Space is filled with the RIEs of all the particles present. RIEs propagate at the speed of light in all directions and interact with every particle present. If the particles are part of an object, then their RIEs form the interaction energy (IE) of the object, which manifests itself as a phenomenon called gravity.. Weight and gravity are connected vessels. For particles, this connection is even more apparent. For an object, the resultant gravitational force is the vector sum of all the interactions acting on it. A particle creates “gravity” by its own RIE. Since we do not measure the mass of a pulsating particle directly, but derive it based on its interaction with its surroundings, which is also the case with a classical personal scales and conversion to mass using gravitational acceleration, it is very difficult to say whether we have measured the real mass of the particle or only its apparent mass. For example, if we take a proton and a neutron, we create deuterium, whose mass is less than the sum of the masses of both particles. According to current theory, the “lost” mass during a nuclear reaction has been converted into energy. But it is also possible that the overall intensity of deuterium’s pulsation has only decreased, and thus its ability to interact with its surroundings. The following table shows the relative differences between the theoretical and measured masses of the elements.
(https://www.sisweb.com/referenc/source/exactmas.htm)
* Atoms with one supplemental neutron
Table 2. Mass losses for individual atoms
The table shows how the relative mass of atoms changes after adding hydrogen (proton and electron) or neutron. One of the most important is the value for 4He, because 4He is a kind of imaginary idol with an optimal arrangement of atomic particles. On the one hand, it is assumed to be the main product of the nuclear fusion of the sun, and on the other hand, it is the basic building block of 3D atoms. The relative mass loss for 4He is 0.753%. We can assume that this value does not change significantly for 3D atoms. Therefore, it is more interesting to compare how the relative mass of atoms changes after subtracting the measured mass of 4He, as shown in the table. It is certainly interesting to compare the relative losses for 3H and 7Li atoms, where 7Li is essentially 3H enclosed in a 4He plane. In the case of radioactive 3H, where the particles can rotate around each other to some extent, the loss is 0.301%. For 7Li, where the particles are separated by a partition, it is 0.385%. The 4He plateau appears to have a significant stabilizing effect. To compare the relative mass loss between 3D atoms, the presence of an additional neutron must be taken into account, which probably slightly reduces the resulting value. The value for 12C is certainly also interesting, as it not only surpasses the value of 4He, but is also very close to the maximum value for 20NE, which is the same as in the case of 16O. It seems that arranging protons and neutrons into two eight-membered rings is even more advantageous than creating a 4He ring. But it should be taken into account that for the calculations we neglected the effect of the 4He plateau on the overall atom.
The more intense the pulsation, the heavier the particle appears. The intensity of the particle’s pulsation depends on its size, but also on the environment in which it is located. Therefore, nucleons in different atomic nuclei have different masses. The pulsation of a particle is affected by the presence of other particles, both by the intensity and direction of their pulses, but also by direct contact. Higher gravity slows down the intensity of the particle’s pulsation. In order for a particle to achieve the same intensity of pulsation, and therefore the same mass, it needs to increase its internal energy. It means that particles in a really high gravitational field, such as stars, can have much higher internal energy than particles in a low gravitational field, such as on earth. It is therefore possible that the more, for example, the sun, loses its energy, and therefore also its mass and thus also its gravity, the more the energy stored in the particles is released. If we return to the short lifetime of the neutron outside the atomic nucleus, as mentioned at the beginning of the article, then the small gravity is responsible for this short lifetime in terrestrial conditions.
If we were to move a molecule in this imaginary system towards an object with really high gravity, such as a black hole, then the protons and neutrons in the atomic nuclei would react by reducing the intensity of their pulses and the electron orbitals would move closer to the protons. First, there would be the cancellation of chemical bonds in the molecule and the disintegration into individual atoms. At some point, the innermost electrons would fuse with the protons to form neutrons. This would cause the atomic nuclei themselves to disintegrate. By the opposite process, if the neutron were moving away from the black hole, at some distance it would become unstable and form a hydrogen atom. At the same time, as it reaches a space with lower gravity, it releases its internal energy and transforms it into thermal energy.
Interaction between objects – gravity
This article explains the principle of gravity according to Particle Interaction Variant – the PIV theory using the relationship between the Sun and the Earth. For simplicity, these two objects are treated as a closed system, isolated from external influences. All values below are approximate and rounded, because regarding this example, their accuracy is not important, but understanding the principle and relationships is. The mass of the Sun is approximately 2×1033 g, which is about 1057 nucleons. We can neglect electrons because they are much lighter and their contribution to both the total IE emission and the interaction with it is insignificant. Their RIE spreads in all directions like the Sun’s IE. This solar IE reaches the earth about 500 seconds after emission. Its intensity is already very small, so the repulsive forces of individual RIEs are quite negligible. However, the density is still quite high with respect to the total number of solar nucleons. These solar IEs collide with the Earth’s nucleons, which, on average, have their orientation distributed in all directions in 3D space. It is also important to realize that the distances between atomic nuclei are truly enormous from a nucleon perspective. The resulting effect will be different for each nucleon, depending on its orientation to the incoming solar IE. If it is oriented against the incoming IE with its axial side, its contribution to the attractive effect will be minimal or even negative. Conversely, if it is oriented against the incoming IE with its radial side, its contribution to the attractive effect will be maximum. Fortunately, for the planets, from carbon onwards, most of the axial faces of nucleons in the nucleus are oriented inwards, so interaction with the radial side is much more likely to happen. According to current theory, the gravitational force appears to be weak precisely because only a small fraction of the nucleons present can interact with maximum effect. In the case of stars, including the Sun, it is likely that their strong IE (gravity) pushes 2D atoms, such as hydrogen, deuterium, and helium, to orient their radial sides toward the center of the star, so that they can then respond more sensitively to incoming IE by attractive effects.
Like the Sun, the Earth also emits its own IE and like an electron in a hydrogen atom (see Figure 13), the Earth orbits the Sun and moves in the gradient of the solar IE. To estimate the magnitude of the gradient, we will start with Newton’s law of gravity, which is again a mathematical approximation, since this law does not contain an interaction mechanism. The fact that this is an approximation can also be deduced from the fact that this law is not generally valid. It may come as a surprise, but Einstein’s modification is also just another approximation, as I will demonstrate further. As a reminder, Newton’s law of gravity, which we will analyze in more detail and which we will use to estimate the magnitude of the solar IE gradient acting on the Earth.
Where:
F is the attractive force acting on bodies 1 and 2.
G is the gravitational constant, essentially a conversion for the chosen unit system.
m1 and m2 these are the masses of body 1 and body 2
r is the distance between bodies 1 and 2.
The size of the total IE of a body depends on the number of nucleons, which depends on its mass. Therefore, we can consider weight, given in the formula above, as a parameter that expresses the total size IE of the body. In general, the IE of a body does not have to propagate in all directions with the same intensity, in addition to the shape and other factors, this parameter also depends on the orientation of the nucleons. In our case, for simplicity, we will assume a uniform distribution of the IE intensity of both bodies. In the case of the Earth, this is a mass of 6×1027 g, which represents 3.6×1051 nucleons. Since IE propagates in a spherical shape, the intensity of IE decreases with the square of the distance. Therefore, if the IE on the surface of a body has a certain intensity (per unit area), then at a distance equal to the body’s radius from the surface, the intensity will be reduced to one-quarter, following the inverse-square law of distance. It is this dependence that is expressed by the denominator in the fraction. The distance of the Sun from the Earth is 23437 Earth radii. Light, and therefore IE of the Earth, travels this distance in 500 seconds. The intensity of IE decreases 5.5×108 times to a value of about 1.1×1019. However, the radius of the Sun is 190 times larger than the radius of the Earth, the total interaction area is proportional to the square of the radius, a total of 11,000 times larger, therefore the total IE of the Earth incident on the Sun is 1.3×1023 g. The Sun reacts to this incident IE proportionally to its mass, which is expressed in the equation as the mass of the second body. Although it is generally assumed that the Sun interacts with this IE in some way, Newton’s law of gravity does not suggest anything of the sort. What is missing from this law is the interaction component. Where does the resulting force F come from? Even Einstein’s theory of relativity cannot explain it, as I will demonstrate below. There is no difference between believing that the F force simply exists without a physical explanation and believing that the world was created in seven days. To uncover the source of the mysterious force, let’s make this logical argument. It is generally assumed that the total IE on the far side of the Sun is composed of the solar IE and the Earth’s IE that has passed through the Sun. In layman’s terms, the gravitational forces of both bodies are added together. But this very consideration rules out an interaction. The only possible explanation is that the incident IE caused a deformation of the Solar IE emission, so that it increased on the far side in proportion to the value of incident IE. Another logical argument is that the total IE emission of the body should remain the same. Therefore, if the IE on the far side of the emission has increased, on the other hand, the IE on the incident side must decrease by this value. If we use the original assumption “about the sum of gravitational forces”, which may not be accurate, then the solar IE emission on the far side is 1.3×1023 g higher, while on the side facing the Earth it is this value lower. The minimum intensity of the solar IE therefore propagates towards the place where the Earth’s IE came from, and the maximum in exactly the opposite direction. After another 500 seconds, it will reach the distance of the Earth from the Sun. A total of 1000 seconds will have passed since the original emission of the Earth’s IE, and during this time, the Earth will have moved by 30 thousand km due to its speed. That is more than two diameters of the Earth. The Earth thus finds itself in a gradient between the minimum and maximum of the Solar IE emission. The front part of the Earth thus receives a slightly higher solar IE than its rear part. If we divide the difference between the maximum and minimum of the Solar IE by the distances of a half circle with the radius of the Earth’s distance from the Sun and multiply it by the diameter of the Earth, we get a value of 6.5×10-14% in relative terms. This value represents an estimate of the difference in incident solar IE between the front and rear sections of the Earth, assuming a uniform increase in solar IE from its minimum to its maximum value. Although the value is very small, it is important to remember that it is permanent. Unlike the influence of other planets, which is canceled in certain cycles, this influence is constant and keeps the Earth rotating around its axis. All planets, except Venus and Uranus, rotate in this natural direction. Just as the planets move in the solar IE gradient, which affects their rotation, it can be expected that the entire solar system moves in the IE gradient of the Milky Way, and that in the next IE gradient, and so on. The following figure shows the individual phases and the overall situation of the Earth-Sun interaction.
Figure 57. The Sun-Earth system in gravitational connection
Gravitational action is undoubtedly one of the interactions of matter. The fundamental principle of interaction is the reaction of matter to environmental stimuli, which results in a measurable change in its behavior. If matter does not change any of its properties, then there has been no interaction. Newton’s law of gravity, however, does not contain any interaction. An analysis of the standard equation suggests that the presence of mass alone is sufficient to generate gravitational force, without requiring any further interactive mechanism. The fundamental question remains: where in these mathematical approximations is the interaction component represented, and what physical change serves as the source of the gravitational force? However, this issue is not confined to Newton’s law alone; unfortunately, this fundamental premise of interaction is consistently overlooked by most currently recognized physical theories. If we wanted to incorporate that interaction into the equation, then according to the mechanism described above, to express the effect of the Sun (m2), we would have to subtract the interaction energy from the Earth (m1) from its mass. The equation would then look like this
Where:
F1 is the attractive force acting on body 1 (Earth).
G is the gravitational constant.
m1 and m2 these are the masses of body 1 and body 2 (Sun)
r is the distance between bodies 1 and 2.
