Gravitation and vacuum polarization, Gravity as a dielectric phenomenon

I have composed two pages in which I equate the Schwarzschild metric term with a speed-of-light moderated by changing permittivity. This reproduces the phenomenology of the GR equations, but I think it says we can interpret an event horizon as dielectric runaway. A finite 'thickening' of vacuum polarization produces this, an infinite vaue of permittivity. We can perhaps do physics on a Euclidean manifold, interpreting the geodesics of light, etc., as slowing of light in an optically thick space. Available in pdf at: http://laps.noaa.gov/albers/physics/na

This post has been edited by Albers on Aug 2 2006, 07:06 PM

Of course, this is a common interpretation of relativistic aberration, gravitation lenses and other phenomenas by Aether Wave theory (AWT).



This post has been edited by Zephir on Aug 2 2006, 07:25 PM

Where does AWT stand among different thinkers lately? Actually, what matters is: do folks speak of a Lorentz-transformable aether? It should be.

This post has been edited by Albers on Aug 3 2006, 09:37 PM

The AWT is pretty close to all modern field theories, in fact. All these protosimplex, M-branes, twistors and/or LQG simplexes & spin networks concepts can be explained on the base of AWT easily, despite the fact, all these theories are based on particular math models, which binds down these theories by its formalism. Bellow is the spin network, protosimplexes and membrane models of vacuum with compare of the quantum foam of AWT. The deep similarity of all these concepts is quite obvious, so they're forming just a different views to the same reality.

The Maxwell's Aether was Lorentz-transformable from its very beginning considering the fact, the Lorentz transforms were derived from it by more than ten years before the special realativity! It's undeniable susses of Aether theory in fact, because the relativity just changes the global philosphy by the way, which I consider neobhajitelný from long term perpsective, because of deep formal antagonism between quantum mechanic and relativity theory.

The recursive quantum foam model fulfills both the models of quantum gravity, both the model of elastic massive environment, aka Aether of the pre-einsteinian era.

This post has been edited by Zephir on Aug 3 2006, 10:07 PM

Nice, thanks, I am eager to learn more. I offer a certain perspective that has been highly productive. Having found reason to doubt our quantum radiation construction, (not for its usefulness but for its assumption of characterizing 'all that is' in the sense of radiation disturbance), I am trying to let basic ideas, rendered in mathematics, dictate the necessary characteristics of the sea of possibilities in which we are one, or many.

This post has been edited by Albers on Aug 3 2006, 10:12 PM

As you can see, the reality can be observed/described by many ways, each of these can be useful in some particular case. The AWT recursive wave model is just global insight, useful with respect of common phenomenology. Feel free to develop your own models.

The formal math is the key approach in Nature understanding, but it's always important to know, what it describes in fact. The AWT supplies an easy answer to such general question. After all, all the conceptual problems aren't solved yet even at the case of AWT. Here's a lot of work to do.

This post has been edited by Zephir on Aug 3 2006, 10:17 PM

Polarization is cooking up everything under the sun, for me. Is there a Phlogiston Society I can join?

I have the first notable result from looking at the curves of permittivity generated in this study. Inside the event horizon, the transverse permittivity is negative. This results in the argument of the spatial exponent being real, implying absorption. Thus there can be no propagation of transverse radiation inside. Radial propagation is as we analyzed before, though understanding of the phenomenology will be welcome!

Yep, the vacuum behaves like sort of metamaterial, being composed from more dense subtle particles, recursively.



This is the only reason for formation of event horizon, by the way. Without it, all the black holes should behave like naked singularities. From the same reason follows the another interesting properties of black holes, like the negative heat capacity and mass - entropy dependence.

This post has been edited by Zephir on Aug 22 2006, 04:06 PM

It's nice to not be totally alone. This is day 20 of final edit decision at JMP. I seek to further our physics of the vacuum. It is the substrate of the matter field as well as radiation.

This post has been edited by Albers on Aug 22 2006, 04:11 PM

Why alone? The vacuum polarization has even some experimental background and practical applications (magnetar jets theory).

I don't understand your theory too much, but I suppose, in high gravitational gradients the effects of electromagnetic and gravitational fields are complementary.

We can picture both the electron, and the exterior of a black hole by constructing in our mind a plastic cylinder. We have a masterful tech shop, and we can create a region between two radii of increasing index of refraction going inward, to the tune of 1/r. This is a bit like a fiberoptic cable, where the center is slightly thicker optically so waves going out toward the wall cladding are steered back in without contact. Do you see that the speed of light decreases inward so that wavefronts pivot like a marching band? Our shop may not take us inside some small radius but the point has been shown. My tech shop is ultracool and can dope preferentially in the transverse sense. We can see how light will bend. If we then accept that we are speaking about the vacuum medium which underlies the manifestation of matter, it too behaves as if it's in heavier and heavier optical medium. If you picture the differential rings of current with which I construct electrons, they will transform appropriately. I am simply positing this to the vaccum because it works so nicely, yeah, offers a major unification.

This post has been edited by Albers on Aug 22 2006, 04:51 PM

Hey Albers...This is the almost exact model I use in my unified theory, in fact. The difference is in that I treat my "aether" as an actual massive fluid. The GR geodesics are just refractions of waves and other disturbances that flow through changes in density within this medium then. I can also produce electromagnetism and the weak nuclear forces, as well as explain the details of the early universe and how matter (and so little anti-matter) came into being in the first place. The other very interesting thing is that the Lorentz-transformations can actually be derived from my model through the use of acceleration and the corresponding radiative gravitational waves. The model is based entirely in an Euclidean 4-dimensional space.

I think the blackbody radiation of space works like this also.

Imagine our space as being the central part of this fiber and having a very "thin" path of constant density passing throughout space.

Now if we're sandwhich along a density gradient, then light could potentially also travel perpendicular to our space and into more or less dense space, but on average not very far as it tends to reflect over some distance due to this gradient. The peak wavelength for blackbody radiation likely correlates with how steep this gradient is.

If the universe is more compressed, the gradient changes faster and light not travelling with our thin plane tends to be reflected faster and with a shorter wavelength, so if the Big Bang began in a more compressed space then nothing could travel very far without being reflected and we'd have short/energetic wavelengths.

Likely a similar thing occurs with mass. We see EMF radiating away from mass and into space (though possibly the same effect occurs complimentarily inside mass with energy inside reflected back by the steep gradient along the boundary and trapped inside as subatomic particles) and the more massive a particle is, the greater the gradient could be and hence the shorter the wavelength, so in this sense the primary physically detectable characteristic is not the mass itself but the interface and the rate at which the density changes.

Consider also this if mass is not entirely self-contained, it can diffuse over time and expand. Smaller masses diffuse relatively to their own sizes at a faster rate than larger masses (similar to how a smaller planet cools faster than a larger one - the ratios of the surface area to volume and the gradient throughout this is steeper for smaller masses), so over time a unit of mass would tend to acquire a rather fixed volume.

This diffusion could be seen similar to gravity without needing an invisible force. If masses scale up in size over time, measurements made using masses would still retain relative scales of measurements the same, though the space between could appear to become smaller relative to this, so scales of distances could be altered over time. The weak forces and gravity might be due to an effect like this. But basically the gravity we experience on Earth could be a product of the mass diffusing outward and us being accelerated on the surface away from the center (the math for the scaling of this force in the interior works out also). Also, space diffuses into mass in a reciprocal manner and sizes appear to remain similar because we relative measures for scales so can't determine how much the universe has expanded in an absolute sense at any point in time. (Though can flip this idea around and say gravity pulls things in also, but the idea seems similar except in the case of diffusion you only need a field generated by point to point interactions instead of long distance gravitons or background 'pushing' EMF etc.)

Anyway, regarding the last half of this post, I'm just tossing out some thoughts but I think blackbody radiation is correlated to the general "thickness" of our lightspeed plane in space. There are also reasons due to self cancellation that seem to require most light to travel and resonate along a thin plane instead of diving into more or less dense spaces and returning (though it's possible without self interference, it's just not easy to do).

This post has been edited by StevenA on Aug 23 2006, 11:07 AM

Yo, babe, you said you wanted help figuring geodesics? Damn good issue, huh! Basically Schwarzschild did it and I just plugged in the permittivity. One would start by saying, let's take the gradient of the permittivity (index of refraction) field. However, it is not just a scalar quantity; I'm not sure yet about representations but I suspect we need a tensor. I am just approaching quantum mechanics here and there is a polarization tensor. Actually, I guess it should be a polarizability tensor to multiply a field vector and yield a polarization vector. I'll let you know.

This post has been edited by Albers on Aug 23 2006, 01:55 PM