“Black Hole in center of Milky Way may be a neutrino factory” (NASA). Why not? An explanation of the possible emission and nature of the neutrinos in question (25)

In my previous post 24 I have described the consequences of the endogenous process of the behavior of electrons in an atom that is being absorbed by a Black Hole.
In this post I am dealing with the possible consequence of this process in cases whereby the “struggle” between the increasing gravitational influence and the increasing counterforce of electromagnetic interaction are reaching a certain limit.

At a certain point in time (see also post21) an electron in the lowest orbit has lost almost all of its mass and energy and is revolving around the nucleus at very high speed. As suggested in post 21 the electron while losing almost all of its mass and energy is losing its charge at the same time. I suggest the possibility that the electron, once its speed has become too extreme, it escapes from the atom out of its orbit and is fully subjected then to the gravitational influence of the Black Hole. This means that if the electron, already highly “slimmed down”, happens to be outward bound to the outside of the Black Hole, it is subjected to further time-acceleration and further loss of mass at a still further increasing speed (see also posts 12, 16, 19 and 20).

So my suggestion is that neutrinos endogenously emitted by Black Holes are very “skinny” ex-electrons. The electrons have lost their electromagnetic properties. This loss of information is forever, because of the irreversibility of the abovementioned process. There is no information paradox.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Consequences of the equality-inequality of gravitation and electromagnetic interaction in a mutual process (24)

Following my posts 21 and 23, consequences of the equality-inequality of gravitation and electromagnetic interaction in a mutual process are dealt with as follows.

What happens inside an atom if it is subjected to a steady increase of gravitational influence, for instance when it is being absorbed by a Black Hole?
The increasing gravitational time-delay reinforces the tendency of the electrons in the higher orbits to go nearer to the nucleus by increasing their energies/masses, whereas this growing gravitational effect increasingly opposes the tendency of the electrons in the lower orbits to get away from the nucleus.
In this process the circumference of the atom, the free space within the atom and the free space between the electrons decrease. As the higher orbits become less high, the electromagnetic interaction force makes the electrons in question lose energy/mass, mitigating the effect of the gravitational time-delay. As the lower orbits become lower, the electromagnetic interaction force also makes the electrons in question lose energy/mass, mitigating the effect of the gravitational time-delay.

All in all in this process the electromagnetic interaction force increasingly counteracts the increasing gravitational influence. As the electromagnetic interaction force is vastly stronger than gravitation I suggest the possibility that electrons, revolving around a nucleus, cannot be forced into htat nucleus. By the same token a singularity and a state of 0-entropy are impossibilities (see also post 20 and post 19).

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Exo-inertia and endo-inertia (23)

In earlier posts I have explained the difference between exogenous and endogenous processes and why the equivalence principle only  holds if and when gravitation (endogenous), acceleration and inertia share the same endogenous driver .

Consequently we have  to make a distinction between inertia as the tendency to maintain momentum (exogenous) and inertia as the tendency to maintain mass (endogenous, see  for instance post 17). Therefore I make the distinction between exo-inertia and endo-inertia.

Endo-inertia, how does it work, what are its properties, its relations to gravitation and acceleration?

As explained in post 21, the tendency of an electron to go nearer to the nucleus  gets stronger the greater the distance  from  it, its mass increases,  time delays. In lower orbits the opposite happens, a stronger tendency to get away from the nucleus through mass decrease and time-acceleration. As suggesred there is no change of momentum.

In this article I suggest the possibility that electromagnetic interaction is in essence endo-inertia, the tendency to maintain mass (no change of momentum, in contrast with exo-inertia, the tendency to maintain momentum without change of mass). 
Gravitation (consequence of a continuous relation between mass and time), time-driven (de)-acceleration and emdo-inertia are equivalent (see posts 9 and 15).

Why is the electromagnetic interaction force vastly stronger than gravitation? In electromagnetic interaction processes changes of mass and energy are directly proportional to each other, they are working together, reinforcing each other. In gravitational processes changes of mass and energy are inversely proportional to each other, they are counteracting.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

The problems in physics (22)

Particles, quanta or quantasy?

No basis for quanta

In posts 1 – 12 and 17 I have explained why quanta need not exist, why there is no basis for their existence.
There are two main arguments:
1. The way light behaves under the influence of gravitation shows that the amount of energy that can be emitted or absorbed by a body is finite because of the self-regulating mechanism of the continuous relation between the body’s mass and time;
2. The difference between endogenous and exogenous processes.

The relativity of the General Theory of Relativity

Speed of light not constant in vacuum

In post 12 I have explained why the speed of light varies with position under the influence of gravitation.

Space-time curvature delusion

In posts 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8 and 21 I have enunciated the idea that gravitation is not the consequence of space-time being curved by the division of mass and energy in it (always resulting in a force of attraction) but the consequence of a continuous relation between mass and time (resulting in a force of attraction or repulsion). When one turns on a light, the speed of light does not emerge, it is already present.

Equivalence Principle updated

In posts 9 and 15 Einstein’s Equivalence Principle has been updated in consistency with the difference between endogenous and exogenous processes.

Introduction of Time Uncertainty Principle

In posts 16 and 18 I have introduced the Time Uncertainty Principle which means that it is impossible to measure time/distance relations with absolute certainty. This intrinsic uncertainty of time is an inescapable property of the world. Consequently, in combination with the speed of light being variant, cosmological measurements as to the age of universe, the total mass of the universe etc. are incorrect.

Big Bang Theory out of date

In posts 6, 14, 18 and 20 I have explained why it is impossible for singularities to exist and why the universe is both finite and unbounded. Consequently the universe has no beginning and no ending, it is eternal.

Conclusion

It seems to me that the best way to solve the problems in physics is to go back to basics.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Comparing gravitation with electromagnetic interaction (21)

Coulomb’s law states that the force of attraction or repulsion between two point charges is directly proportional to the product of magnitude of each charge and indirectly proportional to the square of the distance between them.

Newton’s law of gravitation states that the force of attraction between two point masses is directly proportional to the product of magnitude of each mass and indirectly proportional to the square of the distance between them.

As explained in post 6 (C=T/M x E/S) the processes of planets orbiting a star or the moon orbiting the earth can be considered processes of combinations of changes (increase/decrease) of mass, time, energy and space.

In this article I compare processes like the earth orbiting the sun and the moon orbiting the earth under the influence of gravitation (postulated by me as a force of attraction or repulsion as consequence of a continuous relation between mass and time, see posts 1, 2, 12 and 15) in the same way, without violating the constraint of C, with the processes of electrons orbiting a nucleus under the influence of electromagnetic interaction. I hereby suggest that there is no change of momentum (see posts 6 and 9).

When an electron goes into a lower orbit it (the system of this electron and the nucleus) loses energy. Its charge decreases and so does its mass (the charge-to-mass ratio is a constant). In this process there is energy and space decrease as well as mass and time decrease (C = T-/M- x E-/S-). The increase of the force of attraction between the nucleus and the electron in the lower orbit is compensated by the decrease of the electron’s charge.

When an electron goes into a higher orbit it absorbs energy. Its charge increases and so does its mass. In this process there is energy and space increase as well as mass and time increase (C = T+/M+ x E+/S+). The decrease of the force of attraction between the nucleus and the electron in the higher orbit is compensated by the increase of the electron’s charge.

So we see that the lower the orbit, the faster the course of time and the higher the orbit, the slower the process of time.
Consequently the force of repulsion from time acceleration also compensates the increase of the force of attraction between the nucleus and the electron in the lower orbit, whereas the force of attraction from time delay also compensates the decrease of the force of attraction between the nucleus and the electron in the higher orbit.

How are electromagnetic interaction and gravitation (consequence of a continuous relation between mass and time) related?
I suggest the possibility that they are in fact two of a kind.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The origin of Ultra-High-Energy Cosmic Rays (UHECR) (20)

The origin of UHECR’s is a mystery, notwithstanding the fact that they were discovered 100 years ago.

In my opinion UHECR’s originate from Black Holes or more precisely from the Interchange Horizons of Black Holes in cases of decreasing distances between Black Holes and their Interchange Horizons (see post 19). This can be explained as follows.

In a Black Hole the course of time is extreme slow due to the enormous gravitational pull or time-delay by the mass of the Black Hole. The increase of entropy in a Black Hole evolves at a slower rate than the increase of entropy outside the Black Hole. The difference between the process of time in the centre of a Black Hole and the course of time at its Interchange Horizon is very big. This implicates that the differences in temperature must be very big also due to the thermodynamic effects caused by the time-differences. By the same token singularities cannot exist.

If a Black Hole is subject to time-acceleration (the process of accelerating expansion of the universe is caused by time-acceleration), the process of growth of entropy in the Black Hole evolves at an increasing rate. The circumference of the Interchange Horizon decreases. The energy of rays disappearing from the Interchange Horizon into space increases (increasing wavelengths and increasing amplitude heigths). The mass of the Black Hole decreases (see also post 13).

As explained in earlier posts the accelerating expansion of the universe is accompanied by the emission of energy like the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR), energy emitted by masses moving away from each other.
The difference between the masses involved is the only difference between the origins of UHECR and CMBR (see also post 15).

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Time, Entropy, Black Holes and the Interchange Horizon (19)

The arrow of entropy (as thermodynamic property) has the same directionality as the arrow of time. As explained in post 3 there is no difference between the directions of time and the directions in space. Consequently the freedom of changes in entropy applies to all directions in space-time, following the directions of time.

Entropy is a measure of disorder or more accurately of unpredictability. The intrinsic uncertainty of time (the time uncertainty principle introduced in post 16) implicates that it is impossible to measure time-distance relations with absolute certainty. Entropy can be considered the result of a continuous process of an endogenous increase of either mass or energy in space-time (see also post 6). Gravitation as I see it is the source of entropy.

As explained in post 13, the course of time varies between extreme fast and extreme slow, it cannot be infinite fast or infinite slow.
This means that an increase of entropy in Black Holes evolves at a slower rate than an increase of entropy outside Black Holes (see also posts 12 and 17). By the same token 0-entropy is an impossibility.

At a certain distance from a Black Hole there is a place where light rays are influenced by the Black Hole’s gravitational pull or time-delay to the extent that these rays start to slow down and turn off to the Black Hole. Other light rays happen to get just enough extra speed enabling them to turn away from the Black Hole and disappear into the space surrounding it (see also post 12).
This means that a Black Hole is surrounded by an Interchange Horizon at which light rays share the same constant speed as long as they remain in that area.

The circumference of the Interchange Horizon is a measure of a Black Hole’s mass.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment