Gravity a paradym shift in reasoning

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327201504

Gravity a paradym shift in reasoning Article · August 2018

CITATIONS

READS

0

765

2 authors, including: László Attila Horváth 6 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS    SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

International Private Digital Museum View project

Writting a paper about modern sciense critics. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by László Attila Horváth on 24 August 2018. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

1

Gravity a paradym shift in reasoning Robert Therriault & Laszlo-Attila Horvath

Abstract: In the time of formulation, the substantial nature of gravity, the real physical condition resulting from the presence of an electromagnetic field; the authors of this article used examples from their profession field which led them to formulate this present theory. This new theory of gravity gives very easy and simple reasonable answers several micro- and macro electro-potential, magnetic and gravitational phenomena. In the following material you will be presented some important examples which are often hard or over complicated topics when explained by academic scientists. Under section A, the reader will find examples from the Nano-(atomic) field: including laser tweezing (Wu, 2017), 2nd order nonlinear (Wegener, 2005), Josephson junction, Casimir effect, and Boise Einstein condensate. The macro EM-gravity phenomena will be written in section B which will include: the beginning of Planet formation from the Sun, the macro EM-gravity phenomena examples and reasonable explication to Earth tides, tsunamis, and Isostasy; distribution of gravity field onto surface of Earth.

Keywords: EM-gravity, lattice structures, okham’s razor, quantum mechanics, laser tweezing, electropotential, gravitation, planet erosion, tides and Earthnuts’ tsunami.

Introduction: When in a time the current belief in paradigms by the scientific community cannot be satisfied by marginal guesses, anecdotal mathematics, and filler based on nothing more than imagination; we must force ourselves to the simple answer. It means we need to review, reevaluate, and reset our thoughts on the science in our hands. With a new set of eyes on old topics, new

2 discoveries are made and the chains formed by the community are loosened as is the dogma formulated as by a cult. This new view takes original experiments, and understandings and reorients them to give a fresh perspective hypothesis. The paper does not wish to harm or indict previous scientists or researchers. Instead it invites them to consider the merits of these new ideas. For it is known that these peoples are the most qualified in their fields to answer and prove the paper’s ideas, questions and guidelines. Let us start with a proclamation of simplicity. Indeed Ockham’s razor should be on the front of every seeker’s mind. In this case let us explore a fundamental principle that might lay to rest the very complex ideas in quantum mechanics and in turn open a new avenue of scientific interpretation. Let us set a baseline of understanding we agree on: Try to imagine, protons with electrons “in the nucleus” . . . which is the make-up of Neutrons. A neutron is by definition a proton with a very low orbit electron. We have shown in a lab where the electron of a particular neutron will move from one proton to another. (Jason S Gardner (National Synchrotron Radiation Research Center). This makes sense in the scheme of things if you understand the lattice structure of how an atomic nucleus is constructed. This shows and proves that electrons are inside the core of each atom that possesses a neutron. Now in cores we can go further and still remain on the same page. If we do a basic Coulomb’s law equation around the idea of neutron to proton attraction relative to proton to proton repulsion simplicity shows that the attraction is greater and by factors such that an angle of incidence is produced. This yields a common factor that we see throughout the universe: the least energy configuration principle. Everything tends to the minimum, and from this we get a lattice structure (Massa, 2013). When you look at the way matter builds itself you see structure. You see repetitive notions based on chemical make-up. It does this on a macro scale. We make a sword from lines of steel with each atom connected in a certain way. The strength of those bonds shows the strength of the steel. Diamond’s hardness is also based on this concept. It is hard because carbon bonds so very well with itself. It is rigid and strong because the least energy form is the lattice structure you find in the diamond. There is no reason the universe would not do this in the cores of the atoms as well. This least energy principle seems universal and evidence tends to support it. Now consider beginning with a simple element atom: Lithium . . . 3 protons, 2 neutrons: Protons inherently stay away from each other as like charges repel. That means in simple terms a least energy configuration will force them to be a maximum angle in 3-D space from each other while the neutrons fill the gaps (the connectivity) between protons. In this case P-N-P-N-P, is an acceptable configuration. Other acceptable least energy configuration will yield different material properties of Lithium. Also adding neutrons will make lithium unstable until it can decay back to one of its least states. (Walter D. Loveland, 2017)This is the idea of isotopes for each element. A basic mathematic experiment shows that each element follows a similar construction technique to a minimum angle between protons which becomes a limit of ~1.8 degrees in Uranium. Adding more protons or neutrons seems to upset this minimum angle and causes the atom to be unstable. This becomes a most packed condition. Use of just Coulomb’s law to calculate the repulsive force of 2 protons relative to the attractive force of an electron (on a neutron) to the protons . . . yields no need for a weak, strong, or atomic force. The simple solution of just EM force solves all these problems if combined with the understanding of nuclear lattice structures. If EM can be shown to be the only nuclear force then what is to prevent EM being the primary force driving gravity as a second order nonlinear concept

3 .

Second Order Non Linear Concepts Always in the world there are examples of 2nd order nonlinear effects. These responses are to primary stimuli that produce an alternative effect perpendicular and not of the same type of initial input. Consider: 1.) A laser propagates through a crystal: The laser a red beam is enhanced to be green. 2.) Water flows through a pipe a torque is manifested perpendicular to the force of the flow. 3.) Glass and other brittle material is placed under a clamping force, cracks form perpendicular to the force of application and subsurface. Matter is no different in showing this effect. Matter does not produce gravity directly, but rather as a second order effect of the combined vector EM fields of each atom of the matter. Even EM neutral materials have a strong field independently as show with laser tweezing, where at the atom level all elements have a strong field and can be manipulated by these tweezers. Optical tweezers come into this from the perspective to show that all mass on the atom level are EM, even if they do not react to it when past this size category, since it requires an atom to be EM to be moved by the tweezers. Atomic properties of individual atoms of elements . . . tend to show that properties on a whole change for each element when denied connection to even others of it’s like kind (L.-Marzán, 2003). For instance, Gold known to be a non-magnetic metal that all the sudden become magnetic at the atomic level. Based on this: certainly the “gravity” these non-electric items cause can be linked to the EM they emit or do not emit based on the concept that at the atomic level each atom of an asteroid is EM active. The combined effects being second order and non-linear are outside the measurable EM fields of each object (they exist independently) of the measurable generation as a culmination and addition of each atom of mass. When the fields are combined the non-atom element may be neutral, but the second order effect does not “care” about the combination of the fields. The second order effect “cares” about the individual fields and this creates a gravitational force mutually perpendicular to the field and the flow. The force is attractive and as with all 2nd order effects a lesser than the initial input to the system. It has some of the same characteristics in being instant, being based on distance, being effected by other EM and gravity sources. Note, this does not change the fact that gravity is an independent force only from whence does the force derive. Consider also, that the gravity force will act onto a semi (half) sphere vector which is perpendicular to the direction of flow; a maxima will be found in the direction of the flow. There is a reference to the (+ gravitational) effect in the explanation of the Johansen effect. It has been extremely difficult to integrate gravitation with the other fundamental forces of nature. It is clear, though, that gravitation depends on a fundamental characteristic of light in the special theory, namely the finite and invariant velocity of light. It is the case that this finite and invariant velocity of light holds only in local Lorentz frames, unless of course one is concerned with flat space-time. But in principle, the velocity of light is finite and invariant locally, even if on a global level in the general theory it cannot be said to generally have an invariant velocity. The reason this dependence has not been recognized is likely due to the focus on the very interesting results in the general theory concerning the velocity of light globally. This velocity stands in such contrast to the

4 finite and invariant velocity in the special theory that it seems a contradiction that light could have a curvilinear velocity globally and yet have a finite and invariant velocity locally. These are the circumstances, though, and the finite and invariant velocity of light locally in the general theory provides the theoretical basis for connecting the fundamental forces of gravitation as developed in the general theory and electromagnetism that is elegantly discussed in the special theory. Lorentz force is defined with a “movement” required to generate the force. I point out that with particle motion in the quantum world that motion is not needed it already exists in a steady state condition. In that way, Gravity is steady state due to the additive factors of all fields constantly in flux. Additive factors of EM and gravity deal with 3 dimensions. Most descriptions you get seem to be 2 or single dimensional representations; such as if you turn on an oscilloscope you will see a signal showing frequency, in the “Y” direction you will see an amplitude . . . what is not shown is the 3rd dimension . . . the mutually perpendicular signal.’ We have three directions (X, Y, Z) the cathode ray flowing in direction X in such a way we have an Electro-magnetic field in the direction perpendicular to moving of ray (that is the plane YZ) now the 3rd effect is in direction X contrary to moving. Consider that all EM fields are represented by vectors. Let us take the idea of the earth with its current field as example. In this case we have a near sphere element with a field radiating in all directions simultaneously. When we review the mutually perpendicular vector to the field we find it always points down everywhere; and in fact we have some interesting complications. At the poles and at the equator we have some anomalies called grazing angles and additive extracts where potential discontinuities can exist.

Expressed Examples:

A. This section defines a number of examples both long term and short term as well as micro and macro from a universe perspective. These details seem to show that the universe is constant and consistent. Einstein searched for a method to explain everything and in this small paper by using the simplest methods and observations we have just made him proud. It is a belief that perhaps he let the math, peer pressure, and complexities get in the way of his thought processes. This paper attempts to relieve the reader of those pressures and find a best solution that works in both the dimensions we live and the others that exist beyond our sight. The observations and examples presented tend to show that nature repeats itself on all levels as one would assume in a least energy most organized way. 1. Bose-Einstein condensate: Before was written that using of properties of this type of matter lead one of authors to get a macroscopic explanation of the gravity field of Earth [ (Horvath, 2009)]. In the current science literature the Bose-Einstein condensate is strange state of substance arising when a very less concentrate gas is cooled very close to temperature of absolute zero. From the collected

5 experiences during the arising of quantum drop happens that forms this hardly known material, when the temperature of the material succeeds in cooling near absolute zero. Under such low temperature the vibration of the atoms stops and a new strange materialconduct forms. Each atom in the experiment takes the same behavior – form up (in physics language they reach the same energy- and quantum-state). A coherent, lightly watching material cloud arises. This influenced cold arising concentrate conducts itself like a giant-atom and shows a lot of interesting qualities (Fig. 3.) Between the observed properties one is very important: the quantum drop exerted has a similar attraction effect like the Earth’s gravity field. Ask yourself what physically happens when you cool to near zero. 2 different things happen: First you remove energy from the system and second you reduce the overall space between atoms. When the first thing happens, you reduce the differential of energy across an atom. Let me try to explain better by stating that within each atom exists electrons (which hold the energy due to velocity) these electrons whiz around each atom at different rates, different distances, and with different vibrations. Each electron is unique in these three scopes . . . such is the same inside the core on each neutron. When you remove the energy from these atoms you force the electrons to move slower, to vibrate slower, and to reduce their orbits. You eventually reach a point where they all behave the same . . . you set up a sympathetic vibration of sorts . . . where the entirety of the material in close proximity literally breathes at the same rate in the same time having achieved a lowest energy state. Instead of the uniqueness of each atomic structure being the defining element of the atom, you now have a bunch of structures acting as one defined element. Now add to this the removal of space and the entirety of the cohesive pattern falls into a low energy configuration which is always a lattice structure. It might look like a soup to the naked eye, but it must be highly organized, since energy tends to disorganization. So by super cooling a material you force it into a least energy state both physically and energetically . . . on a macro and micro level. It will take on a structure that is most organized causing the least amount of resistance to whatever is the resistance of the area physically and electrically. Note: you cannot remove all the energy as has been discovered in experiments already. Even at absolute zero, it is shown that energy is not gone[ (Wieman, 2001)].

