer to this is no, why is this? If the answer to this is yes, where is the force coming from?

An even matter density throughout the entire Universe, is what I think you are trying to describe. If this was so, and also an even temperature for all this matter, then the amount of Spacetime absorbed by every bit of matter would be the same. That would mean that all forces acting on all parts of the Universe would be equal, and nothing would move. Spacetime would still expand with the passage of time, but there would be no clumps of Matter, and no Voids. The Universe would remain with an even distribution of Matter for ever.
That is what the Universe would have been like if at the time of final scattering there did not exist the small anisotropies we now measure in the CMB.
The scenario you postulate above describes an extremely fine balancing act. It would only take one small discrepancy between any two particles in the Universe to break that symmetry.
But just for your thought experiment, the answer is Yes and no.
Yes all the known forces of nature would be acting on you exactly the same as they would be acting on everything else.
No because the sum of all the forces, because they are acting on every bit of Matter exactly the same, would have a net effect of "0". The only change in such a Universe would be through expansion.

Hope that helps..

[guest39538]

Consider being a mass of completly uniform density, a gas, liquid or solid. Next consider being surrounded by a medium of exactly the same material stretching out in all directions infinately. Would there be any force imposed on you? if the answer to this is no, why is this? If the answer to this is yes, where is the force coming from?

An even matter density throughout the entire Universe, is what I think you are trying to describe. If this was so, and also an even temperature for all this matter, then the amount of Spacetime absorbed by every bit of matter would be the same. That would mean that all forces acting on all parts of the Universe would be equal, and nothing would move. Spacetime would still expand with the passage of time, but there would be no clumps of Matter, and no Voids. The Universe would remain with an even distribution of Matter for ever.
That is what the Universe would have been like if at the time of final scattering there did not exist the small anisotropies we now measure in the CMB.
The scenario you postulate above describes an extremely fine balancing act. It would only take one small discrepancy between any two particles in the Universe to break that symmetry.
But just for your thought experiment, the answer is Yes and no.
Yes all the known forces of nature would be acting on you exactly the same as they would be acting on everything else.
No because the sum of all the forces, because they are acting on every bit of Matter exactly the same, would have a net effect of "0". The only change in such a Universe would be through expansion.

Hope that helps..

Minkowski space-time is virtual, (almost or nearly as described, but not completely or according to strict definition,not physically existing as such but made by software to appear to do so.),

Space- time does not expand or contract, it is the distance between two masses that expands or contracts,  real time is dependent to mass, the 3 dimensions of mass and time being a 4 dimensional manifold in a n-dimensional timeless space.


Space is neutral ''mass'', 0 on any measuring system, then matter is positive mass and negative mass, + and minus on any measuring system.


Neutral mass is attracted to neutral mass, negative mass is attracted to positive mass and positive mass is attracted to negative mass, and neutral mass is a neutral conduit that allows all this interaction to happen while keeping everything together.


i.e  The Moon is slowly moving away from the Earth, the journey time (virtual space-time)  is expanding between the Earth and the Moon.


added - I drew it you

 [ Invalid Attachment ]

[GoC]

pure speculation,

We might have two systems. An energy state that is uniform throughout the universe and mass that absorbs that energy to move. The energy system without mass would be a completely uniform constant. would there be any view of expansion? No, there would b no light. We only view expansion through red shift. If we are not completely sure what red shift represents we would not be sure about expansion or a big bang. Red shift is considered a SR cause and not a GR cause for expansion faster than the speed of light. Yet we view dilation as lensing which is a GR expansion of space if Einstein is to be believed (curvature of space). From our less dilated position in our galaxy all galaxies would appear red shifted just by position of dilation. Dilated space causes a longer jump for the electron which we assign less energy. And that is probably true if energy density is lowered by dilation. mass causes dilated space and dilated space expands mass. So the cell length used for detection of red shift changes with energy density position. it is not light changing frequency down a gravity well by increasing momentum as has been suggested. it is merely the synchronization parameters that change by position because of the change in cell length.

So gravity is the attraction of mass to a lower density energy state of dilated space. The attraction can be related to a speed of attraction in a stationary position.

[guest39538]

pure speculation,

We might have two systems. An energy state that is uniform throughout the universe and mass that absorbs that energy to move. The energy system without mass would be a completely uniform constant. would there be any view of expansion? No, there would b no light. We only view expansion through red shift. If we are not completely sure what red shift represents we would not be sure about expansion or a big bang. Red shift is considered a SR cause and not a GR cause for expansion faster than the speed of light. Yet we view dilation as lensing which is a GR expansion of space if Einstein is to be believed (curvature of space). From our less dilated position in our galaxy all galaxies would appear red shifted just by position of dilation. Dilated space causes a longer jump for the electron which we assign less energy. And that is probably true if energy density is lowered by dilation. mass causes dilated space and dilated space expands mass. So the cell length used for detection of red shift changes with energy density position. it is not light changing frequency down a gravity well by increasing momentum as has been suggested. it is merely the synchronization parameters that change by position because of the change in cell length.

So gravity is the attraction of mass to a lower density energy state of dilated space. The attraction can be related to a speed of attraction in a stationary position.

A prism shifts light at ground state, as for the rest of it, I have no idea what you are trying to say. Simplify please, dont use science talk.


''An energy state that is uniform throughout the universe and mass that absorbs that energy to move. ''


start here

[Spring Theory]

Somewhat similar to my Space compression spring theory, although a bit more complicated:

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=57392.msg459534#msg459534\

In a nutshell, photons are traveling compressions of space. Matter is made up of trapped knots of photons and therefore compressions of space.