A Reply to Rich Anders’
'Gravity’s Mystery Unveiled'
by Wayne McDonald
Link to
Gravity's Mystery Unveiled by Rich Anders >>
In an essay entitled “Gravity’s Mystery Unveiled,” 1
Rich Anders purports to explain gravity in terms of
“electromagnetism” and “spirituality.” Unfortunately, Mr. Anders’
obvious unfamiliarity with the body of currently accepted
experimental and observational scientific data means that his thesis
fails to stand the test of even a casual critical review. The
purpose of this essay is to address the plausibility of Mr. Anders’
“electromagnetic” and “spiritual” gravity claims versus that of
current scientific theory.
Throughout his essay Mr. Anders Mr. Anders makes repeated
references to what he describes as “positive” and “negative”
spiritual energy as being responsible for gravity. Unfortunately, he
provides no supporting empirical or theoretical support for his
contention except to restate it time and time again. In formal
logic, as well as in rhetoric, this tactic is known as the argument
ad nauseam; the repetition of an unsupported statement in
anticipation that it will eventually be accepted as true. Once this
factor is removed, the validity of Mr. Anders’ theory must rest on
its scientific merits.
Early in his essay Mr. Anders states his acceptance of the
“mainstream” Big Bang theory and further accepts that this primeval
explosive event was responsible for the total amount of matter and
energy present in our Universe as it exists today. It is regarding
his statements regarding what happened before, and immediately
after, the big bang nature with which I will first take exception.
According to Mr. Anders, prior to the big bang there was a period
of time in which “all the matter of the universe before…” (Paragraph
1) was compressed into a single point (a singularity). He does not
state whether this was our Universe or some other “parallel”
universe. The stylistic error of not clarifying his point would be
immaterial except that Mr. Anders repeats that error several times
in the remainder of his essay. We may now turn our attention to what
he alleges happened immediately after the Big Bang.
Mr. Anders first attempts to define the status of matter in the
instant prior to the Big Bang. Consider the following statement,
from paragraph 4:
When matter collapses out of existence its energy component
ceases to exist, as well. … This energy is not destroyed
but it corresponds to dead matter. To re-vitalize this energy
an input of energy is needed. … For matter to collapse it has
to be separated from its electromagnetic energies, the weak and
the strong force of the atom. Energy is not lost …
[Emphasis added].
Well, Mr. Anders, is energy destroyed or not; and what of the
equivalence of matter and energy? Does E=mc2 not hold
true as matter collapses? The self-contradictions continue in the
remainder of the paragraph.
Separating from the dying matter this energy forms its
own dimensionless point in the quantum vacuum. When the separation
of all the electromagnetic energy from all matter in a universe
has been reached the result are two dimensionless points, which
are part of the energy of the quantum vacuum, the spiritual
energy. One such point corresponds to all the dead matter
of the collapsed universe the other one corresponds to all the
electromagnetic energies, which had kept this matter
alive.
Aside from his notion that matter is somehow “alive” because of
its “electromagnetic energies,” 2 Mr. Anders reveals a
serious misunderstanding of the basic principles of quantum physics;
notably the four fundamental forces of the Universe. These forces
are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
How these forces interact with one another in the Universe is
immaterial to our purposes. What is material is how these forces
would be transformed by an extremely intense gravitational
influence.3
Even with our sophisticated 21st century mathematics
and ultra-powerful computers, we cannot describe the exact moment of
the Big Bang. We can only begin with the cosmic microwave background
radiation and work our way back. Even then, we can only theorize
about events and conditions since once we encounter a time frame
less than 1×10-43 seconds after the Big Bang our physical
laws simply cease to exist. But, even though these laws break down
past that barrier, some every interesting things happen do happen at
that instant.
At 1×10-43 seconds after the Big Bang there are not
four fundamental forces in the Universe! Under these conditions of
almost unbelievable temperature and density3 these forces were
merged into a single force, which we call the unified force. It was
only after the Universe began to cool did these forces separate in
what we call the decoupling.
