Version 1
: Received: 16 January 2023 / Approved: 18 January 2023 / Online: 18 January 2023 (03:51:51 CET)
Version 2
: Received: 26 January 2023 / Approved: 28 January 2023 / Online: 28 January 2023 (09:44:13 CET)
How to cite:
Goyal, G. A Mechanical Newton-Einstein Hybrid Gravity based on Matter-vacuum Equilibrium Mediated by Gravitons. Preprints2023, 2023010318. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202301.0318.v2
Goyal, G. A Mechanical Newton-Einstein Hybrid Gravity based on Matter-vacuum Equilibrium Mediated by Gravitons. Preprints 2023, 2023010318. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202301.0318.v2
Goyal, G. A Mechanical Newton-Einstein Hybrid Gravity based on Matter-vacuum Equilibrium Mediated by Gravitons. Preprints2023, 2023010318. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202301.0318.v2
APA Style
Goyal, G. (2023). A Mechanical Newton-Einstein Hybrid Gravity based on Matter-vacuum Equilibrium Mediated by Gravitons. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202301.0318.v2
Chicago/Turabian Style
Goyal, G. 2023 "A Mechanical Newton-Einstein Hybrid Gravity based on Matter-vacuum Equilibrium Mediated by Gravitons" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202301.0318.v2
Abstract
There has been a disconnect between our understanding of the universe's working at the micro and macro scale - that is, disagreement between quantum mechanics (QM) and general relativity (GR). A theory of vacuum-matter equilibrium is presented from scratch to bridge this gap. It is proposed that gravitons are both quanta of matter and gravitation, as every matter entity is believed to interact with gravitation. The vacuum has an energy density that gives rise to virtual-graviton pairs. Upon collision, a virtual-graviton may get stuck to the matter while a graviton from the matter gets ejected. It is possible as all gravitons are identical in mass and size. Equilibrium is thus established where matter erodes in the vacuum, and the vacuum condenses as matter. The probability of graviton exchange depends on the relative energies of the virtual-graviton and matter entity, as calculated in the inertial frame of reference (IFoR) decided by the state motion of vacuum energy at that place. If the rate of matter-vacuum equilibrium is taken as a constant, it leads to the notion of time and time dilation. The force appearing on a matter entity through collision with virtual-gravitons is calculated, and the expression is a hybrid of Newton's and Einstein's equation. It further helps to answer the queries related to phenomena like the flatness of galaxy rotation curves, misconceptions about relativistic mass and length contraction, the relation between time, gravity, and quantum entanglement (QE), and the composite nature of the universal gravitational constant.
Keywords
quantum gravity; alternate theory of gravity
Subject
Physical Sciences, Astronomy and Astrophysics
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
Comment:
The comments received from teferees are as follow:
In this paper, the Author aims to propose and develop a mechanical theory
of gravity capable to reconcile General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics.
The model seems closely related to the Fatio - Le Sage theory, with gravitons
replacing the original ultramondane particles. Also, gravitons are considered as
the basic constituents of matter.
Leaving aside the well-known objections against the mechanical theories a la
Fatio - Le Sage, the proposed model is indeed rather generic and too speculative.
The various hypotheses the Authors puts forward do not take into account the
impressive amount of results in Special and General Relativity as well as in
QFT, theoretically predicted and experimentally tested.
Just to make a trivial example, in the proposed model gavitons are considered
as charged particles and possibly identified with the gluons. But gravitons
are expected to be not charged (nor they are coloured). Also, they are spin-2
particles, while gluons are spin-1.
From an epistemological perspective, the overall basic objection could be
traced back to the Occam’s razor principle, according to which the simplest
theory is also the better.
Furthermore, I would like to point out that, to be viable, a new theory
should be also able to reproduce all the successful results of the old one. In that
respect, I believe that several issues effectively addressed by GR and QM (see,
e.g., spacetime curvature effects) are not affordable by the present model.
Referee: 2
COMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR(S)
The author uses an abbreviation in the abstract that should be used in the introduction.
What is the PDF of KE of virtual-gravitons author use in this paper?
The paper has many grammatical mistakes that should be improved in a revised version.
Referee: 3
COMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR(S)
After much internal debate, I decided to recommend against the publication of this paper in Classical and Quantum Gravity. The project undertaken here is ambitious, couragous and worthwhile. I applaud the effort. Still, it seems to me that there are a number of conceptual blind spots. I find two to be particularly toublesome. First, the author assumes that because all matter has mass (energy would be more accurate here), when can take everything to be composed of gravitons. This is not the case. It merely means that all energy interacts with gravitons. Second, the approach taken here explicitly means to sit in a middle ground between GR and QM, and to take elements from both but still construct things from their foundations. But the foundations sketched out in the manuscript are mainly classical in treatment. The author's approach seems to be largely based on diffusion theory -- having a heavy emphasis both on PDFs and current flux. This is seen in the fact that the case study concerns classically-scaled gravity, without addressing anything high energy enough to relate to quantum gravitational effects.
Commenter: Gaurav Goyal
Commenter's Conflict of Interests: Author
A footnote has been added for additional information.
Commenter:
The commenter has declared there is no conflict of interests.
In this paper, the Author aims to propose and develop a mechanical theory
of gravity capable to reconcile General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics.
The model seems closely related to the Fatio - Le Sage theory, with gravitons
replacing the original ultramondane particles. Also, gravitons are considered as
the basic constituents of matter.
Leaving aside the well-known objections against the mechanical theories a la
Fatio - Le Sage, the proposed model is indeed rather generic and too speculative.
The various hypotheses the Authors puts forward do not take into account the
impressive amount of results in Special and General Relativity as well as in
QFT, theoretically predicted and experimentally tested.
Just to make a trivial example, in the proposed model gavitons are considered
as charged particles and possibly identified with the gluons. But gravitons
are expected to be not charged (nor they are coloured). Also, they are spin-2
particles, while gluons are spin-1.
From an epistemological perspective, the overall basic objection could be
traced back to the Occam’s razor principle, according to which the simplest
theory is also the better.
Furthermore, I would like to point out that, to be viable, a new theory
should be also able to reproduce all the successful results of the old one. In that
respect, I believe that several issues effectively addressed by GR and QM (see,
e.g., spacetime curvature effects) are not affordable by the present model.
Referee: 2
COMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR(S)
The author uses an abbreviation in the abstract that should be used in the introduction.
What is the PDF of KE of virtual-gravitons author use in this paper?
The paper has many grammatical mistakes that should be improved in a revised version.
Referee: 3
COMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR(S)
After much internal debate, I decided to recommend against the publication of this paper in Classical and Quantum Gravity. The project undertaken here is ambitious, couragous and worthwhile. I applaud the effort. Still, it seems to me that there are a number of conceptual blind spots. I find two to be particularly toublesome. First, the author assumes that because all matter has mass (energy would be more accurate here), when can take everything to be composed of gravitons. This is not the case. It merely means that all energy interacts with gravitons. Second, the approach taken here explicitly means to sit in a middle ground between GR and QM, and to take elements from both but still construct things from their foundations. But the foundations sketched out in the manuscript are mainly classical in treatment. The author's approach seems to be largely based on diffusion theory -- having a heavy emphasis both on PDFs and current flux. This is seen in the fact that the case study concerns classically-scaled gravity, without addressing anything high energy enough to relate to quantum gravitational effects.