Quantum gravity

Foundations of physics and/or philosophy of physics, and in particular, posts on unresolved or controversial issues

Quantum gravity

Postby Ben6993 » Tue Oct 20, 2015 2:45 pm

Hello all,

I have finished my paper on quantum gravity and it is now on vixra.

Title: Models for quantum gravity, dark matter and dark energy using the Hexark and Preon Model #7
Quantum gravity, dark matter and dark energy have here been modelled using Hexark and Preon Model #7. Catalyst bosons stimulate a force exchange between fermions and/or between bosons. The photon, Z and gluon form a family of three generations. There are separate families of generations of higgs, W, dark boson and also the graviton. The third generation gluon, higgs, dark and graviton are all coloured in a similar way. Gravitons are in three generations. Gravitational QCD acts as an extremely weak third generation version of QCD while Gravitational QED acts as a weak first generation copy of QED. There is also a gravitational weak force which very weakly mimics the second generation Z force. Dark matter is a third generation dark boson as also is the higgs boson. Gravity is not wholly attractive but the coloured graviton (third generation) is a mainly attractive and dominant Gravitational QCD force on an intergalactic scale, as the strong force is a dominant attractive force within an atomic nucleus. The relative weakness of the gravitational force enables an attractive dominance to extend over a huge domain, but not an unlimited extent. The first generation gravitons enable a repulsive force to dominate outside the sphere of the attractive third generation graviton, just as the first generation photon enables different nuclei to repel one other electromagnetically. This first generation gravitational QED force gives rise, at a very large distance away, to dark energy.

My paper is full of simple pseudo-chemical interactions. I know that physicists want to see the mathematics behind it all and .. well just read the following extract from my paper which shows that there is a possible model already existing ....

(pages 14 and 15)
"Le Tho Hue and Le Duc Ninh (October 2015) presented a mathematical model, “The Simplest 3-3-1 Model” on arxiv, predicting electron-like particles with -1/2 charge and also particles with -1/6 electron charge. That mathematical model may prove very appropriate for preons or at least a good starting point for them. Preon A is basically a left-handed electron with charge -0.5. Preon C is the other half of the left-handed electron. Preon B is a right-handed electron with charge reduced to -0.5. Preon C is again the other half. When the now defunct preon D was devised, it did the job successfully for the up quark and neutrino, but it was not half of any particle, and it failed to succeed in constructing the ¼ G graviton. The new Preon E has been chosen deliberately to be a ‘half’, given artistic license, of a left-handed up quark, and it does allow the ¼ G to be constructed. Preon E is the antiup quark reduced in electric charge to -0.5 and stripped of colour. The up left quark has properties (2/3, -0.5, 0.5) and when stripped of colour and reduced to electric charge 0.5 leaves (0.5, -0.5, 0.5) which has been taken as Preon E’. So preon E has properties (-0.5, 0.5, -0.5) for (electric charge, spin, weak isospin). The other ‘half’ of the left up quark has electric charge +1/6 and colour red which is obtained from CrC’g’C’b’. So all the preons in Model #7 are effectively half electrons or half quarks with electric charge magnitude 0.5 or 1/6 coinciding very well indeed with the mathematical predictions of The Simplest 3-3-1 Model. "

It is not in the abstract but my model predicts that electrons repel one another gravitationally.

Looking back, I am kicking myself that I did not see the graviton interactions sooner than I did.
Posts: 287
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 12:53 pm

Re: Quantum gravity

Postby Ben6993 » Fri Oct 23, 2015 10:54 am

After publishing the quantum gravity paper on vixra two days ago I switched off physics for a break after first noting that fractional charges in the quantum Hall effect needed to be the next target for the model. At least I thought I had switched off but apparently I was only switched off during conscious hours. Last night I woke up with two more ideas in my head. The G and G2 gravitons in my model have colour-anticolour as does the gluon, and these are responsible for the mainly attractive gravitational force in the universe. One can think of the QCD being dominant within the nucleus in a similar way to Gravitational QCD being dominant in the near universe.

The first idea was that I need to add something about the electric charge (or "hexatone") to my Hexark and Preon Model #7. Each hexark has an electric charge of + or - 1/48. But the hexark is a string-like object (as in string theory) and has many components. But in my description it is too quantised as a whole entity. The components within a hexark need a mix of positive and negative electric charges. There could be many components but with a net charge of 1/48. Ditto for spin and weak isospin. That would enable fractional charges of say the electron of -m/n to emerge at very low temperatures, though it is daunting to think that very low temperatures mess around within the hexarks.

My second thought was about glueballs, ie groups of interacting gluons, which can act that way because of their colour-anticolour structures. In Preon model #7 the third generation higgs, dark boson and the graviton also have colour. So there could be higgsballs, darkballs (Figure P of my paper http://vixra.org/abs/1510.0338) and gravitonballs (Figure Q of my paper). I don't supose any of these would be easy to find. The gravitonball if it exists would not be compact and localised.
Posts: 287
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 12:53 pm

Re: Quantum gravity

Postby Ben6993 » Mon Oct 26, 2015 5:50 am

Copy of a blog post that I have written this morning:

This week I have used Preon Model #7 to make a model for gravitation based on the exchange of graviton bosons. See http://vixra.org/abs/1510.0338 for Models for Quantum Gravity, Dark Matter and Dark Energy Using the Hexark and Preon Model #7 and http://vixra.org/abs/1505.0076 for Hexark and Preon Model #6: etc. A full report on Preon Model #7 is in draft.

First, how does the graviton fit into a table of elementary particles? It does not easily fit into such a table without modifying the table structure. The first change is that the photon, Z and gluon are three members of the same family. Note that they all have zero electric charge, spin +1 or - 1 and zero weak isospin. In my model that makes them one family. The photon deals mainly with uncoloured particles. The Z is designed to interact, albeit neutrally, with coloured quarks, while the gluon can alter quark colour in interactions. That means that the photon is first generation, the Z is second generation and more complex in structure while the gluon is third generation and even more complex in colour, containing enough preons to exhibit colour and anticolour properties simultaneously.

The table of elementary particles in my model has a very simple structure of row by column, where the columns are for the generations and the rows are different families. The graviton is a single family of bosons with zero electric charge, spin + or - 2 and weak isospin + or - 0.5. There are at least three generations of graviton the third generation is as complex as the gluon and has colour-anticolour properties. Just as the electron has two forms: left handed and right handed, so the graviton has two forms, one where the spin and weak isospin have the same sign or handedness as each other and another form where the signs are different.

The higgs family also has at least three generations and the third generation higgs is complex enough to have colour-anticolour. The higgs has no electric charge, no spin and weak isospin of +0.5 or -0.5.

The dark boson family has at least a third generation member with zero properties except colour-anticolour, and that colour-anticolour property is just like that for the gluon, graviton, higgs and dark boson. It also may be possible that the top and bottom quarks share this colour-anticolour property. They could have colour plus colour-anticolour. A fourth generation gluon could have colour-anticolour plus colour-anticolour.

So why is gravity always attractive? In my model, it is not always attractive! It is no more so than are the photon, Z and gluon taken in combination, and the types of gravitons combined are as numerous as types of QED photons, weak and strong QCD gauge bosons. So why does gravity appear to be always attractive? The answer lies in its weakness. In my model, an electron repels an electron using the first generation graviton, just as an electron repels an electron via QED. But that repulsion is too weak to be presently detectable. The third generation colour-anticolor graviton is the most important as it attracts quarks (and gluons and higgs and dark) together gravitationally. But why do we never see quarks repelling quarks gravitationally? There is a parallel question: why do quarks attract quarks, as a net effect, within the atomic nucleus? The answer to that answers the question about gravitational attraction. the strong force is very approximately 10 to the power 40 greater than gravity. That means that where the sphere of influence of the strong force is on the order of the diameter of the nucleus, the sphere of net attractive gravitational influence of the third generation graviton is of the order 10 to the power 40 times as big as the nucleus. That is a sphere of attractive-only influence on a universal scale, or at least intergalactic scale. But far enough away, the first generation gravitational influence between quarks, which is repulsive, can assume dominance. And that repulsion at a remote distance is seen as dark energy.

The dark boson of the third generation can interact gravitationally only with the third generation gravitons. The first and second generation dark bosons (if they exist ... as they have no properties we know of) cannot interact repulsively through the first generation graviton and so cannot take part in dark energy. In my guestimation, the higgs is also a candidate for dark matter and it could take part in both attractive gravitation via the third generation graviton and also in dark energy.

I am possibly more pleased at finding a neat structure for the table of elementary particles than at finding the graviton structure. I have always been disconcerted by three things about the Standard Model table: (1) the higgs stuck out on its own, (2) the non-recognition that the photon, Z and gluon are three generations of one family and (3) the W lumped with the Z because tof their weak force connection. The W in my table is a second generation boson in a separate family row.

A further modification in my model is for the way interactions are represented. I have made it a rule in interactions that weak isospin is conserved. This means that an electron cannot simply radiate a photon because it is accelerating. This is basically as issue of field interaction effects versus particle interaction effects. In my model, there is an incoming catalyst boson (the 1/4 higgs+ ) which interacts with the left-handed electron and, as a result, the electron changes handedness and emits a photon- (Figure S in http://vixra.org/abs/1510.0338). For a left-handed red down quark, say the incoming calalyst boson is a Z- (see Figure C), the quark changes handedness and a 1/2 graviton- is emitted. (Where a 1/2 graviton is a second generation graviton.) The QED-like repulsion in this second generation gravitational interaction will be swamped by the third generation attractive QCD colour forces taking place in in other interactions.
Posts: 287
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 12:53 pm

Return to Sci.Physics.Foundations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ahrefs [Bot] and 88 guests

CodeCogs - An Open Source Scientific Library