COOKBOOK COSMOLOGY - PART IV
An Engineering Approach to the Question of Gravity
by
Neil B. Christianson
© Copyright November 1999
Although Isaac Newton (1643-1727) mathematically showed how gravity works, he was unable to pinpoint the exact cause of gravity. Its cause still remains to be identified. However, this uncertainty did not stop contemporary philosophers from attributing the formation of our solar system to gravitational attraction at work within a molecular cloud. Today’s physicists attribute gravity’s cause to a force particle, a graviton, but none have been isolated. Even equations desert them and come up with zero as the answer for gravity1. Which, leads to the questions: Could gravity be as simple as a perfect vacuum -- a vacuum in the heart of each and every atom? Could gravity and all-that-is somehow be linked to hydrogen’s stable stationary states?
Figure I. Tilting prism of hydrogen’s stable stationary states.
Up to 1897 the atom was considered the ultimate constituent of matter and indivisible. Sir J. J.Thomson of the Cavendish Laboratory in Cambridge, England, upset this cherished belief when he introduced new and important concepts: the electron is a particle of negative electricity; all atoms contain electrons; and all electrons are the same no matter the material they are in. Robert A. Millikan made the next great stride by measuring with extreme precision the mass and charge of the electron. He found the ion of hydrogen to be 1835 times heavier than the electron; and, he found the univalent ion’s electric charge to be an equivalent opposite charge to that carried on the electron.
The next step took place in about 1913 when Lord Rutherford found the atom to have a positive nucleus which neutralizes the surrounding negative electrons. This he discovered by bombarding atoms of nitrogen, sodium, aluminum, and other elements with fast-moving, charged helium atoms to break them up. In each case he obtained positively charged ions of hydrogen. Therefore he concluded that one or more of these positively charged ions of hydrogen, which he called protons, must be present in the nucleus of all atoms.
Figure II. Samples of Bohr atoms.
From this starting point, various scientists, including the Danish physicist, Niels Bohr, built up a simple model of the structure of the atom as follows. All atoms can be considered to be made of electrons (negative charges) and protons (positive charges). Since all atoms are electrically neutral, there must be the same number of electrons as of protons in every atom. Hence, atoms of the diverse elements, differ from one another only in the number and arrangement of their electrons and protons. In other words, the atom of any one element differs from every other element because of the number and arrangement of its electrons and protons even though its electrons and protons are exactly the same as those in other elements.
Hydrogen is the simplest atom. It consists of one proton as a nucleus and one electron that vibrates (moves at great speed) around this central nucleus. This nuclear atom-picture resembles a sort of solar system having a heavy star as nucleus around which, at comparatively great distance, revolves a "planetary" electron. But in other elements the weight of the nucleus was found to be a little more than the weight of two protons for every electron. Hence, a new concept was added to the electron-proton theory; namely the neutron. Since a neutron in its free state splits into a proton and an electron, this neutral combination was assumed to be very close; so close their individual charges go undetected. All other elemental atoms, including the heavy hydrogens, have a number of neutrons (close proton-electron combinations) in their nuclei.
Using this model for the make up of the atom, Neils Bohr tried to explain all elemental particles in terms of aggregates of basic hydrogen atoms. And, in turn, extend that model to the formation of planets, stars and galaxies. His enlightened thinking, however, preceded the laboratory data needed to make this connection. It also preceded the identification of a matter particle’s twin; an antimatter particle -- same in all respects, except opposite in charge.
In principle, protons and neutrons can be brought together in a great many combinations to form atomic nuclei2. Some 8,000 nuclei are thought to be capable of survival long enough that they can be said to exist. However, nuclei representing the majority of these combinations do not exist. Even if they could be created they would decay too quickly to be observed directly. About 300 are stable indefinitely, and they are therefore by far the most common nuclei in nature. Today, scientists literally assemble atoms and their isotopes in a wide variety of nucleiform combinations. But, the question still remains, how does nature make the lowly hydrogen atom and from it the rest of the nuclei? The answer lies in steady state physics.
Before space and time existed, as we know it, a teaming nothingness prevailed. In nothingness, virtual particles pop into being as oppositely charged twins. This process is known as steady state physics wherein a proton and its antimatter counterpart form from nothing (ex nihilo). They are probably trapped vacuums within perpetually counter-rotating eddies of energy. At their birth, space and time start for the twins, But if the twins come close to each other they readily annihilate one another to release their formation energy as electromagnetic radiation that runs off in all directions. Space and time end for the twins, but if the oppositely charged, counter-rotating eddies can be separated they become real particles -- protons and antiprotons. Electrons and their counterparts, positrons, also come into being in nothingness. But they possess only 1/1835 the trapped vacuum of a proton.
Think of a spontaneously formed proton as a fisherman, who casts a stiff string in all directions -- front and back, right and left, up and down (a concept borrowed from string theory1). The proton-fisherman is an electromagnetically trapped vacuum (nothing). His string’s extension determines the extent of the space controlled by the proton-fisherman. In his newly formed state (string extended to its maximum length) he is at his highest achievable energy-level. Since his string is extended to the maximum distance, his inner vacuum exerts its lowest attractive force on the attractive vacuums of adjacent proton-fishermen. He is fishing for the illusive electron, which if caught will allow him to gain some measure of neutral stability. However, before the proton-fisherman can hope to find any stability he must be separated from his antimatter counterpart to avoid eventual annihilation.
I believe separation takes place in a spherical, inner-galactic shell, a vacuum, wherein matter particles and antimatter particles continuously materialize. Matter particles escape to the outer side of the shell; antimatter particles take refuge in its interior. Matter particles bunch up on the outside, and antimatter particles bunch up in the interior. Their bunching also draws a stronger vacuum in the inner-galactic shell, which then produces more protons, antiprotons, electrons and positrons. Both matter and antimatter then follow the same steps in their quest for ultimate stability -- their most stable stationary states.
Figure III. A proton-fisherman’s radius of influence.
Aside from the spherical vacuum in the inner galactic shell, there are actually two vacuums at work in the process of reaching ultimate stability. First is the vacuum that constitutes a proton-fisherman and second is the vacuum (void) created by the atom as it changes phase to move to a new stable stationary state. The vacuum of the proton-fisherman is a constant. Only the radius (d) of its sphere of influence changes during a phase change. But in moving to a new stable stationary state the radius of its sphere of influence becomes shorter than the radius at which its phase change began, hence the void created as hydrogen changes phase sucks the surrounding gas close in upon its new radius of influence.
In the bunching mass of proton-fishermen, an individual fisherman soon snags an illusive electron. He then reels in a portion of his stiff string to pull the electron closer to his attracting vacuum, thus hooking the illusive electron. Although he must work hard to hold on, fisherman and electron now make up a stable unit, a hydrogen atom. But the process of reeling in cost the fisherman some energy, which shows up as a quantum of heat that must be expelled and radiated to the vast heat sink of space.
Continuous production of proton-fishermen, with their flailing stiff strings, and the production of electron-fish add to the ever growing mass of hydrogen atoms. Fishermen snag electrons, expel heat and reel in their stiff strings to reduce the distance to each other’s inner vacuums. The mutual attraction of their vacuums and the voids created by the reeling in of their stiff strings draw them together into a crowd. Now, mutual attraction of the fishermen’s vacuums extend in all directions, so the lateral attractions of vacuums in the growing crowd of atoms form a tensional band that squeezes the inner fishermen. But, a fisherman’s string can bend only so far before he joins another fisherman to gain greater stability. They become a hydrogen molecule. Again, their joining cost them energy as they reel in their strings. But, reeling in, in turn, increases the attractive force or pull of their inner vacuums.
Figure IV. Band tightening squeeze vector.
Fishermen all around them follow suit, joining together to step down to colder temperatures to form hydrogen molecules. Thus, achieving a greater degree of stability by moving their electrons closer to their fishermen’s vacuums. At the same time, the vacuums in a pair of fishermen now exert greater lateral attraction toward their neighbors than they did previously. Again, their bands tighten to add a squeeze vector to the hydrostatic force vector. Scrunched together by the crowd’s spherical press two proton-fishermen deep within the crowd discover that a greater stability is achieved if instead ofstanding side by side they stand head to toe. They go from an ortho molecule to a para molecule with an attendant loss of heat and a reduction in distance between their electrons and their proton-vacuums. The most dramatic reeling in of strings (decrease in distance between the electrons and their fishermen’s vacuums) comes when the growing crowd’s spherical press forces two proton-fishermen to expel a quantum of heat to condense and solidify.
Figure V. Fishermen side by side and head to toe
In nature, the full sequence of hydrogen’s stable stationary states can be traced in the formation of high mass stars. Current theory teaches that the capacity of a diffuse (a few 10-23 g/cc) interstellar cloud to form stars, depends on its reaching physical conditions that allow it to collapse. As it radiates away its heat energy, its decreasing temperature and its subsequent increase in density, set in motion the process of star formation. But, temperatures and densities throughout the massive cloud are not exactly uniform, so the cloud begins to fragment into regions of higher density. Subsequent cooling within these fragmented regions continues until phase instability sets in at the critical density of ~10-19 g/cc. These fragmented regions, or portions thereof, in time, are said to compress to an average stellar density of ~1 g/cc. Hence, the formation of high mass stars require the gathering together of a large number of hydrogen molecules (a gigantic cloud of hydrogen) to cause enough squeeze pressure on their inner molecules to get them to convert to parahydrogen and, in turn, condense and solidify. This is an extremely slow process because in reeling in their stiff strings heat is given up and this heat must be moved to the surface of the gaseous cloud where it can be radiated to the vast heat sink of space.
Figure VI. High mass star formation.
Observers3 find high mass stars forming in giant dust free regions (20-60 parsec) where temperatures run 15-40 Kelvin. Once a giant region, or some part of it, manages to become unstable, three major phases of massive star formation follow. Some phases have been identified by direct observation. Some are only inferred by secondary infrared radiation. The earliest phase is isothermal collapse, in which, the free-fall of hydrogen produces a density graduated sphere ~0.5 parsec in diameter. In this phase, free-fall velocities increase faster toward the collapsing region’s center, which results in the growth of a relatively compact core. Butthe new core does not heat up, because the heat of compaction freely radiates away through an optically thin shell; thus, its growth is isothermal. This phase continues until ortho to para conversion forms a small star-like object containing a few tenths of a solar mass in the center of the free-falling outer shell that is now ~0.1 parsec in diameter. Which is just what happens in the spherical press process explained above.
At this point the accretion phase begins. In this phase the core continues to increase its mass through the free-fall (drawing in) of hydrogen from its ample gaseous shell. Under increasing hydrostatic pressure the proton-fishermen deep in the interior begin to condense and solidify into hexagonal closed pack (HCP) crystals. The core slowly contracts from the voids produced by ongoing solidification of hydrogen. This forces the proton-vacuums closer together and, in turn, increases the force exerted by the squeeze vector. Note: when the initial mass of gaseous, molecular hydrogen started, the combined vacuum-pull deep in the interior was very weak. But as the internal molecules change phase they move individual vacuum centers closer together, hence they increase the pull of their combined vacuum. In turn, the cloud’s individual gaseous molecules thus experience a strengthening pull toward the combined vacuum. That pull shows up as hydrostatic pressure. Eventually, the proton-fishermen in the center of the growing mass can no longer resist the pressure and reel in their stiff strings to move their electrons into a closer orbit around their attracting vacuums. They move to the new stable stationary state of Face Centered Cubic (FCC). Their expelled heat boils up through the HCP crystalline shell, which is a quasi-liquid, and floats to the outer surface of the gaseous shell to radiate into space.
Again the attracting vacuums move closer together, squeeze vector strength increases and deep in the growing FCC sphere the stiff strings of proton-fishermen can no longer hold their own and the FCC molecule becomes a Base Centered Cubic (metallic) molecule. As condensation-solidification of the gaseous hydrogen cloud continues to add mass to the growing body, a large sphere of metallic hydrogen grows in the center of that growing mass. Expel heat, reel in strings, tighten bands; expel heat, reel in strings, tighten bands; each step in the spherical press’ process moves the molecules down their stable stationary states. This process continues until the electrons are forced so close to the fishermen that they grab them with their teeth (K Capture) -- proton-fishermen become proton dependent neutrons. They must then join with another pair of fishermen to become a deuterium molecule. As long as this type of neutron is connected to a proton, the unit remains stable through a large range of temperatures and pressures to produce the physical characteristics that govern the reality we experience in our daily lives. If freed from its proton the neutron rapidly takes on energy to fission into a proton-fisherman and a free electron.
Figure VII. Cold fusion of the heavy hydrogens.
Cold fusion of deuterium4 introduces a new element, helium, into the process of high mass star formation. The trick to achieving fusion is to get the electrons close to their protons so they can reeled in (K capture) to a lower stable stationary state. The ever increasing squeeze vector gives the impetuous needed to move an electron close enough to its proton to initiate K-capture. Cold fusion by K-capture was envisioned as far back as 1956. First attempts using frozen hydrogen molecules led to a fusion that formed deuterium. These attempts were soon followed by catalyzed fusion of a hydrogen-deuterium molecule, whose fusion ejects an electron to produce a helium-3 atom, plus 5.4 Mev of energy. Further attempts along this line were conducted with deuterium-deuterium molecules. Forty-two percent of the time this molecule converts to tritium, plus a proton, plus 4 Mev of energy. Fifty-eight percent of the time it produces a helium-3 atom, plus a neutron, plus 3.3 Mev of energy. Fusion of a deuterium-tritium molecule uses up an electron to produce an alpha particle (a positively charged helium ion) plus a neutron to release 17.6 Mev of energy.
Prior to helium’s introduction, the to-be-star got rid of the heat produced from the phase changes taking place in its shells of solid hydrogen by the slow movement of heat out to its gaseous shell. Now, the star has only one direction to go -- colder; so, if a solid shell’s temperature rises toward the upper temperature at which its phase is stable the whole process stops. The process reverses direction and the whole expands to compensate for that excess heat until it can be moved to the gaseous shell. But, the introduction of helium to the to-be-star accelerates the process of cloud condensation and solidification. Once produced helium rapidly chills to near zero Kelvin -- the temperature deep in the metallic sphere. It becomes a superfluid that conducts heat perfectly. As the amount of available helium grows it sneaks into the interstitial spaces in crystalline hydrogen’s grain boundaries to facilitate the flow of expelled heat coming from nuclear fusion and the phase changes taking place between the various solid states of hydrogen. Thus the boiling off of hydrogen is no longer needed, because superfluid helium rapidly moves the heat produced out to the gaseous shell where it floats to the surface and finally radiates to the vast heat sink of space. It should be noted here that low mass stars have an advantage over high mass stars because they form in regions rich in helium.
Figure VIII. Voids in crystal grain boundaries.
Accretion only appears to stop as the star breaks forth as a main sequence star at the Hertzsprung-Russel position appropriate to its mass. Stars moremassive than ten solar masses radiate enough ultraviolet photons to establish detectable molecular shells one parsec in diameter. It has been observed that these molecular hydrogen shells lie closely associated with what appears to be their parental molecular cloud. There is strong evidence for in fall of molecular hydrogen, but the scale size over which this occurs is still somewhat uncertain. However, these observations do support a cold solar model wherein cold fusion of deuterium-tritium produces excess neutrons that build up in the centre of the metallic sphere. This fusion, also, uses up electrons in the production of neutrons and their dearth causes highly ionized gases that strip electrons from infalling hydrogen to fuel roiling lightning storms in the star’s corona. These same highly ionized gases escape through polar holes in the star’s corona. They are again proton-fishermen in search of the illusive electron and once they hook an electron and subsequently combined into molecules they may return again to the star. As long as the unending supply of electrons holds out, the star continues to gain mass (attracting vacuums) during its active lifetime.
Figure IX. High mass star cross section.
Further, neutrons at the boundary between metallic hydrogen and the neutron centre unite with hydrogen ions to form proton-neutron pairs. Once united in a proton-neutron combination their strong vacuum attraction makes them an extremely stable unit. These units then combine to form the nuclei of the various elemental particles found in the universe. This unit, also, withstands high temperatures without fear of breaking apart; hence, in the cold fusion furnace, all manner of stable elemental nuclei come into being. But, once the strength of the metallic hydrogen shell is compromised the star’s cold fusion furnace goes thermonuclear and the star explodes in a supernova. Then these stable nuclei get blown into space to become the elements we find here on Earth.
Aside from electromagnetic forces, the holding together of aggregates of heavier elements, such as iron and nickel, can be understood as high concentrations of vacuums mutually attracting each other. The higher the concentration of vacuums the denser or heavier the material. These materials do not pull apart because the attracting vacuums are so strong that the individual molecules appear to be welded together, so we see them only as a cohesive whole. For example, the combined attractive vacuums in a block of steel also attract the combined attractive vacuums in us. Their attraction is minimal because we possess only a few, widely separated attractive vacuums. But, the number of attractive vacuums in the Earth make for such a strong vacuum that we and the block of steel perceive their pull as gravity. Which lends credence to the portentous observation made by the comedian George Carlin in one of his stand up routines. Quote, "There is no such thing as gravity. The Earth sucks."
Finally, in the depths of the nuclear fusion furnace, pressure becomes so great that proton-fishermen swallow their fish to become independent neutrons -- they reach their lowest possible energy level and strongest combined attractive vacuum force. Independent neutrons pull together to form the most dense material (strongest vacuum) possible. After the star’s supernova this mass shows itself as a neutron star. A pale star that exhibits the strongest gravity seen in the universe.
Figure X. Onion model of the hydrogen molecule.
We have now stepped through the full sequence of hydrogen’s stable stationary states to explain the observed phases in high mass star formation. Molecular hydrogen’s sequences, in this event, can best be visualized as a dual hearted onion. Its two hearts being proton-vacuums and its coats being the spheres of influence occupied by its electrons during each of the molecule’s stable stationary states. Now, if the pull of the combined proton-vacuums is indeed what we call gravity, then Newton’s contemporaries were absolutely right to attribute the formation of solar bodies to gravitational attraction at work within a molecular cloud.
Home | Editor's Diary | Data Bank | Read Out | Features | Products | Events | Communications Bank | Archive