Unifying Relativity and QM - A Breakthrough?, Does relative motion result in gravity?

The following transcript fragment, outlines a proposal that Gravity is a result of loss of time, through relative dilations, resulting in a warping effect of the forth dimension.

What is great about this description, is that it would appear to uncover the relationship between, density, mass, relativity and gravity.

Please have a read at this, I feel that it is workable. Keep in mind that it is a from a series of quick posts, and the origonal poster was assuming a good level of knowledge in Physics.

I would like to hear some feedback on this:

it continues:

it continues:

it continues:

it continues:

it continues:

it continues:

it continues:

it continues:

it continues:

it continues:

it continues:

Yeah....very similar to my spacial compression concept, see my equally "skull crunchingly" painful account in my Spacial Vacuoles thing.

Yeah....very similar to my surface wave concept, see my account in Aether wave theory thingy.

I had a brief look at the link. It is very close in terms that the theory looks for mechanical solutions. I like the graphics, the light propogation is perfect.

I don't agree with the "Origin of the universe based on the model of the supercritic pressure condensation". The simple reason is that there is no such thing as linear time, therefore, a point of "creation" would sound a little silly. A "creation" would imply that a "universal uniform time" exists...it doesn't.

I may have some good news for Stephen Hawkings, this model ALLOWS information loss...

...oh dear, is this debate going to go on for another 30 years????

Why? Haven't the universe well defined age (the very same for all universe)?

No. Our notion of days, months, years, etc. does not exist in reality. It is "illusion" based upon errors that appear in a relative co-ordinate system.

I take it you have not read Einstein's relativity then?

Another quote from the origonal conversation on this topic:

Just to show that this is not too far off the current theories, here is a link to NASA's latest mission on space/time. As you will see, it also describes a "vortex", or void, as I have described here. The different positions of the dilations would manifest a "vortex-like" behavior...

Space-time Vortex
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/16....htm?list766847

In my current model, relative time dialation occurs within spacial vacuoles of differing asymmetry in respect of the vacuole perimeter to the grey hole singularity present at the heart of all particulate matter.

Hi MMC,

I would not want to "rain on anyones parade" but I feel certain that Einstein would not approve of ""dilations" produced by relativity at the quantum level". He fought hard and long at the expense of his well earned reputation to counter this very notion. He had a competing theory called the Unified Field Theory which sought to undermine quantum mechanics. Certainly he would not approve of quantum gravity (without a good reason). Now this theory may be right or it may be wrong... I dunno... I just know Einstein would not be supporting it. What I would like to mention is the term 4th Dimension is not the one Einstein used which was "Time". This 4th Dimension is certainly not Time.... so what is it exactly? How many dimensions in this theory altogether? Does it incorporate Special Theory and General Theory?... or is this slyly another theory altogether made to appear superficially to be similar to Einstein's Theory?

If you are looking for a "dumb" Theory based on Einsteins Ideas then "look at my ideas". Pure Special and General Relativity and an extension into Gravity (using a corollary from the Equivalence principle from Einstein's General Theory) that does not involve space-quantization at the Planck's Length. Theories which have quantization of Space-time at the Planck's Length "introduce" bb's that size weighing 10 gms each... filling all space with a massive matter millions of times denser than dwarf star matter. I don't think so. It might be possible to quantize the "Uberspace" but it is not my first choice.

I have an open mind so you may be able to settle this matter easily. Is there some experimental justification for this "extension" that prompted this theory? I certainly hope so since Einsten's Theories are very well tested and there have been no errors noted to date. You would be pushing "it" up a hill with a stick without some reason to do so!

Cheers

The causality exist, as is the base of most of physical laws. If these laws are valid, so then the causality must exists. If the causality exists, so the time must exist too, as the general causality construct.

Moreover, GR just concludes, the time coordinate exists by the same way, as the space coordinate. They're have equal meaning in GR. It can be shown, after all, the time quantity is the only quantity, which cannot be derived from the others.

It means, time is the only quantity, which is "real", really.... All other quantities can be derived just from the time quantity flow deformations.

Most awesome. To brings the Schrodinger's equations and Heisenberg's equation to union with Einstein's relativity formula and Plank's (and Bohr) subatomic observations. Uniting gravity with electromagnetic ....well I must say it all sounds very good but is it possible, and even if a solution is made is it just a theory like String Theory? well, without evidence and proof , it is impossible for us to say for certain so the question still remains.

I can see what you mean, however, he was the one to introduce the dilations. At the time, quantum mechanics had no evidence to support it. Today it is different and even Einstein would have to accept that. By ignoring the dilations at quantum level, Einstein missed the simplist method of integration.

Actually, he would. Mass is mass, whether quantum or otherwise. Mass and gravity are related.

The theory deals only with the manifestation of gravity and probably mass also. It looks for a mechanical explanation and the basic principle is drawn from Einstein. It is fully compatible with both special and general relativity and actually shows how these arise and why.

Yes, experimentation on relativity, involving Atomic clocks and frames of reference in motion. In addition to this, theories of VSL, symmetry breaking, entanglement and faster than light communication at the sub-atomic level led to the possibility of an "alternating distance" as being the source of the events. This "alternating distance" would be produced by "dilations" in time, during relative motion.

It is drawn from Einstein's work...so there is no problems here.

Using this method, I can both implement uncertainty and relativity, whilst, demonstrating the connection between mass, density and gravity in a real sense.

Yes, time is another form of space. A non-linear hyperbolic space, which is why entaglement works as this hyperbolic space, is non-linear.

It would also be true of my work.

Bingo...its something tangable, not a concept.

It is a theory with a solid basis and a clear mechanical function. It matches all know manifestions of the events and any evidence can be explained through the mechanism.

Yes, however, this can be put to the test and I have found no circumstances where the model fails in describing the relationship between gravity, mass and density.

I was wondering if anyone had any opinions on this...

I not sure if this is the mechanism, however, it is a possible source. It would also explain why mass is consistant; its atomic weight would define a set number of dilations per mole.