[McQueen (OP)]

Neo-Classical Physics (Gestalt Aether Theory) holds that gravity is due to the flexing of the virtual photon aether medium. This flexing of the 'virtual photon' aether medium takes place when electrons within the atom orbiting the nucleus emit and absorb 'virtual photons' . These virtual photons are the same as real photons with the exception that they are emitted and absorbed so fast,   <10^-15 s.,  that they do not come under the purview of the conservation laws. The flexing of the 'virtual photon' aether medium occurs  when 'virtual photons' of the aether  briefly align themselves in the direction of propagation of the emitted 'virtual photon'  for very brief  ≤ 10^-15 periods of time.  The 'virtual photons' of the aether possess the same structure as 'real' photons with the exception that they have extremely low energy < 10^-45 eV. 

Neo-Classical physics raises the possibility that gravity is due to the exchange of gauge interactions. Exchange particles are virtual particles; the process of  exchanging 'virtual particles' has the effect of bringing ordinary particles together—or in some cases pushing them apart. All of the forces; the strong force, the electromagnetic force, gravity and the weak force are due to gauge interactions involving  the exchange of  'virtual particles'.  As far as electrons are concerned the virtual particles that are emitted are photons as  had been explained earlier in this post 'virtual photons ' are ordinary photons that either  interact in such short intervals of time or have such low energies that they effectively avoid the conservation of energy laws experienced by the macro world.  Virtual interactions (Gauge interactions) occur fast enough or posses such small energy that they can evade the Laws of Conservation of energy that prevail in the macro world.

Thus when electrons orbiting the atom emit 'virtual photons' it results in an alignment of the virtual photons of aether forming a line whose ends rest on infinity, albeit this alignment involves no actual transfer of energy as occurs in the case of emission of a real photon, but is merely a tensing of the virtual photon aether. It is this force or tensing of the aether that gives rise to the force of gravity. Since electrons orbiting the nucleus, must of necessity emit and absorb 'virtual photons' in order to maintain their stability around the nucleus it follows that electrons are constantly emitting and absorbing 'virtual photons'. Not only this but also that the number of virtual photons that are emitted depends directly on the number of electrons present in an atom. This means that denser atoms with more electrons, produce more 'virtual photons' than lass dense materials and therefore exert a stronger gravitational force. 

This is an explanation of ordinary gravity as we know and experience it. Next we come to the question of neutrinos and super gravity.

The existence of neutrinos has been well established through observation and empirical experiment. Neutrinos are considered to be fundamental particles of the Universe. Yet they possess such strange properties that it is difficult to relate these particles to reality.  The basic properties of the electron-neutrino—no electric charge and very little mass—were predicted in 1930 by the Austrian physicist Wolfgang Pauli to explain the apparent loss of energy in the process of radioactive beta decay. Neutrinos  are particles because it has been established through logarithmic measurements that they don't follow the inverse square law. Although they are particles they possess no, or very little mass. They travel at the speed of light. They can traverse huge distances spanning Galaxies and the Universe.  At the same time they possess such low interaction with matter that they can go through vast amounts of matter without any interactions taking place. For instance scientists at the huge ice box neutrino detector at the Antarctic claim that they can detect solar neutrinos through the mass of the earth as easily as if they directly faced the sun! It has been estimated that neutrinos can travel through a layer of lead that is one light year across in thickness!  Of all high-energy particles, only weakly interacting neutrinos can directly convey astronomical information from the edge of the universe - and from deep inside the most cataclysmic high-energy processes. Every second of everyday we are being bombarded by neutrinos at the rate of one hundred billion per square centimetre per second! The majority of these are neutrinos emitted from nuclear reactions within the sun.

As far as Neo-classical physics (Gestalt Aether Theory) is concerned there exists only one phenomena that fits all of these attributes and properties of the neutrino and this is the alignment of  the 'virtual photon' aether. According to Neo-Classical physics   Neutrinos are 'virtual photons'  emitted by electrons at the time of the destruction or annihilation of atomic nuclei and are therefore a much stronger force, expressing what terrific energy is involved at the time of the destruction of an atomic nucleus. Because of the energies involved in the emission and re-absorption of these neutrinos it follows that the interaction lasts for a shorter time. The more energy involve in a virtual interaction the shorter the time available for the interaction to take place.  Otherwise it involves exactly the same process of  aligning of the photons of the 'virtual photon aether'. However, in this case so much energy is involved that the aligned 'virtual photons' actually manifest themselves. This is the neutrino and as surmised it can have several different energy values depending on the reaction that gave rise to it.  It is this manifestation of a line of aligned virtual photons of the virtual photon aether, that we perceive as neutrinos. They pass through the earth as if it didn't exist just as predicted, they are established at the speed of light, they can travel infinite distances. They have no mass.  The lines of aligned photons that result from the emission of a neutrino transfer no energy. Thus there is no dispersal of energy through the 'virtual photon' aether as takes place when optical light frequencies, fr instance, are propagating.  These lines of aligned 'virtual photons' of the aether intrinsically possess such small energies, about 10^-45eV. that they do not interact with matter. No electrons in atoms comprising matter can possibly interact with 'virtual photons' possessing energies on the order of  ≤  10^-45eV. Thus it is theoretically possible for a line of  aligned virtual photons to propagate through a layer of lead one light year across without experiencing the slightest resistance or interaction.
This theory of neutrinos raises some interesting possibilities. First of all from the distribution and density of neutrinos striking the earth from the centre of the sun, we can calculate that neutrinos are produced in a relatively small volume of the sun. Since they do not follow the inverse square law it follows that they resemble lines radiating from a central source and therefore spread out to a significant degree. This is especially noticeable near nuclear reactors where neutrinos are strongly detected in close proximity to the core but are undetectable even short distances away from the core.  Thus although neutrinos involve a similar flexing of the 'virtual photon' aether as is thought (by Neo-Classical Physics) to cause gravity, solar neutrinos do not in actual fact contribute much to gravity.

In the case of a neutron star where atoms are non-existent and only nuclear matter is present, the density of neutrino formation might be so strong as to have a significant gravitational effect. However, this gravitational effect must be subject to certain conditions. For instance it is fairly obvious that in order to gain significant gravitational force the neuron star will have to have a sustainable reaction otherwise it will burn out in a very short order of time. However, if there is matter available close at hand, as for instance a companion star, it is possible that the reaction will be a sustained one resulting in super gravity, which is a gravitational force many time that of the gravitational force that exists normally. Further, if other matter is within reach of this super gravity, such as nearby suns or planetary systems the super gravity might result in the formation of a black hole.

[zx16]

I think your post is very valuable. It shows that modern physics has come to a crisis.

[Chaswell]

Does it not seem strange that physics deals with gravity when there is no evidence it exists, yet pays little attention to the dilationary effect on time caused by a mass, that is, at what point does mass start to affect time and what is the process? Is it not also strange that both concepts fail to explain the behaviour of matter when it is separated by large distances?

[GoC]

Does it not seem strange that physics deals with gravity when there is no evidence it exists, yet pays little attention to the dilationary effect on time caused by a mass, that is, at what point does mass start to affect time and what is the process? Is it not also strange that both concepts fail to explain the behaviour of matter when it is separated by large distances?

There is evidence for gravity every time you step on a scale. G=A for equivalence in GR and SR. Dilation in GR is a dilation in zero point energy where energy density decreases in space. Mass causes this dilation by forcing energy to move its electrons. Mass is attracted to a more dilated position because there is less resistance in less dense energy particles (spacetime, Dark Mass Energy or Aether). Call it anything you like but electrons do not move by magic. Charge is a potential only and has nothing to do with electron motion. So gravity follows potential energy reduction to the center of mass where dilation of energy is the greatest. There is no attraction and you are weightless in the center of a moon or planet. It does not take a rocket scientist to follow the logic.

Large distances are a issue of scale in the inverse square law. For instance we are not nearly affected by the suns gravity as the Earth but the affect on the Earth is great. Its the inverse square to the nearest dilation difference for attraction.

[McQueen (OP)]

GoC:There is evidence for gravity every time you step on a scale. G=A for equivalence in GR and SR. Dilation in GR is a dilation in zero point energy where energy density decreases in space. Mass causes this dilation by forcing energy to move its electrons. Mass is attracted to a more dilated position because there is less resistance in less dense energy particles (spacetime, Dark Mass Energy or Aether). Call it anything you like but electrons do not move by magic. Charge is a potential only and has nothing to do with electron motion. So gravity follows potential energy reduction to the center of mass where dilation of energy is the greatest. There is no attraction and you are weightless in the center of a moon or planet. It does not take a rocket scientist to follow the logic.

 To a certain extent I can understand this preoccupation with relativity even though a clock placed on the earth and one placed on the moon might not reflect the 1.3 second (approx. ) time difference that is needed to explain the one way time to the moon and the two way (there and back again) time. The weaving of a whole science around a supposition not supported by empirical evidence is difficult to comprehend.   But sound commonsense  alternatives do exist, and if these alternatives are ignored then your position that what you state is right, does not make sense. First of all as has been demonstrated in several of my posts,  the speed of light might be  constant and independent of its source  because it is travelling through a medium; this is an accepted property of all waves.  Secondly if the medium represents the very fabric of space - which it does, it follows that nothing can move faster than this medium allows. In this respect Einstein, as in many other things, was right. Light is the limiting speed of the Universe, nothing can travel faster. One way to look at it is that as an object travels it gains in energy, energy is equivalent to mass  and therefore as an object comes closer to the speed of light it will gain infinite mass. The significant thing to remember is that this has to do with  (Mass Energy equivalence) E = mc² and not necessarily to do with relativity. 
 A significant criticism of  Einstein's  matter energy equivalence derivation is that although he  begins relativistically, he approximates away all the relativistic bits, and you are left with what is basically a classical calculation. While Einstein's celebrated 1905 paper, "On the electrodynamics of moving bodies",  laid down the foundations of relativity by abandoning the ether and making the speed of light invariant, his derivation of E=mc² did not depend on those assumptions.  It is possible to get the equation E=mc² Starting from the Kinetic energy equation :

KE = ½ mv²
Then substituting Newtonian equation of motion (for constant acceleration):
v² = u² + 2 as
gives:
KE = ½ m ( u² + 2as) = ½ m u² + mas
(W= KE₂ - KE₁ for a system without potential energy. For a constant force (acceleration), W=Fs=mas=1/2mv₂² - 1/2mv₁²)
v = final velocity, u = initial velocity, a = acceleration, s = displacement
Initial Kinetic energy = ½ m u² and
potential energy = mas
So, the equation now represents the total energy instead of just KE :
Total energy = initial KE + potential energy = ½ mu² + mas
Considering  ½ m u² = mas :
Total energy = 2 (½m u² ) = m u²
And when u =c (such as for light in vacuum free of influences) this is
E = m c²

 
 

[Chaswell]

Thanks GoC and McQeen.
Gravity keeps us on ground and allows the operation of satellites. However, a clock on the ground and a clock on the satellite cannot agree on where the satellite is. Can it be assumed the satellite has an effect on the Earth directly in proportion to the number of atoms from which the satellite is constructed? Or to rephrase the question, how many atoms does it take to cause time dilation and does the effect diminish with distance in exactly the same way as gravity?

[GoC]

All I can say is I've been where you currently are in understanding. You are one of the few who think for themselves rather than have others think for them. When you follow relativity correctly all observations are predictable with math. First off light going to the moon is the same as the return trip except for the changing distance rotation of the Earth and elliptical orbit of the moon. Its not like two way longitude measurements on Earth where the speed of the Earth has to be taken into account' Everything in relativity is a relationship with c as energy total. Energy is not of mass. c has a limit not by its allowing faster than light speed but the medium you are discussing is the energy total. Electrons are a motor and space energy c is the battery. The motor will only run as fast as the energy potential allows.

You have to completely abandon the subjective opinions of the past to completely understand the true ratio relativity math explains. Yes there is a medium and there has to be unless there is magic in the universe. Electrons are a flow not a charged potential. Charge in chemistry is balance and unbalanced mass occupying the space energy. BH's are just the opposite. There is no energy in a BH. Electron motion causes friction to fundamental energy. There is no friction in a BH they just eat mass like a giant particle in a fractal universe where they might represent an electron.

Everything is a relative fundamental energy state that follows relativity measurements. E=mc^2 because there is a c to move electrons and a c of space. Its always a ratio of energy density in the position of mass for potential energy. We can use a clock to measure energy density relative to another energy density in GR. For equivalence when the density expands (dilation) the measuring stick expands also. Its not that the speed of light changes but the creation of light is red shifted compared to a more dense position in space and has to travel a further distance. Light wave does not change frequency after created. Our detectors are calibrated to the potential energy state and distance in detector cells. Light is not attracted to mass. Light tries to stay in the dilation it is traveling into. This causes the geodesic curve around mass. BH's curve potential energy of space around them so much no light can reach BH's. The mass of our sun as a BH would be about 1.6 +/- miles in diameter. Suns have to grow to a surface attraction of the speed of light to create and sustain a minimum BH. Energy can no longer keep molecules apart when the BH is formed. Its all about energy!!!!

While GR is physical SR is just visual that follows plain geometry' With motion there is no perpendicular view. And everything is in motion. Our distance for light measurements are measured as different hypotenuses with different vector velocities. The sunlight reaching the Earth is ~8 arc minutes away from our view in our present. The problems caused by the finite speed of light to measurements is off set by allowing definition of objects that infinite speed would not allow. The finite speed of light is = to the distance a photon can travel. Energy c is constant but dilation of energy causes changes in distance light has to travel. When you measure a shorter distance (longer measuring stick) with a slower clock or a longer distance (shorter measuring stick) with a faster clock c remains the same. Your measuring the distance with energy of reaction rates. The visual geometry in SR is equivalent to the physical dilation in GR.

Math cannot prove a theory to be correct. It can only disprove a theory. Main stream has no medium to work with in there standard model so progress will be non existent. You cannot build a theory without the proper pieces. Fundamental energy of space is there missing piece.

The MMX proved there was no stationary medium. Relativity proved there was no vector motion in a medium. All that is left is a complimentary spin medium energy of c spin. Or magic take your pick.

[GoC]

Thanks GoC and McQeen.
Gravity keeps us on ground and allows the operation of satellites. However, a clock on the ground and a clock on the satellite cannot agree on where the satellite is. Can it be assumed the satellite has an effect on the Earth directly in proportion to the number of atoms from which the satellite is constructed? Or to rephrase the question, how many atoms does it take to cause time dilation and does the effect diminish with distance in exactly the same way as gravity?

One because an atom can be used as a clock. One atom dilates space. Dilation is the cause of gravity in the first place. The cycle of the electron is moved by fundamental energy of space or magic. Main stream choses magic every time. So stop here if you believe in magic because I do not. Energy moves the electron away from the proton dilation of space energy. The electron dilates space as a friction to space energy. As it moves away from the proton space becomes less dilated and causes more friction to the electron where it curves back around into more dilated space caused by the proton. Momentum of space energy moves it out in the first place at a rotational speed of light through energy particles complimentary for motion of the electron. A pattern is possible in space for vector rotation particle motion in geometry. The electron continues back to the proton and another electron is ejected to start the cycle all over again. Quantum mechanics causes relativity and energy is quantum mechanics.

Charge potential is just that, a potential that does not explain motion. A battery has potential but is finite. Motion of the electron appears infinite perpetual motion. Something gives it motion or its magic.

I do not believe in magic over mechanics so I created my own mechanics to follow relativity. In my understanding of energy, mass is attracted to the most dilated energy state by the inverse square position. We are attracted to the center of the earth and the earth is attracted to the sun. Always a difference in the dilation of space energy. From the atom to the BH's

[McQueen (OP)]

GoC:You have to completely abandon the subjective opinions of the past to completely understand the true ratio relativity math explains. Yes there is a medium and there has to be unless there is magic in the universe. Electrons are a flow not a charged potential. Charge in chemistry is balance and unbalanced mass occupying the space energy. BH's are just the opposite. There is no energy in a BH. Electron motion causes friction to fundamental energy. There is no friction in a BH they just eat mass like a giant particle in a fractal universe where they might represent an electron.

While it is completely acceptable  to have a positive opinion on what Einstein achieved, maybe it is wrong to be overly ingenuous in accepting everything as gospel? After all take the synchronisation of clocks, one situated at the point of origin A and the other at the destination B, according to Einstein, the clock at A ran faster than the clock at B, (and this is the kicker) while the rate at which the clock at B slowed down was exactly the amount of time needed to allow the speed of light to be constant in the very strange sense that it was constant in a way that could not be detected! While this may have been a more acceptable solution than an aether which was supposed to be millions of times more rigid than steel yet was undetectable and permeable to the planets and all other matter, when it was proposed a hundred years ago, it is hardly an acceptable proposal today. What I am asking you to do is to put things in context. The way you speak of the Michelson-Morley Experiment (MMX) as if it were the very latest in scientific achievements is disturbing to say the least. I repeat again here was an experiment (MMX) devised to detect an aether that was millions of times more rigid than steel but was also invisible and undetectable by any means whatsoever.  What you can't seem to grasp is that the whole ethos behind the experiment was in itself flawed.  They should never have been looking for such a thing and it should have been NO surprise when it was not detected. Instead, scientists in a desperate  bid to prove that something must exist to limit the speed of light and to prevent immediate action at a distance (AAD) were only too keen to grasp at straws in the form of Einstein's proposal that the speed of light was constant no matter in which context it was taken.(i.e., time and space adjusted themselves to  maintain the constancy of the speed of light.)

Einstein used clockwork clocks in his examples:



Look at the cogs, look at the springs! Think about what a far cry this is from your grandiose atomic clock view of theories based on these cogs and springs. Think about how far it is from your view of MMX!

In complete contrast to this early classical version of the aether, where it had to be millions of times more rigid than steel,  is the Neo-Classical (Gestalt Aether Theory) version of the aether in which the aether itself is composed of virtual photons that align themselves in the direction of propagation of a real photon emitted by an electron within an atom and it is the energy of the real photon (not the photon itself) that travels along this line of aligned virtual photons.  In this way every aspect  of the propagation of light according to the inverse square law (and even for coherent light) is   perfectly explained.  How does light propagate according to special or general relativity? Special relativity in particular seems to give the impression that light travels in discrete straight lines!

The point is that when you have the whole of  SPACE and TIME adjust themselves according to your bidding to maintain one factor as constant, it would be possible to do almost anything that came to mind. Even explain gravity for example, although it is almost painfully obvious that Einstein's explanation of gravity is completely based on Newton's discoveries and merely clothes those discoveries in a new motivating force, which it is hoped has been demonstrated does not hold water. It is totally confounding that such unrealistic theories supported by unrealistic proofs have so much credence.

[GoC]

GoC:You have to completely abandon the subjective opinions of the past to completely understand the true ratio relativity math explains. Yes there is a medium and there has to be unless there is magic in the universe. Electrons are a flow not a charged potential. Charge in chemistry is balance and unbalanced mass occupying the space energy. BH's are just the opposite. There is no energy in a BH. Electron motion causes friction to fundamental energy. There is no friction in a BH they just eat mass like a giant particle in a fractal universe where they might represent an electron.

While it is completely acceptable  to have a positive opinion on what Einstein achieved, maybe it is wrong to be overly ingenuous in accepting everything as gospel? After all take the synchronisation of clocks, one situated at the point of origin A and the other at the destination B, according to Einstein, the clock at A ran faster than the clock at B, (and this is the kicker) while the rate at which the clock at B slowed down was exactly the amount of time needed to allow the speed of light to be constant in the very strange sense that it was constant in a way that could not be detected!

This can be proven to be correct by the north pole signal down to clock A and Clock B. It has also been proven by driving atomic clocks from NY to SF and back. Synchronization techniques have changed and all prove relativity postulates follow observations.

While this may have been a more acceptable solution than an aether which was supposed to be millions of times more rigid than steel yet was undetectable and permeable to the planets and all other matter, when it was proposed a hundred years ago, it is hardly an acceptable proposal today. What I am asking you to do is to put things in context. The way you speak of the Michelson-Morley Experiment (MMX) as if it were the very latest in scientific achievements is disturbing to say the least. I repeat again here was an experiment (MMX) devised to detect an aether that was millions of times more rigid than steel but was also invisible and undetectable by any means whatsoever.  What you can't seem to grasp is that the whole ethos behind the experiment was in itself flawed.

It was not flawed in what they were looking to find. The scope of the experiment was limited. Scientists discarded the idea of a medium. That was what was wrong with the experiment. There has to be a medium for Relativity to work properly. Einstein stated that in his 1920 paper. Science left Einstein at that point because of the MMX. It was the best experiment and the worst reaction by the scientists at that time. A medium of spin c could never be detected. You would need something faster than c to detect the medium. This forces us into orthogonal methods of detection.

They should never have been looking for such a thing and it should have been NO surprise when it was not detected. Instead, scientists in a desperate  bid to prove that something must exist to limit the speed of light and to prevent immediate action at a distance (AAD) were only too keen to grasp at straws in the form of Einstein's proposal that the speed of light was constant no matter in which context it was taken.(i.e., time and space adjusted themselves to  maintain the constancy of the speed of light.)

No experiments are bad. Only the limitation of the experiment needs to be observed. In the MMX scientists went beyond the limit of the experiment in there conclusions.

Einstein used clockwork clocks in his examples:



Look at the cogs, look at the springs! Think about what a far cry this is from your grandiose atomic clock view of theories based on these cogs and springs. Think about how far it is from your view of MMX!

Columbus sailed across the ocean no one would consider today. Einstein took a leap in the postulates of relativity. All measurements so far follow those postulates. The only thing left is to find the mechanical cause of relativity which needs a medium of mechanics for the explanation. Or magic as main stream's no medium position.

In complete contrast to this early classical version of the aether, where it had to be millions of times more rigid than steel,  is the Neo-Classical (Gestalt Aether Theory) version of the aether in which the aether itself is composed of virtual photons that align themselves in the direction of propagation of a real photon emitted by an electron within an atom and it is the energy of the real photon (not the photon itself) that travels along this line of aligned virtual photons.  In this way every aspect  of the propagation of light according to the inverse square law (and even for coherent light) is   perfectly explained.  How does light propagate according to special or general relativity? Special relativity in particular seems to give the impression that light travels in discrete straight lines!

Yes an energy medium separate from mass where mass moves as friction to c to create a wave on c as constant front and back of the wave being constant also. Multiple 2 dimension spin particles can create a three dimensional motion as straight in space. Kind of like the string theory but particles of spin causing electrons to move in perpetual motion. Energy is backwards to Main streams model.

The point is that when you have the whole of  SPACE and TIME adjust themselves according to your bidding to maintain one factor as constant, it would be possible to do almost anything that came to mind. Even explain gravity for example, although it is almost painfully obvious that Einstein's explanation of gravity is completely based on Newton's discoveries and merely clothes those discoveries in a new motivating force, which it is hoped has been demonstrated does not hold water. It is totally confounding that such unrealistic theories supported by unrealistic proofs have so much credence.

Gravity follows relativity not for mans bidding but because of mechanics of relativity. All observations follow relativity postulates so I find that to be a pretty strong bucket of water. Your interpretation of relativity may be flawed but relativity not so much. Even main streams model is flawed so if you follow a flawed model of course you would find fault. Yes of course there has to be a medium!!!!

[Chaswell]

Interesting  GoC and McQeen.
I think you both agree that gravity and time dilation are now combined and therefore gravity does not come in two forms. There seems, however, to be some controversy on the mechanisms and it seems there is still a need to search for dark matter.
Does the following hold good?
If an object is dropped then the energy released at impact can never exceed the energy taken to lift the object. This must be true no matter how far away the object is before it is dropped. For example, if the distance of separation is extreme, and there is no outside influence, then the impact between the object and the planet will take place centre of gravity to centre of gravity. Because the driving force is limited and despite the almost limitless amount of time, the speed at impact must be limited otherwise the the impact energy limit would be exceeded (approximately 25,000 mph for Earth).
Of course the above scenario ignores the possible effect that the reduction in time dilation might have between the planet and the atoms of the object. If the processes within the atoms rely on a healthy connection, then the object may become lost, much like an Earth satellite becomes lost. Any deviation from a centre to centre connection would result in rotational energy being induced. This rotational energy would tend to make the object enter an orbital course as it approched.