Sunday, April 17, 2011

Slingshots , Dark Matter and Dark Energy .

Slingshots , Dark Matter and Dark Energy.
Andre Willers
17 Apr 2011

Synopsis :
Dark matter and Dark energy are misinterpretations of slingshot effects where the probe-mass is not infinitesimal .
In other words , they are observational artifacts .

Discussion .
See http://andreswhy.blogspot.com "The Problem with Fields" Dec 2008
Reproduced in Appendix A for ease of reference .

Field Theory assumes that Probe Masses can be infinitesimal . Yet , if we combine finite probe masses with SlingShot theory , a better fit to explain astrophysical anomalies is obtained . Also meson interactions .

Why Slingshot ?
1. Because we do not have a theory of three interacting masses . But we can do it for two masses . But everything rotates and orbits . So , we can describe all moving delineated masses as interactions of two masses slingshotting .
2. It is a valid mechanism for converting angular momentum into linear momentum .
See Penrose Process (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose_process )
And vice-versa .

The alert reader will notice reactionless drives and high-energy storage devices lurking in these seeming innocuous statements .

An Example :
From http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath114/kmath114.htm
A simple slingshot , though the principles hold for more complex cases .


V2={(1-m/M)v1+2U1} / {1+m/M}

We choose not to let m be small relative to M .
But we are also too lazy , ignorant and old to count every particle in a universe .

So we cheat and say : let x = m/M , then integrate v2 for 0 <= x =<1 .
This means that the probe mass m takes on finite values from zero to our major mass M . This then includes subatomic and atomic and any other particles .

This gives values
Integral (v2) dx (from x= 0 to 1) = 2*ln(2)*(v1+u1) ………(1)
Integral {(v2)^2} dx (from x= 0 to 1) = 2*(v1+u1)^2 – 4*ln(2)*v1*u1 + 1 ……(2)

Equation (1) tells you how to make an inertialess drive .
The Spindizzy strikes again !

Equation (2) is an Energy equation and is responsible for all those horrible contortions of Mond (especially the last term of +1) .

It also tells you how to make stable , high , density energy storage devices .

Remember , magnetism is spin . If there is spin , there are Slingshots .

Galaxies seeming to orbit too close and fast/slow are simply exchanging slingshot masses (cf mesons)

Bits and pieces of the universe keep on flying around , creating space-time as they go.
It depends on their entanglements . The present universe looks more like an amoeba , with tentacles shooting out . The extent of space and time depends on where you look.

Vacuoles ?
Mini-universes created by tendrils of slingshot masses enclosing . Interesting spin effects as different tendrils have different velocities .
These should be able to be created in the laboratory .

Complexity :
Invert the Heisenberg Principle to define the Complexity of a Beth(0) Universe .
dx*dmv >= h/2pi ….Heisenberg uncertainty principle

Let 1/dx be all the possible values of x (ie the complexity of space)
Let 1/dmv be all the possible values of momentum . (ie complexity of time)

1/dx * 1/dmv <= 2pi/h ….from Heisenberg uncertainty principle
<= 9.482514 * 10^33
This is the measure of Complexity of the Beth(0) Universe we find ourselves in .

This almost certainly means that we are in a simulation .
The Complexity of Beth(0) is too small .

But is it sufficient for open-ended complexity of Beth(>0) ?

I can intuit that there is a threshold .

Bah .

I can also intuit that we are probably on a chaotic boundary threshold .
Go one way , and you recycle (Karma concept)
Go another way , advance .

And it was designed this way .

Storming Heaven .
Shooting tendrils of space-time into the multiverse will decrease the Heisenberg constant , thereby increasing the complexity past the threshold of recycling .
The Poor Civilization's Singularity .

The mass of the soul .
This can now be calculated from first principles from the complexity of momentum .
It is about 4! gm = 24 gm relative to the surrounding universe simulation .
And may you have joy of that .

May God have Mercy .

Andre

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Appendix A
The Problem with Fields .
Andre Willers
21 Dec 2008

A sad tale of Hidden Assumptions and Fictitious Forces .

Our story begins with Isaac Newton about 400 years ago . He proved that radially symmetric bodies (like balls) can be treated as a point-mass from a gravitational viewpoint as long as f=G*m(1)*m(2)/ (R^2) holds . This is his famous Law of Gravitation .

Fast forward to the Twentieth Century . Space probes were measured to have accelerations not predicted by expected theory . (See New Scientist 20 Sept 2008 p38 "Fly-by Fright." )

Fright indeed . Physical laws were under threat .
It was first noticed with the Pioneer probes and stimulated the MOND (Google it) modification to Newton's Law .
But the effect was small and controversial .

But then even a bigger shock came . Probes doing slingshots around the Earth (like Gallileo in 1992 , Near Shoemaker in 1998 ) showed such large divergences from expected velocities after the slingshot that the matter could not be swept under the carpet anymore . (The favourite human response.)

Is our understanding of physics wrong ?

