Member

Instead of regarding spacetime curvature as the cause of motion, we regard motion as the cause of spacetime curvature. This leads to a model of gravity having magnitudes of curvature that are nearly identical to those arising in General Relativity for most weak field circumstances. Testable differences are duly pointed out. The most feasible experiment to distinguish General Relativity from the present model would be a test of the interior solution, where the difference in predictions is especially stark. The strong field consequences of the new model are not so readily tested, but a comparison with General Relativity is worthwhile because in the new model there are no horizons and no singularities. The heuristic methods used to demonstrate these results motivate a fresh look at the concepts of mass and energy.

This is an updated and augmented version of the previously published paper, Space Generation Model of Gravitation and the Large Numbers Coincidences. The basis of the gravity model is that motion sensing devices---most notably accelerometers and clocks---consistently tell the truth about their state of motion. When the devices are attached to a uniformly rotating body this is undoubtedly true. Uniform rotation is sometimes referred to as an example of stationary motion. It is proposed here, by analogy, that gravitation is also an example of stationary motion. Einstein used the rotation analogy to deduce spacetime curvature. Similar logic suggests that in both cases the effects of curvature are caused by motion. A key distinction is that, unlike rotation, gravitational motion is not motion through space, but rather motion of space. Extending the analogy further, gravitation is conceived as a process involving movement into a fourth space dimension. Space and matter are dynamic, continuous extensions of each other, which implies that the average cosmic density is a universal constant. Assuming this to be the case leads to a cosmological model according to which ratios such as the gravitational to electrostatic force, electron mass to proton mass, Bohr radius to cosmic radius, and constants such as the fine structure constant, Hubble constant, the saturation density of nuclear matter and the energy density of the cosmic background radiation are all very simply related to one another. Measured values of these numbers are discussed in sufficient detail to facilitate judging whether or not the found and predicted relationships are due to chance. The notorious "cosmological constant" (dark energy) problem is also addressed in light of the new gravity model. Finally, it is emphasized that the model lends itself to a relatively easy laboratory test.

Based on the work of Jacobson [1] and Gibbons, [2] Schiller [3] has shown not only that a maximum force follows from general relativity, but that general relativity can be derived from the principle of maximum force. In the present paper an alternative derivation of maximum force is given. Inspired by the equivalence principle, the approach is based on a modification of the well known special relativity equation for the velocity acquired from uniform proper acceleration. Though in Schiller's derivation the existence of gravitational horizons plays a key role, in the present derivation this is not the case. In fact, though the kinematic equation that we start with does exhibit a horizon, it is not carried over to its gravitational counterpart. A few of the geometrical consequences and physical implications of this result are discussed.

For practical and historical reasons, most of what we know about gravity is based on observations made or experiments conducted beyond the surfaces of dominant massive bodies (exterior solution). Here we consider one particular type of interior solution experiment that would not be too diffcult to do, but has never been done.

General Relativity's Schwarzschild solution describes a spherically symmetric gravitational field as an utterly static thing. The Space Generation Model describes it as an absolutely moving thing. The light propagation time-delay experiment of Shapiro-Reasenberg [i] and the falling atomic clock experiment of Vessot-Levine [ii] provide the ideal context for illustrating how, though the respective world views implied by these models are radically different, they make nearly the same predictions for the results of these experiments.

The basis for a new model of gravitation is presented, as are its basic cosmological consequences. Gravity is conceived as a process of outward movement of matter and space whose cumulative effect is the exponential expansion of the Universe. In the cosmological extreme the model thus
resembles Masreliez?s Expanding Spacetime Theory. [1] Unlike the latter theory, the new model predicts novel effects that can be revealed in a modest laboratory. The next most noteworthy feature of the model is that it gives new meaning to the well-known ?large numbers coincidences.? This new
approach encompasses a broader range of physical reality than usual, including now the cosmic background radiation and the density of atomic nuclei.

In the hundreds of torsion balance experiments that have been performed for gravity research, the key data were obtained, typically, with the large and small masses in stationary positions and with the small masses staying outside the surfaces of the large masses. It remains to discover what happens when the balance arm has no restoring force to keep it in a stationary position and material has been removed from the large masses, so as to allow the small masses to move through them. This paper describes a new experiment whose purpose is to answer this question. We may thereby provide empirical support for a common problem in elementary physics: The ideal case involves a relatively isolated, uniformly dense spherical mass with a hole through a diameter. The problem is to find the pattern of motion that unfolds when a test mass is dropped into the hole. The well known theoretical answer is that the small mass undergoes simple harmonic motion. But nothing like this has ever been directly observed. With a suitably modified balance, I intend to demonstrate, as a first approximation, the correctness of the prediction that the small masses oscillate through the large masses.