Higgs Boson?

...Mass?

...Gravity?

Physicists who prefer a mathematical demonstration of the proposed theory can download the original document, a 54 pages PDF file. The URL is located at the end of this web page. This PDF document is more accurate than the present HTML web page and contains experimentations and validation using mathematics. In particular, the Schwarzschild Metric and Newton Law are not calculated from EFE (Einstein-Hilbert Field Equations) but from scratch, using the Hooke Law. This very simple mathematical demonstration doesn't use tensors and validates the proposed theory (please note that a new and more simple demonstration of the theory will be released on the second quarter of 2010).

The spacetime curvature

If we drop a billiard ball in a container filled with water, it is the volume of the ball, and not its mass, which produces the water displacement.

The same phenomenon also exists in spacetime. Contrary to preconceived ideas, it is the volume of elementary particles, and not their mass, which deforms spacetime. So:

Any volume inserted in spacetime necessarily produces a curvature of it

This deduction leads to a question: "what is a volume?"

Notes: 1) This example does not correspond exactly to spacetime since water is not elastic. It would be more exact to compare spacetime to a kind of deformable crystal or a flexible polystyrene foam. Since spacetime is elastic, if the volume of the central object is removed, the curvature disappears. 2) The figure was simplified to two dimensions for teaching purposes. 3) The constitution of the central object is important. However, this subject is covered in Part 2 of the Spacetime Model. 4) The time component of spacetime is also curved.

Open and closed volumes

Let's now replace the billiard ball used in the preceding example by a balloon having the same volume. This does not change anything.

The same phenomenon also exists in quantum mechanics. We have two classes of volumes:

• Closed volumes (fig. A): These volumes make a displacement of spacetime. As we will see further, the spacetime curvature produces a "mass effect". So, closed volumes have a real mass-volume equivalence, which may be written: m=k.v, with k=conversion constant, 5.9239x10¹⁷ kg/m³ for the proton (CODATA 2006). Nuclear matter like quarks, electrons, protons, neutrons, muons, mesons, lambdas... are examples of closed volumes.

• Open Volumes (fig. B): These volumes exist but do not produce any displacement of spacetime. If there is no curvature, there is no "mass effect" either. Orbitals of atoms are examples of open volumes.

All objects of the universe are combinations of closed volumes (with mass) and open volumes (massless). This is why we have the illusion, on Earth, that mass and volume are two different dimensions.

Gravity

Since spacetime is elastic (Einstein), its curvature produces pressures on two volumes. This tends to bring them closer to each other.

The "principle of split", which comes from the fluid theory of the nineteenth century, also confirms this explanation.

Let's imagine a sphere (fig. A). If we split this sphere down the middle (fig. B), each half is subjected to only one force. We have a movement of each half toward the other. Transposed to spacetime, this phenomenon is simply “gravity”, which is a pressure force on volumes.

It is important to note that, in these two examples, it is the volume (not the mass) which makes the curvature of spacetime.

Therefore, contrary to preconceived ideas,

Gravity is not a mysterious attractive force between masses, but a simple pressure force (Hooke Force) exerted by spacetime on (closed) volumes.

Finally, the explanation of mass and gravity is quite simple and, as we see, doesn't need extra dimensions as in the Higgs Model or the String Theory.

Current Theory vs Proposed Theory

Note: Any massive object is made of two quantities: a closed volume, which curves spacetime, and a "mass effect" produced by the curvature of spacetime. Therefore, a "mass effect" is associated to each closed volume. Only volume physically exists. Mass doesn't exist in concrete terms. Mass is an "effect" due to the pressure of spacetime on closed volumes. Mass is a kind of virtual quantity. This phenomenon is the same when a car is moving at speed "v". The car exists in concrete terms, but its kinetic energy is a only a virtual quantity. The formula E=1/2 mv² contains a combination of material and virtual quantities: a physical term, the mass of the car (in Newton Physics), and two virtual quantities, its speed and its energy. So, this equation is not homogeneous. If we replace the material quantity "mass" by the virtual quantity "mass effect", the equation becomes homogeneous since its two members contain only virtual components: energy, "mass effect", and speed.

Examples

Attractive Force vs Pressure Force

In this first example, imagine that you hold a very light polystyrene ball in your hand. A flexible polystyrene foam, which is curved by the ball, replaces spacetime. The curvature of the foam (spacetime) produces a pressure on the top of the ball, toward Earth (not represented on the figure). If you close yours eyes, you will sense that the ball is heavier. It is not the mass of the ball, which increases, as we could think, but the pressure on the top of it. However, the result is identical. It we replace the foam by spacetime, we can say:

Attractive force (gravity) = Pressure force produced by spacetime

What is volume?

In this theory, we must reconsider what we call "Volume". For example, what is the real volume of earth + moon? We have two different points of view.

• In (A), the individual volume of the earth is added to that of the moon.
• In (B), the empty space between the earth and the moon has been added too.

Translated into quantum mechanics, the earth is the nucleus, the moon is an electron, and empty space is the vacuum between the nucleus and electrons, i.e. 99,999 % of the atom volume. Since the empty space doesn't curve spacetime, there is no reason to take into account this empty space for mass and gravity calculations.

Therefore, experimentations measuring the volume of atoms or molecules with the (B) scheme may be interesting for various reasons, but in General Relativity, we must take into account only closed volumes, as in (A). For mass and gravity calculations, all open volumes must be excluded.

The atom volume

In atoms, electrons are on empty orbitals already crossed on both sides by spacetime. As indicated in the precedent paragraph, orbitals in atoms do not produce any spacetime curvature. The volume of orbitals is massless since it is an "open volume". Finally, an atom is a combination of closed volumes (with mass) and open volumes (massless).

• Closed volumes, with mass : protons, neutrons and electrons
• Open volumes, massless : orbitals

If we need to know the volume of an atom, we can take either the "matter volume" (nucleus + electrons), or the entire "visible volume" (nucleus + electrons + empty space). However, as indicated in the preceding paragraph, we must always have in mind that the only kind of volumes which must be taken into account in spacetime calculations is the real volume of the nuclear matter (nucleus and electrons), excluding empty space since this empty space doesn't curve spacetime.

Since the mass per volume unit of the nucleus is identical to that of electrons, we can write: m = k.v (m = mass, v = volume). In other words, the proposition "mass curves spacetime" is identical to "volume curves spacetime".

Note: In reality, the relation between mass and volume isn't linear. Please see the mathematical section of the PDF file to have further informations concerning the mass per unit volume of nuclear matter.

Hydrogen vs Oxygen

Oxygen has 16 times more nucleons than hydrogen. So, the curvature of spacetime will be x16. The pressure of spacetime on closed volumes (the nucleus and electrons) will be x16. Finally, the "mass-effect" of the pressure of spacetime on closed volume will be x16 too.

Since m = k.v, we can say: "(closed) volumes curve spacetime" instead of "masses curve spacetime".

Mass-volume equivalence

This last example, very simple to understand, demonstrates that spacetime is curved by volumes (which seems logical), not by masses.

On our left, we have an eraser and, on our right, a pen that weighs two times more.

If we remove the 99.999% of vacuum existing inside the atoms of the two objects, we obtain two "heaps" of nucleons. We will have two times more nucleons for the pen than for the eraser because all the mass is practically concentrated in nucleons (for teaching purposes, electrons, binding energy, gluons etc... have been ignored).

Since all nucleons have the same volume (proton ≠ neutrons), the pen nucleons will have a total volume twice superior to those of the eraser.

Therefore, the pen will produce 2X more curvature of spacetime since its "closed" volume is twice that of the eraser. In other words, the spacetime will produce a pressure x2 times stronger over the pen than over the eraser in the pen/eraser-Earth context.

So, the pen will be two times heavier than the eraser.

This simple experiment demonstrates that:

Gravity isn't an attractive force between masses but a pressure force (Hooke Force) exerted by spacetime on closed volumes

Existence of the Higgs Boson

The main differences between the Higgs Theory and the Spacetime Model are:

• Contrary to the Higgs Theory, the Spacetime Model is very simple. The latter matches with the simplicity of Nature.
• The Spacetime Model exactly matches Einstein's ideas: "The universe would have only 4 dimensions, no one more". It's not a proof per see, but an important indication.
• The dimensions of a theory must match those of corresponding experimentations, i.e. 4D/4D, 5D/5D... nD/nD. Until today, all mass and gravity experimentations has been conducted in 4D (x, y, z and t). So, the mass and gravity theory associated to these experimentations are necessarily in 4D. Indeed, it seems strange to have a 5D (Higgs), 6D ... nD theories which lead to 4D experimentations... Why should we have more dimensions in theories than in experimentations?
• The mass and gravity phenomena already exists on Earth, like demonstrated in our example of a billiard ball into water. Another experimentation is described in the PDF document. Since we know that Nature always tends to repeat itself, the "Spacetime Model" is much more credible than theories which have no counterpart on Earth.
• Contrary to other theories, this explanation is in perfect accordance with the Stress Tensor used in fluid mechanics, which is at the origin of Einstein Field Equations. The PDF document covers thoroughly this subject.
• This explanation is also in accordance with the constitution of atoms: nucleus is a closed volume with mass, and orbitals are massless open volumes.
• At last, the PDF document contains validation using mathematics. In particular, the Schwarzschild Metric and Newton Law are not calculated from EFE (Einstein-Hilbert Field Equations) but from scratch, using the Hooke Law.

These considerations mean that the proposed theory in 4D is much more credible than any other theory using more dimensions.

Notes: The "Spacetime Model" demonstrates, in Parts 2 and 3, that all components of the universe are made of spacetime. It means that, from a spacetime point of view, the Higgs Boson may be discovered since 1) it is made of spacetime, and 2) all energy levels are allowed. Therefore, it is not impossible to detect a Higgs Boson but, if it does, this discover doesn't prove the validity of the Higgs Theory (remember the confusion between the muon and the π meson when physicists discovered these two particles in 1930's-1940's). On the other hand, it would be more convincing to predict an accurate mass, for example 130.456 GeV, instead of a large range from 114 to 180 GeV..

Comments from physicists...

• "Here's the most important discovery on the unification of physics." (G.M.)
• "I waited 35 years to find such elegant answers." (P.C.)
• "What to the detractors of this theory have to say?" (R.D.)
• "...you've got it..."(concerning the Theory of Everything) (J.G.)
• "Extraordinary simple to understand" (N.L.)
• "You have done a wonderful favor to all the seekers of truth through knowledge." (C.S.)
• "The theory is very interesting and it seems more correct than not." (F.P.)
• "It's interesting that while it makes sense. I like what you've done." (G.Z.)
• "I have only read the first pages so far and already it is the best Physics paper that I have ever read. It explains many things that have bothered me for the last 35 years. It is very elegant…" (G.R.)
• "A seemingly complicated topic has been dealt with such ease and simplicity that the whole experience is enlightening." (C.S.)
• "Thank you very much for the simplicity of your explanations. I think you are really on to something!" (D.M.)
• "Great website." (A.W.)
• "Quantum mechanics explained in a logical fashion. Great work!!" (C.F.)
• "Very interesting." (B.T.)
• "Simple and clear. Well done." (M.S.)
• "Some interesting ideas." (M.C.)
• "This is an excellent presentation." (S.D.)
• "Paper is very interesting!" (D.M.)
• "I love your website." (E.R.)
• "This is the only theory I have ever read that is clearly and easily understood" (A.D.)
• "I love your site." (C.Z.)
• "Please tell us more." (B.X.)
• "Thank you for the clarification." (C.A.)
• "must congratulate you on your style and simplicity." (J.C.)

Download instructions

To download the original 52 pages PDF document V 3.01, please hit the following URL link:

Download the Mass and Gravity PDF document