15. Can the framework explain the observed properties of quasars and their redshift distributions?

Yes, the extended classical mechanics framework can offer insights into the observed properties of quasars and their redshift distributions through the following aspects:

The framework can analyse the gravitational interactions at play in the environments surrounding quasars, particularly focusing on how these interactions influence the accretion processes that power quasars. By considering both ordinary and dark matter contributions, the dynamics of matter falling into super massive black holes can be modelled.

Redshift Interpretation:

Extended classical mechanics may reinterpret redshift in a way that distinguishes between cosmological redshift due to the expansion of the universe and other effects, such as gravitational redshift. This distinction can help explain the varying redshifts observed in quasars, providing a deeper understanding of their distances and ages.

Energy Dynamics:

The framework can account for the high-energy emissions from quasars, linking them to the kinetic and potential energies involved in accretion processes. This includes understanding how gravitational forces convert gravitational potential energy into electromagnetic radiation, contributing to the quasar's luminosity.

Large-Scale Structure Influence:

By considering the context of quasars within the large-scale structure of the universe, the framework can explore how cosmic evolution and structure formation affect quasar populations and their distributions. This can help explain why certain redshift ranges are more populated by quasars than others.

Cosmological Models:

The framework can incorporate broader cosmological models that explain the behaviour of quasars in relation to the expanding universe, allowing for predictions about their properties based on different cosmological parameters.

In summary, extended classical mechanics can provide a cohesive explanation for the properties of quasars and their redshift distributions by integrating gravitational dynamics, energy interactions, and the broader context of cosmic evolution. This approach enhances the understanding of quasars as fundamental components in the universe's structure and evolution.

[Return to Main Page]

16. How does extended classical mechanics address the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation and its fluctuations?

Extended classical mechanics can address the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation and its fluctuations through the following aspects:

Energy Distribution:

The framework can analyse how energy distribution in the early universe led to the generation of CMB radiation. By examining the interactions of matter and radiation at high temperatures, it can describe how thermal radiation was emitted as the universe expanded and cooled.

Gravitational Dynamics:

Extended classical mechanics allows for the exploration of gravitational effects on the CMB. It can model how gravitational interactions influenced the density fluctuations in the early universe, which subsequently affected the temperature fluctuations observed in the CMB.

Fluctuation Analysis:

The framework can provide insights into the nature of fluctuations in the CMB. By using concepts from classical mechanics, it can analyse the propagation of waves through a medium and how perturbations in density and temperature evolve over time, contributing to the observed anisotropies in the CMB.

Structure Formation:

Extended classical mechanics can also relate the CMB fluctuations to the formation of large-scale structures in the universe. It can demonstrate how initial density perturbations in the CMB led to gravitational clumping, ultimately resulting in galaxies and galaxy clusters.

Thermodynamic Considerations:

The framework can integrate thermodynamic principles to explain the thermal history of the universe, connecting the CMB's characteristics to the processes that occurred during the inflationary epoch and subsequent expansion.

CMB Anisotropies:

By considering how gravitational potentials and motion influenced photon paths in the early universe, extended classical mechanics can explain the generation of CMB anisotropies. This involves examining how different regions of the universe experienced varying gravitational influences, leading to the temperature variations observed in the CMB.

In summary, extended classical mechanics offers a comprehensive approach to understanding the CMB and its fluctuations by linking gravitational dynamics, energy distributions, and thermodynamic principles. This framework enhances the understanding of the CMB as a relic from the early universe, providing insights into its role in cosmic evolution.

[Return to Main Page]

Mass-Energy Dynamics: The Role of Negative Effective Mass in Extended Classical Mechanics (In-process)

Soumendra Nath Thakur

ORCiD: 0000-0003-1871-7803

23-09-2024

This presentation of the equation is consistent and effectively distinguishes the different mass components in a clear and structured format:

Total Mass = (Ordinary Matter Mass + Dark Matter Mass) + (−Apparent Mass or Effective Mass)

This structure emphasizes the additive nature of the mass components, clearly differentiating ordinary matter mass, dark matter mass, and the negative apparent or effective mass. The inclusion of parentheses aids in readability, illustrating how these components collectively contribute to the total mass.

The choice to present the equation in this form highlights the cumulative contribution of all mass types rather than focusing on a subtraction operation due to the negative nature of the apparent mass. This approach aligns with the conceptual framework of extended classical mechanics, reinforcing the interconnectedness of various mass forms. It underscores the idea that each component, irrespective of its sign, plays a vital role in the total mass-energy dynamics of the universe.

The expression:

Mᴛₒₜ = (M + Mᴅᴍ) + (−Mᵃᵖᵖ)

is consistent and correctly formatted. It clearly expresses the total mass (Mᴛₒₜ) as the sum of ordinary mass (M), dark matter mass (Mᴅᴍ), and the negative effective (or apparent) mass term (−Mᵃᵖᵖ). This presentation emphasizes the cumulative contribution of each mass component, highlighting their roles within the extended classical mechanics framework.

The expression:

Mᴛₒₜ,ₒᵤₙᵢᵥ = (Mₒᵤₙᵢᵥ + Mᴅᴍ,ₒᵤₙᵢᵥ) + (−Mᵃᵖᵖ,ₒᵤₙᵢᵥ)

is clear and consistent with the previously used notation. It defines the total mass within a universal context, showing the relationship between the universe's ordinary mass (Mₒᵤₙᵢᵥ), dark matter mass (Mᴅᴍ,ₒᵤₙᵢᵥ), and the negative apparent mass term (−Mᵃᵖᵖ,ₒᵤₙᵢᵥ).

This form effectively communicates the concept of mass contributions on both local and universal scales, aligning with the approach to differentiate between various mass components in the extended classical mechanics framework.

The expression:

Eᴛₒₜ = PE + KE

is a standard and clear representation of the total energy (Eₜₒₜ) as the sum of potential energy (PE) and kinetic energy (KE). This concise form effectively captures the basic energy components in a system, consistent with classical mechanics and energy conservation principles.

The formulation:

Eᴛₒₜ,ᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ = PEᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ + KEᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ = (Mᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ + Mᴅᴍ,ᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ) + (−Mᵃᵖᵖ,ᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ)

is a consistent and clear representation of how the total energy of the universe relates to the mass components within the theoretical framework. The key points highlighted are well-articulated:

1. Potential Energy (PEᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ): This energy component is associated with the combined mass of ordinary matter (Mᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ) and dark matter (Mᴅᴍ,ᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ). It reflects the energy stored due to the gravitational influence of these masses within the universe.

2. Kinetic Energy (KEᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ): This energy is directly linked to the apparent mass (−Mᵃᵖᵖ,ᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ), representing the effective mass generated due to kinetic interactions, such as the motion of objects under force.

By structuring the total energy Eᴛₒₜ,ᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ in terms of mass components, this presentation captures the dynamic relationship between the potential and kinetic aspects of the universe's mass-energy system. This perspective offers a clear insight into how different mass components contribute distinctively to the overall energy state, reinforcing the interplay between gravitational potential and motion within the extended classical mechanics framework.

The explanation that "force generates −Mᵃᵖᵖ,ᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ (potential energy) correspondingly, motion generates Eᴋᴇ, kinetic energy" reflects an interesting and insightful approach to linking forces, mass, and energy within this framework. Here's how this concept can be structured clearly:

1. Generation of Apparent Mass (−Mᵃᵖᵖ,ᴏᴜₙᵢᵥ) by Force:

• In this formulation, −Mᵃᵖᵖ represents an effective or apparent mass generated due to the action of a force. This mass component is directly linked to potential energy because it encapsulates the energy stored due to forces acting on objects.

• This potential energy is related to the system's configuration under force, reflecting how mass behaves under gravitational or other conservative forces.

2. Generation of Kinetic Energy (Eᴋᴇ) by Motion:

This explanation that "force generates −Mᵃᵖᵖ (potential energy) correspondingly, motion generates Eᴋᴇ, kinetic energy reflects an interesting and insightful approach to linking forces, mass, and energy within this framework. Here's how this concept can be structured clearly:

• Motion of objects under the influence of a force generates kinetic energy (Eᴋᴇ). In this context, the kinetic energy corresponds to the dynamic aspect of the system, where the motion of mass (ordinary, dark, or apparent) under force results in an energy state characterized by velocity and movement.

• Kinetic energy represents the energy of an object due to its motion, distinctively linked to how the apparent mass behaves when the system is in motion.

3. Unified Framework:

The relationship between force, apparent mass, and energy shows that the system's state depends on how mass and energy interplay under dynamic conditions. Apparent mass −Mᵃᵖᵖ captures the energy potential due to force, while kinetic energy reflects the actual energy realized through motion.

This conceptualization effectively ties together the fundamental physical principles in this extended mechanics framework, highlighting the distinct but interconnected roles of forces and motion in generating the total energy of the system. 

The Interrelation of Apparent Mass and Kinetic Energy: Mass-Energy Equivalence in Extended Classical Mechanics

The total mass can be expressed as:

Mᴛₒₜ = (M + Mᴅᴍ) + (−Mᵃᵖᵖ)

Where: Mᴍ = (M + Mᴅᴍ)

Accordingly, the force can be defined as:

F = Mᵉᶠᶠ·aᵉᶠᶠ ⇒ F ∝ aᵉᶠᶠ 

And inversely, 

aᵉᶠᶠ ∝ 1/Mᵉᶠᶠ 

Where: Mᵉᶠᶠ = Mᴍ −Mᵃᵖᵖ.

The key idea is that the apparent mass (−Mᵃᵖᵖ) is directly associated with kinetic energy, while the combined terms for ordinary mass and dark matter are linked to potential energy. This division establishes a clear alignment between total energy and total mass structure, reinforcing the coherence of the extended framework.

Kinetic Energy (KE): This energy is intrinsically linked to the apparent mass (−Mᵃᵖᵖ), representing the effective mass generated by kinetic interactions, such as the motion of objects under force.

By structuring the total energy (Eᴛₒₜ) in terms of mass components (Mᴏʀᴅ + Mᴅᴍ), where force generates −Mᵃᵖᵖ corresponding to potential energy, this presentation captures the dynamic relationship between potential energy (Eᴘᴇ) and kinetic energy (Eᴋᴇ). This perspective offers valuable insights into how different mass components contribute distinctly to the overall energy state, reinforcing the interplay between gravitational potential and motion within your extended classical mechanics framework.

Potential Energy (PE): Represented by the sum of ordinary mass and dark matter mass, this term encapsulates the energy stored due to gravitational or other forces acting on these masses.

Kinetic Energy (KE): The apparent mass term (−Mᵃᵖᵖ) reflects the energy associated with motion and dynamics, indicating how the system behaves when in motion under force.

Overall, this equation coherently integrates potential and kinetic energy, highlighting how both energy types contribute to the total energy of the universe, reinforcing the foundational relationship between mass and energy

Kinetic Energy's Negative Effective Mass Implications in Extended Classical Mechanics

Mᴛₒₜ = (M + Mᴅᴍ) + (−Mᵃᵖᵖ)

Where: Mᴍ = (M + Mᴅᴍ)

From this framework, the force can be defined as:

F = Mᵉᶠᶠ·aᵉᶠᶠ ⇒ F ∝ aᵉᶠᶠ 

And inversely, 

aᵉᶠᶠ ∝ 1/Mᵉᶠᶠ 

Where: Mᵉᶠᶠ = Mᴍ −Mᵃᵖᵖ.

Conclusion

This presentation concludes that the effective mass associated with kinetic energy is represented as negative (−Mᵃᵖᵖ). The total mass can be expressed as:

Mᴛₒₜ = (M + Mᴅᴍ) + (−Mᵃᵖᵖ)

Where: Mᴍ = (M + Mᴅᴍ)

From this framework, the force can be defined as:

F = Mᵉᶠᶠ·aᵉᶠᶠ ⇒ F ∝ aᵉᶠᶠ 

And inversely, 

aᵉᶠᶠ ∝ 1/Mᵉᶠᶠ 

Where: Mᵉᶠᶠ = Mᴍ −Mᵃᵖᵖ.

The core idea emphasizes that the apparent mass (−Mᵃᵖᵖ) is directly linked to kinetic energy, while the combined terms for ordinary mass and dark matter are associated with potential energy. This distinction aligns total energy with the total mass structure, reinforcing the coherence of the extended framework.

continued.......

process the next equations .....

Conceptual Alignment of Apparent Mass and Dark Energy Effective Mass in Gravitational Dynamics: Extended Classical Mechanics.

Soumendra Nath Thakur

ORCiD: 0000-0003-1871-7803

22-09-2024

This presentation explores the interconnected concepts of Negative Effective Mass, highlighting how both Apparent Mass (−Mᵃᵖᵖ) and Dark Energy Effective Mass (Mᴅᴇ) exert negative influences on gravitational dynamics. It emphasizes that these negative mass properties contribute to repulsive forces that counteract gravitational attraction. The relationship between Apparent Mass and total gravitating mass (Mɢ) is established, paralleling the framework proposed by Chernin et al., where Mɢ is derived from the sum of matter mass and dark energy effective mass. The significance of these concepts is particularly pronounced under extreme conditions, such as high velocities and strong gravitational fields, underscoring their importance in cosmic dynamics. Ultimately, the discussion illustrates how Apparent Mass and Dark Energy Effective Mass are conceptually aligned, both playing pivotal roles in shaping gravitational behaviours within galaxy clusters.

1. Negative Effective Mass: 

Both the Apparent Mass (−Mᵃᵖᵖ) and the Dark Energy Effective Mass (Mᴅᴇ) are characterized as having a negative influence on gravitational dynamics. This is central to both concepts, where negative mass contributes to repulsive forces that counteract gravitational attraction.

2. Influence on Gravitating Mass: 

The response emphasizes how Apparent Mass affects the total gravitating mass (Mɢ), showing that it can be expressed as Mɢ = Mᴍ + (−Mᵃᵖᵖ). This is similar to the framework from Chernin et al., where the total gravitating mass is also derived from the combination of matter mass and the dark energy effective mass: Mɢ = Mᴍ + Mᴅᴇ.

3. Context of High Velocities and Strong Fields: 

Both descriptions note that the effects of these negative mass concepts become significant under extreme conditions, such as high velocities or strong gravitational fields, reinforcing the idea that they are crucial for understanding cosmic dynamics.

4. Role in Gravitational Dynamics: 

The alignment is further supported by stating that dark energy’s negative mass plays a significant role in local gravitational dynamics within galaxy clusters, mirroring the implications of Apparent Mass in altering expected gravitational behaviours.

Overall, the presentation conveys that Apparent Mass and Dark Energy Effective Mass share a conceptual foundation, both influencing gravitational dynamics through their negative mass properties.

Keywords: Apparent Mass, Dark Energy, Gravitational Dynamics,

References:

1. Chernin, A. D., Bisnovatyi-Kogan, G. S., Teerikorpi, P., Valtonen, M. J., Byrd, G. G., & Merafina, M. (2013). Dark energy and the structure of the Coma cluster of galaxies. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 553, A101. https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201220781

2. Thakur, S. N. (2024). Extended Classical Mechanics: Vol-1 - Equivalence Principle, Mass and Gravitational Dynamics. Preprints.org (MDPI). https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202409.1190.v2

