IMT – QUANTUM GRAVITY
The question regarding the true nature of gravity has intrigued mankind since the apple incident.
IMT has evolved from a primary endeavor to perceive a new type of propulsion system, where, gravity has to be considered one of the most important factors.
What is Gravity? Some type of dilation in timespace?
This is almost enough, but still, there are questions. IMT dispenses with nebulous terms and sentiments and provides a specific origin for gravity. IMT then goes on to show how this effects nature and manifests in relativity.
IMT starts by restoring the matter/antimatter balance. Of course this poses it’s own problems, namely, annihilation. So if there is a balance where is the antimatter and why isn’t it annihilating all of the matter in the universe.
This realization brings the manifold concept to life. Somewhere for the antimatter to exist apart from matter, but close enough that it can effect matter and, be an integral part of its existence. This also implies the manifold exists right along side our normal space.
An Interspacial Manifold.
…And a theory is born.
Moving forward it would become evident that the particle and antiparticle would attract, and not only would the two bound particles attract, but other matter particles would also be attracted to the same antiparticle. – Sounds like gravity… but not quite.
At this scale we should only have the strong and weak force and I am not one to make up new forces. More of the same is natures principle and I try to follow that mantra.
These forces would not create gravitational behavior. The strong force would be too strong and exist over too short of a distance.
But, I hadn’t accounted for force translation through the manifold.
This is the key. The manifold not only acts as a membrane to keep matter and antimatter separated. But the manifold also lenses the strong force so that it manifests as the force we see as gravity on the matter side of the manifold.
This happens in much the same way we see optical lensing with light, where a beam can be focused or diffused. The lensing from the manifold stretches the strong force over a larger area extending its range, but reducing the attraction.
We don’t need any new forces or particles, like Gravitons, simply a realization of the strong force through the manifold. This force can be calculated using what I am referring to Gravitational Lensing Constant (glc).
We are easily able to calculate the glc by taking the field strength of the strong force, the field strength of the gravitational force and determining the difference.
We can then use the glc to calculate the gravitational envelope for a given mass or the gravitational field strength for a given mass. The math can also account for n body systems and continue to determine the gravitational envelope.
For instance, Taking into account each of the bodies in a solar system and their mass we can also determine the gravitational envelope for that system or any other local or astronomical structure.
LIMITATIONS & IMPLICATIONS
IMT Quantum Gravity rejects concepts like anti-gravity. I believe this is intuitive to a robust theory. Gravity is based on attraction. Plain and simple. No switching, No magic particle.
The theory does, however, provided for the blocking of the gravitational effect through some yet unknown exotic material or field. This could facilitate a localized reduction of the gravitational effect.
There is also the possibility of finding a way of breaching the manifold to release antimatter for matter-antimatter reactions. This is not just fanciful imaginings.
Based on IMT, Majorana Fermions are one direction pointing the way, if they themselves are able to manifest from the manifold.
Matter antimatter reactors based on IMT would no doubt become a core research endeavor if IMT should prove viable. (see post on MAFT)
Being able to reduce gravity to an area would also facility free-energy types of devices by allowing an imbalance in gravity across the device. I am loathed to use the word free energy in this document, but this unexpected implication is undeniable.
The reality is that you would probably be putting some energy into manipulating the manifold, unless you could create a specialized material, so this quite possibly negates the implication of free energy.