Inverse Square Law, How it relates to shape of space

Yeah, that's exactly what the entire field of Physics is for. It's there to explain uncertainty. What kind of uncertainty are you asking about. It goes back to the what is the question problem again.

Hi All!
I would like to have you focus on a particular "item" on the following diagram. When going from 2d, and spinning the "lens", this creates a 3d sphere full of similar 3d spheres (on the right). The large sphere is not totally filled with spheres. (The small interior spheres at the outside must be completed.) Therefore, there is an automatically "inflation" of the spacetime of the instanton. I guess that this means that there is an other/alternate mechanism for "inflation".

There is no hidding the fact that I feel that the math (1/R^2) must have been done by someone working in"Loop Quantum Gravity".
Therefore, look at Cosmological applications of loop quantum gravity and
Loop Quantum Cosmology: Recent Progress
jal

Nice to see that everyone made it to their spot.
jal

Hi Everyone!
I was expecting that there was an astronomer in the group who had the real numbers to do some real calculation. Oh, well... maybe you are still sharpening your pencil.
Has this been published? I would like to read the published work. I'm not that smart... someone must have published these calculations.
I started the discussion and I was sure that with the following post by confused2 that everyone would have taken it to its conclusion....
THERE IS NO DARK MATTER.

Just imagine, if there was not a pathway to every "spot". You could be standing in a "spot" that would be in perpetually darkness. By taking the situation to light years then it becomes obvious that the electron has more than "4 spots/bulleyes" to hit. It has millions of "spots" and it does not have enough time to hit every "spot". As a result, we cannot get enough photons to be able to see 95% of the universe. If there are only 300,000 variables that are available to the photon then it is obvious that you could be standing in a spot that is in perpetual darkness.

THAT IS WHY WE ONLY SEE 5% OF THE MASS OF THE UNIVERSE. THERE IS NO DARK MATTER. THERE IS ONLY ABSENCE OF PHOTONS THAT CAN GET TO US.
It also demonstrate that the Inverse Square Law is working at these distances.


jal

Hi!

After doing a look at the different threads, it would appear that there are a few theories on this forum that might need more that pencil sharpening. (erasure)
Did everyone jump on the bandwaggon before checking alternatives?
I have not found any published papers that would suggest that the following TWO EXTRA REASONS/PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION CANNOT BE THE CASE FOR THE MISSING DARK MATTER.

LENSING

2) Of course, there will be THOUSANDS OF galaxies that are so far away that we should not be getting any light. If you do not consider that ISL is a serious candidate then you should consider that "lensing" is the cause. A possible answer is that the spacetime of a far away galaxy is focusing part of its own light and we are in its focal path.
3) It is quite possible that our own galaxy is also acting as a len and focusing the light towards the center of our galaxy and as a result leaving our area "poor" in light.
A lot more information is required before invoking "DARK MATTER".
Therefore, I'm going to stick by my statement until I know more.
THERE IS NO DARK MATTER. THERE IS ONLY ABSENCE OF PHOTONS THAT CAN GET TO US.
jal

Hi!
If you understand the following, then you should be able to understand what I was trying to do/communicate with the "SPOT". ( I don't claim to understand it. I wish I did.)
Jal
Sum over Surfaces form of Loop Quantum Gravity
abstract

Hi!
This is the best visual that I could find to illustrate what the "void" of a "spot" would look like in 3D.

I will shortly be starting a thread on "entropy-potential energy" to get some input on how these two items are impacting on the shape of space.
I'll continue to answer questions on this thread.
Jal

Wow, real diamond!!! It's a bjutyyyy....

P.S. It would be great to always link/report the source of the original picture, if you're not original author of it.

Respect the authorship, as you haven't to credit to spread the results of foreign work.

I usually do... I lost the page that I got it from.
I did say,

Jal

Hi!
Check out this post.
Unified Geometry:Overlooked Symmetries Of Spacetime
It might explain my "spot" to you.
Jal

Well, as you probably know, I don't expect the explanation from "spots", but from YOU. Maybe you're right, maybe not - but I don't see any obvious connection between the diamond shape submitted by You and the inverse square law at this time. And I'm afraid, I'm not very alone here...

I believe, the ISL is the result of the number of dimensions involved in the space dimension metric, not the some internal geometry preferred. Such internal geometry can change just the proportional coefficient at the ISL, not the order.

I believe, all explanations should be so simple and specific, as possible. If you insist on pure geometry model of ISL, I recommend you to reconsider some kind of fractal geometry in its explanation (the network composed from the massive elastic strings, or something similar). Such fractal dimension can change the order parameter inside the ISL with respect to the energy spreading across such springy network.

Hi!
Have you checked out the recommended post?
I heard what you have been saying. I don't agree. You don't agree with me...so...we'll agree to disagree.

I hope you are not recommending that I shut up?
jal

I can remember, You've asked me a few-times to leave this topic - but don't affraid, I'm not thinkin' by the simmilar way, really...

Hi!
A Quote from;Overlooked SymmetriesOf Spacetime

You can read the rest of the thread to get a more technical presentation than the one that I did.
I presented what I found. Any question?
jal

Look at the diagram a different way, like intersecting cones of information...I can see what he is getting...Inverse square law is classical physics and not a real law...

Inverse square law is fudged...