Nature does not seem to allow for a gravitational force. The electron for example has two properties charge and spin. It has been shown that if it had any other intrinsic property, even with the tiniest effect, it would multiply and contradict both quantum theory and the observed accuracy of quantum electro dynamics which has been confirmed to hundreds of decimal places.

At the same time, we see the undeniable effects of gravity and do not doubt that gravity is real.

In Newtonian physics gravity was an instantaneous force between all objects everywhere which Einstein showed to be impossibility which, so far, is confirmed by all observation. The effect of gravity travels at the speed of light.

The following is from: http://theory.uwinnipeg.ca/mod_tech/node60.html

. Space and space-time are not rigid arenas in which events take place. They have form and structure which are influenced by the matter and energy content of the universe.
. Matter and energy tell space (and space-time) how to curve.
. Space tells matter how to move. In particular small objects travel along the straightest possible lines in curved space (space-time). (Note the above descriptions of General Relativity are due to John Wheeler.)

In curved space the rules of Euclidean geometry are changed. Parallel lines can meet, and the sum of the angles in a triangle can be more, or less than 180 degrees, depending on how space is curved. Einstein's theory gave a correct prediction for the perihelion shift of Mercury. Finally, in Einstein's theory the instantaneous gravitational force is replaced by the curvature of space-time. Moving a mass causes ripples to form in this curvature, and these ripples travel with the same speed as light. Thus, a distant mass would not feel any instantaneous change in the gravitational force, and special relativity is not violated.

This speed of gravity is consistent with experiment. http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0301/09gravity/

In InformationPhysics space and time are made of electromagnetic information. Recent experiments and calculations have shown that both gravitational and inertial mass can be accounted for as a composite emergent effect of the interaction expected between a mass and the zero point energy (ZPE) (185 giga-electron volts per cubic centimeter) which is simply the energy coming from all directions converging at any point in space.

Empty space is not empty, its composed of ZPE. But what is ZPE? It is the total energy coming from all directions. Most of it comes from the early universe, shortly after the Big Bang. Space expands when more events happen and contracts when events are lost from our window of observation. You are very close in that all those events are responsible for the expansion of space and you are right that there is an energy "shadow" between masses that causes gravity.

This (accelerating) expansion of space would be negative gravity, making things further apart. IP finds quantum electrodynamics sufficient to describe everything we perceive. ZPE expands only if you have more events, energy doesn't come from nowhere usually. The "shadow" effect can explain gravity but only if the shadow (mass) consumes ZPE. Almost the same amount of ZPE pushes on every side of an object. You drop a glass, there is slightly less ZPE coming from the bottom than the top, 32 feet per second. This is a tiny difference, but the earths "shadow" is enough so you see the effect of space below the glass evaporating. If the earth doesn't absorb the ZPE, then how can there be a shadow, the shadow and the "eating" of ZPE are manifestations of the same phenomenon.

Note that the ZPE is not really lost; it is recycled to manifest expansion of the universe in the distance future just as the energy that falls into a black hole is not really lost, it evaporates slowly by random emissions experienced in the distant future.

Your star ship moves by creating space behind itself by generating events.

You cannot really touch anything because no matter how hard you press enough electron exclusion events will occur to maintain a space between your finger and the object. If you press hard enough you may actually see the space created behind the moving object.

You go in space with a giant silver umbrella. You open it and the events between your umbrella and the sun create space between you and the sun accelerating you away. Close the umbrella and the ZPE eaten by the sun becomes apparent as the space decreases accelerating you into the sun.

Events destroy past space and time while creating new space and time that does not yet exist accounting for the expansion of our future and gravity in the present. Future space cannot be created without energy. The vacuum is energetic and energy does not come from no-where. Energy from the distant past is recycled into the distant future in a singular process manifesting gravity and expansion.

Electron interactions create time space velocities between them by exclusion events manifesting as momentum exchange. Entropy of these events due to masses manifests opposite velocities. Since masses are battered on all side equally by the ZPE the net effect of all the events are ZERO, they cancel and are lost. Space-time that was expanded by the events responsible for quantum fluctuations becomes contracted as they are received.

There is no call to invent inexplicable forces at a distance.

See QuantumEventTimeSpace, ExperienceModel, Time, ZPE, WhitescarverModel

%%%http://einstein.stanford.edu/STEP/information/data/gravityhist2.html %%%http://pages.prodigy.com/suna/weight.htm %%%http://www.mariner.connectfree.co.uk/html/eminertia.html %%%http://chaos.fullerton.edu/~jimw/general/inertia/ %%%http://www.energyscience.co.uk/notes/rn9809.htm %%%http://www.stardrive.org/hrppaper.shtml %%%http://www.alien.de/hyperspace/ugc-qe.htm proof?

The speed of gravity has finally been measured; it seems its effect travels at the speed of light. Einstein, again, has been proven correct. http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993232

Maybe gravity is light, simply a very very long length.-Phil

From my meager understanding of classic physics, it seems that gravity is not a radiative force, such as light, but rather the bending or curving of space caused by mass. Photons have mass. This is why they can push on objects (solar sails, stabilize asteroids, etc). Having mass, they curve space. Therefore, the "Gravity" that was observed is an emergent effect of the photon, and that curving of space travels with the photon... meaning, the speed that the dimple of curving is the same speed of travel as the photon that is creating it... which is, of course, the speed of light speed.

Gravity isn't light. But as light creates a gravity well, that well's speed is light speed.

Now, I'm sure that Jim and Ken are going to correct me in all the places I am wrong in classical physics. ;)

Still, gravity seems to be like magnetic fields. You get a magnetic field anywhere you have current traveling. Gravity seems to be a force (like magnetic fields) that exists because wherever you have mass. We have never observed a mass at complete rest, so therefore we cannot say if gravity is a behavior that only emerges when mass is moving, just as magnetic fields are emergent behavior of a moving current. We, as humans, intuit that this seems reasonable (that's our pattern recognizers at work... if this pattern exists here and means this, then this other pattern which resembles that first pattern may hold true as well).

Gotta go. More crazy and easily disproven thoughts later... :-)

---StarPilot

Instead of following space-time geodesics, look at the dynamical properties of space. Space is not empty, it is energetic, it is the ZPE think of it as some sort of super fluid. Plot space-time flow perpendicular to the geodesics. Think of concentric spheres around the earth starting with a radius increase of 32 feet for each sphere, the space (vacuum energy) under each sphere is consumed (received) by the earth as existing theory suggests where the vacuum energy is modeled as increasing in energy density inversely with frequency down to the frequency of the Planck action.

Newton first derived the inverse square law of gravity assuming that mass consumed the aether a constant rate. I speculate he dropped the analogy in later writing as he could not explain how movement of aether imparted acceleration rather than velocity.

In the information model there is no need for strange attractions at a distance. Entropy of space-time information due to masses accounts for the gravitational effect. The acceleration effect is expected since events manifest space-time velocities and as these velocities that are lost in the now, an opposite velocity is manifest.

We can predict that such a space would exhibit inertia since a mass is "tuned" to receive a fixed range of frequencies. Changes in velocity increase or decrease the frequency of all energy coming from each direction equally. Since all frequencies are present in inverse proportion, the energy actually received, that is the energy is the frequency range which can interact with the mass, from all directions will be identical regardless of motion. It is pushed in every direction equally manifesting a time like space-time intervals.

Thus the simple movement of space manifests acceleration in falling objects. The space falling out from under the apple manifests movement (velocity) of the apple which imparts acceleration as inertia at each new speed locks it into each new velocity it attains such that additional movement generates additional velocity, or in sum acceleration.

The volume (energy) of space consumed by a mass per unit time will be constant. Thus the distance between our spheres decreases inversely with distance. At 8000 miles from earth, the spheres would be only 8 feet apart, indicating the effect of earth gravity at that distance to the movement of space, 8 feet, or an acceleration of 8 feet per second, exactly as predicted by general relativity (and Newton).

It is easy to see why masses lose space-time energy as they are batted in every direction equally by interactions. The energy of the random background interactions is not conserved, it doesn't add up==== The total effect of ALL the interactions is ZERO. This is lost information, called entropy. Just as exchanges create expansion velocities, the loss of this information manifests an opposite acceleration, called gravity.

==

See below. See how this one singular process manifests both gravity and accelerating expansion.

I can see my next Truth page has to be the truth about magnetism. The independent effects of up electrons and down electrons usually create and consume space-time equally. Magnetic effects are where they are locally not equal do to imbalances of up and/or down.

-- JimScarver

Intriguing. If the above statement "the speed of the effect of gravity is the speed of light" is true, then it is a radiating force. Since it radiates from a centre. I claim no formal knowledge of classical physics, purely philosophy, linguistics and logic. -Phil

Okay Phil, but why think of it as a force at all, why have spooky actions at a distance? It is simple the dynamics of space-time creation and destruction, local expansions and contractions. --JimScarver

Jim... IP doesn't account for the latest time theories. you know, those "Revolutionary" ideas that get around the classic problem of Achilles and the Tortoise, etc. So that is something for you to look at.

- IP equivalently accounts for these by discrete space and time. -- JimScarver

Second... What is inertia?

- Resistance to a change in velocity

Why should there be any inertia in IP? It is not the matter that has inertia... it is the fact that space is disappearing in front of the object, and/or continuing to appear behind the object that creates the behavior we think of inertia, isnt' it? Otherwise, you have a resistive force that wants to ride the "wave" it is on. And I've seen how you dislike "waves" elsewhere today.

 - space is made of energy, most of the energy of space propagates through mass unseen and unfelt just as it propagates through space, it just takes a longer time, by travelling slower or equivalently travelling further through the mass.  The gravitational effects for human scale objects are so tiny they can be ignored.  The creation or destruction of spacetime manifests accelerations not velocities. Space only disappears when there is entropy, such as gravity, it only appears when events manifest accelerations. --JimScarver

Seriously. Once an object is moving, it will continue to move unless some new events interacts with it, won't it?

- Inertia and gravity are due to the small amounts of energy of the vacuum that the masses actually interact with.  Since this is equal in all directions it holds the mass firmly in place at whatever velocity it is at. --JimScarver

Space is still growing and shrinking in the same ways effectively around it, so therefore, to the object, there is no change.

- Yes, due to equal radiation and consumption of events in all directions --JimScarver

This is why photons can travel through curved space without change to their "inertia", isn't it? Otherwise, those changes of direction/velocity would change its inertia, wouldn't it? And that doesn't happen, unless its inertia is actually its wavelength or something, right?

- Photons only choice is to follow space-time, there is no other idea of a straight line available to them as our three dimensional illusion is relative not absolute.

Just my crazy thoughts, of course. But I don't see why there would be "inertia" in IP. Constant velocity is identical to no velocity because the relative amount of space being added and subtracted is identical in both cases to the object's framework. Therefore, no difference (acceleration), and therefore, no inertia. Inertia may be the amount of space creation/deletion that needs to be changed to affect the object in its current framework, but that isn't some mysterious "resistance". That's just more or less space (depending on if you are accelerating the object further or decelerating it).

---StarPilot

I'm not sure what is not clear here. Your intuition seems correct and is consistent with IP. The trick is that vacuum energy is uniform at all frequencies below the microwave background where there is a slight non-uniformity called the CMBR. Matter interacts with signals from x-rays down to its effective internal dimension which depends primarily on its mass most often and wider frequencies occasionally. The lions share is at lower frequency as the energy density increases inversely. The reason the energy of interaction seems equal on all sides at any speed is that most of the energy of the vacuum is outside the interaction frequency of the mass and when velocity changes the signals red shifted out and blue shifted in to the interaction frequency range are identical such that the interaction in all directions that holds it at its current speed is always equal in all directions.

