hello to your team,

Hello Dr Corda,

Happy to see you again. I liked your essay.It is a beautiful extrapolation.

That said, I askme why the gravitation is not inserted. My equations are relevant considering the volumes and the correlated mass of the analyzed sphere, here the BH.The rotations can be calculated. The singularities are central codes.So of course it is difficult to...

view entire post

hello to your team,

Hello Dr Corda,

Happy to see you again. I liked your essay.It is a beautiful extrapolation.

That said, I askme why the gravitation is not inserted. My equations are relevant considering the volumes and the correlated mass of the analyzed sphere, here the BH.The rotations can be calculated. The singularities are central codes.So of course it is difficult to find them with mathematical plays. If the Horizons must be sorted, so the evolution must be inserted like the SR and its limitation of perceptions in 3D, and still more for our present and its superimposings.It is a difficult puzzle. But what are these BH ? I agree they are intriguing.The fact that they absorb all the perceptions of light imply this fact that they are black. So it implies that they are not really black. How can we see them really ? we must put a light near them in fact :)we shall see them. The informations are intriguing coming from these central spheres.I beleive that we must class them. Their volumes increase towards the central BH of our universal sphere.

The AGNs are intriguing indeed , their mass can be correlated with the volumes.

If we take my equations and this one M=(av²)/G and if we unify G h and c , all becomes easier when the gravitation turns in the other sense than c. In fact it unifies the general relativity and the quantum field theory. The 4 forces are unified.Now the volumes are very relevant when they are inserted with the caompton wavelenght and the planck time and mass. The evolution appears when the fermions encode the bosons. The quantum field theory is unified with G simply in turning in the other sense.Now of course the serie of uniqueness is essential for the two systems of gauge.Fermions and bosons.The substitutions with my equations are relevant at my humble opinion.E=m(c³o³s³) and mcosV=const. The spoe is ok :)

The singularities are these central spheres, quantic.and this central BH of our Universal sphere.The mass curves this space time in the respect of the eisntein equations. In logic, if we know the volumes of all our stars of our milky way, so we can calculate the volume of our central spherical BH. the others are in the same logic.The proportions are universally linked. The singularities are so in a pure intresting complexity of these BH because they are unique. In this line of reasoning we can extrapolate the actual volume of our central sphere of our universal sphere.In fact the serie is between these two 1. It is so the fractal and its distribution which becomes relevant.

The volumes of spheres and their rotations spinal and orbital are purelly linked with h and c so G is ok :)because m and hv turns simply in opposite sense. The real ask is so? binar of fusioned.....the volumes are the secret it seems to me.

I liked this essay, I wish you good luck.

Regards

the spherical Jedi

view post as summary

show all replies (1 not shown)

hide replies

show all replies (5 not shown)

hide replies

Dear Christian,

I agree with you that general relativity (GR) is perfect theory which give us exact results. But the problem with GR is connected with the methodology of physics itself and with the fundamentals of the theory. To make the situation more clear let take the next example. Suppose we have a steady flow of an incompressible liquid with a constant flow rate through the tube which...

view entire post

Dear Christian,

I agree with you that general relativity (GR) is perfect theory which give us exact results. But the problem with GR is connected with the methodology of physics itself and with the fundamentals of the theory. To make the situation more clear let take the next example. Suppose we have a steady flow of an incompressible liquid with a constant flow rate through the tube which has a variable cross-section S, in the absence of gravitational forces. If is the density of the liquid, V is the average speed of the flow, then the formula for the mass flux is: When the section S is changing the speed V of the liquid and the density of the kinetic energy Ek in this section is changed: In this case the density of the kinetic energy is inextricably linked with the geometry, and we can write the law of conservation of energy density where is a geometric function of the cross section S, which in general can arbitrarily depend on external conditions affecting S. On the other hand, we can do not use the geometry, and consider the potential energy of the liquid in the form of pressure P, then the sum of the kinetic and the potential energy will be saved regardless of S: This shows that the problem with pseudotensor energy field arises in general relativity because of the fact that there the role of energy is performed by geometric quantities, and the gravitational field itself is reduced to the metric field and the curvature of spacetime. Of course, gravity changes the movement and energy of photons, which are used for the spacetime measurements. Hence the conclusion that the metric tensor in the presence of gravity changes its form relative to the metric of Minkowski space in the special theory of relativity. Therefore, such a change in GR metrics associated with gravity so as to satisfy the principle of equivalence. But then in GR energy-momentum tensor of the gravitational field disappear, and the field itself is not a real physical field but the geometrical object. Hence, there are paradoxes. For example in GR contribution to the gravitational field can make any other field, but the gravitational field itself do not make similar in the form of contributions in other fields. Then, why the gravitational field has such unique status? Because of the geometrization of the field in general relativity, we may never know exactly what causes spacetime to curve near the masses? And what is the maximum extent of this spacetime distortion? And where is the evidence that the degree of curvature is able to achieve the status of a black hole? Some of these problems are solved in the Covariant theory of gravitation. In this theory, gravitation exists as a fundamental physical field and has its own energy-momentum tensor like the electromagnetic field. That's gravitational field affects the movement and energy of photons or other test particles, and thus changes the spacetime metric, found by these photons and particles. The role of geometry is reduced only to a change in the metric by gravitation. At the same time as the physical mechanism of gravitation provides a mechanism in the Le Sage theory of gravitation, i.e. gravitation is a consequence of the fluxes of gravitons. And we can find density of energy of gravitons fluxes (http://vixra.org/abs/1209.0076).

Sergey Fedosin

view post as summary

Dear Christian, et al,

My condolences also on the passing of Dr. Leiter.

I just read, as best I could, your essay today. I must say that I'm a simple person with no qualifications in physics. However, I did find some of the basic points in your analysis to be complimentary to some of my purely conceptual thinking.

In particular, it seems obvious that no form of matter could...

view entire post

Dear Christian, et al,

My condolences also on the passing of Dr. Leiter.

I just read, as best I could, your essay today. I must say that I'm a simple person with no qualifications in physics. However, I did find some of the basic points in your analysis to be complimentary to some of my purely conceptual thinking.

In particular, it seems obvious that no form of matter could be contained within a dimensionless singularity without invoking metaphysical solutions that allow some dimensional exportation while retaining mass effects locally (more later). As for ideas regarding supermassive material objects, as you discuss the densest confirmed objects are pulsars and neutron stars composed of primarily neutrons with perhaps a quark-gluon plasma core.

But as I understand (and you describe on the basis of theory), those objects seem to be limited to less than 2 Solar masses (by degeneracy pressure) while the orbital characteristics of stars in the proximity of the proposed Milky Way SMBH indicate a compact object with a total mass of >4 million Solar masses. It seems problematic to me that any even hypothetical form of exotic matter must have some finite constraint limiting its degeneracy pressure and resulting maximum density, preventing perhaps even the existence of any physical object of millions of Solar masses. I think you may address this in your essay, but I'm afraid I can't adequately comprehend.

I was intrigued by you brief mention of a recent proposal that "the true BHs should have M = 0," as this may relate to some of my thinking. Unfortunately I was unable to identify much less access the document. Actually, my thinking has been not that BHs effectively contain no mass but that perhaps BHs contain only potential mass-energy - separated from its co-configuration with dimensional matter.

My reasoning is that the extreme conditions imposed in particle accelerator experiments disintegrate massive particles, in effect dispersing not only their dimensional material but also whatever physically imparts the property of mass to particles. Gravitational theory describes its effect fundamentally as being proportionate to localized mass. If, in the extreme conditions of acceleration and density imposed upon matter accreted by a BH, with particle collisions or not, matter may be disintegrated, dissipating even its potential mass-energy. Whether manifested as an energy field or some short-lived exotic particles, perhaps the material residue is (however) ejected through the polar jets as observed while much if not all of the original material's potential mass-energy is retained within the BH, perhaps directly imparted as a gravitational field (curved spacetime). In this way, the internal gravitational effects may be physically directed to a single focal point - presenting the effect of a massive gravitational singularity.

Of course these are merely very loose speculations, but they might could explain the extremely energetic, relativistic expulsion of low mass particles and address the issue of potentially unphysical, exceedingly 'dense' masses. This idea, to me at least, does seem to be reasonably based on observed quantum effects under extreme conditions. In that sense this scenario might even provide a closer link between quantum theory and general relativity.

I'd very much appreciate and consideration you may be able to give to these ideas. I'm sorry to take up so much of your time with what may just be naive nonsense.

Sincerely, Jim

view post as summary

show all replies (2 not shown)

hide replies