The entropy of systems

Hi GD, the "E" in this case refers to the electric field strength, which is measured in Newton's per coulomb. The electric field strength is analogous to the gravitational field strength but differs in that it also depends on the permitivity of the medium. I would argue that we have in effect two types of space. One where
c = 1 / sqrt( mu * epsilon) the other where we replace the speed of light with the speed of gravity. If we mix two differing substances together we get a non newtonian liquid, a viscoelelastic. The properties of this visoelastic "space" are pretty wild. We could push it and pull it about at sub light speed but if we tried to bash it with a big hammer at ftl speed, then it would increase the speed of sound in the medium to the speed of gravity, which would be many times the speed of light. I would also argue that every particle of matter has a Schwarzchild radius and it's in this region that gravitational energy can be exchanged with sub light systems.

Hello Stoat,

I found these definitions, and I would like to comment.

1) "permittivity relates to a material's ability to transmit (or "permit") an electric field."


2) "Schwarzschild metric:

(equation) where:

ô is the proper time (<b>time measured by a clock moving with the particle</b>) in seconds,
c is the speed of light in meters per second,
t is the time coordinate (<b>measured by a stationary clock at infinity</b>) in seconds,
r is the radial coordinate (circumference of a circle centered on the star divided by 2ð) in meters,
è is the colatitude (angle from North) in radians,
ö is the longitude in radians, and
rs is the Schwarzschild radius (in meters) of the massive body, which is related to its mass M by

(equation)

where G is the gravitational constant."

3) "The Schwarzschild radius (sometimes historically referred to as the gravitational radius) is a characteristic radius associated with every mass. <b>It is the radius for a given mass where, if that mass could be compressed to fit within that radius, no known force or degeneracy pressure could stop it from continuing to collapse into a gravitational singularity</b>. The term is used in physics and astronomy, especially in the theory of gravitation, general relativity"

Hi GD, think of permitivity and permeability as being related to stress and strain in a material. However, here we are talking about the properties of the vacuum. Alter the refractive index of the vacuum and light would travel faster in it.

Now let's take a look at Mach's principle, the basis of the idea that gravitational energy and inertial energy are equivalent. We have,
GM / r =C^2 which can be written as 1 = GM / r C^2 Now multiply this by 2 to get 2 = 2GM / rC^2 but this can be written as
1 - 1 / eta^2 = 2GM / r C^2 so that 1 - 1 / eta^2 = 2 This must mean that we have a negative refractive index of 1 which makes the equation 1 +1 = 2

So, inside of our sun is a ball of about 2kms. radius of degenerate matter, that has a negative refractive index. We think its made of neutrons and electrons. I we could remove the outer layers of the sun we simply could not see this ball, which contains half the mass of the sun. That doesn't make it a black hole at all.

Here we enter a world of huge disagreements. I hold to the view that an electron has a radius which is the Compton wavelength. It's a lot bigger than a proton or neutron. With degenerate matter, all of the protons have been forced to become neutrons, they then are supposed to have zero charge but they do have a very small magnetic field. The electrons super conduct but how can they if they are being asked to get through gaps in the neutron packing that are just too small for them?

Now let's look the magnetic field. If we want to remove the magnetism of something we have to heat it. Heat is kinetic energy so consider that the magnetic field is negative potential energy.

That's about as far as I've got with it. I think the radius of the electron has to become h, this doesn't increase their mass but rather makes them speed up to the speed of gravity. The physics of negative refractive space isn't incomprehensible but it is pretty head cracking nevertheless. Push on it and it pushes back, Cerenkov light proceeds a particle, rather than leaving a wake. In short the only way to think about it all is to reverse the arrow of time, do the maths and then flip time back over. Yuk [][xx(][8D]

(Edited) it would be more correct to say that the sun balances its inertial and gravitational mass energy half and half. A photon coming close to this neg r,i radius will lose kinetic energy but increase its potential energy. On leaving this zone it's been red shifted, so it has transfered some of its kinetic energy to the mediumThat raises some interesting questions that I'm just too thick to answer.

Hello Stoat,

The following caught my eye:

"In general, permittivity isn't a constant, as it can vary with the position in the medium, the frequency of the field applied...."

Also I see that time is a factor in the Schwarzschild metrics.

Does the Permittivity of space change with time so that a mass tends to its Schwarzschild radius?
For example, every time a galaxy merges with ours, does this change the properties of matter within the galaxy?
(when 100 clusters of galaxy will have merged, what will this mass look like? - what will the universe look like?-)

I read that the Schwarzschild radius of the Earth is about 9mm and of the sun approx. 3Km.
If the universe has 10^79 electrons (taken from wikipedia) what do you think is its Schwarzschild radius?

Hi GD, those are good questions. Let's start by looking at your question about force and energy. I've been ducking it, simply because I have a great deal of difficulty understanding mass. Anyway, let's cobble together
E = mc^2 and F =ma. We get F =Ea / c^2 Now I would argue that that deals with the electromagnetic component of a mass particle. It's basically all angular momentum. Can we compare it with the force which is down to gravity. The force of gravity is much weaker than the electromagnetic force 10^39 weaker. Change that Ea to one to work out the speed of gravity. Then we change that bottom c^2 to the speed of gravity. It comes out at 3 * 10^19 times c. A lot faster than 20 billion c but that's okay as that figure is the bottom line for the speed of gravity.

As for the Schwarzschild radius, I see no reason for the collection of galaxies that we call the universe not to have stuff inside o this radius. I think big bang supporters would hate the idea though. If I'm right in saying that this is not a black hole but rather a region of negative refractive index, then that raises questions as to where it would be, what's inside of it? it does to horrible things to time but not to time as some sort of abstract fourth dimension of space. It alters the rules of conservation of energy, potential energy becomes kinetic and kinetic potential.

Talking to cosmicsurfer in his thread, we talked about the logic of popping all of the galaxies into a subatomic particle of a scaled universe. I looked at it as a toroidal particle. With this particle model the Schwarzschild radius could be in the hole of the doughnut, actually "in" the space of the next scale up.

(Edited) I made a bit of a mistake there. A couple of books I have say that the force of gravity is 10^39 times smaller than the electromagnetic force but I checked and and it's to the strong atomic force. Not much difference though, I get 1.3129E 19 times c for the speed of gravity.

(Edited again) here's a thing, for an electron the Schwarzschild radius is smaller than h but it's there. The electron is balanced so half and half gravitational mass is balancedby inertial mass. So let's push on it. No problems until we start getting up to the speed of light. The stuff inside the Schwarzschild radius pushes back[] in fact it will stop.In effect we are streching it like a rubber band. Its gravitational information can still connect it but its electromagnetic information cannot. The poor thing will want to start to rotate around its Schwarzschild radius. Once outside the field of the accelerator it could jump back to where it "belongs." Only to face the same problem again.

(Edited once again) It's intriguing this at it seems almost barking mad. The question has to be, can the Schwarzschild radius ever be outside of its sphere of matter? In an accelerator ring, a stretched electron will be the diameter of the accelerator. Much more likely that the electromagnetic part of the electron stays constrained within the accelerator and the gravitational part wants to rotate about it. But it can travel ftl, so it can go off and have a cup of tea, put its feet up for a nap and then get back to its home turf, of being in the centre of the electron, before the very slow light speed electron notices that it's gone. A very neat trick if you can do it.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Stoat</i>
<br />
E = mc^2 and F =ma. We get F =Ea / c^2 Now I would argue that that deals with the electromagnetic component of a mass particle. It's basically all angular momentum. Can we compare it with the force which is down to gravity. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Hello Stoat,

I think Force, Energy, and acceleration (gravity) are in fact all linked together: if force increases, then energy decreases & acceleration increases. But I think what is difficult, is to see how all of this is choreographed with time and distance.

How does time affect bodies in space?

Some ideas:

1)
- A system will have its energy state change at the same time.
for example:
The path the sun takes in its motion through the galaxy has the rotation of the planets perpendicular to this path (If the arrow of time also means "change with time" then this change will happen simultaneously)

2)
Light travels the same distance with time, therefore the universe must be a sphere. (it is not infinite for the same reason.)

3)
The motion of a body or particle will follow a path corresponding to its changing energy state. This path is a curve.

one example: if an object is dropped, its trajectory will be a curve since the ground will have moved with the rotation of the earth from the time(a) the object is released to the time(b) it hits the ground.

In a system, time (a) has not the same properties as time (b)?

4)
Since entropy increases with time, it would require increasing energy with time to move in the opposite direction of the arrow of time.


(please note that for some of these concepts, I have already read somewhere).


Stoat, we have to find a way to make Ea/c^2 = g (maybe throw in "change with time" and "distance")

How about working with Hf=mc^2 and F=Hf(a)/c^2 ?

Is the coupling force of Energy what "mass" is?
How does nature change the coupling force in a mass with time?