Natural
Physical
Length Contraction Due to Gravity
( Last
modified:
2009/11/7 )
Abstract.
This
paper
demonstrates
how quantum mechanics solves the problem
previously
attributed to relativity, when atoms acquire gravitational
energy.
When we apply the principle of mass-energy conservation to an atom
gaining
potential energy, the electron mass increases. Then, using the
fundamental
principles of quantum mechanics, we show that the Bohr radius decreases
so that the physical macroscopic length of bodies also decreases.
Classical physics with quantum mechanics alone lead to predictions,
which
are compatible with all the experimental observations usually
attributed
to relativity. It has been shown previously how the increase of
kinetic
energy changes the atomic structure, due to the change of electron
mass.
We explain here the corresponding phenomenon, when the increase of
electron
mass is due to gravitational energy. Such an increase of
potential
energy leads to an increase of frequency of emission of atoms in
agreement
with Pound and Rebka experiment. This paper also explains the
combined
physical phenomena, taking place when an atom increases its kinetic
energy
at the same time as an increase of potential energy. We see then,
how the physical length of matter changes and how the natural rate of
clocks,
change in such a way that it explains naturally the advance of the
perihelion
of Mercury. Furthermore, we show how the increase of potential
energy
leads to a different change of Bohr radius, than when an increase of
kinetic
energy is involved. This dissimilarity is due to the difference
of
momentum transfer during the interaction of kinetic and potential
energy.
This is explained naturally, without any need of Einstein's theory of
relativity.
Conventional logic and realistic physics are now sufficient to explain
all these phenomena in nature. The esoteric hypothesis of space
and
time distortion is useless. Instead, using realism, we can
understand
how the physical change of length of bodies and clock rates, take place
in a gravitational field.
1--
Introduction.
There
exists
no
physical rationalization explaining why and how matter
can dilate or contract as claimed in relativity. That physics
theory
is impenetrable, because it is not compatible with the existence of an
absolute physical reality, independent of the observer.
Einstein's
theory has never been able to provide a logical description of the
physical
meaning of relativity. Unfortunately, just as during the Middle
Ages,
most scientists claim that nature is not compatible with conventional
logic.
Magic is required in the interpretation of Einstein's relativity.
In
this
paper,
the phenomenon of length contraction or dilation of
matter
and the change of clock rate are explained logically without any of
Einstein's
relativity hypotheses (1). We
have
seen in a previous paper (2-4) how a
simple
classical mechanism can explain the physical length contraction and
dilation
of matter, when the mass of the proton and of the electron inside the
atom
increases due to the absorption of kinetic energy. As expected, a
comparable increase of electron and proton masses occurs, due to the
addition
of gravitational potential energy. Due to the variation of
potential
energy and the application of the principle of mass-energy
conservation,
we show how the Bohr radius increases and decreases, so that the
physical
size of matter changes. Dilation of matter is not a simple
mathematical
transformation: it is a physical reality. Also, matter shrinks
back
to its original length when the atom returns to the original potential
energy as explained previously (2,3).
Here,
we
show
with full details, how matter is dilated and contracted,
and how clocks run at a different rate due to the change of
gravitational
potential energy. Following a change of quantum structure, we can
see how that change of gravitational potential energy is responsible
for
the change of physical size of the atom. Contrary to most papers
in modern physics, we always refer to a realistic physical model.
In contrast to Einstein's relativity, we show that all the phenomena
previously
claimed to belong to relativity, can now be described using models of
the
kind used by Newton, Coulomb and de Broglie. The importance of
the
de Broglie wavelength relationship is vital. The reader must be
able
to conceive first that, due to the potential energy of atoms, the
electron
mass increases. Furthermore, there is a change of size of the
"reference
units" in different frames, which is a direct consequence of the
principle
of mass-energy conservation.
It
is
also
an experimental fact that when an electric charge (i. e. an
electron) is accelerated to high velocity, its mass increases, but its
electric charge remains constant. This is verified experimentally
when an electron is accelerated to velocities close to the velocity of
light, and then deflected in a magnetic field. Experimental data
show clearly that, the electron charge-to-mass ratio (e/m) changes with
velocity in such a way (just as expected), that the electron mass
increases
as a function of velocity, while the electric charge remains constant
at
any velocity. This is a well-verified experimental fact.
Therefore,
just as in the case of kinetic energy, in a gravitational potential,
the
electron mass increases with potential energy and the electric charge
remains
constant.
We
recall
that
an accelerating electric charge generates
electromagnetic
radiation. Consequently, a quantum transition inside a particle
always
emits a quantized amount of energy. In some cases, that flow of
electromagnetic
radiation can be continuous, but its detection is quantized due to the
quantum states of atoms and molecules in the detector.
In
this
paper,
we consider separately the influence of the
gravitational
potential on atoms, assuming momentarily that the kinetic energy is
maintained
at zero. The problem of kinetic energy has been calculated in a
previous
paper (5) and does not need to be
reconsidered
here. The effects of kinetic and potential energy on atoms are
considered
independently before their physical effect are finally combined in the
last section of this paper. Let us calculate first how the atomic
structure of the atoms changes as a function of the gravitational
potential
in which they are immerged.
2--
Mass-Energy Conservation in Gravitational Potential.
We
have
seen
previously (2, 3) that
when
a body is moved between different altitudes in a gravitational field,
its
mass must change in order to be compatible with the principle of
mass-energy
conservation. Let us recall the following experiment. We
consider
that an individual hydrogen atom is located at its initial distance yo
from a gravitational source. This is illustrated on Figure 1.

Figure 1
The
distance
yo is the radial
distance
between the center of the gravitational field and the mass mo
of the particle under study. At that location, the gravitational
acceleration
is g. The direction of the gravitational acceleration g is
negative,
because the gravitational force is directed toward the center of
mass.
A hydrogen atom is attached to a fine weightless thread, so that the
atom
can be lowered down slowly across the distance "minus Dy"
in the gravitational field, while the experimenter (with his measuring
instruments) remains at location yo.
In
the
gravitational
field, the weight of mo produces a force F in the
thread. That force, measured at the original location yo
(using the units of location yo) is:
F = mo
g. 1
The
slow
descent
of the atom attached to the thread is stopped every
time
a measurement is made. Therefore, the kinetic energy is always
zero
during all measurements. When the atom has traveled a radial
distance
-Dy, the atom is closer to the center of the
gravitational field and the observer measures that the force F on the
atom,
has produced an energy DE, transmitted
through
the thread to the original location yo.
The
energy
DE transmitted is:
DE
=
F
Dy.
2
In equation 2, we note that, when
the
mass gets lower, both F and Dy are
negative.
Then, the amount of energy DE transmitted
through
the tread to location yo is
positive.
Using the principle of mass-energy conservation, let us calculate the
extra
mass Dm, which is generated at the
observer's
location yo, due to the arrival of
the
energy DE, as a consequence of the
descent.
We have:
DE
=
Dm c2
3
The fundamental point in equation
3
is that the energy DE is proportional to
the
extra mass Dm generated. The use of
equation
E=mc2 has been explained previously (2)
(equation 2.3). The parameter c2 is
the
constant of proportionality between mass (kilogram) and energy
(joule).
Therefore, when there is a change of gravitational energy between
locations
yo and y(-Dy),
this leads to a resultant change of mass Dm
corresponding to DE. From equations
1,
2 and 3, the amount of mass Dmo
generated by the force on the tread (using the units existing at the
original
location yo), due to the descent of
the
particle across the distance Dy is:
4
Due
to
the
descent of the mass across the distance Dy,
an
energy
DE (therefore a mass Dmo
carried by the string) appears at location yo.
Applying the principle of mass-energy conservation, we find that the
same
amount of mass (Dm(-Dy))
must disappears at the lower location y(-Dy),
than the amount created Dmo,
at location yo, where the energy has
been
moved. We have:
5
Therefore
the
mass
Dmo,
lost due to the transfer of the energy through the thread, moving from
y(-Dy) to yo
must be subtracted from mo.
Using
equation 4, the mass m(-Dy)
at location y(-Dy)
is:
6
In
the
equations
above, Dy is negative when
the mass moves down. The gravitational acceleration g, which is
always
directed downward, is also negative. It is important to recall
that
the masses above must always be calculated using the units existing in
the initial frame located at yo.
Using
the
principle
of mass-energy conservation, the mass of the
hydrogen
atom at location y(-Dy),
is now smaller than its initial mass mo
when it was at the original location yo.
Any
variation
of
g with height is irrelevant, because the exact value
of
g is taken into account in equations 4 and 6. In fact, we
consider
in equation 6, that the change of energy DE
(and therefore Dm) is always the integral
of
the local gravitational force g, times the distance Dy.
Of
course,
since
the change of mass Dmo
is so small, the relative change of mass (Dmo/mo)
(which is 10-15 in Pound and Rebka
experiment
(6))
is an extremely small fraction. In this paper, for practical
reasons,
we consider the absolute value of |g|, which is always positive.
We have:
7
Also,
for
practical
reasons, we define a new variable e
as:
8
Let
us
now
consider a positive increase of distance +Dy
from
the
gravitational source. Equations 6, 7 and 8 give:
9
In
compatibility
with
the definition above, we recall that m+Dy
is the mass at a location +Dy above the
original
location at yo. We have seen
previously
(2)
that equation 9 is compatible with experimental data. This
calculated
change of energy levels as a function of gravitational potential is in
perfect agreement with the Pound and Rebka and also the Pound and
Snider
experiments (6). They used
Mössbauer
spectroscopy to measure the red shift of 14.4 keV gamma rays from Fe57.
In those experiments, the emitter and the absorber were placed at rest,
at the bottom and the top of a 22.5 meters high tower at Harvard
University.
Pound and Rebka reported that the measured red shift agrees within one
percent with the equation:
10
This
result
is
in perfect agreement with the previous calculation (2),
with the detailed calculations in this paper, and with the equation
predicted
by Einstein's relativity (1).
3
--- Inertial versus Gravitational Acceleration.
“Acceleration”
is
defined
as the “change of velocity” as a function of
time. In agreement with Newton’s law, when a free body is
submitted
to a force, its velocity is changing. No acceleration can be
claimed
without a physical change of velocity. Acceleration can be
produced
by different kinds of forces. We have the “inertial acceleration”
when the acceleration (i.e. the change of velocity) is due to a
mechanical
force. The “gravitational acceleration” is due to the interaction
of matter with the force of gravity. The expression
“gravitational
acceleration” is often erroneously used to describe the “force” due to
gravity. That force of gravity is what constitutes the weight of
a stationary mass. In that case, there is no acceleration (no
change
of velocity), since the mass cannot move freely. To be authentic,
a change of velocity must be observable from any other remote frames,
which
are not submitted to the particular force being studied. Any kind of
acceleration,
which is always a simple change of velocity, is a dynamic phenomenon
that
can always be sensed by an observer located in a frame outside the
frame
being accelerated. However, depending on whether we have inertial
or gravitational acceleration, the mass being accelerated will be
influenced
differently.
Inertial
acceleration
is
a change of velocity due to a localized force,
which is applied only on a point or on a surface, which constitute a
pressure
on an accelerated body. That point or that surface of pressure
transmits
that localized force to all other particles inside the accelerated
body.
That pressure due to the accelerating force propagates through the rest
of the mass, owing to the intermolecular force between atoms.
Gravitational
acceleration
is
also a change of velocity, due to a
non-pin-point
gravitational field distributed all over the space where the
accelerated
mass is. This accelerating force is a field, which acts
simultaneously
on all individual particles forming the accelerated mass. Therefore,
all
particles inside the frame are accelerated independently without having
to involve any interaction between atoms. Consequently, contrary
to an inertial acceleration, a gravitational acceleration does not
produce
any stress inside the accelerated body. That last observation is
the key solution that allows us to measure the difference between the
inertial
acceleration and the gravitational acceleration.
We
can
see
that the “gravitational acceleration” is easily
distinguishable
from the “inertial acceleration”. For example, an observer
standing
on the surface of the Earth feels the gravitational force but there is
no change of velocity (no acceleration). However, if the observer
is falling freely from the roof of a building, he does then accelerate,
but then he does not feel any internal force during the
acceleration.
By definition, both inertial acceleration and gravitational
acceleration
do correspond to a physical change of velocity.
One
must
conclude
that: The essential characteristics of
“inertial
acceleration” imply two simultaneous conditions. The inertial
acceleration
(1)
produces
a
positive effect on an accelerometer attached to the
accelerated
body, and
(2)
this
inertial
acceleration produces a change of velocity which
ought
to be observable with respect to any non accelerated frame (i.e. which
is independent of that accelerated body).
Inertial
acceleration
can
be illustrated with an active rocket
accelerating
in space. We know that in that case, all external observers can
measure
the change of velocity due to the burning fuel inside the rocket.
Furthermore, an accelerometer attached to the rocket will also record a
positive acceleration.
The
characteristics
of
acceleration due to gravity are different.
When a mass falls in a gravitational field, that free mass also changes
its velocity, which is observable with respect to any non-accelerated
frame
(i.e. which is independent of that accelerated body).
However,
contrary to the inertial acceleration, during the accelerated fall in
the
gravitational field, no effect appears on an accelerometer attached to
the accelerated body.
An
accelerometer
attached
to the mass will show a positive reading (a
force)
only when the mass remains stationary, as seen from all other external
frames not submitted to that gravitational force. However, there
exists then no change of velocity (no acceleration). This result
can be confirmed by all observers located in frames away from that
gravitational
field. Therefore, there is a fundamental physical difference
between
an inertial acceleration and a gravitational acceleration.
That
difference
is
easily measurable without ambiguity. Any
serious
experimenter can understand the dissimilarity between the two phenomena
and measure independently the inertial and the gravitational
force.
Of course, we assume that the observer does not handicap himself by
ignoring
voluntarily important data that can be gathered outside his own
frame.
It is not acceptable to tell the observer that he does not have the
permission
to look outside the system. In physics, all possible information
must be eagerly looked for, appreciated and used. Physics is not
a game and all possible data must willingly be explored.
Consequently,
any principle claiming that the gravitational and inertial acceleration
are indistinguishable is therefore incorrect. The Einstein's
equivalence
principle between inertial and gravitational acceleration is a flight
of
the imagination. Everybody knows how to distinguish these fundamental
phenomena
except when we formulate our own arbitrary restrictions on
measurements.
4
--- Fundamental Principles.
In
order
to
be able to calculate the internal structure of atoms
located
(at rest) in various gravitational potentials, we need to consider four
fundamental principles in physics. These principles must always
be
compatible, using the proper units that exist in the appropriate
frame.
We apply Newton mechanics, Coulomb law of electrical attraction between
charges, and the fundamental principles of quantum mechanics. It
is well known that for a simple atom, as the atomic hydrogen, there are
simple fundamental rules, which are the foundation of the complicated
systems
of equations of quantum mechanics. Furthermore, it is important
to
recall that all the fundamental equations of physics must be satisfied
simultaneously. We consider that the electron, which is inside
the
atom and orbiting around the nucleus at velocity vo,
behaves in about a similar way as in the Bohr model of the atom.
We know, that in fact the electron in the ground state (1s) is actually
oscillating back and forth across the nucleus since the orbital angular
momentum (the
parameter)
is zero, which gives a configuration 2S(1/2)
for the atom. However, since the de Broglie equation is also
valid
in all orbits, for simplicity we consider here that the orbit of the
electron
cloud is circular, corresponding to 2p, 3d, 4f . . . electrons.
The
first
principle
P1 is the Newton principle of action “equal to
reaction”.
The Newton centrifugal force of the orbiting electron is equal to the
Coulomb
attracting force between the electron cloud and the proton. This
is a well-known condition, which reflects the first principle P1 in
atoms
illustrated here using atomic hydrogen. We have:
P1-
F(centrifugal
force)
=
F(electrical
force)
11
The
second
fundamental
principle P2 is the Newton centrifugal force,
which
is:
P2-
12
Note
on
the
Centrifugal
Force. - In the conventional
calculations
of the centrifugal force using Newton's equations, the same size of
reference
units in all frames is always considered, even when the standard
reference
units is moved to a moving frame or to a frame having a different
gravitational
potential. That is an error since, when we apply the principle of
mass-energy
conservation, the size of the reference units (i.e. the reference
meter)
changes in different frames. Consequently, equation 12 is
incorrect
if we apply it using the size of units existing in the original frame,
while the phenomenon takes place in a frame at a different
potential.
Equation 12 can be used only in conjunction with the proper units were
the phenomenon takes place.
We
must
realize
that the equations of mechanics, as given in equations
11 and 12 are valid only, when we use the number of units, as measured
by an observer using the units existing in the frame where the
phenomenon
takes place. However, when we apply the principle of mass-energy
conservation between frames, it is absolutely necessary to take into
account
both the number of units and also the size of the units, which change
between
frames. This is a consequence of an absolute physical reality of
matter, which is independent of the observer. This will be
discussed
in more detail in section 6 below.
In
this
paper,
we consider atoms, which are stationary in frames
located
at different gravitational potentials. However, it is obvious that the
electron orbiting that stationary nucleus cannot be stationary.
Therefore,
even if we wish to deal only with stationary atoms, the fundamental
consequences
related to the velocity of the orbiting electron cannot be totally
ignored
without further considerations. In that case, there are two
reasons
for which there is a change of electron mass. There is a change
of
electron mass, due to the change of energy in its orbit around the
nucleus
(quantum levels), but also the change of electron mass due to the
change
of velocity of the whole atom. We know that for hydrogen, the
maximum
amount of internal energy that can be involved between the bound
electron
and the proton is 13.6 eV. However, in the case of gravitational
energy, the change of electron and proton mass considered here is
without
limit and can reach millions of eV in the gravitational field near the
surface of extremely massive degenerated stars. Consequently, the
change
of electron velocity (due to the atomic energy levels) in the atom is
quite
negligible with respect to the corresponding change due to the change
of
atom gravitational potential energy considered here. Therefore,
in
this paper, the smaller change of electron mass due to the electron
velocity
around a stationary atom is insignificant and therefore, will be
neglected.
We consider here only the change of electron velocity, (change of
quantum
states) due to the increase of gravitational potential of the atom.
We
have
explained
(2) that the
reference
parameters, which are relevant to calculate the change of structure of
a particle moving in a field are the ones existing in the frame where
the
particle is located (in the gravitational potential). When the
atom
moves to a different gravitational potential, its absolute mass, and
length
as well as the local size of the reference units become different from
the ones existing in the gravitational frame. This is taken into
account here.
The
third
fundamental
principle P3 applied here is the Coulomb
electrostatic
force between the electron e- and the proton p+.
We
have:
P3
13
Where
k
is
the Coulomb constant. Finally, the forth-fundamental
principle
is that the de Broglie electron wavelength lB
is equal to the circumference of the Bohr electron orbit.
We
have:
P4
and
14
Here
ao
is the
local Bohr radius, ve is the electron velocity inside the
atom
and h is the Planck constant. In all these equations, the
reference
units are the ones existing in the frame where the atom is located.
This problem has also been
explained
previously (2), without all
details.
These four principles must always be satisfied simultaneously.
The
observer using the proper units, where the phenomenon takes place,
needs
to find the physical conditions (i.e. the electron velocity) so that
all
these principles are satisfied simultaneously.
5--
Method of Investigation.
Since
we
have
to find a solution to the Bohr atom that must satisfy
simultaneously
the four fundamental equations above, we use a method consisting in a
proposed
solution that will evolve until the equations satisfying simultaneously
the four fundamental principles can be found. We calculate here
the
problem when an atom is transferred from location yo
to a higher altitude y+Dy
(figure 1). First, we suggest a solution that will presumably
satisfy
all the four principles. Then, this assumed solution will be
tested,
with all four physics principles above.
Proposed
Solution- We propose a solution with a constraint X-1,
which will be tested below. We have seen above (equation 9) that
due to the principle of mass-energy conservation, the electron mass in
the atom located in the frame at altitude y+Dy
in the gravitational potential is:
15
We
have
demonstrated
previously (2),
that
the physical length of matter (for example, the Bohr radius)
decreases
(1+e) times when the electron mass
increases
(1+e) times. This is in
agreement
with the Pound and Rebka's experiment (6).
Therefore the proposed solution is:
X-1
Due to the increase of gravitational potential
when
the particle is raised by +Dy, while the
electron
mass increases (1+e) times, the Bohr
radius ro decreases (1+e)
times. This gives:
16
Where
r+Dy
is
the Bohr radius when the atom is at a location +Dy
above
the
initial
location. The sub index o refers to the initial
gravitational
frame of the atom, and the sub index +Dy
always
refers to an atom located at height +Dy
above
the original height yo in a
gravitational
potential.
In
our
solution,
we do not propose any specific value of electron
velocity
in orbit around the nucleus. The electron velocity with respect
to
the nucleus will be calculated below using the classical laws of
physics.
This unknown electron orbiting velocity in the upper frame in the
gravitational
field is represented by v+Dy.
We have vo is
the
normal orbiting electron velocity with respect to the nucleus in a
non-distorted
atom at the initial location yo in
the
gravitational potential. We verify now, whether the assumed
solution
involving the proposal X-1, is compatible simultaneously with all the
four
fundamental principles above.
6--
Number
of
Units.
We
must
give
a warning about a possible confusion between the
quantities
used in this problem. We have seen above in sections 2, 3, and 4,
that the length of a rod always located in the same frame, can be
represented
by different numbers, depending on the reference units used to measure
it. When we refer to "x meters" located in a given gravitational
potential, it is impossible to distinguish whether we refer to the
numerical
"number x" (a pure number) times an assumed standard units of length,
or
if we refer to the "physical length" equal to "x meters". Those
are
two different things. The first one is a simple mathematical
number
while the second is a physical length. A more accurate definition
is necessary.
We
know
that
a physical length is normally expressed as a pure number
"x"
of units when it is implied that the observer uses a universal system
involving
changeless reference units in all frames. However, since we have
seen that reference masses and reference lengths are changing when
switching
frames, the same rod remaining in the same frame, can also be expressed
by a different number {(1+e) times}
of
units, when it is measured with a reference meter, which is (1+e)
times shorter. Within a frame, this "change of size of reference
units" to express an absolute constant physical length, is a pure
mathematical
transformation, requiring a different number of units.
However,
if
a
rod is carried with the observer, from a frame in a
gravitational
potential to another frame in a different gravitational potential, then
we see that the local number of units does not change,
but
the real physical length of the rod has changed. Consequently, a
traveling observer finds that the number of local reference units is
exactly
the same, either in the original frame yo
or in the frame in a different gravitational potential y+Dy,
because both the rod and the observer's reference units get longer at
the
same time when switching frames.
In
order
to
avoid this ambiguities between the "number of units" and
the
"physical length", we use a different notation when we need to refer
specifically
to the number of reference units rather than the physical quantity
involved.
The
use of the “number” of units (instead of the physical length) is
necessary,
because - the fundamental equations of mechanics - are valid
only
when we use the “number” of proper units, rather than the real physical
size of the body. However, when we apply the principle of
mass-energy
conservation, we must consider the absolute amount of matter, which
means
taking into account both the number of units, times the size of the
unit
of mass involved.
