pushing gravity

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by nemesis</i>
<br />Tom, do you equate the "vacuum energy" with a sea of "virtual particles" as some do?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">"Virtual" has various math-defined meanings in QM. But in physics, it seems to mean either faster-than-light or otherwise undetectable with existing instrumentation. In that sense, one contributor to vacuum energy is surely the Le Sage graviton flux. Another is elysons, the unit constituent of elysium, the light-carrying medium. -|Tom|-

The average density of the known universe is an important detail in the real universe reguardless of the what the model requires. So if the average density is one proton per cubic meter the way data from quasars is explained would be very different than if the density was a million protons per cubic meter. I would guess the average density is somewhere between one and a million protons per cubic meter. That might be a good starting point.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tvanflandern</i>
But my reply was addressing Sir_Zerp's claim that "empty space" could contain neutral (quantum) particles, which is clearly not the case. -|Tom|-
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I wasn't shooting for quantum particles, My conjecture uses neutrino like particles. I say neutrino 'like' becuase the current neutrino theory has a little too much energy for my stuff to work out correctly.

That said, we already know that space is filled with big bang legacy neutrinos and solar neutrinos.

In fact our sun just added a few million trillion while you read this.

Seeing that y'all are not to going to take the time to read my pdf.

I'll nutshell it here.

Nothing=Neutral Particles=Zerps

The elementary school version of my zerp conjecture:

Light carries nothing.
Light breaks up into nothing.
Nothing surrounds us.
Nothing streams thru us.
Atoms eat nothing.
Atoms crap light.

I guess this version is the zerp crap conjecture &lt;big smile&gt;

Mainly I say within the pdf.

The universe is filled with a great surplus of netural particles, which are always moving to matter (gravity flows) and then move away from matter as photons.

Photon creation is the engine that drives push gravity.

To make things more complex, gravity (zerp flows) can and do flow thru matter to get to other matter.

Long Story Short, please read the pdf if interested. I spent two years writing it up.

If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. I like to think I have come up with something unique to disprove, which is a good first step for a career in physics.



Zerp's Universal Law --- Dude, The Hot Side Faces Away From the Gravity Well ---

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Sir_Zerp</i>
[brI like to think I have come up with something unique to disprove, which is a good first step for a career in physics.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">A better first step is to read and understand the current models on the table, then show what you think is wrong with them, or what your ideas can do better. Your approach of starting from scratch and giving new meanings to all the common terms is no way to attract the attention or interest of others.

For example, what is your definition of "nothing"? Please provide physical details. It must exist and be both material and tangible, or it could not interact with other entities that are material and tangible. (I'm using standard dictionary definitions for these terms.) Then we would want to know what light is -- particle or wave or wavicle or other. Why couldn't your "neutrino-like particles" be Le Sage gravitons? What is the pushing mechanism in photon creation? If photon emissions cause gravity, why do totally dark bodies have as much gravity as light-emitting bodies of comparable size and density? Etc. -|Tom|-

I'll be glad to form a good response later, but I'm in the middle of finals right now.

It gets kind of deep quickly, but before the big bang there was no space.

After the big bang there was space.

What if space wasn't one big void, but many many many little voids.

And a neutral non-interacting (with charged matter anyway) particle was centered in each of many many voids.

Now you could say space isn't nothing but it is something. In fact you could define the amount of space between any two objects as the average number of voids between the two objects, or indirectly as the average number of neutral partiles between two objects.

I have no problem with Le Sage Gravitons. Thought I'm shooting for bigger game that just gravity. I'm directly linking space as the gross number of neutral particles everwhere around us.

Notice this number is going up as you read this, and also space is expanding.

That is half the loop. Le Sage Gravitons or zerps or neutrion like particles at fine this point. We can always refine and define them better later on.

Now, all matter (barring black holes which I don't have an answer for at this time) emits black body photons if the temp is over zero K. Let's say each time a photon is issued, a near by zerp is shanghaied into service by the atom and then travels within the photon.

An easy way of saying this is that light tunnels zerps away from atoms until it breaks apart later on.

How could you tell if photons contained neutrino like particles; if all space was loaded with them also?

It would be like having a water gun deep within an ocean. You are not going to notice a little more water within an ocean loaded with water. Or another way to say it, a little bit more sand in a big sand storm.

Since all matter has a gravity field and does also issue photons, then we have a pretty neat way to explain gravity, and space at the same time.

Zerp's Universal Law --- Dude, The Hot Side Faces Away From the Gravity Well ---

Not so zerp, impossible for a big bang to create a space or time when the compression requirements are such that an "a priori" condition would have to exist requiring time and space compression from outside of event for big bang to occur....and most of us here do agree at least with the notion that big bang did not happen.

Here ya go:

"The Universe is so old; it has had time to scour clean almost all intergalactic and interstellar dust; if indeed it ever had to. It is doubtful that a small point Singularity of Matter ever existed, nor the postulated Big Bang; which theory totally ignores the need for Big Mess and Big Hole resultants. The train of currently popular theories: Singularity, Big Bang, Inflation, Expansion, Acceleration and finally, cold Death by dissolution of enthalpy:- is full of holes, plugged by "constants" , "factors" and mutually exclusive theories.

Furthermore; these theories and astronomical observations absurdly place us at the exact center of the universe where the Big Hole should be, although this is never pointed out."

ca.geocities.com/rayredbourne/introduction.htm

Now and into future, the time line will expand even further for false assumptions of creation of universe with more powerful telescopes that will find large galactic clusters that will extend the 15 billion year period. If universe is infinite, then for infinity to exist in time then the universe must also be an infinite time based universe.

From flat earth to flat universe ideology. When will we ever even begin to see that universe has always existed at infinite scales in a balanced state that includes a dynamic forward and reverse time flux. Otherwise, curvature could not create gravity nor time without reverse circulations creating flux tensions. The gravitational interlocking attractive force of mass can be unlocked by electric fields causing electrostatic repulsion and reverse time wave polarizations that will result in immediate repulsive forces. These forces may be linked to the flux generated by the reverse time wave itself in interacting with MATTER forward time waves. Matter may re-generate in mass fluctuations from FTL antigravitons (from gravitons) that are emmitted towards the antiuniverse that is in reverse time motion.

I have to laugh at the singular thinking from such as Hawkings and others that simply think that a "phantom memory" created this re-ignited big bang from some entropic dieing universe that expands forever into nothingness. How foolish a logic that even entertains such a condition that repels time in only one direction from some reflex that re-creates the entire process all over again.

Time is a two way street period, otherwise exactly nothing could exist.

John