Tuesday, September 15, 2015
Monday, September 14, 2015
Sunday, March 15, 2015
Gravity, the only fundamental force.
Since the time Newton discovered gravity more than three centuries back, there has been much research and debate on what gravity is? Newton had proposed that it is the attraction between two bodies having certain mass. Bigger the product of masses, more the attraction but it reduced as the square of the distance between them.
Einstein told us that gravity is the curvature of space-time fabric. Mass of an object curves this fabric as if a ball is kept on a taut rubber sheet. More the mass of the object, more the curvature and hence the gravity.
Standard model of atom gives it the shape of a particle and calls it graviton. But no graviton has ever been observed.
In spite of above, we still find it difficult to answer the question about gravity why is it different from other fundamental forces?
To understand gravity, we must look into the concept of medium of space as proposed by British scientist Maxwell in 1860's along with the method of conversion of medium of space into matter.
There will be people who would like to point out that the concept of medium of space was discarded in 1887 because of an experiment conducted by Michelson and Morley. I agree with them to the extent that medium of space could not be found in that experiment, but not that the medium of space does not exist. There is a difference between saying that we could not find something and that something does not exist.
When this medium of space is converted into matter, gravity is created. It can be shown mathematically. Using this method, we can relate other fundamental forces with gravity and can prove that gravity is the only fundamental force.
This method is explained in the books 'Lines of Space' and 'The Big Bang and Lines of Space'.
Links to the two books are
http://amzn.to/15Yg5JY and
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00NYJ9Y56
Einstein told us that gravity is the curvature of space-time fabric. Mass of an object curves this fabric as if a ball is kept on a taut rubber sheet. More the mass of the object, more the curvature and hence the gravity.
Standard model of atom gives it the shape of a particle and calls it graviton. But no graviton has ever been observed.
In spite of above, we still find it difficult to answer the question about gravity why is it different from other fundamental forces?
To understand gravity, we must look into the concept of medium of space as proposed by British scientist Maxwell in 1860's along with the method of conversion of medium of space into matter.
There will be people who would like to point out that the concept of medium of space was discarded in 1887 because of an experiment conducted by Michelson and Morley. I agree with them to the extent that medium of space could not be found in that experiment, but not that the medium of space does not exist. There is a difference between saying that we could not find something and that something does not exist.
When this medium of space is converted into matter, gravity is created. It can be shown mathematically. Using this method, we can relate other fundamental forces with gravity and can prove that gravity is the only fundamental force.
This method is explained in the books 'Lines of Space' and 'The Big Bang and Lines of Space'.
Links to the two books are
http://amzn.to/15Yg5JY and
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00NYJ9Y56
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
'The Big Bang and Lines of Space', has made it to Active list of Book Review Depot. It is a book with simple discussion on whether Big Bang happened or not?
This book is not restricted to the conventional belief of physics that space has no medium. It explores the possibility that empty space could also contain some kind of medium.
This book is not restricted to the conventional belief of physics that space has no medium. It explores the possibility that empty space could also contain some kind of medium.
About expansion of space in the universe
When we talk about cosmology, we hear that the space is expanding which is causing all stars and galaxies to recede from each other. It is also claimed in Inflation theory that space expanded exponentially in the first fraction of a second after Big Bang. So, all cosmologists agree that space is expanding.
But, what is there inside space that is expanding? Take a simple example, if you have a piece of rubber in your hand, you can stretch it, but if your don't have a rubber in your hands and simply make an action of stretching, how can you say that you have stretched the rubber. Similarly for talking about expansion of space, space has to have something inside it that can expand.
On one hand, it is generally agreed that space expands and on the other, it is believed that there is nothing inside the space that can expand. Then how to explain this paradox.
To get out of this dilemma, fourth dimension of time is added to three dimensions of space, and it is said that space-time fabric is expanding. Space-time fabric also gets curved by gravity. Wherever there is high gravity, space-time fabric is highly curved.
Now, we come back to our simple experiment again. Let the stretched rubber in our hands has a small weight kept on it, it will curve downwards. Higher the mass of the object, sharper the curve will be. This is in accordance with space-time fabric theory, where the curve is increased proportional to the mass of the object lying on space-time fabric.
If there is no rubber in your hands and there is no weight lying on the rubber, can you still say that the rubber is curved? No, you cannot. So, there has to be something physically present that can curve by the weight kept on it. It explains that space-time fabric has to be something physical which can curve around heavy mass.
If space-time fabric is something physical that can curve by the presence of heavy mass, then it is wrong to say that space does not have any medium that can expand.
So. we should follow one rule, either the space is expanding, or nothing exists in space that can expand, not both.
If we agree on expansion of space, then we must also agree that there is something physical in space, that expands.
But, what is there inside space that is expanding? Take a simple example, if you have a piece of rubber in your hand, you can stretch it, but if your don't have a rubber in your hands and simply make an action of stretching, how can you say that you have stretched the rubber. Similarly for talking about expansion of space, space has to have something inside it that can expand.
On one hand, it is generally agreed that space expands and on the other, it is believed that there is nothing inside the space that can expand. Then how to explain this paradox.
To get out of this dilemma, fourth dimension of time is added to three dimensions of space, and it is said that space-time fabric is expanding. Space-time fabric also gets curved by gravity. Wherever there is high gravity, space-time fabric is highly curved.
Now, we come back to our simple experiment again. Let the stretched rubber in our hands has a small weight kept on it, it will curve downwards. Higher the mass of the object, sharper the curve will be. This is in accordance with space-time fabric theory, where the curve is increased proportional to the mass of the object lying on space-time fabric.
If there is no rubber in your hands and there is no weight lying on the rubber, can you still say that the rubber is curved? No, you cannot. So, there has to be something physically present that can curve by the weight kept on it. It explains that space-time fabric has to be something physical which can curve around heavy mass.
If space-time fabric is something physical that can curve by the presence of heavy mass, then it is wrong to say that space does not have any medium that can expand.
So. we should follow one rule, either the space is expanding, or nothing exists in space that can expand, not both.
If we agree on expansion of space, then we must also agree that there is something physical in space, that expands.
Friday, February 20, 2015
Secrets of the Universe
Large Hadron Collider (LHC) located at CERN will be functional once again in May this year after upgrading and repairs. Scientists will be trying to find the truth about Dark matter, Dark energy, Higgs particle, Antimatter, Super-symmetry and other secrets of universe by expensive experiments of smashing particles at ever increasing energies, and analyzing their aftereffects, but the question is -Will they succeed in finding these answers?
Unsolved questions about our universe keep increasing as we try to make progress through these experiments. Are we just adding epicycles as Ptolemy had done to justify the now defunct idea of rotation of sun around earth? Something is wrong in our approach to understanding the secrets of universe, what is that?
That is the discarding of the medium of space required for traveling of radiation waves. If we reconsider a medium of space as I have done in my book 'Lines of Space', we can unearth these secrets of universe.
Unsolved questions about our universe keep increasing as we try to make progress through these experiments. Are we just adding epicycles as Ptolemy had done to justify the now defunct idea of rotation of sun around earth? Something is wrong in our approach to understanding the secrets of universe, what is that?
That is the discarding of the medium of space required for traveling of radiation waves. If we reconsider a medium of space as I have done in my book 'Lines of Space', we can unearth these secrets of universe.
Thursday, February 19, 2015
Creation of the Universe: Einstein was right- God doesn't play dice.
Creation of the Universe: Einstein was right- God doesn't play dice.: 'God doesn't play dice', is a well known statement by the most celebrated scientist Albert Einstein. He used to say this whenev...
Wednesday, February 18, 2015
Einstein was right- God doesn't play dice.
'God doesn't play dice', is a well known statement by the most celebrated scientist Albert Einstein. He used to say this whenever he had arguments about Quantum Physics. He never supported the use of probability in science. Probability is only a mathematical tool, but it was used by Max Planck to derive a formula for Brilliance of radiation emitted by Black-body. This is the the basic cause of absurdity in Quantum physics and Einstein never accepted this throughout his life.
Over the years, there has been lot of debate on the topic whether he was right or the quantum physics which is most accurate science, is right. I shall not draw you into that debate but simply give you the result of my research.
Einstein was right. That formula can be explained without the use of probability. For that you have to revisit the Black-body radiation curves in the light of 'Lines of Space' concept. This concept is explained in my first book titled 'Lines of Space'. I shall be writing my third book explaining how probability can be removed from quantum physics using the concept of 'Lines of Space'.
Over the years, there has been lot of debate on the topic whether he was right or the quantum physics which is most accurate science, is right. I shall not draw you into that debate but simply give you the result of my research.
Einstein was right. That formula can be explained without the use of probability. For that you have to revisit the Black-body radiation curves in the light of 'Lines of Space' concept. This concept is explained in my first book titled 'Lines of Space'. I shall be writing my third book explaining how probability can be removed from quantum physics using the concept of 'Lines of Space'.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)