Unfortunately,
the
usual
equations in physics completely rely on an
assumption
of a universal reference unit, which is incorrectly assumed to remain
constant
in all frames. This hypothesis is erroneous because it is not
compatible
with the principle of mass-energy conservation (2).
The parameters in a normal "mathematical equation" give nothing but the
number of units independently of the fact that we must use the number
of
proper units in mechanics and the absolute mass in order to apply
correctly
the principle of mass-energy conservation.
When
needed,
the
number of units (of the physical quantity) is
represented
here by #r in the case of length, #m in the case of mass, and #E in the
case of the number of unit of energy. We must note that in
previous
papers (2-7), the same number of
units
was instead represented by the notation: N-r, N-m and N-E. The
need
for such a notation can be illustrated clearly when we have the same
number
of units of mass in different frames, (therefore
).
In that case, we can see that although we have the same number of
units,
the physical amount of mass is different.
7--
Electron
Velocity
in Frame Y+Dy.
In
order
to
test whether the proposed solution X-1 is compatible with
all
the physical principles, we need to calculate the electrical force F(e)
between the electron e- and the proton p+ in a
hydrogen
atom in frame y+Dy,
at a distance +Dy above location yo,
when calculated using the y+Dy
units. We have seen that the same classical physics
relationship
that exists in the frame yo, must
also
be valid in frame y+Dy.
The relationship giving the electrical force F(e) is:
17
Equation
17
is
valid only if we use the proper reference units existing
in the frame where the mass is located. However, that frame can
be
at any gravitational potential. Therefore, we must calculate how
all these physical quantities and also all the reference units are
modified
between the frame yo and y+Dy.
Let us write the (numerical) relationship existing in the yo
frame. When we are in the yo
frame
and we use the yo units, the Coulomb
electrical
force between the electron and the nucleus is:
18
Equation
18
satisfies
the behavior inside a normal atom at location yo
before the atom is brought to a higher potential. We first
consider
the same matter that was in the yo
frame,
which has been moved to the frame y+Dy.
It would be incoherent to use the physics relationship to predict the
behavior
of matter in frame y+Dy,
using the yo units, because then, the
result
would not be compatible with the equations using the proper units at
location
y+Dy.
Let
us
apply
the distortion corresponding to the proposed solution when
the atom passes from location yo
to y+Dy.
Then
we
must
make use of the proposed solution X-1, (in section 5.1)
requiring
that the Bohr radius decreases (1+e)
times (see equation 16). At location y+Dy,
this gives:
19
Using
a
dimension
analysis, it is possible to demonstrate that the size
of the Coulomb constant ko is the
same
of both frames yo and y+Dy.
This will not be repeated here. Equations 18 and 19 give:
20
Equation
20
shows
the increase of Coulomb force between the electron
and
the proton is due to the reduction of the Bohr radius (when the atom is
moved to the y+Dy
frame), taking into account the suggested solution X-1. This is
calculated
using the yo units, on both sides of
the
equation (i.e. the same size of units). Equation 20 can be
written:
21
We
have
seen
above, in equation 12 (and in the note below equation 12),
that Newton equation giving the electric force equals to the
centrifugal
force is valid only when we use the proper size of reference units
where
the phenomenon takes place. Of course, this relationship is
equivalent
to considering only the number of proper units instead of the physical
force. Therefore the correct physical value must be calculated
using
the parameters in the y+Dy
frame, where the particle is located. Using that principle and
equations
12 and 13, we get:
22
Similarly
to
equation
22, in the yo
frame,
using yo units, the number of units
of
centrifugal force in a stable atom is:
23
Equation
23
gives
the relationship when the atom is in the yo
frame. That last relationship is not valid when the particle is
in
the +y+Dy
frame.
We need equation 23 in order to calculate the physical changes taking
place,
when the atom passes from the yo to
the
+y+Dy
frame.
We have seen in equation 21 that the force on the electron is (1+e)2
times larger in the y(+Dy)
frame than when the atom is in the yo
frame.
Using the fundamental principles, equations 23, 22 and 21 give:
24
However,
we
know
that the number of units of mass and length is the
same
in all frames when we use local proper units. We have:
25
Similarly,
in
the
case of length, we have:
26
Equations
25
and
26 in 24 give:
27
We
recall
that
the size of the reference unit "velocity" is the same in
all frames. This is obvious since a velocity is a length divided
by time (i.e. difference of clock display) and that both length and
time
vary in the same proportion when moving to other frames.
Therefore
the numbers of units of velocity is equal to the physical velocity,
(since
the size of the units are always the same). Consequently,
it
is useless to specify the size of the [units]. Equation 21 gives:
28
Equation
28
shows
that in order to be compatible with the four
fundamental
principles above, with mass-energy conservation and also with the
proposed
solution X-1, the electron velocity in the frame y+Dy
must be (1+e) times larger than in
the
yo frame. Therefore when the
atom
passes from the frame yo to frame y(+Dy),
the electron velocity
inside
the atom, around the proton, becomes (1+e)
times
faster.
We
can see in the above calculation that nature
behaves
in such way that the physics, taking place in such a gravitational
potential
(at location y+Dy)
is different from the one taking place at potential yo.
Of course, this is due to the increase of electron mass. This is
the only way to get matter compatible with the four above fundamental
principles,
as we will see below. The problem of the orbiting electron around
the nucleus is similar to the problem of Mercury around the Sun, in
which
there is an advance of the perihelion, so that the Newton equations are
valid only when we use the units existing where the interaction takes
place.
For the same reason, inside the atom, the electron velocity increases
(1+e)
times with respect to the initial frame, just as in the case of the
larger
velocity of Mercury around the Sun, which leads to the advance of the
perihelion
of Mercury.
8
--
Quantum
Levels of Atoms in a Gravitational Potential.
Let
us
calculate
the energy emitted by an atom after it has been moved
to frame [y+Dy],
as calculated by the observer, which uses [yo]
units. Using a dimension analysis, it can be demonstrated that
the
electric charge e- of the electron and the proton charge p+,
are
constants
in
any gravitational potential. We have:
29
A
similar
relationship
also exists for the positive proton.
