In my view space is full of graviton that they work like a fluid flow, and are layer by layer. Density of graviton is changeable relative to distance of bodies. So, without description the photon-graviton interaction, we cannot resolve problem of space-time

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309153372_What_is_CPH_Theory?ev=prf_pub

Article What is CPH Theory?

Fluids don't propagate transverse wave modes but light is polarised hence must be transverse.

Dear George

You are right transverse wave, but authors in this article have mentioned "... it must be a very special liquid indeed." Please see first paragraph of the following link:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/superfluid-spacetime-relativity-quantum-physics/

But in CPH Theory, space is like an ocean of gravitons and gravitons and photons interact with each other. This action caused transfer of transverse electromagnetic waves.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308890409_Photon-Graviton_Interaction_and_CPH_Theory?ev=prf_pub

Article Photon-Graviton Interaction and CPH Theory

Gravitons are massless so cannot interact, and if you propose something similar with mass then you won't get an inverse square law for Newtonian gravity. To explain light, you need whatever particles to be rigidly bound and unmoving, but then you need another force to bind them, you can't use EM forces obviously or you get a circular argument.

Dear George

Massless of photon and graviton are assumption only, There are good theoretical reasons to believe that the photon mass should be exactly zero, there is no experimental proof of this belief,

Hojman, S. A., & Koch, B. (2013). Closing a window for massive photons. Advances in High Energy Physics, 2013.

These efforts show there is an upper bound on the photon mass, although the amount is very small, but not zero. The tight experimental upper bound of the photon mass restricts the kinematically allowed final states of photon decay to the lightest neutrino and/or particles beyond the Standard Model

Heeck, J. (2013). How stable is the photon? Physical review letters, 111(2), 021801

Theories and experiments have not limited to photons and graviton will also be included. For gravity there have been vigorous debates about even the concept of graviton rest mass

Goldhaber, A. S., & Nieto, M. M. (2010). Photon and graviton mass limits. Reviews of Modern Physics, 82(1), 939

There are a lot unanswered questions and complex concepts in theoretical physics that the standard model and relativity do not have answers for and the physicists believe that it is due to the inability of theories

Kane, G. (2003). The dawn of physics beyond the standard model

So, we need new definitions of photon and graviton, for more detail please see foloowing articles:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308960493_Generalization_of_the_Dirac%27s_Equation_and_Sea?ev=prf_pub

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306271544_Infrastructure_of_CPH_theory_Force_from_Aristotle_to_Modern_Physics?ev=prf_pub

Deleted research item The research item mentioned here has been deleted

Article Infrastructure of CPH theory, Force from Aristotle to Modern Physics

HJ: Massless of photon and graviton are assumption only, There are good theoretical reasons to believe that the photon mass should be exactly zero,..

Right, and the same is true for the graviton.

HJ: there is no experimental proof of this belief,

You next go on to list some of those proofs, for example:

HJ: Hojman, S. A., & Koch, B. (2013). Closing a window for massive photons. Advances in High Energy Physics, 2013.

HJ: These efforts show there is an upper bound on the photon mass, although the amount is very small, but not zero.

Correct, and that will always be the case because all real-world measurements have some uncertainty. The important point is that while there is an upper bound, there is no lower bound, so all the experimental results are consistent with a mass of exactly zero.

Dear George

There is two uncertainties in particle physics:

First, massless particles

As we know, some particles such as photons are never seen at rest in any reference frame. So, there are two kinds of particles in physics;

1- Some particles like the photon move only with the speed of light c, in all inertial reference frames. Let’s call these kinds of particles the NR-particles or Never at Rest condition particles.

2- Other particles like the electron always move with the speed v

Of course when we say "particles" then these can be equivalently seen as manifestations of fields, we have no disagreement there, and those that move at speed c must be massless while those that move slower must have mass. Nothing you said conflicts with my understanding.

Dear George

I appreciate you honestly respond.

Perhaps seems these argument be same, but the results are not the same.

At the beginning of the 20th century, Newton’s second law was corrected considering the limit speed c and the relativistic mass. At that time there has not been a clear understanding of the subatomic particles and basically there was little research in high energy physics. Moreover, the approach of relativity toward the physical phenomena is hyper structural and explains the observations of the observer while there is little consideration to the intrinsic entity of the phenomena. However, in CPH Theory, through various arguments and investigation of some physical phenomena, it has been attempted to show the necessity of reviewing Newton’s second law. Today Physics literature faces numerous problems and questions that without considering the internal structure of the particles, they would remain unanswered.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309153372_What_is_CPH_Theory?ev=prf_pub

Article What is CPH Theory?

Relativistic mass is now considered anachronistic, it is a misleading concept. Relativity revises the second law by noting that the acceleration measured by an accelerometer is not the same as the second derivative of location as measured by an inertial observer.

Classical mechanics and relativity (special and general) describe the acceleration is an explanation of outward of phenomena regardless of the properties of sub quantum scales. It should be noted that the interaction between large objects (e.g. collision of two bodies) under the action of the quantum layer (in fact sub quantum layer) done. In sub quantum level, the amount of speed is constant, in any condition and any space, and in any interaction linear momentum changes to nonlinear momentum and vice versa. According to SQE, we are able to show there is not a zero volume with infinite density in singularity also before the Big Bang. So, regardless to reconsidering the relativistic Newton's second law, how can we resolve the dark energy problem?

Perhaps still in the aftershocks of the Big Bang to take over the universe. In addition, there is no proof for the existence, be limited to the observable universe, or owes its existence not earlier collapse.

Hi dear all:

The question is: How do we know that space-time is a curvature?

Because, the experience shows that the path of light is not direct in gravitational field and it’s in fact a curvature.

But, there is no matter in the space, however, there exist effect of mass (material) in the space that is called gravitation. On the other hand, according to quantum field theories, the carrier of gravitational force is Graviton. Therefore, in order to describe the curvature of space-time, we must investigate interaction between Graviton and photon.

Thus, to combine quantum mechanics and general relativity, there is just one way and that is investigating the physical phenomena by means of Graviton. From one side, since the old definition of Graviton could not solve this problem, CPH theory solved this problem by a new definition of Graviton.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309153372_What_is_CPH_Theory?ev=prf_pub

Article What is CPH Theory?

Quantum gravity is a part of quantum mechanics which is expected to combine these two theories, and it describes gravity force according to the principles of quantum mechanics which has not got the desired result, yet.

If graviton be able to describe physical phenomena that are regarding with gravity, so we should accept it exists.

In CPH theory, after reconsidering and analyzing the behavior of photon in the gravitational field, a new definition of graviton (carrying the gravity force) is given. By using this definition, graviton exchange mechanism between bodies/objects is described. As the purpose of quantum gravity is describing the force of gravity by using the principles of quantum mechanics, all the large bodies such as stars and galaxies which are made up of atoms and elementary particles, quantum gravity should explain the graviton exchange mechanism between atoms and elementary particles, too. In the previous paper (first part), a new definition of the relationship has been given in which the relation between gravity (graviton) and electromagnetic (photon) have been described. In this part, the graviton exchange mechanism in the beneath of layer were studied and analyzed and it finally has been tried to generalize and extend the graviton exchange mechanism from between particles and atoms to large bodies.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/310457967_The_Mechanism_of_Graviton_Exchange_between_Bodies_Part_II?ev=prf_pub

Article The Mechanism of Graviton Exchange between Bodies, Part II

Dear Hossein,

the Hyperfluid hypothesys is verified since the Gravitational waves experimentally found recently have been calculated under that HP.

As George said, it is not a fluid which would not have the due characteristics to drive EM waves.

It is not even the space-time, because the calculations of the GW waves were made with a stationary Hyperfluid in harmonic coordinates...

Dear Stefano

Thank you.

It is interesting this attempt but not satisfactory..

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1051/1/012024/pdf

Thank you for the link.

Hi Hossein

the Spacetime is a Superfluid, and It can Unify Physics.

the superfluid is the CMB.

please see the papers:

http://viXra.org/abs/1704.0082 , Waver /particle

http://viXra.org/abs/1704.0027 Unification

http://viXra.org/abs/1704.0041?ref=9321691 … Hubble constant

http://viXra.org/abs/1705.0155 Big-Bang

and send me comments please.

Seyed

Dear Hossein,

the HP of c being the same for every IRF at the base of the Minkowski picture, makes every IRF to be a sort of an independent system which clashes with a unitary concept of an Hyperfluid in Hyperspace.

There is a degree of freedom which is missing which allows to make the connection between schizofrenic IRFs.

Dear Stefano

Thank you for the mentions.

Dear George,

Exactly, the relavistic mass does not explain the journey of no return of the photon from a black hole.

Actually a photon is unable to exit the black hole because of the speed of rotation of the black hole

It is interesting this one....

From Navier-Stokes To Einstein  https://arxiv.org/abs/1101.2451

https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/10330319

there is an hyperfluid or hypermedium...

GR with its diffeomorphism manages to describe in its static state like a slice in its evolution...