Is matter made from space, Part 2?

v. 4 n. 33

NOTICE the addition of the expression for G_s.

A new paragraph was added after the last paragraph, for emphasis rather than correction. (Oct 19, 2023)

Part 1 of this title was the first article in the Newsletter format; it is from a different viewpoint. *

The previous few Letters suggested that for a stable particle mass to exist it must spin. But exactly what would be spinning? The hypothetical Planck mass, for instance, emerged from a rather arbitrary assemblage of natural constants representing relativity, quantum mechanics and gravity -- c, ? and G respectively. These constants are not physical entities and cannot spin. But something might be spinning near light speed c to give c physical meaning beyond a representation of relativity; similarly for the other constants that describe the Planck mass, length and time.

Earlier, the electron and light quark masses were derived from the ambient gravitational field (which is equivalent to space(time) according to general relativity),

m_e^3 = k_e^2 (A/G)(e/c)^4

m_q^3 = (A/G)(h/c)^2

where A is the acceleration of the local galactic supercluster, essentially that of the Universe itself (about 10^-14 m/s^2 as calculated earlier). Again, when the first equation is divided by the second, the fine structure constant, alpha, is apparent as a ratio of the fundamental matter particles, for an alternate interpretation of alpha. Since these equations are based on gravitation, the fine structure constant would be as well in this view. This electron and light quark essentially make up the visible matter in the Universe, so that visible matter is a form of space in locales of higher concentrations of this ambient gravitational field -- formed by spinning the field sufficiently as suggested in recent Letters?

Specifically, regarding the electron where its "radius" might be given by

r_e = G_s m_e / v^2 ............................... (v→c)

where G_s (G sub-s) = G 1.3(1- v^2/c^2)^-3/2,

because a spinning field about a particle normally a mathematical point might be considered to have a finite size, as a whirlwind touching down has an "eye," or a small rotating black hole has an event horizon.

As with the proton rotation velocity in the previous article, it is desired to know that of the electron, but the size of the electron is not as direct as for the proton. If it is permitted to use the classical electron radius, this value is indicated by the energy necessary to hold two point charges together and has the common value,

r = k_e e^2 / m_ec^2.

Provisionally, let r_e = r; then

v ≈ 2.187 x 10^6 m/s

for electron tangential rotation velocity with given assumptions. This compares with 5.8 x 10^7 m/s for the proton in the previous article. Similar estimations might be made for the rotation velocities of the point-like quarks within the proton to possibly help describe the complex proton internal environment.

Again, what is spinning here is not a rigid object the size of the classical electron radius, but a rotating ambient gravitational field (identical with spacetime itself according to general relativity) with a continuous velocity that decreases with increasing radius. The dimensionless point at the center has been described previously as an absence rather than a presence, and a cancellation of the field -- a gravitational sink rather than a source; an experiment to test this hypothesis was described. Such a description avoids the "excess mass of the quantum vacuum" and need for renormalization, also as discussed. In this way there is no necessary contradiction with the conventional notion of quantum spin, and a possible straightforward explanation of the magnetic moment of the electron.

* This article contains the related second article of the Newsletter: Is matter made from space? | LinkedIn

Cover image: BingAI