The first force to have emerged from unification was gravity. It
is believed that the remaining three forces remained unified until
about 1×10-33 seconds after the Big Bang when the strong
nuclear force separated from the electroweak force when the
temperature of the primeval Universe had fallen to 1×1027
degrees Kelvin, with the electroweak force splitting into the
electromagnetic and weak nuclear forces when the temperature had
fallen to 1×1015 degrees Kelvin at about 1×10-12
seconds (see Figure 1).
If the electromagnetic force not only did not survive whatever
happened in Mr. Anders’ “other universe” but also did not decouple
from its unity with the weak nuclear force until well after the
other forces, how could it “keep matter alive?”
After stating several additional times that “electromagnetism
gives life to matter” and that there are two types of “spiritual
energy,” Mr. Anders makes another statement demonstrating his
unfamiliarity with
Matter consists of two components: matter itself and
electromagnetism, which keeps matter alive. This duality
corresponds to the duality of the spiritual energies.… The
Positive Principle creates and maintains creation and the Negative
Principle destroys. The Positive Principle provides
electromagnetism + the weak and the strong force of the atom and
the Negative Principle provides matter and gravity. Together they
provide living matter (Paragraph 8).
Once again, he contradicts himself. After clearly stating earlier
in paragraph 8 that “electromagnetism…keeps matter alive” he then
states that it is the “Positive Principle” and the “Negative
Principle” that provide living matter! Did he perhaps mean “Positive
Electromagnetism” and “Negative Electromagnetism?”
In either case, he seems to have forgotten that there is no such
entity as either “Positive” or “Negative” electromagnetism! Is there
also a “positive light” and a negative light?” Light is a part of
the electromagnetic spectrum. If his original statement at the close
of paragraph 8 is correct then there must be, by logical extension,
positive and negative light. Since no such entities have been
observed, we may safely conclude that Mr. Anders is again wrong.
His attempts to equate gravity and electromagnetism, since they
depend on his “positive” and “negative” what-evers, are equally
ludicrous. In fact his entire theory collapses with the following
statement.
The weak force and the strong force of the atom counter gravity
on the atomic level and keep the electrons orbiting a nucleus
(Paragraph 9).
Mr. Anders, the reason that electrons orbit the nucleus has
nothing to do with gravity and everything to do with
centripetal motion counteracting the electrostatic attraction
between the protons within the nucleus and the electrons outside it!
Electrons orbit the atomic nucleus at velocities of approximately
10% the speed of light. This velocity is sufficient to prevent the
electron from being drawn into the nucleus by exactly the same
principle that prevents the Moon from crashing into the Earth.
The gravitational attraction exerted by the nucleus is virtually
immeasurable, being some one billion times weaker than the
electrostatic force attracting the low-mass, negatively charged
electron to the higher-mass, positively charged protons. So, if the
major force acting on an electron isn’t gravity at all but instead
an electrostatic attraction, where does this leave Mr. Anders’
theory?
In conclusion, Mr. Anders’ appeal to the supposed properties of
supernatural “positive” and “negative” “spiritual energy” is
supported by neither empirical evidence, nor his own logical
reasoning, and must therefore be disregarded as a viable theory of
gravity.
Notes
1. Anders, Rich (Undated): “Gravity’s Mystery
Unveiled,” World Mysteries.com,
http://www.world-mysteries.com/sci_13.htm#Mystery . Last
accessed June 25, 2007.
2. These “electromagnetic energies, which had kept this
matter alive” sound suspiciously like the electrical bio-animation
theories (long since discredited) advanced by the followers of Luigi
Galvani (1737 – 1798), the Italian physician who discovered that an
electrical impulse was capable of causing a muscular contraction in
dissected muscle tissue. He was the inspiration for the title
character in Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein.
3. For an excellent, non-technical discussion of the
first seconds following the Big Bang, see Weinberg, Steven (1977):
The First Three Minutes, New York: Bantam, pp. 94-139 or
Silk, Joseph (2000): The Big Bang (3rd Edition), New York:
Freeman, pp. 105-137.
4. According to Silk, the temperature of the Universe
at 1 × 10-43 seconds was 1 × 1032 degrees
Kelvin (p. 110) and the density was 1 × 1090 kg/cc3
(p. 108).
©2007 Wayne McDonald
All Rights Reserved.
Reprinted with Permission
|
