(Mathematical symbols, subscripts and superscripts will not appear correctly below)
‘It has been said that more than 200 theories of gravitation have been put forward; but the most plausible of these [the Lesage-Feynman pressure shielding scheme] have all had the defect that they lead nowhere and admit of no experimental test.’ - Sir Arthur Eddington, Space Time and Gravitation, Cambridge University Press, 1921, p64.
Dr Luboš Motl: ‘… quantum mechanics is perhaps the deepest idea we know. It is once again a deformation of a conceptually simpler picture of classical physics.’
Gravity is the pressure of the inflow of the fabric of spacetime inwards to fill the volume left empty by the outward acceleration of galaxies in the big bang. LeSage-Feynman shadowing of the spacetime fabric – which is a light velocity radiation on the 4 dimensional spacetime we observe – pushes us downward. You can’t stop space with an umbrella, as atoms are mainly void through which space pressure propagates! Recently, Dr t’Hooft admitted the fifth dimension is mathematically equivalent to the spacetime fabric by the holographic conjecture. It is good to drag in some real experts.
Gravity occurs because of the spacetime fabric field space shielding by nuclear atoms (mainly void space):STEP 1: Pressure is defined as force/area. By geometry (illustrated here), the scaled area of shielding below you is equal to the area of space pressure above that is pushing you down. The shielded area of the sky is 100% if the shield mass is the mass of the universe, so: Ashielding = Ar M / Muniverse.
(1) Force, F = Pspace Ashielding = (Fspace /Ar).(ArM/Muniverse) = Fspace.M/Muniverse
Next (see step 2 below): introduce Fspace = mspace aH. Here, Hubble velocity variation in spacetime (v = HR) implies an acceleration equal to: aH = dv/dt = c/t = c/(1/H) = cH = RH2, while mspace = m(AR/Ar) = m(R/r)2, and the mass of the universe is its density, r , multiplied by its spherical volume, (4/3)p R3.
(2) F = Fspace.M/Muniverse = (mspace aH)M/Muniverse = m(R/r)2(RH2)M/ [(r 4pR3 /3)]
STEP 2: Air is flowing around you like a wave as you as you walk down a corridor (an equal volume goes in the other direction at the same speed, filling in the volume you are vacating as you move). Similarly, as fundamental particles move in space, a similar amount of mass-energy in the fabric of space (Higgs/graviton field) is displaced as a wave around the particles in the opposite direction, filling in the void volume being continuously vacated behind them. For the mass of the big bang, the mass-energy of Higgs/graviton field particles in the moving fabric of space is similar to the mass of the universe. As the big bang mass goes outward, the fabric of space goes inward around each fundamental particle, filling in the vacated volume. (This inward moving fabric of space exerts pressure, causing the force of gravity.)
‘Popular accounts, and even astronomers, talk about expanding space. But how is it possible for space … to expand? … "Good question," says [Steven] Weinberg. "The answer is: space does not expand. Cosmologists sometimes talk about expanding space – but they should know better." [Martin] Rees agrees wholeheartedly. "Expanding space is a very unhelpful concept".’ – New Scientist, 17 April 1993, pp. 32-3.
However, the effective mass of the spacetime fabric moving inward which actually produces the gravity effect is equal to that which is exactly shielded by the mass (illustrated here). So mspace = m, but we also have to allow for the greater distance of the mass which is producing the gravity force by implosion. To take account of focussing due to the ‘implosion’ of space fabric pressure (see diagram) converging in to us in step 1 above (illustration above), we scale: mspace /m = AR / Ar. Hence: mspace = mAR / Ar = m(R/r)2. This is because nearby areas on which force acts to produce pressure are much smaller than the area of sky at the very great distances where the recession and density are high and produce the source of space pressure and thus gravity.
The big bang recession velocities vary from 0 to c with distance for observable times of 15,000 million years towards zero, so the matter of the universe has an effective outward acceleration of c divided by the age of the universe. This acceleration, a = c/t = cH = RH2 where H is the Hubble constant (in v = HR), is so small that its effects are generally undetectable. (Notice that if we could see and experience forces instantly, the universe would not show this acceleration. This acceleration is only real because we can’t see the universe at an age of 15 Gyr irrespective of distance. By Newton’s 2nd law, the actual outward force, when properly allowing for the varying effective density of the observed universe as a function of spacetime, is large and by Newton’s 3rd law it has an equal and opposite reaction, inward force which, where shielded, is gravity.)
(3) F = m(R/r)2(RH2)M/ [(r 4pR3 /3)] = (3/4)mMH2/(rpr2)
Next: for mass continuity, dr/dt = -Ñ.(rv) = -3rH. Hence, r = rlocal e3 (early visible universe has higher density). The reason for multiplying the local measured density of the universe up by a factor of about 20 (the number e3 , the cube of the base of natural logarithms) is because it is the denser, more distant universe which contains most of the mass which is producing most of the inward pressure. Because we see further back in time with increasing distance, we see a more compressed age of the universe. Gravitational push comes to us at light speed, with the same velocity as the visible light that shows the stars. Therefore we have to take account of the higher density at earlier times. What counts is what we see, the spacetime in which distance is directly linked to time past, not the simplistic picture of a universe at constant density, because we can never see or experience gravity from such a thing due to the finite speed of light. The mass continuity equation dr/dt = -Ñ.(rv) is simple hydrodynamics based on Green’s theorem and allows the Hubble law (v = HR) to be inserted and solved. An earlier method of calculation of this effect in the notes of CERN preprint EXT-2004-007, is to set up a formula for the density at any particular time past, so as to calculate contributions to inward spacetime fabric pressure from a series of shells surrounding the observer. This is the same as the result r = rlocal e3.
(4) F = mMG/r2, where G = (3/4) H2/( p r local e3 ) = 0.0119H2/r local = 6.7 x 10-11 Nm2kg-2, accurate to within 1.65% using reliable supernovae data reported in Physical Review Letters!
Feynman seemed to discuss this vaguely in ‘Character of Physical Law’ 1965 BBC lectures, with a diagram showing that if there is a pressure in space masses will be pushed together by mutual shielding. He elsewhere noted that the contraction effect in general relativity compresses the earth’s radius by (1/3)GM/c2 = 1.5 mm. (By the same pressure effect for inertial mass in motion, you get the FitzGerald-Lorentz contraction in the direction of motion, explaining the Michelson-Morley result.)
If there were any other reason for gravity with similar accuracy, the strength of gravity would then be twice what we measure, so this is a firm confirmation. The ‘alternatives’ don’t predict anything and therefore are relatively useless speculation. SUMMARY OF THE LATEST RESULTS PROVING CAUSALITY
The inverse-square law of gravity which formerly had to be derived empirically by Newton’s method using Kepler’s observed laws of planetary motion (hence no understanding), plus uniquely the correct universal gravitational constant G, accurate to within 1.65% for Physical Review Letters reported data, i.e., a prediction of 10 ms-2 at the earth’s surface compared to a measured 9.8 ms-2. Newton never estimated this constant, it was later worked out by Laplace by fiddling the equation to fit observations, not by a proof based on the mechanism of gravitation. This is completely unique: F = ¾ mM H2/( p r2 r e3) » 6.7 x 10-11 mM/ r2 Newtons!
This shielded force is equal to the shadow from an area equal to a black hole; a fundamental particle of mass M has a radius of 2GM/c2 and a cross-sectional space pressure shielding area of p (2GM/c2)2. [This is obtained by setting the results equal for the two calculation methods: the first simple methods using Newton’s 3rd law to calculate inward force which leaves shield area as an unknown, and the second approach shown in full above which uses logic to obtain G = ¾ H2/(p r e3).] Hence, ‘static’ matter is proved to be composed of light-type energy trapped by its own gravity into black hole. Bohm and others in the 1950s proved that scattering-type interactions between the waves around different moving electrons in an atom would prevent neat orbits and cause the chaotic orbits described statistically by Schroedinger’s quantum mechanics of the atom.
There is little ‘dark matter’ around because the false ‘critical density’ in general relativity is out by a factor e3/2 = 10.
The falsity of the ‘acceleration’ of the universe implied from supernovae red-shift (since gravity is a response to the surrounding matter, distant galaxies in the explosion are not slowed down by gravity, so there is no need to claim there is an acceleration offsetting a fictitious gravity pull-back). This was predicted via Electronics World 1996, before discovery of the ‘acceleration’ confirmed it. Nature’s editor said he was ‘not able’ to publish: http://members.lycos.co.uk/nigelbryancook/ScienceWorld.htm
The smoothness of the ripples in the cosmic background radiation (gravity and electromagnetism forces, Electronics World April 2003, increase in direct proportion to age of universe but this does not vary the sun’s brightness as you might think because each variation offsets each other; fusion rate depends both on electric repulsion between protons and gravitational compression). Since G = (3/4) H2/( p r local e3 ) = 0.0119H2/r local , G is proportional to H2/r . H varies with the age of the universe as 1/t, while r is mass divided by volume so it varies as the inverse cube of radius and (with light speed expansion of the observable radius), inverse cube of time. G thus varies as (1/t)2/(1/t3) = t, so G gets bigger in direct proportion to the age of the universe. Since the mechanism for electromagnetism is linked to gravity by the drunkard’s statistical walk of energy between similar charges in the universe, the forces vary in the same way and no observable effects of this have been predicted to date despite ongoing efforts.
Electronics World (April 2003 and March 2005): electron is the negative energy of 1.022 MeV gamma ray, due to conservation of momentum when a gamma ray passes a lead nucleus and ‘pair production’ occurs. Electromagnetic force is imparted along field lines, so energy flows along them. Equal and opposite charges are randomly distributed in the universe, canceling and thus preventing the energy from adding up in a straight line. But a ‘drunkards walk’ between similar charges occurs. Since impedance is fixed 377 ohms, the electromagnetic force is gravity times the root of the number of similar charges in the universe, predicting Coulomb’s law (see EW, April 2003 diagrams for EM force cause). Repulsion occurs due to the recoils from continuous energy exchange (and thus momentum p=E/c exchange) between similar charges since their spin implies centripetal acceleration a = v2/r and accelerating charges in a radio aerial radiate energy, there is no wiggle (no frequency) for continuous radiation from continuously spinning charges; attraction occurs because opposite charges block energy exchange between each other, and are thus pushed together by the energy they continue to receive from outside.
Coulomb’s law for hydrogen atom (force between proton and electron): F = mMGN1/2/r2 while the force between two electrons is higher by the factor M (proton) / m (electron), although the force between two protons is lower by the same ratio. Thus the ratio of proton to electron masses, M/m = 4peM2GN1/2/q2 where e is permittivity and q is charge. Hence the mass of electron is m = q2/(4peM2GN1/2) while mass of proton is M = q2/(4pem2GN1/2). Since (from Result 5) Coulomb’s force law divided by Newton’s gravity is N1/2 = [e2/(4per2)] / [mMG/r2] = e2 m c2/(4pmMG) = 2.26924x1039, the predicted masses of electron and proton are respectively 9.11 x 10-31 and 1.67 x 10-27 kg, and N = 5.15x1078. Measured masses are for the electron 9.10956 x 10-31 and for the proton 1.672614 x 10-27 kg, other major predictions are the Hubble constant H and the density of the universe locally: H = 16p 2Gme2mprotonc3 e 2/(qe4e2.7…3) = 2.3391 x 10-18 s-1 or 72.2 km.s-1Mpc-1, so 1/H = t = 13.55 Gyr.
r = 192p 3Gme4mproton2c6 e 4/(qe8e2.7…9) = 9.7455 x 10-28 kg/m3.
Strength of strong nuclear force at short range F = hc/ (2p d2), where h is Planck’s constant (proved in EW, April ‘03). This is stronger than Coulomb’s law of electromagnetism by factor x = 2hce /e2, which is about 137.036. Hence (strong nuclear force) = (‘QED force’) = (137 times the EM force). The range of the strong nuclear force is limited (see 9 below).
The uncertainty principle states the product of the uncertainties in momentum and distance as at least h divided by twice pi. The product of momentum and distance is dimensionally equivalent to the product of energy and time, so energy can be being borrowed from the vacuum to form virtual particles for a time that is inversely proportional to the energy borrowed. Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle is usually misinterpreted because people use it to obfuscate and hold back progress. The weak nuclear force is a phase-space quark version of the strong nucleon force, not of the electromagnetic force. Forces with unlimited (non-Heisenberg) range are gravity and electromagnetic; the two nuclear forces are limited. (The popular old wives’ saying that the photon has no rest mass is obfuscation since the photon is defined as never at rest.)
Paul Dirac in 1928 found that the spinning electron is a magnet with a moment of u = eh/(4 p mc) = 1 Bohr magneton. In 1947 Kusch measured it but found it 0.1% higher than Dirac’s formula! This is due to a very small interaction between the electron and its own energy field effects on the fabric of space. The magnetic moment of an electron to the first order QED correction, discovered in 1948 by Julian Schwinger, is 1 + 1/(2 p x) = 1.00116 Bohr magnetons (where x = 2hce /e2 = 137.036). It involves an increase in the magnetic moment of the electron due to so-called virtual particles by a factor of only 0.116% (there are a large number of Feynman diagram coupling terms now calculated, increasing the accuracy to 13 decimal places, each involving a power of the x or 137 factor which Feynman called a damn mystery). We can predict mysterious ‘x’ or 137 number from by dividing simply the ‘nuclear’ force (Result 8) into EM force (Result 6) above!
The discussion with Walter Babin indicates that there are no separate nuclear forces. Both strong and weak nuclear forces are fictitious results of the electromagnetic field energy surrounding particles with large masses. The nucleus is not held together by imaginary superglue called ‘gluon’ but rather by mechanical effects like those that cause two atoms to cohere and bond together. Energy transfer occurs as a net transfer of energy with similar spin to the postulated gluon does take place. As the mass of the particle gets bigger, so do the ‘virtual’ particle effects until stable nucleons and nuclei form, since energy is force times its distance of action.Traditionally, the ‘delta-double-plus’ particle is used to justify the existence of three types of quark charge, which are referred to arbitrarily as ‘colours’. This was proposed because the delta-double-plus contains identical three quarks spinning the same way, which violates the Pauli exclusion principle (which prohibits two or more particles from having the same set of quantum numbers, which include spin). This appears to be correct because the mechanism for the Pauli exclusion principle may be linked to the intrinsic magnetism of spinning charged particles forcing adjacent particles to be paired up with opposite spin (however, there are problems to be resolved). According to quantum chromodynamics (QCD, the analogy to quantum electrodynamics, QED) any proton contains one green, one red, and one blue quark, making the quark as a whole colourless, the nuclear force equivalent of an atom with equal positive and negative charge. The three quarks also have electric charges of +2/3, +2/3 and –1/3 (two upquarks and one downquark), so the net electric charge is +1. The strong force depends on the colour charge, which is short ranged and operates somewhat like the short-range ‘Van der Waals force’ of chemistry that binds some electrically neutral atoms together. (This is really a geometric effect of the locations of the shells of charge with can be polarised to allow a net electromagnetic force to be felt over short distances.) While the QED force is mediated by photons, the QCD force is mediated by ‘gluons’, of which 8 different types exist. Gluons attract (or shield) each other as well as the quarks. There is also a field of other virtual particles around each quark, just as there is a field of ‘virtual’ fermions around an electron, which partly shield the charge of the core. Colour charge has very indirect evidence. While it is a fine example of how usefully predictive ad hoc modifications can be made to physics, it is crass to take it as evidence discrediting causality. A clearer illustration is to consider the weak nuclear force, which has been unified with the electromagnetic force. QCD may similarly be unified with electro-weak force when more is known. The problem with colour charge is that it is vague with respect to which of the two otherwise-identical upquarks in a proton has which colour and why: colour charge is not a fundamental property like electric charge. Is it real, or just a useful corrective epicycle for some more subtle physics?