6

Fig.1. The Bose-Einstein condensate interpreted in the recent electro-magnetic-gravity model. 2. Josephson Effect: First let us understand that there is a lattice structure in every atomic core and within the matrix of each material element as it is constructed from atom to atom. This structure inherent to both macro and micro scales is a least stacking least energy construction. It has the most amount of space possible between repulsive elements within its structure and the most number of bonds to maintain this potential space in order to be inherently stable. Now understand what super conductivity means in respect to this understanding. That some materials can at super low temperatures gain a powerful EM field and near to zero electrical resistance. Imagine a series of lines of wires running but with “switches” not making full connection. When you “freeze” this material it deforms, “changes” shrinks and not uniformly as we think, but on the micro level it is less energy to shrink these open “switches” first and when they are in line no longer is there an impediment to voltage, and indeed a developed internal current loop is established forming a true EM field. This happens with select materials that have a lattice that can account for this type of behavior.

(Fig. 2.)

Imagine 2 fields interfering with each other, both are strong, but distance keeps them from overpowering each other. They have a boundary which exists, but it is not steady state. At each turn you have micro infractions of one field into the other. The flux is not constant. As the mag field of the offended dips and is impeded upon by the offender, a spike is made in the general local venue. This spike accounts for lightening and arcing charge jumps. As you would expect going to a more powerful M number would take a more vicious attack and perhaps more prolonged assault, but in the end you could have an earthquake from the discontinuous exposure. This interference is indicative of the same effect as an Earth- Charged thunderstorm clouds EM field interaction giving the “feel” of gravity. Now that you understand super conductors relative to a lattice structure you can plainly see how these ties in with the Josephson Effect (Josephson, 1962). A common occurrence is happening . . . an induction, but not just any induction, one with special properties due to the situation of an insulator between 2 super conductors. This does not take a quantum anything to accomplish. Just

7 standard EM understanding with a grasp of lattice structures at the macro and micro level. This induction is happening as special consideration of interference between two fields producing the inductive current at the boundary. This interference is indicative of the same effect as an Earth-Sun EM field interaction giving the “feel” of gravity.

Fig.2. The Josephson effect in the new interpretation of gravity 3. Casimir effect: The decision of mentioning Casimir effect (Casimir, 1948) (Lambrecht, 2002)like force similar gravity was not a simple job. In actual scientifically literature this phenomenon appears between two parallel plates close enough (1- few micro-meters) mirrors with perfect surfaces and reflection in vacuum (null temperature). This attraction force between plates was predicted by H. Casimir (1948) and practically demonstrated by Marcus Sparnaay (1958) (Sparnaay, 1958). The mainstream theory explains this effect as: the effect of vacuum fluctuation (the inside plates have a smaller quantum fluctuation than the outside of plates), so the inside pushing force is smaller than outside, for this will appear attractive force. Only one problem has this theory that the attraction force will appear onto both side of plate, which is not mentioned by the mainstream concept, for this is a prediction of the theory of the actual paper’s vision.

8

Fig.3. Casimir effect in the new interpretation of gravity THERE EXIST TWO VARIANT: SIMILAR MEANINGS 1. Try to imagine, protons with electrons “in the nucleus” . . . which is the make-up of Neutrons. A neutron is by definition a proton with a very low orbit electron. .. We have shown in a lab where the electron of a particular neutron will move from one proton to another. This makes sense in the scheme of things if you understand the lattice structure of how an atomic nucleus is constructed. This shows and proves that electrons are inside the core of each atom that possesses a neutron. And plus if is considered that the plates before is place in the vacuum, have a real temperature that means that the plates contain free electrons, because we have metals. The Casimir effect is experienced in the plates after placing them in the vacuum. This forces a contraction of free electrons into the center of the plates (Fig-3.) and with it will appear an attraction force similar with Earth’s attraction force. This explanation has two predictions (this practical prediction is not the subject of the present article). The creating of vacuum induces contraction of electron-electronegative potential in the inside of the plates which will lead to an apparition of attractive force. The validity of this explanation depend of the next criteria: 1) The Casimir force is an analogy to the gravity force of Earth or 2) in this situation have the existence of an attraction force outside of plates also (Fig. 3.). Showing EM field as interference like other EM wave fronts: As additional material consider the base equation: dSin Theta = M*Lambda. This is a basic equation of EM transmission and interference. It explains a curve that starts at whole number 0, then 1, 2, 3, etc. These numbers are the M. At each of these M numbers a maximum can be found that is slightly less than the previous M number. Note it is a sine curve that reduces in amplitude at each M number. These maxima represent fringes which we have used to exacting method to measure distance using coherent light, so the phenomena is at least partially understood. These fringes can be shown to represent energy levels and can be applied to the earth. For instance M = 0 would be the core, M = C would be just beneath the crust, M = X would be at 10k in the air (Troposphere), M = Y would be stratosphere where ice is found floating, M = Z would be the Ionosphere, M = W would be the Geo-station orbit for satellites . . . etc. Note the EM maximum effects at these locations. The energy in these locations causes thing such as earthquakes, thunderstorms, ability to hold ice in solid form, block/deflect other EM radiation, etc.

9

B. The actual mainstream theories of gravity – originated from I. Newton (a.) and developed in current form by A. Einstein [(1978)] (b.) – has conspicuous problems when they have to explain the Earth’s tides. It mentions that this well visible phenomena is related to the Moon’s and Sun’ gravity field influence. After an honest reexamination of this case, it can be shown that there are visible discrepancies in the accepted concept. Considering the new approach (c.), which related directly to our real physical world, the mentioned errors can be eliminated. a.) According to Newton, gravity is a basic feature of all the objects that exist in reality [(Newton, 1687)]. This phenomenon is expressed as an attractive effect from the center of gravity coinciding with the inertia center of the bodies. This theory needs no further description because it is in the core curriculum of every school. However, this curriculum lacks a very weak point of Newton’s theory: the gravitational attraction from the center of gravity of the bodies. The demonstration of this important discrepancy does not require any measurement; it is enough to have general knowledge of nature. Because, according to the theory in question, the center of gravity is usually in or near the geometric center of the bodies, it is very strange for the celestial bodies to refer to the gravitational effect on such point. The best example of this is Earth, Earth-Moon system. In the Newton’s theory the gravity center of the Earth, it is in its geometrical center, approximately (onto the base of actual accounts is about 6371 km from surface). As stated in the theory under discussion from the “theoretical position” of the planet’s is exerted the gravitational effect of Earth. From this point, our planet keeps the moon on a circular path, unable to overcome its giant inertial effect. To overcome this inconvenience, a new gravity center was needed: the barycenter of the Earth and Moon (Fig.4.) In the mathematical calculations of the theory, this barycenter about 1700 km deep below the Earth’s surface, and the orbiting of the two celestial bodies was related to it and so on the inconsistency of concept has increased.

10 Fig. 4. (http://earth-chronicles.com/space/the-barycentre-of-the-solar-system.html)

The Newton’s mathematical formula can show that this situation does not exist; it is an impossible case for our planet. At the point closest to Earth-Moon’s center of gravity, above it, onto Earth’s surface should have a much larger gravity attraction close to 40 g/cm². There are also exist other more “complex calculations” with which it can be calculated that the former situation does not have any possibility to happen. Let us consider the gravity center of our planet and the barycenter of Earth-Moon system, they should approach - the barycenter getting closer to the gravity center of the Earth, due to their interaction. That is why the Moon should be getting closer to the Earth. But this is not the case! There are existing concrete data sets regarding that the Moon is moving away from Earth. The value of this process is 4 cm/year. However, this is again in contradiction with the explanation of the creating of Earth-Moon system, how got the Moon its orbit around the Earth. Among other things, this was probably the case: Albert Einstein wanted to hide, to avoid these (similar) series of contradictions when he formulated his general relativity theory (GRT). [ (Horvath, 2017)]. b.) The General Relativity Theory introduced a new term: the space-time continuum [ (Einstein, 1978)]. It was derived from the theoretical combination of distance and time measurement, comparisons. Again there exists [ (Horvath, 2017)} their mass, and in addition the presence of their energies, energy fields) curves the space-time continuum. Changing occurs in the reference system which is connected to the bodies (their energy) gravity effect. From this occurs the next assumption that should exist an absolute space-time continuum, which is no longer relative. It cannot be cognized in itself. It can be said everything (physical property) that we want about it. So it is elusive (incomprehensible). It is like it would be said: in nothing – in the space-time continuum or in the reference system space and time: Something occurs, a modification, happens. Its curvature changes if a neighbor exists, any object. This modification is connected to gravitation. All this leads to a paradox because of the space-time positioning outside of every object and is considered independently from it but will become curved on the presence of another object. Such a statement separates the bodies from their real physical space. This concept was illustrated with the constantly accelerated spacecraft example. The example mentioned that in the accelerated system leads to an effect similar to the gravity field of the object; which cannot be accepted [ (Horvath, 2017)]. Now if these arguments are considered in the evaluation of Newton’s theory of gravity the validity of General Relativity theory; they will become more questionable. Coordinately so can gravity waves predicted by this theory. c.) The short- and long-term gravity anomalies of our planet (Isostasy, tides effect, the Earth rotation effect, the Earth tectonic effect, ‘tsunamis’-gravity waves caused by Earthquakes), the gravity can get zero onto rocky planets’ surface, shows well that it needs another interpretation of gravity effect of Earth. This new interpretation can gets plausible results if it tries to connect the gravity effect not to over simplified terms used in current theoretical physics (mass, space-time); it uses real matter like Boise-Einstein condensate analogues to the (inner-outer-) core of Earth (Fig.5). Taking in account the reliable data of Earth’s inner structure (core, and mantle-crust) gotten from the geophysical interpretation of seismic waves’ propagation throughout the Earth; it can be concluded that the Earth’s core is like an atomic nucleus. Any physical changing in the stage of the outer core, example: a variation of its concentration causes variation in gravity attraction onto the surface of Earth. The gravity field of Earth is connected to the outer core matter-stage [ (Horvath, 2009)].

11

Fig.5. (http://www.myschoolhouse.com/courses/O/1/69.asp)

Earth

interior

This view is supported with the fact that the asteroids of inner asteroid belts are made up from such a solid matter which were similar to those found on the surface of rocky planets. Such a way leads to the next new interesting assumption. The asteroids of inner asteroid belts could only form one-way. The surface of the rocky planet (crust; upper mantle- lithosphere) brakes up in smaller fragments, as the planet core is consumed and transformed into new solid matter, new mantle. So, the solid part of planet expands and pushes away its fragmented surfaces, example: Mars’s Aram chaos or in case of Earth North part of North America [ (Horvath, 2007)]. At the same time on the surface of the planet, the gravity attraction intensity is decreasing step by step…. This way the lithosphere becomes more and more fragmented and direct connection gets lost from the main body of planet… The process continues until the zero gravity reaches the root of the lithosphere. In this condition the fragments have a possibility to move away from the main body. The same process can be observed in case of the spaceship. This is the formation of the asteroid belt and Ceres type dwarf planets. This process was named: planet-erosion (Horvath, 2007). Such a process with the gravity theory of mainstream science is impossible to describe. From the two approaches which have similar meaning results that the attraction phenomenon onto our planet can be connected to a matter-form which with its presence, continuously changing in its inside, create its outside observable electro-magnetic-gravity field. Near this field also exists plenty of radiations particles, electro-magnetic-gravity waves. This type of matter (which is defined with a well-delimited form, its inside clearly differs from its outside) is well described and identified onto Earth’s surface area by modern science. It can be said, that science knows all types of stable and unstable forms of this matter. The mentioned matter was named as chemical elements and its isotopes. We can all agree this is what all things are built from and that matter is in constant motion and change. The mentioned changing can happen suddenly or gradually depending on inner structure and quality. This matter form is also changing because it is part of some other system, environment, which is in continuous moving – changing too. In the following mentioned real case gives an opportunity for better understanding. Example: in such a type a matter can exists a surplus of negative electric potential as its temperature decreases, or existing mechanical friction with the outside environment, or the outsider field electro-magnetic-gravity affect. It is noted that the affected position will increasing quantity and density of electrons. This build up creates a high electron-electric charge field. Apart from the mentioned electromagnetic effect of this space, it will have another virtual (existing, but nondetectable) attracting outcome. We reference the Casimir effect that shows this effect. Near this radiation occurs a whirling-spinning phenomenon (creating a magnetic field) and the presence of outsider gravity field and friction on the metal surface appears as a virtual gravity field. It is clearly visible that the virtual-real gravitation can someway connect to electron-electric charge, depending on its concentration. As long as the before mentioned phenomenon at the atomic level is connected to the ‘similar process’ observed onto the surface of Sun, immediately you can conclude

12 that the ‘Sun is the biggest atom’ of our solar system. So, such as the way we can arrive at our planet’s surface gravitation. The ‘matter’ (part of matter) in the frozen system will give only small part of its energy: example we have a ball of Iron 1 Kg and (10 Celsius grad) and another same (100 Celsius grad) after a ‘fast’ freeze, the hot ball will have more remaining plus ‘energy’ than the colder... Here is the next prediction in case of Casimir effect in case of the hotter plate (boll) the attraction force will be bigger… Such an explanation of gravitation requires revision of the Earth’s (rocky planets’) formation theory.

THE ROCKY PLANET FORMATION: It is well known the next truth that the planetary science has developed very dynamically in last 200 years and for this in this period has grown into the serious inside science. An interesting thing that the example rocky planets formation explanation remained - as it was formulated at the beginning - approximately in such a form how I. Kant and M.S. Laplace formulated. According to the currently accepted theories, accretion theories (modern nebular theories) the terrestrial and the gaseous planets with their satellites, the asteroids from inner asteroid and Kuiper belts and the rest of our solar system was formed at the same date. After a build-up of the proto-Sun, around it was formed a primary proto-planetary disk. This is itself a byproduct of the formation of the parent star from a dense, rotating interstellar cloud. In this proto-planetary disc the gradual accretion of planets, moons (in the inner side the terrestrial planets in the outside the gas giant planets), and smaller objects from cold cosmic dust grains, gaseous material by gravitational interaction. The present observation is demonstrating proto-planetary disks existence around several young stars in our galaxy. The first observed (1984) disk is found around the star Beta Pictoris, about it the Hubble Space Telescope obtained the first images from the Orion nebula in 1992. Like this the existence of asteroids located roughly between the orbits of the planets Mars and Jupiter (the main belt’s asteroids) is explained with not perfect accretion, or with blowing up of terrestrial planet [ (Dimitrova, 2006), (Flandern, 2000)]. The Earth-Moon system formed as a result of a giant collision. A celestial body with the Mars greatness (labeled “Theia”) impacted with the proto-Earth, blasting sufficient material around Earth to form the Moon through accretion, resulted in the today’s arrangement in this manner [ (Paniello, 2012)]. Actually, in our solar system, the planets are moving along an ellipse with the Sun at one focus, their approximate distances are remaining constant. Opposite to this, Moon diverges from Earth (3-4 cm/years) is explained by means of the pushing effect of the tide’s force. From the presented explanation connected to the inner asteroid belt; generation is not enough for proving right of accretion theory. The Earth and other rocky planets structure in the current theory are described as a spatial object which is made from the crust, mantle, Core (inner and outer core). Its creation explained by accretion of a cloud of gaseous material and dust contracts under the extreme forces of gravity [ (Dimitrova, 2006)]. This theory cannot give a reasonable response to the lot observed features of earth-type planets see some examples from them: • • • •

The most visible is the rocky planets structure, totally not concordant with such a formation; Why from the rocky planets one (Mercury) has the sign of shrinking [ (Courtland, 2008)], Another terrestrial planet (Venus) has a strong atmosphere like Earth, and has a retro rotation; The Earth and Mars are rotating very fast;

13 • • •

Earth has ‘twin rocky planet’, Moon; Mercury, Venus, Earth-Moon, Mars are moving away from the Sun [ (Horvath, 2007)]; (see it later) On the outside part of inner solar system exist the inner asteroid belt which majority pieces were formed on a pre-existed rocky planet – is not concordant with accretion theory.

Such a way, the above-mentioned examples show clearly that such accretion which resulted in rocky planets could not be created by the fundamental phenomena of accretion, the ‘gravity’ of the mainstream’s science. For them, the gravity containing is not clear enough yet, and after all, it became the base that formulated the accretion rocky planet creation theory even if it is not concordant with the inner solar system structure. Here taking in consideration that in the previous parts in the article at the explanation of the gravity; it can be observed that the phenomena of the attracting effect observed onto Earth (other rocky planets) have another-natural explanations. In such case, it can be better explained if the accretion theory is abandoned and is accepted that the rocky planets were formed from Sun. For this reason, their orbits are circular-ellipsoidal spirals, and so they step by step get away from Sun [ (Anderson, 2009)]. It was an article about the time it takes for communications between NASA, and their Vehicles roaming around on the surface of Mars. Since these Vehicles have been operational for years on the surface of Mars, they have kept very good records of how long it takes to send a command to do something, and how long it takes to receive the signal back that a specific command was done. The Time is Variable based on the changing distances based on the two orbits of Earth, and Mars about the Sun. However, the time to send and receive signals has been increasing over the years, so the calculation is that Mars and Earth are moving farther away from one another.’ [From: Michael Clark; interview]. A very precise survey showed that the Earth moves away about 7 – 15 m distance from the Sun every 100 years (in such an interval of the time the Moon gets 40 m further form Earth [ (Anderson, 2009)]. Like so can be said that all rocky planets are moving away from Sun… Here is another prediction of this article: the rate of rocky planets mowing away is a function of distance from Sun. The closer planets distances from the Sun are increasing in bigger rate like in case of planets which are far away. Such a formation can explain why the planets have spheroidal form, and their core should be considered analogous with ‘miniature’ Sun - ‘giant’ average atom. In the same manner we can be explain the presence of gravity on the mentioned planets’ surface and give a reasonable interpretation to its long- and short-term anomalies. For a better understanding the second explanation of rocky planets gravity field was going from Inner Asteroids Belt’s asteroids lithological examination. When you look at the lithological structure of these asteroids immediately it can be observed that they are analogous with the any rock formed in the condition of rocky planet surface and subsurface. In the next step trying to find the location where did they formed, was found Ceres dwarf planet, the largest object in the asteroid belt that lies between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter. In the astrological literature it is mentioned Ceres’s surface has an albedo of 0.09. That why is quite dark compared to the moons in the outer Solar System. Such a way may be considered that its surface is made from basic, ultrabasic rocks, chemically characteristics of mid-ocean ridge basalts. Onto base of the mentioned characteristics connected to the Inner Asteroids Belt’s ‘bodies”, with the short- and long-term gravity anomalies of our planet (Isostasy, tides effect, the Earth rotation effect, the initial momentum of our planet, the Earth

14 tectonic effect, ‘tsunamis’-gravity waves caused by Earthquakes), can be asserted: the gravity can get zero onto rocky planets’ surface. Along these lines can gets plausible results if it tries to connect the gravity effect not to such an over simplified terms used in current theoretical physics (mass, space-time); it uses real matter like Boise-Einstein condensate analogues to the (inner-outer-) core of Earth. Taking in account the reliable data of the Earth’s inner structure (core, and mantle-crust) gotten from the geophysical interpretation of seismic waves’ propagation throughout the Earth [Fig.6.]; it can be concluded that the Earth’s core is like an atomic nucleus. The physical stage of the outer core and its pressure at a certain value causes gravity field onto Earth surface. At the same time any physical changing in the stage of the outer core, example: changing of its concentration, causes variation in gravity attraction onto the surface of Earth [ (Horvath, 2009)]. The permanent anomaly of gravitation Different gravity values are existing at Earth’s equator and poles. The fact can be observed by Satellites that the Earth is made oblate at the poles and there can be measured much more gravitational effect (9.8337 m/s2) than at the Equator (.9.7760 m/s2. (Fig.6.)

Fig.6. (http://lazarus. elte.hu) This difference is very well shown by Newton’s theory of gravity too. According to it, as a result of the Earth’s rotation, an outward acting (centrifugal) force exist, the effect of which is the strongest in the equatorial plane and is zero in polar regions of Earth, at the point where they are penetrated by the imaginary rotational axis. The lower gravity at the equator is explained with an inverse effect of centrifugal force, which has a reducing effect. The recent theory also has a very simple explanation. It has a same countering with a rotational effect of the Earth. Accordingly, to it, the outer shell of Earth (crust-mantle) is in an elastically deformed state, caused by its inertial response to the rotation. For this exists the next situation: The Earth’s radius at the pole and at the Equator is not equal, at the equator is 22 km longer than in the case of the geographical Poles. Such situation has increased the density of matter of outer core under core-mantle boundary at poles and same matter density in the same position is decreased… For this, the gravity field at poles is typically stronger at poles than the Equator. In the inner Solar system there exist two planets which rotate fast: Mars and Ceres. This effect must be present at these planets, there exists a prediction. (There exists an apparent contradiction with Earth’s situation, because the radius of the planet Ceres at the pole is not shorter than at the equator, even though it rotates four times more rapidly than Earth or Mars, because on it the gravity field is approximately null. Noting this planetary contradiction means that the Newtonian prediction of centrifugal force is not causing the gravity differential). The Earth’s tectonic effect on the gravity field The Earth’s tectonic effect on the gravity field can be well studied with analyzing of the local long-term gravity anomalies. Such territories are the folding mountains belts. This newly formed;

15 typically prominent geomorphological structures are created mainly by the surface compression effects to the layers within the upper part of the Earth’s crust. Really to the mentioned geological buildings, to their lateral vicinity are can be accompanied by a longitudinal fosse, narrow in width, but very long, being the deepest parts of the ocean floor. This fosse in a pre-existent geological theory (Geosyncline theory) named geosyncline – in the plate tectonic theory mentioned trench, the subduction begins under orogenic belts. In the just mentioned areas exist well separable gravity anomalies, gravity lineaments: above the geosyncline is mainly negative, whereas strongly positive over the folding mountains. (Bleahu, 1983) The mentioned positive anomaly of the gravity field in the folding mountains easily can be explained by the gravity theory mentioned in the first part of the writing. Namely, in these areas do not happen anything else than the layers over-thrust to one another, creating “folding’s”. Therefore the layer thickening occurs on the surface. That is why the weight of the layer increases, thus directly under Weichert-Gutenberg Discontinuity the matter of outer core in the mentioned place become compressed by the mentioned reasons. This process in the inner core on the surface will be observed with a positive anomaly of the gravity field. Weichselian glaciation effect to the gravity field There is a long theoretical process of several thousand million years, during which a slow change in gravitation can be observed, either decreases or increases. This phenomenon was already discovered in the middle of the 19th century and its point was composed in the theory of Isostasy. The now mentioned theory can describe well the change of the gravitational field as well in the proportion of the accumulated rock mass. The theory of the Isostasy is concordant with the compression in the external kernel which was thought former as the reason of the gravitation. But a lot of people can have a question, what even happens on that place, where there is not rock surplus and still the gravitational field is much stronger than for example in some regions of North Europe (Fig.7.).

Fig.7. The Earth during the last glacial period (Wikipedia). The answer is simple and easy to understand. The above mentioned places were covered with a thick ice sheet, not so long ago, approx. 12000 years ago in time of Weichselian glaciation. Therefore the regions come down. The compression grew up in the external kernel at the same time, which caused an essential gravitational field strength rising. The effect of it can be observed nowadays too, because the equalizing is not gone yet. The studies of stratigraphy certify that those territories which were under ice sheets have been steadily rising over the last 12000 years as a result of the countervailing effect of Isostasy [ (Meszaros, 1984)]. The origin of Earth’s tides According to the present accepted point of views on the Earth in many places, there exists an ocean’s water increases about every 12 hours is caused firstly by the Moon’s gravitational effect and secondly by the Sun’s gravitational effect. This theory took hold because of the real fact that there is an un-denying contact which was observed, mainly during full- and new moon. In vain, this

16 perception is an irrefutable fact in the public awareness, yet anybody, who is studying with a critical eye the arguments are next to it, may notice very serious failures. Firstly, it is enough to compare the picture (Fig.8.) which was made of the mainstream belief to a graph based on real gravity measurement (Fig.9.). It can clearly see when the Moon is in the direction of the tidal effect, theoretically the attraction of the Earth and the moon should be added, would result in a smaller gravitational force. But the gravitational diagram does not show it!

Fig. 8. Mainstream interpretation of tides (National Geographic, 2008. okt.15.)

Fig. 9. The present article interpretation of tides [ (Horvath, 2009)]. Secondly, in the case of tides, the anomaly of gravity appears immediately. This contradicts the delay explanations of actual concept.

17 Thirdly, the effects of the Moon’s gravitational attraction are mentioned by mainstream focals as the cause of the Earth gravity tidal type change. They do not even think of the gravity effect on the surface of our companion (Moon) is so weak; the aforesaid celestial body was incapable of retaining a substantial part of its atmosphere. Soon the dust-sized particles will come to this fate, get away from the Moon’s outward if near null gravity occurs on its surface. After all these things, who is dares to put his or her hand on their heart, and claim sure true that the very weak gravitational power-on of the Moon’s surface causes the rise and fall of sea levels? Man should not think that this phenomenon is caused by the power which causes less effect on the Moon than on the Earth surface which is approximate 400.000 km far away. On the other hand in this writing, a much more acceptable explanation is outlined when the high tide effect is related to the aforementioned real gravitational effect, i.e. the rhythmic compression increase occurring in the outer core, under the hide tides, at about each twelve hours. However, it is not needed even to deny that the Moon has any contact with the rise and fall of sea levels phenomenon because it is really present, and as it before has already mentioned, the reason of this contact has to be searched in the Earth’s and Moon’s common originate. Its trace remained in the real revolving around each other, which is happening around their common inertial point, respecting the inertia law of classical physics. The original drawing made in the present article shows the real circumstances that cause cyclical compressions. These are consistent with the cyclical gravitational growth curves observed on the graphs were made on the basis of continuous gravity measurements. So it can easily admit that this try of arguing will provide a good result when increasing the potential of gravity space is linked to the compression appearance in the outer core of the Earth, with it the real reason of the tides phenomenon is really explained [ (Horvath, 2009)]. Such a way can be imagined the real nature of gravity field. The perturbation of the gravity field caused by Earthquakes The earthquake gives an excellent example to gravity explained by the presence or density increasing of the electron potential. During Earthquake, at the epicenter or its neighborhood can observe rapid changes in gravity, which is similar to the shaking of the surface of the Earth recorded by seismographs’ signals. Whenever an earthquake results, a sudden release of energy in the Earth’s lithosphere that creates vibration, seismic waves, which cause changes not only in the epicenter, on the Earth’s surface, but also will affect the closest point in the Earth’s core under epicenter. When the longitudinal waves reach the Guttemberg-Wiechert discontinuity, in the place of colliding produces similar vibrations like on the epicenter and its surroundings. As a consequence of vibration, compression occurs in the outer core material, which causes extremely short vibration (‘gravitational waves’) at the Earth’s gravitational field in epicenter and its neighbors immediately - with light speed. This fluctuated modification appears on the surface, in epicenter and its neighbors immediately (with light velocity). Such a variation of gravity field was measured by Japanese geophysicist in time of Tokachi-oki earthquake, which occurred in September 2003 (fig.10.). They detected an increase of less than 1 µGal near the epicenter with array of superconducting gravimeters [ (Dume, 2004)]. Another interesting measurement of quick gravity fluctuations were measured by seismologist in China and South Korea in time of magnitude-9.1 Tohoku earthquake that hit Japan in

18 2011 (Fig.11.). It is important to mention that perturbatory ’waves’ occur more than a minute before the arrival of seismic signals (M. Vallée1, 2017)].

Fig.10. ‘Epicentre (asterisk) of the 2003 Tokachi-oki earthquake and gravimeter station locations (triangles). ES, Esashi; MA, Matsushiro; KY, Kyoto (image and text: Science 306 476)’ [ (Dume, 2004)].

Fig. 11. ‘Residual gravity data (blue) recorded by superconducting gravimeters for the 2003 Tokachioki earthquake. (A) Esashi, (B) Matsushiro, and (C) Kyoto (image and text: Science 306 476)’ [ (Dume, 2004)]. However, there is no need for a gravimeter to detect this phenomenon, if the earthquake position is finding in the ocean, where or its vicinity: the height of the water column is greater than 3000 m. The hypocenter is at 30 km deep under crust in the upper mantle, the strength of the earthquake is more than 6,0 M. If these conditions are fulfilled the changing in gravitational space caused by the earthquake is going to trigger tsunami. There exist many tsunamis which appeared

19 under such conditions. A definite undisputable interesting example: the mega-tsunami of the Lituya Bay (Alaska). (J. P. Montagner, 2016) This tsunami occurred on July 9 1958 caused by a 7.8 M earthquake [ (M. Vallée1, 2017)]. The epicenter of this earthquake was considered to be direct on the mainland boundary. After a short detailed analysis follows to the conclusion that the position of earthquake was poorly established. Those processes mentioned in literature could not cause such a tsunami which appeared in Lituya Bay, because did not have enough water quantity to move. Accurately said the position of epicenter was wrongly positioned. In case of better placement in the vicinity abyssopelagic zone of Pacific Ocean, the process mentioned by the literature cannot produce such an observed mega-tsunami. There are no other potential explanations for this observation only using the base of the recent electro-magnetic theory of gravitation. The position of epicenter should be correct if it is positioned minimum 135-145 km on west, in the abyssopelagic zone of Pacific Ocean, or still on the continental land margin. The 7.8 M earthquake near Lituya Bay produced fluctuation in outer core of Earth. So, in the mentioned place existed enough water for creating such a mage-wave which are similar with waves of Earth tides (Fig.12.)-

Fig.12. The theoretical epicenter of Lituya Bay Earthquakes ˙(1958) .

20

Conclusion: By the end of the article, it should be said that we have not been able to meet all the objectives; however, with the surface-observable events presented in the new approach, we are still getting closer to understanding the meaning of these phenomena and with the gravity field origin. It would have been possible to continue the enumeration other examples connected to a variation of gravity field (the yearly diurnal variation of gravity caused by precession, infra-gravity waves, lightening, dewdrops creation). Anyone can easily perceive - even as a fact - that we can get better conclusions without costly equipment, achieve simple uniform physical models, more descriptive of natural phenomena if they are based on easy understandable, sincere and non-manipulative descriptions of the phenomena of our environment –Ockham’s razor. In all this, it could be probable that in this short scholarly essay with the present new view explaining of the real nature of gravity provide a more general and better worldview than current theories. In many ways, the factual role (method) of the old theories can be left without any change. The change in these physical models would only be the replacement of their bases formulated in a theoretical way to others which have the basis of real physical facts. Galilean’s gravity-related results are explained without contradiction. In Newton’s mechanics, the universality of gravity finishes. In short, we would get a physical worldview that would become understandable to more people. The concept of gravity used in the current writing originated from M. Faraday. It is well documented, that in 1850 he attempted to unify: gravity with electricity. Shortly thereafter Maxwell and Lorentz continued his effort in this regard, without plausible success. Their lack of success probably was that the discovery of electron (J. Thompson, 1897) happened later. Before this discovery, they’re only choice was a wrong interpretational; they built an inverse nomination of electro potential. In the next century O. Heaviside, nearly created a concept which is fundamentally the presented approach of gravity and electro-magnetism of this paper. He did not understand that the matter in a solid-crystalline aggregate state, itself, isolated, did not exert same interaction, like in gas-, fluid- and plasma stage matter, what in some cases had electro-magnetic (-gravity) nature. From then on, the published public explanation such as the theory of gravity, where the attraction phenomena has been explained without the existence of electron-electric charge, more accurately, with the electron concentration. The outward scientifically literature lack of a correct gravity theory, which jumps from the next incorrect vision, from such solid mass that exerts gravitational effect. It is clear that physics hides behind math when it encounters a topic for which it has no explanation. Those whose reputation depend on the status quo fear change and have an ego far too large to admit being wrong or have an open mind. The world backs them up since benefits to society do not concentrate on truth, but instead on making something work. To do this engineering focuses on a “box” that represents boundaries of expectation. As long as the technology lives inside the box, then no knowledge or understanding is necessary. In the case of gravity, that is stated that 9.81

21 m/s^2 is about the normal to make objects, therefore, even if this is not correct you can design for a range of 9 to 10 and your object will succeed to accomplish a goal. Never mind the real reason for gravity existence, as long as the industry does not have failures of manufactured objects. We think it is time to step outside this “box” and find solutions that are real; ones that allow us to progress past our current stagnated state. We are trapped in theories that yield no forward progress and only onto other bad theories and rhetoric. Let us test these ideas and show to ourselves how truly simple is this universe.

Acknowledgement:

*Special thanks to Michael Clark for contribution to this work.

Thanks, and credit to Jerry Decker for his contribution.

References: al., M. W.-e. (2017). Stable optical trapping and sensitive characterization of nanostructures using standing-wave Raman tweezers. Sci. Rep. 7, 42930; doi: 10.1038/srep42930. Anderson, D. (2009). Is there something we don't know about gravity. Bleahu, M. (1983). Toctonica Globala Vol 1-2. Stiintifica si. Casimir, H. B. (1948). Proc Kon Nederl Akad wet 51, 793 . Dimitrova, M. (2006). Planet Formations-problems and future. Sens (space ecology and nanotechnology). Dume, B. (2004). Earthquakes shakes up gravity. Forrás: https://physicsworld.com/a/earthquakeshakes-up-gravity Einstein, A. (1978). A specialis es altalanos relativitas elemelete. forditotta vamos ferenc. Flandern, T. V. (2000). The exploded planet hypothesis. metaresearch. Horvath, L. A. (2007). Bolygoerozio . Szokimondo hajduszoboszlo, 5, 12-15. Horvath, L. A. (2017). Az Elmeleti tudomany kenyes jelensege. Horvath, L. A. (2007). Bolygerrozio. Horvath, L. A. (2009). Tenyekkel igazolhato a gravitacio valos oka magankiadas. J. P. Montagner, K. J.-M. (2016). Prompt gravity signal induced by the 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake. Nature Communication. Jason S Gardner (National Synchrotron Radiation Research Center, T. C. (dátum nélk.). The Basics of Neutron Scattering. Forrás: https://www.aps.org/units/fecs/newsletters/201710/neutron.cfm Josephson, B. D. (1962). Possible new effects in superconductive tunnelling. physics letters.

22 L.-Marzán, M. L. (2003). Nanoscale Materials. Springer. Lambrecht, A. (2002). The Casimir effect a force from nothing. Physics World. M. Hermann, M. F. (2009). Lituya Bay Landslide Impact Generated Mega-Tsunami 50th Anniversary. Pure and applied geophysics . M. Vallée1, J. P.-P. (2017). Observations and modeling of the elasto-gravity signals preceding direct seismic waves. Science Geophysics. Massa, W. (2013). Crystal structure determination Textbook. Mercury, R. C. (2008). The incredible shrinking planet. Daily News. Meszaros, M. (1984). Befejezodott a jegkorszak. editura stiintifica si encyclopedia. Newton, I. (1687). Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica. R. C. Paniello, J. M. (2012). Zinc isotopic evidence for the origin of the Earth. Sparnaay, M. (1958). Casimir effect. Physica 24, 6-10. Walter D. Loveland, D. J. (2017). Modern Nuclear Chemistry. John Wiley & Sons. Wegener, M. (2005). Extreme Nonlinear optics: An Introduction /Edition 1. Wieman, E. A. (2001). Bose Einstein Condensation in a dilute gas.

View publication stats