Remember, space is energetic, only marginally less energy dense than matter. Most of the energy of the vacuum propagates through masses as easily as it propagates through space. It is only large masses like the earth that consume significant space-time and major sources like the sun, or rocket engines that create significant amounts of space-time velocities. While we can say the earth eats 32 feet if space-time every second, this bending of space is manifesting acceleration, not a velocity.

The far smaller inertial effects we see on human scale objects inhibit accelerations, not velocities as both are due to the same effects just at different orders of magnitude.

--JimScarver

Humm... The photon thinks its going in a straight line. And to it, it is, until it encounters something. It is just all the space-time event chains being added (grown space) and subtracted (event chain received and collapsing) that is changing. The fact that his curves the path the photon travels to an outside observer is immaterial to the photon. It's still traveling straight. That, I understand...

But if I accelerate my space ship to 10 miles/second, why does it gain resistance to having that path changed?

- It does not.  Drop a buoy and you will see that it takes exactly the same energy to accelerate again from that point to 10 miles/second from the buoy.  It is only your relative speed when you hit something that resist change due to your kinetic energy. It is only the observer who sees your clock as slow that assumes your mass must be greater due to lower apparent velocity.--JimScarver

In classical physics, it does take more energy to accelerate another 10 miles/second. That is because the ship's mass has increased. However, since we use chemical activity of mass interacting (we "burn" fuel and oxidizer to release gas in a directed fashion so that it accelerates us in the desired direction), the mass of the fuel we carry has increased, so we have an equivalent increase in fuel to power that increase in velocity another 10 miles/second (presuming we brought enough along in the first place). So, we can simplify everything and ignore this, in classical terms. Now, if we used a different propulsion form, so that we no longer had to carry and burn fuel (say, a mythical Difference Engine which draws power from the minor fluctuations from the ZPE), then we would find that it takes more and more effort/ship "time" to accelerate, as we are trying to push a larger effective mass using the same amount of derived drive force. This would yield a top speed for a given Difference Engine power yield (presuming that due to various effects (such as interacting with less ZPE, as you increase speed), power yield does not increase in direct proportion with speed/massal increase) and a given starting "rest" mass. ---StarPilot

That's why I was trying to get an IP explanation out of. It seems that in classical sense, the ship has increased mass, so it's inertial factor has gone up, and therefore requires more energy to over come it's inertia (if I wanted to brake to 9 miles/second, it would require lots more energy then it took to go from 1 mile/second to 2 mile/second). Now, why? Once my space ship STOPS making new events via its engines, where do those new space events come from that maintains it in its "static" (same velocity) state?

- Velocity is only relative, your velocity with respect to yourself is always zero and your mass is always your rest mass.  Where you measure your speed with respect to known position of stars and track your progress, you experience no such anomalies.  It is the stationary observer that perceives you to have a speed limit. --JimScarver

Once my space ship is no longer accelerating, it becomes one big photon, after all... going to what it thinks is a straight forward, even though the path will follow the "curves" of space as space-time event chains collapse near larger mass bodies and create the shadow which we call gravity wells. But again... why?

- The fabric of event orderings is all there is to follow, there is no underlying continuum. --JimScarver

I can understand in deep space that the space ship is effectively at a standstill, as we are not accelerating. It is encountering slightly more events in front of its travel path then from behind though, isn't it? So that means eventually, it will slow down, but the amount of such slowing should be so minimal as to not be noticeable on a human time scale, right?

- Yes, approaching objects will look big and bright and blue shifted.  At high enough speed the heat will be visible light and the visible light will be dangerous UV and X-rays.  The effect can be considerable, like a multiplied solar wind. --JimScarver

It should be slightly easier to "brake" then to accelerate, due to having to overcome less ZPE events when braking versus having to overcome more when accelerating, yes? - No, at any speed the uniform ZPE events you interact with are equal from all directions. The red shift or blue shift will leave the same uniform net energy in your reception range of frequencies in all directions.

So is that why it takes more energy to accelerate as you go faster then it takes to slow down? It would seem logical to me, but that doesn't mean much, I know. ;)
- Well it doesn't, not to the traveller.  The real question is why the stationary observer thinks that it does while you see no speed limit at all but find that your clock registered much less time then stationary clocks.  This is due to the relative nature of time and space.  Events in one place define time, which events between places define space.  "Place" is relative to motion and not the same for the traveller and the home body.  Thus time and space are relative to motion. --JimScarver

You description makes me think that everything is in a dense ocean... it's just that since we are in a slightly denser pool of matter, we don't notice the slightly less dense ocean that contains our denser, smaller pool. Is that what you meant to describe?

- yes.... but it acts like a superfluid that "feels" only acceleration, not velocity.  It has only two dimensional signals which cannot define place.  Even less dense structures of more than two dimensions, if such things existed, would interact with the ZPE and define place. --JimScarver

However... the photon, like our space ship, is traveling its rate because it is riding the expanding massal/event wave/bubble of space. So therefore, if its path gets curved due to some local space distortion (a gravity well/shadow), shouldn't its speed SLOW DOWN?

- The photon defines space instantaneously from its point of view.  Its rapidity is infinite.  We have no ways to distinguish slower light from more space.  It takes light longer to pass through a strong gravitational field looking from the outside, but inside time is slowed down so the light is normal speed.

This doesn't seem right. All of Time is ordered forward because we don't have a signed "timestamp". We just have events. Since the fastest any event can travel to us is light-speed, we never see things that happened later after event X (like event Y), in the natural order of receiving the broadcasting of those events. It is due to nothing traveling faster then light that maintains the logical ordering we recognize... cause and effect.

Now, why what you said (time slowing down) isn't "correct"... It's the gravitational shadow. That shadow is the lessening of ZPE received by smaller bodies near larger ones. Remember, ZPE is the main "driver" of perceived time, as its the main event sequence. tick-tick-tick-tick. But a large body (like the earth) creates this "shadow", blocking out some ZPE that would otherwise strike a smaller body near it (like an orbiting International Space Station). Less ticks, less time advancement on the clock of the smaller body. This is why the faster you go, the less time advances for you... you receive less tick-tick-tick events of ZPE striking you. Until you are nothing but a ray, traveling at the speed of light ZPE. But so long as ZPE can strike you, there will be some ticks on the event clock. So wouldn't ZPE that happens to be oriented so it is traveling at right angles (90 Degrees rotated to the travelers path of travel) still cause ticks on our light speed travelers event clock? He isn't a solitary photon "packet", so it can interact with him. Tick. Tick. Tick. What about 45 degrees oriented ZPE? Only the ZPE that is oriented around the axis and direction of his travel cannot interact with him, because it cannot go fast enough to strike our light speed passenger. Less ticks? Yes. But if time is nothing but events, and the main source of these events are ZPE striking something, then logically, at light speed travel, there will still be ZPE events for any non-photate complex signals that somehow get to that speed.

Photons, being exclusionary, do not interaction, and therefore ignore each other. This means they haven't much to strike, and therefore pass time, since photons make up so much of ZPE, jah? ---StarPilot

Riding that wave is live riding a spring... and sliding off the front (due to path curving) would mean some velocity, as measured from an outside framework (we have to have that to see the curving, right?) would be lost as you are no longer riding in the same axis of the wave of space growth. Therefore, it would seem that some internal state of both matter and energy (being merely different forms of each other) must track inertial state. A photon whose path has been altered does not lose speed... it merely changes frequency (looses/red shifts or gains/blue shift energy state, but not travel speed).

- riding the light, if that were possible, there is no change is speed or frequency, Only if it is not the same speed by your clock when it is not in the same gravity as your clock is any changes.  The anomalies are experienced by the distant observer, not the traveller.  The perceived frequency change (energy/mass) balances the speed change such that the energy is constant. --JimScarver

So I do not understand how the ZPE all around holds a object, of whatever size, at it's current speed when there is no nearby curving/shadows and no outside accelerating forces (thrust, sunshine received, etc) involved. All moving objects will be slowed to a stop, as they do not emit as much energy as they absorb. This behavior should be observable. If space is expanding overall equally, then the behavior of braking through different absorption/eating of ZPE effect will still be observable. Only in areas where you have some form of significant local growth of space will you have a disruptive element that could prevent this behavior from being observed. ZPE, it would seem, should abhor movement, and resist it more then staying "still". Therefore, you should have a resistive force that grows when something tries to accelerate, and that this force should indeed act as a brake until the object, whether a very minor particle, or a very major one such as an intergalactic black-hole, is no longer absorbing more ZPE in any direction, and is at "rest" when compared to the ZPE.

- if you always see the same ZPE energy from all directions at any speed since your reception range of frequencies is constant there is no absolute rest frame which it can slow down to coincide with. --JimScarver

Now, time for JW to tell me why I'm wrong and there is no inertial state for any object. ;) But without some internal state, since Photons have mass and they interact with other parts of the ZPE, they would slow down.

- The ZPE is made of photons and photons never actively interact with each other, they only propagate one another unchanged. see below. --JimScarver

The CMBR is the light of our universe's creation/BigBang/EventOne, red-shifted so far over that it is mere cosmic microwaves, rather then the extreme high level frequencies they started out at. But they are still traveling at light speed. To maintain their inertia over time, they've lost their FREQUENCY/energy.

- You can argue that point, but the standard model says the CMBR is red shifted because we are traveling away from it at such high speed in an expanding universe.  The energy loses in photons is zero as near as we can tell as energy only comes in exact multiples of the Plank action interacting elastically and reversible with zero loss in the quantum. --JimScarver

If inertia was not an actual internal state maintained, then light would not shift frequency... it would shift velocity. And therefore, light speed wouldn't be the limit of communication; it would be the average flowing speed of light traffic.

- It is not proper to think of photons as ordinary objects with ordinary properties flowing though some medium.  Photons ARE the medium.  They manifest the only space and time there is by the discriminations they manifest and by mutual propagation.  The proper velocity of a photon is infinity.  No matter how rapidly you are traveling, even at 100c, the speed of light remains as elusive as it is at 0c.  Do not think of photons as being affected by gravity, think of them as manifesting time and space itself, and hence are themselves responsible for our perception of gravity. --JimScarver

Or so my classically influenced grey pattern recognizer intuits.

- Well stop it==== :) There are expansions and contractions manifesting spacetime and gravity, there is no continuum of any particular dimension. --JimScarver

==

---StarPilot

The bottom line is that ALL experience is the result of quantum interactions. In the quantum there is only one speed, the speed of light. Nothing really moves at any other speed. Matter is that which goes in more than one direction such that its direction is always changing. The rest frame position of matter is where the vectors of all directions equal zero manifesting a relative existence of a locality of place and time. If no such rest frame position exists then no place or time or object is manifest, only space and energy are manifest manifesting the expansion of our universe

Where a rest frame position exists entropy is manifest, the energy received adds to zero and is locally lost. The space time velocities once manifest are gone, manifesting gravity the deep relationship between entropy and time.

If in our reference frame we see an object spending 75% of its time at the speed of light going one way, and only 25% going the other way at the speed of light, then we say, on the average, of in a semi-classical sense its rest frame is traveling at .5c relative to our rest frame.

Time is tick-tocks, not just ticks. Unless place is manifest by a change in direction of the speed c, time and location are not manifest since there is no reference frame where the speeds add to zero. At the speed of light nothing happens, the clock is stopped, stuck in one direction until the pendulum swings the other way manifesting an opposite direction and the existence of a rest frame.

Space is manifest by events in one direction while time is events manifesting place by going every which way. Since direction is relative to motion we can never see time pass for a light speed object going only one way at c. All of its events define space in one direction and none of them define a place or time where anything particular happened. We cannot accelerate through space without accelerating through time relative to stationary clocks as our tick-tocks are relative to our motion as exchanges of energy synthesize space, time and perspective (place).

Nothing happens in this world spontaneously, nothing happens unless clocked by discrete application of quantum operators. You can accelerate into the future, but cannot experience events not yet clocked. You cannot escape the thin skin of current events that constitutes all that exists. When you get to the future you see that much more time has passed than passed by your clock. Such is the nature of existence of perspective that everything doesn't happen at once because our clocks are slow, we are slipping into the future, realizing delays, manifesting the universal logic of the machinery of the universe we experience as distinct from all other hypothetical realms.

-- JimScarver

But ZPE isn't equal on an object.

We had a discussion on how a spinning sphere (such as a collapsed star such as a neutron star or pulsar), and whether it should spin up, faster and faster, as it absorbs more ZPE on its rotating edge of movement then its trailing edge, making it's energy state climb, or whether it should slow down, braking, as it absorbs more ZPE on its non spinward orientation. We can observe pulsars spinning down. So they are braking. And it seems to me that this would apply to all objects. That the interaction with ZPE should act as a resistance.

- I must have been mistaken.  The only thing decaying rotations that I know of is tidal forces.  There is no cost of spinning, a body in motion remains in motion unless a force acts on it.  The ZPE lost from the past and exiled into the future is equal in all directions independent of motion defining a rest frame and rotating frame.  Gravity is a tiny force to begin with.  The tidal forces are much much tinier.  They are due to the distortion of space due to the difference in gravity between the front and back of an object due to the inverse square law.  Tidal forces can be significant in binary star systems but are ignorable for human scale objects.

Where else should this braking behavior be observable? If encountering more ZPE on your on your anti movement axis, all objects must be braked by ZPE in deep space, due to their perturbation/shadow that they create in whatever you want to call it/aether ZPE. All the emergent effects from massal "ZPE shadows" imply it should be there. Otherwise, the size of an object would not matter, and a smaller object next to a larger object would experience the same rate of time passage... as equal amounts of ZPE would therefore strike the smaller object when it wasn't near the other object as it was near the other object. This isn't true (being near a mass slows down time), so therefore there must be "shadows" created in the general ZPE aether, if only for a small amount of time.

As a side bar... if photons do not interact, how can they create interference patterns with each other? As separate and unique "ticks" of energy/information, then light should not be able to create interference patterns, should it? Both are communicating a state of change that should cause whatever object you look at to increase energy state, yes? It may immediately emit a photon of information about its state change ("reflect" to the standard world), right? So "1 light source-2 slit" experiment/observation shouldn't exhibit any interference patterns. All the information should add up to re-emitted information... which to us is light. What's the InformationPhysicsTwoSlitExperiment and its explanation? If all photons are unique change states that do not interact?

- Photons interact with matter, introducing delays and resonating alternating patterns of differences canceling each other, reflecting each other and prorogating each other.  They can never really be cancelled however because the positons that cancel light are only virtual, but we can see the resonant and harmonic patterns because the discrete alternations are indeed periodic oscillations vibrating the atoms by momentum exchanges in discrete multiples of the plank action. ---JimScarver

I do not at this time believe photons are any more special then any other particle.

- Photons dont always have a definite direction of travel as shown in the CaseOfTheElectronCollision. They usually don't see objects shorter than their alternation distance and pass through them as if they are not there.  What ordinary particles are you talking about?  But you are sort of right, nothing exhibits either a particle or wave nature, including photons. ---JimScarver

It's all energy (information), in some form even if we don't currently understand most of the underpinnings.

- The information model of the quantum is complete and Turing and others have shown there are no hidden properties we can know about other than quantum state.

If photons didn't have mass, that would make them special. But they do have mass. Having mass, they eat ZPE, even though they themselves make up ZPE. If they didn't have mass, they'd could not eat ZPE. Only mass can eat ZPE, and eating ZPE is the behavior we call gravity. As ZPE is nothing but the background state change packets being communicated from the past (in)to the future, but are made of photons (and smaller particles?), then the signals themselves must occasionally "eat" each.

 - No, if photons interacted we could not see distant planets clearly; photons only interact, or interfere in their interaction with matter.  Matter is distinct from light in that there exist a rest frame having a net velocity less then the speed of light.  It is because the velocities add to zero, losing the information and energy, that gravity and inertia is manifest.  If the total of all the light speed interactions composing an object does not add to zero in any reference frame, there is no rest mass or gravitational effect. --JimScarver

Otherwise photons would not have a mass. They'd just be "space". This ZPE eating itself, then, is pure entropy. Total signal loss. It has to be there; else photons have to have zero mass. That's the only way a photon would not then have a ZPE shadow (gravity well).

- in space all photons are orthogonal to one another.  There is no loss.  Their attempt to cancel one another always fail and they prorogate each other instead. --JimScarver

I understand that you are saying that all of space is photon chains (you call them light cones). After all, that's what the event-sequence chain of time-space is...an information signal/packet traveling from the past into the future. If photons in motion (an information signal) create space, and the receiving of photons creates time (that's an event), the photon chain collapses, destroying space and that creates gravity. ;-) But I don't understand how photons cannot interact with other photon... as that is required for them to eat ZPE. If photons couldn't interact, photons would have 0 mass as they wouldn't eat ZPE at all. And observational experiments confirm they do mass (and therefore, must eat ZPE). While most of the time, photons interact in an exclusionary matter (one photon trail excludes other photon trails, and thus space "emerges" from this behavior), if ZPE is composed of photons, then photons must interact at some point. Otherwise, they would be massless.

- A change in one direction is cancelled, manifesting a change in the other direction the next instant, which is cancelled, and so on, by the magic of time propagating forever.  They have no rest mass because they are not eating anything. --JimScarver

As a final thought: If space twists (i.e., dragging the frame), doesn't this require some form of larger time frame then IP currently allows? This is why I wonder this: the event time-space chain is supposed to collapse instantly once received. However, if it did collapse instantly, there could be no twisting (stretching) of space due to a mass's rotation, and gravity would communicate instantly (which it doesn't, because that's a violation of SR). With instantaneous collapse, then it would not matter how fast an object spins (or how massive the spinning object is) because there would be no "frame dragging". If the universe is an energy fluid, then it's the "draining" (eating) of the ZPE into a rotating body that creates the "dragging of the frame". But this requires for an outside containing time frame during the collapse (drain). We know that space twists near rotating masses. We can observe this via multiple ways. In IP, for space to "grow", we need to be signaling the future about some state change. So, what information is it that these spinning bodies are signaling? However, if some time (however minor) does pass during an event-chain collapse, then we automatically have the mechanism for this twisting of space. Just as water draining from the tub spin up due to the subtle differences in conditions of the water draining away due to rotational differences in speed, then the very essence of space-time draining into the spinning object creates the twisting of the local space time. And the more massive the object, the more space-time would spin up around it while draining.

- Yes and No. You have the right idea, but it is mutual tidal effects between masses creating the vortexes.  The ZPE is uniform right up to the edge of the masses.  Sure it is distorted by flowing but not by self interaction.  The distortions can exhibit non-linearity because the movement manifests accelerations not just velocities so that there is a landslide effect.  These vortexes are only very rarely stable but fortunately rarely occur because the tidal effect that causes them usually much too weak for them to form. --JimScarver

Well, now to find out what I've forgotten and overlooked. :-D

---StarPilot

====What is the speed of Gravity?

==

In IP, if the collapsing of the event sequence chain (when a message is received) is what we call gravity, then its speed has to equal c... otherwise, it would violate Special Relativity. Therefore, the speed of receiving = the speed of collapse, and that just happens to also equal the speed of space growth. Otherwise, the gravity from Alpha Centauri would be felt instantaneously here, and there would be no time delay. Its effect would just be so minor to us due to the small amount of space that just disappeared (its gravity well/shadow from eating its ZPE) in comparison to our local space time that it would effectively not be noticeable.

I know said previously that the speed of collapse must be more then the speed of light/space due to black holes not emitting anything on their own (as otherwise, there would be a maximum amount of signals that they could receive and therefore the excess signals would fall through without being received). However, as signals are not falling through black holes, this would seem to imply that the speed of eating ZPE signals, plus the odd nebula or companion stars signal, has not reached the maximum amount... as nothing escapes a black hole. Therefore, it seems that the speed of communication is higher then the current amount of ZPE received at the event horizon (leaving room for all those extraneous extra signals).

Ok, so what am I missing? I feel that there is something not quite fitted together on this.

(This is what's been bothering me about the "collapse is instant, but nothing travels faster then c" from previous IP conversations.)

---StarPilot

The expansion has taken 14 billion years. That witch reaches us at high energy is the past we see, expanded, that which we receive at low energy (ZPE) is lost. It is at the speed of light because that is the speed of time, how fast it really is depends on how fast our clocks are going so it always seems the same, but in our clockwork universe nothing happens spontaneously and time has no meaning between propagations. At 8000 miles from the center of the earth fall in at 32 feet per second, at 16000 miles it falls at 8 feet per second, at 32000 miles 2 feet per second. The direction of the flow must always be the same as the direction you see the object as the lost photons are coincident with the seen photons. So while nothing is moving a light speed except the light the light is gravity and expansion.

--JimScarver

Er... how much space is created, Jim, when a photon is created and travels into the future? Is it one mere bubble the "size" of the photon? Elsewhere, when we have discussed this on this site, I was left with the impression that the space created resembled a "chain", due to some talk of event sequence chains and what not.

- Just one spoke of spacetime per proton is created or destroyed.  The chain of propagations that gets it from there to here can be ignored in that the mutual prorogations had a net effect of zero on anything else.  The net effect is in two dimensions of effect at each end.  The photon follows the movement of space (gravity). Passing near the earth consuming 32 feet of space per second the photon is hardly affected.  Since it comes and goes in much less than a thousandth of a second the earths gravity only moves it a tiny fraction of an inch. --JimScarver

So is it purely one photon, or something more? If it's just one photon, then the absorption would of course result in the destruction of that exclusionary signal space (and whether it takes any "time" or not becomes effectively moot). But if it's more, then the speed of collapse of that event-chain has to be the speed of light, and not instantaneous, or gravity's speed would be effectively universal. Gravity, in IP, does not communicate via some anti-particle (or event "graviton") that has to TRAVEL to the receivers. Its merely the deletion of that photon's event-chain of space.

So what is it?

- You got it right.  The loss of timespace information is discrete, instantaneous, when a signal is received, but that is when it is realized and lost depending on future events sending redundant signals that maintain general distance information.  When you think of these spokes being lost it is hard associate any speed to them, but they fall in at just one speed, the speed of light.  A point mass with the earths gravity at 8000 miles effectively only moves only 32 feet per second, at half that distance twice as fast, until you reach the distance where the speed is the speed of light, the black hole radius, where the speed of gravity is most certainly the speed of light.  But if we move this point, how fast will other bodies "feel" that movement?  Clearly the maximum is the speed of light and the minimum must also be the speed of light since there are no delay elements in space other than space itself at the speed of light, t=x/c. --JimScarver

So these spokes of yours aren't spokes... they are just a photon. That's the complete signal? To get a 'spoke', you need a string of photons. Ok, that makes more sense to me in regards to what you've said previously. So... the speed of Gravity is instantaneous throughout the universe then. It's just so small a difference we'd never notice it, an probably not be able to measure it as there is just so much Space (low signal) around that all the photons being eaten by the gas giants in orbit around Alpha Centauri just isn't noticeable or measurable to us here. That's the only way it could work if its instantaneous, Jim. Gravity has to be instantaneous itself in IP, as Gravity is the actual loss of signal Space due to the signal being received. It was there, now it isn't. Otherwise, your signal reception (Gravity) is still measurable under some theoretical time frame, and that speed would then turn out to be light speed, as nothing goes faster then light speed in IP. --StarPilot

And what does that mean about neutrinos? They are part of the ZPE, right? Well, once you are away from any local sources like a fusing star. ;) It's something like 35% of the universe is in the form and mass of neutrinos, isn't it? Very tiny particles that zip through effectively ~99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of everything.

- Yes.  Neutrinos are one dimensional and have little effect that we know about.  There are gazillions of them coming from the big bang at low energy.  I presume they play an important role in existence since we know 3D matter is made with 2D energy and can expect 2D energy is composed of 1D entities.  We can view light as a neutrino pair without contradiction as energy is convertible.  We can expect most certainly that neutrinos propagate each other and can speculate that they participate in light prorogation as well.

There are gazillions of them coming from the fusing of hydrogen to helium in our star. That's the main source of neutrinos that pass through us. --StarPilot

I think your "Tidal Forces" reasoning above is a total cop out, by the way. A spinning sphere is going to establish equilibrium, and the minor (VERY minor in a collapsed star or black hole) differences in density are not going to cause it to slow down. It takes something else interacting with it to change it's equilibrium. In classical physics, they are trying to say that the warping of space-time is creating additional gravity waves, and that the energy to create that radiant gravity is coming from the kinetic energy of the spin. Thus the spin looses energy, and braking occurs. That allows them to claim that the rising cost to accelerate an object comes from having to power up the more extensive gravity waves that the object MUST create to go that fast (starting from a given mass of X)... The problem with that reasoning is that if it was this was true, then objects could never begin to be attracted to each other... they couldn't gain the necessary energy to overcome the effective ethereal resistance and create the additional gravity wave force. No additional energy, no gravitational attraction. Second, if that were true, we'd not be seeing "increasing red shift", because all objects in exist, including galaxies and galactic clusters, would constantly loose energy, and would therefore be braking, not accelerating. So... from what I understand you said, going for "Tidal Forces" is going for a faulty, classical cop out.

- No, planets are 3D, space, due to flowing into objects, is not quite 3D (or more than 3D depending of perspective).  Space is bending and if you put a planet or star in bending space you bend it====  I am not talking about classical forces. --JimScarver

==

You cannot have it both ways, Jim. (grin) Remember, in IP, Space is merely exclusionary signals being prorogated into the future. But then, so is the planet==== It's merely a very complex signal being prorogated into the future! They are both the same. Where those 2 signals (Space and Planet) interact, signal is received, Space collapses, and Planet changes State (and occasionally it prorogates a new signal into the future about this State change). If you say Planets are n + 1 Dimensions and Space is merely n Dimensions, then I'll buy into that explanation, because Planets have more internal states/variables then the simpler signals that compose Space. That's the real difference between Space and Not-Space( Stars, Planets, Galaxies, etc )... the amount of information in a particular signal and its structure. Space is low grade signal with a simple informational structure (Neutrinos, Photons, etc), while Not-Space is high-grade/dense signal with a more complex informational structure. --StarPilot

==

Additionally, you don't get tidal forces without a second object. It's the tidal forces between the Sun and Mercury that have reduced Mercury's rotation "day" so significantly. It's the tidal forces between the Earth and the Moon that has reduced Earth's day from it's much speedier rate, locked the Moon to always show the same force to the Earth, and is speeding the Moon away from the Earth (the Earth's lost spin is being translated to a faster orbital velocity in the Moon, hence it's very slow escape from the earth). That, BTW, is why the "gravity slingshot" or "gravity assist" orbital paths that we use to boost satellites velocities work. That additional energy comes from the involved "tidal forces". The smaller object bleeds off some velocity from the larger, slower object, and the smaller object goes much faster. Now, why don't we see tidal forces at work in just a single object? Because in something as compressed as a neutron star, or a pulsar, or a black hole, it is basically homogenous. Whatever minor differences may exist in the solid structure, as part of a larger solid, would gain back the energy lost to less dense parts. You cannot lift yourself off the ground by raising your own bootstraps. In objects less solid (say, a large, clustered ball of nebula gas), you again will achieve equilibrium within a single mass quickly as the more dense clusters of gas first slow down (due to any "tidal effects"), and then speed up (due to "tidal effects").

- Pulsars are binary systems.  Solitary systems cannot have tidal effects and do not slow down there spin or motion, much, through space except as effected by atoms, dust, or other objects. --JimScarver

Pulsars are not binary systems. Pulsars are pulsars, Jim. A Pulsar may be part of a binary system, or trinary, or quad system. Or it may be a solitary stellar figure. --StarPilot

  Yikes, silly mistake, "variable stars" in the old days were called pulsars also; they turned out to be binary systems.  X-ray pulsars kept the name pulsars; I stand corrected, senior moment.  Pulsars slow down because they are expelling energy, with that energy goes rotational motion.  The point is that "SIGNALS" never interact except to propagate one another unchanged; they are always orthogonal in the quantum canceling virtual positrons and electrons until a real one is encountered.  There are no side effects to propagation.  Signals only interact actively with matter. --JimScarver

And if your rotating sphere wasn't strong enough to sustain the stressing caused by its internal tidal effects, it would shatter. Perhaps it would stay apart, or perhaps it would gravitationally collapse again giving it a second chance to reform in a more stable configuration. But with the energies and masses we are talking about for most neutron stars, pulsars, and black holes, I doubt there would be enough matter in close enough proximity to reform into something similar to what it was, off the top of my head.

---StarPilot

-- we could not call internal effects "tidal".  Strong magnetic effects can play a role but mostly as affected by atoms, dust, or other objects. --JimScarver

Again, it seems to me that you make my point for me. You have to have 2 separate items interacting to get some form of change in your rotating sphere. --StarPilot

But, on second thought, there are ways the rotational kinetic energy of solitary objects is randomized. Weather is a prime example. Although our weather is said to be powered by the sun, it would seem that storm systems on the sun (sunspots), Jupiter and earth, must consume rotational energy. Solid bodies, without atmosphere or liquid core would not be susceptible to such losses however. --JimScarver

It has been noted in studies that the wind (which is created entirely by the energy input from the Sun) striking the Andes mountain ranges, is speeding up the Earth's rotation. That's radiant energy received turned into rotational energy.

Our weather is certainly a different system from the Sun, as well as Jupiter. Ours is driven by the extra energy we receive from the Sun. The Sun and Jupiter make more energy themselves then they receive from their spatial environment, and hence their weather is driven by their own internal energy creation/liberation processes. --StarPilot

Hey StarPilot, the effect that you are talking about may exist according to general relativity. Gravitomagnetism may be produced by stars and planets when they spin.

"It's similar in form to the magnetic field produced by a spinning ball of charge," explains physicist Clifford Will of Washington University (St. Louis). Replace charge with mass, and magnetism becomes gravitomagnetism."

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/19apr_gravitomagnetism.htm

Thus far, it seems to me that the InformationPhysics model does not predict this effect, as there are no spinning gravitons, only lost spacetime velocities do to spacetime velocity cancellation effect when neutrinos and photons interact with matter from every direction.

This does illuminate the dragging effect we can expect due to ordinary magnetism. This will be explained in detail in TruthAboutLight and TruthAboutMagetism.

--JimScarver

_very interesting, basic storms counter the earths rotation by rotating clockwise in the north, and counter clockwise in the south, due to the earths rotation. This effect uses up rotational energy._ -JimScarver

I'm going to have to think about that, Jim. As the spin effect for large storms is driven by the fact that the ground travels faster toward the equator then the poles, this means that the winds on the pole-side travel faster relatively to their back side travels. This yields the basic rotation behavior. The only point where you could have the loss of energy from the main rotating mass into the wind has to be at the interface (where wind meets ground). Is that truly a loss of rotation though (Most of Earth's surface is water, and that just effects surface level currents which will either strengthen or weaken their current flow direction)? Also... you are being dyslexic. Storms rotate counter-clockwise in the northern hemisphere, clockwise in the southern hemisphere. (You can check out the National Hurricane Center's FAQ at [1] if you don't believe me). Remember, for the northern hemisphere, the southernmost land under the storm is traveling faster then the northern most... this "pulls" the wind counter-clockwise in the northern hemisphere (see references on the Coriolis force for better/more detailed explanations for those that are curious). --StarPilot

_Okay, I got the rotation backasswards, but I am not convinced that anthing can result from rotation that goes not use rotational energy, the jury is out. -JimScarver

No worries. However, remember, that not only do we have energy ADDED directly by sunlight, but indirectly by those huge stores of solar energy we call oceans. Storm's power are drawn directly from pressure and temperature differences in the air. So again, I'm not sure how the earth's rotational energy would even be able to move from the surface into the storm. Would you really lose any rotational energy to the storm? Part of the storm is blowing on the surface in the rotational direction, after all. And with how gases behave, that storm is going to set up counter circulation elsewhere. It just won't be as concentrated. Will that counter circulation even out the difference? Or will it be in a layer of the atmosphere without any strong enough interface with the surface to be able to release its energy back into the rotational energy? I just don't know. I'm not sure anyone does, at this time. ---StarPilot

Jupiter makes energy itself? The source of the energy is not at issue, the behavior of the storms is the same, with spin determined by rotation because the distance traveled at the equator is greater than the distance closer to the polls due to rotation. --JimScarver

Yep. Jupiter creates more energy then it receives (just so you know, the vast majority of that energy is in the IR wavelength, although it also self-illuminates in other parts of the spectrum). Technically it's a small brown dwarf star. Additionally, the behavior of storms on the Sun and Jupiter is not the same as the behavior of storms on Earth. The Sun and Jupiter are not solid. The Sun is a sphere of plasma (down to something like 1/3 of its interior, where it transitions to a solid rotating ball), Jupiter is big ball of gas (there is currently no transitional point known where it goes from gas to solid). This means literally that different areas of those bodies can, and do, rotate at different speeds. This does not cause the actual spinning of storms. Basic convection (hotter "masses" rising, cooler "masses" sinking) create their observed rotations. Incidentally, for ever storm on Jupiter that spins up clockwise, there must be a storm that spins up counter-clockwise. For atmospheres over non-solid bodies, it turns out that storm rotational spin is a ZeroSumGame. For our atmosphere, it is different, because of the fact that we have a large solid rotating mass (the earth) under it, and so "little" atmosphere on top of that solid rotating mass. Different behaviors emerge due to entirely different conditions. ---StarPilot

Cool stuff, I found a great Juptier weather page http://zebu.uoregon.edu/ph121/l15.html

There are lots of cool stuff out there. Jupiter is really efficent at exchanging heat between all of its lattitudes (as with all planets, its equator being bigger, it gains more energy from sunlight then higher lattitudes). Neptune's weather systems are of real interest to scientists, because it recieves so little energy from the Sun. Neptune is big enough that Hubble can observe its major weather features. Pluto's weather is of extreme interest because it recieves such a tiny, tiny, amount, and has no other sources of energy, other then tidal flexing from its (relative to Pluto) giant moon. But without a probe near Pluto to study it, we cannot find out anything about its weather. ---StarPilot

"Cyclones develop due to the Coriolis effect where the lower latitudes travel faster than the higher latitudes producing a net spin on a pressure zone."

That's the word for it, Coriolis, I couldn't remember it.

Neither could I. I had to look it up. grin ---StarPilot

The more I think about it the more the dragging atmosphere must be accompanied by a slight slowdown in rotation. The effect may be assiciated with tidal hysteresis and magnetic effects. Magnetic effects can be expected to be implicated in reverse spin in oppostition to tidal hysteresis. In any case the net effect is appearently drag.

But the drag of the atmosphere has to be minor. And it can add spin/rotational energy back, if predominate weather and wind patterns cause a lot of wind to blow with the rotation onto a surface which then absords back in that sunlight driven/created energy. Whether that leaves a + or - for the atmosphere's effects on rotational spin, I don't know. --StarPilot

--JimScarver