CONSERVATION OF WAVEFRONTS:
This paper is a work in progress. I will show that setting up devices along
a path in which light waves or radio waves pass by can be counted and the numerical
count number sent back to a central station. The rate at which the numbers change
with time are compared and found to be the same rate, thus the frequency has not
changed along the path with different gravity potentials. This proves that
photons do not change frequency when traveling along a variable gravity potential.
This finding has significant implications concerning the speed of light:
1) When we see a gravity red or blue shift it's not gravity changing the frequency
of the wave in transit, but instead our instruments changing along the path.
2) When we look at a gravity red shifted object in space after the doppler shift
is accounted for, we know that the red shifting is not occurring while in
transit, but instead we are looking at the frequency of the wave as its being
emitted right at the source.
3) In the formula frequency = wave speed divided by wavelength, if we set the
frequency as a constant, then the ratio of wave speed to wavelength is constant
and we know that the wavelength is compressed or elongated due to gravity
potential, therefore the speed of light also must be treated as a variable.
4) If the speed of light is a variable, then we must account for why it appears
to be a constant, and the reason it appears to be a constant, is that our
instruments are changing in direct proportion to the actual speed of light
in such a manner as to always mask the variation in the speed of light. I.e.
the direct measurement of the speed of light is always the same value even
though the actual speed is not the same value. We cannot directly detect the
variation, but only through indirect measurement can we see the speed change.
Cosmological Implications:
5) This has cosmological implications in such that if bodies were closer together
in the past, the entire universe would be at a lower gravity potential, and the
rate of flow of time in the past would be slower. Extrapolating this all the
way back to the beginning of time shows us that the time slows down so much
that the big bang occurred at t = minus infinity years, thus the universe never
had a beginning, but has always been in existence. This has other implications.
6) When we look out to the so called edge of our universe we see objects that are
more red shifted than they should be. Some people think this is due to an
increased recession velocity. It's not due to a greater velocity, but the fact
that we are looking back in time, at a universe that ran more slowly in the past.
The additional red shifting of old objects makes it appear that the universe
expansion is accelerating when it is probably not. We just have to take the
rate of flow of time correctly into account. Note that this model does not
need the so called inflation theory, so we can dispense with that.
7) If the expanding universe is causing our gravity potential here on Earth to
increase, we are in effect speeding up the rate of time flow, and our size
also. This means as those galaxies on the outer edge recede from us, our
sense of distance changes so that if we were to measure their distance some
billions of years from now, we might find that they are the same distance
from us as they are now. Thus we have a steady state expanding universe
in which things actually are moving away from us, but we are expanding at the
same rate, making them appear to be nearly stationary, even though they do
have doppler shift. Interestingly we can have all these things going
on at the same time. This model should do away with the need for dark energy.
8) Let's consider why the galaxies rotate faster than they should. Obviously
the force of gravity by the inverse square law fails to produce enough
force at the scale of a galaxy. We have two choices. We can introduce
dark matter which we have not yet observed, or we can introduce that the
gravity is not completely in accordance with the inverse square law, i.e.
gravity has nonlinear components. Let's assume gravity potential has a
non linear component. The gravity force falls off rapidly with distance
from a mass at 1/r^2. All we need is a 1/r very small term so that when
the 1/r^2 force has fallen too low, there remains a 1/r term force. This
1/r term will not be visible to us here on Earth because the 1/r^2 force
dominates. So let's say we play around and find an appropriate equation
for the coefficient of the 1/r force. That should be easy to do. Let's
do it. What about for r extremely small?
9) Let's say that we now believe that gravity forces follow a nonlinear
equation in which all the terms 1/r 1/r^2 1/r^3 1/r^4 exist. Now we
see that for very small objects like nucleii, a force term like 1/r^4
can easily dominate, thus the nonlinear gravity force may actually be
the nuclear binding force. Let's plug in terms and find out what that
equation actually is. This should be easy.
10) The Pioneer 10 anomaly is about a .001 attractive force greater at 82 AU
Normally the force for gravity for an orbiting body is v^2 = GMsun/r
However, galaxies rotate at about a constant speed in the outer arms.
This suggests an extra term in the above equation is needed for very large r.
We can assume the equation is v^2 = GMsun/r + AMsun so that as r increases
there is a force that keeps rotating objects in the spiral arms going at
a near constant speed independent of r. So at 82 AU we know that the AMsun
is about .001 of the value of GMsun/r. Solving for A = 5E-27. And at a
distance from the sun of 82,000 AU the two forces are about equal. This
is a distance about 30% from our sun to the nearest star 4.3 light years away.
Therefore we can see that the second term will dominate the equation for
the motion of stars in the galaxy and the Newtonian force will be minor.
Thus we see that the Pioneer 10 anomaly is consistent with the rotation of
our galaxy and we have possibly a new non linear gravity force at work.
11) Suppose we have F = m1m2(G1/r + G2/r^2 + G3/r^3 + G4/r^4) nonlinear gravity
Then G1~=5E-27 G2=6.67E-11 G3=~-.0001 for a few % error on the surface of the
Earth and G4~=.007 where G4 is the nuclear binbing force. G3 is the so called
repulsive 5th force seen in gravity measurements made on Earth.
I'm waiting for John Moffat's book to update the value of G1.
Linking Gravity to QED:
12) Now that we have shown that the constant c for the speed of light is
neither constant nor follows linear superposition, let's take our new
equations and plug the effects back into Maxwells classical equations
to try to take a fresh new look at the nonlinear electronic world.
13) Let's say that we find the electron to be a radially oscillating
particle in which energy is swapped between the electric field and
another field, i.e. nonlinear gravity. Possibly G3 exists and plays
a role in the existence of the electron.
Gene Preston
February 12, 2015