1. Introduction
A study of gravitation forces has been conducted modelling them as two distinct forces of repulsive and attractive nature on gaseous matter. The model has been validated applying experimentally determined and established data utilized in practical thermodynamic applications of mechanical engineering. It is a self-standing model, which requires no fitting into existing models. The presented alternative model could more effectively describe the nature of the universe at both micro and macro levels. The gravitational repulsion concept presented in the series of publications 1 emanating from this research program, are based on experimental observations and natural phenomena; making neither abstruse assumptions nor explanations.
The present understanding of the Universe is that there are
four fundamental interactions (also known as fundamental forces in classical theory): weak (subatomic), strong (subatomic), electromagnetic and gravitational [
Table S1 in supplementary information]. None of these fundamental forces is so far defined to be temperature (hence energy) dependent. There are, nevertheless, phenomena observed in nature/universe (e.g.: pressure, expansion, phase change and so on) that are dependent on temperature, which is a manifestation of the thermal energy content. Both gravitational repulsion and attraction forces analytically and experimentally proved, in this research, to be dependent on the thermal energy content, elucidating the inter-relation between energy and fundamental forces. Such findings resonate with ‘Principia Mathematica’
2 published by Isaac Newton in 1687; see Prepositions XLIII-XLV of Book 1, pp171-182, and
3 among others.
In some literature 3, the gravitational repulsion force is referred to as the antigravitational force. Therefore, we use both these terms in our text to mean the same concept.
Presenting a new scientific revelation that fundamentally challenges our understanding of the universe requires examining the foundations of our present understanding, viz., Newtonian and Einsteinian gravity concepts. The author would, for the benefit of those interested in contextual knowledge, in the
supplementary information (supplementary information: Section A), briefly note the following:
Newtonian and Einsteinian gravity concepts, thus highlighting the foundations of our present understanding
Early notions of the gravitational repulsion force and its recent revelations
1.1. Recent Revelation of the Gravitational Repulsion Force:
A series of experiments involving mechanistic laboratory studies
1 by the author, have shown that the upward motion of matter against the gravitational attraction of the Earth (e.g., the upward movement of iodine in a vacuum
1d (briefly presented in
Section 2) and upward movement water droplets in the air
1b, 1c), happens due to a force acting opposite to gravitational attraction. In that series, the studies on water droplets
1b, 1c confirmed that the force acting opposite to the gravitational attraction is proportional to the internal thermal energy of the droplets. The said tangible experiments lead to the understanding of
gravitational repulsion or
antigravity force which persists against the gravitational attraction force. It has further been extended that both gravitational repulsion and attraction forces pervade our surroundings both microscopically and macroscopically
1a; such as condensation of gases, accumulative (flocking together) nature of clouds and accelerating expansion of the Universe.
The discussion so far has briefly indicated why we need a deviation from the existing gravitational models, e.g., Newtonian ‘Law of Universal Gravity’ and Einsteinian ‘EFE’. Also, we need to deviate from a major idealistic assumption made in the kinetic theory of ideal gas, as explained in the next section. Now, our attempt is to develop a relationship for a better understanding of the behavior of gas molecules utilizing the force of repulsive nature on matter; antigravity as revealed in this investigation.
1.2. Challenges of some Major Assumptions in Derivation of the Kinetic Theory of Gas:
As reasoned above, in the derivation of the ideal gas equation, the skepticism is mainly on the idealistic assumption 4:
In deriving the ideal gas equation, one of the most fundamental forces, the gravitational attraction among matter has been overlooked, both among the gas molecules themselves and with the Earth. Such an assumption does not justify the principles of fundamental science. Even though a gas molecule has only a minute quantity of matter, it is susceptible to gravitational forces with all other entities of matter around. Therefore, it may not be prudent to make an assumption to neglect the gravitational forces on gas molecules with entities small or large. It is accepted that the atmosphere around the Earth exists because of the gravitational force of the Earth and this is a major force between the Earth and air molecules. Even Mars with a lower gravitational attraction accommodates an atmosphere of pressure ~ 0.6% (610 Pa) of the Earth atmosphere 5. Also, denser atmospheres are found in planets with higher gravity such as Jupiter and Saturn, which hold even light gases such as hydrogen and helium in their atmospheres 6.