Furthermore,
we have seen in equation 16 that the distance between the electron and
the proton (the Bohr radius) decreases (1+e)
times
in
the
y+Dy
frame. Let us examine the electrostatic electron energy Ee
between the electron and the proton of the atom, in this y+Dy
frame. Using the proper units in the initial frame, the
electrostatic
energy between the electron and the proton in the yo
frame is:
30
However,
when the atom is in the y+Dy
frame, we have an increase of gravitational potential so that the
electron
mass increases. According to the proposed solution X-1 mentioned
above, the Bohr radius ro decreases
(1+e)
times. We recall that we will show below (in section 10) that
this
decrease of the Bohr radius is absolutely necessary to be compatible
with
the electron wavelength required in quantum mechanics.
Substituting
this smaller radius, but using the yo
units,
the electrostatic electron energy Ee
between
the electron and the proton becomes:
31
Equation
31
shows
that, since the radius is smaller, the electrostatic
electron energy Ee between the electron and the proton is (1+e)
times larger after moving in the y+Dy
frame. This is compatible with the observations that an atom in a
higher gravitational potential emits light at a higher frequency.
This "appears" as a blue shift of spectral lines. The
atomic
energy levels of hydrogen, are shifted exactly as calculated and
observed
by Pound and Rebka (6).
Einstein's
theory of relativity, which assumes a slowing down of “time” is
illogical.
The clocks are just slowing down due to mass-energy conservation as
shown
here.
Coulomb
Energy
Curve. - On figure 2, we plot the Coulomb electron-proton
energy
curve for the atom in the frame yo
and
in the frame y+Dy.
Since the electric charge does not change between frames, the Coulomb
curve
is identical. The level
represents the Lyman (n=1) electron orbit (8)
when the atom is in its initial gravitational frame yo.
The level
represents the Balmer (n=2) term (8)
of
the Rydberg series, of the same quantum configuration, when the atom is
in the same original frame yo.

Figure 2
After
the
atom
has been moved to the higher
frame, the ground state of the atom is now shown at
and
its corresponding Balmer series (n=2) is shown at
. Then, the size of the new Bohr radius has decreased (1+e)
times. Consequently, the size of all matter decreases also (1+e)
times. Figure 2 illustrates the physics taking place in an
absolute
frame, as seen by the observer in the initial yo
frame.
9--
Planck
Constant
Relationship between Frames.
We
demonstrate
now
that the size of the Planck constant unit is
different
in the y+Dy
frame. Of course, the number of units is the same in all
frames.
When a mass is in the yo frame, and
the
observer uses the yo
units, we have the relationship E=hn. Using
the full notation this gives:
32
We
know
also
that the same equation E=hn is
valid when the mass is in the y+Dy
frame, when the observer is using the y+Dy
units. The full notation gives:
33
Also
the
(numerical
value of) frequency measured by the yo
observer is the same as the one measured by the y+Dy
observer when the atom has moved from frame yo
to frame y+Dy.
Of course, the absolute frequency emitted is higher when the atom is
located
in the y+Dy
frame, but the local measuring clock also runs faster, so that the
number
frequency measured is the same. This gives:
34
From
equation
15,
we have seen that the electron mass increases (1+e)
times
when passing from the yo frame
to
the y+Dy
frame.
Therefore the absolute size of the reference unit is (1+e)
times larger in the y+Dy
frame. Since mass is the same physical phenomena as energy
(differs
only by c2),
equation
15 gives:
35
Equation 32 can be written:
36
Equation 33 can be written:
37
Equation 35 and 34 in 37 gives:
38
Equations 36 and 38 give:
39
From
equations
39
and 34 we see that the size of the units of the
Planck
constant is (1+e) times larger in the
y+Dy
frame,
while the number of units for the constant remains the same in all
frames.
10--
Quantum
Test
using y+Dy
Units.
Let
us
calculate
the de Broglie electron wavelength measured by the
observer
using the y+Dy
units. We must substitute the local y+Dy
parameters into the de Broglie equation. Using equation 14 with
the
full notation in the yo frame, the de
Broglie
wavelength is:
40
When the mass is in the y+Dy
frame, using the yo units, the local
observer
finds:
41
As
calculated
in
equation 28, the electron velocity in the y+Dy
frame is (1+e) times larger, with
respect
to the initial velocity in frame yo.
We
found
42
Also,
when
the
atom moves to the y+Dy
frame, its mass increases (1+e)
times.
This gives:
43
Finally,
when
the
mass moves to the y+Dy
frame, we must substitute the new size of the Planck units in the y+Dy
frame as given in equation 39. The physical size of the Planck
constant
in the new frame is equal to the same number of units, times the size
of
the units, which is (1+e) times
larger.
The substitution of these three equations (42, 43 and 39) in equation
41
gives:
44
Equation
44
shows
that the electron wavelength, and therefore the
circumference
of the Bohr orbit is (1+e) times
smaller
when the atom is in the y+Dy
frame and measured with the yo
units.
Therefore, this is a physical fact. Let us now calculate the
circumference
of the Bohr orbit as measured by the observer using
units.
For
the
observer
in the y+Dy
frame, using the larger local mass reference units, the mass gives the
same local number of units as for the yo
observer. In the case of the Planck parameter, even if the size
of
the reference unit is (1+e) times
larger,
the local number of units will also be the same number as for the yo
observer.
Finally,
since
the
size of the velocity reference unit is the same in
both
y+Dy and yo
frames, the observer using the y+Dy
units measures a number, which is (1+e)
times
larger.
However,
since his local clock runs at a rate which
is (1+e) times faster, he will
measure
the same frequency using his local second (of time), which is (1+e)
times shorter. This gives:
45
Equation
45
shows
that the observer, using the local units [y+Dy],
measures that the circumference of the orbit is exactly equal to the de
Broglie electron wavelength of the electron using the proper units [y+Dy],
just as when the atom is in frame yo
and
using yo units.
One must conclude that the
proposed
solution satisfies, in the relevant proper frame, the conditions
imposed
by quantum mechanics. Consequently, the atom measured by the
moving
observer "appears" perfectly identical to any atom at rest, observed by
the rest observer. However, it is clear that the absolute
physical
size of the atom at location [y+Dy]
is (1+e) times smaller (Bohr radius)
and (1+e) times more massive and with
a faster orbiting electron. But this change is undetectable by
the
[y+Dy]
observer
when using his local units. Classical physics is still valid when
using local units. For the moving observer, these observations
cannot
inform him that he is actually at a higher gravitational
potential.
This apparent normal atom measured by the observer in frame [y+Dy]
will not appear normal for the observer in frame [yo],
because it will not be compatible with the de Broglie equation.
The
normal equation of mechanics are not valid when applied to an internal
physical phenomenon taking place inside a foreign frame if it is at a
different
gravitational potential or has kinetic energy. For the observer
in
frame [yo],
the atom
in frame [y+Dy]
will be physically (1+e) times
smaller.
This explains logically the physical reality of the dilation and
contraction
of matter. We see now how Einstein's relativity is illogical and
useless.
11-
Generalization
of
Potential and Gravitational Energy.
As
a
consequence
of the principle of mass-energy conservation, we have
seen above that, there is an internal rearrangement inside the
atom.
The absolute physical parameters describing the atoms and molecules
change
due to the increase of electron mass. In addition, we have seen
that
the atomic structure of matter is controlled by the de Broglie electron
wavelength, which determines the size of the Bohr radius and the clock
rate at which matter reacts in different frames.
We
can
show
now that the properties of matter related to length and
clock
rates, can be described as a function of both kinetic and potential
energy.
Knowing the kinetic energy and the gravitational potential energy of
the
atom, we can combine these two phenomena. Let us calculate the
relative
change of de Broglie wavelength of the Bohr electron when the atom
moves
from rest to velocity va, at the time
when
the mass moves from location yo to
location
y+Dy in a
gravitational
potential. We know that the circumference of the Bohr orbit
must always be equal to the de Broglie wavelength using local
units.
Always using yo units, in the
original
frame where the kinetic energy is zero at the gravitational location yo,
the de Broglie wavelength is:
46
When
the
atom
moves to location y+Dy,
and the atom remains stationary (zero velocity) in that new frame,
equation
44 gives that the length of the circumference of the Bohr orbit is:
47
Let
us
now
consider the change of velocity in the new gravitational
frame
y+Dy.
From
the
paper:
"Natural Length Contraction Due to Kinetic Energy"
(5),
we have seen in equation 28 (5),
that at
zero velocity, the electron wavelength in the Bohr orbit is:
48
In
the
same
paper, equation 29(5) and
35(5)
give:
49
Equations
48
and
49 show that the de Broglie wavelength (Bohr orbit
circumference)
becomes g times larger when the
velocity
passes from zero to v. This gives:
50
Equation
50
shows
that the de Broglie wavelength increases g
times when the velocity increases to v. Using the complete
notation
showing the particle in the gravitational frame at location y+Dy
when the particle possesses velocity v gives, equations 50 applied to
47
gives:
51
Equation
51
shows
that when a mass acquires velocity (kinetic energy)
inside
a frame at the same time that it loses gravitational potential,
equation
51 is applied.
When
a
mass
is traveling freely (falling or traveling along an
elliptical
orbit) into a gravitational field we know that the increase of kinetic
energy is equal to the decrease of potential energy. Since there
is no exchange of energy with the exterior of the system, there is no
change
of total energy with the interior. Therefore, the electron mass
remains
constant. However, in equation 51, we see that when a mass is
falling
freely into a gravitational field, the increase of kinetic energy makes
g
larger, while the decrease of gravitational potential makes the
parameter
(1+e) smaller. Consequently,
even
if the electron mass remains constant during the fall of the atom, the
overall effect is that the de Broglie electron length becomes
larger.
Therefore, the size of the Bohr radius increases when a particle falls
freely into a gravitational field, even if the electron mass remains
constant.
From equation 51, when the particle travels freely at a variable
velocity
v at a variable distance Dy from a
gravitational
source, and the mass possesses the parameters (+Dy,
v),
the
Bohr
radius becomes:
52
Naturally,
the
larger
Bohr radius makes the clock run at a slower
rate.
Consequently, since the Bohr radius is increasing during the free fall,
and the behavior of matter depends on the parameters existing at the
location
and at the velocity matter is traveling, this is the fundamental
mechanism
which explains exactly the advance of the perihelion of Mercury in its
elliptical orbit. We see that when a planet (like Mercury)
oscillates
between perihelion and aphelion, the Bohr radius of all the atoms in
the
planet oscillates as given in equation 52. Since the Bohr radius
changes, the standard meter existing on the planet oscillates in
length.
Furthermore, the local clock moving with Mercury acquires a different
rate
between perihelion and aphelion. Since Newton's laws of physics
must
be applied using the units existing at the location where the matter is
located, we see that the change of Bohr radius, which changes the local
length and the local clock is responsible for the advance of the
perihelion
of Mercury as explained in more details in the paper: “ Detailed
Classical Description of the Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury”(3).
Consequently, the change of the electron mass and the change of the
size
of the Planck unit are not the only parameters responsible for the
change
of the Bohr radius.
All
these
explanations
have been demonstrated using three-dimensional
space,
conventional logic, Newton's realistic physics, and a strict
application
of mass-energy conservation. Einstein's general and special
relativity
is quite useless.
12
-
Fundamental
Nature of Kinetic Versus Potential Energy Interaction.
We
have
seen
that due to the addition of potential energy to atoms, the
mass of the particles increases and the Bohr radius decreases. However,
when kinetic energy is added to atoms, the mass of the particles still
increases, but the Bohr radius increases (5).
Nevertheless, solutions in both frames are compatible with the
principle
of mass-energy conservation, classical physics, quantum mechanics and
with
all observational data. Even if in both cases, the electron mass
always increases, the increase of kinetic or potential energy produces
an opposite change to the Bohr radius. Let us examine the
fundamental
physical cause responsible for that behavior of the Bohr radius.
We can see that momentum conservation is involved. We can see
that
energy acquired from gravitational potential possesses zero momentum,
since
the phenomenon is static. However, in the case of kinetic energy,
there is a momentum transfer to the electron since the energy must be
in
motion to transmit energy to a moving mass. Let us examine how
that
difference of momentum transfer between potential and kinetic energy
can
produce a different effect on the electron structure of the atom.
Zero
Momentum
of
Potential
Energy. - When a body is raised, at zero
velocity, from yo to a location y+Dy
having a higher potential energy, the potential energy transmitted to
the
body does not possess any velocity. Therefore, the increase of
potential
energy (which becomes new mass), which possess no momentum but must
contributes
to the increase of electron mass, needs to be accelerated to the
velocity
of the orbiting electron of an atom, in order to become absorbed in
it.
This deficiency of momentum of the energy given to the atom slows down
the electron velocity. This problem of addition of potential
energy
(which is mass) having no velocity, to the moving orbiting electron is
similar to the problem of the orbiting satellites around the Earth
passing
through stationary particles (gases) standing around the Earth.
It
is well known that the drag produced by these stationary particles
(hitting
the moving satellite) slows down the velocity of the satellite, which
produces
a decrease of the altitude of the orbiting body, so that at a lower
altitude,
the satellite now moves at a higher velocity in a lower orbit.
Similarly,
this is what happens to the electron of an atom, which is slowed down
(everywhere
along the orbit) by the absence of momentum of the potential energy
(absorbed
by the moving electron), while the electron increases its mass.
Therefore,
inside the atom, the radius of the electron orbit decreases as long as
some energy (without momentum) is added to the orbiting electron.
This explains the shrinking of the Bohr radius calculated above, when
there
is an increased of gravitational energy which possesses no momentum.
Kinetic
Energy
Momentum. - When kinetic energy is added to atoms, then
that energy (mass) possesses velocity and therefore also its own
momentum.
Contrary to the case of potential energy, we can see that the kinetic
energy
transmitted to the mass possesses momentum, otherwise that force would
not reach the atom which is already moving away. Therefore the
kinetic
energy transmitted to the mass must possess momentum during the
interaction.
Then, not only mass (implicated in the energy transfer), but also
momentum
is given up to the accelerated body and to the internal orbiting
electrons.
We can see that the integrated momentum transferred to the orbiting
electron
produces a net effect on the orbiting electron. Then, the
addition
of kinetic energy and momentum to the orbiting electron increases the
size
of the orbit, so that the centrifugal force around the nucleus
increases
and the radius of the Bohr orbit becomes larger. This increase of
momentum explains the increase of size of the Bohr orbit when the
orbiting
electron absorbs kinetic energy. These considerations show the
difference
of the final atom structure (larger versus smaller Bohr radius) between
an increase of potential energy, which does not possess any momentum
and
the increase of kinetic energy, which increases the size of the
electron
orbit.
This explains the increase of
Bohr
radius due to the kinetic energy and the decrease of Bohr radius due to
the gravitational energy as calculated in this paper. The
complete
calculation involving momentum conservation is beyond the scope of this
paper.
13
- References
(1) A. Einstein, Die
Grundlage der allgemeine Relativitatstheorie, Ann. Phys. 49,
769-822
(1916).
(2) P. Marmet, Einstein's
Theory of Relativity versus Classical Mechanics, Newton Physics
Books, 2401 Ogilvie Road Gloucester On. Canada pp. 200, ISBN
0-921272-18-9
(1997). Also on the Web at:
http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/EINSTEIN/Chapter4.html
(3) P. Marmet, Classical
Description
of
the
Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury",
Physics
Essays,
Volume 12, No: 3, 1999, P. 468-487. Also, P. Marmet, A Logical and
Understandable
Explanation to the Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury", Society for
Scientific
Exploration, Albuquerque, June 3-5, 1999. Also on the Web: A Detailed
Classical
Description of the Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury. At the
address:
http://ww.newtonphysics.on.ca/MERCURY/Mercury.html
(4) P.Marmet, "GPS and the
Illusion of Constant Light Speed" Galilean Electrodynamics,
2001.
Also in Acta Scientiarum, Universidade Estadual de Maringà,
Maringà-Paranà-Brazil,
Vol 22, 5,. page 1269-1279. Dec. 2000: The GPS and the Constant
Velocity
of Light. Also presented at NPA Meeting University of
Conn,
Storrs, June 2000. On the Web at:
http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/Illusion/index.html
(5) P. Marmet, "Natural
Length
Contraction Mechanism Due to Kinetic Energy" J. New
Energy
2001. Also on the Web at:
http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/kinetic/length.html
(6) R. V. Pound and G. A. Rebka,
Apparent
Weight of Photons, Phys. Rev. Letters., 4, 337 1964. Also
R. V. Pound and J. L. Snider, Effect of Gravity on Nuclear
Resonance
Phys. Rev. B. 140, 788-803, 1965.
(7) P. Marmet, Explaining
the Illusion of the Constant Velocity of Light, Meeting
"Physical
Interpretations of Relativity Theory VII" University of Sunderland,
London
U.K., 15-18, September 2000. Conference Proceedings "Physical
Interpretations
of Relativity Theory VII" p. 250-260 (Ed. M. C. Duffy, University of
Sunderland).
(8) G. Herzberg, Atomic
Spectra
and
Atomic
Structure, Dover Publications, New
York,
pp. 258. 1944.
-----------
-------------------------------------------------
Nov,
2001
Return to: Top of page
Return to: List of papers on
the web
Information: About the
author