- #1

- 1,746

- 49

Hello,

I would like to submit my own "crazy" theory of quantum gravity for discussion. The relevant paper was posted in the ArXiv recently

E.V. Stefanovich "A relativistic quantum theory of gravity"

http://www.arxiv.org/physics/0612019 [Broken]

Let me make sure I haven't ignored any of the posting guidelines.

Here is the abstract from the paper:

The main point of "variance" with "accepted theories" is that gravity is not treated as a space-time curvature. This is important for making my theory compatible with the laws of quantum mechanics. Moreover, it appears that all classical predictions of general relativity can be reproduced within this simple potential-based approach. The theory, as presented, is an approximation. However, the message is that a full and exact approach may be based on the same principles.

As I mentioned above, the new theory agrees with all classical tests of general relativity. There are some observations, like frame dragging or orbital decay of binary pulsars, which are not mentioned in the paper, mainly due to my ignorance in these matters. My approach predicts some new effects. The most significant is the dependence of the gravitational acceleration of particles on their velocity. I believe that this effect contradicts the principle of equivalence. However, its magnitude is too small to be observed by modern experimental techniques.

The paper has 70 references

I guess that link to the arXiv article covers this requirement.

I mentioned that already.

No, I didn't claim that.

If there are such errors in my paper, I am eager to learn about them.

I hope I didn't do that.

I think this 29 pages paper can be regarded as "lengthy derivation and diagrams". So, providing an external link should be OK. If this is a problem I can attach a PDF file.

I believe it is OK to make minor modifications to the text posted in arXiv, like adding references. Is it so?

Thank you very much for providing this opportunity to share my work with scientific community.

Best regards.

Eugene Stefanovich.

I would like to submit my own "crazy" theory of quantum gravity for discussion. The relevant paper was posted in the ArXiv recently

E.V. Stefanovich "A relativistic quantum theory of gravity"

http://www.arxiv.org/physics/0612019 [Broken]

Let me make sure I haven't ignored any of the posting guidelines.

*1. The opening post must contain an abstract stating the results obtained and how the new theory is at variance with currently accepted theories.*Here is the abstract from the paper:

**A relativistic quantum theory of gravity is proposed in which the gravitational interaction between particles is represented by distance- and velocity-dependent potentials. The Poincare invariance, the cluster separability, and the causality of this approach are established. The Hamiltonian for interacting massive particles and photons is formulated within the c[tex]^{-2}[/tex] approximation. The classical limit of this theory reproduces well-known relativistic gravitational effects, including the anomalous precession of the Mercury's perihelion, the light bending by the Sun's gravity, the radar echo delay, the gravitational time dilation, and the red shift.**The main point of "variance" with "accepted theories" is that gravity is not treated as a space-time curvature. This is important for making my theory compatible with the laws of quantum mechanics. Moreover, it appears that all classical predictions of general relativity can be reproduced within this simple potential-based approach. The theory, as presented, is an approximation. However, the message is that a full and exact approach may be based on the same principles.

*2. The opening post must contain a section that either cites experiments that have been done that decide between the new and old theories, or it must propose experiments that could be done to decide between the two. If the submission contains a theory that is empirically equivalent to an existing theory, then this section may be substituted with a section that demonstrates the empirical equivalence and that compares and contrasts the insights gained from the submitted and existing theories.*As I mentioned above, the new theory agrees with all classical tests of general relativity. There are some observations, like frame dragging or orbital decay of binary pulsars, which are not mentioned in the paper, mainly due to my ignorance in these matters. My approach predicts some new effects. The most significant is the dependence of the gravitational acceleration of particles on their velocity. I believe that this effect contradicts the principle of equivalence. However, its magnitude is too small to be observed by modern experimental techniques.

*3. All references to relevant prior work must be documented in the opening post.*The paper has 70 references

*4. Quantitative predictions must be derived, wherever appropriate, and mathematical expressions and equations must be presented legibly, using LaTeX whenever necessary. For instructions and sample code see this thread. This should be done in the opening post.*I guess that link to the arXiv article covers this requirement.

*5. New theories must not be already strongly inconsistent with the results of prior experiments.*I mentioned that already.

*6. If a new theory is strongly inconsistent with prior experiments, but the theorist is insisting that the experiments were either misconducted or misinterpreted by the scientific community, then the thread will be rejected. Instead the theorist should rebut the contradicting scientists in an appropriate journal.*No, I didn't claim that.

*7. Theories containing obvious mathematical or logical errors will not be accepted.*If there are such errors in my paper, I am eager to learn about them.

*8. Threads which contain obvious misrepresentations or gross misunderstanding of basic accepted science, especially when used in attempt to compare one's personal theory to currently accepted science, will not be accepted.*I hope I didn't do that.

*9. External links will be permitted only for lengthy derivations and for diagrams. Any other expository text pertaining to the submitted theory must be posted at Physics Forums. Please note that this is a temporary Guideline that will remain in place only while we work on enlarging the maximum allowable attachment size in the IR Forum. Once that happens, we will require that all material pertaining to the theory be either posted at Physics Forums or attached to the thread.*I think this 29 pages paper can be regarded as "lengthy derivation and diagrams". So, providing an external link should be OK. If this is a problem I can attach a PDF file.

*If a submitted thread with external links is approved, then the content of those links must not be altered unless approved by me. Failure to comply may result in a locked or deleted thread.*I believe it is OK to make minor modifications to the text posted in arXiv, like adding references. Is it so?

Thank you very much for providing this opportunity to share my work with scientific community.

Best regards.

Eugene Stefanovich.

Last edited by a moderator: