The speed of Gravity

Discussions on classical and modern physics, quantum mechanics, particle physics, thermodynamics, general and special relativity, etc.

Re: The speed of Gravity

Postby bangstrom on July 8th, 2018, 4:29 am 

DJ_Juggernaut » July 4th, 2018, 4:59 am wrote:
Gravitational waves and the 'speed of gravity' are the not same.
I also find a distinction between the speed of gravity and the speed of gravitational waves. Gravity is a universal spacetime curvature or gradient that is responsible for the effects we call “gravity” while gravity waves are waves within this medium much like sound waves in the air. Gravity is the medium that surrounds us and it has movements involving changes in densities but gravity isn't a force radiating away from a source so I find it difficult to say that gravity has a speed but gravity does appear to contain waves move through space at speed c.

“Spooky action at a distance” may be a completely different phenomenon from gravity or gravity could be a non-local attraction among objects with mass, in which case, the “speed” of gravity is instant, or more likely, far too fast to measure. If the latter is the case, then the time delay we see with gravity is the same c related delay we see where any two objects separated by space are also separated by time.
bangstrom
Member
 
Posts: 448
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
DJ_Juggernaut liked this post


Re: The speed of Gravity

Postby bangstrom on July 8th, 2018, 4:54 am 

Dave_Oblad » July 7th, 2018, 10:37 pm wrote:Hi Event Horizon,

Imagine the collision two equal Black Holes where one is composed of Anti-Matter. Sure, they would annihilate each other and supposedly produce a tremendous amount of energy.. inside of a Black Hole.

The results would be the conversion of both Matter types to Energy.. But would the Energy trapped within still maintain the Gravitational Field Space-Time distortion? Can that Energy escape the Gravity Well? Is Time itself actually distorted within the Black-Hole.. or is Matter (ie: clocks) the only real (temporal) distortion affected by a Gravity Well?

One way to think of gravity is to consider gravity as an energy deficit. Pascual Jordan speculated that the energy of a star consists of equal amounts of both positive and negative energy so the total energy of a star is zero and, consequently, the net total energy of the universe is also zero.

By this “Zero Energy” theory, the universe may have begun as a quantum fluctuation with one half of the fluctuation being positive energy and the other half being negative energy. The positive half became what we call mater and ordinary energy while the negative half remained as negative energy that we recognize as gravity. Gravity is considered negative energy because it takes energy to remove matter from a gravitational field. We can think of gravity as a “hole” left behind in the false vacuum resulting from the half of the quantum fluctuation that went into positive energy so gravity is the energy deficit left behind.

If positive energy/mater can form black holes, I would imagine that negative energy (gravity) could do the same and form negative-energy/anti-matter and anti-mater black holes. And, since gravity is negative energy, an anti-mater black hole would be composed of gravity so a collision between an ordinary black hole and an anti-matter black hole would be the annihilation of positive energy by negative energy or the annihilation of matter by gravity depending on what you choose to call it.

Anyhow, it would likely be a local catastrophe and messy collision but it would eventually be the annihilation of both black holes, both energies (positive and negative) and the gravity well and a return to the false vacuum from whence it all came. Every-thing would all go back to being nothing.
bangstrom
Member
 
Posts: 448
Joined: 18 Sep 2014


Re: The speed of Gravity

Postby bangstrom on July 8th, 2018, 5:16 am 

Dave_Oblad » July 6th, 2018, 12:18 pm wrote:
Anyway, the results of that discussion ended without a solid resolution. For the time being, Science holds that the speed of Gravitational Collapse is the same as Gravity Wave propagation (unless something has changed since that time). My objection was that they are two completely different things from a mechanical point of view (Stress Release in a Medium <vs> Wave Propagation in a Medium).

Your analysis makes sense. If the sun or a black hole were to suddenly disappear, it would result in the propagation of gravity waves into space at speed c but gravity waves are not what hold the planets in orbit. The waves might make them wobble but, only after the waves began to dampen, would they uniformly begin to drift away from the center.
bangstrom
Member
 
Posts: 448
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
DJ_Juggernaut liked this post


Re: The speed of Gravity

Postby Dave_Oblad on July 9th, 2018, 1:06 pm 

Hi Bangstrom,

What I can say about Gravity is that it is not a pulling force, but rather a difference in the Space-Time Medium. That difference (I Believe) is a gradient in the Scale of the Planck Length.

1. The Space-Time Medium is absolutely pixelated (made of discrete cells).

Without Scale.. Any distance between two objects is infinite.. if the distance can be infinitely sub-divided. Without Scale nothing can be a constant (size of particles and distance between such etc). Time also must be Scaled or any temporal distance between events becomes meaningless (The Planck Interval). Without a controlling background Scale we would have Big Atoms and Small Atoms mixed and then, of course, there would be no compatibility for bonding in various Atomic configurations (water for example). Speed becomes meaningless without units of measure that are constant. Scale is extremely important for the Universe to operate.

2. The Universe is expanding by the addition (growth) of new Space-Time Medium structure.

If the Universe is pixelated, then new pixels (cells) are grown on previous cells and of course must match the Scale of the previous cells. Matter has the effect of forcing new cell growth to be compatible with previous cells, thus stunting the growth of Scale.. local to Matter (inside and around said Matter). Connecting new cells are therefore also restricted in Scale Growth. This means that large objects (Galaxies) do not Grow/Inflate/Expand at the same rate as cells between Galaxies. This would lead one to the conclusion that Scale is variable, meaning that the Planck Length is not the same out in Deep Flat Space as one would find around a Black-Hole. So, even though the Planck Length is indivisible, there is no reason to presume the Planck Length is the same everywhere. The Planck Length Scale is conditional to the previous layer of cells that new cells are grown upon.

3. When Matter is Accelerated, it must take on a new Geometry to uphold the exchange of information carriers (photons etc) within the Geometry of said Matter.

Matter will shorten along the axis of travel and because it is accelerating.. the atomic geometry at the front and back of an object must not be linear. When acceleration is removed, said Matter stabilizes with uniform Geometry but is not the exact same Geometry as Matter not moving as fast. This is the result of a simple fact that information exchange has a fixed speed limit (light speed) and thus information flow in the direction of motion must have different timing than information flow opposite of the direction of motion. To accommodate this difference requires a change in the Geometry of Matter. The compensation for said timing irregularity results in an increase in the Complexity of the Geometry of Matter. This is called Momentum. If a change in speed is gradual enough, then the morphing of Matter Geometry is suitable enough to hold stability. If Matter changes velocity fast enough, then Matter can not change Geometry fast enough to maintain stability and it will fall apart into an array of atomic components and energy.

4. Matter under acceleration can not be fully symmetrical along its axis of motion.

Matter at the front of an object is the first to be subjected to a required change in Geometry while Matter at the rear of an object always lags (last to know). This makes Matter Geometry under acceleration non-linear down its length in the direction of motion. Basically, Matter must become slightly more dense on the leading edge as opposed to the trailing edge during acceleration. This is the same regardless of whether said Matter is being pushed or pulled. The front is always the first to know about changes required, while the rear is always lagging a tiny bit.

5. Matter is not independent of Space-Time Structure. Matter Geometry is supported by the structure of Space-Time.

If the Planck Length Scale is smaller (restricted growth) near an object of Mass then the structure of Space-Time is non-linear. Matter must conform to this non-linear Gradient and must become non-linear in itself. This forces the Geometry of Acceleration on said Matter.

Thus Matter is always Accelerated towards a denser Space-Time Gradient, held as such by the presence of Matter which is restricting the Scale of the natural growth of new cells, because Matter has now taken on the non-linear Geometry of Acceleration to conform with the supporting structure of local Space-Time.

That is Gravity.

This is greatly over simplified but has implications that are consistent with observations and avoid issues with the mathematical singularity breakdown of Black-Holes. The breakdown in Math is because Science tends to reject the concept that the Planck Length (while indivisible) is a constant size everywhere.

Once one accepts Variable Planck Scale, held in check by local history, then a lot of other issues fade away.

This is a Universe Model based on a Growing 4D Cellular Automaton where we exist on the expanding 3D surface of said architecture. This defines Time as Expansion of growth via new cells added on the 3D surface.

I'll stop here.. as to go further may put this theory outside mainstream Physics. While several notable Physicists are currently exploring this line of reasoning, it may take awhile for Science to switch tracks. If the above is proven correct then the Science of Black-Holes may soon take a serious blow to the proverbial head. I hope to live long enough to see it..lol.

Regards,
Dave :^)

Ps. If anyone wants to dig deeper, open a new thread in personal theories and I'll respond there. Note: I only drop by every few days to check on things. Meanwhile I'm keeping busy on other fronts at home.
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3229
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)
vivian maxine liked this post


Re: The speed of Gravity

Postby mitchellmckain on July 9th, 2018, 3:46 pm 

Dave_Oblad » July 9th, 2018, 12:06 pm wrote:Hi Bangstrom,

What I can say about Gravity is that it is not a pulling force, but rather a difference in the Space-Time Medium. That difference (I Believe) is a gradient in the Scale of the Planck Length.

Gravity is a pulling force by the definition of the terms. Say rather that gravity does not depend on visualizing it as something apart from the geometry of space-time. BUT there is nothing wrong with visualizing it in such a way and for that we have the QFT picture of graviton exchange particles. I like the geometry explanation too, but it goes too far from science to say that gravity is one thing and not the other.

Dave_Oblad » July 9th, 2018, 12:06 pm wrote:1. The Space-Time Medium is absolutely pixelated (made of discrete cells).

Without Scale.. Any distance between two objects is infinite.. if the distance can be infinitely sub-divided. Without Scale nothing can be a constant (size of particles and distance between such etc). Time also must be Scaled or any temporal distance between events becomes meaningless (The Planck Interval). Without a controlling background Scale we would have Big Atoms and Small Atoms mixed and then, of course, there would be no compatibility for bonding in various Atomic configurations (water for example). Speed becomes meaningless without units of measure that are constant. Scale is extremely important for the Universe to operate.

Sounds like a resurrection of Xeno's rhetoric, which was buried with the mathematics of Calculus.

Dave_Oblad » July 9th, 2018, 12:06 pm wrote:2. The Universe is expanding by the addition (growth) of new Space-Time Medium structure.

If the Universe is pixelated, then new pixels (cells) are grown on previous cells and of course must match the Scale of the previous cells. Matter has the effect of forcing new cell growth to be compatible with previous cells, thus stunting the growth of Scale.. local to Matter (inside and around said Matter). Connecting new cells are therefore also restricted in Scale Growth. This means that large objects (Galaxies) do not Grow/Inflate/Expand at the same rate as cells between Galaxies. This would lead one to the conclusion that Scale is variable, meaning that the Planck Length is not the same out in Deep Flat Space as one would find around a Black-Hole. So, even though the Planck Length is indivisible, there is no reason to presume the Planck Length is the same everywhere. The Planck Length Scale is conditional to the previous layer of cells that new cells are grown upon.

This is where the whole pixelated discrete space picture becomes absurd. I can buy into the idea of quantizing space such as in loop quantum gravity, but I don't think this supports what you are claiming.

It frankly sound like a picture of the universe attractive to computer people the way that a 4000 or 6000 year time scale is attractive to Biblical enthusiasts.

Dave_Oblad » July 9th, 2018, 12:06 pm wrote:3. When Matter is Accelerated, it must take on a new Geometry to uphold the exchange of information carriers (photons etc) within the Geometry of said Matter.

Matter will shorten along the axis of travel and because it is accelerating.. the atomic geometry at the front and back of an object must not be linear. When acceleration is removed, said Matter stabilizes with uniform Geometry but is not the exact same Geometry as Matter not moving as fast. This is the result of a simple fact that information exchange has a fixed speed limit (light speed) and thus information flow in the direction of motion must have different timing than information flow opposite of the direction of motion. To accommodate this difference requires a change in the Geometry of Matter. The compensation for said timing irregularity results in an increase in the Complexity of the Geometry of Matter. This is called Momentum. If a change in speed is gradual enough, then the morphing of Matter Geometry is suitable enough to hold stability. If Matter changes velocity fast enough, then Matter can not change Geometry fast enough to maintain stability and it will fall apart into an array of atomic components and energy.

Are you talking about acceleration due to an external force or a gravitational gradient? Acceleration alone does not imply what you are talking about.

Dave_Oblad » July 9th, 2018, 12:06 pm wrote:4. Matter under acceleration can not be fully symmetrical along its axis of motion.

Matter at the front of an object is the first to be subjected to a required change in Geometry while Matter at the rear of an object always lags (last to know). This makes Matter Geometry under acceleration non-linear down its length in the direction of motion. Basically, Matter must become slightly more dense on the leading edge as opposed to the trailing edge during acceleration. This is the same regardless of whether said Matter is being pushed or pulled. The front is always the first to know about changes required, while the rear is always lagging a tiny bit.

Are you taking about encountering a gravitational wave or entering the gravitational field of a spherical mass?

[quote="[url=http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=337971#p337971]Dave_Oblad » July 9th,
2018, 12:06 pm[/url]"]
This is a Universe Model based on a Growing 4D Cellular Automaton where we exist on the expanding 3D surface of said architecture. This defines Time as Expansion of growth via new cells added on the 3D surface.

I'll stop here.. as to go further may put this theory outside mainstream Physics. While several notable Physicists are currently exploring this line of reasoning, it may take awhile for Science to switch tracks. If the above is proven correct then the Science of Black-Holes may soon take a serious blow to the proverbial head. I hope to live long enough to see it..lol.
[/quote]
personal theory ah... not science then. I see.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1224
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Previous

Return to Physics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests