Can the Hubble Expansion Explain the Mechanism of Gravity?

[Antonio Lao]

I can see similarity with Stokes' theorem in vector analysis. But mass and time are not vectors by current definitions.

 

[felipefas]

I see what you are saying. But it will take me some time to visualize the concept

 

[Antonio Lao]

We are in the same boat. I am still trying to make more sense from them to satisfy my own supposedly rational thinking and trying to be logically minded.

 

[Nigel]

"It has been supposed that empty space has no physical properties but only geometrical properties. No such empty space without physical properties has ever been observed, and the assumption that it can exist is without justification. It is convenient to ignore the physical properties of space when discussing its geometrical properties, but this ought not to have resulted in the belief in the possibility of the existence of empty space having only geometrical properties... It has specific inductive capacity and magnetic permeability." - Professor H.A Wilson, FRS, Modern Physics, Blackie & Son Ltd, London, 4th ed., 1959, p. 361.

Consider this question to get a vitally important intuitive result. "When a submarine moves, how much water moves, and at what net velocity?" This net volume being displaced is simply equal to the submarine's own volume, and it's velocity is minus the submarine velocity (ie, water moves at the same speed, but in the opposite direction). This is because a wave of fluid flows around a moving object, and continuously fills the void forming behind it. This explains the "paradox" of wave-particle duality. If that submarine is continuously accelerating, the water is accelerated in the opposite direction. In the big bang, the clusters of galaxies represent submarines accelerating radially away. The dielectric acceleration is the other way, towards us. From this result, we know the quantity of the 377 ohm vacuum dielectric moving, as well as its motion. The imbalance due to the mass of the Earth below us gives a correct prediction for the force of gravity, with a formula for G to go into Einstein's field.

Consider a static point in space near the Earth's surface. The fabric of space remains static despite a 9.8 ms^-2 gravitational downward acceleration field, because the downward force, Mg, is balanced by an upward force, ma = Mg, where m is the mass of the Earth, a is the acceleration due to the Hubble expansion (H = v/r, where H is the Hubble constant, v is velocity, and r is distance, so a = dv/dt = H^2 r), M is the accelerating dielectric mass for the volume of space defining the field strength g, and g is the downward acceleration. So "ma = Mg" becomes approximately m(H^2 r) = (4/3 pi r^3 rho)g, which rearranges to give gravity, g = 3H^2 m/(4 pi r^2 rho), where rho is the mean density of matter in space (exactly equal to the effective density of the accelerating dielectric which causes gravity). A more rigorous 16 step treatment of the geometry gives the same result; published in the April 2003 issue of Electronics World (http://members.lycos.co.uk/nigelbryancook/)

In the last paragraph, rho is the Greek symbol, while H^2 symbolises H squared.