Introduction

Newtonian gravitation has no machinery. Newton made no hypotheses about how the gravitational force is transmitted. Einstein's SR, and in particular GR, move one step ahead using space curvature found in the Minkovsky and Riemann Universe as the cause of gravitational fields. Nevertheless, there is no real machinery here. The graviton represents the first machinery for explaining gravitational fields.

In many phenomena that describe particle interactions as action-at-a-distance, the concepts of virtual photon, virtual particle, or virtual energy have been employed.

The graviton of AD differs conceptually from these, offering a simple and plausible machinery. In AD's particle decay concept, the particles produced in their final state are smaller than the original ones, and they have a KE equivalent to the lost mass. What is then the machinery of this process?

In our Web Pages, we simplistically compare Newtonian and SR mechanics to the cannon ball, while comparing AD mechanics to a rocked propelled by fuel. The rocket fuel involves a machinery for propulsion. To explain this, we will start with a question by a non-graduate Physicist in New Hampshire.

QUESTION:

"Shouldn't the decay particles analogous to 'rocket fuel' be detectable? If not, why not?"

Our Answer:

It is currently believed that part of the mass particle is ejected back, as a "virtual photon" or "virtual particles." Because NATURE and AD have nothing "virtual", the "particles" equivalent to rocket fuel could be a quantum of energy flying faster than the actual photon. This is related to superluminic velocity and an equation for KE (or mass variation) more complete than the actual AD KE or mv equations. The issue here is much more complex but for the moment, this is good enough.

We know this completely. We are not AD believers. We are AD supporters. This is why David de Hilster tells you this is "EXCITING FUTURE RESEARCH THAT IS OPENED UP BY AD." Carezani has some ideas about this, but, for the moment, only a general idea. Somebody else could work on this.

By the way, Congratulations! You are the first to realize that this question derives from the rocket fuel example.

QUESTION:

Our answer was apparently not good enough, and a new question is addressed to us:

"...2) Apparently, AD predicts the same particles as those predicted by mainstream physics, with two exceptions:

AD eliminates the neutrino and

AD adds an undetected particle(s) carrying away part of an accelerating particle's mass."

Why can't we detect the particle(s) mentioned in (b)? Doesn't the addition of the particle(s) in (b) counter-balance any advantage by eliminating the neutrino?"

Our Answer:

Our new and complete answer is as follows:

We need to be very careful. We cannot mix concepts. The two concepts differ by many orders of magnitude.

We know precisely from where the Neutrino Hypothesis is derived: from the failure of SR to explain energy and momentum conservation. The neutrino is not a particle's "propellant."

In his Universal Gravitation Theory, Carezani explains the Mercury perihelion advance, finding that many gravitons carried an energy of 9.5989 10^-8 eV. This confirms the graviton hypothesis that the gravitational carrier is extraordinarily small in energy. (In a previous communication, U. J. Balis, working with AD in problems of Cosmogony (Gravitational Fields) sent to us these two preliminary values: Graviton mass ~ 8.43 10^-79 kg., and Graviton mean density 1.04 10^54 particles/ m^3).

The neutrino was invented by Pauli (and named by Fermi), to save SR's failure to maintain energy and momentum conservation in the RaE decay experiments. Later, as SR failed to explain any particle decay (and nucleus decay) phenomena, the Neutrino Hypothesis was expanded (to 40 different "qualities") to save SR from these continuing failures. The values calculated with SR KE plus SR motion mass, are larger than the experimental values found, and the neutrino is needed to carry off this excess of energy. Neutrinos escape in all directions with respect to the particle's motion lines. The direction of each depends on the particular phenomenon. The AD particle propellant always escapes in the only possible direction: the opposite direction of the particle that it propels! The action-reaction principle is fulfilled.

The Graviton, "virtual photon" or "virtual particles," are created to explain concrete and observable phenomena, not from any failure, as is the case with SR and the neutrino. We cannot detect the Graviton because it is extremely small in energy, and the same happens in reverse with the "particle propellant" in particle decay. Carezani is working with some ideas (slowly and sporadically) with energy equal to E = moc^3.

For the moment we only have

E = mo c^2

This is "visible" in decay cases.

In AD, if mo = 100 and KE = 50, mv will be = 50. We now can ask: Where does the "particle-propellant" energy come from! Here is the difference in "order of magnitude."

In AD, we have: mo =100 KE = 49 mv = 49 (2 mass lost will create the KE = 49) (probably 2 is 0.2 or 0.002 or 0.0002 , etc. !)

The "new" AD equation could be E = mo c^2 (+ * / ^) ??

I invented this, of course, just to give you an idea of what I'm talking about. The particle propellant will carry a potent energy that it is right now impossible to detect since it is impossible to distinguish it from the mass-energy equivalence. The super-luminic speed is a different problem altogether.

This is related to Gravitons (energy absorbtion), even though in a reverse relation regarding energy (energy emmission), yet both are unrelated to neutrinos.

A very small (infinitesimal) quantity of mass traveling at a velocity many times greater than the light speed creates the energy of a recoiling particle.

We told you this before in the last post. This falls under the category of "the Future of AD". This quantum of energy does not participate in the actual "order of magnitude" regarding energy and momentum conservation. AD alone is good enough to explain (without neutrinos) this energy and momentum conservation in today's state-of-the-art Physics. To detect the "new particle", another technology is needed, another mentality. and many intermediate theoretical research steps in the long travel through the unknown.

It is nearly impossible to "leapfrog" to new scientific knowledge. Leonardo da Vinci came close, but technology limits made his dreams impossible. We first need to develop AD, and only then see what lies ahead in the physical world. We cannot "leapfrog" over history!

At this moment, AD has an enormous field of application, independent of future theoretical applications. Some present issues include: Bohr's Atom, QED, Dirac's equation, etc. The immediate field of application is to particle decay and nuclear reactions, etc.

(end of answer)

IN A RELATED SUBJECT...

"Particle propellant", the graviton, and "superluminic velocity" are related to "events" preceding "cause." This will be the subject of another article, related to a comment from an Astronomer at the Astronomy Department, University of California at Berkeley. This also is related to "information" transmitted between particles (especially electrons) in some phenomena of Quantum Mechanics and in classical electron diffraction by two-slit interference patterns.

Incredibly, all this is also related to the famous **uncertainty principle** of Heisenberg.

The uncertainty principle is, for AD (I should say "according to Carezani"), a simple problem related to our ignorance of the infinitesimal world. The uncertainty principle is only a question of relative levels of energy, separated by many orders of magnitude.

The proportion of the field that we "can see" depends on the "size" of the particle or energy that we use "to see" that portion of the field. Just as a very simple conception like Universal Gravitation changed the Second Law of Thermodynamics, another very simple conception alters the uncertainty principle. The question is simply that of knowledge. If we try to "see" an electron using photons, we will disturb the phenomenon in the way expressed by the uncertainty principle (the energies are comparable). But, if "gravitons," or better, quanta of energy of the order of magnitude given by the Balis graviton (10^-80 kg) are used to "see" the phenomenon, there will be no disturbance of the phenomenon, and the uncertainty principle won't apply (the energies are not comparable).