- #1

- 170

- 0

Particle-wave duality is caused by the motion of particles in the fabric of space. The outward motion of matter in the big bang is therefore balanced by inward directed fabric of space, maintaining a full continuity of volume, just as air moves into a suitcase when you take clothes out of it. The pressure towards us produces gravity by pushing us from all directions equally, except where reduced by the shielding of the planet Earth below us.

Hence, the overriding push is that coming downwards from above us, which is greater than the shielded effect coming up through the earth. This is the mechanism of the acceleration due to gravity. Thus you now know why apples fall!

Here is a brief scientific review article, prepared for submission to the Physical Review in due course, based on the longer article just published in Electronics World:

http://members.lycos.co.uk/nigelbryancook/

Electronics World, Vol. 109, No. 1804 (2003), published by Highbury House Communications Plc, containing on pp. 47-52, 'The Electronic Universe Part 2' (Cook) including mathematical proofs and quantitative unification for the mechanisms of nuclear, electromagnetic and gravitational forces. Available from newsagents or by subscription: Wyvern Subscription Services, Link House, 8 Bartholomew’s Walk, Ely Cambridge, CB7 4ZD, England, Tel 01353 654431; Ray Barnes, Reed Business Publishing Ltd, 475 Park Avenue South, 2nd Fl New York, NY 10016, USA, Tel (212) 679 8888, Fax (212) 679 9455; Pierre Mussard, 18-20 Place de la Madeleine, Paris 75008, France.

General relativity failed to predict the recession speeds of distant supernovas1. This paper reviews and extends the straightforward mathematical proof for the mechanism of gravity, published in Electronics World1, resolving this problem. The result is compatible with general relativity and the Newtonian approximation by substituting into the Einstein field equation the proven expression for the universal gravitational constant, which is locally G = (3/4)H^2/[(pi)(rho)], where H is Hubble’s constant and rho is the average density of the surrounding universe. Gravity is proven to be dielectric pressure in reaction to the big bang – somewhat like the flow of air in the opposite direction (but with the same volume and rate) to a person walking along a corridor. This inward reaction dielectric due to the increasing speeds of stars receding at increasing distance from us is partly shielded by stars and planets, producing an asymmetry and hence ‘attraction’ to any mass. It was predicted prior to observation that because gravity is the reaction to surrounding expansion, recession of the most distant supernovas will not be slowed1.

The empirical law of gravity incorporating the universal gravitational constant has not previously been subjected to any mathematical proof in terms of a consistent mechanism. Commonplace arguments that gravity is caused by an elastic pull are easily rejected since the resulting force would increase with distance. Feynman2 however gives a qualitative pressure analogy in which gravity is the net pushing force when objects shielding one another from an all-round pressure. He correctly rejects the assumption of a particulate fabric of space, because particles deliver and receive momentum, thereby causing a drag effect. Schutz4 argues that the source of the gravitational field in general relativity may be considered to be a perfect continuum, which produces no drag: "A fluid is a continuum that ‘flows’... A perfect fluid is defined as one in which all antislipping forces are zero, and the only force between neighbouring fluid elements is pressure."

Molecular fluid resistance takes the forms of drag due to particles hitting surfaces and carrying away momentum with their recoil, and displacement resistance due to the displacement of fluid from their volume as they move. For a continuous fluid, only displacement resistance would occur. It is well known with dense fluids that displacement resistance is greatest in starting and stopping the motion of objects, i.e., acceleration and deceleration. In water, with a density nearly a thousand times that of sea level air, the molecules are spaced closely together and the displacement resistance clearly predominates over drag at low speeds. In moving through a fluid, the surrounding air or water flows around the object, maintaining continuity. When accelerating from zero velocity, and in decelerating, the flow of water around the submerged object is started or stopped, which increases the inertia (resistance to acceleration) of matter in a fluid. These considerations show that a continuous fabric of space would not exhibit drag effects, but would produce a displacement resistance. It is therefore possible to suggest that the displacement resistance of continuous space around subatomic particles in a vacuum is the cause of Newton’s first law, inertia.

The waves in space created by accelerated and decelerated subatomic particles are well known (photons). Spherical waves are created in particulate fluids (such as spherical diverging sound waves in air) because molecules can strike one another at random. This statistically means that for a very large number of molecules, energy will be dispersed approximately equally in all directions. However, the continuous fabric of space would not permit this mechanism to operate. This model therefore suggests why a photon does not spread out spherically like waves in fluids.

Evidence for the continuous physical nature of the fabric of space had also been stressed by Catt3, who points to the fixed 377 ohms impedance of the vacuum to electromagnetic energy. The resistance of particulate matter is expressible in ohms/metre, due to the number of particles in the material length, rather than simply ohms. This difference suggests that the fabric of space is a non-particulate continuum in which particles of matter are imbedded.

It was proposed1 that a mechanism of gravity should be developed to rigorously test all of the consequences of this semi-speculative physical fluid model for the fabric of space. This paper shall first use the proposed model to provide a step by step mathematical proof of the established general gravitational law, including the universal constant G, by calculation of the space pressure produced in response to the big bang. This paper shall then show that the proposed model uniquely predicts that the recession speeds of distant supernovae should not be gravitationally retarded.

According to the physical fabric of space analogy already described, geometrical volume is equivalent to the sum of the its volume of fluid space plus its volume of matter. Therefore, if we accept that the stars are receding as modern astronomy shows, we must accept that the fabric of the vacuum moves in the opposite direction (towards us), maintaining the continuity of volume. If one walks down a corridor, a volume of matter V moving in one direction will be continuously balanced by a volume of air, also V, moving in the opposite direction; this is why walking does not create a vacuum!

Since distance is proportional to time (the sun being 8.3 light-minutes away, and the next star 4.3 light years, etc.), the statement of the Hubble recession constant as velocity divided by observed distance is misleading since the stars will recede by a further amount during the interval that the light is traveling to us, but a true ‘constant’ for the speed of recession is proportional to the time taken for light to reach us (which is also the time past when the light was actually emitted). Correcting Hubble’s error thus gives us a constant which has units of acceleration, and leads directly to gravity.

The pressure due to the acceleration of the fabric of space towards us produces gravity by pushing us from all directions equally except where reduced by the shielding of the planet Earth below us. Hence, the overriding dielectric push is that coming downwards from the stars above us, which is greater than the shielded effect coming up through the earth. This is the mechanism of the acceleration due to gravity (Fig. 1). We shall calculate step-by-step the gravitational acceleration due to one mass, i.e., the 'curvature in space-time' which causes apples and people to accelerate at the same rate...

For full maths see:

http://members.lycos.co.uk/nigelbryancook/

‘The Michelson-Morley experiment has thus failed to detect our motion through the aether, because the effect looked for – the delay of one of the light waves – is exactly compensated by an automatic contraction of the matter forming the apparatus.’ – Professor A.S. Eddington, MA, MSc, FRS (Plumian Professor of Astronomy and Experimental Philosophy, Cambridge), Space Time and Gravitation: An Outline of the General Relativity Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1921, p. 20.

‘The idealised physical reference object, which is implied in current quantum theory, is a fluid permeating all space like an aether.’ – Sir Arthur Eddington, MA, DSc, LLD, FRS, Relativity Theory of Protons and Electrons, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1936, p. 180.

Hence, the overriding push is that coming downwards from above us, which is greater than the shielded effect coming up through the earth. This is the mechanism of the acceleration due to gravity. Thus you now know why apples fall!

Here is a brief scientific review article, prepared for submission to the Physical Review in due course, based on the longer article just published in Electronics World:

http://members.lycos.co.uk/nigelbryancook/

Electronics World, Vol. 109, No. 1804 (2003), published by Highbury House Communications Plc, containing on pp. 47-52, 'The Electronic Universe Part 2' (Cook) including mathematical proofs and quantitative unification for the mechanisms of nuclear, electromagnetic and gravitational forces. Available from newsagents or by subscription: Wyvern Subscription Services, Link House, 8 Bartholomew’s Walk, Ely Cambridge, CB7 4ZD, England, Tel 01353 654431; Ray Barnes, Reed Business Publishing Ltd, 475 Park Avenue South, 2nd Fl New York, NY 10016, USA, Tel (212) 679 8888, Fax (212) 679 9455; Pierre Mussard, 18-20 Place de la Madeleine, Paris 75008, France.

General relativity failed to predict the recession speeds of distant supernovas1. This paper reviews and extends the straightforward mathematical proof for the mechanism of gravity, published in Electronics World1, resolving this problem. The result is compatible with general relativity and the Newtonian approximation by substituting into the Einstein field equation the proven expression for the universal gravitational constant, which is locally G = (3/4)H^2/[(pi)(rho)], where H is Hubble’s constant and rho is the average density of the surrounding universe. Gravity is proven to be dielectric pressure in reaction to the big bang – somewhat like the flow of air in the opposite direction (but with the same volume and rate) to a person walking along a corridor. This inward reaction dielectric due to the increasing speeds of stars receding at increasing distance from us is partly shielded by stars and planets, producing an asymmetry and hence ‘attraction’ to any mass. It was predicted prior to observation that because gravity is the reaction to surrounding expansion, recession of the most distant supernovas will not be slowed1.

The empirical law of gravity incorporating the universal gravitational constant has not previously been subjected to any mathematical proof in terms of a consistent mechanism. Commonplace arguments that gravity is caused by an elastic pull are easily rejected since the resulting force would increase with distance. Feynman2 however gives a qualitative pressure analogy in which gravity is the net pushing force when objects shielding one another from an all-round pressure. He correctly rejects the assumption of a particulate fabric of space, because particles deliver and receive momentum, thereby causing a drag effect. Schutz4 argues that the source of the gravitational field in general relativity may be considered to be a perfect continuum, which produces no drag: "A fluid is a continuum that ‘flows’... A perfect fluid is defined as one in which all antislipping forces are zero, and the only force between neighbouring fluid elements is pressure."

Molecular fluid resistance takes the forms of drag due to particles hitting surfaces and carrying away momentum with their recoil, and displacement resistance due to the displacement of fluid from their volume as they move. For a continuous fluid, only displacement resistance would occur. It is well known with dense fluids that displacement resistance is greatest in starting and stopping the motion of objects, i.e., acceleration and deceleration. In water, with a density nearly a thousand times that of sea level air, the molecules are spaced closely together and the displacement resistance clearly predominates over drag at low speeds. In moving through a fluid, the surrounding air or water flows around the object, maintaining continuity. When accelerating from zero velocity, and in decelerating, the flow of water around the submerged object is started or stopped, which increases the inertia (resistance to acceleration) of matter in a fluid. These considerations show that a continuous fabric of space would not exhibit drag effects, but would produce a displacement resistance. It is therefore possible to suggest that the displacement resistance of continuous space around subatomic particles in a vacuum is the cause of Newton’s first law, inertia.

The waves in space created by accelerated and decelerated subatomic particles are well known (photons). Spherical waves are created in particulate fluids (such as spherical diverging sound waves in air) because molecules can strike one another at random. This statistically means that for a very large number of molecules, energy will be dispersed approximately equally in all directions. However, the continuous fabric of space would not permit this mechanism to operate. This model therefore suggests why a photon does not spread out spherically like waves in fluids.

Evidence for the continuous physical nature of the fabric of space had also been stressed by Catt3, who points to the fixed 377 ohms impedance of the vacuum to electromagnetic energy. The resistance of particulate matter is expressible in ohms/metre, due to the number of particles in the material length, rather than simply ohms. This difference suggests that the fabric of space is a non-particulate continuum in which particles of matter are imbedded.

It was proposed1 that a mechanism of gravity should be developed to rigorously test all of the consequences of this semi-speculative physical fluid model for the fabric of space. This paper shall first use the proposed model to provide a step by step mathematical proof of the established general gravitational law, including the universal constant G, by calculation of the space pressure produced in response to the big bang. This paper shall then show that the proposed model uniquely predicts that the recession speeds of distant supernovae should not be gravitationally retarded.

According to the physical fabric of space analogy already described, geometrical volume is equivalent to the sum of the its volume of fluid space plus its volume of matter. Therefore, if we accept that the stars are receding as modern astronomy shows, we must accept that the fabric of the vacuum moves in the opposite direction (towards us), maintaining the continuity of volume. If one walks down a corridor, a volume of matter V moving in one direction will be continuously balanced by a volume of air, also V, moving in the opposite direction; this is why walking does not create a vacuum!

Since distance is proportional to time (the sun being 8.3 light-minutes away, and the next star 4.3 light years, etc.), the statement of the Hubble recession constant as velocity divided by observed distance is misleading since the stars will recede by a further amount during the interval that the light is traveling to us, but a true ‘constant’ for the speed of recession is proportional to the time taken for light to reach us (which is also the time past when the light was actually emitted). Correcting Hubble’s error thus gives us a constant which has units of acceleration, and leads directly to gravity.

The pressure due to the acceleration of the fabric of space towards us produces gravity by pushing us from all directions equally except where reduced by the shielding of the planet Earth below us. Hence, the overriding dielectric push is that coming downwards from the stars above us, which is greater than the shielded effect coming up through the earth. This is the mechanism of the acceleration due to gravity (Fig. 1). We shall calculate step-by-step the gravitational acceleration due to one mass, i.e., the 'curvature in space-time' which causes apples and people to accelerate at the same rate...

For full maths see:

http://members.lycos.co.uk/nigelbryancook/

‘The Michelson-Morley experiment has thus failed to detect our motion through the aether, because the effect looked for – the delay of one of the light waves – is exactly compensated by an automatic contraction of the matter forming the apparatus.’ – Professor A.S. Eddington, MA, MSc, FRS (Plumian Professor of Astronomy and Experimental Philosophy, Cambridge), Space Time and Gravitation: An Outline of the General Relativity Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1921, p. 20.

‘The idealised physical reference object, which is implied in current quantum theory, is a fluid permeating all space like an aether.’ – Sir Arthur Eddington, MA, DSc, LLD, FRS, Relativity Theory of Protons and Electrons, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1936, p. 180.

Last edited: