Did you know? ABOUT THE WORD "TRIVIA."

In Ancient Rome where "three roads" would meet they would put memos or "trivia". A.I. is also involved with trivia, but more general events are also important. Perhaps A.I. may have heard of the fomous Dutch road builder "DeTour!"

Showing posts with label Speed of Light. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Speed of Light. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 08, 2023

 Energy Conservation, Cosmic Mass Energy and High Speed Motion

Here want to recap first from my other posts and say that one reason LIGO seems seems incomplete about the speed of gravity to me and general relativity is incomplete because it's only one piece of evidence and Einstein's basis of his prediction for the change in the shift of the perihelion of mercury or the bending of starlight are all based on changes in speed, but his theoretical basis was that all masses fall at the same rate.

Gravity has a problem about causality if you have a pond and the waves start at the outside and then move inward towards the rock in a time reversed method that gravity would need if by Ligo the gravity is actually radiating outward by sensors. I hold that this is going to be solved by Ligo actually having found the speed of inertia or centrifugal force so important to special relativity which would radiate out.

My belief is that while this is evidence that inertia travels at the speed of light by LIGO to explain how gravity actually radiates inward I think it's possible that the classical electromagnetic field lines actually radiate out as found by LIGO and lays down tracks the gravity then follows back inward to the source gravity being much lower energy and much higher speed than like inertia or centrifugal force.


 



This also solves the problem of a changing speed and wavelength for the overlapping field of gravity. Otherwise from the acceleration the gravity waves would be incoherent unless they were moving back and forth in a zigzag inside the inertial or electromagnetic field lines on both sides and keeping them also from kinking up or breaking.

So I believe gravity is much faster than light by my use of Maxwell's method where he predicted the speed of light itself based on the resilience of the field.. more snapback gives higher or lower speed. (Gravity being the opposite of inertia like centrifugal force would radiate inward to one center as inertia would radiate out to many events and so as the snapback decreases its speed would increase unlike the speed of light itself.)

So due to causality and the truth that the speed of light is constant while gravity is an acceleration, this has led me to believe that what Ligo has measured is only something associated with gravity and not gravity itself. Certainly inertia has something to do with gravity but only a loose association and not a complete formulation like Einstein thought he had found the day that the man fall off the roof in Berlin and said he didn't feel any change as he fell. At this moment Einstein said it was the best day of his life because he'd realized he thought that as Maxwell had unified electricity and magnetism and so too gravity and inertia could be made to fit... but I would hold that since inertia is mostly not quantum and gravity being much less so because when you plug in the equations for quantum mechanics you get infinities for gravity, you can't force gravity to fit like the more quantized electromagnetic equivalence of Maxwell.

Gravity and inertia are something other than electromagnetic fields or we'd have quantum numbers for gravity and shielding. Inertia is more unlike heavy quanta and gravity may be more unlike inertia yet.



Relativity and How it would Change the Mass of the Universe and also Violate Cosmic Energy Conservation if True..

If we say that a high speed observer is equivalent to an observer at rest like the universe we might say that also high speed observers could change the mass of the universe and this would violate energy conservation and also we would have many different masses for the stuff around us.

  But if we say that the high speed observer is actually gaining their mass from the field locally to them and that the universe's frame of reference is actually more valid than that of the high speed observer or observers of different speeds, we can see why the cosmic mass is not changing all the time according to Special Relativity. One problem with the twin paradox is that the high speed twin would have a different age than the twin that hasn't traveled as far and stays on the Earth... I hold that the mass energy equivalence of Special Relativity is actually more like an energy energy equivalence because the supposed change in mass is more like an actual increase in the energy by way of interaction with motion of the field. Since mass actually is more important to the universe than energy because as I say heavier quanta like fermions would have the phase change inside and spin faster than the speed of light to give them their rest mass and distinction in rest mass that relativity can't explain and also because one or the other is going to be truer than the other by the way of science and mass and energy can't be equally valid so the universe's frame of reference is more valid, you don't have a whole lot of different masses for the universe depending on the motion of the high speed observer.

I also believe that the heavy quanta also have a phase change that keeps the field lines of gravity from going inside and getting stronger so we don't have shielding because gravity has a sort of invisibility cloak that wraps around the outside of the heavy quanta sort of like paramagnetism or other certain shields that have been devised by engineers.

