[General] Overview

[John Macken]

Andrew and All,

 

The Gravitational Transformations PDF that was included in my last post is
merely an enumeration of the gravitational effect on units of physics such
as the Joule, second, newton, etc. However, now I would like to give an
overview of all of my work.  

 

I started with the simplest possible starting assumption for a theory of
everything which is: The universe is only 4 dimensional spacetime.  I am
really a scientific inventor, so I decided to see if I could “invent” a
model of the universe that used only the properties of 4 dimensional
spacetime.  If this was a wrong assumption, then I should quickly reach an
impasse.  However, if this is the key to understanding the universe, then I
should be on a narrow path which yields answers to all of physics. 

 

In my opinion, the result has been amazing.  Once I characterized the
properties of vacuum energy (zero point energy), then everything fell into
place.  I get particles with the correct properties.  From first
principles, I derive that there should be three different types of forces.
(I do not get the weak force and the strong force is short range)  When I
calculated the two long range forces, the first force turns out to be the
electrostatic force between particles if they both had Planck charge (about
11.7 times charge e).  Planck charge is really the basic unit of charge
because it has a coupling constant of 1 rather than 1/137.  The next force
that I get is due to the fact that the “spacetime field” has boundary
conditions which dictate that waves in spacetime should have a nonlinear
component. The first approximation of this nonlinear component scales with
wave amplitude squared.  When the wave amplitude that gave the
electrostatic force is squared, the result gives the gravitational force.
Eureka!  Furthermore, the squaring means that gravity has only one polarity
since the square is always a positive number.    

 

Einstein worked for 30 years trying to unite gravity and the
electromagnetic force.  Once I reduce these forces to waves, I easily
generated about 10 simple equations which connect a fundamental particle’s
gravitational force to its electrostatic force. Here is one recently
generated equation:

 

Fg/FE = Rs/λc     

 

Fg = magnitude of the gravitational force at arbitrary separation distance r

FE = magnitude of the electrostatic force at distance r assuming Planck
charge qp

Rs = Gm/c2 = Schwarzschild radius of a maximally rotating particle

λc = ħ/mc = reduced Compton wavelength which is the spacetime particle’s
radius 

 

To convert FE to Fe (the force between two elementary charge e), the
equation is: FE = Feα-1.  

  

I have not published Fg/FE = Rs/λc and other recently derived equations
yet.  All these equations were predicted by my particle model. While others
in this group are speculating about photons somehow being confined into a
double loop, my approach gives has quantifiable wave amplitudes, sizes,
energy densities, forces, etc. and these are being ignored. I claim that
others are building castles in the sky because they lack a quantifiable
foundation.  Others in the group use the word “charge” as if it is an
unknowable property.  I can tell you exactly what a charge is and the
quantifiable effect a charged particle has on the surrounding spacetime. I
can tell you the effect a photon has on spacetime.  I can check this model
of photons and charge because they both predict that there should be a
limiting condition which produces 100% modulation of the properties of
spacetime.  I claim that this model is proven because this 100% condition
corresponds to the condition that makes a black hole.  It is not necessary
to do an experiment to verify that spacetime has a maximum photon intensity
or a maximum voltage on a vacuum capacitor.  It is impossible to exceed
either of these conditions because a black hole forms.

 

In my “foundation” paper I give an equation for the curvature of
spacetime produced by my particles.  This corresponds to the weak gravity
curvature of spacetime.  Now I have gone further and shown that gravity has
both an oscillating component and a non-oscillating component which we know
as the curvature of spacetime.  However, in analyzing the oscillating
component of gravity I find that it implies that a gravitational field also
has energy density.  When I compare this to what I call the “interactive
energy density of spacetime” I can see the physics behind how matter
curves spacetime.  It is no longer just a correct curvature equation. The
underlying physics of curvature comes from two different types of energy
density interacting.

 

If anyone is interested in learning more, I suggest first reading my
“foundation” paper which was attached to about 5 of my previous posts.
Then I can give selected portions of my revised book.     

 

John M. 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20150618/5f9071e4/attachment.htm>