The concept of gravity as an emergent phenomenon suggests that gravity might arise from more fundamental interactions rather than being a fundamental force itself. Historically, Newton described gravity without a mechanism, and Fatio proposed particle-based ideas which were not accepted. Modern theories explore emergent gravity, but current mainstream physics understands gravity through Einstein's general relativity, which describes it as the curvature of spacetime rather than an emergent effect from interactions with an ether.

Classical gravity, like all classical phenomena, is emergent, it’s just not yet understood how. Newton understood gravity perfectly well, he provided an expression for the gravitational interaction that does describe what can be observed and Einstein provided the framework for understanding how Newton’s law can be understood as a particular limit thereof. What is still missing is an understanding of how Einstein’s framework emerges as a limiting case, when quantum fluctuations must be taken into account.

If gravity is identical to the acceleration of the Universe it is fundamental. Why this exception in the first place? (15) Newton's gravity might come in two forms: non-local and local. | LinkedIn

Ram Bharosha Tiwari

current mainstream physics understands gravity through Einstein's general relativity,

This is based on Newton's mistake by regarding his own law to describe an attracting force. So, mainstream is wrong - and you also.

John-Erik

Stam Nicolis

Newton did not understand gravity - Fatio did.

John-Erik

Warren Frisina

Gravity and acceleration are not identical. Instead the magnitudes of their forces are equal.

All the best ______________________ John-Erik

Stam Nicolis Ram Bharosha Tiwari Warren Frisina Reg Cahill

Newton did not understand his law. 2 bodies cannot attract each other, since without information about each other no one can define the product needed for defining gravity. The ether has needed information to cause gravy to emerge inside both bodies.

All the best

I see you were not able to reach the reference. You might try this one: (14) (PDF) Particles from Gravity (May 30, 2024) (researchgate.net)

Warren Frisina

I could not find it

John-Erik

Fatio had a speculation about the cause of gravity. So did Newton which is found in his queries in his book "Opticks". Newton suggested an aether. Newton's concept went far further than Fatio's because Newton linked the aether with light diffraction. Particles (photons and other bodies) cause waves in the aether which travel faster (can overtake light in Newton's book) than light and directs light/bodies. The effect on bodies is gravity in the classical scale.

Further note: Newton denotes 3 aspects of body effects not just the 1 called "mass" (which was a deviation physics made from Newton and caused great lessening of Newton's concepts).

The 3 are: (1) a body causes a warping (bodies are sinks Warren Frisina ) in the aether (gravitation mass) which travels faster than light (van Flandern, et al.) (2) the gradient of the aether density exerts a force (weight) on a body related to the surface area. (3) The body tends to remain in a state and resists the weight of the aether (inertial mass).

SUMMARY

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344442808_Scalar_Theory_of_Everything_STOE_unites_the_big_the_small_and_the_four_forces_GUT_by_extending_Newton's_model?_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6InF1ZXN0aW9uIiwicGFnZSI6InByb2ZpbGUiLCJwcmV2aW91c1BhZ2UiOiJwcm9maWxlIiwicG9zaXRpb24iOiJwYWdlQ29udGVudCJ9fQ

Dear John ( John-Erik Persson ),

I think the answer is simple, if we get a positive result in the case of the following experiment:

Research Proposal:

Research Proposal Addendum to 'A Simple Experiment to Support an EM Gravity Theory'

Yesterday (02.07.2024) I have made a new picture for a better understanding (attached file)

Regards,

Laszlo

P.S: For example what do you predict for the mentioned experiment result?

John Hodge

van Flandern was wrong. Gravity does not travel faster than light. Gravity does not travel at all. Gravity is an emergent effect. It is caused by the ether.

John-Erik

John-Erik Persson

Then you should explain the results of his experiment!

John Hodge

I have explained van Flandern's results many times. In short: gravity emerges inside matter. Lack of aberration proves this idea. Details in attachment.

John-Erik

John-Erik Persson

That is NOT an explanation of van Flandern's experiment.

Flandern suggested 1998 an extreme speed of gravity

John-Erik Persson

Thank you, John-Erik, for raising this intriguing question about gravity as an emergent phenomenon. Your reference to historical perspectives and the idea of ether particles interacting with matter to explain gravity is thought-provoking.

The notion that gravity might be an emergent phenomenon is indeed a fascinating area of discussion. Modern theoretical physics explores this idea through various frameworks. For instance, emergent gravity theories, such as those proposed by Erik Verlinde and others, suggest that gravity might not be a fundamental force but rather an emergent property arising from the collective behaviour of underlying microscopic degrees of freedom.

Your point about stability in planetary orbits and the idea of ether particles being absorbed by matter presents an interesting perspective. It’s worth noting that contemporary physics, including the theory of general relativity, describes gravity as a curvature of spacetime rather than a force transmitted through ether. However, the idea that gravity could emerge from more fundamental interactions, such as those involving quantum entanglement or information theory, is an active area of research.

Sandeep Jaiswal

Thank you for taking interest in an important question.

I think that interaction between ether particles and matter has been misunderstood and regarded as collisions. Instead, interactions by absorption and emission can explain no aberration.

This also means that the ether concept is needed and based on particles. Therefore, absorption is important.

From ____________ John-Erik

Dear John-Erik Persson

I will soon have a video of my already mentioned experiment,,,

What result would you expect from the experiment with your theory?

The electromagnetic gravity theory I formulated expects a clear result.

Eibstein would expect the same result as I do.

Thefirst variant of theory of gravity this was formulated in 2009, before Verlinde...

Article Tényekkel igazolható a gravitáció valós oka

It was extended:

Article Gravity a paradym shift in reasoning

Extended:

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

It includes Newton's ideas (also the optical ones, it was a mistake not to keep this idea), Einstein's concept. And so is your vision, John.

It depends on your forecast!

It seemed that Verlinde was inspired by my theory, but he did not mention it. He went in the wrong direction.

Regards,

Laszlo

Dear John-Erik Persson , as I promissed I have made a simple presentation with an video on my YouTube Chanel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5dZ3VQXf6A

What result would you expect from the experiment with your theory?

You should have done it a long time ago!

Regards,

Laszlo

László Attila Horváth

You suggest a simple and theoretically correct test, but perhaps it is difficult to do in practice. I am 89 years of age and I am not an experimenter.

John-Erik

John-Erik Persson

Thank you for your thoughtful follow-up on the concept of ether particles and their role in gravity. Your clarification that interactions involve absorption rather than direct collisions adds an interesting dimension to the discussion about gravity as an emergent phenomenon.

The idea that gravity might emerge from the interaction of ether particles with matter, rather than from a direct force, opens up several intriguing avenues for exploration. Here are some specific aspects and questions I’d like to delve into further:

Your perspective on gravity as an emergent phenomenon driven by ether interactions offers a valuable alternative to current models. I’m keen to understand how your ideas might fit into the broader context of gravitational theories and contribute to ongoing research in this field. Looking forward to your further elaborations and insights.

Best regards,

Sandeep Jaiswal

Dear Sandeep Jaiswal ,

I formulated the experiment in a simpler form...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C219qZU9dOU

The idea is based on an idea related to the electromagnetic-gravitational field, where with the help of a metaphysical concept, since there was no other option, the real physical field was modeled... And we got a graviton, etheron (photon), (The etheron I have to thank toJohn, but my Etheron is not similar to the 'ether' of Earth)

Raw Data Fizikailag-metafizikailag bizonyítani lehet a graviton létezésesét

Regards,

Laszlo

Sandeep Jaiswal

Different theories can have the same predictions. So mainstream does the error of stop searching when they have found a working theory. So, even if you have a good theory there always my be a better theory.

John-Erik

Sandeep Jaiswal

Absorption (instead of collisions) can explain no aberration. Absorption means that a reduced number of particles leaves a body, so s radial ether wind is caused and this explains gravity. This radial ether wind can be very large for large celest bodies and this can also explain the cosmological red shift as a second order Doppler effect. Absorption can be reversed and continuity can be explained by emission.

I regard gravitational waves as only wishful thinking.

The ether is important and explain gravity, reference for light speed, cosmological red shift and Pioneer anomaly.

The ether concept was denied just because it was difficult. This was a scandal.

I think that quantum physics is wrong ans that quantisation is needed only in the ether - not in light and not in energy.

John-Erik

Sandeep Jaiswal

Different theories with the same prediction can explain the alleged dilation of time in Einsteins theory as an illusion due errors in atomic clocks in the GPS system.

MMX for 2-way light: 1/T proportional 1-v^2/c^2

Bound electron move forth and back in the ether wind in 1 dimension of 2.

So: f proportional to 1-2v^2//c^2 for atomic clocks

See attachment

John-Erik

John-Erik Persson

Thank you for your detailed reply and the additional information on how different theories, including your ether-based model, can explain phenomena typically attributed to time dilation in Einstein's theory of relativity.

Your suggestion that the alleged time dilation observed in atomic clocks, such as those used in the GPS system, could be an illusion caused by errors linked to ether wind effects is quite intriguing. The idea that atomic clocks may be influenced by their motion through an ether medium, resulting in frequency shifts, adds a new layer to the discussion.

Key Points to Explore:

Could you elaborate on how the ether wind interacts with atomic clocks? Specifically, how does the motion of bound electrons forth and back in the ether wind result in frequency shifts? How does this mechanism quantitatively align with the observed time dilation effects in GPS systems?

In Einstein's general relativity, time dilation is a consequence of the curvature of spacetime due to gravity and the relative velocities of observers. How does your ether-based explanation reconcile with the vast body of experimental evidence supporting general relativity? Are there specific predictions or scenarios where your model diverges from general relativity, potentially offering testable differences?

What specific experiments or observations could be conducted to distinguish between time dilation caused by ether wind effects and that predicted by general relativity? Have there been any historical or recent experiments that hint at anomalies explainable by your model?

How does your model of ether interactions address gravitational phenomena beyond time dilation, such as gravitational waves or the bending of light by gravity? Could your ether model offer new insights into unresolved issues in modern physics, such as dark matter or dark energy?

Your approach provides a fascinating alternative perspective on gravitational and relativistic phenomena. By further detailing and clarifying the mechanisms behind your ether wind theory and its implications, we can better understand how it fits within or challenges current scientific paradigms.

Best regards,

Sandeep Jaiswal

Could you elaborate on how the ether wind interacts with atomic clocks?

Sandeep Jaiswal

i have explained that in the attached article about clocks. I compared with Michelson Morley's tests.