So not only are the quanta separate and violating relativity by being spinning inside faster than the speed of light but they also are maintaining something internal that's not relative to the observer.

This was what Einstein thought about the quanta and how just to observe is not to measure. My belief is that because of the phase change in line removal the quanta like fermions act like small gyroscopes that stabilize what relativity would otherwise not allow.. the universe's frame of reference is more valid in this respect and doesn't change its mass because of both line removal and the change of phase that allows the fermions to spin faster than light inside.  If mass is spinning energy this faster than light spin would also be where the proton gets 97% of its mass that can't be accounted for by way of the quanta.

The problem about relativistic mass augment of the quanta would be solved because the line removal may limit interaction with the external field to gain that energy from and also the phase change.

Above all else about special relativity Einstein believed that the only thing that determines what happens in special relativity is the connection by way of the light. But if we allow a simple phase change and reduced interaction with the rest of the field as with gravity going between the inertial field lines this is no problem.

About the reversal of time supposed to be possible by some this will be be just as an airplane going faster than the sound doesn't make it so that the sound waves reverse in time to reach us faster.. this without reversal of time has never been proven and is not a guarantee of relativity.

Indeed if space and time are unified and you went backwards through space you'll go backwards through time and this is more evidence that relativity is unfinished..

Because the movie of the motion of the high speed observer is only changed in its speed of playback by relativity and not the events themselves and because the light is relatively slow in its connection over great distances and the gravity is indeed lower energy we can see that while energy or time change for the electromagnetic fields about the speed of light and relativity, the cosmos with its greater mass has a more valid frame of reference and attracts by way of the gravity more than relativity would allow.


The relativistic changes are small and not with much connection while the universe changes not much in the spin of its heavy quanta because the mass component of the quanta would spin at faster than light with little influence by the motion of the high speed observers and would be more essential.


Time being caused mostly by the spin of heavy quanta like small clocks and the relativity of electromagnetic fields over great distances would not really connect up well and the gravity and mass waves of the heavy quantum ultimately would win out.. this would be because the much higher speed of the matter waves that gives the quanta of their mass would actually be more fundamental with more distance because they also connect everything up unlike the quanta of light which Einstein thought of as fundamental to special relativity.

Mass is more fundamental than energy even while both are obviously important and the universe in general has more mass than a small energy observer at high speed and so the universal frame of reference tends to be more valid.



While Einstein repeatedly says the Doppler shift is important to special relativity which is about waves, mostly he says that light is a particle uninfluenced from emission to absorption unlike waves and so light has a constant speed and so doesn't connect like waves of low energy like the matter waves or gravity. By relativity the light isn't being influenced or changed as it travels and "it carries itself". The gravity would change both speed and wavelength and so it's interacting with its own wave as it travels to give the acceleration of gravity that relatively doesn't allow because it's mostly about uniform motion and the constant speed of light and inertial frames. This also would violate energy conservation because without a connection between the distant observers by the "slow" speed of light energy would radiate out and be being lost to the universe.

Tesla believed that large masses like galaxies couldn't hold together by a "slow" speed of light. Because of the separate times of relativity where you can't know what's before after at a star like Alpha Centauri for like four years while light travels back from here to there this essentially means there is no causal connection other than a loose connection between here and more distant events. That is to say the points will become more and more separate by random internal motion with time and this would seem to be solved only if gravity can connect them up by a faster than light connection.


Sunday, June 02, 2019

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..

Saturday, April 06, 2019



Why Bosons and Fermions are Distinct... 
  Perhaps Because Bosons are Simple Like Waves and Spin at c and Fermions Spin at Faster Than Light Inside;

By Local "MASS ENERGY INEQUIVALANCE", Because Mass and Energy are Equivalent But Not Equal in Relativity

 I once said to my grandmother when I was a teen that democrats then were smarter than the republicans, and she said, they're equally smart just in different ways. And this made me think.

 You may say mass and energy are equivalent, so there is no extra centrifugal force of the atoms or energy radiating out of the Earth in violation of energy conservation. Yet I believe my grandmother's remark tells us about the deeper truth. In a healthy civilization the democrats and conservatives are in balance like the energy of centrifugal and inward force. Even so there are definite distinctions in how they act and live that can be measured.

