Gravity Blues:
Gravity Blues:
Having stuck my ego out their i now feel [self] pressured to figure out & arrive at all the likely ramifications (before anyone else, as if anyone actually cared)
Who's neurotic? …not me.
Based on my outline/sketch of a probability waves progress in a time-dilation gradient,
I'm pretty confident that that means over time a probability wave that is getting deeper into a center of mass condenses/consolidates as it progresses.
Which means it loses some of its uncertainty. I believe the probability wave will actually shrink both in time & in space.
It becomes less of a probability and closer to some approximate certainty.
Probability sidebar:
Space-time is possibly a byproduct of probability waves.
Space without time is a certainty & time without space is also a certainty.
Probabilities can only exist with the intersection of space and time.
Only superposition probability waves hang in ambiguous space-time, collapsed waves have arrived at [a] certainty.
Gravity Blues:
Anyway back to condensed probability waves.
I believe that a condensed photon would be a higher frequency than before condensation.
A photon can't gain vector inertia, but it can gain frequency/energy.
To me only an exchange of energy is 'gravity'.
Orbiting at equilibrium a photon or mass body is simply following the non-Euclidean geometry of space-time/relativity which i personally would distinguish from energy exchanging 'gravity'. Call me persnicative why don't you.
Based on that a photon falling towards an external center of mass will be slightly blue shifted & a photon leaving a mass field will be[come] red shifted.
So if two telescopes, 1) an infra-red Earth surface based & 2) the James Webb telescope viewed the same object in space the ground based telescope would see the object a tiny bit bluer than the deeper space based telescope would.
This is due to the time dilation gradient of the Earth.
Shrinking Space:
Since a probability wave shrinks deep in a mass field this supports my assertion that not only is time dilated in a mass field, but the space there is also contracted/shrunken.
Assertion: If time passes at 9/10ths the rate of somewhere else then local space occupies 9/10ths of that somewhere else.
The hard evidence that there is less space in a mass than Euclidean ideation would expect is the fact that the Sun's interior rotates 4 times faster than its exterior. https://www.astronomy.com/science/the-suns-core-rotates-faster-than-its-surface/
Time dilation alone would make the Sun's interior seem to rotate slower [not faster] there due to the slower passage of time there, to us external viewers.
The/a logical reason why it would rotate faster on its interior is because there is less space for it to rotate in.
An ice skater rotates faster as they reduce the occupied radius of their spin.
The angular momentum is distributed over a shorter-distance/less-space.
In a mass field 2pi*r no longer is absolute because the space is not Euclidean normal there.
The circumference per the radius will be greater than that formula predicts.
Around Earth my assertion can be tested by measuring the altitude [additional radius] to a set of satellites that encircle the globe and then measure the circumference they measure of their satellite to satellite distances.
I'm confident that circumference will exceed the expected calculation of 2pi*r. [Earth surface + altitude = r (radius).]
The Earth's radii will be found to be shorter than Euclidean normal geometry predicts, just like the Sun.
Back to blue gravity,
a photon driving into a mass field is encountering less space so its energy-packet/wavelength gets compressed into that less space [& slowed time] which raises its frequency. It crushes/compresses a long wavelength into shorter space which raises its frequency. Think accordion.
Its a little ambiguous as to how much of the frequency shift is from slowed time & how much is a function of shrunken space.
There are additional ramifications of shrunken space, but I'll leave that for another day.
It's tea time.
