See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321474644

Demise of Gravity Mystery

Article · December 2017

CITATIONS READS

0 591

1 author:

Ahmet Yalcin
8 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Who is rolling the planets? View project

The UF-ME and the solar system View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ahmet Yalcin on 02 December 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Demise of Gravity Mystery
Ahmet Yalcin
E-mail: ahmetyalci@gmail.com

“Yesterday is gone and its tale told. Today new seeds are growing.”
Rumi (Seljuk Sufi Poet, 13. Century)

Abstract
Gravity is part of our daily lives, but remains the oldest unsolved phenomena encountered by scientists. This article
presents a simple explanation of this phenomenon based on a concept that is familiar to most people. The solution to
this enigma also defines the attributes of the tiniest element of entity in the universe. This work also investigates the
potential contribution of this element to the solution of other unresolved problems at both the micro and macro level,
or whether additional complications arise due to it proposition. In this work, very little mathematics is introduced,
since many of the fundamental ideas are the subjects of other articles.

1. Introduction
Do you like coffee?
Based on a detailed observation of the surface of a cup of coffee, it is extremely easy to
understand why an apple on a tree falls to the ground.

Newton explained that an apple falls due to the gravitational attraction that Earth exerts on the
apple, which also presumable accounts for the natural phenomenon of "why does the moon hang
in the sky?" and “why does the earth wanders around the sun?". It is not easy to appreciate that
an apple falling from a tree and the Moon moving in the sky are the result of the same natural
phenomenon.

In fact, Newton’s explanation did not quell mankind’s curiosity about the fundamental origin of
gravity; instead, it triggered more difficult questions. Essentially, Newton, with his genius,
demonstrated for the first time that the falling down action of an object was a “problem” which
should have a solution, like any other problem in science. Prior to him, gravity was impulsively
assumed to be an ordinary and accepted natural occurrence. The general accepted dogma which
was commonly advocated in all the communities was that those observed facts were the result of
the immutable rules of Divine power. After Newton, many curious philosophers started to ask
new questions. What is this so called gravitational attraction and why and how does it exists?
How does the sun attract the earth from 150 million kilometers away? If the falling down
action has a reason, then these questions are also significant. In attempting to answer these
challenging fundamental questions, mankind developed new technologies and powerful scientific
tools; which he used to gain incredible insight into our understanding the laws of the natural
universe. However, despite tremendous developments in science, the original question remains
unanswered. What is gravity? The answer to this question is of increasingly important. In a
contradiction with our general understanding of this entity, we know that the universe is
expanding at an increasing rate, despite the effect of gravitational attraction. Obviously, we are
missing something.

1
Let us return to the beginning. Do you like coffee?

I have a cup of coffee with cream twice a day. I add coffee and cream to the cup then fill it with
hot water afterwards. I stir it with a spoon to get a homogeneous mix.

Now, after mixing the coffee, an examination of the surface of the blend will reveal a curious
fact. A small amount of foam accumulates in the middle of the coffee’s surface. Before mixing,
the dissolved part of the cream was randomly dispersed on the surface, but the stirring action
caused this to change (Fig. 1). Why?

Fig. 1 The coffee’s surface before and after stirring action

During the action of stirring, we transferred some energy to the coffee and the mixture gained
kinetic energy, which led to the observed rotation inside the cup. Normally, we would expect the
foam to collect at the edge of the cup due to the reactive centrifugal force, but not at the center. In
that case, one can argue that, "the foam is lighter than the mixture and there is an adhesion force
between the mixture and the foam, the centrifugal force could not overcome this adhesion force".
This explanation seems to be plausible. However, similar conditions are valid while the foam
accumulates in the middle. Therefore, there must be a stronger force which is more effective
than even the sum of the reactive centrifugal and adhesive forces. The kinetic energy in the
mixture is proportional to the squared velocity of the liquid. Therefore, we need to examine the
velocity distribution throughout the mixture. It is not difficult to guess that the velocity in the
middle of the coffee is greater than the velocity at the edges. Immediately after the stirring
process, a careful examination of the mixture’s surface will confirm this assertion. The foam on
the surface normally rotates with the coffee. As previously indicated, the mixture particles
towards the middle of the cup under the foam have greater velocities than those near the edge.
Obviously, the faster moving particles on the coffee’s surface cause, the foam on top to be
dragged towards the middle. In other words, the more energetic particles in the mix attract the
foam. Why?

In fluid dynamics, this phenomenon is very well-known. Most engineers are familiar with this
idea, as the so called Bernoulli’s principle [1]. This principle simply says that "the pressure
distribution inside the incompressible fluid is inversely proportional to the velocity distribution".

2
Higher speed causes unit areas of the coffee’s surface to have less coffee fragments, which
loosens the surface, and consequently lowers the pressure. For this reason, one can expect that
coffee cream would be dragged from high surface pressure points, to the low pressure central
area.

2. Thought Experiment

There is no apparent relation between this observation and the concept of gravitational attraction.
To appreciate the relationship, we need to design a thought experiment which is as simple as the
coffee observation. It will not utilize such obscure logic as that of Schrodinger's cat paradox.

Let us consider a circular and sufficiently large pool. We will be the observer at the side. Let a
robotic propeller be at the center of the pool buried in the water just below the surface. Its
rotation axis is in vertical position. The propeller will represent our spoon, to stir the water. As it
starts to rotate, the water between its blades also rotates. This movement of the water pervades
towards the edges. The velocity of the water between the propeller blades is equivalent to the
propeller velocity. However, the velocity of the water decreases with distance away from the
propeller. We recognize the propeller's rotation by the movement of the water at edges of the
pool after a while, because the rotating fluid will eventually arrive towards the edges after a
certain time period. This time duration will depend on the radius of the pool and the power of
the propeller (the initial speed of the water between the blades). If the power is small, then we
will recognize the existence of the propeller after a relatively long time interval. If the power is
very weak, we may never notice any effect because the movement of the water at edges may be
less than our detection threshold.

For a pool with a higher density liquid, the same propeller will rotate slower, and we will
notice the propeller’s existence much later than in the previous scenario. Perhaps the velocity
field will be terminated before arriving at the edges. If the pool contains a low density fluid
compared to water, then the velocity field will arrive at the edge much sooner.

The propeller pumps energy into the water. While the energy pervades throughout the liquid,
some gets lost due to the friction. If no friction is present and the size of the pool is infinite, we
expect the energy to be pervaded infinitely. If the propeller’s power is constant i.e., if the energy
transfer to the water is constant and continuous, then every outer water ring around the propeller
will carry equivalent energy from the propeller to infinity. Since every outer ring in the pool
contains more water, the velocity of every outer ring has to gradually decrease, even if it is
frictionless. For higher density liquids, the velocity decreases sharper, and in the presence of
friction, the velocity decrease will be even much greater.

If the propeller works continuously in the pool with a fixed power at a fixed position, we will
continuously observe the same event at the same point. The motion of the water in the pool is
initiated by the propeller and this process will continue unless the propeller stops. If this happens,
the water will return to its previous calm state, starting with the nearby vicinity of the propeller.
This phase will also take some time, similar to the previous formation process. This idea reveals
that for the continued propagation of any water disturbance a continuous energy pervading
process is necessary, which means that the energy flow from the propeller to the edges is a
continuous process.
3
If there are floating objects such as pieces of wood on the pool’s surface after disturbance by the
propeller, they will be influenced by water’s movement. On one end, they will revolve with the
water around the propeller; and on the other; they will be dragged towards the propeller just
like the cream on the coffee’s surface. Although there are specified distances between the objects
and the energy source (propeller), the varying velocity field formed by the propeller creates a
force which is sufficient to move the objects (remote effect). The movement speed of the objects
depends on:

 The distant to the propeller,

 The power of the propeller,
 The characteristics of the fluid in the pool.

The last item above is important because, the liquid determines the pervading velocity of the
energy over distance. The density of the liquid is very important in regard to both the circular
motion of the water and the energy diffusion velocity. Lighter liquid rotates faster and diffuses
its energy at a faster rate. If the pool is not very big, a greater portion of the energy will be lost
at the edges due to friction. If, however, the liquid is heavier, for the same initial speed, the
energy may not even reach the edges, because the mass difference and the resulting velocity
difference between the adjacent liquid rings around the propellers will be great. Recall that the
radial force applied to the object to drag it towards the propeller is not a function of the
liquid’s rotational velocity, but its variation in radial direction. This variation in velocity is
lower for lighter liquids than heavier ones. Therefore, if the propeller speed is the same, the
floating objects drift faster to the propeller in heavier liquid than the lighter liquid.

Let us, now, take the experiment one step ahead. We can imagine an infinitely large and deep
pool. Let the propeller be at the middle of the water. We need now, to consider the water
movement along three axes. We will recognize that there is no motion along the rotation axis,
because on this axis line, the water between the blades will move in a circle with zero radii.
However, on the plane which is perpendicular to the rotation axis and crosses the wings at the
middle (equator), the water velocity will be at a maximum. This means that the velocity
distribution on a spherical surface with a fixed radius from the propeller in the water is a horn-
torus type [2]. Fig. 2 depicts this velocity distribution. Here the water velocity on a point , on
the rotation axis of which the distance from the propeller is , is zero, while on , and are
proportional with ́ and ́ and respectively. If there are objects in the pool with equal
density to the water inside the pool, they will be influenced only by this velocity field. The ones
on the rotation axis will remain stationary but the others will both rotate with the water around
the rotation axis, and be dragged towards both the propeller and the equator plane at faster
velocity points.

Let us proceed even further. We now have two equivalent propellers, each with half the power of
the first. Let them stand close to each other. If we observe them from a distance which is much
longer than the distance between the two propellers, we perceive them as being at the same
point. Let us assume for the time being that they have no interaction with each other and keep
their positions fixed. If their axes are in parallel, the total velocity field in the water will be
exactly the same as the first big propeller's field. If the axes are perpendicular to each other, then

4
the total velocity at each point will be the sum of two equivalent perpendicular velocities. In any
case, the resultant velocities will decrease as the distance from the propellers increases. The
rotation axis of the resultant velocity field will be the bisector of the two axes.

Now, let us consider many equivalent smaller propellers such that the total power is equal to
the first one. If all the axes are in parallel, then we will still have a single source, and the same
size horn-torus type velocity field. But if the axes are scattered randomly, the resultant velocity
at each point will be the sum of many small velocity vectors. Obviously, this resultant velocity at
each point will decreases as the distance from the group of propellers increases. Now, we can
consider an infinite number of infinitely small propellers with homogeneously scattered axes.
Still we are assuming that they do not influence each other and our observation point is
sufficiently far away.

Fig. 2 Velocity field of a robot propeller over a spherical plane with radius d. The horn-torus graphic was used with
Mr. Wolfgang Daeumler's permission (www.horntorus.com).

5
The following observations are obvious:

(1) The homogeneously scattered axes impose spherically symmetric field structures and not
axial structures, and a resultant rotation axis is not present,
(2) The diffusion velocity of the total energy in the field will be the sum of each tiny
propeller's spread-out velocity,
(3) For every point in the effective field, the total axially rotating velocity ∑ ,
where is rotating field velocity of the propeller at the specified point.
(4) The pressure intensity caused by the resultant water velocity field at close distances,
is lower than the pressure intensity at greater distances.

The last item above seems to be intuitive, but it is also concrete.

Let us assume two different points in the effective field, one which is close to the propeller’s
stack and another which is farther away. The resultant rotating field velocity at each point is
given by;
∑ ∑

Here and are rotating field velocities of the propeller at near and far points
respectively. We know that . On the other hand, we also know that every velocity
corresponds to a scalar pressure value. If respective pressures are and , according to
Bernoulli principle, . Since all corresponding pressure values are positive scalar
quantities, we conclude that:
∑ ∑

This is the direct result of the vector and scalar nature of the velocity and pressure quantities
respectively [3]. The sum of two equivalent opposite vectors is zero, but the sum of their
pressure equivalent is double the initial pressure of either. Therefore, a lower pressure
medium will be encountered at closer distances; and this parameter will increase as we move
away from the propeller’s stack. Apparently, the object in this field will not have a revolving
motion around the propellers’ stack, but only a radial drift towards the propellers, due to the
radially decreasing pressure.

This thought experiment illustrates what is happening on the earth. We can assume that, space
behaves as an incompressible liquid medium with very low density and Earth consist of an
infinite number of infinitely small propellers. Admittedly, this concept is not compatible with the
atomic structure model that we know. Recall that in our thought experiment, we assumed that the
tiniest propellers do not influence each other. But in a real situation, each propeller has its own
velocity field and consequently, its own force field. Thus, they interact with each other to create
basic particles such as electrons, protons, neutrons etc. Using this assumption, the source of the
gravitation attraction can be readily explained. While we have directed most of our attention to
dealing with interactions at the macro-cosmic scale, we had to define the nature of the tiniest
elements of the entity i.e.; infinitely small propellers (point energy particles). At this point we
need to critically examine this new model to determine whether or not it addresses the original
questions or creates new problems. However, before embarking on this evaluation, we need to

6
address the physical meaning of the velocity field which we have used thus far from the
perspective of traditional theories of gravity.

3. Velocity field versus Gravitational potential

In contemporary physics, the interactions between objects at the macro scale is explained using
Newton's universal law of gravitation [4] and Einstein's general relativity field equations [5].
They are both based on the intangible scalar gravitational potential field. Newton's force field is
the gradient (first derivative) of this potential field, while Einstein uses its Laplacian (second
derivative), because he was primarily interested in how the force changed over distance (space
curvature) rather than the force itself. On the other hand, the dimension of the gravitational
potential is a squared velocity. The coffee experiment revealed that using base field as velocity
field is a very significant concept. It is obvious that, theoretically, there is no difference
between using the intangible gravitational potential and its corresponding tangible square root
(velocity field). Last of all, the first theory uses the "gravitational potential" in gradient form, the
second theory in Laplacian form and our coffee experiment in velocity form. In other words, in
terms of the force relationship between attractive masses, the velocity field is an equally
valid concept. In fact, it can be said that, masses form a velocity field in their effective area
and as a consequence, a gravitational field emerges. The concept of the velocity field has
distinct advantages over the others, which mainly are:
 The velocity field is indispensable as a basic construct of a relativistic force relation
between objects, because, there is no other way to sum the total field effects of various
sources, as well as the perceived (relativistic) field effects by moving the object in the
effective field.
 If one considers the square of a velocity rather than the velocity itself, the loss of
information is unavoidable, because this process ignores the sign of the quantity (uses
speed instead of velocity). In this case, a repulsive effect of the interaction is never
considered.
 The velocity field reveals that the space behaves like a very low density incompressible
liquid medium, such that Bernoulli principle can be applied. This provides new
opportunities for further insight using both geometric and mathematical analysis.

4. Point energy particles and building blocks

At this point, we can examine if the previously discussed tiniest energy particles facilitate
meaningful insight into unresolved problems at all scales in physics or cause additional
deadlocks.

The proposed infinitely tiny propellers are point energy particles and have no volumes. They
simply spin and rotate the space medium. In this way, they transfer their energy to the space
around them. Because they are in a point structure, they expose their entity in the space, with
only the velocity field they create. This velocity field (energy) pervades the effective region with
the speed specified by the space fabric due to its incompressible nature. The field velocity will

7
decrease as the distance from the source increases. The above thought experiment demonstrates
that the model elegantly solves the gravitation phenomena at the macro scale. We will now
examine the predictions of the model at the microcosms.

In the thought experiment, we ignored the interactions of the tiny propellers in stack with each
other. Actually, the interaction between the point energy particles is obligatory, because every
tiny propeller has its own nano velocity field which causes a tiny force field.

Principally, the interaction between the energy particles does not change the property of the
distant effective field, because it is the “space fabric” which carries the velocity field (energy) to
far points. The energy particles simply spin to form a velocity field, but nothing else. The
interaction causes only a new resultant rotation axis of the total velocity field, of the participant
point energy particles.

The energy particles can grow by coming together in two different ways:

(1) Growing in a single horn-torus structures,

(2) Clustering in a balanced manner such that each participant keeps its separate individual
horn-torus structure and distinct location.

The first case implies that the horn-torus structure can be of any size. In this instance, the size
does not have a volumetric interpretation, but instead corresponds to an energy amount. A
larger size implies a larger velocity field. Irrespective of the size, it is still a point quantity.
Double the size or hundred times larger means, twice or one hundred times stronger field velocity
at the same distance. There is no upper limit on size. The traditional Planck constant may be
useful in defining the tiniest particles. Photon or other energy particles which have no visible
mass are samples in microcosms. However, it is not quite that simple. A black hole is also an
example of a huge horn-torus structure. In this context, primordial or low-mass black holes
proposed by Hawking are not meaningless [6].

The velocity fields of the tiniest point energy particles are so small that they cannot interact with
the fields of the other particles. They need to increase in size in horn-torus structures, in order to
interact via the second previously stated case. In this case, these energy particles keep both their
individual identity and discrete locations. By this way, they create their own localized region,
surrounded by a force field, which is not a point particle anymore, and the combined unit
earns a volume. They are therefore able to establish the base particles of an atom such as
volumetric neutron, proton, electron etc.

This type of interaction is also possible in two different ways:

 The interaction takes place such that, the sum of the velocity fields of all the energy
particles in each point is zero. In this case, no net rotational velocity field is present, just
as in our thought experiment. Therefore, the base particles will not interact any more,
except for gravitational attraction, as described. In other words, the energy particles
consisting of the new genesis, will use their full energies for their new “entity form”.
The neuron is an example of one of those kinds of particles. For this reason, it is more

8
 accurate to say that, the mass is a form of energy itself, rather than it has an energy
equivalent.
 The interaction takes place such that, the velocity fields in each effective point, for all
energy particles which constitute the new genesis, do not fully compensate each other and
there is still a net rotating velocity field. Those formations have both visible mass-
volumes and electric charges, such as proton and electron. Due to partially compensated
rotating velocity fields, those particles are very active for further interaction. It is
understood that the origin of electricity, which at many level still remains a mystery, is an
energy particle organization, in which the velocity fields are not fully compensated. In
other words, electricity is a rotating velocity field effect of firmly interacted energy
particles. The total energy of a charged particle is partially in mass form and partially in
charge related.

It can be shown that the building process is very flexible, such that an infinite number of different
sized formations or voluminous base particles are possible. Moreover, two particles with
significantly difference masses may possess equivalent charges, such as protons and electrons,
or three different sized horn-torus structures (quarks) can create a charged proton or uncharged
neutron, depending on interaction combinations.

The model leads to the direct conclusion that the main and only source of the gravitational
force in Nature is the “varying field velocity” in range. This is valid for the gravitational
attraction and electrical interactions, as well as the nuclear forces in atoms. No other mediator
particles such as gravitons, gluons etc. are necessary. Those issues are all examined in detail,
in a separate and exhaustive which will be subsequently published.

5. Black Holes

As previously stated, point energy particles have velocity fields that weaken with distance. For
this reason, they tend to come together. In this context, the largest formation in the Universe are
black holes. Inside a black hole, in any specified region, the velocity field is so violent, that no
other types of interactions are possible. The base particles and matter formations are only
possible at distances where the velocity field strength becomes sufficiently small. This distance
is the event horizon. This means that a black hole is not a singularity region where the density
of the mass (space curvature) goes to infinity; instead, it is a violent velocity field where the mass
type of formation of the base particle is not possible. The increasing mass suggests that during the
gravitational evaluation process, the mass density increases. This process also leads to an increase
in the velocity field strength. After a threshold field velocity is reached, the matter form of energy
particles is disrupted, untied and consequently transformed into a primordial velocity field. This
is also an information loss process [7], i.e., irreversible deterioration of matter structure.

The horn-torus structure of black holes leads to flat structured spiral galaxies, due to their
energy intensified equator planes. Since they are axially symmetric, their masses will be
perceived as larger on the galaxy plane; and will decrease as one move away from the plane.
Therefore, the total mass (energy) in the universe might be less than what we have estimated [8].
Recent observations made by Margot Brouwer and her colleagues at Leiden Observatory [9],
clearly supports the non-spherical horn-torus nature of black holes.
9
 Finally, we had better also point out that such a model of the universe is fully compatible with the big
bang and inflation theories. Although a black hole is not a singularity region, perhaps a special
singularity may be mentioned here, which is a physical singularity rather than a mathematical one. It
is an upper field velocity limit that space fabric could allow. The convergence of all the energy in the
universe in a single horn-torus structure may have forced this speed limit. It can be said that this is the
source of the big bang. This seems to be a plausible assumption, because, indeed, it is inevitable that
after a big explosion, it is followed by a sudden expansion. The big bang will turn the single-piece huge
horn-torus structure into infinite number of point energy particles. These particles will push each other
vigorously due to their individual velocity fields (force fields) and will create the inflation phase of the
explosion. This is an electrical repulsion and will be detailed in a separate article. It is apparent that
this new model of the universe has a great potential to address many unexplained phenomenon at
both the micro and macro level. In fact, every observation reveals a little about nature secrets,
"provided that" like Newton, we remain curious and carefully interpret these observations.

This interpretation of the gravity is in perfect agreement with the "Field Relative Model of the
Universe" which I recently introduced. My other current and future articles are and will be
entirely related to the "Field Relative Model of the Universe", its mathematical statement
"Universal Force-Motion Equation" (UF-ME) and applications [10].

The coffee observation demonstrates that the operation of gravity in nature is not as complicated
as originally thought. Apart from this simplicity, nature comprises incredible diversity and
richness. This contradiction is part of a mysterious and fascinating quality of the universe. Its
elegance comes from the following paradox; extremely simple but extremely rich and
beautiful.

References

[1] G.K. Batchelor, An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics (Cambridge University Press, 1967).
[2] E. W. Weisstein,"Horn Torus", A Wolfram Web Resource, (available at
http://mathworld.wolfram.com).
[3] M.R. Spiegel, Theoretical Mechanics, 2, (the McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1967).
[4] M. Javid, P. M. Brown, Field Analysis and Electromagnetics, 24, (the McGraw-Hill Book
Company, 1963).
[5] A. Einstein, The Meaning of Relativity, (Princeton University Press, 1922).
[6] S. Hawking, A Brief History of Time, 83, (Bantham Press, 1996).
[7] S. Hawking, The Universe in a Nutshell, 24, (Bantham Press, 2001).
[8] H. Hildebrandt, et al., MNRAS 465, 1454-1498 (2017).
[9] M. M. Brouwer, et al., [arXv: 1612.03034v1 [astro-ph.CO]] (2016).
[10] A. Yalcin, True and exact solutions of the accelerated expansion of the Universe, pioneer
and flyby anomalies through the Universal force-motion equation,
(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317845079, June 2017)

10

View publication stats