Posted: Nov 01, 2011 1:36 am
by Jumbo
B.
Thus the essence/definition of gravitation is:
“Gravitation Is the propensity of energy reconversion to mass”.

Gravitation is the “monotheism” and the “ genesis” of the universe. Singularity, at D = 0, is the very brief all-mass pole of the universe. The Big-Bang-inflation did not produce matter or anti-matter. It was the beginning of mass reconversion into energy, of increasing D fueled by decreasing m.

The conjectured gravitons, smallest basic particles, most probably do exist, but must be with mass, and gravitons microclusters must “big-bang” during the on-going expansion at a resolution of their energy-mass superposition.

This is rationally commonsensical, therefore it is scientifically probable.
Inflation started with the whole universe m shattering into fragments that evolved into, became, the galaxy clusters. The clusters expansion is fed at a constant rate by m-fuel. Since expansion accelerates, since the clusters depart from each other at an ever increasing velocity, we learn that the rate of m-to-E reconversion in the universe is constant. The accelerated expansion derives from the ever decreasing m of each cluster.

Gravity in the Newtonian limit is simply the tendency of one mass to attract another. Relativistically its the set of effects caused by the curvature of space time.

Where is there any example of energy being changed to mass in gravitation? If this were so surely gravitating bodies would constantly gain mass. Something thats not observed.

Any mass to a graviton is liable to be tiny and apparently would require serious adaptions to physics to work:
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:djnVIYPz0M4J:https://www.itp.uni-hannover.de/~giulini/papers/MassiveGravity.pdf+graviton+mass&hl=en&gl=uk&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjbxwnTP_vYQiG-ZaXNn1WHdMFCs9sfBYVhq0A6Xy_hVWGWZNGcKluvPO-qQISx9j4VxxPGwgM352f2bUWfI6kZ-leWnUViXMPCaeI4VMWSftpWaWlsj0wARAd89rWTV5qIS43N&sig=AHIEtbSQVEyOhm349zpNAbSNLFIj4ASGpQ

Definitely: Dark energy and dark matter YOK! Universe's m reconverts to E at a constant rate…
Universe accelerated expansion is per Newton's motion laws, obviously…
Also, universe physics constants should vary, probably slightly, between galaxies clusters due to different clusters sizes...
Also, the clusters formed by dispersion at inflation…

If the expansion was accelerated per Newtons motion laws are you claiming that special relativity is simply wrong? If you are ten how do you account for all of the SR effects that have been observed by experiment? If you are not then how can you possibly account for the super luminal velocity of the more distant galaxies?