Einstein's Relativity / Elasticity of Space

[haselhurst]

Einstein's Relativity / Elasticity of Space

Hi Mike (Harney),
Thanks for sending details on Einstein's Relativity / Elasticity of Space - interesting and well written.
Have added a few comments below
Cheers,
Geoff

Hi Geoff,

Something new I have been reading:

http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Forum/9850/gtr_mistake.htm

Where the author proposes from General Relativity analysis that spacetime is elastic. This has been speculated before but he has a really neat way of saying it:
-------------------------------------------
We have seen earlier that as the gravitational field develops or varies in a
region of space under consideration, the radial metric coefficient grr and
hence the radial strain component err varies accordingly, leading to the
radial deformation of space. This radial deformation will keep developing or increasing with the development of gravitational field in that region. The
radial deformation of Riemannian space induced by a developing gravitational field, through the variation of its metric tensor, is a reversible phenomenon. That means a developing gravitational field increases the radial metric coefficient grr, thereby increasing the radial spacing between concentric spherical surfaces and thus leading to the increase in radial strain or deformation. But when the gravitational field is reduced back to the initial state, the radial strain will also get reduced to the initial state. This reversible characteristic of the induced radial strain field in response to the external influence of gravitational field, actually implies an elastic response of the Riemannian space!! This implied notion of elasticity property of space is further strengthened with the associated notions of the 'energy' of gravitational field. Hence, we might view this revised notion of space, which is defined to be a continuum of space points, as an Elastic Space.
--------------------------------

Mike - Strain analysis from GR metric shows it's a reversible process so it's elastic! I like this because embedded in Einstein's equations are much of the truth - and although some of his postulates (even as this author says) are invalid, he got the right answer because the math is reversible / symmetric whatever it can be called. In fact, I state it another
way - a gravitating mass does not deform space but is the result of deformed space! The last statement gives the same results mathematically (at least the Schwarzchild solution) and also makes more sense intuitively from WSM theory.

Geoff - I agree, according to the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM) space is deformed by matter, as waves are a deformation of space. And yes Einstein was close to the truth in realising that matter, space and time where united. He made the error of representing matter as continuous spherical fields in space-time, rather than spherical waves in continuous space. This explains why he could not understand the discrete properties of light and matter as found in Quantum Theory, whereas the Wave Structure of Matter explains this discrete aspect of Nature due to standing waves interacting at discrete frequencies (and wave equations where introduced into QT for this very reason, as you know).

Mike - Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't WSM also agree with special relativity (i.e., no mass traveling faster than the speed of light)? This makes sense because the standing matter waves (SMW) are moving at c and any compression of these waves creates the increase in mass and time dilation effect that we measure.

Geoff - Agreed. The 'apparent' motion of the 'particle' is really the successive locations of where the spherical In-Waves meet at their Wave Center (what we see as the 'particle') thus the particle can never move faster than the velocity of waves in space which is the velocity of light c.

Mike - Therefore, although transfer of information at speeds greater than c may be possible (EPR effect - longitudinal stretching of space at higher than c speeds), mass is limited in speed to c.

Geoff - We have a slightly different view on this, but I am seriously keeping an open mind to your ideas (since you are so smart!).
I think there are three wave factors that must be taken into account, and relate to quantum theory / EPR.

i) Group wave interactions (spherical In and Out waves) limited by velocity of waves in space c. (Similar to Einstein's view)

ii) Phase wave interactions (de Broglie waves) which have much higher velocity when relative velocity is small, where phase velocity = c^2 / relative velocity.

iii) Coherent wave interactions which appear instantaneous.

Mike - Also, the continuous nature of space and the propagation of waves rules out worm holes and other space-fabric short cuts because space is continuous, right? I don't see any faster than light travel for humans in the near future, do you? I was pondering this because of the recent discussion about Mars missions and all countries working out ways to get there faster. After looking at WSM it looks to me like we are stuck with chemical/atomic/ionic/nuclear propulsion for space travel - what do you think? Mike

Geoff - I agree.

Great post - thanks.

[mike]

Hi Geoff,

Thanks for the comments. In regards to quantum scalar waves we agree that they cannot travel faster than c, right? This makes sense based on measured value of special relativity and as I have shown previously that the speed of scalar waves (one dimensional) in an elastic medium is
v = sqroot( F /mass-unit-length), where F = kRu (Ru = 1.9 x 10^26 meters, radius of Hubble Sphere and the spring constant k = 7.18 x 10^17 N/m), mass-unit-length = Mass of Universe (1.44 x 10^53 Kg) / Ru. Plugging these numbers in gives the speed of the scalar waves as c and no option for going higher unless the Universe is expanding (which I also doubt it is). I really believe all of this comes down to examining the properties of space as Milo mentions in his book, the chapter "Space, the final frontier" . Wave interactions do create a lot of things, but these all relate to wave properties as well, which relates to the properties of the medium they travel in (space). It seems intuitively possible that this space can be stretched hard enough to convey information from one particle to another at what appears to be faster than c (demonstrated by EPR effect experiments). Thanks for the comments!

Mike

[haselhurst]

Hi Mike,
Nice to hear from you. I hunted out another quote from Einstein that is relevant to the elasticity of Space.

'The subtlety of the concept of space was enhanced by the discovery that there exist no completely rigid bodies. All bodies are elastically deformable.' (Albert Einstein)

It is from the following page on Wave Motion of Space. I have just added a short essay to page on why assuming Space exists is the most simple sensible explanation for our common experience of Space. Has some good quotes from Aristotle, Leibniz, Hume, Kant and Einstein.

http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Metaphysics-Space-Motion.htm

Cheers,
Geoff

[Harry Costas]

Hello All

Just passing through and reading.

Good work