ARTICLE THREE

Quantum Gravity

**Shown to be a residual of the electrodynamic and nuclear forces as described by quantum field theory.**

**– a solution so simple its basis can first be described without maths yet it matches all the experiments.**

**A novel experiment in Earth orbit could check a new theoretical prediction**

*A successful solution for the vexed question of finding a paradox-free theory of quantum gravity is described. It starts from basic principles yet matches all the experiments normally considered the unique achievements of general relativity. It ends by showing gravity is a minute residual of the quantum field derived nuclear and electrodynamic forces. The derivation shows why gravity is so weak in relation to the others. *

According to Feynman (1985), the nuclear forces and those of electromagnetism (now known as electrodynamics) are fully explained by ‘quantum field theory’. All these forces depend on the existence of a common ‘quantum vacuum’. A vacuum means the absence of matter: its atoms and associated particles. The quantum vacuum, however, consists of a seething mass of so-called ‘virtual particles’ that exist independently of matter yet extend throughout the entirety of space. This provides a type of background medium through which light and matter have to move.

Before the advent of quantum theory physicists postulated the ‘ether’ as a background medium. Experiments made up to 1887 had attempted to measure the speed of the Earth through the postulated ether. The null results returned were inconclusive, however, owing to all apparatus used relying on beams of light. In all cases, as first pointed out by FitzGerald in 1889, speed induced atomic distortion would have cancelled the expected signal. However, this warning appears to have been discounted and instead it was postulated by Poincaré that only relative speeds could exist. Einstein derived his theory of special relativity on the same basis, also postulating the speed of light to be a universal constant that would be the same for all observers.

This meant that no special frames of reference could be permitted and any observer could be regarded as standing still with everything else in relative motion. No two observers, in motion relative to each other, could both be standing still in the quantum vacuum. Furthermore light could not be the same for all moving observers and simultaneously propagate through that medium.

Consequently the relativity principle had to be revised before a theory of quantum gravity could be formulated It meant a special frame of reference had to exist where an object would have zero speed when not moving in the local quantum vacuum. Then all observers, whatever their relative speeds, would all agree on the kinetic energy and associated mass increase of any other object. This absolute reference will be termed the ‘local frame’.

As will be shown, the end result was a theory of quantum gravity arising from an ‘exact classical mechanics’ (ECM). This matches all the experiments that have been regarded as the unique achievements of Einstein’s theory of general relativity. The theory has been published in Russia (1991) and in scientific journals in America (1997) and India (2005).

##### Quantum gravity – summary of a simple solution

As well as basing all velocities on a local frame the theory adopted Euclidean geometry with universal time, which turned out to be fully compatible with quantum field theory.

The very simple logic will now be considered in eight steps without considering mathematical formalism. Derivations in mathematical detail begin in Chapter 1. Introductory books are available from www.pearsonianspace.com.

STEP 1 Since light is deflected by gravity and can be considered as made from the energy of motion (kinetic energy) it followed that the latter must be of the same substance as the ‘rest mass’ of matter: the mass of an object when standing still.

STEP 2 To accelerate an object, in any direction, energy would need to be added, so increasing the energy of the object by adding kinetic energy. A mass increase would arise due to this kinetic energy as a consequence of STEP 1. Matter in absolute motion had therefore to consist of the sum of rest mass and kinetic mass, or conversely rest energy plus kinetic energy – to be called ‘**inertial mass**’ and ‘**sum energy**’ respectively.

**STEP 3** By considering the horizontal acceleration of an object, so that its sum energy increased with speed, two equations appeared that looked identical to those derived from Einstein’s theory called ‘special relativity’. One of these was *E=mc2* the other showed no object could exceed the speed of light denoted *c*. Here *E* denotes the sum energy and *m* the inertial mass of the object.

**STEP 4** Then a horizontal beam of light was considered bent by gravity. The distance light had to travel on the outside of the bend had to be greater than on the inside for equal travel time, assuming light must propagate perpendicular to its waves. This showed the speed of light must increase with altitude and so could no longer be regarded as the universal constant Einstein postulated. This also meant that as *c* reduced *m* increased if *E* remained constant. So* E=mc2* no longer meant mass is equivalent to energy.

**STEP 5** To determine which should be considered as the ultimate substance of matter a thought experiment considered the lowering of a bucket on a cable. The downward force of gravity was produced by the quantum vacuum and, in doing mechanical work, energy had to be extracted from the vacuum. A brake on the winding drum dissipated all this energy released during lowering: so none was added to the bucket. This meant that the rest energy *E0* of any object must always remain constant and it also followed that sum energy, not inertial mass, was the true building substance of the universe.

**STEP 6** This also meant Newton’s equation of gravity had to be modified by substituting variable sum energies for fixed rest masses Then as an object fell its sum energy would increase. Consequently the force of gravity became steeper than the inverse square law of the original Newtonian equation. For a massive Sun and small planet of mass *m* kg and sum energy *E* Joules the equation for gravitational force *F* N (Newtons) at centre distance *r *metres and for *c* = 2.997925´108 m/s where the Newtonian gravitational constant *G* = 6.67259´10-11 Nm2kg-2 reduces to:

[1]

This *r0* is called the ‘gravitational radius of the Sun – a constant where *mS* is the rest mass of the Sun = 1.99´1030 kg.

**STEP 7** Next a quantum rule given by Novikov (1983) showed the virtual particles of the quantum vacuum had an average separating distance *L* that was inversely proportional to *mc*. Substituting for *m = E/c2* showed *L* increased with altitude in the same proportion as *c* increased. This made the observed speed of light, denoted *cT,*, increase as *c2*. This doubled the gravitational bending of light to match Einstein’s prediction - as well as matching the ‘Shapiro excess time delay’ of radar beams bounced from planets (due to light going slower as it nears the Sun).

OTHER PREDICTIONS The same gravitational red shift appeared due to energy loss from the photons of light rising against gravity. The effect Einstein put down to ‘gravitational time dilation’ of clocks now appeared due to the gravitational mass increase. The lifetime increase of cosmic rays also derived from the mass increase. Equations identical to Einstein’s had appeared, so matching the data just as well, but clearly had an entirely different interpretation.

The vibrational frequency of clocks in horizontal motion reduced due partly to the speed induced mass increase and partly due to the electric charges in atoms. Opposite charges in motion through the vacuum produce mutually repulsive magnetic forces that counter part of the attractive electrostatic force between them.

The ‘perihelion advance’ of planets like Mercury also matched the experiments, this time due to the law of gravity being slightly steeper than the inverse square law, the gravitational mass change and change of *L*. (The solution was based on the conservation of angular momentum *mvr* = constant)

**STEP 8 GRAVITY AS A BUOYANCY FORCE** The change of *L* with altitude also meant that the density of the ‘quantum vacuum’ had to increase as a massive object was approached. This meant the force of gravity could act in the manner of buoyancy though negatively directed. (The co-developing solution to the creation problem showed the pressure of the quantum vacuum to have a net negative value and this reversed the direction of the buoyancy force.)

Then since the quantum vacuum, by quantum field theory, generates both the nuclear and electrodynamic forces, it followed that gravity had to be regarded as a small net residual of these two immensely strong forces. In this way quantum gravity appeared without the need for any further development of quantum theory and was shown to predict about the correct order of magnitude for the force of gravity.

One physicist objected that Paul Dirac had unified quantum theory with special relativity so that it was no longer based on Euclidean geometry. This was because all matter and space was subjected to a ‘Lorentz contraction’ in the direction of motion and simultaneously time dilated for the moving object under observation. This was easily countered by pointing out that when these two effects are multiplied together they exactly cancel to leave the same end result as Euclidean geometry with universal time.

Consequently a **grand unified theory** for all four forces of nature had appeared in a very simple and elegant manner.

Some detail is worth inclusion here. According to Starobinskii & Zel’dovitch (1988) the quantum vacuum has an energy density:

eµ = 1045 J/m3. Now according to the forgoing ECM theory energy densities *e* and pressure *P* vary according to:

[2]

*r0* = 1,477 metres for the Sun, its ‘gravitational radius’. So it can be seen that even at the surface of the Sun having *r* = 696´106 m the excess density is only

6.37´10-6eµ, which is relatively very small so the resulting buoyancy force can be expected to be very weak.

From the gas laws and assuming virtual particles of the quantum vacuum move at average speed *vvp* then:

[3]

Also the corresponding pressure gradient of the quantum vacuum multiplied by the volume *V* of the elementary particle will produce a buoyancy type of force. Differentiating [2] yields the buoyancy force as:

[4]

Then from equations [1],[3] & [4] it is readily shown that:, after allowing for the pressure P being negative:

[5]

Let the quark having *m* = 5.58´10-28 kg be considered as the particle of buoyancy force. Then even if *vvp = c* so as to provide the required gravitational force and *V = r*34p/3, the quark would need to be *r* = 2´10-19 m in radius. This is not unreasonable being 0.02% of the size of a proton. Consequently the weakness of the force of gravity in comparison with the others is now explained.

Can the need to speculate on the gravitational force being weak due to “leakage into hyperspace” now be abandoned?

##### A NEW EXPERIMENT IN EARTH ORBIT

The new theory of quantum gravity shows that, unlike relativity theories, clocks need to be placed in two categories: ‘light-clocks’ and ‘matter clocks’, owing to a difference in time keeping when speed is increased. Light clocks, such as caesium beam atomic clocks, depend on beams of light, and orientation to the direction of motion makes no change in timekeeping. Equally no fringe shifts for interferometers will arise.

These null effects are caused by speed-induced distortions of atoms. Atoms contain negatively charged electrons attracted to positively charged nuclei. Pairs of opposite charge in linear motion produce mutual magnetic forces opposing the electric force. This causes the atoms, and any structure they comprise, to stretch slightly in a direction transverse to motion in the proportion 0.5(*v/c*)2 - according to the theory provided in the appendix. to *PART II*. It is this effect that, theoretically, prevents interferometers from measuring absolute speeds and maintains the stability of atomic clocks.

However, our theory also shows that the same distortions __increase__ the variation of frequency with orientation for matter clocks – those depending on mechanical vibration. Quartz crystal types come under this definition.

However, though the quartz clock is treated theoretically in Chapter 5, the simplest matter-clock to envisage is ‘electrostatic pendulum clock’ made on a nanoscale. The pendulum bob has an electric charge and is attracted to an earthed flat plate that is perpendicular to the pendulum chord. It is best to imagine a mirror image – a virtual pendulum reflected from the surface of the plate.

With the line of centres of real and virtual pendulum bobs pointing in the direction of motion the charges produce no mutual magnetic force and also there is no distortion of atoms in that direction. When this line is perpendicular to motion, however, a maximum mutual magnetic force exists between bobs. This opposes a small part of the attractive electric force and so reduces vibration frequency. However, all atoms of the apparatus contain electrons and protons that are similarly affected. So the apparatus distorts by being stretched a little. Increase of pendulum length adds to the reduction of frequency. In this way the atomic distortions now add to the shift caused by magnetic force between bobs.

. Indeed atomic distortion is shown in Chapter 5* PART II* to make this variation 2.5 times that for no distortion for this electrostatic pendulum type of matter-clock.

This makes possible the invention of a new instrument comprising two identical matter clocks with vibrational axes perpendicular to each other. Then a difference frequency will be proportional to (*v/c*)2 where *v* is the speed of the probe measured from the local frame alias the quantum vacuum.

More practical for first trials would be the substitution of quartz crystal clocks for the kind previously described. The main problem is to develop the clocks to achieve a frequency of about 500 MHz with an unwanted random drift rate not exceeding 10-10 s/s. Theory shows that in elongated orbit of 36,000 km at apogee and 300 km altitude at perigee the shift frequency will be only 10-9 of the clock frequency.

A first test in such an Earth orbit ought to establish that the quantum vacuum exists by measuring the local frame of reference.

Ultimately an exciting new form of space exploration could develop - measuring the velocity structure of the quantum vacuum throughout the solar system!

When all existing data is assembled what we expect to discover is an egg-shaped volume of the quantum vacuum gravitationally trapped to move with the Earth and extending about as far as the inner and outer Lagrangian points. This ‘Rankine oval’ should move like a solid object with streamlines flowing round it as it travels within a far larger bubble locked about the Sun.

Funding is needed of about £280,000 for promoting this paradigm-shifting experiment in Earth orbit.

** **

A brief overview of PART III

DARK ENERGY

**What is it really?**

**- We show it arises as a solution to the problem of **

CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE

** by the**

BIG BREED THEORY

*Dark energy was postulated to exist after astronomers found that, contrary to expectations, the expansion of the universe was speeding up. Dark energy was proposed being attributed mysterious and unexplained repulsive forces.*

*However, the big bang theory makes a hopelessly wrong prediction for the rate of expansion of the universe. It gives a value many billions of times too high!*

*A big breed theory is described, without maths, showing how this error can be corrected. The result then predicts that the expansion must be ever accelerating and so the true nature of dark energy appears to have been identified already.*

##### The big breed theory

The big breed theory was the initial problem addressed but could not utilise general relativity. Therefore the theory of quantum gravity, previously summarised, had to be derived as a prerequisite. Indeed the two theories had to be treated as a single holistic problem.

Like the big bang theory it is assumed that both the universe of matter and space arose spontaneously from a void of zero energy. The big bang due to Guth (1989) assumed the high energy density of space, its energy per unit volume, to be balanced by a negative pressure. This led to the false prediction known as ‘**The problem of the cosmological constant**’ that, according to Greene (1999) is 10120 times too high. The reason? No way could be found for switching off the violent creative explosion the theory describes.

To solve the problem the positive energy of space and matter was now balanced by a negative energy of the same nature as the positive kind but defined by the forces of ‘action’ and ‘reaction’ in Newton’s laws of motion being reversed. For example, with the force of action reversed mechanical work, being force times distance moved, would be negative. Kinetic energy and rest energy as well as mass would all be negative. The momentum arrow would point opposite motion.

It was shown, however, that if all matter in the universe were made of negative energy, exactly the same responses of objects in collision would result. This was because the negative signs of the two objects cancelled out. So we could just as easily be made of negative as positive energy: it is impossible to say which applies. So there is nothing strange about particles being made out of negative energy.

The ultimate level of reality, to be called the ‘i-ther’, needs to comprise particles of both kinds: the ‘primaries’. When opposites interact responses are very strange indeed. Opposites of numerically equal energies could cancel to zero and so could mutually annihilate to leave the nothingness of the void. Conversely the void could produce both kinds of primaries from which the universe could evolve and so constitute pure creation from the void.

So what could determine whether annihilation or creation occurred? The answer was the conservation of momentum. The momentum of an object is its mass multiplied by its velocity and the total for two objects in collision always remains the same.

When two opposites collide momentum forces energy gains to occur for both partners in balanced amounts. Each splits after reaching a critical size, so producing a breeding effect with numbers rapidly increasing. This is spontaneous creation but is billions of times too high. Fortunately at a high density instability arises since the same momentum consideration now favours mutual annihilation. Now many primaries can converge from all directions. The entire field then collapses into a myriad of flow cells containing cores or filaments of annihilation at their centres. The result is the formation of a structured background medium called ‘i-ther’ from which the quantum vacuum emerges.

At an ultimate density creation is exactly cancelled by annihilation but at lower densities a net creation remains to produce an accelerating expansion. The rate of acceleration falls as densities increase, so producing a self-governing system. Consequently the rate of expansion can now fall to the observed value – resulting in a solution to the problem of the cosmological constant. However, after the initial burst the expansion continues at a slow but ever-accelerating rate so matching observation.

This was first published in Russia (1994) followed by others in 1997 and 2005. So the prediction of an accelerating expansion preceded its discovery by astronomers as recoded by Schwarzchild (1988).

This solution is combined with that of quantum gravity and explains why it acts as a force of negative buoyancy. Although positive and negative energies are generated in equal amounts each consists of the sum of rest and kinetic energies. Negative kinetic energy exceeds the positive so that the quantum vacuum produces a net negative pressure. Positive rest energy dominates to maintain overall balance.

A further feature of the new creation theory is that to maintain matter excess energy needs to be deposited where that matter exists. The i-ther comprises a fluid in which a solid structure of filaments is embedded so making is act like a porous solid. The excess energy leaks out by viscous flow to produce exactly the density gradients represented in equation [2]. Consequently a reason for the gradients needed to explain gravity has also appeared.

Most important of all is the finding that the i-ther contains all the ingredients needed for evolution by the organising power of chaos. The mathematics of chaos has shown that when energy is continually supplied to an originally random system, incredible self-organisation results. It is inferred that such evolution could explain the emergence of the quantum level of reality. This could explain its unreal and ephemeral qualities. It also permits a theory to be advanced that unifies physics with the empirical evidence showing spiritual worlds exist.

So finally has the nature of dark energy been established? Is it the ‘i-ther’, arising from a solution of the problem of the cosmological constant? The reader can only judge the issue by studying the books available in the *CREATION SOLVED?* trilogy.

**REFERENCES**

Feynman, Richard, P.:(1985): QED, *The Strange Theory of Light and Matter:* Princeton University Press. 1985

Guth, Alan** & **Steinhardt, Paul (1989)**:** The Inflationary Universe

The New Physics Ed. Davies, Paul: Cambridge University Press

Pearson, Ronald D (1991): *Alternative to Relativity including *

* Quantum Gravitation*: Second International Conference on

Problems in Space and Time: St. Petersburg, Petrovskaja

Academy of Sciences & Arts (Sept. 1991) pp 278-292

Pearson, Ronald D, (1994).: *Quantum Gravitation and the *

* Structured Ether*: Sir Isaac Newton Conference. St. Petersburg,

Russian Academy of Sciences, (March 1993) pp 39-55

Chairman Local Organising Committee:Dr. Michael Varin:

Pulkovskoye Road 65-9-1 St. Petersburg 196140, Russia.

FAX: (7) (812) 291-81-35

Phone:Alexandre Alekseev: office:(7) (812) 291-36-73,

Home:(7) (812) 173-55-69 E-Mail: consym@saman.spb.su

Pearson, R. D.(1997): *Consciousness as a Sub-Quantum *

* Phenomenon*: Frontier Perspectives, Spring/Summer 1997,

Vol.6,No.2 pp70-78

Pearson, R.D. (2005): A Paradigm-Shifting Physics Supports Immortality!

CONSCIOUSNESS SERIES 7: Indian Council of Philosophical

Research, Darshan Bhawan, 36, Tughlakabad Institutional Area,

Mehrauli-Badarour Rd., New Delhi 11oo62

Starobinskii, A.A, & Zel’dovitch, Ya.B (1988) *Quantum Effects in*

* Cosmology*: Nature, Vol.331, 25 Feb 1988

Website: www.pearsonianspace.com

This summarises the content of books available.