On Jun 12, 2008, at 5:57 AM, OrionWorks wrote:
http://space.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn14120
Based on the gravimagnetic theory I proposed:
http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/FullGravimag.pdf
I seems unlikely, though possible, that antimatter will fall up. I
suggested in the above article that mirror matter carries a negative
mass charge. Antimatter has ordinary charge, creates ordinary
photons, interacts with magnetic fields, and thus is not mirror
matter. A scientist in the mirror world can be expected to also be
able to do antimatter experiments just like ours, and to see
conservation of charge, the creation and annihilation of pairs of
opposed charge particles. We can expect his universe to be to him
identical to what our universe is to us.
Preservation of symmetry requires that gravitational charge and
Coulomb charge be independent. So, in an energy to matter pair
creation, how is symmetry conserved? On page 30 of the above
Gravimagnetic reference, I suggest the possibility that pair creation
actually always occurs as a foursome, i.e. a dual pair, a mirror
matter pair and ordinary pair. In the simplest symmetric universe
gravitational charge and Coulomb charge must be independent. In the
simplest possible arrangement, it seems to me that mirror matter and
ordinary matter have opposed gravitational charge.
Preservation of symmetry requires that gravitational charge and
Coulomb charge be independent. So, in an energy to matter pair
creation, and also importantly, in annihilation, how is symmetry
conserved? Perhaps I had this analysis wrong. My solution provides
symmetry in pair creation, but provides no means to handle the like
gravitational charges at annihilation, except possibly via neutrino
creation. Neutrinos may simply be a manifestation of naked
gravitational charge.
There is an even simpler arrangement possible at pair production than
that proposed originally in the gravimagnetic theory. That
possibility is based on the idea that the mirror state has nothing to
do with gravitational charge (and thus we have somewhat more
complicated universe because it is all doubled to accommodate mirror
state.) It can simply be that, during pair creation, gravitational
charge is created from the vacuum and allocated to a given particle
of the pair totally independently from the Coulomb charge. We can
call this the *independent charge principle*. Electron-positron pair
creation can thus result in two possible combinations:
+x, -y
-x, +y
Here x indicates positive gravitational mass, y indicates negative
gravitational mass. This would mean that half of all matter created
from the vacuum would carry negative gravitational charge, and half
carry positive gravitational charge. Upon annihilation, however, the
matter in the vicinity would tend to carry like gravitational charge,
as the other would have been repelled away from the vicinity. We thus
end up with the need for neutrino or other neutral particle creation
to account for the annihilation (or at least disappearance) of the
residual pair of like gravitational charges. Despite this similar
shortcoming, this independent charge principle scenario makes as
about much sense as one in which we only see -x, +y, i.e. in which
all antimatter carries negative gravitational charge. It strikes me
as also possible that symmetry is broken here, where in a given
mirror state, one pair type is more likely than another. We might
see 99% -x, +y and 1% +x, -y pair creation here, while in a mirror
world it would be the opposite, and thus full symmetry restored.
The *independent charge principle* might better be called the *quasi-
independent charge principle* in that case.
What makes the independent charge principle in pair creation
scenarios as proposed above of interest is that it is far far easier
to test than the premise that antimatter has negative gravitational
charge! It is not necessary to save the antimatter from the pair
creations. This is a major advantage! It is only necessary to save
all the ordinary matter from the pair creations. If half of that
matter (or even some small proportion) has negative gravitational
mass, then this will be comparatively easy to determine. The ability
to create ordinary matter with negative gravitational mass also has
much more utility. Electrons are not even of much interest because
they are so light. It is only necessary to trap the protons from
proton-anti-proton pair creations.
If the independent charge principle turns out to be correct, then
this has huge cosmological implications. One of them is that
sufficiently heavy black holes can spew forth simultaneously both
matter and antimatter. All such matter will have a gravitational
charge opposed to that of the black hole. As proposed in the
gravimagnetic theory, the black hole, even under within the
independent charge principle theory, absorbs the positive
gravitational charge matter created from the vacuum, and thus
continually becomes more massive without any accretion. It is also
true that sufficiently large but ordinary mass black holes should be
capable of emitting jets of visible matter, though it would have
negative gravitational mass, and thus tend to form a spherical halo.
Another is that very heavy black holes should be a major source of
neutrinos. All this seems a bit weird to be true. That is one
reason why I like the concept that the negative gravitational mass
matter is invisible. The invisible (mirror matter) part helps to
account for dark matter and dark energy all at once.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
