A UNIVERSE FROM APPARENT TO REAL, IN SHORT
Dino Bruniera
Treviso (Italy)
e-mail:
dino.bruniera@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Light is composed of
electromagnetic waves, which therefore need a medium to manifest themselves, so
its speed can be isotropic only relative to the medium and not also relative to
celestial objects, including the Earth, which move in the medium.
Physicists have devised various experiments to demonstrate that the speed of
light is not isotropic relative to the Earth, but without success. To justify
this negative result, some physicists have hypothesized that material objects,
as a function of their speed relative to the medium, undergo a time dilation and
a length contraction, making the speed of light appear isotropic even if it is
not, so that said isotropy would be only apparent. Instead, I have
actually demonstrated, through the CMBR, that the speed of light is not
isotropic relative to the Earth and, therefore, that this isotropy is only
apparent.
To explain what the medium is and how it works, I developed a theory that I
called Space Quanta in Expansion, which then identified the medium with
expanding space, and which explains how photons and material objects move in the
medium. Among other things, it argues that the expansion of the Universe is not
caused by two forces, one that makes material objects move away, which would be
the so-called dark energy, and another that makes them move closer, which would
be gravity, but is caused by a single force, the one that makes the space quanta
expand and which could explain dark energy. Therefore gravity is an apparent
force.
Keywords:
Space Quanta in Expansion, Michelson-Morley experiment, CMBR, expansion of the
space, expansion of the Universe, Shapiro, General Relativity, speed of light,
type Ia supernovae, cosmological redshift, gravity.
1. PREMISES
1.1 Philosophical premise
On the basis of what
the philosophers of science (1), there are three different approaches to
developing a theory on a specific physical phenomenon, for example on that of
gravity, namely: instrumentalist, realist and incompleteist.
For the instrumentalist an explanation of gravity is impossible, but this would
be a problem only if the theory were to give such an explanation and not a
simple description, as is required instead.
For the realist gravity is considered a property of matter, which therefore does
not have to be explained, but serves to explain.
For incompletists, the impossibility of obtaining a sure explanation does not
imply the impossibility of developing the theory, but only of accepting that the
theory is incomplete. However, it must be completed with at least a reasonable
explanation.
I have developed the theory that I present in this article as an incompletist,
that is, with the awareness of not providing a sure explanation of some physical
phenomena, so I have explained them in at least a reasonable way.
1.2 Physical premise
Light is composed of
electromagnetic waves, which therefore need a medium to manifest themselves, so
its speed can be isotropic only relative to the medium and not also relative to
celestial objects, including the Earth, which move in the medium.
Physicists at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century, devised
various experiments to detect the motion of the Earth relative to the medium,
including that of Michelson Morley (2), but without success, because the speed
of light was found to be isotropic relative to the Earth too.
To justify this negative result, some physicists have hypothesized that all
material objects, as a function of their speed relative to the medium, undergo a
time dilation and a length contraction, making the speed of light appear
isotropic even if in reality it is not, so that said isotropy would be
only apparent.
Instead, I was able to demonstrate that the speed of light is not isotropic
relative to the Earth, through the CMBR, and therefore I truly demonstrated that
this isotropy is only apparent (3).
To explain at least in a reasonable way how both photons and material objects
move in the medium, I developed a theory that I called Space Quanta in Expansion
(SQE), and which therefore identified the medium with expanding space. Among
other things, it argues that the expansion of the Universe is not caused by two
forces, one that makes material objects move away, which would be the so-called
dark energy, and another that makes them move closer, which would be gravity,
but is caused by a single force, the one that makes the space quanta expand and
which could explain dark energy. Therefore gravity is an apparent force.
2. A UNIVERSE OF SPACE QUANTA
2.1 Expanding space
For the SQE the
Universe is an immense sphere composed of an infinity of tiny indivisible
particles, containing an equal amount of space, which I call as “space quanta”.
The "space" should be a continuous substance, therefore not made up of particles
(which means that the very small space quanta would not in turn made up of
further even smaller particles), which tends to expand. In practice, it would be
the only real substance that makes up the Universe and which, therefore, should
be very different from the matter that we are be able to observe.
At the beginning of the so-called Big Bang, the space quanta were extremely
compressed. Therefore they immediately began to expand, causing the expansion of
the Universe.
The speed of the space expansion is the same in all locations in the Universe,
so that each location moves away from any other location at a speed that depend
on distance: the more distant they are and the faster they move away from each
other.
So every location can be considered as a center of the Universe, from which all
the other locations move away.
2.2 Motion of material objects
Figure 1
Expansion of the space quanta inside and outside a celestial object
There is no vacuum among the space quanta. Therefore if one single quanta
compresses and shrinks in size, the adjacent quanta can increase in size and
thus expand.
Matter is a physical manifestation in the space quanta.
The elementary
particles of quantum field theory, are physical phenomena that, amongst other
things, compress space quanta. Therefore a material object contains a huge
number of sets of compressed space quanta, that increase the average compression
of the space quanta composing it.
Consequently the quanta adjacent to the object, i.e. those situated in the front
line (first liner), due to the reduction in the size of the quanta in the
object, expand towards the object. However they are later partially
recompressed, because the second-liner space quanta, which are now more
compressed because they have not undergone any expansion, finding less
resistance towards the object, move and expand in turn towards the first-liner
space quanta. Later also the quanta in the third line, still compressed, move
and expand towards those in the second line, and so on, until the quanta ever
more distant from the object.
In a nutshell, the material object, by compressing numerous space quanta,
induces the nearby quanta and then gradually also the increasingly distant ones,
to expand and move towards it. The result is an environment in which the space
quanta close to material objects are more expanded than those further away.
In figure 1 I visualized in a cross section, as a celestial object, which could be the Sun, compresses the space quanta inside it and, consequently, it causes the neighboring quanta to move towards it and expand in a radial sense the external space quanta (of course their actual dimensions are extremely smaller).
The quanta composing a material object, are more compressed than the quanta external to it, however, to be precise, it must be said that it is the average compression of the quanta composing the object, which is greater than the compression of the external quanta. This is because material objects include numerous quanta that could even be more expanded than those outside of it, i.e. those between the atoms, as they are closer to the elementary particles that make up matter.
The material objects
tend to move towards the more expanded quanta and therefore towards the more
massive objects, because the sets of quanta that compose them find less
resistance to force due to their tendency to expand. However, more precisely, we
should not think of quanta as moving from one point to another, but of quanta
compressions as moving from one point to another (like sound waves in the air).
I think this is at least a reasonable explanation of gravity, which is therefore
not a real force, but what appears due to the expansive force of the space
quanta.
2.3 Deflection of light
Light manifests itself
through electromagnetic waves that are massless. So they shouldn't try to
expand towards where the space is less dense, but from the observations it
appears that they deflect towards that direction in any case.
The General Relativity (GR) justifies this phenomenon with a apparent curvature
of spacetime composed of 4 dimensions caused by the presence of a massive
object.
The QSE also justifies this phenomenon with a curvature, but only of the space
composed of the normal 3 dimensions, which is a realistic phenomenon, as can be
seen from figure 2 and its explanations.
Figure 2
Curvature of space caused by the
presence of a massive object
In practice the space quanta farthest from the material object have almost
identical dimensions as they are not influenced by it, those that form the
object are very compressed and those adjacent to it are more expanded radially
and moved towards it, due to the "draft" which they undergo from the quanta that
compose it. So by trying to align the piles of those far from the object with
the piles of those close to it, and by pulling lines between the quanta that
make up the piles, one can observe their curvature and, therefore, the curvature
of space. Which influences the motion of light and the masses.
So the light coming from distant celestial objects, when it passes near the Sun,
tends to follow the lines formed by the alignment of the space quanta, thus
deflecting towards it.
Figure 3
Deflection of light when it passes
near the Sun.
Which means that a star whose light before arriving on Earth passes close to the
Sun, appears to us in a different position from the real one (figure 3), as it
was demonstrated through an experiment carried out during an eclipse of the Sun
in 1919.
As for the calculation of the measure of the deflection of light, I use those of
RG, which used the apparent curvature of spacetime.
3.4 Influence of mass on the speed of time and light
Time flows more or less slowly according to the curvature of space in the location where it is measured, which depends on the distance from a massive object. The curvature of space also affects the speed of light, and in such a way that dividing the space traveled by the time used, the result is always a speed of 299,792,458 m/s.
To calculate the slowing down of time of a material object transiting near a celestial object, I also plan to use the same procedure as the GR, carried out on the basis of the apparent spacetime.
A proof of this
phenomenon is the Shapiro experiment (4), which concerns the measurement of the
time of round trip of the light, between the Earth and Venus, when the Sun is in
the middle.
In fact, a delay of about 200 microseconds was measured with the Sun in the
middle, for the Earth-Venus (and return) journey (on a total journey time of
about 1,000 seconds), in perfect agreement with the provisions of the GR and
therefore also of the SQE.
3.5 Motion of Celestial Objects
Another consideration
to be made is on the difference between the orbit of the planets calculated on
the basis of Newton's theory of gravity and that calculated on the basis of GR
gravity, which is more consistent with observations, for which the orbit is
caused by the curvature of spacetime due to the mass of the Sun and the planets.
Since what should be due to the tendency to move towards where space is more
expanded, correspond to what was predicted by Newton's gravity, the orbit
difference between the two theories mentioned above remains to be justified.
Since material objects are formed by elementary particles, which are also wave
phenomena as it has been shown by the famous experiment of the double slit, in
moving between the various densities of space, they also undergo the phenomenon
of deflection due to the curvature of the space.
Therefore, for example, the orbit of the solar planets is caused not only by the
speed relative to space acquired during the formation of the solar system, but
also by the tendency of their masses to move towards the Sun due to the greater
expansion of space caused by it and to the very small deflection due to the
curvature of space, which causes a very small precession of their perihelion.
However, to calculate the motion of the planets around the Sun I plan to use the
GR procedure based on the apparent curvature of spacetime.
3.6 Adaptation of Newton's formula for the force of gravity
Currently, to calculate
the motions of the most distant celestial objects, Newton's formula of universal
gravitation is used, which however is not compatible with SQE, since it foresees
two causes for the expansion of the space quanta:
a) one is due to the presence of material objects, for which the space quanta
expand without contributing to the expansion of the Universe, because their
expansion is balanced by the compression of the quanta on which the matter is
manifesting;
b) one is due to the native expansion of the space quanta, by which they expand,
causing the Universe to expand as well.
Instead, Newton's famous formula
F = G
where G is a gravitational constant, is based only on the first cause. So for QSE we must also add the second cause, therefore the formula becomes:
F = G
where the constant A
indicates the expansive force of the space quanta.
Therefore we must evaluate the two constants of the formula, so that its results
are compatible with the observations.
From the formula it follows that once a certain distance has been exceeded, the
value relating to the second factor of the formula exceeds that of the first
factor, whereby it results that the two material objects move away from each
other, since the total force changes from attractive to expansive. Which
explains why the large celestial objects that are far apart from each other,
namely the galaxies, their groups, clusters and superclusters, are becoming
increasingly distant.
Therefore it is not true that the celestial objects inside the galaxies do not
move away from each other in time, because inside them the space does not
expand, as stated by the scientific community, because the real reason is that
the expansive force is at least balanced by the attractive one.
4. CONCLUSIONS
1. Light is composed of electromagnetic waves, which therefore need a medium to manifest themselves, so its speed can be isotropic only relative to the medium. Therefore the isotropy of the speed of light that results on Earth is only apparent.
2. The Universe is made up of an enormous number of tiny particles of equal amounts of space, which I have called "space quanta" and which are continually expanding, causing the Universe to expand.
3. A material object is made up of dynamic sets of compressed space quanta, which allow for a greater expansion of the neighbouring quanta and then, progressively, of the more distant ones.
4. The curvature of space affects both the speed of light and that of time, so that when measured, the speed of light is always the same.
5. The deflection of light when it passes close to the masses is caused by the curvature of space.
6. Each material object tends to move towards locations where space quanta are more expanded, i.e. towards other material objects.
7. To accommodate SQE, Newton's gravitational force formula was integrated with the force due to the expansion of space quanta.
8. The expansion of the Universe is not caused by two forces, one that makes material objects move away, which would be the so-called dark energy, and another that makes them move closer, which would be gravity, but is caused by a single force, the one that makes the space quanta expand and which could explain dark energy. Therefore gravity is an apparent force.
REFERENCES
1. Vincenzo
Fano, Claudio Calosi - Di due analoghi dilemmi: forza di gravità e correlazioni
a distanza
https://isonomia.uniurb.it/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Isabella-Tassani-Oltre-la-fisica-normale_-Isonomia-Epistemologica_Special-Issue_2013.pdf
from page 69
2. Boschetto – Esperimento di Michelson e
Morley
http://www.fmboschetto.it/tde/approfondimento_1.htm
3.
The Second Postulate of Special Relativity is Incompatible with Observations
https://www.tsijournals.com/articles/the-second-postulate-of-special-relativity-is-incompatible-with-the-observations.pdf
4. Shapiro time delay
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapiro_time_delay