Quantum Gravity
in [Physics]
|
From: cjcountess on 11 May 2005 15:29 My name is Conrad Countess I am an independent researcher who is convinced that he has unified quantum and general relativity theories. As it turns out matter is curved space-time even on the quantum level. Quantum Gravity in 3 steps 1. Assuming that energy is more basic than matter, if we first start with a field of energy in its ground state it may be below frequency and hard to detect. This can be dark energy or the Higgs field. 2. Next if we assume that this energy field permeates or is indistinguishable from space and moves at the velocity of c because it is energy we have set the stage. 3. Next, just as added energy causes an increase in frequency for electromagnetic waves but no increase in speed beyond c along the light path, any disturbance or increase in energy to this background dark energy field or Higgs field, causes waves of frequency to churn up within it. These waves of frequency are accelerated motion of centripal force of gravity that at c2 attains rest mass. This is because no speed can be added to it in the centrifugal direction sense it is already moving at c and so any added energy causes centripetal force of waves that increase with frequency. The frequency of these waves increase with an increase in energy, mass, momentum, inertia, and centripetal force of gravity. At a critical frequency of c2 the speed of light in the right angle frequency direction equals the speed of light in the forward direction, this is c2 or c x c. This should result in rest mass for at least two reasons. 1. First because the centripetal speed of the cycles per sec equals and balances out the centrifugal speed of the wave along the light path resulting in something analogous to "the speed of light in uniform circular motion", in a clasical sense. I am involking the principal of correspondence here. 2. Second, because the background energy field limits the speed along the light path and in the right angle frequency directions to c. Thus the speed limit of electromagnetism imposed by the background energy field is what gives rise to waves and shapes them into a rest mass particle at the speed of c2. This rest mass particle itself can be said to be curved space if this space is indistinguishable from the energy field that gave rise to it. This makes the ultra violet catastrophe question, which depends on frequency speed being infinite non-existent because frequency speed is also limited to c at this level.It instead introducces rest mass particles as the next step up in the electromagnetic spectrum. Cosmic rays which are rest mass particles were once considered to occupy this space. This also eliminates the need for anti matter to come into existence along with every rest mass particle, which answers the question of why there is not that much anti matter waiting around to annihilate the matter in the universe. Gravity might be said to be the result of any added motion to the centrifugal speed limit of electromagnetism or c of the background dark energy field which may also be the Higgs field which causes waves of centripetal force to churn up, increase in mass, momentum, and inertia with frequency in quantum increments and attain rest mass at c2. Any deviation from the centrifugal speed limit of c of the background energy field is accelerated motion and results in centripetal force of energy or gravity. There is no need for a graviton or a Higgs boson at this point but if we assume that electromagnetic waves can be broken down further just as water waves can be broken down further into water molecules then we may still have gravitons and or Higgs bosons at that level. A more complete account is offered at www.emcsquare.net. Could you please tell me what you think? Thank You Conrad Countess cjcountess(a)yahoo.com admin(a)emcsquare.net
From: Zigoteau on 11 May 2005 16:02 Hi, C.J., > I am an independent researcher who is convinced that he has unified > quantum and general relativity theories. Join the queue. > A more complete account is offered at www.emcsquare.net. Could you > please tell me what you think? I have a soft spot for the "C" of "E2. Maiden aunts cycling past the village green, warm beer, the sweet sound of leather on willow, that sort of thing. Where's the maths? Even Sabbir Rahman had some, and posted a paper to Arxiv. Let me see yours. Cheers, Zigoteau.
From: Uncle Al on 11 May 2005 17:07 cjcountess wrote: > > My name is Conrad Countess > > I am an independent researcher who is convinced that he has unified > quantum and general relativity theories. As it turns out matter is > curved space-time even on the quantum level. [snip] Tell us how affine/teleparallel gravitation makes exactly the same predictions - qualitative and quantitative to the lst decimal place - as metric gravitation but without spacetime curvature. You can't have it both ways, buddy boy. Either the equations are parity-even scalars and tensors with spacetime curvature or parity-odd pseudoscalars and pseudotensors with spacetime torsion. Go ahead, tell us how a curvature looks like a Lorentz force. > 1. Assuming that energy is more basic than matter, if we first start > with a field of energy in its ground state it may be below frequency > and hard to detect. This can be dark energy or the Higgs field. [snip] Idiot. -- Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
From: cjcountess on 11 May 2005 18:57 Hi this is cj Sometimes things are simpler than one thinks. We don't need alot of math just E=mc2 reversed as m=Ec2, logic and imagination. This idea is based on the fact that if you treat a photon in a classical manner as a particle and factor in its frequency motion as it orbits the light path, one could conclude that as frequency increases, not only does energy, momentum, and relative mass increase, but so does speed, and that at C2 a photon attains rest mass? A photon traveling at C in the forward direction, times C in the right angle frequency direction, is energy traveling at the speed of light squared or Ec2 and should equal m as in m=Ec2, the reverse of E=mc2. m in this case refers to rest mass. After all what does c squared mean anyway? I am betting that it realy means the speed of light in the forward direction times the speed of light in the right angle frequency direction, resulting in something analogous to "the speed of light in uniform circular motion." I am not convinced that c2 is just a mathmatical expression without a corresponding geometric reality. I am not a mathmitition but I do have an imagination and I do have confidence that I am correct in this. Later I came to the conclusion that it was the background energy field that gave rise to and shaped these energy waves and rest mass particles. I do not mind if the responces to this idea are at first negative and it take me a while to prove it. Because I believe that I can. Thanks cjcountess
From: cjcountess on 11 May 2005 20:41
Hey Uncle Al I was trying to think of what to say to you after that idiot remark. But that's ok. Obviously you are a very educated person with very complex theories. That is ok because education and complexity have their place. But I do not think that quantum gravity is that complex. Wouldn't it be something if quantum gravity turned out to be like Einstein and Stephen Hawking said that the ultimate theory might be, simple enough that average people and even children can understand? And wouldn't it be something if a simple person, "me" were the one to discover it? Your remarks only make me more determined to prove my theory. But lets be civil to each other. To be honest with you, before now I have never heard of the thinks that you spoke about. And I really don't think that I have to integrate them into my framework in order to prove it. But I will look into them out of respect for the subject of physics and the search for truth and you. cjcountess |