|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
A space that does not conduct light
A space that does not conduct light
----------------------------------- Space could be modeled as a frictionless super solid (logic explained below). If space is treated as a frictionless super solid that conducts light, then it is possible that at some point going outward from the universe that the frictionless super solid thins out and ends. What could lie beyond this? The simplest guess is a 'Witch' Space that does not contain the frictionless super solid we call time and space. (The name Witch Space is taken verbatim from a game called Elite.) Witch Space is devoid of the frictionless super solid material that we call time and space and so it does not conduct light. Matter would still exist in Witch Space but how it functions in an area that has no light conducting frictionless super solid space is hard to guess. Most probably some of the frictionless super solid will cling to matter and allow matter to keep many of its properties but millimeters from its surface, there is no light conducting frictionless super solid and thus light cannot thus propagate from that object. If light cannot propagate, then what about fields? Most likely the fields cannot propagate either. If light is made from electric and magnetic fields, and light can't propagate, then electric and magnetic fields may not also be able to propagate in this is space that does not conduct light. This assumption could be carried further to claim that no fields are conducted in a space that does not conduct light. If that is the case, then two black holes could sit meters apart from each other in Witch Space, and neither will feel the presence of the other!! The idea of Witch Space is just the perfect answer for a multi-verse! One could imagine billions of black holes sitting in a sea of black holes and nothing would happen in this multi-verse because there is no frictionless super solid that allows forces and action at a distance to be conducted to neighboring black holes. The frictionless super solid that conducts light and forces is absorbed into the black hole and would at best extend a few meters above its surface. It is possible some of these black holes are moving, and if they touch, then huge amounts of frictionless space time super solid is released from the black holes that allows light to conduct and forces to conduct, and for the two black holes to then react with immense speed as gravity gets conducted. It ends in a bang reminiscent of a big bang. Probably our universe was born in such a collision. In a multi-verse that would not be a unique thing. In this space that does not conduct light, there is no speed limit and objects can move at arbitrary speeds and collide causing our big bang. Many such events could be taking place, but we would not be wise to it because there is no space time super solid that connects between the two events to allow one universe to feel the effects of another. A simple way to test multi-verse theory --------------------------------------- There is a simple way to test the multi-verse theory. If there are lots of universes out there, then it is possible that the space intervening the universes is not empty. It could contain gases and particles and since their space time is on a different fabric, we could be moving at extreme speeds relative to those items and that would be many orders of magnitude higher than c when encountering these particles and objects. The objects are traveling in Witch Space devoid of space time frictionless super solid without the ability to radiate light or conduct forces until it enters our universe. We might actually be detecting particles from outside of our universe and that might be how we get our cosmic rays from all directions. Those particles are reaching us with energies above 10^20 eV. Nothing in this universe can generate those. There is enough energy in a small particle to kick a tennis ball into the air by 1 meter. Then there are gamma ray busters - these could be larger objects arriving from outside of our universe at immense speed and hitting stars. If a single particle can carry 10^20 eV imagine a boulder sized object with each atom inside carrying 10^20 eV hitting a star, and then you can imagine what a gamma ray burster would look like. It would cause sudden appearance of a gamma ray burst most probably in the distant edges of the universe and no trace afterwards because the burst doesn't relate to something beyond a boulder sized object going through a star. The star would mostly remain in tact, there would be a lot of gas and debris, but that would get absorbed back into the star and then the gamma ray burst and the visible object will disappear fairly quickly. Thats what we see. It is significant that it is seen at the edge of the universe and not near here because these boulders don't have much in the way of a clear line of sight before they hit something. A grain of sand coming our way would encounter 2 meters of air approximately spread over 13 billion light year span because interstellar gas is that thin, but thats still an awful lot of atoms it will have to hit at energies of 10^20 eV which will instantly machine away grains of sand long before it hits us. Something much smaller could reach us and they are the small particles. If grains of sand of this material or something smaller does go past us, then we should be able to detect them. The gas in the galaxy is very thin, however, as they collide with even a grain sized object, they would light up and emit gamma rays and we would be able to detect it as pulses of light separated from each other by fixed time intervals. A bit like watching shooting stars with two cameras. First one one