Using the star/proton model to evaluate the cancellation of
gravitation


* Purpose *

I am looking for a quantitative evaluation of the following
assumption:

I have reasons to believe that space and time are granular, the size
of the "grains" being given by Planck's length and time.

If space is granular, this means that the spatial curvature caused by
gravity is granular too.

So when the spatial distortion is equal to Planck's length, by moving
further from the mass causing the gravitational curvature, gravity
should vanish.

The cancellation of gravity over large distances would explain the
expansion of the universe and its expansion, as once gravity is null,
there is still a propelling force which is not cancelled: that is
radiation pressure.

* Using the star / proton model *

The main difficulty is to derive a quantitative evaluation from the
equations of GR.

In a first step I need only an evaluation and approximation, so the
most simple way to do it is to use the Schwarzchild solution.

For it I need to use spherically symmetric objects, thus I selected
the couple star/proton.

Why a star?

Galaxies are made for the main part of gases and stars. So stars are
the most immediately available object at hand, and we can assume
reasonably that stars are one of the two main causes of gravity
exerted by galaxies, other components being gases.

In the following calculations I am using the mass of the Sun, as the
mean value of the mass of the stars of our galaxy is close to the mass
of the Sun.

Why a proton?

The mass of bodies is located for the main part in protons. So I
assume that gravity is exerted for the main part on protons. I
consider that gravity does not have a physical effect on the void
between protons.

Then a large percentage of the matter of galaxies is made of hydrogen,
which is supposed to be ionized. So hydrogen and naked protons form an
important percentage of the matter in the universe.

So an important part of the gravitational effect from a galaxy on
another galaxy comes from the attraction exerted by stars on protons,
and by calculating this effect, we are modeling one of the main
components of gravitation.

* Theory of vanishing gravity *

This theory is based on the shrinking effect gravity has on rulers.

Under the effect of gravity, protons shrink.

If the proton does not shrink, this means that the local space of the
proton is not curved, thus there is no gravity and the proton does not
move (of course it can move for other reasons.)

So if the contraction of a proton is inferior to Planck's length, it
can be ignored, as fluctuations smaller than Planck's length have no
effect in the physical universe.

So the theory is that when the contraction exerted by a mass on a
proton becomes inferior to Planck's length, gravity vanishes.

Now let us calculate the contraction of a proton under the effect of
the gravity from the Sun.

* Calculations *

By using the Schwarzchild solution, a good approximation of the value
of the contraction is:

deltap = ((G / c^2) * (M / r)) * p

With
M = mass of the star
r = distance from the star
p = diameter of the proton
deltap = contraction of the proton

We want to know the value of r for which deltap = Planck's length

So we have :
r = ((G / c^2) * M) * p / PL

Where PL = Planck's length

Actual values (rounded to one decimal for clarity and estimation):
G / c^2 = 3.7 * 10^-28 m/kg
M = 2 * 10^30 kg
p = 10^-15 m
PL = 1.6 * 10^-35 m

Thus
r = 4.6 * 10^22 m

I assume that if the contraction caused by a star is 0, millions of
stars should also cause 0,
as 0 * something = 0.

In fact QM don't say what occurs below Planck's length, but according
to the assumption that space is granular, once a length is smaller
than spatial resolution, it is in fact null.

That is to be compared to the following actual measu in 2003 the
zero acceleration surface around our local group of galaxies has been
measured. It is close to a sphere of radius 2 MPC = 6 * 10^22 m.

Compare these two figures:

1) Protons do not contract beyond a 4.6 * 10^22 m distance from our
local group of galaxies. That is the critical distance beyond which
our local group does not exert a gravitational effect on protons
(according to the current theory)

2) The zero-acceleration limit around our local group is a sphere with
a 6 * 10^22 m radius (that is an actual measure.)

Both figures (4.6 * 10^22 and 6 * 10^22) are quite similar, so
experience seems to be in agreement with the theory.

Well, I have done a lot of simplifications. But perhaps, considering
this first agreement between experience and theory, the theory should
be investigated more deeply.

Moreover it seems possible to make actual experiments in laboratory to
test these assumptions.

The main assumption is:

Beyond a critical distance, gravity vanishes.

--
Curiosus
http://www.geocities.com/curiosus_2008/
curiosus_2008_at_yahoo.com (replace _at_ by @)

wrote in message
...
Using the star/proton model to evaluate the cancellation of
gravitation


* Purpose *

I am looking for a quantitative evaluation of the following
assumption:

I have reasons to believe that space and time are granular, the size
of the "grains" being given by Planck's length and time.

If space is granular, this means that the spatial curvature caused by
gravity is granular too.

So when the spatial distortion is equal to Planck's length, by moving
further from the mass causing the gravitational curvature, gravity
should vanish.

Why?

Bill


The cancellation of gravity over large distances would explain the
expansion of the universe and its expansion, as once gravity is null,
there is still a propelling force which is not cancelled: that is
radiation pressure.

* Using the star / proton model *

The main difficulty is to derive a quantitative evaluation from the
equations of GR.

In a first step I need only an evaluation and approximation, so the
most simple way to do it is to use the Schwarzchild solution.

For it I need to use spherically symmetric objects, thus I selected
the couple star/proton.

Why a star?

Galaxies are made for the main part of gases and stars. So stars are
the most immediately available object at hand, and we can assume
reasonably that stars are one of the two main causes of gravity
exerted by galaxies, other components being gases.

In the following calculations I am using the mass of the Sun, as the
mean value of the mass of the stars of our galaxy is close to the mass
of the Sun.

Why a proton?

The mass of bodies is located for the main part in protons. So I
assume that gravity is exerted for the main part on protons. I
consider that gravity does not have a physical effect on the void
between protons.

Then a large percentage of the matter of galaxies is made of hydrogen,
which is supposed to be ionized. So hydrogen and naked protons form an
important percentage of the matter in the universe.

So an important part of the gravitational effect from a galaxy on
another galaxy comes from the attraction exerted by stars on protons,
and by calculating this effect, we are modeling one of the main
components of gravitation.

* Theory of vanishing gravity *

This theory is based on the shrinking effect gravity has on rulers.

Under the effect of gravity, protons shrink.

If the proton does not shrink, this means that the local space of the
proton is not curved, thus there is no gravity and the proton does not
move (of course it can move for other reasons.)

So if the contraction of a proton is inferior to Planck's length, it
can be ignored, as fluctuations smaller than Planck's length have no
effect in the physical universe.

So the theory is that when the contraction exerted by a mass on a
proton becomes inferior to Planck's length, gravity vanishes.

Now let us calculate the contraction of a proton under the effect of
the gravity from the Sun.

* Calculations *

By using the Schwarzchild solution, a good approximation of the value
of the contraction is:

deltap = ((G / c^2) * (M / r)) * p

With
M = mass of the star
r = distance from the star
p = diameter of the proton
deltap = contraction of the proton

We want to know the value of r for which deltap = Planck's length

So we have :
r = ((G / c^2) * M) * p / PL

Where PL = Planck's length

Actual values (rounded to one decimal for clarity and estimation):
G / c^2 = 3.7 * 10^-28 m/kg
M = 2 * 10^30 kg
p = 10^-15 m
PL = 1.6 * 10^-35 m

Thus
r = 4.6 * 10^22 m

I assume that if the contraction caused by a star is 0, millions of
stars should also cause 0,
as 0 * something = 0.

In fact QM don't say what occurs below Planck's length, but according
to the assumption that space is granular, once a length is smaller
than spatial resolution, it is in fact null.

That is to be compared to the following actual measu in 2003 the
zero acceleration surface around our local group of galaxies has been
measured. It is close to a sphere of radius 2 MPC = 6 * 10^22 m.

Compare these two figures:

1) Protons do not contract beyond a 4.6 * 10^22 m distance from our
local group of galaxies. That is the critical distance beyond which
our local group does not exert a gravitational effect on protons
(according to the current theory)

2) The zero-acceleration limit around our local group is a sphere with
a 6 * 10^22 m radius (that is an actual measure.)

Both figures (4.6 * 10^22 and 6 * 10^22) are quite similar, so
experience seems to be in agreement with the theory.

Well, I have done a lot of simplifications. But perhaps, considering
this first agreement between experience and theory, the theory should
be investigated more deeply.

Moreover it seems possible to make actual experiments in laboratory to
test these assumptions.

The main assumption is:

Beyond a critical distance, gravity vanishes.

--
Curiosus
http://www.geocities.com/curiosus_2008/
curiosus_2008_at_yahoo.com (replace _at_ by @)

On Jan 13, 6:27*pm, wrote:
Using the star/proton model to evaluate the cancellation of
gravitation

* Purpose *

I am looking for a quantitative evaluation of the following
assumption:

I have reasons to believe that space and time are granular, the size
of the "grains" being given by Planck's length and time.

You're not the first to speculate about this.

If space is granular, this means that the spatial curvature caused by
gravity is granular too.

This doesn't necessarily follow. You would need to prove it
mathematically.

So when the spatial distortion is equal to Planck's length, by moving
further from the mass causing the gravitational curvature, gravity
should vanish.

What do you mean by spatial distortion? And why should gravity vanish
there? Again, you would need to demonstrate this mathematically.

The cancellation of gravity over large distances would explain the
expansion of the universe and its expansion, as once gravity is null,
there is still a propelling force which is not cancelled: that *is
radiation pressure.


But you would probably need to have a rather lopsided distribution of
stellar matter to have a globally unbalanced radiation pressure.

Maybe you need to clarify your starting assumptions before proceeding
any further.

Bill Hobba wrote:


Curiosus:

So when the spatial distortion is equal to Planck's length, by
moving further from the mass causing the gravitational
curvature, gravity should vanish.

Why?

According to GR, gravity comes from a curvature of space.

So if space is not curved, there is no gravity.

If the deformation of space is smaller than Planck length, it is not
measurable and should have no effect.

Thus if the deformation of space caused by gravity is inferior to
Planck length, gravitation has no more effect.

I was looking for a way to get some quantitative data, and eventually
choose the star/proton model as it allows simple calculations.

When the contraction of a proton under the influence of gravity is
inferior to Planck length, there is no measurable effect on the
proton, thus gravity has no effect on the proton. So the proton should
not be attracted by the mass.

By using this model, I get a distance of about 2 MegaParsec from the
Sun, where protons don't feel anymore the gravitational attraction
from the Sun.

That is in accordance with the 2MPC distance from our local group of
galaxies, where attraction becomes null to be replaced by the
expansion of the universe.

--
Curiosus
http://www.geocities.com/curiosus_2008/

Igor wrote:

What do you mean by spatial distortion? And why should gravity
vanish there?

According to GR, space is curved by massive bodies.

I am calling spatial distortion the amount of deformation of space
caused by the curvature. That would be the displacement of local
coordinates caused by a mass.

When this displacement becomes smaller than Planck length, it is no
measurable, so it should have no effect.

This means that gravity should vanish over very large distances.

Again, you would need to demonstrate this mathematically.

Currently I am considering the implications of an analogy with digital
signal processing, so I am using inductive logic, not deductive logic,
and I don't know yet if I can demonstrate it by using the equations of
GR and QM.

Perhaps that is not possible, as it would be necessary to know and
calculate what occurs below Planck time and length, something QM and
GR cannot do currently.

But you would probably need to have a rather lopsided distribution
of stellar matter to have a globally unbalanced radiation pressure.

From some calculations I have made, radiation pressure from our local
group of galaxies would be strong enough to explain the expansion,
"helped" by the cancellation of gravitation. I shall post these
calculations soon.

Regards,

--
Curiosus
http://www.geocities.com/curiosus_2008/