Archive for September, 2013

2nd Edition of Introduction to Quantum-Geometry Dynamics Available

Note: Please see 3rd edition (in progress) for which is a major rewrite from 2nd edition.

For readers who wish to further their knowledge of QGD.

Introduction-to-Quantum-Geometry-Dynamics-2nd-Edition

Download PDF file

Mapping the Universe

Everything we know about the universe we learned from photons. We detect cosmic photons with senses and instruments and from their physical properties we estimate the size, speed, direction, position and composition of each of their sources. In short, cosmic photons allow us to map out the Universe. The maps we now use have been drawn from interpretations of the signals we receive. And these interpretations are based on theories which are founded on the wave model of light.

The main tool used to determine position, direction and speed of a stellar object is provided by what is called the redshift effect. The redshift effect is simply the change in frequency of light attributed to the Doppler effect and is expected to occur when the emitting source is speeding away from us. The magnitude of redshift is understood to be proportional to speed of the source and is be used to calculate its distance from us. Maps of the observable universe are made by compiling data received from all observable sources. The problem, if QGD is correct, is that those maps are built on the assumption that light behaves like a wave and that, consequently, the Doppler effect applies. But if, as QGD suggests, light is singularly corpuscular, will a map based on QGD’s interpretation of the redshift and blueshift effects agree with the maps based on the wave model of light? Before answering the question we will first discuss how QGD explains the redshift effect.

Emission Spectrum of Atoms

We have shown that quantum-geometrical space itself exerts a force on an object and that any change in momentum of an object must be an integer multiple of the mass of the object (see QGD optics part 3). That is, for an object a of mass {{m}_{a}}, \Delta \left\| {{{\vec{P}}}_{a}} \right\|=x{{m}_{a}} where x\in {{N}^{+}}. This applies to the components of an atom that are bombarded by photons. For instance, if a is an electron bombarded by a photon b having mass {{m}_{b}}, which momentum we have learned is equal to {{m}_{b}}c, then a will absorb b only if {{m}_{b}}c=x{{m}_{a}}. Similarly, the allowable changes in momentum \Delta \left\| {{{\vec{P}}}_{a}} \right\|=x{{m}_{a}} must also apply to the emission of photons by an electron. The allowable changes in momentum determine the emission spectrum of the electrons of an atom.

In the figure above, we have the visible part of the hydrogen emission spectrum. Here the first visible band correspond to a change in momentum of the electron a by emission of a photon with momentum {{m}_{{{b}_{i}}}}c=i{{m}_{a}}. Notice that the lowest possible value, which is at the far end of the spectrum is given when i=1 . Each emission line corresponds to allowable emission of a photon from an hydrogen atom’s single electron. In agreement with the laws of motion introduced earlier, each emitted photon has a specific momentum {{m}_{{{b}_{i}}}}c (hence, a specific mass {{m}_{{{b}_{i}}}} ). For values of x<i and x>i+3 which are respectively towards the infrared and ultraviolet; the momentum puts them outside the boundaries of visible light.

For an atom ahaving n components electrons {{a}_{i}}in its outer orbits (the ones that will interact most with external photons) where 1<i<n and having mass {{m}_{{{a}_{{{i}_{{}}}}}}}the emission lines of its component electrons {{a}_{i}} corresponds to photons {{b}_{i}} such that {{m}_{b}}c={{x}_{i}}{{m}_{{{a}_{i}}}} and its spectrogram is the superposition of the emission lines of all its electrons. An example of the superimposition of the emission spectrums of the electrons of iron is shown in the illustration below. Note that an electron can have only one change in momentum at the time, emitting or absorbing a photon of corresponding momentum. So emission spectrograms are really composite images made from the emission of a large enough number of atoms to display the full emission spectrum of an element.

QGD’s Interpretation of the Redshift and Blueshift Effects

Now that we have described and explained the emission spectrum of atoms we can deduce the cause the redshifts and blueshifts in the emission lines of the emission spectrum an atom. We saw earlier that the emission of a photon by and electron a corresponds to a change in the electron’s momentum such that \Delta \left\| {{{\vec{P}}}_{a}} \right\|=x{{m}_{a}} where x\in {{N}^{+}}. So a redshift of the emission spectrum of an element implies that photons emitted by its electrons {{{a}'}_{i}}are less massive than photons emitted by the electrons {{a}_{i}} of a reference atom of the same element (most often, the reference atom is on Earth). This means that x{{m}_{{{{{a}'}}_{i}}}}<x{{m}_{{{a}_{i}}}} sot that {{m}_{{{{{a}'}}_{i}}}}<{{m}_{{{a}_{_{i}}}}}. That is, the mass of electron {{{a}'}_{i}} belonging to an atom of an element from a distance source is smaller than the mass of the corresponding electron {{a}_{i}} belonging to the atom of the same element on Earth. In the same way, the blueshift of the emission lines of the emission spectrum of an atom implies that {{m}_{{{{{a}'}}_{i}}}}>{{m}_{{{a}_{i}}}}.

So, according to QGD, the redshift and blueshift effects imply that the electrons of the light emitting source are respectively less and more massive than the local reference electron a . Therefore, quantum-geometry dynamics does not attribute the redshifts and blueshifts effects to a Doppler-like effect (which in the absence of a medium doesn’t make sense anyway) and, as a consequence, these effects are not speed dependant. Hence redshifts and blueshifts provide no indication of the speed or distance of their source.

From the mechanisms of particle formation introduced earlier, we understand that though all electrons share the same basic structure they can have different masses. As matter aggregates though gravitational interactions, electrons absorb neutrinos, photons or preons(+) and gradually become more massive. It follows that redshifted photons must be emitted by sources at a stage of their evolution that precedes the stage of evolution of our reference source. Similarly, blueshifted photons being more massive were emitted at a stage of their evolution that succeeds that stage of evolution of our reference source. However, it can’t be assumed that sources of similarly redshifted photons are at similar distances from us unless they are part of a system within which they have simultaneously formed. The sources of similarly redshitted photons may be at greatly varying distances from us. Also, a source of blueshifted photons can be at the same distance as a source of redshifted photons would be. Therefore, there are important discrepancies between a map using QGD’s interpretation of the redshift and blueshift effects and one that is based on the classical wave interpretation of the same effects.

So though they provide no information about to the distance of their source (much less about their speed), redshifted or blueshifted photons inform us of the stage of evolution of their sources at the time they were emitted. Also, since sources of similarly redshifted (or similarly blueshifted) photons have similar mass, structure and luminosity, it is possible to establish the distance of one source of redshifted photons relative to a reference source of similarly redshifted photons by comparing the intensity of the light we receive from them.

Gravitational Telescopy

As we have seen, although we can indirectly estimate the distance of source of photons relative to another, there is no direct correlation between distance, direction or speed of a stellar object and how much the photons they emit are redshifted or blueshifted. However, according to QGD, it is theoretically possible to map the universe with great accurately by measuring the magnitude and direction gravitational interactions using a gravitational telescopy. And, unlike telescopes and radio-telescopes, gravitational telescope are not limited to the observation of photon emitting objects.

More importantly, if QGD’s prediction that gravity is instantaneous, then a map based on the observations of gravitational telescopes would represent all observed objects as they currently are and not as they were when they emitted the photons we receive from them.

 

Cosmological Implications

The notion that the universe is expanding is based on the classic interpretation of the redshift and blueshift effects, but if QGD is correct and redshift and blueshift effects are consequences of the stage of evolution of their source, then the expanding universe model loses its most important argument. The data then becomes consistent with the locally condensing universe proposed by quantum-geometry dynamics.

Note: This article is an excerpt from the second edition of Introduction to Quantum-Geometry Dynamics.

Bad Behavior has blocked 169 access attempts in the last 7 days.