Content uploaded by Mark Fiorentino
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Mark Fiorentino on Nov 25, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
The Origin of Gravity and Force Unification via the
Electromagnetic Bridging Model as defined by Super
Relativity
Mark Fiorentino
900 Lake Elbert Drive SE
Winter Haven, Florida 33880
Abstract
The major problem in theoretical physics today is the unification of the force
of gravity with the electromagnetic forces of nature. Gravity therefore is yet
to be successfully included in the theory of everything. The purpose of this
study is to define a method to achieve field unification by means of a non-
quantum approach. The mechanistic method used was influenced by the
theory of Super Relativity. The Lorentz Transformations from Special
Relativity were utilized to construct a mathematical model that was run
using computer simulations for both the neutron and proton. These
simulations generated thousands of possible solutions and by analyzing
this data the one and only solution for both particles was discovered. The
new systems of equations reveal the proper method for calculating the
values for the masses of both the proton and the neutron. The results of
this experiment demonstrate that the quarks operate in a synergistic way
within the core of a Baryon. This experiment also proves that neither the
Higgs boson nor the graviton are the central cause of the gravitational
force, and that field unification is achieved by the bridging mechanism in
which gravity is the natural result of the high speed motion of unbalanced
charges.
Introduction
The organization of this paper is as follows: Section One1 is the Introduction. Section
Two describes the Super Relativity‟s mathematical model the Bridging Mechanism.
Section Three describes the software program used to simulate the Neutron and the
Proton. Section Four discusses the data that was accumulated and its analysis. Section
Five summarizes and discusses the results as well as the significance of the findings.
Section One: Introduction
Since Isaac Newton published Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica in 1687,
the search for the origin of gravity has been an ongoing process. Principia Mathematica
ignited the world of physical sciences and began the study of gravitation in relation to
the physical mechanics of ether. The mechanical model explaining force has been
sought to the present day.[1] The concept of an ether was still in place until the
beginning of the twentieth century when the null result of the Michelson - Morley
Experiment [2] ended the ether‟s influence over the world of physics.
Up till then the concept of an ether being the mediator and the central cause of force
had compiled an impressive record of success. Maxwell‟s electromagnetic theory and
equations published in 1865 were based on ether theory [3], and several other
prominent mathematicians and physicists who followed extended Maxwell‟s work. The
Lorentz Transformations which were described by Joseph Lamor in 1897 and Lorentz in
1899 were also derived by Einstein in 1905. These transformations were used by
Einstein to form the basis for Special Relativity.
The General Theory of Relativity, which was based on the idea of a space-time
continuum, was also founded on a set of field equations. Einstein was introduced to the
idea of space-time by his teacher Hermann Minkowski, in a 1908 essay. This
connection and unification of space and time led directly to a new view of both special
and general relativity as being geometrical in nature. However some sort of mechanical
ether substance remained implicit in these theories.
Therefore I made the following assumption:
It seems unlikely that the vast amount of successful theory and mathematics
based on the concept of an ether which suggests that space is a material object,
could be based on a false concept. Therefore the conclusion made by scientists
at the time of the Michelson-Morley experiment, that the ether does not exist
must be in error1.
Careful analysis of the experiment showed that the experiment itself was accurate.
The null result was confirmed many times over.
Despite this finding, it appears that the experiment was compromised by a flaw which
occurred in the design phase. It was assumed that the ether was stationary and that a
wind would be detected as the earth passed through the ether. However, Special
Relativity says that the speed of light is the same in all reference frames and the
Michelson-Morley experiment proved that. The Michelson-Morley experiment failed to
detect an ether wind and the assumption was made that there was no ether. So,
obviously an ether wind would be impossible to detect when an experiment uses objects
that are moving at the maximum allowable speed. The motion of the reference frame in
which the experiment is conducted, therefore becomes irrelevant, as trying to detect a
difference in motion between two photons in any direction versus a stationary ether
1 “Can there be some point in the theory of Mr. Michelson‟s experiment which has yet been
overlooked?” H.A. Lorentz, letter to Lord Rayleigh, August 1892.
background will not show the existence of an ether wind. The experiment should not
have used photons because they are already moving at the maximum allowable speed.
Michelson did not know this at the time because Special Relativity was not discovered
until some years later.
Therefore particles moving at a speed less than the maximum allowable value,
should have been used to detect the ether wind. By then using the addition of velocities
formula within Special Relativity, an ether wind will be detectable. As a result, the
experiment needs to be repeated accordingly. See Figure1 below.
Figure 1 showing the new ether detection experiment
As using photons in this type of experiment fails to detect absolute motion,
measuring the varying flow rates of time in different moving frames of reference can
also be used to prove that the ether exists.
The basis of this mathematical experiment is that space, the ether, must exist as a
physical object and according to the Theory of Super Relativity, it is both the sub-
stratum and the constituent. Particles are electromagnetic configurations of space and
move within it. They do not displace the ether substance as they move, but instead they
transform the space they occupy.
Furthermore, force, action at a distance, is mediated by the mechanical deformations
(electromagnetic (EM) fields) of space. Particle interactions and particle movement
occur because of the EM fields which are described in detail by the Theory of Super
Relativity. These fields also form the geometries of matter and energy.
Since I have assumed that the theories and mathematics that describe any existing
ether are correct, I support Hendrick Antoon Lorentz‟s hypothesis that atomic and
intermolecular particles and forces are affected by the Lorentz Transformations. The
transformations state that decrease in length, increase in mass and time dilation effects
occur in the microscopic realm when macroscopic objects are accelerated through the
ether. Although these transformations are used in Special Relativity to describe
macroscopic objects and events I believe that they can and do apply to the microscopic
realm. The sum of any macroscopic object is the total of all its constituent atomic and
sub-atomic parts. Therefore since the transformations of Special Relativity have been
verified for macroscopic objects, they must also hold true for atoms and sub-atomic
particles that make up the macroscopic objects.
This experiment was designed to prove the above stated hypothesis and uses the
mass increase combined with the Lorentz-Fitzgerald length contraction formula to prove
the origin of mass is generated by what Super Relativity calls the electromagnetic
bridging mechanism.
Section Two: The Bridging Mechanism Super Relativity’s Mathematical Model
The logical concepts that are the basis for the mathematical model form the
foundation for this experiment, and are simple and straightforward. The equations used
are from Special Relativity and the hypothesis is as follows. If the ether mediates force
then the equations that describe how macroscopic objects interact with it should be able
to correctly solve for particle masses.
The up and down quarks from the Standard Model were used as the starting point
because they are abundant and have been shown to be the main constituents of both
the proton and neutron, which are themselves very stable. The existence of the quarks
has been determined by the inelastic scattering technique. The experiments showed
that at low energy bombardment, both the proton and neutron have internal structures
and three points of deflection. Therefore the proton and neutron consist of a
combination of three quarks.
Deep inelastic scattering is another experimental technique that has been used in
the past. It uses high speed high energy electrons to probe a stationary proton or
neutron. The problem with this technique is that it is very invasive as the electrons
colliding with the quarks inside of the main target particle are extremely disruptive. This
disruption modifies the subject and in so doing brings the measurement accuracy into
question. If all energies are not properly accounted for, there is a high possibility of
obtaining incorrect results for the quark masses. To make matters worse if the energy of
the experiments that probe the proton and neutron is increased, a new set of particles
which include anti-quarks and gluons will emerge. The question then becomes, do the
anti-quarks and gluons exist inside the proton and neutron when they are not being
bombarded by high energy electrons? It is highly possible that the collisions of the
electrons and quarks create a set of particles that do not ordinarily exist within the
proton or neutron. This over-complicates an already very complex problem. If the
additional particles existed under normal conditions, they should have been detected at
lower energies but this has not been the case. So it seems clear that Standard Model
theory had been modified to include these extra particles and had assigned them
additional functions to explain their existence. As a result, the extra particles only
become „visible‟ when the neutron and proton are in a high energy state. The only time
external forces could naturally have this effect are when the particles are located within
in an energy plasma (a star) or when the universe was very young and only energy
plasma existed.
As Super Relativity assumes that under normal circumstances, the protons and
neutrons function by using just the up and down quarks, this experiment was conducted
using that assumption for their mechanical construction.
1. It is assumed that under normal circumstances when the neutron and proton are
not being bombarded by high energy particles their internal structures are composed of
only 3 quarks. The neutron contains one up and two down quarks. The proton contains
two up and one down quark.
2. The binding force which confines the quarks is considered by Super Relativity to
be a special version of the Coulomb force with the physical difference being that the
quarks are mechanically entwined. This explains what the standard model calls the
color charge which is defined as the gluon fields that exist between the quarks. The
entanglement causes the solid ether field around the quarks to stretch as they are
separated, creating the higher than normal spatial tension which draws the quarks back
together. Super Relativity states that there are only three fundamental fields from which
all matter and energy are composed. Therefore the quarks are considered to be a single
unit composed of three nodes of charge. These particles according to Super Relativity
are entangled by their electrostatic fields. Thus, what we call color charge and binding
force are believed to be nothing more than the Coulomb force, amplified by the quark
entanglement, at work.
The charge component of the quarks provides the physical mechanism of propulsion
as defined by Super Relativity physical model. In these quark electrostatic
configurations, is a synergy that both accelerates the quarks and binds them together.
Their high speed velocity combined with their angular momentum creates the
gravitational field. The action of the orbiting high velocity imbalanced moving charge is
the bridging mechanism between electromagnetic fields and gravity. The particles are
subject to the laws of physics as described by the Lorentz Increase of Mass
Transformation as well as the Fitzgerald-Lorentz Contraction. The action of high speed
quarks in circular motion causes the neutron and proton to exhibit the property of mass.
At the same time, it causes space to contract around the orbits as is described by the
Fitzgerald-Lorentz Contraction.
The contraction of Length Formula above, describes the physical process of spatial
contraction. Shown below (Figure 2) is a graphical representation of the contraction
resulting from the motion of the quarks. It is important to note that the contraction is
spherical because the quarks are in a tight circular orbit.
Figure 2 showing spherical spatial contraction
These assumptions form the basis of this
experiment which uses formulae derived for
the explanation of the ether phenomenon. The
formulae demonstrate how to correctly compute
the values for the masses of both proton and
neutron. The method used also proves the
bridging model between the
electromagnetic field and gravity.
The Mathematical Model
The mathematical model used to construct the
Special Relativity was derived directly from Special
Relativity, the key difference being that the mathematics of Special Relativity was used
to explain the action of the quarks inside of the neutron and proton.
The amalgamation of the mathematics of Special Relativity together with more recently
discovered quark particle model creates an entirely new physical explanation for the
possible source of mass. This model eliminates the need for the more complex scalar
field that would have to exist to explain the Higgs boson as the mediator of the
gravitational field.
For this experiment, a physical model using empirical data common sense and logic
was constructed (figure 2). The Lorentz and Einstein mathematical model then was
used to mathematically explain it.[4] The data used in this case are the experimentally
derived values for the up and down quarks. [6]. The properties of the quarks were
obtained from the results of the results of Deep Inelastic Scattering studies, which used
high energy inelastic scattering to reveal the inner structure of both the neutron and
proton.[5] The masses for the quarks were then derived indirectly as the quarks cannot
be separated for individual analysis.
The experiment used the following formula for calculating the mass of individual
quarks.
The rest masses for both the neutron and proton, as given by the standard model
were used for comparison within the program.
The initial values used to find the intersection of the two solutions were:
1.67260000 x 10-27 (Proton)
1.67490000 x 10-27 (Neutron)
The values that were used to refine and retrieve the most accurate solution were:
The Proton Mass as determined by experiment = 1.67262158 x 10-27
The Neutron Mass as determined by experiment = 1.674927211 x 10-27
Section Three: Program Simulation
The software was designed using Microsoft Visual Basic. The application is shown
below:
Figure 3: The software used.
The process for the simulations is as follows:
Step 1. Convert the up quark mass expressed in units of GeV/c2 into joules. The up
quark in Joules = .003 GeV/c2 * 1.60217646E-19 = 5.34798518408036E-30 joules
Step 2. Convert the down quark mass expressed in units of GeV/c2 into joules. The
down quark in Joules = .006 GeV/c2 * 1.60217646E-19 = 1.06959703681607E-29
joules
Step 3. Convert the quark values to mass by using m=e/c2 ; m=kg; e =joules; c=
299792458 meters per second
Next in the process is generating a velocity for the quarks. In the example below, the
quark velocities v1 and v2 used the same velocity as it was assumed that the up quarks
orbits would be the same. V3 was the down quark velocity.
Therefore the total mass of the proton is equal to Relativistic Mass values for the
UpQuark1 + UpQuark2 + DownQuark1 and that of the Neutron equals UpQuark +
DownQuark1 + DownQuark2.
The simulation software runs two loops, an upper and a lower loop, in a defined
series. A configuration file was used to upload the following values:- the starting
velocities for the up and down quarks, the incremental values for the up and down quark
loops and finally the stopping values for the up and down quarks.
Datasets were generated for the neutron and for the proton. An example of the
generated datasets is shown below.
Down= 299769142
Up= 299766644
Mass= 1.67269845606354E-27
Upquarkmass= 4.07537188723018E-28
Downquarkmass= 8.57624078617507E-28
These quantities represent a possible solution node. In the above generated dataset
example, Down represents the down quark velocity and Up, the up quark velocity. Mass
signifies the mass value generated by the simulation and is the calculated value for the
proton at this node. The upquarkMass is the relativistic calculated value for the mass of
the up quark, whereas the downquarkMass is same value for the down quark as
calculated by the simulation.
The data sample above was taken from a proton simulation run. Two up quark
masses were added to the down quark mass to obtain the total mass. The resultant
value was compared to a golden accepted value for the mass of a proton as obtained
by experiment [6]. A small comparison window was used to accept solution nodes, and
the acceptable range was as follows:-
If TotalMass > 1.672599E-27 and TotalMass < 1.6727E-27, then accept value as
possible solution and record the solution node.
The velocities for the quarks were recalculated and incremented by step functions
several times. A typical run would first increment the upper loop by a value of 1
kilometer per second and then run the lower loop again incrementing by 1 kilometer per
second through a range of values. The inner loop continued to run until a solution node
was found. At this point the process would escape to the upper loop and increment
again and the whole process would start again and continue to be repeated over a two
week period, for both the neutron and proton.
Section Four: Data Analysis
The simulation generated a list of possible solutions, which were then plotted in MS
Excel. As expected, the solutions generated a nonlinear (curving line) graph when
plotted on an x-y scatter plot. The two lines intersected at a point which revealed the
location of the only possible solution that can accurately describe the masses of both
the neutron and the proton. See figure 4.
.
Figure 4 showing the solutions generated for both neutron and proton
The chart above clearly shows that only a single pair of quark speeds allows a
solution for both the neutron and proton.
Despite close examination, no other intersection areas were found and the lines
diverged after the intersection occurred. The simulation covered a range of values,
starting at the upper left quadrant with the X axis value equaling down quark velocity
and the Y axis value equaling the up quark velocity. The experiment continued to
generate nodes until it reached the lower right quadrant at which point the lines were
widely divergent.
After the intersection area had been discovered the experiment was rerun using
more accurate values for both the neutron and the proton. The values used were
obtained from the NIST Website and are CODATA values.
proton mass
Value
1.672 621 637 x 10-27 kg
Standard uncertainty
0.000 000 083 x 10-27 kg
Relative standard uncertainty
5.0 x 10-8
Concise form
1.672 621 637(83) x 10-27 kg
Figure 5 showing the precise values for the proton
neutron mass
Value
1.674 927 211 x 10-27 kg
Standard uncertainty
0.000 000 084 x 10-27 kg
Relative standard uncertainty
5.0 x 10-8
Concise form
1.674 927 211(84) x 10-27 kg
Figure 6 showing the precise values for the neutron
Source of the CODATA internationally recommended values2
2The values of the latest available constants provided at the NIST website and recommended for
international use by CODATA. The „2006 CODATA recommended values,‟ are generally recognized
worldwide for use in all fields of science and technology.‟ The values were available in March 2007
replacing the 2002 CODATA set. They are based on all of the data available through 31 December 2006.
The 2006 adjustment was carried out under the auspices of the CODATA Task Group on Fundamental
Constants. [6]
The experiment was then rerun with the new values and higher constraints, so that a
more accurate set of quark velocities could be obtained. The data sets were stripped of
excess information by means of the data extraction software that was specifically written
to leave only the quark velocity coordinates.
Figure 7 showing the data extracting tool.
The output from this program was then imported into an excel spread sheet for
analysis and the results are shown below:
Figure 8 Precision run for proton and neutron solutions
The subsequent run of the simulator software provided a tighter range of data to
work with. After analyzing this run it seemed that the final solution would be a down
quark velocity of 299737587.219242 to 299737591.960729 kps with a corresponding up
quark velocity of 299778628.1 to 299778627.5 kps. At this point, the data was manually
recalculated, first solving for the proton, then using those numbers to solve for the
neutron. The final result was a single pair of quark velocities that can be used to
accurately solve for both the neutron and the proton was found.
The Proton Set of Equations =
The Neutron Set of Equations =
The solution set =
Up quark Velocity = 299778627.86850
Down quark Velocity = 299737589.0490
Using these numbers in the above equations give the correct results for both particles.
Section Five: Summary and Implications
The Theory of Super Relativity is based on a mechanical model derived from ideas
and concepts, which originated from the mathematics of the field theory by
mathematicians and scientists like Maxwell, Lorentz and Einstein. Their concept of
reality was based on the principle of a physical continuum, such as the ether, which was
thought to be the mediator of force. Up until the turn of the twentieth century the idea of
an ether had led to the discovery of a great deal of mathematics that successfully
explained electromagnetism and gravity. Super Relativity implies that it is highly
improbable that the proven theories and formulae that were developed by these
pioneers could have been achieved using incorrect postulates. Indeed, Super Relativity
revived the ether concept and added additional insights to the original ether theory. This
new theoretical framework has been developed to extend Special and General
Relativity. The equations used in Special Relativity can be used for both the
macroscopic and microscopic worlds, the main assumption being that if they work for
macroscopic objects, they must also apply to the fundamental components that make
up macroscopic objects.
Additional analysis of the Standard Model was also conducted in order to formulate
the Bridging Model between electromagnetism and gravity. The analysis of the
Standard Model revealed a subtle pattern embedded within the model itself[7] [8].
1. All the particles that have mass also possess an imbalanced charge state, which
makes them rotate about an axis. This rotation of high speed charged particles
generates the gravitational field.
2. All the particles that do not exhibit mass such as the photon and neutrino, possess
charges that are equally balanced, and yield a net charge of zero. Even the gluon which
carries a strong force adheres to this rule, as it has a neutral charge, zero mass and is
its own anti-particle.
3. Apparent exceptions to the above rules such as the Z0 boson which have mass, are
generally composed of other particles which rapidly rotate around a central axis point.
These particles are unstable composites of fermion-antifermion pairs which most likely
generate their mass by using Super Relativity Bridging Mechanism. The Z0 boson which
is a composite particle, generates its mass from two particles of equal but opposite
charge. Therefore it uses the same method to manifest the property of mass as does
the proton and neutron.
The implications of this theoretical concept are of great importance. The Super
Relativity bridging mechanism if proven correct solves both of the major mysteries in
physics today.
1 The source of the gravitational field, and
2 The unification of electromagnetism to gravity (the Holy Grail of physics).
If the Super Relativity bridging mechanism is the central cause for the gravitational
field, this would raise questions about both quantum mechanics and string theory being
the possible explanation for the Theory of Everything.
Another great insight, which lay dormant for many decades, arose to provide
additional evidence for the support of this model. If the solution revealed by these
experiments is correct, there should already be existing mathematical approximations of
it, expressed as formulas which were discovered by other people. These formulas
should be consistent with the Super Relativity Model and those that are most likely to be
harmonious to the Super Relativity model are:
E=mc^2 and Newton‟s Second Law of Motion f=ma
Transformation for both equations to solve for mass can be resolved simply by using
m=e/c^2 and m = f/a. In both cases mass becomes a function of a force or energy in
motion. The first case is more restrictive as the constant c is used, thereby only allowing
for a specialized version of objects moving at the speed of light. It also does not work for
balanced charge objects such as the photon. The second case is much more flexible
and is most like the Super Relativity model. Both of these equations state that the
physical manifestation of mass is the result of an energy or force in motion. Could the
causal nexus of gravity be this simple? The most specific definition for the cause of
gravity according to Super Relativity is as follows: „The cause of gravity is due to the
motion of energy.‟ Energy is specifically defined as an imbalance electrostatic charge in
motion.
The other important aspect is the motion of the energy through space. In the case of
material objects such as quarks inside of protons and neutrons, the motion is circular or
elliptical in nature. Since the motion of the energy is changing direction this means that
it is in actuality an acceleration. Literally speaking m = f/a. This results in the creation of
a gravitational field by means of the Lorentz Transformations.
Using the bridging mechanism to explain gravity corresponds very well to observed
phenomena. It also provides a great deal of insight into the very foundation of nature as
this theory possesses reasoning, based in principle on an elegant natural philosophy,
which describes nature as a system of explainable and sensible mechanics.
References
[1] Einstein, Albert, “Ether and the Theory of Relativity”, (1920)
[2] Michael Fowler,”http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/109N/lectures/michelson.html”,1996
[3] Einstein, Albert, “Ether and the Theory of Relativity”, (1920)
[4] Einstein, Albert. Relativity: The Special and General Theory. New York: Henry Holt, 1920
[5] C.R. Nave, “HyperPhysics”, http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/nuclear/scatele.html”, (2005)
[6] The NIST Reference on Constants, Units and Uncertainty http://physics.nist.gov (2008)
[7] http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/theory/model.html
[8] http://www.superstringtheory.com/experm/exper2.html