Gravity -> static ether behaviour

Light -> dynamic ether behaviour

Ether -> small and fast particles moving in all directions.

Ether particles -> are absorbed by matter (not colliding with it)

Light beams -> do not exist (instead the normal to the wave fronts is relevant and due to the short wave length light looks like particles

Dear Alessandro Rizzo ,

I have gotten information about your discussion from John-Erik Persson .

The problem you raised is interesting...

But I'm sorry if I'm being critical:

1. this is not a criticism: It's worth paying attention to John-Eriks writings. Ask why he thinks that. What is there to disagree withhim?...

2.Why do you want to conform to the ideas of the 'mainstream'?

3. Your approach is too one-sided... and the Chinese pointed out a long time ago that this leads to a lot of mistakes.

Help me and your help will help you:

Research Proposal Physico-metaphysical proof of the existence of graviton (Fiz...

It can even help you:

Article Gravity a paradym shift in reasoning

Regards,

Laszlo

Dear László Attila Horváth,

Thank you for your engagement with my research. I value your feedback and welcome the chance to delve deeper into my concept of the graviton.

In my work, the graviton isn't just a particle mediating gravitational force, as often depicted in mainstream quantum gravity theories. Instead, I put forth a fresh perspective where the graviton is seen as a quantum black hole, a state of angular momentum of two photons. This viewpoint strongly connects gravitons to the electromagnetic force, hinting at a deep relationship between these two fundamental forces.

Within my framework, the graviton materializes due to the inertial momentum of two photons' energy. These photons are often labelled as dark or heavy photons because of the inertial and mass effects of their binary system. The graviton is an excitation within a spacetime condensate, much like a photon is an excitation in an electromagnetic field.

The interaction between the spacetime condensate and other fields, such as the electromagnetic field, can be viewed as phonon-like excitations within the condensate. These interactions are distinguished by a gravito-electromagnetic resonance, potentially paving the way to manipulate and control gravity through these resonances.

This graviton view aligns with the relativistic view of spacetime, but also adds a quantum layer. It provides a quantum mechanical interpretation of spacetime, bridging the macroscopic and microscopic worlds. This is accomplished by applying the quantum fluid dynamics theory, which frames the understanding of quantum systems as a fluid. This theory lets us model the spacetime condensate as a quantum fluid, providing a comprehensive description that encompasses both the macroscopic behavior of large-scale structures and the microscopic behavior of individual particles.

In this model, a graviton, seen as equivalent to a Planck mass or a quantum black hole, is depicted as being made of two dark photons. Each dark photon is depicted as a quantum electromagnetic vortex. The closed electromagnetic flux from both dark photons forms an overall angular momentum with spin=2, aligning with the spin of a graviton, and a result of combining the two individual spins. The system is bound by a quantum resonance with a phonon. This model proposes a unique view on the quantum mechanical structure of spacetime, suggesting the graviton, tied with gravitational force, and the Planck mass could be one and the same, expressed through a binary system of dark photons.

The left side of the equation represents a quantized gravitational flux related to a Planck mass area, denoting a single graviton. The right side aligns with the momentum of two photons (potentially dark photons) moving at the speed of light. This suggests that a binary photon system equals a single graviton with the Planck mass, revealing a deep connection between gravitational and electromagnetic phenomena.

The "quantized gravitational flux" concept relates to the graviton idea, a hypothetical particle that mediates gravity in most quantum gravity theories. In quantum field theory, a single graviton's state can be depicted as |1_k⟩, where k represents the graviton's momentum.

The "momentum of two photons" can be expressed using the energy-momentum relation for photons. A photon's energy E is tied to its momentum p through the equation E = pc , where c is the speed of light. For two photons, the total momentum would be 2p, and the total energy would be 2E = 2pc.

Therefore, the equations can be rewritten as:

Left-hand side = |1_k⟩ = Single graviton = 4πm_p^2G

Right-hand side = 2pc = Energy of two photons = 2hc

Here, |1_k⟩ denotes the state of a single graviton with momentum k . The factor 4πm_p^2G quantifies the gravitational flux associated with a single graviton or Planck mass area.

Furthermore, the empirical support for my theory is found in a naturally occurring phenomenon known as Terrestrial Gamma-ray Flashes (TGFs). TGFs are brief bursts of gamma rays produced in Earth's atmosphere. Their existence and properties can be considered as evidence for the binary system of dark photons that my theory proposes, and they serve as a practical testing ground for the principles outlined in my research. The detailed study of TGFs could offer additional insights and potentially validate the unique perspective on gravitons that I have described.

On the other side of the equation, 2pc represents the total energy or momentum of two photons, potentially dark photons, moving at the speed of light. The total energy, 2hf, is twice the energy of a single photon, where h is the Planck constant and f is the frequency of the photon. The validation of my theory lies in the existence and characteristics of Terrestrial Gamma-ray Flashes (TGFs), which serve as compelling evidence for the binary system of dark photons proposed in my research. The importance of these relations is underscored by the formulation of the Planck mass and the profound connection it reveals between gravitational and electromagnetic phenomena. This suggests that a binary photon system is equivalent to a single graviton with Planck mass. This link is one of the key implications of my work, providing a fresh perspective on understanding the fundamental forces of nature.

Best Regards

Alessandro Rizzo

I have recently embarked on the substantial task of completely rewriting my paper. This has been a monumental endeavor, made possible thanks to the suggestions and feedback from numerous colleagues. In the process, I have also endeavored to make the theory more accessible to a wider audience.

In addition to the theoretical explanations provided in this paper, we have also created supplemental media content to enhance understanding. This includes a series of videos on our YouTube channel, where we explore these scientific principles in a more digestible format. These videos aim to demystify complex topics in quantum physics, making them understandable to a broader audience, regardless of their prior scientific background. For those interested in unraveling the wonders of the cosmos, these videos provide comprehensible and engaging explanations of concepts such as the theory discussed in this paper. You can access our YouTube channel at: https://www.youtube.com/@Ciaoidea.Channel.

For further reading, you may also refer to my paper titled "On the Vacuum Hydrodynamics of Moving Bodies", which is available on ResearchGate at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372592105_On_the_Vacuum_Hydrodynamics_of_Moving_Bodies

Dear Alessandro Rizzo ,

Congratulations on your article...

Your comment has data from 29.07.2023. The linked article has the next:' All content following this page was uploaded by Alessandro Rizzo on 28 August 2023.'(first attached file) :

Preprint On the Vacuum Hydrodynamics of Moving Bodies

(first attached file)

This is important to avoid being suspected of plagiarism:

for this sentence:

'This postulated force may serve as a bridge between quantum gravity cavitation and terrestrial gamma-ray flashes.' [only term]

Because the conclusion of my article was uploaded to RG- 19.08.2023 (attached file):

Chapter Physico-metaphysical proof of the existence of graviton

The two articles are fundamentally different 'but my graviton concept has' such a meaning. The following article allows its existence:

Article Gravity a paradym shift in reasoning

I made this post to avoid further misunderstandings...

But I do not accept the existence of black holes... as understood by current science, because the concept of gravitational lensing

leads to a contradiction...

I hope we won't fight over this.

Cordially,

I wish you success...

Regards,

Laszlo

Dear László Attila Horváth,

Thank you for your kind words and for bringing your concerns to my attention. I want to state categorically: I wrote, submitted my preprint paper before you did. This is not a matter of opinion, but a fact. My submission to SCIRP on 25th July 2023, which was a full 25 days before your publication on RG on 19th August 2023, underwent a certified review process with the journal's referees. The certification from the reviewers serves as additional proof of my earlier submission and publication. I'm attaching the timestamp and certification for your reference.

Now, to further address your concerns:

1. Quantum Cavitation: I've been delving into the concept of quantum cavitation since March-May, dedicating significant time and effort.

2. Prior Discussions: Well before your publication, about two months earlier, I had profound discussions on the implications of a fifth fundamental force, specifically concerning spacetime cavitation or quantum gravity, with a colleague via email.

3. Graviton Concept: While I respect the myriad opinions in the scientific community, I have reservations about the existence of the graviton, viewing it more as a geometric consequence of photon configuration.

Lastly, it's worth noting that I've been committed to this research topic for nearly a decade. My decision to publish and share findings has been more recent, over the past two years.

I believe in fostering a spirit of collaboration and respect in the scientific community. It's my sincere hope we can move beyond this with clarity and mutual understanding.

Warm regards,

Alessandro Rizzo

Dear László Attila Horváth

Furthermore, I'd like to point out that I have documented all my email conversations dated more 20 days prior to your publication on the internet, where the term "quantum gravity cavitation" is discussed in detail. These are archived and can be provided for certification process and to establish the originality and copyright of the idea.

Dear László Attila Horváth

Moreover, I uploaded a video on YouTube on 30th July 2023 titled "The Fifth Fundamental Force: Quantum Gravity Cavitation (The General Theory of Singularity)", which can be viewed at this link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twpcPlYjngg. Although the video was

posted on 30th July, the work behind it began much earlier, specifically around June-May.

I have posted also another video at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSX8HqoIGdc

where I use the term "Cavitation of quantum gravity" dated August 3rd 2023 and I more other private video date June 2023.

A brief Google search will further verify the upload date of this video, providing additional evidence of the timeline of my endeavors in this domain.

Dear Alessandro Rizzo ,

I do not use this term, but in the case of formulation of gravity, I did.....

At RG, a graviton project was taken down after... 31.03 2023... (This time all projects was take down )

Exist copy about them... If you want I will look after them... John-Erik Persson saw the project... I did not used this term... The term is graviton!

Regards,

Laszlo

Dear László Attila Horváth,

Thank you for drawing attention to your understanding of the term "graviton". To further elucidate my perspective: I harbor significant reservations about the existence of gravitons as they are described in the standard model. As a result of these uncertainties, I intentionally use the term "graviton" sparingly in my studies. Instead, I favor the term "quantum gravity" to characterize a quantum micro black hole, postulated to form geometrically from the resonance of two photons. In my conceptualization, this isn't a real graviton but a dual-photon geometric configuration – a quantum vortex, a twin light cone anchored in Lorentzian Geometry. This approach delineates a notable distinction between our respective works.

Hence, I do not view graviton as a fundamental unit but as a derivation from the electromagnetic field and its resonance, as highlighted in the second-order gravitational field derivation equations from the Larmor resonance of the electromagnetic field.

Given the fundamental differences in our methodologies and terminologies, it should be apparent that there isn't any overlapping or adoption of ideas. I must stress that any similarities would be purely coincidental, especially since I hadn't encountered your work prior to our present exchange.

As additional proof of my original work, I direct you to a model I uploaded on Geogebra titled "Quantum Gravity Cavitation", dated January 31st, 2023:

https://www.geogebra.org/material/show/id/twz2nfyx

Throughout history, contentious claims have arisen, with some even suggesting that Einstein plagiarized Poincaré. However, it's a recognized fact that neither of them copied the other.

I trust that these clarifications dispel any lingering doubts. I hold the scientific community's integrity in high regard and consistently endeavor to offer authentic and innovative insights.

Let's uphold a spirit of cooperation and mutual respect in our scholarly pursuits.

Warm regards, Alessandro Rizzo

Dear Alessandro Rizzo ,

I wrote a comment, but it got lost... Every few seconds something happens to Google Chrome and everything that is entered in RG is lost.I will not write again... my approach is different... As a geologist I try to follow nature... In this regard, valid Maimonides prayer. There are similarities between us at the starting point, but we are already far apart at the conclusion.

I won't continue because I lost the text again. but part of the Google email was written so there it is,

the idea of graviton is allowed by these two writings:

Article Tényekkel igazolható a gravitáció valós oka

Article Gravity a paradym shift in reasoning

the last one was slowly 7000 reads

The concept of gravitonlon is of great importance,

My co-author said:

’No quark

No, contradict you!

Our theory extended

It has Newton and Einstein too..’

Regards,

Laszlo

Dear Alessandro Rizzo ,

Your idea can be challenged with a simple argument. But your idea is good in many ways and should not be rejected... Fit for the mainstream... That's why you deserve recognition from them... My recognition was dismissal from my profession... I follow Maimonides!

Regards,

Laszlo

Dear László Attila Horváth ,

Thank you for your sincere words. I genuinely empathize with the sacrifices you've made in your profession. The integrity to unwaveringly follow one's beliefs, especially in pursuit of truth, is truly commendable. I believe I would have done the same, and I deeply respect your steadfastness in advocating for your ideas.

Nature, in its vast complexity, might indeed be more wondrous than we imagine. With the principle of superposition, perhaps there exists a graviton as a superimposed state of two photons. Maybe, in this intricate dance of understanding, both of us are right in our own way.

Your words bring to mind a short tale about a wise rabbi:

Once, a respected rabbi was sought out by two opposing factions over an essential disagreement. The first group voiced their concerns, to which the rabbi responded, "You are right!" The next day, the other group presented their viewpoint, and the rabbi echoed, "You are right!" Upon witnessing this, the village elders questioned the rabbi about his contradictory positions. To which the rabbi replied, "You are also right!" This leaves us pondering: who is genuinely right? Or perhaps, the rabbi alone was mistaken?

Over these past ten years of studies and dreams left dormant, I've encountered many challenges. However, crises often pave the way for progress. Even in moments of profound loss, including losing those dear to us, there's an innate voice urging us to persist, compelling us to fulfill our purpose. As Elizabeth Bishop beautifully articulated in "One Art," mastering the art of losing isn't hard. Yet, sometimes it's through these losses that we achieve unexpected and even grander outcomes.

Warm regards, Yours

Alessandro

Dear Alessandro Rizzo ,

Thank you for this honorable reply, and for highlighting my answer with a decent explanation!

(

The rest will be in private)

With warm regards, Yours

Laszlo

Matter absorbs ether particles -> fewer particles are leaving a body in relation to the number of arriving particles -> a negative and radial ether wind that can explain gravity.

A radial ether wind can DECREASE 2-way speed of light (moving radially). The effect DECREASES with range. So, 2-way light speed INCREASES with range. This INCREASE can simulate a DECREASE in Pioneer motion. So, the Pioneer illusion can be an effect of ETHER MOTION.

A radial ether wind on a celestial body causes a BLUE shift when light is generated, but also a RED shift, when light is observed. Therefore, the observer will see a SECOND ORDER RED shift. The Big Bang illusion can be an effect of ETHER MOTION.

Best

3 effects of ether motion:

Regards

Dear Alessandro Alessandro Rizzo ,

There are still about a few days left to finish the article. the hardest part, managed to put it together.

Chapter 230902-En-H-Gr-t

Due to the shortness of time, many important ideas were left out.

Regards,

Laszlo

Dear John,

Your mention of the "ether" concept is very interesting, and I've tried to provide a more rigorous mathematical and physical interpretation of your intuitions:

1. Ether Absorption and Gravity:

- Let's denote the ether particle density by rho(r), where r is the distance from the center of a body. If matter absorbs ether particles, the change in density Delta rho would be:

Delta rho = rho_initial - rho_final

- This change in density would lead to an imbalance in the flux of ether particles, given by:

Phi = -D gradient rho

Where D is a diffusion coefficient representing the rate of ether particle movement.

- The gravitational force F_g could then be related to this flux, possibly through a proportionality constant k:

F_g(r) = k |Phi|

2. Radial Ether Wind and Speed of Light:

- The radial ether wind, v(r), could be related to the gradient of the ether density:

v(r) = -beta gradient rho

Where beta is a proportionality constant.

- The two-way speed of light in the presence of this wind would be affected. Let c_0 be the speed of light in vacuum. The effective speed c' in the presence of the ether wind would be:

c' = c_0 (1 - alpha v)

Where alpha is a factor determining the influence of the ether wind on light speed.

3. Effects of Ether Motion:

- For the effects you mentioned:

- Gravity: As discussed, the gravitational force could be a result of the ether wind or flux. A more detailed model would relate the ether dynamics to the curvature of spacetime, possibly modifying General Relativity.

- Big Bang illusion: The ether could affect our observations of cosmic phenomena. For instance, redshifts might not only be due to cosmic expansion but also due to interactions with the ether.

- Pioneer illusion: The unexplained accelerations of the Pioneer spacecrafts could be influenced by ether dynamics. A force term F_ether might be added to the spacecraft's motion equations.

I have tried to provide a mathematical structure to your intuitions but It's crucial to emphasize that these formulations would need empirical validation. While the concept of ether has historical significance, I embrace it as a kind of energy fluid or something similar. Although it's not part of the current mainstream physics paradigm, revisiting old concepts with new data and perspectives can sometimes yield surprising insights.

I'd be eager to hear your thoughts on this more detailed approach.

Best regards,

Alessandro

Dear László,

I've also attempted to provide a preliminary mathematical formulation based on the concepts you've presented in your work. The above formulations are a starting point and aim to capture the essence of your ideas. However, to develop a complete and coherent mathematical model, a much more detailed deep dive into your ideas and a clear understanding of the proposed interactions and dynamics would be necessary. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts and feedback on this approach.

1. A Priori Entity and Fractalization:

- The fractal nature of the a priori entity might be described using fractal geometry. The fractal dimension D of an object can be defined in terms of the logarithmic ratio between the scale of measurement and the number of copies of the object at that scale.

- D = lim (epsilon -> 0) log(N(epsilon)) / log(1/epsilon)

- Where N(epsilon) is the number of spheres of radius epsilon required to cover the object.

2. Gravitational Field at the Atomic Level:

- We could hypothesize a gravitational field function G(r) that describes the intensity of the gravitational field at a distance r from an elementary particle.

- This function might be influenced by atomic parameters like charge, mass, and spin.

3. New Atomic Model:

- Introducing new particles or states in the atomic model, we might have new wave functions psi_n(r) that describe the probability of finding a particle in a state n at a distance r from the nucleus.

- The energy associated with these states could be described by a potential V(r).

4. Secondary Nature of the Graviton:

- If the graviton is a particle of secondary nature, its existence might be described in terms of linear combinations of atomic states. For instance, psi_graviton = c_1 psi_1 + c_2 psi_2 + ...

- Where c_i are coefficients.

5. Dynamic Motion of Atoms:

- The dynamic motion of atoms might be described using motion equations, like the Schrödinger equation for quantum systems.

Best,

Alessandro

Dear Alessandro Alessandro Rizzo ,

It should be solved first in the case of Earth ( you have the image: Deleted research item The research item mentioned here has been deleted

Imagine in 3D I think Gauss's gravity equations should be used. and a complex termodinamic concept...I will prepare the writing soon. You have to see it all...and then find the mathematical solution.

in elementary level use as you said:

and:

Louis de Broglie concept (equation in in square form, and you will get an negative resolution that is connected to the 'negative' quanta- graviton.

here is important the dinamic fluctation of outside of atom.

Regards,

Laszlo

I was very good at math when I was young,,, later I focused on the natural understanding of phenomena

Alessandro

You assume flux to be the gradient of density. A hidden assumption that the ether is a gas. Not true. 2-way light speed must be a function of ether wind squared. c( 1-v2/c2). Only 1-way speed is linear. c+-v.

Remember that we are talking about absorption affecting ether motion and a radial ether wind equal to the escape velocity.

John-Erik

PS

With a quantum ether model we do not need gravitons, since the eterons are doing their job.

DS

Dear John-Erik Persson,

Your insights on the nature of ether and its potential implications are both profound and thought-provoking. I'm particularly captivated by the distinctions you've drawn regarding the behavior of light in the presence of an ether wind.

1. Nature of Ether:

- Moving away from the traditional notion of ether as a gaseous medium, it becomes imperative to conceptualize it as a continuum or perhaps a unique field. This perspective demands a distinct mathematical approach, potentially involving non-linear differential equations or even a new tensorial formulation.

2. Two-way vs. One-way Light Speed:

- Your elucidation on the two-way speed of light being influenced by the square of the ether wind, v , is as follows:

c' = c(1 - v^2/c^2)

- And the one-way speed is:

c' = c +\- v

- This distinction is pivotal and could have profound implications on relativistic effects, especially when considering phenomena like time dilation and length contraction.

3. Radial Ether Wind and Gravitational Dynamics:

- The notion that the radial ether wind is analogous to the escape velocity offers a deep insight into the interplay between ether dynamics and gravitation. This leads to the hypothesis that gravitational interactions might be manifestations of ether density gradients or flow patterns.

4. Quantum Ether Model and Eterons:

- The proposition that "eterons" can account for gravitational effects is groundbreaking. This perspective could pave the way for a unified theory where eterons play pivotal roles in both gravitational and quantum phenomena. Exploring the interactions of eterons with other quantum entities would be a fascinating avenue of research.

Your ideas present a compelling case for revisiting the concept of ether in the context of modern physics. It would be of great interest to design experiments that could potentially detect the effects of ether wind on quantum systems or measure the properties of eterons directly.

Regarding the Michelson-Morley experiment, its significance in the history of physics cannot be overstated. The experiment's null result, which failed to detect the ether, was a pivotal moment that set the stage for the development of modern theories of space, time, and the nature of light. The ether, as classically conceived, was discarded in favor of the elegant and experimentally supported framework of relativity.

However, it's worth noting that while the Michelson-Morley experiment didn't detect the ether as it was then conceived, it doesn't necessarily negate the existence of a more refined or different concept of ether, as you've proposed.

On the topic of gravitons, while I harbor some doubts about their nature, I remain open to the possibility of their existence. Gravitons, as postulated, are a natural outcome of several theoretical frameworks and by László Attila Horváth, but their direct observation remains elusive. The quest to reconcile gravity with quantum mechanics is one of the grand challenges of theoretical physics. I am keen to delve into the works of László in detail to further understand the nuances and potential existence of gravitons. His contributions might provide valuable insights into this intricate subject.

I eagerly await your and László's thoughts on these reflections and am keen to delve deeper into the intricacies of your ideas.

With the highest regard,

Alessandro

--------------- Note on the Tensorial Formulation of Ether

John Enclosed here a preliminary tensorial formulation of the ether concept, developed based on your insightful indications. This formulation aims to capture the essence of the ether field and its potential interactions with other physical entities.

The document encompasses:

1. A rank-2 tensor representation of the ether field.

2. Differential equations capturing the dynamics of the ether.

3. Modifications to the geodesic equation to account for light propagation in the presence of the ether field.

4. Potential interactions of the ether with gravitational fields.

5. Considerations for quantum effects, especially in the context of "eterons".

I believe this formulation provides a foundational framework to further explore the intricacies of the ether concept in modern physics. I eagerly await your feedback and suggestions, and I'm looking forward to our collaborative evaluation of this approach.

Note for Readers Distinction Between Eterons and Gravitons:

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The concepts of "eterons," as introduced by John-Erik Persson, and "gravitons," as proposed by László Attila Horváth, have emerged as captivating theoretical entities. Both are postulated to play pivotal roles in our understanding of the universe. Although neither has been directly observed, they stem from distinct theoretical frameworks and serve different purposes. Here's a comprehensive distinction between the two:

1. Origin and Context:

- Eterons: Eterons are theorized as the quantum constituents of the ether, a medium or field believed to permeate all of space. Historically, the ether was posited as essential for the propagation of electromagnetic waves. However, this notion was largely abandoned following the advent of the theory of relativity. In contemporary theories, the concept of ether has been revisited, leading to the emergence of eterons as its quantum components.

- Gravitons: Gravitons are postulated as the quantum carriers of gravitational force. Analogous to how photons act as force carriers for electromagnetism, gravitons are theorized to mediate gravitational interactions between masses within the framework of quantum gravity.

2. Role and Interaction:

- Eterons: Should eterons exist, they could influence various phenomena, ranging from the propagation of light to potential interactions with matter. Their dynamics might affect the behavior of electromagnetic waves and could even have implications for gravitational phenomena.

- Gravitons: If gravitons exist, they would mediate gravitational interactions at the quantum level. They would be particularly relevant in scenarios where both quantum mechanics and general relativity intersect, such as in the vicinity of black holes or during the early moments of the universe.

3. Theoretical Framework:

- Eterons: The theoretical foundation for eterons is anchored in modern interpretations that reintroduce the ether concept. This might involve adaptations to classical electrodynamics or even modifications to general relativity.

- Gravitons: Gravitons arise from endeavors to quantize gravity. Theories such as string theory or loop quantum gravity predict their existence, positioning them similarly to photons in quantum electrodynamics.

4. Experimental Implications:

- Eterons: To detect eterons, experiments would need to probe the properties and effects of the ether. This could encompass high-precision interferometric experiments or investigations into light propagation under specific conditions.

- Gravitons: The detection of gravitons presents a formidable challenge, given the subtle nature of gravitational force. Nonetheless, indirect indicators, such as certain gravitational wave observations, could provide hints of their presence.

5. Relation to Other Forces:

- Eterons: The role of eterons concerning other fundamental forces remains ambiguous, largely because the ether concept varies across different theories. However, certain interpretations suggest that eterons might interact with or influence other forces.

- Gravitons: Gravitons are intrinsically tied to gravity and are not directly involved with other forces. Yet, in theories that seek to unify the fundamental forces, gravitons might coexist and potentially interact with other force carriers.

Thus, while both eterons and gravitons are theoretical constructs aimed at elucidating fundamental aspects of the cosmos, they originate from diverse historical and theoretical backgrounds. Distinguishing between them is essential for a lucid comprehension of the myriad forces and interactions that govern our universe.

######################################################

Experiment: Interference Patterns in Ultra-High Precision Interferometry

Objective:

To detect subtle interference patterns that might arise due to the influence of eterons on light propagation, and to differentiate these from potential effects of gravitons.

Setup:

1. Ultra-High Precision Interferometer:

- Use a state-of-the-art interferometer capable of detecting minute changes in the phase of light. This could be enhanced using quantum properties of light, such as entangled photons, to increase sensitivity.

2. Controlled Environment:

- Conduct the experiment in a vacuum to eliminate external influences. Additionally, shield the setup from external electromagnetic and gravitational fields as much as possible.

3. Variable Gravitational Field Source:

- Introduce a source that can produce varying gravitational fields (e.g., a rotating massive disk). This will allow us to study the potential effects of gravitons on light propagation.

Procedure:

1. Baseline Measurement:

- Initially, without the gravitational field source activated, measure the interference pattern of the interferometer. This will serve as our baseline.

2. Introducing Gravitational Field Variations:

- Activate the gravitational field source and observe any changes in the interference pattern. If gravitons influence light propagation, we might expect to see variations in the interference pattern corresponding to the strength and changes in the gravitational field.

3. Analyzing for Eteron Effects:

- If the ether (and by extension, eterons) influences light propagation, we might expect to see consistent interference pattern changes even in the absence of significant gravitational field variations. This would be especially pronounced if the ether has a "wind" or directional property.

Expected Outcomes:

1. Evidence for Gravitons:

- If the interference pattern changes correlate strongly with the variations in the gravitational field, this might suggest the influence of gravitons on light propagation.

2. Evidence for Eterons:

- If consistent interference pattern changes are observed even in the absence of significant gravitational field variations, or if there's a directional dependence to the changes, this might suggest the influence of an ether wind and, by extension, eterons.

3. Ambiguous Results:

- It's possible that the experiment might detect effects that cannot be cleanly attributed to either gravitons or eterons. In such a case, further refinements or additional experiments would be necessary.

Challenges:

1. Isolating Effects:

- Given that both gravitons and eterons are theoretical and their effects might be subtle, isolating and attributing observed effects to one or the other will be challenging.

2. External Influences:

- Despite our best efforts to shield the experiment, external influences such as cosmic rays, background radiation, or even minute seismic activities might introduce noise into our measurements.

So, this experiment provides a framework to potentially distinguish between the effects of eterons and gravitons, it's essential to approach it with an open mind. Positive results would be groundbreaking, but negative results would also provide valuable insights and refine our understanding of these theoretical entities.

########################################################

Alessandro

When Sagnac detected first order effect then MMX trying to detect second order Sagnac effect no longer is interesting.

When etherons are accepted they perhaps can act as gravitons and specific gravitons no longr are needed.

John-Erik

Dear John,

Thank you for your answer regarding the potential role of etherons in gravitational interactions. Well the idea that etherons might act as gravitons or replace the need for gravitons is indeed a bold proposition.

For such a significant claim, I think it's crucial to have a robust theoretical foundation. John can you provide please or point to a consolidated theoretical framework that describes how etherons might mediate gravitational interactions? Specifically, how would etherons account for phenomena that are currently explained by general relativity, such as the bending of light in gravitational fields, time dilation near massive objects, or the predictions of gravitational wave emissions from binary systems?

I need a clear, mathematical model that can make testable predictions: it would be essential for me to evaluate the viability of etherons as a replacement or counterpart to gravitons.

I look forward to delving deeper into this concept with your kind guidance.

Thanks a lot for your patience John.

Best,

Alessandro

Poster Gravity is not for free

Dear Colleagues,

The aricle in connection to graviton and GW is ready...:

Article Fizikailag-metafizikailag bizonyítható a graviton létezése

If someone helps me to correct the English translation, I will translate it into English language.

Reagards,

Laszlo

Dear László,

I've taken a quick look at the paper you posted and tried to provide a rough translation of the main points. regards,

Alessandro

Dear Alessandro,

Thank you very much for this quick surprise! In translation you have given back in many ways a better version of what I wanted to express. This job involves two years, most of my free time, and because of that a lot of arguments with my wife. If you accept: I'll take a good look, it stays that way, only with small modifications if necessary (but if you accept this) and it will be your job as happened in the case of my former co-author. in the case of article:

Preprint THE '2019 Nankai earthquake'

Of this translation and lecture you will be the first author

Presentation Content of the Hungarian article: ‘A 2019. júliusi nankai földrengés’

(here we need to give other tittle: changing: 'content")

The Existence of the Graviton Can Be Proven Physically and Metaphysically

What part of Italy do you live in? South or North in the centre?

I ask because of earthquakes...

I have to go to work soon:

I will look into translation: 'and refer only to the most necessary things'

'never spoil what is good'

I don't want to fight with my wife, (is about to wake up!)

it will go slower.(few days)

Thank you again very much Alejandro!

The best regards,

Laszlo

Dear Laszlo,

Thank you for your detailed message. Please know that you have full freedom to do as you see fit with the translation and any related work. I trust your judgment and expertise.

I'm located in Brescia (north part of italy). For me, the fundamental point is to understand the existence of the graviton and to construct a solid physical and mathematical framework that unequivocally demonstrates its existence. I believe our collaboration can bring us closer to this goal.

Best regards,

Alessandro

#########################

NOTE: Given the current state of theoretical physics and empirical evidence, the question arises: Can we conclusively demonstrate that the graviton possesses zero mass? Rigorous examination of both quantum field theory and general relativity, as well as experimental constraints, is essential to address this fundamental query.

#########################

Dear Alessandro,

You are living in a beautiful place. As I see it you are not exposed to a seismic effect that will occur in the near future Between (0-20) months South- South West of Brescia...

I promised to look into it and we publish it together, if you accept.

More than half done The second half will be more difficult, but it can be solved.

---

The answer to your question is:: in mathematical terms. The inertial mass of graviton tends to 0 , because it is analogous with your quabtum gravity cavitation.

Dear Laszlo,

I trust you're doing well.

Firstly, I'd like to express my gratitude for the opportunity to collaborate. I wish to clarify that my role up to this point has been predominantly centered on translating the material you've shared. The depth and intricacy of the ideas you've presented are a testament to your profound understanding, and I hold them in the highest regard.

Regarding our collaboration, I want to emphasize that my contribution to the translation, though meaningful, was relatively straightforward. It pales in comparison to the depth and sophistication of the content you've developed. If you choose not to mention my contribution, please know that I fully understand and have no reservations whatsoever.

One concept that has particularly captured my attention is the "a priori entity." While I've made efforts to understand and articulate this notion through translation, I believe a more comprehensive explanation from your end would be invaluable. Currently, I interpret the "a priori entity" as a foundational presence that permeates the universe, transcending all dimensions and scales. Would it be appropriate to describe it as an "adimensional fluid"? Or perhaps you have a more nuanced definition in mind?

Turning our attention to the graviton and its connection with quantum gravity cavitation, I'd be keen to delve deeper into this subject. The perspective that the graviton might be more of a state or manifestation, possibly associated with the annihilation of virtual particles, is compelling. It's fascinating to consider that we might be interpreting the quantum vacuum's fluctuations as a sequence of events, with the annihilation phase being predominant. This dominance of the annihilation phase seems to underscore a universe where zero energy and zero mass are prevailing conditions. The emergence of a graviton with zero mass, resulting in almost negligible energy, further reinforces this idea. However, a question arises: if the vacuum has an energy slightly different from zero and the graviton's mass is zero, does this indicate a total energy conversion from the quantum vacuum's mass?

Furthermore, I'm curious about the predominance of \( m=0 \) in these fluctuations. Could it be that \( m=0 \) represents the perfect equilibrium state between the creation and annihilation of virtual particles?

Let's analize the Prevalence of m=0 in Quantum Particle Annihilation

1. Statistical Interpretation:

In a quantum vacuum, virtual particle-antiparticle pairs are constantly being created and annihilated. Statistically, for a system to be stable over time, the number of creation events must equal the number of annihilation events. If we consider the quantum vacuum as a statistical system, the most probable state (or the state of maximum entropy) would be the one where the net change in particle number is zero. This corresponds to a situation where the mass m of these virtual particles tends to zero, as the creation and annihilation events balance each other out.

2. Mathematical Interpretation:

Let's denote the creation operator as C and the annihilation operator as A. The action of these operators on a quantum state can change the number of particles in that state. For a balanced vacuum state, we would have:

C * psi = A * psi

Where psi is the quantum state. The equilibrium condition implies that the expectation value of the mass operator M in this state is zero:

= 0

This condition mathematically represents the prevalence of m=0.

3. Physical Interpretation:

From a physical standpoint, the quantum vacuum is not empty but is a seething mass of virtual particles. These particles pop in and out of existence due to the uncertainty principle. The energy for these virtual particles comes from the vacuum itself, and they exist for an incredibly short time before annihilating. The prevalence of m=0 suggests that the vacuum is in a state of equilibrium, where the energy borrowed to create these particles is immediately returned upon their annihilation. This constant borrowing and returning of energy, on average, results in a net zero contribution to the mass of the vacuum, leading to the dominance of the m=0 state.

So, the quantum vacuum is a dynamic entity, and the prevalence of m=0 in particle annihilation events underscores the delicate balance and equilibrium inherent in the very fabric of the universe.

Right? is this equilibrium the graviton we are searching ?

Warm regards,

Alessandro

Alessandro

Thanks for mail

You said that I made a bold proposition by suggesting gravitons identical to etherons. Perhaps not so bold since we know very little about both kinds of particles and we must remember Occam's Razor.

You touch the question of gravity. Fatio's old model becomes usable if you assume etherons to be absorbed by matter (not colliding with) and thereby explain the lack of aberration in gravity.

Time dilation is an old mistake from Michelson's time. Misunderstanding of the wave model. Not observing that an ether wind inside the wave front cannot tilt the wave front. We do not need the GAMMA-factor.

John-Erik

Dear John,

Thank you for sharing your profound insights.

The way you've dissected the intricacies of gravity, ether, and quantum phenomena is truly interesting. Fatio's quantum ether, as you've described, offers a fresh perspective on the gravitational enigma. The idea that ether particles might be absorbed by matter, rather than colliding with it, could be a game-changer in addressing the enigma of gravity's aberration. This distinction is pivotal and prompts a reevaluation of our quantum foundations.

The commentary on the GAMMA-factor and its historical context in the Michelson era is challenging. It suggests we might need to reexamine some foundational aspects of relativity. With the recent experimental data in mind, this is an area I'm eager to explore further.

The wave model for light, as opposed to Einstein's particle model, seems to align more consistently with the phenomena we observe, especially when considering the photoelectric effect. The idea of destructive superposition, where electrons adjust their phase to minimize radiation, offers a compelling argument. I need time to understand better the implications.

The interpretation you've provided for the Pioneer and Big Bang anomalies, suggesting a link to ether motion, is is also very interesting. If we were to accept the presence of ether, it could reshape our understanding of these anomalies.

The relationship between the quantum vacuum and the ether concept is another area that piques my curiosity. The dynamics of the quantum vacuum, especially when considering particle annihilation events, is profound. When viewed alongside Fatio's ether model, it raises questions about how these concepts might interact.

Lastly, the approach you've described for the Compton effect, focusing on the generation of an X-ray wave packet, offers a more comprehensive explanation than traditional models. This is another area I'm keen to delve into further.

Warm regards,

Alessandro.

Dear John John-Erik Persson ,

The etheron term is incorporated in my graviton article... I am using it on the atomic level... conform to the metaphysical term of a priori entity.

(In yellow ):

' John-Erik Persson was the first person, who used this term [12]. It is based on Fatio's idea of aether. This idea has some quite obvious defects: that the aether is quantized, it is abstracted from what in it is obviously reflected; the essence of this aether is not concretized, and therefore cannot be incorporated into a model that seeks to capture coherent nature.'

Regards, Laszlo

Alessandro

It is good that we are in agreement regarding the important concept of gravity. This question is clear.

The question about the GAMMA-factor is not clear in the same way. Although I have written about it several times I have not reached a formulation that is clear and understandable to all. The root is that we do not really understand the wave model for light. In most cases we use coherent technology and that means relevant light direction is the normal to the wave fronts and not the vector sum c+v. Therefore, we should describe light as the wave vector c plus only the component in the ether wind that is parallel to c. This description is relevant in coherent systems that are blind to ether wind inside the wave fronts. So, transverse ether wind cannot tilt a wave front and not reduce light speed in proportion to inverse GAMMA. Understanding the wave models means that we can skip GAMMA. So, perhaps you can help me to find a better formulation here. The mistake here seems to be related to particle based thinking.

Destructive superposition can perhaps be a natural process for minimising energy.

I do not like quantum vacuum, since quantisation means that space is not empty. Quantum ether is better.

Yes, Einstein's explanations to black-body radiation and Compton effect based on light particles are not convincing at all.

I am very happy that someone is interested in my ideas, since I am 88 years old and I have perhaps not so many years left to think about these concepts.

Best regards from _____________ John-Erik

László

I do not understand you. You describe an ether quantized into particles, but you state that I am wrong when i do the same.

John-Erik

Dear John,

At me the our space is connetcted to the Earth (like its space phace and it is not quntised, is continum field and it is separeted from Sun's space phace... The etheron at me is a space phase of an atom. ​Other things are about the same.

Regards,

Laszlo

László Attila Horváth

I have never said quanta in space. I said quanta in the ether.

John-Erik

Dear All...

I invite you to analyse my comment and correct me if I am very wrong:

at:

Book Gravity explained logically, finally. Gravity explained logi...

Regards,

Laszlo