 The local realms of symmetry in my belief are not equal even if equivalent because if they were equal, the electron and plus charge would be so much  alike as Maxwell believed the light wouldn't propagate through the field. If you have a weighing machine and you look at the speed of the signal between the weights on the beam, it's bound to be far faster than the weights. Empty space couldn't balance the local symmetries if the light only carries itself. And this idea that the wavelength of the light wave changes before it reaches the observer is evidence that the connecting matter wave of Special Relativity is indeed faster than light that connects it with the high speed observer so information about the momentum and wavelength of light are conserved.

 The faster than light matter wave and the local distinctions that can be measured both seem evidence that relativity is incomplete.

   I believe Einstein's rejection of the Kaluza Klein method for the cause of the mass and charge of the electron was incomplete. If mass is caused by spinning energy, the mass of the electron, the deep scattering experiments, and renormalization follow more straightforwardly by assuming its internal spin is faster than light. If mass is spinning energy, there's more internal mass than the speed of light spin would allow.

 The Kaluza Klein method involves higher dimensional spin inside for the electron, and I believe  Einstein rejected this for two reasons; the faster than light spin is forbidden by Relativity, and the change of phase needed (to throw off the relativistic events) would violate the Unified Field.

(The Kaluza Klein has been considered to be the foundation of the idea of more advanced physics of the 11 dimensions inside the quanta predicted by some physicists. I don't know that there has been evidence yet for this but it has had real influence in the history of physics, so far!)

What happens if we accept the FTL spin of the heavy quanta? We have an explanation for rest mass. Relativity has no cause for rest mass that Einstein could have advanced by use of the Kulaza Klein method..

 Note that if there is no faster spin and all quanta spin only at the speed of light, since light already spins at c because it moves at c, and slower motion for a heavy quanta is essentially not allowed by conservation of angular momentum.

There can be no electron or any particle heavier than light if relativity is true and momentum is conserved. The electron like light would spin inside at the speed of light. If mass is spinning energy and it all spins at c, unlike my idea GWD, there can be no complexity of mass like extra quantum numbers for the hadrons predicted by Special Relativity.

  So by rest mass not predicted by Relativity, the muon suddenly gains weight from .5 mev to 105 mev because not only is the electron that creates it spinning at faster than light inside, the change it the electron to the muon involves another phase change than from lower energy light to the electron.

 So I believe in the Kaluza Klein and also that Chou's tunneling experiments about the heavy nuclei have Faster than light spin. Chou himself says he doesn't believe this is disproof of relativity because he holds the wave to be only the average so while some of the wave is faster than light, this fits Einstein's belief. Yet Einstein said no signal containing information can move faster than light.

 I hold In my idea GWD General Wave Dynamics any wave has to contain information to keep it internally stable in its rest frame, etc. so if it's a wave that's faster than light it contains information by definition.

 (So I believe we might be able to refine Chou's experiments with methods like shortening the distance from the emission to the absorption of the FTL tunneling wave and so speed it up or slow it from faster to faster than light! And e.g. we could change from one limb of the spinning heavy quantum it's tunneling through for proof of FTL etc. )

  You may ask, "Isn't this solvable about rest mass if we say all the quanta spin at the speed of light? All the gradiations of masses of the heavy quanta are with the same external speed of spin outside, and this is by way of just changing the radius, all at the speed of light".


Note that if we simply allow different radii for the speed of light of the spin, these radii couldn't communicate because no sideways radial FTL signal would be allowed by Relativity to connect them and the disconnection would give internal structure to the electron with the different radii, like a shear force. Yet the electron "has no internal structure" just the smooth quantum well, and no more.

My other reply is that this wouldn't explain the distinction between bosons and fermions as I'll try to elaborate on this post. If they are distinct, there may be evidence for the Kaluza Klein and a phase change, mass and energy aren't equal, and this would involve more than relativity.

 Note also that the radius also would have to fit Planck's constant and the speed of light if it's truly universal.  If the sideways motion is at the speed of light, there can be no radial change, and all the masses like the plus and minus charge are the same.

