Physics today is in disarray with long standing incompatible theories and new discoveries that defy understanding. It is widely held that the very fundamentals as we now understand them are in need of radical rethinking.
The core theories involved are Relativity, Quantum Field Theory (QFT), and Newton’s Laws, all of which relate (or refuse to) to Gravity, which even Newton and Einstein admitted they did not understand beyond being able to make predictions enduringly supported by experiment. Introduced here is a new model of the universe which still aligns with the experimental data, but from a different viewpoint which was unthinkable in Newton’s day, and not even Einstein would question Newton’s gravity model at macro scale, and showed it survived in General Relativity (GR).
However, both seem to have ignored the glaring discrepancy between Newton’s famous 3 laws and his much earlier inverse square law of gravity, which won out as the best formula to explain Kepler’s purely geometric laws, which again are only predictive.
The elephant in the room is the violation of all 3 of Newton’s own laws by the acceleration of a free falling mass in a postulated gravitational field when no force is acting on it. It is, until convincingly falsified, a most important quest is to explore the implications that the surface of the Earth is accelerating upward to collide with the apple, which can’t be accelerating in it’s own inertial frame because it is subject to no force as would be registered by an accelerometer and required by the 2nd law. Is gravity the one exception to the 2nd law? What a mess that would make, the one we're in now.
1. The universe, including all mass is expanding at an accelerating rate. 2. Expanding mass distorts the surrounding fabric of space in accordance with Einstein’s Theory of Relativity with little or no adjustments as per new experimental evidence or interpretation.
Current mainstream physics has entrenched Newton’s and Einstein’s view of gravity as a “force” somehow amenable to unification with the other 3 recognized forces of nature. Both of these great geniuses admitted they didn’t understand the nature of gravity and succeeded only in creating experimentally supported predictive theories, which must be accommodated by this new theory, with perhaps some consequential adaptations.
There is broad agreement that the current obstruction of further progress in physics requires radical adjustment of the fundamental theories of Relativity, Quantum Physics, or both. Here is my contribution.
Two simple postulates are all that is required to reconcile relativity and quantum physics, along with many of the most perplexing conundrums obstructing physics today.
Other evidence may be discovered as the quantum realm becomes involved in exploring the nature of mass expansion, but the one decisive, glaring, simple experiment is just to read an accelerometer in free fall in a vacuum near Earth’s surface. It will report NO ACCELERATION, i.e., NO FORCE, contradicting Newton’s 2nd law (as well as the other 2). The observer on the ground, thinking he is stationary, will interpret it as accelerating at g, but is in fact, as his own accelerometer will attest, experiencing an upward acceleration of g in his non-inertial frame. This is in full accordance with established science! Earth’s surface is accelerating upwards at g to smash into the free falling accelerometer in its inertial frame, which will register a hit on contact.
This has GOT to be worth concerted effort to either be decisively falsified or diligently explored and refined as our best way to better understand the nature of reality. All respectful, constructive collaboration welcome.
There is no such thing as gravity.
Since all mass is expanding so are our rulers and clock mechanisms, so we can't tell the difference in our everyday experience, except for the hitherto overlooked violation of Newton's 2nd law. There is no obvious way to realize that Earth is expanding at g, instead of there being a gravity driven acceleration of g. We can’t easily tell the difference other than by such experiments mentioned above because we are included.
All mass is inertial mass.
The presence of expanding mass deforms space such that rulers, clockworks, the permittivity and permeability of free space, and thus c are unaffected in the compressed frame of reference, but not so for outside observers, as expected.
Even the Special Theory is satisfied as mass in motion compresses the fabric of free space whether it's an expanding planet or a starship.
This reveals a visualizable mechanism of relativity analogous to an expanding object pushing against and thereby deforming its surroundings, as per relativity theory.
The Luminiferous Aether is back.
The “fabric” of space-time is reduced to a compressible fabric of only 3D space. Time is merely a geometric interpretation of 3D clockworks, and depends on the proper observed behavior of the clockworks, including quantum and biological processes in their own frame of reference. It must be fluidic and have the necessary permittivity, permeability and charge dynamics properties to propagate light and support established particle mechanics which implies a topological involvement that should illuminate the nature of physical constants.
Continuous Creation
The Aether (space free of mass) must also be expanding, fluidly, and slightly slower than mass in accord with Relativity, but continuous creation is required to maintain the established constant density of an expanding universe. The Vacuum Catastrophe, the disagreement between the observed values of vacuum energy density (the small value of the cosmological constant) and theoretical large value of zero-point energy suggested by quantum field theory, may be of interest here regarding the energy required for constant creation.
This is just the tip of a multidisciplinary iceberg. New understandings are invited of black holes, dark matter/energy, the vacuum catastrophe, the nature of the fabric of space, and much more.
All of physics is re-empowered and revitalized to explore and refine this new interpretation of reality,