Dark Light Does Not Endanger Grandfather

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Dlanorrenrag</i>
<br />PSEUDO MUSING AND QUESTIONS ...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">You are posting on the Meta Research web site's Message Board. If you hope for meaningful discussion here, it would behoove you to catch up on the basics of "deep reality physics", which is faithful to all observations and experiments but has gone in a different direction with the physical interpretation of the math currently in widespread use.

Here are some examples:

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Perhaps, light travels in a dimension other than that traveled in by matter.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">There are five and only five dimensions to all known reality. Extra dimensions are an undefined sci-fi concept that can mean whatever the author imagines it to mean.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Light follows the straightest path through space-time<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">"Space-time" is a term used in general relativity, and means "proper time expressed in space-like units". It does not mean space plus time.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Because light has no mass, gravity does not act to speed or slow light.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Gravitational force does not affect light, but gravitational potential (which measures the density of the light-carrying medium, now called "elysium") does change light speed. The "Shapiro effect" is radar beams showing down as they approach the Sun.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Mass always, to some extent, disturbs, curves, or drags (frame dragging) the space-time it is in.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Using what definition of "space"? We prefer to reserve that term for its original meaning, the dimension measuring dsiatnces. As such, there is no meaning to altering space because it is an invariable concept, not a tangible, material entity that can be acted upon by forces.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">As light follows the shortest path, it will follow such curvature.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Light traveling through flat Euclidean space is bent by refraction in elysium.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Matter receives information from other matter in respect of g, being a constant for acceleration.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Gravitational force results from the flux of ultra-small, ultra-fast gravitons filling all visible space. Gravity is then a pushing force, not a magical "pull".

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">such information can only be received by matter at the speed of c.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Special relativity is now falsified in favor of Lorentzian relativity. The universe has no speed limit.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">If bodies could receive information from light at speeds other than c, one may receive information about one’s grandfather and arrange to have him killed before one were born.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">That is the part of special relativity with no counterpart in physical reality. Faster-than-light propagation (for example, gravitational forces) takes place in forward time, so there is no causality violation. -|Tom|-

Very interesting conceptualizing!

Re --- "There are five and only five dimensions to all known reality."

3D in space, 1D in time ("time" not really being real), makes 4.
As you say, I am not at all current on "deep space reality."
So, I take it there is some new phraseology, perhaps in respect of elysium?
OK --- What are the 5 dimensions?

Re --- ultra-fast gravitons: Do they push at some grid speed (or at a relative constant speed, like c)?

"Faster-than-light propagation (for example, gravitational forces) takes place in forward time, so there is no causality violation."
"takes place in forward time"

Does "time" exist, or only chronology?
If I understand, one may travel FTL to some distant place in space.
Once there, one could not travel FTL to return to a sequence that had already occurred before his departure.

Re --- FTL:
As a sci-fi layman, I had read that the speed of light could be exceeded by various tricks (such as in respect of expanding space, whatever that means).
But, I have not heretofore heard this could be done by any mass.
What about communicating information?
So long as the communication is "forward in time" (or sequence), can messages be relayed back and forth FTL?
I have been under the impression that mainstream scientists do not believe that "spooky action at a distance" can be finagled to allow FTL communication.

?? Is truth becoming stranger than fiction ??

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Dlanorrenrag</i>
<br />What are the 5 dimensions?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">In deep reality physics, "dimensions reverts to its original, fundamental meaning -- a means of measuring physical entities. So the three dimensions of space measure distances, time measures change, and mass measures scale or quantity of substance. All other physical dimensions or units are derivative from these five.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Re --- ultra-fast gravitons: Do they push at some grid speed (or at a relative constant speed, like c)?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Experiments indicate a <i>lower limit</i> to the speed of gravitational force of 20 billion times the speed of light. Individual gravitons undoubtedly have some Maxwellian distribution of speeds about some very large mean value, just as air molecules do.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Does "time" exist, or only chronology? If I understand, one may travel FTL to some distant place in space. Once there, one could not travel FTL to return to a sequence that had already occurred before his departure.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Time is a measure of change. Even when reversing change, that marks off more forward time. "No speed limit" simply mean one can travel indefinitely far, then return with very little elapsed time. It is conceptually impossible to perform an action that can change something in the past.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I had read that the speed of light could be exceeded by various tricks ... But, I have not heretofore heard this could be done by any mass.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">That is the big advantage of replacing special relativity (SR) with Lorentzian relativity (LR). No tricks, simply no speed limit. The "speed of light barrier" may be thought of as akin to the "speed of sound barrier" -- easily broken by technology.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What about communicating information?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">When we learn how to send and receive graviton signals, we may be able to listen in on Galactic conversations, which surely would never use any communication means as slow as lightspeed.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">So long as the communication is "forward in time" (or sequence), can messages be relayed back and forth FTL?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Yes, with no qualifications. But of course, electromagnetic signals are still confined to speed c. They are a bit like using smoke signals compared to communicating via gravitons.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I have been under the impression that mainstream scientists do not believe that "spooky action at a distance" can be finagled to allow FTL communication.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">That was true when special relativity was our only option. But SR is now falsified in favor of Lorentzian relativity. See metaresearch.org/cosmology/gravity/LR.asp to get up-to-speed about LR.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">?? Is truth becoming stranger than fiction ??<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Mainstream "truth" became stranger than fiction during much of the 20th century. But in deep reality physics, strangeness is going out of fashion and simple truth is making a comeback. -|Tom|-

Tom, I notice you speak of gravity force and not gravity energy. In QM they speak of energy but not force. It seems to me gravity has no energy and energy no force in all models. It this true or not? Where does energy fit in the MM model?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />I notice you speak of gravity force and not gravity energy. In QM they speak of energy but not force.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Right. Mainstream relativists and quantum physicists are primarily concerned with the gravitational potential field, which is where all the field energy is stored ("potential energy"). The potential field bends light rays, but has no effect on the motion of masses (kinetics).

Dynamicists and celestial mechanicians (my field) are primarily concerned with gravitational forces and the positions, velocities, and accelerations of bodies they imply. Gravitational energy has no effect on such motions. Forces operate by transferring momentum.

Notice that the sum of the gravitational and kinetic energies in a closed system is conserved.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">It seems to me gravity has no energy and energy no force in all models. It this true or not?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">You are defining "gravity" as a force, which most of the world does, and as MM does too. But relativists who look outside the equations they primarily use would note that a body raised to some height would have gravitational energy which would be converted to kinetic energy if the body is dropped. In the geometric interpretation of general relativity, gravity is not a force at all, and bodies simply follow "spece-time geometry" made of of field energy.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Where does energy fit in the MM model?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Energy is not of much importance to the dynamics, but is frequently used in mathematical developments of dynamical formulas. -|Tom|-

Taking one detail here-does a body falling in a gravity field gain kinetic energy? The reason I ask is all orbiting bodies are falling. And yet there seems to be no gain in energy.