Quantum Gravity in 3 Steps in Collaboration with Newton's 3 Laws of Motion
cjcountess
Motion
1) The constant speed of light in straight line = being still =
inertia base upon which all wave and rest mass particles oscillate
analogous and equal to orbiting and also = centrifugal force=
Cosmological constant.
2) Any deviation from this constant speed of light in straight line
measured as “c=h” = acceleration = inertia mass = gravity mass
generating waves as this constant speed straight line of energy is
displaced into angular direction creating waves = E=hf/c^2 increasing
in relative mass kinetic energy and momentum as demonstrated by Photo-
Electric Effect and reaches E=hf=mc^2 at high end of EM spectrum where
energy attains rest mass equal to F=ma =mv^2 = Gmm/r^2.
3) For every quantum of E=mc^2 generated by this compression against
light barrier an equal and opposite or right angular push back of
space = to F=mv^2 occurs as rest mass gravity.
Just as gravity exhibits the same “inverse square law” as and in
direct proportion to, “electromagnetic energy increase”, it stands to
reason that gravity too would exhibit waves and travel at speed of
light or “c”. But no waves are detected, and the speed of its
influence seems to be instant.
Instead, apart from its curvature around matter, space seems to be an
immovable barrier that pushes back on matter with no apparent inner
structure such as wave and instead acts as if it is continuous.
Einstein is said to have demonstrated gravity’s curvature of space and
the corresponding waves and light speed by placing a heavy ball in the
middle of a sheet or hammock and letting a lighter ball roll around
it. After which if ball is lifted the center impressed by the heavy
ball would be relieved first and then the wave of relief would ripple
outward at finite speed to also relieve the smaller ball from its
being trapped in the curve caused by the heavier ball.
But another point of view is available of which the smaller ball is
instantly relieved of its capture in the curved space, as if it were
tethered to a rope being spun by the larger ball, and suddenly
released, providing instant relief from capture of larger ball.
To simplify the visual, let’s imagine that we have a rope that is
stretched out without slack. If we were to pull the rope from one end,
because it is one unit, the other end would also be pulled instantly,
at least from the point of view of us as observers unable to see any
finer detail of this cause and effect action. This pulling of the rope
to cause the other end to move instantly from our limited perspective,
would be analogous to the seemingly instant pull and release of
gravity, while a whipping of the rope, making a wave travel down the
rope length, at an observable finite time, slower that the seemingly
instant pull, would be analogous to light traveling as a wave at its
finite speed.
Einstein seemed to describe gravity as emanating first from the larger
object and then rippling out at light speed to capture the smaller
object, in his description of the balls on the sheets, and the ripple
originating from the larger ball. But he also described gravity as the
curvature space, which would have had the influence of the big ball
curving the space within which the little ball is captured, and in
direct contact with both balls at once, and not needing to ripple out
from the larger ball at the center, to the smaller ball.
This same type of instant effect may account for quantum tunnelling
also, as waves traveling along strings that can also be pulled as 1
unite to move instantly, from our limited perspective, or maybe there
is a more clasicel explination that we are just missing
Conrad J Countess
Sam Wormley
> F=ma = mv^2 = Gmm/r^2
You obviously don't understand any physics.
cjcountess
> On 4/27/11 10:34 AM,cjcountesswrote:
>
> > F=ma = mv^2 = Gmm/r^2
>
> You obviously don't understand any physics.
Obviousley I do. The evidence speaks for itself, louder than any title
or degree ever could.
You and your titles are being exposed for what they are worth
I am a discovere of new things, what have you discovered?
Conrad J Countess
Sam Wormley
I guess you cannot see that the three terms you equated are
not dimensionally consistent with each other, which is why I
raise skepticism about you knowing what you are doing.
cjcountess
Maybe I read you wrong, maybe you are not stuck in the old physics,
no matter what new evidence come out.
The reason I used equated F=ma=mv^2=Gmm/r^2 is because F=ma = F=mv^2
if acceleration = velocity change and likewise F=mv^2 as inertia mass
applied to a falling or moving object expresses same resistance as an
object falling at F=Gmm/r^2 and gravity mass = inertia mass.
Furthermore, other sites equate them also, see:
Conrad J Countess
Sam Wormley
From where did you derive F = mv^2.
For mv^2 is in units of energy, not force. Is this not obvious to you?
cjcountess
"mv^2", has always been asociated with force and furtheremore force
and energy are essentially the same thing.
As a matter of fact based on this program this is where Einstien got
"E=mc^2" from
see:http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/3213_einstein.html
which includes these passages
NARRATOR: Despite the overwhelming support for Newton, Du Châtelet did
not waver in her belief. Eventually, she came across an experiment
performed by a Dutch scientist, Willem 'sGravesande that would prove
her point.
EMILIE DU CHÂTELET: 'sGravesande, in Leiden, has been dropping lead
balls into a pan of clay.
FRANCOIS-MARIE AROUET DE VOLTAIRE: Dropping lead balls into clay? How
very imaginative.
EMILIE DU CHÂTELET: Using Newton's formulas, Monsieur Voltaire, he
then drops a second ball from a higher height, calculated to exactly
double the speed of the first ball on impact.
So, Messieurs, care for a little wager? Newton tells us that by
doubling the speed of the ball, we will double the distance it travels
into the clay. Leibniz asks us to square that speed. If he is correct
the ball will travel not two, but four times as far. So who is
correct?
Conrad J Counteaa
Sam Wormley
> Gee Sam where have you been
>
> "mv^2", has always been asociated with force and furtheremore force
> and energy are essentially the same thing.
(sigh)