Matter from relativity instead of quantum theory?

v. 6 n. 46

NOTICE. The complete archive of these Letters is not available in the "newsletter" category but can be accessed in "posts." Presently, the complete archive can be directly accessed by clicking on the "Fundamental Physics Letters" title next to the logo.

It is generally assumed that matter, the very small, stems from a quantum description, and that relativity is concerned with the large scale. But quantum theory, particularly the standard Copenhagen interpretation, is essentially self-referential and not necessarily grounded in a reality that is not observer dependent, dependent on observation and devices that amplify this observation. Would reality exist without human presence? This is like the adage: if a tree falls in the forest where no one can hear it, does it make a sound?

Both quantum mechanics and sounds of falling trees might just as well depend on the presence of a (conscious) wild animal in proximity to the incident. Certainly, the universe existed very well before an inquiring Homo sapiens. This is termed "the measurement problem" in Copenhagen quantum mechanics -- everything is in a state of superposition until measured; then the "wavefunction collapses" into a real state, a real object, reality.

On the other hand, relativity in concert with Newton's classical gravity has been considered at the subatomic scale. [1][2]

While relativity is normally associated with the extreme opposite end of the size scale, the very large, consider this interdependent equation set,

m' = -im(v^2/c^2 -1)^-1/2 ............... (v>c) .............. (1)

v = Hs ......................................................... (v>c) .............. (2)

Let m = m'. .......................................................................... (3)

The first equation is the mass relation of special relativity in the complex domain, where the minimum speed of a non-zero rest mass particle, m, can approach light speed c from v>c. The common form is m'=m(1- v^2/c^2)^-1/2, where the maximum speed of rest mass m may approach c from v<c. But the common form is inconsistent with the second equation, the Hubble Law, where the particle velocity m is directly related to the distance s it is separated from another particle in accelerated expanding space.

In the Hubble Law, velocity v of m may exceed light speed given sufficient distance s. In a large enough system, this is certainly the case. Then the slowest velocity for m would be near c. If it was less than c, it would have to have jumped over a light speed barrier, which is inconsistent with special relativity. Special rather than general relativity is appropriate because of the low acceleration of the universe presently of some 10^-14 m/s^2, and because of the wide separation distances s of expanding space. [3]

The third relation equates relativistic mass m' and rest mass m. This can be the condition where the particle m is created from the pure gravitational field (no relativistic mass in excess of rest mass where relativistic and rest mass are indistinguishable [4]). This field is equivalent to space itself. [5] Combining these three equations,

s = 20 x 10^9 light years;

assuming this set of equations, it is projected that matter was created when the universe was 20 billion light years in diameter.

According to conventional cosmology, matter was created when the universe was 370,000 years old and the size of the universe was only 84 million light years, based somewhat on the speed of light and the assumption that maximum speed is c. But it was shown that this maximum is inconsistent with the Hubble Law; the minimum speed should be c. At the beginning there was no matter, so that the universe might have begun with speed c or greater; if it began at less than c, it could not jump over the light speed barrier and be consistent with the Hubble Law, Equation (2), at present. Presently, it is estimated that the universe is at least about 93 billion light years in diameter, so that the projected figure is consistently within this value.

Regarding Equation (1) and its like, if all mass is negative, it may be defined as positive, and have real and imaginary parts (in mathematical terms), possibly accounting for dark mass/energy. The universe we presently observe might best be described as a subset of a complex domain in constant motion (observed accelerated expanding space), where rest and rest mass is defined purely for convenience, i.e. Condition (3) above and Reference [4].

[1] (3) Gravitational basis of quanta? | LinkedIn

[2] The pure relativistic nucleon? | LinkedIn

[3] (3) Importance of a value for acceleration of the Universe | LinkedIn

[4] (3) What is the actual difference between rest mass and relativistic mass? | LinkedIn

[5] A. Einstein, Relativity, Crown, New York, 1961, p. 155