(m1*m2)/r2 is an expression of the total interaction energy incident on body 2
The newly introduced term considers the amount of interaction energy of the Earth falling on the Sun, but it does not take into account the amount of interaction energy of the Sun falling on the Earth, which will affect the intensity of interaction energy emitted by the Earth towards the Sun. We would have to adjust this term accordingly to the form:
With the same logic, we could modify the newly introduced term by subtracting the Earth’s interaction energy and so on to infinity. We would get an infinite series converging to a certain value. However, each new member of this series would contribute to the refinement of the value by several orders of magnitude less than the previous member. From a practical point of view, it is fully sufficient to introduce only the first reduction in the emission of interaction radiation. Just as for expressing the force acting on the Earth, the relationship for the force acting on the Sun can be derived:
Where:
F2 is the attractive force acting on body 2 (Sun).
The question is whether, regarding the motion of all bodies, including the entire solar system, F1 is really completely identical to F2, or whether it slightly differs.)
Moreover, despite the full completion of the entire series as indicated in formula 3, we would not obtain a formula for the exact calculation of attractive forces, because it would not take into account other effects. It would still be only a mathematical approximation, although much more accurate than the original Newtonian one.
One of the parameters that even the modified equation does not take into account is the geometry of the interaction energy intensity. As can be seen from the figure and as can be expected, the nucleons that are on the line connecting the centers of both bodies or in its close vicinity interact most strongly. Their feedback, i.e. the intensity of IE directed towards the other body, will be the weakest. Conversely, nucleons further from this line will interact much less and their IE intensity will approach the normal value. It is precisely due to the actual geometry of the solar IE intensity that it is possible that the Earth moves in a larger difference ΔSIE than was calculated by the simplified calculation above.
The second parameter that the equation does not reflect is the motion of the bodies. Due to the speed of the Earth and the time shift caused by the speed of propagation of IE (speed of light), the Earth constantly moves in the gravitational field of the Sun deformed by the Earth’s IE emitted about 100 seconds ago.
Furthermore, there is the behavior of the particles themselves. As we will show below, it is evident that when a particle is exposed to a strong interaction, its ability to respond immediately or immediately to another stimulus is reduced. This effect is quite evident in atoms themselves, where nucleons in the nucleus are exposed to strong nuclear interaction. The ability of a deuterium atom to interact with its surroundings (mass) is reduced by 0.14% compared to the sum of the abilities (masses) of both free nucleons. The distance between the two nucleons, with respect to the synchronization of the radial interaction energy (RIE) emission of both nucleons, could be approximately 4 radii, i.e. 3.2×10-15 m, while the mass of deuterium is reduced by 0.14%. The distance between the nuclei in a hydrogen molecule, i.e. between two protons, is 7.4×10-11 m, i.e. 23125 times larger. Since the RIE intensity decreases with the first power of the distance, the decrease in the mass of the hydrogen molecule compared to free hydrogen atoms would correspond to 6×10-6%. This change is beyond the resolution capabilities of the devices.
Even with the tightest arrangement of nucleons in the nucleus, i.e. atoms of noble gases, the loss of the ability to interact with the surroundings ranges from 0.75% for Helium to 0.93% for Krypton.
Consequently, it is hypothesized that the loss of mass – and thus the capacity for environmental interaction – diminishes at an extremely gradual rate in particles subjected to gravitational influence. However, for extremely massive objects such as stars or black holes, this effect can already take on significant values. For example, the Sun may contain 1% more nucleons than would correspond to its mass, because all particles are under the influence of approximately 3.6×1051 surrounding nucleons and their IE. Particles respond to this by reducing their own IE emission, i.e. their ability to interact with their surroundings. They can achieve this in two ways, either by reducing the overall intensity of IE, or by extending the interval between individual emissions. Of course, atoms in atomic clocks react in the same way, i.e. by reducing their activity. In principle, exactly according to Einstein’s theory, which, however, cannot explain the mechanism of this effect. Of course, atoms in atomic clocks react to the high intensity of the surrounding IE (gravity) in the same way, i.e. by reducing their activity. While this effect aligns precisely with the predictions of Einstein’s theory of relativity, the latter provides no fundamental mechanism to explain why such a phenomenon occurs.
