Re: The fabric of space

This reply is to Sue too.

*** rD wrote:
> "Ken S. Tucker" <dynamics@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1118995819.426273.302580@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> |
> | sue jahn wrote:
> | [...], read the post and the refs, thanks.
> |
> | > So... presently we have little more than a crude intuition
> | > that Coulomb attractors should be able to effect a shorter
> | > path than Coulomb repellers through some mechanism of
> | > displacement or deformation.
> |
> | What you call "crude intuition", I call a GR solution.
> |
> | IMHO, the General Theory of Relativity is the most
> | complex problem the human minds have encountered.
> |
> | At any given time, there may be only a few hundred
> | souls, who have the interest, energy and intelligence
> | to pursue it, aka GRist's. Of those, the majority are
> | confident the LIGO and it's follow-up LISA will detect
> | g-waves.
> |
> | Tucker's solution to the G_uv=T_uv, aka Einstein's
> | law, sees the need for gravitational energy being
> | released but it is electromagnetically.
> | That decision is in accord with a GR solution.
> |
> | Neglecting constants and particle speeds, AE's
> | law is,
> |
> | G_00 = T_00.
> |
> | where the G00 is the geometry of spacetime field
> | and T00 is the energy density.
> |
> | To demo electrically, using electricity, a pair
> | of charges "a" and "b" have a relative potential
> | energy given by,
> |
> | U = ab/r ,
> |
> | and an energy density equivalent to,
> |
> | U/r^3 = ab/r^4,
> |
> | so we can now set,
> |
> | T00 = U/r^3 = ab/r^4.
> |
> | The electic field of charge "a" is
> |
> | E(a) = a /r^2
> |
> | and likewise for "b", then
> |
> | T00 = E(a) E(b)
> |
> | and
> |
> | G00 = E(a) E(b) = T00 .
> |
> | A variation of T00 will transmit to the spacetime
> | G00, threw the medium E(a)*E(b), i.e. via EM waves.
> |
> | A solution to the metric is
> |
> | g_00 = 1 - (a/r)*(b/r) = 1 - U/r
> |
> | where U = electical system mass energy ab/r.
> |
> | The above is a unified field theory, and predicts
> | LIGO/LISA to null, but IMO, AE's law holds, and GR
> | is safe.
> |
> | Stop pending comments...
> | Ken S. Tucker
>
> Hello Ken if I convert your algebra into visual terms to see if I
> understand your position could you correct it.?

I read your post carefully, and now see a means to
visualize it even simpler than you have, but it is
only an analogy. I'll replace the rubber *** with
an elastic band that is stretched a bit, because we
only need the 1 dimension that connects the charges
"a" and "b".
Let me try a diagram, let the ===== be a stretched
elastic band that looks like,

==( )==============( )== no charges,

and is an empty space.

Place a pair of attracting charges in,

==>(-)==========(+)<== attracting charges.

Next,

==(+)<==================>(+)== repelling charges.

Between the brackets is a distance S, call that X
in empty space in the 1st diagram then,

S^2 = X^2 + a*b Eq.(1)

works for all the diagrams, ok?

((I call that simple Eq.(1) solution "Unitivity"
because it unitizes charge to length units. It's
been tested for about 10 years and passes)).

Secondly, the attracting charges remove some energy
from the elastic between the brackets, (by reducing
the tension in analogy), but the repelling charges
add energy by stretching the elastic between them.

So we find how repelling charges are further apart
than attracting charges even at the same position,
and so the attractive force is greater than the
repulsive force.
That analogy is a reasonable snap-shot of GR in
action.

Hey for fun, try using an elastic and tweak while
it stretches and gets more energy, and note the
frequency increases as it's stretched. Maybe we
could toss in wave-mechanics.

I'll stop here, pending comments...
Ken S. Tucker


> Using the rubber *** analogy it seems the thickness could be represented
> by T_00 and is a variable current\density state for any space-time position.
> G_00 would be distortion in the vertical plane and could be positive up and
> negative down and a voltage\velocity potential.
> For example if you drew a circle on the rubber *** before it was disturbed
> from its rest state which would be flat and un-stretched it might have a
> value for pi as 3.00 but after disturbance in the vertical plane by
> potential or the thickness and spatial dimensions modified by density
> redistribution. pi representing a geometry change might be 3.1415 etc this
> being the macro average for micro space-time changes from rest due to the
> presence of fields and\or particles and in fact representing the disturbance
> from flat and unstreched that is the cosmic state at present. The attraction
> and repulsive forces as represented by U = ab/r and U/r^3 = ab/r^4 would be
> a positive bump and a negative bump in the *** trying to normalise the
> *** back to flat and unstreched, and for a pair of positive or negative
> bumps trying to avoid increasing the distance from normalisation of the
> area. There seems to be experimental evidence that positive charge is
> spatial dimensional greater than negative charge with perhaps a
> corresponding dilation and contraction in the time vector. If this makes
> sense I will try and understand your use of U/r^3 = ab/r^4 further.
> --
> D & R *** E-field = Electric field, M-field =Magnetic field, two unbound
> field effects
> http://home.freeuk.com/paulps/
> Maybe updates. The spuds, beans and onions are coming up nicely. Ooh
> ah.{:-)

.

Quantcast