Squashed

2006-Jun-12, 02:27 PM

Momentum Gravity

During recent discussions (see links below) I came to the realization that gravity is simply the result of the "sum of the momentums" of the objects.

All moving objects possess momentum which is just "mass in motion" and since mass can be defined as energy then its momentum can also be defined as "energy in motion".

A photon has momentum as shown by the following:

For:

p = momentum

m = mass

v = velocity

E = energy

c = the speed of light

E=mc2

Solving for m gives:

m=E/c2

Starting with the classical momentum equation:

p = mv

And substituting the m with the m from E = mc2 gives:

p = E/c2v

For a photon v=c and so the above equation reduces to:

p = E/c - the momentum of a photon.

Since the path of light bends in the presence of gravity then that would suggest that gravitons are "smaller" than photons and indeed that gravitons are the elemental substance of photons.

Since matter is composed of energy as stated by: E = mc2 ; and since matter is divisible: from molecules to atoms to protons/neutrons/electrons to quarks to ... photons to gravitons then it would seem that a graviton is the smallest indivisible unit of mass-energy possible in this universe.

If all matter radiates gravitons and all energy can radiate gravitons then so could a photon radiate gravitons.

If a photon radiates gravitons and since gravitons represent momentum then the total momentum represented by a photon is decreased as the photon radiates gravitons.

If this is true then as a photon travels and as it releases gravitons the photon's energy level is decreased or red-shifted.

If a photon "throws off" a graviton then the direction of travel of the photon would be altered which would result in a blurring of images - which is not evident.

This evidence would suggest two possibilities:

1.) Either photons do not emit gravitons or;

2.) Gravitons are emitted as opposing pairs in opposite directions.

Since light is red-shifted from distant celestial objects and since the images of distant celestial objects are not blurred this means that momentum is lost from the photon, enroute, and that gravitons are, indeed, emitted as opposite pairs.

The fictional force of spacetime that Einstein refers to is the result of the interference patterns of the gravitons from matter.

The interference can be either constructive interference or destructive interference.

Since matter can collide and if the two colliding bodies have equal momentum then the sum of the collision would be zero momentum or stationary mass.

If two photons collided, it would not result in stationary energy but would result in the collective graviton momentums of the two photons being "unwound" and cast off in opposite directions perpendicular to the original path of the photons.

Such a collision between two gravitons would, inconceivably, result in a stationary pair of gravitons or stationary energy and the net result would be "lost" repulsive momentum from between the two bodies that emitted the two gravitons.

More likely, there would be indirect collisions between gravitons, which would result in deflected paths for the gravitons that cause the gravitons to "miss" the target of their initial velocity.

So gravity has a repulsive component and an attractive component and the dominance of either component is determined by the interaction of the gravitons between the bodies being studied.

Momentum Gravity: All bodies emit gravitons and so all bodies emit momentum and the net sum of the momentum between two bodies generally results in a fictional force of "gravitational attraction" between the two bodies.

"Momentum Gravity" is similar to "Push Gravity" because the lost repulsive momentum between the two bodies allows the greater attractive momentum to "push" the two bodies together.

"Momentum Gravity" is dissimilar to "Push Gravity" because the gravitons are emitted directly from the bodies rather than being from a "sea of gravitons".

Discussion Links:

http://www.bautforum.com/showpost.php?p=757187&postcount=152

http://www.bautforum.com/showpost.php?p=758698&postcount=7

During recent discussions (see links below) I came to the realization that gravity is simply the result of the "sum of the momentums" of the objects.

All moving objects possess momentum which is just "mass in motion" and since mass can be defined as energy then its momentum can also be defined as "energy in motion".

A photon has momentum as shown by the following:

For:

p = momentum

m = mass

v = velocity

E = energy

c = the speed of light

E=mc2

Solving for m gives:

m=E/c2

Starting with the classical momentum equation:

p = mv

And substituting the m with the m from E = mc2 gives:

p = E/c2v

For a photon v=c and so the above equation reduces to:

p = E/c - the momentum of a photon.

Since the path of light bends in the presence of gravity then that would suggest that gravitons are "smaller" than photons and indeed that gravitons are the elemental substance of photons.

Since matter is composed of energy as stated by: E = mc2 ; and since matter is divisible: from molecules to atoms to protons/neutrons/electrons to quarks to ... photons to gravitons then it would seem that a graviton is the smallest indivisible unit of mass-energy possible in this universe.

If all matter radiates gravitons and all energy can radiate gravitons then so could a photon radiate gravitons.

If a photon radiates gravitons and since gravitons represent momentum then the total momentum represented by a photon is decreased as the photon radiates gravitons.

If this is true then as a photon travels and as it releases gravitons the photon's energy level is decreased or red-shifted.

If a photon "throws off" a graviton then the direction of travel of the photon would be altered which would result in a blurring of images - which is not evident.

This evidence would suggest two possibilities:

1.) Either photons do not emit gravitons or;

2.) Gravitons are emitted as opposing pairs in opposite directions.

Since light is red-shifted from distant celestial objects and since the images of distant celestial objects are not blurred this means that momentum is lost from the photon, enroute, and that gravitons are, indeed, emitted as opposite pairs.

The fictional force of spacetime that Einstein refers to is the result of the interference patterns of the gravitons from matter.

The interference can be either constructive interference or destructive interference.

Since matter can collide and if the two colliding bodies have equal momentum then the sum of the collision would be zero momentum or stationary mass.

If two photons collided, it would not result in stationary energy but would result in the collective graviton momentums of the two photons being "unwound" and cast off in opposite directions perpendicular to the original path of the photons.

Such a collision between two gravitons would, inconceivably, result in a stationary pair of gravitons or stationary energy and the net result would be "lost" repulsive momentum from between the two bodies that emitted the two gravitons.

More likely, there would be indirect collisions between gravitons, which would result in deflected paths for the gravitons that cause the gravitons to "miss" the target of their initial velocity.

So gravity has a repulsive component and an attractive component and the dominance of either component is determined by the interaction of the gravitons between the bodies being studied.

Momentum Gravity: All bodies emit gravitons and so all bodies emit momentum and the net sum of the momentum between two bodies generally results in a fictional force of "gravitational attraction" between the two bodies.

"Momentum Gravity" is similar to "Push Gravity" because the lost repulsive momentum between the two bodies allows the greater attractive momentum to "push" the two bodies together.

"Momentum Gravity" is dissimilar to "Push Gravity" because the gravitons are emitted directly from the bodies rather than being from a "sea of gravitons".

Discussion Links:

http://www.bautforum.com/showpost.php?p=757187&postcount=152

http://www.bautforum.com/showpost.php?p=758698&postcount=7