The Fiasco in Modern
Physics called Gravity
Sir Isaac Newton is rightly
considered the father of modern physics. In the 17th
century he was able to fit his observations to mathematics, which
could describe and link what he saw to what he calculated. From this
he was able to then extrapolate those mathematics to predict
observation. He helped pioneer what was then new mathematics, the
maths of motion, now called Calculus. His mathematics were so good in
describing reality that their accuracy in describing the motion of
the planets around the sun is revered today.
Fast forward, through the 18th
and 19th
centuries (where understanding of electricity, astronomy, atomic
theory, light and other phenomena added to Newton's considerable
legacy,) to the early 20th
century.
The one key missing ingredient
was an understanding of where the force called Gravity should fit
into the observations and mathematics of the universe. Gravity is key
in that it is essential to understand its source and nature before
the cosmos and everything happening within it can make any sense.
Albert Einstein revolutionized thought concerning the nature of space
and time, but struggled for all of his life to reconcile gravity to
his theories. Modern physics has, after nearly a century, now shown
that Einstein was correct in his theories. Modern physics is no
closer to understanding the source and place of gravity. The current
proposition that gravity arises as a result of the distortion of the
'fabric of space-time' is, most likely, in itself a fabrication. It
sets off my own personal 'bulldust' alarm.
Modern physics missed the
essential clue, which came from the work of Max Planck in the early
20th
century. Planck argued that physic's units of measure were arbitrary,
(somewhat like the old imperial measures such as a 'nip', a 'gill'
and a 'hundredweight'). He proposed a set of 5 constants based on the
physics of free space and quantum theory, not on any man made unit of
measure. Planck's thought processes led to the mathematics which can
convert any 'man made unit of measure' to a unit of measure that can
be expressed in terms of the two fundamentals, space and time.
This thought process is not
complicated if one begins at the simplest point. For example, most of
us understand that speed is measured by distance travelled in a given
time (km per hour). That is expressed mathematically as speed equals
distance divided by time. S = d / t. The other concept most of us
understand is that distance is a one dimensional expression of
'space'. Area is a two dimensional expression of space (s2)
and volume is a three dimensional expression of space (s3).
We cannot conceptualize time in a similar way, but mathematics can.
For example 1/t is the mathematical expression of frequency, or 'so
many thinga-mi-jigs per second'.
Without going into complex
mathematical proofs in this article, it can be shown beyond any
reasonable doubt that space-time
(S-T) units can substitute for any other units
in the physics of mechanics, electricity, magnetism and mass, whether
Newtonian or Einsteinian physics, just as Planck proposed. If s =
space and t = time, all units of measure are a combination of these
two fundamentals.
Here is what
mainstream physics has missed :
The S-T units for electric energy (emf) is t/s, and the S-T units for
the electric field (current) is s/t. The S-T units for magnetic
energy (mmf) is t2/s2,
and for the magnetic field is s2/t2.
The S-T units for mass energy is t3/s3,
and for the mass field ( = gravity) is s3/t3.
Mass is the three
dimensional analogue of electricity, and gravity is the three
dimensional analogue of the electric field,(magnetism is the two
dimensional analogue). These three dimensions of mass are at right
angles to each other just as the dimensions of volume are (length,
width, depth). That is why the motion of a generator is at a right
angle to the magnetic field, which is at a right angle to the
electric current generated, and the electric motor produces motion
from the electric current and magnetism for the same reason. There
is no rational explanation of electricity and magnetism in current
physics.
The implication of
the above analysis between mass, magnetism and electricity is that
mass is also a form of energy, not a form of matter. Mass has the S-T
unit t3/s3,
while the simplest particle, the up-quark has the S-T unit 'ts'. Mass
and Matter are not the same quantity.
The difference in energy between the three energy analogues is a
function of the constant c,
which is a very large number (3 x 108)
. Between electricity and magnetism the difference is mc,
and between electricity (or energy, which has the same unit) and mass
it is mc2
as
Einstein famously pointed out.
Gravity is in fact
the mass field, or the field produced by mass current, analogous to
the eletcric field produced by electric current. Gravity is a
mathematical inverse (reciprocal) of mass. In S-T units, mass = t3/s3
and gravity = s3/t3.
If they are mathematically multiplied by each other the result equals
1. In physics this is written mg
= 1.
The same applies to electricity and its field, and magnetism and its
field. Gravity
and Acceleration are not the same quantity. The
S-T unit for acceleration is s/t2.
So what is happening in the real world?
In a region of high
mass, such as the centre of the galaxy or a black hole, we know the
acceleration of the matter is high. Expressed in S-T units, gravity
(s3/t3)
= s/t2
(acceleration) x s2/t,
which multiplied together equal s3/t3.
The quantity s2/t
has no name in science. It may be a good bet that it represents
Hawking radiation which is observable in space coming from a black
hole. If these two constituents of gravity are elevated then the
residual gravity field is reduced. This fits with the equation mg =
1, in that if m (mass) is high, then g (gravity) is low for their
product to equal 1.
In the reverse
scenario, when mass is low, then gravity is high. This occurs in a
region where there is little mass. Mass is reduced if its carrier,
matter, is scarce as in empty space. That is why modern physicists
are looking for 'dark matter' to account for the huge increase in
gravitational influence from empty space. Dark
matter and dark energy do not exist. They
are man-made inventions to account for the misconception that mass
and matter are the same,
and that increased mass produces increased gravity when it is the
reverse that is true.
Increased mass produces increased acceleration of matter, while at
the same time reducing the gravitational field. The energies are
conserved by an increase in acceleration being 'funded' by a decrease
in the gravity field.
Mass is
an energy
(as evidenced by nuclear energy, E = mc2
) and
Gravity is its field.
There are many questions which may follow this shift in thinking
around mass and gravity. One which comes to mind is how to explain
Newton's equation for gravitational force, the well known
F
= Gmm'/r2
as the force of attraction from gravity between two objects. The
explanation comes from Newton himself in his other famous equation F
= ma. The first equation is not a fundamental equation, but one based
on Newton's observation. The second is fundamental.
It can be seen that F = m (Gm'/r2)
If m' and r were set at 1, then 'a' would equal G. So the F = m
(Gm'/r2)
where the term in brackets equals 'a'.
The complete Table
of possible S-T units clarifies a number of misconceptions within
physics, however the most important one has been discussed above.
Without the correct interpretation of mass and gravity, our research
into the cosmos is doomed to raise more questions than solutions.
This has been the case for 300 years.
The
Table also is an excellent pointer to that which we do not know,
which in turn drives thought and research in the most productive
directions. An example of that can be seen above with the
understanding of the already observed Hawking radiation being made
clearer by the use of S-T units linking it with the acceleration of
matter within a gravity field. Mainstream
physics has no explanation for Hawking radiation.
It now remains for physics to prove the mathematics, or not. Therein
lies the value of mathematics as a predictor of reality, as Newton
well understood.
Further information is contained within the Paper
entitled 'Theoria Omnia' written by this Author in 2013, about 11,000
words, and is available as a PDF file on request, at
michael3.bull@gmail.com
Word Count 1455
No comments:
Post a Comment