tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post6623645124378737526..comments2024-03-21T09:01:08.175-07:00Comments on Physics with an edge: Quantised Inertia from FundamentalsMike McCullochhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00985573443686082382noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-73722336471444664102017-10-12T10:57:27.927-07:002017-10-12T10:57:27.927-07:00Dear William: Thanks. I'm doing my best to exp...Dear William: Thanks. I'm doing my best to explain it, but it would be better if someone could produce an animation.Mike McCullochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00985573443686082382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-14371789423971649282017-10-12T09:59:05.256-07:002017-10-12T09:59:05.256-07:00Mike : this is getting slightly more understandabl...Mike : this is getting slightly more understandable but on a scale from 1-10 (where 10 is complete understanding) I am still only at a 2 or 3 (I'm 1968 Math Grad - Kings College, London) . I studied relativity in the 60's and later believe the profs either didn't understand it themselves, or didn't really want us to understand it. There were no text books in those days. <br /><br />I believe we CAN improve this (much better) description so it allows a layman to achieve a 6 in understanding. If anyone has the skills to achieve this please leave a note here. William E Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10613319018039687284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-61409240957673585312017-05-24T15:11:27.859-07:002017-05-24T15:11:27.859-07:00When reading this article I remembered your shape:...When reading this article I remembered your shape: https://futurism.com/study-reveals-new-insights-into-a-strange-force-that-can-both-pull-and-push-objects/<br />Might be an interesting case ( to test QI in relation to blackbody radiation ) ?<br />Sorry if the idea is nonsense.Lord Acescohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04600344354692209522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-60678594734365892802017-05-21T05:52:00.776-07:002017-05-21T05:52:00.776-07:00Hi Mike - Can you extend this concept to include t...Hi Mike - Can you extend this concept to include the time-energy uncertainty principle so as to explain why clocks tick slower on earth yet faster in orbit? ThanksGermhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00742015426098209175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-47999395607214671982017-04-27T10:51:02.069-07:002017-04-27T10:51:02.069-07:00tammor: It is not the same as quantised inertia, b...tammor: It is not the same as quantised inertia, but it is getting closer. After someone else told me about this paper I emailed Lee Smolin to say that he should have cited me (I've sent him a few of my papers by email over the past few years) and he kindly replied saying he hadn't noticed them, but would cite me from now on. I hope he does and we can develop a working relationship. He'd be a great person to help to embed QI into GR, if that is possible.Mike McCullochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00985573443686082382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-88556707355275725022017-04-27T06:02:55.560-07:002017-04-27T06:02:55.560-07:00Hi Mike,
Isn't this paper basically the same ...Hi Mike,<br /><br />Isn't this paper basically the same as your MiHsC theory?<br />https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.00780tammorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01364231628636489881noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-11803298680018395522017-04-26T06:00:49.162-07:002017-04-26T06:00:49.162-07:003e: This is my first very vague attempt to embed Q...3e: This is my first very vague attempt to embed QI in GR but in QI an object's movement is determined as horizons appear or dissappear around it changing its information about the world (releasing energy). As a result the inertial mass is not the same in different directions, and since we have an acceleration vector determining horizons and an inertial vector being determined by them, this needs a tensor representation. This looks a bit like GR in that whereas in GR objects follow the curve of spacetime, in QI their inertia varies with bent space (ie: horizons which are more observable). The difference is, and this is one way to think of it, very distant horizons are close to the cosmic one, reducing inertia in a new way for the low accelerations so QI can be thought of as being like GR at high acceleration, but with this cosmic boundary condition appearing at low acceleration.Mike McCullochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00985573443686082382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-67481837306736965822017-04-26T04:36:06.593-07:002017-04-26T04:36:06.593-07:00Can you elaborate on why this theory is "tens...Can you elaborate on why this theory is "tensor-ish"??3ehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05145175234427434795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-51827282577550686142017-04-21T03:42:41.370-07:002017-04-21T03:42:41.370-07:00Zephir: You're missing the overall. The agreem...Zephir: You're missing the overall. The agreement demonstrates a deeper paradigm: mass is caused by changes in how aware a photon is of its environment.Mike McCullochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00985573443686082382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-88663499986002862482017-04-21T02:11:35.093-07:002017-04-21T02:11:35.093-07:00Peter: Thanks. It is not quite a complete system y...Peter: Thanks. It is not quite a complete system yet, there is still the issue of time.Mike McCullochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00985573443686082382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-83746780491226912512017-04-20T21:11:34.155-07:002017-04-20T21:11:34.155-07:00/* This is very close to the mass of the electron .../* <a href="https://arxiv.org/pdf/1610.06787.pdf" rel="nofollow">This is very close</a> to the mass of the electron measured in experiments */<br /><br />Well - it should be even better, because the Compton wavelength of electron can be calculated just by using of electron mass and by anything else - or not? You wrote, that you neglected only term, which is by 38 orders of magnitude smaller than the first one - from where such a difference emerges? You somehow managed to lose an information during your algebra?Zephirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-73509812733068313542017-04-20T01:43:30.148-07:002017-04-20T01:43:30.148-07:00Dan: You are right of course: they are not quite d...Dan: You are right of course: they are not quite diamonds. It's just the way I drew it in powerpoint. The reality is a smoother, more rounded shape.Mike McCullochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00985573443686082382noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-13659771066303722092017-04-19T20:00:09.461-07:002017-04-19T20:00:09.461-07:00Andrews: IMO key sentence from article IMO there i...Andrews: IMO key sentence from article IMO there is <br /><br />..."let us imagine that the (Planck) masses within m and M are being buffeted<br />from all sides by particles from the zero point field and moving at random. The<br />net effect, forgetting horizons for a moment, will be zero.."<br /><br /><br />Where we could read about it first? Well, already in May 1693, when Nicolas Fatio de Duillier proposed an explanation of gravity in which an omni-directional flux of small particles permeates all of space and tends to push objects together because they mutually shield each other from this flux. According to David Gregory “Mr. Newton and Mr. Halley laugh at Mr. Fatio’s manner of explaining gravity”. His friendship with Newton abruptly ended this moment.<br />Zephirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-28054164827330900952017-04-19T18:04:35.986-07:002017-04-19T18:04:35.986-07:00Congratulations Mike! Isn't this a big step fo...Congratulations Mike! Isn't this a big step forward for you? My previous understanding was that while you suspected something similar to QI could explain gravity, you hadn't nailed it down yet. Sounds like you have now - terrific!PeterVermonthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05317675277361584804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-51808371402521515442017-04-19T14:39:14.684-07:002017-04-19T14:39:14.684-07:00The connection of uncertainty principle to particl...The connection of uncertainty principle to particle mass looks most interesting for me. I'd recommend the review <a href="http://vixra.org/abs/1407.0186" rel="nofollow">Nigel Cook's approach</a> in this direction - he also utilizes projective geometry of sort for renormalization. Zephirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-58014398360887830222017-04-19T14:26:44.063-07:002017-04-19T14:26:44.063-07:00Here's a new preprint of relevance...
Univers...Here's a new preprint of relevance...<br /><br /><a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.03921" rel="nofollow">Universal Properties of Centripetal Accelerations in Spiral Galaxies</a><br /><br />James G. O'Brien, Thomas L. Chiarelli, Philip D. Mannheim<br />(Submitted on 12 Apr 2017)<br /><br />In a recent paper McGaugh, Lelli, and Schombert (Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{117}, 201101 (2016)) showed that in a plot of the observed centripetal accelerations against those predicted by the Newtonian gravity of the luminous matter in spiral galaxies the data points occupied a remarkably narrow band. While one could summarize the mean properties of the band by drawing a single mean curve through it, we show here that the width of the band is just as physically significant. We show this by fitting the band with the illustrative conformal gravity theory, with fits that fill out the width of the band. We show that at very low luminous Newtonian accelerations the plot can become independent of the visible matter contribution altogether, with luminous matter not just inside individual galaxies but outside of them as well (viz. the rest of the visible universe) jointly producing the band.<br /><br />qraalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13436948899560519608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-57649388149330845172017-04-19T14:26:43.189-07:002017-04-19T14:26:43.189-07:00Why would they be diamonds? Isn't it kind of a...Why would they be diamonds? Isn't it kind of an orbital of positional probability based on the ideal that the distance to the next object in that direction is influencing its momentum directionally?Dan's Test Bloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11241554417665894721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4637778157419388168.post-48917153934928073762017-04-19T07:02:34.361-07:002017-04-19T07:02:34.361-07:00CoolCoolMark In Mayennehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14987723233401368368noreply@blogger.com