Change Rate of Gravitational Force
Newton’s law of the gravitational force states that the strength of the gravitational force is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the object. This change rate was established by Newton based on the long-term observations of predecessors like Kepler, and has been confirmed by modern precise measurements. Therefore, any new theory of the gravitational force must conform to this quantitative characteristic. If a new theory can also explain its physical cause, the new theory would be of greater significance.
In the above descriptions, the introduced gravitational force expression Eq. (9) seems to say that the so-called mass or of an object changes inversely and linearly with the distance from the object. Thus, the gravitational force strength described by Eq. (9) is inversely proportional to the fourth power of the distance , which is clearly in contradiction with the inverse square law of the gravitational force, which is generally acknowledged.
In fact, this contradiction does not exist. The reason is that the values of and in Eq. (9), i.e., the numerical values of the electric dipole moments and are not fixed. They are determined by the non-uniform charge distribution within the two objects. When the distance between the two objects changes, the internal non-uniform charge distributions in two objects will also change under the influence of each other’s electric field, causing changes in the values of and .
In the most ideal situation, if the values of and can change completely linearly and proportionally with , then the so-called masses and would become fixed and do not change with distance . In this case, the gravitational force strength derived from the dipole model would be able to change precisely inversely with the square of , thus precisely matching Newton’s law.
Of course, this ideal situation does not occur. However, investigation has found that under certain conditions, the values of and can change approximately synchronously with , and when the conditions are ideal, the degree of approximation is very high.
In the universe, any independent object or substance system is composed of atoms and molecules, or electrons and ions with separated positive and negative charges. Within such an object or substance system, due to various macroscopic and microscopic reasons, the distribution of the electric charges is always non-uniform, i.e., there is an inherent original charge disorder in any independent object or substance system. When such an object or substance system is influenced by an external electric field, particularly a single external electric field, because the distances between the atoms and molecules, or electrons and ions within the object or substance system are generally very small, the strengths of the interaction electric fields among these atoms and molecules, or electrons and ions are very large, making the strengths of these internal electric fields much stronger than that of the external electric field. Thus, the main effect of the external electric field is not to excite or increase the internal disorder of the object or substance system, but rather to regularize the internal disorder of the object or substance system, that is, to regularize the internal non-uniform charge distribution of the object or substance system from completely disorder to relative order.
This physical mechanism may be further explained. In the universe, within a completely isolated object or substance system, due to the absence of external constraints, its internal charge distribution is in a state of extreme disorder. Although the extreme disorder does not necessarily result in a large electric dipole moment, the extremely disordered charge distribution is certainly highly sensitive to external electric fields. Therefore, the external electric field, even with the same strength, can more easily cause the isolated object or substance system to form a large electric dipole or more effectively increase its dipole moment value. The degree of independence of an object or substance system is determined by its distance from another object or substance system. The farther apart the two objects or substance systems are, the greater the original disorder of the charge distribution within them, and thus the greater their sensitivities to the external electric fields. Therefore, when the electric fields of these two objects or substance systems interact, the induced effects are stronger. As a result, the values of and of the two objects or substance systems not only change with variation of , but the greater the distance between them is, the greater the change rates of the values of and are.
Under this physical mechanism, for two mutually attracting objects, assuming their physical compositions, states, and environments are not significantly different (for example, both objects are in a solid state), quantitative calculations show that the values of and can indeed change approximately in direct proportion to the distance . Under ideal physical conditions, the degree of approximation can be so high that it approaches or even exceeds the measurement error limits of modern technology. In other words, under ideal physical conditions, the so-called mass of an object, based on the dipole model, is highly approximately invariant, and the change rate of the gravitational force strength is highly approximated to be inversely proportional to the square of the distance . Therefore, it can be said that Newton’s law of the gravitational force is only a highly approximate description of the change rate of the true gravitational force strength in nature under certain physical conditions.
The quantitative proof of this conclusion is given below. Since too many factors affect the interaction between two macroscopic objects, such as the kinds, quantities, spatial compositions, densities, and temperatures of the atoms and molecules contained in the two objects, the calculation can only be simplified, but this does not affect the substantial conclusion.
The method of proof is first to demonstrate that the so-called mass of the object is constant; that is, the so-called mass is not related to the distance
R between two mutually interacting objects. If the so-called mass cannot remain completely unchanged, then the amount of change should be as small as possible, at least smaller than the measurement error limits of modern technology. Therefore, our first step is to calculate the relative change rate
or
of the so-called mass
or
of one of the two objects after a distance change of
.
or
is defined below
In Eqs. (13) and (14), or is the so-called mass of object 1 or object 2 at the distance of meters, or is the so-called mass of object 1 or object 2 at the distance of 1 meter. Obviously, when the distance change is larger and the relative change rate or is smaller, the so-called mass or changes less with distance , so the value of mass or is closer to be constant. In other words, when the value of is larger and the value of or is smaller, the change rate of the gravitational force strength of an object, predicted by the dipole model, is closer to be inversely proportional to the square of the distance from that object.
Let the dipole moment of the object 1 be
, then under the electric field
, which is produced by the dipole moment of the object 2, the
becomes
In Eq. (15),
is the value of
when the electric field
. Because only when the distance
between the two objects approaches infinity (
), the value of
can be zero,
is also the value of
when the distance
approaches infinite.
(SI units:
) is polarizability of the object 1. When
and
have the same direction and are aligned with a line, from Eqs. (3) and (15), we have
If the physical characteristics and external environments of the two objects are not significantly different, then
,where
is a dimensionless proportional constant. Thus, from Eq. (16), a self-consistent equation for calculating
can be obtained
Since the so-called mass of object 1 is
, we have
When , , , Eqs. (17) and (18) encounter singularities. At singularities, the physical approximation on which the Eqs. (17) and (18) are based fails, resulting in the Eqs. (17) and (18) becoming invalid. Additionally, Eq. (18) shows when ,. This is because, based on the dipole model, both the gravitational mass and inertial mass of an object represent the strength of the attraction force experienced by another object (see above descriptions). If an object is located at infinity, the attraction force exerting on other object by that object is zero, and thus its so-called mass becomes zero.
In Eq. (18), the polarizability describes how the electric field generated by one macroscopic object affects the non-uniform charge distribution within another macroscopic object in manner and rate. First, the mutual influence between two objects depends on strengths of electric fields of two objects, which in turn depends on the distance between tow object, thus, should be a function of . Second, the redistribution speed of the non-uniform charge of the object also depends on distance , because as previously explained, the farther the distance between the two objects, the more sensitive the redistribution of the internal non-uniform charges to the external electric field in either of two objects, that is, changes at different rates at different distances, so should be larger when the distance is larger, and cannot be a linear function of the distance .
Since there are too many factors that can affect the mutual influence between two macroscopic objects, to avoid overly complex calculations, we may temporarily assume to be an exponential function of the distance , that is, .
In equation , (SI unit: ) is a proportional constant. is an integer or natural number and should be less than or equal to 3, because the electric field strength of an ideal electric dipole is inversely proportional to the cube of the distance from the dipole (see Eq. (2)).
The value of depends on the mass ratio of the two objects considered, so its minimum value is 1. When considering the attraction between a star and a planet within the solar system, such as the Earth and the Sun, since the mass of the Sun is , and the mass of the Earth is , the value of is . When considering the attraction between the Earth and a measurement sample on the Earth’s surface for testing gravitational force change accuracy, since the Earth’s mass is kg, and the mass of a normal sample can’t exceed 1000kg, the value of γ is 5.97⨯.
Then, simply considering three cases of . After substituting , and into Eq. (18), the calculation results show that when , the relative change rate of with is minimal, that is, in this case, the calculation results are closest to the physical reality.
When
, Eq. (18) becomes
Estimating the polarizability value of a macroscopic object is difficult. Du to polarizability values of various atoms composing any object range from ~0.6 to ~60, for example, hydrogen (H) is 0.667, iron (Fe) is 8.4, sodium (Na) is 24.11, potassium (K) is 43.06, and cesium (Cs) is 59.6 (SI units:
) [
14], and any number of the polarizability value within the range of 0.6 to 60 does not substantially affect the calculation results, a typical value of
is roughly assumed. After substituting this value and
into Eq. (19), the relative change rates
of the mass
of the object 1 with different distance changes
can be obtained, as shown in
Table 1,
Table 2 and
Table 3. In
Table 1,
, in
Table 2,
, in
Table 3,
, and the unit of distance
is
km.
From
Table 1,
Table 2, and
Table 3, it can be seen that when the mass ratio
of the two objects is 1, the relative change rate
of the mass
does not exceed one ten-thousandth (
<
) within the range of distance change
from 1 meter to ten thousand kilometers (
). When the mass ratio
of the two objects is 100,000
, the relative change rate
of the mass
does not exceed one ten-thousandth (
<
) within the range of distance change
from 1 meter to one billion kilometers (
). When the mass ratio
of the two objects is
, the relative change rate
of the mass
does not exceed one billionth (
<
) within the range of distance change
from 1 meter to one hundred billion billion kilometers (
). If the maximum corresponding distance where the relative change rate
of object mass
is less than a certain value, such as one ten-thousandth (
<
), is defined as the “effective” distance
, where the inverse square law holds, then from
Table 1,
Table 2, and
Table 3, it can be seen that when
, the “effective” distance is ten thousand kilometers (
); when
, the “effective” distance is one billion kilometers (
); and when
, the “effective” distance is much longer than one hundred billion billion kilometers (
). Please note that, for the Sun, the relation of
should not no longer strictly hold, because the physical characteristics of the Sun differ significantly from those of the ordinary objects.
So far, precise measurements of the gravitational force change by humans were conducted on the Earth’s surface, with the highest precision being about
[
15]. As mentioned above, the mass ratio γ between the Earth and a possible measurement sample is not greater than 5.97⨯
.
Therefore, in the physical environment on the Earth’s surface, the accuracy of the change rate of the gravitational force established based on the dipole model is far higher than the measurement error limits of modern technology. Thus, the introduced gravitational theory is entirely consistent with the law of the gravitational force change obtained through long-term human observation and precise measurement. It should be noted that, so far, human observations and measurements of the gravitational force change rate were conducted on the Earth’s surface and in the Earth’s nearby space.
From Eq. (18), the gravitational force based on the dipole model has the following characteristics:
The change rate of gravitational force strength, which is inversely proportional to the square of the distance, or the so-called mass of an object being constant, depends on the distance between the interacting objects. This means there is an "effective" distance for these conditions to hold true.
The “effective” distance depends on the mass ratio of the two mutually attracting objects; the larger the mass ratio, the farther the “effective” distance;
The “effective” distance also depends on the polarizabilities of the two mutually attracting objects, and thus is related to the physical characteristics of the two objects, including composition, density, state, temperature, etc.
When , the so-called mass of the interaction body increases very fast and nonlinearly, and when , the so-called mass of interaction body approaches zero. It may be a possible way to solve the mystery of dark matter and why celestial systems have finite sizes. First, because when the distance is great, the so-called mass of the interaction object increases rapidly, the celestial bodies on the far outskirts of a rotating galaxy will not be thrown out of the galaxy due to excessive rotational speed. Thus, although the required amounts of the masses of the celestial bodies on the far outskirts of a rotating galaxy are not found, the dark matter mystery may still be solved. Second, objects that are too far from the center of the galactic system will have their so-called mass decrease rapidly, causing them to leave the galactic system. Therefore, any galactic system may only capture celestial bodies within a certain distance, resulting in a finite size. Certainly, there are other reasons contributing to the dark matter mystery. For example, celestial bodies located at the far outskirts of the rotating galaxies have distinctly different physical components, states, structures, pressures, temperatures, etc., that more easily lead to larger non-uniform charge distributions, resulting in larger electric dipole moment values. Further discussion is provided below.
The above description also explains the physical cause of the change rate of the gravitational force strength being inversely proportional to the square of the distance. The inverse square rate was initially obtained based on the observations and measurements, including the initial observations of planets orbiting stars, the later Cavendish experiment, and modern precise measurements. Previous discussions on the cause of the inverse square rate are only considered it to be due to the spherical divergence of a uniform field emanating from an ideal point in three-dimensional space, thus naturally so. But this paper gives real physical explanation for its cause.
Perhaps there is a question: why to chose and N=2 or N≈2, is it true in the real world? Now, apart from what has been explained above, the author cannot provide more reasons. However, one thing is certain: the change rate of the gravitational force calculated above does indeed align precisely with the observed facts.
Of course, if Eq. (19) is used to calculate the weight difference of the same object on the Earth’s surface and the Moon’s surface, it will be found that the calculation results have an error of nearly one order of magnitude. For Eq. (19), which is a very simplified formula established under many approximate assumptions, having only one order of magnitude error in celestial calculations on a cosmic scale should already be quite good, though Eq. (19) needs further optimization.
In summary, the electric dipole model should be a good model. In fact, the dynamic electric dipole model is likely the most effective gravitational force model proposed based on human common sense until now. It not only naturally explains various characteristics and related phenomena of the gravitational force but also accounts for numerous bizarre cosmic anomalies (see detailed descriptions below). Where else can we find a more reasonable, effective, and commonsensical theory of the gravitational force? It should be noted that humanity has been exploring this for hundreds of years.
It should be said a little more: according to the dipole model, the so-called mass of an object is no longer fixed. However, for the so-called mass of an object to undergo “sufficient and necessary” change, that is, for the overall external effect of the non-uniform charge distribution within an object to undergo “sufficient and necessary” change, the internal physical structure of the object and/or the external physical environment must undergo corresponding “sufficient and necessary” changes. This “sufficient and necessary” is measured from the broad perspective of the universe. The intense physical changes we generally observe on the Earth’s surface, such as temperature changes from tens to hundreds of degrees, density changes by several to dozens of times, and pressure changes from a few to dozens of atmospheres, do not reach the “sufficient and necessary” level on the “universal” scale. Therefore, in general natural environments, such as on or near the Earth’s surface, the so-called mass of an object is highly approximately constant.
Above described properties make the gravitational force exhibit strange and mysterious behaviors, causing confusing phenomena observed in the universe. Some of these phenomena have puzzled humans for a long time. However, by using new understandings of the gravitational force, these confusing phenomena can be explained simply and effectively. On the other hand, these phenomena may be regarded as indirect evidences of the correctness of this introduced new understanding.