"Gravity"

Like almost everyone else, the writer started by assuming that General
Relativity represented good science and that it was his task to understand
that science. Almost immediately it became obvious that a flaw must exist
somewhere in its derivation. Allegedly, General Relativity and Special
Relativity followed The Principle of Equivalence but THEIR CONCLUSIONS WERE
NOT EQUIVALENT! In a Force-Length-Time systems of units, Special Relativity
and General Relativity provided:

Dimensional Entity Special Relativity General Relativity

Force(F) 1 1
Length(L) 1/(1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 1
Time(T) (1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2

Where (1-$) is the gravitational time dilation of General Relativity.

One does not need to be a rocket scientist to recognize that these
transformations are NOT ANALOGOUS. Under Special Relativity, the
transformations for length and time are reciprocal. Under General Relativity
such a reciprocal relationship does not exist since the transformations for
length does not exist.

It is the lack of such a reciprocal relationship that made it
impossible for Dr. Einstein to solve the equations of General Relativity in
terms of our familiar three dimensional Euclidean space. After struggling
with the problem for about 18 months, he asserted that space was not three
dimensional Euclidean but was curved into an unobservable fourth spatial
dimension! He did not go back to see where a rather naive mathematical error
was preventing the solution. This crutch allowed the mathematical equations
to be solved since they added the degree of freedom that his error hid. The
idea of "curved space" was accepted because "no one can prove it isn't
curved". This is hardly a responsible justification for accepting a physical
theory!

Since I wished to understand gravitation, I proceeded to derive the
nature of the gravitational field by using two completely different and
independent methods. ("There is more than one way to skin a cat.") Under
both of these derivations, the following transformations were found:

Dimensional Entity Special Relativity General Relativity

Force(F) 1 1
Length(L) 1/(1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 1/G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2
Time(T) (1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2

These results satisfies the Principle of Equivalence since it provides
reciprocal relationship between the transformations for length and time.
These results yield a solution which is consistent with three dimensional
Euclidean space. (Recent cosmological observations have shown that the space
represented by the Universe as a whole is not "curved", it is three
dimensional Euclidean.)

The correct derivation of gravitational theory described is provided
in http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm. The test for its validity is whether
it agrees with both the results of observation and the results of
theoretical derivations. The material presented passes this test. It agrees
with the observations which are alleged to have verified General Relativity.
The Sun's gravitational field is about 5 orders of magnitude too weak to
reveal the difference between the two approaches. Observations of strong
gravitational fields, such as around neutron stars, cannot differentiate
between the theories without a close up observations of orbital parameters.
Such a verification must await the availability of Star Trek's Warp Drive.

The advantage of the revised approach is that, among other results, it
reveals the source of gravitational energy (force), allows the total energy
of the Universe to remain constant over time, eliminates the idea of a
singularities (no black holes), and explains the creation of Universes. The
topics covered a

Summary of "Gravity"

Chapter Titles

1: - Introduction
2: - Laying the Groundwork
3: - Evaluating the Gravitational Conversion Factors
4: - Comparison with the "Real World"
5: - The Complete Gravitational Field

There are 50,000 words and 22 diagrams.

EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING
ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS,
AND IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET
THIS REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP
FROM THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.

All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.

Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.

E-mail:- . If you wish a reply, be sure that your
mail reception is not blocked.

The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 8
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
exception for which a correction was provided.

Klim wrote:
"Gravity"


Since I wished to understand gravitation, I proceeded to derive the
nature of the gravitational field by using two completely different and
independent methods. ("There is more than one way to skin a cat.") Under
both of these derivations, the following transformations were found:

Dimensional Entity Special Relativity General Relativity

Force(F) 1 1
Length(L) 1/(1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 1/G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2
Time(T) (1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2

These results satisfies the Principle of Equivalence since it provides
reciprocal relationship between the transformations for length and time.
These results yield a solution which is consistent with three dimensional
Euclidean space. (Recent cosmological observations have shown that the space
represented by the Universe as a whole is not "curved", it is three
dimensional Euclidean.)

The correct derivation of gravitational theory described is provided
in http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm. The test for its validity is whether
it agrees with both the results of observation and the results of
theoretical derivations. The material presented passes this test. It agrees
with the observations which are alleged to have verified General Relativity.
The Sun's gravitational field is about 5 orders of magnitude too weak to
reveal the difference between the two approaches. Observations of strong
gravitational fields, such as around neutron stars, cannot differentiate
between the theories without a close up observations of orbital parameters.
Such a verification must await the availability of Star Trek's Warp Drive.

The advantage of the revised approach is that, among other results, it
reveals the source of gravitational energy (force), allows the total energy
of the Universe to remain constant over time, eliminates the idea of a
singularities (no black holes), and explains the creation of Universes. The
topics covered a

Summary of "Gravity"

Chapter Titles

1: - Introduction
2: - Laying the Groundwork
3: - Evaluating the Gravitational Conversion Factors
4: - Comparison with the "Real World"
5: - The Complete Gravitational Field

There are 50,000 words and 22 diagrams.

TO ALL READERS

Frankly I am a little dissappointed in this post. 50,000 words seems a
lot to explain gravity. Personally I believe in Occam's razor.

Also, I must admit I subscribe to a mechanical version of what makes
the universe tick.
This is evident in the title of my main work: "On the Quantum as a
Physical Entity"

Included in it is a quantum theory of gravity. I have trepidations
about posting it here because part of it is concepts developed earlier
in the script. This can cause difficulties in absorbing it -- although
it is possible.

For those willing to give it an effort, I will post it.


GRAVITY

Consider the hypothesis that not all quanta in a material body are
confined,
and that some escape to be free, radiating outward in all directions at
the
speed of light.

We may consider this as analogous to the sublimation of solids.

It is yet to be determined whether this process is affected
quantitatively
by extremes of temperature. Beyond that we may assume that all matter,
regardless of physical or chemical composition, emanates individual
quanta
at the same rate, viz., the emanation is a function of fermion
particles
regardless of how they are grouped. Further, the rate of emanation as a

certain percentage of the total mass, is constant. [Be aware that this
is
an assumption. It may well turn out that there are conditions of state
of
matter, temperature or massiveness, that alter this rate -- and in turn

alter the force of gravity. However, for the present, we proceed on
this
assumption.]

In summation we assume that a portion of a given mass is radiated in
all directions
as solitary "gravity quanta" and that the portion is constant.
Collaterally we also
assume that all grouped quanta (atoms) in a body simultaneously absorb
all available
free quanta arriving in their vicinity. (Recall that free quanta have a
diameter of one light second.)

We now consider the absorptive process. "Absorption" is not a wholly
accurate
term because by the present hypothesis the free gravity quanta are not
absorbed
so much as they are drawn into the body with such great rapidity as to
also draw the absorbing body toward the quanta, which is the same
direction as the emitting body. Since this process is mutual, there
appears what is interpreted as a
"mutual attraction" and "action at a distance".

The question arises, what is the nature of this drawing force? In the
case
of the strong force it was demonstrated that due to their spin protons
and
neutrons developed a vorticle force that mutually drew neighboring
nuclei
together. It is this same vorticle force that draws ambient quanta into
the
nuclei. One observes this centrally directed force in a cyclone. As all

nuclei draw simultaneously the more nuclei present the faster ambient
quanta are ingested.

Let us now quantify the gravitational process.
(temporarily setting general relativity aside)


STANDARD CONDITIONS

(Two one-gram masses one centimeter apart)



F = G = 6.672 x 10^-8 dyne


The assumed mechanism will be shown to be commensurate with the usual
mathematical expression for gravity interaction:


G (m_1 x m_2)
F = --------------------------
d^2




We now quantify the sublimation of matter. To do this we discuss
gravitational force in terms of energy under standard conditions.
It is evident that F x 1 cm = E_k. Thereby, a body having a force F
exerted on it, will possess a kinetic energy of the same coefficient as

the force when it moves 1 cm. By designating the quantity as
dyne-centimeters, we keep this relationship constantly in mind.

Since potential and kinetic energy are interchangeable and conserved in
a
closed system, it matters not whether we consider the energy associated
with
the bodies under consideration as potential or kinetic, what is
essential is
that we consider the energy and recognize that it is created by the
force G.

Having ascertained the energy existent between two bodies under
standard conditions, we can immediately determine the equivalent mass
from the familiar m = E/c^2 .
[This is of the same genre as radiation where E = mc^2.]
In the standard case we assert that mass to be the mass equivalent of
G.

(1) Contemplating the standard condition,

G 1 x 1
F = ----------- = 6.672 x 10^-8 dyne
1^2


m = mass = 1 gr G = gravity constant


d = distance between the masses = 1 cm

(2) If the force applied travels 1 cm, we have

F x 1cm = E = 6.672 x 10^-8 dyne centimeter (erg)

and

E
----- = m
c^2



therefore, the mass equivalent of G is


6.672 x 10^-8
S = ------------------------ = 7.423597 x 10^-29 gr .
c^2


Thus we conclude that the mass of the energy between the weights is
7.423597 x 10^-29 gr and is the quantity sublimated each second from 1
gr.
And so we term this sublimated mass, S.

The reason for taking S as the sublimation of one gram instead of two
is that the force resulting from S is common to both. That means each
weight draws that amount from the other, which in turn means each one
gram mass sublimates S (7.423597 x 10^-29 gr per sec) to be absorbed by

the other.

The correctness of this is displayed in the worked example at the end
of
this section.


Since S is stated for one gram then we can say that it represents the
portion of mass sublimated for any mass. Thus (in grams) m x S is the
total mass sublimated from any body. We designate that m_S, "mass
sublimated".


Next we note that by

m E
n = ----- = ----- we can ascertain the number of
m_q h_0

quanta comprising the 6.672 x 10^-8 erg (or 7.423597 x 10^-29 gr).

This turns to be 1.006994 x 10^19 quanta.

We now ask, if 1.006994 x 10^19 quanta produce 6.672 x 10 ^-8 erg, then
what part of an erg would one quantum produce? That is to say, how much
potential energy exists between one quantum one centimeter from one
gram?
(This is equivalent to being an ambient quantum the surface of which is
in
contact with the drawing mass.) We write


1.006994 x 10^19 quanta 1
--------------------------------------- :: -------
6.672 x 10^-8 erg x erg


and we see x = h_0 . (h_0 is 6.626 x 10^-27 erg)

Thus we show that a 1 gr mass will attract one ambient quanta (1q , or
Q)
with h_0 energy or |h|dyne of force at one centimeter. Thus, G is
quantized,
that is to say gravity is quantized.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:- Henceforward we will refer to sublimated quanta as "gravity
quanta","free quanta", or "ambient quanta" and assign them the symbol,
Q.
"Ambient quanta" are specifically gravity quanta that are in proximity
to
an absorbing body and subject to absorption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note that

1.006994 x 10^19 h_0 = |G|erg. and


|G|erg
-------- = G dyne .
1 cm

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
It will be noticed there is a plethora of familiar constants in which
the coefficient of the constant appears but has mismatched dimensions.
Thisarrangement is practically incestuous.

We will display these quantities in their symbolic form but bracket the

mismatched coefficient symbol; thus we remain aware of the tight
interrelation of a relatively few basic quantities and at the same time

emphasize the simplicity, rhythm, and beauty of the universe. It is
this simplicity and rhythm that forms a fractal-like construction of
the universe.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

In reiteration, 1.006994 x 10^19 ambient quanta correspond to G dyne or

6.672 x 10^-8 dyne .

Therefore, 1 quantum cor |h|dyne. That is, one ambient quantum will
produce
|h| (6.625661 x 10^-27) dyne per gram absorbing it.


It is assumed that bodies radiate individual quanta, i.e., gravity
quanta at the same velocity as any other radiation -- c.

The mass loss would also be the same: E/c^2.

The acceleration of ambient quanta drawn into proximate bodies is
tremendously high. (For all practical purposes the acceleration is
pseudo, the velocity of absorption can be considered attained
instantaneously.)

(where nQ = m x S/m_q)
(recall S = sublimated mass per gram.)
( m_q = mass of the quantum, 7.37203854 x 10^-48 gr.)

F_Q = force of gravity quantum per gram of absorbing body = G/nQ =

|h| gr cm/sec^2 = |h|dyne.



A WORKED EXAMPLE


We shall concern ourselves with the gravitational attraction of the
moon (M)
and earth (E) for which some of the parameters are known. There is one
disadvantage which is that these parameters are approximate (at least
as
given here). However, for purposes of illustration, they shall suffice.

(where m = mass, d = distance, r = radius, a = acceleration (at
Earth's
surface 45 degrees from the equator).



mass of earth m_E = 5.98 x 10^27 gr

mass of moon m_M = 7.36 x 10^25 gr

distance earth-moon d_E-M = 3.8 x 10^10 cm_ _

radius of earth r_E = 6.37 x 10^8 cm

acceleration at earth surface a_E_sur = 980.665 cm/sec^2



Step (1)

We ascertain by standard form the gravitational attraction
between E and M , which we write F_E-M.

Gravity can be expressed either as a force or in terms of acceleration.

By the standard equation,


G m_E m_M
F = ---------------------- = 2.033611 x 10^25 dynes
d_E-M ^2

From

F
a = --- we obtain
m


a_E = 3.400687 x 10-3 cm/sec^2 (acceleration of E toward M)

a_M = 2.763058 x 10^-1 cm/sec^2 (acceleration of M toward E)

(We set aside the counteracting conditions as not germane to the
example.)

We note that whereas F is common to both bodies, the acceleration of
each
is different being inversely proportional to its mass.



Next, we note the condition of emitted gravity quanta spreading along
the
expanding surface of an imaginary sphere; thus quanta available for
absorption diminish in numbers inversely proportional to d^2. Quanta
available for
absorption are called ambient quanta.




Step (2)

We calculate nQ, the number of nascent quanta from the moon that are in
the vicinity of Earth, i.e., ambient quanta


m_M
-------- S
m_q
nQ ============= = 5.132600 x 10^23 Q
d^2


Step (3)

Next we recall that one gram matter attracts one Q with |h|dyne of
force.

So m_E x |h|dyne x nQ = total attraction force = 2.033611 dynes.

We see that this is the same as given by the standard equation.



We now calculate the acceleration of a body at the surface of the
Earth:


m_E S
NQ = ------------- = 6.02 x 10^46 Q
m_q


6.02 x 10^46 Q
------------------------------ = nQ at the surface.
(6.37 x 10^8)^2
(r_E^2)


So the force exerted on bodies at the surface is

|h|dyne nQ = 983.3 gr cm/sec^2

which is the number of dynes per gram. We can write acceleration as

F
a = -----
m

where F ( |h|dyne nQ ) is multiplied by the number of grams of the
body.

Since m is the same number of grams, the two cancel leaving

a = |h|dyne nQ = 983.3 cm/sec at the surface.


Given: a = 980.665 cm/sec^2 (at latitude 45 deg.)





THE QUANTIZATION OF GRAVITY

Gravitational action is not customarily thought of in magnitudes on the

order of c because the response of ponderous bodies results in
velocities extremely small compared to that of light, nor is it thought
of in terms of typical quantum magnitudes because it is such a weak
force that determinations of micro proportion are difficult or
considered insignificant.

