# Fluidic nature of space itself

"Fluidic" nature of space itself

In the following article "the theory reduces to GR coupled to an incompressible fluid."

'Empty Black Holes, Firewalls, and the Origin of Bekenstein-Hawking Entropy'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1212.4176

"But why an incompressible fluid? The reason comes from an attempt to solve the (old) cosmological constant problem, which is arguably the most puzzling aspect of coupling gravity to relativistic quantum mechanics [13]. Given that the natural expectation value for the vacuum of the standard model of particle physics is ∼ 60 orders of magnitude heavier than the gravitational measurements of vacuum density, it is reasonable to entertain an alternative theory of gravity where the standard model vacuum decouples from gravity. Such a theory could be realized by coupling gravity to the traceless part of the quantum mechanical energy-momentum tensor. However, the consistency/covariance of gravitational field equations then requires introducing an auxiliary fluid, the so-called gravitational aether [14]. The simplest model for gravitational aether is an incompressible fluid (with vanishing energy density, but non-vanishing pressure), which is currently consistent with all cosmological, astrophysical, and precision tests of gravity [15, 16]:

__3__
32πGN Gμν = Tμν − Tα gμν + Tμν ,
Tμν = p (uμ uν + gμν ), T μν;ν = 0,

where GN is Newton’s constant, Tμν is the matter energy momentum tensor and Tμν is the incompressible gravitational aether fluid. In vacuum, the theory reduces to GR coupled to an incompressible fluid."

The following article describes a 'back reaction' associated with the "fluidic" nature of space itself.

'An Extended Dynamical Equation of Motion, Phase Dependency and Inertial Backreaction'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1208.3458

"We hypothesize that space itself resists such surges according to a kind of induction law (related to inertia); additionally, we provide further evidence of the “fluidic” nature of space itself."

The following article describes the "ideal fluid" as that which produces resistance to acceleration and is responsible for the increase in mass of an object with velocity and describes the "space-time ideal fluid approach from general relativity."

'Fluidic Electrodynamics: On parallels between electromagnetic and fluidic inertia'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.4611

"It is shown that the force exerted on a particle by an ideal fluid produces two effects: i) resistance to acceleration and, ii) an increase of mass with velocity. ... The interaction between the particle and the entrained space flow gives rise to the observed properties of inertia and the relativistic increase of mass. ... Accordingly, in this framework the non resistance of a particle in uniform motion through an ideal fluid (D’Alembert’s paradox) corresponds to Newton’s first law. The law of inertia suggests that the physical vacuum can be modeled as an ideal fluid, agreeing with the space-time ideal fluid approach from general relativity."

Last edited:

The 'fluidic nature' of space itself relates general relativity with quantum mechnics.

It is the 'fluidic nature' of space itself which waves in a double slit experiment.

Einstein's graviational wave is de Broglie's pilot-wave. Both are waves in the 'fluidic nature' of space itself.

What is mistaken to be non-baryonic dark matter anchored to matter is the fluidic nature of space itself.

'Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter'
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_feature.html

"Astronomers using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark mater, which is somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the water."

The 'pond' is the fluidic nature of space itself. The ripple is a wave in space. The ripple is a gravitational wave.

'Galactic Pile-Up May Point to Mysterious New Dark Force in the Universe'
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/01/musket-ball-dark-force/

"The reason this is strange is that dark matter is thought to barely interact with itself. The dark matter should just coast through itself and move at the same speed as the hardly interacting galaxies. Instead, it looks like the dark matter is crashing into something — perhaps itself – and slowing down faster than the galaxies are. But this would require the dark matter to be able to interact with itself in a completely new an unexpected way, a “dark force” that affects only dark matter."

It's not a new force. It's the fluidic nature of space itself each of the galaxy clusters are interacting with analogous to the bow waves of two boats which pass by each other.

'Offset between dark matter and ordinary matter: evidence from a sample of 38 lensing clusters of galaxies'
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1004/1004.1475v1.pdf

"Our data strongly support the idea that the gravitational potential in clusters is mainly due to a non-baryonic fluid, and any exotic field in gravitational theory must resemble that of CDM fields very closely."

The offset is due to the galaxy clusters moving through the fluidic nature of space itself. The analogy is a submarine moving through the water. You are under water. Two miles away from you are many lights. Moving between you and the lights one mile away is a submarine. The submarine displaces the water. The state of displacement of the water causes the center of the lensing of the light propagating through the water to be offset from the center of the submarine itself. The offset between the center of the lensing of the light propagating through the water displaced by the submarine and the center of the submarine itself is going to remain the same as the submarine moves through the water. The submarine continually displaces different regions of the water. The state of the water connected to and neighboring the submarine remains the same as the submarine moves through the water even though it is not the same water the submarine continually displaces. This is what is occurring physically in nature as the galaxy clusters move through space.

'Surprise! IBEX Finds No Bow ‘Shock’ Outside our Solar System'
http://www.universetoday.com/95094/surprise-ibex-finds-no-bow-shock-outside-our-solar-system/

'“While bow shocks certainly exist ahead of many other stars, we’re finding that our Sun’s interaction doesn’t reach the critical threshold to form a shock,” said Dr. David McComas, principal investigator of the IBEX mission, “so a wave is a more accurate depiction of what’s happening ahead of our heliosphere — much like the wave made by the bow of a boat as it glides through the water.”'

The wave ahead of our heliosphere is state of the space connected to and neighboring the solar system.

Last edited:

Many of these articles are unrelated to your fluidic theory. Some of them contradict MOND and support Dark matter, which is counter to your goal. Your bowshock article for example doesn't deal with either dark matter or MOND. I would suggest you google heliosphere for what it really entails.

Last edited:

Many of these articles are unrelated to your fluidic theory. Some of them contradict MOND and support Dark matter, which is counter to your goal.
What is mistaken for dark matter anchored to matter is the state of the space connected to and neighboring massive objects.

Space itself has mass. That is why it is capable of having a fluidic nature.

So, I am in agreement with 'non-baryonic dark matter' being the 'missing mass'. However, the evidence supports matter moving through and displacing space and the 'missing mass' is the mass of the space which is connected to and neighbors massive objects. Where the notion of 'non-baryonic dark matter' is incorrect is in thinking it is anchored to matter.

Think of 'non-baryonic dark matter' as space itself. Space which particles of matter move through and displace.

Instead of thinking of the Milky Way's halo as being 'dark matter' which is anchored to the Milky Way understand the Milky Way's halo is the state of the space connected to and neighboring the Milky Way which is the state of displacement of the space.

All that needs to occur to correctly understand the evidence is matter is moving through and displacing space which has mass.

There is no need for a 'new force'. What is needed is a new understanding of how matter interacts with space itself.

'Galactic Pile-Up May Point to Mysterious New Dark Force in the Universe'
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/01/musket-ball-dark-force/

"The reason this is strange is that dark matter is thought to barely interact with itself. The dark matter should just coast through itself and move at the same speed as the hardly interacting galaxies. Instead, it looks like the dark matter is crashing into something — perhaps itself – and slowing down faster than the galaxies are. But this would require the dark matter to be able to interact with itself in a completely new an unexpected way, a “dark force” that affects only dark matter."

The 'New Dark Force' is the state of the space displaced by the galaxies analogous to the bow waves of two boats which pass by each other.

Last edited:

Einstein and Freidman both recognized there is a fluidic nature to spacetime. If I were you I would direct my search to the Friedman Fluidic equation. Here is one article to guide you in that its not the best but it should help you out.

http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~hiranya/PHAS3136/PHAS3136/PHAS3136_files/Cosmo2_34_fried.pdf

http://ion.uwinnipeg.ca/~vincent/4500.6-001/Cosmology/Friedmann-Equations.htm

de Broglie also knew it was the 'hidden medium' which waves.

'Interpretation of quantum mechanics by the double solution theory - Louis de BROGLIE'
http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-classiques/aflb124p001.pdf

“When in 1923-1924 I had my first ideas about Wave Mechanics I was looking for a truly concrete physical image, valid for all particles, of the wave and particle coexistence discovered by Albert Einstein in his "Theory of light quanta". I had no doubt whatsoever about the physical reality of waves and particles.”

“any particle, even isolated, has to be imagined as in continuous “energetic contact” with a hidden medium”

The hidden medium of de Broglie wave mechanics is the fluidic nature of space itself. The “energetic contact” is the state of displacement of the space.

"For me, the particle, precisely located in space at every instant, forms on the v wave a small region of high energy concentration, which may be likened in a first approximation, to a moving singularity."

A particle may be likened in a first approximation to a moving singularity which has an associated displacement wave in space.

"the particle is defined as a very small region of the wave"

In a double slit experiment the particle travels a well defined path which takes it through one slit. The associated wave in space passes through both. As the wave in space exits the slits it creates wave interference. As the particle exits a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference. This is the wave piloting the particle of pilot-wave theory. Detecting the particle strongly exiting a single slit turns the associated wave in space into chop. The waves exiting the slits interact with the detectors and become many short waves with irregular motion. The waves are disorganized. There is no wave interference. The particle pitches and rolls through the chop. The particle gets knocked around by the chop and it no longer creates an interference pattern.

If you want to understand what relates general relativity and quantum mechanics it is the fluidic nature of space itself.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot-wave.

Last edited:

OK I'm a little lost on your statement De broglies pilot wave is Eiensteins gravity wave.

Here is a good coverage of De-Broglies. Show me the mathematics that correlates the two.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0506243v1.pdf.