|
The nature of space and mass This page is very much a discussion point; I make no claims here that any of this page expresses reality, merely that if ‘x’ is so, then ‘y’ might follow; nevertheless, I hope you will find it interesting, although it can best be described as ‘wild science’. You need to have read some other pages on this site to follow the argument here. First, the page on inertia, and that on nuclear strong forces. From the page on inertia, it can be seen that particles with an electric field must experience inertia sourced in the motion of that electric field against a putative rest frame, when it generates a magnetic field. From the page on nuclear strong forces it can be seen that the neutron has a bounded electric field, so the inertia from electromagnetic sources is not limited to particles with an electric field that stretches to infinity. Here I make the leap of faith that all particles have a polar electric field that accounts for their inertia. Also, from the page on inertia, only 3/4 of the rest energy of a particle can be made up from its electric field energy, or the inertia would be too high. This leaves 1/4 unaccounted for. The next thing to consider is gravitational mass. There are three masses associated with any particle - its rest mass or energy (the energy used to create that particle), its gravitational mass, and its inertial mass. These are often considered to be identical, but there is no requirement in our measurements of the Universe that they should be identical - they simply need to be in the same ratio to each other for all particles. If we assign the inertial mass to the electric field of every particle, then it is associated with 3/4 of the rest energy of the particle. That leaves the other 1/4 of the rest energy - let’s us assign it to the gravitational mass, so that the ratio of gravitational mass to inertial mass in terms of the rest energy associated with the mechanism is always 1:3. The electric field must always be polar, because any other shape would result in a different ratio of gravitational mass to inertial mass. This brings us to the boundary of the electric field. What actually holds the electric field in place, and what, in essence, is the electric field? The proposal here is that the electric field (and incidentally also the magnetic field) is part of the nature of space itself, and when space is stressed in an appropriate way, the electric field becomes visible. The electric field contains energy that is always tending to expand and diffuse into greater spaces; the boundary of the electric field must produce the opposite effect, attempting to close up the rift in space and assimilate the electric field back into its structure, and this may create ripples in the outer boundary with high ripples balanced by deep ripples, so that if a ripple becomes too deep the outer boundary collapses into the inner boundary and the particle disintegrates - such particles are unstable with a determinable half-life. A boundary at infinity (the electron and positron) has no such stress so will be infinitely stable. Another way of stabilising the outer boundary is to surround it with another larger (and lower-energy) particle. Then any high ripples in the outer boundary are suppressed by the outer particle, and hence deep ripples are indirectly suppressed, so the particle becomes more stable. For certain values of boundary radius and electric field strength, there are viable solutions leading to particles; a boundary at infinity has no stress so will be infinitely stable, while finite boundaries will always be at war with the electric field, leading to potential instability in the boundary and shortened half-life in the particle. Consider a particle with an inner and outer field boundary - every electrostatic field as a limit on its inner boundary, or the rest energy in the electrostatic field would be infinite:-
The inner boundary has a deeper rift at the boundary because the field is stronger and the energy in the inner boundary is (??) the same as that in the outer boundary, but compresed into a much smaller spherical area. The boundary is one edge of a rift in space, unzipped during the creation of the particle, and held open by the electric field that that rift creates in space. This rift “drags in” more space, so there is a localised increase in the “density of space” than surrounding space, so there is a localised rise in overall spatial “density” in the region. This “higher-density” space stresses the surrounding space in such a way that light is slowed down in the region. If two such rifts (i.e. particles) approach they attract each other because the effect on spatial stress of two in the same place is less that the sum of two separate rifts. This means that rifts/particles are forced together by space to reduce the overall stress on space. The rifts are relative - a lot of particles together will create a deep rift in space, but the addition of one particle to a million particles has a lower effect than the addition of the first particle to empty space. Hence space will never break down totally by an accumulation of gravitational mass.
Hence in this model...
|
