Medium entrainment considered as flow

<b>[Bart]".. no rotating LCM bubble ..."</b>

I agree. The LCM bubble that has become <u>statically</u> entrained by this star is not rotating.
<ul>
Some additional assumptions/deductions. It has the shape of a modified sphere, rather than a sphere as one might first expect. This is beacuse of its interaction with both the <u>dynamically</u> entrained LCM and the background LCM.

I need to define these concepts, so I will go back to first principles and "build a universe from scratch". Reasoning forward from my initial assumptions (decuctive logic), I end up with a universe that resembles the one we live in. (If I did not I would have to start over with different assmptions. Or recognize failure, and try something different.)
<ul>
<li><b>Background LCM</b> (initial assumptions and deductions)</li>
<ul>
<li>Visualualize a universe with the graviton medium and with the light carrying medium but without normal sized matter.</li>
<li>The universe is (much) larger than the total volume of LCM.</li>
<li>The total volume of LCM might be divided into two or more non-contiguous volumes.</li>
<li>All the particles within each volume repel each other, but gravitational force contains the overall mass of LCM particles within each volume. </li>
<li>All the particles are stationary with respect to all of their neighbors.</li>
<li>They form a lattice-like structure.</li>
<li>The balance between gravitational compression and elyson repulsion keeps them some constant distance from each other.</li><ul>
<li>It may be possible to estimate this separation distance, but we have not yet done so.</li>
<li>Intuition suggests a minimum of several thousand particle diameters. But it could be/probably is millions or more.</li></ul>
<li>The 'pressure' (higher pressure means smaller particle separation) within a volume of LCM ought to be higher at its core than at its edge.</li>
<li>For now we will stay away from the edges. All we can say for sure about them is that a light wave cannot propagate past an edge. It would be the literal, physical edge of the <u>visible</u> universe. Note however that a physical particle could pass beyond the edge.</li>
<li></li>
</ul>
<li><b>Dynamically Entrained LCM</b> (what happens when we add some normal sized matter?)</li>
<ul>
<li>Now visualize a mass moving through the LCM with some velocity.</li>
<li>Within and close to this (or any) mass, gravitational interactions between normal sized matter and the particles of the LCM create what we call dynamic entrainment.</li>
<li>As you approach any mass (or as it approaches you), the gravitational force field becomes stronger</li>
<li>This will increase the compression of the near by LCM.</li>
<li>Particle separation will go down.</li>
<li>'Pressure' will go up.</li>
<li>As you move away from the mass (or it moves away from you), the gravitational force field becomes weaker</li>
<li>Particle separation will go up.</li>
<li>'Pressure' will go down.</li>
<li>***</li>
<li>We call such a compression process 'dynamic' entrainment.</li>
<li>***</li>
<li>Any light beams that happened to be in the path of this mass will be bent as it moves by.</li>
<li>But none of the LCM particles leaves its position in the background 'lattice'. </li>
<li></li>
</ul>
<li><b>Statically Entrained LCM</b> (what happens when LCM and normal sized matter have a long time to interact?)</li>
<ul>
<li>The larger the normal sized matter mass is, and the closer an individual elyson is to the center of this mass, the stronger they will interact.</li>
<li>Eventually, individual elysons will become detached from the background 'lattice' and begin moving with the mass of normal sized matter.</li>
<li>Over time, more and more elysons are captured by a particular mass.</li>
<li>In addition to gravitational force interactions, electrical force, magnetic force, electromagnetic force and mechanical force interactions become more and more significant as the relative speed between the normal sized matter and the particles of the LCM becomes lower.</li>
<li>The captured elysons form themselves into a separate lattice structure centered on and moving with the mass.</li>
<li>***</li>
<li>We call such a capture process 'static' entrainment.</li>
<li>***</li>
<li></li>
</ul>
</ul>
</ul>
(This is a summary. Some details have not been included, so I expect there will be questions. And of course, it is a work in progress.)

Think about the difference in behavior of a light beam passing through dynamically entrained LCM versus a light beam passing through statically entrained LCM. An MMX performed under the two different conditions would produce different results. (One would detect an aether wind, one would not.)

===

If the LCM bubble were rotatiing, would that have forced the star to rotate? Not sure. The total mass of the <u>statically</u> entrained LCM is probably orders of magnitude less than the total mass of the star. And the interaction between normal sized matter and the particles of the LCM is very low.

On the other hand, even a tiny interaction allowed to continue for long enough can have a large impact.

Since it can be argued either way, lets say (for the sake of argument) that <u>this time</u> it did not make the star rotate. Such variations are part of physics. Chaos rules, in the physical world.

===

So in our example we have a non rotating star surrounded by a non rotating elysium bubble. The part of that bubble that is statically entrained extends out for perhaps a few dozen AU. The part that is dynamically entrained extends beyond that to perhaps a light year or two.

The star and its statically entrained LCM share a common velocity.

The background LCM (actually the LCM that has become statically entrained by the galaxy, but from the star's perspecive it qualifies as 'background') and the LCM that is dynamically entrained by the star share a common velocity.

The relative motion between these two masses of LCM are what keeps the static LCM bubble of the star from being a sphere. It is similar to the interaction between Earth's magnetic field and the solar wind. Without the wind, the magnetic field would be approximately spherical. With it, the field has a tear drop shape. There are some drawings on the net that can help visualize this.

That is probably enough for now.

LCM: "All the particles are stationary with respect to all of their neighbors"

When I compare with the description provided through Tom Van Flandern in "21st Century Gravity"
jvr.freewebpage.org/TableOfContents/Volu...tCenturyGravity1.pdf
In the elysium model, each elyson has a vibration or oscillation speed that must be slightly faster than the wave speed of that medium. Specifically, if elysium were an ideal gas, average elyson speed would be 3c/sqrt(5).

As per The Shapiro Experiment (as predicted per theory of relativity) the speed of light is lower in the gravitational field
www.relativity.li/en/epstein2/read/i0_en/i3_en/

Combining the two references: elysons are slower in a gravitational field (and have a smaller particle separation).
This causes the curvature of light and 'Shapiro delay'.

"The 'pressure' (higher pressure means smaller particle separation) within a volume of LCM ought to be higher at its core than at its edge"
&gt;&gt; Pressure is the combination of the speed of the constituent particles and their density.

<b>[Bart]"... if elysium were an ideal gas, average elyson speed would be 3c/sqrt(5)."</b>

If the ideal gas model applied, this formula would apply.

More than anything I wish I could have had Tom as a physics professor when I was at college. His ability to explain things in physical terms first, with the mathematical stuff tacked on the end almost as an after thought, was amazing. But that was not the way my life worked out. It was not until later in life that I became aware of him.

Once my awe of Tom's vision and ability to convey that vision to others faded a little, I was able to see him as another human being. And that was when we really started to share our thinking. He was of course more knowledgeable than me in many ways, but less in others. I was dismayed to learn how little he understood of certain basic areas of physcs. Such as wave mechanics. And of course he was dismayed to learn how little I understood of certain basic areas of astronomy. But we both understood that such things are inevitable in an age of specialization, and we worked around it.

Tom and I spent a lot of time talking about the right physical model for elysium. When we began our discussions, he was favoring an ideal gas model. It is an obvious first choice, and he had written about it in his book and in several papers.

But there is a fundamental problem that he had missed. I was so busy absorbing all I could from him that I did not think about it at first. But then one day I remembered. No fluid (and all gasses, including ideal gasses, are fluids) can support the propagation of a transverse mode wave. Liquids and plasmas are also fluids, and they are also unable to propagate transverse waves.

Only solids have the necessary properties to support the propagation of transverse mode waves. And EM energy such as light is known to be a transverse wave phenomenon.

We scratched our heads and wondered how the elysium could be a million times more tenuous than a vacuum, and a million times stiffer than steel, at the same time.

He passed away with that possible show stopper haunting him.

And it really sucks that I did that to him.

===
I believe I have solved this problem, using some of his last ideas about the physical nature of sub atomic particles. (I also like to think that he can see this, and is smiling down at me now. But I know better ... sigh)
===

Anyway, did you notice that he spoke of "<b>... each elyson [having] a vibration or oscillation speed ...</b>"? These are not terms usually used to describe the particles of a gas. Or a liquid. But they are quite commonly used when describing the particles in a solid.
<ul>
This misuse of terminology alerted me to the possibility that he was not expert in everthing. It was one of the things that finally allowed me take him off of the pedistal I had him on, and really start learning from him. Believe me, when you challenge someone like Tom, you better have done your homework. He can be mercyless. And you can't object, because you know you deserve it. But if are right, he is one of the most magnanimous souls you could ever meet.
</ul>
Particles in a fluid move linearly until they hit another particle. Momentum is traded, and each particle moves off in a different direction with a different speed. Before long, two particles that recently collided are so far apart they will probably never meet again. The mean free path in a fluid is a measure of this linear movement between collisions. For gasses and plasmas it can be large compared to a particle diameter. For liquids it is typically much less than a particle diameter. Liquid particles can be in physical contact for most of their lives. But they still are not normally spoken of as vibrating or oscillating.

Vibrating/oscillaing are the only motions available to particles in a solid.

<b>[Bart]"Pressure is the combination of the speed of the constituent particles and their density."</b>

True in the context of a solid as well, but other factors are also involved. The pressure at Earth's core is higher than at the surface. But it is so hot down there that everything has melted, so look at Luna instead. Its core is solid. But its core will still be pressurized by the weight of all the material above, pressing down. Even if the particles are only able to vibrate, they do so with less separation between each other.

In a volume of space filled with LCM, the particles at the core of that volume will be under more pressure than the particles away from the core. Even if there is no normal sized matter in this volume of space. Elysons are influenced by the graviton medium in ways that are, for the most part, similar to the way normal sized particles are influenced by it.

In an LCM bubble (I'll call it a local bubble to differentiate it from the really big 'visible universe' bubble I have also talked about) around a star or a planet, the particles at the core of the local bubble (also the core of the star or planet) will be under more pressure than the particles anywhere else in the local bubble. But in this case the pressure comes mostly from the gravitational force field created by the normal sized matter, not from the gravitational force field created by the local LCM. As a result, pressures in the LCM at the core of a star or planet, a local bubble, can be higher than pressures at the core of the very much larger 'visible universe' LCM bubble.

<b>[Bart]"Combining the two references: elysons are slower in a gravitational field (and have a smaller particle separation). This causes the curvature of light and 'Shapiro delay'."</b>

almost ...

... LIGHT IS [not 'elysons are'] slower in a gravitational field (and ELYSONS have a smaller particle separation) ...

and this is why light bends and Shapiro is always late ...


===

I'm trying to build a picture in your mind's eye of a specific model of the light carying medium. Since you already have a picture of a different (but related) model, my task will be doubly difficult.

Please ask questions, until I think you understand. You have one advantage, here. I do not have Tom's reputation, so I do not intimidate you. Challenge away, and I will do my best to satisfy you.

LB

I want to emphasize the following:


I'm trying to build a picture in your mind's eye of a <u><b>specific model</b> of the light carying medium</u>. Since you already have a picture of a different (but related) model, my task will be doubly difficult.

Please ask questions, until I think you understand. You have one advantage, here. I do not have Tom's reputation, so I do not intimidate you. Challenge away, and I will do my best to satisfy you.

LB

Let's start with a question around the initial assumption:
Differentiation between graviton medium // light carrying medium // normal sized matter

What are the main principles/concepts that would support these media to be distinct from each other?
In other words, what would be opposed to assume just one type of medium/particle?

Reasoning:
1- Local properties of light-carrying medium depend on strength of gravitation field.

2- If we add energy to an electron contained in an atom, then the mass of the atom increases (and its energy proportional to E=mc2).
The extra mass is mass 'borrowed' from the medium and kept attached to the atom through the extra energy supplied.

The above is the same question I would have raised with Tom ...
(whereby I would anticipate some of Tom's answers which would allow me to raise my next question)

If you don't mind, I'd like to rephrase your question slightly. I have two reasons for wanting to do this. First, I think there is something more important than principles/concepts that suggest two media. Second, by rephrasing your question in my words, the possibility that we are not talking about the same thing AND NOT REALIZING IT is reduced.

[rephrase]"What physical evidence exists that would support the need for two media?"

Before I present the evidence to you, I'd like to hear any comments you have about what I have just done. (No comment is a tolerable response.)

===

<b>[Bart]"Local properties of light-carrying medium depend on strength of gravitation field."</b>

You have not provided enough information for me to tell if I agree or not. Which gravitational field are you talking about? Each mass has two.

This is not a 'trick question' per se. But it is 'tricky' in the sense that most physics courses do not point this out and as a result most physicists do not think of the two fields as two fields. It is possible that you can name them. And, the simple fact of having spent time at this website makes it more likely that you can. But if you cannot, don't worry. As soon as I name them, you will recognize them.