Gravity over Mass Concept

Gravity Over Mass Concept
INDEX

1. An Overview of The Atomic Structure
2. Garnering Kinetic Energy
3. Mass Versus Kinetics
4. A Balanced Approach to Quantum Kinetics 
5. An Unbalanced Approach to Quantum Kinetics
6. Historical Gravitational Models
7. Gravity over Mass Experiment, VIDEO
8. Summary

-1-

Overview of The Atomic Structure

An atom’s nucleus is approximately 100,000 times smaller than the atom as a whole. Depending on the chemical element, an atom’s nucleus contains one or more protons and zero or more neutrons. An atom’s fundamental identity and character rely upon the number of positively charged protons in its nucleus.

The simplest form of an atom is hydrogen. More specifically, its most common isotope is known as protium. Protium is the simplest atom because it consists of only one proton and one electron. Since the element hydrogen has a single proton (regardless of isotope) it was assigned the atomic number one. This number represents hydrogen’s “atomic number,” which is also referred to as its Z value.

Electrons hover around an atom’s nucleus within what are called “electron clouds.” These electron clouds are mathematically determined regions of probability. The exact orbital paths of electrons within an atom are not truly known. Nonetheless, we do understand that electrons tend to avoid one another. This fact is supported by two important principles:

• Electrons carry the same electrical charge, and identical charges repel one another.
• Electrons are fermions with a spin of 1/2. The well established Pauli Exclusion Principle states that no two identical fermions can occupy the same quantum state at the same time.

Regardless of the above statements, if we could somehow confine an atom’s electrons into one small region, we would see that they occupy a volume of space similar to that of their nucleus.

Now let’s discuss atomic mass for a moment. Protons and neutrons carry the bulk of an atom’s mass. The science of chemistry bases its Periodic Table of the Elements on rest mass which is also referred to as invariant mass.

It is well known that neutrons are slightly heavier than protons. For perspective, although electrons, protons and neutrons are somewhat comparable in size, an electron’s mass is only about 1/1,836 that of a proton and roughly 1/1,839 that of a neutron.

Early atomic models from Dalton, Thomson, Rutherford, and Bohr treated the masses of protons, neutrons, and electrons as fundamental and unexplained. At that time, there was no deep theory explaining why particles possessed certain masses. Scientists simply assigned each particle its measured rest mass.

Nonetheless, even as early as the 1930s through the 1950s, it was known that nuclear binding energy (via E=mc²) causes a measurable mass defect. For example, a helium nucleus weighs slightly less than the combined mass of two protons and two neutrons. Ongoing experiments routinely accounted for these binding energies within the atomic nucleus. Although these mass defects are extremely small compared to the total mass of the nucleus, they help explain phenomena on a much grander scale, such as nuclear fusion.

During the late 1960s and beyond, particle accelerators and deep inelastic scattering experiments revealed the existence of quarks. Quarks themselves have relatively small rest masses. Gluons, the mediators of the strong force, were a key part of the emerging theory of quantum chromodynamics (QCD) in the 1970s.

During the latter half of the 20th century, largely due to the understanding of the strong force, energy became the primary focus of particle physics. Although rest mass remains quite relevant, it is now viewed more as a classical concept.

Rest mass, the Higgs mechanism, quantum chromodynamics (QCD), and nuclear binding energy all contribute to our modern understanding of mass.

• Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD). QCD explains the source of the majority of mass within protons and neutrons (collectively classified as hadrons). The energy stored in the strong force within hadrons accounts for most of what we call the “rest mass” of everyday matter.
• Higgs Mechanism. The Higgs mechanism proposes that elementary particles such as quarks and electrons acquire their rest mass through interactions with the Higgs field. From this perspective, most fundamental fermions would be massless in the absence of the Higgs mechanism.
• Rest mass is essentially the combined outcome of the two preceding concepts. It is a well defined quantity, and the mechanisms described above explain where this rest mass originates.

What I’ve described thus far is a 30,000-foot view of the atom’s structure and mass. We can now begin to think outside the box, so to speak, as we continue.

-2-

Garnering Kinetic Energy

There is too much to unfold here particle-wise in just a few sentences. That discussion is for another day. For now, we are simply gaining a deeper understanding of the relationships between mass, weight, and gravity.

Importantly, atoms are often considered to be almost entirely empty space — if we could simply pluck out their electrons, protons, and neutrons. As fundamental particles, electrons gain momentum through the electromagnetic force. Electrons are negatively charged, whereas protons in the atom’s nucleus are positively charged.

At a basic level, opposite charges are known to attract one another. Therefore, without diving deeper into specific models or theories, we understand that electrons are naturally attracted to the atom’s nucleus. Consequently, as electrons travel toward their respective nucleus — they carry momentum along with a significant amount of kinetic energy. This kinetic energy produced from electrons is a crucial aspect within the Gravity over Mass Concept.

From a rest mass perspective, electrons are extremely light compared with nucleons, so it is primarily the electrons that do most of the moving. If we could actually see something this small, we would discover that atomically bound electrons move so fast they are essentially just a blur.

-3-

Mass Versus Kinetics

As you can probably tell from my writing, I have not received a formal education in science. Therefore, my perception of mass may differ somewhat from what others might take for granted.

I believe that, due to Einstein’s famous equation E = mc², our understanding of mass and energy is largely a matter of convention. From this perspective, there is no single right or wrong way to understand mass and energy — it is simply a question of how well one concept dove-tails into another.

From my understanding, modern-day concepts of mass in the sciences emerged largely from the rest mass of a few crucial particles.

Due to this agreed upon standard for the dalton (Da) and the unified atomic mass unit (u) — other than slight mass corrections due to mass defects — how we understand atomic mass and correlate this to our modern-world is universally fixed through this particular scale.

From my understanding, kinetic energy within the atom is actually what creates much of its invariant mass. At least from an outside observer's point of view.

Through modern quantum mechanics, including the dynamics of momentum, angular momentum, kinetic energy, QED, and especially QCD; all of these combine in a harmonious way to produce an atom's observed mass. 

Importantly, while quantum mechanics provides an extremely successful framework for describing atomic and subatomic forces, its unification with gravity is not fully understood.

-4-

A Balanced Approach to Quantum Kinetics

Essentially, quantum kinetics reveals a previously unknown feature of quantum mechanics. This is based upon the fact that there are particles magnitudes smaller than those of the Standard Model.

Whenever an electron strikes the atom’s nucleus, it releases a significant portion of its extra mass. In simple terms, this extra mass can be considered the electron’s “load.” This load is comprised of sub-subatomic particles — particles that are undetectable from a human perspective, at least on an individual basis. This is part of the confusion between waveforms and particles at extremely fine scales.

It is difficult to explain what occurs inside the atom using a conventional (classical) understanding of the electron. Nevertheless, we know that electrons can occupy different energy levels, particularly within the atom’s quantum structure. Electrons jump between these energy levels by absorbing or emitting photons. In heavier atoms, shielding occurs between electrons, which further influences their energy levels.

Returning to the atom’s dynamics: after an electron strikes the nucleus and releases a good portion of its load, a shuffling occurs among the electrons within the atom’s core. When traffic here becomes too heavy due to the number of electrons — a form of quantum tunneling takes place. This phenomenon allows electrons to safely retreat from the atom's core and prevent excessive collisions.

Periodically, the atom’s core experiences a saturation of energy. At this point, the electron (or electrons) must retreat. After a brief pause the next electron — now fully prepared — hurls itself toward the nucleus from the atom’s perimeter. The electron spirals downward toward the core with high energy.

As the electron reaches the nucleus, kinetic energy is transferred and the electron releases a dense load of sub-subatomic particles. Each electron takes its turn driving mass towards the atom’s core. While the electromagnetic force dominates as an electrons remains a fair distance from the core, the overriding force changes quite rapidly as the electron travels inward. Within the atom's core and just above its nucleus — the dominant force is no longer electromagnetic now, but kinetic.

Due to the sequential cycling of atomically bound electrons, the disparate forces acting upon different sides of the atom's nucleus tend to balance themselves out over time — a period that, relative to the atom —  is perhaps no more than the blink of an eye.

-5-

An Unbalanced Approach to Quantum Kinetics

(a.k.a. Directional Bias)

Whereas in the prior scenario we had a balance of kinetic forces surrounding the atom’s nucleus, here the kinetic energy acting upon the nucleus is not perfectly balanced. This common situation occurs whenever an atom is located within a gravitational field. The net result is a directional bias within the atom itself. This directional bias is what causes the phenomenon we commonly refer to as weight.

Since every planet and star in the Universe produces gravity, it is a rare occasion for an atom to experience a perfectly balanced set of forces upon its nucleus.

Essentially, all atomic structures — atoms and molecules alike — are influenced by gravity. However, free particles outside of atomic structures experience gravity quite differently. This is why the Sun can push small subatomic particles outward while simultaneously pulling extremely larger atomic structures inward.

Consider for a moment just how weak Earth’s gravitational field actually is. If most of the force directing atoms toward the Earth originates within atoms themselves — then the initiating gravitational force is even weaker than we might expect.

As a consequence, gravity acts as a pilot-like force. Gravity as classically understood, is not the primary driver which pulls atoms downward, but merely the instigator. Atoms actually push themselves towards the earth!

So, in principle, Earth’s gravitational field borrows a certain amount of an atom’s invariant mass in order to project it downwards. Due to this realization, I created a load-cell device to test this concept. This apparatus, or “machine,” is explained at the end of the document.

-6-

Historical Gravitational Models

There is no shortage of theoretical models pertaining to gravity. Although a good number of gravitational models and revelations are mentioned below, this list is not exhaustive. There are certainly other gravitational models that I have neglected to mention. In addition, some of the models listed below have been elaborated upon over the years and evolved considerably from the simplified descriptions I have provided.

• Late 1500's and early 1600's: Galileo Galilei's gravity experiments. Galileo's revelations included the following: In the absence of air-resistance — all objects accelerate at the same rate regardless of their mass. He also discovered that acceleration is constant near earth's surface (we now refer to this as g ≈ 9.81 m/s²).
• 1687: Newtonian Gravity. Newton's concepts describe gravity as a force. Here, every particle attracts every other particle within the universe, by using a force which is proportional to the product of their masses, and inversely-proportional to the square of the distance between their centers of mass.
• 1905: Einstein's theory of Special Relativity. This describes the relationship between space and time. This early theory introduced the famous equation E = mc². Einstein describes spacetime here as flat. For simplicity sake, he excluded gravity from the theory.
• 1915: Einstein's theory of General Relativity. Einstein now describes gravity as a curvature of spacetime caused by mass and energy. Modern interpretations of Einstein's General Relativity, consider gravity here as a massless spin-2 field.
• 1934: Blokhintsev & Gal'perin. Two Soviet physicists coined the term graviton. Within this early case, the hypothetical graviton is considered to be a massless spin-2 boson.
• 1939: Massive Gravity (Markus Fierz and Wolfgang Pauli). In this theory, “massive” gravitons are introduced. Notably, these gravitons possess non-zero mass and have more degrees of freedom than those in earlier theories.
• 1974: String Theory was reborn as Quantum Gravity/Unified Theory (Joël Scherk and John H. Schwarz). Within this theory, the theoretical graviton naturally emerges from closed strings.  
• 1983: Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) put forth by Mordehai Milgrom. This theory modifies Newton's laws of motion and/or gravity at very low accelerations. 
• 1988: Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG). Carlo Rovelli and Lee Smolin published their paper "Knot Theory and Quantum Gravity". They postulate that spacetime is discrete and quantized, and introduced the loop representation of quantum gravity.
• 2009: Horava-Lifshitz Gravity. A quantum gravity theory which allows space and time to be treated differently at high energies by breaking Lorentz invariance.
• 2010: dRGT Massive Gravity (de Rham–Gabadadze–Tolley). Their theory treats the graviton as non-zero mass. It agrees with General Relativity at short distances, but is treated differently at extremely large scales.
• 2010: Entropic/Emergent Gravity (Erik Verlinde). In this theory, gravity emerges from entropy and information rather than being a fundamental force.
• 2015: Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory (LIGO). This is not a theory, but an experimental setup. On September 14, 2015, LIGO detected gravitational waves from outer space which correlate with Einstein’s theory on General Relativity.

-7-

Gravity over Mass Experiment

This experiment involved an angled wooden chute whose weight was continually monitored by a set of four load cells mounted on a level stationary base. During each test cycle, the weight of the object under test was recorded twice: once while the object was stationary, and again just before it flew off the end of the chute. The reduction in weight between the two readings was calculated as a percentage of the object’s original weight.

The test begins as soon as the load under test is manually released and allowed to slide naturally down the chute. Once the load begins to move, its leading edge triggers a proximity switch. At that moment, the system records the object’s starting weight. As the load continues sliding down the chute, it accelerates and gains momentum.

Just before the load leaves the chute, a second proximity switch is triggered by the leading edge. The reduction in weight is calculated simply by subtracting the second recorded weight from the first.

Video for Gravity over Mass Experiment 

The video below shows the machine which was used for these repetitive tests. Although the machine looks much too simplistic, it worked quite well. 

Final Results 

Importantly, the measured-weight from each of the objects you saw sliding down the chute in the video, reduced their weight by approximately 8% (on average) while in motion!

Through similar experiments, I saw weight reductions anywhere between 7 to 15 percent. I found that the results of each experiment could vary, depending upon both rate-of-speed and type of matter being tested. The chute angle that you see in this picture, is tilted approximately 28 degrees from level. This was the angle used for a good number of these tests. I found that this angle gave the object in motion a decent amount of velocity over a relatively short distance. The slide was sufficiently polished to ensure a smooth finish and there were no hiccups as the weight was traversing the chute.   

Obviously, this machine was built on a shoe string budget, so its accuracy could certainly be improved upon. My objective here was to merely prove a point. That is: an objects “weight” is reduced once in motion. This concept supports the overall thread of this document. 

This is certainly an odd application for load-cells, as normally the object being weighed has to be as still as possible. The four load-cells at the unit’s base just beneath its floating stand, continually measure the overall weight. All four load-cells work together. As the test weight obviously shifts upon the stand while sliding down the chute, the whole stand is continuously being weighed via all four load-cells. So, it was fairly reliable.

That being said, it took some patience to ensure that the machine’s mechanics were totally repeatable. There are no calibrations for individual load-cells. Load-cells are factory calibrated and non-adjustable. They either work properly or you simply throw them away. If they become over stressed for any reason they can easily be damaged.

During setup, electronic calibration comes into play in order to adjust the gain of the amplifiers and ensure both sides (halves) work equally well. Here, I optionally divided the load-cells into pairs; so the weight of one side of the unit can always be compared against the weight of the other. This helped to ensure the integrity of the overall system.

Quite typically, the weight of the wooden stand was tared out prior to performing any tests. The object under test, is dynamically weighed as soon as it’s placed upon the machine. After carefully removing a fixed stop (so as not to rock the assembly), gravity then pulls the load under test down the chute.

As the load slowly initially slides about an inch or so ahead, the first proximity-switch triggers an immediate recording of weight. From there, the load increases in velocity until its leading edge triggers the second proximity-switch. This action immediately records the weight once more. The program itself, merely provided the difference between the object’s starting weight and ending weight for comparison. The machine's overall operation is quite simple.

One of the challenges of building this system, was to make sure that the floating frame and chute assembly was as light as possible when compared to the load under test. The load-cells had to be sensitive enough so that they could focus upon the weight in motion; and yet be durable enough to carry the additional weight of the frame and chute assembly. Hence, there was always the possibility of over stressing and damaging the load-cells.

-8-

Gravity Over Mass Concept -
SUMMARY 

Importantly, merely by understanding that virtually all of the energy required to push an object downwards using gravity is borrowed from the mass of the object itself — fills a huge void of knowledge. I suspect that at least 99.99% of the energy required for gravity to take hold within atomic structures, is borrowed from the invariant mass of the object in question.

Importantly, the unified atomic mass unit (u) is defined based on the mass of a neutral carbon-12 atom. The experiments that established this standard were conducted on Earth and were therefore influenced by gravity.

Gravity acts as a pilot-like force that produces a directional bias on the atom. When the atom senses this bias, it steers itself in a specific direction. This phenomenon is what creates “weight” as we understand it. Although not exactly the same, consider how an unbalanced car wheel behaves quite differently.

I am confident that in the near future a second machine will be built to further distinguish differences between gravity, mass and weight. I suspect it will be more robust and definitive as far as numbers go.

The options here for testing various materials and methodologies are quite vast. I can't imagine that we could ever negate gravity's effects altogether, but imagine if one could merely reduce the weight of a massive object by 10 to 20% for a short length of time. The cost-savings here could be enormous.

Notably, we do not collect or sell personal information from casual-visitors to our site. The only personal information which we might use herein, is what's voluntarily given to us if one populates a form.