Hi there,
Well, it is a good try, but it has been proven wrong already indeed.
To see a better refutal, see Feynman's popular book 'QED'.
For instance, that theory seems even better once you realize that it
also acounts for the inverse-square law.
But the main flaw, if I recall it, is that objects moving around in space
would feel a larger flux of 'iGravitons' coming against the direction
of movement, causing a decrease in velocity. So much for inertia...
-Eric.
- Original Message -
From: Eric Hawthorne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 6:46 AM
Subject: Re: Gravity Carrier - could gravity be push with shadows not
pull?
Caveat: This post will likely demonstrate my complete lack of advanced
physics education.
But here goes anyway.
Is it possible to model gravity as space being filled with an
all-directional flux of inverse gravitons? These would be
particles which:
1. Zoom around EVERYWHERE with a uniform distribution of velocities (up
to C in any direction).
2. Interact weakly with matter, imparting a small momentum to matter (in
the direction that the iGraviton
was moving) should they collide with a matter particle. The momentum
comes at the cost that the
iGraviton which collided with mass either disappears or at least
reduces its velocity relative
to the mass's velocity.
So note that:
1. If there was just a single mass, it would not receive any net
momentum by collisions from iGravitons
because iGravitons with an even distribution of velocities impact it
from all sides with equal probability,
no matter what the mass's velocity. (This is true because C is the same
for each mass no matter how
it's travelling, so even distribution of velocities up to C is also
the same from the perspective of each
mass regardless of its velocity.
2. If two masses are near each other, they shadow each other from the
flux of iGravitons which
would otherwise be impacting them from the direction in between them.
This shadowing would
be proportional to the inverse square of the distances between the
masses, and would be proportional
to the probability of each mass colliding with (i.e. absorbing)
iGravitons, and this probability would
be proportional to the amount of each mass.
(So the iGraviton shadow between the masses would have properties like a
gravitational field).
3. The mutual shadowing from momentum-imparting flux from all directions
means that net momentum
would be imparted on the masses toward each other (by nothing other than
the usual collisions
with iGravitons from all other directions.)
4. The deficit of iGravitons (or deficit in velocity of them) in between
absorbtive masses
could be viewed as inward curvature of space-time in that region. Amount
or velocity distribution
of iGraviton flux in a region could correspond in some way with the
dimensionality of space in that region.
I find this theory appealing because
1. it's fundamental assumption for causation of gravity is simple (a
uniformly-distributed-in-velocity-and-density
flux of space-involved (i.e. space-defining) particles.)
2. The paucity of iGravitons (or high iGraviton velocities) in a region
corresponding to inward-curving space
is an appealingly direct analogy. You can visualize iGravitons as
puffing up space and a lack of them
causing space there to sag in on itself.
I'd be willing to bet that someone has thought of this long before and
that it's been proven that
the math doesn't work out for it. Has anyone heard of anything like
this? Is it proven silly already?
Cheers,
Eric
