Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of

# Spiral Structural Fractal Index (SSFi) in QM

24 replies to this topic

### #16 sepulchrave

sepulchrave

Psychic Spy

• Member
• 1,695 posts
• Joined:19 Apr 2009
• Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 March 2011 - 11:12 PM

Humblemun, on 09 March 2011 - 04:34 PM, said:

No, it really does. You just haven't given it enough thought Sep.
Perhaps.

Can you elaborate on this issue?

First, while your model suggests that the forces involved galaxy rotation would be different than that predicted by Newtonian gravity, is it still acceptable to use Newtonian mechanics to describe the rotation of stars in the new gravity field?

In other words, the galaxy rotation curves are modeled using FN = ma, where FN is Newtonian gravity. Can we simply replace Newtonian gravity with ``Lowey gravity'' (FL, perhaps) and solve for a new rotation curve?

Second, existing galaxy rotation curves are modeled by assuming that most of the mass of the galaxy is in the ``centre bulge''. Is this assumption still valid?

### #17 NatureBoff

NatureBoff

SandersonHapgood

• Banned
• 3,491 posts
• Joined:23 Oct 2009
• Gender:Male
• Location:UK

Posted 10 March 2011 - 11:02 AM

sepulchrave, on 09 March 2011 - 11:12 PM, said:

Perhaps.

Can you elaborate on this issue?

First, while your model suggests that the forces involved galaxy rotation would be different than that predicted by Newtonian gravity, is it still acceptable to use Newtonian mechanics to describe the rotation of stars in the new gravity field?

In other words, the galaxy rotation curves are modeled using FN = ma, where FN is Newtonian gravity. Can we simply replace Newtonian gravity with ``Lowey gravity'' (FL, perhaps) and solve for a new rotation curve?

Second, existing galaxy rotation curves are modeled by assuming that most of the mass of the galaxy is in the ``centre bulge''. Is this assumption still valid?
You make some good points and I've just had some additional insights just of last night:

The helical screw model gives matter a new fundamental shape and dynamics which the standard model lacks imo. This non-spherical emission of gravitons is in stark contrast to the Newtonian/Einsteinian acceptance that "all things exert a gravitatinal field equally in all directions". This asymmetry of the gravitational field allows for the stars to experience a greater pull towards the galactic plane, due to their rotation giving more order to the inner fluid matter of the stellar core. Both the structure of the emitter and the absorber of the gravity particles is important. It also has implications for hidden matter at the centre of the galaxies..

I've given the idea some more thought and come to the conclusion that the stars furthest from the galactic centre must have a more 'bipolar nature' than the matter of stars of the inner halo presumably. This is the reason they have wandered towards the galactic plane whilst the halo stars have not. The outer stars' configuration means they experience a greater interaction with the flux pattern of the graviton field. Are the stars of the outer arms simply spinning faster?? We are on the outer edge of a spiral arm and so this would fit with this hypothesis. Our sun could have spin which is higher that that of the average halo star. This relationship between spin and distance from the galactic centre is a fundamental feature which ties in with the suggested mechanism of their creation.

All that is needed is an additional factor of stellar spin speed as well as it's mass and distance from the galactic centre. The relationship should then give calculated values which match those of the observed. Is this something you could do Sepulchrave?

The object, known by the locals as "Bicho Voador" (Flying Animal), or "Bicho Sugador" (Sucking Animal), has the shape of a rounded ship and attacks people in isolation.

### #18 sepulchrave

sepulchrave

Psychic Spy

• Member
• 1,695 posts
• Joined:19 Apr 2009
• Gender:Not Selected

Posted 11 March 2011 - 10:58 PM

Humblemun, on 10 March 2011 - 11:02 AM, said:

All that is needed is an additional factor of stellar spin speed as well as it's mass and distance from the galactic centre. The relationship should then give calculated values which match those of the observed. Is this something you could do Sepulchrave?

Yes I think it is. It should be possible to model the Newtonian dynamics from an arbitrary gravity field, and use that to find a field that fits the observed data.

I've been thinking about this a bit, but I don't have the time right now to get into it properly. Maybe in a week or so, though.

### #19 NatureBoff

NatureBoff

SandersonHapgood

• Banned
• 3,491 posts
• Joined:23 Oct 2009
• Gender:Male
• Location:UK

Posted 12 March 2011 - 11:04 AM

sepulchrave, on 11 March 2011 - 10:58 PM, said:

Yes I think it is. It should be possible to model the Newtonian dynamics from an arbitrary gravity field, and use that to find a field that fits the observed data.

I've been thinking about this a bit, but I don't have the time right now to get into it properly. Maybe in a week or so, though.
I'm really pleased you see some merit in the idea Sepulchrave. The deadline for comments on the competition essays is Tues 15th march at 11.59am. If at all possible, an equation in LateX would be most useful! I could then post it for posterity in the essay competition. You could be famous as being the first person to write a mathematical equation which describes the galaxy rotation curve using the additional spin term. I'm pursuing something else to do with climate cycles and in particular the 1,500 year climate cycle which I think is related to the dynamics of the Sun's innermost core. Wish me luck..

The object, known by the locals as "Bicho Voador" (Flying Animal), or "Bicho Sugador" (Sucking Animal), has the shape of a rounded ship and attacks people in isolation.

### #20 sepulchrave

sepulchrave

Psychic Spy

• Member
• 1,695 posts
• Joined:19 Apr 2009
• Gender:Not Selected

Posted 15 March 2011 - 04:34 AM

Based on the following assumptions:
• Galaxies exist for billions of years, so the stars in the outer halo must be in relatively stable orbits,
• Almost all of the visible mass in the galaxy is at the galactic core,
• There is no ``hidden mass'' (i.e. dark matter), and
• Newtonian mechanics (F = ma) are valid for analyzing halo star trajectories,
We have the following assertions:
• The motion of the halo stars must be centripetal, and
• Any gravitational field exerted by the galaxy must be almost completely divergenceless in the halo.

The first assertion implies that there is a center-pulling force (F) on the halo stars (of mass m) creating a velocity (v) of:

F = mv2 / r

Where r is the distance the halo star is from the galactic core. For standard Newtonian gravity the force is:

F = GMm / r2

Where G is the Gravitational constant, and M is the mass of the galactic core. The velocity of a halo star is then:

v = (GM / r)0.5

To match to experimental data, we want the velocity of the halo start to be a constant - i.e. not depend on r. The easiest way of achieving this is to set the gravity to:

F = GMm / r

And then we have:

v = (GM)0.5

This theory has two major problems with it:
• This force would ``break'' all existing planetary orbits, and
• This force has a non-zero divergence.
The second easiest approach is to add a term to Newtonian gravity. There is no ``spiral force'' that will work, such a force would constantly speed up the rotation of halo stars (or constantly slow down, depending on the direction), and the halo would either be flung off into space or collapse into the core. Since we do not observe this happening, we can rule it out.

We can't simply add rn terms to Newtonian gravity either, because they are not divergenceless, and would never cancel out the 1/r2 from Newtonian gravity unless they canceled out the force entirely (i.e. no centripetal motion).

The simplest solution that I can think of is to add some sort of gravitational equivalent to the Lorentz force as follows:

F = m (GM / r2 + bvrn)

Where b and n are to be determined.
This gives us a velocity of:

v = b / 2 rn+1 + r / 2 ( b2r2n - 4 GM / r2)0.5

If we set n = -1, we then have a velocity of:

v = b / 2 + ( b2 - 4 GM )0.5

Which is independent of r, as desired.

Unfortunately... the only Lorentz-type field that is divergence-free has 1/r3 dependence, no 1/r.

If we don't use divergenceless fields, then we are basically postulating dark matter all over again.

### #21 NatureBoff

NatureBoff

SandersonHapgood

• Banned
• 3,491 posts
• Joined:23 Oct 2009
• Gender:Male
• Location:UK

Posted 15 March 2011 - 11:09 AM

It's in!

The object, known by the locals as "Bicho Voador" (Flying Animal), or "Bicho Sugador" (Sucking Animal), has the shape of a rounded ship and attacks people in isolation.

### #22 sepulchrave

sepulchrave

Psychic Spy

• Member
• 1,695 posts
• Joined:19 Apr 2009
• Gender:Not Selected

Posted 15 March 2011 - 04:47 PM

Humblemun, on 15 March 2011 - 11:09 AM, said:

It's in!
I am almost afraid to ask... what is ``in'' ?

### #23 NatureBoff

NatureBoff

SandersonHapgood

• Banned
• 3,491 posts
• Joined:23 Oct 2009
• Gender:Male
• Location:UK

Posted 15 March 2011 - 06:02 PM

sepulchrave, on 15 March 2011 - 04:47 PM, said:

I am almost afraid to ask... what is ``in'' ?
The FQXi physics essay competition of course. FQXi Essay Contest - Is Reality Digital or Analog? \$10,000 1st prise. Thanks for our help..

Edited by Humblemun, 15 March 2011 - 06:02 PM.

The object, known by the locals as "Bicho Voador" (Flying Animal), or "Bicho Sugador" (Sucking Animal), has the shape of a rounded ship and attacks people in isolation.

### #24 sepulchrave

sepulchrave

Psychic Spy

• Member
• 1,695 posts
• Joined:19 Apr 2009
• Gender:Not Selected

Posted 15 March 2011 - 07:47 PM

Oh my.

You didn't even read the post, did you?

Look: Any form of physics (Newtonian, Quantum, Relativity, etc.) is based on rules of the form:

influence defines motion

In you case, we were operating under the idea that Newtonian influence (i.e. the force of gravity) was incorrect, but the motion part (i.e. the ``dynamics'') was correct.

In my previous post I showed my reasoning that there is no way of getting a new force of gravity to match the galactic rotations without requiring some ``hidden'' mass (i.e. Dark matter).

Since I assume you don't agree with conventional Dark matter, the only recourse is to change the rules for motion. There are already (at least) three theories for this:
Each of these has unresolved problems that the Dark matter model does not.

The other problem with changing the rules for motion of course is that it has NOTHING do to with your model for the graviton.

### #25 NatureBoff

NatureBoff

SandersonHapgood

• Banned
• 3,491 posts
• Joined:23 Oct 2009
• Gender:Male
• Location:UK

Posted 17 March 2011 - 05:26 PM

I've deduced that gravity is stronger on the equatorial plane of the Earth due to the difference in nature of the proton and neutron and the fluid dynamics of the inner core. It's too much to explain any longer Sepulchrave. It's a new way of thinking altogether derived from the discipline of simulation modelling rather than mathematical modelling. Thanks for the professional yet mainstream input you've given me. Best wishes, Humblemun.

The object, known by the locals as "Bicho Voador" (Flying Animal), or "Bicho Sugador" (Sucking Animal), has the shape of a rounded ship and attacks people in isolation.

#### 0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users