However, the concept here is that the mechanics of gravity in its
initiating form employs free quanta traveling at c, and the dimensions
of which are on the order of c. Absorption velocity must necessarily be

of much greater magnitudes.

Thus we see gravitational action as initiating on the quantum mass
level but altered by the factors nQ and nq to magnitudes we usually
associate with gravity.

Whereas one usually thinks of quantum magnitudes as being very small,
in gravitational mechanics we are dealing with a broad spectrum
commencing with the large dimensions of individual quanta having micro
mass which are modified by large numbers of quanta and great velocities
to evolve into what appears as a mechanics of macro proportions only.


QUESTIONS

We persue some inevitable questions regarding the sublimation of mass.
We
propose here that all bodies radiate gravitational quanta which
represent


7.423597 x 10^-29 or one part in 1.347056 x 10^28 per second.

The question arises, is this loss detectable? Probably not because (a)
it is so miniscule, and (b) each body also receives ambient quanta from
other bodies which compensates for the loss. Thus the individual quanta
may be thought of as the "virtual" or exchange particle of gravity
(although the mechanics is different).

Other questions: Is the sublimation rate variable for any reason? For
example, would near absolute zero temperatures affect the rate? If not,
what would? And, is any of this detectable with present day
technology?

Collaterally, would extremely high temperatures affect S?

Also, might a body of great mass (ten suns or more) affect sublimation?

In summary, in regard to the basic questions of gravity the present
theory has ascertained or explained quantitatively and qualitatively

(a) action at a distance -- and its corollary

(b) mutual attraction

(c) the gravity "virtual" particle or "gravity wave"

(d) the force engendered

(e) portion of mass radiated as gravitational quanta.


What we are in need of is a more exact picture of the mechanism of
absorption.

At this juncture we picture a continuum of free quanta approaching a
body at c and being drawn in at an increased velocity proportional to
the number of particles comprising the body. Thus the conclusion is
that all particles of the body simultaneously draw on each and every
ambient quantum, the more particles (mass) comprising the body, the
faster the draw and consequently the greater the force.

As a given quantum is drawn in it must, being indivisible, be
eventually pulled away from other absorbing quanta and become an
integral part of a single fermion.

But what is the cause or mechanism of absorption, and how do we
quantify it?

At base we believe the mechanism must be the vortex action described
for the strong force. This is the most logical prospect.

However, taking the vortex force as 8.455122 x 10^-22 dyne as given at
the full radius of a single proton, and applying it to an ambient
quantum, the resultant -- by rough estimate -- is found to be too
great, i.e., greater than gravity by twenty eight orders of ten.

Of course there are differences. The strong force operates between two
nuclei extremely close to their centers whereas the gravity situation
has many fermions spread over a wide range absorbing inactive ambient
quanta. In addition these quanta are impacting at c. This c has to be
to be absorbed and then surpassed before a force can be exerted in the
direction from which the quanta are arriving.

In addition, in the final stage the absorbed quantum is drawn in many
different directions and, because it is indivisible, finally absorbed
by only one fermion. All these conditions must result in a reduction of
force. However, it is extremely difficult to quantitatively assess
them.


REGARDING CURVED SPACE AND THE PRESENT THEORY OF GRAVITY


Apparently the universe is comprised of a cluster of galaxy clusters.

We know that galaxies rotate -- and so do virtually all things in
cosmology and on the quantum particle level.

Thereby, we ask: Does the universe rotate?

If so, we ask


(a) What is the effect of rotation as to centrifugal force?

(b) How would rotation affect Doppler readings?

(c) Does light from distant sources undergo the Coriolis effect?

(d) Do gravity quanta suffer the coriolis effect?

(e) If so would that not create the illusion that space is curved?


V. Vergon

1980 - 1995