Fruechte Gravity Theory Blog

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. 

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

Hi Dan,

Traveling and the email does not go through.  Thanks for the BBC article link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8767763.stm

Now that you and your consortium have proved my physics theory, please send my bonus check so that I can leave my engineering job and do physics research full time.

In a January 6, 2009 article from Symmetry Magazine entitled “Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope discovers slew of new pulsars”, by Kelen Tuttle, we find the following text:

“The 12 newly discovered pulsars offer insight into the mechanism behind the gamma-ray emissions. The data show that the classic understanding of emission, whereby gamma rays are created in the same location as radio waves, is mistaken. Researchers now theorize that the radio beams form near the neutron star’s surface, while the gamma rays form far above.” [1]

Let us say there is a very large rock ‘far above’ a “rapidly spinning neutron star”.  Each time an intense area of the neutron star’s rotating magnetic field passes over and through the conventional interstellar mass, subatomic particles in the mass will fly apart into gamma rays.  This periodic pulse of gamma rays and other radiation is called a Pulsar.

As to why “gravitons like to follow gently arcing uniform magnetic field lines” [2], it works a little like the uncertainty principle.  The magnetic field of a graviton would like to line up with a very strong environmental magnetic field, however oscillating at 7.562 x 10²² Hz perpendicular to the graviton’s direction of travel, it cannot decide which way to turn, and therefore the graviton’s magnetic field actually ends up perpendicular to the intense environmental magnetic field.  The graviton therefore travels along the magnetic field lines of an intense magnetic field as long as the turns are not too sharp.

One thing we should keep in mind here is that the distances in interstellar space written of are typically orders of magnitude larger than our solar system for example.  I don’t know what distance is meant by “far above”.  The FGST people did not invite me to their symposium in Washington D.C. this week, and typically do not allow me into their discussion groups.  We were in Washington D.C. this summer anyway, and I don’t feel like going back so soon.

[1]  http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/breaking/2009/01/06/fermi-gamma-ray-space-telescope-discovers-slew-of-new-pulsars

[2]  https://www.fruechtetheory.com/blog/2009/03/15/electric-charges/

According to a Wikipedia article on Comet McNaught, NASA and ESA’s Ulysses spacecraft “made an unexpected pass through the tail of the comet”, where its Solar Wind Ion Composition Spectrometer (SWICS) “measured the composition speed of the comet tail and solar wind”.
The article explains that sensor data showed that oxygen ions in the solar wind had picked up electrons to replace some of their missing electrons as the ions passed through the tail of the comet.  It goes on to say that “the tail had slowed the solar wind to half its normal speed.”
Space science professor Michael Combi is quoted as saying:  “This was very surprising to me. Way past the orbit of Mars, the solar wind felt the disturbance of this little comet. It will be a serious challenge for us theoreticians and computer modellers to figure out the physics,” *
Here we learn that as atomic ions traveling radially outward from the sun in the solar wind pick up electrons and incorporate them into atomic orbitals, the ions slow down.  For anyone willing to learn some physics, this is because after the ions pick up electrons, they collect more gravitions.  The ions will slow down due to increased gravitational acceleration back toward the sun.
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_McNaught

LIGO stands for Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory, which is focused on finding long wavelength gravitational waves based on Einstein’s theory of general relativity.  According to a Wikipedia article, the funding to build it was “$365 million (in 2002 USD)” [1] through the National Science Foundation.  The antennas at Hanford, Washington and Livingston, Louisiana are one quintillion times longer than a graviton that is based on electron fractional mass and rotational kinetic energy exchange [2], and are apparently being used in an attempt to detect wavelengths at and around 756 quintillion times longer [3].
With the discovery of the graviton at very short wavelength, rather than very long, the LIGO project may have to be re-evaluated.  I am sure that the scientific skills of the effected people working on LIGO can be used on other projects, and in the end we will be better off with the advancement of science into new and exciting times.
 

[1]  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO
[2]  http://www.fruechtetheory.com/full.html
[3]  http://www.ligo-wa.caltech.edu/ligo_science/P040019-02-R.pdf

The Stanford Linear Accelerator Center has an interesting article dated October 17, called “By the Light of the Moon”, by Amber Dance of SLAC Today, which can be viewed at the following site: http://today.slac.stanford.edu/feature/2007/the-moon.asp.
The article states that the moon is “an object with an absolutely known gamma-ray output”, – likely from EGRET data from the 1990’s, and notes that “The moon would be especially useful for calibrating GLAST,”.  Stanford physicist Igor Moskalenko is quoted as saying “Using the moon as a calibrator, you can always be sure that your data are accurate.”
An email I received from a NASA scientist in April 2006, in response to one of my own, said that “the gamma radiation from the Moon was consistent with a conventional model in which cosmic rays hitting the lunar surface produce neutral pi mesons that decay immediately into gamma rays.”, and recommended that I “look elsewhere for possible evidence for gravity photons”.
The question I have is how could the moon be used to calibrate GLAST if it were glowing at an energy of >100 MeV as a result of cosmic ray bombardment?  The bombardment hitting the moon could not possibly be uniform enough from all directions such that it produces a gamma ray output that is steady enough at all times, and in all places where there is a relatively quiet background, so that it can be used to calibrate an instrument.
I contend that the moon has a constant known output of gamma rays because of gravitational output, with the energy centered at 312.76 MeV.

Comet McNaught, C/2006 P1, reached apogee around the Sun at the time of the local publicity on the gravity theory with the newspaper articles and an interview on television.  I think of the designation for this comet as follows:
C:  for my wife Cynthia;
2006:  the year the comet was first spotted, even though pictures from late 2005 showed it;
P:  for momentum, the increased electron momentum making the Coulomb force the final mediator of the gravitational force, and the theory a unification theory;
1:  for the quantum intrinsic spin number of a photon, though some physicists say that gravity must have an intrinsic spin of 2 to be always attractive.
Comet Holmes, on the other hand, partially blew up on October 24, 2007.  This was the two year anniversary of the day the main calculation was started.  The main calculation was finished November 12, 2005, a Saturday because I don’t get paid to be a physicist.
About the intrinsic spin, think of gravity as two separate actions after a graviton has been generated.  One is the absorption of a graviton by an electron in an atomic orbital, and the second is the resultant centripetal Coulomb force.  On average, electrons in a body would have greater mass when traveling in the direction of where the highest flux density of gravitons is coming from.  Since an electron gains mass by absorbing a massless photon, which is possible due to special relativity, an intrinsic spin of 1 works out.
Of the two hundred or so emails sent out to scientists, thank you to the small few who responded.  I am also very appreciative to the three PhD physicists who each read and analyzed my paper at some point along the way, and gave me feedback.
Just think, in the free world some of your tax dollars may still be going to support string theory!