Elevators, Gravity, and Atomic Clocks

  I offer other evidence for the non relativity tendency of gravity on other posts.

 Einstein believed he had found a way to equal Maxwell, you may remember Maxwell was Einstein's most influential influence in science.

 Maxwell connected electricity and magnetism by the speed of light but they are quanta and obey E mc2 while gravity seems nonquantum and obeys the more general f=ma.

 So my belief is because gravity is more wavelike and less quantum, it can't be easily equated to the quantum of light. Maxwell's method seemed to be Einstein' s goal yet there is no assurance the cosmos will fit our will, and it may be more complex than by our need.

 Einstein, so the story goes was in Berlin and someone fell off the roof yelling he felt no force while he was falling. And Einstein thought, this is so cool, what if gravity is not a force?

 Newton believed force distinguishes motion from non motion. The way Einstein hoped to outacheive even Maxwell here about gravity was by the observation that all masses when raised to the same height fall at the same rate.  Einstein believed, we have no need to distinguish force from nonforce here because the masses fall the same way.

 As I discuss elsewhere, it takes distinction of the masses to raise them to the same height by force, and while they fall at the same rate they also release different forces when they hit the Earth.

 And Einstein's epiphany here was that if all masses fall at the same rate,

and all observers are valid it becomes as valid to say the mass falls down, or by expansion the Earth is rushing up as if boosted by millions of rockets.

 Even so and while we can laugh at this at a comfortable rate of 32 ft second,  the Earth would be at the speed of light in less than a year!

  And then based on this Einstein goes on to say all observers are valid though by relativity not equally convenient. So he uses Mcutcheon's idea of field expansion.

 Mcutcheon's idea is much the same as Einstein's and makes no predictions Einstein doesn't make.

  As I say Einstein uses the distinction of masses to then observe them at the same rate of fall where there is supposed to be no distinction.

  Yet the masses when released have distinction of force which Einstein ignores and then makes his predictions based on the lack of change where the masses fall at the same rate where by  the "relativity of gravity"; these predictions like the shift of the perihelion of Mercury, the bending of starlight, frame dragging and so on, all are based on changes in acceleration not the lack of distinction of the earth and the masses falling to it.

 Even beyond these contradictions in both his idea and how he arrives at the prediction which contradicts the idea, Einstein also makes opposite predictions, that these changes in acceleration ate evidence for relativity, yet another prediction Einstein makes is that masses also fall at exactly the same rate.

  On this post in particular I want to look at another type of evidence Einstein considered, the famous elevator events and the redshift of gravity and with it the slowing of clocks in gravity.

  Superficially the slowing of clocks may seem to be good evidence for the relativity of gravity. Einstein' s further belief was that- due to the equivalent rate of fall as above! all inertial accelerated frames are completely equivalent to the gravity frames.

"All experiments in an inertial elevator  accelerating at 32 ft/second are totally indistinguishable from the same experiments in an elevator near the Earth not in free fall"..

  Einstein derives this from his further thought experiment about the inertial accelerating elevator. Imagine a ray of light buzzing through the port of the ship and out the other side. If it's accelerating up at 32 ft/second, the light is in an inertial frame.

 You may remember in special relativity the speed of light is no doubt constant. Einstein strongly believed this because of light being a particle, unchanged by waves from source to sight. So the speed of light in SR is strongly dependant on it not interacting with the field nearby.

  Even so Einstein was constantly invoking the doppler shift in SR and it has strong wave influence. Are all the 30+ wave experiments in support of  this suddenly absent because of Einstein' s belief? This seems doubtful, Indeed Einstein was the founder of the wave particle equivalence in QM.

  At any rate Einstein invokes the quanta of light in the inertial ray of light, moving at 32 ft/ second. There is no force acting on the quanta. In Einstein's view the light has no interaction with the starship at all. Its motion is exactly the same as the 32 feet per second acceleration of the starship and the light is in its rest frame as it moves.

 Einstein then attempts to make this the same as the gravity elevator even with problems like the upward acceleration of the Earth's surface at 32/ft second to the speed of light I mention above-the cosmic elevator seems best.

 In the gravity elevator the light is bent to the same parabolic arc as the inertial acceleration of the 32/ft. "Surely they must be the same" Einstein says, if atomic clocks also slow in the strong gravity according to the same type of reasoning.

  You look downwind of the field in both elevators and as the light rises up to see the atomic clock on the base of the elevator, the flow of the field gives the redshift of the field and the blueshift looking up just like with atomic clocks in gravity right?

 One major problem is about the fact that experiments with light show that light slows down in gravity. If the elevators are the same and with no force or interaction this would be an easy way to find inertia isn't the same as gravity in the elevators.

  Another problem is about what dropping masses involves. At t1 or t2 the masses move at the same rate in both elevators. Even so with a bit of trial and error the right frame of motion in the inertial elevator can cancel out the acceleration apart of the two masses so they are in uniform motion by using the right frame of motion. Yet all observers in the gravity elevator will agree the masses are accelerating apart.

  To me it seems surprising Einstein never thought of these events, surely

Special Relativity is indeed great and much of what he did.

Here I want to also discuss a second set of elevators.

  This is about weightless elevators. One is in orbit with weightless dieters who sail around and save with the elevator radially oriented around in its fall around the Earth.

 An equivalent elevator -via the flab reduced! is an elevator farther away from the source of gravity without acceleration.  

 The second elevator becomes equivalent because of the weight of masses in both machines. So here I equate gravity and no force with uniform motion.

  Atomic clocks slow in gravity and this is promoted as evidence the relativity of gravity. As in the above about the accelerated elevators, Einstein considered the atomic clocks are important. Both gravity accelerated elevators in orbit or at rest by the Earth show the slowing of the clocks.

  Yet with the weightless elevators the inertial elevator will show no change in the clocks yet the orbiting machine has a change in the clocks from base to the higher radius.

  This is due to base of the elevator being closer to the Earth. In my belief this would be because gravity is at a different wavelength and speed than inertia.

 The x and y coordinates of a ballistic arc are completely independent. But if inertia was at the speed of light like inertia as found by LIGO they would be the same and there would be no ballistic arc.

  So I believe LIGO has found something associated with gravity, but perhaps not gravity itself.

  In the orbiting elevator there is no weight yet the atomic clocks continue with the same change as the clocks in the gravity at rest. This would be because inertia like centrifugal force outward is moving
at a different speed and energy outward than the gravity so they balance and are without weight in the orbiting machine.

  Because the clocks slow in both the elevator at rest near the Earth and the elevator in orbit yet one is with no weight while the other has weight the gravity has definite distinction from the inertia, and the Equivalence of gravity and with it the relativity of gravity and its speed of light waves may evidence that LIGO isn't proof of the relativity of gravity.

  While inertia would move at the speed of light because of the influence of relativity, even so inertia isn't gravity or the Earth and moon would orbit at the same rate around each other.

  Motion is distinguished from non motion by force. Otherwise all masses would move at the same rate with the same force like Einstein's idea about field expansion and this seems to be a special limited event. To distinguish the gravity and inertia why not just look out and see if you are by the Earth and the Equivalence is disproved.

  Einstein limits our ability to to this so it may "look good" yet the light is so all important in Special Relativity, it seems Einstein might have realized the value of this method!

Ways to Prove or Disprove This

 Eventually we might find star systems with a pulsar and a visible second star. It's been known the sun goes in 11 year neutrino cycles and this would be caused by Jupiter's 11 year orbit causing the changes in its magnetic field as I say elsewhere. These changes then cause the sunspot cycles which cause changes in pressure to then cause the neutrino flux.

 So if we find a binary star with a strong pulsar in orbit the spin of the jets motions like precession might be enough by gravity to influence the light output of the second star.

 So in terms of the radiation flux of the star the relatively complex changes in the precession of the pulsar might show up almost immediately by the gravity waves, yet the same changes in the second star would only show up in a year at the energy level of light and the LIGO influence of the signal from a year before if the two stars are a light year away from each other and the LIGO signal is only at the speed of light.

 This would be about timing above all. So in order to get a good signal from both the pulsar and the star we might want to compensate by waiting till the two stars are at right angles to us in the orbit, one away, one to us..

 A second way to achieve the proof or disproof of this is to use atomic clocks which are becoming portable to measure gravity and sending the clocks in an array perhaps a half a light hour from the Sun.

 The gravity from a huge event like a flare might show up almost right away with the clocks while the light and signal like LIGO would arrive with a half hour wait.

Where does the proton get its spin and mass?

....The fractional charges of QCD only give 2% of the mass and the gluons are massless.....

Here I consider that the solution is something like dark matter..

My idea about dark matter is that it's much like Stokes believed, Stokes was the great mathematical physicist of the 19th century.

His idea by was that the low energy field connecting up all the cosmos was "like sealing wax" in that it shows strong resistance when strong force or force of short duration is exerted, yet gives way under slow and continued light force exerted on it.

I think of this as valuable, and my version of this involves the recent discovery of the Low Energy Higgs. (LEH) particle in the lab as had been predicted.

So when you jog around the room in hopes of not being so round yet you change your motion, particles have sides, so these small particles exert the force you feel. This would also explain the force of gravity. Like a boat in a river the particles move with you and yet speed up as you fall. The reason they speed up would be because there are also waves between them, the gravity waves, only waves could have cohesion that mere radiant inertia events lack so the gravity radiates in, not out. Note that when you wave your arms in a stream as you flow down the flue, the force you feel on your arms is much like that of inertia as you jog in the exercise machine and change your motion. This is how gravity and inertia, if only loosely are connected, though not in a strong quantum way like Einstein believed about his hopes of repeating Maxwell's triumph of connecting electricity and magnetism. I believe gravity isn't quantum and this is why when you plug in the quantum equations for gravity you get infinities.

 So here's where I look at problems with the particle wave explanation for inertia and gravity as above.

The LEH don't slow everything to a stop with the friction. How is this so? One idea is that the speed of light by use of this method like Stokes might have used gives us the density of the "sealing wax". Light has a huge speed; it's a transverse wave be and it's well known that more familiar transverse waves in physics have a snapback of the "wax" according to the speed. The speed of light is great, so the density of the medium Newton and Maxwell believed in is enormously more than steel. Yet the planets plough through this "wax" without any appreciable resistance. But there's more; Maxwell used the density of the wax to predict the speed of light exactly based on the resilience of the medium Stokes and others considered.

 So there is considerable supporting evidence the particles and waves exist, the LEH and the flat Higgs' field Newton might have considered to be why a bucket "knows" if it's spinning has also been found.

 First of all as I say elsewhere what I call Line Removal (LR) may give a phase change so the inside of a heavy quanta "doesn't know" the outside of the field and this gives it tension that maintains the resilience that Maxwell, Newton and other considered so the particles like heavy quanta don't ever stop spinning.

 I believe that the LEH also are mostly outside the heavier quanta at what I call the Radius Of Action (ROA) a narrow radius that is essentially an area where the outside waves become dense enough to create the particles.

 Even so at more radius they are mostly waves and by the phase change between them they give way with the slow pressure of the sealing wax as Stokes believed.

 The waves can give way like the planets through them yet at the ROA for light the LEH become so strong they cause the huge snapback of Maxwell's method of calculating the speed of light so well.

 So the field has negative entropy used to hold all the fields together so they don't reradiate, resilience by Line Removal, and the particles exert the force of inertia or gravity.

Even so by the waves externally there is no quantum gravity much. Note that these waves and LEH are hard to find.

They're low energy and by Maxwell's method if they are much lighter than light they may move much faster than light. So to the usual quanta like machines used to hope to measure them by more classic methods are much much slower. This would act like the complete continuity of the field Einstein believed in except it is finite so it can't be of infinite speed much less the speed of light it would seem to me. So our machines may sooner or later disprove Einsten about this as in what I call parallel processing sensors that are fast enough and far enough apart to pick up or send out the waves more at the their own speed of resonance.

And here may be how to find dark matter. Its elusive find may be caused by this same high speed and low energy of the medium Stokes considered. This is what it may be and why it hasn't been seen yet!

 This is what I was asking above, Why does the proton have the mass and charge it does? If mass is spinning energy and there is no cause for rest mass in Special Relativity if the heavy quanta spin at c, by using Faster Than Light (FTL) internal spin we have the cause of the rainbow of masses not plus and minus one half.

 "The cause of no cause" of the proton's mass and charge would be a type of dark matter that is also hard to find yet, and even so it may give the mass and spin.

This mass I call it Unobserved Hadron Mass may be generally like dark matter and so I believe things we might learn about how it operates may illuminate our knowledge of dark matter including inertia and gravity!

Wilczic won the nobel prize for calculating the mass of the fractional charges. Even so 97% of the rest of the mass of the proton is unaccounted for.

As I say elsewhere I believe the field inside a supermassive area like a singularity may remove it's own field lines by what I call Line Removal (LR). So while a the quanta around us are created by gravity they become distinct even and as evidenced by the universal conservation of energy. This is why gravity doesn't shield the Earth eclipse after eclipse slowing the Earth or moon down over historic time. Eclipses since ancient times haven't slowed down. The would be because Line Removal wraps the gravity around the heavy quanta beyond a certain level. Einstein believed old electrons might not weigh the same as more recent electrons and experiment has disproven this.

Another way of looking at this is to say because mass and energy aren't completely the same it's much easier to convert mass to energy than vice versa and strong force interactions are only 5% efficient here. So the proton has all the extra mass by spinning faster than light in my explanation by the Line Removal so while some of the spinning field interacts with the fractional charges most of it simply spins past and isn't seen at higher energy as in by probes. So too Einstein's idea about electron's change of mass with gravity mass isn't ultimately the same as energy so the earth has much more of the gravity flowing both in and out from the Earth and around the quanta. In other words if mass and energy aren't absolutely the same since it takes more energy to hold a quantum or the Earth together than for us to fall off the Earth this inequivalence means the proton has a lot more of this spinning mass that holds it together.

We can measure the mass of the proton well. This might also mean the Earth has a lot of extra mass, right?

I believe if mass and energy or gravity and inertia aren't the same an improved description of mass and inertia would be that mass is defined as the resistance to stopping a heavier body that tends to get heavier by gravity and be more at rest while inertia is the tendancy of a lighter body to resist being slowed down. The moon is not able to start the Earth's speeding up while the Earth isn't able to slow down the motion of the moon and it gives way.

By this new definition of mass we might look at how much the moon pulls on the Earth and how much the Earth moves to measure its mass. Note that as with the proton where
most of the field simply spins past the fractional quanta and isn't even much in evidence, most of the extra mass to hold the Earth together would give the Earth more mass than all the quanta of the Earth counted together.

While I'm not a mathematician I know a lot about relativity and machines as you can see. I don't know how to calculate this but if you'd like to collaborate or help with experiments please call me at 276 228 3469. Or you can write me at 138 Longview Village Wytheville,VA. I'd love to put this on more solid basis and we might win prizes. Thanks for reading..