Action at a Distance = Fiction

[Lloyd]

Forces of Attraction = Fiction
* Until I discover otherwise, it appears to me that any force of attraction, whether it be gravitational, magnetic, electrical, or otherwise, must be non-existent and illogical, at least in the physical universe. As far as I know, action at a distance refers to forces of attraction. Forces of repulsion involve one particle in motion colliding with another particle. As the one particle is moving toward the other before collision, I don't think anyone considers that motion a force of attraction. The one particle's motion just happens to put it on a collision path with the other.
* Likewise, the motion of particles toward each other in the case of apparent attraction, such as gravity, or other attractions, is more reasonably the result of repulsive forces from the opposite direction/s. In the case of an object "falling" toward Earth, the cause of the motion is likely a higher pressure (from moving particles) from outside, while Earth itself has a lower pressure. The same would apply to all "gravitating" bodies; they would all have lower pressures than the pressure outside.
* We can understand repulsive forces easily as being the result of one particle or body in motion hitting another particle or body to which both react by elastic motion in opposite directions. An attractive force on the other hand cannot be visualized, but is instead akin to magic. Try to imagine the space between two particles pulling them together. What can be in that space that does that? Nothing physical.
Reference
* I invite anyone to check out any of the discussions of "action at a distance" that have previously occurred on this website at http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fthunderbolts.info+"action+at+a+distance" and see if any of them help provide insight. I'll try to do the same. I also invite you to share your own thoughts on this issue. You could also do a search on "attraction" or "attractive force" etc, but I suppose that would be much less productive.
Emission of Particles
* Michael V and Philip Kanarev and Miles Mathis and Brant Callahan all seem to surmise that electrons and maybe protons emit photons or aether particles, which produce a repulsive force outward. But I think the emission, while it increases pressure in its surroundings, also reduces the pressure within it. The constant vibration-like motions of particles cause those in higher pressure areas to move toward low pressure areas and equalize. So "attractive" forces of gravitation, etc are motions from higher pressure areas toward lower pressure areas.
Paradox
* I've had this idea for several months, since thinking about Mathis' ideas, but I was just now reminded that gravity acts faster than light and almost instantaneously, which I hadn't considered before. I'll have to take that into account and see if the higher pressure forces can explain such near-instantaneous motion of gravity. It seems that it would imply that photons or aether particles would have to be packed together very tightly throughout the known universe. And that would seem to preclude the possibility of anything being able to emit such photons or aether particles. So there's a paradox for me for now.

[Lloyd]

* The first link I found in searching this website for "action at a distance" is for this article.
Electric Gravity
A NEW PARADIGM OF SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2012/01/19/article-10-are-some-ideas-in-todays-science-ready-for-retirement-part-1/
January 19, 2012
Nicholas Sykes

- The Special Theory [of Relativity] is overturned by the understanding of the new paradigm about the nature of gravitational action. Gravity is indeed not an unfathomable influence that one object distant from a second object has upon it without a connection between them. The idea that it was “action at a distance” was actually a criticism that Sir Isaac Newton received over his work. - Newton himself said that the idea that one body could act upon another at a distance without some intermediary action was wholly unacceptable. ... Newton’s mathematics was directly applicable to a model of the apparently instantaneous action of gravity between two bodies separated from one another. In its revolutions around the Sun, the Earth conforms to a Newtonian model very well: the fact that it is not thrown out of orbit progressively by every revolution must mean that the gravitation between the Sun and the Earth operates so fast that it could be considered to be instantaneous.
- The Electric Universe paradigm maintains that the gravitational influence of the Sun upon the Earth does act upon it by a discoverable process through the intermediary of what older philosophers referred to as the “aether”, but that the speed with which this happens is vastly greater than the speed of light waves.

* And that article led me to this one, somewhat on a tangent.
The Mass Mystery
Article 14 : Solving the mystery of mass
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2012/02/25/article-14-solving-the-mystery-of-mass/

... So now let us proceed to the “mystery of mass“. ... These words of the mathematician and philosopher Henri Poincaré were published posthumously in his book “Science and Methods” in 1914: “What we call mass would seem to be nothing but an appearance, and all inertia to be of electromagnetic origin.”
... Then is mass the sum of all the various particles that make up the body – considering these particles to be fundamental particles? It does not appear, however, that such a calculation would give a result consistent with our understanding of mass as we normally measure it. In that respect, such a measure of mass is no better than seeing it as the space or volume occupied by the body.
- Mass is seen also in Newtonian physics as Inertia, and this can start us on a fruitful track. Wal Thornhill has pointed out that if we apply force (for example, a push) to a body, which then moves (or at least reacts to the force), the interaction between the force and the body is an electrical one, pure and simple. Whatever attractive forces might exist are more than overcome by the forces of repulsion, chiefly those between the outer electrons in the atoms closest to the points of contact. As Poincaré pointed out a century or so ago, inertia (and therefore inertial mass) is an electromagnetic quantity.
- This suggests that if the weight or heaviness of the body is proportional to its inertial mass, as Newton states and his (and our) experiments have confirmed, the pull of gravity is likewise an electrical (or electromagnetic) effect. As Thornhill says, “if we can explain inertia, gravity and magnetism in electrical terms, the electric force would become the only one required in the universe.” The pertinent so far unexplained piece in this intriguing science story is how to explain gravity in electrical terms. And this we will be moving on to in succeeding articles.

* Well, Sykes gave some helpful background, but doesn't seem to actually explain how gravity etc is not "action at a distance". So I'll try to move on.

[Lloyd]

* This is from the second link.
Particles with Empty Space Between

SJW said:

Michael V wrote: This is exactly defined as particles separated by empty space. I understand the appeal of visualising a continuous aethereal fluid, but it is a vital necessity of a fluid of any description that it be particles separated by empty space. An atomic fluid is 99.9999....% empty space, an aethereal fluid will be no different.
- The full universe is totally and utterly solid in the ultimate and absolute meaning of that concept, with no chance or hint of motion at any level. You can build model upon model with layer upon layer of aethereal field of finer and finer grained particles, but it will be to no avail. To retain a viable property of motion a vast majority of empty space in required.

I so wholeheartedly agree, and yet the concept is almost unbearable to agree with as well. For such a notion requires action at a distance, as there can be no physical contact.

* Well, that one reinforces the paradox I mentioned initially regarding how could there be emission, if there is no empty space between particles, and how could there be almost instantaneous gravitational force, if there's much space between particles.

[jacmac]

Thank you Lloyd for this topic.
I wish to speak only to the speed of gravity, and to leave the nature of gravity and the nature of the space between objects to another time. How fast does the action at a distance work?
My opinion is that the speed of gravity is the same as the speed of light.
It is suggested that gravity needs to operate instantly (faster than the speed of light) to properly explain the orbits of planets around the sun in our solar system.
At any instant gravity must operate RIGHT NOW to keep the earth in orbit, the speed of light is too slow it is said.
I believe that this does not consider that there is an ongoing relationship between the two bodies. This gravity relationship can be generated from the two bodies outward at the speed of light and still work in the real world because it is a continuous stream of gravity, so to speak, and not separate instants of gravity that must work independently of each other.
I hold this opinion from general reading of physics and do not have any real supporting evidence at this time.
Jack

[PersianPaladin]

I have to admit, I have a limited understanding of what ultimately constitutes apparent attraction and repulsion. All I know is that it apparently exists as a phenomena, and that's what electrical engineers and physicists just work with.

I think there can be quite a bit of things learned from the behaviour of planetary and solar magnetospheres and their complexity (with respect to interactions with other bodies) as a sort of analogy for how things probably work at the atomic and subatomic levels. Magnetic energy (itself being a reflection of moving charged particles) is present everywhere in space, even if the fields are locally very weak within any particular region or cell of plasma. The fields travel in different directions relative to each other - and thus the push-pull dynamics are going to manifest in a variety of ways. A rotating charge-sheath vortex can have an azimuthal magnetic field that pulls energy inward toward it - and thus manifests as "attraction" which weakens with distance. Here's an example of charge-sheath vortex dynamics:-

http://www.peter-thomson.com/tornado/fu ... rnado.html

In my own personal understanding, there is a force acting on everything this instant - in different ways. Magnetic behaviour does seem to have wave dynamics even if it does apparently associate itself with particles. The apparent dilemma of wave-particle dynamics + the "aether" is also looked at as part of Sorce Theory...which is an interesting concept I've lately been looking at:-

http://www.spinbitz.net/#ST_UtB

[sjw40364]

Hey all. Some interesting ideas. This is one subject dear to my heart because I, like most, see the quandary. If gravity is an attractive force then particles must be in constant contact, yet able to rearrange so there are less and less particles between as objects near. Repulsion from outside is just as untenable. If all objects emit this particle then you should weigh less on larger planets, not more as more particles are being emitted from the larger object. For the outside particles to overwhelm the source of said particles they must never loose their repulsive force (faster than light particles?) and travel through planets up to certain diameters, i.e. larger planets block more from shielding than the force they are emitting. Smaller planets more of the particles penetrate all the way through, thereby pushing more from the opposite side and you weigh less. The problem is that these particles must be from every direction equally and they must not interfere with each other, only matter they contact. Or perhaps matter is these particles that have collided and dropped under the "c" threshold.

As for faster than light action of the gravitational force I see no alternative but that it is so. Newtonian gravity is an instant action and mathematically describes the solar system well enough. GR is said to be more exacting and most believe that it uses the speed c for the gravitational force. They would be wrong. To calculate the speed of light we use aberration, i.e. the time of flight of the beam and its angle it must lead the receiver for the receiver to intersect its path (think slant of raindrops while driving in your car). GR uses no aberration for the gravitational force. Zero aberration means instantaneous action. Of course this is incorrect, nothing is instantaneous, but it is orders of magnitude faster than c, which is why the math works. For the same orbital calculations if you used the speed of light you will always get the wrong answers. To calculate gravitational objects you calculate its current position, not where it will be in so much elapsed timeline as you do with light.

[Chromium6]

Consider this event and action at a distance:

-------------


Last Updated: Friday, 18 February, 2005, 19:10 GMT

Huge 'star-quake' rocks Milky Way

An arrow locates the position of SGR1806-20 in a University of Hawaii image
The position of SGR1806-20 in a radio image of the sky - 50,000 light-years away
Astronomers say they have been stunned by the amount of energy released in a star explosion on the far side of our galaxy, 50,000 light-years away.

The flash of radiation on 27 December was so powerful that it bounced off the Moon and lit up the Earth's atmosphere.

The blast occurred on the surface of an exotic kind of star - a super-magnetic neutron star called SGR 1806-20.

If the explosion had been within just 10 light-years, Earth could have suffered a mass extinction, it is said.


This is a once-in-a-lifetime event

Dr Rob Fender, Southampton University
"We figure that it's probably the biggest explosion observed by humans within our galaxy since Johannes Kepler saw his supernova in 1604," Dr Rob Fender, of Southampton University, UK, told the BBC News website.

One calculation has the giant flare on SGR 1806-20 unleashing about 10,000 trillion trillion trillion watts.

"This is a once-in-a-lifetime event. We have observed an object only 20km across, on the other side of our galaxy, releasing more energy in a 10th of a second than the Sun emits in 100,000 years," said Dr Fender.

Fast turn

The event overwhelmed detectors on space-borne telescopes, such as the recently launched Swift observatory.

This facility was put above the Earth to detect and analyse gamma-ray bursts - very intense but fleeting flashes of radiation.

The giant flare it and other instruments caught in December has left scientists scrambling for superlatives.

Swift, Nasa

Swift moved quickly to track down the source of the gamma-rays
Twenty institutes from around the world have joined the investigation and two teams are to report their findings in a forthcoming issue of the journal Nature.

The light detected from the giant flare was far brighter in gamma-rays than visible light or X-rays.

Research teams say the event can be traced to the magnetar SGR 1806-20.

This remarkable super-dense object is a neutron star - it is composed entirely of neutrons and is the remnant collapsed core of a once giant star.

Now, though, this remnant is just 20km across and spins so fast it completes one revolution every 7.5 seconds.

"It has this super-strong magnetic field and this produces some kind of structure which has undergone a rearrangement - it's an event that is sometimes characterised as a 'star-quake', a neutron star equivalent of an earthquake," explained Dr Fender.

"It's the only possible way we can think of releasing so much energy."

Continued glow

SGR 1806-20 is sited in the southern constellation Sagittarius. Its distance puts it beyond the centre of the Milky Way and a safe distance from Earth.

"Had this happened within 10 light-years of us, it would have severely damaged our atmosphere and would possibly have triggered a mass extinction," said Dr Bryan Gaensler, of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, who is the lead author on one of the forthcoming Nature papers.

"Fortunately there are no magnetars anywhere near us."

The initial burst of high-energy radiation subsided quickly but there continues to be an afterglow at longer radio wavelengths.

This radio emission persists as the shockwave from the explosion moves out through space, ploughing through nearby gas and exciting matter to extraordinary energies.

"We may go on observing this radio source for much of this year," Dr Fender said.

This work is being done at several centres around the globe, including at the UK's Multi-Element Radio-Linked Interferometer Network (Merlin) and the Joint Institute for VLBI (Very Long Baseline for Interferometry) in Europe - both large networks of linked radio telescopes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4278005.stm

[+EyeOn-W-ANeed2Know]

"It's the only possible way we can think of releasing so much energy."

LOL! I think that's the most accurate statement in that whole thing.

[sjw40364]

"It's the only possible way we can think of releasing so much energy."

LOL! I think that's the most accurate statement in that whole thing.

It's the only possible way they can think of so much energy being released because their theory ties them to gravitational forces only. If they actually broadened their perspective they might find several things capable of releasing that much energy and more.

[jacmac]

A small addition to my above post:

I am suggesting that it appears the earth / sun interaction happens instantaneously because the earth is in the solar gravity field. The earth reacts instantaneously to the field and not to the sun itself. I am suggesting the fields of each body are continuously generated at the speed of light, but once engaged with another body the interaction is instantaneous between the field and the body.

jack

[sjw40364]

I believe gravity does indeed act FTL because the quantum charge field responds faster than even a photon. Photons travel on this quantum charge field, they travel through this field as fast as their EM properties allow them too, just as larger masses (electrons and protons) travel through the field as fast as their EM properties allow.

Most have probably read this, but it is quite interesting.

http://www.gravitywarpdrive.com/Speed_of_Gravity.htm

[webolife]

Joining this discussion late as I have been traveling much this summer and preoccupied.
If you've been around this forum for very long, you know that my Centropic Pressure Field theory is fundamentally built upon action at a distance, and my persistence in referring to it keeps the subject coming up. Some summative points in reference to the initial statements of this thread:
1. The AAAD I refer to in the CPFT is conceivable from the premise that the universe is finite, both in mass and extent, though the fractality of universal geometry allows for this to be discussed without reference to extent. The universe is finite with respect to an in[de]finite field, in the same way that one can look at the earth as finite with respect to say the solar system, or an atomic nucleus with respect to the atom; or a cruder way of saying this is that any ostensible center of action is surrounded by a relatively huge amount of space between it and any other [particle?] it is interacting with or influenced by. Herein lies the paradox --- From the viewpoint of the universal field, everything in the universe is joined as if there were a single particle, but from the viewpoint of each individual particle or [non-particle] center, it's field is in[de]finitely large. The universal field "sees" no distance, only connection, whereas the finite particle or center [the "local" viewpoint] "sees" no connection, only distance.
2. AAAD is therefore a matter of perspective only. Some around here cannot conceptualize "force", only relative motion, with momentum transferred only by collision. This forces them to theorize all sorts of imaginary intermediary particles filling the spaces between the ostensible centers: an aether, or a quantum field, or rope-thread-chains, or FTL gravitions... Yet there is no doubt in the minds of those who can conceptualize "force" that actions are induced upon objects by other objects separated by some fairly large amount of space, and that this induction occurs at an immeasurably[?] high speed. Deeply entrenched convention/paradigm causes us to think and say that such induction happens at the speed of light [ie. c or ~3X10^8 mps], but if everything is indeed connected no "speed" is necessary... when an electronic field collapses [aka an electron jumps to lower energy level] on the surface of a distant star, I [who am directly connected to it via the universal field] see it. No significant delay is required, other than the electrochemical delays connected with biological or technological "vision". AAAD. No relativistic time dilations or mathematical contradictions like 2c = c... if c is actually 0, then 2(0) = 0.
3. My CPF is a compressive field, so there is no "attraction". This is an affront to the idea that light is emitted... the vectors of light are directed toward the source, not away from it, immediately unifying light and gravitation, as well as the "grounding" EMF of electricity. This also results in the universal experience of entropy; ie. in every interaction of moving objects a net loss of potential energy occurs, or more crudely, something collapses with respect to the local center. Thus the Centropy of the universal field is experienced as Entropy, or as I like to put it: Entropy = Centropy. From a "local" perspective, this collapse takes a wee bit ot time, a relay delay, but no "speed of light" is required. I do NOT say "infinite speed" which is a logical contradiction and impossibility. I say "zero speed".
4. This is why the universe seems to act like a solid, why gravitation is "FTL" and why when we see light it is there, never on it's way.

AAAD happens; the challenge is trying to describe it in physical terms. Call it fiction or call it friction, but I confess that my ideas are way less imaginative than some of the other theories floating around these parts...

[sjw40364]

And if the aether is a dielectric and the only movement required to transfer energy over vast distances is a slight shift of axis to create polarization? Dielectrics transfer and store energy from polarization, not from particulate transfer or movement. IMO the only way to explain why the force of gravity seems to act instantaneous. There is no particulate movement required, only a slight shift of axis to create polarization. Almost all forms of light and EM radiation we receive is polarized.

[webolife]

And whenever I read the term "polarized" I think to myself "vector" -- a force in a direction.

[sjw40364]

And whenever I read the term "polarized" I think to myself "vector" -- a force in a direction.

And a force is applied in a direction, but without actual particle transfer. Dielectric materials only shift axis, they do not transfer across distances, but the force they store can be transferred at whatever speed the permittivity of the dielectric allows.

The electric susceptibility χe of a dielectric material is a measure of how easily it polarizes in response to an electric field. This, in turn, determines the electric permittivity of the material and thus influences many other phenomena in that medium, from the capacitance of capacitors to the speed of light.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dielectric

So a dielectric medium would control how fast light could traverse, but what controls the dielectrics speed of energy transfer it it controls light?