Well, I guess I don't have anything that pertains to the anomalous acceleration, just drag, which I'm still going over, so let me just look at what you got there a little more closely instead, to see what you've really got. It appears that 'D' would be the critical density of the universe, found with

D = H^2 / (8pi/3)G, so placing that into the formula gives us

(4pi/3)GDc / H = (4pi/3)G [H^2/(8pi/3)G] c / H = cH / 2

This means the anomalous acceleration would become cH/2. Now, in my model, cH would come out to just (3/5a) times the gravitational acceleration of an electron at the classical radius, where a is the fine structure constant (alpha). But here, it seems to be independent of the mass of a body and distance from it, so should apparently apply regardless of mass or distance, even in empty space. So the only thing this acceleration could be relative to is the vacuum itself. But then, let's say the object is already stationary to the vacuum. It couldn't then accelerate or decelerate in respect to it in any particular direction.

__________________
Let's put together the pieces of The Grand Puzzle . (website)

"Let's define another operator, Sz, which we won't pay any attention to."
"This transformation will automatically make zero equal zero."
"It may be true that zero equals zero -- and that is certainly an equality -- but I don't want to go into the details at this time."

I'm wondering about something related to the title of this thread. If we figure the gravitational attraction at some distance from the sun, we only consider the mass of the sun for this, right? But let's say we have a spherical shell centered on the sun with a uniform average density of the universe. Then we consider all of the mass that is contained within that spherical shell plus that of the sun as well. Now let's say the radius of the spherical shell is greater than the distance of an object from the sun. Then we just consider the mass of the sun plus the total mass of the spherical space within that distance. No matter how large we make that shell, we still only consider the total mass of the sun and what lies within that distance. That is, until we reach infinity for the radius of the spherical shell. All of the way up to that point, we consider all of the mass within the distance from the sun, that of the sun plus that of the uniform density within the distance from the sun. It remains constant all the way, but then, for an infinite universe, suddenly we subtract the background density and only consider the mass of the sun itself. I know that this is because at infinity, all points becomes the center of mass in an infinite universe of uniform density, so it can no longer be considered a spherical shell which is centered at the sun, and this would probably also apply to the BB, because of the way it is modelled. But I'm wondering, should we also subtract the uniform density from that of the sun as well in this case, for what would ordinarily lie within its volume? If this is the case, then the mass of a body that we measure through gravitational means would be

M = M' - D(4pi/3)r^3

which would make a difference in gravitational formulas. It might also make a difference in the masses of atomic particles.

__________________
Let's put together the pieces of The Grand Puzzle . (website)

"Let's define another operator, Sz, which we won't pay any attention to."
"This transformation will automatically make zero equal zero."
"It may be true that zero equals zero -- and that is certainly an equality -- but I don't want to go into the details at this time."

And this winds up being a correct statement.

The Vacuum itself is traveling at "c" in every/all directions and 'going right through' the massive body that is sitting motionless in space. That is precisely why 'objects' float in space. BUT czeslaw is using 'plasma' and you are using 'a' =1/137/'charge', NEITHER of which can 'go right through' baryonic Matter!

The 'extra gravity' isn't 'extra'...it is ALL of space/the Aether/Medium!!!

That is precisely how the SMBH's are created....with ALL that Gravity/Aether/Medium/Point Particles~

__________________
RussT
________________________________
Everything is, as it should be, otherwise, it wouldn't be!

It is very importany equation M = M' - D(4pi/3)r^3
We observe a massive Black Hole Like Object but a part of its mass is a relativistic mass of the gravitational field acccording to that equation.

Another part is a relativistic masss of the kinetic energy of the baryon particles moving within the Object. The rest mass of the baryons is much less than the gravitational mass of the Object. It is a well known bound mass in neutron star and this effect is much stronger in Black Hole Like Objects.

The relativistic mass of the Gravitational Field is not uniformly distributed. I propose a simple density inversely proportional to the distance from a mass centre. Probably is there a coefficent different than 1 but Dark Matter effect and Pioneer's deceleration shows a general density gradient towards the mass centre.

In my idea the Vacuum are virtual particles created in the Gravitational Field. This Virtual Particles interact with the ordinary particles and we observe change in potential and kinetic energy. I don't think the Dark Matter is an exotic matter. Just well known virtual particles.

I call it a virtual plasma because Vacuum consists of matter-antimatter virtual particles in a balance - similar to an ordinary plasma. The density of the plasma is higher close to double layer - charged matter particles.
The Vacuum can not collapse because the virtual particles live too short and they disappear in Planck time / alfa according to the relation of the gravitational / EM interactions.

There is a possible matter-antimatter creation in a strong Gravitational Field of the SMBH (Penrose process, Hawking radiation).
May be there is a separation process because we observe jets consist of electrons, protons and radiation. There are very little antimatter.
Have you an idea how the matter could be separated from the antimatter in SMBH ?

Do you really want me to answer this here?

__________________
RussT
________________________________
Everything is, as it should be, otherwise, it wouldn't be!

I suppose this should be in question and answer as it is about (string?!? or )virtual particles. If "string is one trillionth of a trillionth of the size of an atom" would it slow down a wavelength? (the size bit comes from Newscientist).

It takes something the size of an electron to capture a photon. I was wondering if something could be small and uniform enough to have mass and yet maintain zero effect on light propagation while distorting the space time that it travels in.

Cheers

__________________
"Nature is obliged to let reality determine its laws, whereas mathematics is under no such constraint."

In String Theory everything is built of strings also the virtual particles.
If there is a Vacuum Energy it has top have ita relativisyic mass and it could be Dark Matter effect.

I have an idea according to Hawking Radiation but it seems crazy for mainstream.
May be you have another idea how to separate matter and antimatter ?

Strange question why anti matter. I like charge and anti charge, I am prepared as always to be wrong because we can make anti matter.

The reason I ask why anti matter is what other requirement is needed if all matter is matter and only charge is separated.

__________________
"Nature is obliged to let reality determine its laws, whereas mathematics is under no such constraint."

What field? Magnetism has a field, gravity does not.

The see Van der waals and casimir is that measurable ‘gravity.’

Then see it is as simply entangled energy.

try Lamb Shift ‘in time.’; resonance.

Feynman and Woolf both tried to patch it up but the problem is that per se angular momentum is incorrectly described.

In a system of 2 resonances an increased amplitude slows or in some settings reverses entropy and this is described casually by entanglement and the ‘time’ shift.

Spooky isn’t it?

The uncertainty is moot at this stage.

No such thing. Proof!

First, DM/DE were postulated based on gravity not being sufficient.

If energy and its properties are recognized then the affects of the energy upon mass to cause a reversal of entropy, is not so strange. For example ‘life.’

But to simplify the setting if 2 waves are imposed upon a pond, at some interactions the wave ‘amplitude’ increase and in others a cancellation. To observe energy as a resonance upon mass then when some mass associates the affects vary.

In the system of galaxies, the outer stars are entangled to their closest partner based on the energy exchanged, that clump is further collectively entangled to magnetosphere of the combined galaxy. See the arms developing.

A little different but then who new I was coming to your site?

Have fun! Read “about time”

I will not put the theorem on paper but there is enough for them who are curious enough to do the homework.

Ask anything you like.

The energy may be transformed into a rest mass but it is always particle-antiparticle. We observe it in CERN and Fermilab.
Why in our Universe is the matter almost anly ? Where is the antimatter gone if there was a pure energy before ?

There are 3 possibilities:
A. There is a deviation in parity and there was more matter than antimatter created.
B. Our Observable Universe is like a Black Hole made of matter and there is another antimatter Universe Black Hole far away.
C. Our Observable Universe is made of collapsed matter and antigravitational Dark Energy causes the expansion now.

The Van der Waals binding force, Casimir force, Lamb's shift suggest a Vacuum Energy. You can remove EM field, particles, photons but you can't remove Gravitational Field. The Gravity is a curvature of the space. This curvature is the only field and energy you can't remove.

My idea is that if gravity is a curvature of the space and energy is an oscillation in the space, the gravity's curvature could be caused by the oscillations of the energetical particles.
That way the gravitational field may exist.

Here is the notion of the Time important.
Is time dilation an extra dimension or it is made by a space's structure according to a relativistic motion ?

If you remove the particles, then you remove the gravitational field. Photons also contribute.

__________________
Let's put together the pieces of The Grand Puzzle . (website)

"Let's define another operator, Sz, which we won't pay any attention to."
"This transformation will automatically make zero equal zero."
"It may be true that zero equals zero -- and that is certainly an equality -- but I don't want to go into the details at this time."

I have to write in our Universe.
We can find a space without particles but there is a gravitational field of the stars, Galaxy. There is nothing behind our Universe of course but we can not search it.
Vacuum Energy is a space without any particle in our Observable Universe. We can't remove a gravity of the far away star there.

Lamb shares that energy causes a resonance.

VDW and Casimir are seeing gravity which is a property of energy and do not recognize it.

Incorrect!

Fixed particles do not exist. Cern is a waste of money.

But doesn’t.

The first line is telling us ‘here is the notion’ and the second is asking a question.

Time and energy are both misunderstood. Entanglement recognizes time as quite relative to the system and energy is completely misunderstood as having a time restraint caused by walking the planck.

There is a whole realm of momentum caused by interactions that has been missed.

Follow the path.

Here is a one….. take 2 base elements at rest, weigh them separately in a vacuum, then combine them, fire them up with emr and then reweigh them.

Will there be molecules of the 2? Will the combined weigh more than the 2 separately?

This is simply a thought experiment. You answer the questions and see the differences.

Energy does have mass (per se) upon structures and why Virial will never represent the cosmological model.

Gravitational Fields in General Relativity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_field
In general relativity the gravitational field is determined as the solution of Einstein's field equations. These equations are dependent on the distribution of matter and energy in a region of space, unlike Newtonian gravity, which is dependent only on the distribution of matter. The fields themselves in general relativity represent the curvature of spacetime. General relativity states that being in a region of curved space is equivalent to accelerating up the gradient of the field. By Newton's second law, this will cause an object to experience a fictitious force if it is held still with respect to the field. This is why a person will feel himself pulled down by the force of gravity while standing still on the Earth's surface.

If the energy-momentum tensor Tμν is zero in the region under consideration, then the field equations are also referred to as the vacuum field equations.
The solutions to the vacuum field equations are called vacuum solutions. Flat Minkowski space is the simplest example of a vacuum solution. Nontrivial examples include the Schwarzschild solution and the Kerr solution.

The problem of finding a rotating perfect-fluid interior which can be matched to a Kerr exterior, or indeed to any asymptotically flat vacuum exterior solution, has proven very difficult. In particular, the Wahlquist fluid, which was once thought to be a candidate for matching to a Kerr exterior, is now known not to admit any such matching. At present it seems that only approximate solutions modeling slowly rotating fluid balls (the relativistic analog of oblate spheroidal balls with nonzero mass and angular momentum but vanishing higher multipole moments) are known. However, the exterior of the Neugebauer/Meinel disk, an exact dust solution which models a rotating thin disk, approaches in a limiting case the a=M Kerr vacuum.
Gravitational Field of a Spinning Mass as an Example of Algebraically Special Metrics http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v11/i5/p237_1

General relativity allows gravitational waves, ripples in the geometry of spacetime which travel at the speed of light. Under a certain definition of gravitational energy (a tricky subject), the wave can be said to carry energy. If QM is ever successfully applied to GR, it seems sensible to expect that these oscillations will also possess discrete "gravitational energies," corresponding to different numbers of gravitons.
Quantum field theory is plagued with infinities, which show up in diagrams in which virtual particles go in closed loops. Normally these infinities can be gotten rid of by "renormalization," in which infinite "counterterms" cancel the infinite parts of the diagrams, leaving finite results for experimentally observable quantities. Renormalization works for QED and the other field theories used to describe particle interactions, but it fails when applied to gravity. Graviton loops generate an infinite family of counterterms. The theory ends up with an infinite number of free parameters, and it's no theory at all. Other approaches to quantum gravity are needed, and they might not describe static fields with virtual gravitons. http://www.qedcorp.com/pcr/pcr/5virtual.html
Original by Matt McIrvin, Comments, gifs and HTML authoring by Jack Sarfatti, Ph.D.