Requiem for Relativity

More
14 years 9 months ago #23978 by Stoat
Replied by Stoat on topic Reply from Robert Turner
Just spent a few hours drinking tea and thinking about this nova. n other threads I've mentioned a graviton and a photon sitting on a planet, talking about stuff. Let's park them in orbit round this super massive sun. The photon will point to where the sun had been, the graviton will point to where it is. The graviton will do a spot of calculus and give the photon a pet lip by casually throwing the photon's universe into the bin. The speed of light is a little bit of the speed of gravity. The graviton is right to dump it. Then the photon says that he/she sees a big glowing ball, the graviton shakes his head in utter disbelief. He sees only the Swartchild radius of the star. Pretty small, about 2000 km diameter.

Now, if we say that any bit of mass gives over half its energy to creating its own space; energy that we can't see; so we double the mass of the particle. Now that's the e.m mass, the particle spins at the speed of light and has an angular momentum of h but we can have a gravitational mass, where the particle spins at the speed of gravity, with an angular momentum of one. This thing is not in our space it's in a phase changed space. In its space it behaves like whatever particle it is in e.m space. However, any interactions it has with e.m space are going to be negative refractive index interactions. It would be like looking in a reversed mirror and seeing that the guy facing you wears his wedding band on the left hand, just like you do. Note that this isn't reverse time, or negative mass. I grant you it's pretty weird though.

Righto, the asteroid belt. It's differentiated, so it looks very much like it was a planet that exploded. I did say to Larry that the only way that I could see the core of a gas giant being totally destroyed is if the force of gravity just switched off. Then the planet would explode like a fizzy pop bottle. Well, we now have a nova where the core has exploded. Gamma rays collide and produce electron/positron pairs, that's effectively switching off gravity.

Consider a soft gamma ray as a particle which has a rest mass of about 6E-64 kg Then it's gravitational mass will be the electron mass. A huge amount of energy packed into a tiny Swartchild radius. Two gamma rays hardly ever collide core to core.

In a planet, even a massive one, the Swartchild radius is tiny. Suppose it could alter slightly, then electrons in gravitational space would find themselves in e.m space and have to dump their energy. We're talking centimetres here. The planet vapourises, wow! The wow is because a super massive tiny core could still be out there.

One thing to note, this star nova has to be very low on heavier elements, metal stops gamma ray production presumably. Though I contend, gravitons don't see anything in e.m space, if they have to give up any of their energy into e.m space it's in little packets of h, to it, but pretty big stuff to us in em. space.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
14 years 9 months ago #23864 by Stoat
Replied by Stoat on topic Reply from Robert Turner
After another cup of tea, I had to think, "what the hell is this thing then?" It's not a black hole, they would have a V shaped energy profile, it's not a bec particle either, they would have a W shaped energy profile. It would have to be an e.m planetary equivalent graitational mass spinning in "imaginary" space. A pure bit of gravitational space totally denuded of e.m. properties. I've no idea what that could do, almost a Kantian thing in itself!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
14 years 9 months ago #23199 by Jim
Replied by Jim on topic Reply from
Dr Joe, There is a light curve posted at: www.minorplanetobserver.com/pdolc/947_IV . you might find useful.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
14 years 9 months ago #23200 by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
<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 />Hi Joe, ... adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1977MNRAS.180..567S
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Hi Bob!

Thanks for the link; I checked it. Their chart on p. 581, shows that the authors are confident that "Supernova 1006" was most likely &gt;10deg South, of Barbarossa's orbit in that part of the sky (where Barbarossa's orbit is ~12deg S of the ecliptic). Also, Barbarossa would have been &gt;90 away in ecliptic longitude, then.

But this is a fruitful area of investigation! Thanks for volunteering this information!

- Joe

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
14 years 9 months ago #23201 by Joe Keller
Replied by Joe Keller on topic Reply from
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />Dr Joe, There is a light curve posted at: www.minorplanetobserver.com/pdolc/947_IV . you might find useful.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Thanks Jim! The "947" suggests that it is indeed about asteroid 947 Monterosa. I tried the link a few times and it wouldn't work, though.

- Joe Keller

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
14 years 9 months ago #23202 by Stoat
Replied by Stoat on topic Reply from Robert Turner
This guy looks as though he's done or is about to do the lightcurve of 1717
members.dslextreme.com/users/rstephens/index_files/Page692.htm

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.403 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum