On 06/05/2010 10:52 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Mauro Lacy <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Wading through the references, I've found the following paper: >> A theory of mass and gravity in 4-dimensional optics >> (http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0109027) >> >> Which lays in mathematical formalism ideas similar to those I've developed >> on my own in an informal way, concerning gravity and mass. >> In my opinion the "graviton" is no more than a perturbation of the standing >> wave, that is, a propagating wave superimposed to the standing gravity wave. >> Something that relates to the concept of "group velocity", but is not >> exactly the same, because that which travels is not the whole wave(which is >> standing) but a perturbation on it. In fact, those perturbations form and >> transform (i.e. equilibrate and distribute) the very structure of the >> standing wave. >> > The observation that I found interesting was that the anomaly observed > by Allais initiated once the eclipse began. Maybe the apparent > "touching" of the two heavenly bodies disrupted the standing wave you > theorize. >
Yes. The paper cited shows this clearly in section 6. The author deserves a Nobel prize. If he hasn't already done so(he gives some indications in the paper, and I need to read other papers), Almeida needs to consider rotation over the fourth dimensional axis as the origin of a particle's gravitational field. Gravitons are no more than the propagation of these rotations outside the particle's standing wave (and the differentiation between standing and propagating waves is a consequence of the wave and its surroudings, i.e. the wave and its interaction with the local vacuum, plus with other "particles", through it.) The interference and superposition of these propagations produce another kind of standing wave, which produces the observed effects of the gravitational field. The atom can probably be explained the same way, as a combination of electromagnetic and gravitational effects on distances smaller than or close to the Compton wavelength (i.e. inside or close to the radius of the particles's own standing waves.) It is interesting to note that, according to Almeida, shielding is caused only by moving bodies(See section 7). In my opinion, subtle shielding effects should manifest also with static bodies. The explanation could be that with moving bodies the observed effect is bigger than with static bodies, as the shielding is in reality a perturbation of the gravitational effects on 3D space, and with moving bodies that perturbation would be bigger. That is, a static body perturbs the environment "once and for all", and becomes then almost totally permeable to these fields, while a moving body is continously perturbating the field. Finally: the possibility of real 4D effects should be considered. That is, not only their expression in 3D space as movement or variation, (for which time is no more than an equivalence), but also their intrinsic nature and properties as a real spatial dimension. Shielding(or no shielding) can maybe be explained that way. The same with non local effects, entanglement, etc. Mauro
