Gravity, an Abstract Essay on Quantum Involvement by Joshua GarrardTraditionally, the wave property is used to describe light. We are already aware that light can be seen as both a particle and a wave, depending on the way it is measured. The following hypothesis expounds onthe same concept, but within a framework that reaches beyond the tangible, as most physicists wouldagree to be vast and perplexing, quantum physics. Though no significant means of proof is providedwithin the thesis, the scientist will find the following ideas most relevant due to a sort of elegance thatappeals to the rule stating the simplest answer is correct. Of the various problems solved, if this schemaor construct, however unfounded it may be makes sense of other related problems in a correlated andmathematically (not yet explored) sound way, it may be of some use to the scientific community.Without further deliberation, I will expound my theory. Gravity is a weak force. Yet, the entire universeis strung together upon its subtle chords. What force underlies this gravity? Is it to be called a wave?Gravity particles have yet to be observed. But this is a false dichotomy. There needn't be any refutationof the gravity wave, as we are embarking on a territory whose very domain is the stuff of flux. Youguessed it, quantum probability. Put down your calculators for a minute, though. Let me give you aframework.Hyperstring theory is based on the idea that all matter is composed of vibrations. In a subtle way thisreminds one of the wave-particle duality of light. But, have you ever wondered what kind of material becomes a “photon?” Travelling at the speed of light, we think it may be hard to catch, so we can'tmeasure it or count its protons. This is not exactly the predicament. Recall Einstein's theory of relativitywhich states that an object accelerated becomes infinitely smaller as it approaches the speed of light.Approximately, a planet could become a single photon when accelerated. This extreme example may notsit well with classical physicists, I think. Neither will the following statement, which will be the mostdebatable premise of my thesis:All matter exists as we know it in a fraction of its quantum state. A particle's quantum state is determined by its quantum clock, which is determined, in turn by acceleration and deceleration. During the “non-material” states, particles have no locus, but a probability cloud in intermediary stages. Now that you have woke the neighbors, sit back down and see how these heresies make sense. Consider two particles, A and B. They were born into the universe at the same time, and have experienced thesame amounts of acceleration. Therefore, their quantum clocks are in exactly the same state. In another manner of speaking, they are not moving in opposite directions but distantly at rest. We have simplifiedthe plethora of true quantum states to 4 frames. The first is resting within a locus. The second is the firstintermediary. The third is its non-local state, and the 4
is of greatest significance.In frames two and four, there is an overlapping of existences or probability clouds as if competing for thesame space in which to manifest. While the individual particles may (as in the double-slit experiment)only collapse for the sake of our observation or measurement. Awareness of these non-localities hasdriven them back into a local state. Between existences, the particles can be said to be half-local, or half-identityless. At this point there is some adhesion of overlapping probability clouds, much like the newer models of electron orbitals. This adhesion, crossing, splitting of probability clouds is the foundation of the weak force known as gravity.