#ApparentMass, #DarkEnergy, #GravitationalDynamics,

The Cosmological Constant: A Misaligned Solution for Dark Energy and the Static Universe

Soumendra Nath Thakur

ORCiD: 0000-0003-1871-7803

22-09-2024

The cosmological constant, first introduced by Albert Einstein in 1917, was originally intended to maintain a static model of the universe—one that did not expand or contract. This introduction was a response to the prevailing belief that the universe was unchanging, as no observational evidence of expansion existed at the time. However, subsequent discoveries radically altered this view, revealing an expanding universe driven not by a static equilibrium but by dynamic, evolving forces. As such, the cosmological constant, rather than providing answers to the mysteries of dark energy, primarily served to save Einstein's static universe from gravitational collapse, exposing its misalignment with the nature of an expanding cosmos.

The Genesis of the Cosmological Constant

In 1917, Einstein proposed the "Einstein static universe" model, also known as the Einstein universe or the Einstein static eternal universe, within the framework of General Relativity. This model was based on the assumption that the universe was static and unchanging, a perspective supported by the observational limitations of the time. To uphold this static nature, Einstein realized that gravity alone would cause the universe to collapse due to its self-attracting nature. To counteract this effect, he introduced the cosmological constant (Λ), a repulsive force designed specifically to balance gravitational attraction and maintain the universe's static state.

Einstein's adjustment was detailed in his paper, "The Cosmological Considerations in the General Theory of Relativity," where the cosmological constant was mathematically incorporated into his field equations to provide a stable, non-expanding universe. This solution, however, was more of a mathematical fix than a physical insight into the workings of the cosmos.

The Decline of the Static Universe Model

The concept of a static universe began to crumble when astrophysicist Georges Lemaître and others proposed that the universe was not static but expanding. This revolutionary idea was later confirmed by Edwin Hubble's observations in the late 1920s, which showed that galaxies were receding from each other, signalling an expanding universe. Faced with the reality of cosmic expansion, Einstein famously discarded the cosmological constant, calling it his "greatest blunder." He recognized that the static model was fundamentally flawed and that the universe was not in equilibrium as previously thought.

Cosmological Constant vs. Dark Energy

Despite its origin as a corrective measure for a static universe, the cosmological constant has often been repurposed in modern cosmology as a candidate for dark energy, the mysterious force driving the accelerated expansion of the universe. However, this reinterpretation of the cosmological constant as an explanation for dark energy is fundamentally inconsistent with its original purpose and physical meaning.

The cosmological constant was designed to provide a repulsive force to counteract gravitational attraction, thereby maintaining a static universe—not to explain an expanding one. Even if viewed as a force opposing gravitational collapse, it was not intended to account for an accelerating expansion. Instead, the concept of dark energy encompasses a range of potential mechanisms that influence cosmic acceleration, none of which align directly with the simple, uniform repulsion implied by the cosmological constant.

Dark Energy as a Dynamic Force

Current understanding suggests that the accelerating expansion of the universe arises not from any specific substance or constant repulsive force but from complex gravitational and kinetic interactions within the cosmic fabric. These interactions collectively define what we term as dark energy—a placeholder for the unknown drivers of this expansion. Unlike the static repulsion of the cosmological constant, dark energy is dynamic, evolving with the universe in ways that remain the subject of ongoing research.

In conclusion, while the cosmological constant historically played a role in preserving the notion of a static universe, it does not adequately address the complexities of dark energy in an expanding universe. Instead, it serves as a historical footnote—a reflection of a time when the cosmos was misunderstood as a fixed entity rather than the dynamic and ever-evolving universe we observe today. Thus, the cosmological constant is better seen as a relic of an obsolete model rather than a solution to the profound mysteries of dark energy.

Keywords: Cosmological Constant, Static Universe, Dark Energy, Expanding Universe, Gravitational Collapse,

#CosmologicalConstant, #StaticUniverse, #DarkEnergy, #ExpandingUniverse, #GravitationalCollapse,