Wednesday, May 30, 2012

My Physics Models

Light is a waveform distortion in gravity caused by variation in the position of the gravitic source; gravity itself has wavelike properties at the very least (it could be a particle, it could be a wave, both work; in the particle interpretation, light is a wavelike variation in the position of the particles, caused by the wavelike variation in the originating particle's position). Strong atomic forces, weak atomic forces, gravity, and the cosmological constant/Hubble's constant are observable parts of the gravitic wave, which is why the cosmological constant looks a lot more variable than it should (like traditional gravity, it varies with distance). A lot of the redshifting we see is not in fact galaxies moving away from us, but a product of that the medium (gravity) that light is traveling in is slowing down as it attenuates. (I'm currently working on a mechanism for this; it's a necessary part of my ideas, as the wavelength of this all-encompassing gravity must increase in rough proportion to the decrease in its amplitude. Strictly speaking this could be explained by a more fundamental version of Hubble's constant, but then the idea loses explanatory power.) This is why black holes aren't infinitely dense.

Gravity moves at the speed of light - light is, in effect, a shift in gravity.  This is why matter cannot exceed the speed of light - it cannot overcome the infinitely high initial peak of its own gravitic wave.  I believe this is also the key to why the wavelength of gravity increases with distance, but haven't integrated this into my ideas in a clear manner yet - the simplest explanation is that gravity traverses space which has already been warped by gravity, which, if light is a distortion in gravity, is implied by the fact that light is also distorted by gravity.

Quantum mechanics is fundamentally wrong, but accurate nonetheless. Energy does not come in discrete quanta, but appears to because the number of stable configurations of matter is finite; we can only observe energy when it makes changes to the configurations of matter, which produces a observable stepladder with discrete steps of energy corresponding to each stable state.

I go with a modified version of Everett's model for uncertainty theory. The observer problem is a product of the fact that the -observer's- position is uncertain, not the observed entity. (This posits at least five dimensions.) Our brains are quantum computers; we're viewing a slice of the fifth dimension with a nonzero scalar scope, producing uncertainty.

Scale is both isotropic and homogeneous. As below, so above.

And dark matter has no special properties; it's just matter such that the substructure prohibits formative bonds with baryonic matter. Also, particularly contentiously, there are no electrical forces, these are effects produced by the configurations of matter. Antimatter may or may not annihilate matter; I lean towards the explanation that antimatter is simply matter configured such that an interaction with matter renders dark matter. (The resulting massive reorganization is what produces the light which is emitted when the two combine; if they annihilate, that would stop the gravitic wave, which would also be a massive gravitic distortion as far as other matter is concerned.)

If I'm correct - there's no particular reason for me to believe so, apart from the apparent elegance of these explanations - you've just read the layman's version of the grand unified field theory, which may or may not incorporate ideas other people had first which I simply haven't read yet.  If I'm incorrect, I'm hardly the first.

[Edit] For those curious about the electrical forces comment, I'm reasonably certain electrical forces can be explained as the result of modeling the n-body problem in a gravity-as-a-wave framework, specifically the implications of Xia's work with the five-body configuration.  Xia's five-body configuration is a theoretical configuration of matter which results in arbitrarily high velocities of particles; given a necessarily orbital framework for particles, which is implied by a gravitic wave, I suspect an approximation of his configuration with a larger number of his particles becomes not merely likely, but guaranteed, given numbers of particles of varying mass - which results in apparent attractive and repulsive forces as the underlying matter is pushed in directions orthogonal to the orbiting mass, an effect which is amplified when the orbits are themselves changing in orthogonal directions.

1 comment:

  1. I believe the technical term for that last paragraph is "word soup."