Another assumption in the kinetic theory that raises skepticism is the “perfectly elastic collision” between gas molecules and the wall (of the container, for example) applied when defining the pressure in a static situation. This definition, especially, would not work when the wall is moving under the pressure force. To move a wall under the pressure force, the energy (momentum) of gas molecules has to be transferred to the wall; which would preclude “perfectly elastic collision”. The mass of an average air molecule is just around 4.8 x 10-26 kg, which is negligibly small in mass when compared to the mass of a rigid wall where any pressure effect is observed/considered. The movement of such a heavy object (with a rigid surface where the pressure force is experienced) by transferring momentum (energy) of gas molecules is highly unrealistic according to ‘Newton’s Third Law’. It is worth mentioning that the mechanism of momentum/energy transfer via fundamental forces is also not clear.
The postulates of the kinetic molecular theory of ideal gases, further ignore the volume occupied by the molecules of a gas. Real gases, however, show significant deviations from the behavior expected for an ideal gas
7, e.g., Van Der Waals Equation. Brief information regarding the behavior of real gas is mentioned in
supplementary information - Section B.
Instead of accepting assumptions with challenges as such as above, this research program considers real forces experimentally established. The following section introduces a few previous experiments carried out in this research program, where the Gravitational Repulsion force was discovered in addition to the already known Gravitational Attraction force.
5. Discussion
It is observed that Newtonian and Einsteinian mechanics encounter challenges in explaining certain phenomena seen in laboratory experiments (e.g.: upward motion of heated iodine particles in vacuum) and natural phenomena (e.g.: condensation of gases, accumulative (flocking together) nature of clouds and accelerating expansion of the Universe) 1. Under these existing models, the gravitational force has been reckoned as a “weak force”. Thus, in deriving the ideal gas equation, one of the most fundamental forces, the gravitational attraction among matter has been overlooked as negligible, both among gas molecules themselves and with the Earth. Such lapses of overlooking the gravitational force among gas molecules as negligible in the classical theory has given an erroneous picture as now revealed by this investigation
The alternative model considering both gravitational repulsion and attraction, presented in this paper, is self-standing; independent of existing idealistic models. This model has been built up without idealistic assumptions such as: “intermolecular force in the gaseous state is zero”, “perfectly elastic collisions”, “consists of a large number of molecules”, “the volume of the molecules is negligibly small” and so on. In fact, there are no idealistic assumptions involved in this model; hence it is closer to reality.
The entire mathematical model presented in this paper has been derived considering the forces of gravitational repulsion and attraction between just two gaseous molecules; the basic building blocks of the gas. Force (net repulsive) between individual gas molecules represents the pressure in the system; a significant deviation from the kinetic theory’s concept of momentum transfer. Hence, the pressure is not identified here as the rate of change of momentum of a number of molecules in a certain mass or volume of the gas, as assumed in the kinetic theory in the derivation of the ideal gas equation.
It should be noted that the above relationships (Equations S11, S12 and 8–12) are developed for the matter in the gaseous state. It is, hence, recommended that future research should focus on analysis of matter in other states, viz., solid, liquid and plasma.
The model has been validated applying experimentally determined and established data
14 utilized in practical thermodynamic applications of mechanical engineering. The data has been published in 1948, by Joseph Henry Keenan and Joseph Kaye. Applying these data to Equations 8-12, the behavior of
x, GR,
GA,
FR and
FA with respect to
T and
y were derived and presented in 3D graphs (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) in
Figure S4 in supplementary information.
The result
x = 3.0 as presented in the 3D graph
Figure S4 (a) contributes new scientific information on the distribution of gravitational force fields that fill up the volume in free space, at the length scale of intermolecular distances for gas molecules. The relationship of gravitational repulsion and attraction forces being inversely proportional to the cube-of-the-distance (r
3), interprets the gravitational force distributions as volumetric or solid spherical distributions (
4/3 πr3) in free space, rather than the area or surface distributions (
4πr2) considered in the classical model. This is a significant departure from the Inverse-Square Law. Inverse-Square Law describes the wave front propagation of energy. In contrast, force fields fill up the volume in the free space. The volumetric distribution or fill-up the free space by the force is more appropriate for understanding; as a force field always exists in a 3D space rather than on a 2D surface.
In the literature on force fields, the inverse proportionality to the cube (Inverse-Cube Law) of the distance is not new. An extra force besides gravity, that is obeying the Inverse-Cube Law, has been mentioned in ‘Principia Mathematica’ 2 published by Isaac Newton in 1687; see Prepositions XLIII-XLV of Book 1, pp171-182. It has also been demonstrated 15 experimentally that, in magnetostatic fields where both poles geometrically coincide, the attraction and the repulsion forces obey the Inverse-Cube Law with the distance. Future research should focus on discerning whether inverse proportionality to the cube-of-the-distance (r3) is more appropriate in applications of fundamental physics.
The analysis presented in this paper signifies that y = 0.5 is a very special value when considering the behaviors of GR, GA, FR and FA. The most noteworthy points were that, for both cv and cp, when y ≈ 0.5:
extrapolation of graphs FR vs. T cross (0,0)
negative FA tends to become positive as T approaches 0 K
This was found to be true for all gases considered: nitrogen, hydrogen, oxygen, water vapor, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide; yielding similar results irrespective of atomic mass m. How these results resonate with other empirically established models such as Boyle’s Law, Charles’ Law and Amontons’ Law/Gay-Lussac’s Law will be discussed in a future publication.
In the 3D graphs Figures S4 (b) and (c), both Gravitational Repulsion Coefficient and Gravitational Attraction Coefficient appeared dependent on the temperature T. This result is unexpected, as the temperature dependency of GA was not previously known. Further to that, as presented in the 3D graphs in Figures S4 (d) and (e), both FR and FA are temperature dependent; being gravitational forces, they are fundamental interactions in nature. Significant departure from the existing knowledge is that, the four fundamental interactions (fundamental forces) in classical theory are not defined to be temperature dependent. Existing theories, nevertheless, state that the increase of thermal energy increases the potential energy of the gas molecules; with no mention that a relationship exists between thermal energy (classically known as potential energy) and gravitational forces. Results showed that, the increase of thermal energy increased the repulsion (Equations 2 and 11) between gas molecules. See the graphs of FR vs. T and FA vs. T, where, as T increases:
That implies that the thermal energy is directly proportional to the resultant of
FR and
FA (see
Figure S8 in supplementary information), confirming the relationship between energy and fundamental forces. With this revelation, the critical gap between energy and fundamental forces has been filled. Fundamental forces could be more readily linked with observable temperature dependent phenomena (e.g.: pressure, expansion, and so on) in the nature/Universe; thus, enabling better explanations.
In the 3D graph
Figure S4 (d), the gravitational repulsion force appeared linearly proportionate to the temperature. This vindicated the experiment conducted in this research program by the Author, presented in paper
1b. The said experiment demonstrated that the time-of-fall of water droplets is linearly proportionate to the temperature (
Figure S6 is drown according to the data given in
Table S2 in supplementary information).
Negative values of
FA at elevated temperatures [
Figure S4 (e)], together with
FR, cause the gas to have only repulsive forces among molecules. This gives rise to the property that real gases expand infinitely as the available space increases. Such circumstances of all repulsive forces were observed in the other gases studied (hydrogen, oxygen, water vapor, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide) as well (information available on request).
Analysis presented in this paper further shows that as the temperature decreases, repulsion forces decrease and attraction forces increase (from negative at elevated temperatures to close to positive at lower temperatures) between gaseous molecules, thus causing aggregation of atoms/molecules together, i.e., causing condensation of the gas. This finding is significant in a context where the exact fundamental mechanism of condensation has so far not been explained by classical theories.
This program of research has shown that, the so called ‘weak’ gravitational force (
Table S1 in supplementary information), is actually the resultant of two extremely large forces, i.e., gravitational repulsion and gravitational attraction, which distinctly act on matter. Newly determined gravitational repulsion and attraction forces between two nitrogen molecules at 305 K are in the order of 10
30 times (
supplementary information: Section F) greater than the classically calculated gravitational attraction force. It thus reveals that the gravitational repulsion and attraction forces in fact are of similar orders of magnitude as the other three forces in nature.