Because Einstein did not have any theory describing the mechanism of interaction between particles to rely on, and on the contrary, the theories of the time did not assume changes in the behavior of particles during interactions, he used the deformation of space-time due to gravity in his theory of relativity to explain phenomena that differed from Newton’s law of gravity. Using this theory, he managed to mathematically capture some of the above-mentioned phenomena, such as the mutual influence of the interaction energies of two bodies, or the decrease in the activity and ability of particles to interact with increasing gravity. But because the theory of relativity is still only a mathematical approximation, lacking the physical essence of the interaction between objects, it was unable to detect the deformation of the emission of the interaction energy of the second object (the Sun) or the gradient of this energy in the direction of motion of the first object (the Earth) as shown in the figure above. Every mathematical approximation is limited in validity by a domain of definition. Outside this domain, the deviation of the output values of the approximation from the real state is outside the acceptance limit. In this case, the limit is the small distance between objects, where the deformation of space-time is no longer sufficient to explain the real behavior of objects and also leads to the creation of a false singularity. Near the object, the inherent mechanism of interaction energy emission begins to manifest itself significantly. According to Newton’s gravitational equation, as well as the above modified equation, and according to Einstein’s theory, the main source of gravity is the center of the object. This can be easily deduced from the denominator, which corresponds to the distance from the center of the object – r. In the following figure, the red arrows show the emission of interaction energy from the center of the first object (red) towards the second object (green), which corresponds to this idea.
Figure 58. The emission of interaction energy from the center of the object
Unfortunately, this idea is false, this simplification only applies to very distant objects and is only suitable for approximations. While all constituent particles contribute to the emission of interaction energy, the particles located within the outer shell primarily dictate the resulting geometry of the field. The system can be compared to Newton’s cradle, where the inner spheres transmit energy, in our case they are also its source, but the final effect is performed by the outer spheres. Depending on the way they are attached, different movements can be achieved. A more correct idea is that each particle (point) in the outer shell is a source of interaction energy emission outside the object, as shown in the following figure. The total IE emission of the object then corresponds to the sum of the IE emissions from all points in the outer shell.
Figure 59. The emission of interaction energy from one point in the outer shell
In Figure 59, internal particles (indicated in light red) serve as the primary sources of IE. The dark red ring represents the surface particles, which simultaneously act as IE sources and determine the final geometry of the emission into the surrounding space. The length of the red arrow represents the intensity of the IE emission in a given direction.
This model does not contain any singularity, but its mathematical interpretation is much more complex because other parameters come into play, such as the distribution of matter (particles) within the object and its overall geometry.
This example clearly illustrates how important it is to correctly understand the physical nature of the mechanism of the process. Without this idea, which can be further improved, it is not possible to create a general model, and all mathematical models created in this way will always be only approximations with their own defined domain of validity.
We can further modify Equation 2 to:
Where the constant I was added as a coefficient to account for the used system of units of mass and the square of length. If the ratio (I*m1)/r2 is several orders of magnitude smaller than the value 1, the entire term in parentheses can be neglected and the equation becomes a classical Newtonian equation. That is, in cases where the distance between objects is much greater in proportion to their masses, or where the mass of object 1 is several orders of magnitude smaller than the mass of object 2. Conversely, this approximation can only be used if the ratio (I*m1)/r2 is less than 0.01. Otherwise, it is necessary to use an approximation including the second interaction according to equation 3. This can again be modified to:
Nevertheless, the distance r, which is the distance between the surfaces of both objects, should be approximately 100 times greater than the diameter of the larger body, because at shorter distances, with regard to Figure 59, other parameters begin to apply more in the interaction and the calculation becomes inaccurate.