camera sees it, then the other camera. Likewise, we may be able to spot super-illuminal objects in the night sky emitting gamma rays and streaking across the galaxy. If we had more than two cameras, we would know the object traveled in a straight line, that it was traveling faster than light as it covers vast distances in fractions of a nanosecond. The near coincidental appearance of gamma rays from two distinctly different points in the sky separated by vast distances would be signature that we live in a multi-verse. It would also explain the source of gamma ray bursts and cosmic rays in one neat step. More speed of light breakage predictions - posted in sci.physics 23-09-2011 ---------------------------------------- http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...cles-neutrinos http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15034414 A little while ago, I posted a very precise claim (claim 1 below) that speed of light would be measured to be faster at lower altitude with a time of flight experiment. These researchers are beaming the neutrinos below the earth's surface to bridge the distance which means according to my theory the physics of the speed of light at that altitude is faster and hence the neutrinos arrive quicker. According to all previous theories, there are no unique frames of reference where speed of light can be measured to be quicker. But the theory I got going was predicting in advance that speed of light is faster and it clearly pointed the finger at strength of gravity as the unique frame of reference. That is exactly what the researchers have found. No ifs or buts, just precise prediction. There are additional and very precise predictions that follow on from the CERN experiments and ways of checking. 8. The original experiment is over 732 km which means the beam tunneled under the earth to bridge the gap. The prediction is that under stronger gravity, the speed of light would be measured to be faster. Average heights of mountains and sea levels being factored in, the maximum strength of gravity is is a few km below land surface in Italy. But going any further below DECREASES gravity. 9. So according to 8, if the detector is moved further away, the beam spends more time in stronger gravity as the beam dips a few more kilometers into stronger gravity, and the effect would increase. But there comes a point, when the increase of effect is minimal because the beam travels through the center of the earth where there is less gravity and therefore less added effect. That is very easy experiment to do to prove the effect is strong in stronger gravitational field but tailors off as gravity decreases. If that turns out to be true, then we know for sure gravitational strength is a frame of reference. This effect cannot be used to send objects back in time. It requires the same continuous gravitational field to be present "at both ends of the experiment". That condition is true between two points on the surface of the earth when they are near to each other. However it would not be possible to bridge the gap between two stars for example with this method because gravity tails off in the intervening gap. The same problem happens between opposite ends of the earth because gravity tails off in the center of the Earth, so the effect is not cumulative with distance separating transmitter and receiver on Earth. If this theory survives the test of time. then rest of that theory and more of my outlandish claims and its precise predictions are described below for future reference: Space may be a frictionless super solid - posted in sci.physics 04-03-2011 ---------------------------------------------------------- Outlandish claims - version 3 I've made an alternative play model of how the universe works. Its just a play model of time and space, and it works for things stellar aberration, Michelson Morley, black holes, c. But its making predictions that are outlandish. It is making claims I don't understand so I'm throwing it your way to see if experimental evidence can fit this model. Since posting a few days back, I am expanding the claims by getting rid of space time fabric to make these weired predictions more consistent by replacing space time with space made of a frictionless super solid material and time as just time on its own as we experience it. Added more refinements - explain where the wave particle duality comes from and explain single particle self interference in double slit - explain where quantum tunneling may come from - explain an inconsistency about how a photon traveling at c keeps time 1. The theory is claiming c is different at different altitudes. As far as I know it should not be because there are no unique frames of reference from where c could be measured to be different. But As far as I know no one has done a direct time of flight experiment with say a 1m sealed tube with mirrors to time light bouncing say 100 times and measuring if there is any change with the same apparatus at sea level and at 1km up mountain. The unique frame of reference is introduced by strength of gravity. If the experiment proves there is a difference, then the rest of the theory below are more consequences that follow. 2. This model is claiming normal time and space ceases to exist at the black hole event horizon. What exists beyond that is a faster version of time and space which moves so much more quicker than what happens in normal space and time. Because of that, the space and time fabric at the event horizon between the two worlds is compatible. So black holes can travel faster than c, but where it rubs up against normal space and time it will create a heck of lot of energy as the space time fabric is shredded and you will see it as a white object with a different kind of spectra as seen today with super-illuminal objects. They would have existed early in the universe as black holes formed and got flung out in collisions and interactions. They are losing energy and would not exist nearby today. Also anything nearby would shred time and space and its wake like a jet stream leaves a wake would not be a fun place to be near at. 3.The model is claiming normal time and space would be sucked into a black hole and converted to this new space and time. This can only be stopped if the black hole and the space time fabric around it is rotating. Because space and time fabric is spinning around the black hole, this is the only place where time and space is stable enough for matter to form around it. i.e. only around spinning black holes. Everywhere else black holes that are not spinning could exist but it hasn't got enough space and time for it to leave a signature such as gravitational lensing. But its force may well be felt (what me might end up calling dark matter.) 4. The next prediction even more difficult to get head around and probably a very wrong interpretation. What I think it is trying to say is that there may be no absolute frames of reference for space time fabric to determine how it is spinning around a black hole. The space time fabric around the black hole may be spinning at one rate if you could step outside of it, but the actual rotation between space time and the black hole is a relative thing and a different thing. We might end up measuring that as dark matter halo around a galaxy because what we are actually measuring is the combined effect of the two rotations. 5. The next prediction is that black holes absorb normal space and time, and so there is less of it around as time goes by. May be the early universe had a few black holes and that would have sucked up almost all space and time at a phenomenal rate because the stuff inside the black holes moves at speeds much faster than c and can do that without any hesitation. This would have led to what we know as the inflationary period. If inflation really did exist, then as we bang together atoms, the density in the experiment goes up and it should be possible to see an inflation type of effect as was present in the early universe creating raw energy out of thin air just because you reproduced early universe conditions. Since we don't see that in any experiment today, it is probably decisive thing to suggest black holes did absorb most of the available time and space creating the inflationary effect and we can't reproduce it today because we are not creating black holes when we bang bits of matter together in accelerators. 6. The next prediction is is that space and time is still being absorbed by black holes and that means there is less of it around as time goes by. Light has to travel further because there is less space time fabric around. This may be what is causing the red shift. If the universe is really expanding, then here on earth we would be able to detect it in calorimeters. When material is cooled to near absolute zero, the space inside that apparatus is expanding by approximately 1 proton diameter every 100 seconds. That should be detectable as free energy production. But I don't know of any reports that makes a correction for it. In other words, there is no free energy production and the universe is not expanding, but more likely the space and time fabric is being absorbed by black holes which reduces overall energy and thus a calorimeter experiment would decisively settle whether space expansion is the an artifact or a genuine thing that is creating free energy. 7. Now for another break with tradition - the space time fabric is replaced with space as a frictionless super solid and time is left to function as we would normally experience it. A space time fabric is equivalent to a connected material that can propagate polarized waves such as light. Only solids can propagate polarized waves. But frictionless super solids behave like a gas or a liquid in that they flow without using energy but they are also connected like a solid and able to pass polarized waves. Frictionless super solid materials are nothing new and they exist now. So if space is a frictionless super solid of a very fine material that permeates through atoms, predictions 1 to 6 would add up without violating any of the problems like stellar aberration, Michelson Morley when measuring speed of light. Because space is a frictionless super solid, it can be dragged around by black holes and item 4 described above would be entirely feasible. We would not be able to measure the frame dragging except by measuring the difference between expected orbit and actual orbit around our black hole at the center of our galaxy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There is such a discrepancy and we call it dark matter. But its probably because the frictionless solid we call space is spinning with the our black hole and the whole thing is spinning at a much faster rate than we can see because we are embedded into the frictionless solid. Surely then outside of our galaxy there would be a point where the flow of the frictionless super solid rubs up against the flow of another black hole neighbor and we would see something uncomfortable at the interface? Probably not for two reasons. Firstly the vast cosmic distances would allow the two super solid flows to rub each other at a sane rate that doesn't cause much of an effect. Secondly the material is a frictionless solid so there is no way for the material to absorb or release energy and so nothing will happen. In the off chance something could happen we would see that as an unexpected glow of infra-red or some other radiation coming from nowhere. Indeed that is what we see with the Subaru deep field when bolometers take measurements between empty regions of space that have nothing in between them despite zooming in on the most distance galaxy that can be seen. May be that infra-red in the bolometers is detecting the the interface between two rubbing super solids in motion. A map of the entire sky would then show where the effects are concentrated and that must be related in some way to nearby galaxies for the data to make sense. Nothing can travel faster than c is true so long as it is made of materials of ordinary matter. When matter traveling, it is rubbing up against the super solid and how fast the solid can move apart in a frictionless way to allow the object to pass through the frictionless media. That creates c and it is constant everywhere providing the density of the material is constant. As highlighted in item 1, that is claimed to be not true if gravity is changing - gravity increases the density of the super solid, and so light would measure to be faster near higher gravitational field than if the same person with same apparatus measured it in a lighter gravity environment. This would be exact opposite result of Einstein prediction where there is no unique frame of reference. And if there was, in a stronger gravitational field, your apparatus may conceivably measure speed of c to be slower - not higher. In a black hole, the frictionless super solid material that we call space is absorbed and condensed into another type of space where everything works quicker. That is why item 2 above is feasible. The black hole material is so dense it does not allow the frictionless super solid material of our space to pass through it. The black hole will just absorb it like a gas and then pressurize it and push it outward allowing black holes to travel faster than c by pushing aside the frictionless super solid material we call space. As ordinary particles are accelerated, they suffer time dilation and acquire mass. It is now easy to see where that is all coming from. The frictionless super solid limits the speed of travel to c because that is how fast it can open the links between the connected material of the frictionless super solid to allow matter to travel through it. When traveling fast, the density of the frictionless super solid gets higher and this affects the ticking of time because all the processes involve movement and the thicker soup of the frictionless solid gets in the way of it causing the ticking of time to slow down. The mass of the object appears to increase because more of the energy is spent in breaking the bonds that connect the frictionless super solid, but because the material is frictionless, that energy must travel with the particle as a wake behind the particle closing up the bonds that were opened in front of it to allow it to pass through the frictionless super solid. The mass of the particle had not increased - merely that more energy has been attached to the frictionless super solid around the object. There may be a clear way to detect the difference between mass gain and creating a bigger wake in the super solid as the object travels. If it is a bigger wake, then it is possible for that particle to pass near another particle and affect it without ever hitting it. But that would be a very difficult experiment to do because these objects may have to be steered to pass within sub atomic distances to be able to tell apart the difference. May be some kind of experiment based on averaging might be able to get at that information. An alternative perspective of above paragraph allows an insight into wave particle duality and self interference in a double slit experiment. Particles traveling through the the frictionless solid have a problem as they become smaller. As they become smaller the geometric aspects of breaking the bonds of the frictionless super solid and carrying the energy in a small compact bundle becomes disproportional ratios. So more of the energy gets spread out as a wake around the particle. This wake is able to interact in double slit experiments because the slit itself is made of atoms, and as their sub atomic particles wizz around the atoms, they also leave a wake. The wakes from the stationary atoms and the wakes from the particle passing through the slit are frictionless but the wakes interfere with each other causing changes of direction without consuming energy. So even a single particle will interfere because its wake is interfering with the wakes created by the atoms at the edge of the slit. If wakes can interfere, then within collections of atoms it is now possible to see how particles acquire high energies to tunnel. The disturbances in the frictionless super solid can be passed on, so some particles can acquire more energy in collisions as the wakes pass energy around and thus tunnel through energy barriers. Current theory suggests particles traveling at c does not have ticking time. But that is inconsistent with change of direction for example caused by gravitational lensing. If direction is different then the clock must be ticking. Using a frictionless super solid as the medium for light to travel in, time still ticks, but speed limit is still c, and directions can change. So everything about light, time dilations and how clocks are ticking are measured becomes more consistent. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
A space that does not conduct light
On 23/10/2011 5:13 PM, 7 wrote:
A space that does not conduct light ----------------------------------- Space could be modeled as a frictionless super solid (logic explained below). Alright, I'll bite, why would you want it to be a supersolid rather than a more run-of-the-mill superfluid? Is this an attempt to reintroduce the solid Luminoferous Ether theory? I can accept a form of an Ether theory, but I think the solid Ether idea is wrong, but a fluid one is acceptable. If space is treated as a frictionless super solid that conducts light, then it is possible that at some point going outward from the universe that the frictionless super solid thins out and ends. What could lie beyond this? A type of blackhole event horizon is what lies beyond this. The simplest guess is a 'Witch' Space that does not contain the frictionless super solid we call time and space. (The name Witch Space is taken verbatim from a game called Elite.) Fine, I'll attempt to not make fun of this. Witch Space is devoid of the frictionless super solid material that we call time and space and so it does not conduct light. Matter would still exist in Witch Space but how it functions in an area that has no light conducting frictionless super solid space is hard to guess. Most probably some of the frictionless super solid will cling to matter and allow matter to keep many of its properties but millimeters from its surface, there is no light conducting frictionless super solid and thus light cannot thus propagate from that object. Matter wouldn't exist in such a space as light is needed to transmit the electromagnetic force. Light isn't just for illuminating things, it keeps things together. Without light, electrons wouldn't orbit atoms. Atoms wouldn't link up to form molecules. Molecules wouldn't clump together to form objects. At a deeper level, electromagnetism is probably linked to the Strong and Weak nuclear forces too, and if light can't travel through this space, then the nuclear forces couldn't either, and so even quarks wouldn't stay together to form protons or neutrons. Also mass is a form of energy (E=mc^2). If light can't exist in this space, then neither can mass. Both are forms of energy. If light cannot propagate, then what about fields? Most likely the fields cannot propagate either. If light is made from electric and magnetic fields, and light can't propagate, then electric and magnetic fields may not also be able to propagate in this is space that does not conduct light. This assumption could be carried further to claim that no fields are conducted in a space that does not conduct light. If that is the case, then two black holes could sit meters apart from each other in Witch Space, and neither will feel the presence of the other!! Actually blackholes couldn't exist in this space either, as mass couldn't exist in it. But ignoring that for a moment, gravity should work in any kind of space, because it's not like any of the other forces of nature. Forget about the theory that gravity is transmitted by a particle called gravitons, it's likely wrong. Instead, another theory proposes that gravity is really a form of negative energy. If matter, light, Strong and Weak nuclear forces are all positive energy, then gravity is its counteracting agent, i.e. it is negative energy. The amount of positive and negative energy in the universe precisely balance each other out to zero energy. The positive and negative energy might not be distributed evenly from region to region, but overall they balance each other. So the point here is that if there is any energy or mass in this Witch Space, then there must be negative energy, i.e. gravity. The idea of Witch Space is just the perfect answer for a multi-verse! One could imagine billions of black holes sitting in a sea of black holes and nothing would happen in this multi-verse because there is no frictionless super solid that allows forces and action at a distance to be conducted to neighboring black holes. The frictionless super solid that conducts light and forces is absorbed into the black hole and would at best extend a few meters above its surface. Gravity will still be transmitted through it. It is possible some of these black holes are moving, and if they touch, then huge amounts of frictionless space time super solid is released from the black holes that allows light to conduct and forces to conduct, and for the two black holes to then react with immense speed as gravity gets conducted. It ends in a bang reminiscent of a big bang. Probably our universe was born in such a collision. In a multi-verse that would not be a unique thing. In this space that does not conduct light, there is no speed limit and objects can move at arbitrary speeds and collide causing our big bang. Many such events could be taking place, but we would not be wise to it because there is no space time super solid that connects between the two events to allow one universe to feel the effects of another. snip rest You have a mistaken assumption about the speed of light. You think that light is the cause of the universal speed limit. In actuality, the universal speed limit is what sets the speed of light, and the speed of everything else too. Yousuf Khan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Biggest void in space is 1 billion light years across - space - 24 August 2007 - New Scientist Space | [email protected] | UK Astronomy | 0 | August 24th 07 08:07 PM |
Space debris mitigation: the case for a code of conduct | Jacques van Oene | News | 0 | April 15th 05 05:58 PM |
"...we are 12 weeks or so from launch and we still do not know how we'll conduct these surveys on-orbit." | Herb Schaltegger | Space Shuttle | 2 | February 15th 05 08:28 PM |
Space Shuttle Should Conduct Final Servicing Mission To Hubble SpaceTelescope (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | Astronomy Misc | 0 | December 9th 04 01:27 AM |
Space Shuttle Should Conduct Final Servicing Mission To Hubble SpaceTelescope (Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | News | 0 | December 9th 04 01:25 AM |