Even though the gravitational repulsion and attraction forces are colossal in magnitude, they are nearly equal, thus nearly in equilibrium in nature and their algebraic sum is a mini (weak) force; hence always observed to be a weak force.
An experiment was referred to in
Section 2, where heated iodine particles moved upwards in vacuum against the Earth’s gravitational pull. This was a groundbreaking experiment where the said phenomenon occurred in a situation where all factors which are believed to be causing the upward movement of particles in the air against the gravitational pull, viz., buoyancy and convective forces, are eliminated by the experimental design. Initially, at room temperature (≈ 25°C), the iodine particles detached from the iodine sample moved downward under the gravitational attraction force with the Earth, and deposited in the bottom part of the paper jacket. When the iodine sample was heated, the experiment revealed that the iodine particles move against gravitational pull in the vacuum and deposited in the top part of the paper jacket. In electronic vacuum tubes (called electronic valves) also, evaporated tungsten and thorium particles from filaments move upwards in the absence of air, despite the gravitational pull and strong radial electric fields, and deposit at the top of the glass tube.
The above was a laboratory experiment at a micro scale. The antigravity concept could also be extended to macro level phenomena in the nature such as clouds and the accelerating expansion of the Universe. Review paper by the Author 1a on the previous papers in this research program states:
In addition to attractive and repulsive forces of water-droplets of a cloud with earth, there exist attractive and repulsive forces among water droplets within the cloud. These forces acting inside the cloud explain the accumulative (flocking together) nature of the cloud which has not been explained by the classical theories. The equilibrium of these two forces will confine the droplets to a certain area as a floccule. The repulsiveness does not allow shrinking and finally collapsing the cloud while the attractive force keeps the droplets together without dispersion. 1a p4
The above is an ideal example where there is no net outward force (no net pressure exerted outward) among flocculent water droplets. Water droplets behave as a flock under the equilibrium of gravitational repulsion and gravitational attraction forces. The paper 1b dispelled the classical belief that clouds float due to convection currents, and showed that the force that holds the flocculent water droplets up in the air is “antigravity”. Coexistence of repulsive and attractive forces considered in the theoretical derivations presented in this paper are supported by the mechanism for the existence of clouds deduced in the paper 1b.
Considering both gravitational repulsion and gravitational attraction on matter and filling the critical gap between energy and fundamental forces, opens doors for more research enabling stronger scientific explanations of observable temperature dependent phenomena, e.g.:
Heavy gas molecules (such as CFC) in the upper atmosphere
Brownian Motion
Condensation/evaporation/sublimation
Expansion/contraction of gas/liquid/solid
and more
The concept of gravitational repulsion and gravitational attraction forces could be further applied at macro level to explain the accelerating expansion of the Universe. Even in our solar system:
… the distance of the Earth’s [sic] from the sun. Various measurements indicate that this distance (or at least the length of the Earth’s semimajor axis) is increasing at the rate of 15 cm per year (plus or minus 4 cm). 16
Galaxies and other interstellar objects are not in a state of equilibrium as a result of increasing thermal energy content due to various reasons including atomic fission and fusion causing mass-energy conversion (E = mc2). The effect of increasing thermal energy on (a) expanding gas, i.e., at the microscopic level, and (b) expanding universe 1a, i.e., at the macroscopic level, should be similar. Such mass-energy conversion has dual effects on equilibria in the Universe: (1) increasing thermal energy increases gravitational repulsion forces, while (2) decreasing mass decreases gravitational attraction forces. Gravitational repulsion forces, hence, keep exceeding gravitational attraction forces, thus causing outward expansion of the Universe with acceleration 17. In essence, gravitational repulsion is a significant force between gas molecules (microscopic level), and could be generalized to explain macroscopic level phenomena, e.g., behavior of the universe 18, existence of clouds 1a.
Gravitational repulsion and attraction forces pervade our environments at both micro and macro levels. Once fully understood, such nearly in balance colossal forces offer the prospect of learning to control and manipulate to achieve hitherto unknown results, outcomes and developments. This is another direction for future research. The reader may continue to read more information related to this topic from the content of the preprint 19.