9 – The new Space-Time

According to Louis de Broglie’s hypothesis, as seen in Chapter 4, electromagnetic waves represent the undefined behavior of objects or particles dispersed in space-time, in relation to our present. Both matter and radiation exhibit wave behavior. The total energy is related to a given temporal frequency or oscillation.

These temporal waves are oscillations between the past and the future, perceived differently by different observation systems (OS), as a consequence of the nonexistence of a privileged location representing the present. This is a characteristic of our space-time: all information received at any point in space-time comes from the past and there is no privileged point of reference, which results from the natural imposition of a limit to the velocity of information.

If we consider the existence of an infinite number of OS, the sum of these infinite waves is the matter wave that defines the electron or the electromagnetic wave that defines the photon, as shown by quantum mechanics. These are the waves of the new quantum theory.

In Chapter 8, we saw that gravity originates in atoms, in the asymmetry imposed by space-time on the Coulomb forces. The atomic structure is influenced by gravitational potential, generating more or less gravity. The electrical charges of the atoms and their associated electromagnetic waves are affected by the intensity of the local time reference, which is defined by the nuclei of the atoms of that space-time, and which, in turn, modulates the atomic equilibrium.

We can therefore affirm that these electromagnetic waves are responsible for gravity, because gravity resides in the asymmetry of the electromagnetic phenomena, and consequently of our space-time. If everything were ideally symmetrical, we would not be here reading this text, because our anti-matter would have consumed our matter.

In order to understand this asymmetry, let us imagine a perfectly isolating rod, with a metallic sphere at each end, one positively-charged (lacking electrons) and one negatively-charged (with an excess of electrons). By means of a cable attached to the middle of the rod, this system is pulled through completely empty interstellar space at constant velocity by spaceship 1, as in Figure 8.




……….continue……….


In the Quantum Theory of Gravity - “QTG” we will demonstrate how the gravity can be found in atoms and the importance of time.


See the complete text in the following Sites:

http://rolfguthmann.sites.uol.com.br/English/index.html
or
http://www.geocities.com/rolfguthmann/

__________________
Quantum Theory of Gravity - “QTG”
The Powerful new law of the gravity !!
http://rolfguthmann.sites.uol.com.br/English/index.html

From here:

EDIT to add: I just saw the BA's warning.
I should have known better than post in these thread.

__________________
papageno


"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" - Hobbes (Calvin and Hobbes)

"It's all about context!" - Vince Noir (The Mighty Boosh)

"I've never heard of such a brutal and shocking injustice that I cared so little about!" - Zapp Brannigan (Futurama)

"...because the logic of the lines traced from reality is as poor of aesthetic value as it is strict in consistency. " - Paolo Bozzi (Naive Physics - free translation)

what is this ?
If he wants to talk about a topic or discuss something that's good but

There is nothing even discussed, is looks like it a set of spam posts of a 'gravitational anomaly' control microgravity fields, or is he trying to sell people something ? Maybe its a sale but his website is somewhat diffuclt to understand.


at least his posts are in the right place - Against the mainstream

The BA has already locked all the other threads, except this one and the one the BA posted to

Rolph, in reference to your Chapter 6, if the Coulomb Force is lower, what happens to the gravitational result? Is it higher or lower?

I am assuming the system remains balanced in terms of positive-negative charge for proton-electron, and that only immediate effect would be lower electron velocity. But what happens to gravitational force of the atom in lower Coloumb Force, per your reasoning, if anything?

Perhaps another way to ask the same question is what happens to the atom's mass in a lower Coulomb Force? My apologies if you had answered these in your text, have only read the first 9 chapters. Thanks.

__________________
Credibility is simply incredible... sometimes even to me.
disclaimer

8) what about isotopes??? varing mass.. same charge...???

-MT

Rolph, enjoying the derivation of your hypothesis, nice math.

I too see gravity as a "residual" of a nuclear force, and developed this idea separately, though in mine Newton's G rather than being a "universal constant" is a variable, which for our solar system varies at the (some would say extreme) rate of 1G per AU, growing in magnitude with distance from the Sun. I had developed some of these ideas, relating Quantum forces (deBroglie-Planck) with gravity (non-relativistic), in this thread on the Axiomatic Equation, though some who know of it are seriously opposed to its conclusions, which also have implications for the Pioneers Anomaly. (A paper on this relationship had been submitted for peer review, so unable to show it here at this time.)

My more direct question is regarding something you mentioned in Chapter 10 with your reference to F.D. Stacey and G.J. Tuck?s 1981 study, ?Geophysical evidence for non-Newtonian gravity?, where G is found to be slightly greater (1%) in a mineshaft than at planet's surface. I would attribute this to a kind of "permanent" Allais Effect, same as when the Sun's radiative electromagnetic energy is temporarily blocked by a solar eclipse. In my view of things, when G is "blocked" from Sun's radiant energy, and being inversely proportional to this energy, tends to be slightly greater. The miners are not necessarily heavier than on the surface, since they are pulled upon by gravity from both below (which is slightly less mass) and above their heads. But if G is slightly higher underground, then the net effect on weight should be pretty much canceled. Is this about how you would see it?

Ivan/ aka nutant gene

__________________
Credibility is simply incredible... sometimes even to me.
disclaimer

Unfortunately, Rolf fails to follow up on the Stacey & Tuck paper. If he had, then he might have found that they later re-examined their data and found that their result was down to them having undersampled the local gravity fields at higher elevations.

Rolf, you may want to mention this on your sites.

I'd be interested to know a couple of things to start:

Why you use the Bohr model of the atom, since the that model was shown to be wrong (useful in some instances, but wrong in totality) in the 1930s.

In your chapter on the Pioneer Anomaly, you don't show how your ideas explain the anomaly. All you do is describe your idea on how your feel mass should increase, but don't tie that in with the anomaly, why?


changed the bolded word, because the other word made no sense

__________________
Some try to tell me, thoughts they cannot defend,... - Moody Blues.

Neptune- The original Dark Matter.

The author feels that this technique of deliberately lying will actually make it easier for you to learn the ideas. - Donald Knuth

One big difference being that the ground state possesses zero orbital angular momentum, whereas it is non-zero in the Bohr model.

Thanks Fortis. It seems that "dead ends" that idea.

__________________
Credibility is simply incredible... sometimes even to me.
disclaimer

The heaviest part of the Earth is in the iron nucleus. A surface with silicon and oxygen is not so heavy. If you are closer to iron nucleus you will be a little heavier.

You're welcome.

I believe that a lot of answers will be found in the chap. 11

http://rolfguthmann.sites.uol.com.br...TG/qtg110.html
or
http://www.geocities.com/rolfguthmann/QTG/qtg110.html

………
The total potential energy of these two systems is different, because energy is not localized in GR. The classical rules of physics tend to be violated by GR. In the QTG, it is mass that is not localized. Dark matter is a consequence of this, as seen in chapter 7 of the QTG.
……….

Rolf

__________________
Quantum Theory of Gravity - “QTG”
The Powerful new law of the gravity !!
http://rolfguthmann.sites.uol.com.br/English/index.html

Not significantly. Besides, Stacey took that into account.

Ahhhhh, so he's using an invalid model to get the answers he wants.

__________________
Some try to tell me, thoughts they cannot defend,... - Moody Blues.

Neptune- The original Dark Matter.

The author feels that this technique of deliberately lying will actually make it easier for you to learn the ideas. - Donald Knuth

The approach taken in the initial development of the QTG in Chapter 3, using the old quantum theory, was motivated in part by the abstract language of quantum mechanics and, especially, by the need to visualize the process, which would otherwise be impossible. We know that the old quantum theory, using much simpler mechanical processes, is able to yield numerically correct results for the hydrogen atom, allowing for a more accessible physical interpretation.

We should imagine the QTG as a jigsaw puzzle, where each chapter gives one of the pieces. In chapter 3, for example, we saw the concept of the direction of time: “One of the properties of atoms, therefore, is that time passes more slowly in the electron cloud, polarizing the time of the nucleus towards the future and thus establishing a direction for time”. In order to assimilate the full power of this new theory, the reader merely needs to put together the pieces of the puzzle.

Rolf

__________________
Quantum Theory of Gravity - “QTG”
The Powerful new law of the gravity !!
http://rolfguthmann.sites.uol.com.br/English/index.html

That's a tall order, to put together the pieces of the puzzle, if it's not in a college text book.

RECareful about calling another "obsessed", since an obsession with the obsessee may become the obsessee's obsessed.

__________________
Credibility is simply incredible... sometimes even to me.
disclaimer

So, because you think the QM equations are abstract, you use a model that is incorrect?

Why does the process need to be visualized? The math should give you a visualization.

So it works for Hydrogen, but not for, say any other atom beyond Lithium.
How does QTG work using straight QM with Hydrogen?

Well, if one of the puzzle pieces is wrong, doesn't that make your entire idea wrong? For example, how does the different orbital momentum between the Bohr and non-Bohr affect your idea?

Theres still this:
corrected the word "increase"

__________________
Some try to tell me, thoughts they cannot defend,... - Moody Blues.

Neptune- The original Dark Matter.

The author feels that this technique of deliberately lying will actually make it easier for you to learn the ideas. - Donald Knuth

Rolf,
Are you going to change your website in the light of the more recent analysis by Stacey and Tuck (that I point out in my earlier post)?

The Step-by-Step QTG:
The powerful new law of gravity and its philosophy of space-time.
The paradoxes of time and the origin of gravity.

This is a presentation of the QTG without the use of mathematics or diagrams, using a logical sequence of information together with mental experiments, arguments, considerations and conclusions to give a simpler understanding of the ideas and philosophy of the QTG.

1. The starting point for a better understanding of the QTG depends on accepting that the speed of light is the same for any point of reference, and that it is also the highest speed that any kind of information can reach. These are structural characteristics of our space-time: the natural laws of our universe.

2. It is also essential to accept the dilation of time and all the other consequences of Step 1, as established by the theories of Special and General Relativity.

3. We will begin with a mental experiment, in which Anna, Tim and Bob are sitting equally spaced around a round table. There is perfect symmetry between them.

4. In this situation, we can see that each of them will have an imperceptibly different reality in relation to the present, as a consequence of the limit to the speed of information.

5. We should consider that we are analyzing macrostructures or objects in the macrocosm, because Anna, Tim and Bob are made up of a very large number of atoms.

6. We know that all of the photons perceived by their eyes had an origin, that is, they were dispersed by atoms, and these atoms do this constantly. Photons do not come from nothing.

7. Electromagnetic waves are photons that oscillate at all frequencies, but we perceive only a small portion of this spectrum.

8. The collapse of these photons also occurs in atoms: the spectrum perceived by the eye transmits the information via an electrical signal along the optic nerve.

9. We must accept that the optic nerve is the point of reference of each observer: the entry point for the electromagnetic waves.

10. Considering Step 1, we know that all information received by the optic nerve is from the past. That is, for Anna, Tim and Bob, all information analyzed is from the past. They are three different observation systems, each with the sensation of being in the future. This is true for each of them, and is what we referred to in Step 4.

11. While we were philosophizing, time was passing: the main time related to the time reference of these macrostructures. In a way, we could admit that time passes at the same rate for each of them, as they are practically within the same point of reference. We will name the velocity at which this time advances the local time reference.

12. Let us now imagine that at the center of our round table is a hydrogen atom, at exactly the same distance from the three optic nerves of Anna, Tim and Bob.

13. As this atoms consists of subatomic particles, we classify it as being a microstructure or a microcosm.

14. For this hydrogen atom, Anna, Tim and Bob are equally in the past by exactly the same amount, because information from them reaches its nucleus simultaneously. We should imagine this as an ideal central point.

15. Even though they are within the same local time reference, Anna, Tim and Bob are in the past for the hydrogen atom. Analyzing the passage of time, including the hydrogen atom, it can be seen that the time of the four objects passes at the same rate, according to the local time reference.

16. This hydrogen atom has one electron in its electron cloud. According to quantum mechanics, there is a probability of around 90% that the electron will be found at a distance equal to Bohr’s radius.

17. By convention, the electron has a negative charge and the proton in the nucleus has a positive charge. Between these charges there is a centripetal Coulomb force from the point of reference of the electron.

18. This negatively-charged electron has a given rotation around the nucleus, necessary to keep it away from the positively-charged nucleus. This centrifugal force counters the centripetal force.

19. We are aware of using the atomic model from the old quantum theory. This was motivated partly by the abstract language of quantum mechanics, and chiefly by the need for a way of visualizing the process, which would otherwise be impossible.

20. The old quantum theory, by means of significantly simpler mathematical processes, can give certain numerically correct results, chiefly for the hydrogen atom, thus allowing a more accessible physical interpretation.

21. We can establish the idea of direction for time if we consider that time passes more slowly in the electron cloud, as a result of the time dilation described by Special Relativity for objects at speeds close to the speed of light. One of the properties of atoms is thus to polarize the time of the nucleus towards the future, thus standardizing a direction for time.

22. At a given instant, with Anna, Tim and Bob in the condition of observation systems for this hydrogen atom, the electron of this atom is located at a different distance from each one.

23. We should bear in mind that any observation system will consist of a large number of atoms and that these will have their own respective nuclei and electron clouds. These atoms also define their own local time reference, through the temporal identification of their nuclei.

24. The geometric center of the nucleus has the greatest concentration of mass (with densities around 1018 kg/m3). Experimentally, it has been shown that protons and neutrons concentrate a great deal of mass in a small spherical volume (measured in cubic Fm, or 10-15m3).

25. Bearing in mind steps 22, 23 and 24, it can be seen that the electron has a temporal behavior with wave characteristics, a temporal wave that is different for each observation system (Anna, Tim and Bob, in this case). This wave oscillates between a near past and a near future, progressing around the local time reference.

26. The observation systems are distributed in 3-dimensional space, and the wave, when projected in 2 dimensions, has a sine form around the local time reference. Imagined in space, it forms a helix.

27. According to Louis de Broglie, both matter and radiation have a wave behavior. The total energy is related to a given frequency or temporal oscillation.

28. The sum of this infinite number of waves (considering an infinite number of observation systems) is the matter wave that defines an electron or the electromagnetic wave that defines a photon, as shown by quantum mechanics. These are the waves of the new quantum theory.

29. For each observation systems, there is a different wave, and it is this that results in the uncertainty principle. Each observation system perceives a different temporal reality for the same event. Under the QTG, this reveals the temporal uncertainty principle.

30. All of quantum theory is based on the uncertainty principle, while the QTG replaces it with the temporal uncertainty principle. This in no way invalidates the powerful mathematical structure of quantum mechanics.

31. In the QTG, the introduction of the temporal uncertainty principle aims to describe physical reality at a deeper level, to counter the merely statistical interpretations of quantum mechanics and to show that the variables that are hidden from us are, in fact, only undefined in time, between a near past and a near future.

32. We therefore conclude that the temporal wave of this electron is none other than the waveform manifestation of its temporal behavior, in relation to the local time of the surrounding macrostructure.

33. So far, we have only analyzed the electron while it is associated with the hydrogen atom. Once dispersed, this electron will continue to exhibit wave behavior, because it will continue to have different temporal information for each observation system.

34. This dispersed electron acquired its wave characteristics in its atom of origin, while orbiting the nucleus, as determined by its quantum numbers. Now, however, the electron no longer oscillates around the nucleus, but around the local time reference.

35. Considering that this electron, when in the atom, was temporally dependent on the entire macrostructure surrounding it, its dispersed behavior should have a certain coherence with this macrostructural interference, and this is why its temporal indefinition persists.

36. For this dispersed electron, its reference is no longer its nucleus, but the nuclei of all the atoms or microcosms that make up the surrounding macrostructure.

37. Experimentally, it can be seen that atoms are stable. That is, these electrons do not emit electromagnetic radiation when within the atoms, even under acceleration. Their energy thus remains constant.

38. Within atoms, the electrical charges are neutralized, which is not the case when an electron is dispersed in the macrocosm, but it is not known why electromagnetism only occurs in the macrocosm.

39. As the nucleus is identified with the local time reference or present, while the electron is constantly out of phase with it, we can see that the electron does not radiate energy beyond the atom while associated with the nucleus, because its temporal identification with the macrocosm beyond the atom is through that same nucleus.

40. To date, no reasonable physical explanation exists for the functioning of the atom. Here, I refer to the continuous and persistent motion of these electrons around the nucleus. The electrons are attracted to the nucleus, but it is not known why they do not spiral into it.

41. On the one hand, the QTG attributes this impossibility of the electrons being intercepted by the nucleus to the particles’ lack of temporal definition. On the other hand, the QTG states that it is the continuous, uninterrupted motion of the particles’ is the result of their search for temporal equilibrium in relation to the local time reference.

42. We know that, depending on the point of reference of the observer, there is an asymmetry in electromagnetic phenomena.

43. In order to understand this, let us imagine a perfectly isolating rod, with a metallic sphere at each end, one positively-charged (lacking electrons) and one negatively-charged (with an excess of electrons).

44. By means of a cable attached to the middle of the rod, a spaceship pull this system at constant velocity through completely empty interstellar space.

45. An observer at a point of reference in the spaceship perceives only a Coulomb force attracting the two spheres.

46. Another observer, at a stationary point of reference at a certain distance from where the spaceship passes, perceives not only the Coulomb force, but also forces of electromagnetic origin resulting from the relative motion of the electric charges.

47. We can therefore conclude that two equal and opposite electric charges, separated by a given distance and in constant parallel motion, will experience different attractive forces according to observers at different points of reference.

48. If we analyze the hydrogen atom and compare the electron-proton pair with the rod seen in Steps 42 to 47, we can see that, if the proton were fixed or static in some ideally centralized location in the nucleus (as in Step 14), no external observer would perceive these forces of electromagnetic origin.

49. However, we know that this ideal situation is not an exact representation of reality, as we must take into account the oscillation of the proton around its local time reference, resulting from the necessity that any particle experiences of constantly identifying itself with the present. As seen in Steps 22 to 26, the location of this present time is very relative.

50. In order to understand the motion that the protons must undergo in order to reach equilibrium with the present, we should perform a mental experiment, imagining two protons connected by an imaginary cable in a hypothetical empty space, monitored by n observation systems, equally spaced around them.

51. We should consider that that it is easier for paired particles to achieve temporal symmetry. This can be observed experimentally for electrons, protons and neutrons in atoms, which is why the most stable atoms are those with the famed magic numbers of pairs.

52. We know that the theory of nuclear shells provides that the protons and neutrons in an atomic nucleus will be paired, with a total spin of zero (spin (+½h) + spin (-½h) = 0). This is because, according to the Pauli exclusion principle that governs the orbital structure, these two protons or neutrons cannot have all of their four quantum numbers equal.

53. We know that the first three quantum numbers are needed to describe the location in three-dimensional space or the spatial coordinates, while the fourth is needed to describe temporal orientation.

54. When these protons are observed from any angle in three dimensions, the same point of equilibrium can always be found between the spheres for any given observer.

55. Any observation system will always perceive two protons, with the differences found to be restricted to the distances between them. We exclude the case of the observers that, due to the eclipse of one of the protons, observe a single proton, because here we have the same equilibrium found in the ideal case of a single proton.

56. The point of equilibrium will be the average of the times taken by a hypothetical signal to cover the distance from the protons to any observer equidistant from the observed system, as was seen for the atom in Steps 22 to 26.

57. On the other hand, if we add a third proton (or any odd number of protons), a three-dimensional analysis will never give a point of temporal equilibrium, excluding the two cases in which the system of three spheres is directly in line with the observation system.

58. It is easier to understand this temporal equilibrium experiment if we imagine a complete external observation system, which defines the local time carrier and imposes this local present on the pair of spheres.

59. It is for this reason that atomic nuclei that contain an even number of protons and neutrons result in more stable structures, as they have better temporal symmetry.

60. Considering that this proton is not ideally at rest, we can now verify the effect of the rod (as seen in Steps 42 to 49) for any observer external to this atom or microcosm.

61. We can affirm that there are forces of electromagnetic origin, found in the atoms, that are relative and dependent on the point of reference of the external observer. That is, the same atom will theoretically present each observer with a different set of force vectors.

62. The perception of these forces by observers external to the atom depends directly on the velocity and angle of the electrical charges in motion. In the case of an atom, we know that the electron in the electron cloud has a velocity far greater than that of the proton in the nucleus.

63. The electron generates a greater electromagnetic field because of its greater velocity, and induces a far greater force in the proton. The asymmetry of these forces is relative, as shown previously, because it is only perceived by observers external to this microsystem.

64. Bearing in mind what we have seen in Steps 42 to 47, we should remember that the electromagnetic attractive force between these opposite charges will not be direct, as would be the case with charges of the same polarity. The resultant force vector of the electron should take into account the Coulomb force of attraction, which acts directly along the line that joins the two charges.

65. Einstein established the equivalence between the forces of gravity and inertia, but was unable to explain natural gravity, that is, the difference between inertia (artificial gravity) and natural gravity.

66. Given that it is possible to generate inertia or gravity artificially, and this implies that gravity or natural inertia also has an origin.

67. We know that inertia is the result of the application of a force on a mass, but we could also say that inertia is the property that a mass has when resisting a force.

68. It has been shown, both theoretically and experimentally, that the intensity of gravity (or natural inertia) influences the velocity of the passage of time or interferes with the rate at which time advances. This affects all processes, biological, chemical and especially physical.

69. Given that gravity has such an influence on time, or on the passage of time, it seems plausible that it has some co-participation in the actual existence of time, because when one thing manages to affect another in this way, we have good reason to suspect some form of complicity.

70. We could consider atoms as clocks that measure the passage of time with great efficiency, because they maintain the constant and uninterrupted oscillation of the electrons within them.

71. When an atom is within a gravitational field, this field has a direct influence on the rate of electron oscillation.

72. We know that atoms are stable, regardless of the intensity of the gravity they experience. That is, the internal forces of the atom must adapt themselves to every location, such that the atomic microsystem remains stable.

73. Let us imagine a truly minimal universe consisting of a single hydrogen atom.

74. In this minimal universe, there will be no gravitational influence external to the atom. If any gravity exists, it will only be that of the atom itself.

75. In this universe, as seen in Steps 42 to 50, there will be no external observer to detect any asymmetry of electromagnetic origin, and there will thus be a perfect equilibrium between the forces related to the atom’s electrical charges.

76. Being without an external observation system, this universe will have no point of reference. This means there is no privileged location to be the present.

77. The electron, due to its lack of temporal indefinition, will have no reason to oscillate around the proton, because this particle will not necessarily represent the present. This universe will end up collapsing.

78. An electron in an atomic orbit is therefore influenced by the gravity of the location (as shown in Steps 69 to 71) to move in a different manner, so as to adjust itself to the local flow of time, or to move within the flow of time, modulated by the local gravity.

79. The macrocosm therefore establishes an induction on the flow of the time of the atom, resulting in its relative stability. The entire macrostructure around the atom is thus involved in the equilibrium of its electrons.

80. We know that the stability of an atom depends directly on the equilibrium of its internal forces. The electrons should experience a centripetal Coulomb force exactly equal to the centrifugal force in order to have atomic stability (see Steps 17 and 18 ).

81. In an atom, we have masses in motion and subject to the postulates of special relativity, due to their relative velocities.

82. The atom’s electron is subject to special relativity, as a result of its velocity, in addition to being subject to general relativity, as a result of its centrifugal force (see Step 18 ).

83. On the one hand, if we take into account the postulates of special and general relativity in calculating the atomic forces, we see that the atom is in perfect equilibrium, because the Coulomb force is exactly equal to the centrifugal force.

84. On the other hand, if we include the problem of the lack of symmetry in the electromagnetic phenomena into the calculations of these forces, we will in fact find a small disequilibrium.

85. The electron, in its point of reference, must make up for this difference in the forces in order to maintain atomic stability. For this to happen, its orbital velocity must be reduced or increased. This velocity must, in some way, be modulated by space-time.

86. As the macrocosmic time reference resides in the nucleus and it is through the nucleus that the atom identifies itself with the local time reference, this difference in the forces is only perceived by observers external to the atom, or by the macrocosm.

87. This residual is gravity or natural inertia, which is only perceived by objects in the macrocosm.

88. We can conclude that this perception of a force without mass – gravity – is an energy of electromagnetic origin, which, because it has the macrocosm as its point of reference, is converted into gravitational energy as a result of this relative time reference and is transmitted to the macrocosm through the atomic nuclei.

89. Given that the electrical charges of the atoms are neutralized, these electrons, being in an equilibrium established by the macrocosm, do not radiate electromagnetic waves beyond the microsystem.

90. Electromagnetism, which theoretically exists within atoms, is not manifested externally, because this electromagnetic energy is seen in the macrocosm in the form of gravitational energy, which is a consequence of the relative time reference imposed by the macrocosm itself.

91. It is important to remember that the gravitational force obeys the inverse square law of distance, as does the Coulomb force. In fact, gravity acquires this characteristic at this origin, in addition to possessing the same velocity as electromagnetic waves.

92. We can therefore say that the gravitational field is formed by the inertia vectors generated by the electron shadows, when these forces are referenced to the atomic nuclei.

93. These vectors are a relativistic residual of the forces that reach equilibrium after the neutralization of the electrical charges, a force without mass, perceived only outside the atom.

94. We can also affirm that the gravitational field thus generated, as described by the QTG, has the same characteristics as the classical gravitational field. In one, the mass of the object is responsible, while in the other (the QTG), it is the electrons of the atoms of that object that are responsible. The result is equivalent, or the principle of equivalence itself.

95. The natural tendency of any massive particle is to identify itself with present time, as seen in Step 37, but this present time is defined by the sum of the atoms at that location.

96. A dispersed electron will be subject to the conditions of space-time, and will therefore exhibit wave characteristics, modulated by space-time or by the entire system responsible for generating gravity around it, the macrocosm.

97. This dispersed electron will now attempt to identify itself with the local time reference of this macrocosm. The macrocosm thus influences the behavior of the electron, as indeed the electron influences the macrocosm.

98. This is where we have the electromagnetic waves that radiate energy. Because the electron is no longer in tune with a single point of reference, but with the entire macrocosm around it, and which can now perceive it.

99. This is why only dispersed electrons can generate electromagnetic fields in the macrocosm, because the macrocosm itself becomes the point of reference. These electrons are no longer part of the formation of space-time and no longer contribute to the generation of gravity. Just as this electron took part, indirectly, in the generation of the vectors of natural inertia or gravity that gave consistency to space-time, so now, in its dispersed state, it is subject to the consequences of the space-time that it no longer sustains.

100. We can now understand why the energy of the electron, which was formerly gravitational, is transformed into electromagnetic form once dispersed.

Have a nice day,
Rolf

Further details:
http://www.geocities.com/rolfguthmann/
http://rolfguthmann.sites.uol.com.br/English/index.html

__________________
Quantum Theory of Gravity - “QTG”
The Powerful new law of the gravity !!
http://rolfguthmann.sites.uol.com.br/English/index.html

I stopped reading about step 40, by which (approx) step the number of inconsistencies I was trying to keep track of got too big.It seems to me that "QTG" is, as presented, inconsisent with at least parts of the two most successful theories of physics that we have today, GR and quantum theory.

It seems to me that we have at least three potentially productive paths forward:
1) a QTG proponent (or three) can demonstrate that QTG gives results which are consistent with those well-established by experiment and observation
2) a QTG proponent can demonstrate that QTG is the same as GR+QFT, in terms of what is predicted as (in principle) testable through experiment or observation
3) a QTG proponent can make some specific, concrete, testable (if only in principle) predictions from the QTG idea which are different from those predicted by GR and/or QFT.

It may very well be that there are other potentially productive paths forward; if so, let's hear them!

OTOH, if all we have the weaving of some word pictures, using terms which seem to have some correspondence to well-established theories (but which, most likely, do not have a close correspondence), then what is there for us to discuss? :P

Rolf, any thoughts on this?

Dear Fortis:

I would thank a lot if you supplied me the source of that information.

Rolf

__________________
Quantum Theory of Gravity - “QTG”
The Powerful new law of the gravity !!
http://rolfguthmann.sites.uol.com.br/English/index.html

Here is a paper referencing it. It appears the reconsideration of their work is in Review of Modern Physics #59 page 157, in 1987. Their reconsideration was due to this paper:

D.F. Bartlett and W.L. Tew, Phys. Rev. D40, 673 (1989), and Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 1531 (1989).

Pointing out the bias.

__________________
Some try to tell me, thoughts they cannot defend,... - Moody Blues.

Neptune- The original Dark Matter.

The author feels that this technique of deliberately lying will actually make it easier for you to learn the ideas. - Donald Knuth

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-ph/pdf/9606/9606249.pdf
Page 4

Sorry about that Fortis :wink:

__________________
Some try to tell me, thoughts they cannot defend,... - Moody Blues.

Neptune- The original Dark Matter.

The author feels that this technique of deliberately lying will actually make it easier for you to learn the ideas. - Donald Knuth

Some evidences that give back-up “QTG”:

1ª – The explanation of the existent duality between the waves and the particles.

2ª - Anomalous orbits of the elliptic galaxies.

3ª - The equality found between the speed of the light and the speed of gravity.
See details: http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...ed_030107.html

4ª – The variability of the “Universal Gravitational Constant”.

5ª - The (GR) paradox of the mass of two gravitational systems.

6ª - The mystery of the tiny unexplained acceleration towards the sun in the motion of the Pioneer 10, Pioneer 11, Ulysses, and others spacecraft’s.
See details: http://spaceprojects.arc.nasa.gov/Sp...er/PNStat.html

7ª – The problem of the non locality or the “EPR” experiment.

8ª - The Biefeld-Brown effect, (or Lifter’s).

9ª - The non detection of the solar neutrinos.

10ª –Explanation of the phenomenon of the superconductivity.

11ª –Explanation of the mysterious spin quantum number.

The Work of

12ª - Dark energy, the most consistent explanation for the dark matter.

13ª - A consistent explanation for the anti-matter existence.

14ª - The reason of the domain of the matter on the anti-matter.

15ª -And the evidence that I consider more spectacular is the one of the Russian engineer's Eugen Podkletnov work.


Rolf

__________________
Quantum Theory of Gravity - “QTG”
The Powerful new law of the gravity !!
http://rolfguthmann.sites.uol.com.br/English/index.html

I'm not well versed on everything you claim here, but I'll tackle what I can:

From that link:
Why does this support QTG over GR?

Any link showing experimental evidence for variability that agrees quantitatively with QTG?

From that section of your site : And your experimental observations showing a quantitative prediction from QTG fits your claim in this section better than GR.

I've asked this before, I didn't see anything on your site showing a quantitative prediton of QTG that agrees with the observed anomaly.

Care to elaborate on this? The missing neutrinos were the result of the detecting the equipment not being able to detect muon and tau neutrinos.
They have been found

I'm really not sure why your consider it mysterious.

And the problem with the QM explanation is.....?

14ª - The reason of the domain of the matter on the anti-matter.

Which parts of his work?

Any luck on explaining why you are still using the Bohr model and how does QTG incorporate straight QM?

The Pioneer anomaly question is still open and here's another one: this site has serveral experimental observations and shows the GR prediction for each. What is the quantitative QTG prediction for each of thses tests?

__________________
Some try to tell me, thoughts they cannot defend,... - Moody Blues.

Neptune- The original Dark Matter.

The author feels that this technique of deliberately lying will actually make it easier for you to learn the ideas. - Donald Knuth

Does your model predict (in the absence of dark matter, etc.) the rotation curves?
I wish that it wasn't referred to as "the speed of light", because it implies that it is light that is the special thing. c is the constant that appears in SR & GR. As magnetism can be considered to be a relativistic effect, we shouldn't be surprised that the magnetic permeability of free space is related, via c, to the permitivity of free space. In addition, any massless particle will propagate at c.

As the "speed of gravity" was predicted using GR before it was measured, I don't think that you can use any similarities here to imply a link.
People have looked, but I wouldn't say that the current evidence of variability is persuasive. Can you point to a particular experiment that allows you to make this claim?
Not sure what you mean here. Can you elaborate?
I know that some people have suggested that the very small anomalous acceleration may be down to some previously unknown phenomena. (Or it may just indicate that there is some known effect that we just haven't taken into account correctly.)

Either way, can you show how your QTG correctly predicts the magnitude of the pioneer anomaly?
Non-locality is certainly troubling if you try to use "common-sense" rules. Unfortunately while common-sense is great for judging the trajectory of a thrown ball, there is no reason to believe that the microscopic world should appeal to our common-sense, as it is so far out of our direct experience.
Have a look at this page, which says, "Their is no new force at work here. All evidence to date suggests that all the thrust created with these devices comes from an easily produced phenomena, ion wind. There is no evidence to suggest that any type of antigravity effect is responsible for the thrust. None of the proponents of these devices have reported any experimental evidence in any peer-reviewed publications to support their claims that a new force is being demonstrated."
What "non-detection" of solar neutrinos?
Initially, only ~1/3 of the expected quantity were observed, but the detectors could only detect electron neutrinos. More recently, using detectors that could detect all three types of neutrino, we see the expected number. (It's all down to the neutrino possessing a small, but finite, mass.) So I don't think that you can use solar neutrinos as prt of your evidence.
BCS theory works pretty well for traditional superconducters. There is no reason to believe that QTG will be required to explain the more exotic forms of superconductivity. On the other hand, if you do believe that your QTG does the trick, then might want to provide the isotope dependence of T_c that your model predicts.
In what way is it mysterious?
I thought that dark energy addressed a different issue to dark matter.
Modern QFT doesn't have a problem with matter and anti-matter. Can you point out where you think that it is inconsistent?
That one is a good question, but you'll have to explain how your model predicts this.
Have a read of http://slate.msn.com/?id=2072733