May13-08, 07:43 AM
The above is a pretty comprehensive review of the Braneworld Gravity notion from folks at the Max Planck institute. Though it is a good ways over my head, as I read between the lines I do get the impression it says that corrections to the gravitational tensor? and relativity can be expected even at “low energies” from a certain set of the Bulk/brane theories, though I think they mean near potentially testable LHC energies (corrections at Planck scales).
The question I have is whether or not relatively large gravitationally involved 4d structure like a planet (largish in the time dimension in particular) might have patterns that suggest a non-local bulk dimensional effect. Specifically could the transition of gravity from the non-local bulk to the local 4d Brane (coupling with matter?) – be likened to a wave passing through 4d aperture, with typical aperture effects – namely wave interference in the form of diffraction (the detector being matter).
Reference to generic aperture diffraction: h______ttp://w____ww.earthboundlight.com/phototips/diffraction-small-apertures.html
Though orbital structure morphology is surely dominated by well-know fluid-wave mechanics, is it possible that something more strange is at play as well? Are there significant mysteries to ring formation? How about planetary nebula? Galactic morphology? Are the the Linblad resonances fully explained without an external forcing function? Has the forcing function been completely identified?
Reference - discussing density wave modeling of Milky way.
Reference to interesting abstract discussing parallels in resonance in plasmas and galactic rings
Could an n-body experiment, looking for diffraction patterns in 4d gravitational interaction of massive bodies, in the presense of a non-local gravitational field perturbation, be used to show a possible connection?
Ref to n-body simulation of galaxy (cluster) formation
Experiment: A stationary 4d sphere with massive properties, surrounded by smaller massive bodies, subjected to non-local perturbations of the g-field, would it show spherical diffraction patterns in the arrangement of the smaller bodies over time?
The aesthetic impulse for this question comes from a personal hunch (yep) that the very coherent orbital structures we see (everywhere) are puzzling in 1) their abundance 2) similarity 3) their constrained coherence? Why, dear goldilocks is it not more chaotic? The everyday 4d interaction of visible mass via gravity from a random uniform soup just seems a bit self-referential to explain such a significant feature of reality. Although this is a purely aesthetic sensation. I would argue that science has always accomodated such things... in the form of questions (albeit potentially dumb ones)
Heres a real question to see if anyone actually read this (god bless). what does "coupling constant" mean?
|Register to reply|
|Spaceships a'turnin round and round -- in space||Astrophysics||5|
|[SOLVED] round and round she goes||Astrophysics||6|