A Theory of Everything: Origins of Gravity, Mach's Principle, Advanced Potentials, Time Dilation

Why are theoretical physicists making strenuous efforts to achieve a Theory of Everything? They are aiming to unite gravitational and quantum theories. The very different mathematics of each of these theories is well understood and enables accurate predictions to be made of both:

• the universe at large, at one extreme; and
   
• atomic interactions at the other extreme.

Another reason may be that there has been no clear understanding of the advanced potential solution of Maxwell's equations. It has not been realised that this solution restricts special relativity to steady-state electromagnetic observations, because the act of observation with a material detector changes what is observed. Maxwell's equations require that, in free space, the observed  steady-state velocity of light is equal to c relative to the observer's material detector. Quantum theory must be used for precursor transient signals. Looked at another way, an "ultraviolet catastrophe" restriction applies to the reception of electromagnetic energy as well as to its radiation. A quantum approach is essential  when dealing with the high frequency Fourier components associated with the initial reception of any pulsed signal. Relativity and quantum theories are then the two parts of a complete solution. There is no need for the imprecise statement that the velocity of light is equal to c in empty space. More on advanced potentials later.

The origin of gravity is a mystery. Gravity is an unusual force that cannot be shielded or absorbed. There is also no explanation for the experimental observation that the gravitational mass of a body is equal to its inertial mass.

However, new ideas on the origin of gravity, based on including a stronger form of Mach’s Principle, predict that these two types of mass should be identical, and indicates that gravity may have inertial origins.

When clarifying Mach's Principle in 1916, Einstein stated that the most distant masses in the universe and their motions relative to local masses must affect either the local laws of motion, or the local law of gravitation, or both. But he was unable to fully embrace this concept within general relatvity.

Physicists have usually ignored part of Einstein's statement concerning Mach's Principle and they have assumed that the law of gravitation is fixed. To incorporate Mach's Principle, unconvincing attempts have been made to show how our local laws of motion might be affected by the relative motion of distant matter. It is postulated that the origin of any inertial reaction force is a gravitational interaction between the body being pushed and the most distant matter in the universe. But inertial reaction forces are instantaneous! It then has to be assumed that gravitational forces from this most distant matter must be continually flowing from both future and past time, as advanced and retarded waves, so as to artificially give an instantaneous inertial reaction force.

Such an improbable concept is only tolerated because all of the suggested alternatives are inherently flawed. Additionally, this concept does not embody Einstein's belief that atomic particles are gravitationally stabilised. Why has Einstein's other option for developing Mach's Principle been ignored? Instead of assuming that local inertial reaction forces are produced by a gravitational interaction with distant matter, one may propose that local gravitational forces are generated by the inertial motion of distant matter. This new approach requires that the motion of distant masses, relative to local masses, must change the local law of gravitation in some way. The most likely change would be a variation in the value of the gravitational constant G. After the distant masses have established a steady-state, local value of G, inertial reaction forces would be instantaneous against this local background. But the manner in which G is generated must not  lead to any conflict with general relativity, and the well established gravitational effects that have been observed in the laboratory, the solar system, and the universe at large.

While leaving general relativity and the free space value of G unchanged, the new approach proposes that the rotational motion of the Earth, relative to the most distant masses in the universe, may give rise to an increase in the value of G equal to about 0.4% when it is measured well below the surface of the Earth. There is already some evidence for this increase that has been provided by both Frank Stacey, who took measurements in an Australian mine, and the author (see next section). Some very recent measurements, obtained at many different laboratories across the world, show unexpected variations of G of up to 0.6%.

One interpretation of the new approach also predicts gravitational stability for all atomic particles having spin - but we start off an examination of a "Theory of Everything" by pointing out a rather obvious shortcoming of classical theory that seems to have been neglected....

Theory of Everything - gravitational / inertial mass
Click for why gravitational and inertial mass are equal

Advanced Potentials, Quantum Theory and Special Relativity
Click for more

Time Dilation, the Clock Paradox or Twin Paradox, and Relativity Theory
Click for more

"New Ideas that Change Einstein's Theories" - an extract from my new book
Click for more

contact us