Einstein’s Gravity and a Question of Gravitational Vectors

A substantiation of Einstein’s gravity, with a development on its internal logic; extracted from; “The Accelerating Universe Dilemma…Correcting the Syntax-Bridge Between Quantum Theory and Relativity” (2009).

____________________________________

Contention Between Theories

The discoveries of dark energy and dark matter have added extra layers of complexity to the study of cosmology. At the core of the dilemma is gravity and it may not be mere coincidence that this is also the juncture of contention between quantum theory and general relativity. How can two theories, such impressive models in their respective domains, mesh in such catastrophic ways? Could it be that a subtle misinterpretation of the physical syntax has been applied at some point? Does the tension approaching the micro level of infinity offer a profound insight into an elusive aspect of energy? Although a lot of consideration is given to gravity via Einstein’s theory of general relativity, special relativity may offer more direct solutions by means of its focus on the dynamics of motion.

Einstein’s Gravity From Moving Dimensions

Einstein’s solution to gravity via the principal of equivalence is brilliant. Using a solution called a 4-velocity, which postulates that the four dimensions of space and time had a combined speed equivalent to the speed of light, he used inertia via the equivalence principal to initiate gravity. This is derived from the fact that any change in speed or direction of a moving body produces acceleration (or deceleration) and thereby, inertia, which in turn produce g-forces.

In that it is understood that matter occupying the four dimensions is also moving at a combined speed of light; how  is this to be understood at a deeper level? First, I have not been able to discern if the 4-vector method is simply seen as a good theoretical solution or if it has been practically proven. The fact that many of the extreme solutions in Einstein’s theories remain unproven begs that question. As one studies EMT, he will see similarities to this solution, especially within the part WMAP Readings…where there is reference to the 2-surface membranes.

The subtle difference between EMT and what Einstein had postulated though is that he created inertial forces by a change in direction of already moving mass, whereas EMT postulates that the fundamental nature of all energy in the universe is that it transforms from a value greater than zero…upwards, however it does not increase isotropically. This results in a tension between areas of lesser and greater energies. The acceleration already exists but this tension causes a drag that  manifests as gravity.

EMT’s position is summed up in an oft-repeated phrase that “Everything has come into existence, so ‘that’ is probably the cosmic prime directive”. The inference being that energy is always increasing but the manner of increase is via “momentum” energy, which induces “acceleration” into the entire cosmic system. This acceleration causes the inertial forces, which in turn produce gravitational mass. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge of special relativity will quickly discern how such an augmentation of the total energy in the universe could proceed unnoticed. Those who have trouble with this view are those who adhere absolutely to the idea that “energy cannot be created”. However, these same people usually agree that at one time our universe did not exist but concur that now it does.

EMT also embodies the seeds to resolve an obscure question of how g-forces caused by a change in direction of momentum coalesce in mass with inward arrows of force. It is one thing to say that you suddenly have mass and inertial forces but it’s entirely another thing to give inward vectors to those forces. With the earth as an example, the inference is that the inertial forces produced by its movement through space counter to the momentum of the moving dimensions produces a g-force directed towards its own center. This geometry must be repeated for every particle of matter in the universe. Something seems to be missing. Dimensions in physical theory have an ad hoc quality not unlike the search for the ether except that dimensions seem to have a quantifiable nature via matter. It would seem logical that dimensions should be bundled with space-time, and that they would have had to come into existence concurrent with the rest of the physical system. Their genesis would be a physical, part of a dynamical sequence of phenomena, rather than each being a distinct physical entity to be manipulated in order to produce gravity. The folly of stacking them in like ingredients into a recipe could be likened to a non-humanoid alien who after having counted all the people in a room, proceeds to count their arms and legs as separate individuals.

Dimensions Moving at Light speed

In considering dimensions within the context of special relativity it becomes apparent that dimensions should be treated as part of the real physical system in that they are deformed along with matter under conditions of relative motion and this is reinforced by their relationship to the inertial forces necessary for gravitational genesis. These facts though impose new net conditions on the universal physical system.

Although the concept of four dimensions moving at light-speed may be a bit obscure, some conclusions are evident without stretching the logic:

1. If dimensions move with any systemic acceleration at all, no matter how slight…according to the principals of special relativity the system grows in scale (mass).

2. The preceding would mean that the scale of the universe itself is increasing (a meter is getting bigger), which in turn means that the velocity of light as a gauge has to be increasing proportionally in order to maintain physical invariance. As there is no other universe to compare it to, such changes would be undetectable by direct measurement, only by inference.

3. This in turn means that the given motion, in order to stay proportionally constant to the augmenting physical scale has to increase from moment to moment, which is acceleration resulting in expansion.

4. If acceleration and expansion is a natural conclusion, there seems to have been no need to introduce the moving dimension idea in the first place as its inclusion would seem to have invoked circular logic. The moving dimension becomes a result rather than a cause. Dimensions themselves may in fact be manifestations of this expansion. (see: Spatial Perspective and the Arrow of Time).

5. Since this expansion and acceleration (if having started from zero) would have progressed for the age of the universe, it should have long ago reached the speed of light for all dimensions; resulting in all matter and space (dimensions) expanding along their diameters at a relative (local) speed of light. The assumption would be that the constant (ruler of measurement) would also be increasing.

6. If #5 is true it may be redundant to even say that systemically anything ever went slower than the speed of light, as c is seemingly integral to the scheme of all things. That is to say, if we think of it as a dynamic constant in the absence of speed or motion, then it has a much deeper meaning.

7. Again if #5 is true it explains gravity’s inward vectors (actually only half of them).

8. Unless a recycling mechanism can be identified for such energy, the total energy in the universe is not a constant but is increasing.

9. If #8 is true, the current data relating to the accelerating universe is normal and is to be expected.

10. A new paradigm is needed for energy and its infiltration into the physical system.

(more on #6…regarding c) c“, although measured as the speed of light, emerges as a manifestation of something deeper, relating to the very core of all dynamics. This is because as stated; space is a time-dependent concept, so kilometers / miles per hour have no meaning as universal gauges but only as local ones. That is to say we are not mathematically speaking of “space/time”; we are saying “time/time” for space, and “space/space” for matter… “c” then is a manifestation of a deeper fundamental gestalt.
To elaborate, the foregoing is related to two pivotal overlapping elements within EMT. One is that the only true extension of space is the extension of matter itself, meaning that the effect of empty space is a result of a delay in transmission caused by intervening energy fields. Distance is a local interpretation based on light-speed near matter combined with parallax. The conclusion here is that whereas time truly exists (as an elastic medium caused by energy gradients), physical space only truly exists as either the physical extension of matter or in the case of empty space…as a false, proxy medium, which drives an assumption resulting from the non-instantaneous transmission of light (see: Spatial Perspective and the Arrow of Time).

______________

Author’s note – It was my original intention to use this part to start the discussion but determined that it was too long and esoteric, requiring contraction into a few concise articles, this being the core of those articles.

Next

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *