Access to a pure physical understanding of gravitation.

Around the beginning of the twentieth century scientists gave up to understand physically the secrets of
electromagnetic signals and certainly that of gravitation. Lorentz, Planck, Maxwell and Einstein started to translate
the physical findings into mathematical terms. The astonishing success of the mathematical approach overruled
completely the lasting doubt, expressed by the believe in an existing ether. But now, when the shaped
mathematical theories of relativity and quantum-mechanics look almost complete, the choice for a pure
mathematical solution revenges itself by resisting the trial to transform the theories, gathered with gravitation, into
a theory of everything.
It seems that the astonishing success of mathematics has lead to an equally astonishing misunderstanding:

Physical problems cannot really be solved but by a pure physical theory.

New insights in gravitation and electromagnetism can make these phenomena physically more
understandable. The fundamental idea is a new form of ether. Instead of resting or dragging, the constituents of
this ether, energons, move with velocities between c ± ½.c with respect to their material sources.

Since Newton introduced the conception of gravitational force and its relation to mass and distance, one thing has
become completely clear:

Gravitation is a matter of matter with the power to exchange energy.

Even Einstein needed the mass of matter for his mathematical construction of a bending space around that mass
to get a grip on gravity. Still it has shown to be impossible to give a physical explanation of the phenomenon of
gravitation with the aid of the great physical theories of the 20th century.

The theories of relativity and quantum mechanics do not provide sufficient insight to solve
the problem of gravitation in a physical way.

Is physical science still progressive after an eighty years lasting want of fundamentally new ideas, or must we say
that it has become formally and conventionally using untransparent mathematical methods?
Perhaps we have to withdraw ourselves from a fixed preoccupation. We can learn from the past that it had been
necessary sometimes to make a change in the customary point of view to overcome certain problems, as can be
seen with the change into a heliocentric standpoint by Copernicus c.s.
"If old answers do not satisfy anymore, it is getting time to look for new questions."
Concerning gravitation our preoccupation may be found in answering two main questions :

1. What kind of particle does really transport forces through space?

2. What’s the relation between the elementary charges and nucleons?

Question 1. One of the most pregnant peculiarities of today's physics is the absence of a simple and reliable
carrier of force through space. Photons, thought to be the carriers of electromagnetic forces, do not support the
logical rule of addition of velocities and the behavior of photons in the two-split experiment seems to be ridiculous.
From the other long distance force, the force of gravitation that acts between concentrations of matter, no carrier
at all is known. On the scale of nuclei a variety of shortly acting and existing particles has been found that must be
indicated as being very complicated. Inside the nucleons one can hardly speak of a carrier of force between the
supposed components (quarks). These components seem to act contradictory to their mutual distances by means
of the hypothetical gluons. It is understandable, therefore, that physicists imputed a more mathematical character
to the carriers of force.
As the elementary charges (ec's) may be regarded as the most fundamental particles causing an infinite 'field of
force', the first possible change in a viewing point concerns the answer that has to be given on the question about
the essence of that field.

In a new look at the subject, the ec's (o 10^-17m) will be regarded to emit huge quantities
of energons or power-particles (pp's), be seen as pole-antipole entities or di-poles (o 10^-32m),
revolving left- or right-handed around their track and being able to transfer basic quanta of
energy to receiving ec's.

Question 2. The fundamental law of charge conservation may have been underestimated. If this law is
interpreted so strictly that opposite ec's must be seen as forming stable structures, rather than annihilating, one
can imagine that the nucleons were shaped inside a dense, primeval plasma of electrons and positrons at the
moment that all the forces between the proto-structures were practically compensated.

A denial of ec-annihilation makes that the nucleons can be considered as dynamic
structures of the two elementary charges, still as some kind of plasma, but with a high
degree of organization (o 10^-15m).

The two proposals have been used to design the energon hypothesis.
An evaluation of this hypothesis has lead to radical consequences, described in:

A sketch of the Universe

and in the report:

'New look at physical forces - a test of an alternative model'

You may see that the energon hypothesis allows the incorporation of the known physical constants, that it offers a
beginning of a deeper insight into phenomena as the universal lightvelocity, relativity and quantum behavior of
energy and that it allows a qualitative and quantitative description of gravitation. In fact it is opening the possibility
for the integration of the modern physical theories. The potentiality to derive the numerical value of Planck's
constant using data obtained from the energon hypothesis, supports the reality of this hypothesis and is leading to
a new vision on the exchange of energy in matter.

Gravitation can be understood as a deficiency of ec-spin compensation, caused by the
differences of motion and conjunction of the two kinds of ec's inside ec-plasma's
(nucleons). The result, as experienced from the outside, is a difference between positive
and negative charge velocity with a mutual attraction between the nucleons.
This mechanism can bend the path of matter, but it can even be responsible for Einstein's
mass-bent space.

Some fundamental values have been obtained twice, following different ways of approach. This is the case with
the quantity and velocity of the ec's inside the nucleons and with the gravitational number. The constant of
gravitation has even be found five times, using calculations on totally different material systems. This may point to
a basic importance of that constant. An other interesting result is the calculation of the gravitational quantum,
which could be linked to the amount of nucleons per kilogram of matter and to the constant of gravitation.
A consequence of the hypothesis is that the density of the hypothetical black holes cannot exceed the density of
the ec's, leading to the interesting conclusion that a black hole of about 1.24 x 10³⁰ kg and a radius of 921 m must
be unstable and may cause a real 'Big Bang'. Another consequence of the hypothesis is that the law of Newton,
concerning gravitation, has to be adapted with respect to phenomena as expansion of space and tolerance to
quanta of gravitational energy, which have an opposite effect. This adaptation leads to a considerable increase of
the expected gravitation at distances between 10³ and 10⁶ light-years, giving an explanation of the fact that
apparently too less dark matter could be found in the universe, that peripheric stars in galaxies move faster than
one was used to think, and giving moreover an explanation of the division of stellar systems into galaxies, clusters
and super-clusters of galaxies. Finally, the energon hypothesis leads to the insight that the physical space is
created by the energon emission of the ec's. As only 4.5 % of the energons must be lost by the annihilating
reactions of force exertion, and because the pp's seem to need the same quantity of space as the Spp's do inside
the ec 's (space-factor = 4.42 x 10^-15), the expansion of the universe may be ascribed to the production of
energons. With that process each elementary charge possibly creates per second 9.5 x 10^-23 m³ of space.

Interested visitors may obtain this report in parts as pdf-files by clicking on the links.

'New look at physical forces-a test of an alternative model'

0.Title-page; Preface; Index (179 kB)

1.Introduction (100 kB)

2.The fundament of forces (250 kB)

3.The exchange of forces between elementary charges (530 kB)

4.Forces between electric currents in conductors (273 kB)

5.Consequences of the nucleonic ec-structure (306 kB)

6. Gravitation, as a result of the nucleonic ec-structure (261 kB)

7. The period of pulsation of the elementary charges (190 kB)

8.The harmonious game with integers by a proton and an electron (162 kB)

9. Dimension of energons and cosmological consequences (334 kB)

10.The transmission of EM-signals by energon waves (331 kB)

11.The physical space (192 kB)

12. Some data, obtained from the energon-hypothesis (129 kB)

13.Explanations (348 kB)

14.Supplement (288 kB)

15.A sketch of the Universe (114 kB)

Last revision October 2009. The documents may be distributed; not for commercial use.