There was an error in this gadget

Sunday, November 25, 2012

Mitchell's CliffNotes of CMR


     What is gravity, really?  Okay, it made the apple fall off the tree and bonk Sir Isaac Newton’s head. It makes everything fall back to Earth. There have been a lot of theories for gravity, but the most plausible is relativity. Relativity incorporates many concepts, and conveniently, one of them is gravity. Albert Einstein, the creator of General and Special Relativity, made one of the two variations of relativity, STR (Space-Time Relativity). In STR, space and time are one; a fourth dimension, if you will. In this theory, an invisible “blanket”, called the space-time continuum, is the medium in which relativity works. The more massive an object is, the more it causes a depression in the “blanket”. If a watermelon is the sun and a blanket is the space-time continuum, then if you put the watermelon on the blanket it causes a depression proportional to its mass. Furthermore, an object with mass less than or equal to another object’s mass will be gravitationally attracted toward that object if it’s close enough. If I were to put an orange on the blanket, it would cause a depression proportional to its mass, and if close enough would roll towards the watermelon. An apple is less massive than our planet, and it is definitely close enough to have a gravitational attraction to Earth. If it’s attracted it will move towards the Earth’s center, so when the tree’s branches become too weak, gravity takes over.
     Should we believe in this theory? After all, it is very plausible. I loved it until Black Friday came along. I went to Brookline to visit my grandfather, Grandpa Charles, and his wife, Martha. I also met a guy whose parents were told by his grade school teacher he was “feeble-minded” (He ended up graduating at Harvard University and becoming a professor there.). I thought STR was the only theory of relativity until Grandpa Charles told me otherwise at Panera. In 2008, a man named Edward Apgar created a new theory of relativity explaining gravity called CMR (Charge-Mass Relativity). I thought STR was the only theory of relativity there was, so I didn’t bother calling it STR. I just called it relativity. But apparently a new theory of relativity was created four years ago. I couldn’t believe I had first learned about the old relativity rather than the one. After all, CMR was out by the time I started learning about quantum mechanics (I did not start learning about physics when I was six!). Well, here is the story of CMR in “English”.
      An atom has a center ball of particles called a nucleus. The particles in the nucleus are the neutrally charged neutrons and the positively charged protons, which have a charge of about 1/2 (never mind the unit of measurement). Circling the nucleus are the negatively charged electrons, which have a charge opposite of the protons, equal to about -1/2. There are an equal amount of protons as there are electrons in an atom, so they should balance each other out giving the atom a neutral charge. Just like the same sides of a magnet repel each other, an electron-electron combo repel each other and a proton-proton pair repel each other. Also just like opposite sides of two magnets attract, an electron-proton pair or a proton-electron pair attract each other. In fact, magnets make use of protons and electrons. If two hydrogen atoms are near each other, each with one proton and one electron, they should not exert any attractions except gravitational attractions. The reason the atoms don’t repel because of the proton in atom 1 and the proton in atom 2 or the two electrons is because of the electric attractions. What about the proton in atom 1 combined with the electron in atom 2 or vice versa? These forces balance each other out. Done! Who needs CMR! Who even cares! Wait a second. Since when can we just assume that the attractive and repulsion forces are equal?! “Duhhhhh”, one might say. Duh what? That’s a nice assumption but physics isn’t perfect like that. Mr. Apgar found that the attractive forces between those atoms is slightly greater than the repulsion forces. This is an attraction, and gravity is an attraction. Essentially what my grandfather was saying was that gravity is not a force on its own, but rather a side effect of electric forces between atoms. And to finish it off, he whipped out a photocopy of the very CMR paper itself. This proves he isn’t just some guy making up some lunatic theory. He’s even met Mr. Apgar himself and PAM Dirac, one of the greatest physicists of all time. And by the way, my lack of updating has been inexcusable, even with my business. My next entry will be much sooner. 

3 comments:

  1. Hi Mitchell,

    Your CMR (charge-mass relativity) description in your CMR Cliffnotes blog is all correct. I think so, Ed Apgar thinks so. Your blog has energized and inspired me and Ed feels that way too. Nice work.

    The best part of your blog was the word "duhhhh", by which you express the obviousness of the basic thought, which is that the enormous attractive electrical forces may not be exactly the same strength as the enormous repulsive forces, but might be stronger by a little bit.

    Even though this idea is completely obvious, and very compelling, the idea is held by only four physicists, at least that I know about. Those four would be me, Ed, Uncle Mike, and you. (Ed's original manuscript, from which his "Physics Essays" paper was prepared, had been typed up for him seventeen years earlier by Uncle Mike.)

    When I say that the electrical forces operating between the proton and the electron on the left (so to speak) and the proton and the electron on the right are how many times stronger than the so-called gravitational force between the two hydrogen atoms? A hundred billion billion billion billion times stronger, that's how much stronger the electrical forces are than the so-called gravitational force. That's ten to the power of 38. That's a one with 38 zeros after it.

    So the attractive forces would have to be only a hundred billion billion billion billion-th stronger that the repulsive forces to account for gravity.

    So your "duhhhh" perfectly captures the essence of what's involved her.

    Of course what's being discussed here is the simple version of the CMR theory. It's what I used to refer to as the grandmother theory, because even a person's grandmother could understand it (with apologies for the sexist and age-ist nature of that designation. By the way, your grandmother does understand this, she totally got it. Now I can call it the grandson version, because you understand it so well.

    As you will see when you read further, based on this simple idea, Ed's paper goes on to derive the entire relativistic Newton mechanics, including gravity and Mach's principle). Ed shows that all of this follows logically from the electrical theory of Maxwell (Maxwell's equations).

    Once again, nice work explaining charge-mass relativity to your enthralled blog readers.

    Grandpa Charles

    ReplyDelete
  2. JER’s UNIVERSE EXPOUNDED

    After re-reading Hawking's "A Brief History of Time" I’ve got it all figured out.

    I've decided that the rate of time is constant. Space itself is the fundamental unified field, and is a flowing medium. At distance equals zero from the event horizon of black holes space flows at the speed of light (the terminal velocity of the medium) into the center. Particle motion itself slows down, at right angles to the direction of travel, or in the dense regions of space (same difference because the densest regions have maximum flow) causing the illusion of time dilation. Particle motion stops at the speed of light (maximum density) because the Lorentz contractions cause the particles to flatten completely in the direction of travel, becoming two dimensional. All fundamental particles are the miniature black holes created in the early moments of the big bang. All of the fundamental massless field spins are the signature black body radiation emanating from these individual flavors of internally stabilized black hole formations. Gravity doesn’t fit into quantum mechanics definitions, because gravity is not a field, but a symptom of space itself flowing into all matter, causing distance between all materialistic bodies to decrease. Apparent gravitational lensing is literal lensing caused by density changes in the flowing medium of space itself. There is no spectral separation because photons of any frequency propagate through a massless medium at the same rate.

    Space is the zero sum field of equilibrium and is both the sync and source of all other fields. Thus all fields arise in pairs, of equal and opposite energy.

    Using the electro-magnetic field as an example; if a single photon is the only thing in a universe it is a massless hole in space of definite energies in both the electric field and the magnetic field at right angles to each other. Before it exists, there is no time because space is at equilibrium. Nothing is flowing, and nothing is measurable. All of space is at the same density everywhere, existing only as potential (I call this eternity). The instant our photon comes in to existence (little bang) space begins to flow from distance equal zero from the event to distance equals infinity. This is also the beginning of time because we can now measure space against itself, and every point in space is different from every other point in speed and direction. When measuring anything against itself, we measure it through time. Space returns to its natural state of equilibrium by filling this hole in space from the center and distributing the energy outward, now a tear in space, in a single spherical pulse of electro-magnetic radiation diminishing its energy through time. At time equal infinity the electro-magnetic energy is reduced to zero, returning space to the original equilibrium. The photon is gone, time ends, and eternity awaits any other event.

    Now consider a single point source electric charge, a single electron. The electron radiates its negative electric field. But wait! Where is the equal and opposite field energy. By definition, it must exist. We know that an electric charge in motion causes a circulation in the magnetic field at a right angle to the direction of travel in our current universe. However, our electron exists in the universe by itself, so where is the magnetic field. From time equal zero, as the electric field radiates in an ever expanding sphere at the speed of light, the associated magnetic field exists only on the edge of the growing sphere, and charges in energy equal to the overall energy of the growing electric field. The source of this energy is space itself flowing in toward the center of the point source charge transforming into the electro-magnetic fields. As the electric field flows outward it presses against the magnetic field causing back pressure from all direction of equal force, thus motion of the point source charge remains zero.
    Continues on Facebook
    https://www.facebook.com/JerryLeeColemanJr/posts/315087451968956

    ReplyDelete
  3. JER’s UNIVERSE EXPOUNDED (continued)

    Applying particle field theory to the growing electrical field, these electrical field particles cannot cause circulation to the magnetic field because of adjacent field particles counter balancing the forces of circulation, but adding energy nonetheless. This magnetic field therefore is mono-polar in nature (neither north nor south). Let’s call it “west” for a negative electric charge and “east” for a positive electric charge keeping to the common metaphor.

    Now let’s allow for two electrons to come in to existence simultaneously, some distance apart. At time equal zero; these two point sources will have relative motion toward one another (gravitational illusion), because space is flowing into each of them, thus diminishing distance. Until the spheres grow large enough for the magnetic fields to come in contact with one another there is actually no real motion of either particle. They are remaining stationary within their own spheres of backpressure at equilibrium. Both particles are just being carried along with the point of space in which they originated (dark matter).

    At some point in time, each sphere grows large enough to come in contact with the other sphere at some point in space. Each sphere now has a point on their surface at twice the “west” magnetic field energy, disrupting the backpressure equilibrium imparting real motion in space. As each sphere continues to grow, this point on each sphere grows as a circle of more intense “west” magnetic field energy, increasing the speed of real motion caused by the increasing disruption of backpressure equilibriums. Eventually, the real motion in the opposite direction of the relative motion will reduce apparent motion to zero. However, the spheres will continue to grow, so the apparent motion changes in the same direction as real motion and continues to increase in speed.

    In a universe containing two positrons instead of electrons, the electric fields are now positive, the magnetic fields are “east” in nature. The results of real, relative, and apparent motion are the same.

    Now let’s look at a universe replacing only one charge with its opposite. When the spheres grow to the point at which they come in contact what happens? A single point on each sphere now results in equal and opposite field energies of “west” and “east” magnetism as well as positive and negative electricity that cancel and change back into space (dark energy). New space is actually being returned to the universe at this point. This causes the relative motion to decrease in speed by injecting new space between the original points of space in which the particles originated. The point of contact on each sphere grows to the circle of new space. The backpressure equilibriums of each sphere however causes apparent and real motion toward the new space overcoming the inverse relative motion (dark energy) in runaway fashion until the distance between the particles becomes zero and they annihilate each other. Thus returning the universe to its natural state of equilibrium as the remainder of the electro-magnetic fields dissipate again at time equal infinity, similar to the original photon example this theory presented.

    All of the other materialistic particles in the standard quantum model obey these same laws.

    All we need now is a mathematician grad student willing to re-write all of the current particle physics equations of quantum mechanics without prejudice. This will result in a grand unified ætheral theory of the universe, along the lines of Hendrik Lorentz’s train of thought I imagine he had when he came up with the exact same transformation equations Einstein did.

    https://www.facebook.com/JerryLeeColemanJr/posts/315087451968956

    ReplyDelete