Why is the EPR constant with distance yet energy radiates out?

I believe there are two fields present for these types of connections, the usual radiant energy field which determines equations like Coulombs Force and the general radiance of light etc., and the other type of field which may pertain to the EPR where it's shown by the evidence to radiate out from the positive charge and back into the negative charge. This has been known since the early days of thermodynamics by how quanta move in the field and also by magnetic filings.

The important thing here may be how the lines are relatively strong and they radiate out and then reradiate inward.

As you may note these lines aren't any faster than light and are the classical electromagnetic field lines, or at any rate the ones that are related to this "out then in" radiation. 

While the low energy waves inside these lines may have a change of phase (as I say on my page link below) so they can also change their speed and by Maxwells method I use, are much faster than light, the external field lines outside of this tend to radiate out because they're more quantum and this in turn makes it so the force changes between the charges even while the EPR waves with their ability to change both speed and wavelength would also be able to keep the EPR constant with distance. The EPR waves would speed up as the lines become more separate and slow down as they converge and the net result is the force is constant with distance.

 I got this idea that gravity might have the particles that follow the inertial lines inward by my belief that since gravity is an acceleration yet doesn't violate causeology, first inertia might lay down the lines outward for gravity to follow in. While inertia and gravity are related they aren't the same thing as Einstein believed.

He thought he had made gravity and inertia quantum as Maxwell had done by unifying electricity and magnetism, yet later on it was found that if you plug the equations for gravity into quantum mechanics you get infinitys. So I tended to believe that gravity is more a wave than a quanta, and it's an acceleration inward, not mostly radiating outward as by LIGO.

One problem I noted about this was, if  gravity has the change both wavelength and speed which is the opposite of relativity which has changes in wavelength but not in speed with the quanta of light which are particles and stay coherent, we have problems about coherence itself with "true"  gravity waves: more about this in a moment.

The reason gravity might have the opposite  sign is because gravity radiates inward to a source, and since inertial forces like the uniform motion of special relativity don't have a source, they radiate out and react to the field in their own area. This is expressed by the two mass terms in the gravitational equation but only one mass term for forces like centrifugal force.

 Atomic Clocks and Gravity

 The idea that no information can travel faster than light is itself an assumption and we can just as easily look at the evidence that shows relativity is incomplete and then hope to find the blueshift of gravity with better sensing machines. After all something is changing the light before it reaches the top of the tower and this would seem to be evidence the influence is superluminal for gravity.

As the light is rising in the tower, it's changing its energy and this is because it's being blueshifted as it rises up by the faster speed of gravity which here is redshifted and the light appears redshifted and to conserve energy mostly the light is slowing down. But because gravity is noncommutative unlike relativity I believe there is a bit of leftover extra energy relativity may not explain and the light may change energy at the top of the tower. Dark matter seems to create a bit more dark matter from Itself.

If you have two masses you've released and they fall and if you drop them at different times, they do accelerate apart but the center of gravity is moving toward the Earth.

One problem about these low energy fields like gravity and the EPR I have noted is,  if you have the waves of a pond first oscillating and then moving inward to the source of the water wave such as a stone, this is unplausible because it violates causality.

 While LIGO would seem to have radiation outward for gravity this may need to be another energy because gravity attracts inward. Certainly the masses if under its influence move inward not outward as we would not expect for particles moving just at the speed of light which seems to be more by special relativity which works well as far as it goes, than by gravity or acceleration.

 

Einstein would often say light is a particle uninfluenced from emission to absorption and so the speed of light is constant. And particles would radiate outward like a gas, and so by relativity masses wouldn't move inward and they also need a field connecting the quanta of light.

 If light is a particle uninfluenced from emission to absorption so the speed of light is constant in relativity, how can the waves of LIGO move with changes in speed by the acceleration of gravity while they travel? If they are waves they would seem to need to be quanta and to not change speed.

  

  This is not relativity because they're changing speed. I think it's not a far step from there to the idea that a major component of gravity is faster than light. 

 It's been said when we look at the galaxies we may be seeing massive disproofs of relativity because they're all spinning faster than they would be able to by centrifugal force and as solid bodies. 

If gravity was the same as by the slowing of the pulsar this must not be about gravity because gravity is an acceleration and the pulsar should speed up. I believe the pulsar evidence and the waves found by LIGO are only about inertia like centrifugal force.

  Friction often slows down a spinning mass while gravity has super low friction with no shielding as by the eclipse evidence where over historical time as we know by ancient records there is no shielding. The reason the pulsar would be about friction is because the radiation as by LIGO and relativity is at the speed of light. Quanta have sides and this is how entropy is about friction, slowing the pulsar.

 

 First the source changes like the rock splashing in the lake and only then the electromagnetic or inertial waves radiate out and reach the outside of the pond.. this isn't about gravity and this mostly would be about inertia as Einstein like Mach believed that inertia and gravity were essentially the same thing, and might be why LIGO has only found evidence for the speed of inertia, not gravity.

More to the point I believe because gravity is an acceleration, the real gravity waves (not those seen by LIGO which would only be about inertial particles) would radiate out while the force of gravity (the particle component) itself radiates back in by low energy waves out. These waves  which induce the small gravity quanta in and both the in waves for inertia and the out waves for gravity would be much lower energy and the particles would be much easier to find by experiment as in just moving around the room shows the pressure changes of the Low Energy Higgs' LEH. The particles would be like the low energy quanta Einstein believed would be valuable about gravity and to get around the uncertainty problem.

 Because gravity and inertia are the same thing by Einstein's idea, gravity should be hugely stronger than the inertial waves, or we would have events like the gyroscope having huge gravity. As I say on my other post usual masses like a gyroscope with or without angular momentum would radiate inertial waves and slow down with or without gravity by the amount seen by the pulsars and measured by LIGO. But because gravity is not the same as inertia, a spinning mass like an ultracentrifuge, or common masses without spin might be radiating in gravity particles and speeding up a little bit if with angular momentum like the galaxies which are all seen to spinning faster than they should.

Gravity tends to increase spin angular momentum, or I believe vice versa spin may increase gravity also (spin is an acceleration and gravity is too), so while the masses slow down by relativity, I believe the pulsar may not be slowing down by exactly the rate of relativity, and the rate of slowing may be offset by the amount of gravity increased by the high rate of angular momentum. And like the galaxies, in general the pulsar might show a related change in rate of acceleration.

So my question was about how the gravitational waves may have many overlapping changes in wavelength and speed so the gravity indeed is an acceleration. How do the waves remain coherent with distance if mostly a wave?

  My solution was that the gravity waves are low energy and zigzag back and forth between the electromagnetic lines inward to the source of gravity after the lines have been radiated out by the force like centrifugal force. The lines in quanta are more stable and the low energy waves maintain stability by constantly referring to them, and also reacting back to stabilize the lines, otherwise unexplained about why the field lines don't kink, or bunch up and why the lines stay like with regular distance.

 As on my other page link I'll show you more about how mass and energy or gravity and inertia are more distinct than by relativity even while they aren't completely unalike.

Since it's inconceivable to have centrifugal without centripetal force the inertial lines would need the low energy waves to stabilize them and the waves also would need a way to know how much to accelerate and where. 

In a real sense the zig zagging lines for the EPR may be able to change their speed by moving between those more quantized inertial lines, so that no energy is lost overall with distance. 

By this interpretation this may be how the force of the EPR stays constant and other events also like about how the cosmological constant is accelerating the cosmos outward because with more (cosmic) distance between the lines the zig zagging waves are able to go faster and faster and at least locally at any rate violate energy conservation by creating more accelerating force.

Even so my belief is that energy conservation is maintained over more cosmic distances.

 As I say my other post, I think while the lines radiate out more than usual like for the galaxies so they all spin faster than they should, by the cosmology I have used, Cosmic jet Cosmology CJC, the lines are merely radiating out from a giant jet like a jet of a galaxy except on a much a larger scale for the cosmos, and eventually they radiate back around and go down towards the disc that may have been found with the WMap images. 

Or at any rate the cosmic jets have loops of the field lines in CJC to connect back to the disc like a body like the Earth has electromagnetic field lines like this so energy conservation is viable. This may be by the evidence seen by WMapfor a cosmic area like the flat disc of the Milky Way except for the cosmos  tending to conserve energy by closing the cosmic loop.

 While extra energy by this method may also explain why the galaxies are all moving too fast and don't explode by centrifugal force, because there's more gravity than there should be by Relativity or Newtonian gravity and also why the dwarf galaxys like nearby the Milky Way seem to have thousands of times more mass than the visible mass seen, over longer distance, I think energy may still be conserved because like with the EPR the lines the positive and negative charges radiate out first and then radiate back in just that much.

But as I say this may be a theoretical way we may be able to explain why the EPR is constant with distance.

 A positive charge has more mass but reduced energy and the minus charge has more energy and less mass. If mass and energy were completely equivalent as by relativity this would not be so. 

 One of the unsolved problems in science has been about the question of why electric charges exactly balance out. This might mostly be caused by the equivalence of mass and energy but not quite. 

I think this is the expression of the proton  which resonates with the the positive charge more than the electron, because they're not quite equivalent and we would expect one as much as the other by relativity. 

 You might say with the huge number of atoms of the Earth even if there was a small difference in the charges this would cause a large explosion. So I think of the opposition of electrons and the protons in the atoms is basically a small change about how the electrons more naturally fit the orbitals around the atom and the slight assymetry of mass and energy here is mostly balanced out essentially by the geometry of the atom. 

So the distinction between the orbitals of the electrons and the more stationary protons in the nucleus might balance out by the geometry per se even with the local asymmetry of mass and energy. 

 If you unify positive and negative charges  by the EPR where they are without this atomic symmetry event this would seem to perhaps tell us if by the EPR where you have a positive charge nearby and a distant minus charge that's entangled, the force of the EPR might be slightly asymmetrical compared to a near minus charge with a distant positive charge. 

This means, contrary to Einstein's idea, mass and energy are not quite commutative, and as has been well known, it's much easier to convert mass to energy than energy to mass.

 This would hold for entangled opposite charges and not fused together electrons as in Einstein's original EPR belief.

For entangling protons photons or electrons ("of the same charge") I think it's possible even so the same event may hold about the field radiating out and then back in unlike by the usual laws of radiant energy. Because you fuse together the charges whether of light or electrons and it's with attraction this may have something related to the more common electromagnetic field lines as above.

This may have been unseen before the EPR because it's special to the EPR and even so it could also explain the constant force with distance.

It's been said that the EPR is never going to be a way to send signals faster than light because the collapse of the wave function is totally random so we can't send any information from one quanta to the other even while they're entangled by a definite connection.

I offer a theoretical way here we might solve this, by using Einstein's idea of a low energy quanta he thought was possible to get around the uncertainty problem that this involves.

I think the low energy Higgs may be important to inertia, mass, gravity and the EPR.

Each quantum like the entangled electrons would have an aurora of these LEH Low Energy Higgs' particles. Each quantum has a special LEH code only that one has and resonates by the waves externally so no friction problems are seen outside the quanta by the LEH (e.g. about stopping quantum spin and resistance to uniform motion) this may solve Maxwell's objection to the problem that for electromagnetic particles the opposite charges attract while the gravity seems to attract by likes. 

 The solution might be that as by the entanglement of only those two quanta by these low energy Higgs', so too the distinction of the special "constellation" for each quanta by the LEH might be the distinction that Maxwell hoped for to cause the attraction of unlikes.

As an engineer and not just a scientist I think about machines so I thought of a machine I call the Higgs' laser.

This could be used to hopefully achieve what Einstein dreamed of about finding a way to energize a low energy particle to the right level to go under the uncertainty level, with the low energy but still definite change of the LEH.

My idea is that a tube of atoms or quanta would have a resonance as we send the energy down that tube that removes some of the LEH and makes them coherent. If Einstein was correct about this I believe we may be able to go underneath the energy of the collapse of the wave function. 

Even so, here I disagree with Einstein that the connection we might be able to achieve by changing the EPR this way is only at the speed of light. If it's lighter than light (by my hopeful use of Maxwell's method, where the speed of light is determined exactly by the force between electric charges) the EPR may be much faster as experiments seem to have shown.

 The low energy waves of the EPR or gravity even if faster than light don't have the large mass augment of relativity because they're waves not quanta like Einstein held that light was in Special Relativity. And because of the superfluid phase change of the EPR the waves have another degree of freedom and don't interact enough with the quanta to gain much mass.

The idea is because we might change the quantum before it collapses with the LEH by way of the laser and make it collapse as we want to by changing the LEH close to the heavy quantum that holds the code for the other entangled quantum by resonance, it's possible that we've gotten around the randomness of the uncertainty problem and so we can send signals faster than light between the entangled quanta by use of the LEH laser.

In any event as above I think the idea that the lines radiate out and in for the electromagnetic field lines combined with the ability of the EPR waves being able to both increase and decrease their speed may be a possible explanation for why the EPR is constant and the rest of this about the Higgs laser is on my other pages. Thanks for reading.

Here's what I consider one of my best and most edited posts about these ideas in more resolution. Disregard more of my older physics posts, this one is most recent. Problems and Solutions About Relativity. Why General Relativity is Incomplete.. CLICK HERE..

As I Say Here's my Link If You Like About How I've Hoped to Improve Cosmic Jet Cosmology, Click Here. Thanks!