The contrast between gravitational lensing and Plasma interaction of photon:

Soumendra Nath Thakur 

December 26, 2924

Gravitational lensing, as the term suggests, arises from the interaction between electromagnetic radiation (photons) and a gravitational field. Specifically, it involves the symmetric energetic interaction of photons with the gravitational field, resulting in balanced blueshifts and redshifts of the photon’s energy. This symmetry causes the photon’s trajectory to curve, deviating from its linear path during transit through the gravitational field. Once the photon exits the field, it retains its energy and resumes its inherent linear trajectory.

The question of whether energetic plasma can cause gravitational lensing must be examined by understanding how photons interact with ionized gas during transit. Unlike the photon-gravitational field interaction, which is energetically symmetric, the interaction between photons and ionized plasma is fundamentally different. This is an electromagnetic-electromagnetic interaction where photons interact with charged particles (electrons and ions) via electromagnetic forces.

Such interactions are inherently asymmetric and often involve absorption, scattering, or redistribution of photon energy due to the charged nature of plasma constituents. Consequently, these processes result in photon scattering rather than the curvature of the photon’s path seen in gravitational lensing.

While hot plasma may facilitate symmetric energy exchanges, it primarily causes photon scattering rather than maintaining the conditions necessary for gravitational lensing. This distinction highlights that the nature of photon interactions with ionized plasma differs fundamentally from the interaction with a gravitational field.

Electrons and ions, due to their electric charge, always interact with photons via electromagnetic forces. However, this interaction leads to scattering and absorption, making it unlikely that hot plasma could produce the phenomenon of gravitational lensing.

In conclusion, photon interaction with a gravitational field and photon interaction with ionized plasma are fundamentally different processes. Gravitational lensing remains a unique phenomenon tied to the symmetric energetic interaction of photons with gravitational fields, distinct from the asymmetric scattering processes characteristic of plasma interactions.

Re-interpretation of relativistic gravitational lensing:

Soumendra Nath Thakur 

December 26, 2024

Your comments suggest a limited understanding of the principles of physical science. Your preconceived notions prevent you from appreciating advancements in physics, particularly the importance of falsifiability in scientific progress. This stagnation renders your studies scientifically unproductive, as progress requires an openness to revise established ideas.

A stagnant river collects decay, much like stagnant thinking in science accumulating outdated ideas.

Your adherence to traditional interpretations of relativity overlooks critical flaws. For example, in relativity, gravity is understood as the consequence of spacetime curvature. This means that the bending of light, described as gravitational lensing, is attributed to spacetime curvature rather than an actual gravitational field. Since relativity posits gravity as an effect of curvature rather than a force, gravitational lensing in this framework should be referred to as curvature lensing, not a consequence of a gravitational field.

However, observational evidence suggests that the bending of light is due to the interaction of photons with the gravitational field itself, not with spacetime curvature. Thus, the relativistic explanation of gravitational lensing as a product of spacetime curvature is fundamentally flawed. Instead, gravitational lensing arises from the curvature within gravitational fields, as this better aligns with empirical observations.

Your assertion that I have 'never studied physics' reflects a misunderstanding of my arguments and an inability to critically engage with the limitations of relativity. It is essential to recognize that progress in science depends on identifying and addressing such foundational inconsistencies. The relativistic framework for gravitational lensing relies on spacetime curvature, yet the evidence points to gravitational field interactions as the actual cause. This discrepancy undermines the relativistic model of gravitational lensing and highlights the necessity of revisiting its foundational assumptions.

Clarification of Concepts in Relativistic Mass, Energy, and Length Contraction:

Soumendra Nath Thakur

December, 26, 2024

The notion of "variation in mass with velocity" is addressed as a misunderstanding. The research framework "Relativistic Mass and Energy Equivalence: Energetic Form of Relativistic Mass in Special Relativity" does not discuss any variation in rest mass. Instead, it introduces the concepts of effective mass and apparent mass as energetic constructs. These terms describe variations in energy, not mass, and do not imply changes to the invariant rest mass.

The idea that particles such as neutrons, protons, and electrons behave as "looped waves in the medium of space" is speculative. Unlike massless photons, massive particles remain stationary within gravitationally bound systems unless influenced by external forces. Their behaviour cannot be directly associated with the relationship E=hf, as this applies to electromagnetic waves. For massive particles, E=mc² governs the conversion of rest mass into energy through nuclear processes and does not involve motion or conversion into pure frequencies.

The assertion that "The change in frequency affects the mass through E=hf" reflects a misconception. E=hf pertains to electromagnetic waves and describes variations in electromagnetic energy rather than mass. It is distinct from E=mc², and the equivalence between hf and mc² does not apply.

Similarly, the suggestion that "the change in wavelength is the cause of length contraction" conflates unrelated concepts. Object length is not analogous to wavelength. Relativistic length contraction is a distinct phenomenon that can be compared to classical mechanics length deformation under Hooke's law. However, the relativistic model relies on the Lorentz factor and often omits classical considerations such as material stiffness and acceleration, potentially leading to less precise predictions than classical deformation theory.

In the relativistic framework, relativistic mass is expressed as m = γm₀, where γ = 1/√(1 − v²/c²). This relativistic mass is an energetic quantity distinct from proper (rest) mass, which remains invariant.

The study emphasizes that no variation in inertial mass is proposed. Instead, the variability of effective mass and apparent mass as energetic forms is central to describing the dynamics of energy systems within the scope of Extended Classical Mechanics.

A Dual Framework for Rest and Motion States: Energy and Mass Dynamics in Extended Classical Mechanics.

Soumendra Nath Thakur

Tagore's Electronic Lab, W.B, India; postmasterenator@gmail.com or

postmasterenator@telitnetwork.in

December 25, 2024

Abstract:

This study explores the foundational equations of Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM), offering a comprehensive framework for analysing energy and force interactions across distinct scenarios involving matter mass (Mᴍ), apparent mass (Mᵃᵖᵖ), and effective mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ). Key equations are presented, including the force equation, effective mass definition, and total energy balance. Two cases are examined: stationary objects with positive matter mass (Mᴍ > 0) and moving objects with zero matter mass (Mᴍ = 0). For the former, total energy is dominated by potential energy, with no contribution from kinetic energy. In contrast, the latter involves negative effective mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ<0) and energy dynamics primarily governed by kinetic energy, with potential energy contributing negatively. The findings highlight the duality of energy and mass interactions and provide novel insights into phenomena such as massless object behaviour and their interaction with gravitational fields.

Keywords: Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM), Matter Mass (Mᴍ), Apparent Mass (Mᵃᵖᵖ), Effective Mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ), Energy Dynamics, Negative Effective Mass, Photon-Gravitational Interactions, Rest and Motion States,

1. Introduction:

In classical mechanics, the relationship between mass, energy, and force has been a foundational concept, traditionally explored through the framework of Newtonian mechanics and Einstein's theory of relativity. However, these classical approaches often encounter limitations when addressing scenarios involving massless or seemingly paradoxical objects, such as photons, or when applying general relativistic concepts to specific gravitational interactions. The Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM) framework offers a novel perspective by introducing new interpretations of mass, force, and energy, particularly focusing on the interplay between matter mass (Mᴍ), apparent mass (Mᵃᵖᵖ), and effective mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ).

The ECM framework presents a dual perspective on energy and mass dynamics, distinguishing between two distinct states: rest and motion. In the first case, when an object is at rest and no external force is acting on it, the total energy is entirely attributed to its potential energy, with the effective mass mirroring the matter mass. In the second case, when an object with zero matter mass (e.g., a photon) is in motion, its energy dynamics are governed by kinetic energy and a corresponding negative potential energy term, driven by negative effective mass. This dual framework allows for a more comprehensive understanding of energy and mass dynamics, especially in the context of objects in motion or interacting with gravitational fields.

By revisiting core principles of mass-energy relationships, the ECM framework offers an alternative model for understanding energy exchanges in both traditional and non-traditional scenarios, including the behaviour of massless entities in gravitational fields. This approach challenges and extends the conventional views of force, mass, and energy in classical mechanics, providing fresh insights into the behaviour of objects with varying mass characteristics, from stationary bodies to dynamic, massless entities.

This paper explores the key equations and implications of the ECM framework, illustrating how it integrates the concepts of kinetic and potential energy in both rest and motion states, and highlighting its potential applications in furthering our understanding of gravitational dynamics and energy-mass interactions.

2. Mathematical Presentation:

The Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM) equations provide a framework for understanding energy and force interactions in various scenarios, particularly involving matter mass (Mᴍ), apparent mass (Mᵃᵖᵖ), effective mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ), and their interplay. The key equations are as follows:

Force Equation: 

F = (Mᴍ −Mᵃᵖᵖ)·aᵉᶠᶠ

• This describes the net force as a function of matter mass, apparent mass, and effective acceleration.

Effective Mass 

Mᵉᶠᶠ = Mᴍ + (−Mᵃᵖᵖ)

• This defines the total effective mass as the sum of the matter mass and the negative apparent mass.

Total Energy

Eₜₒₜₐₗ = PEᴍᴍ + KEᴍᴍ 

• The total energy is the sum of potential energy (PEᴍᴍ) and kinetic energy (KEᴍᴍ).

These equations encapsulate the dynamics of objects in different states, from rest to motion, and provide a basis for analysing scenarios where forces, energies, and mass interact in novel ways.

Interpretation and Analysis:

These presentations articulate two distinct cases within the Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM) framework. Below is an analysis and interpretation of the scenarios:

Case 1: When F = 0

• Condition: Mᴍ > 0; aᵉᶠᶠ = 0 (no effective acceleration.)

Implication:

• The object possesses positive matter mass (Mᴍ > 0).

• Since the net force is zero, the object is stationary or in stable equilibrium within a gravitational or other force field.

• The potential energy (PEᴍᴍ) is the sole contributor to the total energy:

Eₜₒₜₐₗ = PEᴍᴍ 

• The effective mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ) equals the matter mass:

Mᵉᶠᶠ = Mᴍ

• Conclusion: For an object at rest (F = 0), kinetic energy (KEᴍᴍ) does not exist independently; the total energy is entirely attributed to the potential energy of the object.

Case 2: When F < 0 and Mᴍ = 0

• Condition: Mᴍ = 0; Mᵉᶠᶠ < 0 (negative effective mass).

Implication:

• The object has no matter mass (Mᴍ = 0).

• The negative force (F < 0) arises due to the negative apparent mass (−Mᵃᵖᵖ).

• The effective mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ) is purely negative, determined by the apparent mass:

F = −Mᵃᵖᵖ·aᵉᶠᶠ. Where: Mᵉᶠᶠ = −Mᵃᵖᵖ;

Effective Mass:

• The effective mass is defined by the energy-frequency relation:

Mᵉᶠᶠ = h·f/c² = E/c² 

Where:

• h is Planck's constant, 

• f is the frequency, 

• E is the total energy, and 

• c is the speed of light.

This relationship highlights the equivalence of energy and effective mass and how the effective mass of a massless entity, such as a photon, is linked to its energy and frequency.

Total Energy:

• Kinetic energy (KEᵉᶠᶠ) becomes the dominant contributor to the total energy, with a negative correction term from the potential energy (PEᵉᶠᶠ) associated with the effective mass:

Eₜₒₜₐₗ = PEᵉᶠᶠ + KEᵉᶠᶠ

Eₜₒₜₐₗ = √{(Mᵉᶠᶠ·c²)² + (p·c)²} 

This equation expresses the total energy as a combination of contributions from the energy due to effective mass and the momentum of the system.

• Conclusion: 

For an object in motion with zero matter mass (Mᴍ = 0), its energy dynamics are governed by kinetic energy (KEᵉᶠᶠ) and a negative potential energy term (PEᵉᶠᶠ). The presence of negative effective mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ < 0) drives the observed motion and energy 

Overall Conclusion

For objects with Mᴍ > 0, kinetic energy (KEᴍᴍ) cannot exist independently when the object is at rest; only potential energy (PEᴍᴍ) contributes to the total energy.

For objects with Mᴍ = 0 (e.g., photons or other massless entities), the negative effective mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ <0) results in a total energy balance dominated by kinetic energy, with potential energy contributing negatively.

Interpretation

This interpretation emphasizes the duality in energy dynamics within the ECM framework. It showcases the interplay between positive matter mass (Mᴍ) and negative apparent mass (Mᵃᵖᵖ), and how their contributions influence the object’s motion and total energy. For massless objects, such as photons, the ECM framework provides an alternative explanation for their interactions with gravitational fields, including the negative effective mass and its associated energy exchange.

3. Discussion:

The framework presented in this research introduces a novel interpretation of mass, energy, and force interactions, offering insights into how energy dynamics differ based on an object's state—whether at rest or in motion. By examining two key states—rest (when no force is acting) and motion (especially for massless entities)—the ECM framework provides a fresh perspective on classical mechanics and its potential applications.

I. Energy in the Rest State:

In the ECM framework, when an object is at rest and no external force is applied (i.e., when F=0), the object exhibits a purely potential energy-driven state. Here, the potential energy (PEᴍᴍ) is the only contributor to the total energy (Eₜₒₜₐₗ), and kinetic energy (KEᴍᴍ) does not exist independently. The equation Eₜₒₜₐₗ = PEᴍᴍ holds true for objects with positive matter mass (Mᴍ > 0), where the effective mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ) simply equals the matter mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ = Mᴍ). This distinction highlights how an object’s total energy can be governed solely by its potential energy when stationary or in a stable equilibrium.

This interpretation challenges conventional views of energy conservation, which generally assert that both kinetic and potential energies contribute to an object’s total energy. In ECM, energy is partitioned based on the object's state, emphasizing the importance of rest states in understanding energy contributions that are usually neglected.

II. Energy in the Motion State:

When an object with zero matter mass (Mᴍ =0) is in motion, such as a photon or other massless entities, the dynamics shift significantly. In this state, the object is governed by kinetic energy, with a negative correction term arising from the associated potential energy related to the negative effective mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ = −Mᵃᵖᵖ). The effective mass is driven entirely by the apparent mass, which introduces a unique dynamic for objects in motion.

The equation Eₜₒₜₐₗ = KEᵉᶠᶠ + PEᵉᶠᶠ encapsulates this state, where the kinetic energy (usually associated with mass) exists in the absence of traditional rest mass. Moreover, the total energy in this state is affected by the interaction between kinetic and potential energy terms. The negative value of effective mass introduces a counteracting effect, which could explain certain phenomena that classical mechanics struggles to describe, such as the behaviour of photons in gravitational fields or their response to other forces.

This shift in how mass and energy interact in motion supports the ECM’s potential to provide an alternative understanding of dynamics in scenarios involving massless or near-massless particles. It suggests that the apparent mass of objects, especially massless particles, plays a critical role in determining their energy dynamics. The concept of negative effective mass offers a way to reconsider the motion of these particles without relying on traditional ideas of mass.

III. Negative Effective Mass:

A central feature of the ECM framework is the concept of negative effective mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ < 0), which emerges in Case 2, when an object with zero matter mass is in motion. This introduces a novel understanding of how massless particles (e.g., photons) interact with forces and gravitational fields. Negative effective mass can potentially explain why certain phenomena, like gravitational lensing or the bending of light near massive objects, may not align perfectly with classical interpretations. It presents a new avenue to understand gravitational dynamics, where the interaction between energy and mass is not governed by the standard positive mass framework.

In this context, negative effective mass could also suggest the possibility of new force dynamics that are not adequately addressed by traditional Newtonian or relativistic mechanics. The force generated by an object with negative mass is counterintuitive, potentially leading to repulsive interactions or behaviour that deviates from expected norms in classical theories.

IV. Applications and Implications for Gravitational Dynamics:

The ECM framework’s reinterpretation of energy and mass provides a fresh approach to understanding gravitational interactions, particularly with massless entities. The concept of energy exchange between kinetic and potential energy in massless particles can offer an alternative explanation for gravitational lensing, photon redshift/blueshift, and other phenomena related to light’s behaviour in a gravitational field.

Moreover, the negative effective mass dynamic opens the door for rethinking gravitational force. In ECM, an object with zero matter mass but negative effective mass could behave in unexpected ways when interacting with gravitational fields, potentially leading to modifications of existing theories, such as those based on general relativity. This could have profound implications for the understanding of dark matter, dark energy, and other unexplained cosmic phenomena, where traditional models fall short.

V. Energy-Mass Duality:

Ultimately, the ECM framework establishes a duality between rest and motion states, showing that the relationship between energy, mass, and force is contingent upon the state of the object. While rest states focus entirely on potential energy, motion states emphasize kinetic energy, with novel corrections due to the interaction between apparent and effective mass. This dual framework provides an enhanced understanding of energy dynamics, particularly in the case of massless objects or those with unconventional mass properties.

In conclusion, the ECM framework offers a more comprehensive view of mass-energy interactions, where the state of an object determines its energy distribution. The insights gained from this framework could be pivotal for advancing theories in gravitational dynamics, quantum mechanics, and the behaviour of massless particles, providing a deeper understanding of the universe’s fundamental forces.

4. Conclusion:

The Extended Classical Mechanics (ECM) framework introduces a transformative perspective on the relationship between energy, mass, and force, offering a dual interpretation of objects in rest and motion states. By distinguishing the energy dynamics of stationary objects with positive matter mass (Mᴍ >) and massless objects with negative effective mass (Mᵉᶠᶠ < 0), the ECM framework provides a more nuanced understanding of how energy is partitioned between potential and kinetic components.

In the rest state, the total energy is solely derived from potential energy, with kinetic energy being absent, as demonstrated by objects where F=0. Conversely, for objects in motion, particularly massless entities like photons, the total energy is governed by kinetic energy and a negative correction term due to the influence of apparent mass, revealing how massless particles interact with forces differently than traditionally understood.

The concept of negative effective mass introduces new possibilities for explaining gravitational dynamics and the behaviour of light in gravitational fields, such as gravitational lensing and photon redshift. By re-evaluating the roles of energy and mass, ECM offers a potential framework to address phenomena unexplained by classical mechanics and general relativity.

In summary, the ECM framework provides a robust and alternative approach to understanding mass-energy interactions, paving the way for deeper insights into gravitational dynamics, quantum theories, and the behaviour of massless particles. It challenges established paradigms and proposes a new avenue for exploring fundamental forces in the universe, contributing to the ongoing development of more comprehensive physical theories.

Funding: No specific funding was received for this work.

Potential competing interests: No potential competing interests to declare.

5. 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]Classical Mechanics, by Herbert Goldstein in the Journal of the Franklin Institute, 250 (3), 1950, doi:10.1016/0016-0032(50)90712-5

[3] Modern Physics by Kenneth S. Krane

[4] Richard P. Feynman, Robert B. Leighton, & Matthew Sands. The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Volume I. The California Institute of Technology, Michael A. Gottlieb and Rudolf Pfeiffer. https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_toc.html

[5] Ling, S. J., Sanny, J., Moebs, W., Friedman, G., Druger, S. D., Kolakowska, A., ... & Wheelock, K. (2016). University Physics Volume 2. https://assets.openstax.org/oscms-prodcms/media/documents/UniversityPhysicsVolume3-WEB.pdf

[6]Thakur, S. N. (2024). Extended Classical Mechanics: Vol-1 - Equivalence Principle, Mass and Gravitational Dynamics. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202409.1190.v3 

[7]Thakur, S. N. (2024) Photon Dynamics in extended classical mechanics: Effective mass, negative inertia, momentum exchange and analogies with Dark Energy. doi:10.20944/preprints202411.1797.v1

[8]Thakur, S.N. (2024) A symmetry and conservation framework for photon energy interactions in gravitational fields. doi:10.20944/preprints202411.0956.v1

[9]Thakur, S.N. (2024) Photon interactions with external gravitational fields: True cause of gravitational lensing. doi:10.20944/preprints202410.2121.v1.

Response to a commenter's Misinterpretation:

Soumendra Nath Thakur 

December 24, 2024

Your reference to "density of space" reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept of density, violating its very definition. Density is defined as the measure of how tightly packed a material is, expressed as the mass of a substance per unit volume. While "volume of space" is a valid term, "density of space" is incorrect because space is not a material entity and does not possess mass.

Furthermore, your statement, "anything that expands or contracts, its density decreases or increases," is a flawed analogy. The expansion of distance, as discussed in my post, is a linear phenomenon and does not involve volumetric changes. Measuring distance does not equate to measuring volume, rendering your analogy inapplicable to the concept of increasing distances between galaxies.

Additionally, my post does not reference or account for the density of matter or galaxies. Yet, you have misrepresented it by imposing the idea of "density of matter taking galaxies into account," which my post never addressed. This misrepresentation undermines the context and intent of my argument.

To clarify, the recession of galaxies signifies an increase in the distances between them—a linear increment—not a volumetric mass increase, as you incorrectly implied by referencing density changes.

Your comment fails to address the substance of my argument and instead misinterprets it with irrelevant and baseless counterpoints. I recommend understanding the message of my post more thoroughly before attempting to counter it.