I Believe One can have Gravity Without Time-dilation

I Believe One can have Gravity Without Time-dilation

2024 May 28

Time-dilation alone is not only insufficient for gravity, but mechanistically unnecessary for gravity.

Gravity the mutual seeming redirection of masses across/through space.
If space is simply redistributed inequitably (reduced) around masses in a standard graduated manner the effect of redirection would hold imo.

Take a rubber sheet and mark it with Cartesian grid lines.

We'll say this is incredible rubber that even when squished/scrunched together or stretched does so with perfect uniformity & without wrinkles (it just gets thicker or thinner).

Now at some circumference around a point (mass) we draw all that circle together to a single point, essentially removing the interior of the circle functionally from the sheet.
All the lines that intersected with the original circle would all come-together/converge at a single point.

On the cardinal(?) lines one wouldn't see a change but the former parallel lines proximate to the circle would have inward detours as they got nearer to the newly created point.

I believe that gives a good approximation of gravitational trajectories.

Now think about objects moving along those trajectories themselves having their own drawn together effects on the sheet and i think one gets a good correlary of gravity.

And time dilation is only an independent adjunct to the primary gravity function.

Now in actual physics time and space are inseparably joined, but for the purpose of gravity space shrinkage is by itself sufficient to the task.

Not sure if there are any major flaws in this imaginary illustration, but any intellectual critiques are welcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Space Ponder
Jan 2, 2024
222
31
110
Visit site
Does the process of shrinkage not require time to happen? this is from a 3D perspective.
From a 4D perspective, the shrinkage is a completely static 'picture, including the pre- and post.
 
Time has to pass for movement/changes to happen,
but shrunken space is sort of existential to [the] masses.
A moving mass body would have the shrinkage follow it, but existentially it is just statically there.
 
Honestly i wonder if two mass bodies could be perfectly motionless if there would be any demonstrable movement caused by gravity in actual physics.
If i were perfectly motionless 50 feet above the surface of a perfectly motionless Earth would i fall?
Is it only because of constant movement noise everywhere that the reconciliation of reduced space actually happens?
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts