Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Version 4.01
October 5th 2010
Patent Rights
This theory, the "Spacetime Model", was registered in different
legal forms for Copyright and at INPI, the French Patent Institute,
under the following references:
Abstract
Introduction
A close examination of the Einstein Field Equations conducts to a new explanation of
mass and gravitation. In this paper, we show that replacing the well-known combination
"Attractive force + mass" by "Pressure force + volume" perfectly solves the mass and
gravitation enigma, staying in a 4D space with m = f(x,y,z,t).
Mass
It is not the mass of an object which deforms spacetime but its volume, more exactly its
"closed volume", the later being explained in the text. This curvature of spacetime is
convex. As a result, spacetime exerts a pressure force on the surface of the closed volume
which acts as a "mass effect".
Gravitation
Two closed volumes inserted into spacetime make a convex curvature of it. Since
spacetime is elastic (Einstein), this curvature produces an external pressure on these
volumes, which tends to bring them closer to each other. So, contrary to what we
think, gravitation is not an "attractive force between masses" but an "external
pressure force exerted by spacetime on closed volumes".
Mathematics
This paper also gives the expression m = f(x,y,z,t) and calculates from scratch, with a great
simplicity and without using tensors, the Newton Law of Universal Gravitation and the
Schwarzschild Metric. Originality of these calculations is the fact that they are based on
the new combination, "Pressure force + volume", instead of the well known "Attractive
force + mass".
Since tensors aren't easy to understand, this topic is covered in Supplementary Information D:
"EFE vs Constraint tensor". This part may be bypassed for a first reading.
Fig. 1-1
Mass and Gravitation - 6 - 1 - Open and Closed Volumes
Fig. 1-2
a Jupiter
b
Electron
Sun Nucleus
Fig. 1-3
1
Whatever the dimension of the space is, 1D, 2D, 3D or 4D, we always have the same phenomenon. For example, let's
imagine a simple line (1D). A small segment inserted into the middle of the line will push out its two ends to make room.
Similarly, in 2D, a small surface inserted into a larger one will push out the surrounding surface to make room, and so on….
Spacetime shares the same principle. Any volume inserted in spacetime pushes out surrounding spacetime to get room. The
word "volume" may not be exact since a volume has three dimensions, not four. In reality, according to special relativity,
time and volume form a whole. Therefore, a 3D volume in everyday life becomes a 4D spacetime in physics.
Mass and Gravitation - 7 - 1 - Open and Closed Volumes
Sun-Jupiter (fig. 1-3 a): The overall volume of this association is the sum of Sun +
Jupiter. It would have no sense to take into account the volume of the Jupiter's orbit
around the Sun.
Atom (fig. 1-3 b): Curiously, the overall volume of atoms is that of their orbitals,
which is a nonsense.
So, in two identical situations, we have two different definitions of the word "Volume".
So, we have two different definitions of "volume": one is subject to an external pressure (a),
the other not (b).
Curvature of spacetime ?
Yes Mass effect No No mass effect
a b Fig. 1-4
The same phenomenon also exists in spacetime. In reality, we have two classes of volumes:
Closed volumes (fig. 1-4 a): These volumes make a displacement of spacetime1, which
produces a pressure on the surface of the volume. A "mass effect" appears, that is to say
an effect having all characteristics of mass2. Fermions, their associations, empty
volumes enclosed inside the nucleus (see § 3.5) etc… are examples of closed volumes.
Only closed volumes deform spacetime, and since "spacetime curvature ≡ mass"
(Einstein, see § 1.7), only closed volumes have a "mass effect".
1
Considering that spacetime is present anywhere, we could think that a closed volume is crossed itself by spacetime.
Consequently, a closed volume could not curve spacetime itself. In reality, particles, atoms and molecules are continuously in
movement. So, let's imagine a sphere of Minkowski spacetime, far from any mass, with a global volume equal to that of
1000000 protons. Following an interaction for example, a proton crosses this flat spacetime. When the proton will be in the
centre of the sphere, we will have 1000000+1=1000001 protons for a volume of 1000000 protons. Due to the elasticity of
spacetime (Einstein), the sphere will keep its original volume. As a result, spacetime of the bounds will not move, but
spacetime near the proton will be compressed. So, we will have a curvature of spacetime near the proton (see fig. 3-2 b).
2
The "mass effect" [M] must not be confused with the pressure [M/LT²]. Paragraph 1.10 and Supplementary Information C
cover this subject.
Mass and Gravitation - 8 - 1 - Open and Closed Volumes
Open volumes (fig. 1-4 b): These volumes exist but do not produce any displacement
of spacetime. They are "porous" regarding spacetime. According to Einstein, if there is
no curvature, there is no mass effect either. Orbitals of atoms and empty space between
atoms or molecules are examples of open volumes. These volumes are massless.
Everyday life
M≠V
Volume Mass
Physics
M≡V
Closed
Volume Mass
Open volumes
must be ignored
Fig. 1-5
Mass and Gravitation - 9 - 1 - Open and Closed Volumes
Since the spacetime curvature comes from closed volumes exclusively, the Einstein Identity
becomes:
Mass Effect
≡
Curvature of Spacetime
≡
Closed volume
To explain this enigma, or time dilatation, let's consider two times, "t1" and "t2", in a flat
Minkowski spacetime (fig. 1-6 a). We have t1 = t2.
A closed volume inserted into this flat spacetime will curve it. According to special relativity,
space and time form a whole. As a result, we will get t1 < t2 (fig. 1-6 b).
If the volume is static with a spherical symmetry, the mathematical expression of t1 = f(t2) is
given by the Schwarzschild Metric. Otherwise, the expression of t1 = f(t2) is a solution of the
Einstein Field Equations, like that of Kerr, Reissner-Nordström, Robertson-Walker etc...
a b
t2 t2
t1
t1
Fig. 1-6
Mass and Gravitation - 10 - 1 - Open and Closed Volumes
Please note that a new calculation of the Schwarzschild Metric is covered in Supplementary
Information B. Originality of this calculation is that it is based on the convex curvature of
spacetime by a closed volume, instead of the traditional "concave curvature + mass".
To summarize, figure 1-6 and this new calculation of the Schwarzschild Metric fully explain
the time dilatation enigma in the Twin Paradox.
• Massless orbitals: It is obvious that orbitals, which are nothing but a vacuum, don't
curve spacetime. Therefore, according to Einstein (spacetime curvature ≡ mass
effect), orbitals are massless.
Open volume(s):
Orbital(s)
Fig. 1-7
All components of the universe are combinations of these two classes of volumes: closed
volumes (nucleus, particles…), having a mass, and open volumes (orbitals, a vacuum…),
without mass. This proportion varies from one atom or molecule to another.
1
Theoretically, we must also take into account energy levels of atoms which are identical to mass since E = mc². Please see
the two next paragraphs and Supplementary Information C about this topic.
Mass and Gravitation - 11 - 1 - Open and Closed Volumes
In reality, the mass is a virtual entity produced by the curvature of spacetime. This is why, in
this paper, we have replaced the word "mass" (meaning "material") with "mass effect"
(meaning "virtual").
Speed, energy, pressure etc. are some virtual quantities which exist ... without existing in
concrete terms. The mass effect is one of these virtual quantities. In our 4D universe, the only
real quantities are space (x,y,z) and time (t). So, we have:
Speed = f(x,y,z,t)
Energy = f(x,y,z,t)
Pressure = f(x,y,z,t)
Gravitation = f(x,y,z,t)
Force = f(x,y,z,t)
etc….
Some quantities contains the mass variable "m" and/or constants related to the mass, like G0,
the universal constant of gravitation. These terms can be replaced by the equivalent
expression of the "mass effect", m = f(x,y,z,t) (Supplementary Information C covers the real
expression of mass), or by associations of constants. This conducts to represent all the laws of
physics with only four dimensions: f(x,y,z,t).
1.11 Conclusions
Replacing mass by closed volume provides the following advantages:
To follow the view of Einstein who believed that the universe has only four
dimensions. No extra dimension as in the Higgs and String Theories are necessary.
Since mass effect ≡ closed volume, the expression of the mass effect "m" is that of
a simple volume: m = f(x,y,z,t), with x,y,z = the coordinates of the closed volume,
and t the time, as defined in special relativity.
To have a consistent and scientific explanation of gravitation (see the next chapter).
Closed Volume
Mass Proposed theory
?
No scientific explanation
of the curvature of Logical and consistent
spacetime by mass explanation
Mass and Gravitation - 13 - 2 - Gravitation
2. Gravitation
Fig. 2-1
Let's imagine a sphere, which has two opposite forces (fig. 2-2 a). Here, these forces comes
from elasticity of spacetime. If we split this sphere down the middle (fig. 2-2 b), we have a
movement of each half toward the other.
a b
Fig. 2-2
2.3 Conclusions
Spacetime
Gravitation ???
curvature ???
Object
Fig. 2-3
Mass and Gravitation - 15 - 2 - Gravitation
Proposed Theory
Spacetime
Elasticity Spacetime exerts a
Closed volumes
pressure force on
curve spacetime (Einstein) closed volumes
2 3
Gravitation
A "mass effect"
Open 1 4 due to the
Closed Mass pressure of
volumes spacetime on the
volumes effect
(ignored) surface is
associated with
each closed
volume.
Object
Only volume physically exists. Mass does not exist as such. Mass is an
effect produced by the pressure of spacetime on closed volumes. This
pressure on the surface of closed volumes also explains gravitation. Fig. 2-4
Mass and Gravitation - 16 - 2 - Gravitation
3. Experimentations
Why does the mass of a particle moving inside a crystal increase (fig. 3-1)?
M >m
Note
M, m = "mass effect"
(not "mass")
M
Fig. 3-1
The lattice of a crystal is an array of tunnels. The particle moves inside one of these tunnels.
Closed volumes of each atom of the crystal (nucleons, electrons) curve the spacetime located
inside the tunnel, on the path of the particle. Therefore, the density of spacetime will be
higher inside the tunnel than outside the crystal.
The curvature of spacetime made by atoms is added to that made by the closed volume of the
particle. Since the curvature of spacetime increases, the mass effect also increases since
"spacetime curvature ≡ mass effect" (see § 1.7 : Einstein Equations).
Mass and Gravitation - 18 - 3 - Experimentations
1
3.2 The Von Laue Diagram
A set of concentric circles is drawn on an expanded polypropylene (EPP) foam (fig. 3-2 a).
These lines represent the geodesics of spacetime far from any mass (Minkovski space).
If a static spherical symmetry closed volume is inserted in the centre, the EPP foam will be
subject to a curvature (fig. 3-2 b). The Minkovski space becomes a Schwarzschild space.
a b
Fig. 3-2
Figure 3-2 b has been duplicated in fig. 3-3. The Von Laue Geodesics has been drawn over
these circles.
Von Laue
Geodesics 3◊3 GM/c²
3GM/c²
2GM/c²
Fig. 3-3
We see that the Von Laue Geodesics match EXACTLY the concentric circles. In other words,
the Von Laue Diagram seems to confirm the theory described in this paper.
1
Von Laue, 1921, page 226, reported by Jean Eisenstaedt "Einstein and General Relativity", page 247.
Mass and Gravitation - 19 - 3 - Experimentations
This simple thought experiment demonstrates that what we call "mass" is, in reality, a "mass-
effect", which comes from the pressure exerted by the curvature of spacetime on the closed
volumes of the pen and eraser (nucleons and electrons). In this example, for teaching
purposes, gravitation has been taken into account, but this doesn't modify the reasoning
because, far from any gravitation field, the curvature of spacetime also exists. It is produced
by the closed volumes of the pen and eraser.
1
For teaching purposes, mass of electrons, binding energy etc… has been ignored. Moreover, we consider that the volume of
protons is identical to that of neutrons.
Mass and Gravitation - 20 - 3 - Experimentations
Therefore, contrary to what we think, at relativistic speed, the "mass" of a particle remains
unchanged1. It is its "mass effect" due to the compression of spacetime that increases.
V=0
m0
Relativistic speed V
m0
m=
1 – v2/c2
1
When relativist particles are broken in an accelerator, sub-particles produced follow the same rule. As original particles,
they curve spacetime giving us the illusion that they are massive. In reality, the mass of these sub-particles remains
unchanged. It is the curvature of spacetime which is modified.
Mass and Gravitation - 21 - 3 - Experimentations
a b c
Fig. 3-5
Independent nucleons (a) The total volume is 19V and the total surface 19S, V and
S being respectively the volume and surface of a nucleon.
Nucleus (b) The 19 nucleons are linked to make an atom. The grey surface represents a
vacuum enclosed in the nucleus. Therefore, these open volumes become closed volumes
and curve spacetime as closed volumes do.
Nucleus (c) From an external view, the figure (c) looks like (b), but the global volume
of figure (c) is greater to that of (a), and the global surface (c) smaller than (a). As a
result, the mass effect of (c) will be greater of that of (a).
In fig. 3-5, when the nucleus is broken from (c) to (a), the closed volume (shaded part of b)
disappears, causing a large depression in spacetime. This can be identified to a kind of
tsunami in spacetime. Finally, as in tsunamis, we get high energy waves (gammas).
In E = mc², it is not the mass that is converted into energy, but the closed volume that
becomes an open volume. This is exactly the tsunami sequence.
1
Up to day, we don't know exactly the arrangement of protons and neutrons inside a nucleus. This means that
figure 3-5 is a simplified arrangement of nucleons.
Mass and Gravitation - 22 - 3 - Experimentations
As we see on this photo, lines are curved. We have exactly the same phenomenon in
spacetime. Contrary to what we think, the light is not "attracted" by the mass but follows
convex geodesics of spacetime produced by the closed volume.
Light
Fig. 3-6
3.8 Conclusions
What is Spacetime?
What is mass?
What is gravitation?
(*) Stars are combinations of open and closed volumes (large apparent volume, small "mass effect") whereas black holes are
probably closed volumes exclusively (small apparent volume, large "mass effect").
Mass and Gravitation - 23 - 3 - Experimentations
Supplementary Information
E – Equivalence Principle
This document demonstrates that the proposed theory also solves the Equivalence
Principle.
F – Experimentation
This paper describes an interesting simulation.
H – Miscellaneous
Predictions to validate the theory
Objections to the theory
Other original papers from the Author
About the Author
Mass and Gravitation - 24 - 3 - Experimentations
∆V
∆P
Fig. A-1
Mass and Gravitation - S2 - A - The Newton Law
Starting with the Fluid Mechanics, from 1850's, Einstein demonstrated in 1910's that
spacetime is "elastic". Einstein identified spacetime to a fluid. The Bulk Modulus equation (1)
is a part of the Fluid Mechanics and, therefore, can be applied to spacetime.
The proposed theory states that a closed volume produces a displacement of spacetime. Since
spacetime is elastic, this displacement makes a pressure on the surface of the volume, which
conducts to a volume decrease, as shown in figure 1.
The Schwarzschild Metric gives an order of magnitude of the curvature of spacetime. This
latter is infinitesimal. For example, the ratio "curvature of spacetime"/radius, or ∆R/R, is
1.4166 x 10-39 1 for the proton.
Under that conditions, whatever the formulae used, logarithmic or not, we can consider that
the curvature of spacetime is a linear function since we are working on an infinitesimal
segment near to the point zero (limits of elasticity). So, this formulae becomes:
1
M = 1.672 E-27, R = 8.768 E-16, G = 6.674 E-11, c² = 8.987 E+16, ∆R/R = GM/Rc². This formulae is the first
order approximation of the square root of the r radius in the Schwarzschild Metric coefficient in polar
coordinates.
Mass and Gravitation - S3 - A - The Newton Law
V2 V3
V1
V Vn
Fig. A-2
Since the coefficient of elasticity of spacetime ev is constant (see the preceding paragraph),
combining (4) and (5) gives:
Displacement of
Vx spacetime at the
distance "d" : Vx=V
d
Curvature
of spacetime:
∆Vx = εv Vx
Fig. A-3
Mass and Gravitation - S4 - A - The Newton Law
∆Vx :
Vx
∆x
Sx = 4πd²
∆Vx = Sx∆x
∆VR : = 4πd²∆x
VR R
∆R d
SR = 4πR²
∆VR = SR∆R
= 4πR²∆R
Fig. A-4
On the same manner, the volume ∆VR is the product of ∆R by the surface SR:
Finally, at a distance "d" from the centre, the spacetime curvature is inversely proportional to d²:
Mass and Gravitation - S5 - A - The Newton Law
Where:
R is the radius of the closed volume VR, assume it spherical,
∆R is the curvature of spacetime on the surface of the closed volume VR,
d is the distance of the point of measurement from the centre of the closed volume VR,
∆x is the curvature of spacetime at the distance d.
Proposed Theory
Spacetime
Elasticity Spacetime exerts a
Closed volumes
pressure force on
curve spacetime (Einstein) closed volumes
2 3
Gravitation
A "mass effect"
due to the
Open 1 4 pressure of
Closed Mass spacetime on the
volumes surface is
volumes effect
(ignored) associated with
each closed
volume.
Object
Only volume physically exists. Mass does not exist per se. Mass is an
effect produced by the pressure of spacetime on closed volumes. This
pressure on the surface of closed volumes also explains gravitation. Fig. A-5
The mass effect acts as a pressure and, like any pressure, it is inversely proportional to the
surface S, or [1/L²]. It is also proportional to the volume, or [L3]. Therefore, the dimensional
quantity of the mass effect could be [1/L²][L3] = [L]. In other words, the proposed theory
predicts that the mass effect is proportional to [L]. This deduction is in accordance with the
Einstein Field Equations and their solutions (Schwarzschild Metric…).
Mass and Gravitation - S6 - A - The Newton Law
In referring to Einstein's works, we have good reason to believe that the relation between ∆R
and M is a simple linear function like:
The challenge, now, is to calculate K to get the Newton's law of Universal Gravitation.
or
or :
The value ∆x/t² has the dimensional quantity of an acceleration [L/T²]. So, replacing this
fraction by the acceleration symbol "a", we get:
On the other hand, the multiplication of a constant c² by a second constant K gives another
constant. So, we can replace the product c²K by a new unknown constant, G for example:
or:
To be consistent, this new constant G must have the same dimensional quantity as c²K. We
have:
So,
The dimensional quantity of this new
constant G is [L²/T²][L/M] = [L3/MT²].
On the other hand, we know that the force is the product of an acceleration by a mass.
Therefore, equation (19) can be written as follow:
G is a constant,
Its dimensional quantity is [L3/MT²].
So, we can identify G to the well-known constant of gravitation issued from experimentation:
G = 6,67428.10-11. In other words,
A.8 Conclusions
As we see, the Newton Law of Universal Gravitation can be easily explained by the theory
proposed and obtained from the few following considerations:
Finally, this chapter explains, with some logical deductions and a great simplicity, the origin
of the Newton Law of Universal Gravitation.
Mass and Gravitation - S8 - A - The Newton Law
From a mathematical point of view, we get the same result developing and simplifying the
Einstein Field Equations. Details of calculations are described in many books concerning
General Relativity1. This conducts to the following equality2:
1
For example, « Notes on General Relativity » - S. Carroll -.
2
Some authors prefer writing A(r)B(r) = K with K=c². In that case, the term c² must be excluded from the
Minkowski Metric, equation (1). However, in both cases, result is the same. Please also note that, in order to
simplify equations, some Authors replace c and G by 1. In this document, we don't follow this rule because a
simple number, "1" in this case, doesn't have a dimensional quantity like c² or G, [L²/T²] or [L3/MT²]
respectively. This conducts to get inconsistent equations from a dimensional quantity point of view.
Mass and Gravitation - S10 - B - The Schwarzschild Metric
drout
drin
r
Fig. B-1
The theory shows that a flat spacetime is curved near a closed volume. This phenomenon is
exactly what figure B-1 shows. Lines in bold simulate with a great realism the curvature of
spacetime out and in the gravitational field simulated by the foam and the half cylinder.
Since spacetime is "elastic" (Einstein), we can start with the well-known law of elasticity:
where:
• ε is a coefficient of the increase of spacetime curvature at distance r,
• ∆R is the curvature of spacetime1 produced by the closed volume,
• r is the distance of the point of measurement.
The order of magnitude of ε is 10E-39. So, we can use the first order approximation:
The relation between two differential elementary radius drout and drin follows the law of
elasticity L = (1 + ε) L0 :
1
Please note that the curvature of spacetime, ∆R, is not the displacement of spacetime. See Supplementary Information A.
Mass and Gravitation - S11 - B - The Schwarzschild Metric
Developing the denominator (1 – ε)² = 1 - 2ε + ε² and ignoring the last term ε², we obtain:
This result is nothing but the radial component of the Schwarzschild Metric, that is to say the
function A(r) of dr² in expression (2). The calculation of B(r) is immediate, taking into
account that A(r) B(r) = 1 from (3). Hence:
In Supplementary Information A "The Newton Law", we have got the following result
∆R = KM (expression 13) where K = G/c² (20). So, equation (5) can be rewritten as:
Finally, porting this expression in (12) conducts to the well-known Schwarzschild Metric:
Mass and Gravitation - S12 - B - The Schwarzschild Metric
B.4 Conclusions
Starting with a simple and low cost (< $5.00) experiment, this demonstration clearly shows
that Spacetime is curved by a closed volume, not by a mass.
Mass and Gravitation - S13 - C - The Mass Effect Calculation
V
VR = V
∆VR = εvVR
S
∆R = ∆VR / S R
Fig. C-1
On the other hand, we have calculated the Newton Law starting with the following expression
where K is an unknown constant having the dimensional quantity of [L/M]:
Mass and Gravitation - S14 - C - The Mass Effect Calculation
or
Combining equation (20) of Supplementary Information A and (4) gives the expression of the
"mass effect":
(5)
with:
M = Mass effect (kg)
V = Volume of the closed volume (m3)
S = Surface of the closed volume (m²)
εv = Coefficient of elasticity of spacetime 1
c = Speed of the light (m/s)
G0 = Universal constant of gravitation
(6)
C.3 Nuclei
Nuclei aren't spherical. Therefore, it is not possible to apply (5) to calculate the mass effect
since we don't know exactly the shape of the nucleus. Empirical formulae based on A, Z, N
give accurate results because the shape of the nucleus, i.e. its volume and its surface, is
function of A, Z, N 2. It is important to note that the law in A⅓ doesn't mean that the mass is
proportional to the volume, but the rearrangement of nucleons inside the nucleus follows a
law in A⅓. Results may be equivalent but the signification is totally different.
1
This coefficient can be calculated from spherical particles. However, this calculation is not easy to do because the only
supposed spherical particles that we know are leptons. To have accurate data, we must take the muon and the tau which is a
difficult task, or maybe nuclei having a null quadripolar moment.
2
A study on this topic is in hand.
Mass and Gravitation - S15 - D - EFE vs Constraint Tensor
D.1 Background
EFE emphasize an identity between the properties of matter, mass-energy-momentum, and
the geometry of spacetime. Einstein discovered equivalence between the stress-energy tensor
Tjk and the geometrical tensor of curvature Rjk - (1/2) gjkR :
Geometry of spacetime ≡ Matter and energy
Hiding the cosmological constant Λ, the EFE, which must be read from right to left, becomes:
Rjk - (1/2) gjk R = (8πG/c4) Tjk
The member of left describes a representation of the geometry of spacetime. It is a
geometrical tensor verifying a mathematical property of Lorentzian conservation. Rjk is
the tensor of Ricci and R the scalar of Ricci.
The member of right represents the energy-momentum. It is the Tjk stress-energy
tensor.
The simplest solution of Einstein's equations is the Schwarzschild Solution. Its metric
describes the curvature of spacetime produced by a static object with a spherical symmetry.
Setting down (x0, x1, x2, x3) = (ct, r, θ, Ω), this metric is written as follows:
−1+ 2GM 0 0 0
rc²
1
(gµν) =
0 1− GM
2 0 0
rc²
0 0 r2 0
0 0 0 r2sin2θ
Mass and Gravitation - S16 - D - EFE vs Constraint Tensor
Constraint tensor
This tensor, from the Hooke Law, represents the dynamic pressures exerted by the fluid
on an object. Elements of this tensor have the following significance:
• T01, T02, T12, T10, T20, T21 are viscosity
• The trace T00, T11, T22, is the pressure.
Stress-energy tensor
in General Relativity
Constraint tensor
in fluid mechanics T00 T01 T02 T03
Fig. D-1
Stress-energy tensor
The elements of this tensor have the following significance:
• T00 is the density of energy
• T10, T20, T30 are the density of moments
• T01, T02, T03 are the flow of energy
• T12, T13, T23, T21, T31, T32 are viscosity, as with the constraint tensor
• The trace, T11, T22, T33, represents an attractive force: gravitation.
Mass and Gravitation - S17 - D - EFE vs Constraint Tensor
D.3 Deductions
This leads the following inconsistencies:
In fluid mechanics, since 1850's, constraint tensors are always built on volume,
not on mass. Effectively, it is the volume – and not the mass – that produces the
viscosity and pressure in fluid mechanics. Question: why has the mass replaced
the volume?
Viscosity, in the Einstein's tensor, is the same as that of the constraint tensor. If
the viscosity is the same, why would the trace be different? Why has an
attractive force replaced the initial pressure force?
These two inconsistencies conduct to the four following combinations shown in figures 1-1
and 1-2 of chapter 1:
1. "Attractive force + Concave curvature of spacetime (Mass)",
2. "Attractive force + Convex curvature of spacetime (Volume)",
3. "Pressure force + Concave curvature of spacetime (Mass)",
4. "Pressure force + Convex curvature of spacetime (Volume)".
Let's replace the concave curvature of spacetime by the minus sign (-) and the convex
by the positive sign (+). Likewise, let's replace the attractive force by (-) and the
pressure force by (+). So, we can rewrite the four combinations as follows :
1. (- -) "Attractive force + Mass",
2. (- +) "Attractive force + Volume",
3. (+ -) "Pressure force + Mass",
4. (+ +) "Pressure force + Volume".
The first combination is that of Newton-Einstein. It works perfectly but has no sense
since no one can explain how a mass can curve spacetime.
The fourth combination has the same sign that the first one : (- -) = (+ +). This
combination is much more credible because it fully explains many enigmas concerning
mass and gravitation.
To summarize:
Combination 1: Since 1915's, physicists have tried to solve the mass and gravitation
enigma from the first combination "Attractive force + Mass". … One century later, we
are still waiting for a logical and consistent explanation of this enigma.
Combination 4: On the contrary, this unknown combination 4, "Pressure force +
Volume", perfectly solves the mass and gravitation enigma. Moreover, the Newton
Law of Universal Gravitation and Schwarzschild Metric can be easily calculated from
this combination, with logic and consistency. At last, this combination needs only 4D
and is fully compatible with Einstein's works.
Mass and Gravitation - S18 - D - EFE vs Constraint Tensor
On the other hand, Einstein wrote his equations in 4D. Since the mass "m" is not a basic
dimension of the Universe, a question arises :
It would seem logical to have a match between the theory and applications, as :
Since 1920's, all applications of general relativity, like the GPS, uses four dimensions.
Therefore, the number of dimensions of the theory is probably four. This conducts to :
m = f(x,y,z,t)
This deduction is in accordance with the theory presented here which uses only four
dimensions. Effectively, the mass effect is function of the curvature of spacetime (see
Supplementary Information C).
Mass and Gravitation - S19 - E - Equivalence Principle
E. Equivalence Principle
E.1 Demonstration
Let’s consider an object on Earth (Fig. E-1). The volume of this object causes a curvature of
spacetime which exerts a gravitational force on it of g = 9.81 m.s-2 on the surface of Earth.
Fig. E-1
Let’s now consider the same object accelerated out of any gravitational field (fig. E-2). The
acceleration, a, is supposed identical to g, i.e. a = 9.81 m.s-2.
2a 2b
a a This figure is
identical to fig.
E-1 since g = a
Fig. E-2
Mass and Gravitation - S20 - E - Equivalence Principle
Without any reference, a local observer can’t say if the acceleration comes from the object or
from the curvature of spacetime. In fact, figures E-2 a and E-2 b are identical and depend on
where the observer stands, as described in Special Relativity. Since
• By definition, g = 9.81 m.s-2 (fig. E-1) is identical to a = 9.81 m.s-2 (fig. E-2).
• These examples uses the same object. Therefore, the curvature of spacetime produced
by the closed volume of this object is identical.
• So, the "mass effect" produced by these curvatures will be identical.
We deduce that the "gravitational mass effect" (fig. E-1) is identical to the "inertial mass
effect" (fig. E-2). In other words:
F. Experimentation
F.1 Introduction
Einstein demonstrated that spacetime has an elasticity
behaviour.
Fig. F-1
Fig. F-2
F.4 Experiment #1
Experiment #1 shows that far from any mass, the resistance of a FSR is 10MΩ (open circuit,
fig. F-3). When a mass is placed on the FSR (fig. F-4), its resistance decreases to 35 KΩ.
Since in the weight of a mass is directly related to gravitation (second Newton Law,
Weight=mg), we can state:
F.5 Experiment #2
Two FSR’s measure the pressure produced by an expanded polypropylene (EPP) foam on
each side of a volume V1. Figures F-5 and F-7 represent the first step of this experiment.
In order to get an accurate measurement and to use only one galvanometer in this experiment,
the two FSR’s are inserted in a Wheatstone Bridge. This setup is frequently used in strain
gauge measurements. Figure F-6 represents the circuit diagram.
FSR2 V1 FSR1 C
FSR2 FSR1
A Vg B
R1 VR1
D
Pressure of the EPP foam
(= spacetime) on the two FSRs
Fig. F-5 Fig. F-6
The volume V1 is inserted in the EPP foam and the Wheatstone Bridge is adjusted by VR1 to
obtain a zero voltage between the two midpoints A and B (fig. F-6). No current flows through
the galvanometer Vg. The pressure of the EPP foam (or spacetime) on both sides of the
volume V1 is identical.
FSR2
V1
C
A FSR1
B
Fig. F-7
Mass and Gravitation - S24 - F - Experimentation
Without changing anything, a second volume, V2, is inserted near the first volume V1 (fig. F-
8). We note a deviation on the galvanometer (fig. F-10), which indicates an additional
pressure on FSR1.
FSR2
V1
V2
C
A
D
FSR1
B
Fig. F-8
To summarize, with one volume, the galvanometer indicates no voltage (fig. F-9). With two
volumes, it indicates a voltage proportional to the pressure produced by the second volume on
FRS1 (fig. F-8 and F-10). This force between V1 and V2 can be identified to gravitation since
"voltage on FSR = Presence of a force (≡gravitation)" (conclusion of paragraph F-4,
"Experiment #1").
F.6 Deductions
Out of any volume (or mass), the voltage in a Wheatstone Bridge is 0 V (fig. F-9).
When a second volume is inserted into the EPP foam, the voltage on FSR1 increases
(fig. F-10).
Experiment #1 (fig. F-3 and F-4) shows that a decrease of resistance on a FSR
indicates a "presence of gravitation".
Experiment #2 clearly shows that between V1 and V2 a force similar to gravitation
has appeared.
It is obvious that this simulation doesn't prove the theory, but it shows that replacing elasticity
of spacetime by elasticity of an EPP foam highlights two important phenomena:
1. We are faced with a pressure force, not an attractive force
2. The cylinders masses are irrelevant, only their volumes are.
Mass and Gravitation - S26 - F - Experimentation
G.1 Experimentation
A set of lines, spaced 5 mm apart, has been drawn on an EPP foam simulating spacetime. A
half cylinder with a radius of 22mm, or a closed volume, is inserted into the foam (fig. G-1).
Fig. G-1
The gaps between two adjacent lines are measured and plotted with ®Excel (fig. F-2).
6
1
Fig. F-2
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25
Mass and Gravitation - S28 - G - Black Holes Simulation
1,12
1,10
1,08
1,06
1,04
1,02
1,00
0,98
0,96
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 Fig. G-3
23 25
Mass and Gravitation - S29 - G - Black Holes Simulation
1,12
1,10
1,08
1,06
1,04
1,02
1,00
0,98
0,96
Fig. G-4
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
Mass and Gravitation - S30 - G - Black Holes Simulation
G.4 Deductions
As we see, the two tables (3) and (4) and their associated graphics are very close to each
other. In particular, the last column in bold of the two tables are practically identical. This
leads to two important conclusions:
1. The curve calculated from the Schwarzschild Metric (fig. F- 4), is very
close to that plotted from experimentation using a simple EPP foam (fig.
F-3) simulating spacetime,
2. In these two tables, once again, the volume, more exactly radius,
replaces the mass.
Rank r y = f(r)
22
1 24,4 -1,56
2 26,8 -2,03
3 29,4 -2,77
4 32,2 -4,13
30,00 5 35,2 -7,33
r = Rs 6 38,3 -22,53
20,00 8 41,8 23,22
10,00 + 9
10
45,9 7,78
50,4 4,85
0,00 11 55,1 3,65
12 59,9 3,01
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
-20,00
- 14 69,3 2,37
15 74,4 2,16
Fig. G-5 16 79,3 2,02
-30,00
17 84,4 1,90
18 89,5 1,81
19 94,5 1,73
We get a curve that match exactly that of the behaviour of 20 99,5 1,67
the Schwarzschild Metric around Rs (Schwarzschild 21 104,2 1,62
22 108,8 1,58
Radius). Effectively, the table and the curve (fig. F-5)
23 113,6 1,54
show an asymptote when r = 40 mm..
24 118,4 1,51
25 123,2 1,48
We can also remark that the signature is changed from +
26 128 1,45
to -, as inside a black hole. 27 132,9 1,43
However, a question arises : Does that curve reflect the Table of figure G-5
reality?
Mass and Gravitation - S31 - G - Black Holes Simulation
From a physical point of view, r can't be less than R. It means that the validity of the
Schwarzschild Metric is not proven with r < R. It is possible that, instead to have a
singularity, we simply reach a limit of validation of the Schwarzschild Metric if r ≤ R.
What happens if an electromagnetic wave goes near to R? The Von Laue Diagram (main
text, fig. 3-3) partially gives the solution to this enigma:
Far from the volume that makes the displacement of spacetime (fig. G-6 A), the
light is only deviated. It follows geodesics of spacetime.
Near the volume (fig. G-6 B), the light is captured. In this case, the light turns
around the object and doesn't have the possibility of escaping.
In front of the volume (fig. G-6 C), the light comes in collision with the object
(Compton Effect). In other words, the "famous" black hole capture could be
nothing but …an ordinary Compton effect !!!
Fig. G-6
At last, we must note the two following remarks which are only suggestions:
Since a particle (electron, proton…) is a closed volume, its behaviour could be
identical to that of a black hole.
If the light comes near to R (fig. G-6 B), it is possible that a resonance takes place if
the circumference of the particle is a multiple of its wavelength. In that case, it is
possible that particles of groups 2 and 3 of the Standard Model could be nothing but
particles of group 1 in resonance. For example, the muon could be an electron in a
"level 1 resonance". In the same manner, the tau could be an electron in a "level 2
resonance". It is even possible to have particles more heavy with "level 3, 4,
5…resonance". In all case, the resonance increases the closed volume (the mass) of
the particles but keep their charge unchanged (-1 in this example). That is in
accordance with the proposed theory.
Mass and Gravitation - S32 - G - Black Holes Simulation
G.7 Conclusions
This simple and low cost experimentation simulates the black hole behaviour. Results are
EXACTLY identical as in conventional physics using solutions of EFE.
This experiment is very interesting because it proves, one more time, that
Effectively, during all these explanations, only lengths have been considered. Mass has
been totally ignored. It is the radius, not the mass, which has been increased to 40 mm. to
calculate a black hole behaviour.
Mass and Gravitation - S33 - H - Miscellaneous
H. Miscellaneous
H.1 Predictions
The proposed theory can be confirmed by at least three simple experimentations:
3/ Crystals
The enigma of a particle crossing a crystal has been already discussed. The proposed
theory predicts that the mass, more exactly the "mass effect" of the particle, is directly
related with the density of spacetime inside a tunnel, more particularly: 1/ the structure of
the lattice of the crystal, 2/ the number of nucleons of atoms of the crystal, 3/ the space
between atoms. The density of spacetime can be theoretically calculated with different
crystals. Appropriate experimentations should confirm this calculation and, therefore, the
proposed theory too.
H.2 Objections
Some physicists reject the proposed theory because they consider it too simple. They make a
confusion.
Consider, for example, a drum. A 5 years old child intuitively knows the principle, namely
that by striking it, he makes noise. On the other hand, the mathematical description of the
surface waves requires Bessel Functions, which are at the Master level.
Mass, gravitation and modern physics share the same principle. It is advisable to distinguish
the basic phenomena, generally very simple, like mass and gravity explained in this paper,
from the mathematical laws governing them, which may be extremely complex: tensors,
Schrödinger Equation, operators, Lie Groups, QCD etc….
Mass and Gravitation - S34 - H - Miscellaneous
Case 1: Stone-water
A stone
and a water wave
are of different matter.
Case 2: Water-water
A drop of water (corpuscle)
and a water wave are of
identical matter.
So,
This conducts to solve the enigma of antimatter. Atoms are made up of an equal number of
electrons and positrons, exactly 2A (A = atomic number). For example, the C12 is made of 24
e- and 24 e+, the latter being included into the u and d quarks of protons and neutrons. The
following table shows isobars A = 16.
Neutrons Protons
udd uud Antimatter Matter
Nucleus A N Z uN dN uZ dZ Utotal e+ e-
Be 16 12 4 12 24 8 4 48 32 32
B 16 11 5 11 22 10 5 48 32 32
C 16 10 6 10 20 12 6 48 32 32
N 16 9 7 9 18 14 7 48 32 32
O 16 8 8 8 16 16 8 48 32 32
F 16 7 9 7 14 18 9 48 32 32
Ne 16 6 10 6 12 20 10 48 32 32
A calculation with Excel™ of the 2970 known isotopes shows that we have exactly the same
number of positrons as electrons, i.e. 32 in this example. Matter strictly equals antimatter.
Please note that all these explanations are logic and consistent. They only need a validation
by experimentation. So, waiting this validation, the reader must take this information with
caution.
If you are a follower of this theory, or should you have any question, you can contact the
author1 by email at:
diaverre@sfr.fr
1
The author does not work in an institutional establishment. The writing of the Spacetime Model has been done
entirely on his own money and time, with no help from the scientific community. If you find some error in this
document, please let him know. On the other hand, if this paper has been of interest to you, thanks to insert the
above website addresses in your blog or your web page (Face Book …).
Mass and Gravitation - S37 - H - Miscellaneous
Table of contents
1 - Open and Closed Volumes
1.1 Starting point ...................................................................................5
1.2 Current theory..................................................................................5
1.3 Curvature of spacetime....................................................................6
1.4 Definition of the volume ................................................................6
1.5 Open and closed volumes................................................................7
1.6 Our view of the volume...................................................................8
1.7 Einstein Equations...........................................................................9
1.8 Example: The twin paradox ............................................................9
1.9 Confirmation: Atoms ......................................................................10
1.10 The reality of mass ..........................................................................11
1.11 Conclusions .....................................................................................11
2 - Gravitation
2.1 Principle of gravitation ....................................................................13
2.2 Principle of split ..............................................................................14
2.3 Conclusions .....................................................................................14
3 - Experimentations
3.1 Higgs' Intuition ................................................................................17
3.2 The Von Laue's diagram..................................................................18
3.3 Mass-volume equivalence ...............................................................19
3.4 Relativistic particles ........................................................................20
3.5 The mass excess ..............................................................................20
3.6 The light deflection..........................................................................21
3.7 Conclusions .....................................................................................22
Supplementary Information
E – Equivalence Principle
E.1 Demonstration .................................................................................S19
F – Experimentation
F.1 Introduction .....................................................................................S21
F.2 Basic material ..................................................................................S21
F.3 The FSR...........................................................................................S22
F.4 Experiment #1 .................................................................................S22
F.5 Experiment #2 .................................................................................S23
F.6 Deductions.......................................................................................S25
H – Miscellaneous
H.1 Predictions .......................................................................................S33
H.2 Objections........................................................................................S33
H.3 The Spacetime Model......................................................................S34
H.4 Wave-particle duality ......................................................................S34
H.5 Quarks and antimatter......................................................................S35
H.6 Extensions of the theory ..................................................................S36
H.7 About the Author.............................................................................S36
A step toward the
Theory of Everything
Part 2
Constitution of Matter
Jacky JEROME
Ingénieur Européen EUR-ING
Ingénieur DPE (Diplômé Par l'Etat)
Ingénieur IPF
Ingénieur ITP-ECI
Email: toe-author@orange.fr
ISBN 97829531234-0-2
Editions Arts et Culture 42
4, square Kennedy
42120 LE COTEAU (France)
Cover: On the left of the photo of Einstein: Maxwell, Feynman, Max Planck, Schrödinger
On the right: Pauli, Niels Bohr, Marie Curie, De Brogglie, Dirac, Heisenberg
The Spacetime Model - II - Part 2 - Introduction
Patent Rights
This theory, the “Spacetime Model”, was registered at
INPI, the French Patent Institute, under the following
references:
Before reading…
To fully understand this part, the reader must be familiar with the deductions and results
developed in Part 1. These results are summarized below:
Mass = Volume?
In our world, mass and volume seem to be two different quantities because in atoms, the
mass is not proportional to the volume. So, we have a large range of atoms with different
masses and volumes. However, at the particle level, mass = volume (with some
reservations explained in Part 1).
In reality, we have two main classes of volumes:
! Closed volumes (A): These volumes make a displacement of spacetime. Thus, a
pressure force appears on the surface of the volume. This pressure produces a “mass
effect”, an effect having all mass characteristics. Nucleons and electrons are examples
of closed volumes.
! Open volumes (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 electrons
in atoms are examples of open volumes.
A B
Each atom has a particular proportion of open and closed volume. This is why mass and
volume give us the illusion of being two different quantities.
The Spacetime Model - IV - Part 2 - Introduction
What is Gravity?
Two volumes inserted into spacetime curve it. Since spacetime
is elastic, its curvature produces pressures on these two
volumes. This tends to bring them closer to each other. So,
contrary to what we think:
Gravity is not an attractive force between masses but a
pressure force exerted by spacetime on closed volumes.
Since a pressure force is the inverse of an attractive force,
there is no difference between the current theory and this new
explanation of mass and gravity:
Attractive force (Newton) + Concave curvature of spacetime (Einstein)
= Pressure force + Convex curvature of spacetime
Validation by experimentation
Part 1 describes a simple experimentation, which proves that the curvature of spacetime
produces a pressure force, not an attractive force. Moreover, this simple experiment
highlights a black hole behavior when R = Rs.
Validation by mathematics
In Part 1, the Schwarzschild Metric and Newton Law aren’t calculated using the Einstein
Field Equations but using this new explanation of Mass and Gravity, from the Hooke Law.
Moreover, the proposed theory is in perfect accordance with the Von Laue Diagram.
Please note that the Higgs Theory is far to propose to the Physicists Community a simple
explanation, an low-cost experimentation and a full mathematical validation (Schwarzschild-
Newton-Einstein-Hooke) as those explained in Part 1.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 1 - 1 - Wave-Particle Duality
1 Wave-Particle Duality
Matter presents the particularity of having a wave and particle behavior. This
phenomenon is known as "wave-particle duality", or "complementarity".
However, this enigma, which has been challenged by so many physicists, has still
not been solved.
This chapter solves the mystery of wave-particle duality.
If, moreover, we activate the pressure washer for a short time, comparable to the action
time of a particle, we can see that the small jet of water emitted from the nozzle
becomes a single wave.
As we can see in this example, the water has either a corpuscular or a wave behavior.
Nature offers us identical situations: the water of Niagara Falls has a particle behavior during
its fall and, once it has reached the river down below, the particles become "eddies", or
waves.
The opposite situation also exists: let's consider the example of an almost empty swimming
pool. If we make only one wave in the residual water, some amount will spill out of the drain
valve. Thus, the wave is transformed into a short filament of water, or "particle". The water
coming out of the drain valve is obviously not a wave. Yet, it is the same water that, a few
seconds ago, was a wave.
Another example that anyone can conduct is a stone falling into a container filled with water
(example 1, fig. 1-2).
In example 2, a drop of water replaces the stone. The same object (water) has either a particle
behavior (drop) or a wave behavior. We are exactly in a wave-particle duality situation. This
photograph proves that the wave-particle duality also exists on Earth.
Example 1
A stone
and a water wave
are of different matter.
Example 2
A drop of water (corpuscle)
and a water wave
are of identical matter.
Water has either a corpuscle
behavior or a wave behavior.
However, in our first example, water coming out of the nozzle can't be transformed into
waves if the experiment is done in the air. This transformation is possible only if the medium
is also water. The same condition can be applied in the example of a drop of water. The wave
exists only if the medium is also water.
In other words, the medium must also be in the same composition as the particle and the
wave. This is a necessary condition.
Duality ? No No No YES No No No
Impossibility Impossibility
Duality is fully explained
in this particular case Fig. 1-3
Note
Medium and waves are obviously of identical matter. However, we will separate them for teaching
purposes. Sometimes, we will use the wave concept, for example when we are talking about 511 KeV
gammas, and sometimes we will use the medium concept.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 4 - 1 - Wave-Particle Duality
We can thus state a second principle of duality, resulting from experimentation, based on the
“OR EXCLUSIVE” conjunction:
When the conditions of the first principle of duality are met, the
element concerned can exclusively take one, and only one, of
the three following states:
2 1 - Particle state, when it is motionless
2 - Wave state, when it is moving
3 - Halfway state between wave and particle, during the
transition (the particle is moving at a very low speed).
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 5 - 1 - Wave-Particle Duality
This principle is very important since it solves many enigmas of modern physics.
For example, in accordance with experimentations, magnetism only appears when the charged
particle is moving. The reason, covered in Part 4 "Electromagnetism", is quite simple:
So,
Electromagnetism is nothing but a
consequence of wave-particle duality.
1.7 Polymorphism
All elements that meet the criteria of duality are polymorphic. Their form can be transformed
from a particle form into a waveform and conversely. We have arrived at the concept of
polymorphism that will be used further in Parts 3 and 5. Even if it is obvious, like the three
preceding principles, it is interesting to formalize this concept as follows:
1
Only the "r" radius is relevant in the explanation of ‘electric field’. The angles ϕ et θ are not relevant.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 6 - 1 - Wave-Particle Duality
1.8 History
Why, since 1905, has this enigma never been solved?
In fact, the real question arising is: “Is there not the possibility that we are in the particular
case where waves, particle and medium are of the same constitution?”.
Unfortunately, since 1905, physicists have great difficulty solving this enigma because they
have generalized a particular case. Indeed, trying to understand the wave-particle duality
with, for example, a stone and water, leads to a true enigma.
As we see, the only way to explain logically the wave-particle duality is to consider that, in
quantum mechanics, we are in the particular case where waves, particles and medium are of
the same constitution.
1.9 Conclusions
Duality has always been regarded as a burden for the physicists because no one has been able
to explain it rationally. This enigma is summarized as follows:
“We note a wave-particle duality, which is very strange. However, this is a normal
situation since quantum mechanics is, by definition, illogical and irrational”.
This document does not share this "theory of irrationality" of some physicists concerning
quantum mechanics. It transforms this disadvantage into an advantage. Instead of regarding
duality as a burden, it regards it as fortuitous, the great opportunity to solve the mystery of
matter. Indeed, this enigma, which is no longer a mystery, is summarized as follows:
“Since we note a wave-particle duality in quantum mechanics, we can deduce from this
that waves, particles and medium have the same constitution. This is a necessary
condition. Thus, if we find the constitution of the medium, we will know the constitution
of waves and particles and the converse".
-o-o-o-o-o-
Note
It is obvious that wave-particle duality only applies to waves and particles. Is the photon a particle? It is far
from being proven. As Einstein (in 1920’s), many physicists think that photons aren’t “traditional particles” but,
rather, mathematical objects, like vectors, used to describe waves. It means that wave-particle duality doesn’t
apply to photons. This is why the Young Slits Enigma is not solved with the above explanation. In reality, this
mystery has a different explanation, which is covered in Part 4 “Electromagnetism”.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 7 - 2 - EM radiations
2 EM radiations
Since the first principle of wave-particle duality shows that waves and particles
have, necessarily, the same constitution, the knowledge of the waves leads us
directly to the knowledge of the particles. So, the resolution of the c invariance
enigma, although interesting, is not an end per se but rather a method of
investigation by which to solve the mystery of the constitution of particles.
2.1 History
The nature of EM radiations has always been the "pet peeve" of physicists. To this day, this
problem has not been solved.
• Newton, during his time, thought that light was made of particles.
• In the nineteenth century, physicists favoured the wave concept. EM waves were
propagated in aether, an unknown propagation medium.
• In 1905, continuing the works of Max Planck (Nobel Prize - 1918), Albert Einstein (Nobel
Prize - 1921) built a particle theory of EM radiations. The concept of aether became
obsolete since photons do not need any aether to be propagated. However, some problems,
like Young's experimentations for example, were still not solved with the photon concept.
• Later, in 1922, Einstein returned to aether. He was confronted with the problem of duality
since the photon is incompatible with the wave, and therefore with aether.
• In 1959, 39 years later, Louis de Broglie (Nobel Prize - 1929) proposed the idea that
aether was made of neutrinos.
• Around 1980, physicists verified once more the constant speed of light with quasars, using
embedded systems and telescopes in satellites.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 8 - 2 - EM radiations
These recent experiments show that the propagation of EM waves and the enigma of the
constant speed of light are still not solved. The aether concept would help but no one is able
to give an exact definition of it.
Finally, since 1905, the enigma of the constitution of light has been so persistent it prompted
Louis De Broglie to say: “Science will make a great step ahead the day that it can explain a
simple ray of light”.
The introduction of the photon partially solves this problem. Indeed, like any particle, the
photon can move in a vacuum. However, if an EM radiation behaves like a particle in 90% of
the cases, it also behaves like a wave in the remaining 10% of cases, as in Young's slits
experimentation. The enigma thus remains unsolved for these cases.
When a hard drive periodically makes one, two, three or more errors, it must be formatted. Of
course, this leads to a waste of time, but there is no other solution. In quantum mechanics,
errors or inconsistencies don't occur in one’s, two’s or three’s, …but in ten’s. In such a case,
the only thing to do is to "format" the quantum mechanics. The best approach is to start from
scratch, ignoring the few laws of quantum mechanics that are inconsistent, but keeping
experimentations in mind.
Therefore, to understand the nature of EM radiations, we must return to the early 1900’s, when
Einstein explained the photoelectric effect and discovered special and general relativity.
As stated, the particle aspect of EM radiations, namely photons, will be discussed in Part 4
“Electromagnetism”.
1- “Apparent medium”
This is the visible medium that carries out the experimentations, and from where the
EM wave is emitted.
For example, in Fizeau Experimentation, this medium is water, and in Michelson’s, it is
the Earth's atmosphere moved by the Earth itself.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 9 - 2 - EM radiations
2- “Real medium”
EM waves are propagated in a “real medium”. For example, this "Real Medium" could
be De Broglie "Neutrinos Sea".
The "apparent medium" and the "real medium" are overlaid (fig. 2-1).
"Apparent medium":
Air, water, vacuum…,
in which the experimentations In this figure, points A
and A', as well as the
are carried out apparent and real media,
are separated for teaching
A purposes but, obviously,
they share the same
place. Any apparent
medium has, necessarily,
a subjacent real medium
A’ that is associated with it.
"Real medium" of
propagation of the light Fig. 2-1
1- To be present everywhere
Since EM waves are propagated everywhere, the "real medium” must also be present
everywhere, in air, in water … and even in a vacuum. Spacetime is an excellent
candidate to be this "real medium” since it is present everywhere, even in a vacuum1.
Therefore, spacetime could be used without any problem as a support for EM waves.
This being said, gravity and EM waves do not curve spacetime in the same manner. Please
read the three following documents, Part 1, Parts 3 and Part 4 concerning these subjects.
1
Spacetime is not this unknown aether for which we are looking. Spacetime is spacetime. There is no other
correct definition and spacetime can’t be identified with aether. In order to avoid any confusion, we will use the
term “real medium” instead of "aether”.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 10 - 2 - EM radiations
In fact, the laser beam L is not emitted from the apparent medium as this figure shows, but
from the point 'A' located in this "real medium" which is spacetime of the universe.
"Apparent medium":
Moving support
holding the laser L
diode.
L'
A
A'
"Real medium":
Motionless spacetime. Fig. 2-2
Since light is propagated in the real medium, its speed depends only on the nature of this
medium, and nothing else. In reality, the permittivity of free space ε0 is not a "vacuum
permittivity" but rather a "spacetime permittivity", a physical constant that defines the
spacetime propagation characteristics, as the "spacetime permeability" µ0.
Fizeau, Michelson and other physicists thought that light is propagated in this apparent
medium which is moving, water, air, vacuum etc…, whereas, in fact, it is propagated in this
real medium which is the "motionless" spacetime of the universe.
Note 1
We should not have any confusion between the word “motionless” used in the context of the universe, which is
correct, and the same word used in Special Relativity, which is not relevant in that study.
Note 2
The spacetime of the universe, sometimes called "global spacetime structure", is the one that was created about
13.9 billion years ago, and not the local spacetime of special relativity. So, in this document, the word
"spacetime" will always refer to "global spacetime structure of the universe", as in Friedman-Robertson-Walker
Definition.
Note 3
There should not be any confusion between the apparent medium, from where the EM wave is emitted, and its
propagation medium, the real medium, which is spacetime of the universe.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 11 - 2 - EM radiations
Current Theory
A
Photon
Fig. 2-3
A photon is emitted from A to B, or the converse, to synchronize the two reference spaces, which are both
moving. The points A and B belong to the apparent media. In this case, no one can explain why the speed of
light is constant. Logically, the velocities should be added. Since this is not the case, this diagram must be
revised (…but not the experimentations!!!), despite the fact it has been used since 1905.
Proposed Theory
A
B'
EM wave
A'
Real medium: spacetime of the universe
Fig. 2-4
Light is not propagated in the apparent medium, which supports the sources of light A and B, but in the real
medium, which is global spacetime of the universe. EM radiations do not consist of photons but of EM
waves (please see Part 4 “Electromagnetism” concerning this assertion). As a result, the constant speed of light
is easily explainable. The velocity of light is a function of the real medium characteristics, i.e. spacetime
permittivity ε0, and spacetime permeability µ0. Thus, the speed of light is always 300 000 km/s, whatever the
velocity of the reference space, or the apparent medium, from where the light is emitted.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 12 - 2 - EM radiations
2.7 Conclusions
Therefore, although it amounts to the same thing, it would be more accurate to write:
“The speed of light is 300 000 km/s in spacetime”
rather than:
“The speed of light is 300 000 km/s in a vacuum”
Note:
Under certain conditions, EM waves may move at a speed different than 300 000 km/s. For example, using Bose
Einstein Condensate made up with sodium atoms at -273.15°, Lene Vestergaard Hau, from Harvard University,
USA, slowed down EM waves to 17 m/s. In the same way, EPR also is an exception to the theory. See Part 1,
"Mass and Gravity", and Part 4, “Electromagnetism”, to understand these few exceptions.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 13 - 3 - Movements in Spacetime
3 Movements in Spacetime
This chapter affords the reader a more concrete vision of the role of spacetime in
EM waves. The deduction developed in chapter 2, i.e. EM waves = spacetime
movements, will lead us directly to the knowledge of the constitution of the
elementary particles.
3.1 EM waves
The spacetime vibrations of an EM wave are shown in figure 3-1. This is a simplified figure,
which is not necessarily the real representation of an EM wave. These vibrations are
variations of spacetime density.
The universe is filled with EM waves of all kinds. Thus, spacetime is not motionless but is
vibrating continuously. In this chapter, we only consider the vibrations of EM waves, not
those due to gravitational waves.
In figure 3-1, wave 1 is the main wave, and waves 2, 3, 4… are secondary waves (if they
exist). In this figure, the wave is propagated from left to right.
4 3 2 1
Fig. 3-1
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 14 - 3 - Movements in Spacetime
Fig. 3-2
t t
1 2 3 4
Fig. 3-3 Fig. 3-4
The "reference" is the density of spacetime before the arrival of the wave. The positive and
negative variations of the wave densities, i.e. spacetime densities, are relative to this
reference. This is why the word "relative" was used.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 15 - 3 - Movements in Spacetime
d d
Reference Reference
+ + t + t
+ +
- - - -
3.5 Example
Let's imagine that ambient air is divided into small cubes. In this example, the EM wave is
replaced by a soundwave.
Each cube has a density of air. When a soundwave arrives, the pressure of the air inside each
cube changes in a combination of positive and negative pressures, or high and low pressures.
After the passage of the soundwave, the pressure of cubes falls back to its initial value.
It is this initial value of density of air that is called "reference" on figures 3-5 and 3-6.
Important note
In this example, a sound wave makes a periodic displacement of air into
each cube, which can be identified to EM or Matter waves.
4 Forces in Spacetime
Physicists think that nature has three fundamental forces: gravity, electroweak
force (unified in 1972 by Weinberg and Salam, Nobel Prize – 1979) and strong
nuclear force.
This chapter covers one of these three forces. Differences of high and low
densities of spacetime necessarily produce a force. We have the same
phenomenon in air: the difference of pressure produces wind.
We do not know the character of the force described below, or its properties. At
the present moment, we will simply be satisfied to understand it. We will try to
identify this force later, in the following two chapters.
This principle goes hand in hand with the Einstein's concept of elasticity. Indeed, like any
elastic material, spacetime naturally tends to minimize its curvature.
1
Koenig, De Fermat, Liebniz, Euler, Lagrange, Jacobi and Helmholtz have written similar principles.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 18 - 4 - Forces in Spacetime
As we see in this figure, the word “curve” is synonymous with “density”. Any part of
spacetime that is curved necessarily produces variations of density. These two words express
the same phenomenon.
Variations of
spacetime
density
Fig. 4-1
Thus, the principle of least curvature can be stated in a different way, which will be useful for
us, later in this document:
We do not know if a low density produces a negative polarity or the reverse. Further in this
document, we will presume that a high density of spacetime corresponds to a positive
polarity, and a low density to a negative polarity.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 19 - 4 - Forces in Spacetime
+ + + t
- - -
B
Reference:
zero relative density
Fig. 4-2
Reference:
zero relative
density
A B
Fig. 4-3
Intuitively, we might think that these two areas will cancel out each other. The area of high
density of spacetime in A will annihilate the area of low density of spacetime in B.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 20 - 4 - Forces in Spacetime
We can also demonstrate this phenomenon with the "spacetime curvature" concept (fig. 4-4).
Since spacetime is elastic, the two areas A and B will not remain motionless. In any case,
spacetime tends towards a null relative curvature. The Maupertuis Principle adapted to
spacetime states: The only way to get the least curvature of spacetime is when areas A and B
annihilate each other.
B A
Fig. 4-4
To better understand the phenomenon, let's consider the example of an acoustic wave. As we
know, it is a succession of pressures and depressions in air.
Let's isolate two small cubes of air, one in a pressure half period (A), and the other in a
depression half period (B). Now, let's put them in contact. Intuitively, we might think that
these two areas, A and B, will mutually cancel out each other. The result will be two neutral
areas with zero relative density, like our "reference" in fig. 4-2 and 4-3 or 3.5 and 3.6.
The same phenomenon occurs in spacetime when we put together two areas, one with a high
density of spacetime, and the other with a low density.
If the two areas are far away from each other, nothing occurs. One area doesn't have any
influence on the other.
If their horizon of influence comes into contact, the high density of spacetime in A tends to
cancel the low density of spacetime in B. As we have seen before, the two areas, A and B,
will cancel out each other.
When the annihilation begins, the two areas continually approach each other, and finally
disappear completely if they have exactly the same volume.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 21 - 4 - Forces in Spacetime
This “attraction” of the two areas towards each other until complete annihilation is like an
attractive force.
A B
Fig. 4-5
The principle of least relative density of spacetime, or its twin principle of spacetime
curvature, confirms this attraction. Since the attraction process is identical to the annihilation
process, it is not necessary to go over the preceding explanation again.
A A
Fig. 4-6
When the two areas approach each other, their horizons of influence (L line in fig. 4-6) come
into contact.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 22 - 4 - Forces in Spacetime
Just before the contact, the relative density of spacetime on this line L was zero. If the two
areas continue to approach each other, this relative density will increase or decrease
depending on the polarity but, obviously, will no longer remain null. A repulsive force
appears between the two areas A and B since the line L must remain null.
The principle of least relative density of spacetime or its twin principle of curvature of
spacetime confirms this repulsive force.
Thus:
4.8 Fusion
Under certain conditions, two areas of identical polarity can merge (fig. 4-7).
For example, if the energy of one area is higher than the "barrier" of another, this barrier can
be crossed over and fusion becomes possible. We know this phenomenon on Earth in nuclear
fusion with light nuclei. Thus, under some conditions of proximity, repulsion can become a
fusion.
Fig. 4-7
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 23 - 5 - Electron-Positron Annihilation
5 Electron-Positron Annihilation
In this chapter, we propose a scenario using the attractive and annihilation forces
seen in the preceding chapter, including the explanation of wave-particle duality
seen in chapter 1. More precisely, we will try to imagine what occurs when two
areas of opposite density of spacetime are put together.
For the moment, we do not know the character of this interaction. In the following
chapter, we will try to describe the phenomenon and compare it to something
known.
5.1 Scenario
Let's imagine two areas of spacetime, A and B, of the same dimension (fig. 5-1 on the right).
These areas are two small pieces taken from an EM wave (fig. 5.1 on the left) and are made of
high and low density of spacetime respectively. Area A comes from a positive half-period and
B from a negative one (fig. 5.1 down).
Movements in spacetime
EM wave
A
A B
B
Movements in spacetime
+ + + t
- - -
Fig. 5-1
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 24 - 5 - Electron-Positron Annihilation
In the previous chapter we saw that when two areas of opposite polarity meet, they annihilate
each other.
We must note that all the elements of figure 5-1 are made up of spacetime:
• The areas A and B are “parts” of the EM wave, therefore areas of spacetime
• Surrounding space is also made up of spacetime
• Since everything is spacetime, movements produced by annihilation are also made up
of spacetime. As we saw, these movements are like an eddy or whirlpool in water.
They are EM waves.
For example, let's take an area of a volume equivalent to 511 KeV1, and the other 509 KeV.
After annihilation, it will remain an area of 2 KeV. This area will be ejected in a direction that
preserves the momentum, in relation to the two other disturbances.
1
It would seem strange to relate mass or energy to volume. Explanation of this assertion is given in Part 1 “Mass
and Gravity”.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 25 - 5 - Electron-Positron Annihilation
5.3 Interpretation
This scenario, purely intuitive, coincides curiously with that of an e+e- annihilation.
• The two areas of high and low density of spacetime could be the positron and the
electron.
• The movements of spacetime due to annihilation could be the two gammas of 511
KeV created during an e+e- annihilation.
• The volumes A and B disappear. In physics, the positron and electron disappear too.
• The volume of the movements in spacetime corresponds to the volumes destroyed.
• The remainder, if volumes are slightly different, could be the neutrino. Indeed, we
don't have the proof that the positron has exactly the same mass as that of the
electron1, but we have proof that the neutrino exists. Further discussion of the
neutrino is covered in Part 3 “Quarks and Antimatter”.
• If the neutrino comes from an electron or positron, it must also have a spin = 1/2. This
is exactly what the experimentation proves.
Note: If this scheme is correct, the neutrino should have a very light charge, so light
that it could be very hard to detect. This eventuality is covered in chapter 8.2 "The
Neutrino", in Part 3 "Quarks and Antimatter".
1
The accuracy of measurement is: |me+ - me-| /m < 8.10-9, with a CL of 90%.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 26 - 5 - Electron-Positron Annihilation
6 Nature of Particles
We know of about 300 elementary particles. Among those, physicists have favored
the electron. It seems that the electron, and its antiparticle the positron, are the
basic particles of the universe. For this reason we have also chosen the electron
and the positron with which to continue our research into the constitution of
particles.
This phenomenon is very simple to explain. The positive Coulomb Field of the nucleus
attracts the negative areas of the EM wave and pushes back the positive areas, namely
the areas of low and high density of spacetime. Thus, the wave decays in two parts
(fig. 6-1 and 6-2). These two “pieces of wave” are e+e- pair(s).
Obviously, it is impossible to create particles or any other object from nothing1. The
electron and positron originate somewhere, and this “somewhere” can only be the
original EM wave, i.e. spacetime vibrations.
1
Spacetime is not considered as "nothing".
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 28 - 6 - Nature of Particles
d e+ d e+
+ + t + t
+ +
- - -
- -
e- e-
Fig. 6-1 Fig. 6-2
Since the original EM wave is made up of spacetime, the electron and the positron are
necessarily made up of spacetime too. We can deduce that:
3) Electron-positron annihilation
We have studied, in the previous chapter, the annihilation of an electron and a positron.
Since the result, two gammas of 511 KeV, are a movement in spacetime, the origin, or
the electron and the positron, is made up of spacetime too. This experimentation is a
simple conversion from spacetime (particles) to spacetime (gammas), in accordance
with the wave-particle duality explanation of chapter 1.
4) De Broglie Waves
In 1924, Louis De Broglie had the idea that any particles could have an associated wave
similar to the EM wave. For De Broglie, all the waves have a comparable constitution.
The experimentations of Davisson (Nobel Prize - 1937) and Germer in 1927 confirmed
De Broglie's theory. So:
! Particles and matter waves are of the same constitution (first principle of
duality).
! "Matter waves1" and EM waves and are of comparable constitution (De
Broglie).
By association, we deduce that particles have the same constitution as EM waves, i.e.
they are made of spacetime.
1
The subject of EM and matter waves is covered in the two following documents: Part 3 “Quarks and
antimatter”, and Part 4 “Electromagnetism”.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 29 - 6 - Nature of Particles
5) Coulomb's Force
Let's return to the scenario discussed in the preceding chapter and try to identify this
force. What is this unknown force that brings closer the two areas A and B until their
complete annihilation? We have four possibilities:
• Gravity? The scenario of chapter 5 couldn't work with two areas of identical
polarity. Since gravity disregards polarity, this unknown force is not gravity.
• The strong nuclear force? In chapter 5, we never mentioned nuclei or quarks.
Thus, this unknown force cannot be the strong nuclear force.
• The weak nuclear force? In the same way, it is not a question of interactions
with bosons Z°, W+ or W-. This unknown force is not a weak nuclear force or,
more precisely, the weak nuclear component of the electroweak force.
• The EM force? By elimination, it must be the EM force.
We deduce that the unknown force discussed in the preceding chapter is the Coulomb
component of EM force. This conclusion seems logical since the two areas, A and B, are
"pieces of EM waves", which are related to EM force.
Since the Coulomb Force acts only on charged particles, we deduce that the two areas A and
B are charged particles. However, these two areas are “pieces” of an EM wave, i.e. spacetime.
We naturally conclude that the particles are made up of spacetime.
6.2 Conclusions
The conclusion is that Nature is founded on only one basis, which is summarized below.
Note: the concept of polymorphism has been added to the following definition for
reasons that will be discussed in Part 3 “Quarks and Antimatter”.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 30 - 6 - Nature of Particles
EM waves are
Medium is spacetime
movements in
(chapter 2)
spacetime (chapter 3)
Particles
Have necessarily the same internal
constitution as waves and medium, i.e.
Spacetime
Thus, the proposed theory is far from being unrealistic since, in the 1920's, this great physicist
thought that Nature was directly connected to spacetime.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 31 - 6 - Nature of Particles
• Either the charge is independent of the four known dimensions and thus cannot be
expressed by the form q = f(t,x,y,z). It is then necessary to envisage a fifth dimension,
independent of the others four. This new dimension is the charge, q. In this way, the
universe variables would be t,x,y,z,q.
• Or, the charge is a function of four known dimensions and can be expressed by the
form q = f(t,x,y,z). In this case, we can remain in these four well-known dimensions. All
particles are then expressed with the four spacetime variables: t,x,y,z.
Except for the few years of his life when Einstein was interested in the Kaluza Theories, he
believed the universe had only 4 dimensions. The previous demonstration shows that he was
right. It is not necessary to add a fifth dimension to explain the charge.
7 Clarification
As the discussion stands now, the reader may take the following stance:
"This does not mean anything… When I take a hammer, I see that
this hammer is made of matter, and not of the so-called polymorphic
areas of high and low densities of spacetime…”.
This chapter is probably the most difficult to understand of the theory since it tries
to explain to the reader that all the matter of the universe is made up of spacetime
areas and that we are living in a virtual world. This is far from being obvious.
2 - Waves
In accordance with De Broglie, matter and waves are identical. Thus, the human body,
at least the 0.001% that remains after all the vacuum is removed, would be nothing but
waves…
3 - Energy
As we know, E = mc². So, this pinhead would be identical… to pure energy… We will
further reconsider this equation in Part 4 “Electromagnetism”.
Of course not. It is obvious that we can’t continue to call “matter” something that is 99.999%
vacuum and 0.001% waves or energy…
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 34 - 7 - Clarification
It would be more reasonable to consider that what we call “matter” is nothing but a virtual
concept since a vacuum and waves don't exist in concrete terms. So, if a vacuum and waves
are both virtual concepts, we are living in a virtual world.
Please, note that this is not a new idea. These conclusions were well known in the last
century, in particular when Davisson and Germer demonstrated in 1927 that matter and waves
are identical.
Note: This enigma (99,999% of an object is a vacuum) is fully explained in Part 3 “Quarks
and Antimatter”.
The Spacetime Model is a little more precise regarding the nature of waves (fig. 7-1).
So, the major difficulty doesn't arise from the Spacetime Model but from what we have
known for 50 years: 99,999% of matter is made of a vacuum.
We already know that gravity has its origin in spacetime. The Spacetime Model demonstrates
that spacetime is also "curved" by EM and De Broglie Waves. The Spacetime Model simply
extends the Einstein Concept to all components of the universe, stating that
All is spacetime
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 35 - 7 - Clarification
Current theory
A vacuum De Broglie
Waves (1)
+
Proposed theory
A vacuum De Broglie
Waves (2)
+
Fig. 7-1
(1) At the present time, no one knows exactly the constitution of De Broglie Waves
(2) The constitution of matter and many enigmas of quantum mechanics are fully explained if we
consider that De Broglie and EM Waves are spacetime variations. This is the only contribution of
this new theory.
7.3 Explanation
In reality, we must not think in terms of “matter” but in terms of “forces”. Indeed, forces
alone generate all forms of communication experienced in human life:
Of course, all these forces are invisible, as those of two magnets, but they exist and must be
taken into consideration in any explanation of what we call “matter”.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - 36 - 7 - Clarification
• If all the EM force disappeared, we would not have any more light. We would be
blind.
• Acoustic waves are propagated in the air by forces. If these forces did not exist, we
could not hear noises, music, or speech.
• We know that nerves propagate electric potentials. If our hands were disconnected
from our brain, we would not have any feelings (sensory nerves), or movements
(motor nerves).
• But the chemical interactions between neurotransmitters and glial cells of our brain are
Coulomb Forces. Thus, our brain would no longer function.
• Molecules are associations of atoms thanks to the Coulomb Force. Thus, the human
body, life, and all the objects that surround us would not exist since there would be no
association of atoms in molecules.
• Moreover the atoms themselves could not exist since it is still the Coulomb Force that
maintains the electrons on their orbital. If we remove the Coulomb Force from the
nucleus, what would become of the Schrödinger Equation?
• At last, nucleons are quarks associations thanks to the nuclear force.
Thus, if all of these forces did not exist, the universe would only be made of free electrons
and positrons1. In other words, the universe would be made of areas of low and high densities
of spacetime.
Finally, these polymorphic areas of spacetime that we call “matter”, that is to say atoms,
which are made of a vacuum and waves or energy, have only a passive role to play in Nature.
On earth, we encounter the same situation. For example, on a CD, it is not the material, or
PVC, which is relevant, but the data or music registered on it, i.e. a virtual concept.
To summarize, we can say that Nature = Forces. Forces are a virtual concept produced by
spacetime which, by various combinations, make up atoms, molecules, and finally the
universe and life.
1
We will confirm later, in Part 3 “Quarks and Antimatter”, that quarks are made up of positrons.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - I - Complements
Complements
Predictions
According to paragraph 5.3, the neutrino could have a very slight charge.
…/…
Each atom has a particular proportion of open and closed volume. This is why
mass and volume seem to be two different quantities but this is an illusion. At the
particle level, more exactly at the electron and positron level, mass equals volume.
Composite particles, like mesons, are combinations of other classes of volumes.
Gravity
Contrary to a preconceived idea, spacetime is not curved by mass but by closed
volume. This phenomenon is the same as when a ball is immersed into water: It is the
volume of the ball, and not its mass, which produces the displacement of water.
Antimatter
From this discovery, we can deduce that antimatter is not located at the bottom of
the universe but right before our eyes, embedded in u and d quarks.
The calculation is fully explained in this Part and is 100% accurate for all 2930
known isotopes.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - III - Complements
Part 4 - Electromagnetism
The mystery of the wave-particle duality solved in Part 2 leads to a full knowledge
of electromagnetism. This phenomenon is quite simple to understand.
In short, when a charged particle is motionless, its electric field has a spherical
symmetry. When it moves, it becomes a wave and its spherical symmetry
disappears. Its 1D space is transformed into a 2D/3D space. A magnetic component
(2D/3D) is added to the electric field (1D) of the particle.
Unification of forces
This part unifies the three basic forces (gravity, electroweak and strong nuclear force)
in two generic forces: the Coulomb Force and the Hooke Force.
The Universe
A suggestion regarding the creation of the universe is proposed. In reality, the Big-
Bang Theory does not explain the “electron mystery" and this enigma is discussed. This
Part offers two suggestions, much more credible than the “Big-Bang”, regarding the
creation of the universe.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - IV - Complements
Contact
You can contact the author1 by email at:
toe-author@orange.fr
or writing to:
M. Jacky JEROME
Editions Arts et Culture 42
4 square Kennedy
42120 LE COTEAU
(France)
1
Note: The author is a physics hobbyist and does not work in an institutional establishment. The writing of the
Spacetime Model has been done entirely on his own money and time, with no help from the scientific
community. If you find some error in this document, please let him know.
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - V - Complements
Table of content
Introduction........................................................................................I – IV
1. Wave-Particle Duality
1.1 Current definition of duality.............................................................1
1.2 Explanation of the duality................................................................1
1.3 First principle of duality...................................................................3
1.4 Important deduction .........................................................................4
1.5 Second principle of duality ..............................................................4
1.6 Third principle of duality .................................................................5
1.7 Polymorphism ..................................................................................5
1.8 History..............................................................................................6
1.9 Conclusions......................................................................................6
2. EM Radiations
2.1 History..............................................................................................7
2.2 Nature of EM radiations...................................................................8
2.3 Separation of media ........................................................................8
2.4 Property of the “Real Medium” ......................................................9
2.5 Constant speed of light ....................................................................10
2.6 Case of two reference spaces ...........................................................11
2.7 Conclusions......................................................................................12
3. Movements in Spacetime
3.1 EM waves.........................................................................................13
3.2 Movements in spacetime..................................................................13
3.3 Mathematical formalization .............................................................14
3.4 Polarity of spacetime .......................................................................14
3.5 Example ..........................................................................................15
4. Forces in Spacetime
4.1 Elasticity of spacetime ....................................................................17
4.2 Principle of "Least curvature" ..........................................................17
4.3 Principle of "Least relative density of spacetime" ...........................18
4.4 Densitiy of spacetime ......................................................................18
4.5 Annihilation process ........................................................................19
4.6 Attractive force ................................................................................20
4.7 Repulsive force ................................................................................21
4.8 Fusion...............................................................................................22
The Spacetime Model - Part 2 - VI - Complements
5. Electron-Positron Annihilation
5.1 Scenario............................................................................................23
5.2 Different volumes ............................................................................24
5.3 Interpretation ....................................................................................25
6. Nature of Particles
6.1 Constitution of particles ...................................................................27
6.2 Recapitulation ..................................................................................29
6.3 Conclusions......................................................................................29
6.4 Einstein's Point of view....................................................................30
6.5 The fifth dimension? ........................................................................31
7. Clarification
7.1 What we know .................................................................................33
7.2 The Spacetime Model contribution..................................................34
7.3 Explanation ......................................................................................35
7.4 Importance of forces in spacetime ...................................................36
Complements.......................................................................................I - IV
A step toward the
Theory of Everything
Part 3
Jacky JEROME
Ingénieur Européen EUR-ING
Ingénieur DPE (Diplômé Par l'Etat)
Ingénieur IPF
Ingénieur ITP-ECI
Email: toe-author@orange.fr
ISBN 97829531234-0-3
Editions Arts et Culture 42
4, square Kennedy
42120 LE COTEAU (France)
Cover: On the left of the photo of Einstein: Maxwell, Feynman, Max Planck, Schrödinger
On the right: Pauli, Niels Bohr, Marie Curie, De Brogglie, Dirac, Heisenberg
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - II - Introduction
Patent Rights
This theory, the “Spacetime Model”, was registered at
INPI, the French Patent Institute, under the following
references:
Before reading…
To fully understand this part, the reader must be familiar with the deductions and results
developed in Parts 1 and 2. These results are summarized below:
A B
Each atom has a particular proportion of open and closed volume. This is why mass and
volume give us the illusion of being two different quantities.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - IV - Introduction
Validations (Part 1)
This part describes a simple experimentation, which highlights a black hole behavior when
R = Rs. The Schwarzschild Metric and Newton Law are also calculated using this new
explanation of Mass and Gravity, from the Hooke Law. Moreover, the proposed theory is
in perfect accordance with the Von Laue Diagram.
This explanation of wave-particle duality leads to a major deduction: when the particle is
motionless, it remains in a corpuscular state, and when it is moving, it becomes a wave.
Waves = Matter
(Spacetime variations) (Spacetime areas)
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 -1- 1 - MicroDomains
1 MicroDomains
It seems that spacetime would be parcelled out in a kind of "neutral electrons" called
µDomains in this document.
This chapter covers the µDomains concept and gives arguments in their favour: why
they are necessary, their use, how to verify their existence etc...
It is impossible, or highly improbable, that the universe was created at an intermediate stage
with so many different charges: - 1, - 2/3, -1/3, 0, +1/3, +2/3 and +1, taking into account both
particles and antiparticles of the Standard Model, including the three neutrinos.
Seven different charges are too many to make this point of view credible
It is obvious that the universe was created in a very simple state. It is a necessary condition.
The simplest is the best. Its symmetry was elementary, probably originating with only one
particle.
The original particle remains to be determined. If physicists were to choose a particle among
the 300 known, it would almost certainly be the electron. It is a logical choice.
Since the electron charge is - 1, we need at least an opposite charge of +1 to preserve the
symmetry. Moreover, it is not possible to build anything with only one charge. Thus, the
second particle to be considered is, of necessity, the positron, with a charge of +1. It is,
therefore, logical to think that the creation of the universe required only two particles, the
electron and the positron.
This means that ALL PARTICLES are made up with Electrons and Positrons. The
reader will have confirmation of this assumption in the following chapters.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 -2- 1 - MicroDomains
1.2 µDomains
The physicist Pierre Weiss discovered the existence of microscopic magnetic fields, called
“Weiss Domains”. Later, Felix Bloch (Nobel Prize - 1952) discovered that walls, called
"Bloch Walls", surrounded the Weiss Domains.
It would seem that global spacetime1 of the universe is divided into quanta called
"microdomains", analogous with the Weiss Domains. These µDomains are electrons (or
positrons) without charge. Each µDomain could thus have an mass of 511 KeV.
It is a simple assumption but we will see that it can be verified, at least for the µDomains,
(possibly not for the walls). This leads to interesting conclusions. In particular, µDomains
explain perfectly the Coulomb Force, magnetism, quarks, antimatter etc….
Let's examine the following table 1-1, which summarizes the well-known particles. In this
table, the muon and tau are missing since they are some kind of electron.
Charge
1
For a definition of "Global Spacetime", please see Part 2 "Constitution of Matter", paragraph 2.5, footnote #2
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 -3- 1 - MicroDomains
All the particles are grouped in three’s. It should be noted that a similar approach has already
been used in physics with Lie Groups.
1
Paragraph 3.7 in Part 1 "Mass and Gravity" explains the deviation of light thank to µDomains which are the
support to this phenomenon.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 -4- 1 - MicroDomains
At the present time, µDomains have never been detected because, like neutrinos, they have no
charge1. The existence of the neutrino is obvious when we examine the conservation laws of
momentum. This is not the case with µDomains. That is the difficulty.
1
Not exactly. The Spacetime Model predicts that the neutrino has a very little charge. See § 8.2.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 -5- 1 - MicroDomains
-1 0 +1 Charge
Fig. 1-2
Note: We will see, in Part 5 "Forces, the Universe", that the charge of a µDomain may shift to
another µDomain making electron-positron or matter-antimatter pairs.
π− meson muon
Electron
µDomains
π° meson
Electron
Fig. 1-3
The central particle is the π° meson. An electron surrounds it in order to build a π - meson1.
The outer-shell electron charge is distributed in µDomains surrounding the central π° meson.
Some µDomains are locked up in the mass difference π -- .π°.
1
See the following chapter. For the rule of addition of spins, please see paragraph 2-6, Part 4
"Electromagnetism".
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 -6- 1 - MicroDomains
It would seem that the µDomains, electrons and positrons, gather in multiples of 3 or 91. The
following calculation (data from PDG) is based on groups of 9 µDomains. The abbreviated
form below is µD for one µDomain and µD9 for 9 µDomains.
! The muon, including the outer-shell electron, consists of 23 µD9. Each µD9 has a
volume, i.e. mass, of 105.658369/23 = 4.5938 MeV.
! The difference between the π+/− and π° meson is 4.5936 MeV. This difference seems
to be equal to one µD9 calculated from the muon.
The tau would have 387 µD9. Each µD9 of the tau has a volume of 1776.99/387 = 4.5917
MeV. We can note that 387 is also a multiple of 9. However, the tau volume (mass) is 17
times more important than the muon mass. An adjustment of the µDomains according to the
volume may be necessary2.
The following table summarize the calculation. The CL between the muon and the pion, and
the tau and the pion, are:
µD9 µD CL
As follows:
• The theory predicts that a µDomain has a volume close to 511 KeV. Calculations give
510,4 KeV for these three particles. It is a normal result since the volume (the mass) of
each particle is compressed due to the curvature of spacetime (see Part 2 "Mass and
Gravity").
• The CL of correlations obtained is very interesting:
- Between the muon and the pion: 99.9948 %
- Between the adjusted tau and the muon: 99.9972 %, with a measurement error
of 0.0309%.
At last, these results are close to the center of tolerance of each particle.
1
This is not a rule but only a simple remark by the author.
2
This calculation isn't described in this document but the Author can send his study by email upon request.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 -7- 2 - The "Distributed Charge" Model
Contrary to a preconceived idea, in atoms, the electron is not moving around the
nucleus as a punctual particle. Its charge is distributed into quanta, making a kind of
"cloud of charges" around the nucleus. This is a consequence of wave-particle duality.
This new model can also be applied to composite particles such as neutrons or mesons
and its application is of considerable interest.
When the wave, i.e. the electron, approaches the nucleus, it takes the form that any
polymorphic object, in similar circumstances, does: it spreads out over its orbital, like a drop
of oil does over the eggshell. Its form will resemble a thin shell of spacetime density
surrounding the nucleus (fig. 2-1).
Fig. 2-1
µDomains
Fig. 2-2
Current theory
The Schrödinger Equation could say that the probability of finding the electron at a given
position and at a given time, in this example, is 0.02. Since, around the nucleus, we have
50 µDomains, the total probability of finding the electron on its orbital is 0.02 x 50 = 1.
Proposed theory
In the Spacetime Model, the measurement1 does not relate to the electron as a particle,
but to a negligible part of its charge. The probability of finding the electron is always 1
(100%) in each µDomain, but the charge measured is –0.02 instead of -1. Since we have
50 µDomains, we obtain the same result.
As we see, from a mathematical point of view, nothing is changed. However, the explanation
of this phenomenon is different. In both cases, the whole probability is 1. Therefore, the
Schrödinger Equation can continue to be used, but it would be more correct to replace
"probability density" with "charge distribution".
1
We mention “measurement” making the theory comprehensible, but it is obvious that a real measurement of the
electron under the above conditions must be in accordance with the Heisenberg Uncertainly Relation.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 -9- 2 - The "Distributed Charge" Model
Note: Einstein never agreed with this probabilistic explanation posed by Max Born (Nobel
prize – 1954). All things considered, the Spacetime Model is more close to Einstein's view
than to its opposite Max Born’s and Schrödinger’s view.
For example, let’s consider a “ball pit”, also known as “ball pool” (fig. 2-3).
Fig. 2-3
Each ball is empty. Therefore, the amount of PVC in each ball is very small, so small that we
can consider that 99% of the pit is a vacuum.
In atoms, the phenomenon is the same. If the electron is that particle moving around the
nucleus, no one can explain why 99.999% of the atom is a vacuum (fig. 2-4A).
If electrons are distributed in µDomains as figure 2-2 shows, the amount of "matter" (0.001%)
is the same but we have the perception that "matter" exists (fig. 2-4B).
If the electron is that particle moving around the nucleus at a great distance from it (fig. 2-
4A), the probability that a photon has to meet the electron is practically zero. Today, under
these circumstances, why does the PE yield reach 95%?
If the electron is distributed in µDomains all around the nucleus (fig. 2-4B), this enigma
becomes clear. In such a case, the PE yield may reach 100%.
Note: the footnote of paragraph 3.1, in Part 4, offers more information concerning this
enigma.
d quark
2/3 – 1
u quark -1/3 Note: The peripheral
+2/3
electron may not be
spherical and
homogenous.
u quark
For the moment, let's say that the central charge of both quarks is +2/3. The outer-shell
electron of the d quark has a double effect: it decreases the charge from +2/3 (u quark) to –1/3
(d quark), and it increases the volume, i.e. the mass (see Part 2 "Constitution of Matter"). This
explains the mass difference between the d and u quarks.
It should be noted that the volume of the d quark is considerably smaller than that of any
atom; it is a closed volume. Since this overall volume is hermetic to spacetime, it is mass-like.
1
The rule of addition of spins is discussed in chapter 2-6, Part 4 "Electromagnetism".
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 11 - 3 - Atom
3 Atom
Niels Bohr (Nobel Prize - 1922) thought that electrons were continually moving
around the nucleus inside the atom. Around 1930, Schrödinger (Nobel Prize -
1933) created another concept: "probability density". In this concept, the electron
is a particle, as the third postulate of quantum mechanics indicates: “the
probability of locating the particle is described by the wavefunction…”. The word
"particle" is not ambiguous and doesn't mean a wave or anything else. This new
concept was an improvement on Bohr’s idea but did not solve the enigma of the
quantification of orbitals.
Since atoms are built according to the "distributed charge” model”, this chapter
is the continuation of the preceding one which covers this subject. We will try to
bring logical answers to those questions that are mathematically verified but, so
far, remain unanswered.
Moreover, if the electron is a punctual particle, the Pauli Principle also can't be explained.
If the charge of the electron is distributed in several µDomains around the nucleus, according
to the "Distributed Charge Model", the quantification of orbitals becomes obvious. The
following example explains this phenomenon.
Let's place five magnets, all oriented in the same direction (fig. 3-1), in a vertical rail.
Each magnet is subject to gravity, which attracts it toward Earth, and to a repulsive
force due to the adjacent magnets.
The lower magnets carry the total weight of the upper ones. This is why spaces between
magnets are not equally drawn. The levels E1, E2, E3… are, thus, dynamically built.
By repeating the same experiment any number of times and under the same conditions,
we will always find the same spaces E1, E2, E3… We could think that these magnets are
systematically placed on imaginary rails, or “quantum rails”, E1, E2, E3… In other
words, we could think that the position of each magnet E1, E2, E3…is "quantified".
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 12 - 3 - Atom
N S E4
Quantum
N S E3
energy
levels
N S E2
N S E1
N S E0
Fig. 3-1
If the electron is distributed in the µDomains surrounding the nucleus, according to our
"distributed charges" model, this enigma no longer exists. The above example explains the
construction of orbitals inside the atom. In particular, we must note that the orbitals are
dynamically built.
In the example, if the magnet E1 is removed, the magnet E2 drops down and takes the empty
place of the removed magnet (fig. 3-2).
N S E2
N S E1
N S E0
Fig. 3-2
1
In quantum mechanics, there is often confusion between “discrete” and “quantified”. In the Schrödinger
Equation, we have both definitions. On one hand, the Laguerre Polynomials are discrete and, on the other hand,
the Planck Constant is quantified. In this document, when the two concepts are simultaneously present, we will
use the qualifier of “quantified”, even if this word is not entirely correct.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 13 - 3 - Atom
Fig. 3-3 shows the principle of the “distributed charge” model inside the atom. This diagram
is only for illustration since, as we know, orbitals are not spherical.
Next orbital to be
filled: n=4. n=1
To sum up, the quantification of orbitals is a mathematical illusion. Orbitals are not quantified
but are dynamically built taking into account electrons that are still in place. New electrons,
distributed in several µDomains, take their natural place on orbitals having the most
favourable Coulomb Force.
In the Spacetime Model, since the charge is distributed in many µDomains, the overall charge
surrounding the nucleus is stable. This problem doesn’t exist.
1
Sometimes, some orbitals are far from each other. This is the case of the "p" layer orbitals. We can also have
coinciding energy levels of layers, like "s" and "p" for example (layers known as "sp").
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 14 - 3 - Atom
In the Spacetime Model, the Schrödinger Equation doesn’t relate to a probability but to a
charge. Since the nucleus (the main charge) is precisely located in the center of the atom, the
maximum charge is obviously focused in the center.
Around the nucleus, we can have either one or two electrons distributed in several µDomains
(fig. 3-4). If two electrons fill the orbital, the spin locks them up1.
However, a more accurate explanation of the spin is necessary to fully understand this
enigma, but it is obvious that the current model, which is based on a punctual particle moving
around the nucleus, is far from reality.
Important note: The following explanation is only a suggestion and must be taken with great
care.
Fig. 3-4
1
Chapters 2-6, Part 4 "Electromagnetism" cover the spin.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 15 - 4 - U and d quarks
4 U and d quarks
We saw that electrons and positrons are charged µDomains, i.e. µDomains
containing a spacetime density higher and lower than the average density (see
Part 2 "Constitution of Matter"). Would u and d quarks follow the same model?
! The universe is made of spacetime. It has only four dimensions. Not one more.
! µDomains include various relative densities of spacetime: the negative densities, by
convention, are electrons, and the positive ones are positrons (see Part 1).
! These electrons, positrons and µDomains make up quarks
! The "distributed charge" model also applies to quarks.
It is interesting to see that we have two means by which to verify this theory:
1. If this theory is correct, we should find as many electrons as positrons in the universe.
This leads to the resolution of the antimatter enigma.
2. If this theory is correct, it should also solve the enigma of the proton's charge. Indeed,
the proton’s and electron's charges are both strictly equivalent, with a remarkable
accuracy of 10-21. This is a true mystery for physicists.
At last, it should be noted that a confirmation of this quark model is done in the following
chapters, in particular concerning the proton enigma and location of antimatter.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 16 - 4 - U and d quarks
Phase 1: Fusion
e+ µD(s) e+
Two positrons merge with one or many µD(s)
to make a three-particle group. The µD(s) + +
is(are) necessary to bind the two positrons, to
avoid the Coulomb Repulsion.
The result is an intermediate particle having a
charge of +2.
Phase 2: Separation
The charge of +2 tends to be uniformly
distributed. When the Coulomb Repulsion
appears, the particle decays into three sub-
particles. The charge of +2 is then divided into
three parts. Each sub-particle, therefore, has a
charge of +2/3. These sub-particles are u u u u
quarks.
Phase 3: d quarks e-
u +
When a free electron, in its waveform, meets a
u quark, it surrounds the quark according to the
“distributed charge” model. The electron closes
up one or many µDomains. Thus, we obtain a µDs
charge of +2/3 - 1 = -1/3. The volume, or the d quark u
mass, of the d quark is necessarily larger than
that of the u quark. Please note that the
fermions/bosons law of addition is covered in
paragraph 2-6, Part 4.
Fig. 13-1
Note 1
Experimentation gives a value different from 511 KeV for a u quark. Several explanations are possible. For
example, the two positrons may merge with a µD10, that is to say a group of 10 µDomains. In this case, the
overall volume will be equal to 12 µD (µD10 + two positrons), and each u quark would have a volume, or a
mass, of (12 x 511 KeV)/3 = 2 044 KeV.
It is possible that the volume (the mass) of the u quark is:
(n x 511KeV)/3, with n = integer value ≥ 3.
It would be premature trying to solve this problem because it is impossible to isolate quarks and, therefore,
results of experimentations (from 1.5 MeV to 3 MeV for the u quark) are inaccurate..
Note 2
The scheme of figure 13-1 is probably not exact and needs some adjustments, but there is no longer any doubt
about the construction of the u and d quarks from electrons and positrons. If this quark configuration solves so
many enigmas, it is not a simple matter of chance.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 17 - 4 - U and d quarks
4.3 Conclusions
We think having:
(matter) (antimatter)
electron positron
u quark u antiquark
d quark d antiquark
neutrino antineutrino
muon antimuon
tau antitau
etc…
(matter) (antimatter)
electron positron
Mark Twain
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 18 - 4 - U and d quarks
5 Antimatter
If the Quark Model previously described is correct, it must provide the solution to one
of the greatest enigmas of physics: where is the antimatter in the universe?
Initially, from the Quark Model, we will calculate the quantity of antimatter inside
atoms. Then, we will extend this calculation to the antimatter in the universe
1/ Location in atoms
! If electron-positron pairs were created at the same time and in the same place,
positrons are, necessarily, close to electrons.
! We already know where the electrons are.
! Since the atoms are neutral, the positrons we are looking for are probably in the
positive part of the atom, the nucleus. That these positrons are associated in quarks or
in one form or in another does not matter. One thing is sure, positrons are not far from
electrons. In other words, we can say: Search the electron, and you will find its
companion, the positron1, which, by necessity, is close to it (probably in the positive
part of the atom).
It is obvious that, if at a given time, an electron was created in the universe, its
counterpart, the positron, is certainly not 14 billion light-years from the event.
2/ β + radioactivity
Let's imagine that each nucleus is a type of balloon filled with helium. We know that,
in the universe, we must have a large amount of helium, but we don't know where it is.
At the bottom of universe? In extra-dimensions (string theory)? In SUSY? …
1
As on Earth: "Search the woman, and you will find her companion, the man"… It is obvious that women and
men, necessarily, live on the same planet. It would be strange to consider that women live on Earth, whereas men
live on a planet located 14 billion light-years away from Earth.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 20 - 5 - Antimatter
After accurate investigations, we note that one part per million of helium flows out of
each balloon. What should we think? Of course, the immediate thought is: "The little
amount of helium that flows out of the balloons leads us to suppose that the balloons
are filled with the helium for which we are searching". It is obvious.
We know that a very small amount of antimatter flows out of the nucleus by way of β+
radioactivity. Whatever the name given to the internal particles, bosons, gluons, X, Y or
Z… we can strongly suppose that antimatter is enclosed inside the nucleus. This means
that we must undertake our investigations to find antimatter starting with the nucleus1.
To summarize, these two starting points let's consider that we have a strong probability of
finding antimatter inside the nucleus, and not 14 billion light-years from Earth.
Whatever the chemical element is, this calculation indicates that, in any atom, we have
exactly the same number of positrons as electrons. Therefore, the antimatter, i.e. positrons, is
strictly equal to the matter, i.e. electrons.
This conclusion is in accordance with Feynman's Formalism (Nobel Prize 1965) and QED in
which the electron and positron have symmetrical roles in quantum mechanics.
(5-1)
ke+ = ke- = 2A k = number of electrons or
positrons inside an atom
A = atomic number (A=N+Z)
1
In reality, the β+ radioactivity is not directly related to quarks (see Part 5). However, the reasoning given here is
correct. Without good reason, it is not logical to think that antimatter is located in the deepest universe.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 21 - 5 - Antimatter
Spacetime
See fig. 1-2, in
+ -
e µD e chapter 1
Electron
d
u u
d d d
u u u u u u
Proton Neutron
-
3u+1e 3 u + 2 e-
Total
(3Z+3N) u quarks
(Z+2N) electrons
Positrons Electrons
Electrons
U quarks ..................... 3N+3Z Inside d quarks............2N+Z
Nucleus....................... Z+2N
Converted in positrons (*): Atomic
Atomic electrons ......... Z
electrons.......... Z
Total Positrons .........2N+2Z Total
Total electrons ......... 2N+2Z
........................2Z+2N
5.3 Example
The table below (fig. 5-2) shows the isobars A = 16. This table must be read as follow:
Neutrons Protons
udd uud Antimatter Matter
Nucleus A N Z uN dN uZ dZ Utotal e+ e-
Be 16 12 4 12 24 8 4 48 32 32
B 16 11 5 11 22 10 5 48 32 32
C 16 10 6 10 20 12 6 48 32 32
N 16 9 7 9 18 14 7 48 32 32
O 16 8 8 8 16 16 8 48 32 32
F 16 7 9 7 14 18 9 48 32 32
Ne 16 6 10 6 12 20 10 48 32 32
Fig. 5-2
Conclusion: We see that we have exactly the same number of positrons as electrons. Matter
strictly equals antimatter. This number of electrons or positrons is, in any case, and in any
atom, the double of the mass number A. This means that antimatter is located into the
nucleons' quarks.
1. The "exotic" Li3 is the only exception but its existence is not proven. Its acknowledgement depends on
published works. In any case, this exception can't be retained as a valid objection. The problem comes from the
lack of a neutron. In the Spacetime Model, as we will see, each nucleus needs at least one neutron. The Li3
doesn't have any. If this isotope does indeed exist, it should decay immediately into three protons. The author
doesn't have detailed information about Li3.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 23 - 5 - Antimatter
Neutrons
Each neutron is made up of three “u” quarks and two electrons (see the following chapter,
paragraph 6-2). The three “u” quarks are made up of two positrons. Two positrons and two
electrons mean that we have a perfect equivalence of matter and antimatter in the neutron.
With:
ke-, ke+Number of electrons or positrons in the universe
nn Number of neutrons in various elements. The “2” factor comes from formula (5-1).
NH Number of hydrogen atoms1 in the universe. As in the neutron calculation, the
“2” factor comes from the formula (5-1).
Index A Atomic number of the various atoms in the universe. The limit “m” is the
maximum atomic number supposed in the universe. “A” serves as an index too.
It starts from 2 since we have already taken hydrogen into account.
NA Number of atoms, of index A, in the universe.
2A Number of electrons or positrons of the atom of index A. The “2” factor comes
from the same formula (5-1).
ε Free electrons and positrons in various forms in the universe, other particles,
free electrons from ionized atoms etc.. This quantity is negligible when compared
to the other terms.
1
Excluding the hydrogen isotopes, which are calculated in the following term.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 24 - 5 - Antimatter
(Part 3)
Atoms, neutrons, particles
As much matter (electrons) (Part 3)
as antimatter (positrons)
Fig. 5-3
-o-o-o-o-
“The greatest joke that Nature has played on us was to have us believe that antimatter is
at the edge of the universe when it is right before our eyes, into the quarks.”
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 25 - 6 - Nucleons
6 Nucleons
The explanation of the enigma of the antimatter in the universe confirms the quark
model described in chapter 4. Are the nucleons affected by this structure?
This chapter covers the proton and neutron schemes according to the "distributed
charge" model. A scenario of the creation of nucleons is proposed.
6.1 Proton
The (u u d) quark structure of the proton in figure 6-1A is not exact and must be replaced by
the (u u u) + electron structure (fig. 6-1B), which is in perfect accordance with
experimentations. That does not change any previous calculations of antimatter.
Indeed, the three quarks (u u d) are not bound by a hypothetical strong nuclear force whose
origin is unknown. Nature made things a lot simpler. A free electron surrounds the three u
quarks and keeps them locked up. This electron acts as a rubber band: the more one moves
away from the center, the stronger the force becomes. When the proton interacts, its electron
surrounds a u quark, which becomes a d quark. This makes us believe that the d quark exists
inside the proton. This, however, is an illusion. Examination of some interactions and logical
deductions let’s suppose that the d quark is built during the interaction with the proton’s
electron of one of its three u quarks.
6.2 Neutron
The neutron is a proton surrounded by an electron (fig. 6-2). Please note that the
fermions/bosons law of addition is covered in paragraph 2.6, Part 4. This electron has two
effects:
! It cancels the positive charge of the proton making it neutral
! It increases the volume, i.e. the mass, of the proton.
These effects are confirmed by experimentation. However, µDomains are probably kept
closed between the two electrons surrounding the three quarks. If that were the case, the
pressure made by the outer-shell electron, due to the Coulomb Force, would decrease the
µDomains volume, which would be lower than 511 KeV.
Neutron Electron
from the d
quark of the
proton (uud)
u u
Electron from
the additional d
µDomain(s) u quark of the
neutron (udd)
Proton
Fig. 6-2
The Spacetime Model offers a very simple explanation of this enigma. The negative charge
comes from the electron surrounding the proton to make up a neutron (fig. 6-2). Therefore,
this well known experimentation confirms that:
1. The neutron is made of an electron, which surrounds a proton,
2. Since this experimentation is a reality, the “distributed charge” model is a reality too.
1
Since the antineutrino is a secondary effect (see chapter 8), it is not mentioned here.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 27 - 6 - Nucleons
Charge
Proton
Neutron
It was pointed out, earlier, that the universe, at the time of its creation, was necessarily very
simple. By no means is this an assumption or a conjecture. It is a necessity. Any phenomenon
during its creation, whatever it is, is necessarily very simple too.
As an alternative scenario, figures 6-4A and 6-4B require two stages. The u and d quarks are
initially built separately. Then, a d quark attracts two u quarks. The electron leaves the d
quark and surrounds the three u quarks to make up a proton.
A B
Electron Proton
d
u u u u u
u
This scenario is provided for information only. This
scheme is less probable than the scenario of figure
6-5 on the next page, which is immediate. Fig. 6-4
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 28 - 6 - Nucleons
Spacetime
Spacetime (µDomains)
e- e+ e+ e- creates e+e- pairs. For more
information, see Part 5.
µD
Hydrogen atom
or neutron IMPORTANT
Here, the process is illustrated for
teaching purposes. In reality, it may
be immediate. The quarks, the
proton and the H atom or neutron
are probably built instantaneously.
Other schemes are also possible.
Fig. 6-5
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 29 - 6 - Nucleons
Very often, physicists use the image of a rubber band to explain this asymptotic freedom: the
more we move away from the center of the rubber band, the more intense is the recall force.
That is exactly what the electron does in the Spacetime Model. Like a rubber band, it
surrounds the three u quarks and prevents them from moving away from each other.
Note: This model of nucleons was not built of all parts to satisfy the asymptotic freedom theory.
It results from the polymorphism concept of the wave-particle duality enigma described in Part
2, chapter 1.
The initial problem, for the author, was to logically explain the "probability density” of the
Schrödinger Equation. The concept is mathematically perfect, but no one can rationally explain
the probability. The "distributed charge" concept is a more rational solution.
The author extended this model to all particles, quarks, baryons, mesons…. In this way, he
noticed that, finally, all components of Nature are based on the same concept, the "distributed
charge" model. One of the major successes of this model is to explain perfectly the enigma of
antimatter in the universe (see chapter 5). It also means that the strong nuclear force doesn't
exist per se. Instead, the electron acts as a rubber band and produces a Hooke Force, which is
an elastic force. This conclusion is nothing but the logical connection between the Author’s
"distributed charge" model and the asymptotic freedom theory.
So:
Hydrogen atom
Electron
Neutron ∆°
p p p
Closed Open
volume Proton volume
Fig. 6-6
The only difference is the mass. In the neutron and ∆°, the electron creates a closed volume,
with mass, while in the hydrogen atom, it creates an open volume, or is massless, since its
orbital is much larger and is "porous" to spacetime.
Nature’s favoring of the neutron or the hydrogen atom may be a simple fact of proximity and
energy. When the proton is met, if the electron-wave is large, a hydrogen atom may be
created. Conversely, if the electron-wave is small, as in a proximity phenomenon, a neutron
may be created. This suggestion must be studied thoroughly.
Note: Information in this paragraph needs verification and must be considered with great
care.
With the "distributed charges" model, the explanation of this enigma becomes very simple:
• The proton is made up of three quarks (u u d)
• But the quarks (u u d) are made up of (u u u) and one electron
• The quarks (u u u) require 2 positrons, and thus have an overall charge of +2.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 31 - 6 - Nucleons
• Since the "d" quark is a "u" quark surrounded by an electron, the resulting charge is
+2 - 1 = +1
• In this way, it seems logical that the proton charge, +1, would be equal to the electron
charge since it comes from the excess positron.
6.9 Antineutron
Experimenters try to detect spontaneous transformation from neutrons to antineutrons. It is
theoretically possible if energy allows it (fig. 6-7, on the following page).
The neutron and the antineutron are both made up of two positrons and two electrons.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 32 - 6 - Nucleons
Neutron
u u
u u u e- e-
Electrons
Antineutron
Positrons
u u
e+ e+ u u u
Fig. 6-7
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 33 - 7 - Interactions
7 Interactions
In Part 2, we have already studied two interactions, the e+e- pair production by a
gamma, and the opposite effect, the e+e- annihilation. Since all components are made
up of spacetime, it is possible that various interactions follow the same rule as the e+e-
production or annihilation.
For example, figure 7-1 on next page, shows the creation of six quarks, three u and three u
bar, an e+e- pair, and a residual gamma. All these components are created at practically the
same time from the spacetime movements, or gammas.
In this example, the most probable scheme is the creation of a proton-antiproton pair.
However, any other particles may be created. Of course, we must have the same quantity of
electrons-positrons before and after the interaction, including the gammas1. Finally, the
incoming gamma provides many possible combinations.
The same principle may be applied in high-energy interactions. The particles' jets come from
spacetime movements produced by the particle collision.
In our example, the creation of three u/u bar quarks requires the presence of two
positrons/electrons very close to each other. The particles are created mainly due to energy,
but the proximity should probably also be taken into account.
1
This new way to consider that, in the universe, we have only three components, the electrons, the positrons and
the µDomains, doesn't change the current formulas in quantum mechanics.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 34 - 7 - Interactions
u
+
e
u
e+
u
d e+
Various
combinations
+ + Gammas of particles,
+ like proton-
- - antiproton
e-
u
e-
u
-
e
u
Fig. 7-1
It should be noted that these schemes are in perfect agreement with Feynman's diagrams.
This means that any heavy particles (SUSY…) may exist and will probably be
discovered in the future since all particles are made of spacetime1.
1
Since the real nature of the spin is unknown, it is not impossible to find some heavy particles having a spin = 1
or 2 or, why not, 3 or 4…. Such cases do not mean that these heavy particles would explain gravity or other
phenomena. A good knowledge of the spin mechanism is necessary before making any assertion.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 35 - 7 - Interactions
In this way, it would be useful to have a simple method of representing the internal structure
of the basic components, electrons, positrons, quarks….
d quark e-(u)
Proton e-(u, u, u)
Neutron e-(e-(u, u, u))
Antiproton e+(u bar, u bar, u bar)
etc…
The particles that surround the others are the electron and positron. They act as the "strong
nuclear force". Since this force is necessary in any composite particle, meson, baryons…, we
can state the following rule1:
Or, as an alternative,
However, there are two exceptions, the Li3 isotope, which may not exist, and the ∆++, which is not stable.
1
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 36 - 7 - Interactions
The Standard Model does not take into account the origin of the quarks, i.e. the
positrons. Moreover, the presence of neutrinos among the leptons is very debatable.
The s, c, b and t quarks may be built with electrons and positrons, like the u and d quarks,
with particular schemes and energy levels. This is also the case with the two other leptons, the
muon and the tau, which are built with an electron. For that reason, these particles have not
been represented in this table.
8.2 Neutrinos
Within the Spacetime Model, the properties of neutrinos are not in accordance with the
Standard Model. Here are their properties:
This point of view explains why the neutrino's charge has always been considered
equal to zero. The fact that much experimentation has been conducted near a neutron
reactor has not been taken into consideration so this very slight charge has never been
highlighted1. On the other hand, "we find only that we are looking for".
! In an e+e- annihilation, a possible charge would be equal to:
Ma - Mb 1.602 x 10-19 C
q=
Ma
With:
q = charge of the neutrino, in Coulombs
Ma, Mb = mass, or volume (see Part 1), of the electron and positron. The greatest
mass of both is Ma.
! The charge should have the polarity of the particle having the greatest mass.
! Since the neutrino comes from an electron or a positron, its spin must be 1/2.
Experimentation confirms this point of view.
! In the Spacetime Model, the only basic neutral particle that could exist is the
µDomain. A neutral particle like the neutrino should not exist.
1
However, it is possible that a quantum of charge may exist. In such a case, the charge of the neutrino may be
equal to zero. Please note that this quantum of charge, if it exists, must not be confused with the Planck Quantum
of charge, which is not a real quantum like "h" but a unit (the word "quantum" often leads to a confusion).
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 39 - 8 - The Standard Model
Level 1
e- µD e+
-1 0 +1
Level 2 + +
e- u µD u e+
-1 -2/3 0 +2/3 +1
Level 3 + +
e- d u µD u d e+
Standard Model
Note: As indicated in paragraph 8.1, this figure does not include neutrinos and particles of groups 2
and 3, such as heavy quarks, which are various combinations of electrons and/or positrons.
Fig. 8-1
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - 40 - 8 - The Standard Model
Complements
Predictions
! The u quark is made up of two positrons and µDomain(s) (Chapter 4).
! The d quark is a u quark surrounded by an electron (Chapter 4).
! Antimatter is located inside nuclei, more exactly, inside quarks (Chapter 5)
! An elastic diffusion or electrons on the d quark would highlight its “distributed
charge” model. The graphic must be close to that of figure 6-3.
! The configuration of the proton is e-(u u u) instead of (u u d) (Chapter 6)
! The neutron is a proton surrounded by an electron (Chapter 6).
! The strong nuclear force doesn’t exist if the particle or nucleus has not at least one
electron or one positron (paragraph 6.6).
! The neutrino could have a very slight charge (Paragraph 8.2)
…/…
2. Open volumes. These volumes exist but do not produce any displacement
of spacetime. If there is no curvature, there is no "mass effect" either.
Orbitals in atoms are examples of open volumes. Indeed, orbitals are
massless.
Each atom has a particular proportion of open and closed volume. This is why mass
and volume seem to be two different quantities but this is an illusion. At the particle
level, more exactly at the electron and positron level, mass equals volume.
Composite particles, like mesons, are combinations of other classes of volumes.
Gravity
Contrary to a preconceived idea, spacetime is not curved by mass but by closed
volume. This phenomenon is the same as when a ball is immersed into water: It is the
volume of the ball, and not its mass, which produces the displacement of water.
The solving of these three enigmas conducts to the knowledge of the constitution of
matter and EM waves. This new theory is confirmed by much experimentation.
Part 4 - Electromagnetism
The mystery of the wave-particle duality solved in Part 2 leads to a full knowledge
of electromagnetism. This phenomenon is quite simple to understand.
In short, when a charged particle is motionless, its electric field has a spherical
symmetry. When it moves, it becomes a wave and its spherical symmetry
disappears. Its 1D space is transformed into a 2D/3D space. A magnetic component
(2D/3D) is added to the electric field (1D) of the particle.
Unification of forces
This part unifies the three basic forces (gravity, electroweak and strong nuclear force)
in two generic forces: the Coulomb Force and the Hooke Force.
The Universe
A suggestion regarding the creation of the universe is proposed. In reality, the Big-
Bang Theory does not explain the “electron mystery" and this enigma is discussed. This
Part offers two suggestions, much more credible than the “Big-Bang”, regarding the
creation of the universe.
Contact
You can contact the author1 by email at:
toe-author@orange.fr
or writing to:
M. Jacky JEROME
Editions Arts et Culture 42
4 square Kennedy
42120 LE COTEAU
(France)
1
Note: The author is a physics hobbyist and does not work in an institutional establishment. The writing of the
Spacetime Model has been done entirely on his own money and time, with no help from the scientific
community. If you find some error in this document, please let him know.
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - IV - Complements
Table of content
Introduction.........................................................................................I – IV
1. MicroDomains
1.1 The basic particles............................................................................1
1.2 µDomains.........................................................................................2
1.3 Existence of µDomains ....................................................................3
1.4 Properties of µDomains ...................................................................4
1.5 Basic components of the universe....................................................4
1.6 Example of verification....................................................................5
3. Atom
3.1 Energy levels of orbitals...................................................................11
3.2 The E0 energy level ..........................................................................13
3.3 Schrödinger Equation.......................................................................14
3.4 The Pauli Principle (proposal) ........................................................14
4. U and d Quarks
4.1 Starting points .................................................................................15
4.2 U and d quarks construction (proposal) ...........................................15
4.3 Conclusions......................................................................................17
5. Antimatter
5.1 Starting points ..................................................................................19
5.2 Homogeneity of the atom.................................................................20
5.3 Example ...........................................................................................22
5.4 Antimatter in the universe................................................................23
5.5 Validation of the Spacetime Model .................................................24
The Spacetime Model - Part 3 - VI - Complements
6. Nucleons
6.1 Proton...............................................................................................25
6.2 Neutron.............................................................................................26
6.3 Confirmation by experimentation ....................................................26
6.4 Direct proton creation ......................................................................27
6.5 Proton synthesis ...............................................................................29
6.6 Asymptotic freedom.........................................................................29
6.7 Hydrogen atom (proposal) ...............................................................30
6.8 Equality of charge of the proton.......................................................30
6.9 Antineutron ......................................................................................31
7. Interactions
7.1 Guiding principles............................................................................33
7.2 Formulation (proposal) ....................................................................35
Complements......................................................................................I - IV
A step toward the
Theory of Everything
Part 4
Electromagnetism
Jacky JEROME
Ingénieur Européen EUR-ING
Ingénieur DPE (Diplômé Par l'Etat)
Ingénieur IPF
Ingénieur ITP-ECI
Email: toe-author@orange.fr
ISBN 97829531234-0-4
Editions Arts et Culture 42
4, square Kennedy
42120 LE COTEAU (France)
Cover: On the left of the photo of Einstein: Maxwell, Feynman, Max Planck, Schrödinger
On the right: Pauli, Niels Bohr, Marie Curie, De Brogglie, Dirac, Heisenberg
The Spacetime Model - II - Part 4 - Introduction
Patent Rights
This theory, the “Spacetime Model”, was registered at
INPI, the French Patent Institute, under the following
references:
Before reading…
To fully understand this part, the reader must be familiar with the deductions and results
developed in Parts 1, 2 and 3. These results are summarized below:
Mass (Part 1)
In our world, mass and volume seem to be two different quantities because in atoms, the
mass is not proportional to the volume. So, we have a large range of atoms with different
masses and volumes. However, at the particle level, mass = volume.
In reality, we have two classes of volumes:
A B
! Closed volumes (A): These volumes make a
displacement of spacetime. It is this spacetime
curvature, which produces the mass effect.
Nucleons and electrons are examples of closed
volumes.
! Open volumes (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 electrons in atoms
are examples of open volumes.
Each atom has a particular proportion of open and closed volume. This is why mass and
volume give us the illusion of being two different quantities.
Gravity (Part 1)
Two volumes inserted into spacetime curve it. Since
spacetime is elastic, its curvature produces pressures on these
two volumes. This tends to bring them closer to each other.
So, contrary to what we think:
Gravity is not an attractive force between masses but a
pressure force exerted by spacetime on volumes.
The Spacetime Model - IV - Part 4 - Introduction
So:
Waves = Matter
(Spacetime variations) (Spacetime areas)
1. EM Radiations
Paragraphs 1.1 to 1.7 of this chapter are identical to those of chapter 2 of Part 2
“Constitution of Matter”. These paragraphs have been duplicated only for
teaching purposes.
EM radiations are mathematically described with a high degree of accuracy, but
no one is able to explain the constitution of photons and EM waves.
To solve the mystery of EM waves, we will proceed by an indirect method.
Initially, we will try to understand why "c", the velocity of light, is invariant.
There is a good probability that the solution to this enigma will lead us to the
constitution of EM waves.
1.1 History
The nature of EM radiations has always been the "pet peeve" of physicists. To this day, this
problem has not been solved.
• Newton, during his time, thought that light was made of particles.
• In the nineteenth century, physicists favoured the wave concept. EM waves were
propagated in aether, an unknown propagation medium.
• In 1905, continuing the works of Max Planck (Nobel Prize - 1918), Albert Einstein (Nobel
Prize - 1921) built a particle theory of EM radiations. The concept of aether became
obsolete since photons do not need any aether to be propagated. However, some problems,
like Young's experimentations for example, were still not solved with the photon concept.
• Later, in 1922, Einstein returned to aether. He was confronted with the problem of duality
since the photon is incompatible with the wave, and therefore with aether.
• In 1959, 39 years later, Louis de Broglie (Nobel Prize - 1929) proposed the idea that
aether was made of neutrinos.
• Around 1980, physicists verified once more the constant speed of light with quasars, using
embedded systems and telescopes in satellites.
These recent experiments show that the propagation of EM waves and the enigma of the
constant speed of light are still not solved. The aether concept would help but no one is able
to give an exact definition of it. Finally, since 1905, the enigma of the constitution of light has
been so persistent it prompted Louis De Broglie to say: “Science will make a great step ahead
the day that it can explain a simple ray of light”.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 -2- 1 - EM Radiations
The introduction of the photon partially solves this problem. Indeed, like any particle, the
photon can move in a vacuum. However, if an EM radiation behaves like a particle in 90% of
the cases, it also behaves like a wave in the remaining 10% of cases, as in Young's slits
experimentation. The enigma thus remains unsolved for these cases.
When a hard drive periodically makes one, two, three or more errors, it must be formatted. Of
course, this leads to a waste of time, but there is no other solution. In quantum mechanics,
errors or inconsistencies don't occur in one’s, two’s or three’s, …but in ten’s. In such a case,
the only thing to do is to "format" quantum mechanics. The best approach is to start from
scratch, ignoring the few laws of quantum mechanics that are inconsistent, but keeping
experimentations in mind.
Therefore, to understand the nature of EM radiations, we will not begin from 1905, when
Einstein discovered the photon, but from 1916, after his discovery of general relativity.
Indeed, if the key to the problem is spacetime, we must restart from general relativity. In this
chapter, we will study the wave aspect of EM radiations.
Important note:
The particle aspect of EM radiations, namely photons, will be discussed in the following
chapters.
1- “Apparent medium”
This is the visible medium that carries out the experimentations, and from where the
EM wave is emitted.
For example, in Fizeau Experimentation, this medium is water, and in Michelson’s, it is
the Earth's atmosphere moved by the Earth itself.
2- “Real medium”
EM waves are propagated in a “real medium”. For example, this "Real Medium" could
be De Broglie's "Neutrinos Sea".
The "apparent medium" and the "real medium" are overlaid (fig. 1-1).
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 -3- 1 - EM Radiations
"Apparent medium":
Air, water, vacuum…
In this figure, points A
in which the experimentations
and A', as well as the
are carried out apparent and real media,
are separated for teaching
purposes but, obviously,
A they share the same
place. Any apparent
medium has, necessarily,
a subjacent real medium
A’ that is associated with it.
"Real medium" of
propagation of the light Fig. 1-1
1- To be present everywhere
Since EM waves are propagated everywhere, the "real medium” must also be present
everywhere, in air, in water … and even in a vacuum. Spacetime is an excellent
candidate to be this "real medium” since it is present everywhere, even in a vacuum1.
Therefore, spacetime could be used without any problem as a support for EM waves.
This being said, gravity and EM waves do not curve spacetime in the same manner. Please see
Part 1 “Mass and Gravity” concerning these subjects.
In fact, the laser beam L is not emitted from the apparent medium as this figure shows, but
from the point 'A' located in this "real medium" which is spacetime of the universe.
1
Spacetime is not this unknown aether for which we are looking. Spacetime is spacetime. There is no other
correct definition and spacetime can’t be identified with aether. In order to avoid any confusion, we will use the
term “real medium” instead of "aether”.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 -4- 1 - EM Radiations
"Apparent medium":
Moving support
holding the laser L
diode.
L'
A
A'
"Real medium":
Motionless spacetime. Fig. 1-2
Since light is propagated in the real medium, its speed depends only on the nature of this
medium, and nothing else. In reality, the permittivity of free space ε0 is not a "vacuum
permittivity" but rather a "spacetime permittivity", a physical constant that defines the
spacetime propagation characteristics, as the "spacetime permeability" µ0.
Fizeau, Michelson and other physicists thought that light is propagated in this apparent
medium which is moving, water, air, vacuum etc…, whereas, in fact, it is propagated in this
real medium which is the "motionless" spacetime of the universe.
Note 1
We should not have any confusion between the word “motionless” used in the context of the universe, which is
correct, and the same word used in Special Relativity, which is not relevant.
Note 2
The spacetime of the universe, sometimes called "global spacetime structure", is the one that was created about
13.9 billion years ago, and not the local spacetime of special relativity. So, in this document, the word
"spacetime" will always refer to "global spacetime structure of the universe", as in Friedman-Robertson-Walker
Definition.
Note 3
There should not be any confusion between the apparent medium, from where the EM wave is emitted, and its
propagation medium, the real medium, which is spacetime of the universe.
Current Theory
A
Photon
Fig. 1-3
A photon is emitted from A to B, or the converse, to synchronize the two reference spaces which are both
moving. The points A and B belong to the apparent media. In this case, no one can explain why the speed of
light is constant. Logically, the velocities should be added. Since this is not the case, this diagram must be
revised (…but not the experimentations!!!), despite the fact it has been used since 1905.
Proposed Theory
A
B'
EM wave
A'
Real medium: spacetime of the universe
Fig. 1-4
Light is not propagated in the apparent medium, which supports the sources of light A and B, but in the real
medium, which is global spacetime of the universe. EM radiations do not consist of photons but of EM
waves. As a result, the constant speed of light is easily explainable. The velocity of light is a function of the
real medium characteristics, i.e. spacetime permittivity ε0, and spacetime permeability µ0. Thus, the speed of
light is always 300 000 km/s, whatever the velocity of the reference space, or the apparent medium, from
where the light is emitted.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 -6- 1 - EM Radiations
1.7 Conclusions
Therefore, although it amounts to the same thing, it would be more accurate to write:
“The speed of light is 300 000 km/s in spacetime”
rather than:
“The speed of light is 300 000 km/s in a vacuum”
Note:
Under certain conditions, EM waves may move at a speed different than 300 000 km/s. For example, using Bose
Einstein condensates made up with sodium atoms at -273.15°, Lene Vestergaard Hau, from Harvard University,
USA, slowed down EM waves to 17 m/s. In the same way, EPR (paragraph 3.12) also is an exception to the
theory. The Spacetime Model partially covers these exceptions, particularly in Part 1 "Mass and Gravity".
The photon concept (chapter 3), from this point of view, is nonsense. Reality is much simpler.
With the image of a stone falling into the water, the displacement of a particle produces
movements in spacetime (fig. 1-5). From a mathematical point of view, these spacetime
perturbations are "EM waves" but have all the characteristics of photons.
Spacetime
Charged
particle
Fig 1-5
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 -7- 1 - EM Radiations
We have the same phenomenon in spacetime; a motionless electron doesn't create any
perturbation, or wave.
Therefore, we have a perfect match between this common phenomenon on Earth and
electromagnetism (∆ ∆q/∆∆t). This simple example clearly shows that the photon concept,
despite the fact it has been used since 1905, is inconsistent.
Moreover, this phenomenon is in perfect accordance with the third principle of duality (see
chapter 1 of the document “Constitution of Matter”).
EM wave e-
Fig. 1-6
The explanation of the EM radiation emitted during a change of orbital follows the same
principle as the precedent. The passage of the electron from one orbital to another of less
energy creates movements in spacetime, like whirpools or eddies in water. These movements
are EM waves or, to be more precise, "quantified EM waves" (see the following chapters).
Note: In reality, contrary to a preconceived idea, the electron does not move continuously
on the orbital. Therefore, this diagram is not exact. Part 3, “Quarks and Antimatter”,
covers this subject.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 -8- 1 - EM Radiations
2 Electromagnetism
Everyone acknowledges the EM force but no one can clearly explain how it
works. This chapter examines the electromagnetism force in detail and solves
this enigma.
A B
e+ e- e+ e-
Fig. 2-1
Part 3 “Quarks and Antimatter” demonstrates that electrons and positrons are charged
µDomains whose borders make a volume, or “mass effect”, of 510.998918 KeV (see the
introduction in page 3 of this part). Since these borders are very "clean", the propagation of
the charge of the electron, i.e. spacetime density (see Part 2 “Constitution of Matter”), over its
boundary is an enigma. How can the EM field exceed the electron's borders?
µDomains, defined in Part 3, have a homogenous spacetime density that makes their charge
neutral. Under an external influence, like near a charge, this homogeneity is disturbed.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 10 - 2 - Electromagnetism
The electric field creates a pressure of spacetime on one side of the µDomain, and a
depression on its opposite side. Thus, the electric field can be gradually propagated, step-by-
step, inside the µDomain (fig. 2-2). Each µDomain acts like an electric dipole.
µDomains
--- ---
+++ +++
--- ---
+++ +++
--- ---
+++ +++
Electron
Fig. 2-2
The representation of this figure is only for teaching purposes. The µDomains and the electron
have the same volume: 511 KeV., and not the different volumes represented in this figure.
Figure 2-3 represents, on the left, a 3D view of a static electron and six µDomains. On the
right is a cross-section of the left view. If the electron is fully static it produces only an
electric field, which is this one-dimensional polarization. As we know, the magnetic field
does not exist.
---
µDomains +++
---
+++
---
+++
r r
---
---
r
+++
---
Electron +++
---
+++
---
Fig. 2-3
The radial co-ordinate is already used by the electric field. We can, therefore, deduce that the
magnetic field uses one or both of the remaining co-ordinates, angles θ or/and ϕ. This point of
view is exactly what the experimentation proves. Indeed, to describe magnetism, we need
vectors perpendicular to each other, whereas only one vector is necessary to define the electric
field.
We don't know exactly the shape of the magnetic polarization of the µDomains. We may
suppose that it is in 3D, but a 2D polarization must not be excluded. The only thing of which
we are sure is that the magnetic field is propagated inside µDomains, like with the electric
field, but with different directions of polarization.
The response to this question is found in the third principle of wave-particle duality: “When
the particle is moving, it becomes a wave” (see Part 2 Chapter 1).
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 12 - 2 - Electromagnetism
Indeed, when the electron is moving, its shape changes from a corpuscular state to a wave.
We know that the magnetic field doesn't exist when the electron is motionless. In this case,
the field is only a function of the radius "r", as seen in the preceding paragraph.
When the electron is moving, it becomes a wave. Its spherical symmetry disappears.
Therefore, the field can't be expressed with only one variable, the "r" radius. Additional
variables, angles θ or/and ϕ, are necessary to describe the field.
Figures 2-4 A and B show the difference between a static and dynamic electron. We must
only keep in mind that when a charged particle is moving, the corpuscular shape disappears
and the particle becomes a wave.
A B x
r
r r
Dynamic
Static electron electron
(motionless particle) (wave)
Fig. 2-4
In other words, magnetism does not exist as a fundamental force. It is the Coulomb Force,
nothing more. The magnetic field is a sort of "lateral" Coulomb Field. The orientation of the
µDomains’ polarization produces a new phenomenon called "magnetism", but we must keep
in mind that magnetism is nothing but a Coulomb force in a different direction.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 13 - 2 - Electromagnetism
We must also note that the particle, when it is motionless, has an electric field (1D), which
acts like a monopole since it is a punctual object. On the other hand, the magnetic field
(2D/3D) requires dipoles (the wave) to create it. So, the magnetic monopole can't exist. This
is exactly what is proven by experimentation.
Lastly, it is also possible to have a magnetic component without an electric field. This is the
case, for example, of permanent magnets. It is only a matter of the polarization of µDomains1.
The Spacetime Model doesn’t share the complexity of quantum mechanics. The universe is
very simple by necessity and needs only 4 dimensions, no more. From this point of view, we
can deduce that the spin is related either to the charge, like electromagnetism, or to the mass
(volume). It seems that the spin is related to electromagnetism rather than to the mass.
Since the spin is not proportional to the charge, it could be a simple ratio, like h/l on figure 2-
5, in relation to the wave or, more precisely, to the magnetic component of the wave.
The following example (fig. 2-5), which is only a suggestion, shows the idea proposed. The
two particles, an electron and a neutrino, go towards the reader. On the left (A), the two
particles are motionless, i.e. in their corpuscular form. The spin doesn’t exist. On the right
(B), these two particles are moving as waves producing the spin effect.
h
Electron
l
h
Neutrino
l
Spin of neutrino = h/l
Fig. 2-5
1
The current document can’t cover, completely, so vast a subject.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 14 - 2 - Electromagnetism
If this point of view is correct, the spin would not be a value attached to any particle but rather
a value attached to the mode of propagation of the waves. More precisely, the spin would be 0
with an EM wave, and a multiple of 1/2 with matter waves.
This point of view means also that any motionless particle can't have a spin. In other words,
the theory described in this document predicts that the spin exists only when the particle is
moving, i.e. only when the particle is in its waveform. However, if the particle is moving at
low speed, its form is between a corpuscle and a wave. In such a case, the spin could have a
different value, for example 1/4 instead of 1/2 (this suggestion must be considered with great
care).
Cases A and B: Matter waves. The spin is a multiple of 1/2 in absolute value.
Case C: EM waves. The spin of a half-period cancels each other.
Case D: In some cases, we can have a set of half-periods. This is the case when an
atom is moving. The atom is moving as a complex set of waves (quarks, electrons…)
and their individual spins can or can’t be mutually cancelled. This depends on the
overlap of the individual waves.
S (Spacetime density) S
A B
t
S S
C D
t t
Spin = 0 Spin = ?
Fig. 2-6
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 15 - 2 - Electromagnetism
1/ It is not possible to create a reliable theory concerning the spin since the real nature
of this parameter is unknown1.
2/ The rule of addition of spins applies in most cases, but this does not mean that it
applies in all cases. Any extrapolation toward the quarks or other particles may produce
debatable results since our knowledge of the nature of these components, as our
knowledge of the spin, is very poor. More precisely, we have an excellent knowledge of
the particle’s behavior from a mathematical point of view but we are still not able to
answer the fundamental questions concerning the basic phenomena: What is the charge?
mass? gravity? spin?....
3/ Moreover, the spin seems to be a function of the overlap of waves. As we know,
molecules and atoms are much larger than protons or quarks. When these elements are
moving, the overlap of their waves is different. Therefore, we may get erroneous results
when extrapolating the rule of addition of spin toward elementary particles since we
don't know exactly the wave shape of each particle, which is concerned.
Under these conditions, is it reasonable to assume that the rule of addition of spins, which is
100% correct with molecules, atoms, and some particles, can be extrapolated to all particles of
physics without reservation?
For all these reasons, the violation of the rule of addition of spins can't be retained as a
valid objection to the proposed theory, the “Spacetime Model”.
1
Saying "the spin is a quantum value" doesn't mean anything. Indeed, this definition “the spin is a quantum
value” doesn't explain the real nature of the spin.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 16 - 2 - Electromagnetism
3 The Photon
• The Planck Quantum is a physical reality and not just a mathematical concept. This
unit absolutely must be preserved.
• Experimentations (photoelectric effect…) also tend to prove that the photon exists.
The interpretation of these experimentations is, however, debatable1.
• The EM wave decrease. This decrease in 1/r² makes it impossible for a wave to exist
far from its origin. Only the photon concept would resolve this paradox. This chapter
contains a new explanation of this phenomenon.
• Vacuum propagation. This enigma is not relevant since EM waves can be
propagated in spacetime, and spacetime is present in a vacuum. This problem was
solved in chapter 1.
1
In 1905, when Einstein explained the PE effect using the Planck Quantum, the atom's internal configuration
was unknown. Rutherford thought that the atom was like an "English pudding". In 1905, physicists didn't know
that the atom had a nucleus. Einstein thought that the poor efficiency of the PE effect was in relation to the
probability that the photon had to meet an electron (in 1905, electron distribution was described as being like
raisins in a pudding). Later on, physicists demonstrated that the electron was: 1/ infinitely smaller than the
nucleus and, 2/ a huge distance from it, proportionately. This means that the collision probability between a
photon, if it exists, and an electron is practically null. However, and paradoxically, the yield was increased to
attain about 98% today. This paradox remains a mystery. The cross section calculations and other theories about
the photon are highly debatable, not from their mathematical point of view, but, in their interpretation, if we
regard the photon as a particle. On the other hand, as every physicist knows, several different mathematical
theories may be devised to explain a given phenomenon. For example, we know three different theories which
are mathematically verified, to explain mass and gravity: the Higgs boson, Superstrings (E. Wirren) and the
Spacetime Model (Part 1). At least two of these three theories are wrong, despite the fact that they are all
mathematrically verified. It means that any theory, which is not fully explained with logic and good sense, must
be considered with great care. This is the case of theories concerning the photon and the PE yield, because their
explanation is not consistent and remains a true mystery. See paragraphe 3.2.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 18 - 3 - The Photon
These 10 inconsistencies - and probably more - mean that the photon concept, despite the fact
it has been used since 1905, must be seriously revised.
1
We could say that the speed may increase in order to preserve the momentum but the interaction remains a true
mystery, not from a mathematical point of view but if we try to understand the phenomenon using logic and
good sense. The main problem comes from the mass of the photon, which is null.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 19 - 3 - The Photon
The charge, which passes from one µDomain to another, must be higher than this quantum.
Under this condition, how will an EM wave react when the charge transmitted in the
µDomains approaches this quantum? There are only two possibilities:
The first possibility is not credible because, in Nature, nothing totally disappears. Therefore,
the second possibility is more reasonable.
1 3 4
2
Fig. 3-1
• Step 1: The wave is created in a 360° space (grey circle). Note that the angle is not
necessarily 360° and may have any other value.
• Step 2: At some distance from its source, the decrease in 1/r² of the EM wave reaches
its quantum. The spacetime density of the wave is too weak to continue to decrease
while propagating from µDomains to µDomains. The wave has only one solution: to
break at an unspecified place to remain grouped 1.
• Step 3: The distance increases, and the arc of the circle decreases proportionally.
• Step 4: The wave is now very far away from its source and its curvature becomes
practically a segment or, in quantum mechanics terms, a "wave pack". The EM wave
always keeps its wave behavior while remaining grouped. It can thus travel billions
of light-years as a photon would, but as a small "piece of wave".
1
This phenomenon may be better understood by replacing the EM wave with a water wave. The quantum of
water is the H2O molecule. It is obvious that a water wave can't be smaller than a H2O molecule. When the H2O
quantum is reached, the wave doesn't continue decreasing but breaks. However, please note that this simple
comparison is done for teaching purpose only. A quantified wave can’t be identified to a H2O molecule.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 20 - 3 - The Photon
So, when we see galaxies, our eyes do not perceive a photon but a "quantified wave". During
all its travel, this wave remains grouped1.
Figure 3-2 shows an EM wave that is propagated gradually in µDomains. The charge is q at
the source level, and is divided by 3, then by 5. In figure 3-2, the quantum q/5 is reached at
Time t + ∆t2. The EM wave doesn't continue decreasing over time t + ∆t2.
q/3
x, t
q
Time t
t + ∆t1
Quantum
= q/5 t + ∆t2 t + ∆t3 t + ∆t4 Fig. 3-2
1
On earth, we have a similar phenomenon: capillarity.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 21 - 3 - The Photon
1 2 3
5
4
An identical process exists on Earth (fig. 3-4). The EM wave is replaced by a trickle of water.
The particle, which absorbs the wave energy, is replaced by a blotting paper. The trickle of
water is absorbed by the blotting paper at the place of interaction, or measurement.
To summarize:
Blotting
paper
Trickle of water
Interaction
Fig. 3-4
• The constant speed of light, 300 000 km/s, proves that we are in front of a wave and
not of a corpuscle. If an object moves at one and only one speed, this object can't be a
particle but a wave, and the speed of this wave is function of medium characteristics.
• Any particle has the ability to stop. Why doesn’t the photon? It means that the so-
called "photon" is not a corpuscle but a wave. Indeed, a wave never stops.
• Saying that the "mass" of the photon must be null is scientific nonsense. Only a wave
has a null mass, not a particle.
• The displacement of a charged particle (∆q/∆t) can't emit tiny particles called
"photons". This is nonsense. If this displacement produces waves, this enigma
becomes consistent. Etc…
This phenomenon is quite simple to understand by returning to our blotting paper of fig. 3-4.
The simple fact of putting this blotting paper anywhere on the trickle of water produces the
disappearance of the water. The experimenter believes that, at the point "c" on the figure, he
measures a photon but in reality, he measures a wave.
When a wave reaches an atom of a detector, the energy included in µDomains is emptied by a
PE effect (or Compton Effect, or anything else). The µDomains are immediately emptied at
the speed of 300 000 km/s. This speed is so high and the vacuum between atoms and particles
is so huge that a wave can't activate two detectors at exactly the same time. In other words, a
wave may reach the two detectors at approximately the same time but activates one, and
only one at a time. A very short ∆t or fraction of pS is sufficient to make the difference.
However, there is a very slight probability, nearly zero, that the two detectors are activated at
the same time. In this case, it is logical to think that the energy of the incoming wave is split.
For example, a 1 MeV wave may be detected as two waves of 500 KeV each, or 520 KeV -
480 KeV. Examining the distribution of the measured waves with a coincidence system must
highlight this phenomenon, which could be additional proof that we measure waves and not
photons. However, please note that this prediction is not 100% certain. It is only a suggestion.
L R
Fig. 3-5
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 24 - 3 - The Photon
To better understand this principle, let’s replace the five waves of fig. 3-5 by five trickles of
water and the two detectors by two blotting papers (fig. 3-6). A trickle would be absorbed by
the first blotting paper reached. It is obvious that when a trickle has been absorbed by one
blotting paper there is no water left for the second blotting paper to absorb.
L R
Blotting papers (the two
slits with two detectors)
Quantum Mechanics: If the electron moves as a particle, it must pass through point A (fig.
3-7) and not points B or C. This would seem to be nonsense. However, this nonsense is a
reality. Why? No one can explain with consistency this strange phenomenon.
Proposed theory: The third principle of wave-particle duality (see Part 2 “Constitution of
Matter”) states: “When the particle is moving, it becomes a wave”. Therefore, points A, B
and C are all crossed by the electron-wave. We are facing the same phenomena as the Young
Slits1 explained in the preceding paragraph. As in our example of blotting paper, the wave
may be absorbed at point A or, with a less high probability, by points B or C.
1
Althought it amounts to the same thing, it would be wise to compare the Uncertainly Principle to the Davisson-
Germer rather than to the Young Slits Experimentation.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 25 - 3 - The Photon
Quantum Proposed
Mechanics theory
Electron
Electron
? ?
∆x ∆x ∆x ∆x
B A C B A C
Fig. 3-7
Note: With regard to the Uncertainly Relation, we may suppose that the shape of the wave packet depends on its
speed. Taking into account experimentations and the Heisenberg Theory, the immediate deduction is that the
wave becomes more conical as its energy increases (Gauss Curve for example).
In the EPR experiment, it is necessary to replace the photon concept with waves. Two waves,
"A" and "B", are emitted with a perpendicular polarization of the one compared to the other.
These waves are propagated in µDomains and are "catalysed" in x and y.
If it has been decided to take the vertical wave "A" in point x, it will remain the horizontal
wave "B" for point y, and the converse. Whatever the wave taken in x, it will always remain
the complementary wave in y.
If the two measuring instruments, x and y, are isolated by something to avoid interference
such as a concrete or a metal wall, the wave still exists, even if it is not seen. The reason is
quite simple: the EM wave is propagated in spacetime, and spacetime is present
EVERYWHERE… even inside a concrete or a metal wall…
However, it must be pointed out that, as a consequence of the curvature of spacetime (see
Parts 1 and 2), the EM wave may be slowed down or absorbed by molecules of the wall.
1
The author is a physics hobbyist and has no access to reliable data concerning many EPR experimentations.
Therefore, explanations given in this paragraph must be taken with great care.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 26 - 3 - The Photon
Concrete wall …
Wave B
y x
Wave A
Fig. 3-8
From this point of view, the Spacetime Model predicts that the mystery of EPR disappears if
the two points of measurement, at 180°, are located far from the point of emission. The reason
is quite simple. In such a case, traditional EM waves become quantified EM waves.
In other words, the mystery of EPR exists only if the EM waves are not quantified. This
enigma no longer exists with quantified waves.
3.13 Conclusions
The table on the following page draws a comparison between the photon and the quantified
wave concepts.
1
Most physicists agree this point of view
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 27 - 3 - The Photon
Problem Explanation
The fact that the photon can move at only one speed, c, is nonsense
if it is considered as a particle. Indeed, a particle can move at any
Only one velocity, "c" velocity. Since the photon doesn't exist as a physical reality, even
though it may exist as a mathematical object like a vector, the
question about its speed becomes meaningless.
Matter of photon Since the photon doesn't exist, this question is meaningless.
e+e- pairs creation and If the EM radiation is made of photons, the e+e- pair creation, as the
e+e- annihilation e+e- annihilation, is a true mystery (Part 2 “Constitution of Matter”).
Only an EM wave, quantified or not, can explain this enigma.
This chapter gives additional explanations concerning waves, in the framework of the
Spacetime Model, taking into account the equality Mass = Closed Volume developed in
Part 1.
This chapter is not fundamental and is included, primarily, for the benefit of non-
physicists.
Open your hand beside your lengthened legs and wait until the water is still.
Then, suddenly, close your hand. You will immediately feel a wave being
propagated on your entire body.
Closing your hand produces a wave of water, which carries some energy. We have exactly the
same phenomenon in spacetime. An orbital change of electron produces a movement in
spacetime, which is an EM wave, not a photon.
A perforated balloon is immersed into a container filled with water. The holes allow water to
infiltrate the balloon. If its volume varies from V1 to V2, or the converse, a wave of water is
produced. However, since the balloon is perforated, the quantity of water remains unchanged.
The volume of water doesn't increase or decrease since these movements in water are bipolar
(pressure + depression).
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 30 - 4 - Waves and Complements
µDomains
Fig. 4-1
∆V
P P
∆V
A B
When a "matter-wave" is moving, each µDomain transfers to the other ones some quantity of
additional spacetime, in positive or negative charges. These µDomains become charged
during the period of the wave and act like a "partial" electron or positron.
Negative matter
wave
S (Spacetime density)
Particle
t
µDomains
Fig. 4-3
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 32 - 4 - Waves and Complements
Positive matter
wave S (Spacetime
Particle
µDomains
Fig. 4-4
4.5 Differences
The difference between "EM waves" and "matter waves" is only a question of charge. Let's
examine the following figure 4-5.
- - - - - - +++ +++
+++ +++ +++ +++
- - - - - - Neutral
+++ +++
+++ +++ µDomains +++ +++
- - - - - - +++ +++
+++ +++ +++ +++
Fig. 4-5
! EM waves: The charge is bipolar, alternatively positive and negative. The charge
moves gradually inside the µDomains. As a result, EM waves produce some
variations of the internal polarization of the µDomains. The charge of a µDomain,
which is neutral, remains neutral for the full period. In this case, the µDomain doesn't
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 33 - 4 - Waves and Complements
get mass since it has no additional charge (+ or -). The velocity of the propagation is a
function only of the permittivity ε0 and permeability µ0 of spacetime.
! Matter waves: Each µDomain receives, during a short period of time, an additional
charge. Since the charge is transmitted from one µDomain to another, each involved
µDomain becomes charged and gets mass. The example of figure 4-5 shows a positive
charge like a "positron wave".
4.6 E = hv
To understand this formula with µDomains, according to the equality Mass = Volume, let us
consider again the first experiment, which you can carry out yourself.
While having your legs lengthened in your bathtub, quickly close your hand. You
will note that the wave is more or less pronounced according to the velocity of the
movement of your hand.
This reaction is exactly the same as the quantum phenomenon described by: E=hv or E=h/T.
The shorter the period of time, or the more quickly your hand is closed, the greater the energy
produced.
We have already explained the e+e- annihilation in Part 2 “Constitution of Matter”. We give
below another explanation (fig. 4-6), taking into account the equality Mass = Volume. Let's
consider that the electron and positron are both motionless, that is to say, the magnetic
component of the EM field does not exist.
• When an electron meets a positron, the excess spacetime in one particle moves inside
the other.
• The annihilation of the two charges is assimilated to a double ∆q/∆t. Indeed, the
charge of the positron passes from +1 to 0, and that of the electron from - 1 to 0.
• The annihilated electron and positron become two ordinary µDomains.
• This annihilation produces two movements in spacetime, or EM waves.
• These movements, resulting from the double ∆q/∆t, are propagated gradually through
adjacent µDomains.
• The EM radiation will not be propagated like a photon, but like an EM wave,
quantified, if necessary, and called a "gamma".
• And finally, as seen in chapter 6 of Part 2, if this gamma passes near a nucleus, it may
be split into a negative and a positive part, if its energy allows.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 34 - 4 - Waves and Complements
+∆q/2 +∆q/2
e+
Gamma Gamma
511 keV 511 keV
e-
−∆q/2 −∆q/2
Neutral
µDomains
It is often stated that Mass = Energy. This is not exact and there is a subtlety to this equation.
The dimensional quantity of the mass is [M] while that of energy is [ML²/T²].
These two quantities are different. The E=mc² formula is homogeneous because it has a
dimensional quantity, c². This constant has the dimension [L²/T²].
In other words, a mass, or a volume, can produce energy, certainly, but never "Matter =
Energy". Saying "Matter = Energy" is scientific nonsense since mass and energy are two
different dimensional quantities.
4.9 E = mc²
This formula is fully verified using mathematics and experimentation. However, no one is
able to explain it using logic and good sense. The solution is quite simple within the
Spacetime Model. Let us take again the figure 4-2 which, slightly modified, becomes the
figure 4-9.
The overall process is as follows. In parenthesis and italics, the equivalent in quantum
mechanics is given:
! The balloon (the particle) is filled with air. It doesn't have any energy.
! The balloon deflates during a ∆t time ("Matter" disappears, like in the e+e-
annihilation). This decrease in volume produces waves, which are ∆V variations.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 35 - 4 - Waves and Complements
These waves are moving in water (in spacetime) and carry some energy, which is a
function of ∆t, at the time of the balloon’s deflation (in the same way, the wave energy
is E=h/T).
! When the waves reach the surface, they are converted back to a volume (a gamma
may produce e+e- pairs).
It is important to note that energy appears ONLY in phase 2, when the volume is in its wave
state. When the volume is in a particle state, as in phases 1 and 3, energy doesn't exist or,
more exactly, we have a sort of "potential energy".
This energy comes from the speed "c" of gammas, which are the result of decays. Only a
movement can produce energy. A motionless particle only has a "potential energy". In other
words, the E=mc² formula simply means that energy appears only when the volume of the
particle becomes waves, or gammas (fig. 4-9, phase 2).
∆V
Waves
−∆V
1 2 3
Fig. 4-9
Finally, the E=mc² formula is very simple to understand (fig. 4-10) if we keep in mind these
three points:
! There is a relationship between mass and volume (see Part 1).
! The particle may become a wave and the converse (see Part 2). Both, particles and
waves, are made up of spacetime.
! Energy is not embedded inside the particle as we think. A particle is an area of
spacetime, nothing more. Energy appears when the particle is destroyed and when
this area of spacetime becomes a wave, as in the e+e- annihilation. Energy is carried
out by these EM waves, which move at the speed c.
Thus, although it amounts to the same thing, it would be more accurate to write:
"The volume (mass) of the particle is converted into another volume, the EM
wave, which moves at the speed c, and gets energy due to its speed"
rather than: "The mass is converted into energy".
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - 36 - 4 - Waves and Complements
Current theory
(Special relativity)
E = mc²
How can a mass be converted into energy ???
No one is able to explain this formula.
Suggested explanation
(Special relativity and Spacetime Model)
We must note also that replacing E=mc² by E=kvc² (when m=kv) gives a homogenous
formula since ALL is volume.
Particle Wave
(volume) (volume)
Fig. 4-10
NOTE: When the particle disappears, as in the e+e- annihilation, it becomes an EM wave (gamma). This is why
the term c² is present in E=mc². In this formula, c is not related to the particle itself but comes from the speed of
the light. This speed, c, which appears after annihilation, must not be confused with the speed of the particle, v,
if the latter is moving. Please also note that this explanation doesn’t modify calculations already in place.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - I - Complements
Complements
Predictions
! The spin disappears when the particle is motionless. The spin is not a "quantum value"
attached to a particle but a value attached to the mode of propagation of waves: 0 = no
spin, 1/2 = matter wave, 1 = EM wave (Chapter 2). However, it is possible that the
spin of a particle may have a different value when it is moving at very low speed.
! The magnetic monopole doesn't exist (Paragraph 2.4).
! In the Young Slits experiment, we have a very slight probability that the energy of the
incoming wave (the "photon") might be split, depending on the amount of energy. In
such a case, each detector measures a part of the wave, close to 50-50%, for example
51% and 49%. This experiment must be done with a coincidence system (paragraph
3.10).
! The EPR enigma disappears at huge distances (Paragraph 3.12)
…/…
2. Open volumes. These volumes exist but do not produce any displacement
of spacetime. If there is no curvature, there is no "mass effect" either.
Orbitals in atoms are examples of open volumes. Indeed, orbitals are
massless.
Each atom has a particular proportion of open and closed volume. This is why mass
and volume seem to be two different quantities but this is an illusion. At the particle
level, more exactly at the electron and positron level, mass equals volume.
Composite particles, like mesons, are combinations of other classes of volumes.
Gravity
Contrary to a preconceived idea, spacetime is not curved by mass but by closed
volume. This phenomenon is the same as when a ball is immersed into water: It is the
volume of the ball, and not its mass, which produces the displacement of water.
The solving of these three enigmas conducts to the knowledge of the constitution of
matter and EM waves. This new theory is confirmed by much experimentation.
.../...
Antimatter
From this discovery, we can deduce that antimatter is not located at the bottom of
the universe but right before our eyes, embedded in u and d quarks.
The calculation is fully explained in this Part and is 100% accurate for all 2930
known isotopes.
Unification of forces
This part unifies the three basic forces (gravity, electroweak and strong nuclear force)
in two generic forces: the Coulomb Force and the Hooke Force.
The Universe
A suggestion regarding the creation of the universe is proposed. In reality, the Big-
Bang Theory does not explain the “electron mystery" and this enigma is discussed. This
Part offers two suggestions, much more credible than the “Big-Bang”, regarding the
creation of the universe.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - IV - Complements
Contact
You can contact the author1 by email at:
toe-author@orange.fr
or writing to:
M. Jacky JEROME
Editions Arts et Culture 42
4 square Kennedy
42120 LE COTEAU
(France)
1
Note: The author is a physics hobbyist and does not work in an institutional establishment. The writing of the
Spacetime Model has been done entirely on his own money and time, with no help from the scientific
community. If you find some error in this document, please let him know.
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - V - Complements
Table of content
Introduction.........................................................................................I – IV
1. EM Radiations
1.1 History..............................................................................................1
1.2 Nature of EM radiations...................................................................2
1.3 Separation of media ........................................................................2
1.4 Property of the “Real Medium” ......................................................3
1.5 Constant speed of light ....................................................................4
1.6 Case of two reference spaces ...........................................................5
1.7 Conclusions......................................................................................6
1.8 Application: Displacement of charged particles ..............................6
1.9 Application: ∆q/∆t ...........................................................................7
1.10 Application: Changes in orbitals......................................................7
2. Electromagnetism
2.1 The electron......................................................................................9
2.2 1D polarization of µDomains...........................................................10
2.3 3D polarization of µDomains...........................................................11
2.4 Principle of magnetism ...................................................................11
2.5 The spin (proposal) .........................................................................13
2.6 Rule of addition of spins ..................................................................15
3. The Photon
3.1 Justification of the photon ...............................................................17
3.2 Inconsistencies of the photon ...........................................................18
3.3 Deacrease in 1/r²...............................................................................18
3.4 The “quantified wave” ....................................................................19
3.5 The emission ....................................................................................20
3.6 The travel .........................................................................................20
3.7 The reception....................................................................................21
3.8 Validation of the proposed theory....................................................22
3.9 The Experimenter.............................................................................22
3.10 Young Slits.......................................................................................23
3.11 The Heisenberg Uncertainly Relation ..............................................24
3.12 EPR (proposal).................................................................................25
3.13 Conclusions......................................................................................26
The Spacetime Model - Part 4 - VI - Complements
Complements.....................................................................................I - IV
A step toward the
Theory of Everything
Part 5
Jacky JEROME
Ingénieur Européen EUR-ING
Ingénieur DPE (Diplômé Par l'Etat)
Ingénieur IPF
Ingénieur ITP-ECI
Email: toe-author@orange.fr
ISBN 97829531234-0-5
Editions Arts et Culture 42
4, square Kennedy
42120 LE COTEAU (France)
Cover: On the left of the photo of Einstein: Maxwell, Feynman, Max Planck, Schrödinger
On the right: Pauli, Niels Bohr, Marie Curie, De Brogglie, Dirac, Heisenberg
The Spacetime Model - II - Part 5 - Introduction
Patent Rights
This theory, the “Spacetime Model”, was registered at
INPI, the French Patent Institute, under the following
references:
Before reading…
To fully understand this part, the reader must be familiar with the deductions and results
developed in Parts 1 to 4. These results are summarized below:
So:
Waves = Matter
(Spacetime variations) (Spacetime areas)
We could think that the nucleus is built on the same principle as that of the quarks,
leptons, mesons, baryons and atoms: the "distributed charge" model.
This chapter does not undertake a complete study of the nucleus, this subject being so
huge, but proposes suggestions according to the "distributed charge" model.
1.1 Isobars
Usually, nucleus graphs are plotted from the atomic number "A", the neutron number "N" or
the proton number "Z". The figure 1-1 was drawn on a u quark basis. The u quarks inside the
d quarks were taken into account. That is to say, each proton is made up of three u quarks and
one electron, and each neutron is made up of one proton surrounded with one electron, or
((u u u)e-)e-.
∆ mass
12
10
0
21-11
24-12
27-14
30-15
33-17
36-18
39-20
41-21
45-23
48-24
11-6
15-7
18-9
9-4
This graph covers the first nuclei, those for which the mass number goes from 3 to 16. The X-
coordinates thus go from 9 to 48 since each nucleon, proton or neutron, has three up quarks
each. The mass of each nucleus was initially divided by the mass number A. An offset of
930,9 MeV was subtracted from each element in order to make the graph more readable1.
Figure 1-1 shows a simplified graph. A more precise graph emphasizes that the lowest point
of each isobar’s group is always reached when the number of electrons is equal to half the
number of u quarks, including the d quark electrons.
1.2 Isotopes
The lowest point noted with the isobars is repeated with the isotopes. However, examination
of the curves shows that the mass of each isotope oscillates with a period of two elements.
In order to better emphasize this oscillation, the difference between two adjacent isotopes, the
derivative, has been plotted. Thus, every other time, we have a negative derivative (fig. 1-2
and 1-3). The object of these graphs is to know what the electron of the d quarks becomes
inside the neutron. For that, it is necessary that the number of protons doesn't vary.
C Na
Zn La
126
Fig. 1-2
1
There have been many studies of atoms. However, it is the interpretation that is particularly interesting because
this study has a new basis, namely that the d quark is made up of a u quark surrounded by an electron. This
appears to highlight a binary structure, in figures 1-2 and 1-3, which seems to be a new idea.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 -3- 1 - The Binary Structure of Nuclei
Au Pb
126
Rn Th
126
126
Fig. 1-3
On these graphs, the mass increases and decreases alternately in steps of two neutrons.
It is highly probable that when a neutron meets a proton inside the nucleus, the outer-shell
electron of the neutron “phagocytoses” the proton to make a deuteron.
Deuterons would not, therefore, be composed entirely of a proton and a neutron, but of two
protons and an outer-shell electron, which act as a strong nuclear force, keeping the two
protons locked inside the deuteron.
Moreover, the structure in two protons and one electron of the deuteron is more homogeneous
and logical than the structure of one proton and one neutron. It should be noted that other
structures, like e-(e-(e-(u u u u u u))) or e-(e-(u u u (e-(u u u)))) are also possible but
improbable.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 -4- 1 - The Binary Structure of Nuclei
Proton Neutron
u u u u
u u
Electrons
The outer-shell
electron goes into
deuteron periphery to
make, what we call,
the "strong nuclear
force".
u u u u
u u
Within the "distributed charge" model, many configurations are possible for the He structure.
However, taking into account the great stability of this nucleus, it is judicious to think that the
following scheme (fig. 1-5) is the most probable. This configuration is very close to the
deuteron scheme (fig. 1-4).
4
He 6 electrons
u u u u
u u
u u u u 12 u quarks,
u u made up with 8
positrons
4 protons
This diagram is homogeneous because the two outer-shell electrons of the He nucleus make it
particularly strong. Alpha particles are also very strong.
1.5 H isotopes
Figures 1-7 and 1-8 cover the possible configurations of H isotopes where electrons replace
the strong nuclear force. These diagrams are only for teaching purposes.
1 u u
H u (proton)
Most probable
2 u u u u u u u u
H u u u u See note
Most probable
u u u u
u u u u
u
3
H u u
u
u u
u
u u u u u u
u
u u
u
u u
The 4H isotope (fig. 1-8 on the following page) is divided into three groups: with one, two and
three outer-shell electrons.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 -6- 1 - The Binary Structure of Nuclei
u u u u u u u u
4 u u
H u u u u
u u
u
u u
u u u u u u
u u u u u u
u u u u u
u u u u
u u
u u u u
u u
u u u u u u u u
u u u u
u u u u u u u u u u
u u u u u
u u u u
u u
u u u u u u u u u u
u u u u u
Most probable
u u u u
u u
u u u u
u u
Fig. 1-8
These schemes are only suggestions. Intuitively, the most probable configurations are when
electrons surround protons. The correct configuration would require some investment of time,
and must be in accordance with many parameters: decay modes, binding energy, volume
differences from one isotope to another, the mass derivative, quadripolar moment etc…
It should be pointed out, once more, that if a decay or radioactivity produces protons and
neutrons, it does not mean that these particles were parts of the nucleus before the interaction.
Since waves and particles are both created from spacetime, it is necessary to keep in mind that
what we see is not necessarily what really exists. The only thing we can be sure of is that all
these particles and waves come from spacetime.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 -7- 1 - The Binary Structure of Nuclei
Phase 1
Neutron
u u u u Nucleus
u u
Proton
Phase 2
Proton
u u u u u u
u u u
Deuteron
Fig. 1-9
Phase 1: The first neutron takes its place in the nucleus as a proton. It is stripped from
its electron. The latter joins the other electrons on the nucleus’s periphery
Phase 2: The second neutron takes its place in the nucleus as a proton. Its electron also
surrounds the preceding proton, making a deuteron, instead of going on the periphery of
the nucleus.
In both cases, the volume of the nucleus increases since it contains one more proton.
When the electron goes on the nucleus’s periphery, it produces an increase in volume. When
it is used to make a deuteron, the increase in volume is different. This could explain the
binary steps1.
1
We can suppose that the electron decreases the Coulomb Field inside the nucleus and the repulsion force
between protons is decreased too. However, this is only an assumption.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 -8- 1 - The Binary Structure of Nuclei
These two phases are repeated in a loop. Thus, we have a succession of increasing and
decreasing volumes in a same isotope group. Figures 1-2 and 1-3 confirm this deduction.
It is also possible that the electrons go on the periphery, two per outer layer, such as in the
orbitals of the atom, as the Pauli Principle states. This process could also explain the
periodicity of two.
The traditional explanation of the "strong nuclear force" is not in accordance with this
formula. The problem lies in the two following terms:
1/ Surface energy1: The strong nuclear force supposes linking protons and neutrons
inside the nucleus. Under no circumstances is this force a "surface force". In this way,
the Bethe-Weizsäcker Formula should not have a surface term.
On the contrary, within this Spacetime Model, the surface component term is perfectly
logical. Indeed, it matches exactly the model of outer-shell electrons, which act like a
rubber band and may explain the "strong nuclear force".
2/ The Coulomb Force: A similar problem is met with the Coulomb term. Since the
Coulomb Force is far less important than the strong nuclear force, this term is
unexplainable in the present theory.
Within this Spacetime Model, the nucleus volume comes from the repulsion force
between protons. Since the nuclear force does not exist as a basic force, the magnitude
of the Coulomb Force does not cause any problem. The presence of a Coulomb term in
this formula is, therefore, perfectly logical. It is even a necessity.
Another point must also be considered. The nuclear volume, i.e. the mass, and the binding
energy increase both as A, the atomic number. Currently, physicists think that the nuclear
forces are saturated since each nucleon interacts only with its neighbours.
1
The explanation of this surface energy usually uses the Van Der Walls Model. The author is not fully
convinced by this model, which is a good comparison, but not a reliable explanation of the phenomenon.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 -9- 1 - The Binary Structure of Nuclei
If we consider that the neutrons are transformed into protons inside the nucleus, the atomic
number A relates the overall number of protons, that is to say, the original protons + the
protons coming from neutrons. In other words, it is highly probable that
All these protons make a repulsive Coulomb Force between them, which creates the volume
(see Part 2). It is, therefore, normal that the volume increases as the atomic number does.
It is only a simple Coulomb problem …and not a complex and unexplained phenomenon of
saturated forces.
To summarize,
This chapter covers the other quarks and mesons in accordance with the "distributed
charge" model. However, this chapter contains only suggestions and this information
must be taken with care.
C quark +2/3
S quark
-1/3
Positron
Closed volume
(= mass, see Part 1) Fig. 2-1
T quark
B quark
Positron
Fig. 2-2
Since d and dbar quarks are built from u and ubar quarks, the electron and the positron are
peripheral (fig. 2-4). These two particles maintain the four quarks locked inside the meson.
Other configurations are also possible. We must keep in mind that the electron or positron has
to be peripheral to the other particles.
π° meson
Positron (*)
u u
Electron (*)
u u
The π meson is probably not spherical as the figure 2-4 shows, because the four quarks
introduce attractive and repulsive forces (fig. 2-5).
π° meson Proton or
neutron u
Attractive force
u u
u Repulsive force
u u
Répulsive force
u
In the proton and the neutron, the three u quarks produce exclusively repulsive forces (fig. 2-
6). This is why the volume, or the mass, of the proton (938 MeV) or neutron (939 MeV) is
greater than that of the π° meson (135 MeV), although this last contains an additional quark.
This internal annihilation is possible because the u-u bar pairs are very close to each other.
The interaction is immediate and internal and, therefore, invisible to the experimenter. It is
possible that such invisible interactions are more frequent than we would think.
This scheme (fig. 2-7) is in perfect accordance with experimentation that gives:
The remaining electron or positron has a volume close to that of the π meson. This scheme
suggests a muon (105 MeV) as a result. This is exactly what the experimentation indicates,
with a Γ/Γtotal of 99,9877%.
Note: The figure 2-7 is generic and may be adapted to other particles.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - 14 - 2 - Quarks and Mesons (a proposal)
u u
u u
This electron
or positron converts the
neutral pion into a
charged pion
Future muon or
antimuon
The electron or positron
The u and u bar quarks becomes a muon or
are mutually annihilated antimuon.
u u
u u
The electron
and positron have
annihilated each other
Fig. 2-7
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - 15 - 3 - Radioactivity (a proposal)
3 Radioactivity (a proposal)
The study of α radioactivity allows us to foresee the origin of the phenomenon. On the
other hand, other types of radioactivity remain unexplained. In the standard model, it is
difficult to understand from where the electron comes in β- radioactivity, since we
suppose that the neutron (u d d) doesn't have an electron.
Thus, what we call “bosons exchanges” are nothing but EM waves and their own
multiple reflections from any part.
We know that quarks, leptons, bosons, waves… are made of spacetime. It is not exceptional
to see a W- boson being transformed into an electron or anything else since W bosons and
electrons are both made of spacetime.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - 16 - 3 - Radioactivity (a proposal)
3.3 β− radioactivity
Some suggestions of possible schemes are represented in figure 3-1.
The mass of a β- isotope is higher than the mass of the chemical element. Neutrons are in
excess. This tends to prove that the electron comes from an internal structure made up of
neutrons and confirms that the neutron structure has at least one electron. Please refer to the
preceding chapters to understand this deduction.
Note: The neutrino has not been represented in figures 3-1 and 3-2. See Part 3 concerning this
subject.
Outer electron
Excessive electrons of nucleus β-
W-
β-
The electron, or W-
boson, comes from a
deuteron or other
internal element.
Deuteron or other element,
surrounded by one or several
electrons, possibly in various
combinations.
Fig. 3-1
3.4 β+ radioactivity 1
The mass of a β+ isotope is lower than the mass of the chemical element of reference. There
is a lack of neutrons. Since a neutron is nothing but a proton with an electron, there is a lack
of electrons too.
One of the possibilities of the β+ radiation is a spacetime movement produced inside the
nucleus (fig. 3-2). We know that a gamma ray moving near a nucleus splits into electron(s)
and positron(s) if its energy is sufficient. This subject was discussed previously. However, it
is not possible to be nearer to a nucleus that inside the nucleus itself. This means that any high
energy EM wave inside the nucleus may be split into electron(s) and positron(s).
1
It is probable that the positron doesn't come from a quark. Thus, the paragraph 5.1 in Part 3 is not verified.
However, the reasoning is correct.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - 17 - 3 - Radioactivity (a proposal)
Note:
Neutrinos are not
represented
e-
γ
β+
Fig. 3-2
The electron issued from the gamma is immediately used to link protons into binomials, like
deuterons, or into other configurations. The positron is ejected by way of a W+ boson and
tunnel effect. Other schemes are also possible but this one (fig. 3-2) gives an explanation of
β+ radioactivity in perfect accordance with experimentation.
Since a gamma, a positron and a W+ boson are all made of spacetime, waves are converted
into particles and the converse. All these interactions are very simple to understand, but
require complex mathematics to describe them (QCD).
It should be pointed out that all these phenomena are well known: e+e- annihilation, e+e-
creation…. Inside the nucleus, we probably have the same phenomena.
Taking into account the "binary steps" of the nucleus, the Spacetime Model considers that the
alpha is built by two deuterons when these particles take off the nucleus (fig. 3-3).
Since the "binary steps" are a reality (see graphs 1-2 and 1-3), alpha radioactivity must be in
accordance with this configuration.
We consider that alpha particles are directly emitted from the nucleus. This point of view
doesn't explain the binary steps; however, the proposed scheme (fig. 3-3) does.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - 18 - 3 - Radioactivity (a proposal)
Deuteron 4
He
u u u u
u u u u u u
u u
+
u u u u
u u u u u u
u u
Fig. 3-3
Therefore, we have a Schwarzschild Singularity inside the nucleus which may produce an
invertion between time and space. This may explain the mass of the W and Z bosons (???).
On the other hand, it must be pointed out that, inside the nucleus, the µDomains are
compressed and spacetime properties may be modified. Who knows if, inside the nucleus
(inside the Schwarzschild radius), "c" is still 300 000 km/s? Part 4 covers this subject. If c,
inside the nucleus, is modified, there may be consequences. These could affect the W and Z
bosons’ mass for example.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - 19 - 4 - Forces
4 Forces
Physicists consider that all forces come from ONE generic force. Why one force rather
two or three? No one knows, but one thing is sure: to understand the GUT or ToE, it is
necessary to drop all preconceived ideas that have no consistent base.
In accordance with experimentations, the Spacetime Model considers that there would
be only two fundamental forces. These two forces cannot be unified into a generic force,
but include, nevertheless, a common element: spacetime.
4.1 Gravity
Gravity is a pressure force produced by volumes and not an attractive force produced by
masses. Its origin is spacetime curvature made by volumes (see Part 1).
In gravity, the pressure comes from µDomains. In the strong nuclear force, the pressure
comes from electrons or positrons. Since µDomains, electrons and positrons are made of
spacetime, gravity and the strong nuclear force are finally identical.
Forces in the
universe
Spacetime
Exerts only on
Exerts on all particles
charged particles
Application :
Electroweak force
Fig. 4-1
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - 21 - 5 - The Universe (a proposal)
Apparently, physicists have never posed a fundamental question concerning the origin
of the universe: the "enigma of the electron" (see below). This question is of great
importance because it allows for only two solutions. The creation of the universe
necessarily resides in one of these two solutions.
Since the Big-Bang Theory doesn't solve this enigma, this theory is not credible.
Important note Information given below is only an assumption since no one can
prove anything about the birth of the universe
Indeed, electrons in Europe, in the USA, in Asia… always have the same volume:
510,998918 KeV, a volume measured with an extraordinary precision of +/- 0,000044, or
To fully understand where the problem lies, let's imagine the following scenario:
The "enigma of the electron" is exactly like this scenario. This enigma needs a rational
explanation, other that "Matter came from a Planck Length" or the "big-bang theory", which
doesn't mean anything.
In reality, the universe is a kind of machine that manufactures electrons and positrons in
astronomical quantity. These electrons are produced precisely with the same volume, namely
mass. So, undoubtedly, there is a "trick" somewhere. It cannot be otherwise. The fundamental
challenge is …to find this trick.
510,998918 KeV
…and always with the incredible precision of:
< 0,0000086% ?
This is the GREAT QUESTION and, by far, the most important mystery regarding the
creation of the universe.
5.3 Division
This scenario is explained in figures 5-1 and 5-2.
Fig. 5-1
Fig. 5-2
5.4 Multiplication
The previous scenario explains the quantum of 511 KeV but does not solve the creation of
spacetime that is explained below. This is why the following scenario is more credible than
the preceding one. It supports an alternative:
! Simple multiplication: A cell multiplies with identical volume, or mass, in 2n steps:
2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128 etc…
! Increase with division: A cell is growing then is divided by two, and so on. The
divider is therefore 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128 etc…. This version is more interesting than
the preceding one because the creation of spacetime is fully explained. In addition, this
scenario is close to the behavior of Nature on Earth.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - 24 - 5 - The Universe (a proposal)
For the human being, the cellular multiplication presents the following properties:
This faculty of reproduction in nature and the simplicity of the process are …incredible.
In other words, we must be conscious that Nature on Earth has an extraordinary capacity for
self-reproducibility with the same accuracy. This capacity is found on Earth, but also on Mars,
and on all components of the universe.
Quantity
We need a replication process of
Nature is able to make electrons and positrons in
replications in astronomical astronomical quantities. The
quantities, as in human beings, universe is "manufactured"
with billions of identical cells. through this unique process.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - 25 - 5 - The Universe (a proposal)
The first part of this scenario must, necessarily, be very simple. It is a major condition. In
addition, it must take account of the quantum concept, which is a reality. This quantum of
volume is 511 KeV (see Part 2).
Nothing has been invented. This process is well known on Earth, for example in the
replication of bacteria. Since Nature tends to always repeat the same models, this scenario
illustrated in figure 5-3, on the next page, is very relevant.
5.7 Spacetime
In this process, a question arises: "What grows, only the 3D volume or 4D spacetime?”.
When the universe was created, there were no masses. Out of the gravitational field, the
Riemann Curvature is reduced to a Minkowski Space expressed as follows:
or:
If we consider that:
! The universe was created from nothing, neither space nor time.
! There is a perfect symmetry. Nothing can be created without a counterpart.
Fig. 5-3
This ds is an infinitesimal spacetime. At the beginning of the universe, as there was nothing,
all ds² were equal to zero. In polar co-ordinates, since we have a spherical symmetry, we can
ignore dθ² and dϕ². We get c.dt = dr. Usually, in physics, length is expressed by x and not by
r, so:
c.dt = dx
From a mathematical point of view, the dimensional quantities "time" (T) and "space" (L) are
different. The dimensional constant c, which keeps homogeneity in the equation, should not
be removed. So, we should not take this sentence "time creates space" word for word since,
from a mathematical point of view, this sentence is not exact. It has the same imprecision as
the sentence "money creates employment". Of course, this sentence is correct, but not from a
mathematical point of view since the words "money" and "employment" are of different
dimensional quantities.
Let's consider a baby who has just been born and ask the mother: “what was the size of
your baby two years ago?” This question does not make any sense since, for this baby,
time was created nine months ago. Space, i.e. the size of the baby, was created 9 months
ago too. Two years ago, this baby had neither time nor space.
As in this example, it is absurd to want to know what the universe was before its creation
since there was no time and no space. The word "before" doesn't mean anything in this
context. On the other hand, we may note that, in this example, the process is the same as in
the universe: time creates spaces (or the converse).
We may apply the same reasoning to common objects. For example, a stone on Earth has a
maximum age of 4,5 billion years. Asking, “What was the size of this stone 10 billion years
ago?” is a nonsensical question. …Many such examples can be given.
Since Nature tends to repeat itself, we may think that the creation of the
universe follows the same principle as the creation of common objects we
know on Earth. We have a creation date, and before this date, there was
nothing: no time and no space.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - 28 - 5 - The Universe (a proposal)
On the universe level, spacetime means "a ∆x space created by a ∆t time, or the converse".
This is why space (3D) and time (1D) are inseparable. This relationship between time and
space is emphasized in the proposal of new models of the creation of the universe described in
figures 5-4 and 5-5.
We have good reasons to consider that the universe has been created in two phases:
! Phase 1 (t0, t1, t2): During this phase, only µDomains were created. The universe
was empty. It had only space and time, nothing else. Billions of billions of billions of
µDomains were created. This phase is common in figures 5-4 (scenario A) and 5-5
(scenario B).
! Phase 2 (t3...): During the second phase, due to chance, "islands of matter" are
created. Several scenarios are possible, but we will study only two.
Notes 1:
It is possible that the creation of the universe was a combination of these two scenarios.
Note 2:
In phase 2, spacetime movements or e-e+ pairs have formed galactic clusters, which are
separated only by (empty) µDomains. These µDomains can, however, transmit EM waves and
gravitational field.
It is also interesting to note that the expansion of the universe seems to be outside galactic
clusters, not inside. This statement is in accordance with these two scenarios.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - 29 - 5 - The Universe (a proposal)
Scenario A
Fig. 5-4
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - 30 - 5 - The Universe (a proposal)
Scenario B
! Density of matter
"Manufacture accidents", which transform a µDomain in an e+e- pair, have a very low
probability: 10-40, 10-60, 10-80? The e+e-/µDomain ratio is, thus, very small: 10-40,
10-60, 10-80.... This ratio is in accordance with experimental measurements, which state
that the average density of matter in the universe is very low, only a few electrons per
m3 .
! Spacetime
This scenario gives a physical explanation of spacetime: “A time ∆t creates a space
∆x or the converse".
! Antimatter
This subject has already been covered. These scenarios of the creation of the universe
also explain the location of antimatter. Indeed, each electron created has its
counterpart, the positron, which is, by necessity, close to it. In the universe, there are
as many electrons as positrons. With these scenarios, it is IMPOSSIBLE to find even
one electron or positron in excess. We have precisely the same number of each.
Small "islands" of matter (fig. 5-6) are, thus, created in the universe, without any
relation to each other. The perpetual creation of matter is probably due only to chance.
Regarding the 2.7°K temperature, its origin probably comes from various interactions
involving electrons, positrons, gammas, and combinations of these elements in these
small islands of matter (fig. 5-6).. This new approach concerning the creation of the
universe is not incompatible with the 2.7°K discovery. Moreover, the spatial
distribution of the 2.7°K temperature seems to confirm the scenario suggested in this
document.
Fig. 5-6
Note
A part of the charge is initially transferred from one µDomain to another. The amount of each
part is probably due to chance as well. It may be, for example, 5%. In this case, the electron
has 95% of the µDomain charge and the positron 105%. If this were the case, in others
galactic clusters, we may have some electrons and positrons having the same volume, but
with different charges. This could have many consequences. This subject is not covered by the
present document.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - 33 - 5 - The Universe (a proposal)
We can compare the Big-Bang Theory to a volcano. Is it credible to think that a volcano can
emit millions of stones of 510,998918 gr. each, with a precision of 0,0000086%? Moreover,
why would the amount of matter be exactly identical to that of antimatter under these
conditions?
Of course, not.
From a scientific point of view, the Big-Bang Theory has too many inconsistencies to be
credible. This theory is scientific nonsense.
In the following table, the symbol (???) means that the question is unanswered within the Big-
Bang Theory. On the other hand, all questions are logically and rationally answered within the
proposed model. Each enigma below is fully explained in the preceding paragraph.
Complements
Gravity
Contrary to a preconceived idea, spacetime is not curved by mass but by closed
volume. This phenomenon is the same as when a ball is immersed into water: It is the
volume of the ball, and not its mass, which produces the displacement of water.
A particle also produces a displacement of spacetime. Since spacetime is elastic
(Einstein), the curvature of spacetime produces a pressure on volumes. This tends to
bring them closer to each other. It means that gravity is not an attractive force
between masses, but a pressure force on closed volumes.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - II - Complements
The solving of these three enigmas conducts to the knowledge of the constitution of
matter and EM waves. This new theory is confirmed by much experimentation.
Antimatter
From this discovery, we can deduce that antimatter is not located at the bottom of
the universe but right before our eyes, embedded in u and d quarks.
The calculation is fully explained in this Part and is 100% accurate for all 2930
known isotopes.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - III - Complements
Part 4 - Electromagnetism
The mystery of the wave-particle duality solved in Part 2 leads to a full knowledge
of electromagnetism. This phenomenon is quite simple to understand.
In short, when a charged particle is motionless, its electric field has a spherical
symmetry. When it moves, it becomes a wave and its spherical symmetry
disappears. Its 1D space is transformed into a 2D/3D space. A magnetic component
(2D/3D) is added to the electric field (1D) of the particle.
Contact
You can contact the author1 by email at:
toe-author@orange.fr
or writing to:
M. Jacky JEROME
Editions Arts et Culture 42
4 square Kennedy
42120 LE COTEAU
(France)
1
Note: The author is a physics hobbyist and does not work in an institutional establishment. The writing of the
Spacetime Model has been done entirely on his own money and time, with no help from the scientific
community. If you find some error in this document, please let him know.
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - IV - Complements
Table of content
Introduction........................................................................................I – IV
3. Radioactivity (a proposal)
3.1 Origin of the radioactivity................................................................15
3.2 Mathematical point of view .............................................................15
3.3 β- radioactivity.................................................................................16
3.4 β+ radioactivity................................................................................16
3.5 Alpha radioactivity...........................................................................17
3.6 Electronic capture ............................................................................18
3.7 W and Z Bosons (a proposal)...........................................................18
4. Forces
4.1 Gravity..............................................................................................19
4.2 The weak nuclear force ....................................................................19
4.3 The EM force ...................................................................................19
4.4 The strong nuclear force...................................................................19
4.5 Unification of the two fundamental forces.......................................20
The Spacetime Model - Part 5 - VI - Complements
Complements.......................................................................................I - IV