Essay Abstract

All this time, the field of physics did not seriously consider the possibility of existence of negative mass (energy) in a general state. The standard explanation of negative mass is that the state of low energy is stable when a negative energy level exists and that the lowest state of energy is minus infinity. Thus, this means that all positive mass emits energy and this will be transitioned to the energy level of minus infinity and the universe will collapse. However, at the present, our universe exists without collapsing, so the explanation for this has become strong proof of the nonexistence of the negative mass and negative energy level of. Thus, we have considered this to be obvious common sense and have taught this to students. At the center of this background, there is the fundamental proposition that "State of low energy is stable'' In this essay, we will reveal that this proposition is an incomplete, and that it is stable at a low energy state in the case of positive mass. However, it is stable at a high energy state in the case of negative mass. Due to this, "the problem of the transition of the energy level of minus infinity" does not occur, and the existence of negative mass is therefore possible. Moreover, we will show that negative mass provides a qualitative explanation for dark matter and dark energy, which are the biggest issues posed to cosmology at the present.

Author Bio

Bachelor of Science in Physics

Download Essay PDF File

  • [deleted]

  • Post #2

A pretty good read. There were two excellent works produced by Don Hotson and published by Infinite Energy Magazine. They are an excellent read that you might find interesting. He examines Dirac's work with emphasis upon the interpretation of the four solutions. He also spends quite a bit of time discussing the hbar/2 value associated with the vacuum.

Good Luck,

Gary Simpson

Houston, Tx

Thanks Gary Simpson!

And some typo

In the caption of Figure 3,

(1200,0,0), (0,1200,0), (0,0,1200) --> (±1200,0,0), (0,±1200,0), (0,0,±1200)

Have a good time!

---Hyoyoung Choi

    8 days later

    Dear Hyoyoung,

    Experiments show that when two photons annihilate, there's no energy liberated so the energy of a photon must be as positive in one phase as it is negative in the next: if energy equals mass, then mass similarly must be a quantity which is neither positive nor negative or both. For details see topic 1328 or www.quantumgravity.nl

    Anton

      Dear Anton,

      Thank you very much!

      =======

      Experiments show that when two photons annihilate, there's no energy liberated so the energy of a photon must be as positive in one phase as it is negative in the next

      =======

      A photon could produce a pair of particles. However, no energy?, no products? Hmm,

      What kind of experiments shows the result shown above?

      • [deleted]

      • Post #6

      Hyoyoung,

      Well, you sure must know that two identical photons arriving in counter phase at the same point in space and time annihilate each other without liberating any energy?

      The uncertainty principle is thought to mean that virtual particles continuously pop up out of nothing to disappear after a time inversely proportional to their energy. This energy is supposed to be borrowed from the vacuum, as if conservation laws may be violated for a shorter time as the violation is more serious. Because we assume that particle properties (including their energy) only are the cause, the source of interactions and forces, we assume that particles, virtual or real, exist even if they wouldn't interact at all, as if their existence is a given, a state rather than an activity.

      However, if we live in a self-creating universe where particles have to create themselves, each other, then particles, particle properties must be as much the product as the source of their interactions, of the force between them. If in such universe particles only exist to each other if and as far as they interact and as long as they do, and to interact is to exchange energy, then virtual particles don't borrow their energy from the vacuum, but borrow and lend energy from and to each other, so they pop up with an opposite energy sign.

      In this universe real particles are virtual particles which manage to pop up again and again after every disappearance, borrowing and lending each other the energy to exist, the sign of their energy alternating as they do, which explains their wave character. So if particles by continuously exchanging energy express and at the same time preserve each other's mass, if they owe their energy to all particles within their interaction horizon, then the annihilation (or creation) of two identical massive particles (identical but for their energy sign), obviously affects the energy of all other particles -which is observed as the particles emitting photons as they annihilate each other, or the creation of a particle-antiparticle pair out of energy.

      The fact that a frequency always is a positive number doesn't mean that energy is a positive quantity: energy is a quantity which is greater as its rate of change (dE/dt) is greater, the frequency particles oscillate at, alternate their energy sign, so it is as positive in one phase as it is negative in the next.

      Anton

      Dear Anton,

      I am sorry. I apologize for my poor English.

      I have trust in mass-energy equivalence, and I know that virtual particle can have energy and momentum. In addition, I know that virtual particle can be converted into real particle which has mass.

      Therefore, it's hard for me to agree with your viewpoint (if energy equals mass, then mass similarly must be a quantity which is neither positive nor negative or both.).

      Have a nice day!

      --- Hyoyoung Choi

      Hyoyoung,

      Thanks for the nice you tube link, even though it shows that nobody has a clear notion of what energy is.

      On my site, www.quantumgravity.nl, I argue that energy is a quantity which is as positive in one phase as it is negative in the next, which is why particles have a wave character.

      The faster a particle alternates its energy sign, the greater its rate of change is (dE/dt or dE/dx), the higher its energy is, so it is a quantity which is neither positive or negative or both, its sign depending on the distance and/or time it is observed at.

      That this frequency is a positive number does not mean that the quantity it quantifies is a positive quantity.

      If you really believe that when two identical photons annihilate there is energy liberated, then you should ask your university tuition fees back.

      Anton

      I am very sorry. Some typo

      HSS(The High-z Supernova Search) team : If Omega_M = - 0.38( ± 0.22)

      SCP(Supernova Cosmology Project) team : If Omega_M = - 0.4( ±0.1)

      -->

      HSS(The High-z Supernova Search) team : If Lamda = 0, Omega_M = - 0.38( ± 0.22)

      SCP(Supernova Cosmology Project) team : If Lamda = 0, Omega_M = - 0.4( ±0.1)

      5 days later

      I am sorry. I apologize for my poor English.

      Below explanation is answer for Marcoen's questions. Please refer to below answer.

      ----------

      Question1: For example, if one would apply contact forces to a body with negative inertial mass (assuming there is such a thing in a world where also positive inertial mass exists). If I would push such a body away from me, it would accelerate towards me, or not? Doesn't this sound so implausible that we can dismiss the idea of negative inertial mass? I would be interested in your thoughts about this.

      ----------

      Answer: For gravity, there is the influence of attractive force between objects with the same signs, but it does not come into existence, when applying this to electromagnetic force as it is. Charges with the same signs exchange repulsive force with each other, although this phenomenon is very weird, considering the case of gravity.

      Most of people have strong aversion of negative mass, but no law of physics says there is only positive mass in nature.

      I think that implausible phenomena in nature are phenomena against physical laws such as the law of conservation of energy or momentum, not our thoughts.

      We are necessary to watch carefully the fact that sort of physical laws such as law of energy conservation or law of conservation of momentum do not deny negative mass.

      ----------

      Question2 : In your essay you write that "negative mass has repulsive effects towards each other so it cannot form any structure". However, two bodies with negative inertial mass and like electrical charges would attract each other: the Coulomb force on the first charged particle, exerted by the second equally charged particle, is directed away from the second particle, so the first particle would accelerate towards the second because of its negative inertial mass. So why would atomic structures (e.g. hydrogen-like) be impossible in a universe?

      ----------

      Answer : As examined the equation of motion for negative mass, it is marked in form of F = -ma(m > 0), when attraction is applied together with nuclear force(when usually nuclear force is attraction, but has the form of repulsive core), and assuming nuclear force has the form of F = -Q(r) r^, Q(r) is the function of distance r, thus nuclear force is in the form of attraction worked in the direction of -r^. Because they form a binding structure together, regardless of the form of force~

      Here, for the force worked on negative mass m,

      F = - ma = - Q(r) r^

      a = (Q(r)/m) r^

      The term of acceleration is positive, so the effect of increasing distance r, namely repulsive effect appears. This means that negative mass hard to form the structure like atom(massive nucleon, baryon, particle consists of multi elementary particle), because nuclear force has not binding negative mass when it is applied to negative mass. Also, gravity has not binding negative mass (repulsive).

      We have to open up a lot of possibilities about negative mass(energy) and also, consider the possibility that negative mass does not make electromagnetic interaction.

      In a particular case, negative mass can form the structure such as atoms, but in general, it seems it is difficult for it to form a large-scale structure like stars or galaxies.

      ----------

      Question3 : If small particles with negative inertial mass would exist everywhere in the universe, would not we then observe a constant incoming flow of these particles on earth?

      ----------

      Answer : In my article,

      If negative mass and positive mass were came into being together at the beginning of universe, since positive mass has attractive effects with each other, so it forms stars and galaxy. In addition, negative mass has repulsive effects towards each other so it cannot form any structure and may spread out almost uniformly across the whole area of universe.

      Therefore, positive masses and negative masses are completely offset in the whole universe, but there is a local area where positive masses exist more than negative masses.

      Owing to the effect of negative mass and positive mass, negative mass disappears near massive positive mass structures (such as the galaxy and galaxy clusters, etc.) after meeting positive mass. However, negative mass, which came into existence at the beginning of universe, can still exist in a vacuum state outside of general galaxy.

      The current structure of the galaxy is a structure that survived in the pair-annihilation of positive mass and negative mass and, since negative mass existed outside of this galaxy structure, therefore it has not been observed at the Earth.

        ----------

        Question4 : how can we in principle detect a particle with negative inertial mass? In other words: how can we prove its existence?

        ----------

        1. Theoretical calculation

        After making new Friedmann eq., on the assumption that negative mass and positive mass coexist, we have to explain dark matters and dark energy using it, predict new phenomena and compare them with one another.

        Dark matter and dark energy come from one origin!

        "Pair creation model of negative mass(energy) and positive mass(energy)" insists that dark matter is not different from dark energy each other, dark matter is the effect of centripetal force by negative mass out of galaxy, and dark energy is that positive gravitational potential term in total potential energy.

        "Pair creation model of negative mass and positive mass" insists that dark energy is a gravitational potential energy(with positive value) between negative mass and positive mass.

        As a matter of fact, through numerical calculation using a computer, the distribution having a similar value to the predicted rate of WMAP was revealed.( Refer to 6~7P)

        We get a result at almost zero energy state.

        (Zero rest mass energy: |m_positive| = |-m_negative|)

        Matter (U_posiposi) : -83.2 (Ratio:1)

        Dark Matter (U_neganega) : -459.6 (Ratio:5.52)

        Dark Energy (U_negaposi) : 1286.9 (Ratio : 15.46)

        2. Computer simulation

        1) Big bang simulation

        We set up each model from the birth of universe to the present, and calculated GPE using computer simulation in each level.

        As a result, we could verify that "pair creation model of negative mass and positive mass" explains inflation of the early universe and decelerating expansion, and present accelerating expansion in time series.

        This simulation is showing incredible results.

        It not only explains the total energy of the universe, flatness, and the essence (Total zero energy, pair creation of negative energy and positive energy) of the process of birth of the universe, but it explains inflation, decelerating expansion in the early stage, accelerating expansion(dark energy) in the late stage, and dark matter through the only term, negative energy. Moreover, this negative energy is one that is essentially required by the law of energy conservation.

        - The Change of Gravitational Potential Energy and Dark Energy in the Zero Energy Universe :

        http://vixra.org/abs/1110.0019

        - Dark energy - Accelerating expansion of distant galaxy due to negative mass :

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71nMvwUhHwE

        - Inflation, accelerating expansion with pair creation of negative and positive mass :

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRUqQM2FfNU

        Therefore, a larger-scale, precise experiment is needed.

        2) Bullet cluster simulation

        Have a nice day!

        ---Hyoyoung Choi

        a month later

        • [deleted]

        • Post #14

        Hi Hyoyoung!

        Great to see you here! I had the negative mass interpretation thread on BAUT forum where I found your videos originally. Very glad to see you have posted an essay here. I am still figuring out the best way to present my own ideas, which are closely linked to your own.

        Here is a simple proof against General Relativity (and is an interpretation of your negative mass and energy) (note that the addition sign is not working on my preview so I have substitued the oplus symbol)

        The most general equation formed from the metric guv and the Riemann tensor is [math]\Lambda g_{\mu\nu}\oplus G_{\mu\nu}=R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}R g_{\mu\nu}[/math] In keeping with this essay contest, lets change the symbols for the cosmological constant and the Einstein tensor so that we do not confuse what these are thought to physically represent and thus leave only a mathematical meaning. Then we can have [math]\Omega g_{\mu\nu}\oplus L_{\mu\nu}=R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}R g_{\mu\nu}[/math] Let the condition [math]R_{\mu\nu}=0[/math] apply. This then becomes [math]\Omega g_{\mu\nu}\oplus L_{\mu\nu}=0[/math] so that [math]L_{\mu\nu}=-\Omega g_{\mu\nu}[/math] If we then also require [math]\Omega g_{\mu\nu}=0[/math] we obtain [math]L_{\mu\nu}=R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}R g_{\mu\nu}[/math] This is a special case which results in the Einstein tensor since [math]\Omega g_{\mu\nu}=L_{\mu\nu}\oplus G_{\mu\nu}[/math] and for [math]\Omega g_{\mu\nu}=0[/math] then [math]G_{\mu\nu}=-L_{\mu\nu}[/math] which we can substitute in by pulling a -1 out of the Luv coefficients. Thus Einstein putting a multiple of the metric with his tensor (the cosmological constant) ruined the mathematical rigor of the field equation. He should have flipped his Einstein tensor around first. Therefore, in keeping with your work, [math]\Omega g_{\mu\nu}\oplus L_{\mu\nu}=R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}R g_{\mu\nu}[/math] is the negative mass and energy field interpretation of GR (classical gauge theory). The positive mass and energy equation is only valid with no cosmological constant. Let me know what you think, I look forward to more of your simulations!

        Regards,

        Jeff Baugher

          15 days later

          For the observation or evidence of negative mass(energy)

          In 1998, an observation by both the HSS team and SCP team obtained a negative mass density from inspected field equations over 70years.(field eq. has a Lamda=0)

          SCP(Supernova Cosmology Project) team : If Lamda=0, Omega_M= - 0.4(±0.1)

          http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9805201 refer to 7P

          HSS(The High-z Supernova Search) team : If Lamda=0, Omega_M = - 0.38(±0.22)

          http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9805201 refer to 14P

          However, the two teams which judged that negative mass and negative energy level could not exist in our universe based on "the problem of the transition of the energy level of minus infinity" and they instead revised the field equation by inserting the cosmological constant.

          We must to know that not the equation has disposed the value, but our thought disposed the value.

          Moreover, we considered vacuum energy as the source of cosmological constant Lamda, but the current result of calculation shows 10120, which is unprecedented even in the history of Physics.

          However, if "the problem of the transition of the energy level of minus infinity" does not occur, and thus negative and positive mass can coexist, what would happen?

          It is well known that a cosmological constant can respond to the negative mass density.

          peff = -Lamda/4piG

          Lamda is positive, so peff is negative.

          ==================

          Have a Nice day!

          --- Hyoyoung Choi

          • [deleted]

          • Post #16

          Dear Choi,

          I like your division to negative and positive part.

          I thinking about it in my two essay

          http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/946

          http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1413

          Don't worry about broken English.....

            Dear Yuri Danoyan

            Thank you very much!

            I will read your paper, and if I have an opinion on your essay, I will post it.

            Have a nice day!

            --- Icarus2

            Dear Jeff Baugher!

            I am glad to see your essay at here and good luck in the contest.

            --- Hyoyoung Choi

            Dear Hyoyoung,

            This is a good idea you have. Who knows if it will turn out to be right, but it is clear, based on a simple motivating principle, and has a lot of explanatory potential. I have a couple of questions.

            1. Would you expect particles of negative mass to interact with particles of positive mass nongravitationally? The reason I ask is because I am trying to think of how one might try to observe such a thing in the laboratory.

            2. A similar "gravitational segregation" argument has been used before to try to explain the matter-antimatter asymmetry in the observable universe. (I mention this briefly in my essay here On the Foundational Assumptions of Modern Physics.) The idea is based on the fact that the nature of the gravitational interaction between matter and antimatter particles has never been conclusively established since gravity is so weak, and some people have speculated that antimatter itself may have an anti-gravity effect. Do you think it's possible that the negative-mass particles you are proposing might be ordinary antimatter?

            Take care,

            Ben Dribus

              Dear Ben Dribus,

              I am sorry. I apologize for my poor English. I am not sure that below thought be helpful to you.

              We have to open up a lot of possibilities about negative mass(energy).

              1. Negative mass hard to form the structure greater than the atom.

              As examined the equation of motion for negative mass, it is marked in form of F = -ma(m > 0), when attraction is applied together with nuclear force(when usually nuclear force is attraction, but has the form of repulsive core), and assuming nuclear force has the form of F = -Q(r)^r, Q(r) is the function of distance r, thus nuclear force is in the form of attraction worked in the direction of -^r. Here, for the force worked on negative mass m,

              F = -ma = -Q(r) ^r

              a = (Q(r)/m) ^r

              The term of acceleration is positive, so the effect of increasing distance r, namely repulsive effect appears. This means that negative mass hard to form the structure like atom(massive nucleon, baryon, particle consists of multi elementary particle), because nuclear force has not binding negative mass when it is applied to negative mass. Also, gravity has not binding negative mass(repulsive)

              But, we can see that the negative mass can form its binding structure if there is any repulsive interaction among the negative mass, from the characteristics of negative mass.

              In addition, negative mass and positive mass can form binding structure and atomic structure in theory.

              For example, it can form atomic structure if the positive mass is located in the center, and the negative mass is located in the surrounded area, and both are rotating.

              2. Without giving that kind of characteristics of "the observation result that seems to be that dark matter does not emit or absorb photons" from the first, can this kind of result be induced from other basic principle?

              The process of negative mass emitting photon

              (-E) -hv < -E

              -E: Initial energy of negative mass, (E>0)

              The relational expression above means that if negative mass emits photon(with positive energy), then the energy after emitting gets lower than the energy before emitting.

              Negative mass is stable at the state of high energy(Refer to my essay!), so the voluntary transition that negative mass emits photon and succeeds to the lower energy level does not exist. Therefore, negative mass explains the result of the current observation that dark matter does not emit photon from the fundamental principle.