Missing mass/energy in the universe is not dark but light (31)

Posted on September 6, 2016 by martenvandijk

In addition to previous posts (15 and 18 in particular) I suggest the possibility that missing mass/energy in the universe is not dark but actually light and therefore in fact not missing at all. I’ll explain why there is no empty space in the universe as there always is at least almost nothing everywhere.

Dark Matter/Energy is mass/energy that is missing because it is unaccounted for due to the use of wrong parameters. The arguments on which I base this statement have been explained comprehensively in previous posts, like the speed of light not being constant, the difference between endogenous and exogenous processes, the space-time curvature delusion, the nothing delusion, the impossibility for a singularity to exist or for entropy to be zero, etc. Now , in addition to these views, I’ll bring forward my ideas with regard to seemingly empty space actually containing a lot of extra energy/mass implying a lot of extra gravitational influence.

When light/radiation is invading spaces into directions where the influence of gravitation is decreasing to almost zero while time is accelerating, its energy/mass decreases to almost nothing (its wavelengths becoming almost infinite long) and its speed increases extremely (see also post 12 in particular). This process is comparable with accelerating masses emitting energy, the true source of CMB as I have suggested in previous posts.

When light/radiation goes into other (opposite) directions where the gravitational influence is increasing while time is delaying, its energy/mass increases (its wavelengths becoming shorter) and its speed decreases.

Conclusion:

There is vastly more light mass/energy in the universe than is taken into account generally.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Was the signal observed by LIGO really a gravitational wave or is there an alternative explanation? (30)

Posted on February 29, 2016 by martenvandijk

In previous posts I have explained why I think that gravitational waves do not exist and cannot come into existence. In short I have a combination of two arguments on which I base my conviction that the signal observed by LIGO is not a gravitational wave:

By introducing gravitation, in his General Theory of Relativity, as the effect of space-time being curved by the division of mass and energy in it, Einstein made it possible for the speed of light to be constant (see post 1 in particular); nevertheless the speed of light is not constant (see post 12 in particular);

Einstein’s equivalence principle is not valid, because Einstein did not take account of the difference between endogenous and exogenous processes (see post 15  in particular).

In space-time continuously a process is going on, everywhere and in each direction, of changes of mass, energy, space and time and the ratios between them, causing them to change again etc. Any event, originating at a particular point at a particular moment, will unfold histories from that point and that moment on into each and every direction. Moreover events will develop faster into directions where the course of time is relatively  fast and slower into directions where the course of time is relatively slow. Mass, energy, space and time are fundamental properties of the world which shape the world endogenously, being generic and not independent, their proportions being fully interrelated, continuously changing each other’s proportions . They are endogenously bound by C = T/M x E/S  (see also posts 6, 13 and 14).

As suggested in post 29 all four fundamental forces are bound by C = T/M x E/S.
What are the effects of the process of the merger of two Black Holes as reported by LIGO?
– a decrease of the system’s mass (a loss of 3 solar masses);
– a decrease of the system’s space (the merger);
– a decrease of  the system’s energy (energy release);
– very long wavelengths.
How can these effects be understood as variable factors within the concept of C = T/M x E/S? A decrease of mass, a decrease of energy , a decrease of space and time-acceleration (responsible for increasing wavelengths) are compatible with one of the four equations suggested in post 29, C = T-/M- x E-/S-, which describes effects of electromagnetic and weak interactions.

Conclusion:
I suggest the possibility that the signal observed by LIGO as result of the merger of two Black Holes is a footprint from an electromagnetic interaction process and/or a weak interaction process.

Update ((March 2, 2016):

On September 14, 2015, at almost the exact same time as LIGO’s sinal was observed, the Fermi Gamma-Ray Space Telescope observed a passing burst of gamma rays (source: QUANTAmagazine, March 2, 2016).

Update (June 15, 2016):

Two facts: the LIGO team cannot determine as yet the astrophyscal nature of the signal nor assess that it was produced by a binary Black-Hole merger leading to a newly formed Black Hole; also the LIGO team cannot determine as yet the true source of gravitation.

Posted in cosmology, gravitation, physics, relativity, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

A closer look at the strong and weak forces as endogenous interactions (29)

Posted on December 1, 2015 by martenvandijk

As explained in posts 21, 23, 24 and 25, both gravitation and electromagnetic interaction are bound endogenously by C=T/M x E/S, a concept derived from Einstein’s E=MCC (see also posts 6, 13 and 14).

Electromagnetic interaction

An increase of the distance between an electron and the nucleus it orbits is accompanied by an increase of energy and mass and by time-delay: the electron’s attraction towards the nucleus increases (C=T+/M+ x E+/S+).
A decrease of the distance between an electron and the nucleus it orbits is accompanied by a decrease of energy and mass  and by time-acceleration: the electron’s attraction towards the nucleus decreases (C=T-/M- x E-/S-).

Strong interaction

The processes between quarks, described as QCD’s confinement and asymptotic freedom, can be described  endogenously as follows.

Confinement: if quarks happen to get away from each other, this results in a reaction which is a process of decreasing energy, increasing mass, time-delay and decreasing distance (C=T+/M+ x E-/S-).
Asymptotic freedom: if quarks happen to get closer to each other,  this results in a reaction which is a process of increasing energy, decreasing mass, time-acceleration and an increasing distance (C=T-/M- x E+/S+).

Weak interaction

The weak interaction makes it possible for elementary particles such as quarks and electrons to exchange  energy, mass and charge, like electromagnetic interactions, but then on a much smaller scale.

Conclusion

I suggest the possibility that not only gravitation and electromagnetic interaction, but also the strong and weak interactions are bound endogenously by C=T/M x E/S.

For gravitation and strong interactions this means C=T+/M+ x E-/S-  or C=T-/M- x E+/S+.
For electromagnetic and weak interactions this means C=T+/M+ x E+/S+ or C=T-/M- x E-/S-.

The consequence of my suggestion is that gravitation, electromagnetic interaction and the strong and weak interactions are endogenously compatible with each other.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Cosmological relativity (28)

Posted on October 15, 2015 by martenvandijk

In post 12 I have explained why the speed of light is not constant. In posts 9 and 15 I have explained why Einstein’s Equivalent Principle is out of date as he did not take account of the difference between endogenous and exogenous processes. The General Theory of Relativity is based on the premises of a constant speed of light (see also post 1) and the Equivalent Principle. The speed of light not being constant and the Equivalent Principle being out of date, what does that mean for the concept of relativity in cosmological sense? This question can be answered as follows.

Nothing can go faster than the speed of light ceteris paribus.
There is light here and there is light there, because there is light everywhere.
The speed of light can be higher here than the speed of light there or the speed of light there can be higher than the speed of light here. Therefore something can go faster here than the speed of light there  or something can go faster there than the speed of light here.

This is what I call cosmological relativity.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

“Particles accelerate without a push” (MIT news, January 20, 2015). An explanation (27)

Posted on January 24, 2015 by martenvandijk

Particles accelerate without a push: this phenomenon is a perfect example of an endogenous process. I have laid the theoretical foundation for such a process in various earlier posts as will be explained below.

First question: what is the essence of why particles apparently spontaneously accelerate without a push?
Answer: endo-inertia (see post 23). This property does not mean that a particle is accelerating without a cause, “force/energy”, but that the cause, “force/energy” is for free.

Second question: what is the free driving “force” that makes particles accelerate ?
Answer: time (see post 15).

The underlying basic reason is the difference between endogenous and exogenous processes. This difference implies that the acceleration of a body by gravitation is not equivalent to the acceleration of a body by pseudo-gravitation or the push of a rocket or an elevator. Gravitation, acceleration and inertia are only equivalent to each other if they share the same driver. They are endogenously equivalent if this driving “force” is time (see also posts 3, 6, 12, 13, 19, 21, 24, 25 and 26).

I think it is time the Physics Community starts taking account of the difference between endogenous and exogenous processes and its corresponding consequences.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The wrong tracks of physics and string theories (26)

Posted on January 14, 2015 by martenvandijk

In his book “A Brief History of Time” Stephen Hawking describes how in Euclidean space-time there is no difference between the directions of time and the directions of space.

The theoretical consequences of this concept imply that freedom of travel of light and for the transmission of energy or information applies to all directions in space-time. Any event therefore, originating in a particular point at a particular moment, will unfold histories from that point and from that moment on into each and every direction.

However, the concepts of gravitational fields, electromagnetic fields, quantum/Higgs fields and strings incorporated in space-times with 10, 11 or 26 dimensions imply limitations to the freedom of travel of light and for the transmission of energy or information in space-time.
The question is whether these limitations are justified by each or any combination of these diverse concepts.
As explained in various previous posts, the limitations in question seem to be unjustified for reasons of several incompatibilities with the current views:

1. When one turns on a light, the speed of light does not emerge, it is already present;
2. The speed of light is not constant;
3. Einstein’s Equivalence Principle does not take account of the difference between
endogenous and exogenous processes;
4. A singularity (a real Black Hole) is an impossibility;
5. A state of 0-entropy is an impossibility;
6. The consequences of the equality-inequality of gravitation and electromagnetic interaction.

My views on these subjects imply that there is no difference in space-time between the directions of time and the directions of space and that this equality of the directions of time and the directions of space is a fundamental property of the world.

It is for this basic reason that I think that physics and string theories are on wrong tracks.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

“Black Hole in center of Milky Way may be a neutrino factory” (NASA). Why not? An explanation of the possible emission and nature of the neutrinos in question (25)

Posted on November 28, 2014 by martenvandijk

In my previous post 24 I have described the consequences of the endogenous process of the behavior of electrons in an atom that is being absorbed by a Black Hole.
In this post I am dealing with the possible consequence of this process in cases whereby the “struggle” between the increasing gravitational influence and the increasing counterforce of electromagnetic interaction are reaching a certain limit.

At a certain point in time (see also post21) an electron in the lowest orbit has lost almost all of its mass and energy and is revolving around the nucleus at very high speed. As suggested in post 21 the electron while losing almost all of its mass and energy is losing its charge at the same time. I suggest the possibility that the electron, once its speed has become too extreme, it escapes from the atom out of its orbit and is fully subjected then to the gravitational influence of the Black Hole. This means that if the electron, already highly “slimmed down”, happens to be outward bound to the outside of the Black Hole, it is subjected to further time-acceleration and further loss of mass at a still further increasing speed (see also posts 12, 16, 19 and 20).

So my suggestion is that neutrinos endogenously emitted by Black Holes are very “skinny” ex-electrons. The electrons have lost their electromagnetic properties. This loss of information is forever, because of the irreversibility of the abovementioned process. There is no information paradox.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Consequences of the equality-inequality of gravitation and electromagnetic interaction in a mutual process (24)

Posted on November 11, 2014 by martenvandijk

Following my posts 21 and 23, consequences of the equality-inequality of gravitation and electromagnetic interaction in a mutual process are dealt with as follows.

What happens inside an atom if it is subjected to a steady increase of gravitational influence, for instance when it is being absorbed by a Black Hole?
The increasing gravitational time-delay reinforces the tendency of the electrons in the higher orbits to go nearer to the nucleus by increasing their energies/masses, whereas this growing gravitational effect increasingly opposes the tendency of the electrons in the lower orbits to get away from the nucleus.
In this process the circumference of the atom, the free space within the atom and the free space between the electrons decrease. As the higher orbits become less high, the electromagnetic interaction force makes the electrons in question lose energy/mass, mitigating the effect of the gravitational time-delay. As the lower orbits become lower, the electromagnetic interaction force also makes the electrons in question lose energy/mass, mitigating the effect of the gravitational time-delay.

All in all in this process the electromagnetic interaction force increasingly counteracts the increasing gravitational influence. As the electromagnetic interaction force is vastly stronger than gravitation I suggest the possibility that electrons, revolving around a nucleus, cannot be forced into htat nucleus. By the same token a singularity and a state of 0-entropy are impossibilities (see also post 20 and post 19).

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Exo-inertia and endo-inertia (23)

Posted on April 22, 2013 by martenvandijk

In earlier posts I have explained the difference between exogenous and endogenous processes and why the equivalence principle only  holds if and when gravitation (endogenous), acceleration and inertia share the same endogenous driver .

Consequently we have  to make a distinction between inertia as the tendency to maintain momentum (exogenous) and inertia as the tendency to maintain mass (endogenous, see  for instance post 17). Therefore I make the distinction between exo-inertia and endo-inertia.

Endo-inertia, how does it work, what are its properties, its relations to gravitation and acceleration?

As explained in post 21, the tendency of an electron to go nearer to the nucleus  gets stronger the greater the distance  from  it, its mass increases,  time delays. In lower orbits the opposite happens, a stronger tendency to get away from the nucleus through mass decrease and time-acceleration. As suggesred there is no change of momentum.

In this article I suggest the possibility that electromagnetic interaction is in essence endo-inertia, the tendency to maintain mass (no change of momentum, in contrast with exo-inertia, the tendency to maintain momentum without change of mass). 
Gravitation (consequence of a continuous relation between mass and time), time-driven (de)-acceleration and emdo-inertia are equivalent (see posts 9 and 15).

Why is the electromagnetic interaction force vastly stronger than gravitation? In electromagnetic interaction processes changes of mass and energy are directly proportional to each other, they are working together, reinforcing each other. In gravitational processes changes of mass and energy are inversely proportional to each other, they are counteracting.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

The problems in physics (22)

Posted on February 6, 2013 by martenvandijk

Particles, quanta or quantasy?

No basis for quanta

In posts 1 – 12 and 17 I have explained why quanta need not exist, why there is no basis for their existence.
There are two main arguments:
1. The way light behaves under the influence of gravitation shows that the amount of energy that can be emitted or absorbed by a body is finite because of the self-regulating mechanism of the continuous relation between the body’s mass and time;
2. The difference between endogenous and exogenous processes.

The relativity of the General Theory of Relativity

Speed of light not constant in vacuum

In post 12 I have explained why the speed of light varies with position under the influence of gravitation.

Space-time curvature delusion

In posts 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8 and 21 I have enunciated the idea that gravitation is not the consequence of space-time being curved by the division of mass and energy in it (always resulting in a force of attraction) but the consequence of a continuous relation between mass and time (resulting in a force of attraction or repulsion). When one turns on a light, the speed of light does not emerge, it is already present.

Equivalence Principle updated

In posts 9 and 15 Einstein’s Equivalence Principle has been updated in consistency with the difference between endogenous and exogenous processes.

Introduction of Time Uncertainty Principle

In posts 16 I have introduced the Time Uncertainty Principle which means that it is impossible to measure time/distance relations with absolute certainty. This intrinsic uncertainty of time is an inescapable property of the world. Consequently, in combination with the speed of light being variant, cosmological measurements as to the age of universe, the total mass of the universe etc. are incorrect.

Big Bang Theory out of date

In posts 6, 14, 18 and 20 I have explained why it is impossible for singularities to exist and why the universe is both finite and unbounded. Consequently the universe has no beginning and no ending, it is eternal.

Conclusion

It seems to me that the best way to solve the problems in physics is to go back to basics.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment