Is gravity fundamentally attractive or repulsive (a retrospective)?
2-D schematic of typical large-scale void with supercluster shell, to scale.*

Is gravity fundamentally attractive or repulsive (a retrospective)?

v. 5 n. 13

While mainly for new subscribers, this concept of repulsive gravity (without regard to negative mass) is so radical and central in these Letters that a review in general is in order.

Figure 1. Large-scale structure representation.

Figure 1 is a not-to-scale computer generation of the large-scale structure of the universe. The black spherical voids in this two-dimensional representation are surrounded by a web of galactic superclusters. The proper scale is indicated in the cover image, where the blue circle represents a shell of galactic superclusters surrounding a large-scale void in a single basically spherical cell of the large-scale structure. The thickness of the blue circle is from 100-300 million light years, which is also the typical size of a galactic supercluster; the void is typically 10-100 times the shell thickness.

Recall the distinction between a "galactic supercluster," and a "cluster of galaxies." A galactic supercluster takes part in the accelerated Hubble expansion. For instance, the blue circle in the cover image is increasing in circumference and thickening (clusters of galaxies are separating from other clusters). On the other hand, the galaxies making up a cluster of galaxies do not take part in this Hubble expansion and remain in close proximity to one another in mutual orbits.

A brief quiz. [1]

Figure 2.

The Figure 2 image is a general schematic for any section of the universe where a cluster of galaxies borders a galactic supercluster. This border, naturally indistinct, is represented by the circle. The space outside the circle represents the supercluster and above where the accelerated Hubble expansion is in effect. The space inside the circle represents a cluster of galaxies where the individual galaxies in the cluster remain in close proximity and do not take part in the Hubble expansion.

The two bold rectangles in this two-dimensional drawing represent any two bodies within the cluster, each body being from the galaxy scale to the elementary particle scale.

The fine radial spokes represent the predominant gravitational field. [2][3][4] This field is from the centers of the large-scale voids to the shells of galactic superclusters (see Figure 3). Conventionally, these arrows indicate the "dark energy" field driving the accelerated expansion of the universe. This field, which has been quantified, is the proposed repulsive gravitational field responsible for inertia and Mach's principle, and apparently attractive effects at the smaller scales; note that opposing arrows at the tangents point toward the smaller scales, tending to push particles between the arrowheads together, indicating locality of particles and large-scale space (no gravitational locality among particles).

Figure 3. Four large-scale cells indicating proposed primary gravitational field in each.

  1. In Figure 2, are the two bodies attracted to one another from within the circle or pushed toward one another from outside the circle?
  2. Or, is gravity fundamentally attractive or repulsive respectively?

The repulsive view provides Mach's principle with locality and quantification as well, aside from conventional qualitative relative motion between the particle and the visible matter in large-scale space. The scale is above that usually considered with Mach's principle; the conventional scale is within any of the shells (100-300 million light years), where the large-scale voids are completely ignored, but the void fields are the primary effectors in the more comprehensive view.


* Cover Image by Author. Data from: Large Scale Structure of the Universe, Alison L. Coil, University of California, San Diego La Jolla, CA 92093 [email protected] June 21, 2012 ?https://arxiv.org/pdf/1202.6633.pdf

[1] Is gravity fundamentally attractive or repulsive? | LinkedIn

[2] (3) How Mach's Principle exposes dark matter and dark energy | LinkedIn

[3] (3) Is inertia really dependent on the larger scales? | LinkedIn

[4] (3) An approach to the quasar alignment puzzle | LinkedIn


Balungi Francis

Author of Quantum Gravity | Physics, Mathematics, Teaching

8 个月

Find yo Genius Today: https://www.bit.ly/findyogeniusnow

回复
Guy Hogan

Founder & CEO, AUS Corp. Green Sustainable Aviation Technologies, Changing Aviation for the Better CERTIFIED SERVICE DISABLED VETERAN, OWNED BUSINESS

8 个月

Hope you dont mind, My theory/idea, DMD, Dark Matter Displacement As a new planet is being created of any size it will automatically displace Dark Matter. (Dark Matter should be viewed as a constant an ocean if you will. Just like a ship stays afloat on a ocean by the displacement of water, matter displaces dark matter.) The displacement of Dark matter by matter creates a pressure on the surface of that matter. When matter is still in its fluid form pressure from DMD, on all sides equally will create near perfect spheres, sun's, planets & moons down to the smallest atoms and Quarks. The larger the matter displacement the greater the downward displacement pressure. Our Moon is 1/4 the size of Earth therefore 1/4 the displacement pressure. So, in theory we are not being pulled to the center of earth we're instead being pushed towards the center of earth by DMD. The DMD, pressure waves that are formed around each body will eventually tie into others from other body's like ripples in a pond. Tried to disprove but haven't been able so far. When our solar system, galaxy, atoms are viewed through the prism of DMD, things seem to line up & make sense. Could be wrong but it does get the mind working. Would like to hear any thoughts

回复

要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了