No .

What is going on ?

They treated planets as point sources in their programs .
(Remember , these are the guys that mixed up newtons and poundals on the Mars probe) .

The Earth-Moon illustration .
The system orbits around a common center of gravity which lies inside the Earth .
Even school atlases' state this .

You can treat the Earth as a gravity point-source , but then you must include the Moon as well (and other bodies , but their effect is very small) .

The velocity change during the slingshot maneuver is dependant on the Earth's rotation around the common center of gravity . The Earth-Moon rotational plane coincides roughly with the Earths equator . Hence the observational datum that the velocity change is proportional the difference in the angles incoming and outgoing with reference to the equatorial plane .


What is happening ?
Are conservation laws being violated ?
No .

Internal Slingshot .

It is simply a slingshot maneuver around a virtual mass .

The Earth-Moon rotating system is not radially symmetric . It is lumpy . The velocity change is dependant on a large number of factors , but can be calculated .

The energy comes from the weak coupling between angular momentum and linear momentum .
From a really basic viewpoint , this can be easiest seen as the difference between a straight line touching a circle and the continuation of the circle . (Newton's laws measure forces by disturbances from a straight line .)

Another way of looking at it :
The gravitational attractions on an outside probe of masses rotating around each other and about a common center of gravity do not cancel out . A small vector-residue is left .
This is a dynamical effect . Movements only need apply .

This can be calculated ,
But will vary in every instance .
(A software-computer (General Theory) is not possible .) This is because there are three bodies involved :
Earth , Moon and Probe .

The Three-body Problem has no general solution . This is well known in mathematics Now are you happy ?

Calculating this gravitational difference gives rise to a disturbing effect : the mathematical terms for the field probe does not vanish .
In hindsight , a necessary effect because of the general insolubility of the Three-Body problem . But not obvious beforehand .

This is simply restating there is no general solution of the Three-body Problem .
Two bodies plus a probe makes a three-body problem . Every case will be different . Use Chaos theory .

This will be true for any body in the solar System (ie Pioneer probes) , as well as any rotating set of bodies in this Universe .

The Field Assumption .
Beloved of theoretical physicists , mainly because they are too lazy to do it properly .

The Classical definition is a probe mass , charge or whatever examined near the identifiable object . The forces the probe experience are defined as the Field . The Probe is then ignored .

This has the hidden assumption that the effect of the probe can be cancelled out .
(Ie that it is really a Two-body Problem).

In most radially symmetric objects like balls or charges this can be done .
But , alas , it breaks down if the objects are lumpy . Then the pesky mathematical terms denoting the probe just won't go away .

Without the hidden assumptions about symmetry , error margins have to be specified .
We cannot use our software computer (ie theory) to cancel out the interference of our test-probe .

This is analogous to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle , but not similar .

You have to understand levels of Randomness
(See http://andreswhy.blogspot.com "NewTools " )
Error-margins at Beth(x+1) level for Beth(x) levels can be made arbitrarily small (although maybe not zero) .

General Relativity and Tensors .
This effect can be clearly seen if you use Ricci's Tensors to denote gravitational fields. This is the really general granddaddy of fields .
Tensor theory very clearly requires that tensors are only defined in continuous and differentiable spaces . (Rather amusing , since this takes place before any metric is assigned . Sub-Space !) Hence the problems with quantum gravity . A quantal system is by definition discontinuous . Trying to describe it by continuous methods is futile .

Or Bio-fields . Things are just too idiosyncratic for meaningful abstractions using fields .

Fictitious Forces .
The major culprit is centripetal force (also known as centrifugal force ) . This is a fictitional force to balance the theory's bookkeeping .

From the above you can see that a large composite body like a galaxy composed of many objects rotating around each other and all around a center will have a nett attraction either larger or smaller than by gravity alone .

If larger , objects that we observe to fall around it in orbit will have a higher speed than required by the fictitious centripetal force of purely gravitational attraction .
Dark matter , anyone ?

If smaller , things fly apart .
Negative Dark matter , anyone ?

If you look at the maths , being exactly the same will smack of design (The probability of this is very small for Beth(0) randomness ) .
Stellar engineering on Beth(2) or Beth(3) scale .

Does this sound familiar ?

Dark Matter .
Phlogiston , ahoy! Your buddy Dark Matter is coming .
You can then dance the Ptolemaic Gavotte .

Can Fields be salvaged ?
Maybe .
But then horrible contortions are necessary .
Dimensions writhe in semi-being . As a last resort , a marriage counselor might have to be called in .

But why bother ? There are better ways .

If you have to , assign error margins to every field-point and interact the error-margins . This will automatically result in spiky discontinuities . Gauss would have loved them , but unless you are as expert as he was, try the simpler route .

Once again , why bother ? Use Beth(x) systems .

And if you are feeling adventurous , try numbers that only exist at different Beth(x>1) levels .

Guaranteed to lose weight .

Andre .

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

No comments: