Fruechte Gravity Theory Blog

Checked the Fermi mission web site for the first time in weeks.  I had been waiting a long time to get information on what the GBM has been reading, and the Fermi article from 01.10.11 finally gives some information:

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/GLAST/news/fermi-thunderstorms.html

As some of you know, an explanation for terrestrial gamma-ray flashes is included in my April 2007 paper in the section entitled More on Synchronization.  The Fermi article refers to “strong electric fields” in the milliseconds before a lightning strike.  The fields result from areas of high voltage, which involve electrons in high concentration, which produce Compton scattered gravitons coming out of the earth.  The gravitons are down scattered to an energy where they are no longer gravitons, 511 keV according to the article.

The pattern of the scattered gamma rays, shown in magenta color in the article, is exactly what we would expect when gravitons are scattered in the milliseconds before a lightning strike in a TGF.

It is interesting, to say the least, the way some of the constants of physics mix and match.  There are lots of examples of this in text books and on web sites, including this one, so there is no point in reiterating any now which do not relate specifically to this entry.

Some constants, nevertheless, turn out not to be constants, including the permittivity of free space, termed ε₀.  At the surface of the earth, and at any point not far enough away to discern a difference, we have ε₀ = 8.85 x 10^-12 C²/(N-m²) when measured in a vacuum.  One of the ways in which the permittivity of free space relates to other physical entities is in the makeup of the Coulomb constant, k = 1/(4πε₀), which is then also not really a constant in all locations, the difference relating to the local density of gravitons.

The speed of light in a vacuum can be written as: c = sqrt(k/k_m) = 1/sqrt(ε₀ µ₀) = 2.998 x 10⁸ m/s, which is a constant throughout the universe.  One may be tempted to say then that µ₀ is an inverse function to ε₀ when evaluated at a given point, except that this is so unlikely with present understanding so as to be unimaginable.  Along with the constancy of the speed of light in a vacuum in any reference frame, the fact that it equals 1/sqrt(ε₀ µ₀) in our locale can remain somewhat of a mystery.

In Thomas’ Calculus we find the definition: “If F is a vector field defined on D and F = del f for some scalar function f on D, then f is called a potential function for F.” ([1], pg 921)

Kaplan states that the “gravitational field is the gradient of the scalar f = kMm/r” ([2], Prob. 4, pg 180), which for General Relativity is indeed the case.  With gamma ray energy exchange however, the scalar is f = k₁M/r, in form much like the scalar potential k₂q/r with electrodynamics.  This tells us that both gravitational and Coulomb forces are of independent action, and the corresponding fields are gradients of scalar potentials, which can be considered as more evidence for unification.

The vector fields we are looking at have units of N/kg for gravity, and of course E = N/C for an electric field.  A gravitational field calculation is most applicable when the object in the field is small compared to, or far away from, the source of the field, such as Jupiter compared to the sun.

Aside from the King James Version of the Bible, Wilfred Kaplan’s Advanced Calculus is still my favorite book.  By the way, we used Thomas’ Calculus book at the University of Wisconsin in 1976 and 1977.

[1] Thomas, George B., as revised by Weir, Maurice D. and Hass, Joel, Thomas’ Calculus, Twelfth Edition, Addison-Wesley of Pearson Education, Inc., 2010, 2005, 2001

[2] Kaplan, Wilfred, Advanced Calculus, Fifth Edition, Addison-Wesley of Pearson Education, Inc., 2003

There is a graph of Brightness vs. Energy (GeV) at the lower left of the image at the following NASA Fermi web site, relating to the same discovery I have been writing about recently, and one that has been fascinating to a great number of scientists:

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/498886main_DF4_bubbles_graphs.jpg

I just thought it was interesting to see that the “Bubble spectrum” in magenta color has a pointer at what could be 313 MeV.  The brightness rises markedly from that point which is where we would expect gravitons to reside.  Once peaked in brightness, the spectrum rises to much higher energies which, if it were not that we are very far away from the bubbles, could indicate that energies are adding.

We know from laser calculations and uses that energy from coherent light waves do add.  As an example, the gravitons coming off the sun, at the surface of the sun, would be so concentrated so as to create somewhat of a laser field.  The earth, of course, is of a size and at a distance from the sun where the gravitons help sustain life rather than damage biological function.

It seems I suggested to the GLAST people at one point, when the Fermi Gamma Ray Space Telescope was still in a pre-launch test phase, that they try pointing the telescope straight up into the sky and turn the instrument on to see what they could read.  As long as the anti-coincidence shield did not activate, there would be a gamma ray fog from the earth’s atmosphere, considerably stronger than the diffuse background that is found with the telescope now in space and pointing away from the earth.  With a planned schedule already at the time, they probably did not try it.

As far as new equipment goes, another way to test whether or not our atmosphere emits gamma rays is to send a gamma ray telescope up as the payload of a high altitude balloon.  The instrument would point at an acute angle to the vertical so as to keep the balloon itself out of the picture.  As the balloon ascends to high altitude there should be a gradually decreasing flux density of gamma rays.  The energies to look for are centered on 312.76 MeV.

The suggestion would otherwise be to place the instrument looking out an opening of a high altitude engine propelled aircraft as it ascends, except that vibrations may at times affect the readability.

Any middle school student in the free world with a true interest in science, and proper resources to learn, has noticed from diagrams in books or on the web, or with iron filings on a piece of paper with a magnet beneath, that magnetic field lines have curvature.  A local electric field between and surrounding two point charges also has curvature in the near space, except for on a line pointing directly away from the other charge.  Dr. Schombert gives us a good diagram of this on the web. [1]

The lines of a gravitational field, on the other hand, have no curvature in any instance, and “the gravitational force is entirely radial”. ([2], pg 616)  So, what is going on here?

Earlier it was mentioned that the Coulomb force may transmit “through the gravitational field in wave packets at group velocity, by phase shift and chirality” [3].  This could otherwise be stated as by phase shift and parity and, as physicists know, group velocity can be faster than the speed of light.

To extend on this concept and compare then, if a rotational component is developed in a free graviton, it is due only to Coulomb field production, and though free gravitons always travel in a straight line, neglecting lensing, when there are no charges present the rotational component of a free graviton would be zero. 

[1] http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/21st_century_science/lectures/lec04.html

[2] Kline, Morris, Calculus, An Intuitive and Physical Approach, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1967, 1977; Dover (1998) unabridged republication.

[3] http://www.fruechtetheory.com/blog/2010/06/15/muonic-states/

Received an email back from Doug Finkbeiner with a reference and a calculation.  I did have to look up the definition of a parsec and multiply by 180/pi to get his parsecs per degree factor and understand better.  In any case, lensing does not need to be considered with the gamma ray bubbles of the Milky Way.

The answer was detailed, informative, and polite.  Could be enough encouragement for me to continue contacting scientists again.  Emails sent out Friday and Saturday were the first in over two years; for a long time I was too discouraged to even click a send button.

Something that needs to be considered relating to the size of the massive gamma ray emitting bubbles at the center of the Milky Way Galaxy is light lensing, – gravitational, and by many other wavelengths.  This is because light bends light.

Doug Finkbeiner of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and Harvard graduate students Meng Su and Tracy Slatyer “made the discovery while processing publicly available data from NASA’s Fermi Large Area Telescope (LAT).” *  So as not to make assumptions, the three may have already considered light lensing, and the massive bubbles of the Milky Way may indeed be 50,000 light years across as published.  If not considered, on the other hand, the bubbles may be smaller than thought, though still quite massive.

As is already estimated by scientists, the bubbles volumetrically are mostly gas, with rocks, dust, stars, and other items intermixed in places.  If scientists are spectrum analyzing for the gaseous elements present, that will be very interesting and we can all look forward to the results.

* http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101110/sc_afp/usastronomy

Just bubbles of mass with atoms and molecules present:

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/GLAST/news/new-structure.html

These bubbles would help keep the spiral structure of the Milky Way on a plane.

After seven years of study, five involving gravity, and pretty much getting ostracized by the physics community in 2010, I have started to ramp down my math and physics study time.  Helping students is still a fairly common occurrence and I am hoping this, with the engineering also, will be enough to keep me sharp.

One thing that I may not get to in the near future then is the concept of the Coulomb force by phonon transmission through a gravitational field, similar to phonon transmission in a crystal.  It was alluded to earlier with the phrase “shouldering through the gravitons in a highly relativistic sense” *, and the mathematics, I suppose, would utilize that already existing within quantum mechanics relating to phonon transmission.

In areas of deep space where the gravitational field is very weak, the Coulomb force may not transmit effectively.  Nevertheless, it is irrelevant because protons and electrons cannot exist without enough gravitational pressure. 

* http://www.fruechtetheory.com/blog/2009/03/15/electric-charges/