  This idea that the internal spin is FTL  would be the cause of the experimental evidence found in the 1970's that there are indeed the virtual spacelike and timelike photons as predicted by Einstein. I wondered about this when I was in my 20's . If "time is reversed" for FTL in Relativity, yet there is no evidence around us yet seen for FTL, perhaps the solution might be seen by Feynman’s idea about the particles and antiparticles having time reversal. Einstein believed that the FTL interval balanced the slower motion with the 0 interval at the speed of light. At first I tried to fit this to just say as with the reversed spin of the particles like small clocks, the plus charges move fast nearer to c and the minus charges move slow as in nonrelativite distinction of mass and energy, and the 0 interval wouldn't be the speed of light, rather at 1/2 the speed of light, mediated perhaps by the light between them. Even so I searched for evidence for this 0 interval at half the speed of light, and there is no great cosmic resonance at one half the speed of light.

So I left this for rest and cogitation, and more recently I have a possible more advanced way of solving this.

  If the spacelike and timelike virtual photons exist, and if  we look all around for all the motion at slower than light we find real evidence the FTL interval isn’t a mere idea if both spacelike and timelike photons exist there would seem to be a real area where the FTL motion exists. So the real way the FTL motion exists that would seem to give the interaction and symmetry between the virtual photons would be about the FTL events and where they physically exist is inside the spins of the heavier quanta. Faster than light internal spin would solve this otherwise unresolved symmetry of the virtual photons.

  One problem in relativity is about mass. Sure you can say the outside of each quantum spins at the speed of light, this by simple use of Planck's constant. But constance while of real value to Relativity has the problem that if mass is spinning energy and all the quanta are spinning at the quantum speed of light, they would all have mass of 1 and minus 1 etc. (I say in my belief, the Uncertainty Principle gives mass as spinning energy because it uses the relationship between mass or momentum and time in a definite way. If time is about frequency and is a curve in higher math, mass and time become more the same. If you add more mass to a spinning body it tends to spin faster and time speeds up, for the Earth or for a quantum..)

   The idea of a phase change to allow change of mass being change in energy and without so much interaction with the outside field and Planck's constant would allow many masses of many wavelengths and energies inside. So if all the quanta are made of the matter waves and mass is spinning energy by way of the Uncertainty Principle, we take the matter waves as we find them and look at resonances and interference and so on and then we simulate by putting them inside the electron, calculate the speed and see if we can use the derived information to predict when the electron becomes a muon and so on for all the heavy quanta eventually.

  One use of the idea may be about the distinction between fermions and bosons. Bosons would spin at the speed of light like energy, and the fermions with the phase change would all spin inside at Faster Than Light. The faster than light phase change from Relativity doesn't allow compatibility. This is why you can put two bosons like light in the same place and time, yet the fermions are more solid and don't unify as well so by the phase change and FTL spin, mass is indeed distinct from the energy of the bosons, so the two types of particles fermions and bosons are a sort of cosmic balancing point,  relative and non relative. Energy is simple more like a wave, and mass is more complex like with more complex quantum numbers.

  Relativity says they are equivalent, but if they aren't equal, there must be more than relativity in physics.

  The phase change and FTL that Einstein didn't accept for the electron would allow another great idea that he also hoped to solve. The phase change gives the (non relativistic) stability of the quanta and the world around us. So if this is "disproof of relativity" it's also a way Einstein was also right in a deeper way, even if his ideas about relativity are "non absolute".

  I believe the Higg's field outside the quanta gives mass instead of the internal spin..Wilczek recently won a Nobel prize by his work that shows the high energy Higgs' gives only 1/5th the mass of the heavy fractional charges in QCD. This would follow from Line Removal. The mass is caused more from the outside, this isn't ruled out.  First, the spin is internal. If you want to milk a cow, you don't go out in the middle of the field with your stool and wait for the cow to back up to you to milk the cow. So too if the Higgs' field is flat, I believe it may no more cause mass than uniform motion causes acceleration.


  The low energy Higgs' has been discovered, and I believe it gives mass by being in the interface between the internal spin of the heavy quanta and the external flat Higgs' field. The heavy quanta spin (externally only at the speed of light). And this imparts spin to the Low Energy Higgs (LEH). The LEH's are also spinning at much faster than light but with much shorter wavelength (as Einstein believed about low energy quanta to get around quantum uncertainty) than allowed by Planck's constant and the speed of light, this would also be how the LEH are an independant parameter in the Standard physics.. These act like much smaller gyroscopes to stabilize and transmit the information about the momentum of the field through the  Higgs' field itself. In truth mass mass may be a combination of the internal spin of the quanta the LEH, and the Higgs' field, all three are needed to conserve the changes in momentum and energy conservation of the field. Even so because of the phase change and FTL motion of the mass, it is distinct from mass in relativity, there is no cause for mass in SR. Einstein believed mass isn't strictly speaking thermodynamic, yet electromagnetic fields have mass too.



 You may know that at high energy, light behaves like a heavy particle. Yet they both travel at the speed of light. This would only be possible if mass is spinning energy  if there is distinction in the spin not found in SR. One important thing about this way of distinction of mass and energy is about the simplicity of energy vs. the complexity of mass as it relates to the collapse of the wave function.

This might be also a bit distinct between bosons and fermions. If bosons spin only at the speed of light and fermions spin inside at faster speeds, at some radii where the FTL spin is influencing the collapse of the wave function, I believe the distinction of mass and energy might give a slightly different speed of the collapse.

 So high energy light might collapse a bit faster than other light all else held the same.

  Einstein and Lorentz held that space contracts in the line of motion in order to explain the difference between motion and non motion.

 Here I offer the following explanation since Einstein offered none. The small low energy Higgs' quanta (which have been predicted and recently found by experiment) exert the pressure that causes the contraction. We haven't directly seen the low energy field since it is mostly wavelike and converts over to much faster than light externally. It becomes like a superfluid here so it's much faster than light and this changes its phase so it's so efficient we don't usually find evidence for it even while it maintains the conservation of momenta of the low energy external fields.

I believe in Newton's idea that the low energy flat Higgs' field is a way the spinning bucket of water "knows" if it's spinning or not. This may only be a way to measure spin if a gyroscope only senses changes in rotation not linear motion, so it's not as absolute as he believed. Note that this version of the low energy field of gravity and inertia isn't at rest. It moves at higher speed than light as the EPR speed and at the speed of gravity by its low displacement toward the sun. The field gives way and causes force only at the ROA with the LEH by proxy all deputies sign up! This would be why Einstein and Mach believed only the relative motion of mass and energy were what "matters"! The low energy waves exist to send information about energy conservation between such as the starship and the light in SR. Because they give way so well to find like of the heavy quanta, they only so to maintain the common forces seen around us in such a passive way, as if the space and time are empty as Einstein believed. So other than the low energy Higgs' field the spinning bucket might use, this way of connection of all the external events would not be so much any absolute source of rest by which motion is measured as a way of sending and storing information about changes in Mass and energy reliably. This is why the Michealson Morely found no evidence for the Medium Maxwell assumed even while it conserves energy. Or for example if you run around the room, the medium is there and you feel the force by change of your motion by way of the LEH at the ROA of each quantum exercise boost yet the outside waves being low energy and more slippery slide and make it so you don't knock down the lady near you in the gym with the force of the wave needed even so to conserve energy. The low energy waves and particles would also be the dark matter and the same general evidence would be there like the evidence for dark matter. And both would seem invisible to sensors even while it makes up most of the cosmos, this in essence is more evidence for dark matter. It may be what you find all around.


Light is a transverse wave with large density of snapback and the particles at ROA  (Radius  Of Action ,see below) would be the cause at its radius, even so for constant motion at greater distance the waves are not so quantum and they give way much more smoothly, this is why Stokes believed the medium was like sealing wax, with strong force of high speed impact and giving way under slow or continued force of low energy. The light has a large snapback at the ROA yet the planets move through the waves with no resistance not because the waves are not viable, even while they have the important value of maintaining the momentum and energy conservation of all the fields by connecting the inside spin with the outside motions of the fields.

 The pressure of the particles freezes in by way of the force between the plus and minus electric charges as Maxwell believed to predict the speed of light exactly based on the force between them as in resilience of the medium.  The plus and minus charges act like a weight and counterweight of the elevator, so uniform motion continues without awareness as much by the high speed observer.

  This would seem like terminal velocity with the cushion falling in the air and the Earth's gravity except there is no friction felt because while the waves try to move the body in uniform motion at higher speed ahead, the particles try to slow the motion with the result being uniform motion like terminal velocity. The one major distinction is there is no friction unlike the cushion due to the reversal of entropy for the quanta inside. So the LEH exert pressure only on the outside of each heavy quanta at what I call the ROA Radius of Action. This would seem to be the cosmic balancing point between mass and energy, a balancing point where the Higgs' doesn't disappear even at the lowest energy unlike all the other heavy quanta in physics. 

 So here the Lorentz contraction is caused by the pressure of the LEH, these waves are not commonly seen even though they are in all the field, and since the heavy quanta have to be held together more than radiate out to exist as we see them, they have attraction and negative entropy, at least on the outside near the ROA, and so. And so the LEH exerting pressure only exert pressure on the outside of the heavy quanta and don't cause reradiance like the cushion because of negative entropy, like e.g. gravity which radiates in more than out (and I believe indeed that this outer zone of the quanta is derived from gravity, and so as others say, gravity may have important connections to the collapse of the wave function).

 So this idea of terminal velocity would explain uniform motion by a mechanical method and also the Lorentz contraction, for which Einstein offered no cause.

 Near the speed of light there is more and more pressure on the heavy quanta and this creates the augment of the mass. The rest mass comes from the FTL phase change inside of the heavy quanta, and this is why the more mass an object has the slower it tends to move by simple conservation of angular momentum.  Einstein' believed that at near the speed of light the observer would notice no real change or nothing unusual in the starship going on. Even so I think first the quanta would line up as e.g. electrons with high energy fields. This would change many of the properties of the events in the starship, this isn't mere change of space and time, this would involve events like changes in different historys seen by two observers at different speeds watching the higher speed starship. Since when the two observers match up the different historys of the two observations can't be time reversed even while the thermodynamic heat will cause different historys (e.g. change in the thermostat would cause more accidents, leading to time spent healing the accident, and other events) if relativity is true and the observers are absolute, even so they can't be time reversed when the observers of different speeds compare movies.

If you take a helix and force it against the wall, it would make the "events of its spin" go faster by the helix being "squashed". Since in the theorems time is always proportional to frequency, and also time is an acceleration, the spins of the quanta like small clocks would speed up even while slowing even more as seen by the distant observer.

So in my belief the Lorentz contraction with time might speed up onboard the high speed starship.  The distant observer sees the time slow down even more. This would be because of the stretching of the redshift of the light. Note that the relative red shift is in any direction unlike the doppler redshift, and I believe this is due to the internal force exerted on the field by the LEHs so it’s compressed by the field yet reacts more in radiance for the redshift, like the sun has gravity to squeeze out the heat of fusion at another wavelength of the energy.

 And the reason for the paradoxical distinction is here again, the distinction of mass and energy. The mass of the starship and the predicted speeding of time is overbalanced in this way by the even more influential slowing of time at long range as in relativity due to the opposition of the long wavelength light which is like energy, and the mass of the starship. Like truth and falsehood in life and science one or the other will win out, and while relativity wins out for long range observers, I believe this would be another possible way to disprove the complete equality of mass and energy.

 As I say elsewhere, these ideas about the speeding of time locally and the polarization of light not found in SR may be testable in the lab by way of my invention, what I call the Relativistic Wind tunnel, RWT. This involves the idea that since motion is relative, we send the high speed motion of a field like light with lasers or masers past the small starship in the lab to find effects like the Fitzgerald contraction, the polarization of the quanta and this idea of the speedup of time onboard the machine. If the speed of light is more thermodynamic and not about empty space time, there may be more complex events involved with the RWT than Einstein believed. And at the least the RWT will help us find the Fitzgerald contraction, since only the slowing of light not the change of the contraction yet has been found as in particle accelerators. While all the physics of the accelerators and other machines fit Relativity, due to the ideas like the inequality of mass and energy as above, there may be more in store.

  If mass is spinning energy you might wonder about the recent experiments that show mass may be spin independant. I would think since the gravity is at another energy than the inertial field (if gravity and inertia are the same "where's the huge gravity around an ultracentrifuge"? And the inertia radiates out not in like gravity.) the gravity waves of the quanta go through the slower speed of light realm of Planck's constant on the outside (this  FTL motion is needed to cause the information about momentum to be moved outside and in). The slower speed of the quantum spin at the higher radii might convert the FTL spin of the outer radii to a more radial motion by an exchange of motion and this interaction would be why the quanta don't accelerate indefinitely and they conserve momenta well. The pressure between the inner spin and the quantum spin which resists the FTL would give the radial acceleration of gravity.

 Or as I say elsewhere the speed of the gravity may be so hugely more by GWD it would have only a small change in the spin with the net acceleration compared on both sides of the quanta at c, even so it wouldn't be a zero change with spin and its magnitude of the effect is readily based on the speed of gravity compared to the speed of light spin.

   Finally I want to say that recent evidence seems to show that high energy light from cosmic sources seems to travel at a different speed than low energy light, high energy light arrives a few seconds before the lower energy wave.

  (I would think because of light being a boson as you add on more energy it would move more slowly it being the opposite of the fermions, as in the opposition of mass and energy.)  Relativity tells us that the light is the same as space time, and if all the changes fit inside the constant speed of light, there is "no room for relativity about change in the light itself". Light is at the speed of light yet it connects with all the rest of the quanta at slower than the speed of light. Yet how can light both move at the absolute speed of light and slower than light also? It would need something Faster Than Light to connect its already speed of light motion to change into the higher energy. Light at high energy behaves like a heavy quanta as expected if it has internal FTL spin, yet by relativity light is simple and without change. As I say elsewhere the Equivalence Principle and the ideas about the equivalence of mass and energy both seem to involve unlike masses moving at like speeds with the same force applied.

 Yet if Einstein assumes mass and inertia are the same, he's assuming what he's trying to prove. You raise different masses to the same height and they fall at the same rate because it took that much more mass to raise the heavier weight and that much more energy is liberated by the heavy mass as it falls. Yet using the same force gives a different rate of motion and they fall at different rates like the earth and moon.

 Due to conservation of momentum and angular momentum, a heavy mass tends to move slower with the same force applied. So if high energy light has had the same force often applied, we would expect heavier light to move at another speed than low energy light. This result about the different speeds of light hasn't yet made it into the mainstream of physics, even so I think it may be...if of worth to us in R and D about science...

 Like the moon falling around the Earth at different speeds, it seems possible that this high and low energy light sight may allow the two light waves to bend at different rates with the gravity lens, something Einstein's ideas wouldn't allow.

 WHAT ABOUT LIGO?

 Mach and Einstein  believed gravity and inertia are essentially the same thing.  LIGO may have found an event associated with the gravity at the speed of light. If it's inertia then it would be at the speed of light since inertia and SRT with its absence of gravity is much about the speed of light. But gravity has an extra tensor that can't be transformed away.  If inertia is what LIGO has found and it's at the speed of light, SRT says it can only change wavelength. I believe it may change both speed and wavelength, because of the extra tensor and because gravity is an acceleration. So LIGO would have the radiant outward particles of the equivalence of centrifugal force. It radiates out from the source. Gravity on the other hand would change both speed and wavelength and the particles would move inward..  So if we have three sensors at three radii, at different radii of the Earth they would change wavelength, but by the much larger speed of gravity, there may be a small change in relative motion of the speed of the sensors.


 Even if gravity moved at the speed of light, due to the coherence of the field, the inward particle motion at any speed at all means that this change could be sent as information back to the source of gravity at the nearer radius.

 The real reason I would hold that you can't add your speed to the speed of light in Special Relativity is because the light is more a particle as Einstein believed, uninfluenced from emission to sensor, and this is because light is more quantum.

 When you plug in gravity to quantum equations you get infinities, and it would be because gravity isn't mostly quantum. This the coherence of gravity would seem to be a real measure of its faster than light motion, at any rate for the waves.

   So if you shake a mass at the higher radius, in GWD General Wave Dynamics, the information in gravity wavelengths would arrive at faster than light for the inner radius. The light would only send the information at due to Planck's constant and relativity's power over the heavier quanta like light,  but the complete continuity Einstein believed in for gravity wouldn't always just give received knowledge, it may be by the much higher speed allowing the connection of gravity. Complete continuity would be infinite.

  Others hope to use Feynmann's idea that if two quanta can be in resonance and superimposed, and Feynmann believed that if this is done by gravity of the quanta, by improved sensors, then gravity is quantum. To me this seems like saying if a wave interacts with a boat, this is real proof the boat is made of the wave! So I disagree with Feynmann here, and the cause of infinities when you plug gravity in quantum equations is because gravity is more a wave and nonquantum.