The Gravity Field

Paper 8

M.J.Bull 2016

(Word count 6389)

Abstract: This Paper aims at explaining exactly what the phenomenon of gravity is; why its definition has defied science until now; from whence it comes and its relationship with mass, acceleration, inertia and light. The Paper also explores the implications of the gravity field (G-field) as a reciprocal motion to mass energy. Quantum values for the different physical phenomena expressed in terms of Space-Time (S-T) units of measure, including mass and gravity, are available in the tables called Table of Motions and Table of Energies reproduced in section 3. of this paper.

(The evidence supporting the mathematical reciprocity of mass and the gravity field [G-field] are discussed at length in Paper 1 and expanded upon in Papers 2 to 8 by this author. Papers are available to read or download at Academia.edu under the author's name or can be seen at michaeljbull.blogspot.com)

Contents

1. Fundamental G-field Relationships

2. Managing Conversion of Units of Measure

3. Tables of Motions and Energies

4. Some Earthly Facts

5. Cosmic Implications

6. Multidimensional Scalar Motion

7. The Defining Criteria of the Gravity Field

8. Changing Mass and the G-field

9. Extrpolation of the Mass altering Experimental Results

10. Multi dimensional Analogues within Space-Time Measurement

11. The Adequate Frame of Reference

12. Conclusions

Summary: The concept of a 3D space is itself challenged by the existence of scalar motions such as gravity, and energies such as mass, which operate simultaneously in more than one dimension. The idea that a frame of reference does not define that which is within it but, on the contrary, the motions within it define what the frame of reference must be, is a concept which may free up a thought impasse which has existed around the gravity field for over 350 years. The Tables of Motions and Energies are key in understanding a physical reality that is different from the conventional view, which has until now left the phenomenon of gravity inexplicable.

1. Fundamental G-field Relationships

In Paper 1. section 4., the relationship between electro-magnetism and mass was explored and later in Paper 1 experimental evidence provided to support the mathematics of the hypothesis linking these phenomena. As the mathematical reciprocal of mass, the G-field is linked in a similar way to electro-magnetism, that is, it is a cubic function of the electric (E) field just as the magnetic (B) field is a square function of the E-field. Where F = m g, 1/F = G ί.

From Newton's Second Law of Motion, F = ma, it was shown in Paper 1 section 4 also that

F = a/G (and G = 1/m at quantum values), where a is acceleration and is sometimes expressed as g.

ie F = g/G.

Quantum values in the afore mentioned Tables numerically support that G-field relationship with the E and B fields. The fundamental quantum values are the quantum of time and the quantum of length (space in one dimension) as calculated by Planck. These two quanta define all other quanta as well as the constants when expressed in Space-Time (S-T) units of measure.

The mathematical reciprocity of the G-field with Mass means that, in the region around a large mass, where acceleration of mass, g, is high, the G-field is reduced. In a region of low mass and low g, the G-field is higher. This may seem counter intuitive, but only if g and G are not differentiated, as is often the case in mainstream physics texts. The G-field is the source of the force (energy) which supplies acceleration of mass, g. Energy is thus conserved and that is the reason for the counter intuitive result for the G-field value.

Acceleration of different masses in the same G-field have the same g value (the equivalence principle) because of the reciprocity of acceleration and inertia . This is also discussed in Paper 1 section 1.

2. Managing Conversion of Units of Measure

Within the Table of Energies it is necessary to be able to convert SI units to S-T units of measure. It is so because SI units do not have units which use seconds per metre. The Table of Motions use units expressed as metres per second which are directly equivalent to SI units and require no conversion factor.

To find the conversion factor for the elements in the Table of Energies it is necessary to revert to quantum values, the SI value has already been calculated by Max Planck. The S-T quantum values have been calculated by this author in the Tables below.

This example is for mass.

The quantum of mass in SI units m_(q) = 2.1765 x 10^-8 kg. calculated by Planck

The quantum of mass in S-T units m_(q) = 3.711404 x 10^-26 sec³ / metre³ calculated from the quanta of time and length as determined by Planck.

These two are both the same quantum and therefore the conversion factor from SI to S-T units is

m_(q) SI / m_(q) S-T = 2.1765 x 10^-8 / 3.711404 x 10^-26 = 5.86438 x 10¹⁷

Observation shows that regardless of the indices applying to the seconds and metres, the conversion factor of the Energies from SI to S-T units is of the order of 10¹⁸ .

3. Motions and Energies Quantum Values M.J. Bull 2015-6

Table of Motions                                                                                                           Contraction of Space

S4/T4 m4/s4 c4 = 8.077596x 1034	S4/T3 m4/s3 sc3 4.354684x 10-9	S4/T2 m4/s2 s2c2 2.347635x 10-53	S4/T m4/s s3c 1.265625x 10-96	S4 ? 6.823062x 10-140 m4	↑ S4
S3/T4 m3/s4 3D accel c3/t 4.997898x 1069	S3/T3 mass current (gravity) c3 = m3/sec3 = 2.694398x 1025	S3/T2 m3/s2 sc2 1.452565x 10-18	S3/T m3/s (cumecs) s2c 7.830923x 10-62	S3 volume 4.221672x 10-105 m3	S3
S2/T4 m2/s4 c2/t2 3.092377x 10104	S2/T3 m2/s3 2D accel c2/t 1.667120x 1061	S2/T2 magnetic current c2 = m2/sec2 = 8.957548x 1016	S2/T m2/s sc (= Gί = 1/F ) 4.845242x 10-27	S2 area 2.612099x 10-70 m2	S2
S/T4 ? c/t3 = 1.914383x 10138 m/s4	S/T3 change of acceleration Δa c/t2 = 1.031505x 1095 m/s3	S/T2 1D acceleration, Δv c/t = 5.560912 x 1051 m/s2	S/T velocity electric current c = m/sec = 2.997924x108 m/s	S length electric quantity Q as capacitance C (coulomb) Sq = 1.616199x 10-35 m Quantum of length	S1
1/T4 ? 1.183866x 10174 ←	1/T3 ? 6.385696x 10129 Expansion	1/T2 ? 3.440734x 1087 of Time	1/T frequency (Hz) 1.854921x 1043	Minimum Values MOTION Maximum Values	S0
← T - 4	T - 3	T - 2	T - 1	T0	O

Table of Energies

O	T0	T1	T2	T3	T4 →
S0	Maximum Values ENERGY Minimum Values	T time (sec) Tq = 5.391063x 10-44 Quantum of time	T2 Contraction 2.906356x 10-87	T3 of Time 1.566833x 10-131	T4 → 8.446895x 10-175
S-1	1/S power =VI (t/s2 x s/t) 6.187356x 1034	T/S potential energy electric charge Q sec/m 1/c =3.335643x 10-9	T2/S 1D inertia ί t/c = s2/m 1.798266 x 10-52	T3/S moment of inertia t2/c = s3/m 9.694554x 10-97	T4/S ? t3/c 5.226395x 10-140
S-2	1/S2 ? 3.828338x 1071	T/S2 force, electric potential V 1/cs = sec/m2 2.063880x 1026	T2/S2 momentum magnetic energy sec2/m2 electric resistivity σ 1/c2 = 1.12265x 10-17	T3/S2 2D inertia t/c2 = s3/m2 5.998367x 10-62	T4/S2 ? t2/c2 3.233758x 10-105
S-3	1/S3 ? 2.368729x 10106	T/S3 elect field intensity E 1/cs2 = sec/m3 1.276998x 1061	T2/S3 electric resistance R magnetic potential 1/c2s 6.884371x 1017	T3/S3 mass energy quantum = 1/c3 sec3/m3 3.711404x 10-26	T4/S3 3D inertia t/c3 = s4/m3 2.000841x 10-70
S-4 ↓	1/S4 ? 1.465617x 10141	T/S4 pressure (sec/m4) (1/cs3 = force/m2, energy/ m3) 7.890828x 1095	T2/S4 magnetic intensity H 1/c2s2 4.253995x 1052	T3/S4 mag resistance μ 1/c3s 2.296378x 108	T4/S4 ? 1/c4 1.237992x 10-35

             Expansion of Space

4. Some Earthly Facts

The mass of the Earth, m_earth , has been calculated as 5.972 x 10²⁴ kg., which converts to

3.502208 x 10⁴² sec³ / metre³.

Gravitational acceleration of mass, g, is 9.807 metres / sec² (or newtons / kilogram) at the surface.

The force, F, applying to an object at or near the Earth's surface from gravitational effects was calculated from Newton's second law of motion, F = ma as F = G m_earth m_object / r² where G is the gravitational constant for Earth and is equal to 6.67384 x 10^-11, and where m equals m_earth and a equals G m_object / r².

So, if the object were 1 metre from the Earth and had a mass of 1 kg, the force applied would be

F = 5.972 x 10²⁴ x 6.67384 x 10^-11 x 1 / 1²

= 3.98561 x 10¹⁴ N

From the above mentioned equation, F = g/G, the G-field between the objects is G = g/F and equals

2.88814 x 10^-14 kg^-1, which is a small value and is consistent with the large mass that is the Earth.

It indicates that mass is reciprocal to the G-field, given that the quantum (maximum) value for the G-field in free space is 2.694398 x 10²⁵ kg^-1 (or m³/sec³) and the quantum (minimum) value for mass is 3.711404 x 10^-26 sec³ / m³.

5. Cosmic Implications

The mathematical reciprocal relationship between mass and the G-field is mirrored by all of the other elements of the Tables of Motion and Energies. Each element of one Table has a reciprocal element within the other Table. They are readily identified by their S-T formula. For example, energy, T/S and velocity S/T ; inertia T²/ S and acceleration S/T² ; electric quantity (coulombs), S and power 1/S. There are still a number of unknown elements within both Tables even though their quantum values and S-T dimensions are known.

The G-field throughout the cosmos interacts with mass to produce acceleration of mass, known as Force (mg), and it interacts with inertia to produce the mathematical reciprocal of force, which has no name in science to date. The G-field is a motion while mass is an energy ; force (T/S² ) is an energy while 1/ force (S²/T) is a motion. The S-T dimensions of that element equate to metres²/sec. It is not clear why that is so or what the implications of it may be. The Tables above present many such unknowns for further research.

Paper 7 discusses the frequencies and wavelengths of the G-field, concluding that the G-field has a lower energy in the vicinity of large masses than it does in 'empty' space. Also of interest is the bending of light waves in the vicinity of massive objects and calculates a reduction of light speed in such places. These observations imply that the G-field is the medium which conducts light waves, formerly referred to as the 'Aether' by 19^th century scientists but never detected. The wavelength calculations for the G-field indicate that they are less than the quantum of length except in the vicinity of large masses. This may be why gravity waves have not been detected until 2016 where researchers claim to have detected them near a binary 'black hole' system, where their wavelength is greater than the quantum of length. Their experimental appartus mirrored that designed by Michelson and Morley except that the interferometer uses short wavelength laser light, which was not available to Michelson and Morley in the 19^th century attempt to detect the 'aether'.

The proposition that the G-field is maximised in regions of little or no mass implies that its motion, which is reciprocal to mass energy, must be accounted for in considerations of the energy and mass of the cosmos as a whole. Science has long been searching for 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' without success. As with the reciprocal motion to force, the G-field is difficult to detect yet is distributed non-uniformly throughout the cosmos. Non-uniformly is also the case for distribution of mass throughout the cosmos.

The vast energy of the G-field must significantly affect the total energy within the universe and may well be the elusive 'dark energy' which has yet to be identified, in addition to being the 'aether' which medium carries light wave oscillation. The mathematics support the foregoing hypotheses.

The motions which are the G-field can be expressed as a function of the speed of light, c, and it is represented by c³. Similarly the energies called mass can be expressed as 1/c³. They are both composite phenomena and mutually reciprocal. Mass energy is carried by most matter and G-field effects are highly visible as a result. The G-field is a composite scalar motion and in regions of 'empty' space it has no observable effects.

6. Multidimensional Scalar Motion

Much of the problem in detecting multi-stranded scalar motion (such as is the G-field,) arises from science's inadequate frames of reference. There is in the 3D spatial reference system the ability to resolve motion (vectors for example) into a 1D motion which is linear or orbital within the 3D frame. It does not allow for scalar motions such as the G-field which have three simultaneous and orthogonal motions which make up the whole phenomenon that is gravity. It simply cannot be represented in a 3D frame of reference without ignoring 2 of the 3 constituent motions. Mathematics has no such limitation and the Tables above represent three-stranded scalar motion as a cube function of a linear motion. The E-field is S/T , the B-field is S²/T² and the G-field S³/T³ . That is their fundamental relationship and it was identified by Einstein as the relationship between energy and mass. Each scalar motion (velocity S/T) can be expressed as the light constant c, thus gravity can be expressed as c³. The Table of S-T units make the relationship between all of the elements of space-time clear, regardless of the limits imposed by a 3D frame of reference.

The following is a lucid explanation of the nature of gravity and the reference system from D.B.Larson:

“Now that the existence of scalar motion has been demonstrated (in a prior article), it will be appropriate to examine the consequences of this existence. Some of the most significant consequences are related to the dimensions of this hitherto unrecognised type of motion. The word “dimension” is used in several different senses, but in the sense in which it is applied to space it signifies the number of independent magnitudes that are required for a complete definition of a spatial quantity. It is generally conceded that space is three-dimensional. Thus three independent magnitudes are required for a complete definition of a quantity of space. Throughout the early years of science this was taken as an indication that the universe is three-dimensional.

Currently, the favored hypothesis is that of a four-dimensional universe, in which the three dimensions of space are joined to one dimension of time. Strangely enough, there does not appear to have been any critical examination of the question as to the number of dimensions of motion that are possible. The scientific community has simply taken it for granted that the limits applicable to motion coincide with those of the spatial reference system. On reviewing this situation it can be seen that this assumption is incorrect. The relation of any one of the three space magnitudes to a quantity of time constitutes a scalar motion. Thus three dimensions of scalar motion are possible. But only one dimension of motion can be accommodated within the conventional spatial reference system. The result of any motion within this reference system can be represented by a vector (a one-dimensional expression), and the resultant of any number of such motions can be represented by the vector sum (likewise one-dimensional). Any motions that exist in the other two dimensions cannot be represented.

Here again we encounter a shortcoming of the reference system. In our examination of the nature of scalar motion we saw that this type of motion cannot be represented in the reference system in its true character. The magnitude and direction attributed to such a motion in the context of the reference system are not specifically defined, but are wholly dependent on the size and position of the object whose location constitutes the reference point. Now we find that there are motions which cannot be represented in the reference system in any manner. It is therefore evident that the system of spatial coordinates that we use in conjunction with a clock as a system of reference for physical activity gives us a severely limited, and in some respects inaccurate, view of physical reality. In order to get the true picture we need to examine the whole range of physical activity, not merely that portion of the whole that the reference system is capable of representing.

For instance, gravitation has been identified as a scalar motion, and there is no evidence that it is

subject to any kind of a dimensional limitation other than that applying to scalar motion in general. We must therefore conclude that gravitation can act three-dimensionally. Furthermore, it can be seen that gravitation must act in all of the dimensions in which it can act. This is a necessary consequence of the relation between gravitation and mass. The magnitude of the gravitational force exerted by a material particle or aggregate (a measure of its gravitational motion) is determined by its mass..... We may therefore identify the gravitational motion as three-dimensional speed, which we can express as s³/t³, where s and t are space and time respectively.”

The gravity field cannot be fully recognised from within the three dimensional frame of reference used for space. Gravity's makeup of three orthogonal scalar motions cannot be accommodated within that spatial 3D reference for the reasons outlined above.

The scalar motion which is the electric field operates as a one dimensional motion and can therefore be accomodated within a 3D spatial frame of reference.

The magnetic field is a two dimensional scalar motion and one of its dimensions cannot be accomodated within the 3D spatial frame of reference. It is known to science that there is an orthogonal 'magnetic' phenomenon arising from an electric current (one dimensional motion) but its nature is not known to mainstream science because of the inability of the 3D spatial reference system to define two similtaneous motions which cannot be resolved as a vector (one dimensional) motion.

The gravity field is a three dimensional scalar motion and two of the three motions cannot be resolved by a 3D spatial frame of reference.

Those are the reasons science has been unable to define magnetism and gravity to date.

Science has attempted to use the effects of gravity (and magnetism) to define these phenomena, but that does not shed any knowledge upon their true nature, numerical value and definition.

7. The Defining Criteria of the Gravity Field

There are several criteria which define the G-field:

1. The three scalar motions which constitute gravity (the G-field) are mathematically reciprocal to the three energies which constitute mass. (Refer Paper 1 for mathematical and experimental evidence for the nature of the energy called mass.)
2. The G-field is a three dimensional analogue of the electric field. The magnetic field is a two dimensional analogue of the electric field. (Refer Paper 1 for supporting evidence.)
3. The quantum value for the G-field is a mathematical reciprocal of the quantum value for mass, expressed in S-T units of measure. (Refer section 3. Tables above.) The G-field quantum value is a maximum value, 2.694398 x 10²⁵ m³/s³ , which is defined by the quantum (minimum) value for mass. Gravity's S-T unit is S³/T³. The cube root of this value, S/T, is the quantum value of the E-field and also the speed of light constant, c, but it cannot be arrived at by a vector sum of the three scalar motions. (That is evidence for the inadequacy of the 3D spatial frame of reference.)
4. The quantum value of the G-field can also be derived using only the quantum of length (space in 1 dimension) and the quantum of time. Both of these quanta were calculated by Max Planck in the early 20^th century (however he may not have been aware of their defining relationship with the G-field value or the quantum of mass expressed in S-T units).

8. Changing Mass and the G-Field

The mathematics dealing with the frequency and wavelength of the G-field can be found in Papers 4 and 7 and support the hypothesis that the G-field has a value which varies according to its proximity to mass. As reciprocal energies, the G-field has a lower energetic value in a region of large concentrations of mass than it does in a region with little or no mass. Thus the frequency is lower and the wavelength longer in the G-field near a mass than it is in a region of little or no mass.

The following is included from Paper 7 for the reader's convenience:

{''As far as is known by this author, there has not been published scientific consideration that the electric, magnetic and gravity fields (E-M-G fields) may have a frequency. The highest known electro-magnetic frequencies are associated with gamma radiation, which is of the order of 10²⁵ Hz. The current electro-magnetic spectrum physics texts do not look beyond gamma radiation.

The equations relevant are E = mc², E = hυ and υ = c/λ .

These equations are quantum and relativistic in their physics and sourced from the accepted work of Planck and Einstein. [where h is the Planck constant ; c is Speed of light constant ; υ (Greek letter upsilon) is the frequency ; λ (lambda) is the wavelength and ί (iota) is this author's symbol for inertia.] Also relevant is the reciprocity of an energy to its field (or motion) such as potential to kinetic energy or electric charge to electric current for example. Space-Time units of measure make that reciprocity clear.

The Space-Time (S-T) units of measure can be used to confirm the validity of the equations used to calculate the following Frequency Constants. The three fields compared are the electric (E) field, the magnetic (B) field and the gravity (G) field. (Note that the G field and acceleration g are different physical quantities.)

                        E field                           B field                           G field

Equations     1. E field = 1/mc²           2. B field = 1/mc           3. G field = 1/m

                     4. E field = 1/hυ              5. B field = c/hυ            6. G field = c²/hυ

S-T unit       1. s/t = (t³/s³ x s²/t²)^-1 = s/t          2. s²/t² = (t³/s³ x s/t)^-1 = s²/t²     3. s³/t³ = (t³/s³)^-1 = s³/t³                    check            4. s/t = (t²/s x 1/t)^-1 = s/t                5. s²/t² = s/t (t²/s x 1/t)^-1 = s²/t²  6. s³/t³ = s²/t² (t²/s x1/t)^-1 = s³/t³

All six equations above correlate with the S-T units below them, indicating they are correct and equivalent. (for details on S-T units refer Appendix 1 and 2 of Paper 1, “Mass, Gravity and Unity” by this author)

Substitute the values for h and c in the equations below,

E = 1/hυ = 1/6.629x10^-34 υ

B = c/hυ = 3x10⁸ /6.629x10^-34 υ

G= c²/hυ = 9x10¹⁶ /6.629x10^-34 υ

(where h is value of the Planck constant and c is Speed of light constant and υ is the frequency)

The algebra becomes

Eυ = 1.508 x10³³ = K_E Bυ = 4.525 x10⁴¹ = K_B Gυ = 1.357 x 10⁵⁰ = K_G

where K_E, K_B and K_G are constants.

(Because, for example, from Gυ = c²/h, Gυ is constant because c and h are themselves constants.)

The G-field of varying Frequency and Wavelength

The above constants (K_E, _B and _G) allow the calculation of the frequency and wavelength of, for example, the gravitational fields of the Earth, the Sun and a hypothetical Black Hole, which vary with the gravitational field strength.

Frequency and Wavelength calculations, (given ί =1/g, λ= c/υ, and υ _{G earth} means frequency of the G-field of Earth, and g _earth is the acceleration of mass caused by gravity on Earth.)

Earth

Frequency υ _{G earth} = K_G /g _earth = 1.357x 10⁵⁰ / 9.8 = 1.384x10⁴⁹ Hertz

Wavelength λ _{G earth} = c/υ _{G earth} = 4.613 x10 ^-40 metres

Sun

Frequency υ _{G sun} = K_G /g _sun = 1.357x10⁵⁰ / 274 = 4.952x10⁴⁷ Hertz

Wavelength λ _{G sun} = c/υ _{G sun} = 6.058x10^-39 metres

Black Hole (of mass 10,000 times the Sun)

Frequency υ _{G black hole} = K_G / g _{black hole} = 1.357 x 10⁵⁰ / 2,740,000 = 4.952 x 10⁴³ Hertz

Wavelength λ _{G black hole} = c / υ _{G black hole} = 6.058 x 10^-36 metres.

[ This Black Hole gravity wavelength approaches the quantum of length, 1.616 x10^-35 metres. A marginally more massive black hole would exhibit a gravitational wavelength longer that the quantum of length and gravitational waves would theoretically be detectable. A detection was recently claimed (in 2016) from the study of a binary Black Hole system of very large mass using a laser interferometer. The claimed result is consistent with these mathematics of frequency and wavelength calculation, although there is still a (perhaps unfounded) view in mainstream science that gravity waves are a much longer wavelength.]

(Note that the G field interacts with inertia in a similar way that mass interacts with acceleration, g, which is the basis of the above equations using K_G /g to determine υ and λ. F = m g and

1/F = G ί.

Logic of the Mathematics above and the relevance of Inertia, ί.

υ _{G earth} = K_G ί _earth , (as ί = 1/g,) and ί _earth = 1/9.8 = 0.102041 kg/N, which is why the frequency of G varies between the Earth and the Sun, because of the different inertia values. (ί _sun = 0.003650 kg/N).

A maths validity check of these equations is υ = c/λ, so c = υλ and the equations approximate 3 x 10⁸ = c.

Light speed in the sun's G-field is 3.385 m/sec slower than in the earth's G-field,

(c _earth – c _sun)

and slower in the earth's G-field than in free space. Light speed in the vicinity of the black hole is 10,000 m/sec slower than in the vicinity of the sun. Both are very small variations when it is considered that light speed in free space is nearly 300 million m/sec. ''}

It can be seen from the above that the G-field is not constant and is lower in energy in the vicinity of large masses. It can also be seen from the Experimental results in Paper 1 that mass is not constant and can be varied using an electro-magnetic coil system, demonstrating that the relationship between electric, magnetic and gravitational phenomena are as stated in Paper 1.

It follows that if mass can be altered electro-magnetically, then so can the G-field.

The following is reproduced from Paper 1 for the reader's convenience and demonstrates the results for the experiments which altered mass, including a quantum analysis by others:

{'' In collaboration with Kelvin Abraham of Brisbane, Australia, the author of Tetryonic Theory, the experimental results were analysed at a quantum level to find a theoretical explanation at that level. (The file containing that analysis has not been included in this paper due to file size.)

The analysis of the quantum forces created by the coil system within the object concluded that:

1. An excess of positive charge mass energy momenta within the object resulted in an asymmetry between positive and negative Planck charge quanta. The state of excess positive charge mass energy momenta increased the mass of the object.
2. An excess of negative charge mass energy momenta within the object decreased mass.
3. The linear vector force created by the coil in the object had a direct proportion to its mass.

The linear vector force in 3. above did not cause motion of the object and resulted in a variation of mass, manifested as weight in the experimental results. When Newton's F = ma is applied, that force which did not cause motion was channelled into the form of mass energy and thus the energy was conserved.

The quantum analysis and the original hypothetical mathematics, summarised in section 8.(Paper 1), when added to the experimental results, leave little room for doubt that:

1. There is direct connection between the energies of electricity, magnetism and mass.
2. Mass is not the same entity as matter; acceleration of mass due to gravity, g, is not the same entity as the gravitational field G.
3. Weight of an object within a gravity field is not the same as its mass. Weight is a force equal to mass x gravitational acceleration, mg.

These conclusions are similarly indicated by Tetryonic Theory itself.

In summary,

'' If a force is applied to an object of invariant mass, that object must accelerate according to Newton's Second Law of Motion, F = ma. When an applied force does not result in an acceleration (in the absence of any other counter forces), the mass of that object becomes variable. Energy is thus conserved.'' (Bull's Law)

It is indicated by the experimental results and quantum analysis that the Theory of Special Relativity is correct in its conclusion that the mass of an object will increase as its speed approaches its maximum velocity, c, and it undergoes no further acceleration with additional energy input. The experiments (outlined in Paper 1) create the analogue of that condition. ''}

Einstein's proposition that an object cannot be accelerated beyond the velocity of light and the force applied in that situation would result in an increase of mass energy of the object has been verified by the results of the three Mass Experiments documented in Paper1 and summarised above.

9. Extrapolation of the Mass altering Experimental Results

Given the mathematical reciprocity between mass and the G-field, acceleration and inertia, it may be a reasonable assumption that the experimental results hold true in the reciprocal case. That is, as a mass approaches light speed the force of acceleration applied to it is converted to additional mass energy. The reciprocal case is that as a mass approaches light speed, the G-field is reduced as the mass increases, and as acceleration reduces to near zero, the inertia increases to a high value. [The results of Mass Experiment 2, the increasing of mass within the coil, indicated that the electric power applied, 3.2 amps x 2.1 volts = 6.7 watts, was sufficient to increase the mass by 6.6% only, after which the change in mass tapered to zero.] The power available limits the increase in mass.

Both of the reciprocal cases above would have the same effect upon the subject mass, that is, as mass increases its G-field decreases and as acceleration decreases inertia increases. At the limit of velocity, c, theoretically mass becomes infinite, the G-field becomes zero, acceleration becomes zero and inertia becomes infinite.

At the limit of velocity the motion of acceleration becomes the energy of mass and the motion of the G-field becomes the energy of inertia.

In summary, at the limit of velocity, c, motions cease and become energies. In terms of S-T dimensions, acceleration S/T² (x T⁵/S⁴) → mass T³/S³ the difference in dimension being T⁵/S⁴ , an unknown S-T ratio. Similarly, G-field S³/T³ (x T⁵/S⁴) → inertia T²/S, the differnce in dimension also being T⁵/S⁴ , itself an unnamed energy. The same S-T ratio, T⁵/S⁴ , is the same for mass and acceleration and for the G-field and inertia at the limit of velocity, c.

This result supports the hypothesis that mass is reciprocal to the G-field and acceleration is reciprocal to inertia. The existence of the unnamed energy, T⁵/S⁴, at velocity c is a new hypothetical supported by the mathematical logic of Space-Time units of measure. It has not been substantiated experimentally. An alternative expression for this quantity is t/c⁴ with a quantum value of 6.674092 x 10^-79 sec⁵/metres⁴.

10. Multi dimensional Analogues within Space-Time Measurement

It can be seen from the Tables in 3. and the discussion of multi dimensional scalar motion in 6. above that in the Motions (of velocity, magnetic current and the G-field) and the Energies (of energy, magnetic energy and mass energy) that the three elements from both are analogues of the simplest form. In the case of the Motions it is velocity, S/T, and the Energies it is energy, T/S. The analogues are the same S-T form raised to the powers of two or three. It can also be seen from the Tables that S⁴/T⁴ and T⁴/S⁴ , both currently unnamed by science, also exist. There is nothing in the mathematics which limits the extent to which the indices can be raised, even if it is unimaginable physically.

The Tables in 3. above are predictive in that they allow concepts to be seen which non Space-Time tables of measure do not, and expand their concept beyond that which is currently known.

A simple example of this arises from velocity, S/T. When velocity is divided by time, T, the equation is S/T x 1/T which equals S/T² which is acceleration. That is so in SI units as well as S-T units. Using the same mathematical logic as with the analogues of magnetic current and the G-field, the next analogue of acceleration is S²/T³ which is the equivalent of acceleration as a two dimensional scalar motion, ie S²/T² x 1/T = S²/T³ .

Similarly, the equivalent scenario within the Energies when energy T/S is multiplied by time, T, becomes inertia T²/S, and its second dimensional analogue is T³/S² which is inertia in two dimensions. T⁴/S³ is inertia in three dimensions, and T⁵/S⁴ is inertia in four dimensions. From 9. above, it is now known that at the limit of velocity, c, the conversion of acceleration motion to mass energy invokes 4^th dimension inertia.

S/T² (accel) x T⁵/S⁴ (4D inertia) → T³/S³ (mass). The same 4D inertia results in the reciprocal case with the G-field and 1D inertia. S³/T³ (G-field) x T⁵/S⁴ (4D inertia) → T²/S (inertia 1D)

The quantum values for all these 'unknown' elements are predicted by the Tables. It was shown in Paper 3 that the quantum of inertia in one dimension is also the Planck Constant, h, see below.

{“ It is notable that the SI units used for the Planck Constant, h, is joule.second, which in S-T units is T/S x T = T²/S, an Energy reciprocal to the Motion acceleration, the joule.second is a unit of inertia. An SI equivalent unit for the quantum of inertia is, from the foregoing, therefore sec²/metre and its value is 1.798 x 10^-52. The Planck value in joule.sec is 6.629 x 10^-34 . The conversion factor from s²/m to J.sec is 3.687 x 10¹⁸. Multiplying 1.798 x 10^-52 by the conversion factor 3.687 x 10¹⁸ , the answer is 6.629 x 10 ^-34, the value of the Planck Constant in joule.seconds. From general observation, many of the conversion factors of the Energies from sec^x / metre^y to SI units are of the order of 10¹⁸ . The Planck Constant, h, is in fact the quantum of inertia. “}

11. The Adequate Frame of Reference

What frame of reference is needed so that multistranded scalar motions or energies can be adequately defined according to their true physical nature?

It is likely that the frame of reference necessary will allow more than the three motions of the G-field or mass, the reason being that this Paper has already identified a 4D inertia which is calculated to be associated with the result of a mass moving at or near the maximum velocity, c. In our current 3D spatial frame, there can only be one dimension of velocity defined when time is represented as T. If the number of scalar motions to be defined is n then the number of spatial dimensions needs to be 3 n. It is therefore the number of scalar motions which define the number of spatial dimensions needed to define them. Mathematics alone imposes no limit upon the number of scalar motions possible.

It may be that the number of spatial dimensions is determined by the number of scalar motions to be defined rather than by a set perception of what physical reality should be. The failure of science for more than 300 years to make progress in understanding the reality that is the gravity field may be evidence that a set perception of physical reality is a flawed concept. This idea is analogous to the lack of definition within quantum mechanics.

12. Conclusions

1. The Gravity Field functions across three separate dimensions which are not commensurate with the three spatial dimensions commonly assigned to the universe. Two of the three scalar motions which constitute the G-field cannot be defined by the three spatial dimensions, hence the complete inability of current science to understand the true nature of the G-field.

2. The calculation by this author of the G-field constant, K_G, has allowed the calculation of the frequency and wavelength of the G-field and shows its variability according to the proximity of mass. This result explains why G-field waves are so difficult to detect experimentally.

3. The development over a period of time of the Tables of Motions and Energies by this author allow an insight into the unknown physical ratios defined by Space-Time; the complexity of Space-Time ratios; the prediction of previously unknown ratios and their relationship to each other; the calculation of the quantum values for each using Planck's fundamental quanta for space and time; the derivation of the 'constants' such as 'c' and 'h' using Space-Time units of measure and their dependence upon the quanta of space and time.

4. The insight provided by S-T units of measure allow the expression of physical ratios such as acceleration and inertia beyond the single dimension which is imposed by the almost universal acceptance of the limited model of 3D space. Those other physical ratios also exist beyond that limitation, for example, 4D inertia and 3D acceleration which cannot be defined by 3D space.

5. The concept of a 3D space is itself challenged by the existence of scalar motions and energies which operate simultaneously in more than one dimension. The idea that a frame of reference does not define that which is within it but, on the contrary, the motions within it define what the frame of reference must be, is a concept which may free up a thought impasse which has existed around the gravity field for over 300 years.