Fruechte Gravity Theory Blog

Any middle school student in the free world with a true interest in science, and proper resources to learn, has noticed from diagrams in books or on the web, or with iron filings on a piece of paper with a magnet beneath, that magnetic field lines have curvature.  A local electric field between and surrounding two point charges also has curvature in the near space, except for on a line pointing directly away from the other charge.  Dr. Schombert gives us a good diagram of this on the web. [1]

The lines of a gravitational field, on the other hand, have no curvature in any instance, and “the gravitational force is entirely radial”. ([2], pg 616)  So, what is going on here?

Earlier it was mentioned that the Coulomb force may transmit “through the gravitational field in wave packets at group velocity, by phase shift and chirality” [3].  This could otherwise be stated as by phase shift and parity and, as physicists know, group velocity can be faster than the speed of light.

To extend on this concept and compare then, if a rotational component is developed in a free graviton, it is due only to Coulomb field production, and though free gravitons always travel in a straight line, neglecting lensing, when there are no charges present the rotational component of a free graviton would be zero. 

[1] http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/21st_century_science/lectures/lec04.html

[2] Kline, Morris, Calculus, An Intuitive and Physical Approach, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1967, 1977; Dover (1998) unabridged republication.

[3] https://www.fruechtetheory.com/blog/2010/06/15/muonic-states/

Received an email back from Doug Finkbeiner with a reference and a calculation.  I did have to look up the definition of a parsec and multiply by 180/pi to get his parsecs per degree factor and understand better.  In any case, lensing does not need to be considered with the gamma ray bubbles of the Milky Way.

The answer was detailed, informative, and polite.  Could be enough encouragement for me to continue contacting scientists again.  Emails sent out Friday and Saturday were the first in over two years; for a long time I was too discouraged to even click a send button.

Something that needs to be considered relating to the size of the massive gamma ray emitting bubbles at the center of the Milky Way Galaxy is light lensing, – gravitational, and by many other wavelengths.  This is because light bends light.

Doug Finkbeiner of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and Harvard graduate students Meng Su and Tracy Slatyer “made the discovery while processing publicly available data from NASA’s Fermi Large Area Telescope (LAT).” *  So as not to make assumptions, the three may have already considered light lensing, and the massive bubbles of the Milky Way may indeed be 50,000 light years across as published.  If not considered, on the other hand, the bubbles may be smaller than thought, though still quite massive.

As is already estimated by scientists, the bubbles volumetrically are mostly gas, with rocks, dust, stars, and other items intermixed in places.  If scientists are spectrum analyzing for the gaseous elements present, that will be very interesting and we can all look forward to the results.

* http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101110/sc_afp/usastronomy

Just bubbles of mass with atoms and molecules present:

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/GLAST/news/new-structure.html

These bubbles would help keep the spiral structure of the Milky Way on a plane.

After seven years of study, five involving gravity, and pretty much getting ostracized by the physics community in 2010, I have started to ramp down my math and physics study time.  Helping students is still a fairly common occurrence and I am hoping this, with the engineering also, will be enough to keep me sharp.

One thing that I may not get to in the near future then is the concept of the Coulomb force by phonon transmission through a gravitational field, similar to phonon transmission in a crystal.  It was alluded to earlier with the phrase “shouldering through the gravitons in a highly relativistic sense” *, and the mathematics, I suppose, would utilize that already existing within quantum mechanics relating to phonon transmission.

In areas of deep space where the gravitational field is very weak, the Coulomb force may not transmit effectively.  Nevertheless, it is irrelevant because protons and electrons cannot exist without enough gravitational pressure. 

* https://www.fruechtetheory.com/blog/2009/03/15/electric-charges/

When a PhD researcher in Finland found in the early 1990’s that a gravitational field is altered by a strong magnetic field, he lost his job and sort of went into hiding, – no mathematical proof that gravity is electromagnetic at the time.  On this web site is mathematical proof, and I did not know about the Finland experiment until around January 2006.

Even if gravitons are the fundamental quantum unit, it is beyond obvious that many other electromagnetic waves and particles have their own functions in the physical world.

Electrons, along with protons, alpha particles, and a few other nuclei are stable, whether part of atoms or free.  They are synchronized with a gravitational field providing barrier pressure and conjugate wave functions.  Several other particles in the standard model typically have lifetimes shorter than a micro second, found often through scattering experiments.  Since we cannot call a time so short an ‘existence’, one occasionally finds statements by physicists that these particles have never been found in the free state.

With gravitons coming in at all polar angles to a subatomic particle or to a nucleus, combinations of mass, angular momentum, parity, isospin, and charge, to maintain a nucleus or to produce intermediate particles, are needed in order to produce the four fundamental forces of nature.  In other words, understanding in terms of internal and free gravitons, with their wave functions and conjugates, is simply not enough.  The uncertainty principle prevents us from obtaining a clear picture of the inside of an atomic nucleus or an electron at any instant in time.

Many of the gamma rays emitted through nuclear fission or a scattering experiment are in the tens and hundreds of keV in terms of energy.  For nuclear fission, it is nuclear multipole vibrations and moments, and internal wave functions that provide the spring action to eject particles from a nucleus.  In scattering we can add incident particle energies.

As far as internal gravitons, no matter how many are involved with an ejection, recoil energy expenditure and other effects can cause the 312.76 MeV gamma rays to reduce in energy down into the keV range when emitted, – which are of course then no longer gravitons.  Internal wave functions with transverse momentum to the ejection of a particle from a nucleus, which would be most of them, may acquire angular momentum or circular or elliptic polarity in the process, in both the remaining nucleus and in the resultant scattered particles, whether it be alpha or beta decay, or the short lived quark, gluon, pion, ω meson, ρ meson, kaon, W^± boson, Z boson, or the hyperon and other strange baryons, to name a few.

As far as free gravitons captured as they enter a nucleus, some may be used to manufacture W^± and Z⁰ bosons in order to maintain the weak nuclear force.

We cannot go forward with physics by throwing out the standard model.  It must stay, and only be revised by agreement of the physics community as a whole.

Hi Dan,

Traveling and the email does not go through.  Thanks for the BBC article link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8767763.stm

It happened again; a Greek letter did not come through properly.  In “Subatomic Particle Structure” it was the letter nu.  I try to be very careful when copying referenced formulas into the blog, and the character was not a mistake, just a software incompatibility.  Sorry.

Research on the internal structure of subatomic particles has been ongoing since the early days of particle accelerators and cosmic ray experiments, and there are several points of view that merit study.  The view promoted here has not much new, and should sound familiar.  The very stable proton, as CERN would agree, is a worthy starting point.

First of all, “there is no hard core to the proton. … It could be like jelly, or it could be like a strawberry, with seeds scattered throughout, but no accumulation of them at the centre.”  When scattering e^– + p is elastic, the resulting Bjorken scaling “is interpreted as indicating that the scattering takes place off point like constituents of the proton, called partons.”, where “the structure factors are functions of ω only.” ([1], pgs 16-18).

Since “q is the photon 4-momentum”, for “an individual parton of mass m” we can use the relativistic mass of the graviton, m_g = 5.575 x 10^-28 kg [2], in which case the dimensionless ω = (2Mν)/q², with q² = 2mν ([1], pg 17), gives ω = m_p/m_g = 3.

One may think of the internal structure of the proton as a crystal lattice, with nodes, or partons, that are basically zero points of eigenvectors, where internal and pass through wave functions add or subtract momentum.  If you are a string theorist, added head to tail you may choose to look at the vector structure as vibrating strings.  If you have a Mechanical or Civil engineering degree you may think of the structure as finite elements, – not necessarily tetrahedral however.  The nodes are the seeds of Ryder’s strawberry.

The defined boundary of a subatomic particle results from gravitational pressure at its barrier domain.  Let us view then the particle as a wave packet “when the wave packet is subject to the influence of a parabolic potential.  Physically, this result arises from the fact that the tendency of the wave packet to spread is compensated by the potential, whose effect is to push the wave packet towards the origin from regions where V(x) is large.” ([3], Compl. G_v, 3.c., pg 572)  Due to gravitational pressure, V(x) would be large at the barrier domain of the particle.  With consistent frequency, ω_g =  4.75 x 10²³ rad. sec^-1 [2], gravitons step through the barrier easily.

Baryons and fermions would be similar in structure, though differing greatly in density.  Scattering can happen through barrier elasticity or partial penetration with node to node scattering.  Deeper node penetration on a large nucleus can result in alpha decay.

[1] Ryder, Lewis H., Quantum Field Theory, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press, 1996

[2] https://www.fruechtetheory.com/blog/2010/06/15/muonic-states/

[3] Cohen-Tannoudji, Dui, Laloë, Quantum Mechanics, Hermann, 1977, Paris, France