Why Is The Mass Zitter Term Related To The Gravitational Parameter?

[QuantumTantrum]

Why is the mass zitter term related to the gravitational parameter?

 

 

 

To show how time emerged when matter is considered, we begin with an equation which is in the strong gravity range using the gravitational fine structure and a timeless action:

 

 

 

[math]\alpha_G \cdot \hbar = \int p_{\gamma} \cdot q[/math]

 

 

[math]\int \hbar\ dr_s = \lambda \int [m_{\gamma} v \cdot q][/math]

 

 

We know this because of Maurapitus' principle

 

 

[math]\int mv\ ds = \int p \cdot q[/math]

 

 

[math]ds = cdt[/math]

 

 

You can find an energy

 

 

[math]\int E = \int p \cdot \dot{q}[/math]

 

 

Our generalized coordinate [math]\dot{q}[/math] has absorbed the time term. You find the clock to matter by distributing a frequency

 

 

[math]\int \hbar\ dr_s = \lambda \int [mv \cdot q][/math]

 

 

The mass term requires a coefficient: [math](\frac{c^2}{\hbar})[/math] to become a frequency term itself. This would imply a relativistic change in the wavelength [math]\lambda_2 - \lambda_1 = \Delta \lambda[/math] since frequency and wavelength are related

 

 

[math]\nu = \frac{c}{\lambda}[/math]

 

 

[math]\lambda = \frac{c}{\nu}[/math]

 

 

distributing the coefficient we have (including a factor of 2 as true zitter term)

 

 

[math]\int d r_s\hbar\ (\frac{c^2}{\hbar}) = \lambda \int [2m(\frac{c^2}{\hbar})v \cdot q][/math]

 

 

This gives time to matter! The equation simplifies to

 

 

[math]\int c^2 \ dr_s = \lambda \int [2m(\frac{c^2}{\hbar})v \cdot q][/math]

 

 

[math]\int c^2 r_s = \mu[/math]

 

 

which is the 'standard' gravitational parameter of classical physics, while at the same time, we have the quantum contribution of the mass zitter term found in quantum electromagnetics [math]2m(\frac{c^2}{\hbar})[/math].

 

Somehow we have an equation which states a quantum phenomenon inversely related to the zitter mass with the velocity and position of the particle, which will have an uncertainty relationship:

 

 

[math]\int c^2 \ dr_s = \lambda \int [2(\frac{c^2}{\hbar})\Delta Mv \cdot \Delta q][/math]

 

 

We would know this amount of uncertainty because of Heisenbergs relationship [math]\frac{1}{2}\hbar = \Delta P \Delta x[/math] - however recent experiments have actually shown the uncertainty principle can in fact be as predicable by half of its value.  [1]

 

 

What has also became interesting, is that a mass squared term can appear on the left hand side, so long as we substitute this change for a gravitational charge:

 

 

[math]GM^2 = \lambda \int [2M^2(\frac{c^2}{\hbar})v \cdot q][/math]

 

 

This is because [math]\int Mc^2 \ dr_s = Er_s = GM^2 = \hbar c[/math] which is a standard relationship from a Weyl quantization procedure. 

 

The equation:

 

 

[math]GM^2 = \lambda \int [2 \mathcal{Z}_T mv \cdot q][/math]

 

 

[math]2\mathcal{Z}_T = 2M(\frac{c^2}{\hbar})[/math]

 

 

Is telling us that the mass of the particle is related to an internal zitter motion which depends on the velocity and the position of the particle. 

 

 

You can mathematically show how two fermions can make a boson, like a photon. You don't actually need to specifically get into symmetry breaking but I will make some comments on it later.

 

 

If the gravitational charge is treated as a primordial particle, it would need to expain mass as an intrinsic property, just as an electromagnetic charge is intrinsic. 

 

 

This is a speculation, but one I will leave you with just now... is it possible the electron is really a particle trapped in a motion, predicted by Dirac equation as the zitter frequency of the internal motion?

 

 

A few papers have been published in reputable journals suggesting this. In the model I presented using very basic math, is that such a gravitational charge is generated from an internal motion inside the electron and not only its internal motion but there seems to be a net velocity attached to it and for some reason, its position is important in some way.

 

 

The positions role may be as simple as there having a uncertainty relation with the momentum when we retrieve the mass. This would make the mass uncertain as well.

Edited May 28, 2015 by QuantumTantrum