A Quantum Theory of Gravity - The Illusion of Attraction by A-J Tarttelin

I very much love the spirit of your essay. Thank you for sharing it. :)

Hi AJ

Thanks for sharing your essay.

You state that a mass of one object blocks off the repulsive force of gravity of another object in a straight line which you state is a gravitational shadow.

Doesn't that mean as a planetary object becomes smaller, but more dense, that its shadow would also get smaller and thus block less repulsion? If using straight lines, doesn't that also require one to take into consideration physical size as well as the mass? What are the differences between your concept and LeSage's, not counting particle collisions?

There are also other ways to make repulsive gravity, have a look at a sketch I recently added.

Btw, if you read enough essays in the contest, you will notice that quite a few of them are written too vague to get a concrete grasp of how it relates to real physical assumptions. I thank you for your boldness.

Thanks

Jeff

Hi A-J,

I find a lot to like about your essay, although my alternative conception of non-attractive gravity does not agree with yours (IMO, space containing kinetic vacuum energy is condensed by interaction with potential mass-energy, producing accelerating energy gradients within spacetime). I do think you'll find my essay to be quite complementary: Inappropriate Application of Kepler's Empirical Laws of Planetary Motion to Spiral Galaxies Created the Perceived Galaxy Rotation Problem - Thereby Establishing a Galactic Presence for the Elusive, Inferred Dark Matter.

Best wishes, Jim

P.S. I recommend beta blockers (Coreg/Carvedilol) if not already prescribed.

A-J,

You are allowed a hearing in the FQXi essay contest, but many of the readers that examine the various essays quickly brush aside any viewpoint that doesn't follow what is "generally accepted".

I wonder how two of your more conventional UK scientists, Queen Mary University of London, were viewed when they presented a mathematical justification for an electromagnetic (EM) cause of gravity, this in 2004.

Electrifying Gravity

Newton's Gravitation Constant G as a Quantum Coupling Constant

If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is [math]R_1 [/math] and [math]N_1 [/math] was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have [math]S_1=R_1 N_1 [/math] of points. After it anyone give you [math]dS [/math] of points so you have [math]S_2=S_1+ dS [/math] of points and [math]N_2=N_1+1 [/math] is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have [math]S_2=R_2 N_2 [/math] of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be: [math]S_2/ N_2>S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] (S_1+ dS) / (N_1+1) >S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] dS >S_1/ N_1 =R_1[/math] In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points [math]dS [/math] then the participant`s rating [math]R_1 [/math] was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process.

Sergey Fedosin

Hello A.J.

Very well written and informative. Your opinion mirrors my own. I'm very interested in reading further your thoughts on the subject. Can you post a link to your blog? I tried and couldn't find it

Thanks

Jack