2 posts
• Page **1** of **1**

Happy 100th birthday to General Relativity! However, is the interpretation of it correct?

- FrediFizzx
- Independent Physics Researcher
**Posts:**1845**Joined:**Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:12 pm**Location:**N. California, USA

I don't know how to interpret general relativity, but I have been aware of the 100th birthday. I was very pleased to publish, on vixra, my paper on quantum gravity using a preon model in October 2015 in the special birthday year. (A link to my paper is in a nearby thread or can easily be googled.)

In my model the photon, the Z and the gluon form three generations of a single family with zero charge and spin 1. Just like the electron, muon and tau form three generations of the electron family with charge 1 and spin 1/2. There are three gravitons in one family with zero charge and spin 2. The coupling with spin 2 is 10^40 times weaker than the coupling with spin 1 which means that the weaker forces for spin 2 are 10^40 time further in spatial reach than for spin 1. So for the gravitational effects in the universe (or considerable chunks of it) just think of the QCD effects within the atom which are net attractive. The third generation graviton is analogous to a very weak and far reaching gluon and that provides a net attractive gravity in the universe. But in my model, spin 2 quantum gravity acts almost parallel to spin 1 QED, weak and QCD forces so there is nothing intrinsically special about gravity wrt a table of elementary particles. It fits in quite nicely as just another three generation family. Quite ordinarily really. My prediction is that electrons repel electrons gravitationally. Also quarks will repel like quarks using the first generation QED-like graviton, but only when at huge distances away from each other and therefore away from the general attractiveness of the third generation QCD-like graviton ... giving rise to dark energy.

The model is a hidden variable model. There is no maths in the paper. So recognition will not happen. But I have written the paper and recorded it for posterity on vixra. I am not prepared to wait around for the paper to be appreciated. I need a long break of at least a term, and I am not sure that I will return to physics research work afterwards, at least not working as intensively. I think that I have done all I can do or want to do in this area.

In my model the photon, the Z and the gluon form three generations of a single family with zero charge and spin 1. Just like the electron, muon and tau form three generations of the electron family with charge 1 and spin 1/2. There are three gravitons in one family with zero charge and spin 2. The coupling with spin 2 is 10^40 times weaker than the coupling with spin 1 which means that the weaker forces for spin 2 are 10^40 time further in spatial reach than for spin 1. So for the gravitational effects in the universe (or considerable chunks of it) just think of the QCD effects within the atom which are net attractive. The third generation graviton is analogous to a very weak and far reaching gluon and that provides a net attractive gravity in the universe. But in my model, spin 2 quantum gravity acts almost parallel to spin 1 QED, weak and QCD forces so there is nothing intrinsically special about gravity wrt a table of elementary particles. It fits in quite nicely as just another three generation family. Quite ordinarily really. My prediction is that electrons repel electrons gravitationally. Also quarks will repel like quarks using the first generation QED-like graviton, but only when at huge distances away from each other and therefore away from the general attractiveness of the third generation QCD-like graviton ... giving rise to dark energy.

The model is a hidden variable model. There is no maths in the paper. So recognition will not happen. But I have written the paper and recorded it for posterity on vixra. I am not prepared to wait around for the paper to be appreciated. I need a long break of at least a term, and I am not sure that I will return to physics research work afterwards, at least not working as intensively. I think that I have done all I can do or want to do in this area.

- Ben6993
**Posts:**287**Joined:**Sun Feb 09, 2014 12:53 pm

2 posts
• Page **1** of **1**

Return to Sci.Physics.Relativity

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests