[Posts are sequential, to be read/heard in date order - opposite to the order they’re generally displayed in. Paid-for posts have technical content.]
Please pass a link to these posts to any friend you feel may be interested.
This is a substantially cut-down version of the full post, to give a flavour of the content and style. The full 36-minute post is available, fully illustrated, by agreement for a scientific article or live presentation.
Click the arrow below to hear an audio version of this edited post (15 mins 22 sec).
So where does gravity actually come from?
Let’s start with a simple thought experiment - one we don’t actually need to do physically.
We’ll imagine two identical asteroids, both static with respect to each other, a very long distance apart. Far enough apart that their gravitational attraction on each other is almost nothing (and there are no other planets, stars or gravitating masses close enough to have any effect). Those asteroids will start moving towards each other, almost imperceptibly at first then faster as they get closer together and their mutual gravitational attraction gets ever stronger. Their behaviour will of course be identical, equal and opposite, as they themselves are identical.
Ok, so by the time they get close to each other they’re both moving very fast, due to that increasing mutual attraction. So, now, a question: conservation of energy tells us that each asteroid has the same total energy as it had to start with (since they’re both identical and there’s been no energy input or output) but each asteroid now has a substantial amount of kinetic energy; so where did that come from, since neither asteroid appears to have got smaller, or lost mass-related energy in some other way? That mass-related energy, the E = mc squared stuff, was all they each had initially. Where did that extra kinetic energy magically appear from??
Ok, we’ll now take our thought experiment a step further. We’ll imagine a humungous sized spring of negligible mass hanging in space midway between those two asteroids. It acts like a giant brake, slowing those two asteroids as it’s compressed between them, so that they both come to a halt a short distance apart. We now have two asteroids, static as they were to start with - but now with a compressed spring holding all that energy they built up as kinetic energy on their way towards each other.
Since final energy = initial energy, and final energy now includes that very substantial energy held in a compressed spring, it’s clear that the energy content of each asteroid is now considerably less than it was at the start - even though those asteroids don’t appear to have changed physically in any way.
What we’re seeing here is gravitational negative energy: an object held in the gravitational field of a large mass (as each of these asteroids now is) has less structural energy than it does when it’s free of gravitational fields (as they were at the start).
So how can that be?
Each asteroid is bathed in the extended time-varying electromagnetic fields of the matter-particles of the other. This prompts the receiving asteroid to experience an apparent excess of electromagnetic field effects, aka energy – so it releases some of its structural energy as energy of motion, without compromising its structural integrity.
It’s maybe easier to consider a smaller object - say a pebble dropped from the Leaning Tower of Pisa. The pebble is bathed in the time-varying electromagnetic field effects emanating from the particles of our planet. It experiences an apparent excess of structural energy - so it releases that excess as energy of motion (acting preferentially downwards, for reasons we’ll discuss shortly). It can then exist in a stable state with that reduced energy, as its structural energy is being augmented by those extended field effects of the planet that’s attracting it. When the pebble hits the ground - assuming it doesn’t shatter - it will then release its kinetic energy as sound, heat, maybe compression of the surface, and exist as a stable static pebble with reduced energy: original energy less that negative gravitational energy. To get it back up to the top of the Tower of Pisa would take a positive input of energy to counteract that loss in energy, that negative energy, resulting from that loss in height.
In the same way, each of those asteroids receives structural support for their formative energy-flows from the ‘gravitational field’ of the other, allowing - indeed, forcing - each to transmute some of its structural energy into energy of motion.
[Those two asteroids could of course be returned to their original state by reinstating their full structural energy at the same time as moving each out of the ‘gravitational field’ of the other. This could be done by simply allowing that spring to re-expand, releasing its compressed-spring energy content back into the asteroids. They would each accelerate as the spring expanded to its full length, then the ever-diminishing effect of gravity would slow them at an ever-decreasing rate as their energy of motion was re-absorbed as energy of structure (as the structural support given by the other asteroid’s field in each case would steadily diminish with distance). Ultimately they would come to a halt at the same distance apart as they first started, if the spring was 100% efficient.
. . . Then, presumably, the whole cycle would start again. . . ]
In this we see included the idea of escape velocity: in simple terms, it’s theoretically possible (though unlikely in practice) to give an object on Earth an upward velocity at ground zero sufficient for it to escape from the Earth’s gravitational field: the transfer of energy from kinetic to structural would slow the object as it moved away. Ignoring air resistance, escape velocity from Earth is around 11.2 kilometres per second; this means that (if there were no atmosphere) a projectile such as a bullet fired vertically upwards at that speed would be slowed by our planet’s gravitational pull at an ever-decreasing rate as that pull itself steadily diminished, to the extent that it could never stop that bullet’s motion or pull it back to the Earth; the projectile would, at least in theory, reduce its speed to zero at an infinite distance from Earth, where the planet’s influence on it would also reduce to zero.
When we talk about ‘gravitational pull’, we are of course referring to the effect of the extended electromagnetic field of a gravitating body - Earth in this case - on the electromagnetic energy structure of the affected object - the bullet in this case.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Curvature of Spacetime
Just envisage every particle of matter having around it, extending infinitely in every direction (reducing in strength with distance), electromagnetic field effects from both right and left circularly polarised photons which together form the structure of those particles. This makes the whole of the cosmos a vast ocean of intermingled positive and negative charge effects, both present at every point in space (and not cancelling each other out).
This next picture shows in diagrammatic form a tiny fragment of space in which a particle is immersed in this ocean. We’ll take green to represent positive-charge components and orange for negative-charge components. You’ll see that the particle is electrostatically neutral, being composed of an equal measure of right and left circularly polarised photon energy; also that the surrounding space has an equal balance of positive and negative charge influences.
Let’s imagine that the particle is part of a satellite orbiting Earth. The space surrounding it will contain predominantly charge influences emanating from the matter of the planet (because they’re closest). If you look carefully, you’ll see that those influences are bunched slightly more closely in the upper left of the picture; this tells us that Earth is in that direction relative to the satellite (again, exaggerated for illustration purposes).
Those influences in every direction will give rise to proportional changes in the energetic structure of the particle, translating into attractions and repulsions from all directions. Those effects will be stronger in the upper left direction - towards Earth - and for reasons we’ve already discussed the attractive influence will very slightly exceed the repulsive influence: the satellite will experience an element of attraction towards Earth.
The whole of space is, then, an undulating energy-scape through which all material objects manoeuvre their paths - including those massive bodies which themselves sculpt that energy-scape in its ever-changing form. Equal measures of positive and negative influences, which will be the case everywhere except small pockets around charged objects, combine to form the unbroken fabric of that energetic space-scape and so give rise to the effect referred to as curvature of spacetime. The energetic structure of material objects draws them to follow those contours in concert with their own innate velocities, like cosmic bobsleigh riders. In the case of the satellite, that particular bobsleigh is balancing its own velocity against the downward ‘slope’ of the Earth’s extended electromagnetic influence like a wall of death rider.
[Note that representation of an additional dimension - texture/curvature of space - in this already 3D setup (shown in 2D) is necessarily limited (how does one show the focus of the ‘gravity well’ as being ON the Earth’s surface directly below the satellite, rather than below the Earth?), but as a snapshot in time (yet another dimension) it hopefully gets the idea across.]
The Equivalence Principle: Gravity or Acceleration?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
How is light bent by gravity?
That’s actually quite simple.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Speed of Light. Black Holes
It’s a well-established fact that light moves more slowly in a gravitational field; the stronger the field, the greater the degree of retardation. Why might this be?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Gravitational Time Dilation
Those of you who’ve studied earlier posts on this channel will be well aware that time is propagated across the universe by the time-varying electromagnetic flows - photons - that both form particles and provide the links between them.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Next up:
Photons: Our Passport to the Stars.
A mind-blowing insight into the true nature of Material Reality
In the meantime, be sure to check out Transfinite Mind for a wealth of free resources, including non-technical articles and presentations, as well as books to suit every level of scientific (or non-scientific) background.
Also, if you find these articles interesting and thought-provoking, and you know others who may find them of interest, please be sure to point those others in this direction. Thanks.