## gravity as filtering

Expand Messages
• ... You use the term, field as do all physicists today. This term is meaningless. What is a field? What shape is it? What causes it, fundamentally? The
Message 1 of 1 , Jun 20, 2001
• 0 Attachment
At 02:04 PM 6/20/01 +0200, Daniel Lapadatu wrote:

>Dear Ross and Claude,
>
>Claude mentioned something about gravity seen as filtering (within Ross'
>model).
>off the wall.
>
>The only way I see right now one can emulate the curved spacetime by
>employing waves is to emulate the behaviour of the electromagnetic waves
>in a gravitational field:

You use the term, "field" as do all physicists today. This term is
meaningless. What is a field? What shape is it? What causes it,
fundamentally? The answers you might dream up or put forward out of
familiarity, if you really think about them, are just words without form or
structure at the Planck scale.

Now, you begin below to go into how wave geometry might be altered, and
that is excellent and what must be done to understand this stuff. You can
discard the notion, "field" and speak in terms of wavelengths and
frequencies and geometries and how the nodes and anti nodes are varied in
space and in time.

universe, plus, spacetime where spacetime is a structure of standing waves
permeating the entire universe and the structure of waves to which the
"particles" are under damped resonances.

If the two particles (remember the name particle is used, but what is
always meant is "standing wave" or "spherical resonance", and not a
particle in the sense of a rock or dust grain that just sits there doing
nothing.)

If the two particles are alone in the universe, they will interact via
their waves which pass through each other. If the waves interfere at 180
phase, they will move toward one another or, "attract". If the waves
interfere at 90 or 270 phase, they will be neutral to each other and won't
accelerate relative to one another. If their waves interfere at 0 phase,
they will repulse. This was known back in the 1880's by Thomson, Bjerknes
and everyone working with aether theories, so read history texts to get
this aspect.

Now, let's add a bunch of random, frequency shifted wave energy coming
inward from all distances throughout the rest of the universe (from other
resonances far away and moving away so that they are red shifted in
frequency). That wave energy will not interfere with the two we are
dealing with via a phase interference because they are at different
frequencies. That energy is like noise, literally.

If you sit two people on a chair on a frictionless ice rink, stationary,
and then you turn on a bunch of loud speakers around the rink, they will be
pushed toward one another because their bodies will filter out some of that
noise and it will be quieter in between them.

The same thing happens and we call it gravity. The wave energy that drives
gravity comes from the rest of the universe. The funny thing is, the power
is about the same no matter how far away the noise is coming from because
while the intensity is falling off by 1/R^2, the number of galaxies is
rising by R^2, and the two multiplied together is just 1.

So, galaxies billions of light years away play as important a role in
gravity as do galaxies a few million light years away. Spacetime is the
local time keeper of wave energy, and it has as it's frequency, the Planck
scale frequency where the majority of the power is, nearby.

However, this is just showing how to think of the aspects of gravity that

if you really want to learn about what is wrong with GR, then you must
study how gravity also has an effect that repulses objects away from one
another due to exothermy and the formation of new spacetime. This happens
in stars due to fusion and mass to space conversion. This is what is wrong
with GR and QM, ...........ie, they fail to acknowledge this aspect of how
the universe really works.

rt

>The wavelengths of the wave increases as the wave proceeds against the field.
>
>If one considere the distance between two successive crests of the wave as
>the length etalon, is it also easy to visualise why space is bend around a
>massive body: make a circle around the body and use a wave to measure its
>length. Since the wave is in a constant field, its wavelength will stay
>fixed (OK, you can't do this with light, because it flies to fast, but you
>can use mirrors or a slower wave). Lets say that the wave crests count is NP.
>
>Now, you measure the radius of the circle. Because of the gravity, you
>will get a count NR which is MORE than NP/2Pi (which will be the answer in
>flat space).
>
>That's the space curvature (remember: we can measure the space only with
>material objects!).
>
>Now, let's assume that the spacetime is flat and some filtering of the
>waves occurs around massive bodies for some reasons. This means that from
>a wave-packet containing high frequencies waves some of the high frequency
>waves are absorbed. What is left are the low frequancy ones. So, this
>process is equivalent with observing an increase in the wavelength of a
>wave as it moves against the field. Which means it is a possible way to
>emulate gravity,
>
>because in the end, taking into acound how we measure distances and times
>- by using waves, this is equivalent of having bent spacetime around a
>massive body.
>
>Einstein's GRT tells us how much matter bends spacetime and how matter
>moves through spacetime, but does not give an answer to **why** matter
>bends spacetime. A filtering of the waves appears, at least at a quick
>glance, to provide such a mechanism (however, it has to have the right
>features as to generate the same equations as GRT).
>
>Cheers,
>Daniel
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.