Posted: Mar 02, 2017 7:31 pm
LjSpike wrote:Well, I for one found your response and interesting one. Perhaps it may be wrong, perhaps it may be right. Some bits sounded a bit wibbly in there, but it was a certainly intriguing view.
As to clarify my previous point, gravitons sound much to be a fudge factor, as we have no empirical evidence for them, and they are not predicted by the standard model (by which numerous particles are predicted) so that can't suggest they would exist. They have simply been coined by scientists as a potential "fix all" solution, with no actual suggestion from the universe that they exist. They may do, but we have no evidence for that yet. It could as easily be god playing around with his little universe that's causing all this gravity.
Thats why this topic is a nice little one to open to discussion, as there is so little evidence aside from the fact that we know gravity, whatever causes it, exists.
For imagining gravity as the 5th dimension, work off the nice little demonstration where space-time is shown as a 2D piece of paper (or fabric or whatever) and you put a mass on it. You've now stretched space time, but in a 3rd dimension. For a 4D scenario, you'd be stretching it into the 5th dimension. A distortion into the 5th dimension causes a disturbance in the fourth, which then cascades to our 3D existence, as gravity.
Thanks for the response, at least you found it interesting. I note you mention the graviton, was that idea not dropped quietly about 10 years ago. Your concept uses a mathematical approach I merely visualised a solution, which to be quite honest, I have no idea how to model it, it covers everything. It is my opinion that a lumped parameter approach looking it individual aspects of science would be easier which to a large degree is what we have today. The particle physics approach seems to be the most accurate, but it does not take into account the concept of space as a substance and therefore does not include gravity yet as far as I am aware.
Everything in quantum theory is waves.
A wave to describe gravity could be a vibration in space radiating in all directions. It does not have to be a radio wave or a magnetic field, or a static charge type wave. A static charge using dipole theory could be a wave looking like a donut spinning radially, rotating in on itself, giving it a north and south. A magnetic field line would like a sausage or a stream of donuts connected together. A photon would be a ???? maybe a vibration moving through space. Space conserves inertia, once a body starts moving, it may develop an envelope around it, and it is pushed fwd until it changes speed. etc
I have over the years looked at particle physics, astrophysics, string theory, and various dipole theories. I understand a monopole theory is being worked on by Alan Guth somewhere in the states. The concept of the ether to visualise what is happening may fit with all these theories. It is just a thought, what I put forward is a method of visualising what is happening, what other theories have done is use maths to try and describe what I have visualised. So String Theory, Quantum Mechanics, Dipole theory, Multiverses may all be calculating different aspects of the ether depending on exactly what waveform you are looking at. Which one of the many proposed physics theories using maths is one hundred percent accurate. Is it even possible to have one theory fit all scenarios, or is it better to have little lumped parameter models of the universe depicting various aspects, that explain different things.
Todays science may be tomorrows pseudo science. The ether theory was dumped years ago, but it wont go away, space has a substance and properties, it has memory of what has passed, see double slit experiment, the Aspden effect also, etc.