In this page:

- For gravitation we maintain the view of the vacuum sagging-in shell after shell. The propagation speed of the sagging-ins is chosen to be infinite in order to avoid the sagging-ins being a process disrupting the vacuum Bosecondensate.

- Instantaneous sagging-in all over space is a way of sending messages infinite fast. Maybe we just have to wait until the first manmade paradox becomes apparent.

- Vacuums are like superfluids. What is observed to hold for superfluids holds for vacuums too.

 

Some philosophy about gravitation

Take two masses m1 and m2, initially at rest relative to the stars and thus to each other. The masses attract each other by gravitation and as a result they accelerate towards each other. The masses don’t feel being dragged. Masses fall weightless in each other’s gravitational field, as if there is no gravitation, as if they are standing still. Mass m1 is standing still and remaining standing still relative to its private vacuum. Mass m2, dragged by mass m1, is standing still too and remaining standing still, relative to its private vacuum. As said, at the start the private vacuum of m1 is the same vacuum as the private vacuum of m2. Then some time elapses. No force did act on any mass; no mass went anywhere caused by a force. But when accurately measuring light from stars around, one measures an increasing red or blue shift, due to acceleration of m1 and m2 relative to the distant stars (galaxies). Velocity is building up. And the two private vacuums of m1 and m2 are no longer the same.         (1.1)

As used in page 4 of NEG *), a velocity can be put in a box. One can embody a velocity by a mass m2 having that velocity and subsequently raise the walls of a box around it, around a sufficiently large part of its track. We take the box standing still relative to m1, we construct it like that. The walls of the box shield off observation of its content, but we trust m2 being within still has its velocity. When the sagging-in shells around m1 do reach m2 then the box is dragged by, and with it all its velocities in it.         (1.2)

*) For abbreviations of storyline names, see the Contents page.

As long as the box around m2 is closed and shields it off from its environment completely, in principle something strange happens. Quantum mechanics demands that at the moment full shield is applied, the box content suddenly is in superposition of all possible contents the box could have contained too. Savior are the couplings in mass m2, causing sagging-in shells around m2 that reach outside the box and betray its content to outside observers. So we indeed can trust our mass m2 having its velocity in the box. And when opening the box no - or virtually none - wavefunction reduction is taking place. We find m2 being accelerated along with its enveloping box, despite m2 is not standing still with respect to the vacuum of the sagging-in shells around m1.         (1.3)

 

Does the field sag in shell after shell?

There is no Pressure from the outside forcing the marbles around to fill in the empty spot, to fall into it. A distance is the number of vacuum particles on it, that’s all there is to distance, and to space. When there are lesser vacuum marbles along the line connecting two objects, then these objects thus are nearer to each other. The disappearance of a vacuum marble, creating a hole there, is equal to the shortening of distances through the hole, as is argued at the previous page. But there must be some rearrangement of the remaining vacuum marbles, to decide which marble glues **) to which other one. It is this decision that defines the empty spot mentioned at page 3 of NEG. Mind there is no space behind the space, except for the field of all possible velocities.         (2.1)

**) It is indeed supposed to be the strong force underlying the Bose condensate of the vacuum, as is shown at e.g. page 5 of QG, yet to come if you are reading TONE.

Initially I thought of a kind of real interaction mechanism between the particles of the vacuum to maintain its coherence. However, e.g. in The grid: a previous attempt in the column at the right at page 5 of QG, is shown that this is not feasible, not really. At this moment is chosen for a Bose condensate to form the vacuum, see paragraph No grid and paragraph Bose-Einstein condensates at page 5 of QG.         (2.2)

The undisturbed grid of marbles, spanning empty vacuum, can be called a solid state vacuum. All vacuum marble connections are present.         (2.3)

The gravitational field in action, the act of sagging-in, acts like a liquid. The gravitational field is supposed to be a liquid Bose condensate there. The vacuum marble connections are partly present and partly disconnected.         (2.4)

There is no space behind the space. Therefore, when fully disconnected, vacuum marbles will not see each other anymore. Their relative distances become undefined. They have become superposed states relative to each other. The gaseous vacuum state is the whole of superpositions of isolated vacuum marble states PLUS all other indistinguishable states. The sea of possibilities.         (2.5)

Dragged-by objects in the gravitational field don’t react with the vacuum (except for the Higgs field absorptions of their constituent particles). Therefore, when objects are dragged by, in principle the wavefunction of the vacuum remains intact. So the act of dragging on itself doesn’t influence the sagging-ins.         (2.6)

 

Vacuums that are Bose condensates that are superfluids

In the column at the right at page 3 of NEG, that also is the very first page of TONE, is said: The Higgs field is assumed to be a liquid Bose condensate. Fluid Bose condensates resemble superfluids. Superfluids can stream through each other as if they don’t see each other, as if they are vacuums. As if they are superpositions to each other.         (3.1)

Let's take this as a guide-line: vacuums are like superfluids. What is observed to hold for superfluids holds for vacuums too.         (3.2)

The undisturbed vacuum, the Higgs field, is thought of as a solid state, a standing still Bose condensate, ruled by one single wave function in flat space (Minkowski spacetime). A Higgs field absorption, standing still with respect to the Bose condensate disrupts the bose condensate, the Higgs field absorption holds as an observation of the vacuum, an observation of the Higgs field. The disrupting process has a reaction time, the condensate has a reaction time.         (3.3)

The previous three pages in the NEG storyline describe how, after all the sagging-ins of one Higgs field absorption had passed, the Higgs field has returned to the flat space Bose condensate it was before the absorption of mass from the Higgs field.

But what happens in between the forming of a hole in the Bose condensate and the disappearance of the resulting sagging-ins in the far distance?

In the next paragraph will be chosen for an immediate sagging in all over space, an infinite sagging-in propagation speed that is. One moment there is a hole, the next moment the resulting sagging-ins have been completed, the last sagging-in disappeared in the ultimate far distance.         (3.4)

But what if that velocity was finite, e.g. c, the speed of light? Then the sagging-in front will act like a particle, isn't it? Compare the wave front of a light ray propagating with c and consisting of photons. The particle could be absorbed then by any mass on its route and that's not what I mean. As said in (2.6), I mean the dragged-by objects DON'T react with the vacuum they are floating in.         (3.5)

Especially at page 5 of NEG the situation immediately after a Higgs absorption is considered to be a vacuum particle sea with one hole at the spot of the absorbed vacuum particle, equaling a solid bose condensate with one hole in it. Now sagging in after sagging in takes place. The hole displaces to the outside, its shape now a shell of diminishing thickness while propagating. We have a spherical hole with a solid bose condensate inside it and a streaming, liquid bose condensate outside the hole, at least the shell of vacuum particles outside just next to the hole is liquid.         (3.6)

However, we choose for an infinite propagation speed (infinite in at least in one frame of reference) and then this doesn't play a role.         (3.7)

See also paragraph Renormalization at page 4 of the storyline THE COLLAPSE OF THE WAVEFUNCTION (not a TONE page).

I wish I knew more about superfluids.

 

Sagging-in propagation speed

In (2.11) in paragraph Bose-Einstein condensates at page 5 of QG is proposed to set the vacuum particles to ONE SINGLE HIGGS FIELD of COLORED GLUON PAIRS that ALSO is a Bose condensate.

The vacuum as a bose condensate is ruled by one single wave function. The sagging‑in shell after shell however rather looks like a sequence of distinct processes. So for the vacuum to remain a bose condensate the entire vacuum must react as a whole, all sagging‑ins in one single stroke, in the frame of reference wherein the vacuum marble was standing still (all sagging‑ins that are the result of one marble absorption, one hole).

Then it is as if the propagation speed of the sagging-in shell-after-shell process is infinite, in the frame of reference A wherein the absorbed vacuum marble was standing still. That a Higgs absorption has taken place and a is hole formed, is not yet known at the same moment everywhere. But the subsequent falling into the hole at the next moment is known here and at the other end of the universe at that same moment.

The entire process of gravitation from page 3 of NEG now more looks like a mathematical exercise. The propagation of sagging-ins of the gravitational field cannot be observed from place to place.

Let's pursue this a little further. According to No past. No future. at page 5 of SR, the propagation speed of the sagging-in's in any other frame B then is larger than c, the speed of light. It is not really the propagation speed of a sagging-in, it is the propagation speed of one single moment, the moment the entire vacuum saggs in as a whole in the frame of reference wherein the absorbed vacuum marble (and thus its hole) was standing still. The propagation front is not a sphere as it is with sagging-ins, but is a flat plane perpendicular to the relative speed of A and B. Subsequent new holes filled in by new sagging-ins, those then are subsequent distinct processes. They have to be since subsequent holes are almost always in a different frame of reference, with a non-zero speed relative to the previous hole.

Observed in one single frame the sagging-ins of different other frames would propagate with different speeds, all larger than c. Of course one single absorption is virtually unobservable because its effect is too small. An object like a star or a planet consists of mainly protons, neutrons and electrons that absorbs from the Higgs field while having different speeds. This causes an entire spectrum of propagation speeds all larger than c.

How is the speed distribution of Higgs absorbing particles? The electrons in matter will have moderate speeds, for otherwise excitation reactions will take place, or the electron might even escape the planet or star. Small electron speeds result in virtually infinite sagging-in propagations, see No past. No future. However, the protons and neutrons, it are not them that absorb from the Higgs field, isn't it? It are the quarks within that absorb from the Higgs field. And little is known about the quark's velocity spread inside the nucleons at the moment of Higgs field absorption.

Instantaneous sagging-in all over space is a way of sending messages faster than light, infinite fast in fact, see About messages faster than light in the column at the right.

This is a messy situation. Anyhow, the propagation speed of sagging-ins in the act of gravitation has to be:
- slower than c
- c
- faster than c
- infinite fast,
that are all possibilities. Then the latter two are a kind of the best choices from the fields of all possible velocities, aren't they?

Moreover, the description in paragraph The fermion explosion of the vacuum particles at page 4 of EXPAN, about the Big Bang, argues the field of all possible velocities equals the field of all possible expansions. The description of the sagging-ins as a result of a Higgs field absorption should have a corresponding description in an expanding frame.

 
IF YOU ARE READING TONE FOR THE FIRST TIME, ALL NECESSARY THINGS FOR THE CHAPTERS TO COME ARE GIVEN NOW, YOU CAN SKIP THE REST OF THE PAGE AND READ IT LATER.
 

Previous attempt 1

The typical reaction time for vacuum particles is 10^-23 sec, when the vacuum is to consist of gluons (gluon pairs). In radius of the vacuum particle is calculated the distance of neighboring vacuum particles to be about 10^-20 m. This then also can be taken as the thickness of a sagging-in shell. The first 10^-23 sec a shell sags in, the next 10^-23 sec the next shell sags in, and so on. So in 1 second 10^23 sagging-ins of 10^-20 m take place: a velocity of 10^23 * 10^-20 = 1000 m/s. Which is very low compared to the speed of light. A little too slow, I guess.

Can this be compared with the speed of electrons that conduct the electricity through a wire?

1 Ampere through a wire with cross section 1 mm

= 1 Coulomb / sec

= 0.63 * 10^19 electron charges / sec through the 1 mm wire cross section,

which turns out to be about 10^-4 m/s average drift velocity of the electrons that conduct the electricity through the wire, very slow compared to the speed of light. While the time needed for the electric potential to cover the entire length of the wire seems to suggest about 0.1 of the speed of light. Is this the same kind of situation?

Previous attempt 2

Paragraph Experiment 2 - the inverse square force law about the many world interpretation, at page 2 of EXPER, the part of it that starts with In the previous page, EXPERIMENT 1, confirms the speed of light is the upper limit for every displacement, any kind of transfer of information by any means (It just confirms it, it did not derive it). The speed of branching of localities might equal the speed of the propagation of the shell after shell sagging-in process of gravitation. Especially is stated branching of worlds cannot spread faster than c (just stated either, not derived).

End of all previous attempts