Inverted Physics: Vacuum is Solid, Matter are Holes

[wolram]

Has anyone thought what physics would be like if, matter and the vacuum
were inverted, ie the stars planets ect are (holes) in the (solid) vacuum,
and these holes can travel the solid like bubbles in water ?

 

[-Job-]

Let me join this experiment. If we tried to model matter as bubbles floating around in the water of vaccum, then would the vacuum exert pressure on the matter? If so would this affect the behavior of matter in any way? Such an object should be under the same pressure from any direction, unless there is an object nearby blocking off some of that pressure, in which case the opposing pressure wins and the objects come together. This i think is equivalent to Lesage's theory of gravity. Your universe now has a form of gravity.

 

[wolram]

Let me join this experiment. If we tried to model matter as bubbles floating around in the water of vaccum, then would the vacuum exert pressure on the matter? If so would this affect the behavior of matter in any way? Such an object should be under the same pressure from any direction, unless there is an object nearby blocking off some of that pressure, in which case the opposing pressure wins and the objects come together. This i think is equivalent to Lesage's theory of gravity. Your universe now has a form of gravity.

Very intuitive job, i will have to look up Lessage.

 

[wolram]

Le Sages theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_(LeSage)

PS, you do not (have) to read all the way to the bottom bit.

 

[wolram]

So what is (wrong) with Le Sages theory, it seems it did not fall out of
focus until the 1960s, so it must have had some good points.

 

[-Job-]

I think it has problems dealing with the fact that "energy gravitates, possesses inertia and is a source of gravitation". One challenge this generates, according to the link you posted:

Similarly it has been shown experimentally that all known forms of energy, including potential energy act as gravitational sources. In order to reconcile these facts with the principles of Le Sage theory it would be necessary to posit that potential energy somehow increases the cross-sectional area of matter, and that the elementary particles of mundane matter increase their cross-sectional areas when moving.

According to that link, Maxwell and Poincare noted that:

the primary flux (of Lesage particles) must be billions of times more penetrating than X-rays (since ordinary X-rays penetrate only a few feet into the earth), and he dubbed these X'-rays. Then, in order to avoid destroying the gravitational force, the excess energy must be re-radiated in a form that is billions of times more penetrating than the X'-rays, so he dubbed these X"-rays. The process of re-radiation at a higher penetrating ability (and therefore lower entropy) violates the second law of thermodynamics, so Poincare concluded that this re-radiation is inconsistent with the known laws of physics, and therefore Maxwell was correct in asserting that the Earth should be incinerated in a fraction of a second, and this fate cannot be avoided either by Kelvin's internal energy modes or Preston's vanishingly small corpuscles.

Also, in order to work, Lesage particles would have to propagate at super-liminal speeds:

As pointed out initially by Pierre-Simon Laplace and then later many others, if the force of gravity is purely central, i.e., points directly toward the source, the gravitational force carrier must propagate almost instantaneously, i.e., at a speed much greater than light, in order to account for the apparent lack of aberration. Hence any theory of gravity must either posit an effect that propagates much faster than light or else must not be purely central. General relativity is consistent with the lack of appreciable aberration because gravity is not a purely central effect, a characteristic which is required of any field theory in order to be consistent with relativity, as shown by Henri Poincaré [15] However, this attribute is considered inconsistent with purely non-interactive rectilinear trajectories, a fact which has led some modern proponents of Le Sage's theory to adopt the other alternative, i.e., to assert that the ultra-mundane particles do indeed move at extreme superluminal speeds. However, such a premise is in direct conflict with modern relativity, one of the most strongly validated theories in science.

The biggest problem with Lesage's theory is that it has to compete with Relativity.

 

[Chronos]

A big problem indeed. Some, myself included, would say fatal.

 

[wolram]

Thanks Job, i guess GR wins this time.