Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    sci.physics.research    |    Current physics research. (Moderated)    |    17,516 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 16,473 of 17,516    |
|    J.B. Wood to Rich L.    |
|    Re: The "Force" of Gravity    |
|    19 Apr 19 21:57:45    |
      From: arl_123234@hotmail.com              On 4/18/19 10:48 AM, Rich L. wrote:              >       > The key to understanding how general relativity explains gravity       > is to focus on the time metric component, g_00. This is the component       > that results in the gravitational red shift, which, in simple terms,       > says that an oscillator at one elevation in a gravitational field       > will appear to have a lower frequency when viewed from a higher       > elevation, and conversely will appear to have a higher frequency       > when viewed from a lower elevation. (it is incorrect to say that       > the frequency changes; no matter where the oscillator is located,       > an observer at the same elevation will always observe the same       > frequency.)       >       > Now consider a particle at rest (momentarily) in a gravitational       > field. As reqpresented in quantum mechanics this particle will be       > a wave function with a frequency proportional to its mass, and the       > wave function will be a fuzzy blob extending over some region of       > space. Because the particle is at rest, all parts of the wave       > function will have the same phase. Because of the gravitational       > red shift, the lower parts of this wave function will change phase       > at a lower frequency than higher parts. As a result the wave       > function will quickly get out of phase. The result is a linear       > change in phase with altitude, which quantum mechanically means it       > has momentum, and it is a momentum that grows with time. i.e. a       > force.       >       > Rich L.       >              Hello, and is the above hypothesis shared among rank-and-file       physicists? You're bringing QM concepts into GR and I thought the       theoretical/experimental physics community is still wrestling with that.       Can what I posted previously be explained by Einsteinian GR? I don't       see how the "oscillator" concept translates to a (apparent) force       without the use of QM concepts. Sincerely,              --       J. B. Wood e-mail: arl_123234@hotmail.com              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca