125 views

Uploaded by dgE

Principles of mass-energy distribution and similitude by ZPF equilibria are utilised to derive the values of the present Hubble constant "H_0" and CMBR temperature "T_0". It is demonstrated that a mathematical relationship exists between the Hubble constant and CMBR temperature such that "T_0" is derived from "H_0". The values derived are "67.0843(km/s/Mpc)" and "2.7248(K)" respectively. We also derive improved estimates for the solar distance from the Galactic centre "R_0" and total Galactic mass "M_G" as being "8.1072(kpc)" and "6.3142 x10^11(solar-masses)" respectively. The construct herein implies that the observed "accelerated expansion" of the Universe is attributable to the determination of the ZPF energy density threshold "U_ZPF" being "< -2.52 x10^-13(Pa)". Moreover, it is graphically illustrated that the gradient of the Hubble constant in the time domain is presently positive.

save

- Antarctic Sun Feb 2001
- On Measuring the CMB Temperature at Redshift 0.89
- Quinta Essentia - Part 2
- book review.docx
- Young and Hot
- The vortex theory of matter
- Whisper From the First Stars Sets Off Loud Dark Matter Debate 20180329
- 50 Greatest Mysteries in the Universe 2012.pdf
- Quinta Essentia - Part 3
- The Plasma Universe
- the Expanding Space Time Theory Masreliez
- Carl H. Gibson and Rudolph E. Schild- Hydro-Gravitational Dynamics of Planets and Dark Energy
- Neil DeGrasse Tyson-Astrophysics for People in a Hurry-W. W. Norton & Co (2017)
- ECA Qa
- Quinta Essentia - Part 1
- E%3Dmc%5E2 is Not Einstein Discovery
- albert einstein
- Essay
- Pranayam A
- designing the capacity for life
- Creation vs Evolution Timeline - Kent Hovind
- Kinetic Energy of a Moving Charged Particle and a Mass-energy Equivalence Law as E = 1/2 mc^2
- Dynamic Analysis of an Offshore Wind Turbine: Wind-Waves Nonlinear Interactions
- Allegato_110143
- Explanation of the INTROSPECT-Biospect Graphs
- The best pro God argument.
- R7221904 Signals and Systems
- Universe
- time doma
- The New Earth the Higher Knowledge
- Polarizable Vacuum (PV) and the Reissner-Nordstrom Solution
- Polarizable Vacuum (PV) and the Schwarzschild Solution
- The Natural Philosophy of the Cosmos (Graphs) (C)
- The Natural Philosophy of the Cosmos (A)
- The Natural Philosophy of the Cosmos (C)
- SPIE 2011
- Derivation of ElectroMagnetic Radii
- Derivation of the Photon Mass-Energy Threshold
- The Extraterrestrial Casimir Effect
- The Natural Philosophy of the Cosmos (B)
- Derivation of the Photon & Graviton Mass-Energies & Radii
- Derivation of Fundamental Particle Radii: Electron, Proton & Neutron
- The Natural Philosophy of Fundamental Particles
- Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM); Practical modelling methods of the polarizable vacuum - VII
- Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM); Practical modelling methods of the polarizable vacuum - I
- Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM); Practical modelling methods of the polarizable vacuum - VI
- Particle Physics & Cosmology Posters
- Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM); Practical modelling methods of the polarizable vacuum - IV
- Quinta Essentia - Part 3
- SPIE 2009
- Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM); Practical modelling methods of the polarizable vacuum - III
- EGM Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM); Practical modelling methods of the polarizable vacuum - V
- SPIE 2005
- SPIE 2007
- Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM); Practical modelling methods of the polarizable vacuum - II
- Quinta Essentia - Part 1

You are on page 1of 421

A Practical Guide to Space-Time Engineering

PART 4

“THE DERIVATION OF THE HUBBLE

CONSTANT & THE COSMIC

MICROWAVE BACKGROUND

RADIATION (CMBR) TEMPERATURE”

“To my parents”

RESEARCH NOTES

Key Words: Big-Bang, CMBR, Cosmological Evolution / Expansion / History / Inflation, Dark

Energy / Matter, Gravitation, Hubble constant.

2nd Edition

Project Initiated: October 13, 2005

Project Completed: April 14, 2007

Revised: Thursday, 24 November 2011

RICCARDO C. STORTI1

**www.deltagroupengineering.com
**

1

rstorti@gmail.com

© Copyright 2011: Delta Group Engineering (dgE): All rights reserved.

2

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Preface

This text is a compilation of research notes and a companion to “Quinta Essentia - Part 3”,

extending the principles of Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM) to two important aspects of Cosmology

[i.e. the present value of the Hubble constant “H0” and Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation

(CMBR) temperature “T0”]. Subsequently, the reader is actively encouraged to review “Part 3”, to

obtain a full appreciation of the EGM method.

“Part 3” develops an equation facilitating the harmonic representation of all fundamental

particles relative to an arbitrarily chosen base particle. It is demonstrated, for example, that the

EGM wavefunction frequency of an Electron “ωΩ(rε,me)” is twice that of the Proton “ωΩ(rπ,mp)”,

and the harmonic relationship between them “Stω” has a value of “2”. Hence, a table of fundamental

particle harmonics was formulated.

This resulted in a relationship between the mass-energy and size of fundamental particles

based upon Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) equilibria. Although the EGM harmonic representation is an

approximation derived from basic engineering principles, it produces experimentally verified

results substantially beyond the current abilities of the Standard Model (SM) of Particle-Physics to

do so, to at least four orders of magnitude.

“Part 4” utilises the principles of mass-energy distribution and similitude by ZPF equilibria

developed in “Part 3”, to derive “H0” and “T0”. It is demonstrated that a mathematical relationship

exists between the Hubble constant and CMBR temperature such that “T0” is derived from “H0”.

Consequently, this enables the complete and precise specification of the thermodynamic,

inflationary and expansive history of the Universe, from the “Big-Bang” to the present day.

Astonishingly, the application of the EGM construct to Cosmology produces “Black-BodyRadiation” curve characteristics, without the application of the “Black-Body-Law”, further

reinforcing the validity of the “H0” and “T0” formulations of approximately “67.0843(km/s/Mpc)”

and “2.7248(K)” respectively. Considering that the experimental tolerance of the CMBR

temperature is presently “2.725 ± 0.001(K)”, it is obvious that any determination within such a tight

tolerance should be given serious consideration.

The derivation of “H0” and “T0” is possible assuming that, instantaneously prior to the “BigBang”, the Primordial Universe was analogous to a homogeneous Planck scale particle of maximum

permissible energy density, characterised by a single EGM wavefunction. Simultaneously, we

represent the “Milky-Way” as a Planck scale object of equivalent total Galactic mass “MG”, acting

as a Galactic Reference Particle (GRP) characterised by a large number of EGM wavefunctions

with respect to the solar distance from the Galactic centre “Ro”.

This facilitates a comparative analysis between the Primordial and Galactic particle

representations utilising the harmonic equation derived in “Part 3”, yielding “H0” in terms of “Ro”

and “MG”. Moreover, we extend the analysis by determining the theoretical frequency shift of a

fictitious EGM wavefunction being radiated from the Primordial particle, yielding “T0” in terms of

“H0”. Consequently, by utilising the measured value of “T0”, we derive improved estimates for “Ro”

and “MG” as being approximately “8.1072(kpc)” and “6.3142 x1011(solar-masses)” respectively.

Because the value of “H0” is still widely debated and the associated experimental tolerance

is much broader than “T0”, the EGM construct implies that the observed “accelerated expansion” of

the Universe is attributable to the determination of the ZPF energy density threshold “UZPF” being

“< -2.52 x10-13(Pa)”. Moreover, it is graphically illustrated that the gradient of the Hubble constant

in the time domain is presently positive.

Subsequently, it is demonstrated that the majority of what is currently conjectured to

constitute “Dark Matter / Energy” by the scientific community, is nothing more than Photons due to

the definition of a Graviton under the EGM construct. In addition, it is mathematically shown that

the magnitude of the impact of “Dark Matter / Energy” on the value of the Hubble constant and

CMBR temperature is “< 1(%)” such that the Universe is composed of:

• “> 94.4(%) Photons”, “< 1(%) Dark Matter / Energy” and “4.6(%) Atoms”.

3

www.deltagroupengineering.com

4

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Table of Contents

Preface ........................................................................................................................................... 3

Scientific Achievements .............................................................................................................. 23

1

Introduction......................................................................................................................... 25

1.1

The natural philosophy of the Cosmos ............................................................................... 25

1.1.1

Objectives and scope................................................................................................... 25

1.1.2

How are these objectives achieved? ............................................................................ 25

1.1.2.1 Synopsis................................................................................................................. 25

1.1.2.2 Derivation process.................................................................................................. 26

1.1.2.2.1 Hubble constant “HU” ...................................................................................... 26

1.1.2.2.2 CMBR temperature “TU” ................................................................................. 27

1.1.2.2.3 “HU → HU2, TU → TU2 → TU3” ........................................................................ 28

1.1.2.2.4 Rate of change “dHdt” ...................................................................................... 29

1.1.3

Sample results............................................................................................................. 30

1.1.3.1 Numerical evaluation and analysis.......................................................................... 30

1.1.3.1.1 Cosmological properties................................................................................... 30

1.1.3.1.2 Significant temporal ordinates .......................................................................... 32

1.1.3.2 Graphical evaluation and analysis........................................................................... 33

1.1.3.2.1 Average Cosmological temperature vs. age ...................................................... 33

1.1.3.2.2 Magnitude of the Hubble constant vs. Cosmological age .................................. 34

1.1.3.2.3 Cosmological evolution process ....................................................................... 35

1.1.4

History of the Universe according to EGM ................................................................. 36

1.1.5

Discussion .................................................................................................................. 38

1.1.5.1 Conceptualization................................................................................................... 38

1.1.5.1.1 “λx”.................................................................................................................. 38

1.1.5.1.2 “TL” ................................................................................................................. 38

1.1.5.1.3 “CΩ_J” .............................................................................................................. 38

1.1.5.1.4 “Stω” ................................................................................................................ 39

1.1.5.2 Dynamic, kinematic and geometric similarity......................................................... 39

1.1.5.2.1 “HU” ................................................................................................................ 39

1.1.5.2.2 “TU”................................................................................................................. 40

1.1.6

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................... 40

1.2

Fundamentals .................................................................................................................... 42

1.2.1

General Relativity (GR) .............................................................................................. 42

1.2.2

Black-Holes (BH’s) .................................................................................................... 43

1.2.3

Quantum Mechanics (QM).......................................................................................... 44

1.2.4

Particle-Physics .......................................................................................................... 45

1.2.4.1 Synopsis................................................................................................................. 45

1.2.4.2 Subatomic particles ................................................................................................ 45

1.2.4.3 History ................................................................................................................... 45

1.2.4.4 Standard Model (SM)............................................................................................. 46

1.2.4.5 Experiment............................................................................................................. 46

1.2.4.6 Theory.................................................................................................................... 46

1.2.5

Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) Theory ................................................................................... 48

1.2.5.1 Synopsis................................................................................................................. 48

1.2.5.1.1 Zero-Point-Energy (ZPE) ................................................................................. 48

5

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1.2.5.1.1.1 General...................................................................................................... 48

1.2.5.1.1.2 Elementary particles .................................................................................. 48

1.2.5.1.1.3 Implications............................................................................................... 48

1.2.5.1.2 History ............................................................................................................. 49

1.2.5.1.3 Foundational Physics........................................................................................ 49

1.2.5.1.4 Varieties of ZPE............................................................................................... 50

1.2.5.1.5 Experimental evidence ..................................................................................... 50

1.2.5.1.6 Gravitation and Cosmology.............................................................................. 50

1.2.5.1.7 Propulsion theories........................................................................................... 50

1.2.5.1.8 Popular culture................................................................................................. 51

1.2.5.2 Spectral Energy Density (SED) .............................................................................. 51

1.2.6

The Polarisable Vacuum (PV) model of gravity .......................................................... 51

1.2.7

Dimensional Analysis Techniques and Buckingham’s “Π” (Pi) Theory ...................... 52

1.2.7.1 The principles......................................................................................................... 52

1.2.7.2 The atomic bomb.................................................................................................... 53

1.2.7.3 The birth and foundations of Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM) ............................... 54

1.2.8

EGM: the natural philosophy of fundamental particles ................................................ 57

1.2.8.1 How was it derived? ............................................................................................... 57

1.2.8.2 Poynting Vector “Sω” ............................................................................................. 61

1.2.8.3 The size of the Proton, Neutron and Electron (radii: “rπ”, “rν”, “rε”) ....................... 62

1.2.8.4 The harmonic representation of fundamental particles ............................................ 64

1.2.8.4.1 Establishing the foundations............................................................................. 64

1.2.8.4.2 Improving accuracy.......................................................................................... 64

1.2.8.4.3 Formulating an hypothesis ............................................................................... 65

1.2.8.5 Identifying a mathematical pattern.......................................................................... 65

1.2.8.6 Results ................................................................................................................... 66

1.2.8.6.1 Harmonic evidence of unification..................................................................... 66

1.2.8.6.2 Recent developments........................................................................................ 67

1.2.8.6.2.1 PDG mass-energy ranges........................................................................... 67

1.2.8.6.2.2 Electron Neutrino and Up / Down / Bottom Quark mass............................ 68

1.2.8.6.2.3 Top Quark mass ........................................................................................ 68

1.2.8.6.2.3.1 The dilemma....................................................................................... 68

1.2.8.6.2.3.2 The resolution..................................................................................... 68

1.2.8.7 Discussion.............................................................................................................. 69

1.2.8.7.1 Experimental evidence of unification ............................................................... 69

1.2.8.7.2 The answers to some important questions......................................................... 70

1.2.8.7.2.1 What causes harmonic patterns to form?.................................................... 70

1.2.8.7.2.1.1 ZPF equilibrium.................................................................................. 70

1.2.8.7.2.1.2 Inherent quantum characteristics......................................................... 70

1.2.8.7.2.2 Why haven’t the “new” particles been experimentally detected?................ 71

1.2.8.7.2.3 Why can all fundamental particles be described in harmonic terms? .......... 71

1.2.8.7.2.4 Why is EGM a method and not a theory?................................................... 72

1.2.8.7.2.5 What would one need to do, in order to disprove EGM? ............................ 72

1.2.8.7.2.6 Why does EGM produce current and not constituent Quark masses? ......... 72

1.2.8.7.2.7 Why does EGM yield only the three observed families? ............................ 73

1.2.8.8 What may the periodic table of elementary particles look like under EGM? ........... 73

1.2.8.9 What are the most important results determined by the EGM construct?................. 74

1.2.8.9.1 PV and ZPF ..................................................................................................... 74

1.2.8.9.1.1 Gravitational amplitude spectrum “CPV”.................................................... 74

1.2.8.9.1.2 Gravitational frequency spectrum “ωPV”.................................................... 74

1.2.8.9.1.3 Harmonic cut-off frequency “ωΩ”.............................................................. 74

1.2.8.9.2 Photons, Gravitons and Euler's Constant .......................................................... 74

6

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.2.8.9.2.1 The mass-energy of a Graviton “mgg” ........................................................ 74
**

1.2.8.9.2.2 The mass-energy of a Photon “mγγ” ........................................................... 74

1.2.8.9.2.3 The radius of a Photon “rγγ” ....................................................................... 75

1.2.8.9.2.4 The radius of a Graviton “rgg”.................................................................... 75

1.2.8.9.3 All Other Particles............................................................................................ 75

1.2.8.9.3.1 The Fine Structure Constant “α”................................................................ 75

1.2.8.9.3.2 Harmonic cut-off frequency ratio (the ratio of two particle spectra) “Stω”.. 75

1.2.8.9.3.3 Neutron Magnetic Radius “rνM”................................................................. 75

1.2.8.9.3.4 Proton Electric Radius “rπE” ...................................................................... 75

1.2.8.9.3.5 Proton Magnetic Radius “rπM” ................................................................... 75

1.2.8.9.3.6 Classical Proton Root Mean Square Charge Radius “rp” ............................ 76

1.2.8.9.3.7 The first term of the Hydrogen Spectrum (Balmer Series) “λA” ................. 76

1.2.8.10 Graphical representation of fundamental particles under EGM ............................... 76

1.2.8.11 Concluding remarks about EGM ............................................................................ 78

1.2.9

The Hubble Constant “H0”.......................................................................................... 79

1.2.9.1 Description............................................................................................................. 79

1.2.9.2 Discovery............................................................................................................... 79

1.2.9.3 Interpretation.......................................................................................................... 80

1.2.9.4 Olbers’ paradox...................................................................................................... 81

1.2.9.5 Measuring the Hubble constant .............................................................................. 82

1.2.10 CMBR temperature..................................................................................................... 83

1.2.10.1 Description............................................................................................................. 84

1.2.10.2 Features.................................................................................................................. 84

1.2.10.3 Relationship to the “Big-Bang” .............................................................................. 85

1.2.10.3.1 General .......................................................................................................... 85

1.2.10.3.2 Temperature................................................................................................... 85

1.2.10.3.3 Primary anisotropy ......................................................................................... 86

1.2.10.3.4 Late time anisotropy....................................................................................... 87

1.2.10.3.5 Polarisation .................................................................................................... 88

1.2.10.4 Microwave background observations...................................................................... 88

2

2.1

Definition of Terms ............................................................................................................. 93

Numbering conventions..................................................................................................... 93

2.2

Quinta Essentia – Part 3..................................................................................................... 93

2.2.1

Alpha Forms “αx” ....................................................................................................... 93

2.2.2

Amplitude Spectrum ................................................................................................... 93

2.2.3

Background Field........................................................................................................ 93

2.2.4

Bandwidth Ratio “∆ωR” .............................................................................................. 93

2.2.5

Beta Forms “βx”.......................................................................................................... 93

2.2.6

Buckingham Π Theory (BPT) ..................................................................................... 93

2.2.7

Casimir Force “FPP” .................................................................................................... 93

2.2.8

Change in the Number of Modes “∆nS”....................................................................... 93

2.2.9

Compton Frequency “ωCx”.......................................................................................... 93

2.2.10 Cosmological Constant ............................................................................................... 94

2.2.11 Critical Boundary “ωβ” ............................................................................................... 94

2.2.12 Critical Factor “KC” .................................................................................................... 94

2.2.13 Critical Field Strengths “EC and BC” ........................................................................... 94

2.2.14 Critical Frequency “ωC”.............................................................................................. 94

2.2.15 Critical Harmonic Operator “KR H” ............................................................................. 94

7

www.deltagroupengineering.com

2.2.16

2.2.17

2.2.18

2.2.19

2.2.20

2.2.21

2.2.22

2.2.23

2.2.24

2.2.25

2.2.26

2.2.27

2.2.28

2.2.29

2.2.30

2.2.31

2.2.32

2.2.33

2.2.34

2.2.35

2.2.36

2.2.37

2.2.38

2.2.39

2.2.40

2.2.41

2.2.42

2.2.43

2.2.44

2.2.45

2.2.46

2.2.47

2.2.48

2.2.49

2.2.50

2.2.51

2.2.52

2.2.53

2.2.54

2.2.55

2.2.56

2.2.57

2.2.58

2.2.59

2.2.60

2.2.61

2.2.62

2.2.63

2.2.64

2.2.65

2.2.66

**Critical Mode “NC”..................................................................................................... 94
**

Critical Phase Variance “φC”....................................................................................... 94

Critical Ratio “KR”...................................................................................................... 94

Curl ............................................................................................................................ 94

DC-Offsets ................................................................................................................. 94

Dimensional Analysis Techniques (DAT's)................................................................. 95

Divergence ................................................................................................................. 95

Dominant Bandwidth .................................................................................................. 95

Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM)................................................................................. 95

Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM) Spectrum ................................................................. 95

Energy Density (General) ........................................................................................... 95

Engineered Metric ...................................................................................................... 95

Engineered Refractive Index “KEGM” .......................................................................... 95

Engineered Relationship Function “∆K0(ω,X)” ........................................................... 95

Experimental Prototype (EP)....................................................................................... 95

Experimental Relationship Function “K0(ω,X)” .......................................................... 95

Fourier Spectrum ........................................................................................................ 95

Frequency Bandwidth “∆ωPV” .................................................................................... 96

Frequency Spectrum ................................................................................................... 96

Fundamental Beat Frequency “∆ωδr(1,r,∆r,M)”........................................................... 96

Fundamental Harmonic Frequency “ωPV(1,r,M)” ........................................................ 96

General Modelling Equations (GMEx) ........................................................................ 96

General Relativity (GR) .............................................................................................. 96

General Similarity Equations (GSEx) .......................................................................... 96

Gravitons “γg”............................................................................................................. 96

Graviton Mass-Energy Threshold “mγg”...................................................................... 96

Group Velocity ........................................................................................................... 96

Harmonic Cut-Off Frequency “ωΩ”............................................................................. 96

Harmonic Cut-Off Function “Ω”................................................................................. 97

Harmonic Cut-Off Mode “nΩ” .................................................................................... 97

Harmonic Inflection Mode “NX”................................................................................. 97

Harmonic Inflection Frequency “ωX”.......................................................................... 97

Harmonic Inflection Wavelength “λX” ........................................................................ 97

Harmonic Similarity Equations (HSEx) ....................................................................... 97

IFF.............................................................................................................................. 97

Impedance Function.................................................................................................... 97

Kinetic Spectrum ........................................................................................................ 97

Mode Bandwidth ........................................................................................................ 97

Mode Number (Critical Boundary Mode) “nβ”............................................................ 97

Number of Permissible Modes “N∆r”........................................................................... 98

Phenomena of Beats.................................................................................................... 98

Photon Mass-Energy Threshold “mγ”.......................................................................... 98

Polarisable Vacuum (PV)............................................................................................ 98

Polarisable Vacuum (PV) Beat Bandwidth “∆ωΩ”....................................................... 98

Polarisable Vacuum (PV) Spectrum ............................................................................ 98

Potential Spectrum...................................................................................................... 98

Poynting Vector.......................................................................................................... 98

Precipitations .............................................................................................................. 98

Primary Precipitant ..................................................................................................... 98

Radii Calculations by Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM) .............................................. 99

Range Factor “Stα” ..................................................................................................... 99

8

www.deltagroupengineering.com

2.2.67

2.2.68

2.2.69

2.2.70

2.2.71

2.2.72

2.2.73

2.2.74

2.2.75

2.2.76

2.2.77

2.2.78

2.2.79

2.2.80

2.2.81

2.2.82

2.2.83

2.2.84

2.2.85

2.2.86

2.2.87

2.2.88

2.2.89

2.2.90

2.2.91

2.2.92

2.2.93

**Reduced Average Harmonic Similarity Equations (HSExA R) ...................................... 99
**

Reduced Harmonic Similarity Equations (HSEx R) ...................................................... 99

Refractive Index “KPV” ............................................................................................... 99

Representation Error “RError”....................................................................................... 99

RMS Charge Radii (General) ...................................................................................... 99

RMS Charge Radius of the Neutron “rν” ..................................................................... 99

Similarity Bandwidth “∆ωS” ....................................................................................... 99

Spectral Energy Density “ρ0(ω)”............................................................................... 100

Spectral Similarity Equations (SSEx) ........................................................................ 100

Subordinate Bandwidth............................................................................................. 100

Unit Amplitude Spectrum ......................................................................................... 100

Zero-Point-Energy (ZPE).......................................................................................... 100

Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) ............................................................................................. 100

Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) Spectrum ............................................................................. 100

Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) Beat Bandwidth “∆ωZPF”...................................................... 100

Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) Beat Cut-Off Frequency “ωΩ ZPF”......................................... 100

Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) Beat Cut-Off Mode “nΩ ZPF”................................................. 100

1st Sense Check “Stβ”................................................................................................ 100

2nd Reduction of the Harmonic Similarity Equations (HSExA R)................................. 100

2nd Sense Check “Stγ” ............................................................................................... 100

3rd Sense Check “Stδ”................................................................................................ 101

4th Sense Check “Stε”................................................................................................ 101

5th Sense Check “Stη” ............................................................................................... 101

6th Sense Check “Stθ”................................................................................................ 101

Physical Constants .................................................................................................... 101

Mathematical Constants and Symbols ....................................................................... 102

Solar System Statistics .............................................................................................. 102

2.3

Quinta Essentia – Part 4................................................................................................... 103

2.3.1

“Big-Bang”............................................................................................................... 103

2.3.2

Black-Hole “BH”...................................................................................................... 103

2.3.3

Broadband Propagation............................................................................................. 103

2.3.4

Buoyancy Point......................................................................................................... 103

2.3.5

CMBR Temperature “T0” ......................................................................................... 103

2.3.6

EGM-CMBR Temperature “TU” ............................................................................... 103

2.3.7

EGM Flux Intensity “CΩ_J” ....................................................................................... 103

2.3.8

EGM Hubble constant “HU”...................................................................................... 103

2.3.9

Event Horizon “RBH” ................................................................................................ 103

2.3.10 Galactic Reference Particle “GRP” ........................................................................... 103

2.3.11 Gravitational Interference ......................................................................................... 103

2.3.12 Gravitational Propagation ......................................................................................... 103

2.3.13 Hubble Constant “H0”............................................................................................... 104

2.3.14 Narrowband Propagation .......................................................................................... 104

2.3.15 Non-Physical ............................................................................................................ 104

2.3.16 Physical .................................................................................................................... 104

2.3.17 Primordial Universe.................................................................................................. 104

2.3.18 Schwarzschild-Black-Hole “SBH” ............................................................................ 104

2.3.19 Schwarzschild-Planck-Black-Hole “SPBH” .............................................................. 104

2.3.20 Schwarzschild-Planck-Particle .................................................................................. 104

2.3.21 Singularity ................................................................................................................ 104

2.3.22 Singularity Radius “rS” ............................................................................................. 104

2.3.23 Solar Mass ................................................................................................................ 104

9

www.deltagroupengineering.com

2.3.24

2.3.25

2.3.26

3

**Super-Massive-Black-Hole “SMBH”........................................................................ 105
**

Total Mass-Energy.................................................................................................... 105

Astronomical / Cosmological statistics...................................................................... 105

Glossary of Terms ............................................................................................................. 107

3.1

Quinta Essentia – Part 3................................................................................................... 107

3.1.1

Acronyms ................................................................................................................. 107

3.1.2

Symbols in alphabetical order ................................................................................... 109

3.2

Quinta Essentia – Part 4................................................................................................... 116

3.2.1

Acronyms ................................................................................................................. 116

3.2.2

Symbols by chapter................................................................................................... 117

3.2.3

Symbols in alphabetical order ................................................................................... 121

4

Derivation Processes.......................................................................................................... 125

4.1

Main sequence................................................................................................................. 125

4.1.1

Characterisation of the gravitational spectrum........................................................... 125

4.1.2

Derivation of “Planck-Particle” and “Schwarzschild-Black-Hole” characteristics ..... 125

4.1.3

Fundamental Cosmology .......................................................................................... 125

4.1.4

Advanced Cosmology............................................................................................... 126

4.1.5

Gravitational Cosmology .......................................................................................... 126

4.1.6

Particle Cosmology................................................................................................... 126

4.2

The Hubble sequence....................................................................................................... 127

4.2.1

Preconditions ............................................................................................................ 127

4.2.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 127

4.2.3

Simplified sequence.................................................................................................. 127

4.3

The CMBR temperature sequence ................................................................................... 128

4.3.1

Preconditions ............................................................................................................ 128

4.3.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 128

4.3.3

Simplified sequence.................................................................................................. 128

5

Characterisation of the Gravitational Spectrum ............................................................. 129

Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 129

5.1

Simplification of the EGM equations............................................................................... 130

5.1.1

“Ω → Ω1”, “nΩ → nΩ_1” and “ωΩ → ωΩ_1” ............................................................... 130

5.1.2

Computing errors ...................................................................................................... 130

5.2

Derivation of gravitational acceleration in terms of “ωΩ”................................................. 131

5.2.1

Transformation: “ωΩ_1 → ωΩ_2”................................................................................ 131

5.2.1.1 Simplification....................................................................................................... 131

5.2.1.2 Computing errors ................................................................................................. 132

5.2.1.2.1 “ωΩ_1 → ωΩ_2” ............................................................................................... 132

5.2.1.2.2 “g” ................................................................................................................. 132

5.2.1.3 Error analysis ....................................................................................................... 132

5.2.2

Transformation: “ωΩ_1 → ωΩ_3”................................................................................ 133

5.2.2.1 Simplification....................................................................................................... 133

10

www.deltagroupengineering.com

5.2.2.2

Computing errors ................................................................................................. 133

5.3

Formulation of a generalised cubic frequency expression in terms of “g”: “g → ωPV3” .... 134

5.4

Determination of the gravitationally dominant EGM frequency: “SωΩ → c⋅Um”............... 134

5.5

Derivation of EGM Flux Intensity “CΩ_J” ........................................................................ 135

5.5.1

Simplification ........................................................................................................... 135

5.5.2

Computing errors ...................................................................................................... 135

5.5.3

Error analysis............................................................................................................ 135

6

Derivation of “Planck-Particle” and “Schwarzschild-Black-Hole” Characteristics ...... 137

Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 137

6.1

Derivation of the minimum physical “Schwarzschild-Planck-Particle” mass and radius... 138

6.1.1

What does “physical” mean?..................................................................................... 138

6.1.1.1 Conceptualisation................................................................................................. 138

6.1.1.2 Assumptions......................................................................................................... 138

6.1.1.3 Definitions ........................................................................................................... 139

6.1.1.3.1 Matter ............................................................................................................ 139

6.1.1.3.2 Energy density ............................................................................................... 139

6.1.1.3.3 Planck scale properties ................................................................................... 139

6.1.2

What is a “Schwarzschild-Planck-Particle”? ............................................................. 140

6.1.2.1 Conceptualisation................................................................................................. 140

6.1.2.2 Assumptions......................................................................................................... 140

6.1.2.3 Definition............................................................................................................. 140

6.1.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 141

6.1.4

Computing errors ...................................................................................................... 143

6.1.5

Convergent and divergent spectra ............................................................................. 144

6.1.6

Honourable mention ................................................................................................. 144

6.1.7

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 144

6.1.7.1 Characteristics of a physical SPBH....................................................................... 144

6.1.7.2 Characteristics of a non-physical “Planck-Particle” .............................................. 144

6.1.7.3 Physicality of the EGM adjusted Planck Length ................................................... 145

6.2

Derivation of the value of the “KPV” at the event horizon of a SPBH ............................... 146

6.2.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 146

6.2.2

Construct .................................................................................................................. 146

6.2.2.1 1st Formulation ..................................................................................................... 146

6.2.2.2 2nd Formulation .................................................................................................... 148

6.2.3

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 148

6.3

Derivation of “ωΩ” at the event horizon of a SPBH ......................................................... 149

6.3.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 149

6.3.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 149

6.3.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 149

6.3.4

“ωPV(1,λxλh,mxmh)” .................................................................................................. 150

6.3.5

Honourable mention ................................................................................................. 151

6.3.6

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 151

6.4

Derivation of “ωΩ” at the event horizon of a SBH............................................................ 152

6.4.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 152

11

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.4.2

6.4.3

6.4.4

6.4.5

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 152

Construct .................................................................................................................. 152

Sample calculations .................................................................................................. 152

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 152

6.5

Derivation of “rS” ............................................................................................................ 154

6.5.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 154

6.5.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 154

6.5.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 154

6.5.3.1 1st Formulation ..................................................................................................... 154

6.5.3.2 2nd Formulation .................................................................................................... 155

6.5.3.3 3rd Formulation..................................................................................................... 155

6.5.4

Sample calculations .................................................................................................. 155

6.5.5

Honourable mention ................................................................................................. 156

6.5.6

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 156

6.6

“nΩ” and “ωΩ” profiles (as “r → RBH”) of SBH’s............................................................. 157

6.6.1

“nΩ”.......................................................................................................................... 157

6.6.1.1 Synopsis............................................................................................................... 157

6.6.1.2 Assumptions......................................................................................................... 157

6.6.1.3 Construct.............................................................................................................. 157

6.6.1.4 Sample calculations.............................................................................................. 157

6.6.1.5 Sample plots (log vs. log) ..................................................................................... 158

6.6.2

“ωΩ” ......................................................................................................................... 158

6.6.2.1 Synopsis............................................................................................................... 158

6.6.2.2 Assumptions......................................................................................................... 158

6.6.2.3 Construct.............................................................................................................. 159

6.6.2.4 Sample calculations.............................................................................................. 159

6.6.2.5 Sample plots (log vs. log) ..................................................................................... 160

6.6.3

“ωPV(1,r,MBH)” ......................................................................................................... 160

6.6.3.1 Synopsis............................................................................................................... 160

6.6.3.2 Assumptions......................................................................................................... 160

6.6.3.3 Construct.............................................................................................................. 161

6.6.3.4 Sample calculations.............................................................................................. 161

6.6.3.5 Sample plots (log vs. log) ..................................................................................... 161

6.6.3.6 Honourable mention............................................................................................. 162

6.6.4

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 162

6.7

Derivation of the minimum gravitational lifetime of matter “TL” ..................................... 163

6.7.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 163

6.7.1.1 Fundamentals ....................................................................................................... 163

6.7.1.2 Assumptions......................................................................................................... 164

6.7.1.3 Sample calculations.............................................................................................. 164

6.7.2

Construct .................................................................................................................. 165

6.7.2.1 Reconciliation ...................................................................................................... 165

6.7.2.1.1 Dilemma ........................................................................................................ 165

6.7.2.1.2 Resolution...................................................................................................... 165

6.7.2.1.2.1 Uncertainty.............................................................................................. 165

6.7.2.1.2.2 Quasi-Uncertainty ................................................................................... 165

6.7.2.2 “TL” ..................................................................................................................... 165

6.7.2.2.1 Fundamentals ................................................................................................. 165

6.7.2.2.2 Sample calculations........................................................................................ 166

12

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.7.2.2.3 Simplifications ............................................................................................... 167

6.7.3

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 167

6.8

Derivation of the average emission frequency per Graviton “ωg”..................................... 168

6.8.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 168

6.8.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 168

6.8.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 168

6.8.4

Sample calculations .................................................................................................. 169

6.8.5

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 169

6.9

Why can't we observe BH’s? ........................................................................................... 170

6.9.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 170

6.9.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 170

6.9.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 171

6.9.4

Sample calculations .................................................................................................. 171

6.9.4.1 SBH’s .................................................................................................................. 171

6.9.4.2 SPBH’s ................................................................................................................ 172

6.9.5

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 173

7

Fundamental Cosmology................................................................................................... 175

Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 175

7.1

Derivation of the primordial and present Hubble constants “Hα, HU”............................... 176

7.1.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 176

7.1.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 176

7.1.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 177

7.1.3.1 “AU, RU, HU”........................................................................................................ 177

7.1.3.2 “Hα”..................................................................................................................... 178

7.1.3.3 “ρU” ..................................................................................................................... 179

7.1.3.4 “MU” .................................................................................................................... 179

7.1.4

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 179

7.2

Derivation of the CMBR temperature “TU”...................................................................... 180

7.2.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 180

7.2.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 180

7.2.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 181

7.2.4

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 181

7.3

Numerical solutions for “Hα, AU, RU, ρU, MU, HU” and “TU” ........................................... 182

7.3.1

“r2, r3, M2, M3” ......................................................................................................... 182

7.3.2

Computational results ............................................................................................... 183

7.3.3

Honourable mention ................................................................................................. 183

7.3.4

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 184

7.4

Determination of the impact of “Dark Matter / Energy” on “HU” and “TU”...................... 185

7.4.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 185

7.4.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 185

7.4.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 185

7.4.4

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 185

7.5

**“TU” as a function of a generalised Hubble constant “TU → TU2” .................................... 186
**

13

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7.6

Derivation of “Ro”, “MG”, “HU2” and “ρU2” from “TU2”................................................... 187

7.6.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 187

7.6.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 187

7.6.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 188

7.6.3.1 “Ro” or “MG”........................................................................................................ 188

7.6.3.2 “Ro” and “MG” ..................................................................................................... 189

7.6.3.3 “Ro”, “MG”, “HU2” and “ρU2” ............................................................................... 190

7.6.3.3.1 “Ro” and “MG” ............................................................................................... 190

7.6.3.3.2 “HU2” and “ρU2” ............................................................................................. 190

7.6.4

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 191

7.7

Experimentally implicit derivation of the ZPF energy density threshold “UZPF”............... 192

7.7.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 192

7.7.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 192

7.7.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 192

7.7.4

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 193

8

Advanced Cosmology ........................................................................................................ 195

Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 195

8.1

Time dependent CMBR temperature “TU2 → TU3” .......................................................... 196

8.1.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 196

8.1.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 196

8.1.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 196

8.1.4

Sample calculations .................................................................................................. 197

8.1.5

Sample plots ............................................................................................................. 197

8.1.5.1 “TU3 vs. Hβ”: Figure 4.22 ..................................................................................... 198

8.1.5.2 “TU3 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.23................................................................... 199

8.1.6

Honourable mention ................................................................................................. 200

8.1.7

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 200

8.2

Rates of change of CMBR temperature “TU3 → TU4 → d1,2,3TU4/dt1,2,3” ........................... 201

8.2.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 201

8.2.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 201

8.2.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 201

8.2.4

Sample calculations .................................................................................................. 202

8.2.5

Sample plots ............................................................................................................. 203

8.2.5.1 “TU3 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.24.................................................................. 204

8.2.5.2 “TU3 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (iii): Figure 4.25................................................................. 205

8.2.5.3 “TU3 vs. H = (HβHα)” (i): Figure 4.26 ................................................................... 206

8.2.5.4 “TU3 vs. H = (HβHα)” (ii): Figure 4.27 .................................................................. 207

8.2.5.5 “TU3 vs. r = (HβHα)-1c” (i): Figure 4.28................................................................. 208

8.2.5.6 “TU3 vs. r = (HβHα)-1c” (ii): Figure 4.29................................................................ 209

8.2.5.7 “dTU4/dt vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.30............................................................. 210

8.2.5.8 “dTU4/dt vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.31............................................................ 211

8.2.5.9 “d2TU4/dt2 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.32 .......................................................... 212

8.2.5.10 “d2TU4/dt2 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.33 ......................................................... 213

8.2.5.11 “|d3TU4/dt3| vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.34......................................................... 214

8.2.5.12 “|d3TU4/dt3| vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.35 ....................................................... 215

8.2.6

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 216

14

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.3

Rates of change of the Hubble constant “d1,2H/dt1,2”........................................................ 217

8.3.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 217

8.3.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 217

8.3.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 217

8.3.4

Sample calculations .................................................................................................. 220

8.3.5

Construct errors ........................................................................................................ 222

8.3.5.1 How can they be determined?............................................................................... 222

8.3.5.2 Analytical............................................................................................................. 222

8.3.5.3 Graphical ............................................................................................................. 223

8.3.5.4 Numerical ............................................................................................................ 223

8.3.5.4.1 General case................................................................................................... 223

8.3.5.4.2 Specific case .................................................................................................. 223

8.3.6

Sample plots ............................................................................................................. 224

8.3.6.1 “dH/dt vs. (HβηHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.36 ................................................................... 225

8.3.6.2 “dH/dt vs. (HβηHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.37.................................................................. 226

8.3.6.3 “dH/dt vs. (HβηHα)-1” (iii): Figure 4.38................................................................. 227

8.3.6.4 “dH/dt vs. (HβηHα)-1” (iv): Figure 4.39 ................................................................. 228

8.3.6.5 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.40 ................................................................ 229

8.3.6.6 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.41 ............................................................... 230

8.3.6.7 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (iii): Figure 4.42 .............................................................. 231

8.3.6.8 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (iv): Figure 4.43............................................................... 232

8.3.6.9 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (v): Figure 4.44................................................................ 233

8.3.6.10 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (vi): Figure 4.45............................................................... 234

8.3.6.11 “|H| vs. (HβηHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.46 ....................................................................... 235

8.3.6.12 “|H| vs. (HβηHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.47 ...................................................................... 236

8.3.6.13 “TU2,3 vs. |H|”: Figure 4.48 ................................................................................... 237

8.3.6.14 “TU2 vs. |H|”: Figure 4.49 ..................................................................................... 238

8.3.7

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 239

8.4

Cosmological evolution process ...................................................................................... 241

8.5

History of the Universe.................................................................................................... 243

8.5.1

According to the Standard Model (SM)..................................................................... 243

8.5.1.1 Graphical representation (i) .................................................................................. 243

8.5.1.2 Graphical representation (ii) ................................................................................. 244

8.5.1.3 Graphical representation (iii) ................................................................................ 245

8.5.1.4 Graphical representation (iv) ................................................................................ 246

8.5.2

According to EGM.................................................................................................... 247

8.6

EGM Cosmological construct limitations ........................................................................ 248

8.6.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 248

8.6.2

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 248

8.6.3

Construct .................................................................................................................. 248

8.6.3.1 The mass limit “ML” ............................................................................................ 248

8.6.3.2 The size limit “rL” ................................................................................................ 248

8.6.3.3 The age limit “tL” ................................................................................................. 249

8.6.4

Boundary ratio .......................................................................................................... 249

8.6.5

Sample calculations .................................................................................................. 249

8.6.6

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 249

8.7

Are conventional radio telescopes, practical tools for gravitational astronomy? ............... 250

8.7.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 250

15

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.7.2

8.7.3

8.7.4

8.7.5

9

Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 250

Construct .................................................................................................................. 250

Sample calculations .................................................................................................. 251

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 251

Gravitational Cosmology .................................................................................................. 253

Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 253

9.1

Gravitational propagation: the mechanism for interaction ................................................ 254

9.1.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 254

9.1.2

Construct .................................................................................................................. 255

9.1.2.1 Broadband............................................................................................................ 255

9.1.2.2 Narrowband ......................................................................................................... 255

9.1.3

Testing...................................................................................................................... 257

9.1.3.1 Newtonian............................................................................................................ 257

9.1.3.2 Relativistic ........................................................................................................... 257

9.1.3.3 PV........................................................................................................................ 258

9.1.4

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 258

9.2

Gravitational interference: the mechanism of interaction ................................................. 259

9.2.1

Synopsis ................................................................................................................... 259

9.2.2

Construct .................................................................................................................. 259

9.2.2.1 Broadband............................................................................................................ 259

9.2.2.2 Narrowband ......................................................................................................... 260

9.2.3

Concluding remarks.................................................................................................. 262

9.2.3.1 Broadband............................................................................................................ 262

9.2.3.2 Narrowband ......................................................................................................... 262

10

Particle Cosmology........................................................................................................ 263

Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 263

10.1

Derivation of the Photon and Graviton mass-energies lower limit.................................... 264

10.2

Derivation of the Photon and Graviton RMS charge radii lower limit .............................. 264

10.3

Derivation of the Photon charge threshold ....................................................................... 264

10.4

Derivation of the Photon charge upper limit..................................................................... 265

10.5

Derivation of the Photon charge lower limit..................................................................... 266

10.6

Other useful relationships ................................................................................................ 266

11

Equation Summary ....................................................................................................... 269

**11.1 Gravitation ...................................................................................................................... 269
**

11.1.1 “Stg” ......................................................................................................................... 269

11.1.2 “ωΩ_2”....................................................................................................................... 269

11.1.3 “aEGM_ωΩ” ................................................................................................................. 269

11.1.4 “StG”......................................................................................................................... 269

11.1.5 “ωΩ_3”....................................................................................................................... 269

16

www.deltagroupengineering.com

11.1.6

11.1.7

11.1.8

11.1.9

11.1.10

11.1.11

11.1.12

11.1.13

11.1.14

11.1.15

11.1.16

11.1.17

11.1.18

11.1.19

11.1.20

“λΩ_3” ....................................................................................................................... 269

“G” ........................................................................................................................... 269

“ωPV(nPV,r,M)3” ........................................................................................................ 269

“StJ”.......................................................................................................................... 269

“CΩ_J1, CΩ_Jω” ........................................................................................................... 269

“nΩ_2” ....................................................................................................................... 270

“KDepp” ..................................................................................................................... 270

“KPV”........................................................................................................................ 270

“TL”.......................................................................................................................... 270

“ωg”.......................................................................................................................... 270

“ngg” ......................................................................................................................... 270

“rω”........................................................................................................................... 270

“aPV”......................................................................................................................... 270

“ag”........................................................................................................................... 270

“gav” ......................................................................................................................... 270

**11.2 Planck-Particles............................................................................................................... 270
**

11.2.1 “mx”.......................................................................................................................... 270

11.2.2 “λx” .......................................................................................................................... 270

11.2.3 “ρm, ρS” .................................................................................................................... 271

11.2.4 “r3, M3”..................................................................................................................... 271

11.3 SBH’s.............................................................................................................................. 271

11.3.1 “StBH” ....................................................................................................................... 271

11.3.2 “ωΩ_4”....................................................................................................................... 271

11.3.3 “rS” ........................................................................................................................... 271

11.3.4 “nΩ_4” ....................................................................................................................... 271

11.3.5 “nΩ_5” ....................................................................................................................... 271

11.3.6 “nBH” ........................................................................................................................ 271

11.3.7 “ωΩ_5”....................................................................................................................... 271

11.3.8 “ωBH”........................................................................................................................ 271

11.3.9 “ωΩ_6”....................................................................................................................... 271

11.3.10 “ωΩ_7”....................................................................................................................... 271

11.3.11 “ωPV_1” ..................................................................................................................... 272

11.3.12 “ng”........................................................................................................................... 272

11.4 Cosmology ...................................................................................................................... 272

11.4.1 “r2, M2”..................................................................................................................... 272

11.4.2 “λy” .......................................................................................................................... 272

11.4.3 “KU” ......................................................................................................................... 272

11.4.4 “AU” ......................................................................................................................... 272

11.4.5 “RU” ......................................................................................................................... 272

11.4.6 “HU, HU2, HU5, |H|” ................................................................................................... 272

11.4.7 “Hα” ......................................................................................................................... 272

11.4.8 “ρU, ρU2”................................................................................................................... 273

11.4.9 “MU”......................................................................................................................... 273

11.4.10 “KT” ......................................................................................................................... 273

11.4.11 “TW” ......................................................................................................................... 273

11.4.12 “StT” ......................................................................................................................... 273

11.4.13 “TU, TU2, TU3, TU4, TU5” ............................................................................................ 273

11.4.14 “dTdt, dT2dt2, dT3dt3”................................................................................................. 274

17

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**11.4.15 “dHdt, dH2dt2” ........................................................................................................... 274
**

11.4.16 “t1, t2, t3, t4, t5” .......................................................................................................... 274

11.5 ZPF ................................................................................................................................. 275

11.5.1 “ΩEGM” ..................................................................................................................... 275

11.5.2 “ΩZPF” ...................................................................................................................... 275

11.5.3 “UZPF”....................................................................................................................... 275

11.6 EGM Construct limits...................................................................................................... 275

11.6.1 “ML”......................................................................................................................... 275

11.6.2 “rL” ........................................................................................................................... 275

11.6.3 “tL” ........................................................................................................................... 275

11.6.4 “ML / rL = MEGM / REGM = tL / tEGM” .......................................................................... 275

11.7 Particle-Physics ............................................................................................................... 275

11.7.1 “mγγ2” ....................................................................................................................... 275

11.7.2 “mgg2” ....................................................................................................................... 275

11.7.3 “rγγ2” ......................................................................................................................... 275

11.7.4 “rgg2”......................................................................................................................... 276

11.7.5 “Nγ” .......................................................................................................................... 276

11.7.6 “Qγ” .......................................................................................................................... 276

11.7.7 “Qγγ”......................................................................................................................... 276

11.7.8 “Qγγ2”........................................................................................................................ 276

11.7.9 “tL / TL = mγγ / mγγ2 = Qγγ / Qγγ2”................................................................................ 276

11.8

Other useful relationships ................................................................................................ 276

11.9

Quick symbol guide......................................................................................................... 277

APPENDIX 4.A......................................................................................................................... 281

Thermodynamic “Π” Groupings of BH’s .................................................................................... 281

Conventional calculation of SPBH temperature “TBH” ................................................................ 281

“TU2 : TBH”.................................................................................................................................. 282

Approximations of “TU2(t1-1)” ..................................................................................................... 282

•

“1st” Form................................................................................................................. 282

•

“2nd” Form ................................................................................................................ 284

Approximation of “λx” in terms of physical constants ................................................................. 284

Physical interpretation of “λx”..................................................................................................... 285

Bibliography 4........................................................................................................................... 287

APPENDIX 4.B ......................................................................................................................... 291

Quinta Essentia – Part 3 .............................................................................................................. 291

•

MathCad 8 Professional: calculation engine .............................................................. 291

a. Computational environment ........................................................................................ 291

18

www.deltagroupengineering.com

b.

c.

e.

f.

g.

h.

i.

j.

k.

l.

m.

n.

o.

p.

q.

r.

•

a.

b.

c.

d.

e.

**Units of measure (definitions) ..................................................................................... 291
**

Constants (definitions) ................................................................................................ 292

Planck characteristics (definitions) .............................................................................. 293

Astronomical statistics ................................................................................................ 293

Other........................................................................................................................... 293

Arbitrary values for illustrational purposes.................................................................. 293

PV / ZPF equations ..................................................................................................... 294

Casimir equations........................................................................................................ 295

Fundamental particle equations ................................................................................... 296

Particle summary matrix 3.1........................................................................................ 300

Particle summary matrix 3.2........................................................................................ 301

Particle summary matrix 3.3........................................................................................ 302

Particle summary matrix 3.4........................................................................................ 303

Similarity equations .................................................................................................... 304

Calculation results....................................................................................................... 305

Resonant Casimir cavity design specifications (experimental)..................................... 313

MathCad 12: High precision calculation results ........................................................ 315

Computational environment ........................................................................................ 315

Particle summary matrix 3.1........................................................................................ 315

Particle summary matrix 3.2........................................................................................ 316

Particle summary matrix 3.3........................................................................................ 317

Particle summary matrix 3.4........................................................................................ 318

**Quinta Essentia – Part 4 .............................................................................................................. 321
**

•

MathCad 8 Professional ............................................................................................ 321

a. Complete simulation ................................................................................................... 321

i.

Computational environment.................................................................................... 321

ii.

Units of measure (definitions)................................................................................. 321

iii. Constants (definitions)............................................................................................ 321

iv. Astronomical statistics............................................................................................ 321

v.

Characterisation of the gravitational spectrum ........................................................ 321

1. “Ω → Ω1, nΩ → nΩ_1, ωΩ → ωΩ_1”....................................................................... 321

2. “g → ωΩ” ............................................................................................................. 323

i. “ωΩ_1 → ωΩ_2” ................................................................................................. 323

ii. “ωΩ_1 → ωΩ_3” ................................................................................................. 325

3. “g → ωPV3” .......................................................................................................... 325

4. “SωΩ → c⋅Um” ...................................................................................................... 326

5. “CΩ_J” .................................................................................................................. 326

vi. Derivation of “Planck-Particle” and SBH characteristics ........................................ 327

1. “λx, mx”................................................................................................................ 327

2. “ρm(λxλh,mxmh), Um(λxλh,mxmh)”......................................................................... 329

3. Physicality of “Kλ”............................................................................................... 329

4. “KPV @ λxλh”....................................................................................................... 329

i. “KPV = Undefined”........................................................................................... 329

ii. “KDepp = KPV”................................................................................................... 331

5. “ωΩ_3” .................................................................................................................. 332

6. “ωΩ_4” .................................................................................................................. 333

7. “rS”....................................................................................................................... 334

i. “rS(λxλh)” ......................................................................................................... 334

ii. “rS(ΜΒΗ), rS(RΒΗ)” ........................................................................................... 334

iii. “MBH(rS)” ........................................................................................................ 335

19

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**“r → RBH” ............................................................................................................ 336
**

i. “nΩ → nΩ_4, nΩ_5, nBH” ..................................................................................... 336

ii. “ωΩ → ωΩ_5, ωBH” ........................................................................................... 337

iii. “ωΩ_6, ωΩ_7, ωPV_1” .......................................................................................... 338

9. “TL” ..................................................................................................................... 339

10. “ωg, ngg”............................................................................................................... 340

11. BH’s..................................................................................................................... 341

vii. Fundamental Cosmology ........................................................................................ 343

1. “Hα, HU” .............................................................................................................. 343

i. “AU, RU, HU”.................................................................................................... 343

ii. “Hα”................................................................................................................. 344

iii. “ρU”................................................................................................................. 344

iv. “MU”................................................................................................................ 345

2. “TU” ..................................................................................................................... 345

3. “TU → TU2”.......................................................................................................... 346

4. “TU2 → Ro, MG, HU2, ρU2” .................................................................................... 347

5. “UZPF” .................................................................................................................. 349

viii. Advanced Cosmology............................................................................................. 349

1. “nΩ_2 → nΩ_6”....................................................................................................... 349

2. “KU2 → KU3”........................................................................................................ 350

3. “HU2 → HU3, TU2 → TU3” ..................................................................................... 350

4. “HU3 → HU4, TU3 → TU4” ..................................................................................... 350

5. “HU4 → HU5, TU4 → TU5” ..................................................................................... 350

6. “HU3, HU4, HU5, TU3, TU4, TU5” ............................................................................. 351

7. Time dependent characteristics............................................................................. 351

8. History of the Universe ........................................................................................ 360

9. “ML, rL, tL, tEGM” .................................................................................................. 361

10. Radio astronomy .................................................................................................. 362

ix. Gravitational Cosmology........................................................................................ 363

x.

Particle Cosmology ................................................................................................ 365

b. Calculation engine ...................................................................................................... 367

i.

Computational environment.................................................................................... 367

ii.

Standard relationships............................................................................................. 367

iii. Derived constants ................................................................................................... 367

iv. Base approximations / simplifications..................................................................... 368

v.

SBH mass and radius.............................................................................................. 369

vi. “nΩ”........................................................................................................................ 370

vii. “ωΩ, TΩ, λΩ”........................................................................................................... 371

viii. Gravitation ............................................................................................................. 373

ix. Flux intensity.......................................................................................................... 374

x.

Photon and Graviton populations ............................................................................ 376

xi. Hubble constant and CMBR temperature................................................................ 377

xii. SBH temperature .................................................................................................... 384

xiii. ZPF ........................................................................................................................ 385

xiv. Cosmological limits................................................................................................ 386

xv. Particle Cosmology ................................................................................................ 386

•

MathCad 12 .............................................................................................................. 389

c. High precision calculation engine................................................................................ 389

i.

Computational environment.................................................................................... 389

ii.

Astronomical statistics............................................................................................ 389

iii. Derived constants ................................................................................................... 389

8.

20

www.deltagroupengineering.com

iv.

d.

Algorithm............................................................................................................... 389

Various forms of the derived constants........................................................................ 390

**Periodic Table of the Elements ................................................................................................. 391
**

Notes

22, 24, 56, 78, 92, 102, 105, 106, 108, 115, 116, 120, 124, 127, 128, 136, 145, 151,

153, 167, 173, 174, 179, 184, 191, 194, 200, 216, 240, 242, 251, 252, 267, 268, 279,

280, 286, 290, 314, 319, 320, 366, 388, 390, 392

ERRATA

21

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

22

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Scientific Achievements

The physical characteristics derived herein (from 1st principles), based upon a single paradigm [i.e.

the application of Buckingham “Π” Theory (BPT) and Dimensional Analysis Techniques (DAT’s)]

may be articulated as follows (many of which are experimentally verified or implied),

• Astro-Physics

1. Derivation of the minimum physical “Schwarzschild-Black-Hole” (SBH) mass and radius.

2. Derivation of maximum permissible energy density.

3. Derivation of the harmonic mode and frequency characteristics and profiles of a SBH.

4. Derivation of the SBH singularity radius.

• Cosmology

• General

5. Derivation of the minimum gravitational lifetime of matter.

6. Derivation of the present Cosmological age.

7. Derivation of the present Cosmological size.

8. Derivation of the total Cosmological mass.

9. Derivation of the present Cosmological mass-density.

• Hubble constant

10. Derivation of the Hubble constant at the instant of the “Big-Bang”.

11. Derivation of the maximum Hubble constant since the “Big-Bang”.

12. Derivation of the present Hubble constant within experimental tolerance.

13. Derivation of the Hubble constant in the time domain.

14. Derivation of the rates of change of the Hubble constant in the time domain.

• Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) temperature

15. Derivation of the CMBR temperature at the instant of the “Big-Bang”.

16. Derivation of the maximum Cosmological temperature since the “Big-Bang”.

17. Derivation of the present CMBR temperature within experimental tolerance.

18. Derivation of the CMBR temperature in the time domain.

19. Derivation of the rates of change of the CMBR temperature in the time domain.

• Evolutionary processes

20. Categorisation of the Cosmological evolution process into two regimes: comprised of

four distinct periods.

21. Determination of the impact of “Dark Matter / Energy” on the Hubble constant and

CMBR temperature.

22. Articulation of the precise history of the Universe.

• Cosmological constant

23. Experimentally implicit derivation of the Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) energy density

threshold, yielding an insight into the Cosmological constant.

• Particle-Physics

24. Derivation of the Photon and Graviton mass-energies lower limit.

25. Derivation of the Photon and Graviton Root-Mean-Square (RMS) charge radii lower limit.

26. Derivation of the Photon charge threshold.

27. Derivation of the Photon charge upper and lower limits.

Note: where possible, calculated results have been compared to physical measurement. Cognisant

of experimental uncertainty, key predictions herein may be considered to be exact.

23

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

24

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1 Introduction

1.1 The natural philosophy of the Cosmos

1.1.1 Objectives and scope2

The present Hubble constant “H0” and Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR)

temperature “T0” denote two of the most important Cosmological phenomenon to have been

identified in the last hundred years and may hold significant insight into the natural philosophy of

the Cosmos. Experimental measurements of “H0” and “T0” are advancing dramatically and have

raised some important aspects regarding the nature of the Cosmological evolution process.

This text is a companion to “Quinta Essentia – Part 3”, applying a method termed ElectroGravi-Magnetics (EGM). [1-19] Storti et. Al. derived the EGM construct, utilising Dimensional

Analysis Techniques (DAT’s) and Buckingham “Π” Theory (BPT)3, to represent fundamental

particles in harmonic form to high computational precision in favourable agreement with the

Standard Model (SM) of Particle-Physics and experimental measurement.

One of the key findings was that, at a fundamental physical level, mass-energy is distributed

over space-time in only one manner4. The EGM construct has been re-applied to Cosmology with

the following derivational objectives (within experimental tolerance where applicable):

i. The Hubble constant (see: Ch. 7.1, 7.3, 7.6, 8.3).

ii. The CMBR temperature (see: Ch. 7.2, 7.3, 7.5, 8.1, 8.2).

iii. The ZPF energy density threshold (see: Ch. 7.7).

iv. The Cosmological evolution process (see: Ch. 8.4).

v. The history of the Universe (see: Ch. 8.5).

1.1.2 How are these objectives achieved?

1.1.2.1 Synopsis

The primary tool employed to achieve our objectives is similitude5, subject to the following

simplified constraints (see: Ch. 6.1, 7.1 – 7.3),

i. The Cosmos at an instant prior to the “Big-Bang” is termed the “Primordial Universe”. It

was characterised by a single wavefunction with maximum permissible energy density

distributed homogeneously, analogous to a Planck scale particle of radius “λxλh” and mass

“mxmh” such that it was dynamically, kinematically and geometrically similar to a

“Schwarzschild-Black-Hole” (SBH).

ii. The relationship between the “Primordial Universe” and its present visible size obeys the

EGM harmonic representation of fundamental particles.

iii. The “Milky-Way” (MW) Galaxy may be represented as a Planck scale particle of

homogeneous energy density and equivalent total mass. This configuration has been

termed the Galactic Reference Particle (GRP), such that dynamic, kinematic and

geometric similarity exists between the “Primordial Universe” and the GRP.

2

**At the time of commencement of formulation of this text, only the National Institute of Standards
**

and Technology (NIST) 2002 data was available. Subsequently, the NIST 2006 values for physical

constants may differ slightly, but do not change any computed or predicted results herein, or in

“Quinta Essentia – Part 3”, by any significant measure.

3

Refer to the many standard texts relating to DAT’s and BPT.

4

In accordance with Zero-Point-Field equilibria.

5

A reference to DAT’s and BPT.

25

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1.1.2.2 Derivation process

1.1.2.2.1 Hubble constant “HU”

i. Utilising harmonic cut-off frequency in “ωΩ_3” form (see: Ch. 5.2.2), derive an expression

for EGM Flux Intensity “CΩ_J1”: (see: Ch. 5.5),

Output:

St J

C Ω_J1( r , M )

9

. M

2

5

8

r

r

(4.52)

where,

9 .c .

St G

4 .π

4

St J

St G

•

•

•

3.

3 .ω h

4 .π .h

2

9

(4.51)

2

. c

2

9

(4.35)

“c = 299792458(m/s)”.

“h = 6.6260693 x10-34(Js)”.

“ωh = 1 / th = 1 / √(Gh/c5), G = 6.6742 x10-11(m3kg-1s-2)”.

**ii. Derive an expression for the minimum gravitational lifetime of matter “TL”:
**

(see: Ch. 6.7.2.2),

Output:

TL

h

m γγ

(4.196)

where,

• “mγγ” denotes the mass-energy of a Photon defined in [8,10].

• “mγγ = 3.195095 x10-45(eV)”.

iii. Derive an expression for the EGM Hubble constant “HU” utilising the EGM harmonic

representation of fundamental particles: (see: Ch. 7.1),

Output:

λ y r 2, M 2

K U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

ln

1

ln n Ω_2 r 2 , M 2

(4.229)

λ y r 2, M 2

.M

C Ω_J1 λ y r 2 , M 2 .r 3 ,

3

2

C Ω_J1 r 2 , M 2

A U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

H U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

(4.231)

TL

K U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

5

(4.233)

1

A U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

(4.235)

**where, “nΩ_2” denotes the non-refractive form of “nΩ” defined in [4].
**

26

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.1.2.2.2 CMBR temperature “TU”
**

iv. Derive an expression for the average number of Gravitons “ng” radiated by a SBH at

frequency “ω”: (see: Ch. 6.7.1.1),

Output:

n g ω , M BH

E M BH

E g( ω )

(4.177)

**where, “MBH” denotes SBH mass.
**

v. Derive an expression for the value of the EGM Hubble constant at the instant of the “BigBang”, termed the primordial Hubble constant “Hα”: (see: Ch. 7.1.3.2),

Output:

H α r 3, M 3

2.

2. . .

π G ρ m r 3, M 3

3

(4.237)

**vi. Derive an expansive scaling factor “KT” incorporating “ng”, “Hα” and “HU”:
**

(see: Ch. 7.2.3),

Output:

K T r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

n g ω Ω_3 r 3 , M 3 , M 3 .ln

H α r 3, M 3

H U r 2, r 3 , M 2, M 3

(4.240)

**where, “ωΩ_3” has a generalised definition according to,
**

9

ω Ω_3( r , M )

2

M

St G.

5

r

(4.36)

**vii. Derive a thermodynamic scaling factor “TW” incorporating Wien’s displacement constant
**

“KW” and EGM wavelength of the form “λΩ_3”: (see: Ch. 7.2.3),

Output:

T W r 2, r 3, M 2 , M 3

KW

λ Ω_3 R U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3 , M 3

(4.241)

where,

“ωΩ_3(r,M) → ωΩ_3(RU(r2,M2,r3,M3),M3)”

“λΩ_3(RU(r2,M2,r3,M3),M3) = c / ωΩ_3(RU(r2,M2,r3,M3),M3)”

R U r 2, r 3 , M 2, M 3

•

c .A U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

(4.234)

“KW = 2.8977685 x10-3(mK)”.

**viii. Derive an expression for EGM Cosmological temperature “TU” utilising “KT” and “TW”:
**

(see: Ch. 7.2.3),

Output:

T U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

K T r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3 .T W r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

27

(4.242)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.1.2.2.3 “HU → HU2, TU → TU2 → TU3”
**

ix. Derive the minimum physical dimensions of mass and radius for a SBH with maximum

permissible energy density at the Planck scale: (see: Ch. 6.1.3),

Output:

mx

λx

λx

2

(4.71)

4 . 2

π 3

6

(4.72)

**Hence, the dimensions of a SBH at maximum permissible energy density at the Planck scale
**

is given by,

• “Mass = mxmh” when “mh = √(hc/G)”.

• “Radius = λxλh” when “λh = √(Gh/c3)”.

x. Assume that the “Primordial Universe” (i.e. the Universe instantaneously prior to the

“Big-Bang”) is analogous to a SBH of Planck scale dimensions at a condition of maximum

permissible energy density, with radius “r3 = λxλh” and mass “M3 = mxmh = λxmh / 2”:

(see: Ch. 7.3.1),

xi. Formulate generalised expressions for “r2” and “M2” incorporating the EGM adjusted

Planck length and mass: (see: Ch. 7.3.1),

Output:

r2(r) = Kλ⋅r

(4.247)

M2(M) = Km⋅M = Kλ⋅M

(4.248)

**where, “Kλ = Km = [π / 2](1 / 3) ≈ 1.162447” as defined in [13].
**

xii. Simplify “ng”: (see: Ch. 7.3.1, 7.6),

Output:

For “r3 = λxλh” and “M3 = mxmh = λxmh / 2”: “ng[ω,MBH] = ng[ωΩ_3(r3,M3),M3] = 8 / 3”.

xiii. Simplify “Hα”: (see: Ch. 7.3.2),

Output:

H α λ x.λ h , m x.m h

ωh

λx

(4.249)

**For brevity in future applications, let: “Hα = ωh / λx”.
**

xiv. Transform “HU” to “HU2”: (see: Ch. 7.6.1),

Output:

H U2( r , M )

H U K λ .r , λ x.λ h , K m.M , m x.m h

28

(4.276)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**xv. Transform “TU” to “TU2”: (see: Ch. 7.5),
**

Output:

K W .St T .ln

T U2( H )

ωh

λ x.H

9

. H5

(4.275)

**where, “H” denotes a generalised reference to Hubble constant and “StT” is a constant
**

according to.

9

4. 3. 1 . λ x

3 4 c5 π .λ 2

h

3

St T

2

(4.274)

**xvi. Transform “TU2” to “TU3”: (see: Ch. 8.1.3),
**

Output:

T U3 H β

K W .St T .ln

1

Hβ

. H .H

β α

5 .µ

2

(4.318)

**where, “µ = 1 / 3” and “Hβ” denotes a dimensionless range variable such that “1 ≥ Hβ > 0”.
**

xvii. Select values of “r” and “M” for application to “r2(r), M2(M)” utilising the following

measures: (see: Ch. 7.3.2):

Input:

i.

ii.

iii.

iv.

v.

vi.

**“r = Ro” denotes the mean distance from the Sun to the MW Galactic centre.
**

“Ro = 8(kpc)” as defined by the PDG [20] (“kpc” = kilo-parsec).

“M = MG” denotes the total mass (i.e. visible + dark) of the MW Galaxy.

“MG ≈ 6 x1011” solar masses as defined by [21].

“H0 = 71(km/s/Mpc)” as defined by the PDG [22] (“Mpc” = Mega-parsec).

“T0 = 2.725(K)” as defined by the PDG. [20]

**1.1.2.2.4 Rate of change “dHdt”
**

xviii. Derive a generalised expression for the rate of change of the EGM Hubble constant in the

time domain “dHdt” as a function of the dimensionless range variable “Hγ” such that:

“1 ≥ Hγ > 0” and “Hγ ∝ Hβη”: (see: Ch. 8.3.3),

Output:

dH dt H γ

2

H α .H γ

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2

2

Hγ

.

5µ

Hγ

1

(4.361)

**Note: “dHdt” is alternative notation introduced to replace the typical differential form
**

“dH/dt”, for application in the “MathCad 8 Professional” computational environment.

xix. For solutions where the deceleration parameter is zero, derive an expression for the

magnitude of the EGM Hubble constant “|H|” in the time domain6: (see: Ch. 8.3.3),

Output:

H

d

H

dt

(4.378)

6

**This terminology is an abbreviated reference to “the square-root of the magnitude of the rate of
**

change of the Hubble constant in the time domain”, as indicated by the equation.

29

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**xx. Devise a numerical approximation method facilitating the graphical representation of “|H|”
**

in terms of an indicial power “η” (see: Ch. 8.3.3) such that,

Input:

1

t

H γ .H α

Hγ Hβ

(4.359)

η

(4.376)

**xxi. For non-zero deceleration parameter solutions, derive the ZPF energy density threshold
**

“UZPF” (see: Ch. 7.7),

Output:

3 .c .

H U2 R o , M G

Ω ZPF .

8 .π .G

2

U ZPF

2

(4.315)

where,

Ω ZPF

1

Ω EGM

(4.313)

ρ U2 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

Ω EGM

ρ U2 R o , M G

(4.308)

**xxii. Reduce the expression for the EGM Hubble constant and Cosmological temperature to
**

their simplest functionally dependent forms: “HU5” and “TU5” respectively (see: App. 4.B:

“MathCad 8 Professional – b. Calculation engine – xi”, “MathCad 12 – c. High precision

calculation engine – iv”).

Output:

H U5( r , M )

1 .

ln

TL

T U5( r , M )

( 3 .π )

7 .µ .

256

KW

c

µ

µ

32

2

µ

. µ m

.ln ( 3 π ) . h

4

M

.

.ln

. 4µ

H U5( r , M ) λ h

Hα

2 .µ

7 .µ

2

. r

λh

.

1

π .H α

2

7 .µ

5

.

mh

5 .µ

2

. r

λh

M

2 .µ

2

2

26 .µ

(4.529)

. 2

.H ( r , M ) 5 µ

U5

(4.530)

1.1.3 Sample results

1.1.3.1 Numerical evaluation and analysis

1.1.3.1.1 Cosmological properties

Evaluating “AU”, “RU”, “HU” and “TU” yields,

9

A U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 14.575885 10 .yr

(4.250)

9

R U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 14.575885 10 .Lyr

(4.251)

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 67.084304

km

.

s Mpc

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 2.724752 ( K )

30

(4.254)

(4.255)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

The EGM construct error associated with “HU” and “TU” with respect to expert opinion and

physical measurement is given by,

1 .

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

H0

1 .

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

1 = 5.515064 ( % )

(4.256)

.

1 = 9.08391310

T0

3

(%)

(4.257)

It is possible to calculate the value of “HU” and “TU” based upon the “visible mass only” of

the MW Galaxy by a simple substitution of values (i.e. “M2 / 3 = KmMG / 3”) as follows,

1

km

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , .K m.M G, m x.m h = 67.753267

.

3

s Mpc

(4.262)

1

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , .K m.M G, m x.m h = 2.739618 ( K )

3

(4.263)

**Hence, the magnitude of the impact of “Dark Matter / Energy” on the value of “HU” and “TU” is
**

demonstrated to be “< 1(%)” when compared to the previously derived value according to,

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

1 = 0.987352 ( % )

1

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , .K m.M G, m x.m h

3

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

(4.264)

1 = 0.542607 ( % )

1

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , .K m.M G, m x.m h

3

(4.265)

**A simple test verifying “TU2” is demonstrated below. Since the computed value of
**

“TU2[HU2(Ro,MG/3)]” based upon visible MW Galactic mass “MG/3” is exactly compliant with “TU”

(i.e. “TU = TU2”), no technical error exists. Moreover, the result “TU2(H0) ≈ T0” agrees precisely

with historical expectation (i.e. prior to measurement by satellite) of “T0”.

1

T U2 H U2 R o , .M G

3

T U2 H 0

=

2.739618

2.810842

( K)

(4.277)

**Note: the validation of “TU = TU2” above, also verifies that “HU = HU2”. In addition, it is also
**

demonstrated and numerically verified in “App. 4.B” that “HU2 = HU5”.

The preceding results demonstrate that the impact of “Dark Matter / Energy” on “HU” and

“TU” is very small. This implies that the constitution of the Universe under the EGM construct is

quite different from current thinking. The contemporary view asserted in [23] is that the constitution

of the Universe is,

i. “72(%) Dark Energy”.

ii. “23(%) Dark Matter”.

iii. “4.6(%) Atoms”.

However, the EGM construct generalises the constitution of the Universe as being,

iv. “> 94.4(%) Photons”.

v. “< 1(%) Dark Matter / Energy”.

vi. “4.6(%) Atoms”.

31

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**For solutions where the deceleration parameter is zero, “η” may be numerically
**

approximated utilising the “Given” and “Find” commands within the “MathCad 8 Professional”

computational environment, subject to the constraint that “dHdt” as a function of the present value

of “Hβ” [i.e. “≈ HU2(Ro,MG) / Hα”] raised to an indicial power, is equal to the square of the present

Hubble constant as determined by the EGM construct “HU2(Ro,MG)2” according to the following

algorithm,

Given

dH dt

H U2 R o , M G

η

Hα

H U2 R o , M G

η

1

(4.379)

Find( η )

(4.380)

Hence, “η = 4.595349”.

1.1.3.1.2 Significant temporal ordinates

(See: Ch. 8.3.4)

Significant temporal ordinates of Cosmological evolutionary events (marked on the

proceeding graphs) are given in matrix form as follows,

1

t1

e

5 .µ

10 .µ

t2

e

2

. 1

Hα

2

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

t3 e

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

. 1

Hα

2.206287 2.206287

4.196153 4.196153

2

3

2

. 1

Hα

e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

t5 e

10

42 .

s

**20.932666 20.932666
**

8.385263 8.385263

1

t4

= 6.205726 6.205726

1

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

. 1

Hα

2

1

2

. 1

Hα

(4.384)

where, “t5” denotes the temporal ordinate of the local minima of the “2nd” time derivative of the

Hubble constant (see: Ch. 8.3.3, 8.3.6.10).

32

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.1.3.2 Graphical evaluation and analysis
**

1.1.3.2.1 Average Cosmological temperature vs. age

(See: Ch. 8.2.5.1, 8.2.5.2)

Av. Cosmological Temperature vs. Age

1

Hα

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

t1

3 .1031

1

T U3 e

T U3 e

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

2 .1031

2

10 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

2

.

.

.

.

.

2

5µ 5µ 5µ

3

1 .1031

1 .10

43

1 .10

42

1 .10

41

1 .10

40

1 .10

1

39

1 .10

38

1 .10

37

1 .10

36

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

Figure 4.24,

Av. Cosmological Temperature vs. Age

t2t3

3 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

T U3 e

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

2 .1031

2

1

10 .µ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

3

1 .1031

1 .10

43

1 .10

42

1 .10

41

1 .10

40

1 .10

1

39

1 .10

38

1 .10

37

1 .10

36

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

Figure 4.25,

33

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.1.3.2.2 Magnitude of the Hubble constant vs. Cosmological age
**

(See: Ch. 8.3.6.11, 8.3.6.12)

Mag. of Hubble Cons. vs. Cosm. Age

2.5 .10

dH dt H β

dH dt e

η

1

2

5 .µ

2 .10

(Hz)

dH dt e

1

Hα

t1

42

1

1.5 .1042

1

dH dt e

42

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

1 .1042

5 .10

41

0

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

36

35

34

33

32

31

30

1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

Figure 4.46,

Mag. of Hubble Cons. vs. Cosm. Age

2.5 .10

dH dt H β

dH dt e

η

1

2

5 .µ

2 .10

(Hz)

dH dt e

1

Hα

t4

42

1

1.5 .1042

1

dH dt e

42

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

2

4

5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

1 .1042

5 .10

41

0

43

42

41

40

39

38

37

36

35

34

33

32

31

30

1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10 1 .10

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

Figure 4.47,

34

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.1.3.2.3 Cosmological evolution process
**

Based upon the preceding graphical output, the Cosmological evolution process may be

categorised into two regimes, comprised of four distinct periods (i.e. three inflationary and one

expansive) as follows,

Time

Temperature

Hubble Constant

0 < t < Hα-1

-∞ < TU2 < 0

+∞ > |H| > Hα

-1

0 → Hα

-∞ → 0

+∞ → Hα

Hα-1 ≤ t < t1

0 ≤ TU2 < TU2(t1-1)

Hα ≥ |H| > 0

Hα-1 → t1

0 → TU2(t1-1)

Hα → 0

-1

t1 ≤ t < t4

TU2(t1 ) ≥ TU2 > TU2(t4-1)

0 ≤ |H| < √|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]|

t1 → t4

TU2(t1-1) → TU2(t4-1)

0 → √|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]|

-1

TU2(t4 ) ≥ TU2 ≥ TU2(HU2)

√|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]| ≥ |H| ≥ HU2

t4 ≤ t < AU

t4 → AU

TU2(t4-1) → TU2(HU2)

√|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]| → HU2

Description

Primordial Inflation (prior to the “Big-Bang”): the Universe may be described as

“inverted and non-physical” such that the interior of the Cosmos existed outside

the exterior boundary “RBH” in accordance with the “Primordial Universe” model

described in Ch. (7, 8) such that:

1. “TU2” increases from negative infinity to zero.

2. “dHdt” increases from negative infinity to “-Hα2”.

3. “|H|” decreases from positive infinity to “Hα”.

Thermal Inflation: the period from the instant of the “Big-Bang” to the instant of

maximum Cosmological temperature such that:

4. “TU2” increases from zero to its maximum value “TU2(t1-1)”.

5. “dHdt” increases from “-Hα2” to zero.

6. “|H|” decreases from “Hα” to zero.

Hubble Inflation: the period from the instant of maximum Cosmological

temperature to the instant of maximum post-primordial “|H|” such that:

7. “TU2” decreases from its maximum value to “TU2(t4-1)”.

8. “dHdt” increases from zero to its maximum physical value “dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]”.

9. “|H|” increases from zero to its maximum physical value “√|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]|”.

Hubble Expansion: the period from the maximum post-primordial “|H|” to the

present day such that:

10. “TU2” decreases from “TU2(t4-1)” to “TU2(HU2)”.

11. “dHdt” decreases from its maximum physical value to “HU22”.

12. “|H|” decreases from its maximum physical value to “HU2”.

Symbol

Definition / Value

The EGM Hubble constant at the instant of the “Big-Bang”:

Hα

≈ 2.742004 x1042(Hz) ≈ 8.460941 x1061(km/s/Mpc)

-Hα2

≈ -7.518587 x1084(Hz2) ≈ -7.158752 x10123(km/s/Mpc)2

HU2

The present value of the EGM Hubble constant:

= HU2(Ro,MG) ≈ 67.084304(km/s/Mpc)

HU22

≈ 4.500304 x103(km/s/Mpc)2

H0

The PDG Hubble constant: ≈ 71(km/s/Mpc)

H02

≈ 5.041 x103(km/s/Mpc)2

Hα-1

The instant of the “Big-Bang”: ≈ 3.646967 x10-43(s)

t1

The instant of max. Cosmological temperature: ≈ 2.206287 x10-42(s)

Physical @ {RBH ≥ rS}

Non-Physical

@ {RBH < rS}

Period

Primordial

Inflation

Thermal

Inflation

Hubble

Inflation

Hubble

Expansion

Regime

35

www.deltagroupengineering.com

t4

AU

TU2(Hα)

TU2(t1-1)

TU2(t4-1)

TU2(HU2)

T0

dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]

√|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]|

RU

2

Hα ⋅(dHdt[(t4Hα)-1])-1

Hα⋅(√|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]|)-1

**The instant of maximum physical “|H|”: ≈ 2.093267 x10-41(s)
**

The EGM Cosmological age: = HU2-1 ≈ 14.575885 x109(yr)

The EGM Cosmological temperature at the instant of the “Big-Bang”:

= 0(K)

The Maximum EGM Cosmological temperature:

≈ 3.195518 x1031(K)

The EGM Cosmological temperature at the instant of maximum physical

“|H|”: ≈ 2.059945 x1031(K)

The present EGM Cosmological temperature:

= TU3(HU2Hα-1) ≈ 2.724752(K)

The present experimentally measured CMBR temperature: ≈ 2.725(K)

The approximated maximum rate of change of the physical EGM

Hubble constant:

≈ 1.553518 x1084(Hz2) ≈ 1.479167 x10123(km/s/Mpc)2

The approximated maximum physical “|H|”:

≈ 1.246402 x1042(Hz) ≈ 3.845994 x1061(km/s/Mpc)

The EGM Cosmological size: = c⋅HU2-1 ≈ 14.575885 x109(Lyr)

≈ 4.839718

≈ 2.199936

Table 4.10,

Time

0

-1

Hα ≈ 3.646967 x10-43(s)

t1 ≈ 2.206287 x10-42(s)

t4 ≈ 2.093267 x10-41(s)

AU ≈ 14.575885 x109(yr)

TU2 (K)

dHdt (km/s/Mpc)2

-∞

-∞

0

≈ -7.158752 x10123

31

0

≈ 3.195518 x10

31

≈ 2.059945 x10

≈ 1.479167 x10123

≈ 2.724752

≈ 4.500304 x103

Table 4.11,

|H|| (km/s/Mpc)

+∞

≈ 8.460941 x1061

0

≈ 3.845994 x1061

≈ 67.084304

**1.1.4 History of the Universe according to EGM
**

Utilising “TU2”, the history of the Universe may be articulated as follows,

Epoch or Event

Time Domain

t

Primordial epoch

Grand unification epoch

Electroweak / Quark Epoch

Lepton Epoch

Boundary Temperature Value

1

T U2 H α = 0 ( K )

Hα

1

< t 10

34 .

(s)

Hα

10-34 < t(s) ≤ 10-10

10-10 < t(s) ≤ 102

1

T U2

10

34 .

10

10 .

(s)

1

T U2

T U2

. 28 ( K )

= 1.92400510

. 15 ( K )

= 3.43308810

(s)

1

2.

.

= 1.01325410

( K)

9

10 ( s )

36

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Photon Epoch

Universe becomes transparent

102 < t(s) ≤ 1013

1013(s) ≈ 3 x105(yr)

T U2

3 x105 < t(yr) ≤ 109

T U2

1

13 .

10

= 978.724031 ( K )

(s)

1

9.

= 11.838588 ( K )

10 ( yr )

109 < t(yr) ≤ 5 x109

First Supernovae

T U2

5 x109 < t(yr) ≤ 14.58 x109

Present Epoch

1

9.

5 .10 ( yr )

= 4.898955 ( K )

T U2 H U2 R o , M G

= 2.724752 ( K )

Table 4.12,

T U2

1

T U2

T U2

1 .( day )

1

.

31 ( day )

T U2

T U2

T U2

1

1 .( s )

1

1 .( yr )

1

2

10 .( yr )

1

3.

1

4.

10 ( yr )

5.

10 ( yr )

1

T U2

6.

10 ( yr )

1

T U2

7.

10 ( yr )

T U2

T U2

T U2

10 ( yr )

T U2

1

T U2

1

. 7

2.52413210

521.528169

.

3.86401510

147.71262

6

= 1.00307810

. 6

41.823796

1

. 4

8.07751510

11.838588

9

10 .( yr )

.

2.29089210

3.35005

1

.

6.49496110

0.947724

8

10 .( yr )

4

3

( K)

10 .

10

T U2

. 10 1.84076810

. 3

1.2497710

( yr )

1

11 .

10

( yr )

37

(4.405)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1.1.5 Discussion

1.1.5.1 Conceptualization

1.1.5.1.1 “λx”

A physical interpretation of “λx” is possible utilising the Stefan-Boltzmann Law by

considering the energy flux emitted from a “Black-Body” and equating it to the peak average

Cosmological temperature. “λx” is shown to be proportional to the “4th power-root” of the energy

flux of the Universe at the peak average Cosmological temperature (see: App. 4.A).

1.1.5.1.2 “TL”

The minimum gravitational lifetime of matter “TL” is a simple concept to embrace by

considering all matter to represent a vast store of Gravitons within, being ejected at a uniform rate

with an emission frequency of “ωg” (see: Ch. 6.7.2.2, 6.8).

1.1.5.1.3 “CΩ_J”

The initial step in conceptualizing the method of solution for the derivation of the Hubble

constant and CMBR temperature presented herein is to understand the nature of EGM Flux

Intensity “CΩ_J”. The EGM construct represents gravitational fields as a spectrum of conjugate

wavefunction pairs, each comprising of a population of Photons.

The spectrum is gravitationally dominated by the energy of the population of conjugate

Photon pairs at the harmonic cut-off frequency7 “ωΩ” (see: Ch. 5.4). Subsequently, all gravitational

objects may be usefully represented by approximation as wavefunction radiators of a single

population of conjugate Photon pairs (see: Ch. 9.2.2.2, 9.2.3.2).

The EGM spectrum is derived from the application of Fourier Series Harmonics, involving

the hybridization of “2” spectra (i.e. an amplitude spectrum and a frequency spectrum). The

relationship between “CΩ_J” and harmonic cut-off mode “nΩ” (which also denotes the total number

of modes in the PV spectrum8) is analogous to the relationship between the amplitude and frequency

spectra inherent in Fourier Series Harmonics. Thus,

i. “CΩ_J” decreases with Cosmological expansion and is analogous to the decrease in PV

spectral amplitude as the distance to the subject increases (i.e. the gravitational influence

decreases).

ii. Instantaneously after the “Big-Bang”, there were no Galaxies and as the Universe

expanded, energy condensed into matter and the EGM spectrum developed into its current

form such that matter radiates a spectrum of conjugate wavefunction pairs, each

comprising of a population of Photons. Therefore, a single frequency mode describing the

“Primordial Universe” becomes “many modes” when describing matter in the present state

of the Universe. Hence, “nΩ” increases with Cosmological expansion as the distance to the

subject increases.

iii. EGM finds the convergent solution relating “2” spectra of opposing gradient. That is,

“CΩ_J” decreases and “nΩ” increases as the Universe expands.

iv. For solutions to “ωΩ” where the Refractive Index “KPV” approaches unity9, it is

demonstrated that “ωΩ → ωΩ_3” (see: Ch. 5.1, 5.2), consequently “CΩ_J” may be simplified

7

**i.e. the high-end terminal spectral frequency.
**

The PV spectrum is a bandwidth of the EGM spectrum.

9

The typical representation of “KPV” is an isomorphic weak field approximation to General

Relativity (GR).

8

38

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**to “CΩ_J1” (see: Ch. 5.5.1) and a definition stated as follows: EGM Flux Intensity is a
**

representation of gravitational field strength (i.e. the gradient in the energy density of the

space-time manifold) expressed in “Jansky’s” (Jy).

v. The gravitational forces governing the formation of the “Milky-Way” Galaxy are

equivalent to the gravitational forces responsible for the current state of the Universe as a

whole. Subsequently, the average EGM Flux Intensity of the “Milky-Way” Galaxy is

proportional to the average value of the present Universe and the peak value of the

“Primordial Universe” instantaneously prior to the “Big-Bang”. This means that the EGM

Flux Intensity of the “Milky-Way” Galaxy acts a baseline reference.

1.1.5.1.4 “Stω”

The EGM harmonic representation of fundamental particles “Stω” demonstrates that the

mass-energy distribution over the space-time manifold at the elementary level, utilising the

condition of ZPF equilibria, occurs in only one manner. The significance of this is that it provokes

an obvious question with respect to Cosmology. That is: “perhaps it applies on a Cosmological

scale?” Simply described, the representation works by expressing the values of “ωΩ” of two

fundamental particles10, as an integer ratio (i.e. a harmonic of the reference particle).

Subsequently, it follows that “CΩ_J” may be expressed in a similar manner as it is derived

utilising “ωΩ”. Thus, if the EGM harmonic representation of fundamental particles with respect to

mass-energy distribution over the space-time manifold were universally valid, we would expect that

in order to apply it cosmologically:

i. The ratio of the presently observable Cosmological size “rf”, to the initial size “ri” of the

“Primordial Universe” instantaneously prior to the “Big-Bang”, is proportional to the

corresponding EGM Flux Intensity {i.e. “(rf / ri) ∝ [CΩ_J1(rf) / CΩ_J1(ri)]”}.

ii. The value of “CΩ_J” at the periphery of the “Primordial Universe” (i.e. instantaneously

prior to the “Big-Bang”) is substantially greater than the value at the edge of the presently

observable Universe. That is, the gradient of the energy density of the “Primordial

Universe”, instantaneously prior to the “Big-Bang”, was substantially greater than the

gradient of the energy density at the periphery of the presently observable Universe.

iii. Since the values of wavefunction amplitude in the EGM spectrum decrease inversely with

“nΩ”, and “nΩ” increases with radial displacement, it follows that “some sort” of naturally

logarithmic or exponential relationship should exist between the ratio of the sizes

described above and the associated EGM Flux Intensities.

iv. “Stω9” represents the harmonic relationship between the values of “ωΩ” of two

dimensionally similar particles. Hence, recognising that the frequency and time domains

are interchangeable, we may apply “Stω9” as the ratio of “TL” to the present “Hubble age”

of the Universe by the EGM method “AU”. Hence, it follows that the ratio of the sizes

described above is proportional to the ratio “TL : AU” (see: Ch. 6.7.2.2).

1.1.5.2 Dynamic, kinematic and geometric similarity

1.1.5.2.1 “HU”

The “Primordial Universe” was analogous to a spherical particle on the Planck scale with

radius “r1” and homogeneous mass distribution “M1”, described by a single wavefunction whereas

the presently observable Universe is described by a spectrum of wavefunctions. The maximum

EGM Flux Intensity measured by an observer at the edge of the “Primordial Universe” is given by

“CΩ_J1(r1,M1)”.

10

**One of them being an arbitrarily selected reference particle from which to compare all others.
**

39

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Matter radiates Gravitons11 at a spectrum of frequencies such that the Cosmological majority
**

of it exists in Photonic form, resulting in an approximately homogeneous mass-energy distribution

throughout the Universe whereby any Galactic formation is dynamically, kinematically and

geometrically equivalent to a spherical particle of homogeneous mass distribution and may be

represented as a Planck scale object to be utilised as a Galactic Reference Particle (GRP).

The associated EGM Flux Intensity of the GRP is given by “CΩ_J1(r2,M2)” where, “r2”

denotes the mean “H0” measurement distance12 to the Galactic centre and “M2” represents total

Galactic mass (i.e. visible + dark). The definition of “r2” comes from the scientific requirement to

compare calculation or prediction to measurement. Subsequently, one should also utilise parameters

within the same frame of reference as the measurement, against which the construct is being tested.

It is not known by physical validation that “H0” is measured as being the same from all

locations in the Universe. It is believed to be the case by contemporary theory; however it is not

factually known to be true. To verify it physically, one would be required to perform the “H0”

measurement from a significantly different location in space. Thus, to minimise potential modelling

errors, we shall confine “r2” to the same frame of reference13 as the measurement of “H0” (see: Ch.

7.1).

1.1.5.2.2 “TU”

EGM defines the “Primordial Universe” as a single mode wavefunction, therefore any

temperature calculation must be scaled accordingly for application to black-body radiation (i.e.

black-bodies emit a spectrum of thermal frequencies, not just one). Hence, we would expect that the

peak CMBR temperature since the “Big-Bang” is proportional to the average number of Gravitons

being radiated per harmonic period by the “Primordial Universe” instantaneously prior to the “BigBang” (see: Ch. 7.2).

1.1.6 Concluding remarks

⇒ The CBMR temperature is a function of the Hubble constant.

⇒ The Hubble constant and CBMR temperature instantaneously prior to the “Big-Bang” is

calculated to be:

• Hα = ωh / λx ≈ 8.460941 x1061(km/s/Mpc).

• TU2[Hα] = 0(K).

⇒ Physical Laws become real instantaneously after the “Big-Bang”. For example, the “2nd Law

of Thermodynamics” is not violated at “TU2[H > Hα]” because “TU2 > 0(K)”.

⇒ The magnitude of the EGM Hubble constant14 at the instant of maximum EGM

Cosmological temperature is graphically illustrated to be:

• |H(t1)| = 0(km/s/Mpc).

⇒ The maximum EGM Cosmological temperature is calculated to be:

• TU2(t1-1) ≈ 3.195518 x1031(K).

11

**Coherent populations of conjugate Photon pairs for a minimum period of “TL”.
**

i.e. the distance relative to the Galactic centre from where a physical measurement of “H0” is

performed.

13

The solar system.

14

This terminology is an abbreviated reference to “the square-root of the magnitude of the rate of

change of the Hubble constant in the time domain”.

12

40

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**⇒ The magnitude of the maximum physical (i.e. post “Big-Bang”) EGM Hubble constant
**

(abbreviated reference) is calculated to be:

• |H(t4)| = √|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]| ≈ 3.845994 x1061(km/s/Mpc).

⇒ The EGM Cosmological temperature at the instant of maximum physical EGM Hubble

constant (abbreviated reference) is calculated to be:

• TU2(t4-1) ≈ 2.059945 x1031(K).

⇒ The present EGM Hubble constant and average EGM Cosmological temperature is

calculated to be:

• HU2(Ro,MG) ≈ 67.084304(km/s/Mpc).

• TU2[HU2(Ro,MG)] ≈ 2.724752(K).

⇒ The present CMBR temperature is measured to be:

• T0 ≈ 2.725 ± 0.001(K).

⇒ The present Hubble constant is stated by the PDG15 to be:

• H0 = 71, +1/-2(km/s/Mpc).

⇒ The EGM Cosmological temperature based upon the PDG Hubble constant is calculated to

be:

• TU2[H0] ≈ 2.810842(K).

⇒ The Universe is composed of:

• “> 94.4(%) Photons”.

• “< 1(%) Dark Matter / Energy”.

• “4.6(%) Atoms”.

⇒ The magnitude of the impact of “Dark Matter / Energy” on the value of the Hubble constant

and CMBR temperature is “< 1(%)”.

⇒ The EGM construct exhibits characteristics satisfying the observed phenomena of

“accelerated Cosmological expansion” due to:

• The ZPF energy density threshold value “UZPF < -2.52 x10-13(Pa)”.

• The gradient of the Hubble constant in the time domain is presently positive.

On a human scale, this translates to levels of ZPF energy according to,

i. “< -252(yJ/mm3)”.

On an astronomical scale, this becomes,

ii. “< -0.252(mJ/km3)”.

iii. “< -7.4 x1012(YJ/pc3)”.

On a Cosmological scale, this becomes,

iv. “< -6.6 x1041(YJ/RU3)”.

The deceleration parameter,

v. “ΩEGM” may be utilised to obtain non-zero deceleration parameter solutions.

Note: although on the human scale the quantities of ZPF energy are extremely small, on the

astronomical or Cosmological scales, they become extremely large when approaching the

dimensions of the visible Universe according to “RU → RU(KλRo,λxλh,KmMG,mxmh)”.

15

**http://pdg.lbl.gov/2006/reviews/hubblerpp.pdf (pg. 20 - “WMAP + All”).
**

41

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1.2 Fundamentals

The following statements are verbatim quotations from [24].

1.2.1 General Relativity (GR)

General Relativity (GR) is a geometrical theory of gravitation published by Albert Einstein

in 1915-16. It unifies special relativity and Sir Isaac Newton’s law of universal gravitation with the

insight that gravitation is not due to a force but rather is a manifestation of curved space and time,

with this curvature being produced by the mass-energy and momentum content of the space-time.

GR is distinguished from other metric theories of gravitation by its use of the Einstein field

equations to relate space-time content and space-time curvature. GR is currently the most successful

gravitational theory, being almost universally accepted and well confirmed by observations. The

first success of general relativity was in explaining the anomalous perihelion precession of Mercury.

Then in 1919, Sir Arthur Eddington announced that observations of stars near the eclipsed

Sun confirmed GR’s prediction that massive objects bend light. Since then, other observations and

experiments have confirmed many of the predictions of GR, including gravitational time dilation

and gravitational red-shift of light. In addition, numerous observations are interpreted as confirming

the weirdest prediction of GR, the existence of Black-Holes (BH’s).

In the mathematics of GR, the Einstein field equations become a set of simultaneous

differential equations which are solved to produce metric tensors of space-time. These metric

tensors describe the shape of the space-time manifold and are used to obtain predictions. The

connections of the metric tensors specify the geodesic paths that objects follow when travelling

inertially. Important solutions of the Einstein field equations include the Schwarzschild solution (for

the space-time surrounding a spherically symmetric uncharged and non-rotating massive object),

the Reissner-Nordström solution (for a charged spherically symmetric massive object), and the Kerr

metric (for a rotating massive object).

In spite of its overwhelming success, there is discomfort with GR in the scientific

community due to its being incompatible with Quantum Mechanics (QM) and the reachable

singularities of BH’s (at which the math of GR breaks down). Because of this, numerous other

theories have been proposed as alternatives to GR. The most successful of these was Brans-Dicke

theory, which appeared to have observational support in the 1960’s. However, those observations

have since been refuted and modern measurements indicate that any Brans-Dicke type of deviation

from GR must be very small if it exists at all.

End of verbatim quotation.

Albert Einstein16,

16

**http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1921/index.html
**

42

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.2.2 Black-Holes (BH’s)
**

The following statements are verbatim quotations from [24].

A Black-Hole (BH) is an object predicted by GR, with a gravitational field so powerful that

even ElectroMagnetic (EM) radiation (such as light) cannot escape its pull. A BH is defined to be a

region of space-time where escape to the outside Universe is impossible. The outer boundary of this

region is called the event horizon. Nothing can move from inside the event horizon to the outside,

even briefly, due to the extreme gravitational field existing within the region.

For the same reason, observers outside the event horizon cannot see any events which may

be happening within the event horizon; thus any energy being radiated or events happening within

the region are forever unable to be seen or detected from outside. Within the BH is a singularity, an

anomalous place where matter is compressed to the degree that the known laws of Physics no

longer apply to it.

Theoretically, a BH can be of any size. Astrophysicists expect to find BH’s with masses

ranging between roughly the mass of the Sun (“stellar-mass” BH’s) to many millions of times the

mass of the Sun (i.e. SuperMassive BH’s). The existence of BH’s in the Universe is well supported

by astronomical observation, particularly from studying X-ray emission from X-ray binaries and

active Galactic nuclei. It has also been hypothesised that BH’s radiate an undetectably small amount

of energy due to QM effects called Hawking radiation.

End of verbatim quotation.

**Figure 4.1: A Feeding SuperMassive “Black-Hole” - credit: Gabriel Pérez Díaz, SMM del IAC,
**

43

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1.2.3 Quantum Mechanics (QM)

The following statements are verbatim quotations from [24].

Quantum Mechanics (QM) refers to a discrete unit that Quantum Theory assigns to certain

physical quantities, such as the energy of an atom at rest. The discovery that waves could be

measured in particle-like small packets of energy called quanta led to the branch of Physics that

deals with atomic and subatomic systems which we today call QM. It is the underlying

mathematical framework of many fields of Physics and Chemistry.

The foundations of QM were established during the first half of the twentieth century by

Werner Heisenberg, Max Planck, Louis de Broglie, Niels Bohr, Erwin Schrödinger, Max Born,

John von Neumann, Paul Dirac, Wolfgang Pauli and others. Some fundamental aspects of the

theory are still actively studied.

It is necessary to use QM to understand the behavior of systems at atomic length scales and

smaller. For example, if Newtonian mechanics governed the workings of an atom, Electrons would

rapidly travel towards and collide with the nucleus. However, in the natural world the Electrons

normally remain in an unknown orbital path around the nucleus, defying classical

ElectroMagnetism.

QM was initially developed to explain the atom, especially the spectra of light emitted by

different atomic species. The Quantum Theory of the atom developed as an explanation for an

Electron remaining in its orbital, which could not be explained by Newton's laws of motion and by

classical ElectroMagnetism.

In the formalism of QM, the state of a system at a given time is described by a complex

wave function (sometimes referred to as orbital’s in the case of atomic Electrons), and more

generally, elements of a complex vector space. This abstract mathematical object allows for the

calculation of probabilities of outcomes of concrete experiments. For example, it allows one to

compute the probability of finding an Electron in a particular region around the nucleus at a

particular time.

Contrary to classical mechanics, one cannot make simultaneous predictions of conjugate

variables, such as position and momentum, with arbitrary accuracy. For instance, Electrons may be

considered to be located somewhere within a region of space, but with their exact positions being

unknown. Contours of constant probability, often referred to as “clouds”, may be drawn around the

nucleus of an atom to conceptualise where the Electron might be located with the most probability.

It should be stressed that the Electron itself is not spread out over such cloud regions. It is either in a

particular region of space, or it is not. Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle quantifies the inability to

precisely locate the particle.

The other exemplar that led to QM was the study of EM waves such as light. When it was

found in 1900 by Max Planck that the energy of waves could be described as consisting of small

packets or quanta, Albert Einstein exploited this idea to show that an EM wave such as light could

be described by a particle called the Photon with discrete energy, dependent upon its frequency.

This led to a theory of unity between subatomic particles and EM waves called waveparticle duality in which particles and waves were neither one nor the other, but had certain

properties of both. While QM describes the world of the very small, it also is needed to explain

certain “macroscopic quantum systems” such as superconductors and superfluids.

Broadly speaking, QM incorporates four classes of phenomena that classical Physics cannot

account for: (i) the quantisation (discretisation) of certain physical quantities, (ii) wave-particle

duality, (iii) the uncertainty principle and (iv), quantum entanglement.

End of verbatim quotation.

44

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1.2.4 Particle-Physics

The following statements are verbatim quotations from [24].

1.2.4.1 Synopsis

Particle-Physics is a branch of Physics that studies the elementary constituents of matter and

radiation, and the interactions between them. It is also called High Energy Physics (HEP), because

many elementary particles do not occur under normal circumstances in nature, but can be created

and detected during energetic collisions of other particles, as is done in particle accelerators.

1.2.4.2 Subatomic particles

Modern Particle-Physics research is focused on subatomic particles, which have less

structure than atoms. These include atomic constituents such as Electrons, Protons, and Neutrons

(Protons and Neutrons are actually composite particles, made up of Quarks), particles produced by

radiative and scattering processes such as Photons, Neutrinos and Muons, as well as a wide range of

exotic particles.

Strictly speaking, the term particle is a misnomer because the dynamics of Particle-Physics

are governed by QM. As such, they exhibit wave-particle duality, displaying particle-like behavior

under certain experimental conditions and wave-like behavior in others (more technically they are

described by state vectors in Hilbert space). Particle Physicists use the term “elementary particles”

to refer to objects such as Electrons and Photons, with the understanding that these “particles”

display wave-like properties as well.

All the particles and their interactions observed to date can be described by a Quantum Field

Theory (QFT) called the Standard Model (SM). The SM has 40 species of elementary particles (24

Fermions, 12 Vector Bosons, and 4 Scalars), which can combine to form composite particles,

accounting for the hundreds of other species of particles discovered since the 1960’s.

The SM has been found to agree with almost all the experimental tests conducted to date.

However, most particle Physicists believe that it is an incomplete description of Nature, and that a

more fundamental theory awaits discovery. In recent years, measurements of Neutrino mass have

provided the first experimental deviations from the SM.

Particle-Physics has had a large impact on the philosophy of science. Some particle

Physicists adhere to reductionism, a point of view that has been criticized and defended by

philosophers and scientists.

1.2.4.3 History

The idea that all matter is composed of elementary particles dates to at least the 6th century

BC. The philosophical doctrine of atomism was studied by ancient Greek philosophers such as

Leucippus, Democritus, and Epicurus. In the 19th century John Dalton, through his work on

stoichiometry, concluded that each element of nature was composed of a single, unique type of

particle.

Dalton and his contemporaries believed these were the fundamental particles of nature and

thus named them atoms, after the Greek word “atomos”, meaning “indivisible”. However, near the

end of the century, Physicists discovered that atoms were not, in-fact, the fundamental particles of

nature, but conglomerates of even smaller particles.

The early 20th century explorations of Nuclear and Quantum-Physics culminated in proofs

of Nuclear Fission in 1939 by Lise Meitner (based on experiments by Otto Hahn), and Nuclear

Fusion by Hans Bethe in the same year. These discoveries gave rise to an active industry of

generating one atom from another, even rendering possible (although not profitable) the

transmutation of lead into gold. They also led to the development of Nuclear Weapons.

45

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Throughout the 1950’s and 1960’s, a bewildering variety of particles were found in
**

scattering experiments. This was referred to as the “particle zoo”. This term was deprecated after

the formulation of the SM during the 1970’s in which the large numbers of particles were explained

as combinations of a (relatively) small number of fundamental particles.

1.2.4.4 Standard Model (SM)

The current state of the classification of elementary particles in the SM describes the Strong,

Weak and ElectroMagnetic fundamental forces utilising mediating Gauge Bosons. The species of

Gauge Bosons are the Gluons, W-, W+, Z Bosons and Photons. The model also contains 24

fundamental particles which are the constituents of matter. Finally, it predicts the existence of the

Higgs Boson, which has yet to be discovered.

1.2.4.5 Experiment

The major laboratories researching Particle-Physics are (listed in alphabetical order):

i. Brookhaven National Laboratory, located on Long Island, USA. Its main facility is the

Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider, colliding heavy ions such as gold ions and Protons.

ii. Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics (Novosibirsk, Russia).

iii. CERN, located on the French-Swiss border near Geneva. Its main project is now the Large

Hadron Collider (LHC). Earlier facilities include LEP, the Large Electron-Positron

collider, which was stopped in 2001 and which is now dismantled to give way for LHC;

and Super Proton Synchrotron (SPS).

iv. DESY, located in Hamburg, Germany. Its main facility is HERA colliding Electrons,

Positrons and Protons.

v. Fermilab, located near Chicago, USA. Its main facility is the Tevatron, colliding Protons

and Anti-Protons.

vi. KEK the High Energy Accelerator Research Organization located in Tsukuba, Japan. It is

the home of a number of interesting experiments such as K2K (a Neutrino oscillation

experiment) and Belle (an experiment measuring the CP-Symmetry violation in the BMeson).

vii. SLAC, located near Palo Alto, USA. Its main facility is PEP-II, colliding Electrons and

Positrons.

The techniques required to do modern experimental Particle-Physics are quite varied and

complex, constituting a sub-specialty nearly completely distinct from the theoretical side

of the field.

1.2.4.6 Theory

Theoretical Particle-Physics attempts to develop the models, theoretical framework, and

mathematical tools to understand current experiments and make predictions for future experiments.

There are several major efforts in theoretical Particle-Physics today and each includes a range of

different activities and the efforts in each area are interrelated.

One of the major activities in theoretical Particle-Physics is the attempt to better understand

the SM and its tests. Extracting the parameters of the SM from experiments with less uncertainty

probes the limits of the SM and therefore expands our understanding of nature. These efforts are

made challenging by the difficult nature of calculating many quantities in Quantum

ChromoDynamics (QCD).

The second major effort is in model building where scientists develop ideas for what Physics

may lie beyond the SM (at higher energies or smaller distances). This work is often motivated by

the hierarchy problem and is constrained by existing experimental data. It may involve work on

46

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**supersymmetry, alternatives to the Higgs mechanism, extra spatial dimensions or other ideas.
**

The third major effort in theoretical Particle-Physics is String Theory (ST). String theorists

attempt to construct a unified description of QM and GR by building a theory based upon small

strings and branes rather than particles. If the theory is successful, it may be considered a “Theory

of Everything” (ToE). There are also other areas of work in theoretical Particle-Physics ranging

from particle Cosmology to Loop-Quantum-Gravity (LQG).

End of verbatim quotation.

Figure 4.2: credit: USDoE, http://pdg.lbl.gov/barnett/extradim.html,

47

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.2.5 Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) Theory
**

1.2.5.1 Synopsis

The following statements are verbatim quotations from [24].

1.2.5.1.1 Zero-Point-Energy (ZPE)

1.2.5.1.1.1 General

In Physics, Zero-Point-Energy (ZPE) is the lowest possible energy that a QM system may

possess, representing the energy of the ground state. The field associated with ZPE is termed the

Zero-Point-Field (ZPF). The concept of ZPE was proposed by Albert Einstein and Otto Stern in

1913, which they originally called “residual energy” or “Nullpunktsenergie”.

All QM systems are associated with ZPE. The term arises commonly in reference to the

ground state of the quantum harmonic oscillator and its null oscillations. In QFT, it is a synonym

for vacuum energy, an amount of energy associated with the vacuum of empty space and is the

underlying background energy that exists in space even when devoid of matter. In Cosmology, ZPE

is taken to be the origin of the Cosmological constant.

It is widely accepted that ZPE results in the existence of most (if not all) of the fundamental

forces and the effects derived from them. They have been observed in various experiments such as

the spontaneous emission of light, gamma radiation, Van-Der Waals bonds and the Lamb shift etc.

Importantly, the ZPE of the vacuum leads directly to the Casimir effect and is directly observable in

nanoscale devices.

It is thought (but not yet demonstrated) to have consequences for the behavior of the

Universe on a Cosmological scale. Because ZPE is the lowest possible energy a system can have, it

cannot be removed. Despite the definition, the concept of ZPE has attracted the attention of amateur

inventors with the prospect of extracting “free energy” from the vacuum.

Numerous perpetual motion and other pseudoscientific devices, often called free energy

devices exploiting the idea, have been proposed. As a result of this activity and its intriguing

theoretical explanation, it has taken on a life of its own in popular culture, appearing in science

fiction books, games and movies.

1.2.5.1.1.2 Elementary particles

QFT, which describes interactions between elementary particles in terms of fields, allows a

contribution to ZPE (even when no particles are present) via the ZPF. An example is the Casimir

effect whereby two metal plates experience a small attractive force between them. This has been

attributed to the dependence on the ZPF and the distance between the plates. This has important

consequences on a Cosmological scale because ZPE is expected to contribute to the Cosmological

constant, which affects the expansion of the Universe.

The calculation of the ZPE in QFT, in terms of Feynman diagrams, may be considered as

accounting for virtual particles (also known as vacuum fluctuations), which are created and

destroyed out of the vacuum. Additional contributions to the ZPE come from spontaneous

symmetry breaking in QFT.

1.2.5.1.1.3 Implications

Vacuum energy has a number of consequences. For one, vacuum fluctuations are always

created as particle / antiparticle pairs. The creation of these “virtual particles” near the event horizon

of a Black-Hole (BH) has been hypothesised by Physicist Stephen Hawking to be a mechanism for

the eventual “evaporation” of BH’s such that the net energy of the Universe remains zero so long as

48

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**the particle pairs annihilate each other within Planck time.
**

If one of the pair is pulled into the BH before this, then the other particle becomes “real” and

energy / mass is radiated into space from the BH. The loss is cumulative and could result in the

Black-Hole's disappearance over time. The time required is dependent upon the mass of the BH, but

could be in the order of “10100” years for large solar-mass BH’s.

Grand Unification Theory (GUT) predicts a non-zero Cosmological constant from the

energy of vacuum fluctuations. Examining normal physical processes with knowledge of these field

phenomena leads to interesting insights into ElectroDynamics (ED).

1.2.5.1.2 History

In 1900, Max Planck derived the formula for the energy of a single “radiator” (i.e. a

vibrating atomic unit) as:

(W.1)

In 1913, using this formula as a basis, Albert Einstein and Otto Stern published a paper of

great significance in which they suggested for the first time the existence of energy that all

oscillators have at absolute zero. They called this “residual energy” and then “Nullpunktsenergie”

(in German), which later became translated as ZPE. They carried out an analysis of the specific heat

of Hydrogen gas at low temperature and concluded that the data is best represented if the vibration

energy is taken to have the form,

(W.2)

Thus, according to this expression - even at absolute zero, the energy of an atomic system has the

value “½hν”.

In 1934, Georges Lemaître used an unusual perfect-fluid equation of state to interpret the

Cosmological constant as a result of ZPE. In 1973, Edward Tryon proposed that the Universe may

be a large scale QM vacuum fluctuation where positive mass-energy is balanced by negative

gravitational potential energy.

During the 1980’s, many attempts were made to relate fields that generate vacuum energy to

specific fields that were predicted by the GUT and to use observations of the Universe to confirm it.

So far, these efforts have failed and the exact nature of the particles or fields that generate ZPE,

with a density such as that required by inflation theory, remains a mystery.

1.2.5.1.3 Foundational Physics

In classical Physics, the energy of a system is defined in relation to “some” given state

(often called the reference state). Typically, one might associate a motionless system with zero

energy, although doing so is purely arbitrary. However, in quantum Physics it is natural to associate

the energy with the expectation value of a certain operator - the Hamiltonian of the system.

For almost all QM systems, the lowest possible expectation value that this operator can

obtain is not zero; the lowest possible value is called the ZPE (caveat: if we add an arbitrary

constant to the Hamiltonian, we get another theory which is physically equivalent to the previous

Hamiltonian - because of this, only relative energy is observable, not the absolute energy).

The origin of non-zero minimal energy can be intuitively understood in terms of the

Heisenberg uncertainty principle. This principle states that the position and momentum of a QM

particle cannot both be known arbitrarily accurately. If the particle is confined to a potential well,

then its position is at least partly known - it must be within the well.

Thus, one may deduce that within the well, the particle cannot have zero momentum

otherwise the uncertainty principle would be violated. Because the kinetic energy of a moving

49

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**particle is proportional to the square of its velocity, it cannot be zero either. This example however,
**

is not applicable to a free particle - the kinetic energy of which can be zero.

1.2.5.1.4 Varieties of ZPE

The concept of ZPE occurs in a number of situations and it is important that they be

distinguished. In ordinary QM, the ZPE is the energy associated with the ground state of the system.

The most famous example is the energy associated with the ground state of the quantum harmonic

oscillator. More precisely, the ZPE is the expectation value of the Hamiltonian of the system.

In QFT, the fabric of space is visualised as consisting of fields and every point in space and

time being a quantised simple harmonic oscillator, with neighboring oscillators interacting. In this

case, one has a contribution of energy from every point in space, resulting in infinite ZPE. The ZPE

is the expectation value of the Hamiltonian.

In Quantum Perturbation Theory (QPT), it is sometimes stated that the contribution of oneloop and multi-loop Feynman diagrams, to elementary particle propagators, are the contributions of

vacuum fluctuations (ZPE) to particle masses.

1.2.5.1.5 Experimental evidence

The simplest experimental evidence for the existence of ZPE in QFT is the Casimir effect.

This effect was proposed in 1948 by Dutch Physicist Hendrik B. G. Casimir, who considered the

quantised EM field between a pair of grounded, neutral metal plates. A small force can be measured

between the plates ascribable to a change of the ZPE of the EM field between the plates.

Although the Casimir effect at first proved difficult to measure because its manifestation can

be seen only at very small distances, it is taking on increasing importance in nanotechnology. The

Casimir effect can be accurately measured in specially designed nanoscale devices, and increasingly

needs to be taken into account in the design and manufacturing processes of small devices. It can

exert significant forces and stress on nanoscale devices, causing them to bend, twist, stick or break.

Other experimental evidence includes spontaneous emissions of light (Photons) by atoms

and nuclei, the observed Lamb shift of positions of energy levels of atoms and the anomalous value

of the Electron’s gyromagnetic ratio etc.

1.2.5.1.6 Gravitation and Cosmology

In Cosmology, ZPE offers an intriguing possibility for explaining the speculative positive

values of the proposed Cosmological constant. In brief, if the energy is “really there”, then it should

exert a gravitational force. In General Relativity (GR), mass and energy are equivalent; either

produces a gravitational field.

One obvious difficulty with this association is that the ZPE of the vacuum is absurdly large.

Naively, it is infinite, but one must argue that new Physics takes over at the Planck scale, and so its

growth is cut off at that point. Even so, what remains is so large that it would visibly bend space,

and thus, there seems to be a contradiction.

There is no easy way out, and reconciling the seemingly huge ZPE of space with the

observed zero or small Cosmological constant has become one of the important problems in

theoretical Physics. Subsequently, it has become a criterion by which to judge a candidate “Theory

of Everything” (ToE).

1.2.5.1.7 Propulsion theories

Another area of research in the field of ZPE is how it could be used for propulsion. NASA

and British Aerospace both have programs running to this end, though practical technology is still a

long way off. For any success in this area, it would have to be possible to create repulsive effects in

50

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**the quantum vacuum, which according to theory should be possible. Experiments to produce and
**

measure these effects are planned for the future.

Note: Haisch, Rueda and Puthoff have proposed that an accelerated massive object interacts with

the ZPF to produce an EM drag force giving rise to the phenomenon of inertia.

1.2.5.1.8 Popular culture

The Casimir effect has established ZPE as an uncontroversial and scientifically accepted

phenomenon. However, the term ZPE has also become associated with a highly controversial area

of human endeavour – i.e. so-called “free energy” devices, similar to perpetual motion machines of

the past. These devices purport to “tap” the ZPF and somehow extract energy from it, thus

providing an “inexhaustible”, cheap, and non-polluting energy source.

Controversy arises when such devices are promoted without scientifically acceptable proof

that they tap the energy sources claimed. Promoters of a device frequently demonstrate no

understanding of how the device might do so; they may demonstrate misunderstanding of widely

accepted scientific facts and methods, in development or communication of a theory concerning a

device; and they generally have made no attempt to investigate simpler explanations for the claimed

performance of a device.

Any of these behaviours are liable to taint the reputations of those involved with such

devices, and qualified researchers are therefore likely to be reluctant to make any attempt to verify

or even seriously examine such a device unless its promoters demonstrate enough competence to be

taken seriously.

End of verbatim quotation.

1.2.5.2 Spectral Energy Density (SED)

An extremely important development in ZPF Theory - utilised as a foundation for the EGM

construct, is the concept of Spectral Energy Density (SED). This quantifies the spectral energy

distribution of ZPE within the ZPF and may be described in terms of the energy density per

frequency mode by,

ρ 0( ω )

2 .h .ω

c

3

3

(3.47)

**where, “h” denotes Planck’s Constant [6.6260693 x10-34(Js)] and “ω” is in “(Hz)”.
**

1.2.6 The Polarisable Vacuum (PV) model of gravity

The Polarizable Vacuum (PV) refers to an analogue of GR to describe gravity in optical

terms offering the following,

i. The potential to replace GR in terms of the propagation of light through an optical

medium, with a scalar theory of gravitation featuring formal analogies with Maxwell's

theory of ElectroMagnetism.

ii. The potential to unify gravitation and ElectroMagnetism in a theory of Electro-Gravity.

iii. The potential to provide a physical mechanism for how space-time “gets curved” in GR,

suggesting the possibility of “metric engineering” for spacecraft propulsion etc.

The Polarisable Vacuum (PV) model of gravity is an optical representation such that the

curvature of the space-time manifold is expressed in terms of a Refractive Index “KPV”. The value

of “KPV” of a solid spherical object with homogeneous mass-energy distribution (i.e. a weak field

isomorphic approximation to GR) is given by,

51

www.deltagroupengineering.com

2.

K PV e

G .M

2

r .c

(3.55)

where,

Variable

KPV

e

G

M

r

c

Description

Units

Refractive Index of a gravitational field in the PV model

of gravity, only contributing significantly when a large

gravitational mass (i.e. a strong gravitational field) is

None

considered. For weak gravitational fields, the effect is

approximated to KPV(r,M) = 1.

Exponential function

Gravitational constant

m3kg-1s-2

Mass

kg

Magnitude of position vector from centre of mass

m

Velocity of light in a vacuum

m/s

Table 4.1,

**1.2.7 Dimensional Analysis Techniques and Buckingham’s “Π” (Pi) Theory
**

1.2.7.1 The principles

The following statement is a verbatim quotation from [24]

Dimensional Analysis is a conceptual tool often applied in Physics, Chemistry, and

engineering to understand physical situations involving a mix of different kinds of physical

quantities. It is routinely used by physical scientists and engineers to check the plausibility of

derived equations. Only like dimensioned quantities may be added, subtracted, compared, or

equated.

When like or unlike dimensioned quantities are multiplied or divided, their dimensions are

likewise multiplied or divided. When dimensioned quantities are raised to a power or a power root,

the same is done to the dimensions attached to those quantities. The dimensions of a physical

quantity is associated with symbols such as “M, L, T” which represent mass, length and time, each

raised to rational powers. For instance, the dimension of the physical variable speed is “distance /

time (L/T)” and the dimension of force is “mass × distance / time² (ML/T²)”. In mechanics, every

dimension can be expressed in terms of distance (which Physicists often call “length”), time and

mass, or alternatively in terms of force, length and mass.

Depending on the problem, it may be advantageous to choose one or another set of

dimensions. In ElectroMagnetism, for example, it may be useful to use dimensions of “M, L, T, and

Q”, where “Q” represents the quantity of electric charge. The units of a physical quantity are

defined by convention, related to some standard; e.g. length may have units of meters, feet, inches,

miles or micrometres; but length always has dimension “L” whether it is measured in meters, feet,

inches, miles or micrometres.

In the most primitive form, dimensional analysis may be used to check the “correctness” of

physical equations: in every physically meaningful expression, only quantities of the same

dimension can be added or subtracted. Moreover, the two sides of any equation must have the same

dimensions. For example, the mass of a rat and the mass of a flea may be added, but the mass of a

flea and the length of a rat cannot be added.

Furthermore, the arguments to exponential, trigonometric and logarithmic functions must be

dimensionless numbers. The logarithm of “3(kg)” is undefined, but the logarithm of “3” is “0.477”.

It should be noted that very different physical quantities may have the same dimensions: work and

torque, for example, have the same dimensions, “M L2T-2”.

An equation with torque on one side and energy on the other would be dimensionally

52

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**correct, but cannot be physically correct! However, torque multiplied by an angular twist measured
**

in (dimensionless) radians is work or energy. The radian is the mathematically natural measure of

an angle and is the ratio of arc of a circle swept by such an angle divided by the radius of the circle.

The value of a dimensional physical quantity is written as the product of a unit within the

dimension and a dimensionless numerical factor. When like dimensioned quantities are added,

subtracted or compared, these dimensioned quantities must be expressed in consistent units so that

the numerical values of these quantities may be directly added or subtracted. But, conceptually,

there is no problem adding quantities of the same dimension expressed in different units.

Buckingham “Π” (Pi) Theory (BPT) forms the basis of the central tool of Dimensional

Analysis. This theorem describes how every physically meaningful equation involving “n” variables

can be equivalently rewritten as an equation of “n-m” dimensionless parameters, where “m” is the

number of fundamental dimensions used. Furthermore, and most importantly, it provides a method

for computing these dimensionless parameters from the given variables, even if the form of the

equation is still unknown.

BPT is a systematic method of Dimensional Analysis, whereby variables that are relevant to

a particular situation are formed into dimensionless Π groups. The number of dimensionless groups

equals the original number of variables minus the number of fundamental dimensions present in all

the variables. This analysis reduces the degrees of freedom for a physical situation and can be used

to guide experimental design programs.

Proofs of BPT often begin by considering the space of fundamental and derived physical

units as a vector space, with the fundamental units as basis vectors and with multiplication of

physical units as the “vector addition” operation and raising to powers as the “scalar multiplication”

operation. Making the physical units match across sets of physical equations can then be regarded

as imposing linear constraints in the physical unit vector space.

Two systems for which these parameters coincide are called similar; they are equivalent for

the purposes of the equation and the experimentalist whom wishes to determine the form of the

equation can choose the most convenient one. BPT uses linear algebra: the space of all possible

physical units can be seen as a vector space over rational numbers if we represent a unit as the set of

exponents needed for the fundamental units (with a power of zero if the particular fundamental unit

is not present). Multiplication of physical units is then represented by vector addition within this

vector space. The algorithm of BPT is essentially a Gauss-Jordan elimination carried out in this

vector space.

End of verbatim quotation.

1.2.7.2 The atomic bomb

The following statement is a verbatim quotation from [24]

In 1941, “Sir Geoffrey I. Taylor” used Dimensional Analysis to estimate the energy released

in an atomic bomb explosion. The first atomic bomb was detonated in New Mexico on July 16,

1945. In 1947, movies of the explosion were declassified, allowing “Sir Taylor” to complete the

analysis and estimate the energy released in the explosion, even though the energy release was still

classified! The actual energy released was later declassified and its value was remarkably close to

Taylor's estimate.

Taylor supposed that the explosive process was adequately described by five

physical quantities, the time “t” since the detonation, the energy “E” which is released at a single

point in space at detonation, the radius “R” of the shock wave at time “t”, the ambient atmospheric

pressure “p” and density “ρ”. There are only three fundamental physical units in this combination

(MLT) which yield Taylor's equation. Once the radius of the explosion as a function of the time was

known, the energy of the explosion was calculated.

End of verbatim quotation.

53

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.2.7.3 The birth and foundations of Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM)
**

Historically, Dimensional Analysis Techniques (DAT’s) and BPT has been used extensively

in the engineering field to model, predict and optimise fluid flow and heat transfer. However, in

principle, it may be applied to any system that is dynamically, kinematically and geometrically

founded – such as the geometric space-time manifold. Typical examples of experimentally verified

Π groupings in fluid mechanics are Froude, Mach, Reynolds and Weber numbers. Thermodynamic

examples are Eckert, Grashof, Prandtl and Nusselt numbers. Moreover, the Planck Length

commonly used in theories of Quantum Gravity shares its origins with the Dimensional Analysis

Technique (the foundation of BPT).

The application of BPT is not an attempt to answer fundamental physical questions but to

apply universally accepted engineering design methodologies to real world problems. It is primarily

an experimental process. It is not possible to derive system representations without involving

experimental relationship functions. These functions incorporate all variables within the

experimental environment that influence results and behaviour including parameters that might

otherwise be neglected due to practical calculation limitations, in theoretical analysis. Once the Π

groupings have been formed, they may be manipulated or simplified as required to test ideas and

applied to determine experimental relationship functions. Ultimately, these functions validate the

system equations developed.

Ideally, experimental relationship functions possess values of unity relative to the distant

observer. This indicates a loss-less relationship between an Experimental Prototype (EP) and the

mathematical model utilised to describe the EP. Typically, due to viscous forces and energy loss /

transformation effects, experimental relationship functions take extreme values of magnitude (i.e.

large or small). If we consider the EP to be the ambient gravitational environment (i.e. local spacetime manifold) and the mathematical model to be the PV model of gravity, then we expect all

experimental relationship functions to approach unity. The reasons for this are:

i. The true nature of gravity is currently unknown to Physics.

ii. The mathematical descriptions used to predict gravitational behaviour are constructed

from observation of effects, not causes.

iii. A mathematical description is nothing more than just that. It is a non-physical

manifestation of human understanding. For example, GR is a Tensor based mathematical

formulation only - there is no physical evidence to validate the contention that the true

nature of space-time is physically geometric with Planck scale grid lines radiating from

Cosmological objects.

iv. There can be no physical losses between two mathematical representations of the same

thing.

BPT commences with the selection of significant parameters. There are no right or wrong

choices with respect to the selection of these parameters. Often, the experience of the researcher

exerts the greatest influence to the beginning of the process and the choice of significant parameters

is validated (or refuted) by experimentation.

When applying BPT, it is important to avoid repetition of dimensions. Subsequently, it is

often desirable to select variables that may be formulated by the manipulation of simpler variables

already chosen. The selected variables used in EGM are shown by Storti et. Al. in [1]. These

parameters were selected to facilitate experiments utilising ElectroMagnetic (EM) fields and

assume that there is a physical device to be tested, located on a laboratory test bench. The objective

is to utilise a superposition of EM fields to reduce the weight of a test-mass when placed in the

volume of space located directly above the device. Therefore, the significant parameters are those

factors that may affect the acceleration of the test-mass within this volume.

The selection of significant parameters involved the magnitude of vector quantities and

scalars. This avoids unnecessary repetition of fundamental units in accordance with the application

of BPT methodology. The significant vector magnitude parameters are acceleration, Magnetic field,

54

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Electric field and position. The scalar quantities are Electric charge and frequency.
**

Since static charge on the device or the test-mass may also exert strong Lorentz forces and

therefore accelerations, the scalar value of static charge is included to determine its contribution. If

the device is small then the distance between the surface of the device and the test-mass suspended

in the volume above it is trivial and that the magnitude of the position vector is usefully constant.

Storti et. Al. utilise BPT to relate gravitational acceleration, EM acceleration by the

superposition of applied fields, ZPF Theory and the PV model of gravity via Einstein’s equivalence

principle. Dimensionally, there is no difference between gravitational and EM acceleration. The

equivalence principle provides a well accepted vehicle for the logical application of BPT and

DAT’s to gravity. Much of Thermodynamics and Fluid Mechanics is built form the application of

BPT and DAT’s. BPT facilitates the ability to string together any number of variables in a way that

permits one to test one’s own idea. So, it is really a mix between science and art. There is nothing

wrong with any grouping formed utilising BPT, it is simply a question of how “well” a grouping

tends to fit physical observation.

To derive the PV spectrum, Storti et. Al. take the standard ZPF spectral energy density

equation that describes the energy density in a region of space as a smooth cubic distribution and

combine it with a Fourier distribution. This yields the beginning and endpoint of the spectrum. In

other words, objects with mass polarise the ZPF which may be described as a Fourier distribution at

the surface of the object. The surface is the equilibrium boundary between the energy contained

within the object and the polarized state of the ZPF surrounding it.

The difference between the EGM, PV and ZPF spectra is that the EGM spectrum

commences incrementally above “0(Hz)” and approaches the Planck Frequency. The PV spectrum

is mass specific and represents a bandwidth of the EGM spectrum commencing at a non-zero

fundamental frequency. The EGM and PV spectra follow a Fourier distribution. The ZPF spectrum

has the same frequency bandwidth as the EGM spectrum, but does not follow a Fourier distribution.

So, the EGM spectrum is the polarized form of the ZPF spectrum, whilst the PV spectrum is an

object specific subset of the EGM spectrum following a Fourier distribution.

Note: the EGM spectrum is a simple, but extreme, extension of the EM spectrum.

DAT’s and BPT bring to the research and design table, the following key elements17:

• It helps to assess the reasonableness of a model and which variables it should

contain.

• It reduces the number of variables and parameters to a minimum.

• It reduces the number of needed experiments, on computers as well as in the

laboratory.

• It provides the fundamental theory behind experiments on scale models.

• It is a systematic method for the analysis of problems.

• It forces you to make estimates and to understand the problem.

• It helps you understand what is important and what is not.

• It produces dimensionless equations with small (or large) parameters.

• It facilitates a “reverse engineering” approach to gravity if a region of space-time on

a laboratory test bench is considered to be the Experimental Prototype (EP) for the

mathematical model produced by the application of DAT’s and BPT. Subsequently,

the mathematical model can be applied to the EP for scaling purposes, leading to

gravity control experiments.

Note: DAT’s and BPT should be applied before numerical computations are done.

17

**Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
**

http://www.math.ntnu.no/~hanche/kurs/matmod/1998h/

http://www.math.ntnu.no/~hanche/notes/buckingham/

55

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**EGM develops a dynamic, kinematic and geometric equivalent of the ZPF, expressed in
**

Fourier terms, which describes gravity at the surface of the Earth as a PV. The EGM spectrum is a

simple, but extreme, extension of the EM spectrum. In the same way that radio waves, visible light,

ultra violet, x-rays and gamma rays exist, gravitational waves exist as a spectrum of frequencies.

The EGM spectrum is in fact the EM spectrum (subject to a Fourier distribution) but with an “end

point” approaching the Planck Frequency at conditions of maximum permissible energy density.

Typically, for the surface of the Earth for example, the vast majority of gravitational waves

exist well above the Terahertz (THz) range. It is extremely important to note that gravity does not

exist as a single wave; it exists as a spectrum of frequencies with a group propagation velocity of

zero. EGM does not differentiate between EM and gravitational spectra but does predict the

endpoint as being far above what we currently measure the EM spectrum to be.

NOTES

56

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.2.8 EGM: the natural philosophy of fundamental particles
**

1.2.8.1 How was it derived?

To date, great strides have been made by GR to our understanding of gravity. It is an

excellent tool that represents space-time as a geometric manifold of events, where gravitation

manifests itself as a curvature of space-time and is described by a metric tensor. However, GR does

not easily facilitate engineering solutions that may allow us to design electromechanical devices

with which to affect the space-time metric.

If mankind wishes to engineer the space-time metric, alternative tools must be developed to

compliment those already available. Subsequently, the EGM methodology was derived to achieve

this goal. EGM is defined as the modification of vacuum polarisability by applied EM fields. It

provides a theoretical description of space-time as a PV derived from the superposition of EM

fields.

The PV representation of GR is a heuristic tool and is isomorphic to GR by weak field

approximation. Utilising EGM, EM fields may be applied to affect the state of the PV and thereby

facilitate interactions with the local gravitational field. BPT is a powerful tool that has been in

existence, tried and experimentally proven for many years. It is an excellent tool that may be

applied to the task of determining a practical relationship between gravitational acceleration and

applied EM fields. The underlying principle of BPT is the preservation of dynamic, kinematic and

geometric similarity between a mathematical model and an EP.

EGM is a term describing a hypothetical harmonic relationship between Electricity, Gravity

and Magnetism. The hypothesis may be mathematically articulated by the application of DAT’s and

BPT, both being well established and thoroughly tested geometric engineering principles, via

Fourier harmonics. The hypothesis may be tested by the correct derivation of experimentally

verified fundamental properties not predicted within the Standard Model (SM) of Particle-Physics.

To understand the way in which EGM was derived, one requires a basic knowledge of

engineering principles. Primarily, EGM is a method of calculation (not a theory) based upon

fundamental engineering principles and techniques. It does not compete with or contradict the SM

of Particle-Physics in any manner.

The creation and development of EGM was driven by necessity. A scan of contemporary

approaches in gravitational Physics illustrates an obvious lack of mathematical tools facilitating

engineering of the space-time manifold. Or rather, engineering possibilities are obvious, but require

massive objects on a planetary, stellar or Galactic scale.

Therefore, to facilitate gravity control, a new tool is required permitting engineering of the

space-time manifold. To begin the process, we must first make some basic assumptions based upon

the availability and practicality of existing tools by which we may construct further tools. We shall

use one tool to build another. EGM is nothing more than an engineering tool constructed from other

engineering tools and should be always regarded as such.

Engineering is fundamentally a practical discipline that does not search for highly precise

numerical or exact results. Instead, it aims to achieve physically meaningful quantitative solutions.

Again, practicality and common sense must prevail and, by necessity, must commence with the

assumption that any realistic attempt at gravity control must physically fit on a laboratory test

bench. There is no benefit in developing a tool requiring non-practical scales of reality.

Einstein brought forth the concept that mass and energy are interchangeable. This is trivially

obvious by virtue of his now famous equation (E = mc2). This, combined with practical thinking,

clearly suggests that EM radiation is the mechanism of choice. Hence, we have established the basic

requirements going forward. That is, we are necessarily bounded in research and design terms by

practical benchtop EM fields.

The next step is to find a tool that facilitates the construction of relationships tying EM

fields to acceleration. For an experienced engineer, the answer is obvious. In situations where little

has been established previously, DAT's and BPT are solid first steps. In addition to being able to

57

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**connect seemingly unrelated parameters, it also serves to minimise the number of experiments
**

required to investigate physical behaviour.

Mainstream understanding of gravity is based upon GR - a geometric approach. Assuming

Einstein was correct and the enormous collective scientific effort since 1905 has not been a poor

investment, it follows that any geometrically based engineering tool is an excellent starting point.

Being geometric in nature makes it ideally suited to gravitational problems in keeping with BPT.

However, a strict GR approach is unwieldy and a simpler description would be highly

advantageous. Subsequently, Storti et. Al. utilise the PV model of gravity as a substitute to GR,

which is isomorphic in the weak field, is conducive to engineering approaches and facilitates the

development of the EGM construct.

Thus far, we have established several of the baseline elements forming a skeletal EGM

structure. To add flesh, we require a way to relate the geometric output of BPT to the PV model of

gravity. The relationship between the two may be bridged by assuming the equivalence principle

applies cross discipline.

Considering the need for an EM mechanism, we shall assume that the PV model of gravity

denotes a polarized state of the ZPF representing a sinusoidal manifestation of the space-time

manifold by virtual particles, Photons or wavefunctions. Consequently, it follows that the

representation of gravity at a mathematical point by Fourier Harmonics is a useful tool by which to

represent the ZPF.

Therefore, we may relate the logic of the preceding arguments in a solution algorithm

constituting the EGM construct by five simple steps as follows,

i. Apply DAT's, BPT and similarity principles to combine Electricity, Magnetism and

resultant EM acceleration in the form of Π groupings.

ii. Apply the equivalence principle to the Π groupings formed in (i).

iii. Apply Fourier Harmonics to the equivalence principle.

iv. Apply ZPF Theory to Fourier Harmonics.

v. Apply the PV model of gravity to the ZPF.

Hence, the complete EGM derivation process flow was constructed by Storti et. Al. in [1-19]

as follows,

Dimensional Analysis Techniques

↓

Buckingham Π Theory

↓

General Modelling Equations

↓

Amplitude and Frequency Spectra

↓

General Similarity Equations

↓

Harmonic Similarity Equations

↓

Reduced Harmonic Similarity Equations

↓

nd

2 Reduction of Harmonic Similarity Equations

(Reduced Average Harmonic Similarity Equations)

↓

Spectral Similarity Equations

↓

Fundamental Particle Properties, the Hydrogen Atom

Spectrum and the Casimir Force

Table 4.2,

58

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**It was shown that a theoretical representation of constant acceleration at a mathematical
**

point in a gravitational field may be defined by a summation of trigonometric terms utilising

modified complex Fourier series in exponential form, according to the harmonic distribution “nPV =

-N, 2 - N ... N”, where “N” is an odd number harmonic. Hence, the magnitude of the gravitational

acceleration vector “g” (via the equivalence principle) may be usefully represented by Eq. (3.63) as

“|nPV| → ∞”,

g( r , M )

G. M .

2

r

n PV

2 . i . π .n PV .ω

e

π . n PV

..

PV ( 1 , r , M ) t i

(3.63)

**such that, the frequency spectrum of the harmonic gravitational field “ωPV” is given by Eq. (3.67),
**

ω PV n PV, r , M

n PV 3 2 . c . G. M

.

. K ( r, M )

PV

r

π .r

(3.67)

where,

Variable

ωPV(1,r,M)

KPV

nPV

r

M

G

Description

Units

Fundamental spectral frequency

Hz

Refractive Index of a gravitational field in the Polarisable Vacuum

(PV) model of gravity, only contributing significantly when a large

gravitational mass (i.e. a strong gravitational field) is considered. For

None

all applications herein, the effect is approximated to KPV(r,M) = 1.

Harmonic modes of the gravitational field

Magnitude of position vector from centre of mass

m

Mass

kg

Gravitational constant

m3kg-1s-2

Table 4.3,

**Subsequently, the harmonic (Fourier) representation of the magnitude of the gravitational
**

acceleration vector (in the time domain) at the surface of the Earth up to “N = 21” is graphically

shown to be,

Gravitational Acceleration

g

Time

**Figure 4.3: harmonic representation of gravitational acceleration,
**

As “N → ∞”, the magnitude of the gravitational acceleration vector becomes measurably constant.

Hence, Eq. (3.63, 3.67) illustrate that the Newtonian representation of “g” is easily harmonised over

the Fourier domain, from geometrically based methods (i.e. DAT’s and BPT). Therefore, unifying

(in principle) Newtonian, geometric (relativistic) and quantum (harmonised) models of gravity.

Storti et. Al. showed that the spectrum defined by Eq. (3.67) is discrete and finite. The lower

boundary value is given by “ωPV(1,r,M)”, whilst the upper boundary value “ωΩ” (also termed the

harmonic cut-off frequency) is given by Eq. (3.73),

ω Ω ( r , M ) n Ω ( r , M ) .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

59

(3.73)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**supported by the following equation set,
**

n Ω ( r, M )

Ω ( r, M )

4

12

Ω ( r, M )

1

(3.71)

3

Ω ( r, M )

108.

U m( r , M )

12. 768 81.

U ω( r , M )

U m( r , M )

U ω( r , M )

3 .M .c

U m( r , M )

2

U ω( r , M )

(3.72)

2

4 .π .r

(3.70)

h .

4

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

3

2 .c

(3.69)

3

where,

Variable

nΩ

Ω

Um

Uω

h

Description

Units

None

Harmonic cut-off mode [mode number at ωΩ]

Harmonic cut-off function

Mass-energy density of a solid spherical gravitational object

Pa

Energy density of mass induced gravitational field scaled to

the fundamental spectral frequency

Planck’s Constant [6.6260693 x10-34]

Js

Table 4.4,

**Since the relationship between trigonometric terms, at each amplitude and corresponding
**

frequency, is mathematically defined by the nature of Fourier series, the derivation of Eq. (3.71,

3.72) is based on the compression of energy density to one change in odd harmonic mode whilst

preserving dynamic, kinematic and geometric similarity in accordance with BPT.

The preservation of similarity across one change in odd mode is due to the mathematical

properties of constant functions utilising Fourier series as discussed in [4]. The subsequent

application of these results to Eq. (3.63) acts to decompress the energy density over the Fourier

domain yielding a highly precise reciprocal harmonic representation of “g” whilst preserving

dynamic, kinematic and geometric similarity to Newtonian gravity, identified by the “compression

technique” stated above.

Key gravitational characteristics for the Earth18 in the displacement domain may be

graphically represented as follows,

Fundamental Frequency

RE

ω PV 1 , r , M E

ω PV 1 , R E , M E

r

Radial Distance

Figure19 3.7,

18

19

**“RE” and “ME” denote the radius and mass of the Earth respectively.
**

Fundamental frequency (|nPV| = 1) as a function of planetary radial displacement.

60

www.deltagroupengineering.com

RE

n Ω R E, M E

n Ω r, M E

ω Ω r, M E

ω Ω R E, M E

r

Radial Distance

Cutoff Mode

Cutoff Frequency

Figure20 3.8,

1.2.8.2 Poynting Vector “Sω”

It was demonstrated by “Haisch, Puthoff and Rueda” in [25-28] that “inertia” may have

ElectroMagnetic (EM) origins due to the ZPF of Quantum-Electro-Dynamics (QED), manifested by

the Poynting Vector, via the equivalence principle. Hence, it follows that gravitational acceleration

may also be EM in nature and the Polarizable Vacuum (PV) model of gravity is an EM polarized

state of the ZPF with a Fourier distribution, assigning physical meaning to Eq. (3.63).

Subsequently, it follows that the energy density of a mass induced gravitational field may be

scaled to changes in odd harmonic mode numbers satisfying the mathematical properties of any

constant function described in terms of Fourier series utilising Eq. (3.69) - such that,

U ω n PV, r , M

U ω( r , M ) .

n PV

2

4

4

n PV

(3.68)

**Therefore, the Poynting Vector21 of the polarized Zero-Point (ZP) gravitational field “Sω”
**

surrounding a solid spherical object with homogeneous mass-energy distribution is given by,

S ω n PV, r , M

c .U ω n PV, r , M

(3.74)

ZPF Poynting Vector

and may be graphically represented as follows,

S ω n PV , R E , M E

n PV

Harmonic

Figure 3.9,

Fig. (3.9) illustrates that the Poynting Vector of the ZP gravitational field increases with

“nPV”. Further work by Storti et. Al. showed that “>>99.99(%)” of the effect in a gravitational field

20

21

**Harmonic cut-off mode “nΩ” and frequency “ωΩ” as a function of planetary radial displacement.
**

Per change in odd harmonic mode number.

61

www.deltagroupengineering.com

exists well above the “THz” range. Hence, it becomes apparent that “nΩ” and “ωΩ” are important

characteristics of gravitational fields and were used to “quasi-unify” Particle-Physics in harmonic

form.

1.2.8.3 The size of the Proton, Neutron and Electron (radii: “rπ”, “rν”, “rε”)

In 2005, Storti et. Al. derived the mass-energy threshold of the Photon utilising “nΩ” and the

classical Electron radius as shown in [8], to within “4.3(%)” of the Particle Data Group (PDG)

value22 stated in [29], then proceeded to derive the mass-energies and radii of the Photon and

Graviton in [10] by the consistent utilisation of “nΩ”.

The method developed in [8] was re-applied in [9] to derive the sizes23 of the Electron,

Proton and Neutron. The motivation for this was to test the hypothesis presented in Ch. 1.2.8.1 by

direct comparison of the computed size values to experimentally measured fact. They believe that

highly precise computational predictions’, agreeing with experimental evidence beyond the abilities

of the SM to do so, is conclusive evidence of the validity of the harmonic method developed.

To date, highly precise measurements have been made of the Root-Mean-Square (RMS)

charge radius of the Proton by [30] and the Mean-Square (MS) charge radius of the Neutron as

demonstrated in [31]. However, the calculations presented in [9] are considerably more accurate

than the physical measurements articulated in [30,31], lending support for the harmonic

representation of the magnitude of the gravitational acceleration vector stated in Eq. (3.63).

The basic approach utilised in [9] was to determine the equilibrium position between the

polarized state of the ZPF and the mass-energy of the fundamental particle inducing space-time

curvature as would appear in General Relativity (GR). In other words, one may consider the

curvature of the space-time manifold surrounding an object to be a “virtual fluid” in equilibrium

with the object itself24.

This concept is graphically represented in Fig. (4.4). A free fundamental particle with

classical form factor is depicted in equilibrium with the surrounding space-time manifold. The ZPF

is polarized by the presence of the particle in accordance with the PV model of gravity, which is (at

least) isomorphic to GR in the weak field.

**Figure 4.4: free fundamental particle with classical form factor,
**

In the case of the Proton, the ZPF equilibrium radius coincides with the RMS charge radius

“rπ” [Eq. (3.199)] producing the experimentally verified result “rp” by the SELEX Collaboration as

stated in [30]25,

22

**Consistent with experimental evidence and interpretation of data.
**

From first principles and from a single paradigm.

24

The intention is not to suggest that the space-time manifold is actually a fluid, it is merely to

present a method by which to solve a problem.

25

rπ = 0.8306(fm), rp = 0.8307 ± 0.012(fm).

23

62

www.deltagroupengineering.com

rπ

h .m e

5

4

. . m

. 27 h c . e

2

3

4 .π .G m p

16.c .π .m p

(3.199)

**where, “me” and “mp” denote Electron and Proton rest-mass respectively.
**

In the case of the Neutron, the ZPF equilibrium radius coincides with the radial position of

zero charge density “rν” [Eq. (3.200)] with respect to the Neutron charge distribution as illustrated

in Fig. (4.5). It is shown in [14] that “rν” relates to the MS charge radius “KS” by a simple formula

[Eq. (3.396)] producing the experimentally verified result “KX” as presented in [31]26,

h .m e

5

4

. . m

. 27 h c . e

rν

2

3

4 .π .G m n

16.c .π .m n

(3.200)

**where, “mn” denotes Neutron rest-mass.
**

Neutron Charge Distribution

Charge Density

rν

r dr

ρ ch( r )

ρ ch r 0

r dr

5.

3

rν

ρ ch r dr

r

Radius

Charge Density

Maximum Charge Density

Minimum Charge Density

**Figure 4.5: Neutron charge distribution,
**

KS

3. π .r ν

8

2

. (1

x) . x

1

x x

3

2

(3.396)

27

**where, “x” is solved numerically within the “MathCad” environment by the following algorithm,
**

Given

2

x

ln( x) .

2

x

x

1

(3.398)

1 3

(3.399)

Find ( x)

**Utilising “KS”, “KX” may be converted to determine an experimental zero charge density radial
**

position value “rX” according to Eq. (3.418),

26

27

**rν = 0.8269(fm), KS = -0.1133(fm2), KX = -0.113 ± 0.005(fm2).
**

x = 0.6829, rX = 0.8256 ± 0.018(fm).

63

www.deltagroupengineering.com

rν

rX

KS

. K .K

S X

(3.418)

In the case of the Electron (as with the Proton), the ZPF equilibrium radius coincides with

the RMS charge radius “rε” [Eq. (3.203)] producing an experimentally implied result28 as stated in

[32],

9

r ε r e.

1.

2

ln 2 .n Ω r e , m e

5

γ

(3.203)

**where, “re” and “γ” [33] denote the classical Electron radius and Euler-Mascheroni constant
**

respectively.

1.2.8.4 The harmonic representation of fundamental particles

1.2.8.4.1 Establishing the foundations

Motivated by the physical validation of Eq. (3.199, 3.200), Storti et. Al. conducted thought

experiments in [9] to investigate harmonic and trigonometric relationships by analysing various

forms of radii combinations for the Electron, Proton and Neutron consistent with the DAT’s and

BPT derivations in [1-8] – yielding the following useful approximations,

ω Ω r ε, m e

ω Ω r ε, m e

ω Ω r π, m p

ω Ω r ν ,mn

rε

rπ

α

2

(4.1)

π

rν

rε

(3.214)

2

.e

3

rπ

(3.204)

where,

i.

ii.

iii.

iv.

**“α” and “e” denote the fine structure constant and exponential function respectively.
**

Eq. (4.1) error:

(a) Associated with “ωΩ(rε,me)/ωΩ(rπ,mp) = 2” is “8.876 x10-3(%)”

(b) Associated with “ωΩ(rε,me)/ωΩ(rν,mn) = 2” is “0.266(%)”.

Eq. (3.214) error is “2.823(%)”.

Eq. (3.204) error is “0.042(%)”.

1.2.8.4.2 Improving accuracy

Since the experimental value of the RMS charge radius of the Proton is considered by the

scientific community to be precisely known29, the accuracy of Eq. (3.214, 3.204) may be improved

by re-computing the value of “rν” and “rε”. This action further strengthens the validity of Eq. (4.1)

by verifying trivial deviation utilising the re-computed values.

Hence, it follows that numerical solutions for “rν” and “rε”, constrained by exact

mathematical statements [Eq. (3.203, 3.204, 3.214, 4.1)], suggests that the gravitational relationship

between the Electron and Proton, as inferred by the result “ωΩ(rε,me)/ωΩ(rπ,mp) = 2”, is harmonic.

28

29

**rε ≥ 0.0118(fm), γ = 0.577215664901533.
**

To a degree of accuracy significantly greater than the Electron or Neutron.

64

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**The computational algorithm supporting this contention may be stated as follows,
**

Given

α

r ε ω Ω r ε, m e

r e ω Ω r π, m p

rν

rε

rε

rπ

rε

rν

9

2

.e

rπ

3

1.

2

ln 2 .n Ω r e , m e

5

γ

2 π

Find r ν , r ε

(4.2)

(4.3)

yields,

rν

0.826838

rε

0.011802

.( fm)

(4.4)

where,

i.

ii.

iii.

Eq. (4.1) error:

(a) Associated with “ωΩ(rε,me)/ωΩ(rπ,mp) = 2” is “4.493 x10-7(%)”.

(b) Associated with “ωΩ(rε,me)/ωΩ(rν,mn) = 2” is “0.282(%)”.

Eq. (3.214) error is “1.11 x10-13(%)”.

Eq. (3.204) error is “0.026(%)”.

1.2.8.4.3 Formulating an hypothesis

In the preceding calculations utilising known particle mass and radii as a reference, it was

found that the harmonic cut-off frequency ratio of an Electron to a Proton was precisely “2”. This

provokes the hypothesis that a simple harmonic pattern may exist describing the relationship of all

fundamental particles relative to an arbitrarily chosen base particle according to,

ω Ω r 1, M 1

ω Ω r 2, M 2

St ω

(3.230i)

**Performing the appropriate substitutions utilising Eq.(3.69 – 3.73), Eq. (3.230i) may be simplified
**

to,

M1

M2

2

.

r2

5

r1

St ω

9

(3.230ii)

**where, “Stω” represents the ratio of two particle spectra. Subsequently, “rε” may be simply
**

calculated according to,

5

1 . me

r ε r π.

9

2 mp

2

(3.231)

**1.2.8.5 Identifying a mathematical pattern
**

Utilising Eq. (3.230ii), Storti et. Al. identify mathematical patterns in [11-13] showing that

“Stω” may be represented in terms of the Proton, Electron and Quark harmonic cut-off frequencies

derived from the respective particle. Potentially, three new Leptons (L2, L3, L5 and associated

Neutrino’s: ν2, ν3, ν5) and two new Quark / Boson’s (QB5 and QB6) are predicted, beyond the SM

as shown in table (4.5).

65

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**The EGM Harmonic Representation of Fundamental Particles (i.e. table (4.5)) is applicable
**

to the size relationship between the Proton and Neutron (i.e. to calculate “rπ” from “rν” and viceversa utilising “Stω = 1”) as an approximation only. For precise calculations based upon similar

forms, the reader should refer to Eq. (3.199, 3.200).

Note: although the newly predicted Leptons are within the kinetic range30 and therefore “should

have been experimentally detected”, there are substantial explanations discussed in the proceeding

sections.

Proton

Electron

Quark

Harmonics Harmonics Harmonics

Proton (p), Neutron (n)

Stω = 1

Stω = 1/2

Stω = 1/14

2

1

1/7

Electron (e), Electron Neutrino (ν

νe)

4

2

2/7

L2, ν2 (Theoretical Lepton, Neutrino)

6

3

3/7

L3, ν3 (Theoretical Lepton, Neutrino)

8

4

4/7

Muon (µ

µ), Muon Neutrino (ν

νµ)

10

5

5/7

L5, ν5 (Theoretical Lepton, Neutrino)

12

6

6/7

Tau (ττ), Tau Neutrino (ν

ντ )

Up Quark (uq), Down Quark (dq)

14

7

1

Strange Quark (sq)

28

14

2

Charm Quark (cq)

42

21

3

Bottom Quark (bq)

56

28

4

QB5 (Theoretical Quark or Boson)

70

35

5

QB6 (Theoretical Quark or Boson)

84

42

6

W Boson

98

49

7

Z Boson

112

56

8

Higgs Boson (H) (Theoretical)

126

63

9

Top Quark (tq)

140

70

10

Table 4.5: harmonic representation of fundamental particles,

Existing and Theoretical Particles

1.2.8.6 Results

1.2.8.6.1 Harmonic evidence of unification

Exploiting the mathematical pattern articulated in table (4.5), EGM predicts the RMS charge

radius and mass-energy of less accurately known particles, comparing them to expert opinion. The

values of “Stω” shown in table (4.5), predict possible particle mass and radii for all Leptons,

Neutrinos, Quarks and Intermediate Vector Bosons (IVB’s), in complete agreement with the SM,

PDG estimates and studies by Hirsch et. Al in [34] as shown in table (4.6),

Particle

Proton (p)

Neutron (n)

Electron (e)

Muon (µ

µ)

Tau (ττ)

Electron Neutrino (ν

ν e)

Muon Neutrino (ν

νµ)

30

EGM Radii

x10-16(cm)

rπ = 830.5957

rν = 826.8379

rε = 11.8055

rµ = 8.2165

rτ = 12.2415

ren ≈ 0.0954

rµn ≈ 0.6556

**EGM Mass-Energy
**

(computed or utilised)

**PDG Mass-Energy Range
**

(2005 Values)

**Mass-Energy precisely known,
**

See: National Institute of Standards and Technology

(NIST) [35]

Note: δm = 10-100

men(eV) ≈ 3 - δm

mµn(MeV) ≈ 0.19 - δm

men(eV) < 3

mµn(MeV) < 0.19

**A region extensively explored in Particle-Physics experiments.
**

66

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Tau Neutrino (ν

ν τ)

rτn ≈ 1.9588

mτn(MeV) ≈ 18.2 - δm mτn(MeV) < 18.2

Up Quark (uq)

1.5 < muq(MeV) < 4

ruq ≈ 0.7682

muq(MeV) ≈ 3.5060

Down Quark (dq)

3 < mdq(MeV) < 8

rdq ≈ 1.0136

mdq(MeV) ≈ 7.0121

Strange Quark (sq)

80 < msq(MeV) < 130

rsq ≈ 0.8879

msq(MeV) ≈ 113.9460

1.15 < mcq(GeV) < 1.35

Charm Quark (cq)

mcq(GeV) ≈ 1.1833

rcq ≈ 1.0913

Bottom Quark (bq)

4.1 < mbq(GeV) < 4.4

rbq ≈ 1.071

mbq(GeV) ≈ 4.1196

Top Quark (tq)

169.2 < mtq(GeV) < 179.4

rtq ≈ 0.9294

mtq(GeV) ≈ 178.4979

W Boson

80.387 < mW(GeV) < 80.463

rW ≈ 1.2839

mW(GeV) ≈ 80.425

Z Boson

91.1855 < mZ(GeV) < 91.1897

rZ ≈ 1.0616

mZ(GeV) ≈ 91.1876

Higgs Boson (H)

mH(GeV) ≈ 114.4 + δm mH(GeV) > 114.4

rH ≈ 0.9403

Photon (γγ)

rγγ = ½Kλλh

mγγ ≈ 3.2 x10-45(eV)

mγ < 6 x10-17(eV)

No definitive commitment

Graviton (γγg)

rgg = 2(2/5)rγγ

mgg = 2mγγ

L2 (Lepton)

mL(2) ≈ 9(MeV)

rL ≈ 10.7518 mL(3) ≈ 57(MeV)

L3 (Lepton)

L5 (Lepton)

mL(5) ≈ 566(MeV)

ν2 (L2 Neutrino)

rν2,ν3,ν5

mν2 ≈ men

Not predicted or considered

≈

ν3 (L3 Neutrino)

mν3 ≈ mµn

ren,µn,τn

ν5 (L5 Neutrino)

mν5 ≈ mτn

QB5 (Quark or Boson) rQB ≈ 1.0052 mQB(5) ≈ 10(GeV)

QB6 (Quark or Boson)

mQB(6) ≈ 22(GeV)

Table 4.6: RMS charge radii and mass-energies of fundamental particles,

where,

i.

“Kλ” denotes a Planck scaling factor, determined to be “(π/2)1/3” in [13].

ii.

“λh” denotes Planck Length [4.05131993288926 x10-35(m)].

iii.

“rL” and “rQB” denote the average radii of SM Leptons and Quark / Bosons

(respectively) utilised to calculate the mass-energy of the proposed “new particles”.

Note:

iv.

A formalism for the approximation of ν2, ν3 and ν5 mass-energy is shown in [15].

v.

It is shown in [8,10,13] that the RMS charge diameters of a Photon and Graviton are

“λh” and “1.5λh” respectively, in agreement with Quantum Mechanical (QM) models.

1.2.8.6.2 Recent developments

1.2.8.6.2.1 PDG mass-energy ranges

The EGM construct was finalized by Storti et. Al. in 2004 and tested against published PDG

data of the day [i.e. the 2005 values shown in table (4.6)]. Annually, as part of their “continuous

improvement cycle”, the PDG reconciles its published values of particle properties against the latest

experimental and theoretical evidence. The 2006 changes in PDG mass-energy range values not

impacting EGM are as follows:

i.

Strange Quark = “70 < msq(MeV) < 120”.

ii.

Charm Quark = “1.16 < mcq(GeV) < 1.34”.

iii.

“W” Boson = “80.374 < mW(GeV) < 80.432”.

iv.

“Z” Boson = “91.1855 < mZ(GeV) < 91.1897”.

Therefore, we may conclude that the EGM construct continues to predict experimentally verified

results within the SM to high computational precision.

67

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.2.8.6.2.2 Electron Neutrino and Up / Down / Bottom Quark mass
**

Particle-Physics research is a highly dynamic field supporting a landscape of constantly

changing hues. The EGM construct relates “mass to size” in harmonic terms. If one applies Eq.

(3.230ii) and utilizes the Proton as the reference particle in accordance with table (4.5), one obtains

a single expression with two unknowns, as implied by Eq. (3.231).

Since contemporary Physics is currently incapable of specifying the mass and size of most

fundamental particles precisely and concurrently, EGM is required to approximate values of either

mass or radius to predict one or the other (i.e. mass or size). Subsequently, the EGM predictions

articulated in table (4.6) denote values based upon estimates of either mass or radius.

Hence, some of the results in table (4.6) are approximations and subject to revision as new

experimental evidence regarding particle properties (particularly mass), come to light. The 2006

changes in PDG mass-energy values affecting table (4.6) are shown below. In this data set, the

EGM radii are displayed as a range relating to its mass-energy influence.

Note: the average value of EGM “Up + Down Quark” mass from table (4.6) [i.e. 5.2574(MeV)]

remains within the 2006 average mass range specified by the PDG [i.e. 2.5 to 5.5(MeV)].

EGM Radii x10-16(cm)

**PDG Mass-Energy
**

Range (2006 Values)

men(eV) < 2

Electron Neutrino (ν

νe) ren < 0.0811

PDG Mass-Energy

Up Quark (uq)

1.5 < muq(MeV) < 3

0.5469 < ruq < 0.7217

Range

(2006

Values)

Down Quark (dq)

3 < mdq(MeV) < 7

0.7217 < rdq < 1.0128

Bottom Quark (bq)

1.0719 > rbq > 1.0863

4.13 < mbq(GeV) < 4.27

Table 4.7: RMS charge radii and mass-energies of fundamental particles,

Particle

**EGM Mass-Energy
**

(utilised)

**The predicted radii ranges above demonstrate that no significant deviation from table (4.6)
**

values exists. This emphasizes that the EGM harmonic representation of fundamental particles is a

robust formulation and is insensitive to minor fluctuations in particle mass, particularly in the

absence of experimentally determined RMS charge radii.

Therefore, we may conclude that the EGM construct continues to predict experimentally verified

results within the SM to high computational precision.

1.2.8.6.2.3 Top Quark mass

1.2.8.6.2.3.1 The dilemma

The Collider Detector at Fermilab (CDF) and “D-ZERO” (D0) Collaborations have recently

revised their world average value of “Top Quark” mass from “178.0(GeV/c2)” in 2004 [36] to,

“172.0” in 2005 [37], “172.5” in early 2006, then “171.4” in July 2006. [38]

Note: since the precise value of “mtq” is subject to frequent revision, we shall utilize the 2005 value

in the resolution of the dilemma as it sits between the 2006 values.

1.2.8.6.2.3.2 The resolution

The EGM method utilizes fundamental particle RMS charge radius to determine mass.

Currently, Quark radii are not precisely known and approximations were applied in the formulation

of “mtq” displayed in table (4.6). However, if one utilizes the revised experimental value of “mtq =

172.0(GeV/c2)” to calculate the RMS charge radius of the Top Quark “rtq”, based on Proton

68

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**harmonics, it is immediately evident that a decrease in “rtq” of “< 1.508(%)” produces the new
**

world average value precisely. The relevant calculations may be performed simply as follows,

The revised “Top Quark” radius based upon the “new world average Top Quark” mass,

5

GeV

172.

2

1 .

c

r π.

9

mp

140

2

= 0.9156 10

16 .

cm

(4.5)

The decrease in “Top Quark” RMS charge radius [relative to the table (4.6) value] based upon the

“new world average Top Quark” mass becomes,

r tq

1 = 1.5076 ( % )

5

GeV

172.

2

1 .

c

r π.

9

mp

140

2

(4.6)

**where, “rtq” denotes the RMS charge radius of the “Top Quark” from table (4.6).
**

Therefore, since the change in “rtq” is so small and its experimental value is not precisely known,

we may conclude the EGM construct continues to predict experimentally verified results within the

SM to high computational precision.

Note: the 2006 value for revised “mtq” modifies the error defined by Eq. (4.6) to “< 1.65(%)”.

1.2.8.7 Discussion

1.2.8.7.1 Experimental evidence of unification

Table (4.5, 4.6, 4.7) display mathematical facts demonstrating that all fundamental particles

may be represented as harmonics of an arbitrarily selected reference particle, in complete agreement

with the SM. Considering that the EGM method is so radically different and quantifies the physical

world beyond contemporary solutions, one becomes tempted to disregard table (4.5, 4.6, 4.7) in

favour of concluding these to be “coincidental”.

However, it is inconceivable that such precision from a single paradigm spanning the entire

family of fundamental particles could be “coincidental”. The derivation of the “Top Quark” massenergy is in itself, an astonishing result which the SM is currently incapable of producing.

Moreover, the derivation of (a), EM radii characteristics of the Proton and Neutron (rπE, rπM

and rνM) (b), the classical RMS charge radius of the Proton (c), the 1st term of the Hydrogen atom

spectrum “λA” and (d), the Bohr radius “rx”: all from the same paradigm, strengthens the harmonic

case.

Additionally, Storti et. Al. demonstrate in “Quinta Essentia, A Practical Guide to SpaceTime Engineering, Part 3: pg. 54 (see: Ref.)” that the probability of coincidence is “<< 10-38”

based upon the results shown in table (4.8),

Particle / Atom EGM Prediction

Proton (p)

rπ = 830.5957 x10-16(cm) [9]

rπE = 848.5274 x10-16(cm) [14]

rπM = 849.9334 x10-16(cm) [14]

rp = 874.5944 x10-16(cm) [14]

Neutron (n)

rν = 826.8379 x10-16(cm) [9]

69

Experimental Measurement

rπ = 830.6624 x10-16(cm) [30]

rπE = 848 x10-16(cm) [39,40]

rπM = 857 x10-16(cm) [39,40]

rp = 875.0 x10-16(cm) [35]

rX ≈ 825.6174 x10-16(cm) [14]

(%) Error

< 0.008

< 0.062

< 0.825

< 0.046

< 0.148

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Neutron (n)

Top Quark (tq)

Hydrogen (H)

where,

i.

ii.

iii.

iv.

**KS = -0.1133 x10-26(cm2) [14] KX = -0.113 x10-26(cm2) [31]
**

rνM = 878.9719 x10-16(cm) [14] rνM = 879 x10-16(cm) [39,40]

mtq(GeV) ≈ 172.0 [37]

mtq(GeV) ≈ 178.4979 [12,17]

λA = 657.3290(nm) [16]

λB = 656.4696(nm) [41]

rx = 0.0527(nm) [16]

rBohr = 0.0529(nm) [35]

Table 4.8: experimentally verified EGM predictions,

< 0.296

< 0.003

< 3.64

< 0.131

< 0.353

**“rπE” and “rπM” denote the Electric and Magnetic radii of the Proton respectively.
**

“rνM” denotes the Magnetic radius of the Neutron.

“λA” and “λB” denote the first term of the Hydrogen atom spectrum (Balmer series).

“rp = 875.0 x10-16(cm)” and “rBohr = 0.0529(nm)” are not experimental values, they

denote the classical RMS charge radius of the Proton and the Bohr radius, i.e. the official

values listed by NIST.

**Note: numerical simulations generating all values in table (4.5, 4.6, 4.8) can be found in [17-19].
**

1.2.8.7.2 The answers to some important questions

1.2.8.7.2.1 What causes harmonic patterns to form?

1.2.8.7.2.1.1 ZPF equilibrium

A free fundamental particle is regarded by EGM as a “bubble” of energy equivalent mass.

Nature always seeks the lowest energy state: so surely, the lowest state for a free fundamental

particle “should be” to diffuse itself to “non-existence” in the absence of “something” acting to

keep it contained?

This provokes the suggestion that a free fundamental particle is kept contained by the

surrounding space-time manifold. In other words, free fundamental particles are analogous to

“neutrally buoyant bubbles” floating in a locally static fluid (the space-time manifold). EGM is an

approximation method, developed by the application of standard engineering tools, which finds the

ZPF equilibrium point between the mass-energy equivalence of the particle and the space-time

manifold (the ZPF) surrounding it - as depicted by Fig. (4.4).

1.2.8.7.2.1.2 Inherent quantum characteristics

If one assumes that the basic nature of the Universe is built upon quantum states of

existence, it follows that ZPF equilibrium is a common and convenient feature amongst free

fundamental particles by which to test this assumption. Relativity tells us that no absolute frames of

reference exist, so a logical course of action is to define a datum as EGM is derived from a

gravitational base. In our case, it is an arbitrary choice of fundamental particle.

To be representative of the quantum realm, it follows that ZPF equilibrium between free

fundamental particles should also be analogous to quantum and fractional quantum numbers – as

one finds with the “Quantum Hall Effect”. Subsequently, the harmonic patterns of table (4.5) form

because the determination of ZPF equilibrium is applied to inherently quantum characteristic

objects – i.e. fundamental particles.

Hence, it should be no surprise to the reader that comparing a set of inherently quantum

characterised objects to each other, each of which may be described by a single wavefunction at its

harmonic cut-off frequency, results in a globally harmonic description. That is, the EGM harmonic

representation of fundamental particles is a quantum statement of ZPF equilibrium – as one would

expect. In-fact, it would be alarming if table (4.5), or a suitable variation thereof, could not be

formulated.

Therefore, harmonic patterns form due to inherent quantum characteristics and ZPF equilibrium.

70

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.2.8.7.2.2 Why haven’t the “new” particles been experimentally detected?
**

EGM approaches the question of particle existence, not just by mass as in the SM, but by

harmonic cut-off frequency “ωΩ” (i.e. by mass and ZPF equilibrium). Storti et. Al. showed in [5]

that the bulk of the PV spectral energy31 at the surface of the Earth exists well above the “THz”

range. Hence, generalizing this result to any mass implies that the harmonic cut-off period32 “TΩ”

defines the minimum detection interval to confirm (or refute) the existence of the proposed “L2, L3,

L5” Leptons and associated “ν2, ν3, ν5” Neutrinos. In other words, a particle exists for at least the

period specified by “TΩ” – i.e. its minimum lifetime.

Quantum Field Theory (QFT) approaches this question from a highly useful, but extremely

limited perspective compared to the EGM construct. QFT utilizes particle mass to determine the

minimum detection period (in terms of eV) to be designed into experiments. To date, this approach

has been highly successful, but results in the conclusion that no new Leptons exist beyond the SM

in the mass-energy range specified by the proposed Leptons. Whilst QFT is a highly useful

yardstick, it is by no means a definitive benchmark to warrant termination of exploratory

investigations for additional particles.

Typically in the SM, short lived particles are seen as resonances in cross sections of data

sets and many Hadrons in the data tables are revealed in this manner. Hence, the SM asserts that the

more unstable particles are, the stronger the interaction and the greater the likelihood of detection.

The EGM construct regards the existing Leptons of the SM as long-lived particles. It also

asserts that the SM does not adequately address the existence or stability of the extremely shortlived Leptons proposed. This assertion is supported by the fact that detection of these particles is

substantially beyond current capabilities due to:

i.

The minimum detection interval (with negligible experimental error) being “< 10-29(s)”.

ii.

The possibility that the proposed Leptons are transient (intermediate) states of particle

production processes which decay before detection. For example, perhaps an Electron

passes through an “L2” phase prior to stabilization to Electronic form (for an appropriate

production process). Subsequently, this would be not be detected if the transition process

is very rapid and the accelerator energies are too low.

iii.

The possibility of statistically low production events.

Hence:

iv.

The proposed Leptons are too short-lived to appear as resonances in cross-sections.

v.

The SM assertion that the more unstable particles are, the stronger the interaction and

the greater the likelihood of detection is invalid for the proposed Leptons.

Therefore, contemporary particle experiments are incapable of detecting the proposed Leptons at

the minimum accelerator energy levels required to refute the EGM construct.

1.2.8.7.2.3 Why can all fundamental particles be described in harmonic terms?

Because of the precise experimental and mathematical evidence presented in table (4.5, 4.6,

4.8). These results were achieved by construction of a model based upon a single gravitational

paradigm. Moreover, Storti et. Al. also derives the Casmir force in [7] from [1-6] utilising Eq. (3.63,

3.67, 3.73).

31

32

“>> 99.99(%)”.

The inverse of “ωΩ”.

71

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.2.8.7.2.4 Why is EGM a method and not a theory?
**

EGM is a method and not a theory because: (i) it is an engineering approximation and (ii),

the mass and size of most subatomic particles are not precisely known. It harmonizes all

fundamental particles relative to an arbitrarily chosen reference particle by parameterising ZPF

equilibrium in terms of harmonic cut-off frequency “ωΩ”.

The formulation of table (4.5) is a robust approximation based upon PDG data. Other

interpretations are possible, depending on the values utilised. For example, if one re-applies the

method presented in [12] based upon other data; the values of “Stω” in table (4.5) might differ.

However, in the absence of exact experimentally measured mass and size information, there is little

motivation to postulate alternative harmonic sequences, particularly since the current formulation

fits the available experimental evidence extremely well.

If all mass and size values were exactly known by experimental measurement, the main

sequence formulated in [12] (or a suitable variation thereof) will produce a precise harmonic

representation of fundamental particles, invariant to interpretation. Table (4.5) values cannot be

dismissed due to potential multiplicity before reconciling how:

i. “ωΩ”, which is the basis of the table (4.5) construct, produces Eq. (3.199, 3.200) as

derived in [9]. These generate radii values substantially more accurate than any other

contemporary method. In-fact, it is a noteworthy result that EGM is capable of

producing the Neutron MS charge radius as a positive quantity. Conventional techniques

favour the non-intuitive form of a negative squared quantity.

ii. “ωΩ” is capable of producing “a Top Quark” mass value – the SM cannot.

iii. EGM produces the results defined in table (4.8).

iv. Extremely short-lived Leptons [i.e. with lifetimes of “< 10-29(s)”] cannot exist, or do not

exist for a plausible harmonic interpretation.

v. Any other harmonic interpretation, in the absence of exact mass and size values

determined experimentally, denote a superior formulation.

Therefore, EGM is a method facilitating the harmonic representation of fundamental particles.

1.2.8.7.2.5 What would one need to do, in order to disprove EGM?

Explain how experimental measurements of charge radii and mass-energy by international

collaborations such as CDF, D0, L3, SELEX and ZEUS in [30,36-38,42-45], do not correlate to

EGM calculations.

1.2.8.7.2.6 Why does EGM produce current and not constituent Quark masses?

The EGM method is capable of producing current and constituent Quark masses, only

current Quark masses are presented herein. This manuscript is limited to current Quark masses

because it is the simplest example of ZPF equilibrium applicable whereby a particle is treated as “a

system” and the equilibrium radius is calculated.

Determination of the constituent Quark mass is a more complicated process, but the method

of solution remains basically the same. For example, Storti et. Al. calculate an experimentally

implicit value of the Bohr radius in [16] by treating the atom as “a system” in equilibrium with the

polarized ZPF.

72

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.2.8.7.2.7 Why does EGM yield only the three observed families?
**

This occurs because it treats all objects with mass as a system (e.g. the Bohr atom) in

equilibrium with the polarized ZPF (the objects own gravitational field). Therefore, since

fundamental particles with classical form factor denote fundamental states (or systems: Quarks in

the Proton and Neutron) of polarized ZPF equilibrium, it follows that only the three families will be

predicted.

1.2.8.8 What may the periodic table of elementary particles look like under EGM?

Assuming “QB5,6” to be Intermediate Vector Bosons (IVB's), we shall conjecture that the

periodic table of elementary particles may be constructed as follows,

Types of Matter

Group II

Group III

Up

14 Charm

42 Top

140

+2/3,1/2,[R,G,B]

+2/3,1/2,[R,G,B]

+2/3,1/2,[R,G,B]

uq

cq

tq

1.5 < muq(MeV) < 3

≈ 1.1833(GeV)

≈ 172.0(GeV)

28 Bottom

Down

14 Strange

56

-1/3,1/2,[R,G,B]

-1/3,1/2,[R,G,B]

-1/3,1/2,[R,G,B]

dq

sq

bq

(GeV)

< 4.27

3 < mdq(MeV) < 7

4.13

<

m

≈ 113.9460(MeV)

bq

Electron

2 Muon

8 Tau

12

-1,1/2

-1,1/2

-1,1/2

e

µ

τ

= 0.5110(MeV)

= 105.7(MeV)

= 1.777(GeV)

8 Tau Neutrino

12

Electron Neutrino

2 Muon Neutrino

0,1/2

0,1/2

0,1/2

νe

νµ

ντ

< 2(eV)

< 0.19(MeV)

< 18.2(MeV)

L2

4 L3

6 L5

10

-1,1/2

-1,1/2

-1,1/2

L2

L3

L5

≈ 9(MeV)

≈ 57(MeV)

≈ 566(MeV)

L2 Neutrino

4 L3 Neutrino

6 L5 Neutrino

10

0,1/2

0,1/2

0,1/2

ν2

ν3

ν5

≈ men

≈ mµn

≈ mτn

Standard Model and EGM Bosons

Photon

N/A Gluon

? QB6

84 Z Boson

112

1,Colour,1

1,Weak Charge,10-6

1,Weak Charge,10-6

1,Charge,α

gl

Q B6

Z

γ

-45

< 10(MeV)

≈ 22(GeV)

≈ 91.1875(GeV)

≈ 3.2 x10 (eV)

Graviton

N/A QB5

70 W Boson

98 Higgs Boson

126

2,Energy,10-39

1,Weak Charge,10-6

1,Weak Charge,10-6

0,Higgs Field,?

QB 5

W

H

γg

≈ 10(GeV)

≈ 80.27(GeV)

> 114.4(GeV)

= 2mγγ

Table 4.9: predicted periodic table of elementary particles,

E GM

Leptons

Standard

Model

Leptons

Quarks

Group I

73

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Legend

Leptons

Quarks

Bosons

Stω Name

Stω Name

Stω

Charge(e),Spin,Colour

Charge(e),Spin

Spin,Source,*SC

Symbol

Symbol

Symbol

Mass-Energy

Mass-Energy

Mass-Energy

(i) *Where, “SC” denotes coupling strength at “1(GeV)”. [46]

(ii) The values of “Stω” in table (4.9) utilize the Proton as the reference particle. This is due to its RMS

charge radius and mass-energy being precisely known by physical measurement.

Name

**Table 4.9: particle legend,
**

1.2.8.9 What are the most important results determined by the EGM construct?

The most important results determined by the EGM construct may be categorised into five

main areas as follows:

i. Polarisable Vacuum and Zero-Point-Field.

ii. Photons, Gravitons and Euler's Constant.

iii. All other particles.

iv. The Casimir Force.

v. The Planck scale and the Bohr radius.

1.2.8.9.1 PV and ZPF

1.2.8.9.1.1 Gravitational amplitude spectrum “CPV”

G.M .

C PV n PV, r , M

2

r

2

.

π n PV

(3.64)

**1.2.8.9.1.2 Gravitational frequency spectrum “ωPV”
**

n PV 3 2 . c . G. M

.

. K ( r, M )

PV

r

π .r

ω PV n PV, r , M

(3.67)

**1.2.8.9.1.3 Harmonic cut-off frequency “ωΩ”
**

ω Ω ( r , M ) n Ω ( r , M ) .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

(3.73)

**1.2.8.9.2 Photons, Gravitons and Euler's Constant
**

Note: Euler's Constant “γ” may be calculated by: (i) physical measurement of “mγγ” and (ii), the

assumption that “2 x rγγ” is precisely equal to the experimentally implicit value of the Planck

Length characterised by “Kλ x λh”.

1.2.8.9.2.1 The mass-energy of a Graviton “mgg”

mgg = 2mγγ

(3.216)

**1.2.8.9.2.2 The mass-energy of a Photon “mγγ”
**

3

m γγ

h .

re

3

π .r e

2 .c .G.m e

.

512.G.m e

2

c .π

74

2

.

n Ω r e, m e

ln 2 .n Ω r e , m e

γ

2

(3.220)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.2.8.9.2.3 The radius of a Photon “rγγ”
**

5

2

m γγ

r γγ r e .

m e .c

2

(3.225)

G.h . r µ

r γγ K ω .

c

rτ

3

(3.274)

**1.2.8.9.2.4 The radius of a Graviton “rgg”
**

r gg

5

4 .r γγ

(3.227)

**1.2.8.9.3 All Other Particles
**

1.2.8.9.3.1 The Fine Structure Constant “α”

α

rε

2

.e

3

rπ

(3.204)

rµ

rε

α

rτ

.e

rν

(3.236)

**1.2.8.9.3.2 Harmonic cut-off frequency ratio (the ratio of two particle spectra) “Stω”
**

2

ω Ω r 1, M 1

M1

ω Ω r 2, M 2

M2

5

9

.

r2

9

r1

St ω

(3.230)

**1.2.8.9.3.3 Neutron Magnetic Radius “rνM”
**

r dr

rν

r ν . ρ ch r νM

ρ ch ( r ) d r

rν

(3.420)

**1.2.8.9.3.4 Proton Electric Radius “rπE”
**

r dr

r ν . ρ ch r πE

ρ ch ( r ) d r

rν

(3.423)

**1.2.8.9.3.5 Proton Magnetic Radius “rπM”
**

∞

r ν . ρ ch r πM

ρ ch ( r ) d r

r dr

rν

75

(3.426)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.2.8.9.3.6 Classical Proton Root Mean Square Charge Radius “rp”
**

r P r πE

1.

2

r νM

rν

(3.429)

**1.2.8.9.3.7 The first term of the Hydrogen Spectrum (Balmer Series) “λA”
**

•

**By EGM: utilising the Bohr radius “rBohr” and the fundamental PV wavelength “λPV”
**

λA

λ PV 1 , K ω .r Bohr , m p

2 .n Ω K ω .r Bohr , m p

(3.457)

**1.2.8.10 Graphical representation of fundamental particles under EGM
**

Illustrational (only) wavefunction “ψ” [Eq. (3.458)] based on Proton harmonics,

sin St ω .2 .π .ω Ω r π , m p .t

ψ St ω , t

(3.458)

1.

T Ω r π ,m p

2

ψ( 1, t )

ψ( 2, t )

ψ( 4, t )

0

5 .10

29

1 .10

28

1.5 .10

28

2 .10

28

2.5 .10

28

3 .10

28

3.5 .10

28

ψ( 6, t )

t

Proton, Neutron

Electron, Electron Neutrino

L2, v2

L3, v3

Figure 3.44,

76

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1 .

T Ω r π ,m p

16

ψ( 8,t)

ψ ( 10 , t )

ψ ( 12 , t )

5 .10

0

30

1 .10

29

1.5 .10

29

2 .10

29

2.5 .10

29

3 .10

29

3.5 .10

29

4 .10

29

4.5 .10

29

ψ ( 14 , t )

t

**Muon, Muon Neutrino
**

L5, v5

Tau, Tau Neutrino

Up and Down Quark

Figure 3.45,

1 .

T Ω r π ,m p

56

ψ ( 28 , t )

ψ ( 42 , t )

ψ ( 56 , t )

0

1 .10

30

2 .10

30

3 .10

30

4 .10

30

5 .10

30

6 .10

30

30

7 .10

8 .10

30

9 .10

30

1 .10

29

1.1 .10

29

1.2 .10

29

1.3 .10

29

ψ ( 70 , t )

t

Strange Quark

Charm Quark

Bottom Quark

QB5

Figure 3.46,

77

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1 .

T Ω r π ,m p

168

ψ ( 84 , t )

ψ ( 98 , t )

ψ ( 112 , t )

ψ ( 126 , t )

0

5 .10

31

1 .10

30

1.5 .10

30

2 .10

30

2.5 .10

30

3 .10

30

3.5 .10

30

4 .10

30

4.5 .10

30

ψ ( 140 , t )

t

QB6

W Boson

Z Boson

Higgs Boson

Top Quark

Figure 3.47,

1.2.8.11 Concluding remarks about EGM

A concise mathematical relationship, based upon homogeneity concepts inherent in BPT,

augmented with Fourier series, has been used to combine gravitational acceleration and

ElectroMagnetism into a method producing fundamental particle properties to extraordinary

precision. This also results in the representation of fundamental particles as harmonic forms of each

other. Additionally, the representation predicts the existence of new fundamental particles not found

within the Standard Model – suggesting the following:

i.

An exciting avenue for community exploration, beyond the Standard Model.

ii.

The potential for new Physics at higher accelerator energies.

iii.

The potential for unification of fundamental particles.

iv.

Physical limitations on the value of two extremely important mathematical constants [i.e.

“π” and “γ”] at the QM level – subject to uncertainty principles.

NOTES

78

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.2.9 The Hubble Constant “H0”
**

The following statements are verbatim quotations from [24].

1.2.9.1 Description

Hubble’s Law is the statement in physical Cosmology that the red-shift in light coming from

distant Galaxies is proportional to their distance. The law was first formulated by Edwin Hubble

and Milton Humason in 1929 after nearly a decade of observations. It is considered the first

observational basis for the expanding space paradigm and today serves as one of the most often

cited pieces of evidence in support of the “Big-Bang”. The most recent calculation of the constant,

using the satellite WMAP began in 2003, yielding a value of “71 ± 4(km/s/Mpc)”. As of August

2006, the figure had been refined using data from NASA's orbital Chandra X-ray Observatory to

“77(km/s/Mpc)” with an uncertainty of 15(%).

1.2.9.2 Discovery

In the decade before Hubble made his observations, a number of Physicists and

Mathematicians had established a consistent theory of the relationship between space and time by

using Einstein's field equations of GR. Applying the most general principles to the question of the

nature of the Universe yielded a dynamic solution that conflicted with the then prevailing notion of

a static Universe.

In 1922, Alexander Friedmann derived his famous equations from GR, showing that the

Universe might expand at a calculable rate. The parameter used by Friedman is known today as the

scale factor which can be considered as a scale invariant form of the proportionality constant of

Hubble's Law. Georges Lemaître independently found a similar solution in 1927. From the

Friedmann equations, the Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker metric was derived for a fluid

with a given density and pressure. This idea of expanding space-time would eventually lead to the

“Big-Bang” theory of Cosmology.

Before the advent of modern Cosmology, there was considerable talk as to the size and

shape of the Universe. In 1920, a famous debate took place between Harlow Shapley and Heber D.

Curtis over this very issue with Shapley arguing for a small Universe the size of our “Milky-Way”

Galaxy and Curtis arguing that the Universe was much larger. The issue would be resolved in the

coming decade with Hubble's improved observations.

Edwin Hubble did most of his professional astronomical

observation work at Mount Wilson observatory, the world's most

powerful telescope at the time. His observations of Cepheid variable

stars in spiral nebulae enabled him to calculate the distances to these

objects. Surprisingly, these objects were discovered to be at distances

which placed them well outside the “Milky-Way”. The nebulae were

first described as “island Universes”, and it was only later that the

term “Galaxy” would be applied to them.

Combining his measurements of Galactic distances with Vesto

Slipher's measurements of the red-shifts, Hubble discovered a rough

proportionality of the objects’ distances with their red-shifts. Though

there was considerable scatter (now known to be due to peculiar

velocities), Hubble was able to plot a trend line from the 46 Galaxies

he studied and obtained a value for the Hubble constant of 500(km/s/Mpc), which is much higher

than the currently accepted value due to errors in his distance calibrations - a frequent problem even

for modern astronomers.

79

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**In 1958, the first good estimate of “H0”, 75(km/s/Mpc), was published by Allan Sandage.
**

But it would be decades before a consensus was achieved. After Hubble’s discovery was published,

Albert Einstein abandoned his work on the Cosmological constant which he had designed to allow

for a static solution to his equations. He would later term this work his “greatest blunder” since the

belief in a static Universe was what prevented him from predicting the expanding Universe.

Einstein would make a famous trip to Mount Wilson in 1931 to thank Hubble for providing the

observational basis for modern Cosmology.

1.2.9.3 Interpretation

The discovery of the linear relationship between recessional velocity and distance yields a

straightforward mathematical expression for Hubble’s Law as “v = H0D” where, “v” is the

recessional velocity due to red-shift, typically expressed in “km/s”. “H0” is Hubble's constant and

corresponds to the value of “H” (often termed the Hubble parameter which is time dependent) in the

Friedmann equations taken at the moment of observation denoted by the subscript “0”.

This value is the same throughout the Universe for a given conformal time. “D” is the

proper distance that the light had traveled from the Galaxy in the rest frame of the observer,

measured in “MegaParsecs” (Mpc). For relatively nearby Galaxies, the velocity “v” can be

estimated from the Galaxy’s red-shift “z” using the formula “v = zc “where, “c” is the speed of

light. For far away Galaxies, “v” can be determined from “z” by using the relativistic Doppler

Effect.

However, the best way to calculate the recessional velocity and its associated expansion rate

of space-time is by considering the conformal time associated with the Photon travelling from the

distant Galaxy. In very distant objects, “v” can be larger than “c”. This is not a violation of the

special relativity however because a metric expansion is not associated with any physical object’s

velocity.

In using Hubble's law to determine distances, only the velocity due to the expansion of the

Universe can be used. Since gravitationally interacting Galaxies move relative to each other,

independent of the expansion of the Universe, these relative velocities, called peculiar velocities,

need to be considered when applying Hubble's law.

The Finger of God Effect is one result of this phenomenon discovered in 1938 by Benjamin

Kenneally. In systems that are gravitationally bound, such as Galaxies or our planetary system, the

expansion of space is (more than) annihilated by the attractive force of gravity.

The mathematical derivation of an idealised Hubble’s Law for a uniformly expanding

Universe is a fairly elementary theorem of geometry in 3-dimensional Cartesian / Newtonian

coordinate space, which considered as a metric space, is entirely homogeneous and isotropic

(properties do not vary with location or direction).

Simply stated the theorem is

this: “Any two points which are

moving away from the origin, each

along straight lines and with speed

proportional to distance from the

origin, will be moving away from

each other with a speed proportional

to their distance apart”.

The ultimate fate and age of

the Universe can both be

determined by measuring the

Hubble

constant

today

and

extrapolating with the observed

value of the deceleration parameter,

uniquely characterised by values of total density parameter (Ω, Ω0).

80

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**A so-called “closed Universe” (Ω, Ω0 > 1) comes to an end in a “Big-Crunch” and is
**

considerably younger than its Hubble age. An “open or flat Universe” (Ω, Ω0 ≤ 1) expands forever

and has an age that is closer its Hubble age. For the accelerating Universe that we inhabit, the age of

the Universe is coincidentally very close to the Hubble age.

Figure 4.6,

The value of Hubble parameter changes over time either increasing or decreasing depending

on the sign of the deceleration parameter “q” which is defined by,

(W.3)

In a Universe with a deceleration parameter equal to zero, it follows that “H = 1 / t”, where “t” is

the time since the “Big-Bang”. A non-zero, time-dependent value of “q” simply requires integration

of the Friedmann equations backwards from the present time to the time when the comoving

horizon size was zero.

It was long thought that “q” was positive, indicating that the expansion is slowing down due

to gravitational attraction. This would imply an age of the Universe less than “1 / H”, for instance, a

value for “q = ½” (one theoretical possibility) would give the age of the Universe as “2/3⋅H-1”. The

discovery in 1998 that “q” is apparently negative means that the Universe could actually be older

than “1 / H”. In-fact, independent estimates of the age of the Universe come out fairly close to

“1/H”.

Note: we may define the “Hubble age” (also known as the “Hubble time” or “Hubble period”) of

the Universe as “1 / H”.

1.2.9.4 Olbers’ paradox

The expansion of space summarised by the “Big-Bang” interpretation of Hubble’s Law is

relevant to the old conundrum known as Olbers' paradox: if the Universe were infinite, static, and

filled with a uniform distribution of stars (notice that this also requires an infinite number of stars),

then every line of sight in the sky would end on a star, and the sky would be as bright as the surface

of a star. However, the night sky is largely dark. Since the 1600’s, astronomers and other thinkers

have proposed many possible ways to resolve this paradox, but the currently accepted resolution

81

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**depends in part upon the “Big-Bang” theory and in part upon the Hubble expansion.
**

In a Universe that exists for a finite amount of time, only the light of finitely many stars has

had a chance to reach us yet, and the paradox is resolved. Additionally, in an expanding Universe

distant objects recede from us, causing the light emanating from them to be red-shifted and

diminished in brightness. Both effects contribute (the red-shift being the more important of the two;

remember the original paradox was couched in terms of a static Universe) to the darkness of the

night sky, providing a kind of confirmation for the Hubble expansion of the Universe.

1.2.9.5 Measuring the Hubble constant

For most of the second half of the 20th century the value of “H0” was estimated to be 5090(km/s/Mpc). The value of the Hubble constant was the topic of a long and rather bitter

controversy between Gérard de Vaucouleurs who claimed the value was 80 and Allan Sandage who

claimed the value was 40. In 1996, a debate moderated by John Bahcall between Gustav Tammann

and Sidney van den Bergh was held in similar fashion to the earlier Shapley-Curtis debate over

these two competing values.

This difference was partially resolved with the introduction of the Lambda-CDM model of

the Universe in the late 1990’s. With these model observations of high-red-shift clusters at X-ray

and microwave wavelengths using the Sunyaev-Zel'dovich Effect, measurements of anisotropies in

the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR), and optical surveys all gave a value of

around 70 for the constant.

In particular the Hubble Key Project (led by Dr. Wendy L. Freedman, Carnegie

Observatories) gave the most accurate optical determination in May 2001 with its final estimate of

“72 ± 8(km/s/Mpc)”, consistent with a measurement of “H0” based upon Sunyaev-Zel'dovich Effect

observations of many Galaxy clusters having similar accuracy. The highest accuracy CMBR

determinations were “71 ± 4(km/s/Mpc)” by WMAP in 2003, and “70 +2.4/-3.2(km/s/Mpc)” for

measurements up to 2006.

The consistency of the measurements from all three methods lends support to both the

measured value of “H0” and the Lambda-CDM model. A value for “q” measured from standard

candle observations of “Type Ia supernovae”, which was determined in 1998 to be negative,

surprised many astronomers with the implication that the expansion of the Universe is currently

“accelerating” (although the Hubble factor is still decreasing with time).

In August 2006, using NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory, a team from NASA's Marshall

Space Flight Center (MSFC) found the Hubble constant to be “77(km/s/Mpc)”, with an uncertainty

of about 15(%).

End of verbatim quotation.

Note: the Particle Data Group (PDG) estimate “H0” to be “71(km/s/Mpc)”.

82

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1.2.10 CMBR temperature

**Figure 4.7: credit: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/,
**

83

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**The following statements are verbatim quotations from [24].
**

1.2.10.1 Description

In Cosmology, the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR), also referred as

relic radiation, is a form of ElectroMagnetic radiation discovered in 1965 that fills the entire

Universe. It has a thermal “2.725(K)” Black-Body spectrum which peaks in the microwave range at

a frequency of “160.4(GHz)”, corresponding to a wavelength of “1.9(mm)”. Most cosmologists

consider this radiation to be the best evidence for the hot “Big-Bang” model of the Universe.

1.2.10.2 Features

The Cosmic Microwave Background is isotropic to roughly one part in 100,000: the RootMean-Square (RMS) variations are only “18(µK)”. The Far-Infrared Absolute Spectrophotometer

(FIRAS) instrument on the NASA Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite has carefully

measured the spectrum of the CMBR. FIRAS compared the CMBR with a reference “Black-Body”

and no difference could be seen in their spectra.

Any deviations from the “Black-Body” form that might still remain undetected in the

CMBR spectrum over the wavelength range from “0.5 - 5(mm)” must have a weighted RMS value

of (at most) 50 parts per million [0.005(%)] of the CMBR peak brightness. This made the CMBR

spectrum the most precisely measured “Black-Body” spectrum in nature.

The CMBR is a prediction of “Big-Bang” theory such that the early Universe was made up

of hot plasma of Photons, Electrons and Baryons. The Photons were constantly interacting with the

plasma through Thomson scattering. As the Universe expanded, adiabatic cooling (of which the

Cosmological red-shift is an on-going symptom) caused the plasma to cool until it became

favourable for Electrons to combine with Protons and form Hydrogen atoms.

This happened at around “3,000(K)” or when the Universe was approximately 380,000 years

old. At this point, the Photons did not scatter off the neutral atoms and began to travel freely

through space. This process is called recombination or decoupling (referring to Electrons combining

with nuclei and to the decoupling of matter and radiation respectively).

The Photons have continued cooling ever since; they have now reached “2.725(K)” and their

temperature will continue to drop as long as the Universe continues expanding. Accordingly, the

radiation from the sky we measure today comes from a spherical surface, called the surface of last

scattering, from which the Photons that decoupled from interaction with matter in the early

Universe, 13.7 Billion years ago, are just now reaching observers on Earth.

The “Big-Bang” suggests that the CMBR fills all of observable space, and that most of the

radiation energy in the Universe is in the Cosmic Microwave Background, which only makes up a

small fraction of the total density of the Universe.

Two of the greatest successes of the “Big-Bang” theory are its prediction of its almost

perfect “Big-Bang” spectrum and its detailed prediction of the anisotropies in the cosmic

microwave background. The recent Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) has

precisely measured these anisotropies over the whole sky down to angular scales of “0.2°”.

These can be used to estimate the parameters of the standard Lambda-CDM model of the

“Big-Bang”. Some information, such as the shape of the Universe, can be obtained

straightforwardly from the CMBR, while others, such as the Hubble constant, are not constrained

and must be inferred from other measurements.

84

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**1.2.10.3 Relationship to the “Big-Bang”
**

1.2.10.3.1 General

The standard hot “Big-Bang” model of the Universe requires that the initial conditions for

the Universe are a Gaussian random field with a nearly scale invariant or Harrison-Zel'dovich

spectrum. This is, for example, a prediction of the cosmic inflation model. This means that the

initial state of the Universe is random, but in a clearly specified way such that meaningful

statements about the in-homogeneities in the Universe need to be statistical in nature. This leads to

cosmic variance in which the uncertainties in the variance of the largest scale fluctuations observed

in the Universe are difficult to accurately compare to theory.

1.2.10.3.2 Temperature

The CMBR and the Cosmological red-shift are together regarded as the best available

evidence for the “Big-Bang” theory. The discovery of the CMBR in the mid-1960s curtailed interest

in alternatives such as the steady state theory. The CMBR gives a snapshot of the Universe when,

according to standard Cosmology, the temperature dropped enough to allow Electrons and Protons

to form Hydrogen atoms, thus making the Universe transparent to radiation.

When it originated some 400,000 years after the “Big-Bang” – this time period is generally

known as the “time of last scattering” or the period of recombination or decoupling – the

temperature of the Universe was about “3,000(K)”. This corresponds to energy of about “0.25(eV)”,

which is much less than the “13.6(eV)” ionization energy of Hydrogen. Since then, the temperature

of the radiation has dropped by a factor of roughly 1100 due to the expansion of the Universe.

**Figure 4.8: credit: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/,
**

Note: as the Universe expands, the CMBR Photons are red-shifted, making the CMBR temperature

inversely proportional to the Universe’s scale length.

85

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1.2.10.3.3 Primary anisotropy

The anisotropy of the CMBR is divided into two sorts: primary anisotropy – which is due to

effects which occur at the last scattering surface and before – and secondary anisotropy – which is

due to effects such as interactions with hot gas or gravitational potentials, between the last

scattering surface and the observer.

The structure of the CMBR anisotropies is principally determined by two effects: acoustic

oscillations and diffusion damping (also called collision-less damping or Silk damping). The

acoustic oscillations arise because of a competition in the Photon-Baryon plasma in the early

Universe. The pressure of the Photons tends to erase anisotropies, whereas the gravitational

attraction of the Baryons, moving at speeds “<< c”, makes them tend to collapse to form dense

haloes. These two effects compete to create acoustic oscillations which give the microwave

background its characteristic peak structure. The peaks correspond, roughly, to resonances in which

the Photons decouple when a particular mode is at its peak amplitude.

**Figure 4.9: credit: http://pdg.lbl.gov/,
**

The peaks contain interesting physical signatures. The angular scale of the first peak

determines the curvature of the Universe (but not the topology of the Universe). The second peak –

truly the ratio of the odd peaks to the even peaks – determines the reduced Baryon density. The

third peak can be used to extract information about the dark matter density.

The location of the peaks also gives important information about the nature of the primordial

density perturbations. There are two fundamental types of density perturbations – called “adiabatic”

and “isocurvature”. A general density perturbation is a mixture of these two types and different

theories that purport to explain the primordial density perturbation spectrum predict different

mixtures.

For adiabatic density perturbations, the fractional over-density in each matter component

(Baryons, Photons etc.) is the same. That is, if there is “1(%)” more energy in Baryons than average

in one location, then with pure adiabatic density perturbations there is also “1(%)” more energy in

Photons and Neutrinos, than average. Cosmic inflation predicts that the primordial perturbations are

adiabatic.

86

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**With isocurvature density perturbations, the sum of the fractional over-densities is zero.
**

That is, a perturbation with “1(%)” more energy in Baryons and Photons than average, and “2(%)”

lower energy in Neutrinos than average, would be a pure isocurvature perturbation. Cosmic strings

would produce mostly isocurvature primordial perturbations.

The CMBR spectrum is able to distinguish between these two types of perturbations because

they produce different peak locations. Isocurvature density perturbations produce a series of peaks

whose angular scales are roughly in the ratio “1 : 3 : 5 ...”, while adiabatic density perturbations

produce peaks whose locations are in the ratio “1 : 2 : 3 ...”. Observations are consistent with the

primordial density perturbations being entirely adiabatic, providing key support for inflation, and

ruling out many models of structure formation involving, for example, cosmic strings.

Collision-less damping is caused by two effects when the treatment of the primordial plasma

as a fluid begins to break down:

i. The increasing mean free path of the Photons as the primordial plasma becomes

increasingly rarefied in an expanding Universe.

ii. The finite thickness of the last scattering surface (LSS), which causes the mean free path

to increase rapidly during decoupling, even while some Compton scattering is still

occurring.

Note: these effects contribute about equally to the suppression of anisotropies on small scales, and

give rise to the characteristic exponential damping tail seen in the very small angular scale

anisotropies.

The thickness of the LSS refers to the fact that the decoupling of the Photons and Baryons

does not happen instantaneously, but instead requires an appreciable fraction of the age of the

Universe up to that era. One method to quantify exactly how long this process took uses the Photon

Visibility Function (PVF). This function is defined so that, denoting the PVF by “P(t)”, the

probability that a CMBR Photon last scattered between time “t” and “t + dt” is given by “P(t)dt”.

The maximum of the PVF (the time where it is most likely that a given CMBR Photon last

scattered) is known quite precisely. The first-year WMAP results put the time at which “P(t)” is

maximum as “372 +/- 14(kyr)”. This is often taken as the “time” at which the CMBR formed.

However, to figure out how long it took the Photons and Baryons to decouple, we need a measure

of the width of the PVF.

The WMAP team found that the PVF is greater than half of its maximum value (the “full

width at half maximum”, or FWHM) over an interval of “115 +/- 5(kyr)”. By this measure,

decoupling took place over roughly 115,000 years and when it was complete, the Universe was

roughly 487,000 years old.

1.2.10.3.4 Late time anisotropy

Since the “Big-Bang”, the CMBR was modified by several physical processes collectively

referred to as late-time anisotropy or secondary anisotropy. After the establishment of the CMBR,

ordinary matter in the Universe was mostly in the form of neutral Hydrogen and Helium atoms, but

from observations of Galaxies it seems that most of the volume of the Inter-Galactic Medium

(IGM) today consists of ionized material (since there are few absorption lines due to Hydrogen

atoms). This implies a period of reionization in which the material of the Universe breaks down into

Hydrogen ions.

The CMBR Photons scatter off free charges such as Electrons that are not bound in atoms.

In an ionized Universe, such Electrons have been liberated from neutral atoms by ionizing

(ultraviolet) radiation. Today these free charges are at sufficiently low density in most of the

volume of the Universe that they do not measurably affect the CMBR. However, if the IGM was

ionized at very early times when the Universe was denser, then there are two main effects on the

CMBR:

87

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**i. Small scale anisotropies are erased (just as when looking at an object through fog, details
**

of the object appear fuzzy).

ii. The Physics of how Photons scatter off free Electrons (Thomson scattering) induces

polarisation anisotropies on large angular scales. This large angle polarisation is correlated

with the large angle temperature perturbation.

Note: both of these effects have been observed by the WMAP satellite, providing evidence that the

Universe was ionized at very early times.

Other effects that occur between reionization and our observation of the Cosmic Microwave

Background which cause anisotropies include the Sunyaev-Zel’dovich Effect, such that a cloud of

high energy Electrons scatters the radiation, transferring some energy to the CMBR Photons and the

Sachs-Wolfe effect, thus causing Photons from the Cosmic Microwave Background to be

gravitationally red-shifted or blue-shifted due to changing gravitational fields.

1.2.10.3.5 Polarisation

The cosmic microwave background is polarized at the level of a few “µK”. There are two

types of polarisation, called E-modes and B-modes. This is in analogy to Electrostatics in which the

Electric Field (E-field) has a vanishing curl and the Magnetic Field (B-field) has a vanishing

divergence. The E-modes arise naturally from Thomson scattering in in-homogeneous plasma. The

B-modes, which have not been measured and are thought to have an amplitude of (at most)

“0.1(µK), are not produced from the plasma Physics alone. They are a signal from cosmic inflation

and are determined by the density of primordial gravitational waves. Detecting the B-modes will be

extremely difficult, particularly given that the degree of foreground contamination is unknown and

weak gravitational lensing signal mixes the relatively strong E-mode signal with the B-mode signal.

1.2.10.4 Microwave background observations

Subsequent to the discovery of the CMBR, hundreds of Cosmic Microwave Background

experiments have been conducted to measure and characterise the signatures of the radiation. The

most famous experiment is probably the NASA Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite that

orbited in 1989–1996, which detected and quantified the large scale anisotropies at the limit of its

detection capabilities.

Inspired by the initial COBE results of an extremely isotropic and homogeneous

background, a series of ground and balloon-based experiments quantified CMBR anisotropies on

smaller angular scales over the next decade. The primary goal of these experiments was to measure

the angular scale of the first acoustic peak, for which COBE did not have sufficient resolution.

These measurements were able to rule out cosmic strings as the leading theory of cosmic structure

formation, and suggested cosmic inflation was the right theory.

During the 1990’s, the first peak was measured with increasing sensitivity and by 2000, the

BOOMERanG experiment reported that the highest power fluctuations occur at scales of

approximately “1°”. Together with other Cosmological data, these results implied that the geometry

of the Universe is flat. A number of ground-based interferometers provided measurements of the

fluctuations with higher accuracy over the next three years, including the Very Small Array, Degree

Angular Scale Interferometer (DASI) and the Cosmic Background Imager (CBI).

In June 2001, NASA launched a second CMBR space mission (WMAP) to make much

more precise measurements of the large scale anisotropies over the full sky. The first results from

this mission, disclosed in 2003, were detailed measurements of the angular power spectrum to

below degree scales, tightly constraining various Cosmological parameters. The results are broadly

consistent with those expected from cosmic inflation as well as various other competing theories,

and are available in detail at NASA's data center for CMBR.

88

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Although WMAP provided very accurate measurements of the large angular-scale
**

fluctuations in the CMBR (structures about as large in the sky as the moon), it did not have the

angular resolution to measure the smaller scale fluctuations which had been observed using

previous ground-based interferometers.

End of verbatim quotation.

Figure 4.10: WMAP - credit: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/,

**Figure 4.11: CMBR history - credit: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/,
**

89

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Figure 4.12: credit: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/,

Figure 4.13: credit: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/,

Figure 4.14: credit: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/,

90

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Figure 4.15: credit: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/,

Figure 4.16: credit: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/,

Figure 4.17: credit: http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/,

91

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

92

www.deltagroupengineering.com

2 Definition of Terms

2.1

Numbering conventions

•

•

2.2

**References of the form “3.*” refer to “Quinta Essentia – Part 3”.
**

References of the form “4.*” refer to “Quinta Essentia – Part 4”.

Quinta Essentia – Part 3

**2.2.1 Alpha Forms “αx”
**

• An inversely proportional description of how energy density may result in acceleration.

2.2.2 Amplitude Spectrum

• A family of wavefunction amplitudes.

• The amplitudes associated with a frequency spectrum.

• See: Frequency Spectrum.

2.2.3 Background Field

• Reference to the background (ambient) gravitational field.

• Reference to the local gravitational field at the surface of the Earth.

2.2.4 Bandwidth Ratio “∆ωR”

• The ratio of the bandwidth of the ZPF spectrum to the Fourier spectrum of the PV.

2.2.5 Beta Forms “βx”

• A directly proportional description of how energy density may result in acceleration.

2.2.6 Buckingham Π Theory (BPT)

• Arrangement of variables determined by DAT's into Π groupings. These groupings

represent sub-systems of dimensional similarity for scale relationships.

• Minimises the number of experiments required to investigate phenomena.

• See: DAT's.

2.2.7 Casimir Force “FPP”

• Attractive (non-gravitational) force between two parallel and neutrally charged mirrored

plates of equal area.

2.2.8 Change in the Number of Modes “∆nS”

• The difference between the ZPF beat cut-off mode and the Mode Number at the Critical

Boundary as a function of the Critical Ratio.

• See: Mode Number “nβ”.

• See: Critical Ratio “KR”.

2.2.9 Compton Frequency “ωCx”

• The generalised definition of Compton frequency applied globally herein is:

ωCx = mxc2 / h-bar = 2πm

2π xc2/ h = 2πc

2π 2/ λCx.

• This is the only equation in which the “h-bar” form of Planck's constant is used.

93

www.deltagroupengineering.com

2.2.10 Cosmological Constant

• A constant introduced into the equations of GR to facilitate a steady state Cosmological

solution.

• See: General Relativity.

2.2.11 Critical Boundary “ωβ”

• Represents the lower boundary (commencing at the ZPF beat cut-off frequency) of the

ZPF spectrum yielding a specific proportional similarity value.

• See: Zero-Point-Field Beat Cut-Off Frequency “ωΩ ZPF”.

• See: Critical Ratio “KR”.

2.2.12 Critical Factor “KC”

• A proportional measure of the applied EM field intensity (or magnitude of Poynting

Vectors) within an experimental test volume.

• The ratio of two experimentally determined relationship functions.

2.2.13 Critical Field Strengths “EC and BC”

• RMS strength values of applied Electric and Magnetic fields for complete dynamic,

kinematic and geometric similarity with the background gravitational field.

• See: Background Field.

2.2.14 Critical Frequency “ωC”

• The minimum frequency for the application of Maxwell's Equations within an

experimental context.

2.2.15 Critical Harmonic Operator “KR H”

• A representation of the Critical Ratio at ideal dynamic, kinematic and geometric

similarity utilising a unit amplitude spectrum.

2.2.16 Critical Mode “NC”

• The ratio of the critical frequency to the fundamental harmonic frequency of the PV.

• See: Critical Frequency “ωC”.

• See: Fundamental Harmonic Frequency “ωPV(1,r,M)”

2.2.17 Critical Phase Variance “φC”

• The difference in phase between applied Electric and Magnetic fields for complete

dynamic, kinematic and geometric similarity with the background gravitational field.

• See: Background Field.

2.2.18 Critical Ratio “KR”

• A proportional indication of anticipated experimental configurations by any suitable

measure. Typically, this is the magnitude of the ratio of the applied EM experimental

fields to the ambient background gravitational field.

2.2.19 Curl

• The limiting value of circulation per unit area.

2.2.20 DC-Offsets

• A proportional value of applied RMS Electric and / or Magnetic fields acting to offset

the applied function/s.

94

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**2.2.21 Dimensional Analysis Techniques (DAT's)
**

• Formal experimentally based research methods facilitating the derivation, from first

principles, of any number or combination of parameters considered important by an

experimentalist.

• See: BPT.

2.2.22 Divergence

• The rate at which “density” exits a given region of space.

2.2.23 Dominant Bandwidth

• The bandwidth of the EGM spectrum which dominates gravitational effects.

• See: Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM) Spectrum.

2.2.24 Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM)

• A method of calculation (not a theory) based upon energy density.

• Being a calculation method, it does not favour or bias any particular theory in the

Standard Model of particle physics.

• Developed as a tool for engineers to modify gravity.

• The modification of vacuum polarisability based upon the superposition of EM fields.

2.2.25 Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM) Spectrum

• A simple but extreme extension of the EM spectrum (including gravitational effects)

based upon a Fourier distribution.

2.2.26 Energy Density (General)

• Energy per unit volume.

2.2.27 Engineered Metric

• A metric tensor line element utilising the Engineered Refractive Index.

2.2.28 Engineered Refractive Index “KEGM”

• An EM based engineered representation of the Refractive Index.

2.2.29 Engineered Relationship Function “∆K0(ω,X)”

• A change in the Experimental Relationship Function resulting from a modification in the

local value of the magnitude of acceleration by similarity of applied EM fields to the

background gravitational field.

2.2.30 Experimental Prototype (EP)

• Reference to the gravitational acceleration through a practical benchtop volume of

space-time in a laboratory at the surface of the Earth.

2.2.31 Experimental Relationship Function “K0(ω,X)”

• A proportional scaling factor relating an experimental prototype (typically herein, it is

the local gravitational field or ambient physical conditions) to a mathematical model.

2.2.32 Fourier Spectrum

• Two spectra combined into one (an amplitude spectrum and a frequency spectrum)

obeying a Fourier Series.

• See: Amplitude Spectrum.

• See: Frequency Spectrum.

95

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**2.2.33 Frequency Bandwidth “∆ωPV”
**

• The bandwidth of the Fourier spectrum describing the PV.

• See: Fourier Spectrum.

• See: Polarisable Vacuum (PV).

2.2.34 Frequency Spectrum

• A family of wavefunction frequencies.

• The frequencies associated with an amplitude spectrum.

• See: Amplitude Spectrum.

2.2.35 Fundamental Beat Frequency “∆ωδr(1,r,∆r,M)”

• The change in fundamental harmonic frequency of the PV across an elemental

displacement.

• See: Fundamental Harmonic Frequency “ωPV(1,r,M)”.

• See: Polarisable Vacuum (PV).

2.2.36 Fundamental Harmonic Frequency “ωPV(1,r,M)”

• The lowest frequency in the PV spectrum utilising Fourier harmonics.

2.2.37 General Modelling Equations (GMEx)

• Proportional solutions to the Poisson and Lagrange equations resulting in acceleration.

2.2.38 General Relativity (GR)

• The representation of space-time as a geometric manifold of events where gravitation

manifests itself as a curvature of space-time and is described by a metric tensor.

2.2.39 General Similarity Equations (GSEx)

• Combines General Modelling Equations with the Critical Ratio by utilisation of the

Engineered Relationship Function.

• See: Critical Ratio “KR”.

2.2.40 Gravitons “γg”

• Conjugate Photon pairs responsible for gravitation. This is an inherent mathematical

conclusion arising from similarity modelling utilising a Fourier distribution in Complex

form and the PV model of gravity considerate of ZPF Theory (due to harmonic

symmetry about the “0th” mode).

2.2.41 Graviton Mass-Energy Threshold “mγg”

• The upper boundary value of the mass-energy of a Graviton as defined by the Particle

Data Group.

2.2.42 Group Velocity

• The velocity with which energy propagates.

2.2.43 Harmonic Cut-Off Frequency “ωΩ”

• The terminating frequency of the Fourier spectrum of the PV.

• See: Fourier Spectrum.

• See: Polarisable Vacuum (PV).

96

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**2.2.44 Harmonic Cut-Off Function “Ω”
**

• A mathematical function associated with the harmonic cut-off mode and frequency.

• See: Harmonic Cut-Off Mode “nΩ”.

• See: Harmonic Cut-Off Frequency “ωΩ”.

2.2.45 Harmonic Cut-Off Mode “nΩ”

• The terminating mode of the Fourier spectrum of the PV.

• See: Fourier Spectrum.

• See: Polarisable Vacuum (PV).

2.2.46 Harmonic Inflection Mode “NX”

• The mode at which the phase variance between the Electric and Magnetic wavefunctions

describing the PV in a classical Casimir experiment begins to alter dramatically.

• A conjectured resonant mode of the PV in a classical Casimir experiment.

• See: Casimir Force “FPP”.

• See: Polarisable Vacuum (PV).

2.2.47 Harmonic Inflection Frequency “ωX”

• The frequency associated with the harmonic inflection mode.

• See: Harmonic Inflection Mode “NX”.

2.2.48 Harmonic Inflection Wavelength “λX”

• The wavelength associated with the harmonic inflection frequency.

2.2.49 Harmonic Similarity Equations (HSEx)

• A harmonic representation of General Similarity Equations utilising the Critical

Harmonic Operator.

• A family of equations defined by relating the experimental prototype to a mathematical

model (General Similarity Equations).

• See: Critical Harmonic Operator “KR H”.

• See: General Similarity Equations (GSEx).

2.2.50 IFF

• If and only if.

2.2.51 Impedance Function

• A measure of the ratio of the permeability to the permittivity of a vacuum.

• Resistance to energy transfer through a vacuum.

2.2.52 Kinetic Spectrum

• Another term for the ZPF spectrum.

• See: ZPF Spectrum.

2.2.53 Mode Bandwidth

• The modes associated with a frequency bandwidth.

2.2.54 Mode Number (Critical Boundary Mode) “nβ”

• The ratio of the Critical Boundary frequency to the fundamental frequency of the PV.

• The harmonic mode associated with the Critical Boundary frequency.

97

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**2.2.55 Number of Permissible Modes “N∆r”
**

• The number of modes permitted for the application of Maxwell's Equations within an

experimental context, based upon the harmonic cut-off frequency.

• See: Harmonic Cut-Off Frequency “ωΩ”.

2.2.56 Phenomena of Beats

• The interference between two waves of slightly different frequencies.

2.2.57 Photon Mass-Energy Threshold “mγ”

• The upper boundary value of the mass-energy of a Photon as defined by the Particle

Data Group.

2.2.58 Polarisable Vacuum (PV)

• The polarized state of the Zero-Point-Field due to mass influence.

• Characterised by a Refractive Index.

• Obeys a Fourier distribution.

• A bandwidth of the EGM Spectrum.

• See: Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM).

• See: Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM) Spectrum.

2.2.59 Polarisable Vacuum (PV) Beat Bandwidth “∆ωΩ”

• The change in harmonic cut-off frequency across an elemental displacement.

• See: Harmonic Cut-Off Frequency “ωΩ”.

• See: Phenomena of Beats.

• See: Polarisable Vacuum (PV).

2.2.60 Polarisable Vacuum (PV) Spectrum

• Another term for the Fourier spectrum applied by EGM to describe the PV harmonically.

• A bandwidth of the EGM Spectrum.

• See: Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM).

• See. Fourier Spectrum.

• See: Polarisable Vacuum (PV).

2.2.61 Potential Spectrum

• Another term for the PV spectrum.

• See: Polarisable Vacuum (PV) Spectrum.

2.2.62 Poynting Vector

• Describes the direction and magnitude of EM energy flow.

• The cross product of the Electric and Magnetic field.

2.2.63 Precipitations

• Results driven by the application of limits.

2.2.64 Primary Precipitant

• The frequency domain precipitation.

• See: Precipitations.

98

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**2.2.65 Radii Calculations by Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM)
**

• Radii calculations by EGM represent the radial position of energetic equilibrium

between the energy density of a homogeneous spherical mass with the ZPF.

• The radii predictions calculated by EGM coincide with the RMS charge radii of all

charged fundamental particles.

• See: Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM).

• See: Zero-Point-Field (ZPF).

2.2.66 Range Factor “Stα”

• The product of the change in energy density and the Impedance Function.

• An “at-a-glance” tool indicating the boundaries of the applied energy requirements for

complete dynamic, kinematic and geometric similarity with the background field.

• See: Energy Density.

• See: Background Field.

• See: Impedance Function.

2.2.67 Reduced Average Harmonic Similarity Equations (HSExA R)

• See: 2nd Reduction of the Harmonic Similarity Equations.

2.2.68 Reduced Harmonic Similarity Equations (HSEx R)

• A simplification of the Harmonic Similarity Equations by substitution of RMS

expressions for the time varying representations of applied Electric and Magnetic field

harmonics.

• A simplification of the Harmonic Similarity Equations facilitating the investigation of

the effects of phase variance [on a modal (per mode) basis].

2.2.69 Refractive Index “KPV”

• Characterisation value of the PV.

2.2.70 Representation Error “RError”

• Error associated with the mathematical representation of a physical system.

2.2.71 RMS Charge Radii (General)

• The RMS charge radius refers to the RMS value of the charge distribution curve.

2.2.72 RMS Charge Radius of the Neutron “rν”

• The RMS charge radius of a Neutron “rν” is so termed by analogy to the Neutron Mean

Square charge radius “KX” which is typically represented as a squared length quantity

“fm2”. Therefore, the dimensional square root of “KX” represents “rν” by analogy.

• “rν” represents the cross-over radius (the node) on the Neutron charge distribution curve.

2.2.73 Similarity Bandwidth “∆ωS”

• The difference between the ZPF beat cut-off frequency and the critical boundary

frequency.

• A measure of similarity between the background gravitational field spectrum and the

applied field frequencies (commencing at the ZPF beat cut-off frequency).

• See: Background Field.

• See: Critical Boundary “ωβ”.

• See: Zero-Point-Field Beat Cut-Off Frequency “ωΩ ZPF”.

99

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**2.2.74 Spectral Energy Density “ρ0(ω)”
**

• Energy density per frequency mode.

2.2.75 Spectral Similarity Equations (SSEx)

• A representation of the complete spectrum of the PV utilising the 2nd Reduction of the

Harmonic Similarity Equations by application of similarity principles.

2.2.76 Subordinate Bandwidth

• The EM spectrum.

• See: Dominant Bandwidth.

• See: Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM) Spectrum.

2.2.77 Unit Amplitude Spectrum

• A harmonic representation of unity (the number one) utilising the amplitude spectrum of

a Fourier distribution.

2.2.78 Zero-Point-Energy (ZPE)

• The lowest possible energy of the space-time manifold described in quantum terms.

2.2.79 Zero-Point-Field (ZPF)

• The field associated with ZPE.

2.2.80 Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) Spectrum

• The spectrum of amplitudes and frequencies associated with the ZPF.

2.2.81 Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) Beat Bandwidth “∆ωZPF”

• The difference between the ZPF beat cut-off frequency and the fundamental beat

frequency.

• See: Fundamental Beat Frequency “∆ωδr(1,r,∆r,M)”.

• See: Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) Beat Cut-Off Frequency “ωΩ ZPF”.

2.2.82 Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) Beat Cut-Off Frequency “ωΩ ZPF”

• The terminating frequency of the ZPF spectrum across an elemental displacement.

2.2.83 Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) Beat Cut-Off Mode “nΩ ZPF”

• The terminating mode of the ZPF spectrum across an elemental displacement.

2.2.84 1st Sense Check “Stβ”

• A common sense test relating the ZPF beat bandwidth to the Compton frequency of an

Electron.

• See: Compton Frequency “ωCx”.

• See: Zero-Point-Field (ZPF) Beat Bandwidth “∆ωZPF”.

2.2.85 2nd Reduction of the Harmonic Similarity Equations (HSExA R)

• A time averaged simplification of the Reduced Harmonic Similarity Equations.

2.2.86 2nd Sense Check “Stγ”

• A common sense test relating the PV beat bandwidth to the Compton frequency of an

Electron.

• See: Compton Frequency “ωCx”.

• See: Polarisable Vacuum (PV) Beat Bandwidth “∆ωΩ”.

100

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**2.2.87 3rd Sense Check “Stδ”
**

• A common sense test relating the harmonic cut-off mode across an elemental

displacement.

• See: Harmonic Cut-Off Mode “nΩ”.

2.2.88 4th Sense Check “Stε”

• A common sense test relating the representation error across an elemental displacement.

• See: Representation Error “RError”.

2.2.89 5th Sense Check “Stη”

• A common sense test relating the harmonic cut-off frequency of a Proton to the

Compton frequency of a Proton.

• See: Compton Frequency “ωCx”.

2.2.90 6th Sense Check “Stθ”

• A common sense test relating the harmonic cut-off frequency of a Neutron to the

Compton frequency of a Neutron.

• See: Compton Frequency “ωCx”.

2.2.91 Physical Constants

Symbol

α

c

G

ε0

µ0

h

h-bar

λCe

λCP

λCN

λCµ

λCτ

me

mp

mn

mµ

mτ

re

rp

λh

mh

th

ωh

eV

Description

Fine Structure Constant

Velocity of light in a vacuum

Universal Gravitation Constant

Permittivity of a vacuum

Permeability of a vacuum

Planck's Constant

Planck's Constant (2π form)

Electron Compton Wavelength

Proton Compton Wavelength

Neutron Compton Wavelength

Muon Compton Wavelength

Tau Compton Wavelength

Electron rest mass

Proton rest mass

Neutron rest mass

Muon rest mass

Tau rest mass

Classical Electron radius

Classical Proton RMS charge radius

Planck Length

Planck Mass

Planck Time

Planck Frequency

Electron Volt

101

**NIST value utilised by EGM
**

7.297352568 x10-3

299792458

6.6742 x10-11

8.854187817 x10-12

4π x10-7

6.6260693 x10-34

1.05457168 x10-34

Units

None

m/s

m3kg-1s-2

F/m

N/A2

Js

= h / (me,p,n,µ,τ c)

m

9.1093826 x10-31

1.67262171 x10-27

1.67492728 x10-27

1.88353140 x10-28

3.16777 x10-27

2.817940325 x10-15

0.8750 x10-15

= √(Gh/c3)

= √(hc/G)

= √(Gh/c5)

= 1/th

1.60217653 x10-19

kg

m

kg

s

Hz

J

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**2.2.92 Mathematical Constants and Symbols
**

• Euler-Mascheroni Constant (Euler's Constant) [33] “γ” = 0.5772156649015328

• “∩” Refers to an intersection.

• “∪” Refers to a union.

• “→” Or “↓” refers to a process: “leads to”.

2.2.93 Solar System Statistics

Symbol

MM

ME

MJ

MS

RM

RE

RJ

RS

Description

Mass of the Moon

Mass of the Earth

Mass of Jupiter

Mass of the Sun

Mean Radius of the Moon

Mean Radius of the Earth

Mean Radius of Jupiter

Mean Radius of the Sun

**Value utilised by EGM Units
**

kg

7.35 x1022

5.977 x1024

1898.8 x1024

1.989 x1030

m

1.738 x106

6.37718 x106

7.1492 x107

6.96 x108

NOTES

102

www.deltagroupengineering.com

2.3

Quinta Essentia – Part 4

2.3.1 “Big-Bang”

• The moment of Cosmological creation.

• The explosion of space-time at the moment of Cosmological creation.

2.3.2 Black-Hole “BH”

• A massive gravitational body such that light cannot escape.

• See: Super-Massive-Black-Hole “SMBH”.

2.3.3 Broadband Propagation

• The propagation of the EGM wavefunctions in the PV spectrum, at a group velocity of zero.

2.3.4 Buoyancy Point

• The point of gravitational acceleration balance (neutrality) between the Earth and the Moon.

2.3.5 CMBR Temperature “T0”

• Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) temperature.

• See: EGM-CMBR Temperature “TU”.

2.3.6 EGM-CMBR Temperature “TU”

• Derivation of the CMBR temperature by the EGM method.

• See: CMBR Temperature “T0”.

2.3.7 EGM Flux Intensity “CΩ_J”

• The flux intensity of gravitational energy expressed in Jansky's.

• Formulated by considering celestial objects as point radiation sources of a high frequency

EGM wavefunction.

2.3.8 EGM Hubble constant “HU”

• Derivation of the Hubble constant by the EGM method.

• See: Hubble Constant “H0”.

2.3.9

•

•

•

**Event Horizon “RBH”
**

Refers to “RBH” of a SBH.

The radial displacement from the centre of a SBH from which light cannot escape.

See: Schwarzschild-Black-Hole “SBH”.

**2.3.10 Galactic Reference Particle “GRP”
**

• The total mass / energy of any Galactic formation represented as a particle with dimensions

approaching the Planck scale.

2.3.11 Gravitational Interference

• The formation of interference patterns from either broadband or narrowband EGM

wavefunction propagation between two or more gravitational fields.

2.3.12 Gravitational Propagation

• See: Broadband Propagation.

• See: Narrowband Propagation.

103

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**2.3.13 Hubble Constant “H0”
**

• A measure of the rate of Cosmological expansion.

• See: EGM Hubble constant “HU”.

2.3.14 Narrowband Propagation

• An approximation of Broadband characteristics.

• See: Broadband Propagation.

2.3.15

•

•

•

Non-Physical

Situations where “nΩ” is less than unity.

See: “nΩ”, “Quinta Essentia – Part 3”.

See: Physical.

2.3.16

•

•

•

Physical

Situations where “nΩ” is greater than or equal to unity.

See: “nΩ”, “Quinta Essentia – Part 3”.

See: Non-Physical.

2.3.17 Primordial Universe

• The Universe prior to the “Big-Bang”.

• The Universe at the instant prior to the “Big-Bang”.

2.3.18 Schwarzschild-Black-Hole “SBH”

• A static Black-Hole.

• The simplest form of Black-Hole.

2.3.19 Schwarzschild-Planck-Black-Hole “SPBH”

• A SBH of maximum permissible energy density existing at the Planck scale such that the

singularity and event horizon radii coincide.

• The value of harmonic cut-off mode “nΩ” at the periphery is unity.

• The minimum physical radius is “λxλh”.

• The minimum physical mass is “mxmh”.

• See: Schwarzschild-Black-Hole “SBH”.

• See: “nΩ”, “Quinta Essentia – Part 3”.

2.3.20 Schwarzschild-Planck-Particle

• Generalised reference to a SPBH.

2.3.21 Singularity

• The maximum permissible energy density at the centre of a SBH, represented as a particle.

• The particle representation (or mathematical point) at the centre of a SBH for which

physical laws are unknown to apply.

• See: Schwarzschild-Black-Hole “SBH”.

2.3.22 Singularity Radius “rS”

• The radius of the singularity at the centre of a SBH.

• See: Schwarzschild-Black-Hole “SBH”.

2.3.23 Solar Mass

• The mass of the Sun.

104

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**2.3.24 Super-Massive-Black-Hole “SMBH”
**

• A BH of greater than “109” solar masses.

• See: Black-Hole “BH”.

2.3.25 Total Mass-Energy

• Refers to “visible + dark”.

2.3.26 Astronomical / Cosmological statistics

Symbol

DE2M

H0

MG

MG/3

MNS

RNS

Ro

T0

Description

Mean Earth-Moon distance

Hubble constant (present value)

Total Galactic mass

Visible Galactic mass

Mass of Neutron Star

Mean Radius of a Neutron Star

Mean distance to Galactic centre

CMBR temperature (present value)

**Value utilised by EGM
**

3.844 x108

71

6 x1011MS

2 x1011MS

≥ MS

20

8

2.725

Units

m

km/s/Mpc

kg

km

kpc

K

NOTES

105

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

106

www.deltagroupengineering.com

3 Glossary of Terms

3.1

Quinta Essentia – Part 3

3.1.1 Acronyms

BNL

BPT

CCFR

CERN

CHARM-II

D0C

DAT

DELPHI

DONUT

E734

EGM

EM

EP

ERF

FNAL

FS

GME1

GME2

GMEx

GPE

GR

GSE1

GSE2

GSE3

GSE4

GSE5

GSEx

HERA

HSE1

HSE2

HSE3

HSE4

HSE5

HSEx

IFF

IHEP

INFN

LANL

LEP

LHS

MCYT

**Brookhaven National Laboratory
**

Buckingham Π Theory

Chicago Columbia Fermi-Lab Rochester

European Organisation for Nuclear Research

Experiment: study of Neutrino-Electron scattering at CERN

D-Zero Collaboration: an international research effort of leading scientists utilising

facilities at FNAL in Illinois, USA

Dimensional Analysis Techniques

Detector with Lepton, Photon and Hadron Identification

Experiment: a search for direct evidence of the Tau Neutrino at Fermi-Lab

Experiment: a measurement of the elastic scattering of Neutrino's from Electrons and

Protons (at BNL)

Electro-Gravi-Magnetics: a mathematical method based upon the modification of the

vacuum polarisability by the superposition of EM fields

ElectroMagnetic

Experimental Prototype

Experimental Relationship Function

Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (FERMI-LAB)

Fourier Series

General Modelling Equation One

General Modelling Equation Two

Generalised reference to GME1 and GME2

Gravitational Potential Energy

General Relativity

General Similarity Equation One

General Similarity Equation Two

General Similarity Equation Three

General Similarity Equation Four

General Similarity Equation Five

Generalised reference to GSE1, GSE2, GSE3, GSE4 or GSE5

Hadron Electron Ring Accelerator in Hamburg, Germany

Harmonic Similarity Equation One

Harmonic Similarity Equation Two

Harmonic Similarity Equation Three

Harmonic Similarity Equation Four

Harmonic Similarity Equation Five

Generalised reference to HSE1, HSE2, HSE3, HSE4 or HSE5

If and only if

Institute of High Energy Physics

National Institute of Nuclear Physics (Italy)

Los Alamos National Laboratories

Large Electron-Positron storage ring

Left hand side

Ministry of Science and Technology (Spain)

107

www.deltagroupengineering.com

MEXT

MS

NIST

NuTeV

PDG

PV

RFBR

RHS

RMS

SK

SLAC

SNO

SSE1

SSE2

SSE3

SSE4

SSE5

SSEx

TRISTAN

US NSF

USDoE

ZC

ZPF

**Ministry of Science (Japan)
**

Mean Square

National Institute of Standards & Technology

Neutrino's at the Tevatron

Particle Data Group: an international research effort of leading scientists

Polarisable Vacuum

Russian Foundation for Basic Research

Right hand side

Root Mean Square

Super-Kamiokande Collaboration

Stanford Linear Accelerator Centre

Sudbury Neutrino Observatory

Spectral Similarity Equation One

Spectral Similarity Equation Two

Spectral Similarity Equation Three

Spectral Similarity Equation Four

Spectral Similarity Equation Five

Generalised reference to SSE1, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4 or SSE5

Particle collider at the Japanese High Energy Physics Laboratory (KEK)

United States National Science Foundation

United States Department of Energy

ZEUS Collaboration: an international research effort of leading scientists utilising

facilities at HERA

Zero-Point-Field

NOTES

108

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**3.1.2 Symbols in alphabetical order
**

Symbol

A

a

a1

a2

APP

ax(t)

a∞

Description

1st Harmonic term

Magnitude of acceleration vector

Acceleration with respect to General Modelling Equation One

Acceleration with respect to General Modelling Equation Two

Parallel plate area of a Classical Casimir Experiment

Arbitrary acceleration in the time domain

Mean magnitude of acceleration over the fundamental period in a FS

representation in EGM

Magnitude of Magnetic field vector

B

Magnitude of Magnetic field vector (at infinity) in the PV model of gravity:

Ch. 3.2

Amplitude of applied Magnetic field: Ch. 3.6

B0

Magnitude of Magnetic field vector (locally) in the PV model of gravity

Magnitude of applied Magnetic field vector

BA

Critical Magnetic field strength

BC

Magnitude

of PV Magnetic field vector

BPV

Bottom Quark: elementary particle in the SM

bq

Root Mean Square of BA

Brms

Velocity of light in a vacuum

c

Velocity of light in a vacuum (at infinity) in the PV model of gravity: Ch. 3.1

Velocity of light (locally) in the PV model of gravity

c0

Amplitude of fundamental frequency of PV (nPV = 1)

CPV(1,r,M)

CPV(nPV,r,M) Amplitude spectrum of PV

Charm Quark: elementary particle in the SM

cq

Common difference

D

Experimental configuration factor: a specific value relating all design

criteria; this includes, but not limited to, field harmonics, field orientation,

physical dimensions, wave vector, spectral frequency mode and

instrumentation or measurement accuracy

Offset function

DC

Down Quark: elementary particle in the SM

dq

Energy: Ch. 3.3

E

Magnitude of Electric field vector

Magnitude of Electric field vector (at infinity) in the PV model of gravity:

Ch. 3.2

Electronic energy level

Charge

e, e

Electron: subatomic / elementary particle in the SM

Exponential function: mathematics

Amplitude of applied Electric field: Ch. 3.6

E0

Energy (locally) in the PV model of gravity

Magnitude of Electric field vector (locally) in the PV model of gravity

Magnitude of applied Electric field vector

EA

Critical Electric field strength

EC

Magnitude

of PV Electric field vector

EPV

Root Mean Square of EA

Erms

F(k,n,t) Complex FS representation of EGM

109

Units

m/s2

m2

m/s2

T

T

m/s

m/s2

%

J

V/m

J

C

V/m

J

V/m

m/s2

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Magnitude of the ambient gravitational acceleration represented in the time
**

m/s2

domain

Amplitude spectrum / distribution of F(k,n,t)

F0(k)

The Casimir Force by classical representation

N

FPP

The Casimir Force by EGM

FPV

Gluon: theoretical elementary particle in the SM

g

Magnitude of gravitational acceleration vector

m/s2

Universal Gravitation Constant

m3kg-1s-2

G

Tensor element

g00

Tensor element

g11

Tensor element

g22

Tensor element

g33

Height: Ch. 3.4

m

h

Higgs Boson: theoretical elementary particle in the SM

H

Hydrogen

Magnetic field strength

Oe

Planck’s Constant (plain h form)

Js

h

h-bar

Planck’s Constant (2π form)

HSE4A R Time average form of HSE4 R

HSE5A R Time average form of HSE5 R

Generalised reference to the reduced form of HSEx

HSEx R

Complex number

i

Initial condition

Macroscopic intensity of Photons within a test volume

W/m2

In,P

Vector current density

A/m2

J

Wave vector

1/m

k

K0(r,X) ERF by displacement domain precipitation

Generalised ERF

K0(X)

K0(ω

ω,r,E,B,X) ERF by wavefunction precipitation

K0(ω

ω,X) ERF by frequency domain precipitation

K0(ω

ωPV,r,EPV,BPV,X) ERF equivalent to K0(ω,r,E,B,X)

ERF formed by re-interpretation of the primary precipitant

(V/m)2

K1

ERF formed by re-interpretation of the primary precipitant

T-2

K2

Harmonic wave vector of applied field

1/m

kA

Critical

Factor

KC

PaΩ

Engineered Refractive Index

KEGM

Harmonic form of KEGM

KEGM H

Experimentally implicit Planck Mass scaling factor

Km

The intensity of the background PV field at specific frequency modes

W/m2

Kn,P

A refinement of a constant in FPP

KP

Harmonic wave vector of PV

1/m

kPV

Refractive Index of PV

KPV

Harmonic form of KPV

KPV H

Critical Ratio

KR

Critical harmonic operator (based upon the unit amplitude spectrum)

KR H

Neutron MS charge radius by EGM

m2

KS

Neutron MS charge radius (determined experimentally) in the SM

KX

Experimentally implicit Planck Length scaling factor

Kλ

Experimentally implicit Planck Frequency scaling factor

Kω

Length

m

L

f(t)

110

www.deltagroupengineering.com

L0

L2

L3

L5

M

m0

M0

mAMC

mbq

mcq

mdq

me

ME

men

mgg

mH

mh

MJ

mL(2)

mL(3)

mL(5)

MM

mn

mp

mQB(5)

mQB(6)

MS

msq

mtq

muq

mW

mx

mZ

mε

mγ

mγg

mγγ

mµ

mµn

mτ

mτn

n

n, N

nA

nB

NC

nE

nPV

nq

NT

**Length (locally) in the PV model of gravity by EGM
**

Theoretical elementary particle (Lepton) by EGM

Theoretical elementary particle (Lepton) by EGM

Theoretical elementary particle (Lepton) by EGM

Mass

Mass (locally) in the PV model of gravity by EGM

Zero mass (energy) condition of free space

Atomic Mass Constant

Bottom Quark rest mass (energy) by EGM

Charm Quark rest mass (energy) by EGM

Down Quark rest mass (energy) by EGM

Electron rest mass (energy) according to NIST

Mass of the Earth

Electron Neutrino rest mass (energy) according to PDG

Graviton rest mass (energy) by EGM

Higgs Boson rest mass (energy) according to PDG

Planck Mass

Mass of Jupiter

Rest mass (energy) of the L2 particle by EGM

Rest mass (energy) of the L3 particle by EGM

Rest mass (energy) of the L5 particle by EGM

Mass of the Moon

Neutron rest mass (energy) according to NIST

Proton rest mass (energy) according to NIST

Rest mass (energy) of the QB5 particle by EGM

Rest mass (energy) of the QB6 particle by EGM

Mass of the Sun

Strange Quark rest mass (energy) by EGM

Top Quark rest mass (energy) according (energy) to PDG

Up Quark rest mass (energy) by EGM

W Boson rest mass according (energy) to PDG

Imaginary particle mass

Z Boson rest mass according (energy) to PDG

Electron rest mass (energy) in high energy scattering experiments

Photon rest mass (energy) threshold according to PDG

Graviton rest mass (energy) threshold according to PDG

Photon rest mass (energy) by EGM

Muon rest mass (energy) according to NIST

Muon Neutrino rest mass (energy) according to PDG

Tau rest mass (energy) according to NIST

Tau Neutrino rest mass (energy) according to PDG

Neutron: subatomic particle in the SM

Field harmonic (harmonic frequency mode)

Harmonic frequency modes of applied field

Harmonic mode number of the ZPF with respect to BA

Critical mode

Harmonic mode number of the ZPF with respect to EA

Harmonic frequency modes of PV

Quantum number

Number of terms

111

m

kg or eV

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NTR

NX

N∆r

nΩ

nΩ ZPF

nβ

P

p

Q, Qe

QB5

QB6

r

r0

rBohr

rBoson

rbq

rc

rcq

rdq

re

RE

ren

RError

rgg

rH

RJ

rL

RM

rp

rQB

RS

rsq

rtq

ru

ruq

rW

rx

rxq

rZ

rε

rγγ

rµ

rµn

rν

**The ratio of the number of terms
**

Harmonic inflection mode

Permissible mode bandwidth of applied experimental fields

Harmonic cut-off mode of PV

ZPF beat cut-off mode

Mode Number (Critical Boundary Mode) of ωβ

Polarisation vector

Proton: subatomic particle in the SM

Magnitude of Electric charge

Theoretical elementary particle (Quark or Boson) by EGM

Theoretical elementary particle (Quark or Boson) by EGM

Arbitrary radius with homogeneous mass (energy) distribution

Generalised notation for length (e.g. r → λ/2π): Ch. 3.1

Generalised notation for length (locally) in the PV model of gravity: Ch. 3.1

Magnitude of position vector from centre of spherical object with

homogeneous mass (energy) distribution

Reciprocal of the wave number: Ch. 3.1

Length (locally) in the PV model of gravity

Classical Bohr radius

Generalised RMS charge radius of a Boson by EGM

RMS charge radius of the Bottom Quark by EGM

Transformed value of generalised length (locally) in the PV model of gravity

RMS charge radius of the Charm Quark by EGM

RMS charge radius of the Down Quark by EGM

Classical Electron radius in the SM

Mean radius of the Earth

RMS charge radius of the Electron Neutrino by EGM

Representation Error

RMS charge radius of the Graviton by EGM

RMS charge radius of the Higgs Boson utilising ru

Mean radius of Jupiter

Average RMS charge radii of the rε, rµ and rτ particles

Mean radius of the Moon

Classical RMS charge radius of the Proton in the SM

Average RMS charge radius of the QB5 / QB6 particles by EGM utilising ru

Mean radius of the Sun

RMS charge radius of the Strange Quark by EGM

RMS charge radius of the Top Quark by EGM

Heisenberg uncertainty range

RMS charge radius of the Up Quark by EGM

RMS charge radius of the W Boson utilising ru

Bohr radius by EGM

Generalised RMS charge radius of all Quarks as determined by the ZC

within the SM

RMS charge radius of the Z Boson by utilising ru

RMS charge radius of the Electron by EGM

RMS charge radius of the Photon by EGM

RMS charge radius of the Muon by EGM

RMS charge radius of the Muon Neutrino by EGM

Neutron RMS charge radius (by analogy to KS)

112

C/m2

C

m

%

m

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**RMS charge radius of the ν2 particle by EGM
**

RMS charge radius of the ν3 particle by EGM

RMS charge radius of the ν5 particle by EGM

Neutron Magnetic radius by EGM

Generalised reference to rν2, rν3 and rν5

RMS charge radius of the Proton by EGM

Proton Electric radius by EGM

Proton Magnetic radius by EGM

RMS charge radius of the Tau by EGM

RMS charge radius of the Tau Neutrino by EGM

Rydberg Constant

Poynting Vector

Strange Quark: elementary particle in the SM

nth Harmonic term

Range factor

1st Sense check

3rd Sense check

4th Sense check

2nd Sense check

5th Sense check

6th Sense check

A positive integer value representing the harmonic cut-off frequency ratio

between two proportionally similar mass (energy) systems

Poynting Vector of PV

Sω

Time

t

Top Quark: elementary particle in the SM

tq

Initial state GPE per unit mass described by any appropriate method

Ug

Harmonic form of Ug

Ug H

Rest mass-energy density

Um

Up Quark: elementary particle in the SM

uq

Field energy density of PV

Uω

Local value of the velocity of light in a vacuum

vc

W Boson: elementary particle in the SM

W

All variables within the experimental environment that influence results and

X

behaviour including parameters that might otherwise be neglected due to

practical calculation limitations, in theoretical analysis

Impedance function

Z

Z Boson: elementary particle in the SM

Change in electronic energy level

∆Ε

Change in the magnitude of the local PV acceleration vector

∆aPV

Change in magnitude of the local gravitational acceleration vector

∆g

∆GME1 Change in GME1

∆GME2 Change in GME2

∆GMEx Generalised reference to changes in GME1 and GME2

Harmonic form of ∆K0

∆K0 H

∆K0(ω

ω,X) Engineered Relationship Function by EGM

Change in K1 by EGM

∆K1

Change in K2 by EGM

∆K2

Change in Critical Factor by EGM

∆ KC

rν2

rν3

rν5

rνM

rνx

rπ

rπE

rπM

rτ

rτn

R∞

S

sq

StN

Stα

Stβ

Stδ

Stε

Stγ

Stη

Stθ

Stω

113

m

J

W/m2

PaΩ

W/m2

s

(m/s)2

Pa

Pa

m/s

Ω

J

m/s2

(V/m)2

T-2

PaΩ

www.deltagroupengineering.com

∆nS

∆r

∆t

∆t0

∆ Ug

∆UPV

∆vΩ

∆vδr

∆ΛPV

∆λΩ

∆λδr

∆ωPV

∆ωR

∆ωS

∆ωZPF

∆ωΩ

∆ωδr

Π

ΣH

ΣHR

Ω

α

α1

αx

β

β1

βx

ε0

φ

φC

φgg

φγγ

γ

γg

λ

λΑ

λΒ

λCe

λCN

λCP

λh

**Change in the number of ZPF modes
**

Plate separation of a Classical Casimir Experiment

Practical changes in benchtop displacement values

Change in time (at infinity) in the PV model of gravity by EGM

Change in time (locally) in the PV model of gravity by EGM

Change in Gravitational Potential Energy (GPE) per unit mass induced by

any suitable source

Change in energy density of gravitational field

Change in rest mass-energy density

Terminating group velocity of PV

Group velocity of PV

Change in the local value of the Cosmological Constant by EGM

Change in harmonic cut-off wavelength of PV

Change in harmonic wavelength of PV

Frequency bandwidth of PV

Bandwidth ratio

Similarity bandwidth

ZPF beat bandwidth

Beat bandwidth of PV

Beat frequency of PV

Dimensional grouping derived by application of BPT

The sum of terms

The ratio of the sum of terms

Harmonic cut-off function of PV

An inversely proportional description of how energy density may result in an

acceleration: Ch. 3.2

Fine Structure Constant

The subset formed, as “N → ∞”, by the method of incorporation

Generalised reference to α1 and α2

A directly proportional description of how energy density may result in an

acceleration

The subset formed, as “N → ∞”, by the method of incorporation

Generalised reference to β1 and β2

Permittivity of a vacuum

Relative phase variance between EA and BA

Critical phase variance

RMS charge diameter of the Graviton by EGM

RMS charge diameter of the Photon by EGM

Mathematical Constant: Euler-Mascheroni (Euler’s) Constant

Photon: elementary particle in the SM

Graviton: theoretical elementary particle in the SM

Wavelength

1st term of the Balmer Series by EGM

Classical Balmer Series wavelength

Electron Compton Wavelength

Neutron Compton Wavelength

Proton Compton Wavelength

Planck Length

114

m

s

(m/s)2

Pa

m/s

Hz2

m

Hz

Hz

m/s2

m/s2

F/m

θc

m

m

www.deltagroupengineering.com

λPV

µ, µµ

µ0

ν2

ν3

ν5

νe

νµ

ντ

ρ

ρ0

τ, τω

Wavelength of PV

Muon: elementary particle in the SM

Reduced mass of Hydrogen

Permeability of a vacuum

Theoretical elementary Neutrino of the L2 particle by EGM

Theoretical elementary Neutrino of the L3 particle by EGM

Theoretical elementary Neutrino of the L5 particle by EGM

Electron Neutrino: elementary particle in the SM

Muon Neutrino: elementary particle in the SM

Tau Neutrino: elementary particle in the SM

Charge density

Spectral energy density

Tau: elementary particle in the SM

Field frequency

Field frequency (at infinity) in the PV model of gravity: Ch. 3.2

Field frequency (locally) in the PV model of gravity

ω0

Field frequency (locally) in the PV model of gravity by EGM

Harmonic frequency of the ZPF with respect to BA

ωB

Critical frequency

ωC

Harmonic

frequency of the ZPF with respect to EA

ωE

Electron Compton Frequency

ωCe

Neutron Compton Frequency

ωCN

Proton Compton Frequency

ωCP

Planck Frequency

ωh

Generalised reference to ωPV(nPV,r,M)

ωPV

Fundamental frequency of PV (nPV = 1)

ωPV(1,r,M)

Frequency

spectrum of PV

ωPV(nPV,r,M)

Harmonic inflection frequency

ωX

Harmonic cut-off frequency of PV

ωΩ

ZPF

beat cut-off frequency

ωΩ ZPF

Critical boundary

ωβ

〈 mQuark〉 Average mass (energy) of all Quarks according to PDG

Average mass (energy) of all Quarks by EGM

Average RMS charge radius of all Bosons in the SM utilising ru

〈rBoson〉

Average RMS charge radius of all Quarks by EGM

〈rQuark〉

Average RMS charge radius of all Quarks and Bosons by EGM utilising ru

〈r〉〉

m

kg or eV

N/A2

C/m3

Pa/Hz

Hz

kg or eV

m

NOTES

115

www.deltagroupengineering.com

3.2

Quinta Essentia – Part 4

3.2.1 Acronyms

•

Refer to “Quinta Essentia – Part 3: Acronyms” where appropriate.

BH

CMBR

DAT

ED

EFT

EP

GA

GRP

GUT

HEP

LFT

MW

NASA

QED

QFT

QM

RF

SBH

SED

SM

SMBH

SPBH

ST

ToE

VP

ZP

ZPE

Black-Hole

Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation

Dimensional Analysis Technique

Electro-Dynamics

Effective Field Theory

Experimental Prototype

Gravitational Astronomy

Galactic Reference Particle

Grand Unified Theory

High Energy Physics

Lattice Field Theory

Milky-Way

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Quantum Electro Dynamics

Quantum Field Theory

Quantum Mechanics

Radio Frequency

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole

Spectral Energy Density

Standard Model of Particle-Physics or Cosmology

Super-Massive-Black-Hole

Schwarzschild-Planck-Black-Hole

String Theory

Theory of Everything

Virtual Photon

Zero-Point

Zero-Point-Energy

NOTES

116

www.deltagroupengineering.com

3.2.2 Symbols by chapter

•

Refer to “Quinta Essentia – Part 3: Symbols in alphabetical order” where appropriate.

Symbol

aEGM_ωΩ

ωΩ

CΩ_J

CΩ_J1

nΩ_1

Stg

StG

StJ

SωΩ

Ω1

ωΩ_1

ωΩ_2

ωΩ_3

**Chapter 5: Characterisation of the Gravitational Spectrum
**

Description

Gravitational acceleration utilising ωΩ_2

EGM Flux Intensity

Non-refractive form of CΩ_J

Non-refractive form of nΩ

1st EGM gravitational constant: Stg = 1.828935 x10245

2nd EGM gravitational constant: StG = 8.146982 x10224

3rd EGM gravitational constant: StJ9 = 1.093567 x10-146(kg4m26/s18)

Approximated / simplified Poynting Vector

Non-refractive form of Ω

Non-refractive form of ωΩ

Gravitational acceleration form of ωΩ_1

Transformed representation of ωΩ_1

Units

m/s2

Jy (Jansky)

m-1s-5

m5kg-2s-9

(kg4m26/s18)(1/9)

W/m2

Hz

**Chapter 6: Derivation of “Planck-Particle” and “Schwarzschild-Black-Hole” Characteristics
**

Symbol Description

Units

Propagation energy of a Graviton

J

Eg

Ex

Proportional relationship between Eg and Eγ

Propagation energy of a Photon

J

Eγ

Hubble constant (present value)

Hz

H0

Refractive Index of PV by Depp

KDepp

Planck scale experimental relationship function

Kh

Generalised mass

kg

M1

Generalised mass

M2

Mass of a SBH

MBH

2nd SPBH constant

mx

nBH

Harmonic cut-off mode ratio (nΩ_5 : nΩ_4)

ng

Average number of Gravitons radiated by a SBH per TΩ_4 period

Population of Gravitons within starving matter

ngg

Transformed representation of nΩ_1

nΩ_2

The form nΩ_2 takes as a function of λx

nΩ_3

nΩ_1 at the periphery of a SBH singularity

nΩ_4

nΩ_1 at the event horizon of a SBH

nΩ_5

Average number of Photons radiated by a SBH per TΩ_4 period

nγ

Population of Photons within starving matter

nγγ

Hubble size (present value)

m

r0

Generalised radial displacement

r1

Generalised radial displacement

r2

Radius of the event horizon of a SBH

RBH

Range variable for SBH’s

Rbh

Singularity radius

rS

ZPF equilibrium radius

rZPF

Distance from the centre of mass of a celestial object to the Earth

rω

Average emission period per Graviton

s

Tg

117

www.deltagroupengineering.com

TL

TΩ_3

TΩ_4

V

∆KPV

∆r

λVL

λx

λX-RAY

ρm

ρS

ωBH

ωg

ωPV_1

ωX-RAY

ωΩ_4

ωΩ_5

ωΩ_6

ωΩ_7

**Minimum gravitational lifetime of matter
**

1 / ωΩ_3

1 / ωΩ_4

Volume

Change in Refractive Index of PV

Change in displacement within the event horizon of a SBH

Wavelength of visible light

1st SPBH constant

Wavelength of X-Rays

Mass density

Mass density of a SPBH

Harmonic cut-off frequency ratio (ωΩ_5 : ωΩ_4)

Average Graviton emission frequency (1 / Tg)

Fundamental harmonic frequency ratio (ωΩ_6 : ωΩ_7)

Frequency of X-Rays

ωΩ_3 at the event horizon of a SBH

ωΩ_3 at the periphery of a SBH singularity

ωPV(1,r,MBH) at the periphery of a SBH singularity: r = rS(MBH)

ωPV(1,r,MBH) at the event horizon of a SBH: r = RBH(MBH)

s

m3

m

m

kg/m3

Hz

Hz

**Chapter 7: Fundamental Cosmology
**

Symbol

AU

H

HU

HU2

Hα

KT

KU

KW

M3

Mf

MG

mg1

mg2

mg3

mg4

mg5

Mi

MU

r3

rf

ri

Ro

RU

rx1

rx2

rx3

rx4

Description

EGM Cosmological age (present value)

Generalised reference to the Hubble constant

EGM Hubble constant

Transformed representation of HU

Primordial Hubble constant

Expansive scaling factor

rf / ri

Wien displacement constant: 2.8977685 x10-3 [35]

Generalised mass or mxmh

Total Cosmological mass (present value)

Total mass of the Milky-Way Galaxy

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

Total Cosmological mass (initial value)

Total EGM Cosmological mass

Generalised radial displacement or λxλh

Cosmological size (present value)

Cosmological size (initial value)

Distance from the Sun to the Galactic centre

EGM Cosmological size (present value)

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

118

Units

s

Hz

mK

kg

kg

m

pc (parsec)

m

www.deltagroupengineering.com

rx5

T0

TU

TU2

TW

UZPF

∆ Ro

∆T0

Ω

ΩEGM

Ωm

ΩPDG

ΩZPF

ΩΛ

Ωγ

Ων

λy

λΩ_3

ρ

ρc

ρU

ρU2

**Computational pre-factor
**

CMBR temperature (present value)

CMBR temperature by the EGM method

Transformed representation of TU

Thermodynamic scaling factor

ZPF energy density threshold

Experimental tolerance of Ro

Experimental tolerance of T0

Community reference to the net Cosmological density parameter

Net Cosmological density parameter as defined by the EGM method

Visible mass contribution to the net Cosmological density parameter

Net Cosmological density parameter as defined by the PDG

ZPE contribution to the net Cosmological density parameter

Dark energy contribution to the net Cosmological density parameter

Photon contribution to the net Cosmological density parameter

Neutrino contribution to the net Cosmological density parameter

Generalised representation of λx

c / ωΩ_3

Community reference to Cosmological mass-density

Critical Cosmological mass-density

EGM Cosmological mass-density

Transformed representation of ρU

K

Pa

pc

K

m

kg/m3

**Chapter 8: Advanced Cosmology
**

Symbol

CΩ_Jωω

dH2dt2

dHdt

dT2dt2

dT3dt3

dTdt

Hβ

Hβ2

Hγ

MEGM

ML

REGM

rL

t1

t2

t3

t4

t5

t7

tEGM

Description

Equal to CΩ_J

2nd time derivative of H

1st time derivative of H

2nd time derivative of TU4

3rd time derivative of TU4

1st time derivative of TU4

Dimensionless range variable

Computational pre-factor

Dimensionless range variable

Convenient form of MU

EGM Cosmological mass limit

Convenient form of RU

EGM Cosmological size limit

• Temporal ordinate (local maxima) of the CMBR temperature

• The instant of maximum Cosmological temperature

Temporal ordinate (local minima) of the 1st time derivative of the

CMBR temperature

Temporal ordinate (local maxima) of the 2nd time derivative of the

CMBR temperature

• Temporal ordinate (local maxima) of the 1st time derivative of H

• The instant of maximum physical EGM Hubble constant

Temporal ordinate (local minima) of the 2nd time derivative of H

Equal to t1

Convenient form of AU

119

Units

Jy

Hz3

Hz2

K/s2

K/s3

K/s

kg

m

s

www.deltagroupengineering.com

tL

TU3

TU4

η

µ

**EGM Cosmological age limit
**

Transformed representation of TU2

Transformed representation of TU3

Computed index

Indicial constant (µ = 1 / 3)

s

K

Symbol

ag

aPV

DE2M

gav

r4

r5

**Chapter 9: Gravitational Cosmology
**

Description

High frequency harmonic acceleration

Gravitational acceleration harmonic

Mean distance from the Earth to the Moon

Average high frequency harmonic acceleration

Distance from the centre of mass of the Earth to the buoyancy point

Distance from the centre of mass of the Moon to the buoyancy point

Units

m/s2

m

m/s2

m

**Chapter 10: Particle Cosmology
**

Symbol

mgg2

mγγ2

γγ

Nγ

Qγ

Qγ_PDG

Qγγ

Qγγ2

γγ

rgg2

rγγ2

γγ

Description

Graviton mass-energy lower limit

Photon mass-energy lower limit

Photon population at Qγ

Photon RMS charge threshold by EGM

Photon RMS charge threshold by PDG

Photon RMS charge upper limit by EGM

Photon RMS charge lower limit by EGM

Graviton RMS charge radius lower limit

Photon RMS charge radius lower limit

Units

eV

C

m

Appendix 4.A

Symbol

TBH

Th

TSPBH

Φ

κ

σ

Description

BH temperature

Planck temperature

SPBH temperature

Energy flux emitted from a “Black-Body” at temperature “T”

Boltzmann’s constant: 1.3806505 x10-23 [35]

Stefan-Boltzmann constant: 5.670400 x10-8 [35]

Units

K

W/m2

J/K

Wm-2K-4

NOTES

120

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**3.2.3 Symbols in alphabetical order
**

•

Refer to “Quinta Essentia – Part 3: Symbols in alphabetical order” where appropriate.

Symbol

aEGM_ωΩ

ωΩ

ag

aPV

AU

CΩ_J

CΩ_J1

CΩ_Jωω

DE2M

dH2dt2

dHdt

dT2dt2

dT3dt3

dTdt

Eg

Ex

Eγ

gav

H

H0

HU

HU2

Hα

Hβ

Hβ2

Hγ

KDepp

Kh

KT

KU

KW

M1

M2

M3

MBH

MEGM

Mf

MG

mg1

mg2

mg3

mg4

mg5

mgg2

Mi

ML

Description

Gravitational acceleration utilising ωΩ_2

High frequency harmonic acceleration

Gravitational acceleration harmonic

EGM Cosmological age (present value)

EGM Flux Intensity

Non-refractive form of CΩ_J

Equal to CΩ_J

Mean distance from the Earth to the Moon

2nd time derivative of H

1st time derivative of H

2nd time derivative of TU4

3rd time derivative of TU4

1st time derivative of TU4

Propagation energy of a Graviton

Proportional relationship between Eg and Eγ

Propagation energy of a Photon

Average high frequency harmonic acceleration

Generalised reference to the Hubble constant

Hubble constant (present value)

EGM Hubble constant

Transformed representation of HU

Primordial Hubble constant

Dimensionless range variable

Computational pre-factor

Dimensionless range variable

Refractive Index of PV by Depp

Planck scale experimental relationship function

Expansive scaling factor

rf / ri

Wien displacement constant: 2.8977685 x10-3 [35]

Generalised mass

Generalised mass

Generalised mass or mxmh

Mass of a SBH

Convenient form of MU

Total Cosmological mass (present value)

Total mass of the Milky-Way Galaxy

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

Graviton mass-energy lower limit

Total Cosmological mass (initial value)

EGM Cosmological mass limit

121

Units

m/s2

s

Jy (Jansky)

m

Hz3

Hz2

K/s2

K/s3

K/s

J

J

m/s2

Hz

mK

kg

eV

kg

www.deltagroupengineering.com

MU

mx

mγγ2

γγ

nBH

ng

ngg

nΩ_1

nΩ_2

nΩ_3

nΩ_4

nΩ_5

nγ

Nγ

nγγ

Qγ

Qγ_PDG

Qγγ

Qγγ2

γγ

r0

r1

r2

r3

r4

r5

RBH

Rbh

REGM

rf

rgg2

ri

rL

Ro

rS

RU

rx1

rx2

rx3

rx4

rx5

rZPF

rγγ2

γγ

rω

Stg

StG

StJ

SωΩ

T0

t1

**Total EGM Cosmological mass
**

2nd SPBH constant

Photon mass-energy lower limit

Harmonic cut-off mode ratio (nΩ_5 : nΩ_4)

Average number of Gravitons radiated by a SBH per TΩ_4 period

Population of Gravitons within starving matter

Non-refractive form of nΩ

Transformed representation of nΩ_1

The form nΩ_2 takes as a function of λx

nΩ_1 at the periphery of a SBH singularity

nΩ_1 at the event horizon of a SBH

Average number of Photons radiated by a SBH per TΩ_4 period

Photon population at Qγ

Population of Photons within starving matter

Photon RMS charge threshold by EGM

Photon RMS charge threshold by PDG

Photon RMS charge upper limit by EGM

Photon RMS charge lower limit by EGM

Hubble size (present value)

Generalised radial displacement

Generalised radial displacement

Generalised radial displacement or λxλh

Distance from the centre of mass of the Earth to the buoyancy point

Distance from the centre of mass of the Moon to the buoyancy point

Radius of the event horizon of a SBH

Range variable for SBH’s

Convenient form of RU

Cosmological size (present value)

Graviton RMS charge radius lower limit

Cosmological size (initial value)

EGM Cosmological size limit

Distance from the Sun to the Galactic centre

Singularity radius

EGM Cosmological size (present value)

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

Computational pre-factor

ZPF equilibrium radius

Photon RMS charge radius lower limit

Distance from the centre of mass of a celestial object to the Earth

1st EGM gravitational constant: Stg = 1.828935 x10245

2nd EGM gravitational constant: StG = 8.146982 x10224

3rd EGM gravitational constant: StJ9 = 1.093567 x10-146(kg4m26/s18)

Approximated / simplified Poynting Vector

CMBR temperature (present value)

• Temporal ordinate (local maxima) of the CMBR temperature

• The instant of maximum Cosmological temperature

122

kg

eV

C

m

pc (parsec)

m

m

m-1s-5

m5kg-2s-9

(kg4m26/s18)(1/9)

W/m2

K

s

www.deltagroupengineering.com

t2

t3

t4

t5

t7

TBH

tEGM

Tg

Th

TL

tL

TSPBH

TU

TU2

TU3

TU4

TW

TΩ_3

TΩ_4

UZPF

V

∆KPV

∆r

∆ Ro

∆T0

Φ

Ω

Ω1

ΩEGM

Ωm

ΩPDG

ΩZPF

ΩΛ

Ωγ

Ων

η

κ

λVL

λx

λX-RAY

λy

λΩ_3

µ

ρ

ρc

ρm

**Temporal ordinate (local minima) of the 1st time derivative of the
**

CMBR temperature

Temporal ordinate (local maxima) of the 2nd time derivative of the

CMBR temperature

• Temporal ordinate (local maxima) of the 1st time derivative of H

• The instant of maximum physical EGM Hubble constant

Temporal ordinate (local minima) of the 2nd time derivative of H

Equal to t1

BH temperature

Convenient form of AU

Average emission period per Graviton

Planck temperature

Minimum gravitational lifetime of matter

EGM Cosmological age limit

SPBH temperature

CMBR temperature by the EGM method

Transformed representation of TU

Transformed representation of TU2

Transformed representation of TU3

Thermodynamic scaling factor

1 / ωΩ_3

1 / ωΩ_4

ZPF energy density threshold

Volume

Change in Refractive Index of PV

Change in displacement within the event horizon of a SBH

Experimental tolerance of Ro

Experimental tolerance of T0

Energy flux emitted from a “Black-Body” at temperature “T”

Community reference to the net Cosmological density parameter

Non-refractive form of Ω

Net Cosmological density parameter as defined by the EGM method

Visible mass contribution to the net Cosmological density parameter

Net Cosmological density parameter as defined by the PDG

ZPE contribution to the net Cosmological density parameter

Dark energy contribution to the net Cosmological density parameter

Photon contribution to the net Cosmological density parameter

Neutrino contribution to the net Cosmological density parameter

Computed index

Boltzmann’s constant: 1.3806505 x10-23 [35]

Wavelength of visible light

1st SPBH constant

Wavelength of X-Rays

Generalised representation of λx

c / ωΩ_3

Indicial constant (µ = 1 / 3)

Community reference to Cosmological mass-density

Critical Cosmological mass-density

Mass density

123

s

K

s

K

s

K

s

Pa

m3

m

pc

K

W/m2

J/K

m

m

m

kg/m3

www.deltagroupengineering.com

ρS

ρU

ρU2

σ

ωBH

ωg

ωPV_1

ωX-RAY

ωΩ_1

ωΩ_2

ωΩ_3

ωΩ_4

ωΩ_5

ωΩ_6

ωΩ_7

**Mass density of a SPBH
**

EGM Cosmological mass-density

Transformed representation of ρU

Stefan-Boltzmann constant: 5.670400 x10-8 [35]

Harmonic cut-off frequency ratio (ωΩ_5 : ωΩ_4)

Average Graviton emission frequency (1 / Tg)

Fundamental harmonic frequency ratio (ωΩ_6 : ωΩ_7)

Frequency of X-Rays

Non-refractive form of ωΩ

Gravitational acceleration form of ωΩ_1

Transformed representation of ωΩ_1

ωΩ_3 at the event horizon of a SBH

ωΩ_3 at the periphery of a SBH singularity

ωPV(1,r,MBH) at the periphery of a SBH singularity: r = rS(MBH)

ωPV(1,r,MBH) at the event horizon of a SBH: r = RBH(MBH)

kg/m3

Wm-2K-4

Hz

Hz

NOTES

124

www.deltagroupengineering.com

4 Derivation Processes

4.1

Main sequence

**4.1.1 Characterisation of the gravitational spectrum
**

The Electro-Gravi-Magnetic (EGM) equations, utilised to describe fundamental particles in

harmonic terms “Stω”, are simplified for values of Refractive Index approaching unity “KPV → 1”.

This facilitates the representation of gravitational acceleration “g” utilising the Polarisable Vacuum

(PV) harmonic cut-off frequency “ωΩ”, leading to the formulation of a generalised cubic frequency

expression “g → ωPV3”. It is demonstrated that the PV spectrum is dominated by “ωΩ” such that the

magnitude of the associated gravitational Poynting Vector “SωΩ” is usefully approximated by the

total energy density “SωΩ → c⋅Um”, resulting in an expression for EGM Flux Intensity “CΩ_J”. The

derivation sequence proceeds as follows,

1. Simplification of the EGM equations.

2. Derivation of gravitational acceleration in terms of “ωΩ”.

3. Formulation of a generalised cubic frequency expression in terms of “g”: “g → ωPV3”.

4. Determination of the gravitationally dominant EGM frequency: “SωΩ → c⋅Um”.

5. Derivation of EGM Flux Intensity “CΩ_J”.

4.1.2 Derivation of “Planck-Particle” and “Schwarzschild-Black-Hole” characteristics

The minimum physical dimensions of “Schwarzschild-Planck-Particle” mass and radius is

derived, leading to the determination of the value of “KPV” at the event horizon of a

“Schwarzschild-Planck-Black-Hole” (SPBH). Consequently, the magnitude of the harmonic cut-off

frequency “ωΩ” at the event horizon “RBH” of a “Schwarzschild-Black-Hole” (SBH) is presented,

yielding the singularity radius “rS” and harmonic cut-off profiles (“nΩ” and “ωΩ” as “r → RBH”).

The minimum gravitational lifetime of matter “TL” is also advanced such that the value of

generalised average emission frequency per Graviton “ωg” may be calculated. These determinations

assist in the supplemental EGM interpretation with respect to the visibility of “Black-Holes”

(BH’s). The derivation sequence proceeds as follows,

6. Derivation of the minimum physical “Schwarzschild-Planck-Particle” mass and radius.

7. Derivation of the value of the “KPV” at the event horizon of a “Schwarzschild-PlanckBlack-Hole” (SPBH).

8. Derivation of “ωΩ” at the event horizon of a SPBH.

9. Derivation of “ωΩ” at the event horizon of a SBH.

10. Derivation of “rS”.

11. “nΩ” and “ωΩ” profiles (as “r → RBH”) of SBH’s.

12. Derivation of the minimum gravitational lifetime of matter “TL”.

13. Derivation of the average emission frequency per Graviton “ωg”.

14. Why can't we observe BH’s?

4.1.3 Fundamental Cosmology

The primordial and present values of the Hubble constant are derived (“Hα” and “HU”

respectively), leading to the determination of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation

(CMBR) temperature “TU”. This facilitates the determination of the impact of “Dark Matter /

Energy” on “HU” and “TU” such that a generalised expression for “TU” in terms of “HU” is

formulated. An experimentally implicit derivation of the ZPF energy density threshold “UZPF” is

also presented. The derivation sequence proceeds as follows,

125

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**15. Derivation of the primordial and present Hubble constants “Hα, HU”.
**

16. Derivation of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) temperature “TU”.

17. Numerical solutions for “Hα, AU, RU, ρU, MU, HU” and “TU”.

18. Determination of the impact of “Dark Matter / Energy” on “HU” and “TU”.

19. “TU” as a function of a generalised Hubble constant “TU → TU2”.

20. Derivation of “Ro”, “MG”, “HU2” and “ρU2” from “TU2”.

21. Experimentally implicit derivation of the ZPF energy density threshold “UZPF”.

4.1.4 Advanced Cosmology

A time dependent derivation of “TU” is performed, including its rate of change and

relationship to “HU”. This facilitates the articulation of the Cosmological evolution process into four

distinct periods dealing with the inflationary and early expansive phases. Subsequently, the history

of the Universe33 is developed and compared to the Standard Model (SM) of Cosmology. This

assists in determining the Cosmological limitations of the EGM construct. The question of the

practicality of utilising conventional radio telescopes for gravitational astronomy is also addressed.

The derivation sequence proceeds as follows,

22. Time dependent CMBR temperature “TU2 → TU3”.

23. Rates of change of CMBR temperature “TU3 → TU4 → d1,2,3TU4/dt1,2,3”.

24. Rates of change of the Hubble constant “d1,2H/dt1,2”.

25. Cosmological evolution process.

26. History of the Universe.

27. EGM Cosmological construct limitations.

28. Are conventional radio telescopes, practical tools for gravitational astronomy?

4.1.5 Gravitational Cosmology

An engineering model is developed to explain how gravitational effects are transmitted

through space-time in terms of EGM wavefunction propagation and interference. The derivation

sequence proceeds as follows,

29. Gravitational propagation: the mechanism for interaction.

30. Gravitational interference: the mechanism of interaction.

4.1.6 Particle Cosmology

The following characteristics are derived utilising EGM principles:

31. The Photon and Graviton mass-energies lower limit.

32. The Photon and Graviton Root-Mean-Square (RMS) charge radii lower limit.

33. The Photon charge threshold.

34. The Photon charge upper limit.

35. The Photon charge lower limit.

33

**As defined by the EGM construct.
**

126

www.deltagroupengineering.com

4.2

The Hubble sequence

**Note: refer to “Glossary of Terms” where required.
**

4.2.1 Preconditions

i. Derivation of EGM Flux Intensity “CΩ_J”.

ii. Derivation of the minimum physical “Schwarzschild-Planck-Particle” mass and radius.

iii. Derivation of the minimum gravitational lifetime of matter “TL”.

4.2.2 Assumptions

i. At an instant prior to the “Big-Bang”, the Universe (termed the “Primordial Universe”)

was analogous to a homogeneous Planck scale particle at the maximum permissible

energy density limit (i.e. with the physical proportions defined by precondition “ii”).

ii. The “Milky-Way” is analogous to a Planck scale particle of equivalent total Galactic

mass-energy (i.e. visible + dark) such that dynamic, kinematic and geometric similarity

exists between the “Primordial Universe” and the “Milky-Way” Planck scale particles34.

Hence, for Earth based observations, the average EGM Flux Intensity of the “Milky-Way

Galaxy” is proportional to the average value of the present Universe and the peak value of

the “Primordial Universe” at the instant of the “Big-Bang”.

iii. Matter is dispersed throughout the Universe in accordance with the EGM harmonic

representation of fundamental particles, i.e. Eq. (3.230) applies to Cosmology.

4.2.3 Simplified sequence

The Hubble constant by the EGM method “HU”, may be derived from first principles in

agreement with physical measurement, by the following sequence,

i. Express the EGM harmonic representation of fundamental particles in Cosmological form.

ii. Formulate a relationship between the size of the Planck scale particles and EGM Flux

Intensity.

iii. Formulate a generalised relationship between the dimensions of a “Schwarzschild-PlanckParticle” and harmonic frequency mode.

iv. Formulate a generalised expression for “HU” utilising the output from the three previous

steps and evaluate appropriately,

NOTES

34

**The analogous Planck scale particle for the “Milky-Way” performs the function of a “Galactic
**

Reference Particle” (GRP) in relation to the “Primordial Universe”.

127

www.deltagroupengineering.com

4.3

The CMBR temperature sequence

**Note: refer to “Glossary of Terms” where required.
**

4.3.1 Preconditions

i. “HU” has been derived correctly.

ii. The total mass-energy of the present Universe is dynamically, kinematically and

geometrically similar to a particle at the Planck scale limit, consistent with the formulation

of “HU”.

4.3.2 Assumptions

i. EGM considers the “Primordial Universe” as a single mode wavefunction, therefore any

temperature calculation must be scaled accordingly for application to black-body radiation

(i.e. black-bodies emit a spectrum of thermal frequencies, not just one).

ii. The CMBR temperature is proportional to the average number of Gravitons radiated per

harmonic period by the “Primordial Universe” at the instant prior to the “Big-Bang”.

4.3.3 Simplified sequence

The Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) temperature by the EGM method

“TU”, may be derived from first principles in precise agreement with physical measurement, by the

following sequence,

i. Formulate an expansive scaling factor relating the average number of Gravitons radiated

per harmonic period by the “Primordial Universe” at the instant prior to the “Big-Bang”,

the value of the Hubble constant at the same instant (termed the primordial Hubble

constant “Hα”) and “HU”.

ii. Formulate a thermodynamic scaling factor relating Wien’s Displacement Law and EGM

wavelength.

iii. Multiply the expansive and thermodynamic scaling factors to compute “TU”.

NOTES

128

www.deltagroupengineering.com

5 Characterisation of the Gravitational Spectrum

Abstract

The Electro-Gravi-Magnetic (EGM) equations, utilised to describe fundamental particles in

harmonic terms “Stω”, are simplified for values of Refractive Index approaching unity “KPV → 1”.

This facilitates the representation of gravitational acceleration “g” utilising the Polarisable Vacuum

(PV) harmonic cut-off frequency “ωΩ”, leading to the formulation of a generalised cubic frequency

expression “g → ωPV3”. It is demonstrated that the PV spectrum is dominated by “ωΩ” such that the

magnitude of the associated gravitational Poynting Vector “SωΩ” is usefully approximated by the

total energy density “SωΩ → c⋅Um”, resulting in an expression for EGM Flux Intensity “CΩ_J”.

129

www.deltagroupengineering.com

5.1

Simplification of the EGM equations

**5.1.1 “Ω → Ω1”, “nΩ → nΩ_1” and “ωΩ → ωΩ_1”
**

Considering celestial objects as point masses radiating a spectrum of gravitational

wavefunctions, dominated by “ωΩ” in accordance with [5], the EGM Particle-Physics equations

applied to Cosmology produce signature characteristics of the gravitational spectrum resulting in

highly precise simplified representations (with negligible error) such that:

i. Ω(r,M) → Ω1(r,M)

ii. nΩ(r,M) → nΩ_1(r,M)

iii. ωΩ(r,M) → ωΩ_1(r,M)

Utilising Eq. (3.69, 3.70) yields,

3 .M .c

U m( r , M )

U ω( r , M )

For solutions where “ 81.

U m( r , M )

3

4 .π .r

3 .M .c

5

4

3

h .

4

ω PV( 1 , r , M ) 2 .π .r .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

3

2 .c

(4.7)

2

U ω( r , M )

3

Ω 1( r , M )

2

108.

**>> 768”: Eq. (3.72) → Eq. (4.8) [i.e. “Ω → Ω1”] as follows,
**

U m( r , M )

108.

U ω( r , M )

3

U m( r , M )

216.

U ω( r , M )

U m( r , M )

U ω( r , M )

(4.8)

**Substituting Eq. (4.7) into Eq. (4.8) yields,
**

Ω 1( r , M )

3

6 .c

r .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

.

3 .M .c

2

2 .π .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

(4.9)

**For solutions where “Ω(r,M) >> 1”: Eq. (3.71) → Eq. (4.10) by substitution of Eq. (4.9) [i.e.
**

“nΩ → nΩ_1”] as follows,

3

n Ω_1( r , M )

3

2

Ω 1( r , M ) 1 U m( r , M )

c

3 .M .c

.

.

12

2 U ω( r , M ) 2 .r .ω PV( 1 , r , M ) 2 .π .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

(4.10)

**Hence: Eq. (3.73) → Eq. (4.11) [i.e. “ωΩ → ωΩ_1”] as follows,
**

3

ω Ω_1( r , M ) n Ω_1( r , M ) .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

2

c .

3 .M .c

2 .r 2 .π .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

(4.11)

5.1.2 Computing errors

ω Ω_1 R M , M M

ω Ω_1 R E, M E

ω Ω R M, M M

ω Ω R E, M E

ω Ω_1 R J , M J

ω Ω_1 R S , M S

ω Ω R J, M J

ω Ω R S, M S

1=

ω Ω_1 R NS , M NS

ω Ω R NS , M NS

130

.

6.66133810

14

.

2.22044610

14

.

6.66133810

14

.

8.88178410

14

(%)

(4.12)

1 = 0 (%)

(4.13)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

5.2

Derivation of gravitational acceleration in terms of “ωΩ”

**5.2.1 Transformation: “ωΩ_1 → ωΩ_2”
**

5.2.1.1 Simplification

The cubic form of Eq. (4.11) yields,

ω Ω_1( r , M )

3

2

c .

3 .M .c

2 .r 2 .π .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

3

(4.14)

**For solutions where “KPV(r,M) = 1”, “ωPV(1,r,M)” may be usefully approximated and utilised such
**

that “ωΩ_19 → ωΩ_29” according to,

3

ω Ω_2( r , M )

9

9

2

1

c . 3 .M .c .

.

.

.

3

2r

2πh

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

3

9

2

c . 3 .M .c

2 .r

2 .π .h

.

3 14

2

3 .c .M

1

.

1 . 2 c .G.M

3

π .r

r

13 5 2 3

2 .r .π .h .G

(4.15)

Recognising,

th

G.h

c

λh

5

ωh

λh

(4.19)

2

c

G.h

mh

2

h .c

G

(4.17)

(4.18)

3

1

3

5

1

th

(4.16)

G.h

c

2

c

G.h

G

λh

(4.20)

c

2

3

h

(4.21)

Yields,

3 14

2

3 .c .M

4

3 2

2

3 .G .M .ω h .c

13 5 2 3

2 .r .π .h .G

2

13 5 2

2 .r .π .λ h

5

3

3 .ω h

.

. GM

13

5

π

2 .λ h .r

2

5

3

3 .ω h .G.M G.M

.

2 3

13

2 .λ h .π .r

2

r

6

3

3 .ω h

.

. GM

2

13 2

2 .π .r .c r

2

(4.22)

Let,

6

3

3 .ω h

St g

13 2

2 .π .c

(4.23)

G.M

g( r , M )

2

r

(4.24)

Hence,

ω Ω_2( r , M )

9

St g

.g ( r , M ) 2

r

(4.25)

**Let “aEGM_ωΩ(r,M)” denote the magnitude of the gravitational acceleration vector such that:
**

a EGM_ωΩ( r , M )

131

r .

9

ω Ω_2( r , M )

St g

(4.26)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

5.2.1.2 Computing errors

5.2.1.2.1 “ωΩ_1 → ωΩ_2”

The error associated with Eq. (4.25) in relation to the refractive inclusive simplified form of

harmonic cut-off frequency (i.e. “ωΩ_1”) may be articulated as follows,

ω Ω_2 R M , M M

ω Ω_2 R E, M E

ω Ω_1 R M , M M

ω Ω_1 R E, M E

ω Ω_2 R J , M J

ω Ω_2 R S , M S

ω Ω_1 R J , M J

ω Ω_1 R S , M S

ω Ω_2 R NS , M NS

ω Ω_1 R NS , M NS

1=

.

1.04678510

9

.

2.32001510

8

.

6.57443310

7

.

7.07196310

5

(%)

(4.27)

1 = 2.491576 ( % )

(4.28)

5.2.1.2.2 “g”

The error associated with Eq. (4.26) in relation to “g” may be articulated as follows,

a EGM_ωΩ R M , M M

a EGM_ωΩ R E, M E

g R M,M M

g R E, M E

a EGM_ωΩ R J , M J

a EGM_ωΩ R S , M S

g R J, M J

g R S, M S

a EGM_ωΩ R NS, M NS

g R NS, M NS

1=

.

1.49880110

.

1.5432110

12

12

.

1.49880110

12

.

1.57651710

12

(%)

(4.29)

.

1 = 1.65423210

12

( %)

(4.30)

5.2.1.3 Error analysis

The difference in error between Eq. (4.28, 4.30) indicates that the historical weak field

representation of “KPV” is limited in applicability to celestial objects with mass approximately less

than Neutron Stars. However, Eq. (4.30) demonstrates that the simplified EGM representation is not

effected by this constraint.

This is due to the manner in which “KPV” is defined. It has two definitions according to

“Puthoff et. Al.”: these are (i), it has a value of unity at infinity [i.e. Eq. (3.55)] and (ii), it has a

value of “KPV = c / vc” where, “c” is the velocity of light in a vacuum and “vc” denotes the velocity

of light in a vacuum affected by a gravitational field as perceived by an observer at infinity.

Since “c” is a definition and “vc” is measured, the application of the PV model of gravity in

terms of “KPV” is exact when the measurement is made from infinity: however, “g” is a local value.

Consequently, when comparing “g” to “aEGM_ωΩ”, the contribution of “KPV” must be either (iii),

removed from “aEGM_ωΩ” or (iv), merged with the classical representation of “g” for strong

gravitational fields when utilising the weak field approximation specified by Eq. (3.55).

Subsequently, two subtle yet important characteristics must be observed when comparing

the PV model of gravity to its classical equivalent: these are (v), “KPV” increases from unity at

infinity to the local observer and (vi) “g” decreases to zero at infinity from the local observer.

132

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**5.2.2 Transformation: “ωΩ_1 → ωΩ_3”
**

5.2.2.1 Simplification

Utilising Eq. (4.10, 4.11), an alternative expression for harmonic cut-off frequency may be

formulated as follows,

3

ω Ω_1( r , M )

3

1

1 . U m( r , M ) .

ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .

2

2 U ω( r , M )

U m( r , M )

h .

4

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

3

.

2c

.ω ( 1 , r , M )

PV

(4.31)

**Taking the cubic form yields,
**

ω Ω_1( r , M )

3

3

1 . 2 .c . U m( r , M )

8 h ω PV( 1 , r , M )

(4.32)

**For solutions where “KPV(r,M) = 1”, “ωPV(1,r,M)” may be usefully approximated and utilised such
**

that “ωΩ_19 → ωΩ_39” according to,

3 .M .c

ω Ω_3( r , M )

9

3

c . U m( r , M )

4 .h ω PV( 1 , r , M )

3

3

3

c

4 .h

2 3

. .3

. 4πr

2 .c .G.M

14

2

5

27 . c . M

8192 h 3 π2 .r5 .G

9

2

27 . c . c . M

8192 G.h h 2 π2 .r5

3

9

2

3 . 2.c . M

ωh

13

2

2

2

h π .r5

π .r

4

(4.33)

Hence,

9

ω Ω_3( r , M )

c.

3.

2

3 .ω h

4 .π .h

2

. M

2

5

r

(4.34)

Let,

St G

3.

3 .ω h

2

. c

2

4 .π .h

9

(4.35)

Therefore,

9

ω Ω_3( r , M )

2

M

St G.

5

r

(4.36)

where,

G

St G

St g

(4.37)

5.2.2.2 Computing errors

ω Ω_3 R M , M M

ω Ω_3 R E, M E

ω Ω_2 R M , M M

ω Ω_2 R E, M E

ω Ω_3 R J , M J

ω Ω_3 R S , M S

ω Ω_2 R J , M J

ω Ω_2 R S , M S

ω Ω_3 R NS , M NS

ω Ω_2 R NS , M NS

1 . St G

G

1=

.

1.11022310

13

. 13

1.11022310

.

1.11022310

13

(%)

(4.38)

.

1 = 6.66133810

.

1 = 3.33066910

St g

. 14

8.88178410

14

(%)

(4.39)

14

( %)

(4.40)

133

www.deltagroupengineering.com

5.3

Formulation of a generalised cubic frequency expression in terms of “g”: “g → ωPV3”

**Applying the methodology utilised to derive “ωΩ_2” and “ωΩ_3”, a generalised cubic
**

frequency expression in terms of gravitational acceleration at an arbitrary value of “nPV” may be

formulated directly from Eq. (3.67, 4.24). For solutions where “KPV(r,M) = 1”, “ωPV(nPV,r,M)3”

may be usefully approximated as follows,

2 .c .n PV

3

3

ω PV n PV, r , M

5.4

π .r

.g ( r , M )

2

(4.41)

Determination of the gravitationally dominant EGM frequency: “SωΩ → c⋅Um”

**Storti et. Al. demonstrated in [5] that “>> 99.99(%)” of gravitational energy exists well
**

above the “THz” range at the surface of the Earth. Moreover, it was also shown in [5] that, in

accordance with DAT’s and BPT, the PV model of gravity may be usefully approximated by a

unique wavefunction at a specific frequency. This section advances these conclusions by

demonstrating that the gravitational spectrum of PV frequencies may be usefully approximated by a

single valued Poynting Vector wavefunction “SωΩ”.

Considering the harmonic element on the Right-Hand-Side (RHS) of Eq. (3.68) and

simplifying yields,

n PV

2

4

4

n PV

(RHS: 3.68)

**Let “nPV = nΩ - 2”, “nPV > 0”:
**

nΩ

2

2

4

nΩ

2

substitute , n Ω

4

2

nΩ

2

8 .n Ω

simplify

24.n Ω

3

2

32.n Ω

16

(4.42)

**For solutions where “nΩ >> 1”,
**

8 .n Ω

3

24.n Ω

8 .n Ω . n Ω

2

2

32.n Ω factor

3 .n Ω factor

8 .n Ω . n Ω

2

8 .n Ω . n Ω

2

3

3 .n Ω

4

(4.43)

→ 8 .n Ω 3

(4.44)

**Hence, “Sω(r,M)”, in terms of “nΩ(r,M)”, is usefully approximated as “SωΩ(r,M)” according to:
**

S ωΩ ( r , M )

h .

4

ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .

2

2 .c

n Ω ( r, M )

2

4

n Ω ( r, M )

4

h .

4

3

ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .8 .n Ω ( r , M )

2

2 .c

(4.45)

**Assuming “nΩ → nΩ_1” yields,
**

3

2

4 .h .

4

4

c

3 .M .c

3 4 .h .

.

S ωΩ ( r , M )

ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .n Ω ( r , M )

ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .

2

2

2 .r .ω PV( 1 , r , M ) 2 .π .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

c

c

3

(4.46)

4

3

2

3

4 .h .c . ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .

3 .M .c

3 .M .c

S ωΩ ( r , M )

2 3

3 . . .

3

8 .c .r ω PV( 1 , r , M ) 2 π h ω PV( 1 , r , M ) 4 .π .r

Therefore,

S ωΩ ( r , M ) c .U m( r , M )

(4.47)

(4.48)

**This result demonstrates that “Sω(r,M)” for any solid spherical object with homogeneous
**

mass-energy distribution may be characterised by a single wavefunction at “ωΩ(r,M)”. In other

words, all other frequencies [i.e. for “ωPV(nPV,r,M) < ωΩ(r,M)”] within the PV spectrum of the

gravitational field generated by the object, may be usefully neglected.

134

www.deltagroupengineering.com

5.5

Derivation of EGM Flux Intensity “CΩ_J”

5.5.1 Simplification

By considering each celestial object as a point mass / source radiating a high frequency

EGM wavefunction (i.e. in accordance with the conclusion stated in the preceding section), the

intensity of gravitational energy (EGM Flux expressed in Jansky's) may be derived as follows:

Let,

2 d

λ Ω ( r , M ) . U m( r , M )

dr

C Ω_J ( r , M )

(4.49)

**Note: “CΩ_J” contains “KPV” because “λΩ → c / ωΩ”.
**

Assuming “λΩ → c / ωΩ_3” yields “CΩ_J → CΩ_J1” (i.e. the refractive exclusive form) as

follows,

2

C Ω_J1( r , M )

2

c

9

2

M

St G.

5

r

. .

. d 3M c

d r 4 .π .r3

2

c

2

5

9

. r

9

M

2

St G

2

1

2

5

. . 2 . 4

. 9 M c 9 c .St 9 . M

G

4

26

4 .π

4 .π .r

r

9

(4.50)

Let,

9 .c .

St G

4 .π

4

St J

2

9

(4.51)

Hence,

C Ω_J1( r , M )

St J

2

r

9

. M

5

8

r

(4.52)

5.5.2 Computing errors

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M M

C Ω_J1 R S , M M

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M M

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M E

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M E

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M J

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M J

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M S

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M S

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M NS

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M NS

C Ω_J R S , M M

1=

.

3.63875410

8

.

2.95903310

6

.

9.40034410

4

C Ω_J1 R S , M E

C Ω_J R S , M E

C Ω_J1 R S , M J

( %)

C Ω_J R S , M J

0.979587

C Ω_J1 R S , M S

0.979587

C Ω_J R S , M S

1=

.

3.86357610

12

.

4.23450210

10

.

1.3506210

7

.

1.41439110

4

.

1.41439110

4

( %)

C Ω_J1 R S , M NS

C Ω_J R S , M NS

(4.53)

5.5.3 Error analysis

The preceding equation set indicates that for practical astronomical applications [i.e. “r >>

100(km)”],

i. “CΩ_J = CΩ_J1”.

ii. The historical definition of “KPV” [i.e. the weak field approximation shown in Eq. (3.55)]

does not significantly modify the value of “CΩ_J”.

135

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

136

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6 Derivation of “Planck-Particle” and “SchwarzschildBlack-Hole” Characteristics

Abstract

The minimum physical dimensions of “Schwarzschild-Planck-Particle” mass and radius is

derived, leading to the determination of the value of “KPV” at the event horizon of a

“Schwarzschild-Planck-Black-Hole” (SPBH). Consequently, the magnitude of the harmonic cut-off

frequency “ωΩ” at the event horizon “RBH” of a “Schwarzschild-Black-Hole” (SBH) is presented,

yielding the singularity radius “rS” and harmonic cut-off profiles (“nΩ” and “ωΩ” as “r → RBH”).

The minimum gravitational lifetime of matter “TL” is also advanced such that the value of

generalised average emission frequency per Graviton “ωg” may be calculated. These determinations

assist in the supplemental EGM interpretation with respect to the visibility of “Black-Holes”

(BH’s).

137

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.1

Derivation of the minimum physical “Schwarzschild-Planck-Particle” mass and radius

**6.1.1 What does “physical” mean?
**

6.1.1.1 Conceptualisation

The definition and conceptualisation of the term “physical” has been disputed and discussed

for millennia. It remains one of the greatest questions in philosophy, dating back to ancient Greek

civilization. A standard dictionary definition is “of or pertaining to that which is material”. To many

people, this is an adequate and useful definition. The next obvious task is to define what “material”

means. Of course, this process can be repeated indefinitely such that no universally acceptable

definition is ever reached.

Everyday life and experience is extremely forgiving in a “communication” sense. More

often than not, one is not required to articulate in unambiguous terms, the key elements in a chance

discussion. It is often sufficient, in many casual settings, to communicate thoughts and ideas in the

most generalised terms available as brief human encounters can be quite dynamic.

However, this luxury does not exist in the realm of Physics where precise definitions are vital

for clear communication and understanding. Fortunately, the EGM construct is able to provide a

useful mathematical definition facilitating the computation of common “Planck-Particle” and

“Schwarzschild-Black-Hole” (SBH) characteristics.

Storti. et. Al. demonstrated in [5] that by considering a solid spherical object with

homogeneous mass-energy distribution to be a point source spectral wavefunction radiator with

ZPF equilibrium radius “rZPF’, the following properties are mathematically observed,

i. As “|Um(rZPF,M)|” increases at any arbitrarily fixed value of radial displacement35 “r”:

i. “|nΩ(r,M)|” decreases.

ii. “|ωΩ(r,M)|” increases.

iii. “|ωPV(1,r,M)|” increases.

iv. “|ωΩ(r,M)| - |ωPV(1,r,M)|” decreases.

v. The PV spectrum is converging.

ii. For any arbitrarily fixed value of |Um(rZPF,M)|, as “r” increases:

i. “|nΩ(r,M)|” increases.

ii. “|ωΩ(r,M)|” decreases.

iii. “|ωPV(1,r,M)|” decreases.

iv. “|ωΩ(r,M)| - |ωPV(1,r,M)|” increases.

v. The PV spectrum is diverging.

6.1.1.2 Assumptions

A Cosmological physical limit exists for maximum permissible energy density such that

“|Um(rZPF,M)| → the physical limit”. Hence, a consistent interpretation of the results above within

the framework of contemporary Quantum Mechanical (QM) expectation provokes the following

hypotheses when “r > rZPF” such that “r → rZPF”:

i. “|nΩ(r,M)| → 1”.

ii. “|ωΩ(r,M)| → |ωPV(1,r,M)|”.

iii. “[|ωΩ(r,M)| - |ωPV(1,r,M)|] → 0”.

iv. The PV spectrum is convergent.

35

Where, “r > rZPF”.

138

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.1.1.3 Definitions

6.1.1.3.1 Matter

Based upon the preceding hypotheses, we are able to state an EGM definition of a specific

class of “physical matter” (i.e. spherical), in addition to contemporary interpretations. Matter with

spherical geometry and homogeneous mass-energy distribution is said to be “physical” if:

i. The magnitude of the energy density of the object at rest, bounded by the ZPF equilibrium

radius, is less than or equal to the Cosmological physical limit for maximum permissible

energy density (i.e. “|Um(rZPF,M)| ≤ the physical limit”).

ii. The number of harmonic frequency modes is greater than or equal to unity at the ZPF

equilibrium radius (i.e. “|nΩ(rZPF,M)| ≥ 1”).

6.1.1.3.2 Energy density

As specified in the proceeding construct, the limit for maximum permissible “physical

energy density” is defined as “|Um(λxλh,mxmh)|”.

Note: this condition implies a state of maximum permissible space-time manifold curvature.

6.1.1.3.3 Planck scale properties

The historical derivation and classical definitions of Planck Frequency “ωh”, Length “λh”

and Mass “mh” were not performed in accordance with formalised DAT’s. Alternatively, one could

argue that the classical definitions were derived correctly, but the experimental relationship function

“Kh”, associated with the formalised DAT derivation process of Planck scale properties, was

assumed to be unity [i.e. “Kh(ωh,λh,mh) = 1”].

Storti et. Al. derive experimentally implicit values of “ωh”, “λh” and “mh” in [13], based

upon the determination of three Experimental Relationship Functions (ERF’s) [i.e. “Kh(ωh) = Kω =

(2/π)1/3” and “Kh(λh) = Kλ = Kh(mh) = Km = (π/2)1/3”]. Hence, the experimentally implicit (also

termed “EGM adjusted”) values of Planck Frequency, Length and Mass are given by “Kω ωh”,

“Kλλh” and “Kmmh” respectively, such that when “h = 6.626069 x10-34(Js)”:

i. “Kωωh = 6.365769 x1042(Hz)”.

ii. “Kλλh = 4.709446 x10-35(m)”.

iii. “Kmmh = 6.341792 x10-8(kg)”.

A derivation of the Root-Mean-Square (RMS) charge diameter (i.e. the ZPF equilibrium

diameter) of a Photon “φγγ” (i.e. twice the RMS charge radius “rγγ”) is performed in [10]

demonstrating that “φγγ = 2rγγ ≈ λh” [to within 15.3(%)]. Subsequently, utilising the EGM adjusted

Planck Length, it may be demonstrated that “Kλλh = φγγ” to within “0.83(%)”. [13]

Since “φγγ” is extremely close to QM expectation and all EGM adjusted Planck properties

were derived in the same manner, it follows that the individual (not combined) “physical Planck

scale properties” of frequency “ω”, length “λ” and mass “m” may be defined as:

iv. “ω ≤ Kωωh”.

v. “λ ≥ Kλλh”.

vi. “m ≥ Kmmh”.

Note: in the proceeding construct,

vii. “λx > Kλ”.

viii. “mx > Km”.

139

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**6.1.2 What is a “Schwarzschild-Planck-Particle”?
**

6.1.2.1 Conceptualisation

Contemporary Physics believes the maximum permissible energy density of a “Black-Hole”

(BH) is governed by classical Planck scale dimensions. Hence, a proportional representation of this

belief by an EGM based method is a natural evolutionary step. Subsequently, one would expect that

a SBH with “Planck-Particle” energy density represents the natural physical energy density limit

[i.e. “Um(λxλh,mxmh)”] as the number of harmonic frequency modes approaches unity [i.e.

“nΩ(λxλh,mxmh) = 1”].

For a SBH or “Planck-Particle” in a vacuum, one would intuitively expect that “KPV →

Undefined” at (or beyond) the event horizon, relative to a non-local observer without. However, if

we consider ourselves to be local observers within the event horizon, the space-time manifold is

maximally curved and no variation exists with respect to the PV model of gravity in terms of “KPV”,

from point to point.

Therefore, by logical induction, we shall assign a value of “KPV = 1” within the event

horizon of a SBH due to the dimensional consistency of the space-time manifold within being

analogous (only) to a totally flat space-time manifold without [i.e. “∆KPV(∆r) = 0”]. In other words,

one cannot geometrically curve the space-time manifold, within the event horizon, more than

“completely” (i.e. beyond the maximum permissible curvature limit).

Note: conceptualising a local observer within the event horizon negates potential modelling

difficulties of a non-local observer beyond the event horizon36.

6.1.2.2 Assumptions

In addition to the assumptions specified in the preceding section (i.e. serving as a

derivational base), we shall also apply the following,

i. Complete dynamic, kinematic and geometric similarity exists, in accordance with DAT’s

and BPT principles, between a SBH and a mass-energy equivalent particle on the Planck

scale (i.e. a “Planck-Particle”).

ii. The relationship between a SBH and “Planck-Particle” may be described by the EGM

harmonic representation of fundamental particles [i.e. Eq. (3.230ii)].

iii. The energy density limit also denotes a condition of maximum permissible space-time

manifold curvature such that “KPV = 1” is a valid assignment within the even horizon of a

SBH.

6.1.2.3 Definition

A “Schwarzschild-Planck-Particle” is a SBH with “Planck-Particle” energy density

satisfying the condition “Stω(λxλh,mxmh) = 1” and “nΩ(λxλh,mxmh) = 1” such that the event horizon

“RBH” and ZPF equilibrium radii “rZPF” coincide at “λxλh”:

• i.e. “RBH = rZPF = λxλh”.

Note: a SBH with “Planck-Particle” energy density is also termed a “Schwarzschild-Planck-BlackHole” (SPBH).

36

**Due to the historical definition of “KPV” being a weak field approximation only.
**

140

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.1.3 Construct

If we equate the energy density of a “Planck-Particle” of mass “mxmh” and radius “λxλh” to

a SBH, we may determine the minimum radius of a SBH with “Planck-Particle” energy density.

This is termed a “Schwarzschild-Planck-Black-Hole” and its minimum radius and mass may be

determined.

Taking the cubic form of Eq. (4.10) yields,

n Ω_1( r , M )

1 . U m( r , M ) 1 . 3 .M .c .

2 .c

8 U ω( r , M ) 8 4 .π .r3 h .ω ( 1 , r , M ) 4

PV

2

3

3

(4.54)

**For solutions where “KPV(r,M) = 1”, “ωPV(1,r,M)” may be usefully approximated according to,
**

1 . 3 .M .c .

8 4 .π .r3 h .ω

2 .c

2

1 . 3 .M .c .

8 4 .π .r3

2 .c

2 .c

2

PV( 1 , r , M )

2

1 . 3 .M .c .

8 4 .π .r3

3

4

3

1 2 .c .G.M

h. .

r

π .r

1 . 3 .M .c .

8 4 .π .r3

3

3

2 .c

2

4

3

1 2 .c .G.M

h. .

r

π .r

4

(4.55)

3

3

1 2 .c .G.M . 2 .c .G.M

h. .

4

π .r

π .r

r

(4.56)

3

2

1 . 3 .M .c .

8 4 .π .r3

2 .c

3. c . . 2

cr

1 . 4 h .G

3

3

1 2 .c .G.M . 2 .c .G.M 8

h. .

4

π .r

π .r

r

3

2 .c .G.M

π .r

(4.57)

**Substituting Eq. (4.20) into Eq. (4.57) produces,
**

3 .c . r

n Ω_1( r , M )

3

Therefore, “nΩ_1 →

nΩ_19”

9

3

2 .c .G.M

π .r

(4.58)

2 3

λh

1. 4

8

8

λh

according to,

3 .c . r

n Ω_1( r , M )

1. 4

3

2

3

r . π .c . 3

.

16

2

2 GM λh

7

2 .c .G.M

π .r

2

3

7

r . π .m h . 3

16

2

2 M λh λh

3

(4.59)

Hence, let:

9

n Ω_2( r , M )

.

3

3 .π m h . r

16 M

λh

2

7

(4.60)

**such that “nΩ_2 → nΩ_3” as “r → λxλh” and “M → mxmh” according to,
**

9

n Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

λ x.λ h

16

2

7

9

m

. π . h. 3

m x.m h λ h λ 2

h

141

3

7

9

3

3

3 .π . λ x 1 . 3 .π . λ x

16 m

2

x 2 mx 2

7

(4.61)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Assuming “nΩ_3(λxλh,mxmh) = 1” (i.e. for the maximum energy density condition), the value of
**

“mx” satisfying this limit may stated as,

3

3 .π . 7

λx

16

2

mx

(4.62)

**The value of “λx” may be derived by application of the EGM harmonic representation of
**

fundamental particles [i.e. relating Eq. (4.62) to Eq. (3.230ii)]. Within the boundaries of

contemporary Physics, the dimensions of the smallest permissible SBH exist on the Planck scale.

Subsequently, if “r1 = RBH”, “M1 = MBH”, “r2 = λxλh” and “M2 = mxmh” then Eq. (3.230ii) may be

applied as follows,

λ x.λ h

5

m x.m h

2

2

M BH

.

5

R BH

2

2

c .R BH

2 .G

λ x.λ h

5

m x.m h

2

.

5

R BH

(4.63)

**where, the radius to the event horizon “RBH” is related to mass “MBH” by,
**

2 .G .

M BH

2

c

R BH

(4.64)

**Substituting Eq. (4.64) into Eq. (4.63) yields,
**

2

2

c .R BH

2 .G

λ x.λ h

5

m x.m h

2

.

5

R BH

5

2

1. λ x . c

4 R 3 G

BH

2

λh

.

5

5

1.

m x.m h

5

1.

. c

3 G

4 λ .λ

x h

2

λ x.λ h .c

λh

.

λh

.

5

m x.m h

. c

3 G

5

m x.m h

2

2 2

λx

4 λ .λ

x h

2

2 2

λx

5

2

1. λ x . c

4 R 3 G

BH

λh

.

(4.65)

5

m x.m h

2

λ x.λ h .c

2

2

2 .G.m x.m h

2

(4.66)

2

(4.67)

2

St ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

2 .G.m x.m h

9

(4.68)

**Assuming ideal similarity between a SBH and a “Planck-Particle” satisfying
**

“Stω(λxλh,mxmh) = 1” at “nΩ_3(λxλh,mxmh) = 1”, the value of “λx” and “mx” may be determined as

follows,

Recognising that Eq. (4.69) may be substituted into Eq. (4.68) yields,

c

2

mh

G λh

(4.69)

2

λ x.λ h .c

1.λ x

2 .G.m x.m h 2 m x

1

(4.70)

such that:

142

www.deltagroupengineering.com

mx

λx

2

(4.71)

**Substituting Eq. (4.71) into Eq. (4.62) yields,
**

λx

4 . 2

π 3

6

(4.72)

Evaluating produces,

λx

=

mx

2.698709

1.349354

(4.73)

λ x.λ h = 1.093333 10

10 .

.

m x.m h = 7.36147410

8

ym

(4.74)

( kg )

(4.75)

where, “ym = yoctometre = 10-24(m)”.

Mass and energy density characteristics of a SPBH may also be easily derived based upon

the preceding results according to,

V( r )

4. . 3

πr

3

(4.76)

**where, “V” and “ρm” denote volume and mass-density respectively. Hence,
**

ρ m( r , M )

M

V( r )

(4.77i)

. 94 kg

ρ m λ x.λ h , m x.m h = 1.34467810

3

m

(4.78)

**The ratio of the mass-density of a SPBH to the Sun is given by,
**

ρ m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

ρ m R S, M S

.

= 9.55041510

90

(4.79)

**Substituting Eq. (4.74, 4.75) into Eq. (3.70) produces the SPBH energy-density result,
**

. 87 ( YPa)

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h = 1.20853710

(4.80)

24

**where, “YPa = yottaPascals = 10 (Pa)”.
**

6.1.4 Computing errors

The “1st” of two simple checks to ensure no algebraic errors were made in relation to the

baseline assumption that “Stω(λxλh,mxmh) = 1” at “nΩ_3(λxλh,mxmh) = 1”, is to substitute Eq. (4.71)

into Eq. (4.61) producing the result,

3

9

n Ω_3 λ x

π.

2

3.

λx

2

2

(4.81)

**Comparing “nΩ_2” to “nΩ_3” confirms a lack of algebraic errors,
**

n Ω_2 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

n Ω_3 λ x

143

.

1 = 2.22044610

14

(%)

(4.82)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**The “2nd” check substitutes “mx = λx / 2” into Eq. (4.68). Upon simplification one concludes that
**

“Stω(λxλh,mxmh) = 1”, confirming a lack of algebraic errors.

6.1.5 Convergent and divergent spectra

Substituting various values into Eq. (4.81) yields a sequence demonstrating the preservation

of EGM characteristics and exhibiting PV spectral convergence / divergence behaviour as follows,

n Ω_3

n Ω_3

1

3

0.248017

1

0.324994

2

n Ω_3( 1 )

=

0.515897

0.818935

n Ω_3( 2 )

1

n Ω_3 λ x

1.073108

n Ω_3( 3 )

(4.83)

**Therefore, for solutions where “KPV = 1” such that “nΩ → nΩ_3”, the following statements may be
**

articulated:

i.

Values of “nΩ(r,M) < 1” indicate a divergent PV spectrum where “ωΩ(r,M) < ωPV(1,r,M)”

and are non-physical.

ii.

Values of “nΩ(r,M) ≥ 1” indicate a convergent PV spectrum where “ωΩ(r,M) ≥ ωPV(1,r,M)”

and are physical.

6.1.6 Honourable mention

It should not escape attention that “mx” is very close to the square of the experimentally

implicit definition of EGM adjusted Planck mass ERF derived in [13] (see below). However, no

specific conclusion may be inferred from this result.

mx

1 = 0.14278 ( % )

2

Km

(4.84)

6.1.7 Concluding remarks

6.1.7.1 Characteristics of a physical SPBH

i.

ii.

iii.

iv.

**It has coinciding singularity and event horizon radii.
**

“r ≥ λxλh”, “M ≥ mxmh” and “mx = λx / 2”.

“ρm(r,M) ≤ ρm(λxλh,mxmh)”.

A value of “KPV = 1” is assigned within the event horizon (i.e. “r < λxλh”) due to maximum

permissible space-time manifold curvature [i.e. “∆KPV(∆r) = 0”].

v. For solutions where “KPV = 1”, only one harmonic mode exists [i.e. “nΩ(λxλh,mxmh) = 1”]

such that “ωPV(1,λxλh,mxmh) = ωΩ(λxλh,mxmh)” and the PV spectrum is convergent.

**6.1.7.2 Characteristics of a non-physical “Planck-Particle”
**

i.

ii.

iii.

iv.

**It is not a SPBH.
**

“r < λxλh” such that “nΩ(r<λxλh) < 1”.

“ωΩ(r,M) < ωPV(1,r,M)”.

The PV spectrum is described as divergent.

144

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**6.1.7.3 Physicality of the EGM adjusted Planck Length
**

A derivation of the Root-Mean-Square (RMS) charge diameter is performed in [10]

demonstrating that “φγγ = 2rγγ ≈ λh”. Subsequently, utilising the EGM adjusted Planck Length, it

may be demonstrated that “Kλλh = φγγ” to within “0.83(%)” [13] according to,

K λ .λ h

2 .r γγ

1 = 0.82832 ( % )

(4.85)

**Since “φγγ” is extremely close to QM expectation and all EGM adjusted Planck properties
**

were derived in the same manner, it follows that the individual (not combined) “physical Planck

scale properties” of frequency “ω”, length “λ” and mass “m” may be defined as:

i. “ω ≤ Kωωh”.

ii. “λ ≥ Kλλh”.

iii. “m ≥ Kmmh”.

NOTES

145

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.2

Derivation of the value of the “KPV” at the event horizon of a SPBH

6.2.1 Synopsis

It was stated previously that, for a SPBH in a vacuum, one would intuitively expect that

“KPV → Undefined” at (or beyond) the event horizon, relative to a non-local observer without. This

section demonstrates two independent methods for mathematically verifying this contention

utilising “λxλh” and “mxmh”. The “1st” method applies EGM principles; the “2nd” advances the work

of Depp et. Al as derived in [47].

6.2.2 Construct

6.2.2.1 1st Formulation

Recognising,

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

h .

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3

.

2c

4

h .

ω Ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3

.

2c

4

(4.86)

**and utilising Eq. (4.69), it follows that:
**

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3 . . .

.

1 . 2 c G mx mh .

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

λ x.λ h

π .λ x.λ h

(4.87)

3

3

1 .

λ x.λ h

2 .c .G.m x.m h

π .λ x.λ h

3

2 .c .G.

1 .

λ x.λ h

λx

2 .c .G. .m h

1 .

2

. K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

.

.

λxλh

π λ x.λ h

. K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

(4.88)

λx

.m

h

2

. K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

π .λ x.λ h

3

c . 1.

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

λ x.λ h π

3

c . 1.

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

λ x.λ h π

ωh

3

. 1. K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

λx π

ωh

(4.90)

3

. 1. K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

λx π

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

(4.89)

(4.91)

**Performing the appropriate substitutions yields,
**

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

h .

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3

.

2c

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

h .

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3

2 .c

4

(4.92)

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

4

3

h . ωh. 1.

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3

2 .c λ x π

146

4

(4.93)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3

h . ωh. 1.

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3 λ

π

.

2c

x

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

h .ω h

4

3

4

3

2 .π . π .c .λ x

.K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

2

4

h .ω h

3

4

4

3.

2 .π . π .c λ x

.K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

2

(4.94)

3

4

3

2 .π . π .c .λ x U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

.

4

.

h ωh

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

2

(4.95)

**Partially evaluating Eq. (4.95) numerically within a computational environment yields,
**

3

4

3

2 .π . π .c .λ x

.U λ .λ , m .m = 8

m x h x h

4

.

h ωh

Hence,

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

(4.96)

8

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

2

(4.97)

**such that an expression for “KPV” may be formed according to,
**

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

2. 2.

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

(4.98)

**Recognising that the EGM spectrum converges to a single mode for a SPBH and utilising
**

Eq. (3.71) yields,

n Ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

Ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

12

4

Ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

1 1

(4.99)

where,

Ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

4. 3

(4.100)

3

Ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

108.

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

12. 768 81.

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

2

4. 3

(4.101)

**By inspection, the only solution satisfying this equation is:
**

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

0

(4.102)

**Verifying numerically yields,
**

3

108.0

2

12. 768 81.0 = 6.928203

4 . 3 = 6.928203

(4.103)

(4.104)

Therefore,

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

147

2. 2

0

Undefined

(4.105)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.2.2.2 2nd Formulation

Let the expression for “KPV” (shown as “KDepp” below) derived by Depp et. Al. in [47],

satisfying the SBH condition be assigned the form,

1

K Depp ( r , M )

2 .G.M

1

r .c

2

(4.106)

such that:

K Depp ( r , M )

1

2 .G.M

2

1

r .c

r .c

r .c

2

2

2 .G.M

2

(4.107)

**Performing a sample calculation at the surface of the Earth and comparing results utilising
**

Eq. (3.55, 4.107) produces,

K PV R E, M E = 1.00000000069601

(4.108)

K Depp R E, M E = 1.00000000069601

(4.109)

**Hence, the relationship between the “Depp” and weak field exponential form is,
**

K PV( r , M )

K Depp ( r , M )

2

K Depp ( r , M )

K PV( r , M )

(4.110)

**To ensure the preceding results were not coincidental due to weak field application, we shall
**

test Eq. (4.110) in the strong field as follows,

K PV( r , M )

1

2 .G.M

r .c

r .c

1

r .c

2

2

2

2 .G.M

(4.111)

**Substituting Eq. (4.64) into Eq. (4.110) validates the relationship for a strong gravitational field and
**

yields the expected result,

K PV R BH, M BH

1

2 .G.M BH

2 .G .

2

M BH.c

2

c

1

1

Undefined

0

(4.112)

**Substituting Eq. (4.69, 4.71) into Eq. (4.107) produces the “Depp” value for a SPBH as follows,
**

K Depp λ x.λ h , m x.m h

2

1

1

2 .G.m x.m h

2

λ x.λ h .c

1

1

2 .G.m x c2

.

1

2 G

.

λxc

1

1

2 .m x

λx

2.

1

1

λx 0

Undefined

2

λx

(4.113)

6.2.3 Concluding remarks

From the results obtained above, we have shown by derivation of identical values of

Refractive Index, that a “Planck-Particle” is dynamically, kinematically and geometrically

equivalent to a SBH. This may be mathematically stated as follows,

KPV(λxλh,mxmh) = KPV(RBH,MBH) = KDepp(λxλh,mxmh) = KDepp(RBH,MBH)

148

(4.114)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.3

Derivation of “ωΩ” at the event horizon of a SPBH

6.3.1 Synopsis

It was stated previously - for a SPBH in a vacuum, one would intuitively expect that “KPV

→ Undefined” (not infinity - an important distinction) at (or beyond) the event horizon, relative to a

non-local observer without. This section derives the value of “ωΩ” for a SPBH [i.e.

“ωΩ_3(λxλh,mxmh)”] relative to a local observer within the event horizon.

6.3.2 Assumptions

The value of “ωΩ_3(λxλh,mxmh)” may be determined by assuming the following (remaining

consistent with preceding sections),

i.

The space-time manifold is maximally curved and cannot be geometrically modified beyond

the maximum permissible limit.

ii.

A value of “KPV = 1” is assigned within the event horizon of a SPBH due to the dimensional

consistency of the space-time manifold within being analogous (only) to a totally flat spacetime manifold without [i.e. “∆KPV(∆r) = 0”].

6.3.3 Construct

Commencing with the utilisation of the “9th” power form of Eq. (4.36), we substitute “r =

λxλh” and “M = mxmh” producing,

2

M

St G.

5

r

St G.

m x.m h

2

λ x.λ h

5

λx

2

2

St G.

St G.

2

λ x.λ h

5

(4.115)

λx

2

St G.

.m

h

λ x.λ h

m x.m h

2

.m

h

λ x.λ h

5

(4.116)

2

St G m h

.

3

5

4 .λ x λ h

5

(4.117)

**Substituting Eq. (4.35) into Eq. (4.117) yields,
**

2

St G m h

.

3

5

.

4λx λh

3

.

4λ

3

.

4λ

3

.

x

3

x

.

ωh

2

π .h

3

.

x

2

π .h

3

.

4λ

5

4

c .ω h

.

9

2

2

ωh

2

9 m

. c . h

2 λ 5

h

ω h .m h

π .h

3

.

4λ

3

x

.

2

9 m

. c . h

2 λ 5

h

ω h .m h

3

2

.

π .h

2

c .m h

.

h

λx

3

(4.118)

5

4

c .ω h

9

2

2

.

ωh

(4.119)

7

15 2

2 .π

(4.120)

**Substituting Eq. (4.121) into Eq. (4.120) yields Eq. (4.122) as follows,
**

149

www.deltagroupengineering.com

m h .c

2

ωh

h

St G.

m x.m h

2

λ x.λ h

5

(4.121)

3

3

ωh

.

λx

9

15 2

2 .π

(4.122)

**Utilising Eq. (4.36, 4.122) and simplifying yields,
**

9

St G.

9

3

3

λx

9

1.

2

.

m x.m h

2

λ x.λ h

5

ωh

9

3

3

9

λx

9

1.

15 2

2 .π 2

ωh

.

9

15 2

2 .π

(4.123)

3

3

. 1 .ω

h

λ x 26 .π2

9

3

(4.124)

3

1. 1 . 3

. 1 .ω

.ω

h

h

2

6

2 π2 4 .λ x

λ x 2 .π

3

9

3

1. 1 . 3

.ω

h

2 π2 4 .λ x

3

1

9

.

2

2. π

(4.125)

3 .

ωh

4 .λ x

(4.126)

**Substituting Eq. (4.72) into the Left-Hand-Side (LHS) of Eq. (4.126) yields,
**

9

1. 1 .

2 π2

3

3

6

4. 4.

3

2

9

4

1. 3 . 6

4 25 π3

3

3 .π

(4.127)

Hence,

9

ω Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

4

1. 3 . 6 .

ωh

4 25 π3

(4.128)

**Displaying the numerical result for “ωΩ” at the event horizon of a SPBH yields,
**

. 18 ( YHz)

ω Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h = 1.87219710

(4.129)

**6.3.4 “ωPV(1,λxλh,mxmh)”
**

Substituting Eq. (4.81) into the basic EGM relational form “ωΩ(r,M) = nΩ(r,M)ωPV(1,r,M)”,

facilitates the derivation of “ωPV(1,λxλh,mxmh)” as follows,

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

ω Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

n Ω_3 λ x

(4.130)

ω Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

(4.131)

**Recognising that “nΩ_3(λx) = 1” yields,
**

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

150

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.3.5 Honourable mention

By inspection, “ωΩ_3(λxλh,mxmh) ≈ ¼ωh” utilising a definition of “h = 6.626069 x10-34(Js)”.

However, no specific conclusion may be inferred from the following result,

1.

. 18 ( YHz)

ω h = 1.84996810

4

(4.132)

**Evaluating the approximation with respect to Eq. (4.129) demonstrates a small error according to,
**

ωh

1.

4 ω Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

1 = 1.187319 ( % )

(4.133)

**Additionally, it is noteworthy that “λx” may be represented in terms of the exponential
**

function “e” and the Fine Structure constant “α” (to high precision). However, no specific

conclusion may be inferred from the following results,

λx

e

1

e

1

α

α

(4.134)

= 2.698589

(4.135)

**Checking the simplification error yields,
**

1 . e

λx 1 α

. 3 (%)

1 = 4.43474910

(4.136)

6.3.6 Concluding remarks

The preceding construct demonstrates that the value of “ωΩ” for a SPBH is “≈ ¼ωh”. This

“appears” consistent with the QM assertion of a physical frequency limit being “≈ ωh”. However, in

the proceeding construct, the QM expectation shall be challenged and shown to be ill-founded.

NOTES

151

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.4

Derivation of “ωΩ” at the event horizon of a SBH

6.4.1 Synopsis

The actual value of “KPV” is unimportant within the event horizon of a SBH. That is, an

observer without cannot see past the event horizon, so any value of “KPV” within, has no physical

meaning to an observer without. Therefore, we may assign any convenient value of “KPV” inside

the event horizon, provided it is done consistently.

6.4.2 Assumptions

At the event horizon of a SBH, “KPV(RBH,MBH) = Undefined” (not infinity - an important

distinction) relative to a non-local observer without. Subsequently, for an observer within the event

horizon of a SBH, we shall assume:

i.

A physical singularity of radius “rS” exists at the centre of a SBH.

ii.

“KPV” is constant [i.e. “∆KPV(∆r) = 0”] from the singularity radius “rS” to the event

horizon “RBH” [i.e. “KPV(rS≤r≤RBH,MBH) = 1”]. This feature is beyond the determination

of an observer without.

6.4.3 Construct

Utilising Eq. (4.36, 4.64), we may derive the value of “ωΩ” at the event horizon of a SBH

[i.e. “ωΩ_4(MBH)” at “RBH”] as follows,

9

ω Ω_4 M BH

2

St G.

2 .G.M BH

c

c .St G

9

M BH

c.

5

5

3

( 2 .G) .M BH

2

(4.137)

Let,

9

St BH

c.

c .St G

5

( 2 .G)

(4.138)

Hence,

3

ω Ω_4 M BH

St BH.

1

M BH

(4.139)

6.4.4 Sample calculations

Performing sample calculations for a SPBH (i.e. “MBH = mxmh”), a SBH at one solar mass,

“105” and “1010” solar masses (i.e. “MBH = MS, 105MS, 1010MS” respectively) yields,

ω Ω_4 m x.m h

. 18

1.87219710

ω Ω_4 M S

5

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

=

. 5

6.23977510

( YHz)

. 4

1.34431910

10

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

289.624693

(4.140)

6.4.5 Concluding remarks

Since “ωΩ_4(mxmh) = ωΩ_3(λxλh,mxmh)”, no errors have been generated in the formulation of

“ωΩ_4(MBH)”. A clear mathematical pattern is articulated demonstrating that “ωΩ_4” increases with

energy density (i.e. to “RBH”) and decreases with “MBH”.

152

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Note: the decrease in “ωΩ_4” arises from the increase in “RBH” because:
**

i. The physical geometry of a SBH utilised to determine energy density is defined by “RBH”.

The larger it becomes due to an “MBH” increase, the lower the value of the energy density

and “ωΩ_4”.

ii. Matter is considered to be a point source wavefunction radiator under the EGM construct.

As the wavefunction propagates, its frequency decays. Since the event horizon is farther

away from the singularity (i.e. the point source) for increasing “MBH”, “ωΩ_4” decreases.

NOTES

153

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.5

Derivation of “rS”

6.5.1 Synopsis

A physical “Planck-Particle” is considered to represent the condition of maximum

permissible energy density in the Universe. If a SBH is a real manifestation of a physical “PlanckParticle”, then it follows that the maximum permissible mass-density of the singularity at the centre

of a BH is equal to the mass-density of a physical “Planck-Particle” (i.e. a SPBH).

6.5.2 Assumptions

Utilising key features defined in preceding sections, we shall assume that, for an observer

within the event horizon of a SBH:

i. A physical singularity of mass-density “ρm(rS,MBH)” exists at the centre of a SBH.

ii. The physical singularity at the centre is a SPBH [i.e. “ρm(rS,MBH) = ρm(λxλh,mxmh)”].

iii. “KPV” is constant [i.e. “∆KPV(∆r) = 0”] from the singularity radius “rS” to the event

horizon “RBH” [i.e. “KPV(rS≤r≤RBH,MBH) = 1”]. This feature is beyond the determination

of an observer without.

6.5.3 Construct

6.5.3.1 1st Formulation

“rS” may be derived utilising Eq. (4.77i) according to,

ρ m( r , M )

3 .M

3

4 .π .r

(4.77ii)

Substituting “Planck-Particle” characteristics yields,

ρ m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3.

3 .m x.m h

4 .π . λ x.λ h

λx

2

3

.m

h

3 .m h

3

4 .π . λ x.λ h

2

3

8 .π .λ x .λ h

(4.141)

**Let the mass-density of the singularity at the core of a SBH be defined by,
**

3 .M BH

ρ m r S , M BH

4 .π .r S

3

(4.142)

**If “ρm(rS,MBH) = ρm(λxλh,mxmh)” then,
**

M BH

3

rS

mh

2

3

2 .λ x .λ h

(4.143)

**Substituting “ωh2 = (c/λh)2” and “c2/G = mh/λh” into the above yields,
**

M BH

3

rS

ωh

2

2

2 .G.λ x

(4.144)

such that:

154

www.deltagroupengineering.com

3

r S M BH

2

2 .G.λ x

ωh

2

3

. . 2.

.M

BH λ h 2 λ x

M BH

mh

(4.145)

**Recognising that “RBH(MBH) = 2GMBH/c2” yields,
**

3

r S R BH

2

λ x.λ h .R BH

(4.146)

Noting that,

3

r S λ x.λ h

2

λ x.λ h . λ x.λ h

λ x.λ h

(4.147)

6.5.3.2 2nd Formulation

Since the singularity mass-density “ρS” is constant, we may express the construct in an

alternative form by specifying “ρS = ρm(λxλh,mxmh)” as follows,

3

r S M BH

3 .M BH

4 .π .ρ S

(4.148)

Hence,

3.

2

c .R BH

2 .G

3

4 .π .r S

ρS

3

r S R BH

2

3 .c .R BH

3

8 .π .G.r S

(4.149)

2

3 .c .R BH

8 .π .G.ρ S

(4.150)

6.5.3.3 3rd Formulation

An expression for “MBH” as a function of “rS” may be formulated utilising “V(r) = (4/3)πr3”

as follows,

4. .

3

π ρ S .r S

3

M BH r S

(4.151)

6.5.4 Sample calculations

Performing sample calculations of “rS” expressing “MBH” in terms of proportional solar

mass yields,

rS MS

5.

r S 10 M S

.

3.28046310

=

10

r S 10 .M S

0.015227

4

( am)

0.706754

(4.152)

155

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Similarly, performing sample calculations of the BH to solar mass ratio “MBH/MS” as a function of
**

“rS” such that it resides on the fundamental particle scale (see: [12,17]) yields,

M BH r ε

M BH r π

M BH r ν

M BH r µ

. 13 1.62379510

. 19 1.60185510

. 19 1.57097210

. 13

4.66247210

M BH r τ

1 . M

BH r uq

MS

M BH r bq

M BH r en

M BH r µn

M BH r τn

. 13 2.45782610

. 7

5.19529810

M BH r dq

M BH r sq

M BH r cq

= 1.28408510

. 10 2.95005410

. 10 1.9828610

. 10 3.68186410

. 10

M BH r tq

M BH r W

. 10 2.27391910

. 10 5.99684310

. 10 3.39015710

. 10

3.47948910

M BH r H

M BH r γγ

M BH r gg

M BH r Z

1.( kg )

. 10

2.3560510

. 9 2.12850410

. 11

7.96867110

0

0

0

(4.153)

Note:

i. Disregard “1(kg)” from the above: this was required and included merely to define the

matrix for evaluation in the “MathCad” computational environment.

ii. “rS” of a “Super-Massive-Black-Hole” (SMBH) [i.e. “1010” solar masses] approaches

the dimensions of a Quark or Boson.

Calculating the total mass of the Universe has been attempted many times by the Physics

community, with no definitive success. We shall perform some qualitative comparisons utilising

“rS”. The following results represent various speculative total mass values of the Universe if it were

condensed to an “rS” value equal to some well known particles.

M BH r ε

. 43

9.27104510

M BH r π

. 49

3.22881910

M BH r e

=

. 51

1.26038310

( kg )

. 63

8.34661610

M BH r Bohr

(4.154)

6.5.5 Honourable mention

It should not escape attention that when “rS ≈ rε”, “RBH” approximately equals the size of the

observable Universe according to,

RBH(MBH(rε)) ≈ 14.56(GLyr)

(4.155)

6.5.6 Concluding remarks

The derivation of “rS” has lead to the development of some very useful relationships and

characteristics. Six significant results may be emphasised from this section, these are:

i. The SPBH and SBH singularity energy densities are equal:

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U m r S M BH , M BH

(4.156)

**ii. The singularity at the centre of every SBH exists at the energy density limit.
**

iii. A key difference between a SPBH and a SBH singularity is the location of the event

horizon. For a SPBH, “rS” and “RBH” coincide: for a SBH, they do not.

iv. By observational inference regarding the mass limit of SMBH’s (i.e. approximately “1010”

solar masses), the preceding results suggest that the physical dimensions of a “Quark or

Boson” might be some sort of natural singularity size limit.

v. If the preceding point is correct, it may be possible to discount “Bosons” by recognising

them to be force carriers. Subsequently, it may (?) be reasonable to conjecture that the

dimensions of a SMBH singularity is generalised by the physical “Quark” range according

to “1.28 x1010MS < MBH(rS) < 3.69 x1010MS”.

vi. A philosophical question arises: “is a Quark actually a SMBH from another Universe”?

156

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.6

“nΩ” and “ωΩ” profiles (as “r → RBH”) of SBH’s

6.6.1 “nΩ”

6.6.1.1 Synopsis

This section derives the “nΩ” profile (i.e. as “r → RBH”) of any SBH. It is numerically

demonstrated (explicitly in terms of “MBH”) and graphically illustrated (in terms of radial

displacement) that the profile remains consistent with conclusions defined in [5] such that:

i. “nΩ_2” increases as “r → RBH” [see: Eq. (4.157, 4.158), Fig. (4.18)].

ii. “nΩ_4,5” increases with rising “MBH” [see: Eq. (4.160)].

6.6.1.2 Assumptions

Utilising key features defined in preceding sections, we shall assume that, for an observer

within the event horizon of a SBH:

i. The singularity of mass-density “ρm(rS,MBH)” at the centre of a SBH exists at the physical

limit such that: “ρm(rS,MBH) = ρm(λxλh,mxmh)”.

ii. “KPV” is constant [i.e. “∆KPV(∆r) = 0”] from the singularity radius “rS” to the event

horizon “RBH” [i.e. “KPV(rS≤r≤RBH,MBH) = 1”]. This feature is beyond the determination

of an observer without.

iii. “nΩ(rS≠λxλh,MBH≠mxmh) > 1” where “nΩ → nΩ_2”.

6.6.1.3 Construct

The “nΩ” profile for SBH’s (i.e. as “r → RBH”) may be determined trivially in a

computational environment utilising “nΩ_2”. However, for subsequent use within this text, it is more

convenient to define a new form explicitly in terms of “MBH” as follows,

Let “nΩ” at the periphery of a SBH singularity be given by “nΩ_4” according to,

n Ω_2 r S M BH , M BH

n Ω_4 M BH

(4.157)

**Let “nΩ” at the event horizon of a SBH be given by “nΩ_5” according to,
**

n Ω_2 R BH M BH , M BH

n Ω_5 M BH

(4.158)

**Let the event horizon to singularity cut-off mode ratio be given by “nBH” according to,
**

n BH M BH

n Ω_5 M BH

n Ω_4 M BH

(4.159)

6.6.1.4 Sample calculations

Evaluating Eq. (4.157 – 4.159) utilising arbitrary values produces the following illustrational

results explicitly in terms of “MBH”,

n Ω_4 m x.m h

n Ω_5 m x.m h

n BH m x.m h

n Ω_4 M S

n Ω_5 M S

n BH M S

5

n Ω_4 10 .M S

5

n Ω_5 10 .M S

5

n BH 10 .M S

10

n Ω_4 10 .M S

10

n Ω_5 10 .M S

10

n BH 10 .M S

157

1

=

1

1

. 5 9.00254210

. 24 2.56419310

. 19

3.51086810

. 6 1.93953910

. 28 1.0035610

. 22

1.93265910

. 7 4.1786110

. 31 3.92767810

. 24

1.06388810

(4.160)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**6.6.1.5 Sample plots (log vs. log)
**

The increase in “nΩ” (as a function of radial displacement “Rbh” and mass “MBH”) over the

range “rS(MS) ≤ Rbh ≤ RBH(MS)” may be graphically illustrated according to,

Harmonic Cut-Off Mode vs Radial Disp.

Harmonic Cut-Off Mode

rS MS

R BH M S

n Ω _2 R bh , M S

5

n Ω _2 R bh , 10 .M S

n Ω _2 R bh , 10

10 .

MS

n Ω _4 M S

R bh

Radial Displacement

**Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (1 Solar Mass)
**

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (10^5 Solar Masses)

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (10^10 Solar Masses)

**Figure 4.18 (log vs. log),
**

Note: “nΩ_2(RBH,mxmh)” has been omitted due to plotting limitations.

6.6.2 “ωΩ”

6.6.2.1 Synopsis

This section derives the “ωΩ” profile (i.e. as “r → RBH”) of any SBH. It is numerically

demonstrated (explicitly in terms of “MBH”) and graphically illustrated (in terms of radial

displacement) that the profile remains consistent with conclusions defined in [5] such that:

i. “ωΩ_3” decreases as “r → RBH” [see: Fig. (4.19)].

ii. “ωΩ_4” decreases with rising “MBH” [see: Eq. (4.165)].

iii. “ωΩ_5” increases with rising “MBH” [see: Eq. (4.163, 4.165)].

6.6.2.2 Assumptions

Utilising key features defined in preceding sections, we shall assume that, for an observer

within the event horizon of a SBH:

i. The singularity of mass-density “ρm(rS,MBH)” at the centre of a SBH exists at the physical

limit such that: “ρm(rS,MBH) = ρm(λxλh,mxmh)”.

ii. “KPV” is constant [i.e. “∆KPV(∆r) = 0”] from the singularity radius “rS” to the event

horizon “RBH” [i.e. “KPV(rS≤r≤RBH,MBH) = 1”]. This feature is beyond the determination

of an observer without.

iii. “ωh” is not a physical limit.

158

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.6.2.3 Construct

The “ωΩ” profile for SBH’s (i.e. as “r → RBH”) may be determined trivially in a

computational environment utilising “ωΩ_3”. However, for subsequent use within this text, it is

more convenient to define a new form explicitly in terms of “MBH” as follows,

Let “ωΩ” at the periphery of a SBH singularity be given by “ωΩ_5” according to,

ω Ω_5 M BH

ω Ω_3 r S M BH , M BH

(4.161)

**Let the singularity to event horizon cut-off frequency ratio be given by “ωBH” according to,
**

ω BH M BH

ω Ω_5 M BH

ω Ω_4 M BH

(4.162)

6.6.2.4 Sample calculations

Evaluating Eq. (4.161, 4.162) utilising arbitrary values produces the following results

explicitly in terms of “MBH”,

ω Ω_5 m x.m h

. 18

1.87219710

ω Ω_5 M S

. 19

4.55727410

=

5

ω Ω_5 10 .M S

. 19

6.9805610

. 20

1.06924110

10

ω Ω_5 10 .M S

ω BH m x.m h

(4.163)

1

ω BH M S

5

ω BH 10 .M S

( YHz)

=

. 13

7.30358710

. 15

5.19263810

. 17

3.69181510

10

ω BH 10 .M S

(4.164)

**Hence, the proportional relationship between “ωh” and “ωΩ_4,5” may be trivially
**

approximated as follows,

ω Ω_5 m x.m h

ω Ω_4 m x.m h

ω Ω_5 M S

1 .

5

ω h ω Ω_5 10 .M S

5

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_5 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

0.253004

ω Ω_4 M S

=

0.253004

.

6.158585 8.43227510

14

.

9.433354 1.81667910

15

14.44945

0

(4.165)

**The preceding results may be indicative of a natural physical frequency boundary based upon an
**

observational mass limit of SMBH’s.

If we conjecture that “ωBH” has harmonic foundations, in accordance with the broader EGM

construct for the harmonic representation of fundamental particles, then a set of simultaneous

equations may be formulated such that a precise observational mass limit for SMBH’s may be

predicted.

For example, if we assume that “ωBH = 15” (i.e. an integer value), a precise prediction for

the SMBH limit may be calculated. If this result matches the observational limit, then a natural

physical frequency limit is implied such that a harmonic relationship exists between “rS” and “RBH”.

Of course, this is pure conjecture and no emphatic conclusion may be inferred.

159

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**6.6.2.5 Sample plots (log vs. log)
**

The decrease in “ωΩ” (as a function of radial displacement “Rbh” and mass “MBH”) over

the range “rS(MS) ≤ Rbh ≤ RBH(MS)” may be graphically illustrated according to,

Harmonic Cut-Off Freq. vs Radial Disp.

Harmonic Cut-Off Frequency

rS MS

R BH M S

ω Ω _3 R bh , m x .m h

ω Ω _3 R bh , M S

5

ω Ω _3 R bh , 10 .M S

10

ω Ω _3 R bh , 10 .M S

R bh

Radial Displacement

**Schwarzschild-Planck-Black-Hole
**

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (1 Solar Mass)

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (10^5 Solar Masses)

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (10^10 Solar Masses)

**Figure 4.19 (log vs. log),
**

Note: Eq. (4.140, 4.163) indicate that “ωΩ(rS,mxmh) = ωΩ(RBH,mxmh)”. However, the preceding

graph illustrates that, over the radial displacement range specified, “ωΩ” is not constant for a

SPBH. This is due to “Rbh > [rS(mxmh) = RBH(mxmh) = λxλh]” (i.e. “ωΩ” decreases beyond the

event horizon).

6.6.3 “ωPV(1,r,MBH)”

6.6.3.1 Synopsis

This section derives the value of “ωPV(1,r,MBH)” at “rS” and “RBH” of any SBH (i.e.

“ωΩ_6,7”). It is numerically demonstrated (explicitly in terms of “MBH”) that results remain

consistent with conclusions defined in [5] such that:

i. “ωPV(1,r,MBH)” decreases as “r → RBH” [see: Fig. (4.20)].

ii. “ωPV[1,r(MBH),MBH]” decreases with rising “MBH” [see: Eq. (4.166 - 4.169)].

6.6.3.2 Assumptions

Refer to preceding sections.

160

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.6.3.3 Construct

The value of “ωPV(1,r,MBH)” at “rS” and “RBH” for SBH’s may be determined trivially in a

computational environment utilising “ωΩ_4,5” and “nΩ_4,5”. However, for subsequent use within this

text, it is more convenient to define new forms explicitly in terms of “MBH” as follows,

Note: the following symbols for the fundamental harmonic frequencies of a SBH have been adopted

to emphasise that “ωPV(1,r,M) = ωΩ(r,M)” for a SPBH (i.e. when “r = λxλh”, “M = mxmh”).

Let “ωPV[1,rS(MBH),MBH]” at the periphery of a SBH singularity be given by “ωΩ_6” according to,

ω Ω_6 M BH

ω Ω_5 M BH

n Ω_4 M BH

(4.166)

**Let “ωPV[1,RBH(MBH),MBH]” at the event horizon of a SBH be given by “ωΩ_7” according to,
**

ω Ω_7 M BH

ω Ω_4 M BH

n Ω_5 M BH

(4.167)

**Let the singularity to event horizon fundamental frequency ratio be given by “ωPV_1” according to,
**

ω Ω_6 M BH

ω PV_1 M BH

ω Ω_7 M BH

(4.168)

6.6.3.4 Sample calculations

Evaluating Eq. (4.166 - 4.168) utilising arbitrary values produces the following

approximated results explicitly in terms of “MBH”,

ω Ω_6 m x.m h

ω Ω_7 m x.m h

ω Ω_6 M S

ω Ω_7 M S

5

ω Ω_6 10 .M S

5

ω Ω_7 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_6 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_7 10 .M S

. 42 1.87219710

. 42

1.87219710

=

. 38 6.93112610

. 4

1.29804810

. 37

3.61189510

. 37 6.93112610

.

1.00503110

ω PV_1 m x.m h

( Hz)

0.693113

6

(4.169)

1

ω PV_1 M S

5

ω PV_1 10 .M S

=

10

ω PV_1 10 .M S

. 33

1.8727810

. 37

5.21112310

. 42

1.45002610

(4.170)

**The preceding results indicate that the PV spectral bandwidth expands as the radial displacement
**

from the singularity increases (i.e. “r → ∞”).

6.6.3.5 Sample plots (log vs. log)

The decrease in “ωPV(1,r,MBH)” (as a function of radial displacement “Rbh” and mass

“MBH”)37 over the range “rS(MS) ≤ Rbh ≤ RBH(MS)” may be graphically illustrated according to,

37

**Shown in the proceeding graph as the ratio “ωΩ_3(Rbh,MBH) / nΩ_2(Rbh,MBH)”.
**

161

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Fundamental Freq. vs Radial Disp.
**

rS MS

R BH M S

ω Ω _3 R bh , m x .m h

n Ω _2 R bh , m x .m h

Fundamental Frequency

ω Ω _3 R bh , M S

n Ω _2 R bh , M S

5

ω Ω _3 R bh , 10 .M S

5

n Ω _2 R bh , 10 .M S

10

ω Ω _3 R bh , 10 .M S

n Ω _2 R bh , 10

10 .

MS

R bh

Radial Displacement

**Schwarzschild-Planck-Black-Hole
**

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (1 Solar Mass)

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (10^5 Solar Masses)

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (10^10 Solar Masses)

Figure 4.20,

6.6.3.6 Honourable mention

It should not escape attention that the dimensionless ratio shown below approaches an

integer value. However, no specific conclusion may be inferred from the following result,

1

.

ωh

10

ω PV_1 10 .M S ( Hz)

= 5.103269

(4.171)

6.6.4 Concluding remarks

The key determinations are:

i. “nΩ_2” increases as “r → RBH”.

ii. “nΩ_4,5” increases with rising “MBH”.

iv. “ωΩ_3” decreases as “r → RBH”.

v. “ωΩ_4” decreases with rising “MBH”.

vi. “ωΩ_5” increases with rising “MBH”.

vii. “ωPV(1,r,MBH)” decreases as “r → RBH”.

viii. “ωPV[1,r(MBH),MBH]” decreases with rising “MBH”.

ix. “ωPV[1,r(Rbh),MBH]” increases with rising “MBH” [Rbh ≠ f(MBH)].

x. The PV spectral bandwidth expands as the radial displacement from the singularity

increases (i.e. “r → ∞”).

xi. It is conjectured that a natural physical frequency limit may exist such that it

influences the SMBH observational limit.

162

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.7

Derivation of the minimum gravitational lifetime of matter “TL”

6.7.1 Synopsis

6.7.1.1 Fundamentals

EGM assumes that the spectral energy of the polarized ZPF surrounding an object (i.e. the

PV spectrum / gravitational field) is equal to the mass-energy of the object itself, which may be

characterised by a population of coherent conjugate wavefunction Photon pairs at “ωΩ”. The massenergy equivalence relationship is given by Einstein’s famous equation,

E( M )

M .c

2

(4.172)

**To derive the minimum gravitational lifetime of matter “TL”, we require a reference particle
**

(i.e. a starting point) for the derivation process. For simplicity and clarity, we shall utilise the SPBH

as our reference particle from which to build a construct. The primary reason for this selection is

because “rS” coincides with “RBH” which negates any potential “singularity or event horizon”

arguments the investigator (i.e. us / the reader) might have.

The propagation energy of a single Photon is given by “Eγ(ω)”,

E γ( ω )

h .ω

(4.173)

**Consequently, the energy of a coupled Photon pair (i.e. a Graviton as defined by EGM) should
**

equal “2Eγ(ω)”. A simple mathematical proof of this may be demonstrated as follows: let the

relationship between the propagation energy of a Graviton (i.e. a conjugate Photon pair) be,

E g ( ω ) E x.E γ ( ω )

(4.174)

**where, “Eg(ω)” denotes the Propagation energy of a Graviton and “Ex” represents the proportional
**

relationship to the propagation energy of a Photon. Moreover, let the population of Gravitons (i.e. a

population of coherent conjugate Photon pairs) being radiated per period be given by “TΩ_4”

according to,

T Ω_4 M BH

1

ω Ω_4 M BH

(4.175)

**Hence, the average number of Photons radiated by a SBH, each with propagation energy
**

“Eγ(ω)”, is given by “nγ” according to,

n γ ω , M BH

E M BH

E γ( ω )

(4.176)

**Subsequently, the number of Gravitons is given by “ng” according to,
**

n g ω , M BH

E M BH

E g( ω )

(4.177)

**However, recognising that a single Graviton is a conjugate Photon pair (i.e. by the EGM
**

definition given) according to,

n g ω , M BH

1.

n γ ω , M BH

2

(4.178)

**It follows that,
**

1.

n γ ω , M BH

2

163

E M BH

E g( ω )

(4.179)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Substituting “Eg(ω) = ExEγ(ω)” yields,
**

1.

n γ ω , M BH

2

Hence,

Ex

E M BH

E x.E γ ( ω )

(4.180)

2 .E M BH

2

n γ ω , M BH .E γ ( ω )

E g( ω )

(4.181)

2 .E γ ( ω )

(4.182)

6.7.1.2 Assumptions

To apply the preceding equations, we are required to specifically assign a mechanism

facilitating the existence of gravitational fields. EGM considers all matter to be wavefunction

radiators of populations of coherent conjugate Photon pairs such that each pair constitutes a

Graviton38. Hence, to evaluate the preceding equations we shall assume the following key

mathematical modelling criteria for an object at rest,

i. Gravitons reside within, until they are spontaneously ejected and the supply has been

exhausted. Hence, existing gravitational (PV) field strengths are sustained in this manner.

ii. Only whole Gravitons are ejected.

iii. The physical reality of the mathematical modelling processes utilised, or theories of

Graviton absorption by the object itself from external sources - at this stage, are irrelevant.

The true measure will be the complete and accurate derivation of the Hubble constant and

Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) temperature later in this text.

6.7.1.3 Sample calculations

Considering a SPBH (i.e. “MBH = mxmh”) yields a value of mass-energy equivalence and

Photon-Graviton “emission / absorption” period as follows,

E m x.m h = 6.616163 ( GJ)

(4.183)

T Ω_4 m x.m h = 5.341319 10

43 .

s

(4.184)

**The energy radiated per “TΩ_4” (i.e. per Photon or Graviton) is given by “Eγ(ω)” and “Eg(ω)”
**

respectively according to,

E γ ω Ω_4 m x.m h

= 1.240531 ( GJ)

E g ω Ω_4 m x.m h

= 2.481061 ( GJ)

(4.185)

(4.186)

**Hence, the average number of Photons and Gravitons radiated per “TΩ_4” is evaluated to be,
**

n γ ω Ω_4 m x.m h , m x.m h

n g ω Ω_4 m x.m h , m x.m h

=

5.333333

2.666667

(4.187)

38

In a manner of speaking, the typical PV spectrum contains many different Graviton massenergies dependent upon one’s definition of how many Photons constitute “a specific kind / type”

of Graviton. However, the EGM definition is applied throughout this construct.

164

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.7.2 Construct

6.7.2.1 Reconciliation

6.7.2.1.1 Dilemma

•

How does one reconcile Eq. (4.187) against the “2nd” assumption?

6.7.2.1.2 Resolution

6.7.2.1.2.1 Uncertainty

The preceding results suggest that the Graviton burst per period varies slightly around the

average value. Subsequently, over “3” periods, the total number of Gravitons radiated equals “8”.

This may be explained a numbers of ways. For example, in the case of a SPBH (conserving

coherent population characteristics), Graviton emission profiles could (?) appear as follows,

i. “3” Gravitons in the “1st” period + “3” Gravitons in the “2nd” period + “2” Gravitons in the

“3rd” period = 3 + 3 + 2 = 8, with an average being = “8/3” = “2.6667” =

“ng(ωΩ_4(mxmh),mxmh)”.

ii. “2” Gravitons in the “1st” period + “2” Gravitons in the “2nd” period + “4” Gravitons in the

“3rd” period = 2 + 2 + 4 = 8 etc.

iii. “1” Graviton in the “1st” period + “1” Graviton in the “2nd” period + “6” Gravitons in the

“3rd” period = 1 + 1 + 6 = 8 etc.

iv. “0” Gravitons in the “1st” period + “0” Gravitons in the “2nd” period + “8” Gravitons in the

“3rd” period = 0 + 0 + 8 = 8 etc.

Note: the potential emission profiles above re-enforce the uncertainty principle.

6.7.2.1.2.2 Quasi-Uncertainty

An alternative possibility is that the sum of the Gravitons radiated over any “3” consecutive

periods equals “8” (commencing the count from an arbitrary period position in the emission train),

in which case an emission profile could (?) be “3 + 3 + 2 + 3 + 3 + 2 + 3 + 3 + 2 + ….”. Hence,

moving from left to right across the emission train yields,

i. 3 + 3 + 2 = 8

ii. 3 + 2 + 3 = 8

iii. 2 + 3 + 3 = 8 etc.

Therefore, our initial assumption regarding coherent integer Graviton population ejections has

been reconciled against “ng” by the existence of a number of different possible emission trains and

temporal profiles.

6.7.2.2 “TL”

6.7.2.2.1 Fundamentals

The generalised form has been avoided thus far because it did not adequately expose the

dilemma surrounding “emission / absorption” trains. For example, if one applies a value of “MBH”

other than “mxmh”, one obtains relatively large values of Graviton “emission / absorption” numbers.

Hence, the presence of uncertainty principles in the EGM construct may not have been readily

apparent.

165

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**However, because the possibility of “emission / absorption” trains has been introduced, we
**

may now determine the minimum gravitational lifetime of starving matter in generalised form by

considering the mass-energies of a Photon “mγγ” and Graviton “mgg” at rest by the EGM method

defined in [10],

m γγ

m gg

3.195095

=

10

6.39019

45 .

eV

(4.188)

**Subsequently, the population of Gravitons and Photons contained within starving matter
**

(“ngg” and “nγγ” respectively) may be stated as,

E( M )

n gg ( M )

m gg

(4.189)

2 .n gg ( M )

n γγ( M )

(4.190)

**Hence, the minimum gravitational lifetime of starving matter is given by “TL” according to,
**

T L( r , M )

n gg ( M ) .T Ω_3( r , M )

n g ω Ω_3( r , M ) , M

(4.191)

where,

1

T Ω_3( r , M )

ω Ω_3( r , M )

(4.192)

6.7.2.2.2 Sample calculations

Evaluating the preceding equations for arbitrary values of SBH mass at “rS” yields,

T L r S λ x.λ h , m x.m h

. 13

4.10173110

T L r S M S ,M S

=

5

5

T L r S 10 .M S , 10 .M S

. 13

4.10173110

9

10 .yr

. 13

4.10173110

. 13

4.10173110

10

10

T L r S 10 .M S , 10 .M S

(4.193)

**Evaluation at “RBH” [recalling that: “rS(λxλh) = RBH(λxλh) = λxλh”] produces,
**

T L R BH λ x.λ h , m x.m h

. 13

4.10173110

T L R BH M S , M S

5

5

T L R BH 10 .M S , 10 .M S

10

10

T L R BH 10 .M S , 10 .M S

=

. 13

4.10173110

.

4.10173110

13

9

10 .yr

. 13

4.10173110

(4.194)

**Notably, evaluation at the charge radius (i.e. ZPF equilibrium radius) of several fundamental
**

particles produces,

T L r uq , m uq

T L r ε, m e

T L r π, m p

T L r ν,mn

. 13

4.10173110

=

. 13

4.10173110

. 13

4.10173110

9

10 .yr

. 13

4.10173110

(4.195)

**Therefore, these results indicate that all starving matter has identical gravitational lifetimes.
**

166

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.7.2.2.3 Simplifications

By inspection, “TL” may be simplified according to,

h

TL

m γγ

(4.196)

Evaluating yields,

1

m γγ

h.

. 13

4.10173110

=

2

.

4.10173110

13

m gg

9

10 .yr

(4.197)

6.7.3 Concluding remarks

Utilising the Hubble constant “H0” defined by the Particle Data Group (PDG) in [22], we

may determine the minimum gravitational lifetime of the Universe expressed as a scalar multiple of

“H0” according to,

H0

71.

km

s .Mpc

(4.198)

Hence,

.

T L.H 0 = 2.97830810

12

(4.199)

**Therefore, the minimum gravitational lifetime of starving matter is approximately “3” Trillion
**

times the Hubble age of the Universe.

NOTES

167

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.8

Derivation of the average emission frequency per Graviton “ωg”

6.8.1 Synopsis

BH’s are the most extreme gravitational objects in nature and at least “1” Graviton should

be emitted within a few periods at “ωΩ”. However, all but a SPBH are described by a spectrum of

EGM frequencies. Subsequently, at “ωΩ” for example, not every cycle emits a Graviton with

certainty. Hence, the average emission frequency per Graviton shall be determined.

6.8.2 Assumptions

i. The “uncertainty” resolution in the preceding section is an adequate representation for

mathematical modelling purposes and is appropriate for the objective defined above.

ii. The average number of Gravitons radiated by matter at “ωPV” is given by “ng(ωPV,M)”

[i.e. the generalised form of Eq.(4.177)].

iii. The maximum number of cycles at “ωPV” it may take to emit the appropriate coherent

Graviton population is given by “ng(ωPV,M)-1”.

6.8.3 Construct

The average emission period per Graviton at “ωPV” is given by “Tg” according to,

T g n PV, r , M

T PV n PV, r , M

n g ω PV n PV, r , M , M

(4.200)

**Hence, the average emission frequency per Graviton is given by “ωg” according to,
**

ω g n PV, r , M

n g ω PV n PV, r , M , M

T PV n PV, r , M

(4.201)

**Substituting “TPV = 1 / ωPV” yields,
**

n g ω PV n PV, r , M , M

T PV n PV, r , M

ω PV n PV, r , M .n g ω PV n PV, r , M , M

(4.202)

**Substituting “ng = ½nγ” yields,
**

1

ω PV n PV, r , M . .n γ ω PV n PV, r , M , M

2

ω PV n PV, r , M .n g ω PV n PV, r , M , M

(4.203)

Subsequently,

ω g n PV, r , M

1

E( M )

ω PV n PV, r , M . .

2 E γ ω PV n PV, r , M

(4.204)

**Substituting “Eγ = hωPV” yields,
**

1

E( M )

ω PV n PV, r , M . .

2 E γ ω PV n PV, r , M

1

E( M )

ω PV n PV, r , M . .

2 h .ω PV n PV, r , M

(4.205)

Simplifying produces,

1

E( M )

ω PV n PV, r , M . .

.

2 h ω PV n PV, r , M

E( M )

2 .h

(4.206)

Therefore,

ω g( M )

M .c

2 .h

168

2

(4.207)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Hence, it follows that the total population of Gravitons residing within matter is equal to the
**

average emission frequency per Graviton39 multiplied by the minimum gravitational lifetime of

starving matter, given by “ngg(M)” according to,

n gg ( M ) T L.ω g ( M )

(4.208)

**Note: “ngg(M) = E(M) / mgg = Mc2 / mgg”.
**

6.8.4 Sample calculations

Evaluating the preceding equations for various arbitrary values of SBH mass yields,

ω g m x.m h

. 18

4.99252510

ωg MS

5

ω g 10 .M S

=

. 56

1.34855310

. 61

1.34855310

( YHz)

. 66

1.34855310

10

ω g 10 .M S

n gg m x.m h

(4.209)

. 72

6.46222510

n gg M S

=

5

n gg 10 .M S

10

n gg 10 .M S

. 110

1.7455410

. 115

1.7455410

. 120

1.7455410

E m x.m h

(4.210)

. 72

6.46222510

E MS

1 .

5

m gg E 10 .M S

=

10

E 10 .M S

. 110

1.7455410

. 115

1.7455410

. 120

1.7455410

(4.211)

6.8.5 Concluding remarks

•

39

On average, Graviton emission occurs once every “ωg-1” seconds.

**“ωg” is non-physical: it is a mathematical contrivance.
**

169

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.9

Why can't we observe BH’s?

6.9.1 Synopsis

The “invisibility” of BH’s has been historically attributed to the curvature of the space-time

manifold induced by their mass. However, the PV model of gravity attributes this behaviour to the

value of “KPV” of the space-time manifold induced by the radial gradient of the energy density of

the gravitational field at the event horizon.

EGM advances to the next logical step by combining the static PV gravitational field with

the harmonic nature of the ZPF resulting in a spectrum of frequencies describing the gravitational

field such that the spectral bandwidth converges to a single mode in the case of a SPBH. Moreover,

it demonstrates that the PV spectrum may be characterised by a single wavefunction due to the

magnitude of “SωΩ” where, “>> 99.99(%)” of gravitational energy exists at “ωΩ” (i.e. all other

frequencies may be usefully neglected).

Therefore, EGM implies that, for a SBH, a wavefunction radiating from “RBH” with a

frequency of “ωΩ”, should degrade into the Visible Light (VL) frequency range if a hypothetical

“EGM wavefunction detector” was sufficiently distant from it. However, three principle reasons

exist as to why SBH’s will never be detectable. The “1st” reason is discussed in this section, i.e. the

Universe is insufficiently large to permit an “EGM wavefunction detector” to detect SBH’s, even if

the incoming conjugate pair EGM signal could be appropriately isolated, amplified and filtered

“somehow(?)”40.

Even if the Universe is much older and larger than current estimates, we show that it

remains too small for a device to detect SBH’s in the VL range. Subsequently, it is implied that the

EGM wavefunction of a SBH will enter the optical wavelength range in the far distant future – long

after our species has probably disappeared from existence.

As an alternative to VL detection and confirmation of the EGM construct, we explore the

possibility of detecting BH’s within the X-Ray range. It is shown that, whilst VL prospects are

doubtful, the X-Ray range may be a potential theoretical direction for future community research, if

(and only if), the technical problems of signal isolation, amplification and filtration, emphasised in

“Are conventional radio telescopes, practical tools for gravitational astronomy?” and

“Gravitational Cosmology” respectively, are overcome.

To facilitate this derivation, we must firstly specify “a” size and age of the Universe for

subsequent use. Since these values are not precisely known and are “hotly debated” within the

scientific community, we shall approximate them directly from the Hubble constant. These are

termed the “Hubble” size and age of the Universe (i.e. “r0” and “H0-1” respectively).

6.9.2 Assumptions

i. All physical BH’s, for the purpose of this derivation, are usefully represented by

approximation to SBH’s (note: SPBH’s are probably non-physical).

ii. The present size and age of the observable Universe is adequately approximated utilising

“H0” according to “r0 = c / H0” and “H0-1” respectively.

iii. “r0 >> RBH” such that “KPV(r0,M) → 1” and “ωΩ(r0,M) → ωΩ_3(r0,M)”.

iv. It will “somehow(?)” be technologically possible in the distant future to appropriately

isolate, amplify and filter the incoming conjugate wavefunction paired EGM signal to

verify the derivation.

40

**The “2nd” and “3rd” reasons are discussed in: “Are conventional radio telescopes, practical tools
**

for gravitational astronomy?” and “Gravitational Cosmology” respectively.

170

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.9.3 Construct

The VL spectrum for human beings is approximately bounded by wavelengths in the

“nanometre” (nm) range according to “400≤λVL(nm)≤750”. The X-Ray spectrum has an

approximate wavelength range of “0.3≤λX-RAY(nm)≤300”. Both these wavelength ranges can be

converted to the frequency domain according to the classical relationship “ω = c / λ”.

Utilising the expression for “ωΩ_3”, such that “r = rω” represents the distance from the centre

of mass of a celestial object to the Earth, we may determine the “visibility” of SBH’s in the VL and

X-Ray ranges by transposing for “rω” as follows,

5

St G.

r ω ω Ω_3 , M

M

2

ω Ω_3

9

(4.212)

**Therefore, “rω” denotes the distance from the Earth that a celestial object (i.e. an EGM
**

wavefunction radiation source) must be located such that its EGM wavefunction frequency decays

to the VL or X-Ray ranges.

6.9.4 Sample calculations

6.9.4.1 SBH’s

The value of “ωΩ_3” at the edge of the presently observable Universe for various arbitrary

SBH mass configurations (i.e. expressed as solar multiples) is approximated by,

ω Ω_3 r 0 , M S

5.

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10 M S

10

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10 .M S

0.163994

= 2.118067 ( EHz)

27.355887

(4.213)

**where, “EHz = 1018(Hz)”. However, computation of the EGM Flux Intensity at an Earth based
**

detector implies current impossibility of technical achievement according to,

C Ω_J1 r 0 , M S

5.

C Ω_J1 r 0 , 10 M S

10

C Ω_J1 r 0 , 10 .M S

.

1.48429110

5

= 8.89809310

.

3

10

20 .

yJy

5.334267

(4.214)

-24

**where, “yJy” denotes “yocto-Jansky” [i.e. “10 (Jansky)”].
**

Ignoring technical feasibility: for SBH’s at the edge of “an” observable Universe, the

following results demonstrate (i.e. being significantly greater than unity) that “a” Universe is

required to be substantially larger than “r0” for the value of “ωΩ_3” to be within the VL range

according to,

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , M S

1 . r ω ( 400 ( nm ) ) , 105 .M

ω VL

S

r0

10

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , M S

. 4 5.05271110

. 4

1.62975410

5

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm) ) , 10 .M S

= 1.62975410

. 6 5.05271110

. 6

10

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

. 8 5.05271110

. 8

1.62975410

(4.215)

**Repeating the procedure in the X-Ray frequency range (i.e. “30(PHz)≤ωX-RAY≤30(EHz)”) produces
**

favourable detection results according to,

171

www.deltagroupengineering.com

r ω 30.( PHz) , M S

5.

r ω 30.( EHz) , M S

r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 M S

r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 M S

10

r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S

10

r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

. 5

2.93002110

5.

= 2.93002110

.

7

1.166462

116.646228

. 9 1.16646210

. 4

2.93002110

6

10 .Lyr

(4.216)

15

**where, “PHz = 10 (Hz)” and “Lyr = light-year”.
**

The preceding results indicate that the detection of SBH’s in the X-Ray range “may(?)” be

possible within observational distances of approximately “1.2 → 117” million light years from

Earth. However, computation of the EGM Flux Intensity for an Earth based detector implies current

impossibility of technical achievement according to,

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( PHz) , M S , M S

2.164916

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 M S , 10 M S

5.

5.

.

= 2.16491610

3

.

2.16491610

6

10

10

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S , 10 .M S

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( EHz) , M S , M S

5.

10

29 .

yJy

(4.217)

8.618686

5.

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 M S , 10 M S

.

= 8.61868610

3

.

8.61868610

6

10

10

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S , 10 .M S

10

14 .

yJy

(4.218)

6.9.4.2 SPBH’s

The existence of SPBH’s is considered to be a theoretical possibility predicted by the

dimensional manipulation of Planck properties. Physicality of such phenomena cannot be

completely discounted due to a lack of observational evidence. Hence, EGM predicts a VL range

according to,

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h

=

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h

0.239057

0.741144

( Lyr)

(4.219)

**However, computation of the EGM Flux Intensity for an Earth based detector implies current
**

impossibility of technical achievement according to,

C Ω_J1 r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h , m x.m h

C Ω_J1 r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h , m x.m h

=

28.979765

1.102778

10

16 .

yJy

(4.220)

**A SPBH existing in the X-Ray frequency range would be “visible” within our solar system
**

according to,

r ω 30.( PHz) , m x.m h

r ω 30.( EHz) , m x.m h

=

. 6

2.95234410

3

10 .km

11.753495

(4.221)

**However, computation of the EGM Flux Intensity for an Earth based detector implies current
**

impossibility of technical achievement according to,

7

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( PHz) , m x.m h , m x.m h = 6.228302 10 .yJy

(4.222)

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( EHz) , m x.m h , m x.m h = 2.479532 ( fJy )

(4.223)

where, “fJy” denotes “femto-Jansky” [i.e. “10-15(Jansky)”].

172

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6.9.5 Concluding remarks

Assuming it is technically possible to appropriately isolate, amplify and filter an incoming

EGM wavefunction signal, the preceding construct implies the following,

i. Eventually, as the observable Universe continues to expand to thousands of times its

present size, the radiant EGM wavefunctions of BH’s at the edge of the Universe will

enter the VL range. This does not mean that they will become “visible” to the naked eye.

This only means that their EGM wavefunction will enter the “VL” part of the EM

spectrum.

ii. It “may(?)” be theoretically possible to detect BH’s utilising the X-Ray range within

observational distances of approximately “1.2 → 117” million light years from Earth.

However, significant theoretical and technical challenges would be required to be

overcome, emphasised in “Are conventional radio telescopes, practical tools for

gravitational astronomy?” and “Gravitational Cosmology” respectively.

NOTES

173

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

174

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7 Fundamental Cosmology

Abstract

The primordial and present values of the Hubble constant are derived (“Hα” and “HU”

respectively), leading to the determination of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation

(CMBR) temperature “TU”. This facilitates the determination of the impact of “Dark Matter /

Energy” on “HU” and “TU” such that a generalised expression for “TU” in terms of “HU” is

formulated. An experimentally implicit derivation of the ZPF energy density threshold “UZPF” is

also presented.

175

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7.1

Derivation of the primordial and present Hubble constants “Hα, HU”

7.1.1 Synopsis

The derivation of the primordial “Hα” and present “HU” Hubble constants by the EGM

method is possible by postulating an initial size, shape and mass of the Universe, momentarily prior

to the “Big-Bang”: we shall term this state the “Primordial Universe”. Once a description of the

“Primordial Universe” has been mathematically articulated in generalised terms, it may be

compared to a dimensionally equivalent object in accordance with BPT and similarity principles.

The objective herein is to derive a system of generalised equations, withholding numerical

evaluation. In a subsequent section, the generalised expressions will be numerically evaluated

demonstrating a calculation of “HU” in favourable agreement with expert opinion and physical

measurement of “H0”. Moreover, a value of “Hα” is presented demonstrating that the EGM method

suggests exciting new avenues for Cosmological research.

7.1.2 Assumptions

i. Dynamic, kinematic and geometric similarity:

The “Primordial Universe” was analogous to a spherical particle on the Planck scale

with radius “r1” and homogeneous mass distribution “M1”, described by a single

wavefunction whereas the presently observable Universe is described by a spectrum of

wavefunctions. The maximum EGM Flux Intensity measured by an observer at the edge of

the “Primordial Universe” is given by “CΩ_J1(r1,M1)”.

Matter radiates Gravitons41 at a spectrum of frequencies such that the Cosmological

majority of it exists in Photonic form, resulting in an approximately homogeneous massenergy distribution throughout the Universe whereby any Galactic formation is dynamically,

kinematically and geometrically equivalent to a spherical particle of homogeneous mass

distribution and may be represented as a Planck scale object to be utilised as a Galactic

Reference Particle (GRP).

The associated EGM Flux Intensity of the GRP is given by “CΩ_J1(r2,M2)” where,

“r2” denotes the mean “H0” measurement distance42 to the Galactic centre and “M2”

represents total Galactic mass43. The definition of “r2” comes from the scientific requirement

to compare calculation or prediction to measurement. Subsequently, one should also utilise

parameters within the same frame of reference as the measurement, against which the

construct is being tested.

It is not known by physical validation that “H0” is measured as being the same from

all locations in the Universe. It is believed to be the case by contemporary theory; however

it is not factually known to be true. To verify it physically, one would be required to perform

the “H0” measurement from a significantly different location in space. Thus, to minimise

potential modelling errors, we shall confine “r2” to the same frame of reference44 as the

measurement of “H0”.

ii. The ratio of the presently observable Cosmological size “rf”, to the initial size “ri” of the

“Primordial Universe” instantaneously prior to the “Big-Bang”, is proportional to the

corresponding EGM Flux Intensity {i.e. “(rf / ri) ∝ [CΩ_J1(rf) / CΩ_J1(ri)]”}.

iii. A relationship exists between the physical proportions of a particle at the Planck scale

limit governed by “λx” and “nΩ_2” such that it may be stated as “λx = λy(r1,r2,M1,M2)”.

41

**Coherent populations of conjugate Photon pairs for a minimum period of “TL”.
**

i.e. the distance relative to the Galactic centre from where a physical measurement of “H0” is

performed.

43

Visible + dark.

44

Our solar system.

42

176

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Upon consideration of the preceding assumptions, it follows that Eq. (3.230ii) represents the basic
**

form of mass-energy distribution throughout the Cosmos.

7.1.3 Construct

7.1.3.1 “AU, RU, HU”

The EGM harmonic representation of fundamental particles may be applied to facilitate the

derivation of “HU” by considering the initial “i” and present “f” mass and observable size of the

Universe. Hence, utilising Eq. (3.230ii) yields,

Mi

2

.

Mf

rf

5

St ω

ri

9

(4.224)

where, “Mi = Mf” due to the conservation of mass. For simplicity, let the “rf” to “ri” ratio be defined

according to,

rf

KU

ri

(4.225)

**“Stω9” in Eq. (3.230ii) represents the harmonic relationship between the values of “ωΩ” of
**

two dimensionally similar particles. Hence, recognising that the value of “Stω” is presently

unknown in a Cosmological context, and that the frequency and time domains are interchangeable,

let “Stω9” equal the ratio of “TL” to the present “Hubble age” of the Universe “AU” according to,

St ω

9

TL

AU

(4.226)

Hence,

5

KU

TL

AU

(4.227)

**Considering the preceding assumptions and equations, one expects that a relationship should
**

exist between “ri,f” and “CΩ_J1(r1,2,M1,2)”; however, their precise values are not yet known.

Subsequently, we shall deduce a relationship to be tested against physical observation utilising the

following logical statements and deductions,

i. If the order of magnitude of “rf” is approximately known by physical measurement45 and

“ri” approached the Planck scale limit, then “rf >> ri” such that “e(rf / ri) → ∞”.

ii. Without empirical evidence, one’s expectation is that “CΩ_J1(r1,M1) >> CΩ_J1(r2,M2)”, such

that “[CΩ_J1(r1,M1) / CΩ_J1(r2,M2)] → ∞”.

iii. Hence, it follows that46: “e(rf / ri) → [CΩ_J1(r1,M1) / CΩ_J1(r2,M2)]” according to,

rf

ri

ln

C Ω_J1 r 1 , M 1

C Ω_J1 r 2 , M 2

(4.228)

**It was demonstrated earlier that the appropriate proportions of a particle at the Planck scale
**

limit satisfying the EGM construct are: “r1 = λxλh” and “M1 = mxmh = λxmh / 2”. Although the

precise value of “λx” was calculated and shown to be small, we shall remove this constraint and

advance the derivation in a more generalised manner.

45

46

**i.e. approximately “< 15” billion light-years.
**

“e” denotes the “exponential function”.

177

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Temporarily ignoring the previously computed value of “λx” facilitates the creation of a
**

substantially more robust construct such that the generalisation may be tested against physical

observation utilising the following logical statements and deductions,

iv. Let “λx = λy(r1,r2,M1,M2)”.

v. If “λy(r1,r2,M1,M2) → 0” then “e[1 / λy(r1,r2,M1,M2)] → ∞”.

vi. Without empirical evidence to the contrary, one’s expectation is that “nΩ_2(r2,M2) >>

nΩ_2(r1,M1)”, such that “[nΩ_2(r2,M2) / nΩ_2(r1,M1)] → ∞”.

vii. By definition: “nΩ_2(r1,M1) = 1” at the Planck scale limit for the wavefunction of the

particle to remain consistent with the EGM construct47. Subsequently, “nΩ_2(r2,M2) → ∞”.

viii. Hence, it follows that “e[1 / λy(r1,r2,M1,M2)] → nΩ_2(r2,M2)” according to,

1

λ y r 2, M 2

ln n Ω_2 r 2 , M 2

(4.229)

**Subsequently, “r1” and “M1” may be written in the following block form,
**

λ y r 2 , M 2 .r 3

r1

λ y r 2, M 2

.M

3

2

M1

(4.230)

Thus, “KU” may be written in functional form according to,

K U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

ln

λ y r 2, M 2

.M

C Ω_J1 λ y r 2 , M 2 .r 3 ,

3

2

C Ω_J1 r 2 , M 2

(4.231)

**Performing the appropriate substitutions, one obtains the reduced functional form as follows,
**

5

5

K U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

ln

1

2

9

7

.ln n

Ω_2 r 2 , M 2

3.

M3

26

9

.

M2

r2

r3

9

(4.232)

**Hence, the EGM age of the Universe “AU” is given by,
**

A U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

TL

K U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

5

(4.233)

**Consequently, the EGM size of the Universe “RU” may be stated as follows,
**

R U r 2, r 3 , M 2, M 3

c .A U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

H U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

1

(4.234)

**Therefore, for a “flat” Universe,
**

A U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

(4.235)

7.1.3.2 “Hα”

The energy density of the Universe changes with time and, by mathematical definition, so

must the Hubble constant. Assuming the “Primordial Universe” was analogous to a particle at the

Planck scale limit, it is possible to predict a value for the Hubble constant at the instant of the “BigBang” (i.e. the primordial Hubble constant “Hα”) by equating it to the mass-density “ρm”.

47

i.e. “rS(r1,M1) = RBH(r1,M1)”.

178

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Utilising the contemporary density relationship according to,
**

3 .H

ρm

8 .π .G

2

(4.236)

**such that: “H → Hα(r3,M3)” and “ρm → ρm(r3,M3)” yields,
**

H α r 3, M 3

2.

2. . .

π G ρ m r 3, M 3

3

(4.237)

7.1.3.3 “ρU”

Utilising the contemporary density relationship, the EGM mass-density of the Universe “ρU”

may be determined as follows,

ρ U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

3 .H U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

8 .π .G

2

(4.238)

7.1.3.4 “MU”

Approximating the observable Universe to a spherical volume [i.e. “V(r) = 4πr3 / 3”], the

total EGM mass of the Universe “MU” (i.e. visible + dark) when “r → RU(r2,M2,r3,M3)” is given by,

M U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

V R U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3 .ρ U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

(4.239)

7.1.4 Concluding remarks

A robust generalised construct for “Hα”, “HU”, “ρU” and “MU” has been formulated which

may be tested against physical observation. Non-refractive forms were utilised throughout this

derivation (i.e. “CΩ_J1” and “nΩ_2”) because:

i. “KPV(r,M)” evaporates when “[CΩ(r1,M1) / CΩ(r2,M2)] → [CΩ_J1(r1,M1) / CΩ_J1(r2,M2)]”.

ii. “r2 >> 1” such that “KPV(r2,M2) → 1”.

NOTES

179

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7.2

Derivation of the CMBR temperature “TU”

7.2.1 Synopsis

The Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) temperature “TU” may be

calculated utilising the EGM method by considering the total mass-energy of the Universe to be

dynamically, kinematically and geometrically similar to a particle at the Planck scale limit,

consistent with the formulation of “Hα” and “HU” in the preceding section.

By generalising the result: “ng(ωΩ_4(mxmh),mxmh) → ng(ωΩ_3(r3,M3),M3)” {see Eq. (4.187)},

we may formulate a relationship between the primordial and Galactic reference average numbers of

Gravitons radiated by similar particles. For a “Primordial Universe” particle model at the Planck

scale limit, the relationship yields “TU” by the application of proportional similarity principles,

wavefunction frequency degradation and the “Wien” Displacement Constant “KW”.

The following quotation is taken verbatim from [http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hphys.html].

“When the temperature of a blackbody radiator increases, the overall radiated energy

increases and the peak of the radiation curve moves to shorter wavelengths. When the maximum is

evaluated from the Planck radiation formula, the product of the peak wavelength and the

temperature is found to be a constant.

Figure 4.21,

This relationship is called “Wien's Displacement Law” and is useful for determining the

temperature of hot radiant objects such as stars, and indeed for a determination of the temperature

of any radiant object whose temperature is far above that of its surroundings.

It should be noted that the peak of the radiation curve in the Wien relationship is the peak

only because the intensity is plotted as a function of wavelength. If frequency or some other

variable is used on the horizontal axis, the peak will be at a different wavelength.”

End of verbatim quotation.

7.2.2 Assumptions

i. The primordial average number of Gravitons radiated per “TΩ_3” period, instantaneously

after the “Big-Bang”, is given by “ng(ωΩ_3(r3,M3),M3)”.

ii. The Galactic reference average number of Gravitons “KT” (also termed the “expansive

scaling factor”), radiated per wavefunction period, may be defined as a proportion of the

primordial average given by “KT(r2,M2,r3,M3) ∝ ng(ωΩ_3(r3,M3),M3)”.

iii. Specific information about “KT’s” wavefunction period is irrelevant due to the assignment

of proportional similarity characteristics between the primordial (i.e. “Primordial

Universe”) and Galactic reference averages described above.

180

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7.2.3 Construct

Generalising the result “ng(ωΩ_4(mxmh),mxmh) → ng(ωΩ_3(r3,M3),M3)” facilitates the creation

of a substantially more robust construct such that it may be tested against physical observation

utilising the following logical statements and deductions,

i. If “ng(ωΩ_3(r3,M3),M3) → 0” then “e[KT(r2,M2,r3,M3) / ng(ωΩ_3(r3,M3),M3)] → ∞”.

ii. Without empirical evidence to the contrary, one’s expectation is that “Hα(r3,M3) >>

HU(r2,M2,r3,M3)”, such that “[Hα(r3,M3) / HU(r2,M2,r3,M3)] → ∞”.

iii. Hence, it follows that “e[KT(r2,M2,r3,M3) / ng(ωΩ_3(r3,M3),M3)] → [Hα(r3,M3) / HU(r2,M2,r3,M3)]”,

yielding the expansive scaling factor according to,

K T r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

n g ω Ω_3 r 3 , M 3 , M 3 .ln

H α r 3, M 3

H U r 2, r 3 , M 2, M 3

(4.240)

**“Wien's Displacement Law” provides the frequency (or wavelength) at which “Planck’s
**

Law” has maximum specific intensity. [46] Consequently, the hotter an object is, the shorter the

wavelength at which it will emit most of its radiation and the frequency for maximal (i.e. peak)

radiation power is found by dividing “KW” by the temperature. [24]

If the present size of the Universe were held static (i.e. spatial expansion was miraculously

halted) and its total mass-energy (i.e. visible + dark) were compressed48 such that it was

dynamically, kinematically and geometrically analogous to a particle at the Planck scale limit such

that “nΩ_2(r3,M3) = 1” (i.e. only one wavefunction describes the “Primordial Universe”), then a

mass-less observer at the periphery of the presently observable Universe, given by

“RU(r2,M2,r3,M3)”, would measure its EGM wavefunction frequency to be “ωΩ_3(r,M) →

ωΩ_3(RU(r2,M2,r3,M3),M3)”.

Recognising that “λΩ_3(RU(r2,M2,r3,M3),M3) = c / ωΩ_3(RU(r2,M2,r3,M3),M3)” yields the

expansive independent average temperature of the observable Universe “TW” (also termed the

“thermodynamic scaling factor”) according to,

T W r 2, r 3, M 2 , M 3

KW

λ Ω_3 R U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3 , M 3

(4.241)

**Hence, applying “Wien's Displacement Law” for blackbody radiation, scaled by “KT for application
**

to the EGM domain by preservation of dynamic, kinematic and geometric similarity, yields the

CMBR temperature (i.e. the expansive dependent average) as follows,

T U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

K T r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3 .T W r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

(4.242)

Therefore,

i. “TW” denotes the Cosmological expansive independent average temperature because the

expression does not contain “HU”.

ii. “TU” denotes the Cosmological expansive dependent average temperature because the

expression contains “HU”.

7.2.4 Concluding remarks

It is clear from the preceding construct that the CMBR temperature is a function of the

Hubble constant.

48

**Mimicking the “Primordial Universe” and excluding space-time manifold expansion from
**

consideration.

181

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7.3

Numerical solutions for “Hα, AU, RU, ρU, MU, HU” and “TU”

7.3.1 “r2, r3, M2, M3”

Thus far, we have determined mathematical relationships for “Hα, AU, RU, ρU, MU, HU” and

“TU”. However, to numerically evaluate these expressions, we require precise definitions of “r2, r3,

M2” and “M3”. If the “Primordial Universe” was analogous to a particle at the Planck scale limit,

then “RBH” must have coincided with “rS” (i.e. the “Primordial Universe” was analogous to a

SPBH) because nothing (i.e. including a space-time manifold) existed beyond “RBH”.

This assertion is reinforced by the contemporary scientific belief that the “Big-Bang” was not

an explosion in the space-time manifold, but was an explosion of the space-time manifold.

Moreover, it was previously shown, by the calculation of “rS”, that a Planck scale particle

configuration of “r = λh” and “M = mh” is inconsistent with the EGM construct and “non-physical”.

The argument for this conclusion is easily demonstrated according to,

r S mh

1 . r m .m

S x h

λh

λx

1=

144.219703

.

4.21884710

13

(%)

(4.243)

r S mh

1 = 22.109851 ( % )

R BH m h

(4.244)

These results indicate that a Planck scale particle of radius “λh” and mass “mh” is nonphysical because “rS(mh) > λh” {i.e. “[rS(mh) / λh] > 1”}. Moreover, they also demonstrate that

“RBH” is smaller than “rS” {i.e. “[rS(mh) / RBH(mh)] > 1”}. This means that the event horizon is

inside the singularity, not outside as expected and required. Notably, “rS” of a particle with radius

“λxλh” and mass “mxmh” is equal to the radius of the particle [i.e. “rS(mxmh) = λxλh”] hence, it is

physical. Thus, “r3” and “M3” may be given according to,

r3 = λxλh

(4.245)

M3 = mxmh = λxmh / 2

(4.246)

**At the commencement of the “Hα” and “HU” derivation process, the following assertion was
**

articulated: “any Galactic formation is dynamically, kinematically and geometrically equivalent to a

spherical particle of homogeneous mass distribution and may be represented as a Planck scale mass

to be utilised as a GRP”.

Moreover, it was also stated that - for the Galactic formation to be related by proportional

similarity to the “Primordial Universe”, it should be the Galactic formation from which the Hubble

constant and the CMBR temperature were measured. This constraint ensures that no currently

unknown phenomena influence the calculation.

The GRP is formulated by the compression of all matter (i.e. visible + dark), within the

Galactic formation, to the Planck scale. Hence, it follows that the GRP’s dimensions must be

transformed by the EGM adjusted Planck characteristics of Length “Kλ” and Mass “Km”, as derived

by Storti. et. Al. in [13], such that “r2 → r2(r)” and “M2 → M2(M)”.

Therefore, for consistent and complete generalised dynamic, kinematic and geometric

similarity of any GRP to a SPBH in terms of radius and mass, “r2” and “M2” may be defined

according to,

r2(r) = Kλ⋅r

(4.247)

M2(M) = Km⋅M = Kλ⋅M

(4.248)

**where, “Kλ = Km = [π / 2](1 / 3) ≈ 1.162447”.
**

182

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7.3.2 Computational results

Utilising the expressions for “r2, r3, M2” and “M3” defined above such that the GRP is

formed from the “Milky-Way” (MW), solutions for “Hα, AU, RU, ρU, MU, HU” and “TU” may be

given according to,

i. “r = Ro” denotes the mean distance from the Sun to the MW Galactic centre.

ii. “Ro = 8(kpc)” as defined by the PDG. [20]

iii. “M = MG” denotes the total mass (i.e. visible + dark) of the MW Galaxy.

iv. “MG ≈ 6 x1011” solar masses as defined by [21].

v. “H0 = 71(km/s/Mpc)” as defined by the PDG. [22]

vi. “T0 = 2.725(K)” as defined by the PDG. [20]

H α λ x.λ h , m x.m h

ωh

λx

(4.249)

9

A U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 14.575885 10 .yr

(4.250)

9

R U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 14.575885 10 .Lyr

(4.251)

33 kg

ρ U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 8.453235 10 .

3

cm

(4.252)

. 52 ( kg )

M U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 9.28458610

(4.253)

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 67.084304

km

.

s Mpc

(4.254)

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 2.724752 ( K )

(4.255)

The EGM construct error associated with “HU” and “TU” with respect to expert opinion and

physical measurement is given by,

1 .

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

H0

1 = 5.515064 ( % )

1 .

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

T0

.

1 = 9.08391310

(4.256)

3

( %)

(4.257)

7.3.3 Honourable mention

It should not escape attention that the absence of “Kλ”, “λx”, “Km” and “mx” from “r2, r3,

M2” and “M3” respectively, continues to produce impressive results, re-affirming the validity of the

EGM construct as follows,

H U R o , λ x.λ h , M G, m x.m h

H U R o , λ h , M G, m h

H U K λ .R o , λ h , K m.M G, m h

T U R o , λ x.λ h , M G, m x.m h

T U R o , λ h , M G, m h

T U K λ .R o , λ h , K m.M G, m h

183

66.700842

= 69.672169

70.06923

km

s .Mpc

(4.258)

2.716201

= 1.199134 ( K )

1.202877

(4.259)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**The EGM construct error associated with “HU” and “TU” for the various functional
**

deviations with respect to physical measurement is given by,

H U R o , λ x.λ h , M G, m x.m h

1 .

H0

H U R o , λ h , M G, m h

6.055152

1=

H U K λ .R o , λ h , K m.M G, m h

1.310944

T U R o , λ x.λ h , M G, m x.m h

1 .

T0

T U R o , λ h , M G, m h

T U K λ .R o , λ h , K m.M G, m h

1.870184 ( % )

(4.260)

0.322893

1=

55.995089 ( % )

55.857737

(4.261)

7.3.4 Concluding remarks

The EGM construct produces highly precise numerical approximations, in agreement with

physical measurement as reported by the PDG. The correlation of “HU” and “TU” (including the

functional deviations presented) to the experimental evidence, demonstrates a clear relationship

between “H0” and “T0”, suggesting exciting new avenues of theoretical Cosmological research.

An important question arises as to why the relationship between “Kλ” and “Km” is different

to the relationship existing between “λx” and “mx”. The reason for this is because “λx” and “mx”

apply specifically to a SPBH – a theoretically physical object with a singularity radius, an event

horizon and a value of “nΩ” equal to unity.

The GRP does not physically exist, it is a mathematical contrivance formulated by

dimensional similarity principles approaching the Planck scale. It does not have a singularity radius

or event horizon associated with it and relative to the position of the Earth, has a value of “nΩ”

much greater than unity.

Therefore, the reasons for the difference in relationship between “λx,mx” and “Kλ,Km” may

be summarised as follows:

i.

The relationship between “λx” and “mx” is governed by “nΩ(λxλh,mxmh) = 1”.

ii.

The relationship between “Kλ” and “Km” is governed by the Planck scale such that

“nΩ(r2(r),M2(M)) >> 1” hence, “M2(M) ≠ (Kλ / 2)⋅M”.

NOTES

184

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7.4

Determination of the impact of “Dark Matter / Energy” on “HU” and “TU”

7.4.1 Synopsis

The question of the impact of “Dark Matter / Energy” on “H0” has long thought to be

certain. It has been assumed that the “driving” component of the accelerating expansion of the

Universe is the presence of “Dark Matter / Energy”. EGM disagrees with this assertion because it

(i.e. EGM) maintains that Photon's have mass. Therefore, a significant contribution to the “missing

mass” relating to “Dark Matter / Energy” theories, is in-fact - Photonic mass.

Note: the impact of “Dark Matter / Energy” on “T0” has never been (to date) seriously considered,

supported by meaningful and accurate calculations, by mainstream Physicists.

7.4.2 Assumptions

i. The EGM construct is valid.

ii. The values of “HU” and “TU” calculated in the preceding section are correct.

iii. The “visible mass” of the MW Galaxy is “MG / 3”, as defined by [21].

7.4.3 Construct

It is possible to calculate the value of “HU” and “TU” based upon the “visible mass only” of

the MW Galaxy by a simple substitution of values (i.e. “M2 / 3 = KmMG / 3”) as follows,

1

km

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , .K m.M G, m x.m h = 67.753267

.

3

s Mpc

(4.262)

1

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , .K m.M G, m x.m h = 2.739618 ( K )

3

(4.263)

**Hence, the magnitude of the impact of “Dark Matter / Energy” on the value of “HU” and “TU” is
**

demonstrated to be “< 1(%)” when compared to the previously derived value according to,

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

1 = 0.987352 ( % )

1

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , .K m.M G, m x.m h

3

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

1

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , .K m.M G, m x.m h

3

(4.264)

1 = 0.542607 ( % )

(4.265)

7.4.4 Concluding remarks

The preceding results demonstrate that the impact of “Dark Matter / Energy” on “HU” and

“TU” is very small. This implies that the constitution of the Universe under the EGM construct is

quite different from current thinking. The contemporary view asserted in [23] is that the constitution

of the Universe is,

i. “72(%) Dark Energy”.

ii. “23(%) Dark Matter”.

iii. “4.6(%) Atoms”.

However, the EGM construct generalises the constitution of the Universe as being,

iv. “> 94.4(%) Photons”.

v. “< 1(%) Dark Matter / Energy”.

vi. “4.6(%) Atoms”.

185

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7.5

“TU” as a function of a generalised Hubble constant “TU → TU2”

**Utilising “ωΩ_3”, “TU” may be expressed in terms of a generalised Hubble constant “TU2(H)”
**

according to,

9

λ Ω_3( r , M )

c

c

ω Ω_3( r , M )

9

5

1 . r

St G M 2

c.

2

M

St G.

5

r

(4.266)

**If “r → (c / H)” and “M → M3” then,
**

9

c

c λ x.

λ Ω_3 ,

mh

H 2

c.

1 .

St G

5

9

H

λx

2

c.

2

.m

h

1 .

2

St G λ x.m h

2

. c

H

5

(4.267)

**Recognising that “ng(ωΩ_3(r3,M3),M3) = (8 / 3)” yields “KT(H)” as follows,
**

K T( H )

8 . H α r 3, M 3

ln

3

H

(4.268)

Hence,

KW

T W( H)

λ Ω_3

c λ x.

,

mh

H 2

(4.269)

T U2( H ) K T( H ) .T W ( H )

(4.270)

**Recognising that “Hα(r3,M3) = ωh / λx” yields,
**

K T( H ) .T W ( H )

ωh

8.

.

ln

3

λ x.H

KW

λ Ω_3

c λ x.

,

mh

H 2

(4.271)

**Performing the appropriate substitutions produces,
**

9

ωh

λ .m

8 KW.

. St . x h

T U2( H ) .

ln

G

3 c

2

λ x.H

2

. H

c

5

(4.272)

Let,

9

.

8 . St G . λ x m h

St T

5

3 .c

2

c

2

(4.273)

**Injecting “StG” and simplifying yields,
**

9

4. 3. 1 . λ x

3 4 c5 π .λ 2

h

3

St T

2

(4.274)

Therefore,

T U2( H )

K W .St T .ln

186

ωh

λ x.H

9

. H5

(4.275)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7.6

Derivation of “Ro”, “MG”, “HU2” and “ρU2” from “TU2”

7.6.1 Synopsis

The value of “Ro” has been substantially improved in recent years and is stated by the PDG

as being “Ro = 8(kpc)” with an experimental uncertainty given as “∆Ro = 0.5(kpc)”. The value of

MW total Galactic mass, expressed in solar masses as being “MG / MS ≈ 6 x1011”, is quite rough.

In-fact, one has difficulty finding an “MG / MS” uncertainty value anywhere in the scientific

literature [note: “kpc” = kilo-parsec].

The principle reason for “MG” being so generalised is due to the lack of current knowledge

around “Dark Matter / Energy”. However, utilising the relationship between “TU” and “HU”

articulated in “TU2”, we are able to significantly improve upon the estimates for “Ro” and “MG” by

determining a convergent numerical solution bound by the experimental uncertainty associated with

“Ro” (i.e. “∆Ro”).

Before commencing the derivation process, we shall generalise “HU” such that “Ro → r”,

“MG → M” and “HU → HU2(r,M)” according to,

H U2( r , M )

H U K λ .r , λ x.λ h , K m.M , m x.m h

(4.276)

**A simple test verifying “TU2” is demonstrated below. Since, the computed value of
**

“TU2(HU2(Ro,MG/3))” based upon visible MW Galactic mass “MG/3” is exactly compliant with “TU”

(i.e. “TU = TU2”), no technical error exists. Moreover, the result “TU2(H0) ≈ T0” agrees precisely

with historical expectation (i.e. prior to measurement by satellite) of “T0”.

1

T U2 H U2 R o , .M G

3

=

T U2 H 0

2.739618

( K)

2.810842

(4.277)

**Computing values of “TU2” associated with “∆Ro”, yields violation of “T0” experimental
**

boundaries [i.e. “∆T0 ± 0.001(K)”]. In other words, the “TU2” result returned when “r = (Ro ± ∆Ro)”

is beyond “T0 ± ∆T0” when “M = MG” according to,

T U2 H U2 R o

∆R o , M G

T U2 H U2 R o

∆R o , M G

=

2.720213

2.729021

( K)

(4.278)

**Repeating the calculation based upon visible MW Galactic mass (i.e. “M = MG/3”) yields,
**

T U2 H U2 R o

T U2 H U2 R o

1

∆R o , .K m.M G

3

1

∆R o , .K m.M G

3

=

2.733025

2.741859

( K)

(4.279)

**The preceding results infer numerical avenues for the accurate determination of “Ro” and
**

“MG” based upon precise measurement of “T0”. It is likely that the experimental measurement of

“T0” will advance at a substantially greater pace than “Ro” or “MG”. In the proceeding construct, we

shall establish a method to accurately determine the values of “Ro” and “MG”, which may be

observationally tested in the future when the experimental capability of “∆T0 → 0(K)” is achieved.

7.6.2 Assumptions

i. The EGM Cosmological construct thus far is correct.

ii. The values of “Ro”, “MG” and “MG/3” are approximately correct.

iii. The values of “T0”, “∆T0” and “∆Ro” are precisely correct.

187

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7.6.3 Construct

7.6.3.1 “Ro” or “MG”

Compliant mutually exclusive boundary values for “Ro” and “MG” may be determined

numerically within the “MathCad 8 Professional” environment utilising the “Given” and “Find”

commands as follows,

Let “rx1”, “rx2”, “mg1” and “mg2” denote the algorithm pre-factors required by the computational

environment with initialisation string: “rx1 = rx2 = mg1 = mg2 =1”.

Given

T U2 H U2 r x1.R o , M G

T U2 H U2 R o , m g1 .M G

T U2 H U2 r x2.R o , M G

T U2 H U2 R o , m g2 .M G

T0

∆T 0

(4.280)

T0

∆T 0

(4.281)

r x1

r x2

m g1

Find r x1, r x2, m g1 , m g2

m g2

(4.282)

Hence,

r x1

r x2

m g1

0.989364

=

1.017883

1.057292

0.911791

m g2

(4.283)

Substituting “rx1”, “rx2”, “mg1” and “mg2” into “TU2” produces “T0 ± ∆T0”, confirming that the

algorithm executed correctly as follows,

T U2 H U2 r x1.R o , M G

T U2 H U2 r x2.R o , M G

T U2 H U2 R o , m g1 .M G

T U2 H U2 R o , m g2 .M G

2.724

=

2.726

2.724

( K)

2.726

(4.284)

**Thus, the mutually exclusive boundary values satisfying the condition “TU2 = T0 ± ∆T0” become,
**

R o.

r x1

=

r x2

7.914908

8.143063

( kpc )

(4.285)

. 11

M G m g1

6.34375310

.

=

M S m g2

. 11

5.47074910

r x1 m g1

r x2 m g2

1=

(4.286)

1.063645 5.729219

1.788292

188

8.820858

(%)

(4.287)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Therefore, “TU2 = T0 ± ∆T0” is satisfied when:
**

• “0.9894Ro < Ro < 1.0179Ro” or “0.9118MG < MG < 1.0573MG”.

7.6.3.2 “Ro” and “MG”

Compliant simultaneous boundary values for “Ro” and “MG” (i.e. to “6” decimal places)

satisfying the condition “TU2 = T0 ± ∆T0” may be determined numerically within the “MathCad 8

Professional” environment utilising the “Given” and “Find” commands as follows,

Given

T U2 H U2 r x1.R o , m g1 .M G

T U2 H U2 r x1.R o , m g2 .M G

T0

T U2 H U2 r x2.R o , m g1 .M G

T U2 H U2 r x2.R o , m g2 .M G

T0

∆T 0

(4.288)

∆T 0

(4.289)

Let,

r x3

r x4

m g3

Find r x1, r x2, m g1 , m g2

m g4

(4.290)

Hence,

r x3

r x4

m g3

0.984956

=

1.013348

0.977007

0.977007

m g4

(4.291)

Substituting “rx3”, “rx4”, “mg3” and “mg4” into “TU2” produces “T0 ± ∆T0”, confirming that the

algorithm executed correctly as follows,

T U2 H U2 r x3.R o , m g3 .M G

T U2 H U2 r x4.R o , m g4 .M G

=

2.724

2.726

( K)

(4.292)

**Thus, the simultaneous boundary values satisfying the condition “TU2 = T0 ± ∆T0” become,
**

R o.

r x3

=

r x4

7.879647

8.106786

( kpc )

(4.293)

. 11

M G m g3

5.8620410

.

=

M S m g4

. 11

5.8620410

r x3 m g3

r x4 m g4

1=

1.50441 2.29934

1.334822 2.29934

(4.294)

(%)

(4.295)

**Therefore, “TU2 = T0 ± ∆T0” is satisfied when:
**

• “0.9850Ro < Ro < 1.0133Ro” and “MG / MS = 5.8620 x1011”.

189

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**7.6.3.3 “Ro”, “MG”, “HU2” and “ρU2”
**

7.6.3.3.1 “Ro” and “MG”

Compliant simultaneous values for “Ro” and “MG” satisfying the condition “TU2 = T0” may

be determined numerically within the “MathCad 8 Professional” environment utilising the “Given”

and “Find” commands as follows,

Given

T U2 H U2 r x1.R o , m g1 .M G

T0

(4.296)

Let,

r x5

m g5

Find r x1, m g1

(4.297)

Hence,

r x5

m g5

1.013403

=

1.052361

(4.298)

**Substituting “rx5” and “mg5” into “TU2” produces “T0”, confirming that the algorithm executed
**

correctly as follows,

T U2 H U2 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

= 2.725 ( K )

(4.299)

**Thus, the simultaneous values satisfying the condition “TU2 = T0” become,
**

r x5.R o = 8.107221 ( kpc )

m g5 .

MG

(4.300)

.

= 6.31416710

11

MS

r x5

m g5

(4.301)

1=

1.340256

5.236123

(%)

(4.302)

**Therefore, “TU2 = T0” is satisfied when:
**

• “Ro = 8.1072(kpc)” and “MG / MS = 6.3142 x1011”.

7.6.3.3.2 “HU2” and “ρU2”

If “T0” is exactly correct, then “HU2” and “ρU2” may be determined utilising the derived

values for “rx5” and “mg5” according to,

H U2 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G = 67.095419

km

s .Mpc

(4.303)

Hence,

ρ U2( r , M )

3 .H U2( r , M )

2

8 .π .G

(4.304)

33 kg

ρ U2 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G = 8.456036 10 .

3

cm

190

(4.305)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7.6.4 Concluding remarks

The preceding construct demonstrates a method by which it is possible to determine the

values of “Ro” and “MG” for the MW Galaxy from an exact measurement of “T0”.

NOTES

191

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7.7

Experimentally implicit derivation of the ZPF energy density threshold “UZPF”

7.7.1 Synopsis

The ZPF energy density threshold “UZPF” is very important to Cosmology as it is believed to

be the reason for the “flat expansion phenomenon” as determined by the “Wilkinson Microwave

Anisotropy Probe” (WMAP). The EGM method may be applied to derive “UZPF” by considering the

average EGM mass-density of the Cosmos, given by the form “ρm(r,M)” – according to,

ρ m R U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h , M U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

= 8.453235 10

33 .

kg

3

cm

(4.306)

**This result may also be expressed in “ρU2” notation as,
**

ρ U2 R o , M G = 8.453235 10

33 .

kg

3

cm

(4.307)

**Hence, if we compare “ρU2(rx5Ro,mg5MG)” to “ρU2(Ro,MG)”, the ratio produces the EGM density
**

parameter “ΩEGM”, leading to the threshold value (i.e. upper limiting estimate) of “UZPF”.

7.7.2 Assumptions

i. The experimental value of “T0” is exactly correct.

ii. “ρU2(rx5Ro,mg5MG)” being based upon the experimentally measured value of “T0”, differs

from the idealised EGM result “ρU2(Ro,MG)” due to the “flat expansion phenomenon”.

iii. The ZPF energy density value, responsible for the “flat expansion phenomenon”, is a

negative quantity.

7.7.3 Construct

The EGM total density parameter “ΩEGM” may be written according to,

Ω EGM

ρ U2 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

ρ U2 R o , M G

(4.308)

Evaluating produces,

Ω EGM = 1.000331

(4.309)

**Subsequently, considering the contemporary representation of Cosmological density parameter “Ω”
**

such that “Ω → ΩEGM”, the critical EGM total density may be identified as “ρU2(Ro,MG)” from,

Ω

ρ

ρc

(4.310)

**where, “ρc” denotes critical Cosmological total density.
**

The PDG state in [20] that the total density parameter is “ΩPDG = 1.003” such that its

constitution may be decomposed according to,

Ω PDG Ω m Ω γ .. Ω ν

ΩΛ

(4.311)

**where, each term on the Right-Hand-Side (RHS) of the equation denotes a physical contribution
**

such as visible matter “Ωm”, Photon’s “Ωγ”, Neutrinos “Ων” and Dark Energy “ΩΛ” etc.

However, under the EGM construct all matter radiates populations of high frequency

conjugate Photon pairs (possessing non-zero mass). Subsequently, all the typical density terms may

be “clumped together” such that “ΩEGM ≈ ΩPDG” according to,

192

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Ω EGM

Ω PDG

= 0.997339

(4.312)

**The geometry of the Cosmological space-time manifold has been measured by WMAP to be
**

nearly flat, hence; the Friedman equation written in ZPF considerate form is “ΩEGM + ΩZPF = 1”

where, “ΩZPF” denotes the “ZPF” density parameter. Approximated evaluation yields,

Ω ZPF

Ω EGM

1

.

Ω ZPF = 3.31400710

(4.313)

4

(4.314)

**Therefore, the Cosmological average ZPF energy density may be approximated according to,
**

3 .c .

Ω ZPF .

H U2 R o , M G

8 .π .G

2

U ZPF

U ZPF = 2.51778 10

2

(4.315)

13 .

Pa

(4.316)

7.7.4 Concluding remarks

The utilisation of “T0” (i.e. a physical measurement) leads to an experimentally implicit

derivation of the ZPF energy density threshold “UZPF” characterised by the following boundary

values:

i. ΩZPF < -3.32 x10-4.

ii. UZPF < -2.52 x10-13(Pa).

On a human scale, this translates to levels of ZPF energy according to,

iii. “< -252(yJ/mm3)”.

On an astronomical scale, this becomes,

iv. “< -0.252(mJ/km3)”.

v. “< -7.4 x1012(YJ/pc3)”.

On a Cosmological scale, this becomes,

vi. “< -6.6 x1041(YJ/RU3)”.

The deceleration parameter,

vii. “ΩEGM” may be utilised to obtain non-zero deceleration parameter solutions.

Note: although on the human scale the quantities of ZPF energy are extremely small, on the

astronomical or Cosmological scales, they become extremely large when approaching the

dimensions of the visible Universe according to “RU → RU(KλRo,λxλh,KmMG,mxmh)”.

193

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

194

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8 Advanced Cosmology

Abstract

A time dependent derivation of “TU” is performed, including its rate of change and

relationship to “HU”. This facilitates the articulation of the Cosmological evolution process into four

distinct periods dealing with the inflationary and early expansive phases. Subsequently, the history

of the Universe49 is developed and compared to the Standard Model (SM) of Cosmology. This

assists in determining the Cosmological limitations of the EGM construct. The question of the

practicality of utilising conventional radio telescopes for gravitational astronomy is also addressed.

49

**As defined by the EGM construct.
**

195

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Time dependent CMBR temperature “TU2 → TU3”

8.1

8.1.1 Synopsis

A Hubble constant dependent expression is formulated and graphed for the CMBR

temperature in the time domain. This may be further developed into a generalised time dependent

representation of the average CMBR temperature; laying foundations such that the relationship to

the primordial Hubble constant is emphasised and thermodynamic rates of change may be

subsequently articulated in the proceeding section.

8.1.2 Assumptions

i. The Universe is “flat” (i.e. as indicated by WMAP).

ii. “t = 1 / H”.

8.1.3 Construct

Recalling that “Hα(λxλh,mxmh) = ωh / λx” facilitates the derivation of a time dependent

expression for CMBR temperature. Simplifying notation such that “ωh / λx = Hα” and substituting

into “TU2”, yields a primordially dependent form where “TU2 → TU3” according to,

T U3( H ) K W .St T .ln

Hα

9

. H5

H

(4.317)

**Let: “µ = 1 / 3” and “H = HβHα” where, “1 ≥ Hβ > 0” such that it denotes a dimensionless range
**

variable. Hence,

T U3 H β

K W .St T .ln

1

Hβ

. H .H

β α

5 .µ

2

(4.318)

**Determining local maxima in the conventional manner (i.e. “dTU3/dHβ = 0”) yields,
**

1 .

d

K W .St T .ln

H β .H α

Hβ

dH β

5 .µ

2

0

(4.319)

1

Hβ e

2

5 .µ

(4.320)

**If the freezing temperature of water [i.e. “0°(C) = 273(K)”] represents “some sort” of
**

Cosmological milestone, we may determine the value of the Hubble constant and the age of the

Universe satisfying this temperature condition numerically utilising the “Given” and “Find”

commands within the “MathCad 8 Professional” environment according to the following algorithm,

Let “Hβ2” denote the algorithm pre-factor required by the computational environment with an

appropriate initialisation value such that the error vector converges to zero.

Given

T U2 10

H β2

H β2

.H

α

273.( K )

(4.321)

Find H β2

(4.322)

Hence,

H β2 = 56.450309

196

(4.323)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.1.4 Sample calculations

•

**The primordial Hubble constant (i.e. the value at the instant of the “Big-Bang”) was,
**

. 61

H α = 8.46094110

•

km

s .Mpc

(4.324)

**The maximum average Cosmological temperature since the “Big-Bang” was,
**

1

T U3 e

•

2

5 .µ

. 31 ( K )

= 3.19551810

(4.325)

**The value of the Hubble constant at the maximum average Cosmological temperature
**

was,

1

e

•

2

5 .µ .

. 61

H α = 1.39858410

km

s .Mpc

**The present Cosmological value of “ H β ” is,
**

H U2 R o , M G

= 7.928705 10

61

Hα

•

T U3( 1 )

=

0

0

( K)

(4.328)

**The value of the Hubble constant coinciding with an average Cosmological temperature
**

of “273(K)” was,

10

•

(4.327)

**The average Cosmological temperature at the moment of the “Big-Bang” was,
**

T U2 H α

•

(4.326)

H β2

.H = 2.99992310

. 5

α

km

.

s Mpc

(4.329)

**The Cosmological age coinciding with an average Cosmological temperature of
**

“273(K)” was,

10

H β2

.H

α

1

6

= 3.259461 10 .yr

(4.330)

8.1.5 Sample plots

•

See overleaf.

197

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.1.5.1 “TU3 vs. Hβ”: Figure 4.22
**

Av. Cosmological Temperature

1

31

3.5 .10

e

5 .µ

2

3 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

2.5 .1031

31

2 .10

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

1.5 .1031

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1

0.1

0.01

1 .10 3

Hβ

Dimensionless Range Variable

1 .10 4

1 .10 5

1 .10 6

**Average Cosmological Temperature
**

Maximum Av. Cosmological Temperature

198

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.1.5.2 “TU3 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.23
**

Av. Cosmological Temperature vs. Age

1

31

3.5 .10

2

1

Hα

e

5 .µ . 1

Hα

3 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

2.5 .1031

31

2 .10

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

1.5 .1031

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

199

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.1.6 Honourable mention

It should not escape attention that the preceding graphs clearly exhibit “Planck-Black-Body”

radiation characteristics.

8.1.7 Concluding remarks

The key determinations are:

i. The preceding graphs imply that the “Primordial Universe” prior to the “Big-Bang”

was non-physical and at the moment of the “Big-Bang”, it became physical. This

suggests that the space-time geometry of the “Primordial Universe” prior to the “BigBang” was “inverted”50 in relation to its present form51.

ii. Prior to the “Big-Bang”52, “T0 → -∞(K)”.

iii. At the instant of the “Big-Bang”53, “T0 = 0(K)”.

iv. Since the “Big-Bang”54, the maximum value of “T0” was “≈ 3.2 x1031(K)”.

v. The present value of “T0” is “2.724752(K)”.

NOTES

50

**i.e. it was analogous to a non-physical “Planck-Particle” such that “RBH < rS”.
**

i.e. analogous to a SBH where “RBH > rS”.

52

i.e. at “t = 0”.

53

i.e. at “t = 1 / Hα”.

54

i.e. at “t = t1”: refer to proceeding section.

51

200

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Rates of change of CMBR temperature “TU3 → TU4 → d1,2,3TU4/dt1,2,3”

8.2

8.2.1 Synopsis

This section develops expressions and graphical representations of the rates of change of

CMBR temperature within the first few moments of the “Big-Bang”, based upon the preceding

construct.

8.2.2 Assumptions

•

No new assumptions are asserted.

8.2.3 Construct

If “t = (HβHα)-1” then “TU3 → TU4” according to,

1

T U4( t ) K W .St T .ln H α .t .

t

5 .µ

2

(4.331)

**Determining the local maxima of CMBR temperature in the time domain utilising standard
**

techniques produces “t1” according to,

d

T U4( t )

dt

K W .St T .

µ

1 . 1

t t5

1 . 1

K W .St T .

t t5

µ

2

. 5 .ln H .t .µ 2

α

1

(4.332)

2

. 5 .ln H .t .µ 2

α

1

0

(4.333)

**Subsequently: if “t → t1” then,
**

1

t1

e

2

5 .µ .

1

Hα

(4.334)

**Hence, let the expression for the “1st” derivative of the CMBR temperature be given by,
**

K W .St T .

dT dt ( t )

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

t

5 .µ

2

1

(4.335)

.t

**The local minima of the “1st” CMBR temperature derivative “t2” is determined according to,
**

2

1 . 1

T U4( t ) K W .St T .

2

5

2

dt

t

t

d

1 . 1

K W .St T .

2

5

t

t

µ

µ

2

. 5 .µ 2 . ln H .t . 5 .µ 2

α

1

2

1

(4.336)

2

. 5 .µ 2 . ln H .t . 5 .µ 2

α

1

2

1

0

(4.337)

**Subsequently: if “t → t2” then,
**

10 .µ

t2

e

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

201

1

1

. 1

Hα

(4.338)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Hence, let the expression for the “2nd” derivative of the CMBR temperature be given by,
**

K W .St T .

dT2 dt2 ( t )

2

2

5 .µ . ln H α .t . 5 .µ

t

2

5 .µ

1

2

1

.t2

(4.339)

**The local maxima of the “2nd” CMBR temperature derivative “t3” is determined according
**

to,

d

3

d t3

T U4( t )

1 . 1

K W .St T .

3

5

t

t

K W .St T .

1 . 1

t

3

t

5

µ

µ

2

. 5 .µ 2 .ln H .t . 5 .µ 2 . 5 .µ 2

α

3

2

2

2

15.µ . 5 .µ

2

2

(4.340)

2

. 5 .µ 2 .ln H .t . 5 .µ 2 . 5 .µ 2

α

3

2

2

2

15.µ . 5 .µ

2

2

0

(4.341)

**Subsequently: if “t → t3” then,
**

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

t3

e

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

3

. 1

Hα

2

(4.342)

**Hence, let the expression for the “3rd” derivative of the CMBR temperature be given by,
**

dT3 dt3 ( t )

K W .St T .

2

2

2

5 .µ .ln H α .t . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

t

3

5 .µ

2

2

.t3

2

2

15.µ . 5 .µ

2

2

(4.343)

8.2.4 Sample calculations

Evaluating expressions numerically yields,

dT dt t 1 = 0

K

dT2 dt2 t 2 = 0

s

(4.344)

K

s

dT3 dt3 t 3 = 0

2

(4.345)

K

s

3

(4.346)

**Expressing values in perspective produces,
**

1

Hα

t1

t2

0.364697

=

2.206287

4.196153

10

42 .

s

6.205726

t3

(4.347)

202

www.deltagroupengineering.com

dT dt

1

. 74

1.32321810

Hα

dT dt t 1

=

dT dt t 2

s

(4.348)

1

. 116

7.65967810

Hα

dT2 dt2 t 1

=

dT2 dt2 t 2

. 114

2.02615310

K

0

s

2

. 112

8.77595210

dT2 dt2 t 3

dT3 dt3

K

. 72

1.05719310

. 71

9.25283810

dT dt t 3

dT2 dt2

0

(4.349)

1

. 159

6.22716710

Hα

dT3 dt3 t 1

=

. 156

3.77545710

155

.

1.45285710

dT3 dt3 t 2

K

s

3

0

dT3 dt3 t 3

(4.350)

T U2 H α

T U2

T U2

T U2

1

0

t1

1

t2

1

. 31

3.19551810

=

. 31

3.03432210

( K)

. 31

2.83254210

t3

(4.351)

**An example of the CMBR temperature prior to the “Big-Bang” is given by,
**

4

. 34 ( K )

T U2 10 .H α = 7.41414610

(4.352)

8.2.5 Sample plots

•

See overleaf.

203

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.2.5.1 “TU3 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.24
**

Av. Cosmological Temperature vs. Age

1

Hα

31

3.5 .10

t1

3 .1031

2.5 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

T U3 e

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

31

2 .10

2

10 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

1.5 .1031

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

2

.

.

.

.

.

2

5µ 5µ 5µ

3

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

204

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.2.5.2 “TU3 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (iii): Figure 4.25
**

Av. Cosmological Temperature vs. Age

t2

31

3.5 .10

t3

3 .1031

2.5 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

T U3 e

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

31

2 .10

2

10 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

1.5 .1031

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

2

.

.

.

.

.

2

5µ 5µ 5µ

3

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

205

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.2.5.3 “TU3 vs. H = (HβHα)” (i): Figure 4.26
**

Av. Cosmological Temp. vs. Hubble Cons.

31

3.5 .10

1

t1

Hα

31

3 .10

2.5 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

2

5 .µ

2 .1031

2

T U3 e

T U3 e

10 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

31

2

2

1.5 .10

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

3

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .1043

1 .1042

1 .1041

1 .1040

1 .1039

1 .1038

1 .1037

1 .1036

H β .H α

Hubble Constant (Hz)

206

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.2.5.4 “TU3 vs. H = (HβHα)” (ii): Figure 4.27
**

Av. Cosmological Temp. vs. Hubble Cons.

31

3.5 .10

1

1

t2 t3

31

3 .10

2.5 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

2

5 .µ

2 .1031

2

T U3 e

T U3 e

10 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

31

2

2

1.5 .10

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

3

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .1043

1 .1042

1 .1041

1 .1040

1 .1039

1 .1038

1 .1037

1 .1036

H β .H α

Hubble Constant (Hz)

207

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.2.5.5 “TU3 vs. r = (HβHα)-1c” (i): Figure 4.28
**

Av. Cosmological Temperature vs. Size

c

Hα

31

3.5 .10

t 1 .c

31

3 .10

2.5 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

2

5 .µ

2 .1031

2

T U3 e

T U3 e

10 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

31

1.5 .10

2

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

3

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .10 34

1 .10 33

1 .10 32

1 .10 31

1 .10 30

1 .10 29

1 .10 28

1 .10 27

1.

c

H β .H α

EGM Cosmological Size (m)

208

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.2.5.6 “TU3 vs. r = (HβHα)-1c” (ii): Figure 4.29
**

Av. Cosmological Temperature vs. Size

31

3.5 .10

t 2 .c t 3 .c

31

3 .10

2.5 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

2

5 .µ

2 .1031

2

T U3 e

T U3 e

10 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

31

1.5 .10

2

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

3

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .10 34

1 .10 33

1 .10 32

1 .10 31

1 .10 30

1 .10 29

1 .10 28

1 .10 27

1.

c

H β .H α

EGM Cosmological Size (m)

209

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.2.5.7 “dTU4/dt vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.30
**

1st Derivative of Av. Cosmological Temp.

1 .1072

t1

t2

71

8 .10

6 .1071

4 .1071

71

2 .10

dT dt

H β .H α

1

0

(K/s)

dT dt t 1

dT dt t 2

dT dt t 3

2 .1071

4 .1071

71

6 .10

71

8 .10

1 .1072

72

1.2 .10

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

210

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.2.5.8 “dTU4/dt vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.31
**

1st Derivative of Av. Cosmological Temp.

1 .1072

t2

t3

71

8 .10

6 .1071

4 .1071

71

2 .10

dT dt

H β .H α

1

0

(K/s)

dT dt t 1

dT dt t 2

dT dt t 3

2 .1071

4 .1071

71

6 .10

71

8 .10

1 .1072

72

1.2 .10

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

211

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.2.5.9 “d2TU4/dt2 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.32
**

2nd Derivative of Av. Cosmological Temp.

113

5 .10

t1

t2

0

113

5 .10

(K/s^2)

dT2 dt2

H β .H α

1

1 .10114

dT2 dt2 t 1

dT2 dt2 t 2

dT2 dt2 t 3

114

1.5 .10

2 .10114

114

2.5 .10

114

3 .10

2 .10 42

3 .10 42

4 .10 42

5 .10 42

6 .10 42

7 .10 42

8 .10 42

9 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

212

1.1 .10 41 1.2 .10 41 1.3 .10 41 1.4 .10 41 1.5 .10 41

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.2.5.10 “d2TU4/dt2 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.33
**

2nd Derivative of Av. Cosmological Temp.

113

5 .10

t2

t3

0

113

5 .10

(K/s^2)

dT2 dt2

H β .H α

1

1 .10114

dT2 dt2 t 1

dT2 dt2 t 2

dT2 dt2 t 3

114

1.5 .10

2 .10114

114

2.5 .10

114

3 .10

2 .10 42

3 .10 42

4 .10 42

5 .10 42

6 .10 42

7 .10 42

8 .10 42

9 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

213

1.1 .10 41 1.2 .10 41 1.3 .10 41 1.4 .10 41 1.5 .10 41

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.2.5.11 “|d3TU4/dt3| vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.34
**

3rd Derivative of Av. Cosmological Temp.

157

1 .10

t1

t2

156

1 .10

(K/s^3)

dT3 dt3

H β .H α

1 .10155

1

dT3 dt3 t 1

dT3 dt3 t 2

1 .10154

153

1 .10

152

1 .10

2 .10 42

3 .10 42

4 .10 42

5 .10 42

6 .10 42

7 .10 42

8 .10 42

9 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

1.1 .10 41

1.2 .10 41

1.3 .10 41

1.4 .10 41

1.5 .10 41

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

214

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.2.5.12 “|d3TU4/dt3| vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.35
**

3rd Derivative of Av. Cosmological Temp.

157

1 .10

t2

t3

156

1 .10

(K/s^3)

dT3 dt3

H β .H α

1 .10155

1

dT3 dt3 t 1

dT3 dt3 t 2

1 .10154

153

1 .10

152

1 .10

2 .10 42

3 .10 42

4 .10 42

5 .10 42

6 .10 42

7 .10 42

8 .10 42

9 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

1.1 .10 41

1.2 .10 41

1.3 .10 41

1.4 .10 41

1.5 .10 41

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

215

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.2.6 Concluding remarks

The preceding graphs exhibit interesting properties of the CMBR temperature in relation to

the Hubble constant. In particular, an inference is presented to precisely differentiate and articulate

the differences between the inflationary period of the “Primordial Universe” (i.e. “t < t1”) and the

expansion period of the present Universe (i.e. “t > t1”).

NOTES

216

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Rates of change of the Hubble constant “d1,2H/dt1,2”

8.3

8.3.1 Synopsis

The rates of change of the Hubble constant in the time domain “d1,2H/dt1,2” are useful

relationships confirming the assertion that the Cosmos can never end with a “Big-Crunch”. This

shall be comprehensively discussed in the next section, but for the moment, we shall develop the

tools (i.e. expressions and graphs) we require to conduct the analysis.

This section achieves, by differentially combining the CMBR temperature in the Hubble and

time domains – via numerical approximation methods, verification that the assigned temporal

property of “t = 1 / H” produces the appropriate “d1,2H/dt1,2” curves resulting in,

i. Mathematical expressions for “dH/dt”, “d2H/dt2” and “|H|” in the time domain.

ii. Graphical representations of “dH/dt vs. (HβηHα)-1”, “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” and “|H| vs.

(HβηHα)-1” – qualitatively and quantitatively tested against “TU2,3 vs. |H|”.

Note: neither an expression nor graphical representation of “d3H/dt3 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” has been

included - for reasons of brevity.

8.3.2 Assumptions

•

No new assumptions are asserted.

8.3.3 Construct

Substituting “µ = 1 / 3” into “TU3”, the generalised “1st” derivative of the CMBR

temperature with respect to the Hubble constant “dTU3/dH”: is given by,

Hα

. 2

d

d

.H5 µ

T U3( H )

K W .St T .ln

dH

dH

H

5 .µ

Hα

. 2

d

.H5 µ K .St . H

K W .St T .ln

W T

dH

H

H

(4.353)

2

. 5 .ln

Hα

.µ 2

1

H

(4.354)

**Recognising that “TU3 → TU4”, the “1st” derivative of the Hubble constant with respect to time
**

“dH/dt” may be determined according to,

5 .µ

H

K W .St T .

d

d

T U3( H ) .

t

dH

d T U4( t )

5 .µ

H

K W .St T .

2

. 5 .ln

H

1 . 1

K W .St T .

t t5

Hα

. 5 .ln

.µ

µ

. 5 .ln H .t .µ 2

α

2

. 5 .ln

2

. 5 .ln H .t .µ

α

217

1

1 . 1

t t5

1

(4.355)

H

2

1

2

H

1

.µ 2

H

5 .µ

2

Hα

H

1 . 1

K W .St T .

t t5

H

µ

2

Hα

.µ 2

1

H

µ

2

. 5 .ln H .t .µ 2

α

1

(4.356)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

5 .µ

2

H

. 5 .ln

Hα

H

.µ 2

t . . 5 .µ 2 . . H α . 2

(H t)

5 ln

µ

H

H

1

H

1 . 1

t t5

µ

2

. 5 .ln H .t .µ 2

α

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

1

1

1

(4.357)

Hence,

H

d

H

dt

.

. 2

5µ .

( H .t )

t

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

5 .ln

Hα

.µ 2

1

1

H

(4.358)

**Let: “H → Hα” such that “dH/dt → dHdt” and “Hγ ∝ Hβη” according to,
**

t

1

H γ .H α

5 .ln H α .

Hα

d

H

dt

H α.

1

H γ .H α

(4.359)

.

2

5 .µ

.

5 .ln

1

H γ .H α

1

.µ 2

.

Hγ Hα

Hα

.µ 2

1

1

Hα

(4.360)

Therefore,

dH dt H γ

2

H α .H γ

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2

2

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

1

(4.361)

**The temporal ordinate of the local maxima “t4” may be determined in the typical manner,
**

2

H α .H γ

d

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2

2

dH γ

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

d

dH dt H γ

dH γ

2

H α .H γ

d

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2

2

Hγ

dH γ

5 .µ

Hγ

Hα

Hγ

Hα

(4.362)

2

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2 . 1

2

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

1

1

5 .µ

2

1

(4.363)

2

2

5 .µ

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2 . 1

Hγ

5 .µ

2

1

0

(4.364)

1

Hγ e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

(4.365)

Hence,

1

t4

e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

. 1

Hα

(4.366)

**The “2nd” time derivative “dH2dt2” may be derived similarly as follows,
**

Let,

218

www.deltagroupengineering.com

d

2

d t2

H

d t2

H

d

dt

H

2

d

dH2 dt2

( H .t )

(4.367)

.

5 .µ

2

.t

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

Hα

5 .ln

1

.µ 2

1

H

(4.368)

Subsequently,

H

d

dt

.

. 2

5µ .

( H .t )

t

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

5 .ln

Hα

1

H

.

2

2

5 .µ . ln H α .t . 5 .µ

. 2

.µ 2

5µ .2

( H .t )

t

1

5 .ln

H

d

2

H

H α.

5 .µ

1

H γ .H α

.µ 2

2

1

1

H

2

5 .µ . ln H α .

Hα

d t2

Hα

1

.

2

.

2

1

H γ .H α

(4.369)

1

. 5 .µ 2

.

Hγ Hα

Hα

5 .ln

.µ 2

1

2

1

1

Hα

(4.370)

Therefore,

3

2

H α .H γ

. 5 .µ 2 . ln 1 . 5 .µ 2

2

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

dH2 dt2 H γ

1

2

1

(4.371)

**The temporal ordinate of the local minima “t5” is determined as follows,
**

3

2

H α .H γ

d

. 5 .µ 2 . ln 1 . 5 .µ 2

2

Hγ

dH γ

5 .µ

Hγ

1

2

1

3

H α .H γ

. 5 .µ 2 . 5 .µ 2 . 5 .µ 2 .ln

Hγ

5 .µ

1

ln

Hγ

2

3

H α .H γ

. 5 .µ 2 . 5 .µ 2 . 5 .µ 2 .ln 1

2

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

ln

1

Hγ

1

2 .ln

1

1

Hγ

4

2

4

2

(4.372)

0

Hγ

(4.373)

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

Hγ e

2 .ln

1

1

Hγ

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

1

2

(4.374)

Hence,

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

t5

e

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

1

2

. 1

Hα

(4.375)

**The magnitude of the Hubble constant “|H|” in the time domain may be derived by
**

numerical approximation utilising “dHdt” as follows55,

Let,

Hγ Hβ

η

(4.376)

**For solutions where “H = 1 / t” (i.e. the deceleration parameter is zero),
**

55

**This terminology is an abbreviated reference to “the square-root of the magnitude of the rate of
**

change of the Hubble constant in the time domain”, as indicated by the proceeding equations.

219

www.deltagroupengineering.com

d

d 1

H

dt

dt t

1

t

2

H

2

(4.377)

56

Hence ,

d

H

dt

H

(4.378)

**Therefore, “η” may be numerically approximated utilising the “Given” and “Find”
**

commands within the “MathCad 8 Professional” computational environment, subject to the

constraint that “dHdt” as a function of the present value of “Hβ” [i.e. “≈ HU2(Ro,MG) / Hα”] raised to

an indicial power, is equal to the square of the present Hubble constant as determined by the EGM

construct “HU2(Ro,MG)2” according to the following algorithm,

Given

dH dt

H U2 R o , M G

η

Hα

1

H U2 R o , M G

η

(4.379)

Find( η )

(4.380)

Note: the utilisation of “rx5Ro” and “mg5MG” instead of “Ro” and “MG” does not significantly, nor

adversely, influence the otherwise computed value of “η”.

8.3.4 Sample calculations

Executing the algorithm to determine the value of “η” yields,

η = 4.595349

(4.381)

**Evaluating “dHdt” and “dH2dt2” for various temporal ordinates produces the results,
**

1

dH dt t 1 .H α

1

dH dt e

5 .µ

10 .µ

dH dt t 2 .H α

1

dH dt e

2

2

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt t 3 .H α

1

dH dt e

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

3

2

1

dH dt t 4 .H α

1

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt t 5 .H α

1

dH dt e

1

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

. 68

7.50137510

. 68

7.50137510

. 83

9.06689310

. 83

9.06689310

= 1.22575310

. 84

. 84

1.22575310

. 84

1.55351810

. 84

1.55351810

. 84

1.38436210

. 84

1.38436210

2

Hz

2

1

2

(4.382)

56

**Noting that the terminology utilised is an abbreviated reference to “the square-root of the
**

magnitude of the rate of change of the Hubble constant in the time domain”, as indicated by the

equation.

220

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1

dH2 dt2 t 1 .H α

1

2

5 .µ

dH2 dt2 e

10 .µ

dH2 dt2 t 2 .H α

1

dH2 dt2 e

2

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

dH2 dt2 t 3 .H α

1

dH2 dt2 e

2

1

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH2 dt2 e

=

2

3

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH2 dt2 t 5 .H α

1

dH2 dt2 e

. 125

8.50679910

0

0

2

1

dH2 dt2 t 4 .H α

. 125

8.50679910

1

4

125

.

1.16257810

. 125

1.16257810

. 124

8.2461110

. 124

8.2461110

. 125

1.33162810

. 125

1.33162810

3

Hz

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

1

(4.383)

where,

1

e

t1

2

5 .µ .

1

Hα

10 .µ

t2

e

2

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

t3 e

. 1

Hα

1

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2.206287 2.206287

4.196153 4.196153

2

3

. 1

Hα

2

= 6.205726 6.205726

e

t5 e

s

8.385263 8.385263

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

42 .

20.932666 20.932666

1

t4

10

1

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

. 1

Hα

2

1

. 1

Hα

2

(4.384)

**The present values of “dHdt” and “dH2dt2” are given by the following approximations,
**

dH dt

dH2 dt2

H U2 R o , M G

η

= 4.726505 10

Hα

36 .

2

Hz

(4.385)

H U2 R o , M G

η

3

= 0 Hz

Hα

(4.386)

**The “η” calculation algorithm may be verified against the following two determinations,
**

confirming the validity of the numerical approximation as follows,

Hα

=1

η

dH dt 1

221

(4.387)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

η

dH dt 1

H U2 R o , M G

dH dt

=

η

. 61

8.46094110

km

67.084257

s .Mpc

Hα

(4.388)

8.3.5 Construct errors

8.3.5.1 How can they be determined?

The computational environment utilised for the numerical determination of “η” has

limitations. Subsequently, one must consider its effect and the error associated with the introduction

of any numerical method into a construct. The error relating to the approximation of “η” and “|H|”

are resolved by graphical, analytical and numerical techniques indicating that,

i. The expression for “dH/dt” is correctly derived.

ii. The approximated value of “η” satisfies boundary conditions such that “TU2 = TU3” and is

precisely representative of the present value of CMBR temperature – hence, it is

sufficiently accurate for qualitative applications.

iii. Graphical comparison of various intermediate thermal ordinates indicates that the

approximated value of “η” is sufficiently accurate for qualitative applications.

iv. Calculation of various intermediate thermal ordinates demonstrates that “TU2 ≈ TU3” –

hence, the approximated value of “η” is sufficiently accurate for qualitative applications.

8.3.5.2 Analytical

Separating variables in the “dH/dt” expression and integrating both sides of the equation

produces “H = 1 / t”, confirming that the rate of change was correctly derived as follows,

5 .µ

H

2

. 5 .ln

Hα

H

.µ

2

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

1 dH

H

t

5 .µ

2

1

dt

.t

(4.389)

5 .µ

H

2

Hα

. 5 .ln

H

.µ 2

5 .µ

1 dH H

H

2

.ln

Hα

H

(4.390)

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

t

5 .µ

2

ln H α .t

1

dt

.t

t

5 .µ

2

(4.391)

5 .µ

H

2

.ln

Hα

H

ln H α .t

t

5 .µ

2

(4.392)

Solving for “H” confirms that the expression for “dH/dt” is correct and no error exists.

H

1

t

(4.393)

222

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.3.5.3 Graphical

Graphical representations of the “TU2,3 vs. |H|” curves57 suggests common characteristics.

Thus, illustrating that “TU2 ≈ TU3” and the approximated value of “η” is sufficiently accurate for

qualitative applications.

8.3.5.4 Numerical

8.3.5.4.1 General case

A numerical comparison of results demonstrates that the approximated value of “η” satisfies

boundary conditions such that “TU2 = TU3” and is exactly representative of the present value of

CMBR temperature. Moreover, determination of various intermediate thermal ordinates

demonstrates that “TU2 ≈ TU3” such that the difference between them at “t1” is “≈ 7(%)”. This

indicates that the approximated value of “η” is sufficiently accurate for qualitative applications.

η

T U2

dH dt 1

T U3( 1 )

η

1

T U2

dH dt e

2

10 .µ

T U2

dH dt e

T U3 e

η

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt e

T U2

dH dt

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

H U2 R o , M G

0

2

. 31

3.19551810

= 3.18632310

. 31 3.03432210

. 31 ( K )

1

T U3

3

2.724751

2.724752

2

H U2 R o , M G

Hα

1

dH dt

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

η

T U2

.

2.97174510

. 31 2.83254210

. 31

3.18071410

T U3 e

Hα

0

31

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

3

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

T U3 e

η

2

5 .µ

2

10 .µ

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

T U2

1

2

5 .µ

(4.394)

η

2

5 .µ

e

1 = 7.002696 ( % )

1

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

(4.395)

8.3.5.4.2 Specific case

For the specific case of “dHdt(Hγ) = 0”, the exact value of “η” may be determined by solving

for “Hγ” as follows,

2

H α .H γ

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2

2

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

1

0

(4.396)

1

Hγ e

5 .µ

2

(4.397)

57

**i.e. the “TU2” curve (solid line) is superimposed upon the “TU3” curve (dotted line) – refer to
**

graphs.

223

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Let “Hγ → t7” in the typical manner, hence:
**

1

t7

2

5 .µ .

e

1

Hα

(4.398)

**Comparing “t7” to “t1” (i.e. the instant of maximum Cosmological temperature) yields,
**

t7

=1

t1

(4.399)

**Therefore, utilising the relationship “Hγ = Hβη”, the value of “η” at “t7 = t1” is given by,
**

η

ln H γ

ln t 7 .H α

1

ln H β

ln t 1 .H α

1

1

(4.400)

**However, when “t7 = t1” in terms of “Hγ” is substituted into “dHdt(Hγ)”, a result consistent
**

with Eq. (4.394) is produced (see below), not the correct result such that “dHdt[(t1Hα)-1] = 0” as

required by the preceding derivation.

1

2

H α .e

1

. 5 .ln

2

5 .µ

1

e

2

5 .µ

.µ 2

. 68 Hz2

1 = 7.50137510

1

5 .µ

e

2

5 .µ

2

(4.401)

**The obvious question arises as to why this occurs when the “t7 = t1” result is analytically
**

exact. Localising the anomaly is possible by systematically simplifying the expression for “dHdt”. A

“1st” level investigation may be conducted by recognising that “dHdt(Hγ)” may be written as,

dH dt H γ

2

1 . 2

2

4 .µ . .

H α .H γ

5 ln

µ

Hγ

1

(4.402)

**Evaluating at “Hγ → t7 = t1” continues to produce the anomalous result as given by,
**

4

2.

Hα e

5.

1

5 .ln

.µ 2

. 68 Hz2

1 = 7.50137510

1

e

5 .µ

2

(4.403i)

**A “2nd” level investigation produces the correct result by further simplification according to,
**

1

4

2.

Hα e

5.

5 .ln e

5 .µ

2

.µ 2

2

1 = 0 Hz

(4.403ii)

**The cause of the anomalous result becomes apparent when replacing “µ” with “1 / 3” as follows,
**

1

5 .ln

. 1

3

1

5.

e

1

2

1 =0

2

3

(4.404)

8.3.6 Sample plots

•

See overleaf.

224

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.3.6.1 “dH/dt vs. (HβηHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.36
**

1st Derivative of the Hubble Constant

1.6 .1084

t1

t4

84

1.4 .10

84

1.2 .10

dH dt H β

(Hz^2)

dH dt e

dH dt e

dH dt e

η

5 .µ

1

2

1 .1084

1

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

8 .1083

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

1

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

83

6 .10

83

4 .10

2 .1083

0

0

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

225

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.3.6.2 “dH/dt vs. (HβηHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.37
**

1st Derivative of the Hubble Constant

2 .1084

1

Hα

t1

84

1 .10

0

0

dH dt H β

(Hz^2)

dH dt e

η

5 .µ

1

2

1 .1084

1

84

2 .10

1

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

3 .1084

2

dH dt e

1

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

1

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

84

4 .10

5 .1084

6 .1084

84

7 .10

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

226

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.3.6.3 “dH/dt vs. (HβηHα)-1” (iii): Figure 4.38
**

1st Derivative of the Hubble Constant

2 .1084

t2

t3

84

1 .10

0

0

dH dt H β

(Hz^2)

dH dt e

η

5 .µ

1

2

1 .1084

1

84

2 .10

1

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

3 .1084

2

dH dt e

1

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

1

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

84

4 .10

5 .1084

6 .1084

84

7 .10

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

227

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.3.6.4 “dH/dt vs. (HβηHα)-1” (iv): Figure 4.39
**

1st Derivative of the Hubble Constant

2 .1084

t5

t4

84

1 .10

0

0

dH dt H β

(Hz^2)

dH dt e

η

5 .µ

1

2

1 .1084

1

84

2 .10

1

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

3 .1084

2

dH dt e

1

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

1

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

84

4 .10

5 .1084

6 .1084

84

7 .10

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

228

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.3.6.5 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.40
**

2nd Derivative of the Hubble Constant

1

Hα

4 .10127

t1

127

3.5 .10

3 .10127

(Hz^3)

2.5 .10127

dH2 dt2 H β

η

127

2 .10

127

1.5 .10

1 .10127

5 .10126

0

0

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

229

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.3.6.6 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.41
**

2nd Derivative of the Hubble Constant

t2

4 .10127

t3

127

3.5 .10

3 .10127

(Hz^3)

2.5 .10127

dH2 dt2 H β

η

127

2 .10

127

1.5 .10

1 .10127

5 .10126

0

0

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

230

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.3.6.7 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (iii): Figure 4.42
**

2nd Derivative of the Hubble Constant

t5

4 .10127

t4

127

3.5 .10

3 .10127

(Hz^3)

2.5 .10127

dH2 dt2 H β

η

127

2 .10

127

1.5 .10

1 .10127

5 .10126

0

0

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

231

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.3.6.8 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (iv): Figure 4.43
**

2nd Derivative of the Hubble Constant

125

8 .10

t1

t2

7 .10125

125

6 .10

dH2 dt2 H β

(Hz^3)

dH2 dt2 e

dH2 dt2 e

dH2 dt2 e

η

5 .µ

1

2

125

5 .10

1

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4 .10125

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

.

.

.

.

.

2

5µ 5µ 5µ

1

125

3 .10

2 .10125

1 .10125

0

0

1 .10125

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

232

1 .10 40

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.3.6.9 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (v): Figure 4.44
**

2nd Derivative of the Hubble Constant

125

8 .10

t3

t4

7 .10125

125

6 .10

dH2 dt2 H β

(Hz^3)

dH2 dt2 e

dH2 dt2 e

dH2 dt2 e

η

5 .µ

1

2

125

5 .10

1

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4 .10125

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

.

.

.

.

.

2

5µ 5µ 5µ

1

125

3 .10

2 .10125

1 .10125

0

0

1 .10125

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

233

1 .10 40

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.3.6.10 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (vi): Figure 4.45
**

2nd Derivative of the Hubble Constant

125

8 .10

t5

7 .10125

125

6 .10

dH2 dt2 H β

(Hz^3)

dH2 dt2 e

dH2 dt2 e

dH2 dt2 e

η

5 .µ

1

2

125

5 .10

1

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4 .10125

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

.

.

.

.

.

2

5µ 5µ 5µ

1

125

3 .10

2 .10125

1 .10125

0

0

1 .10125

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

234

1 .10 40

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.3.6.11 “|H| vs. (HβηHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.46

Mag. of Hubble Cons. vs. Cosm. Age

2.5 .1042

1

Hα

t1

42

2 .10

dH dt H β

dH dt e

5 .µ

η

1

2

1

1.5 .1042

(Hz)

1

dH dt e

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

42

1 .10

5 .1041

0

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

1 .10 35

1 .10 34

1 .10 33

1 .10 32

1 .10 31

1 .10 30

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

235

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.3.6.12 “|H| vs. (HβηHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.47

Mag. of Hubble Cons. vs. Cosm. Age

2.5 .1042

1

Hα

t4

42

2 .10

dH dt H β

dH dt e

5 .µ

η

1

2

1

1.5 .1042

(Hz)

1

dH dt e

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

42

1 .10

5 .1041

0

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

1 .10 35

1 .10 34

1 .10 33

1 .10 32

1 .10 31

1 .10 30

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

236

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.3.6.13 “TU2,3 vs. |H|”: Figure 4.48

Av. Cosmological Temp. vs. Hubble Cons.

31

3.5 .10

1

t1

Hα

31

3 .10

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

2.5 .1031

T U2

dH dt H β

η

2 .1031

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

31

1.5 .10

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .1043

1 .1042

1 .1041

1 .1040

1 .1039

1 .1038

1 .1037

1 .1036

η

dH dt H β

, H β .H α

Hubble Constant (Hz)

237

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.3.6.14 “TU2 vs. |H|”: Figure 4.49

Av. Cosmological Temp. vs. Hubble Cons.

31

3.5 .10

1

t1

Hα

31

3 .10

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

2.5 .1031

T U2

dH dt H β

η 2 .1031

1

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

31

1.5 .10

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .1043

1 .1042

1 .1041

1 .1040

1 .1039

1 .1038

1 .1037

1 .1036

η

dH dt H β

Hubble Constant (Hz)

238

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.3.7 Concluding remarks

For most computational environment application users, it is naturally assumed that the

environment will always produce numerically valid results. However, one should be cautious in this

regard because numerical output is a direct function of the computational structure of the

environment. For example, an anomalous result became apparent when replacing “µ” with “1 / 3”

in a specific calculation.

Importantly, the same computational anomaly encountered when “dHdt = 0” does not occur

when “dH2dt2 = 0”. This suggests that the anomalous effect is a localised environmental defect – an

assertion supported by the following scaled representation of the “1st” derivative of the Hubble

constant versus Cosmological age.

The axis scaling technique nullifies potential “large number” error effects, clearly

demonstrating that at maximal resolution, the interpolated line between the final “2 of 5000” data

points – spanning an identical domain to that utilised in preceding curves, passes precisely through

the origin (i.e. at “dHdt = 0”) – in agreement with the exact analytical result.

Moreover, it is known that within the “MathCad 8 Professional” environment, the graphical

generation engine is sufficiently distinct from the user facing “work pad calculation engine”, such

that graphical results may sometimes be considered more reliable. Hence, in our case at the very

least, the graphical representations are sufficiently accurate for qualitative applications, to disregard

the computed result of “dHdt[(t1Hα)-1] ≠ 0” in favour of the agreement between the analytical proof

and the graphical evidence.

1st Derivative of the Hubble Constant

10

42

t 1 .10

8

Scaled Derivative (Hz^2)

6

4

dH dt H β

10

η

79

2

0

0

2

4

2.20624

2.20625

2.20626

2.20627

2.20628

2.20629

2.2063

2.20631

2.20632

2.20633

2.20634

2.20635

2.20636

2.20637

2.20638

1

η

.1042

H β .H α

Scaled Cosmological Age (s)

Figure 4.50,

Therefore, the construct error relating to the approximation of “η” and “|H|” is resolved by

graphical, analytical and numerical techniques indicating that,

i. The expression for “dH/dt” is correctly derived.

ii. Numerical comparisons of results demonstrate that the approximated value of “η” satisfies

boundary conditions such that “TU2 = TU3” and is exactly representative of the present

value of CMBR temperature – hence, it is sufficiently accurate for qualitative applications.

iii. Determination of various intermediate thermal ordinates demonstrates that “TU2 ≈ TU3”

239

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**such that the difference between them at “t1” is “≈ 7(%)”. This indicates that the
**

approximated value of “η” is sufficiently accurate for qualitative applications.

iv. Graphical representations of the “TU2,3 vs. |H|” curves [i.e. the “TU2” curve (solid line) is

superimposed upon the “TU3” curve (dotted line) – refer to graphs] suggests common

characteristics. Thus, illustrating that “TU2 ≈ TU3” and the approximated value of “η” is

sufficiently accurate for qualitative applications.

v. The graphical representations of “dH/dt, d2H/dt2 and |H|” demonstrate that the rate of the

change of the Hubble constant in the time domain is presently positive – indicating that the

Universe is “flatly” expanding.

NOTES

240

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.4

Cosmological evolution process

**The Cosmological evolution process may be categorised into two regimes, comprised of
**

four distinct periods (i.e. three inflationary and one expansive) as follows,

Time

Temperature

Hubble Constant

-1

0 < t < Hα

-∞ < TU2 < 0

+∞ > |H| > Hα

0 → Hα-1

-∞ → 0

+∞ → Hα

-1

-1

Hα ≤ t < t1

0 ≤ TU2 < TU2(t1 )

Hα ≥ |H| > 0

Hα-1 → t1

0 → TU2(t1-1)

Hα → 0

-1

-1

t1 ≤ t < t4

TU2(t1 ) ≥ TU2 > TU2(t4 )

0 ≤ |H| < √|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]|

t1 → t4

TU2(t1-1) → TU2(t4-1)

0 → √|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]|

-1

t4 ≤ t < AU

TU2(t4 ) ≥ TU2 ≥ TU2(HU2)

√|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]| ≥ |H| ≥ HU2

t4 → AU

TU2(t4-1) → TU2(HU2)

√|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]| → HU2

Description

Primordial Inflation (prior to the “Big-Bang”): the Universe may be described as

“inverted and non-physical” such that the interior of the Cosmos existed outside

the exterior boundary “RBH” in accordance with the “Primordial Universe” model

described previously such that:

1. “TU2” increases from negative infinity to zero.

2. “dHdt” increases from negative infinity to “-Hα2”.

3. “|H|” decreases from positive infinity to “Hα”.

Thermal Inflation: the period from the instant of the “Big-Bang” to the instant of

maximum Cosmological temperature such that:

4. “TU2” increases from zero to its maximum value “TU2(t1-1)”.

5. “dHdt” increases from “-Hα2” to zero.

6. “|H|” decreases from “Hα” to zero.

Hubble Inflation: the period from the instant of maximum Cosmological

temperature to the instant of maximum post-primordial “|H|” such that:

7. “TU2” decreases from its maximum value to “TU2(t4-1)”.

8. “dHdt” increases from zero to its maximum physical value “dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]”.

9. “|H|” increases from zero to its maximum physical value “√|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]|”.

Hubble Expansion: the period from the maximum post-primordial “|H|” to the

present day such that:

10. “TU2” decreases from “TU2(t4-1)” to “TU2(HU2)”.

11. “dHdt” decreases from its maximum physical value to “HU22”.

12. “|H|” decreases from its maximum physical value to “HU2”.

Symbol

Definition / Value

The EGM Hubble constant at the instant of the “Big-Bang”:

Hα

≈ 2.742004 x1042(Hz) ≈ 8.460941 x1061(km/s/Mpc)

-Hα2

≈ -7.518587 x1084(Hz2) ≈ -7.158752 x10123(km/s/Mpc)2

HU2

The present value of the EGM Hubble constant:

= HU2(Ro,MG) ≈ 67.084304(km/s/Mpc)

HU22

≈ 4.500304 x103(km/s/Mpc)2

H0

The PDG Hubble constant: ≈ 71(km/s/Mpc)

H02

≈ 5.041 x103(km/s/Mpc)2

Hα-1

The instant of the “Big-Bang”: ≈ 3.646967 x10-43(s)

t1

The instant of maximum Cosmological temperature:

≈ 2.206287 x10-42(s)

t4

The instant of maximum physical “|H|”: ≈ 2.093267 x10-41(s)

Physical @ {RBH ≥ rS}

Non-Physical

@ {RBH < rS}

Period

Primordial

Inflation

Thermal

Inflation

Hubble

Inflation

Hubble

Expansion

Regime

241

www.deltagroupengineering.com

AU

TU2(Hα)

TU2(t1-1)

TU2(t4-1)

TU2(HU2)

T0

dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]

√|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]|

RU

2

Hα ⋅(dHdt[(t4Hα)-1])-1

Hα⋅(√|dHdt[(t4Hα)-1]|)-1

**The EGM Cosmological age: = HU2-1 ≈ 14.575885 x109(yr)
**

The EGM Cosmological temperature at the instant of the “Big-Bang”:

= 0(K)

The Maximum EGM Cosmological temperature:

≈ 3.195518 x1031(K)

The EGM Cosmological temperature at the instant of maximum physical

“|H|”: ≈ 2.059945 x1031(K)

The present EGM Cosmological temperature:

= TU3(HU2Hα-1) ≈ 2.724752(K)

The present experimentally measured CMBR temperature: ≈ 2.725(K)

The approximated maximum rate of change of the physical EGM

Hubble constant:

≈ 1.553518 x1084(Hz2) ≈ 1.479167 x10123(km/s/Mpc)2

The approximated maximum physical “|H|”:

≈ 1.246402 x1042(Hz) ≈ 3.845994 x1061(km/s/Mpc)

The EGM Cosmological size: = c⋅HU2-1 ≈ 14.575885 x109(Lyr)

≈ 4.839718

≈ 2.199936

Table 4.10,

Time

0

Hα-1 ≈ 3.646967 x10-43(s)

t1 ≈ 2.206287 x10-42(s)

t4 ≈ 2.093267 x10-41(s)

AU ≈ 14.575885 x109(yr)

TU2 (K)

dHdt (km/s/Mpc)2

-∞

-∞

0

≈ -7.158752 x10123

0

≈ 3.195518 x1031

31

≈ 2.059945 x10

≈ 1.479167 x10123

≈ 2.724752

≈ 4.500304 x103

Table 4.11,

|H|| (km/s/Mpc)

+∞

≈ 8.460941 x1061

0

≈ 3.845994 x1061

≈ 67.084304

NOTES

242

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.5

History of the Universe

**8.5.1 According to the Standard Model (SM)
**

8.5.1.1 Graphical representation (i)

Figure 4.51,

243

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.5.1.2 Graphical representation (ii)

Figure 4.52,

244

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.5.1.3 Graphical representation (iii)

Figure 4.53,

245

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.5.1.4 Graphical representation (iv)

Figure 4.54,

246

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.5.2 According to EGM

Epoch or Event

Time Domain

t

Primordial epoch

Boundary Temperature Value

1

T U2 H α = 0 ( K )

Hα

1

Grand unification epoch

Hα

< t 10

34 .

10

10-34 < t(s) ≤ 10-10

Electroweak / Quark Epoch

1

T U2

(s)

10-10 < t(s) ≤ 102

28

T U2

( K)

(s)

1

T U2

10

Lepton Epoch

.

= 1.92400510

34 .

. 15 ( K )

= 3.43308810

10 .

(s)

1

. 9 ( K)

= 1.01325410

2.

10 ( s )

Photon Epoch

Universe becomes transparent

102 < t(s) ≤ 1013

1013(s) ≈ 3 x105(yr)

T U2

3 x105 < t(yr) ≤ 109

T U2

1

13 .

= 978.724031( K )

10 ( s )

1

9.

= 11.838588 ( K )

10 ( yr )

109 < t(yr) ≤ 5 x109

First Supernovae

Present Epoch

T U2

5 x109 < t(yr) ≤ 14.58 x109

1

9.

5 .10 ( yr )

= 4.898955 ( K )

T U2 H U2 R o , M G

= 2.724752 ( K )

Table 4.12,

T U2

1

T U2

T U2

1 .( day )

1

31.( day )

T U2

T U2

1

1 .( s )

1

1 .( yr )

1

2.

T U2

1

3

10 .( yr )

1

4

10 .( yr )

5.

10 ( yr )

1

T U2

6.

10 ( yr )

T U2

T U2

1

T U2

T U2

. 10 1.84076810

. 3

1.2497710

. 7

2.52413210

521.528169

. 6

3.86401510

147.71262

= 1.00307810

. 6

41.823796

. 4

8.07751510

11.838588

10 ( yr )

. 4

2.29089210

3.35005

1

.

6.49496110

0.947724

7

10 .( yr )

1

8

10 .( yr )

1

T U2

10 ( yr )

T U2

1

T U2

9.

3

( K)

10

10 .( yr )

1

11

10 .( yr )

247

(4.405)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.6

EGM Cosmological construct limitations

8.6.1 Synopsis

Any complete physical model requires construct limitations to be clearly defined so as to

acknowledge the boundaries of applicability. This section determines the maximum permissible

values of Cosmological mass, size and age (i.e. “ML”, “rL” and “tL” respectively) at which the EGM

construct remains valid – expressed as,

i. MU ≤ M < ML.

ii. RU ≤ r < rL.

iii. AU ≤ t < tL.

8.6.2 Assumptions

•

No new assumptions are asserted.

8.6.3 Construct

8.6.3.1 The mass limit “ML”

Utilising “CΩ_J1(r,M)”, we may formulate an estimation for the maximum permissible

Cosmological mass “ML” for which the EGM construct remains valid. This is facilitated by

considering “ML” to be concentrated at the geometric centre of a spherical Universe, with an

observer at its periphery. Hence,

CΩ_J1(r1,M1) = CΩ_J1(r2,M2)

(4.406)

5

M1

5

M2

26

26

r1

M 2 M 1.

r2

r2

5 5

.

r1

(4.407)

r2

r1

(4.408)

Let, “r1 = KλRo”, “r2 = REGM”, “M1 = KmMG” and “M2 = ML” such that the maximum permissible

Cosmological mass “ML” is given by,

ML

K m.M G.

where,

R EGM

R EGM

K λ .R o

5 5

.

R EGM

K λ .R o

(4.409)

R U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

(4.410)

**8.6.3.2 The size limit “rL”
**

For a SBH of mass “ML”, the maximum permissible Cosmological size “rL” is given by,

rL

R BH M L

248

(4.411)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**8.6.3.3 The age limit “tL”
**

The maximum permissible EGM age limit of the Universe “tL” may be determined as

follows,

tL

rL

c

(4.412)

8.6.4 Boundary ratio

EGM construct boundary relationships for “ML”, “rL” and “tL” may be expressed in ratio

form as follows,

Let: “MEGM = MU” and “tEGM = AU” given by,

M EGM

t EGM

M U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

A U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

(4.413)

(4.414)

Hence,

M L M EGM

rL

tL

R EGM t EGM

(4.415)

8.6.5 Sample calculations

Evaluating “ML”, “rL”, “tL” and boundary ratio’s yields,

. 71 ( kg )

M L = 4.86482110

(4.416)

.

r L = 7.6372910

(4.417)

9

10 .Lyr

19

. 19 109 .yr

t L = 7.6372910

(4.418)

ML

M EGM

rL

R EGM

. 18

5.23967510

= 5.23967510

. 18

tL

. 18

5.23967510

t EGM

(4.419)

Notably,

tL

.

= 1.86196810

6

TL

(4.420)

8.6.6 Concluding remarks

The boundaries of Cosmological mass, size and age at which the EGM construct remains

valid are given by,

i. MU ≤ M < ML.

ii. RU ≤ r < rL.

iii. AU ≤ t < tL.

249

www.deltagroupengineering.com

8.7

Are conventional radio telescopes, practical tools for gravitational astronomy?

8.7.1 Synopsis

A very important question to address is the possibility of utilising conventional Radio

Telescopes (RT’s) for application to Gravitational Astronomy (GA). The practicality of this may be

determined by consideration of “CΩ_J1” expressed in terms of “ωΩ_3” such that “CΩ_J1 → CΩ_Jω”.

Subsequently, if “ωΩ_3” represents the observational Radio Frequency (RF) limit, the required RF

Flux Intensity for direct gravitational observation may be determined.

8.7.2 Assumptions

•

No new assumptions are asserted.

8.7.3 Construct

Substituting the expression for “ωΩ_3” into “CΩ_J1” produces “CΩ_Jω” as follows,

9

9

5

M

St J .

St J .

26

r

M

5

26

M

St G.

5

2

9

ω Ω_3

(4.421)

9

9

M

St J .

5

M

St G.

2

5

St G

5

.

ω Ω_3

26

5

M

5

2

9

ω Ω_3

(4.422)

9

St J .

M

St J .

26

26

9

26

M

5

ω Ω_3

.

26

St G

M

5

St J .ω Ω_3

9

St J .ω Ω_3

2

26 9

5 .

M

M

52

M

5

26

5

26

.St

G

5

52

M

26 9

5 .

26

5

St J .ω Ω_3

5

5

26

.St 5

G

5

9

1

.

27

5

M

26

.St 5

G

1

9

1

5

St J .ω Ω_3 .

27

M

5

26

(4.423)

4

5

4

9 .c .ω Ω

5.

5.

.ω

Ω_3 St G M

4 .π

.St 5

G

(4.424)

3

5

(4.425)

Recognising that,

26

St J .St G

45

2

9 .c .

9

St G .St G

.

4π

4

250

26

45

9 .c .

St G

4 .π

4

4

5

(4.426)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Therefore,

5.2

C Ω_Jω ω Ω_3 , M

4

9 .c . ω Ω_3

4 .π St 0.8 .M 0.6

G

(4.427)

8.7.4 Sample calculations

For illustrational purposes only, let “ωΩ_3” equal the value of “ωΩ” at the event horizon of a

SMBH, such that “ωΩ_3 = ωΩ_4(1010MS)”. Although the illustrational value of “ωΩ_3” is

substantially above the RF range, it clearly demonstrates that the required RF flux intensity for

direct gravitational observation far exceeds present capability as follows,

10

10

C Ω_Jω ω Ω_4 10 .M S , 10 .M S = 180.283336( nJy )

(4.428)

**where, “nJy” denotes nano-Jansky’s [i.e. “10-9(Jansky)”].
**

8.7.5 Concluding remarks

It is exceedingly obvious from the illustrational result that conventional RF telescopes are

not practical tools for GA. To compound the problem, the signal strength required to be detected

from an Earth base telescope, due to amplitude decay by the time it reaches the detector, makes the

problem even more difficult (i.e. “CΩ_Jω” will be many orders of magnitude less than computed

above).

In addition to signal strength detection issues, frequency decay poses another substantial

issue to be resolved. By the time the signal has reached the detector, it will be hidden amongst

background radiation as noise. Subsequently, the signal would require the appropriate filtration

(also considering the conjugate wavefunction pair nature of the signal in accordance with the EGM

construct) such that it might “somehow” be identified.

Note: the propagation characteristics of gravitational signals are discussed in the proceeding

chapter.

NOTES

251

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

252

www.deltagroupengineering.com

9 Gravitational Cosmology

Abstract

An engineering model is developed to explain how gravitational effects are transmitted

through space-time in terms of EGM wavefunction propagation and interference.

253

www.deltagroupengineering.com

9.1

Gravitational propagation: the mechanism for interaction

9.1.1 Synopsis

EGM is a method, not a theory, producing experimentally verified results from the

fundamental to the Cosmological scale. This chapter develops an engineering model to explain how

gravitational effects are transmitted through space-time. The intention herein is not to advance an

explanation (theory) on how gravitational transmission occurs, only to present an engineering

approach leading to observationally validated physical results as derived in the preceding chapters.

To achieve this, we are compelled to distinguish between physical theory and modelling

technique. As stated in the very first sentence, EGM is a method, a tool by which we may attempt to

conceptualise space-time manifold effects. The tool has been repeatedly tested against physical

observation in order to ensure that, at the very least; the method itself is robust and consistent.

One of the most fundamental questions in Physics is the phenomenon of gravity and its

propagation. The standard view of this was advanced by Einstein involving the geometry of spacetime curvature. His approach has been highly successful in describing and predicting many

astronomical situations and has been rigorously tested by the scientific community.

Commonly in engineering solutions, one is not required to understand the physical nature of

a specific phenomenon in great detail. Very often, the observed behaviour of a system is modelled

in a non-physical way, permitting and facilitating the manipulation and prediction of desired effects

for commercial gain. For example, the technique of “discontinuity functions” is often applied to

beam loading configurations to avoid the loss of life or property through structural failure.

This particular approach to stress analysis is such that physical loads (uniformly distributed

and point alike) are represented as discontinuous functions along the beam. The reason for this is

because no single equation can model deflections along a beam continuously (other than the

simplest situations). Each time the loading situation changes, so does the mathematical equation

describing the deflection of the beam. Subsequently, the analysis is “broken-up” into a set of

manageable stress sections. From this, one obtains shear force and bending moment diagrams and is

able to determine permissible loading boundaries and beam deflections.

The significance of the above is that it emphasises the fact that the structural member (the

beam in the example given) is modelled and analysed in a manner which is vastly distant from what

is physically real. In this case, the engineer is seeking to predict an effect and quantify safe working

loads, not necessarily model the Physics of what is happening within the beam in great detail. For a

far more detailed analysis, an engineer requires finite difference or element methods.

The point of the beam example is to help the reader understand that only the result of a

mathematical modelling method is required to agree with physical observation. The technique

applied to derive the physically verified result is not necessarily important. Only if the logically

derived result disagrees with observation does the mathematical modelled utilised become

questionable. If it agrees with physical observation, particularly on a broad scale of application, it

defies logic to disregard it in favour of that which cannot achieve comparable results.

A second example of a mathematical description being potentially dissimilar to physical

reality is an EM wave. The true nature of an EM wave is unknown to contemporary Physics, yet it

is considered by many, to be exactly as it appears mathematically (i.e. a sinusoid). However, one

should be very careful to draw the distinction between “what physically is” and the tool utilised to

describe observed effects and behaviour. Hence, we shall demonstrate that basic engineering

Control Theory is a useful tool by which to develop a gravitational propagation model, consistent

with the Cosmological results obtained in the preceding chapters.

Note: two propagation models are presented herein (i.e. broadband and narrowband), with the key

characteristics of the broadband model preserved in the narrowband approximation.

254

www.deltagroupengineering.com

9.1.2 Construct

9.1.2.1 Broadband

The propagation of EGM waves may be represented by two distinct models (i.e. broadband

and narrowband). The broadband propagation model refers to the entire PV spectrum surrounding

an object, whilst the narrowband propagation model refers to the same spectrum, but usefully

approximated to a single wavefunction at a frequency of “ωΩ”. Since the narrowband model is an

analogous representation of the broadband model, key characteristics of the broadband model are

required to be preserved in the narrowband analogy.

In was demonstrated in [5] that, in the case of broadband propagation, the group velocity of

a large number of superimposed wavefunctions is zero. However, if one could filter-out all EGM

wavefunctions except a specific frequency, an EM signal would be detected. The next important

issue to reconcile against the “zero group velocity” behaviour of broadband propagation is how

narrowband propagation might work such that it remains consistent with broadband characteristics.

A single wavefunction representation of a broadband PV spectrum implies that the evidence

of propagation of high frequency gravitational waves from celestial bodies should be clear and

obvious – contradicting physical observation. Hence, it shall be demonstrated in the proceeding

section that broadband characteristics are preserved in the analogous narrowband approximation by:

i. The utilisation of Control System principles to describe EGM wavefunction propagation

and space-time curvature in terms of a control loop.

ii. Simplifying the constitution of a Graviton to be: a Photon coupled to its ZPF (space-time

manifold) response, representing the conjugate EGM wavefunction associated with a

Photon pair. Subsequently, the narrowband approximation propagates with characteristics

preserving the broadband group velocity condition.

iii. Recognising that the conjugate EGM wavefunction associated with a Photon pair (i.e. the

ZPF response) may be considered, for practical solution purposes, to be a “Virtual

Photon” (VP) popping into existence as a result of the ZPF response to EGM stress.

9.1.2.2 Narrowband

EGM considers all masses to be radiators of conjugate wavefunction pairs. That is to say, all

mass radiates a spectrum of wavefunctions at frequencies according to “ωPV(1,r,M) ≤ ω ≤

ωΩ(r,M)”: both being dependent upon the objects mass-energy distribution over space-time. At each

frequency in the spectrum, wavefunctions are being radiated with positive and negative amplitudes

of equal magnitude. This is at the heart of a Fourier representation of any constant function in

complex form.

Hence, each positive amplitude wavefunction is coupled to its negative amplitude

counterpart. If we assume that Electricity, Magnetism and Gravity are unified, then EGM

propagation may be graphically represented as follows,

Figure 3.14,

255

www.deltagroupengineering.com

where, the Electric Field Wave is at right angles (orthogonal58) to the Magnetic Field Wave, and the

Electro-Gravitic Coupling Wave is at right angles (orthogonal) to the Magneto-Gravitic Coupling

Wave. The arrow denotes the orientation of the associated Poynting Vector (i.e. the propagation of

energy).

A very big and obvious question is “what is the nature of the Gravitic coupling waves?”

Simply put, the Gravitic coupling waves are the responses of the space-time manifold to the work

being done to it by the Electric and Magnetic Field Waves, consistent with “Newton’s 1st Law of

motion” (i.e. for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction).

Explaining EGM propagation may be reduced in complexity by initially considering only

the contribution of the Electric Field Wave. That is, we may consider the Electric and Magnetic

Field Waves as being independent of each other. As will be shown graphically, the Magnetic Field

Wave may then be considered and the “explanation process” repeated.

To facilitate this, let “M” denote the mass of an object radiating an Electric Field Wave in

accordance with the EGM construct (i.e. not generated in the classical EM wave production

manner). This characteristic is conceptualised diagrammatically by the function “G(s)”, existing in

the Laplace Domain (i.e. the classical form of representation in Control System Engineering59).

Subsequently, “H(s)” denotes the response of the space-time manifold to the Electric Field Wave

(i.e. the Electro-Gravitic Coupling Wave).

**Figure 4.55: control system representing EGM propagation (illustrational only),
**

Mathematically, this means that “G(s) = -H(s)”, or in other words, the response of the spacetime manifold is equal and opposite of the work being done to it by the Electric Field Wave.

Diagrammatically, “G(s) = H(s)” but note that it feeds into the summing junction illustrated as a

negative input, producing “G(s) = -H(s)” mathematically. Graphing forcing function and space-time

manifold response [i.e. “G(s)” and “H(s)” respectively], for each EM component separately, yields

the following two illustrations,

Electric Field

EGM Propagation (Electric Component)

Time

**Electric Field Wave (Forcing Function)
**

Space-Time Manifold Electric Response

**Figure 4.56: Electric forcing function “G(s)” and its space-time manifold response “H(s)”,
**

58

**http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthogonal
**

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_systems; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_engineering;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfer_Function

59

256

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Magnetic Field

EGM Propagation (Magnetic Component)

Time

**Magnetic Field Wave (Forcing Function)
**

Space-Time Manifold Magnetic Response

**Figure 4.57: Magnetic forcing function “G(s)” and its space-time manifold response “H(s)”,
**

The function “E(s)”, in both cases, represents signal degradation (in the Laplace domain)

over distance (in the direction of propagation). A complete and thorough control systems

engineering analysis60 utilising Transfer Functions, Characteristic Equations, Root Locus, Nyquist

Stability, Bode Plots and Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) Controllers etc., is beyond the

scope of this text and has been omitted for brevity.

9.1.3 Testing

9.1.3.1 Newtonian

It is extremely important to test the analogous narrowband approximation against well

established classical and contemporary gravitational models. The testing to be conducted is not

intended to replace any widely accepted model, but rather to ensure that key aspects of mainstream

Physics are qualitatively contained within the narrowband approximation.

Immediately, one can see that the Electric and Magnetic Field Waves mathematically

“cancel-out” with respect to their conjugate space-time manifold responses, producing a constant

mathematical result of zero force (i.e. action equals reaction), at right angles to the direction of the

Poynting Vector61. In terms of EM propagation, the Poynting Vector travels the path of least

resistance through the space-time manifold.

Hence, key Newtonian aspects are qualitatively (in principle) satisfied by the action-reaction force

pairing in the analogous narrowband approximation.

9.1.3.2 Relativistic

From a General Relativity (GR) perspective, energy has been deposited into the region by

the EM Field Wave and the space-time manifold reacts via the physical manifestation of “spacetime curvature”. The analogous narrowband approximation regards the ZPF as an “infinite store” of

available reactive space-time manifold “bending” stress as an EM wave propagates through it.

Hence, key aspects of GR are qualitatively (in principle) satisfied by the deposition of energy

manifesting as space-time curvature (i.e. “bending” stress) in the analogous narrowband

approximation.

60

**Suggest reading: Linear Control System Analysis and Design, John J. D’Azzo and Constantine
**

Houpis, Third Edition, 1988, McGraw-Hill.

61

The direction of energy flow: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poynting_Vector.

257

www.deltagroupengineering.com

9.1.3.3 PV

Gravitational acceleration is proportional to the cubic frequency of the PV spectrum62, of the

specific mass being considered. As the EM signal degrades, the Poynting Vector diminishes. EGM

considers Gravity to be a direct result of the gradient of the Energy Density (realised by the

Poynting Vector). The EM field deposits energy into a region, but without a gradient over distance,

there would be no change in Energy Density, no change in Poynting Vector and “no Gravity”.

Since the Energy Density of the gravitational field surrounding an object is less, farther

away from the objects centre of mass than closer to it, the change in Energy Density always acts

toward the centre of mass of the object. That is why Gravity always acts downward because the

change in Energy Density is always negative.

The Electro-Gravitic and Magneto-Gravitic Coupling Waves may each be described as

populations of Virtual Photons (VP’s), “popping” into existence from the Zero-Point Vacuum as it

seeks a lower state of potential energy in response to work being done to it. That is, in response to it

being “bent” by the input of energy, in the case of EGM, a propagating EM wave. In other words,

one may consider the ZPF as being an energy sink which is always full. It seeks equilibrium with

the applied EM forcing function by “curving” the space-time manifold, thereby producing an EGM

wave.

Hence, key aspects of the PV model are satisfied by the analogous narrowband approximation.

9.1.4 Concluding remarks

The analogous narrowband approximation may be summarised as follows:

i. The constitution of a Graviton is simplified to be: a Photon coupled to its ZPF (space-time

manifold) response, representing the conjugate EGM wavefunction associated with a

Photon pair. Subsequently, the narrowband approximation propagates with characteristics

preserving the broadband group velocity condition such that an EGM Wave may be

described as an EM Wave coupled to its ZPF (space-time manifold) response.

ii. Gravity propagates as EGM Waves with EM characteristics, but remains undetectable

unless the ZPF response can be appropriately filtered-out by “a” detector.

iii. The conjugate EGM wavefunction associated with a Photon pair (i.e. the ZPF response)

may be considered, for practical solution purposes, to be a “Virtual Photon” (VP) popping

into existence as a result of the ZPF response to EGM stress, such that the ZPF acts as an

infinite store of available reactive space-time manifold “bending” stress as an EM wave

propagates through it.

iv. The response of the ZPF to an applied forcing function is reactionary (consistent with

Newtons “1st” Law of Motion) and equivalent (in principle) to “space-time manifold

curvature”.

v. The mechanism of the ZPF response may be usefully described by VP’s, propagating

“180°-out-of-phase” with respect to an EM forcing function.

vi. The EGM Wave may be categorised into two key couplings. That is, the Electric Field

Wave couples to its Electro-Gravitic conjugate, whilst the Magnetic Field Wave couples

to its Magneto-Gravitic conjugate.

vii. The gravitational effect arises from the degradation of the EM Wave Poynting Vector over

distance (change in Energy Density) associated with EGM propagation.

Note: the wavefunction describing each population of Photon pairs (i.e. a population of Photons

and their ZPF response) may be considered to be representative of either side of a Fourier

distribution in Complex form, symmetrical about the “0th” mode.

62

**A bandwidth of the EGM spectrum.
**

258

www.deltagroupengineering.com

9.2

Gravitational interference: the mechanism of interaction

9.2.1 Synopsis

The gravitational interaction between two bodies may be represented by the EGM construct

as (i), a broadband interference pattern or (ii), a narrowband interference pattern such that the entire

PV spectrum surrounding each mass is usefully approximated by a single wavefunction at “ωΩ”.

We shall illustrate both of these situations by graphical example.

Consider the location of zero net acceleration [0(m/s2) - termed the buoyancy point] between

the Earth and the Moon with the lunar orbit usefully approximated as being circular. Let, “DE2M”,

“r4” and “r5” denote the mean distance from the Earth to the Moon, the mean distance from the

centre of mass of the Earth to the buoyancy point and the mean distance from the centre of mass of

the Moon to the buoyancy point respectively such that:

r4

r 5 D E2M

r5

(4.429)

D E2M

r4

(4.430)

**Hence, when accelerations are balanced:
**

G.M E G.M M

2

2

r4

r5

(4.431)

**Solving for “r4” yields,
**

r4

D E2M. M M .M E

MM

M M .M E

(4.432)

Evaluating produces,

r4

r5

=

. 5

3.46028110

. 4

3.83719110

( km)

(4.433)

**Calculating “g” at “r4” and “r5” yields,
**

g r 4, M E

g r 5, M M

=

. 3

3.33165310

m

. 3

3.33165310

s

2

(4.434)

**where, the resultant acceleration is given by,
**

g r 4, M E

g r 5, M M = 0

m

s

2

(4.435)

9.2.2 Construct

9.2.2.1 Broadband

The broadband interference pattern of the buoyancy point between the Earth and the Moon

may be formulated by graphing the harmonics of gravitational acceleration “aPV”. Summing the first

“21” modes only (i.e. “nPV = 21”), an approximation of the resultant interference pattern may be

represented (illustrational only) utilising the EGM construct as follows,

a PV( r , M , t )

i .

C PV n PV, r , M .e

n PV

π .n PV .ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .t .i

(4.436)

**where, “CPV” and “nPVωPV(1,r,M)” represent the gravitational amplitude and frequency spectra
**

respectively – mindful that in physical reality, “|nPV| → ∞”.

259

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Harmonic Acc. & Grav. Interference
**

T PV 1 , r 5 , M M

Acceleration

a PV r 4 , M E , t

a PV r 5 , M M , t

a PV r 4 , M E , t

a PV r 5 , M M , t

t

Time

**Gravitational Acceleration due to The Earth
**

Gravitational Acceleration due to The Moon

Resultant Acceleration (Interference)

Figure 4.58,

The graph above only includes the first “21” harmonics. A complete representation would

involve summing all modes (i.e. “> 1029” wavefunctions for each celestial object). Subsequently,

complete graphical representation at the zero “g” position [“aPV(r4,ME,t)” and “aPV(r5,MM,t)”

respectively: producing a resultant acceleration of zero “aPV(r4,ME,t) - aPV(r5,MM,t)”], will appear as

flat lines. The resultant magnitude of acceleration curve “aPV(r4,ME,t) - aPV(r5,MM,t)” will run along

the x-axis with a value of zero.

9.2.2.2 Narrowband

The narrowband representation is formed by usefully approximating the PV spectrum of the

gravitational field, as a single wavefunction at “ωΩ”. Firstly, we shall validate that the EGM method

produces the correct result with negligible error as follows,

a EGM_ωΩ r 4 , M E

a EGM_ωΩ r 5 , M M

=

.

3.33165310

3

.

3.33165310

3

m

s

2

(4.437)

**where, the resultant acceleration is given by,
**

a EGM_ωΩ r 4 , M E

a EGM_ωΩ r 5 , M M = 0

m

s

2

(4.438)

**Graphing the high frequency harmonic accelerations “ag” of the gravitational interaction of
**

the Earth and the Moon at the buoyancy point (illustrational only), based solely upon “ωΩ” [i.e.

“ωΩ(r4,ME)” and “ωΩ(r5,MM)”], produces a visualisation of beats utilising a generalised form

according to,

a g ( r , M , φ, t )

π

g ( r , M ) . .sin 2 .π .ω Ω ( r , M ) .t

2

φ

(4.439)

At “φ = 0”, the average acceleration is given by “gav”,

g av ( r , M )

2

T Ω ( r, M )

1.

T Ω ( r, M )

2

.

0 .( s )

260

a g( r, M , 0, t ) d t

(4.440)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Evaluating yields the correct result as demonstrated by,
**

g av R E, M E = 9.809009

m

s

2

(4.441)

such that:

ω Ω r 4 , M E = 56.499573 ( YHz)

(4.442)

ω Ω r 5 , M M = 72.138509( YHz)

(4.443)

and,

Hence, the conjugate wavefunction acceleration pairs may be illustrated as follows,

Conjugate WaveFunction Acc. Pairs

Acceleration

a g r 4, M E, 0, t

a g r 4, M E, 0, t

a g r 5, M M, π , t

a g r 5, M M, π , t

t

Time

**+ve WaveFunction From The Earth
**

-ve WaveFunction From The Earth

+ve WaveFunction From The Moon

-ve WaveFunction From The Moon

Figure 4.59,

The Moon’s EGM narrowband wavefunction approximation contribution is phase-shifted

“180°” (polarized) relative to the Earth because it approaches the zero “g” position from the

opposite direction. This is inconsequential because “aPV” is equal to the time averaged magnitude of

the curves above.

Acceleration

Conjugate WaveFunction Acc. Beats

a g r 4, M E, φ , t

a g r 4, M E, φ , t

a g r 5, M M, π , t

a g r 5, M M, π , t

t

Time

**+ve WaveFunction Interference Beat
**

-ve WaveFunction Interference Beat (Conjugate)

Figure 4.60,

261

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Note: for narrowband representations of non-zero acceleration, one may apply either of two
**

techniques to the approximation,

i. Disregard the conjugate wavefunction or,

ii. Apply an appropriately adjusted magnitude constraint.

9.2.3 Concluding remarks

9.2.3.1 Broadband

EGM interference patterns form when two or more gravitational fields interact. EGM

considers all masses to be radiators of conjugate wavefunction pairs. That is to say, all mass

radiates a spectrum of wavefunctions at frequencies according to “ωPV(1,r,M) ≤ ω ≤ ωΩ(r,M)”. Each

positive amplitude wavefunction is coupled to its negative amplitude counterpart. The total

gravitational influence of the wavefunction pair is characterised by the sum of the magnitudes.

Gravitational interaction between two bodies may be written mathematically in the time domain as

an interference pattern such that “nPV” has the odd number harmonic distribution from “-nΩ(r,M)”

to “+nΩ(r,M)” as follows,

n PV

n Ω ( r, M ) , 2

n Ω ( r , M ) .. n Ω ( r , M )

(4.444)

**The magnitude of “nΩ(r,M)” is extremely important in EGM as it defines the breadth of the
**

double sided EGM spectrum. Without a sufficiently large magnitude of “nΩ(r,M)”, a measurably

constant function is not possible. In other words, if “nΩ(r,M)” is too low, then EGM would imply

that gravity varies with time (noticeably) at the surface of the Earth and we would all be able to feel

this behaviour on our bodies.

Therefore, “nΩ(r,M)” is required to be sufficiently large such that “aPV” produces a “flatlined” graph, consistent with human experience of “g” at the surface of the Earth. Fortunately, the

EGM method produces extremely large values of “nΩ(r,M)” for all masses, even at the fundamental

particle level. Typically, real world values of “1014 to +∞”, depending on the mass being

considered. It should be noted that “acceptably constant” graphical behaviour can be observed with

values of “nΩ(r,M)” as low as several hundred.

The value of “nΩ(r,M)”, as determined by the EGM method, is intimately tied to the massenergy distribution of the object under consideration. For example, the value of “nΩ(r,M)” for free

space (zero gravity) is “+∞”. This decreases as the energy density of the space-time manifold

increases. In other words, as mass is added to the space-time manifold, the value of “nΩ(r,M)”

decreases acting to compresses the local PV spectrum.

Note: gravitational interference patterns form due to broadband propagation of EGM

wavefunctions at a group velocity of zero.

9.2.3.2 Narrowband

A narrowband interference pattern may be produced by approximating the entire PV

spectrum surrounding each mass as a single wavefunction, existing as a population of conjugate

Photon pairs. Where, one population of Photons propagate with positive amplitude, coupled to a

population of Virtual Photons propagating with negative amplitude, such that each population of

pairs is polarized “180°” apart (i.e. a pair existing as equal and opposite forms)63.

Note: the broadband group velocity condition is preserved in the narrowband approximation.

63

**Refer to previous section for an expanded description.
**

262

www.deltagroupengineering.com

10 Particle Cosmology

Abstract

The following characteristics are derived utilising EGM principles:

i. The Photon and Graviton mass-energies lower limit.

ii. The Photon and Graviton Root-Mean-Square (RMS) charge radii lower limit.

iii. The Photon charge threshold.

iv. The Photon charge upper limit.

v. The Photon charge lower limit.

263

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**10.1 Derivation of the Photon and Graviton mass-energies lower limit
**

The lower limit of the Photon and Graviton mass-energies (“mγγ2” and “mgg2” respectively)

may be determined trivially by equating “tL” to “TL” as follows,

Let, “TL → tL” such that:

tL

h

m γγ

(4.445)

**Therefore: if “mγγ → mγγ2” then,
**

m γγ2

h

tL

(4.446)

2 .m γγ2

(4.447)

m gg2

Evaluating yields,

m γγ2

1.715978

=

m gg2

10

3.431956

51 .

eV

(4.448)

Hence,

m γγ2 < m m γγ

(4.449)

m gg2 < m m gg

(4.450)

**10.2 Derivation of the Photon and Graviton RMS charge radii lower limit
**

The lower limit of the Photon and Graviton Root-Mean-Square (RMS) charge radii (“rγγ2”

and “rgg2” respectively) may be determined utilising “mγγ2” and the radii relationships derived in

[10] as follows,

5

r γγ2

r e.

m γγ2

m e .c

2

2

(4.451)

where, “re” and “me” denote the classical Electron radius and rest mass respectively. Thus,

r gg2

5

4 .r γγ2

(4.452)

Evaluating yields,

r γγ2

r gg2

=

7.250508

9.567103

10

38 .

m

(4.453)

Hence,

r γγ2 < r r γγ

(4.454)

r gg2 < r r gg

(4.455)

**10.3 Derivation of the Photon charge threshold
**

The Root-Mean-Square (RMS) charge threshold of a free Photon “Qγ” may be derived in a

similar manner to the mass-energy threshold in [8]. Utilising a generalised form for the energy of a

Photon “EΩ” [10] propagating at “ωΩ”, “Qγ” may be derived in highly favourable agreement with

the PDG estimate [49] as follows,

E Ω ( r, M )

h .ω Ω ( r , M )

264

(4.456)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Subsequently, the Photon population at the charge threshold is given by “Nγ”,
**

E Ω ( r, M )

N γ( r, M )

mγ

(4.457)

**where, “mγ” denotes the mass-energy threshold. Hence, “Qγ” is given by,
**

Qe

Q γ( r, M )

N γ( r, M )

(4.458)

where, “Qe” denotes the Electric charge.

Let: “r → rε” and “m → me” such that “Qγ(rε,me) → Qγ” where “rε” denotes the RMS charge

radius of the Electron as determined in [9]. Hence, “Qγ” may be evaluated according to,

Qγ

= 2.655018 10

30

Qe

(4.459)

30

Q γ < 2.7.10 .Q e

(4.460)

Therefore,

**Comparing “Qγ” to the PDG value (i.e. “Qγ_PDG = 5 x10-30Qe”) produces a highly favourable result
**

as follows,

Q γ_PDG

= 1.883226

Qγ

(4.461)

**10.4 Derivation of the Photon charge upper limit
**

The upper limit of the RMS charge of a free Photon “Qγγ” may be derived trivially by

considering the value of the charge threshold in proportion to the Photon population as follows,

Q γ( r, M )

Q γγ( r , M )

N γ( r, M )

(4.462)

**Subsequently it follows that,
**

Q γ( r, M )

Q γγ ( r , M )

2

Qe

(4.463)

**Let: “r → rε” and “m → me” such that “Qγ(rε,me) → Qγ” according to,
**

Q γγ

Qγ

2

Qe

(4.464)

Evaluating yields,

Q γγ = 1.129394 10

Q γγ

= 7.049122 10

78 .

C

(4.465)

60

Qe

(4.466)

Therefore,

Q γγ 7.05. 10

265

60

.Q

e

(4.467)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**10.5 Derivation of the Photon charge lower limit
**

The lower limit of the RMS charge of a free Photon “Qγγ2” may be derived trivially by

recognising that the Cosmological age, Photon mass-energy and Photon RMS charge limit ratios are

equal as follows,

tL

m γγ

Q γγ

T L m γγ2 Q γγ2

m γγ

(4.468)

.

= 1.86196810

6

m γγ2

(4.469)

Hence,

Q γγ

Q γγ2

m γγ

.m

γγ2

(4.470)

Evaluating yields,

Q γγ2 = 6.065593 10

Q γγ2

85 .

= 3.785846 10

C

(4.471)

66

Qe

Therefore,

(4.472)

Q γγ2 .Q e < Q Q γγ .Q e

(4.473)

**10.6 Other useful relationships
**

i. Relationship:

mγ

2

E Ω r ε,me

ω Ω r e, m e

.m

γγ

ω Ω r ε, m e

(4.474)

Verification,

mγ

2

E Ω r ε, m e

ω Ω r e, m e

.m

γγ

ω Ω r ε, m e

=

1.525768

1.525768

10

46 .

eV

(4.475)

ii. Relationship:

E Ω r e, m e

mγ

2

m γγ

(4.476)

Verification,

E Ω r e, m e

mγ

2

=

0.165603

0.165603

m γγ

( µJ )

(4.477)

iii. Relationship:

ω Ω r e, m e

266

mγ

2

h .m γγ

(4.478)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Verification,

ω Ω r e,m e

mγ

2

=

h .m γγ

249.926816

249.926816

( YHz)

(4.479)

iv. Relationship:

Qe

me

2.

=

c Q γγ

. 11

1.7588210

C

198.286288

kg

m γγ

(4.480)

NOTES

267

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

268

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**11 Equation Summary
**

The following is an itemised account of the key relationships derived herein:

11.1 Gravitation

11.1.1 “Stg”

6

3

3 .ω h

St g

13 2

2 .π .c

(4.23)

11.1.2 “ωΩ_2”

ω Ω_2( r , M )

9

St g

r

.g ( r , M ) 2

(4.25)

11.1.3 “aEGM_ωΩ”

r .

9

ω Ω_2( r , M )

St g

a EGM_ωΩ( r , M )

(4.26)

11.1.4 “StG”

3.

St G

2

3 .ω h

9

. c

2

4 .π .h

(4.35)

11.1.5 “ωΩ_3”

9

2

M

St G.

5

r

ω Ω_3( r , M )

(4.36)

11.1.6 “λΩ_3”

λΩ_3 = c / ωΩ_3

11.1.7 “G”

St G

G

St g

(4.37)

**11.1.8 “ωPV(nPV,r,M)3”
**

2 .c .n PV

3

ω PV n PV, r , M

3

π .r

.g ( r , M )

2

(4.41)

11.1.9 “StJ”

9 .c .

St G

4 .π

4

St J

2

9

(4.51)

**11.1.10 “CΩ_J1, CΩ_Jω”
**

C Ω_J1( r , M )

St J

2

r

9

. M

5

8

r

(4.52)

5.2

C Ω_Jω ω Ω_3 , M

269

4

9 .c . ω Ω_3

4 .π St 0.8 .M 0.6

G

(4.427)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

11.1.11 “nΩ_2”

.

3

3 .π m h . r

16 M

λh

2

9

n Ω_2( r , M )

7

(4.60)

11.1.12 “KDepp”

1

K Depp ( r , M )

2 .G.M

1

11.1.13 “KPV”

K PV( r , M )

r .c

2

(4.106)

K Depp ( r , M )

2

K Depp ( r , M )

K PV( r , M )

(4.110)

11.1.14 “TL”

TL

h

m γγ

(4.196)

11.1.15 “ωg”

M .c

2 .h

ω g( M )

11.1.16 “ngg”

2

(4.207)

n gg ( M ) T L.ω g ( M )

(4.208)

11.1.17 “rω”

5

St G.

r ω ω Ω_3 , M

M

2

ω Ω_3

9

(4.212)

11.1.18 “aPV”

a PV( r , M , t )

i .

C PV n PV, r , M .e

π .n PV .ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .t .i

n PV

(4.436)

11.1.19 “ag”

a g ( r , M , φ, t )

π

g ( r , M ) . .sin 2 .π .ω Ω ( r , M ) .t

2

φ

(4.439)

11.1.20 “gav”

g av ( r , M )

2

1.

T Ω ( r, M )

2

.

T Ω ( r, M )

0 .( s )

a g( r, M , 0, t ) d t

(4.440)

**11.2 Planck-Particles
**

11.2.1 “mx”

mx

λx

2

(4.71)

11.2.2 “λx”

λx

4 . 2

π 3

6

270

(4.72)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**11.2.3 “ρm, ρS”
**

. 94 kg

ρ m λ x.λ h , m x.m h = 1.34467810

3

m

(4.78)

**ρS = ρm(λxλh,mxmh)
**

11.2.4 “r3, M3”

r3 = λxλh

(4.245)

M3 = mxmh = λxmh / 2

(4.246)

11.3 SBH’s

11.3.1 “StBH”

c .St G

9

St BH

c.

( 2 .G)

5

(4.138)

11.3.2 “ωΩ_4”

3

St BH.

ω Ω_4 M BH

1

M BH

(4.139)

11.3.3 “rS”

3

2

λ x.λ h .R BH

r S R BH

3

r S M BH

3

r S R BH

(4.146)

3 .M BH

4 .π .ρ S

(4.148)

2

3 .c .R BH

8 .π .G.ρ S

(4.150)

11.3.4 “nΩ_4”

n Ω_4 M BH

n Ω_2 r S M BH , M BH

(4.157)

n Ω_5 M BH

n Ω_2 R BH M BH , M BH

(4.158)

11.3.5 “nΩ_5”

11.3.6 “nBH”

n BH M BH

n Ω_5 M BH

n Ω_4 M BH

(4.159)

11.3.7 “ωΩ_5”

ω Ω_5 M BH

ω Ω_3 r S M BH , M BH

(4.161)

11.3.8 “ωBH”

ω BH M BH

ω Ω_5 M BH

ω Ω_4 M BH

(4.162)

11.3.9 “ωΩ_6”

ω Ω_6 M BH

ω Ω_5 M BH

n Ω_4 M BH

(4.166)

11.3.10 “ωΩ_7”

ω Ω_7 M BH

271

ω Ω_4 M BH

n Ω_5 M BH

(4.167)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

11.3.11 “ωPV_1”

ω Ω_6 M BH

ω PV_1 M BH

ω Ω_7 M BH

(4.168)

11.3.12 “ng”

n g ω , M BH

E M BH

E g( ω )

(4.177)

11.4 Cosmology

11.4.1 “r2, M2”

r2(r) = Kλ⋅r

(4.247)

M2(M) = Km⋅M = Kλ⋅M

(4.248)

11.4.2 “λy”

1

λ y r 2, M 2

ln n Ω_2 r 2 , M 2

(4.229)

11.4.3 “KU”

K U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

ln

λ y r 2, M 2

.M

C Ω_J1 λ y r 2 , M 2 .r 3 ,

3

2

C Ω_J1 r 2 , M 2

5

5

K U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

1

ln

2

9

(4.231)

7

.ln n

Ω_2 r 2 , M 2

3.

M3

26

9

.

M2

r2

9

r3

(4.232)

11.4.4 “AU”

A U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

11.4.5 “RU”

TL

K U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

5

(4.233)

R U r 2, r 3 , M 2, M 3

c .A U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

H U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

1

(4.234)

11.4.6 “HU, HU2, HU5, |H|”

H U5( r , M )

1 .

ln

TL

( 3 .π )

µ

(4.235)

H U K λ .r , λ x.λ h , K m.M , m x.m h

H U2( r , M )

7 .µ .

A U r 2, r 3 , M 2, M 3

2

32

256

. µ m

.ln ( 3 π ) . h

4

M

H

µ

(4.276)

7 .µ

2

. r

λh

d

H

dt

2

7 .µ

5

.

mh

M

5 .µ

2

. r

λh

2

26 .µ

(4.529)

(4.378)

11.4.7 “Hα”

H α r 3, M 3

2.

2. . .

π G ρ m r 3, M 3

3

(4.237)

Hα(r3,M3) = ωh / λx

272

www.deltagroupengineering.com

ωh

H α λ x.λ h , m x.m h

λx

(4.249)

**11.4.8 “ρU, ρU2”
**

3 .H U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

ρ U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

8 .π .G

3 .H U2( r , M )

ρ U2( r , M )

11.4.9 “MU”

M U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

2

(4.238)

2

8 .π .G

(4.304)

V R U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3 .ρ U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

(4.239)

11.4.10 “KT”

K T r 2, r 3 , M 2, M 3

H α r 3, M 3

n g ω Ω_3 r 3 , M 3 , M 3 .ln

H U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

8 . H α r 3, M 3

ln

3

H

K T( H )

(4.240)

(4.268)

11.4.11 “TW”

T W r 2, r 3, M 2 , M 3

KW

λ Ω_3 R U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3 , M 3

(4.241)

KW

T W( H)

λ Ω_3

c λ x.

,

mh

H 2

(4.269)

11.4.12 “StT”

9

4. 3. 1 . λ x

3 4 c5 π .λ 2

h

3

St T

2

(4.274)

**11.4.13 “TU, TU2, TU3, TU4, TU5”
**

T U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

K T r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3 .T W r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

ωh

K W .St T .ln

T U2( H )

T U3 H β

9

λ x.H

K W .St T .ln

1

Hβ

. H5

(4.275)

. H .H

β α

KW

c

µ

.ln

.

. 4µ

H U5( r , M ) λ h

Hα

273

2 .µ

.

5 .µ

2

(4.318)

1

T U4( t ) K W .St T .ln H α .t .

t

T U5( r , M )

(4.242)

5 .µ

1

π .H α

2

(4.331)

2 .µ

2

. 2

.H ( r , M ) 5 µ

U5

(4.530)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**11.4.14 “dTdt, dT2dt2, dT3dt3”
**

K W .St T .

dT dt ( t )

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

t

dT2 dt2 ( t )

K W .St T .

dT3 dt3 ( t )

.t

(4.335)

2

2

5 .µ . ln H α .t . 5 .µ

t

K W .St T .

2

5 .µ

5 .µ

2

1

2

1

.t2

2

2

2

5 .µ .ln H α .t . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

t

1

(4.339)

3

5 .µ

2

2

2

15.µ . 5 .µ

2

.t3

2

2

(4.343)

**11.4.15 “dHdt, dH2dt2”
**

1

t

H γ .H α

Hγ Hβ

dH dt H γ

dH2 dt2 H γ

(4.359)

η

(4.376)

2

H α .H γ

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2

2

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

1

(4.361)

3

2

H α .H γ

. 5 .µ 2 . ln 1 . 5 .µ 2

2

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

1

2

1

(4.371)

**11.4.16 “t1, t2, t3, t4, t5”
**

1

t1

e

2

5 .µ .

1

Hα

10 .µ

t2

e

2

(4.334)

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

. 1

Hα

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

t3

e

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

(4.338)

2

3

2

. 1

Hα

(4.342)

1

t4

e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

t5

e

. 1

Hα

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

274

(4.366)

2

1

2

. 1

Hα

(4.375)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

11.5 ZPF

11.5.1 “ΩEGM”

Ω EGM

ρ U2 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

ρ U2 R o , M G

r x5

1.013403

=

m g5

(4.308)

1.052361

(4.298)

11.5.2 “ΩZPF”

Ω ZPF

Ω EGM

1

(4.313)

11.5.3 “UZPF”

3 .c .

H U2 R o , M G

Ω ZPF .

8 .π .G

2

U ZPF

2

(4.315)

**11.6 EGM Construct limits
**

11.6.1 “ML”

ML

K m.M G.

R EGM

5 5

R EGM

.

K λ .R o

R EGM

K λ .R o

(4.409)

R U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

(4.410)

11.6.2 “rL”

rL

R BH M L

(4.411)

11.6.3 “tL”

rL

tL

c

(4.412)

**11.6.4 “ML / rL = MEGM / REGM = tL / tEGM”
**

M L M EGM

rL

M EGM

t EGM

tL

R EGM t EGM

(4.415)

M U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

A U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

(4.413)

(4.414)

**11.7 Particle-Physics
**

11.7.1 “mγγ2”

m γγ2

11.7.2 “mgg2”

m gg2

h

tL

(4.446)

2 .m γγ2

(4.447)

11.7.3 “rγγ2”

5

r γγ2

r e.

m γγ2

m e .c

275

2

2

(4.451)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

11.7.4 “rgg2”

r gg2

11.7.5 “Nγ”

5

4 .r γγ2

(4.452)

E Ω ( r, M )

N γ( r, M )

mγ

(4.457)

11.7.6 “Qγ”

Qe

Q γ( r, M )

N γ( r, M )

(4.458)

11.7.7 “Qγγ”

Q γ( r, M )

Q γγ( r , M )

N γ( r, M )

Q γ( r, M )

Q γγ ( r , M )

Q γγ

Qγ

(4.462)

2

Qe

(4.463)

2

Qe

(4.464)

11.7.8 “Qγγ2”

Q γγ2

Q γγ

m γγ

.m

γγ2

(4.470)

**11.7.9 “tL / TL = mγγ / mγγ2 = Qγγ / Qγγ2”
**

tL

m γγ

Q γγ

T L m γγ2 Q γγ2

(4.468)

**11.8 Other useful relationships
**

mγ

2

E Ω r ε,me

ω Ω r e, m e

.m

γγ

ω Ω r ε, m e

E Ω r e, m e

ω Ω r e, m e

276

mγ

(4.474)

2

m γγ

mγ

(4.476)

2

h .m γγ

(4.478)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**11.9 Quick symbol guide
**

Symbol

aEGM_ωΩ

ωΩ

ag

aPV

AU

CΩ_J1

CΩ_Jωω

dH2dt2

dHdt

dT2dt2

dT3dt3

dTdt

gav

H

H0

HU

HU2

HU5

Hα

Hβ

Hγ

KDepp

KT

KU

KW

M1

M2

M3

MBH

MEGM

mg5

mgg2

ML

MU

mx

mγγ2

γγ

nBH

ng

ngg

nΩ_2

nΩ_4

nΩ_5

Nγ

Qγ

Qγγ

Qγγ2

γγ

r1

Description

Gravitational acceleration utilising ωΩ_2

High frequency harmonic acceleration

Gravitational acceleration harmonic

EGM Cosmological age (present value)

Non-refractive form of CΩ_J

Equal to CΩ_J

2nd time derivative of H

1st time derivative of H

2nd time derivative of TU4

3rd time derivative of TU4

1st time derivative of TU4

Average high frequency harmonic acceleration

Generalised reference to the Hubble constant

Hubble constant (present value)

EGM Hubble constant

Transformed representation of HU

Simplest functionally dependent form of HU

Primordial Hubble constant

Dimensionless range variable

Dimensionless range variable

Refractive Index of PV by Depp

Expansive scaling factor

rf / ri

Wien displacement constant: 2.8977685 x10-3 [35]

Generalised mass

Generalised mass

Generalised mass or mh

Mass of a SBH

Convenient form of MU

Computational pre-factor

Graviton mass-energy lower limit

EGM Cosmological mass limit

Total EGM Cosmological mass

2nd SPBH constant

Photon mass-energy lower limit

Harmonic cut-off mode ratio (nΩ_5 : nΩ_4)

Average number of Gravitons radiated by a SBH per TΩ_4 period

Population of Gravitons within starving matter

Transformed representation of nΩ_1

nΩ_1 at the periphery of a SBH singularity

nΩ_1 at the event horizon of a SBH

Photon population at Qγ

Photon RMS charge threshold by EGM

Photon RMS charge upper limit by EGM

Photon RMS charge lower limit by EGM

Generalised radial displacement

277

Units

m/s2

s

Jy (Jansky)

Hz3

Hz2

K/s2

K/s3

K/s

m/s2

Hz

mK

kg

eV

kg

eV

C

m

www.deltagroupengineering.com

r2

r3

RBH

REGM

rgg2

rL

Ro

rS

RU

rx5

rγγ2

γγ

rω

Stg

StG

StJ

T0

t1

t2

t3

t4

t5

tEGM

TL

tL

TU

TU2

TU3

TU4

TU5

TW

UZPF

ΩEGM

ΩZPF

η

λx

λy

λΩ_3

µ

ρm

ρS

ρU

ρU2

ωBH

ωg

ωPV_1

**Generalised radial displacement
**

m

Generalised radial displacement or λh

Radius of the event horizon of a SBH

Convenient form of RU

Graviton RMS charge radius lower limit

EGM Cosmological size limit

Distance from the Sun to the Galactic centre

pc (parsec)

Singularity radius

m

EGM Cosmological size (present value)

Computational pre-factor

Photon RMS charge radius lower limit

m

Distance from the centre of mass of a celestial object to the Earth

1st EGM gravitational constant: Stg = 1.828935 x10245

m-1s-5

nd

224

2 EGM gravitational constant: StG = 8.146982 x10

m5kg-2s-9

3rd EGM gravitational constant: StJ9 = 1.093567 x10-146(kg4m26/s18)

(kg4m26/s18)(1/9)

CMBR temperature (present value)

K

s

• Temporal ordinate (local maxima) of the CMBR temperature

• The instant of maximum Cosmological temperature

Temporal ordinate (local minima) of the 1st time derivative of the

CMBR temperature

Temporal ordinate (local maxima) of the 2nd time derivative of the

CMBR temperature

• Temporal ordinate (local maxima) of the 1st time derivative of H

• The instant of maximum physical EGM Hubble constant

Temporal ordinate (local minima) of the 2nd time derivative of H

Convenient form of AU

Minimum gravitational lifetime of matter

EGM Cosmological age limit

CMBR temperature by the EGM method

K

Transformed representation of TU

Transformed representation of TU2

Transformed representation of TU3

Simplest functionally dependent form of TU

Thermodynamic scaling factor

ZPF energy density threshold

Pa

Net Cosmological density parameter as defined by the EGM method

ZPE contribution to the net Cosmological density parameter

Computed index

1st SPBH constant

Generalised representation of λx

m

c / ωΩ_3

Indicial constant (µ = 1 / 3)

Mass density

kg/m3

Mass density of a SPBH

EGM Cosmological mass-density

Transformed representation of ρU

Harmonic cut-off frequency ratio (ωΩ_5 : ωΩ_4)

Average Graviton emission frequency (1 / Tg)

Hz

Fundamental harmonic frequency ratio (ωΩ_6 : ωΩ_7)

278

www.deltagroupengineering.com

ωΩ_2

ωΩ_3

ωΩ_4

ωΩ_5

ωΩ_6

ωΩ_7

**Gravitational acceleration form of ωΩ_1
**

Transformed representation of ωΩ_1

ωΩ_1 at the event horizon of a SBH

ωΩ_1 at the periphery of a SBH singularity

ωPV(1,r,MBH) at the periphery of a SBH singularity: r = rS(MBH)

ωPV(1,r,MBH) at the event horizon of a SBH: r = RBH(MBH)

Hz

NOTES

279

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

280

www.deltagroupengineering.com

APPENDIX 4.A

Thermodynamic “Π

Π” Groupings of BH’s

The temperature of a BH is given by (“κ” denotes Boltzmann’s constant [35]),

h .c

T BH

3

2

16.π .κ .G.M BH

(4.481)

**This may be represented in “Π” form as follows
**

h .c

3

1

2

2

16.π .κ .G.M BH ( 4 .π ) .M BH

2

.

. c . hc

G

κ

(4.482)

**Recognising that “c2 / G = mh / λh”, “ωh = c / λh” and64 “Th = mhc2 / κ = hωh / κ” yields,
**

1

2

( 4 .π ) .M BH

mh

2

( 4 .π ) .M BH

mh

2

.

. c . hc

G

κ

.

. hc

.

κ λh

.

mh

2

( 4 .π ) .M BH

mh

.

2

( 4 .π ) .M BH

h .ω h

T h .m h

κ

2

( 4 .π ) .M BH

2

( 4 .π ) .M BH

Hence,

T BH

.

. hc

κ .λ h

(4.483)

h .ω h

κ

(4.484)

(4.485)

T h .m h

2

( 4 .π ) .M BH

(4.486)

**Therefore, the thermodynamic “Π” representation of BH temperature is given by,
**

Th

.

T BH

mh

( 4 .π )

2

M BH

(4.487)

**Note: it is a personal preference of the author, never to apply the “h-bar” form of Planck’s
**

Constant.

Conventional calculation of SPBH temperature “TBH”

The EGM construct identifies that the “Primordial Universe” may be modelled as a SPBH

of mass “mxmh”. Hence, substituting “mxmh = λxmh / 2” into the “Π” form of BH temperature

yields,

Th

T BH

.

mh

m x.m h

Th

. 1

T BH m x

Th

T BH

. 2

λx

2

( 4 .π )

(4.488)

64

**Planck temperature = Planck energy divided by “κ”.
**

http://www.planck.com/plancktemperature.htm

281

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Th

2

( 4 .π ) .λ x

T BH

2

2

8 .π .λ x

(4.489)

**Therefore, the conventional representation of the temperature of a SPBH is given by,
**

Th

T BH m x.m h

2

8 .π .λ x

(4.490)

Evaluating yields,

Th

.

= 1.66667410

30

( K)

2

8 .π .λ x

(4.491)

“TU2 : TBH”

The ratio between “TBH” and the maximum value of “TU2” since the “Big-Bang” (i.e. at “t1”)

may be determined numerically, leading to a simple relationship between them [i.e. an

approximation to within “1.72(%)”] as follows,

T U2

1

t1

= 19.173025

T BH m x.m h

(4.492)

Hence,

T U2

1

6 .π .T BH m x.m h

t1

(4.493)

Therefore by approximation,

T U2

1

3 .T h

t1

4 .π .λ x

(4.494)

**Evaluating the difference yields,
**

T U2

1

t1

6 .π .T BH m x.m h

1 = 1.716054 ( % )

(4.495)

Approximations of “TU2(t1-1)”

•

“1st” Form

**The peak value of Cosmological temperature may be usefully approximated [i.e. to within
**

0.163(%)] by applying Dimensional Analysis Techniques (DAT’s) to the gravitational Poynting

Vector “SωΩ”, yielding the dimensional limit of the Cosmological temperature “TSPBH” (“σ” denotes

the Stefan-Boltzmann constant [35]) as follows,

4

T SPBH

S ωΩ λ x.λ h , m x.m h

σ

(4.496)

Evaluating yields,

.

T SPBH = 5.02766910

31

( K)

(4.497)

Comparing the result to the conventional BH form produces,

282

www.deltagroupengineering.com

T SPBH

T BH m x.m h

= 30.165887

(4.498)

**Comparing the result to the precise EGM form produces,
**

T SPBH

T U2

= 1.57335

1

t1

(4.499)

Therefore by approximation,

T U2

1

3

K ω .T SPBH

t1

(4.500)

Evaluating,

3

. 31 ( K )

K ω .T SPBH = 3.20071410

(4.501)

**Hence, the difference yields,
**

3

K ω .T SPBH

T U2

1 = 0.162602 ( % )

1

t1

(4.502)

**Since the difference between forms is small [i.e. “< 0.163(%)”], we may usefully
**

approximate “TU2(t-1)” according to,

4

3.

K ω T SPBH K ω

3

3 .m x.m h .c

3.

4 .π .σ . λ x.λ h

4

4

3

Kω .

4 .π .σ . λ x.λ h

4

3.

Kω

3.

3.

2

3

3 .m h .c

3.

Kω

3

3 .c . ω h

8 .π .G.σ λ x

Kω

3.

4

2

Kω

4

.m .c3

h

3 .m h .c

3.

3

3 .c . ω h

8 .π .G.σ λ x

3

2

3 .c .H α

8 .π .G.σ

3

(4.504)

3

2

3

8 .π .σ .λ x .λ h

4

3

λx

4 .π .σ . λ x.λ h

4

3.

(4.503)

2

3

Kω .

.m .c3

h

2

3

8 .π .σ .λ x .λ h

4

Kω

λx

3

4 .π .σ . λ x.λ h

4

Kω

3.

3

3 .m x.m h .c

3

(4.505)

2

(4.506)

(4.507)

4

3

2

3

2

3 .c .H α 2 3 .c .H α

3.

.

Kω

8 .π .G.σ π

8 .π .G.σ

4

(4.508)

4

2

2

. 3.

. 3.

2. 3 c Hα 1. 6 c Hα

π

8 .π .G.σ π

π .G.σ

283

(4.509)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

4

2

. 3.

1. 6 c Hα

π

π .G.σ

Hα

4

6 .c

π .σ .G

3

.

π

(4.510)

Therefore by approximation,

T U2

1

Hα

t1

π

4

.

6 .c

π .σ .G

3

(4.511)

**Checking the result confirms the simplification,
**

Hα

4

.

π

•

6 .c

. 31 ( K )

= 3.20071410

π .σ .G

3

(4.512)

“2nd” Form

**“TU2(t-1)” may be approximated explicitly in terms of physical constants as follows (to
**

within “0.249(%)” where, “KW” denotes Wien’s displacement constant [35]),

T U2

2

c . KW

5 G.κ

1

t1

(4.513)

Evaluating,

2

c . KW

. 31 ( K )

= 3.18758510

5 G.κ

(4.514)

**Hence, the approximation error is,
**

T U2

1

1

t1

2

KW

.c .

5 G.κ

1 = 0.248248 ( % )

(4.515)

Approximation of “λ

λx” in terms of physical constants

The value of “λx” may be usefully approximated in terms of physical constants to within

“1.45(%)” as follows,

3 .T h

2

c . KW

4 .π .λ x 5 G.κ

(4.516)

Hence by approximation,

λx

15.T h

.

. Gκ

KW

4 .π .c

2

(4.517)

Simplifying yields,

m .c

. h

15

15.T h G.κ

κ . G.κ

.

2

2

KW

KW

4 .π .c

4 .π .c

(4.518)

m h .c

15.

.

κ . G.κ 15 m h . G.κ

2

K W 4 .π .κ K W

4 .π .c

(4.519)

2

2

284

www.deltagroupengineering.com

15.m h

15.m h

.

G

. Gκ

.

4 .π .κ K W

4 .π

κ .K W

15.m h

4 .π

.

(4.520)

15 . h .c .

G

κ .K W 4 .π G κ .K W

G

(4.521)

15 . h .c .

G

15 .

h .c

4 .π G

κ .K W 4 .π κ .K W

(4.522)

Therefore by approximation,

λx

15 .

h .c

.

.

4 π κ KW

(4.523)

Evaluating,

15 .

h .c

= 2.659782

4 .π κ .K W

(4.524)

1 . 15 .

h .c

.

.

λx 4 π κ KW

(4.525)

**Hence, the approximation error is,
**

1 = 1.442436 ( % )

Physical interpretation of “λ

λx”

A physical interpretation of “λx” is possible utilising the Stefan-Boltzmann Law where, “Φ”

denotes the energy flux emitted from a “Black-Body” at temperature “T” according to,

Φ σ .T

4

(4.526)

**Subsequently, if we equate the Stefan-Boltzmann Law to the peak average Cosmological
**

temperature (correlating to the approximated temperature of a SPBH), a physical interpretation of

“λx” is possible as follows,

Φ σ.

3 .T h

4

4 .π .λ x

(4.527)

th

**Therefore by inspection, “λx” is proportional to the “4 power-root” of the energy flux of the
**

Universe at the peak average Cosmological temperature, in accordance with the Stefan-Boltzmann

Law shown by,

λx ∝

285

4

1

Φ

(4.528)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

286

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Bibliography 4

Note: [1 - 19] refer to: http://stores.lulu.com/dge; “Riccardo C. Storti”, Quinta Essentia: A Practical

Guide to Space-Time Engineering, Part 3, Metric Engineering & The Quasi-Unification of ParticlePhysics.

[1] Ch. 3.1, Dimensional Analysis.

[2] Ch. 3.2, General Modelling and the Critical Factor.

[3] Ch. 3.3, The Engineered Metric.

[4] Ch. 3.4, Amplitude and Frequency Spectra.

[5] Ch. 3.5, General Similarity.

[6] Ch. 3.6, Harmonic and Spectral Similarity.

[7] Ch. 3.7, The Casimir Effect.

[8] Ch. 3.8, Derivation of the Photon Mass-Energy Threshold.

[9] Ch. 3.9, Derivation of Fundamental Particle Radii (Electron, Proton and Neutron).

[10] Ch. 3.10, Derivation of the Photon and Graviton Mass-Energies and Radii.

[11] Ch. 3.11, Derivation of Lepton Radii.

[12] Ch. 3.12, Derivation of Quark and Boson Mass-Energies and Radii.

[13] Ch. 3.13, The Planck Scale, Photons, Predicting New Particles and Designing an Experiment to

Test the Negative Energy Conjecture.

[14] App. 3.G, Derivation of ElectroMagnetic Radii.

[15] App. 3.H, Calculation of L2, L3 and L5 Associated Neutrino Radii.

[16] App. 3.I, Derivation of the Hydrogen Atom Spectrum (Balmer Series) and an Experimentally

Implicit Definition of the Bohr Radius.

[17] App. 3.K, Numerical Simulations, MathCad 8 Professional, Complete Simulation.

[18] App. 3.L, Numerical Simulations, MathCad 8 Professional, Calculation Engine.

[19] App. 3.M, Numerical Simulations, MathCad 12, High Precision Calculation Results.

[20] http://pdg.lbl.gov/2006/reviews/astrorpp.pdf

[21] http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~imamura/123/lecture-2/mass.html

[22] http://pdg.lbl.gov/2006/reviews/hubblerpp.pdf (pg. 20 - “WMAP + All”).

[23] http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_mm.html

[24] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

[25] “Alfonso Rueda, Bernard Haisch”, Contribution to inertial mass by reaction of the vacuum to

accelerated motion, Found.Phys. 28 (1998) 1057-1108: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/9802030v1

[26] “Alfonso Rueda, Bernard Haisch”, Inertia as reaction of the vacuum to accelerated motion,

Phys.Lett. A240 (1998) 115-126: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/9802031v1

[27] “Bernard Haisch, Alfonso Rueda, Hal Puthoff”, Advances in the proposed ElectroMagnetic

zero-point field theory of inertia, presentation at 34th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion

Conference, July 13-15, 1998, Cleveland, OH, 10 pages: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/9807023v2

[28] “Puthoff et. Al.”, Polarizable-Vacuum (PV) approach to general relativity, Found. Phys. 32,

927 - 943 (2002): http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9909037v2

[29] Particle Data Group, Photon Mass-Energy Threshold: “S. Eidelman et Al.” Phys. Lett. B 592, 1

(2004): http://pdg.lbl.gov/2006/listings/s000.pdf

[30] The SELEX Collaboration, Measurement of the Σ- Charge Radius by Σ- - Electron Elastic

Scattering, Phys.Lett. B522 (2001) 233-239: http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0106053v2

[31] “Karmanov et. Al.”, On Calculation of the Neutron Charge Radius, Contribution to the Third

International Conference on Perspectives in Hadronic Physics, Trieste, Italy, 7-11 May 2001, Nucl.

Phys. A699 (2002) 148-151: http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0106349v1

[32] “P. W. Milonni”, The Quantum Vacuum – An Introduction to Quantum Electrodynamics,

Academic Press, Inc. 1994. Page 403.

[33] Mathworld, http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Euler-MascheroniConstant.html

[34] “Hirsch et. Al.”, Bounds on the tau and muon Neutrino vector and axial vector charge radius,

Phys. Rev. D67: http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0210137v2

287

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**[35] National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST): http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/
**

[36] The D-ZERO Collaboration, A Precision Measurement of the Mass of the Top Quark, Nature

429 (2004) 638-642: http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0406031v1

[37] Progress in Top Quark Physics (Evelyn Thomson): Conference proceedings for PANIC05,

Particles & Nuclei International Conference, Santa Fe, New Mexico (USA), October 24 – 28, 2005.

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0602024v1

[38] Combination of CDF and D0 Results on the Mass of the Top Quark, Fermilab-TM-2347-E,

TEVEWWG/top 2006/01, CDF-8162, D0-5064: http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0603039v1

[39] “Hammer and Meißner et. Al”., Updated dispersion-theoretical analysis of the nucleon

ElectroMagnetic form factors, Eur. Phys.J. A20 (2004) 469-473:

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0312081v3

[40] “Hammer et. Al”, Nucleon Form Factors in Dispersion Theory, invited talk at the Symposium

"20 Years of Physics at the Mainz Microtron MAMI", October 20-22, 2005, Mainz, Germany,

HISKP-TH-05/25: http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0602121v1

[41] Spectrum of the Hydrogen Atom, University of Tel Aviv.

http://www.tau.ac.il/~phchlab/experiments/hydrogen/balmer.htm

[42] The CDF & D0 Collaborations, W Mass & Properties, FERMILAB-CONF-05-507-E.

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0511039v1

[43] The L3 Collaboration, Measurement of the Mass and the Width of the W Boson at LEP, Eur.

Phys.J. C45 (2006) 569-587: http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0511049v1

[44] The ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL, SLD Collaborations, the LEP Electroweak Working Group,

the SLD Electroweak & Heavy Flavor Groups, Precision Electroweak Measurements on the Z

Resonance, CERN-PH-EP/2005-041, SLAC-R-774: http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0509008v3

[45] The ZEUS Collaboration, Search for contact interactions, large extra dimensions and finite

quark radius in ep collisions at HERA, Phys. Lett. B591 (2004) 23-41:

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0401009v2

[46] “James William Rohlf”, Modern Physics from α to Z, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1994.

[47] “Joseph Depp”, Polarizable Vacuum and the Schwarzschild Solution.

[48] Scienceworld, http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/

[49] http://pdg.lbl.gov/2006/listings/s000.pdf

Other useful references:

[50] “J. F. Douglas”, Solving Problems in Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 2, Third Edition, Longman

Scientific & Technical, ISBN 0-470-20776-0 (USA only), 1986.

[51] Software: MathCad 8 Professional, http://www.mathsoft.com/

[52] University of Illinois, http://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/NumRel/mathmine1.html

[53] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimensional_analysis

[54] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckingham_%CF%80_theorem

[55] University of California, Riverside,

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Quantum/casimir.html

[56] Georgia State University, http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/forces/exchg.html

[57] “B.S. Massey”, Mechanics of Fluids sixth edition, Van Nostrand Reinhold (International),

1989, Ch. 9.

[58] “Rogers & Mayhew”, Engineering Thermodynamics Work & Heat Transfer third edition,

Longman Scientific & Technical, 1980, Part IV, Ch. 22.

[59] “Douglas, Gasiorek, Swaffield”, Fluid Mechanics second edition, Longman Scientific &

Technical, 1987, Part VII, Ch. 25.

[60] “Erwin Kreyszig”, Advanced Engineering Mathematics Seventh Edition, John Wiley & Sons,

1993, Ch. 10.

[61] “R.H. Dicke”, Gravitation without a principle of equivalence. Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 363 – 376,

1957.

288

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**[62] “R.H. Dicke”, Mach’s principle and equivalence, in Proc. Of the International School of
**

Physics “Enrico Fermi” Course XX, Evidence for Gravitational Theories, ed. C. Møller, Academic

Press, New York, 1961, pp. 1 – 49.

[63] “Puthoff et. Al.”, Engineering the Zero-Point Field and Polarizable Vacuum for Interstellar

Flight, JBIS, Vol. 55, pp.137, 2002, http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0107316v2

[64] “K.A. Stroud”, “Further Engineering Mathematics”, MacMillan Education LTD, Camelot

Press LTD, 1986, Programme 17.

[65] “Lennart Rade, Bertil Westergren”, “Beta Mathematics Handbook Second Edition”, ChartwellBratt Ltd, 1990, Page 470.

[66] Scienceworld, http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/BeatFrequency.html

[67] Scienceworld, http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/MaxwellEquationsSteadyState.html

[68] Scienceworld, http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/ElectromagneticRadiation.html

[69] Georgia State University, http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/ems1.html

[70] Scienceworld, http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/MaxwellEquations.html

[71] http://www.mathcentre.ac.uk/students.php/all_subjects/series

[72] Georgia State University, http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/astro/whdwar.html

[73] Georgia State University, http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/astro/redgia.html

[74] Georgia State University, http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/astro/pulsar.html

[75] “Stein, B. P”. Physics Update, Physics Today 48, 9, Oct. 1995.

[76] “Simon et Al.”, Nucl. Phys. A333, 381 (1980).

[77] Scienceworld, http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Proton.html

[78] “Andrews et Al.”, 1977 J. Phys. G: Nucl. Phys. 3 L91 – L92.

[79] “L.N. Hand, D.G. Miller, and R. Wilson”, Rev. Mod. Phys. 35, 335 (1963).

[80] Stanford Linear Accelerator, http://www.slac.stanford.edu/

http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/theory/quarks.html

[81] Scienceworld, http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/PlanckLength.html

[82] Scienceworld, http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Photon.html

[83] Stanford Linear Accelerator, http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/theory/fundamental.html

[84] “Joshipura et. Al.”, Bounds on the tau Neutrino magnetic moment and charge radius from

Super-K and SNO observations, http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0108018v1

[85] Scienceworld, http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/BohrRadius.html

[86] “Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier”,

http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Fourier.html

[87] http://stores.lulu.com/dge

[88] http://www.veoh.com/users/DeltaGroupEngineering

[89] http://www.deltagroupengineering.com/Docs/QE3_-_Summary.pdf

[90] http://www.deltagroupengineering.com/Docs/QE3_-_Calculation_Engine.pdf

[91] http://www.deltagroupengineering.com/Docs/QE3_-_High_Precision_(MCAD12).pdf

[92] http://www-cdf.fnal.gov/physics/new/top/top.html#PAIR

[93] Cornell University Library: http://www.arxiv.org/

289

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

290

www.deltagroupengineering.com

APPENDIX 4.B

Note: “Quinta Essentia – Part 4” is a companion to “Quinta Essentia – Part 3”. Subsequently, the

simulation and calculation engine in “Part 4” is a natural extension of “Part 3”, utilising it as a

foundational construct. Hence, the calculation engine developed in “Part 3” has been included

(verbatim) herein for reference. Please consult “Part 3” if required.

Quinta Essentia – Part 3

•

**MathCad 8 Professional: calculation engine
**

a. Computational environment

**NOTE: KNOWLEDGE OF MATHCAD IS REQUIRED AND ASSUMED
**

•

•

•

**Convergence Tolerance (TOL): 0.001.
**

Constraint Tolerance (CTOL): 0.001.

Calculation Display Tolerance: 6 figures – unless otherwise indicated.

b. Units of measure (definitions)

Scale 1

10

Scale 2

10

3

3

10

6

10

6

10

9

9

10

10

12

10

12

10

15

10

15

10

18

10

( mm µm nm pm fm am zm ym )

18

10

21

10

10

10

24

24

Scale 1 .( m)

**( mHz µHz nHz pHz fHz aHz zHz yHz )
**

( mJ µJ nJ pJ fJ aJ zJ yJ )

21

Scale 1 .( Hz)

Scale 1 .( J )

Scale 1 .( W )

( mW µW nW pW fW aW zW yW )

( mΩ µΩ nΩ pΩ fΩ aΩ zΩ yΩ )

( mV µV nV pV fV aV zV yV )

Scale 1 .( ohm )

Scale 1 .( V)

**( mPa µPa nPa pPa fPa aPa zPa yPa )
**

( mT µT nT pT fT aT zT yT )

Scale 1 .( T )

**( mNs µNs nNs pNs fNs aNs zNs yNs )
**

( mN µN nN pN fN aN zN yN )

Scale 1 .( Pa )

Scale 1 .( Ns )

Scale 1 .( newton )

( mgs µgs ngs pgs fgs ags zgs ygs )

Scale 1 .( gauss )

291

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Scale 1 .( gm )

**( mgm µgm ngm pgm fgm agm zgm ygm )
**

( mSt µSt nSt pSt fSt aSt zSt ySt )

Scale 1

( kSt MSt GSt TSt PSt ESt ZSt YSt )

Scale 2

( kHz MHz GHz THz PHz EHz ZHz YHz)

Scale 2 .( Hz)

Scale 2 .( newton )

( kN MN GN TN PN EN ZN YN )

Scale 2 .( J )

( kJ MJ GJ TJ PJ EJ ZJ YJ )

Scale 2 .( W )

( kW MW GW TW PW EW ZW YW )

Scale 2 .( ohm )

( kΩ MΩ GΩ TΩ PΩ EΩ ZΩ YΩ )

Scale 2 .( V)

( kV MV GV TV PV EV ZV YV)

Scale 2 .( Pa )

( kPa MPa GPa TPa PPa EPa ZPa YPa )

Scale 2 .( T )

( kT MT GT TT PT ET ZT YT )

( keV MeV GeV TeV PeV EeV ZeV YeV)

Scale 2 .( eV)

Ns newton .s

c. Constants (definitions)

G

ε0

α

.

6.674210

3

m

11 .

kg .s

.

8.85418781710

2

12 .

F

c

m

299792458.

s

h

.

6.626069310

µ0

34 .

( J .s )

7 newton

4 .π .10 .

2

A

.

eV 1.6021765310

19 .

( J)

m

.

7.29735256810

3

.

1.6021765310

Qe

19 .

( C)

γ

0.5772156649015328

**d. Fundamental particle characteristics (definitions or initialisation values)
**

m e m p m n m µ m τ m AMC

. 31 1.6726217110

. 27 1.6749272810

. 27 1.883531410

. 28 3.1677710

. 27 1.6605388610

. 27 .( kg )

9.109382610

λ Ce λ CP λ CN λ Cµ λ Cτ

ω Ce ω CP ω CN ω Cµ ω Cτ

h. 1

c

1

1

1

1

me mp mn mµ mτ

2

2 .π .c .

h

me mp mn mµ mτ

292

www.deltagroupengineering.com

eV

6

6

3 0.19.10 18.2.10 .

2

c

m en m µn m τn

**Note: for the Bottom Quark, the “SLAC” estimate is utilised initially.
**

4 .10

m uq m dq m sq m cq m bq m tq

( 80.425 91.1876 114.4 ) .

mW mZ mH

GeV

0.13 1.35 4.7 179.4 .

2

c

2

( 2.817940325 0.875 0.85 ) .( fm)

re rp rn

0.85.10

3

GeV

c

r xq

8 .10

3

16 .

( cm)

.

0.529177210810

r Bohr

10

.( nm )

656.469624182052

λB

( m)

**e. Planck characteristics (definitions)
**

G.h

λh

c

3

h .c

mh

G.h

th

G

c

1

ωh

5

th

f. Astronomical statistics

MM ME MJ MS

5

1738 6377.18 71492 6.96.10 .( km)

RM RE RJ RS

2

c .R E

2 .G

M BH

200.R S

R RG

24

24

24

30

0.0735.10 5.977.10 1898.8.10 1.989.10 .( kg )

R BH

2 .G .

M BH

2

c

M NS

1 .M S

R NS

M RG

4 .M S

R WD

4200.( km)

M WD

20.( km)

3

300.10 .M E

g. Other

.10

M BH = 4.29379067958471

33

( kg )

mx

mp

rx

r Bohr

**h. Arbitrary values for illustrational purposes
**

ω

KR

1 .( Hz)

1

k

1

R max

X

4

10 .( km)

r

1

∆R max

RE

F 0( k )

1

K 0( ω , X )

1

R max

250

293

www.deltagroupengineering.com

i. PV / ZPF equations

2.

K PV( r , M )

e

G .M

3

2

r .c

K 0( r , M )

K PV( r , M ) .e

K EGM_N( r , M )

K PV( r , M )

2

2 . ∆K 0( r , M )

G.M .

KR

2

r .c

∆K 0( r , M )

K PV( r , M )

K EGM_E( r , M )

e

G.M .

C PV n PV, r , M

2

r

2

1

T PV n PV, r , M

n PV 3 2 .c .G.M

.

. K ( r, M )

PV

r

π .r

ω PV n PV, r , M

π .n PV

c

λ PV n PV, r , M

ω PV n PV, r , M

2 . ∆K 0( r , M )

U m( r , M )

ω PV n PV, r , M

3 .M .c

2

4 .π .r

3

3

U ω( r , M )

n Ω ( r, M )

h .

4

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

3

2 .c

Ω ( r, M )

4

12

Ω ( r, M )

∆ω PV( r , M )

ω Ω ( r, M )

∆ω δr n PV, r , ∆r , M

c.

λ PV n PV, r

ω Ω ( r, M )

n Ω ( r , M ) .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

U ω( r , M )

S m( r , M )

∆r , M

∆r , M

1

ω Ω(r

108.

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

ω PV n PV, r

∆λ δr n PV, r , ∆r , M

∆λ Ω ( r , ∆r , M )

1

U m( r , M )

Ω ( r, M )

12. 768 81.

c .U m( r , M )

∆ω ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

ω β r , ∆r , M , K R

U ω( r , M )

N ∆r( r , M )

ω Ω ( r, M ) .

∆r

c

ω PV n PV, r , M

λ PV n PV, r , M

1

∆r , M )

ω Ω ( r, M )

3 .M .c .

4 .π

2

∆K C( r , ∆r , M )

2

∆ω δr n PV, r , ∆r , M .∆λ δr n PV, r , ∆r , M

∆v δr n PV, r , ∆r , M

∆v Ω ( r , ∆r , M )

U m( r , M )

∆v δr n Ω ( r , M ) , r , ∆r , M

∆U PV( r , ∆r , M ) .

4

4

µ0

ω Ω_ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

ε0

ω Ω_ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

ω Ω_ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

∆U PV( r , ∆r , M )

∆ω δr( 1 , r , ∆r , M )

4

(r

1

∆r )

3

2 .c .

∆U PV( r , ∆r , M )

h

3

r

3

n Ω_ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

4

K R . ω Ω_ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

294

1

∆ω δr( 1 , r , ∆r , M )

4

ω Ω_ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

∆ω δr( 1 , r , ∆r , M )

4

www.deltagroupengineering.com

ω β r , ∆r , M , K R

n β r , ∆r , M , K R

∆ω Ω ( r , ∆r , M )

ω Ω(r

∆ω S r , ∆r , M , K R

∆r , M )

∆ω Ω ( r , ∆r , M )

St γ ( r , ∆r , M )

ω Ω ( r, M )

ω Ω_ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

∆U PV( r , ∆r , M ) .

St α ( r , ∆r , M )

∆n S r , ∆r , M , K R

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

ω Ce

µ0

n β r , ∆r , M , K R

∆ω ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

∆ω R( r , ∆r , M )

∆ω Ω ( r , ∆r , M )

ω β r , ∆r , M , K R

St β ( r , ∆r , M )

ε0

n Ω_ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

St δ( r , ∆r , M )

n Ω(r

∆ω ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

ω Ce

∆r , M )

n Ω ( r, M )

∆v δr n PV, r , ∆r , M

St ε n PV, r , ∆r , M

∆v Ω ( r , ∆r , M )

j. Casimir equations

ω C( ∆r )

c

.

2 ∆r

E C( r , ∆r , M )

ω X( r , ∆r , M )

N C( r , ∆r , M )

λ C( ∆r )

π .N X( r , ∆r , M )

N X( r , ∆r , M ) .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

ω C( ∆r )

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

Σ HR( A , D , r , ∆r , M )

∆Λ ( r , ∆r , M )

ω C( ∆r )

c .K PV( r , M ) . St α ( r , ∆r , M )

N TR( A , D , r , ∆r , M )

F PP( r , ∆r )

c

A D St N

N T A , D , N X( r , ∆r , M )

N T A , D , N C( r , ∆r , M )

Σ H A , D , N X( r , ∆r , M )

Σ H A , D , N C( r , ∆r , M )

π .h .c .A PP( r )

4

480.∆r

F PV( r , ∆r , M )

N X( r , ∆r , M )

B C( r , ∆r , M )

λ X( r , ∆r , M )

(1 1 1 )

Σ H A , D, N T

N R( r , ∆r , M )

n Ω_ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

1

ln 2 .n Ω_ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

γ

E C( r , ∆r , M )

c

c

ω X( r , ∆r , M )

St N

N T A , D , St N

NT

. 2 .A

2

N C( r , ∆r , M )

A PP( r ) .∆U PV( r , ∆r , M ) .

D

D

D. N T

N X( r , ∆r , M )

A

1

A PP( r )

N C( r , ∆r , M )

N X( r , ∆r , M )

2

.ln

4 .π .r

2

N X( r , ∆r , M )

4

N C( r , ∆r , M )

8 .π .G .

∆U PV( r , ∆r , M )

2

3 .c

295

www.deltagroupengineering.com

2

4

8 .π .G . F PV( r , ∆r , M ) . N X( r , ∆r , M ) . N X( r , ∆r , M )

ln

2

A PP( r )

N C( r , ∆r , M )

N C( r , ∆r , M )

3 .c

St ∆Λ ( r , ∆r , M )

∆Λ ( r , ∆r , M )

Λ R( r , ∆r , M )

∆ω δr_Error( r , ∆r , M )

St ∆Λ ( r , ∆r , M )

9 .G.M . ∆ω δr( 1 , r , ∆r , M )

∆Λ EGM( r , ∆r , M )

3

2

U m( r , M )

. 3 .

∆ω δr( 1 , r , ∆r , M ) 2

∆U PV( r , ∆r , M )

∆Λ Error( r , ∆r , M )

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

2 .r

2

2 3

1 . 16.π .r .h . N X( r , ∆r , M ) . N X( r , ∆r , M )

ln

K P 27.c .M .∆r4 N C( r , ∆r , M )

N C( r , ∆r , M )

St PP K P , r , ∆r , M

2

4

2 3

16.π .r .h . N X( r , ∆r , M ) . N X( r , ∆r , M )

ln

4 N ( r , ∆r , M )

N C( r , ∆r , M )

.

.

.

27 c M ∆r

C

K P( r , ∆r , M )

1

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

1

∆Λ ( r , ∆r , M )

1

4

∆Λ EGM( r , ∆r , M )

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

.

∆ω δr( 1 , r , ∆r , M )

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

.

∆ω δr( 1 , r , ∆r , M )

k. Fundamental particle equations

mγ

512.h .G.m e

.

2

c . π .r e

n Ω r e, m e

ln 2 .n Ω r e , m e

5

2 .m γγ

m gg

φ γγ

r e.

r γγ

2.

φ gg

r γγ

γ

2

m γγ

m e .c

r gg

2

ω Ω ( r, M )

St ζ( r , M )

r gg

h .ω Ω r e , m e

EΩ

ω Ce

5

3

4 .r γγ

Kω

St η ( r , M )

Nγ

2

Kλ

π

ω Ω ( r, M )

ω CP

EΩ

m γγ

mγ

1

Km

Kω

mγ

Nγ

Kλ

ω Ω ( r, M )

St θ ( r , M )

ω CN

**Note: the highlighted equation is not included as a constraint. This is the most significant difference
**

between the calculation engine and the “complete algorithm” of Appendix 3.K.

5

1

rπ

c .ω Ce

rν

4

5

.

2

4

27.ω h .ω Ce

4

32.π

.

ω CP

3

.

ω CP

5

1

.

rµ rτ

r ε.

1 . mµ

9

4 me

2 5

1 . mτ

9

6 me

1

5

rε

1 . me

r π.

9

2 mp

2

ω CN

3

ω CN

5

1

5

2

r en r µn r τn

r ε.

m en

me

2

5

r µ.

m µn

mµ

2

5

r τ.

m τn

2

mτ

Given

5

r ε r π.

1 . me

9

2 mp

2

296

www.deltagroupengineering.com

rε

α

2

.e

3

rπ

rµ

rε

α

.e

rτ

rν

rε

rπ

π

rν

rε

rπ

rν

rµ

rτ

1

5

Find r ε , r π , r ν , r µ , r τ , r en , r µn , r τn

3 .r xq. 2

r uq

m dq

5

2

r dq

m uq

r uq

m dq

.

2

m uq

r en

r µn

r τn

5

2

m sq

9

St sq

St dq

ω Ω r dq , m dq

St dq

floor St dq

St sq

ω Ω r xq, m sq

St sq

floor St sq

St cq

St bq

1

ω Ω r uq , m uq

St tq

. ω Ω r xq, m cq

St cq

floor St cq

ω Ω r xq, m bq

St bq

floor St bq

ω Ω r xq, m tq

St tq

floor St tq

5

m cq

r sq

r cq

r bq

5

r uq .

1

m uq

.

2

St cq

9

m bq

2

5

r tq

St bq

5

m tq

ω Ω r uq , m uq

St uq

floor St uq

St dq

ω Ω r dq , m dq

St dq

floor St dq

ω Ω r sq , m sq

St sq

floor St sq

ω Ω r cq , m cq

St cq

floor St cq

St bq

ω Ω r bq , m bq

St bq

floor St bq

St tq

ω Ω r tq , m tq

St tq

floor St tq

St sq

1

St cq

ω Ω r ε, m e

.

297

9

2

St tq

St uq

2

9

www.deltagroupengineering.com

9

5

St uq .r uq

m uq

9

5

St dq .r dq

m dq

m sq

me

m cq

rε

m bq

5

9

5

St sq .r sq

.

1 . m tq

r uq .

9

10 m uq

r tq

9

5

St cq .r cq

5

2

r u( M )

h

.

4 π .c .M

rW

r u mW

rZ

r u mZ

rH

r u mH

9

5

St bq .r bq

m tq

9

5

St tq .r tq

ω Ω r u mW ,mW

St W

round St W , 0

. ω Ω r u mZ ,mZ

St Z

round St Z , 0

ω Ω r u mH ,mH

St H

round St H , 0

St W

1

St Z

ω Ω r uq , m uq

St H

5

1

St W

rW

5

5

1

r uq .

rZ

.

m uq

rH

2

9

.m 2

W

1 .

2

mZ

9

St Z

5

rµ

rL

rε

rτ

3

1 .

2

mH

9

St H

1.

r QB

9

r uq

m QB St ω , r QB

Let:

r dq

r sq

r cq

9

m uq . St ω .

r bq

r QB

r uq

r tq

rW

rZ

rH

m L St ω , r L

9

m e . St ω .

rL

5

rε

5

4. . 3

πr

3

V( r )

Q( r )

1

V( r )

Q ch ( r )

Q( r )

3

r dr

5.

rν

3

1

x

2

Given

2

x

ln( x) .

2

x

x

KS

1

1 3

Find( x)

2

3 . π .r ν ( 1 x) .x3

.

2

8

1 x x

b1

2

3 .r ν

.

2

KS

2

x

KX

2

0.113. fm

1

298

www.deltagroupengineering.com

6 .b 1 .K X . x

2

rX

3 .b 1 . x

2

1

1

r νM

KS

2.

3

. e

3

5

2

π .r ν . x

rν

r πE

rν

r πM

r dr .

r dr

fm

r

x .r

1.

e

3

x

1

rν

1

2

r

ρ ch ( r )

rν.

rν

fm

1

K S.

KS

2

fm

2

ν

10.r ν

∞

rν

1

V

volt

Given

r dr

rν

r ν .ρ ch r νM

ρ ch ( r ) d r

rν

r dr

r ν .ρ ch r πE

ρ ch ( r ) d r

rν

∞

r ν .ρ ch r πM

ρ ch ( r ) d r

r dr

rν

r νM

Find r νM , r πE, r πM

r πE

r πM

r νM

r νM

r πE

r πE .( fm)

r πM

r πM

5

5

r ν2 r ν3 r ν5

λ A( r, M )

m en

1 .

r ε.

2

9

me

2

2

5

r µ.

m µn

9

3

2

rν

5

r τ.

m τn

r ν .( fm)

KS

K S . fm

2

2

9

5

λ PV( 1 , r , M )

2 .n Ω ( r , M )

Given

λ A K ω .r x, m AMC

λB

rx

1

Find r x

299

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**l. Particle summary matrix 3.1
**

2

0.69. fm

0.848.( fm)

rπ

r πE

KX

KS

=

0.113

2

0.113364

0.857.( fm)

r πM

fm

1.

r πE

2

830.702612 830.662386

=

r νM

rν

rp

848.636631

848

850.059022

857

874.696943

875

( am)

**826.944318 825.617412
**

rν

rX

r νM

0.879.( fm)

879.064943

879

2

rε

.e

3

rπ

m tq = 178.440506

GeV

c

rε

2

.e

rµ

.

7.29735310

3

rτ

= 7.29735310

.

3

rν

λ A K ω .r Bohr , m p

λB

3.141593

=

657.329013

656.469624

( nm )

rε

rπ

1 .r ε .

e

α rπ

rν

rµ

2

1 .r ε .

e

α rν

3

rπ

2

0.69. fm

M Error

1 . 1.

r νM

rp 2

rν

0.848.( fm)

0.857.( fm)

1

r πE

rν

KS

rX

KX

178.( GeV)

.

1.11022310

0

0.034635

.

7.38826910

Error Av

r πM

0.879.( fm)

3

3

0.809916

0.160717

0.321692

0.247475

0.130911

M Error

0, 1

M Error

2, 1

2

λ A K ω .r Bohr , m p

λB

13

0.075074

1.

M Error

0,0

12

+ M Error

2, 0

rν

r πE

m tq .c

.

4.8425510

rε

1.

π rπ

r νM

0

M Error =

rτ

(%)

M Error

0, 2

M Error

2, 2

M Error

1, 0

M Error

3,0

M Error

1,1

M Error

3, 1

M Error

1, 2

...

M Error

3, 2

Error Av = 0.149388 ( % )

300

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**m. Particle summary matrix 3.2
**

2

rε

. c .e

r e ω Ce

r π_1

r π_2

3

rπ

r ν_1

5

r π_av

3

r π_2

∆r π

r π_av

r π_1

2 r ν_1

r ν_2

∆r ν

r ν_av

r ν_1

1 .

r π_av

r π_Error

r π_2

r ν_Error

1 .

r ν_av

r ν_2

∆r π

rX KX

3 .b 1 . x

2

r π_Error

1

r π_1

r π_2

r ν_1

r ν_2

r π_av r ν_av

1

∆r π

∆K X

=

( 0.69 0.02) . fm

2

(%)

830.594743

826.944318

826.941624

830.648674

826.942971

.

1.34683810

( am)

3

2

0.005. fm

=

( 0.69 0.02) . fm

14

830.702606

0.053931

2

0.69. fm

1.

2

4

27.ω h ω Ce

.

4

32.π ω CN

0

∆r ν

. 3 ( YHz)

ω Ω r π , m p = 2.61722210

π

.

2.22044610

1=

r ν_Error

∆r ν

2

6 .b 1 .K X . x

.

4 .ω CN

r π_1

1.

r ν_av

c .ω Ce

r ν_2

2

4

27.ω h ω Ce

.

.

3

4

4 .ω CP

32.π ω CP

c .ω Ce

5

rε

830.662386

12.03985

2

( am)

2

r X_av

r X_Error

1.

∆K X

rX KX

2

∆K X

rX KX

rX KX

∆r X_av

∆K X

∆r X_av

r X_av

rX KX

∆K X

1

r X_av

rX KX

∆K X

rX KX

∆K X

843.685579

807.144886

=

r X_av

825.415232

∆r X_av

18.270346

m γ = 5.746734 10

17 .

eV

r X_Error = 0 ( % )

( am)

m γγ

m gg

=

3.195095

6.39019

10

301

45 .

eV

www.deltagroupengineering.com

φ

1 . γγ

λ h φ gg

=

1.152898

1.521258

φ

1 . γγ

K λ .λ h φ gg

=

0.991785

1.308668

**n. Particle summary matrix 3.3
**

The following is accurate to “1 or 2” decimal places (as implied by the results):

ω Ω r π, m p

ω Ω r ν ,mn

ω Ω r ν,mn

ω Ω r ε, m e

ω Ω r ε, m e

0.5

ω Ω r en , m en

0.5

2

ω Ω r L, m L 2 , r L

1

4

ω Ω r L, m L 3 , r L

1

6

ω Ω r µn , m µn

ω Ω r µ,mµ

8

3

ω Ω r L, m L 5 , r L

8

ω Ω r µn , m µn

4

10

ω Ω r L, m L 5 , r L

4

ω Ω r τ, m τ

12

ω Ω r τ, m τ

12

ω Ω r τn , m τn

ω Ω r en , m en

1

ω Ω r L, m L 2 , r L

2

ω Ω r L, m L 3 , r L

ω Ω r µ,mµ

ω Ω r τn , m τn

1

ω Ω r π, m p

.

ω Ω r uq , m uq

= 14

ω Ω r dq , m dq

14

1

ω Ω r ε, m e

.

ω Ω r uq , m uq

2

5

6

=

6

7

7

28

ω Ω r dq , m dq

42

ω Ω r cq , m cq

ω Ω r sq , m sq

56

ω Ω r bq , m bq

70

ω Ω r cq , m cq

28

84

ω Ω r bq , m bq

35

ω Ω r QB, m QB 5 , r QB

ω Ω r QB, m QB 5 , r QB

42

ω Ω r QB, m QB 6 , r QB

98

112

ω Ω r W,mW

ω Ω r QB, m QB 6 , r QB

126

56

ω Ω r Z, m Z

140

ω Ω r W,mW

63

ω Ω r Z, m Z

70

ω Ω r sq , m sq

ω Ω r H, m H

14

21

49

ω Ω r H, m H

ω Ω r tq , m tq

ω Ω r tq , m tq

302

www.deltagroupengineering.com

ω Ω r π, m p

ω Ω r ν ,mn

ω Ω r ε,me

0.07

ω Ω r en , m en

0.07

ω Ω r L, m L 2 , r L

0.14

ω Ω r L, m L 3 , r L

0.14

1

14

0.29

1

ω Ω r µ,mµ

0.43

7

ω Ω r µn , m µn

0.57

0.07

1

0.57

0.07

ω Ω r L, m L 5 , r L

7

0.71

2

0.86

7

0.86

3

1

7

1

4

2

7

3

4

ω Ω r cq , m cq

4

7

0.86

ω Ω r bq , m bq

5

5

0.86

ω Ω r QB, m QB 5 , r QB

6

ω Ω r τ,mτ

1

1

14

ω Ω r τn , m τn

.

=

ω Ω r uq , m uq

ω Ω r uq , m uq

ω Ω r dq , m dq

ω Ω r sq , m sq

8

ω Ω r W,mW

9

ω Ω r Z, m Z

10

0.14

0.29

= 0.43

0.57

0.57

0.71

7

6

7

ω Ω r QB, m QB 6 , r QB

0.14

7

6

7

ω Ω r H, m H

ω Ω r tq , m tq

**o. Particle summary matrix 3.4
**

φ γγ

φ gg

r Bohr

rx

=

4.670757

6.163101

10

35 .

1 = 0.352379 ( % )

m

.

r x = 5.27319110

m γγ

m gg

=

11

( m)

3.195095

6.39019

10

303

φ

1 . γγ

K λ .λ h φ gg

=

0.991785

1.308668

45 .

eV

www.deltagroupengineering.com

rε

me

rπ

11.807027

mp

.

5.10998910

rν

830.702612

mn

0.938272

rµ

826.944318

mµ

0.939565

rτ

8.215954

mτ

r en

12.240673

m en

0.095379

r µn

0.105658

1.776989

0.655235

m µn

1.958664

m τn

r uq =

0.768186

m uq

r dq

1.013628

r τn

( am)

0.887904

r sq

1.091334

3 .10

9

1.9.10

4

0.0182

=

.

3.50490310

3

m dq

.

7.00980510

3

m sq

0.113909

1.182905

r cq

1.070961

m cq

r bq

0.92938

m bq

m tq

rW

1.061716

mW

91.1876

mZ

114.4

rH

c

2

4.11826

1.284033

rZ

GeV

178.440506

r tq

0.940438

4

80.425

mH

m L 2, r L

.

9.15554710

m L 3, r L

rL

=

r QB

10.754551

1.005287

0.056767

m L 5, r L

( am)

3

=

0.565476

m QB 5 , r QB

9.596205

m QB 6 , r QB

21.797922

GeV

c

2

**. 3 1.32141 1.319591 11.734441 0.697721 ( fm)
**

λ Ce λ CP λ CN λ Cµ λ Cτ = 2.4263110

.

ω Ce ω CP ω CN ω Cµ ω Cτ = 7.76344110

1.

6

1.

6

r uq

m uq

r dq

r sq

m dq

r cq

m sq

r bq

m cq

4

1.425486 1.427451 0.160523 2.699721 ( YHz)

r tq = 0.960232 ( am)

m bq

m tq = 30.644349

GeV

c

2

p. Similarity equations

SSE 3 E rms , B rms , r , ∆r , M

φ 4C_S( r , ∆r , M )

K PV( r , M ) . St α ( r , ∆r , M ) ln 2 .n Ω_ZPF( r , ∆r , M )

γ

.

π .E rms .B rms

n Ω_ZPF( r , ∆r , M ) 1

Re acos SSE 3 E C( r , ∆r , M ) , B C( r , ∆r , M ) , r , ∆r , M

304

www.deltagroupengineering.com

φ 5C_S( r , ∆r , M )

**Re asin SSE 3 E C( r , ∆r , M ) , B C( r , ∆r , M ) , r , ∆r , M
**

1

SSE 4 φ , DC_E, DC_B, E rms , B rms , r , ∆r , M

.SSE ( 1

3

DC_E) .E rms , ( 1

DC_B) .B rms , r , ∆r , M

.SSE ( 1

3

DC_E) .E rms, ( 1

DC_B) .B rms , r , ∆r , M

cos ( φ )

1

SSE 5 φ, DC_E, DC_B, E rms , B rms, r , ∆r , M

sin ( φ)

q. Calculation results

K PV R E, M M

K PV R E, 2 .M M

K PV R E, M E

K PV R E, 2 .M E

K PV R E, M J

K PV R E, 2 .M J

K 0 R E, M M

K 0 R E, M E

K 0 R E, M J

∆K 0 R E, M M

∆K 0 R E, M E

∆K 0 R E, M J

K EGM_N R E, M M

K EGM_N R E, M E

K EGM_N R E, M J

1

1

1.000001

K EGM_E R E, M M

K EGM_E R E, M E

K EGM_E R E, M J

1

1

1

=

1

1

1

1

1

1.000001

1

1

0.999999

.

8.55887110

12

.

6.96005110

K PV R E, M S

K PV R E, 2 .M S

3

K PV R E, M E .e

3

K PV R S , M S .e

∆K 0 R E , M E

∆K 0 R S , M S

ω PV 1 , R E, M M

ω PV 1 , R E, M E

K 0 R E, M E

= 1.000008

.

8.27226110

=

e

=1

∆K 0 R E , M E

0.035839

e

( Hz)

K 0 R S, M S

2.484128

T PV 1 , R E, M S

λ PV 1 , R E, M M

. 7

3.62406910

λ PV 1 , R E, M E

.

8.36497210

λ PV 1 , R E, M J

λ PV 1 , R E, M S

. 6

1.2259310

. 5

1.20683210

1.000927

K EGM_E R E, M S

1

4

120.885935

=

U m R E, M E

U m R E, M J

U m R E, M S

305

27.902544

4.089263

(s)

0.402556

U m R E, M M

( km)

.

2.31613510

K EGM_N R E, M S

T PV 1 , R E, M E

ω PV 1 , R E, M S

=

0.999305

= 1.000008

T PV 1 , R E, M J

6

=

∆K 0 R S , M S

0.244543

ω PV 1 , R E, M J

7

1.000927

∆K 0 R E, M S

T PV 1 , R E, M M

3

.

2.211110

1.000463

K 0 R E, M S

=1

10

6.080707

494.481475

=

. 5

1.57089110

( EPa)

. 8

1.64551410

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Ω R E, M M

Ω R E, M E

Ω R E, M J

=

. 29

2.83606210

n Ω R E, M M

. 29

1.73968910

n Ω R E, M E

. 28

9.17216810

n Ω R E, M J

. 28

4.2341410

n Ω R E, M S

Ω R E, M S

ω Ω R E, M M

519.573099

=

ω Ω R E, M J

. 3

1.86915710

ω Ω R E, M S

. 3

8.76512110

S m R E, M M

0.182295

S m R E, M E

S m R E, M J

( YHz)

14.824182

=

S m R E, M S

. 3

4.70941210

∆ω δr 1 , R E, ∆r , M E

=

∆ω δr 1 , R E, ∆r , M J

. 27

3.5284510

195.505363

∆ω PV R E, M E

519.573099

=

∆ω PV R E, M J

N ∆r R E, M E

YW

N ∆r R E, M J

2

cm

. 14

6.52135710

=

N ∆r R E, M S

1.729554

∆λ δr 1 , R E, ∆r , M M

7.493187

∆λ δr 1 , R E, ∆r , M E

( pHz)

51.128768

∆λ δr 1 , R E, ∆r , M J

.

1.33585910

4

∆v δr 1 , R E, ∆r , M M

∆λ Ω R E, ∆r , M E

.

5.02660110

5

∆v δr 1 , R E, ∆r , M E

.

1.39724710

5

∆λ Ω R E, ∆r , M S

.

2.97920610

6

∆v Ω R E, ∆r , M M

13.105112

∆λ Ω R E, ∆r , M J

∆v Ω R E, ∆r , M E

∆v Ω R E, ∆r , M J

=

∆K C R E, ∆r , M M

∆K C R E, ∆r , M E

∆K C R E, ∆r , M J

∆K C R E, ∆r , M S

( ym )

∆v δr 1 , R E, ∆r , M J

13.105121

pm

∆U PV R E, ∆r , M E

13.105115

s

∆U PV R E, ∆r , M J

87.634109

. 4

2.78399910

. 16

2.9237310

7.577156

=

∆U PV R E, ∆r , M S

1.74894

0.256316

13.105101

=

13.10513

pm

13.105131

s

13.109717

2.860531

232.617621

=

. 7

7.74094810

ω Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M E

ω Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M J

. 7

2.9162510

( GPa)

4

7.3899.10

ω Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M M

( MPa .MΩ )

( m)

0.025237

∆U PV R E, ∆r , M M

1.077649

=

. 15

6.23483610

∆v δr 1 , R E, ∆r , M S

13.109693

∆v Ω R E, ∆r , M S

. 15

1.73310910

∆λ δr 1 , R E, ∆r , M S

∆λ Ω R E, ∆r , M M

=

( YHz)

. 3

1.86915710

. 3

8.76512110

N ∆r R E, M M

519.469801

∆ω δr 1 , R E, ∆r , M S

. 27

7.64347410

∆ω PV R E, M S

. 6

4.93312710

∆ω δr 1 , R E, ∆r , M M

. 28

1.44974110

=

∆ω PV R E, M M

195.505363

ω Ω R E, M E

. 28

2.36338510

ω Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M S

123.501066

370.868276

=

. 3

1.56573710

( PHz)

. 3

8.90753610

KR2 = 99.99999999999999(%)

306

www.deltagroupengineering.com

∆ω ZPF R E, ∆r , M M

∆ω ZPF R E, ∆r , M E

ω β R E, ∆r , M M , K R2

14.793206

ω β R E, ∆r , M E, K R2

=

ω β R E, ∆r , M J , K R2

∆n S R E, ∆r , M M , K R2

∆n S R E, ∆r , M E, K R2

∆n S R E, ∆r , M J , K R2

∆n S R E, ∆r , M S , K R2

∆ω R R E, ∆r , M M

=

∆ω R R E, ∆r , M J

∆ω R R E, ∆r , M S

St α R E, ∆r , M M

. 18

6.40202410

∆ω Ω R E, ∆r , M J

. 18

3.58539910

∆ω Ω R E, ∆r , M S

∆ω S R E, ∆r , M E, K R2

9.615565

∆ω S R E, ∆r , M J , K R2

11.66707

∆ω S R E, ∆r , M S , K R2

St β R E, ∆r , M M

.

2.78399910

St β R E, ∆r , M E

St β R E, ∆r , M J

.

2.9162510

7

St β R E, ∆r , M S

.

2.19383110

5

St δ R E, ∆r , M M

St γ R E, ∆r , M E

.

5.83032610

5

St δ R E, ∆r , M E

.

2.0974410

St γ R E, ∆r , M S

.

9.83425710

St ε 1 , R E, ∆r , M M

St ε 1 , R E, ∆r , M E

St ε 1 , R E, ∆r , M J

=

St ε 1 , R E, ∆r , M S

2.

G .M M

. 1

2

R E .c

1.

2

St δ R E, ∆r , M J

4

St δ R E, ∆r , M S

4

=1

=

( PHz)

. 3

8.90658910

3

0.011474

1

=

1

1

1

St ε n Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M J , R E, ∆r , M J

1.000002

St ε n Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M S , R E, ∆r , M S

e

. 3

1.56556910

.

2.01680710

1.000001

2

370.826434

=

4

1.000001

1.

( PHz)

123.486273

.

4.77711210

St ε n Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M E , R E, ∆r , M E

G .M E

. 1

2

R E .c

162.833549

4

St ε n Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M M , R E, ∆r , M M

2.

45.263389

.

1.59080310

0.999999

2

. 14

6.84403710

763.476685

8.19356

St γ R E, ∆r , M M

St γ R E, ∆r , M J

=

∆ω S R E, ∆r , M M , K R2

( MPa .MΩ )

. 15

1.16748410

. 14

3.81125810

7.251258

4

=

=

17.031676

∆ω Ω R E, ∆r , M E

.

1.034710

87.634109

=

. 15

1.78829110

∆ω Ω R E, ∆r , M M

19

=

n β R E, ∆r , M M , K R2

n β R E, ∆r , M S , K R2

. 19

1.49277510

. 18

6.40270810

. 18

3.5857810

n β R E, ∆r , M J , K R2

1.077649

St α R E, ∆r , M S

e

167.366022

. 19

1.03481710

n Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M S

n β R E, ∆r , M E, K R2

( THz)

946.765196

ω β R E, ∆r , M S , K R2

∆ω R R E, ∆r , M E

41.841506

=

n Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M J

. 3

8.90753610

∆ω ZPF R E, ∆r , M S

St α R E, ∆r , M J

( PHz)

. 3

1.56573710

. 19

1.49295410

n Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M E

370.868276

=

∆ω ZPF R E, ∆r , M J

St α R E, ∆r , M E

n Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M M

123.501066

1.000001

=

1

1.000003

1

2

=1

307

www.deltagroupengineering.com

G .M J

. 1

2

R E .c

2.

e

1.

2

2.

2

= 1.000001

e

G .M S

. 1

2

R E .c

1.

2

2

= 1.000927

N X R M , ∆r , M M

. 17

2.15162910

E C R M , ∆r , M M

N X R E, ∆r , M E

. 17

2.29685210

E C R E, ∆r , M E

.

3.15778710

E C R J , ∆r , M J

N X R J , ∆r , M J

=

N X R S , ∆r , M S

. 17

3.76223110

B C R M , ∆r , M M

B C R E, ∆r , M E

B C R J , ∆r , M J

=

λ X R M , ∆r , M M

λ X R J , ∆r , M J

2

=

36.419294

97.406507

=

=

N C R J , ∆r , M J

N C R S , ∆r , M S

ln 2 .N X R E, ∆r , M E

γ

ln 2 .N C R E, ∆r , M E

ln 2 .N X R J , ∆r , M J

γ

ln 2 .N C R J , ∆r , M J

ln 2 .N X R S , ∆r , M S

γ

ln 2 .N C R S , ∆r , M S

8.231693

3.077746

( PHz)

. 12

3.20180310

N C R E, ∆r , M E

γ

m

1.791481

N C R M , ∆r , M M

167.343325

volt

23.079214

10.073108

ω X R S , ∆r , M S

( nm )

190.811924

7.220558

ω X R J , ∆r , M J

ln 2 .N C R M , ∆r , M M

1.

2

( mgs )

γ

2

1.

6.364801

ω X R E, ∆r , M E

ln 2 .N X R M , ∆r , M M

1.

2

ω X R M , ∆r , M M

29.761666

λ X R S , ∆r , M S

1.

9.8181

0.76984

=

E C R S , ∆r , M S

0.240852

B C R S , ∆r , M S

λ X R E, ∆r , M E

17

294.339224

. 12

4.18248610

. 13

1.53794510

. 13

3.14792110

1 . N X R M , ∆r , M M

ln

2

N C R M , ∆r , M M

γ

γ

γ

1 . N X R E, ∆r , M E

ln

2

N C R E, ∆r , M E

5.557718 5.557718

=

1 . N X R J , ∆r , M J

ln

2

N C R J , ∆r , M J

5.45678 5.45678

4.964882 4.964882

4.694305 4.694305

1 . N X R S , ∆r , M S

ln

2

N C R S , ∆r , M S

N T 1 , 2 , N C R M , ∆r , M M

N T 1 , 2 , N C R J , ∆r , M J

. 12 7.68972610

. 12

1.60090210

N T 1 , 2 , N X R M , ∆r , M M

N T 1 , 2 , N X R J , ∆r , M J

. 17 1.57889410

. 17

1.07581410

N T 1 , 2 , n Ω_ZPF R M , ∆r , M M

N T 1 , 2 , n Ω_ZPF R J , ∆r , M J

N T 1 , 2 , N C R E, ∆r , M E

N T 1 , 2 , N C R S , ∆r , M S

N T 1 , 2 , N X R E, ∆r , M E

N T 1 , 2 , N X R S , ∆r , M S

. 17 1.88111510

. 17

1.14842610

N T 1 , 2 , n Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M E

N T 1 , 2 , n Ω_ZPF R S , ∆r , M S

. 18 8.57004510

. 18

5.17408410

N TR 1 , 1 , R M , ∆r , M M

N TR 1 , 1 , R E, ∆r , M E

N TR 1 , 1 , R J , ∆r , M J

N TR 1 , 1 , R S , ∆r , M S

=

=

. 18 7.16489910

. 18

4.83975610

. 12 1.57396110

. 13

2.09124310

. 4

6.72005410

Σ H 1 , 2 , n Ω_ZPF R M , ∆r , M M

. 4

5.49159510

Σ H 1 , 2 , n Ω_ZPF R E, ∆r , M E

. 4

2.05325110

Σ H 1 , 2 , n Ω_ZPF R J , ∆r , M J

. 4

1.19514810

Σ H 1 , 2 , n Ω_ZPF R S , ∆r , M S

308

. 37

9.36929710

=

. 38

1.07084610

. 38

2.05343110

. 38

2.93782710

www.deltagroupengineering.com

F PP R M , ∆r

A PP R M

Σ HR 1 , 2 , R M , ∆r , M M

. 9

4.51591310

F PP R E, ∆r

Σ HR 1 , 2 , R E, ∆r , M E

. 9

3.01576110

A PP R E

.

4.21583910

F PP R J , ∆r

. 8

1.42837810

A PP R J

=

Σ HR 1 , 2 , R J , ∆r , M J

Σ HR 1 , 2 , R S , ∆r , M S

8

1.300126

=

1.300126

( fPa )

1.300126

1.300126

F PP R S , ∆r

A PP R S

F PV R M , ∆r , M M

F PP R M , ∆r

A PP R M

F PV R M , ∆r , M M

F PV R E, ∆r , M E

2.349179

F PP R E, ∆r

A PP R E

1.300007

F PV R E, ∆r , M E

=

F PV R J , ∆r , M J

0.074224

( fPa )

F PP R J , ∆r

0.015617

A PP R J

F PV R J , ∆r , M J

F PV R S , ∆r , M S

F PP R S , ∆r

A PP R S

F PV R S , ∆r , M S

∆Λ R M , ∆r , M M

∆Λ R E, ∆r , M E

∆Λ R J , ∆r , M J

=

44.65616

1

=

1

1.447168

St ∆Λ R E, ∆r , M E

0.029107

15 .

2

Hz

. 3

1.65163110

St ∆Λ R J , ∆r , M J

3

(%)

1

St ∆Λ R M , ∆r , M M

10

. 3

9.15864310

. 3

8.22480110

3.225809

.

3.39437710

∆Λ R S , ∆r , M S

1

3.225809

=

St ∆Λ R S , ∆r , M S

1.447168

10

0.029107

.

3.39437710

15 .

2

Hz

3

ω PV 1 , R M , M M

∆ω δr 1 , R M , ∆r , M M

Λ R R M , ∆r , M M

Λ R R E, ∆r , M E

Λ R R J , ∆r , M J

Λ R R S , ∆r , M S

=

1

ω PV 1 , R E, M E

1

∆ω δr 1 , R E, ∆r , M E

1

ω PV 1 , R J , M J

1

∆ω δr 1 , R J , ∆r , M J

9

1.3035.10

=

. 9

4.78288210

. 10

5.36192210

. 11

5.22005110

ω PV 1 , R S , M S

∆ω δr 1 , R S , ∆r , M S

309

www.deltagroupengineering.com

2

U m R M, M M

3 .

2

∆U PV R M , ∆r , M M

2

U m R E, M E

3 .

2

∆U PV R E, ∆r , M E

9

1.3035.10

=

2

U m R J, M J

3 .

2

∆U PV R J , ∆r , M J

. 9

4.78288510

. 10

5.361910

. 11

5.21985810

2

U m R S, M S

3 .

2

∆U PV R S , ∆r , M S

∆ω δr_Error R M , ∆r , M M

∆ω δr_Error R E, ∆r , M E

∆ω δr_Error R J , ∆r , M J

∆ω δr_Error R S , ∆r , M S

∆ω δr_Error R WD , ∆r , M WD

∆ω δr_Error R RG, ∆r , M RG

∆ω δr_Error R NS, ∆r , M NS

∆ω δr_Error R BH, ∆r , M BH

.

2.45448210

=

7

.

4.09314210

4

.

6.56319310

5

.

3.69917510

3

0.023754

0.195216

5.248215

27.272806

∆Λ EGM R M , ∆r , M M

∆Λ EGM R E, ∆r , M E

3.225809

1.447169

∆Λ EGM R J , ∆r , M J

∆Λ EGM R S , ∆r , M S

0.029107

. 3

3.39425210

∆Λ EGM R WD , ∆r , M WD

∆Λ EGM R RG, ∆r , M RG

∆Λ EGM R NS , ∆r , M NS

∆Λ EGM R BH, ∆r , M BH

∆Λ Error R M , ∆r , M M

∆Λ Error R E, ∆r , M E

∆Λ Error R J , ∆r , M J

∆Λ Error R S , ∆r , M S

∆Λ Error R WD , ∆r , M WD

∆Λ Error R RG, ∆r , M RG

∆Λ Error R NS , ∆r , M NS

∆Λ Error R BH, ∆r , M BH

K P R M , ∆r , M M

K P R E, ∆r , M E

K P R J , ∆r , M J

K P R S , ∆r , M S

=

. 6

2.30813410

. 15

5.25385210

=

.

8.47616310

12

(%)

10

15 .

2

Hz

. 9

1.42948610

.

2.45448210

7

.

6.56319310

5

.

4.09314210

4

.

3.69917510

3

0.023754

0.195216

5.248215

27.272806

(%)

265.650431

480.043646

=

. 3

8.40786210

. 4

3.99605210

2 .G.M M ∆U PV R M , ∆r , M M

.

3

U m R M,M M

RM

2 .G.M E ∆U PV R E, ∆r , M E

.

3

U m R E, M E

RE

2 .G.M J ∆U PV R J , ∆r , M J

.

3

U m R J, M J

RJ

3.225809

=

1.447168

10

0.029107

.

3.39437710

15 .

2

Hz

3

2 .G.M S ∆U PV R S , ∆r , M S

.

3

U m R S, M S

RS

310

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1

2 .G.M M .

1

∆r

RM

3

RM

1

2 .G.M E.

1

∆r

RE

3

RJ

1

∆r

3

∆r

3

RJ

1

2 .G.M S .

RS

3.225809

3

RE

1

2 .G.M J .

3

1.447168

=

3

.

3.39437710

15 .

10

0.029107

2

Hz

3

1

3

RS

2 .G.M M ∆U PV R M , ∆r , M M

1

.

. 2 .G.M .

M

3

U

R

,

M

RM

m M

M

R M ∆r

2 .G.M E ∆U PV R E, ∆r , M E

1

.

. 2 .G.M .

E

3

U m R E, M E

RE

R E ∆r

2 .G.M J ∆U PV R J , ∆r , M J

1

.

. 2 .G.M .

J

3

U

R

,

M

RJ

m J

J

R J ∆r

3

3

3

RJ

3

1

1

∆Λ EGM R E, ∆r , M E . 2 .G.M E.

3

1

∆Λ EGM R J , ∆r , M J . 2 .G.M J .

∆r

RJ

3

1

∆Λ EGM R S , ∆r , M S . 2 .G.M S .

RS

3

0

1

1

1

1

1

=

1

.

2.45448210

7

.

6.56319710

5

.

4.09312510

4

.

3.69903810

3

(%)

1

1

1

1

3

1

3

RE

=

1

1

3

RJ

.

2.45448210

7

.

6.56319710

5

.

4.09312510

4

.

3.69903810

3

(%)

1

1

∆r

(%)

3

1

1

0

1

1

RM

1

∆r

RE

1

3

0

RS

1

3

0

=

1

1

2 .G.M S ∆U PV R S , ∆r , M S

.

3

U m R S, M S

RS

∆r

1

1

2 .G.M J ∆U PV R J , ∆r , M J

.

∆Λ EGM R J , ∆r , M J .

3

U m R J, M J

RJ

RM

1

3

2 .G.M E ∆U PV R E, ∆r , M E

.

3

U m R E, M E

RE

∆Λ EGM R M , ∆r , M M . 2 .G.M M .

3

RE

2 .G.M M ∆U PV R M , ∆r , M M

.

∆Λ EGM R M , ∆r , M M .

3

U m R M,M M

RM

∆Λ EGM R S , ∆r , M S .

1

RM

1

2 .G.M S ∆U PV R S , ∆r , M S

1

.

. 2 .G.M .

S

3

U m R S, M S

RS

R S ∆r

∆Λ EGM R E, ∆r , M E .

1

1

1

3

RS

311

www.deltagroupengineering.com

5

λ CP

c .m e

5

27.m e

.

4

.

K PV r p , m p .m p

3

128.G.π .h

2

8 .π

3

λ CN

5

2

16.π .λ Ce

c .ω Ce

5

λ Ce m p λ Ce m n

λ CP m e λ CN m e

r ν λ CN ω CP m p

r π λ CP ω CN m n

rν

.

830.594743

.

3

2

4

27.ω h ω Ce

.

4

32.π ω CN

5

.

2

3

16.c .π .m n

826.941624

= 826.941624 ( am)

826.941624

2

4

27.m h m e

.

mn

4 .π

= ( 0.315205 0.315205 0.315205) ( % )

St θ r ν , m n

. 5 1.8360210

. 3 1.8386810

. 3

= 3.21927910

ω PV 1 , r e , m e

ω PV 1 , r π , m p

ω PV 1 , r ν , m n

ω Ω r e, m e

ω Ω r π, m p

ω Ω r ν ,mn

ω PV 1 , r π , m p

ω Ω r π, m p

ω PV 1 , r e , m e

ω Ω r e, m e

ω PV 1 , r ν , m p

ω Ω r ν ,mn

ω PV 1 , r e , m e

ω Ω r e, m e

=

ω Ω r ν ,mn

ω PV 1 , r e , m e

ω PV 1 , r ν , m p

ω PV 1 , r ν , m n

2 .π .c .

λ Ce

2

λ CP

0.568793

35.500829

.

2.49926810

.

2.61722210

17

18

35.73252

. 18

2.62462610

( GHz)

62.792864 10.50158

ω Ω r π, m p

2

=

62.414364 10.471952

ω Ω r e,m e

ω Ce

5

h .m e

St η r π , m p

ω CP

2

4

4 .π .λ h λ Ce

4 .ω CN

830.594743

λ

. CN

= ( 0.995476 0.998623 0.998623 0.998623)

r π λ CN ω CP m p

ω Ω r π, m p

c .ω Ce

= 830.594743 ( am)

27

. 3 1.83615310

. 3 1.83868410

. 3 1.83868410

. 3

= 1.83615310

λ CP ω CN m n

St ζ r e , m e

5

.

2

16.π .λ Ce

2

4

27.m h m e

.

mp

4 .π

2

3

16.c .π .m p

( am)

4

2

K PV r n , m n .m n

3

2

4

27.ω h ω Ce

.

.

3

4

4 .ω CP

32.π ω CP

1

λ CN

.

2

4

4 .π .λ h λ Ce

.

826.941624

λ CN

5

h .m e

830.594743

=

4

λ

. CP

27

.

4

2

K PV r p , m p .m p

5

K PV r n , m n .m n

λ CP

4

λ CP

.

ω CP.

mp

. 17 7.32784510

. 16 7.34520410

. 16

= 4.39398910

. 3 2.6174110

. 3 2.6174110

. 3 2.6174110

. 3 ( YHz)

= 2.61722210

me

312

www.deltagroupengineering.com

2

ω CN

ω Ω r ν,mn

ω Ce

2 .π .c .

λ Ce

mn

ω CN.

me

2

λ CN

2

ω Ω r ε, m e

2 .ω Ω r π , m p

. 3 2.62463110

. 3 2.62463110

. 3 2.62463110

. 3 ( YHz)

= 2.62462610

2

ω

. CP

ω Ω r π , m p ω Ce

ω

. CN

ω Ω r ν , m n ω Ce

1

1

= ( 99.985611 100.007215 100.000181) ( % )

m L 1, r ε

m L 2, r L

m L 3, r L

m L 4, r µ

m L 5, r L

m L 6, r τ

m L 7, r L

m L 8, r L

m L 9, r L

m L 10, r L

m L 11, r L

m L 12, r L

m L 13, r L

m L 14, r L

m L 15, r L

m L 16, r L

m L 17, r L

m L 18, r L

m L 19, r L

m L 20, r L

. 5 1.80208610

. 5 2.29847910

. 5 2.89523810

. 5

1.3933810

m L 21, r L

m L 22, r L

m L 23, r L

m L 24, r L

. 5 4.44581510

. 5 5.4303110

. 5 6.57657710

. 5

3.60608710

0.510999

=

9.155547

56.766874

105.677748

. 3 2.5703410

. 3

565.476231 1.77526210

. 3

4.6876410

. 3 1.27952710

. 4 1.96479110

. 4 2.90646410

. 4

7.96417210

MeV

.

.

.

.

4.16672110

5.81601510

7.93341210

1.06069210

c

4

4

4

5

m QB 1 , r dq

m QB 2 , r sq

m QB 3 , r cq

m QB 4 , r bq

.

7.00980510

m QB 5 , r QB

m QB 6 , r QB

m QB 7 , r W

m QB 8 , r Z

9.596205

21.797922

80.425

91.1876

m QB 9 , r H

m QB 10, r tq

m QB 11, r QB

m QB 12, r QB

114.4

178.440506

333.427609

493.23068

m QB 13, r QB

m QB 14, r QB

m QB 15, r QB

m QB 16, r QB

707.097922

986.98519

. 3 1.80000810

. 3

1.3463110

=

3

0.113909

1.182905

4.11826

m QB 17, r QB

m QB 18, r QB

m QB 19, r QB

m QB 20, r QB

.

2.36458310

m QB 21, r QB

m QB 22, r QB

m QB 23, r QB

m QB 24, r QB

. 3 7.54460610

. 3 9.21530610

. 3 1.11605410

. 4

6.11957610

∆U PV R E, ∆r , M M

∆U PV R E, ∆r , M E

∆U PV R E, ∆r , M J

∆U PV R E, ∆r , M S

3

.

.

3.05816410

3.90054810

3

2

3

GeV

c

2

.

4.91325710

3

2.860531

232.617621

=

4

7.3899.10

( GPa)

. 7

7.74094810

**The following two result sets are accurate to “13” decimal places:
**

1

.

ω Ω r uq , m uq

1

ω Ω r ε, m e

.

ω Ω r dq , m dq

ω Ω r sq , m sq

ω Ω r cq , m cq

ω Ω r bq , m bq

ω Ω r W,mW

ω Ω r Z, m Z

ω Ω r H, m H

ω Ω r tq , m tq

ω Ω r dq , m dq

ω Ω r sq , m sq

ω Ω r cq , m cq

ω Ω r bq , m bq

ω Ω r W,mW

ω Ω r Z, m Z

ω Ω r H, m H

ω Ω r tq , m tq

=

=

1 2 3 4

7 8 9 10

7 14 21 28

49 56 63 70

**r. Resonant Casimir cavity design specifications (experimental)
**

Given

∆ω R R E, ∆r , M E

∆r

Find( ∆r )

1

∆r = 16.518377( mm)

ω X R E, ∆r , M E = 16.340851 ( PHz)

313

www.deltagroupengineering.com

E C R E, ∆r , M E = 550.422869

V

m

B C R E, ∆r , M E = 18.360131 ( mgs )

SSE 4 0 .( deg ) , 0 .( % ) , 0 .( % ) , E C R E, ∆r , M E , B C R E, ∆r , M E , R E, ∆r , M E

SSE 5 90.( deg ) , 0 .( % ) , 0 .( % ) , E C R E, ∆r , M E , B C R E, ∆r , M E , R E, ∆r , M E

=

1

1

NOTES

314

www.deltagroupengineering.com

•

**MathCad 12: High precision calculation results
**

a. Computational environment

**NOTE: KNOWLEDGE OF MATHCAD IS REQUIRED AND ASSUMED
**

The high precision calculation results are obtained via the “MathCad 12” computational

environment utilising the calculation engine defined in the preceding section.

•

•

•

**Convergence Tolerance (TOL): 10-14.
**

Constraint Tolerance (CTOL): 10-14.

Calculation Display Tolerance: 6 figures – unless otherwise indicated.

b. Particle summary matrix 3.1

rπE +

( 2)

0.69⋅ fm

rπ

rπM

1

2

⋅ ( rνM − rν )

rν

rνM

**830.647087 830.662386
**

848.579832 848

0.857⋅ ( fm) 849.993668

857

( am)

=

874.643564

875

rp

826.889045 825.617615

rX

879.016508 879

0.879⋅ ( fm)

0.848⋅ ( fm)

rπE

( )

KX −0.113 2

=

fm

KS −0.113348

2

−

rε

⋅e 3

rπ

rµ

−

rε ⋅ e rτ

rν

rε

rπ − rν

mtq = 178.470327

GeV

2

c

** λA( Kω ⋅ rBohr , mp ) 657.329013
**

=

( nm)

λB

656.469624

7.297353× 10− 3

=

−3

7.297353× 10

3.141593

rµ

2

−

−

r

r

r

r

1 ε

1 ε

1

ε

3

τ

⋅ ⋅e

⋅ ⋅e

⋅

α rπ

α rν

π rπ − rν

rπ

rπE

rπM

0.848⋅ ( fm)

0.857⋅ ( fm)

2

0.69⋅ fm

M Error :=

−1

1 1

r

K

ν

S

⋅ ⋅ ( rνM − rν ) + rπE

rX

KX

rp 2

2

rνM

mtq ⋅ c

λA ( Kω ⋅ rBohr , mp )

0.879⋅ ( fm)

178⋅ ( GeV)

λB

( )

315

www.deltagroupengineering.com

− 14

− 13

0

2.220446× 10

1.110223× 10

−1.841834× 10− 3

0.068376

−0.817542

M Error =

( %)

−0.040736

0.153997

0.308232

−3

0.264229

0.130911

1.87806× 10

1

ErrorAv :=

12

⋅ MError

0, 0

+ M Error

0,1

+ MError

0, 2

+ M Error

1,0

+ MError

+ M Error

1, 1

1,2

...

+ M

Error2 , 0 + MError2 , 1 + M Error2 , 2 + MError3 , 0 + M Error3 , 1 + MError3 , 2

ErrorAv = 0.148979(%)

c. Particle summary matrix 3.2

2

−

rε c

3

⋅

⋅e

re ωCe

rπ_1

:=

5

2

4

rπ_2

c⋅ ωCe

27⋅ ωh ωCe

⋅

⋅

4⋅ ω 3 32⋅ π4 ωCP

CP

∆rπ

rπ_Error

rπ_av − rπ_1

rν_2

rν_av

∆rν

rπ_2

rε

rπ −

π

rν_1

5

:=

2

4

r

ν_2

⋅

27⋅ ωh ωCe

c

ω

Ce

⋅

⋅

4⋅ ωCN3 32⋅ π4 ωCN

1 ⋅ (r

r

π_av + ∆rπ )

π_2

:=

1

rν_Error

rν_2 ⋅ ( rν_av + ∆rν )

:=

∆rν rν_av − rν_1

rπ_1

rν_1

rπ_av

∆rπ

** 830.647081 830.594743
**

826.889045 826.941624

=

( am)

830.620912 826.915335

−0.026169 0.02629

rX ( KX ) :=

** rπ_av 1 rπ_1 + rπ_2
**

:= ⋅

rν_av 2 rν_1 + rν_2

rπ_Error

0

− 1 = ( %)

0

rν_Error

(2 )

2

3⋅ b 1⋅ ( x − 1)

−6⋅ b 1⋅ KX ⋅ x − 1

( 2)

**ωΩ ( rπ , mp ) = 2.617319× 10 ( YHz)
**

3

∆KX := 0.005⋅ fm

( )

2

0.69⋅ fm

830.662386

=

1

( am)

2

2

⋅ ( 0.69 + 0.02) ⋅ fm − ( 0.69 − 0.02) ⋅ fm 12.03985

2

( )

rX_av :=

1

2

( (

( )

)

(

⋅ rX KX − ∆KX + rX KX + ∆KX

rX_Error :=

(

)

**rX KX − ∆KX − ∆rX_av
**

rX_av

−1

))

(

∆rX_av := rX_av − rX KX + ∆KX

)

** rX( KX − ∆KX) 843.685786
**

rX( KX + ∆KX) 807.145085

( am)

=

825.415435

rX_av

18.270351

∆rX_av

316

www.deltagroupengineering.com

− 14

rX_Error = 2.220446× 10

φγγ 1.152898

=

λh φgg 1.521258

1

⋅

(

− 17

mγ = 5.746734 10

( %)

)

⋅ eV

(

)

mγγ 3.195095 − 45

=

10 ⋅ eV

mgg 6.39019

φγγ 0.991785

=

Kλ ⋅ λh φgg 1.308668

1

⋅

**d. Particle summary matrix 3.3
**

The following is accurate to “1 or 2” decimal places (as implied by the results):

ωΩ ( rν , mn)

ωΩ ( rε , me)

ωΩ ( ren , men)

ωΩ ( rL , mL( 2 , rL))

ωΩ ( rL , mL( 3 , rL))

ωΩ ( rµ , mµ )

ωΩ ( rµn , mµn)

ω ( r , m ( 5, r ))

Ω L L

L

ωΩ ( rτ , mτ )

ωΩ ( rτn , mτn)

1

ω

r

,

m

⋅

Ω ( uq uq)

ωΩ ( rπ , mp )

ωΩ ( rdq , mdq)

ωΩ ( rsq , msq )

ωΩ ( rcq , mcq)

ωΩ ( rbq , mbq)

ω (r , m (5 , r ) )

Ω QB QB QB

ωΩ (rQB , mQB(6 , rQB) )

ωΩ ( rW , mW)

ωΩ ( rZ , mZ )

ωΩ ( rH , mH )

ωΩ ( rtq , mtq )

ωΩ ( rπ , mp )

ωΩ ( rν , mn)

ωΩ ( rε , me)

ωΩ ( ren , men)

ωΩ ( rL , mL( 2, rL) )

ω (r , m (3, r ) )

Ω L L

L

ωΩ ( rµ , mµ )

ωΩ ( rµn , mµn)

ωΩ ( rL , mL( 5, rL) )

ωΩ ( rτ , mτ )

ωΩ ( rτn , mτn)

1

⋅

ωΩ ( rε , me)

ωΩ ( ruq , muq)

ωΩ ( rdq , mdq)

ωΩ ( rsq , msq)

ωΩ ( rcq , mcq)

ωΩ ( rbq , mbq)

ωΩ ( rQB , mQB( 5, rQB) )

ωΩ ( rQB , mQB( 6, rQB) )

ωΩ ( rW , mW)

ωΩ ( rZ , mZ )

ωΩ ( rH , mH)

ωΩ ( rtq , mtq )

1

2

2

4

6

8

8

10

12

12

= 14

14

28

42

56

70

84

98

112

126

140

317

0.5

0.5

1

1

2

3

4

4

5

6

6

=

7

7

14

21

28

35

42

49

56

63

70

www.deltagroupengineering.com

ωΩ ( rπ , mp )

ωΩ ( rν , mn)

ωΩ ( rε , me)

ωΩ ( ren , men)

ωΩ ( rL , mL( 2, rL) )

ω (r , m ( 3, r ))

Ω L L

L

ωΩ ( rµ , mµ )

ωΩ ( rµn , mµn)

ωΩ ( rL , mL( 5, rL) )

ωΩ ( rτ , mτ )

ωΩ ( rτn , mτn)

1

⋅

ωΩ ( ruq , muq)

ωΩ ( ruq , muq)

ωΩ ( rdq , mdq)

ωΩ ( rsq , msq )

ωΩ ( rcq , mcq)

ωΩ ( rbq , mbq)

ωΩ ( rQB , mQB( 5, rQB) )

ωΩ ( rQB , mQB( 6, rQB) )

ωΩ ( rW , mW)

ωΩ ( rZ , mZ )

ωΩ ( rH , mH)

ωΩ ( rtq , mtq )

0.07

0.07

0.14

0.14

0.29

0.43

0.57

0.57

0.71

0.86

0.86

=

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

**e. Particle summary matrix 3.4
**

rε

rπ 11.806238

r 830.647087

ν

rµ 826.889045

8.214055

rτ

12.237844

ren

0.095379

rµn 0.655235

rτn

1.958664

ruq = 0.768186 ( am)

r 1.013628

dq

rsq 0.887904

r 1.091334

cq 1.070961

rbq

0.92938

r

tq

1.283947

rW

1.061645

rZ 0.940375

r

H

me

5.109989× 10− 4

mp 0.938272

m

n 0.939565

mµ 0.105658

1.776989

mτ

men

−9

3 × 10

mµn 1.9 × 10− 4

mτn

0.0182

GeV

muq =

−3

m 3.505488× 10 c2

dq

7.010977× 10− 3

msq

m 0.113928

cq

1.183102

mbq

4.118949

m

tq

178.470327

mW

80.425

91.1876

m

Z

m

114.4

H

318

(

)

φγγ 4.670757 − 35

=

10 ⋅ m

φgg 6.163101

www.deltagroupengineering.com

− 11

rx = 5.273191× 10

φγγ 0.991785

=

Kλ ⋅ λh φgg 1.308668

1

( m)

(

⋅

)

mγγ 3.195095 − 45

rL 10.752712

=

10 ⋅ eV

=

( am)

mgg 6.39019

rQB 1.005262

1

6

1

6

rBohr

− 1 = 0.352379( %)

rx

mL( 2 , rL)

mL( 3 , rL)

m (5, r )

L L

mQB( 5 , rQB)

m (6, r )

QB QB

** 9.153163× 10− 3
**

0.056752

GeV

=

0.565329 2

9.597226 c

21.800242

**⋅ ( ruq + rdq + rsq + rcq + rbq + rtq ) = 0.960232( am)
**

⋅ ( muq + mdq + msq + mcq + mbq + mtq ) = 30.649471

GeV

2

c

**The following two result sets are accurate to “13” decimal places:
**

1

ωΩ ( ruq , muq)

** ωΩ ( rdq , mdq) ωΩ ( rsq , msq) ωΩ ( rcq , mcq) ωΩ ( rbq , mbq)
**

ωΩ ( rW , mW) ωΩ ( rZ , mZ ) ωΩ ( rH , mH) ωΩ ( rtq , mtq )

⋅

1 2 3 4

7 8 9 10

=

** ωΩ ( rdq , mdq) ωΩ ( rsq , msq) ωΩ ( rcq , mcq) ωΩ ( rbq , mbq) 7 14 21 28
**

=

ωΩ ( rε , me) ωΩ ( rW , mW) ωΩ ( rZ , mZ ) ωΩ ( rH , mH) ωΩ ( rtq , mtq ) 49 56 63 70

1

⋅

NOTES

319

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

320

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Quinta Essentia – Part 4
**

•

MathCad 8 Professional

a. Complete simulation

i. Computational environment

**NOTE: KNOWLEDGE OF MATHCAD IS REQUIRED AND ASSUMED
**

•

•

•

**Convergence Tolerance (TOL): 0.001.
**

Constraint Tolerance (CTOL): 0.001.

Calculation Display Tolerance: 6 figures – unless otherwise indicated.

ii. Units of measure (definitions)

Jy

10

W

26 .

pc

2.

. 16 .( m)

3.085677580710

m Hz

( mJy µJy nJy pJy fJy aJy zJy yJy )

Scale 1 .( Jy )

( mpc µpc npc ppc fpc apc zpc ypc )

Scale 1 .( pc )

( kJy MJy GJy TJy PJy EJy ZJy YJy )

Scale 2 .( Jy )

( kpc Mpc Gpc Tpc Ppc Epc Zpc Ypc )

Scale 2 .( pc )

**iii. Constants (definitions)
**

σ

. 8.

5.67040010

W

κ

2. 4

.

1.380650510

Th

J

K

m K

m h .c

23 .

KW

. 3 .( m.K )

2.897768510

2

κ

**iv. Astronomical statistics
**

Lyr

∆T 0

c .yr

D E2M

0.001.( K )

8

3.844.10 .( m)

Ro

8 .( kpc )

AU

∆R o

149597870660.( m) H 0

0.5.( kpc )

MG

71.

km

.

s Mpc

T0

2.725.( K )

11

6 .10 .M S

**v. Characterisation of the gravitational spectrum
**

1. “Ω → Ω1, nΩ → nΩ_1, ωΩ → ωΩ_1”

Note: “the complete simulation” is the computational algorithm developed for this text and is

predominantly without comment.

321

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Commencing with the following relationship set, significant simplifications to primary
**

EGM equations may be derived as follows,

4

h .

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

3

2 .c

U ω( r , M )

c .U ω n PV, r , M

S ω n PV, r , M

U ω( r , M ) .

U ω n PV, r , M

U m( r , M )

3 .M .c

n PV

2

4

4

n PV

2

4 .π .r

3

3

Ω ( r, M )

108.

U m( r , M )

U ω( r , M )

2

U m( r , M )

12. 768 81.

n Ω ( r, M )

U ω( r , M )

Ω ( r, M )

4

12

Ω ( r, M )

1

Hence,

3 .M .c

U m( r , M )

2

4 .π .r

3 .M .c

3

U ω( r , M )

5

4

3

h .

4

ω PV( 1 , r , M ) 2 .π .r .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

3

2 .c

U m( r , M )

108.

3

Ω 1( r , M ) 6 .

>> 768”, hence simplifying / approximating forms yields,

U ω( r , M )

3

Ω 1( r , M )

2

U m( r , M )

Typically: “ 81.

108.

U ω( r , M )

U m( r , M )

3 .M .c

6.

U ω( r , M )

216.

U ω( r , M )

3

U m( r , M )

3

U m( r , M )

U ω( r , M )

Ω 1( r , M )

4

3

2 .π .r .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

3

6 .c

5

r .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

.

3 .M .c

2

2 .π .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

Typically: “ Ω ( r , M ) >> 1” hence,

3

n Ω_1( r , M )

Ω 1( r , M ) 1 U m( r , M )

.

C Ω_1( r , M )

12

G.M .

2

r

ω Ω_1( r , M )

3

c

U ω( r , M ) 2 .r .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

2

.

3 .M .c

2

2 .π .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

n Ω_1( r , M )

Ω 1( r , M )

12

3

2

ω Ω_1( r , M ) n Ω_1( r , M ) .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

π .n Ω_1( r , M )

n Ω_1( r , M ) .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

T Ω_1( r , M )

1

ω Ω_1( r , M )

2

c .

3 .M .c

2 .r 2 .π .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

λ Ω_1( r , M )

c

ω Ω_1( r , M )

**Checking errors yields,
**

Ω 1 R M,M M

Ω 1 R E, M E

Ω R M, M M

Ω R E, M E

Ω 1 R J, M J

Ω 1 R S, M S

Ω R J, M J

Ω R S, M S

1=

. 14 4.44089210

.

6.66133810

14

. 14 6.66133810

.

4.44089210

14

322

(%)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Ω 1 R NS , M NS

1 = 0 (%)

Ω R NS , M NS

n Ω_1 R M , M M

n Ω_1 R E, M E

n Ω R M,M M

n Ω R E, M E

n Ω_1 R J , M J

n Ω_1 R S , M S

n Ω R J, M J

n Ω R S, M S

n Ω_1 R NS , M NS

n Ω R NS , M NS

ω Ω_1 R E, M E

ω Ω R M,M M

ω Ω R E, M E

ω Ω_1 R J , M J

ω Ω_1 R S , M S

ω Ω R J, M J

ω Ω R S, M S

ω Ω R NS , M NS

T Ω_1 R E, M E

T Ω R M,M M

T Ω R E, M E

T Ω_1 R J , M J

T Ω_1 R S , M S

T Ω R J, M J

T Ω R S, M S

T Ω R NS, M NS

λ Ω_1 R E, M E

λ Ω R M,M M

λ Ω R E, M E

λ Ω_1 R J , M J

λ Ω_1 R S , M S

λ Ω R J, M J

λ Ω R S, M S

λ Ω R NS , M NS

.

2.22044610

14

.

4.44089210

14

.

8.88178410

14

(%)

1=

.

6.66133810

14

.

2.22044610

14

.

6.66133810

14

.

8.88178410

14

(%)

1=

.

7.77156110

14

.

2.22044610

14

.

5.55111510

14

.

7.77156110

14

.

7.77156110

14

.

2.22044610

14

.

6.66133810

14

.

7.77156110

14

(%)

1 = 0 ( %)

λ Ω_1 R M , M M

λ Ω_1 R NS , M NS

14

1 = 0 (%)

T Ω_1 R M , M M

T Ω_1 R NS, M NS

.

6.66133810

1 = 0 (%)

ω Ω_1 R M , M M

ω Ω_1 R NS , M NS

1=

1=

(%)

1 = 0 (%)

2. “g → ωΩ”

i. “ωΩ_1 → ωΩ_2”

3

ω Ω_1( r , M )

2

c .

3 .M .c

2 .r 2 .π .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

ω Ω_1( r , M )

323

3

3

2

c .

3 .M .c

2 .r 2 .π .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

www.deltagroupengineering.com

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

. 3

. .

. 2r . 2πh

3

2

c

3 .M .c

ω Ω_1( r , M )

1

16.π .h .

r

5

3 .M .c ω Ω_1( r , M )

3

ω Ω_2( r , M )

th

9

9

2

c . 3 .M .c .

1

.

3

2r

2 .π .h

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

G.h

c

ωh

5

th

2

c

G.h

3 14

2

3 .c .M

4

3 2

2

3 .G .M .ω h .c

13 5 2 3

2 .r .π .h .G

2

13 5 2

2 .r .π .λ h

ω Ω_2( r , M )

g( r , M )

9

6

3

3 .ω h

.

. GM

2

13 . 2 . .

2 π rc r

G.M

mh

2

St g

9

r

λh

G

5

3

3 .ω h

.

. GM

13

5

π

2 .λ h .r

ω Ω_2( r , M )

2

h .c

5

1

2

9

2

c . 3 .M .c

2 .r

2 .π .h

2

3

3

G.h

c

λh

2

r

6

3

3 .ω h

13 5 2 3

2 .r .π .h .G

3

1

3

5

3

3 .ω h .G.M G.M

.

2 3

13

2 .λ h .π .r

3 14

2

3 .c .M

1

.

1 . 2 c .G.M

3

π .r

r

.

2

c

G.h

G

λh

6

3

3 .ω h

.

. GM

2

13 2

2 .π .r .c r

c

2

3

h

2

245

10

St g = 1.828935

13 2

2 .π .c

1.

2

St g .g ( r , M )

r

ω Ω_2( r , M )

9

5

m.s

St g

.g ( r , M ) 2

r

**Checking errors yields,
**

ω Ω_2 R M , M M

ω Ω_2 R E, M E

ω Ω_1 R M , M M

ω Ω_1 R E, M E

ω Ω_2 R J , M J

ω Ω_2 R S , M S

ω Ω_1 R J , M J

ω Ω_1 R S , M S

ω Ω_2 R NS , M NS

1=

.

1.04678510

9

.

2.32001510

8

.

6.57443310

7

.

7.07196310

5

(%)

1 = 2.491576 ( % )

ω Ω_1 R NS , M NS

Therefore,

a EGM_ωΩ( r , M )

r .

9

ω Ω_2( r , M )

St g

a EGM_ωΩ R E, M E = 9.809009

m

s

2

**Checking errors yields,
**

a EGM_ωΩ R M , M M

a EGM_ωΩ R E, M E

g R M,M M

g R E, M E

a EGM_ωΩ R J , M J

a EGM_ωΩ R S , M S

g R J, M J

g R S, M S

1=

.

1.49880110

12

.

1.49880110

12

.

1.5432110

12

.

1.57651710

12

324

(%)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

a EGM_ωΩ R NS , M NS

.

1 = 1.65423210

g R NS, M NS

12

(%)

**ii. “ωΩ_1 → ωΩ_3”
**

3

3

1 U m( r , M ) .

1

ω Ω_1( r , M ) .

ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .

2 U ω( r , M )

2

ω Ω_1( r , M )

U m( r , M )

4

h .

ω PV( 1 , r , M )

3

2 .c

3

1 . 2 .c . U m( r , M )

8 h ω PV( 1 , r , M )

3

3 .M .c

ω Ω_3( r , M )

.ω ( 1 , r , M )

PV

3

c . U m( r , M )

4 .h ω PV( 1 , r , M )

9

3

3 3

c

4 .h

3

2

. .

. 4πr

.

2 c .G.M

3

14

2

27 . c . M

8192 h 3 π2 .r5 .G

5

9

2

27 . c . c . M

8192 G.h h 2 π2 .r5

3

9

2

3 . 2 .c . M

ωh

13

2

2

2

h π .r5

π .r

4

9

ω Ω_3( r , M )

c.

3.

2

9

ω Ω_3( r , M )

3 .ω h

2

. M

4 .π .h

2

St G

5

r

3.

3 .ω h

2

. c

2

4 .π .h

M

St G.

5

r

ω Ω_3( r , M )

224 .

St G = 8.146982 10

5

m

2 9

kg .s

2

1

2

9

9 M

St G .

St G

9

G

St g

5

r

9

**Checking errors yields,
**

ω Ω_3 R M , M M

ω Ω_3 R E, M E

ω Ω_2 R M , M M

ω Ω_2 R E, M E

ω Ω_3 R J , M J

ω Ω_3 R S , M S

ω Ω_2 R J , M J

ω Ω_2 R S , M S

ω Ω_3 R NS , M NS

ω Ω_2 R NS , M NS

.

1 = 6.66133810

1=

14

(%)

. 14

8.88178410

.

1.11022310

13

. 13

1.11022310

.

1.11022310

13

1 . St G

.

1 = 3.33066910

G

(%)

14

(%)

St g

3. “g → ωPV3”

2 .c .n PV

3

ω PV n PV, r , M

3

2

π .r

.g ( r , M )

325

www.deltagroupengineering.com

4. “SωΩ → c⋅Um”

Reducing / simplifying / approximating utilising computational features of the environment

yields,

nΩ

8 .n Ω

3

2

24.n Ω

8 .n Ω . n Ω

4

2

2

nΩ

2

nΩ

2

8 .n Ω

simplify

32.n Ω factor

3 .n Ω factor

2

substitute , n Ω

4

2

8 .n Ω . n Ω

2

8 .n Ω . n Ω

3 .n Ω

2

3

24.n Ω

2

32.n Ω

16

4

3

Hence,

nΩ

8 .n Ω

2

3

4

2

2

24.n Ω

S ωΩ ( r , M )

nΩ

2

4

nΩ

4

32.n Ω 8 .n Ω . n Ω

h .

4

ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .

2

.

2c

nΩ

2

2

8 .n Ω

4

3 .n Ω

n Ω ( r, M )

4

24.n Ω

2

32.n Ω

8 .n Ω . n Ω

2

3 .n Ω

4

2

3

n Ω ( r, M )

4

16

2

8 .n Ω . n Ω

3

8 .n Ω

3

h .

4

3

ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .8 .n Ω ( r , M )

2

.

2c

3

2

c

4 .h .

4

4

3 .M .c

3 4 .h .

.

S ωΩ ( r , M )

ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .n Ω ( r , M )

ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .

2

2

2 .r .ω PV( 1 , r , M ) 2 .π .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

c

c

3

4

3

2

3

4 .h .c . ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .

3 .M .c

3 .M .c

S ωΩ ( r , M )

2 3

3 . . .

3

8 .c .r ω PV( 1 , r , M ) 2 π h ω PV( 1 , r , M ) 4 .π .r

Hence,

S ωΩ ( r , M ) c .U m( r , M )

5. “CΩ_J”

C Ω_J ( r , M )

2 d

λ Ω ( r , M ) . U m( r , M )

dr

2

C Ω_J1( r , M )

2

c

9

2

M

St G.

5

r

9 .c .

St G

4 .π

4

St J

. .

. d 3Mc

d r 4 .π .r3

2

9

C Ω_J1( r , M )

2

c

2

. r

9

2

St G

St J

2

r

9

5

9

. M

M

2

1

. .

.9 M c

4

4 .π .r

2

2

5 9

9 .c .

9 M

St G .

26

4 .π

r

4

5

8

r

326

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Checking errors yields,
**

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M M

C Ω_J1 R S , M M

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M M

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M E

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M E

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M J

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M J

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M S

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M S

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M NS

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M NS

C Ω_J R S , M M

1=

.

3.63875410

8

.

2.95903310

6

.

9.40034410

4

C Ω_J1 R S , M E

C Ω_J R S , M E

C Ω_J1 R S , M J

(%)

1=

C Ω_J R S , M J

0.979587

C Ω_J1 R S , M S

0.979587

C Ω_J R S , M S

.

3.86357610

12

.

4.23450210

10

.

1.3506210

7

.

1.41439110

4

.

1.41439110

4

(%)

C Ω_J1 R S , M NS

C Ω_J R S , M NS

**vi. Derivation of “Planck-Particle” and SBH characteristics
**

1. “λx, mx”

n Ω_1( r , M )

2 .c

1 . U m( r , M ) 1 . 3 .M .c .

8 U ω( r , M ) 8 4 .π .r3 h .ω ( 1 , r , M ) 4

PV

2

3

2

1 . 3 .M .c .

2 .c

2

1 . 3 .M .c .

3

8 4 .π .r3 h .ω ( 1 , r , M ) 4 8 4 .π .r3

PV

1 . 3 .M .c .

8 4 .π .r3

2 .c

2

3

2 .c

3

1 2 .c .G.M

h. .

r

π .r

1 . 3 .M .c .

8 4 .π .r3

3

3

2 .c

2

3

1 2 .c .G.M

h. .

r

π .r

4

4

3

3

1 2 .c .G.M . 2 .c .G.M

h. .

4

π .r

π .r

r

3 .c . r

3

2

1 . 3 .M .c .

8 4 .π .r3

2 .c

3. c . . 2

cr

1 . 4 h .G

3

3

1 2 .c .G.M . 2 .c .G.M 8

h. .

4

π .r

π .r

r

3 .c . r

n Ω_1( r , M )

1. 4

9

8

3

3

n Ω_1( r , M )

2 .c .G.M

π .r

3

n Ω_2( r , M )

3

λh

r . π .c . 3

.

16

2

2 GM λh

7

2 .c .G.M

π .r

3 .

16

2

π .m h

8

3

λh

2 .c .G.M

π .r

2 3

2

3

7

r . π .m h . 3

16

2

2 M λh λh

3

1

1

9

1. 4

2

. r

M

λh

3 9

7

n Ω_2( r , M )

1. 3

2

327

7

2

.

π .m h

M

7

9

. r

λh

9

www.deltagroupengineering.com

9

λ x.λ h

n Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

7

16

2

mx

3

3 .π . 7

λx

16

2

2

c .R BH

2 .G

R BH

9

m

. π . h. 3

m x.m h λ h λ 2

h

3

2

2 .G .

M BH

2

c

9

7

3

3

3 .π . λ x 1 . 3 .π . λ x

16 m

2

x 2 mx 2

M BH

.

5

R BH

7

2

2

c .R BH

2 .G

λ x.λ h

5

m x.m h

2

λ x.λ h

5

m x.m h

2

.

5

R BH

2

.

5

R BH

5

2

1. λ x . c

4 R 3 G

BH

2

2

λ x.λ h .c

2

λ x.λ h

5

m x.m h

2

λh

.

5

2

1. λ x . c

4 R 3 G

BH

5

5

1.

m x.m h

St ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

2 .G.m x.m h

6

λ x 33 .π

.λ 7

x

2 216

9

3

2

λ x 4.

3

3 .π

λh

.

λx

5

m x.m h

2 2

λx

4 λ .λ

x h

2

2

. c

3 G

.

λh

2

5

m x.m h

c

2

5

1.

. c

3 G

4 λ .λ

x h

2

2

λ x.λ h .c

mh

λx

mx

2

λh

.

1.λ x

1

2

mx

2 .G.m x.m h

λx

2

9

n Ω_3 λ x

2

2

λ x.λ h .c

5

m x.m h

2 .G.m x.m h 2 m x

G λh

4 . 2

6

π 3

2 2

λx

3

1 . 3 .π . λ x

2 λx 2

9

7

1.

2

3.

3 π.

λx

6

2

2

3

9

n Ω_3 λ x

π.

3.

2

λx

2

2

λ x.λ h = 1.093333 10

10 .

ym

n Ω_3 λ x

λx

1 = 0 ( %)

.

m x.m h = 7.36147410

8

mx

( kg )

mx

=

2.698709

1.349354

1 = 0.14278 ( % )

2

Km

n Ω_3

n Ω_3

1

3

0.248017

1

0.324994

2

n Ω_3( 1 )

=

0.515897

0.818935

n Ω_3( 2 )

1

n Ω_3 λ x

1.073108

n Ω_3( 3 )

328

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**2. “ρm(λxλh,mxmh), Um(λxλh,mxmh)”
**

V( r )

4. . 3

πr

3

ρ m( r , M )

. 94 kg

ρ m λ x.λ h , m x.m h = 1.34467810

3

m

M

V( r )

ρ m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

. 87 ( YPa)

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h = 1.20853710

ρ m R S, M S

.

= 9.55041510

90

3. Physicality of “Kλ”

. 42 ( Hz)

K ω .ω h = 6.36576910

K λ .λ h

K λ .λ h = 4.709446 10

35 .

m

.

K m.m h = 6.34179210

8

( kg )

1 = 0.82832 ( % )

2 .r γγ

4. “KPV @ λxλh”

i. “KPV = Undefined”

Recognising,

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

h .

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3

.

2c

4

h .

ω Ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3

.

2c

4

m h c2

λh

G

**It follows that,
**

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3 . . .

.

1 . 2 c G mx mh .

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

λ x.λ h

π .λ x.λ h

3

3

1 .

λ x.λ h

2 .c .G.m x.m h

π .λ x.λ h

3

2 .c .G.

1 .

λ x.λ h

. K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

λx

2 .c .G. .m h

1 .

2

. K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

.

.

λxλh

π λ x.λ h

λx

.m

h

2

. K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

π .λ x.λ h

3

c . 1.

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

λ x.λ h π

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

ωh

ωh

3

c . 1.

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

λ x.λ h π

3

. 1. K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

λx π

3

. 1. K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

λx π

329

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Performing substitutions yields,
**

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

h .

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3

.

2c

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

h .

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3

.

2c

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

4

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

4

3

h . ωh. 1.

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3

2 .c λ x π

4

3.

4

2 .π . π .c λ x

.K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

3

4

3

2 .π . π .c .λ x U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

.

4

.

h ωh

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

4

.K

.

.

PV λ x λ h , m x m h

h .ω h

3

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3

4

3

2 .π . π .c .λ x

4

3

h . ωh. 1.

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3 λ

π

.

2c

x

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

h .ω h

4

2

2

2

**Checking errors yields,
**

3

h . ωh. 1

3

2 .c λ x π

h .ω h

4

.

1 = 6.66133810

14

(%)

4

3

4

3

2 .π . π .c .λ x

ω 3

. h . h. 1

4

3

2 .c λ x π

h .ω h

4

.

1 = 6.66133810

14

(%)

3

4

3

2 .π . π .c .λ x

Evaluating,

3

4

3

2 .π . π .c .λ x

.U λ .λ , m .m = 8

m x h x h

4

.

h ωh

**Checking errors yields,
**

3

4

3

2 .π . π .c .λ x

.U λ .λ , m .m

m x h x h

4

.

h ωh

.

8 = 8.88178410

13

(%)

3

4

3

2 .π . π .c .λ x

h .ω h

4

= 6.619576

10

87

YPa

. 87 ( YPa)

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h = 1.20853710

330

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Simplifying,

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

8

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

2

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

2. 2.

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

**Recognising that the EGM spectrum converges to a single mode for a SPBH yields,
**

Ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

n Ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

12

Ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

4. 3

4

.

Ω λ x λ h , m x.m h

1 1

4 . 3 = 6.928203

3

Ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

108.

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

12. 768 81.

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

2

4. 3

**By inspection, the only solution which satisfies this equation is,
**

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

U ω λ x.λ h , m x.m h

0

Checking yields,

3

108.0

2

12. 768 81.0 = 6.928203

Therefore,

2. 2

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

K PV R BH, M BH

Undefined

0

K PV λ x.λ h , m x.m h

ii. “KDepp = KPV”

K Depp ( r , M )

1

2 .G.M

2

1

r .c

1

r .c

2

2

K PV( r , M )

2 .G.M

2 .G.M

r .c

K Depp ( r , M )

2

K Depp ( r , M )

K PV( r , M )

2

1

K Depp ( r , M )

r .c

K Depp R E, M E = 1.00000000069601

2

K PV R E, M E = 1.00000000069601

K PV( r , M )

1

331

2 .G.M

r .c

2

r .c

1

r .c

2

2

2 .G.M

R BH

2 .G .

M BH

2

c

www.deltagroupengineering.com

K PV R BH, M BH

2 .G.M BH

1

1

1

2 .G .

2

M BH.c

2

c

1

K Depp λ x.λ h , m x.m h

λh

0

1

.

2 G.m x.m h

2

K Depp λ x.λ h , m x.m h

m h c2

Undefined

1

.

2 G.m x c2

.

1

2 G

.

λxc

1

2

λ x.λ h .c

K Depp R BH, M BH

λx

mx

G

1

1

2 .m x

λx

2

1

2.

λx 0

Undefined

2

1

λx

Undefined

5. “ωΩ_3”

2

M

St G.

5

r

St G.

m x.m h

2

λ x.λ h

5

2

St G m h

.

3

5

.

4λx λh

3

4 .λ

3

.

x

3

4 .λ

3

π .h

x

2

ω h .m h

π .h

2

ωh

.

St G.

9

St G .

m x.m h

9

9

15 . 2

2

π

9

ω Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

9

3

λx

3

.

ωh

9

St G.

9

1.

15 2

2 .π 2

3

2

.

ωh

2

λ x.λ h

3

ωh

.

m h .c

7

2

π .h

x

St G.

5

2

3

4 .λ

2

St G.

ωh

2

.m

h

λ x.λ h

2

9 m

. c . h

2 λ 5

h

h

15 2

2 .π

λx

.m

h

3

.

2

5

ω h .m h

x

π .h

m x.m h

2

λ x.λ h

5

St G m h

.

3

5

4 .λ x λ h

2

.

5

4

c .ω h

9

2

3

3

λx

.

ωh

9

15 2

2 .π

1

9

1

.

λx

5

λ x.λ h

3

3

4 .λ

3

1

3

5

2

c .m h

.

h

λx

3

2

.

λ x.λ h

2

St G.

2

5

4

c .ω h

.

9

2

9 m

. c . h

2 λ 5

h

2

1

m x.m h

λx

.ω

h

.

1 = 1.11022310

m x.m h

2

λ x.λ h

5

9

St G.

9

3

. 1 .ω

h

λ x 26 .π2

1.

2

13

(%)

m x.m h

2

λ x.λ h

5

3

λx

3

.

ωh

9

15 2

2 .π

9

3

3

9

3

1. 1 . 3

. 1 .ω

.ω

h

h

2 π2 4 .λ x

λ x 26 .π2

2

9

3

1. 1 . 3

.ω

h

2 π2 4 .λ x

3

1

9

.

2

2. π

1

3 .

ωh

.

4λx

9

St G .

m x.m h

9

.

5

λ x.λ h

9

332

3

1

9

2. π

.

2

1

3 .

ωh

.

4λx

.

1 = 1.11022310

13

(%)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

9

1. 1 .

2 π2

6

4. 4.

9

3

3

9

4

1. 3 . 6

4 25 π3

3

2

m x.m h

9

St G .

λ x.λ h

5

9

1

9

9

4

. 1 . 3 . 6 .ω

h

4 25 π3

ω Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

9

4

1. 3 . 6 .

ωh

4 25 π3

3

3 .π

2

1

ω Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

.

1 = 1.11022310

.

1 = 1.11022310

13

13

(%)

. 18 ( YHz)

ω Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h = 1.87219710

(%)

4

1. 3 . 6 .

ωh

4 25 π3

1.

. 18 ( YHz)

ω h = 1.84996810

4

λx

e

e

1

α

1

α

ωh

1.

1 . e

λx 1 α

= 2.698589

.

1 = 4.43474910

ω Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

ω PV 1 , λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3

(%)

n Ω_2 λ x.λ h , m x.m h = 1

n Ω_3 λ x

n Ω_3 λ x = 1

1 = 1.18731904721517( % )

4 ω Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

ω Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

6. “ωΩ_4”

9

ω Ω_4 M BH

2

9

M BH

St G.

2 .G.M BH

c

c.

5

c .St G

9

5

3

( 2 .G) .M BH

ω Ω_4 M BH

St BH.

c .St G

5

( 2 .G)

2

ω Ω_4 m x.m h

3

St BH

c.

1

M BH

ω Ω_4 M S

10

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

333

. 18

1.87219710

= 6.23977510

. 5

( YHz)

289.624693

www.deltagroupengineering.com

7. “rS”

i. “rS(λxλh)”

ρ m( r , M )

3 .M

ρ m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

4 .π .r

3

ρ m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

3 .m h

.

1 = 2.22044610

14

3.

3 .m x.m h

λx

2

4 .π . λ x.λ h

3

.m

h

3 .m h

4 .π . λ x.λ h

3 .M BH

ρ m r S , M BH

(%)

2

3

8 .π .λ x .λ h

3

4 .π .r S

3

2

3

8 .π .λ x .λ h

M BH

ρ m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

ρ m r S , M BH

3

ωh

2

R BH( M )

2 .G.λ x

3

2

rS

3

r S M BH

λ x.λ h

2

ωh

ωh

2

2 .G.λ x

2

3

.M

. . 2.

BH λ h 2 λ x

= 1.195378 10

32 .

G

2

λh

2

ωh

2

kg

.

= 5.63257510

94

2

3

m

M BH

3

r S R BH

mh

r S λ x.λ h

2

am

λh

c

2

2 .G.M

c

2

2 .G.λ x

m h c2

2

3

2 .λ x .λ h

rS

M BH

mh

3

2

λ x.λ h .R BH

2

λ x.λ h . λ x.λ h

λ x.λ h

**ii. “rS(ΜΒΗ), rS(RΒΗ)”
**

3

ρS

ρ m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

r S M BH

r S R BH

3

2

3 .c .R BH

8 .π .G.ρ S

2

λ x.λ h .R BH M S

3

2.

3 .c R BH M S

8 .π .G.ρ S

1

rS MS

3 .M BH

4 .π .ρ S

3

3

3.

.

4 .π .r S

3

2

λ x.λ h .R BH M S

3

2.

3 .c R BH M S

8 .π .G.ρ S

rS MS

1 = 0 (%)

2

c .R BH

2 .G

1=

.

3.28046310

5.

r S 10 M S

=

10

r S 10 .M S

334

0.015227

ρS

2

3 .c .R BH

8 .π .G.r S

3

.

1.11022310

14

.

1.11022310

14

(%)

4

( am)

0.706754

www.deltagroupengineering.com

ρ m r S m x.m h , m x.m h

ρ m r S M S ,M S

1 .

5

5

ρ S ρ m r S 10 .M S , 10 .M S

1=

.

1.29896110

12

.

8.32667310

13

.

7.66053910

13

.

6.7723610

10

10

ρ m r S 10 .M S , 10 .M S

(%)

13

U m r S M S ,M S

.

8.10462810

1

. U m r S 105 .M S , 105 .M S

.

.

U m λ x λ h,m x mh

10

10

U m r S 10 .M S , 10 .M S

ρ m r S m x.m h , m x.m h

.

7.2164510

13

.

6.7723610

13

(%)

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

ρ m r S M BH , M BH

10

r S 10 .M S

r uq = 0.768186 ( am)

1=

13

U m r S M BH , M BH

1 = 7.996993 ( % )

r uq

iii. “MBH(rS)”

4. .

3

π ρ S .r S

3

M BH r S

M BH r tq

. 10

= 2.27391910

. 40 ( kg )

M BH r tq = 4.52155110

M BH r uq

MS

. 10

= 1.28408510

MS

M BH r ε

M BH r π

M BH r ν

M BH r µ

. 13 1.62379510

. 19 1.60185510

. 19 1.57097210

. 13

4.66247210

M BH r τ

M BH r en

M BH r µn

M BH r τn

. 13 2.45782610

. 7

5.19529810

1 . M

BH r uq

M BH r dq

M BH r sq

M BH r cq

= 1.28408510

. 10 2.95005410

. 10 1.9828610

. 10 3.68186410

. 10

M BH r bq

M BH r tq

M BH r W

. 10 2.27391910

. 10 5.99684310

. 10 3.39015710

. 10

3.47948910

M BH r H

M BH r γγ

M BH r gg

M BH r Z

1 .( kg )

MS

. 10

2.3560510

. 9 2.12850410

. 11

7.96867110

0

0

14.554628

. 6

5.06892810

R BH M BH r τn

16.217926

.

7.67248410

R BH M BH r sq

R BH M BH r cq

= 4.00847210

.

R BH M BH r tq

R BH M BH r W

R BH M BH r Z

0.010862

R BH M BH r γγ

R BH M BH r gg

R BH( 1.( kg ) )

.

7.35477510

R BH M BH r ε

R BH M BH r π

R BH M BH r ν

R BH M BH r µ

R BH M BH r τ

R BH M BH r en

R BH M BH r µn

R BH M BH r uq

R BH M BH r dq

R BH M BH r bq

R BH M BH r H

ω Ω_4 m x.m h

5

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

=

. 5

6.23977510

.

9.2090510

3

.

7.0983910

3

3

0

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

. 18

1.87219710

ω Ω_4 M S

3

. 4

1.34431910

5

5

U m R BH 10 .M S , 10 .M S

289.624693

10

10

U m R BH 10 .M S , 10 .M S

335

. 6

5.0004410

4.904034

.

2.48754410

3

0.066445

.

6.18980410

3

0.011494 ( Lyr)

0.01872

0.010583

0

0

. 87

1.20853710

U m R BH M S , M S

( YHz)

6

0

=

. 12

1.65639710

( YPa)

165.639685

.

1.65639710

8

www.deltagroupengineering.com

r S mh

1 . r m .m

S x h

λh

λx

r S m x.m h

R BH m x.m h

144.219703

1=

.

4.21884710

(%)

13

.

1 = 4.44089210

M BH r π

1 = 22.109851 ( % )

=

M BH r e

R BH m h

(%)

. 43

9.27104510

M BH r ε

r S mh

13

M BH r Bohr

. 49

3.22881910

. 51

1.26038310

( kg )

. 63

8.34661610

8. “r → RBH”

i. “nΩ → nΩ_4, nΩ_5, nBH”

n Ω_2 r S M BH , M BH

n Ω_4 M BH

n BH M BH

n Ω_5 M BH

n Ω_5 M BH

n Ω_4 M BH

n Ω_4 m x.m h

n Ω_5 m x.m h

n BH m x.m h

n Ω_4 M S

n Ω_5 M S

n BH M S

5

n Ω_4 10 .M S

5

n Ω_5 10 .M S

5

n BH 10 .M S

10

n Ω_4 10 .M S

10

n Ω_5 10 .M S

10

n BH 10 .M S

R BH M S

∆R bh

n Ω_2 R BH M BH , M BH

rS MS

200

R bh

1

=

1

1

. 5 9.00254210

. 24 2.56419310

. 19

3.51086810

. 6 1.93953910

. 28 1.0035610

. 22

1.93265910

. 7 4.1786110

. 31 3.92767810

. 24

1.06388810

r S M S , ∆R bh .. R BH M S

Harmonic Cut-Off Mode vs Radial Disp.

Harmonic Cut-Off Mode

rS MS

R BH M S

n Ω _2 R bh , M S

5

n Ω _2 R bh , 10 .M S

10

n Ω _2 R bh , 10 .M S

n Ω _4 M S

R bh

Radial Displacement

**Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (1 Solar Mass)
**

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (10^5 Solar Masses)

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (10^10 Solar Masses)

336

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**ii. “ωΩ → ωΩ_5, ωBH”
**

ω Ω_5 M BH

ω Ω_3 r S M BH , M BH

ω Ω_4 m x.m h

. 5

6.23977510

=

5

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

. 18

1.87219710

ω Ω_5 M S

( YHz)

5

ω Ω_5 10 .M S

289.624693

10

ω Ω_5 10 .M S

1

ω BH M S

. 13

7.30358710

10

ω BH 10 .M S

ω Ω_4 M BH

. 4

1.34431910

ω BH m x.m h

=

ω Ω_5 M BH

ω Ω_5 m x.m h

. 18

1.87219710

ω Ω_4 M S

5

ω BH 10 .M S

ω BH M BH

=

. 19

4.55727410

. 19

6.9805610

( YHz)

. 20

1.06924110

. 15

5.19263810

. 17

3.69181510

ω Ω_5 m x.m h

ω Ω_5 M S

1 .

5

ω h ω Ω_5 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_5 10 .M S

ω Ω_4 m x.m h

0.253004

ω Ω_4 M S

5

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

=

0.253004

.

6.158585 8.43227510

14

.

9.433354 1.81667910

15

14.44945

0

Harmonic Cut-Off Freq. vs Radial Disp.

Harmonic Cut-Off Frequency

rS MS

R BH M S

ω Ω _3 R bh , m x .m h

ω Ω _3 R bh , M S

5

ω Ω _3 R bh , 10 .M S

10

ω Ω _3 R bh , 10 .M S

R bh

Radial Displacement

**Schwarzschild-Planck-Black-Hole
**

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (1 Solar Mass)

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (10^5 Solar Masses)

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (10^10 Solar Masses)

337

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**iii. “ωΩ_6, ωΩ_7, ωPV_1”
**

ω Ω_6 M BH

ω Ω_5 M BH

n Ω_4 M BH

ω PV_1 M BH

ω Ω_4 M BH

ω Ω_7 M BH

n Ω_5 M BH

ω Ω_6 M BH

ω Ω_7 M BH

ω Ω_6 m x.m h

ω Ω_7 m x.m h

. 42 1.87219710

. 42

1.87219710

ω Ω_6 M S

ω Ω_7 M S

. 38 6.93112610

. 4

1.29804810

5

ω Ω_6 10 .M S

5

ω Ω_7 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_6 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_7 10 .M S

ω PV_1 m x.m h

=

. 37

3.61189510

( Hz)

0.693113

. 37 6.93112610

.

1.00503110

6

1

ω PV_1 M S

=

5.

ω PV_1 10 M S

. 33

1.8727810

.

5.21112310

37

1

.

ωh

10

ω PV_1 10 .M S ( Hz)

= 5.103269

. 42

1.45002610

10

ω PV_1 10 .M S

**Fundamental Freq. vs Radial Disp.
**

rS MS

R BH M S

Fundamental Frequency

ω Ω _3 R bh , m x .m h

n Ω _2 R bh , m x .m h

ω Ω _3 R bh , M S

n Ω _2 R bh , M S

5

ω Ω _3 R bh , 10 .M S

5

n Ω _2 R bh , 10 .M S

ω Ω _3 R bh , 10

n Ω _2 R bh , 10

10 .

MS

10 .

MS

R bh

Radial Displacement

**Schwarzschild-Planck-Black-Hole
**

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (1 Solar Mass)

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (10^5 Solar Masses)

Schwarzschild-Black-Hole (10^10 Solar Masses)

338

www.deltagroupengineering.com

9. “TL”

M .c

E( M )

2

n γ ω , M BH

1.

n γ ω , M BH

2

E g( ω )

h .ω

E γ( ω )

E g ( ω ) E x.E γ ( ω )

E M BH

E M BH

n g ω , M BH

E γ( ω )

E M BH

E M BH

E x.E γ ( ω )

E m x.m h = 6.616163 ( GJ)

2 .E γ ( ω )

n γ ω Ω_4 m x.m h , m x.m h

n g ω Ω_4 m x.m h , m x.m h

=

Ex

= 6.616163 ( GJ)

P g ω Ω_4 m x.m h

n γγ( M )

E g ω Ω_4 m x.m h

= 1.240531 ( GJ)

P γ ω Ω_4 m x.m h

c

= 8.275929 ( Ns )

2 .n gg ( M )

T Ω _3( r , M )

T L r S λ x.λ h , m x.m h

10

10

T L r S 10 .M S , 10 .M S

=

m γγ

m gg

3.195095

=

6.39019

1

P g( ω )

10

=2

E g( ω )

c

45 .

T L( r , M )

ω Ω _3( r , M )

n gg ( M )

eV

E( M )

m gg

n gg ( M ) .T Ω _3( r , M )

n g ω Ω _3( r , M ) , M

9

10 .yr

. 13

4.10173110

. 13

4.10173110

T L r uq , m uq

. 13

4.10173110

T L R BH M S , M S

10

10

T L R BH 10 .M S , 10 .M S

s

E g ω Ω_4 m x.m h

E γ ω Ω_4 m x.m h

= 2.481061 ( GJ)

= 4.137964 ( Ns )

. 13

4.10173110

T L R BH λ x.λ h , m x.m h

5

5

T L R BH 10 .M S , 10 .M S

43 .

. 13

4.10173110

T L r S M S ,M S

5

5

T L r S 10 .M S , 10 .M S

2 .E M BH

2

n γ ω , M BH .E γ ( ω )

2.666667

n g ω Ω_4 m x.m h , m x.m h .E g ω Ω_4 m x.m h

E γ( ω )

1.

n γ ω , M BH

2

5.333333

= 6.616163 ( GJ)

P γ( ω )

ω Ω_4 M BH

T Ω_4 m x.m h = 5.341319 10

n γ ω Ω_4 m x.m h , m x.m h .E γ ω Ω_4 m x.m h

E γ ω Ω_4 m x.m h

1

n g ω , M BH

E g( ω )

1.

n γ ω , M BH

2

E g( ω )

T Ω_4 M BH

=

. 13

4.10173110

.

4.10173110

13

9

10 .yr

T L r ε, m e

T L r π, m p

T L r ν,mn

. 13

4.10173110

339

. 13

4.10173110

=

. 13

4.10173110

.

4.10173110

13

9

10 .yr

. 13

4.10173110

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1

m γγ

h.

=

2

. 13

4.10173110

.

4.10173110

13

m γγ

T L λ x.λ h , m x.m h

. m

gg

h

2

9.

10 yr

m gg

H0

71.

km

.

s Mpc

=

1

TL

1

h

m γγ

.

T L.H 0 = 2.97830810

12

**10. “ωg, ngg”
**

T PV n PV, r , M

T g n PV, r , M

n g ω PV n PV, r , M , M

n g ω PV n PV, r , M , M

T PV n PV, r , M

T PV n PV, r , M

ω PV n PV, r , M .n g ω PV n PV, r , M , M

ω PV n PV, r , M .n g ω PV n PV, r , M , M

ω g n PV, r , M

n g ω PV n PV, r , M , M

ω g n PV, r , M

1

ω PV n PV, r , M . .n γ ω PV n PV, r , M , M

2

E( M )

1

ω PV n PV, r , M . .

2 E γ ω PV n PV, r , M

1

E( M )

ω PV n PV, r , M . .

2 E γ ω PV n PV, r , M

1

E( M )

ω PV n PV, r , M . .

2 h .ω PV n PV, r , M

ω g m x.m h

E( M )

2 .h

=

10

ω g 10 .M S

. 56

1.34855310

. 61

1.34855310

E MS

1 .

5

m gg E 10 .M S

10

E 10 .M S

M .c

2 .h

2

n gg ( M )

5

n gg 10 .M S

10

n gg 10 .M S

T L.ω g ( M )

. 72

6.46222510

n gg M S

( YHz)

. 66

1.34855310

E m x.m h

ω g( M )

n gg m x.m h

. 18

4.99252510

ωg MS

5

ω g 10 .M S

1

E( M )

ω PV n PV, r , M . .

.

2 h ω PV n PV, r , M

=

. 110

1.7455410

. 115

1.7455410

. 120

1.7455410

. 72

6.46222510

=

. 110

1.7455410

. 115

1.7455410

. 120

1.7455410

340

www.deltagroupengineering.com

11. BH’s

r0

c

1

9

r 0 = 13.772016 10 .Lyr

H0

5

St G.

r ω ω Ω_3 , M

M

ω VL λ VL

c

ω VL( 750 ( nm ) )

9

λ VL

ω VL( 400 ( nm ) )

ω Ω_3 r 0 , M S

ω VL( 400 ( nm ) )

ω VL( 750 ( nm ) )

5

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10 .M S

5

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10 .M S

ω VL( 400 ( nm ) )

ω VL( 750 ( nm ) )

10 .

218.810356

410.269418

. 4 6.84370610

. 4

3.64997710

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10 M S

ω VL( 400 ( nm ) )

ω VL( 750 ( nm ) )

4

ω Ω_3 1.63.10 .r 0 , M S

4

ω Ω_3 5.052.10 .r 0 , M S

ω VL( 400 ( nm ) )

ω VL( 750 ( nm ) )

6

5

ω Ω_3 1.63.10 .r 0 , 10 .M S

6

5

ω Ω_3 5.052.10 .r 0 , 10 .M S

ω VL( 400 ( nm ) )

ω VL( 750 ( nm ) )

ω Ω_3 1.63.10 r 0 , 10 M S

10 .

8.

ω Ω_3 5.052.10 r 0 , 10

ω VL( 400 ( nm ) )

10

C Ω_J1 r 0 , 10 .M S

( THz)

. 3 5.29883310

. 3

= 2.82604410

10 .

MS

5

C Ω_J1 r 0 , 10 .M S

749.481145

27.355887

ω Ω_3 r 0 , M S

C Ω_J1 r 0 , M S

399.723277

= 2.118067 ( EHz)

10

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10 .M S

8.

=

0.163994

5

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10 .M S

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10

H0

2

ω Ω_3

ω Ω_3 r 0 , M S

9

= 13.772016 10 .yr

0.999916 1.000078

= 0.999916 1.000078

0.999916 1.000078

10 .

MS

ω VL( 750 ( nm ) )

.

1.48429110

5

= 8.89809310

.

3

10

20 .

yJy

5.334267

1

10

C Ω_J1 r 0 , 10 .M S .

C Ω_J1 r 0 , M S

1

=

. 5

3.59381410

599.48425

5

C Ω_J1 r 0 , 10 .M S

341

www.deltagroupengineering.com

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , M S

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , M S

5

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

5

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

10

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

10

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , M S

5

r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

10

r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S

10

r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 M S , 10 M S

10

10

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S , 10 .M S

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 M S , 10 M S

10

10

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S , 10 .M S

=

. 6

2.95234410

0.741144

( Lyr)

16 .

yJy

= 2.12751776034345

.103 8.46980075872643

.10

3

.105

2.12751776034345

= 2.93002110

.

7

0.846980075872643

1.166462

116.646228

6

10 .Lyr

. 9 1.16646210

. 4

2.93002110

2.164916

.

= 2.16491610

3

.

2.16491610

6

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( EHz) , M S , M S

5.

0.239057

5

. 5

2.93002110

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( PHz) , M S , M S

5.

10

=

.10

21.2751776034345 8.46980075872643

10

r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

5

r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S

r ω 30.( EHz) , m x.m h

1.102778

5

r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

r ω 30.( EHz) , M S

r ω 30.( PHz) , m x.m h

28.979765

=

r ω 30.( PHz) , M S

5.

. 8 5.05271110

. 8

1.62975410

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h

r ω 30.( EHz) , M S

5.

= 1.62975410

. 6 5.05271110

. 6

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h

C Ω_J1 r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h , m x.m h

1 . r 30.( PHz) , 105 .M

ω

S

r0

10

r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S

. 4 5.05271110

. 4

1.62975410

10

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

C Ω_J1 r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h , m x.m h

9

10 .Lyr

9

. 9

2.2445.10 6.95860210

5

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

1.

10

( Lyr) , 10 .M S = 1.031709

10

r ω 30.( PHz) , M S

**= 2.2445.107 6.95860210
**

. 7

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , M S

1 . r ω ( 400 ( nm ) ) , 105 .M

ω VL

S

r0

10

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm) ) , 10 .M S

K PV

5

. 5

2.2445.10 6.95860210

10

29 .

10

14 .

yJy

8.618686

.

= 8.61868610

3

.

8.61868610

6

yJy

3

10 .km

11.753495

7

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( PHz) , m x.m h , m x.m h = 6.228302 10 .yJy

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( EHz) , m x.m h , m x.m h = 2.479532 ( fJy )

342

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**vii. Fundamental Cosmology
**

1. “Hα, HU”

i. “AU, RU, HU”

5

C Ω_J1 r 1 , M 1

9

C Ω_J1( r , M )

M

St J .

26

r

ln

C Ω_J1 r 1 , M 1

C Ω_J1 r 2 , M 2

λ y r 2, M 2

ln

9

5

M1

ln

.

M2

r2

r1

M1

r1

K U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

9

ln

ln

A U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

H U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

ln

.

r2

26

5

ln

ri

C Ω_J1 r 1 , M 1

C Ω_J1 r 2 , M 2

λ y r 2 , M 2 .r 3

λ y r 2, M 2

.M

3

2

5

λy M3

r

.

. 1 . 2

2 M2

λy r3

C Ω_J1 r 2 , M 2

λy M3

r

.

. 1 . 2

2 M2

λy r3

rf

r1

C Ω_J1 r 3 , M 3

26

26

λ y r 2, M 2

.M

C Ω_J1 λ y r 2 , M 2 .r 3 ,

3

2

C Ω_J1 r 2 , M 2

5

5

K U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

5

M2

26

ln n Ω_2 r 2 , M 2

C Ω_J1 r 2 , M 2

M1

C Ω_J1 r 2 , M 2

9

1

C Ω_J1 r 3 , M 3

9

1

2

9

7

.ln n

Ω_2 r 2 , M 2

TL

K U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

5

1

3.

M3

26

9

.

M2

r2

9

r3

R U r 2, r 3 , M 2, M 3

c .A U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

9

A U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 14.575885 10 .yr

A U r 2, r 3 , M 2, M 3

9

R U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 14.575885 10 .Lyr

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 67.084304

1 .

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

H0

km

s .Mpc

1 = 5.515064 ( % )

343

www.deltagroupengineering.com

H U R o , λ x.λ h , M G, m x.m h

H U R o , λ h , M G, m h

66.700842

H U K λ .R o , λ h , K m.M G, m h

70.06923

H U R o , λ x.λ h , M G, m x.m h

1 .

H0

km

.

s Mpc

= 69.672169

6.055152

H U R o , λ h , M G, m h

1=

1.870184 ( % )

H U K λ .R o , λ h , K m.M G, m h

1.310944

1

km

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , .K m.M G, m x.m h = 67.753267

.

3

s Mpc

H U K λ .R o , λ h , K m.M G, m h

1

H U K λ .R o , λ h , .K m.M G, m h

3

1=

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

0.978843

0.987352

(%)

1

H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , .K m.M G, m x.m h

3

ii. “Hα”

3 .H

ρm

8 .π .G

2

H α r 3, M 3

2.

. 61

H α λ x.λ h , m x.m h = 8.46094110

λx

H α λ x.λ h , m x.m h .

ωh

2. . .

π G ρ m r 3, M 3

3

H α λ x.λ h , m x.m h

ωh

km

s .Mpc

.

1 = 4.44089210

λx

14

.

= 8.46094110

61

ωh

λx

km

s .Mpc

(%)

iii. “ρU”

3 .H U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

8 .π .G

ρ U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

2

ρ U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

ρ U K λ .R o , λ h , K m.M G, m h

3 .H 0

2

8.453235

= 9.222226

10

33 .

kg

3

cm

9.468862

8 .π .G

Hence,

8.45 ρ U . 10

33 .

kg

9.23

3

cm

344

www.deltagroupengineering.com

iv. “MU”

M U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

V R U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3 .ρ U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

. 52 ( kg )

M U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 9.28458610

2. “TU”

K T r 2, r 3 , M 2, M 3

λ Ω_3 r 3 , M 3

n g ω Ω_3 r 3 , M 3 , M 3 .ln

c

T0

ω Ω_3 r 3 , M 3

T W r 2, r 3, M 2 , M 3

T U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

H α r 3, M 3

H U r 2, r 3, M 2, M 3

2.725.( K )

.

K W = 2.89776910

3

( m.K )

KW

λ Ω_3 R U r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3 , M 3

K T r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3 .T W r 2 , r 3 , M 2 , M 3

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h = 2.724752 ( K )

1 .

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

.

1 = 9.08391310

3

(%)

T0

T U R o , λ x.λ h , M G, m x.m h

T U R o , λ h , M G, m h

2.716201

= 1.199134 ( K )

T U K λ .R o , λ h , K m.M G, m h

1.202877

T U R o , λ x.λ h , M G, m x.m h

1 .

T0

T U R o , λ h , M G, m h

T U K λ .R o , λ h , K m.M G, m h

0.322893

1=

55.995089 ( % )

55.857737

1

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , .K m.M G, m x.m h = 2.739618 ( K )

3

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

1 = 0.542607 ( % )

1

T U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , .K m.M G, m x.m h

3

345

www.deltagroupengineering.com

3. “TU → TU2”

9

c

c

λ Ω_3( r , M )

ω Ω_3( r , M )

9

2

M

St G.

5

r

9

5

c

c λ x.

λ Ω_3 ,

mh

H 2

1 .

St G

c.

λx

8 . H α r 3, M 3

ln

3

H

K T( H ) .T W ( H )

ωh

8.

.

ln

3

λ x.H

ωh

8.

.

ln

3

λ x.H

2

.m

h

1 .

2

St G λ x.m h

2

. c

H

λ Ω_3

KW

T U2( H ) K T( H ) .T W ( H )

c λ x.

mh

λ Ω_3 ,

H 2

c λ x.

,

mh

H 2

ωh

8.

.

ln

3

λ x.H

c λ x.

,

mh

H 2

KW

9

c.

1 .

2

St G λ x.m h

2

. c

H

9

c.

1 .

2

St G λ x.m h

2

. c

H

5

ωh

λ .m

8 .K W .

. St . x h

ln

G

3 c

2

λ x.H

.

H α = 8.46094110

km

.

s Mpc

. H

c

5

ωh

λ .m

8 KW.

. St . x h

T U2( H ) .

ln

G

3 c

2

λ x.H

9

.

8 . St G . λ x m h

St T

5

3 .c

2

c

8 .

3 .c

2

9

61

9

3.

5

9

KW

λx

9

5

KW

KW

ωh

Hα

c.

T W( H)

ωh

8.

.

ln

3

λ x.H

λ Ω_3

9

H

2

K T( H )

5

1 . r

St G M 2

c.

3 .ω h

4 .π .h

c

5

2

. c

2

9

2

3.

2

.

8 . St G . λ x m h

5

3 .c

2

c

8 .

3 .c

3 .ω h

4 .π .h

c

5

2

. c

2

2

. H

c

5

9

.

λ x.m h

2

2

9

.

λ x.m h

2

2

9

.

8 .c . 3 . 3 ω h

3 .c 2 c5 4 .π .h

2

.

λ x.m h

2

2

346

www.deltagroupengineering.com

9

.

8 .c . 3 . 3 ω h

3 .c 2 c5 4 .π .h

9

4.

3

3

3

4 .c

.

9

3

λ x.m h

9

2

2

2

4.

3

3

6 5

2 .c

3

3

4 .c

3

3

4.

9

2

m λ

. h. x

π .h λ h

4. 3. . λ x

c

3 4

π .h .G

T U2( H )

2

2

λ

. x .c

π .h G

9

3

λx

4. 3. .

c

2

3

3 4

π .c .λ h

K W .St T .ln

ωh

λ x.H

.

λ x.m h .ω h

π .h

3

4.

3

3

6 5

2 .c

.

4.

3

3

4 .c

4.

π .h

3

9

4. 3. 1 . λ x

3 4 c5 π .λ 2

h

9

2

4.

3

3

.

mh λ x

.

π .h λ h

3

3 . λx

c.

4

π .h .G

2

2

2

9

. 95

St T = 6.35557910

s

5

9

m

T U2 H U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

. H5

3

4 .c

3

2

λ

. x .c

π .h G

3

St T

9

2

λ x.m h .ω h

9

2

2

9

9

2

= 2.72475246336977( K )

**4. “TU2 → Ro, MG, HU2, ρU2”
**

∆R o

0.5.( kpc )

T U2 H U2 R o , M G

T U2 H 0

T U2 H U2 R o

1 .

T U2 H U2 R o , M G

T0

= 2.724752 ( K )

1

T U2 H U2 R o , .M G

3

T U2 H U2 R o

H U K λ .r , λ x.λ h , K m.M , m x.m h

H U2( r , M )

=

2.739618

( K)

2.810842

1

∆R o , .K m.M G

3

1

∆R o , .K m.M G

3

=

2.733025

2.741859

.

1 = 9.08391310

T U2 H U2 R o

∆R o , M G

T U2 H U2 R o

∆R o , M G

∆T 0

( K)

Computational environment initialisation values →

=

2.720213

2.729021

3

(%)

( K)

0.001.( K )

r x1

1

m g1

1

r x2

1

m g2

1

Given

T U2 H U2 r x1.R o , M G

T U2 H U2 R o , m g1 .M G

T0

∆T 0

T U2 H U2 r x2.R o , M G

T U2 H U2 R o , m g2 .M G

r x1

r x1

r x2

r x2

m g1

m g2

Find r x1, r x2, m g1 , m g2

m g1

T0

∆T 0

0.989364

=

m g2

347

1.017883

1.057292

0.911791

www.deltagroupengineering.com

T U2 H U2 r x1.R o , M G

T U2 H U2 r x2.R o , M G

T U2 H U2 R o , m g1 .M G

T U2 H U2 R o , m g2 .M G

2.724

=

2.726

R o.

( K)

2.724

r x1

=

r x2

7.914908

8.143063

( kpc )

2.726

. 11

M G m g1

6.34375310

.

=

M S m g2

. 11

5.47074910

r x1 m g1

1.063645 5.729219

1=

r x2 m g2

1.788292

8.820858

(%)

Given

T U2 H U2 r x1.R o , m g1 .M G

T U2 H U2 r x1.R o , m g2 .M G

∆T 0

T0

T U2 H U2 r x2.R o , m g1 .M G

T U2 H U2 r x2.R o , m g2 .M G

r x3

r x3

r x4

r x4

m g3

Find r x1, r x2, m g1 , m g2

=

2.724

=

2.726

1.013348

0.977007

0.977007

m g4

T U2 H U2 r x3.R o , m g3 .M G

T U2 H U2 r x4.R o , m g4 .M G

∆T 0

0.984956

m g3

m g4

T0

R o.

( K)

. 11

M G m g3

5.8620410

.

=

M S m g4

. 11

5.8620410

r x3

=

r x4

7.879647

8.106786

r x3 m g3

r x4 m g4

1=

( kpc )

1.50441 2.29934

1.334822 2.29934

(%)

**Hence, if “T0” is exactly correct (i.e. zero experimental uncertainty); “Ro”, “MG” and “HU2”
**

may be approximated as follows,

Given

T U2 H U2 r x1.R o , m g1 .M G

r x5

m g5

Find r x1, m g1

r x5.R o = 8.107221 ( kpc )

T0

r x5

m g5

m g5 .

H U2 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G = 67.095419

=

MG

1.013403

T U2 H U2 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

1.052361

.

= 6.31416710

11

MS

r x5

m g5

1=

1.340256

5.236123

= 2.725 ( K )

( %)

km

.

s Mpc

ρ m R U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h , M U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

= 8.453235 10

33 .

kg

3

cm

348

www.deltagroupengineering.com

5. “UZPF”

Ω

ρ

ρc

Ω EGM

Ω PDG

Ω EGM

Ω PDG

3 .H U2( r , M )

ρ U2( r , M )

ρ U2 R o , M G = 8.453235 10

8 .π .G

Ω EGM = 1.000331

ρ U2 R o , M G

.

Ω ZPF = 3.31400710

1

U ZPF

3 .c .

H U2 R o , M G

Ω ZPF .

8 .π .G

13 .

U ZPF = 2.51778 10

Ω EGM

U ZPF = 251.778016

Pa

fJ

U ZPF = 251.778016

U ZPF = 842.934914

3

kg

3

Ω PDG Ω m Ω γ .. Ω ν

Ω ZPF

2

= 0.997339

33 .

cm

ρ U2 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

1.003

2

m

2

ΩΛ

4

U ZPF = 251.778016( fPa )

yJ

U ZPF = 0.251778

3

mJ

3

mm

km

EJ

. 12

U ZPF = 7.39723510

AU

3

YJ

pc

3

YJ

. 41

U ZPF = 6.60189810

R U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

3

**viii. Advanced Cosmology
**

1. “nΩ_2 → nΩ_6”

9

n Ω_6( r , M )

.

.

3

3 . π mh . K λ r

.

16

2 KmM λh

9

7

9

9

9

1

6.

.

3

3 .K λ π m h . r

16

M

λh

2

2 .

3

3 . π .π m h . r

16 2

M

λh

2

7

7

9

n Ω_6( r , M )

3 .π . m h

4

M

9

6

1

.

π .m h

. r

M

λh

3

( 3 .π ) . m h . r

18

M λh

2

1

3

3

3

3 . π

16

2

2

.

.

3

3 . π mh . K λ r

.

16

2 KmM λh

7

3

3 . π

16

2

2

9

7

3

7 9

6. .

3

3 .K λ π m h . r

16

M

λh

2

7

6

.

π .m h

. r

M

λh

3

( 3 .π ) . m h . r

18

M λh

2

7

9

1.

4

7

9

2 .

3

3 . π .π m h . r

16 2

M

λh

2

3 mh

. r

( 3 .π ) .

M λh

7

7

7

9

. r

λh

9

349

www.deltagroupengineering.com

2. “KU2 → KU3”

K U2( r , M )

ln

Kλ

λx

7

5

3

9

.ln n

Ω_6( r , M )

.

mh

26

9

. r

λh

4 .M

K U3( r , M ) ln ( 3 .π )

7

5

2 .

ln n Ω_6( r , M )

256

3.

3

Kλ

( 3 .π )

λx

7 18

6.

5

2

256

26

9

. r

λh

M

.

4

9

mh

9

1

5

7 18

6.

7

5

**3. “HU2 → HU3, TU2 → TU3”
**

K U2( r , M )

H U3( r , M )

5

TL

7

5

7 18

5

6

2

ln ( 3 .π ) .

256

7

.ln n

Ω_6( r , M )

3.

9

mh

M

7 18

5

6

2

9

. r

λh

3

1

26

ln ( 3 .π ) .

.ln

3

9

3 .π . m h

256

4

9

. r

λh

M

5

7

.

mh

M

26

9

. r

λh

9

7

7

5

1 . 18 . . 6 .

2 ( 3 π ) ln

256

K U3( r , M )

ln

T U3( r , M )

T U2 H U3( r , M )

1

1

3

( 3 .π ) . m h

9

4

3

. r

λh

M

5

7

9

.

mh

M

26

9

9

. r

λh

**4. “HU3 → HU4, TU3 → TU4”
**

K U3( r , M )

H U4( r , M )

5

T U4( r , M )

TL

T U2 H U4( r , M )

5. “HU4 → HU5, TU4 → TU5”

µ

1

H U5( r , M )

3

9

3

m γγ

( 3 .π )

.ln

h

7 .µ .

µ

2

32

256

µ

m

.

.ln ( 3 π ) . h

4

M

µ

7 .µ

2

. r

λh

9

λx

4 3 1.

St T . .

3 4 c5 π .λ 2

h

2

St T

9

9

4 . 3

3

4

3

2

7 .µ

5

.

mh

M

5 .µ

2

. r

λh

2

26 .µ

9

.1 .

c

5

2

λx

π .λ h

350

2

9

4 . 3

3

4

3

.1 .

c

5

2

λx

π .λ h

2

4 .1 . λx

3 c5 π .λ 2

h

6

2

www.deltagroupengineering.com

ωh

λx

6

H α r 3, M 3

Hα

2

6

( 4 .µ ) .

ωh

5

π .H α .λ h

c

St T

1

c

St T

4 .1 . λx

3 c5 π .λ 2

h

3

1

c

µ

2

c

1

2

9

9

.

1

π .H α

.

. 4µ

λh

6

( 4 .µ ) .

2 .µ

.

π .H α .λ h

3

.

. 4µ

λh

5

π .H α .λ h

c

c

π .H α .λ h

1

2

9

9

9

1

2 .µ

3

.

1

π .H α

2

T U5( r , M )

π .H α

.

. 4µ

λh

KW

c

µ

.ln

2

2

1

3

6

c

1

ωh

6

3

2

( 4 .µ ) .

6

( 4 .µ ) .

2

1

2

1.

3

c

2

1

π .H α

3

6

1

2

9

3

9

1

c

.

1

π .H α

.

. 4µ

H U5( r , M ) λ h

Hα

.

. 4µ

λh

6

2

.

. 4µ

λh

2 .µ

.

3

2 .µ

1

π .H α

2

. 2

.H ( r , M ) 5 µ

U5

**6. “HU3, HU4, HU5, TU3, TU4, TU5”
**

H U3 R o , M G

H U4 R o , M G

H U5 R o , M G

T U3 R o , M G

T U4 R o , M G

T U5 R o , M G

H U3 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

H U3 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

H U3 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

= 67.084304 67.095419

T U3 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

T U3 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

T U3 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

= 2.724752 2.725 ( K )

**67.084304 67.095419
**

67.084304 67.095419

2.724752 2.725

2.724752 2.725

1 . H

U4 R o , M G

H0

H U5 R o , M G

H U3 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

H U3 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

H U3 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

T U3 R o , M G

T U3 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

1 . T

U4 R o , M G

T0

T U5 R o , M G

T U3 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

T U3 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

H U3 R o , M G

km

.

s Mpc

5.515064 5.499409

1=

5.515064 5.499409 ( % )

5.515064 5.499409

1=

.

9.08391310

3

.

8.37394610

9

.

9.08391310

3

.

8.37394610

9

.

9.08391310

3

.

8.37394610

9

(%)

**7. Time dependent characteristics
**

T U3( H ) K W .St T .ln

Hα

9

H H β .H α

. H5

H

T U3 H β

K W .St T .ln

1

Hβ

. H .H

β α

5 .µ

2

1

1 .

d

K W .St T .ln

H β .H α

dH β

Hβ

Hβ

H β_min ,

2

5 .µ

H β_max H β_min

1 .10

5

0

Hβ e

2

5 .µ

.. H β_max

T U3 H β

351

H β_min

10

H β_max

1

K W .St T .ln

1

Hβ

6

. H .H

β α

5 .µ

2

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1

T U3 e

1

2

5 .µ

. 31 ( K )

= 3.19551810

2

5 .µ .

. 61

H α = 1.39858410

e

km

s .Mpc

1

e

2

5 .µ .

1

= 2.206287 10

H U2 R o , M G

42 .

s

= 7.928705 10

T U2 H α

61

T U3( 1 )

Hα

Hα

=

0

( K)

0

**Computational environment initialisation value → H β2 56.4503086205567
**

Given

T U2 10

H β2

10

H β2

273.( K )

.H

α

H β2 = 56.450309

Find H β2

H β2

1

.H

α

.

= 1.02858610

14

10

(s)

10

H β2

H β2

1

.H

α

km

.

s Mpc

.H = 2.99992310

. 5

α

6

= 3.259461 10 .yr

T U2 10

H β2

.H

α = 273 ( K )

See Fig. 4.22, 4.23.

1

H β .H α

t

T U3 H β

1 . 1

K W .St T .

t t5

d

T U4( t )

dt

1

K W .St T .ln

µ

Hβ

t1

e

1

. 5 .ln H .t .µ 2

α

2

1 . 1

K W .St T .

2

5

t

t

dT2 dt2 ( t )

µ

µ

3

d t3

T U4( t )

1

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

5 .µ

2

µ

2

K W .St T .

. 5 .µ 2 . ln H .t . 5 .µ 2

α

ln H α .t . 5 .µ

2

2

2

5 .µ . ln H α .t . 5 .µ

1 . 1

K W .St T .

3

5

t

t

. 5 .ln H .t .µ 2

α

1

0

.t

1

2

1

10 .µ

. 5 .µ

2

1

2

2.

5 .µ

2

t

d

1 . 1

K W .St T .

5

t

t

t

1 . 1

T U4( t ) K W .St T .

2

5

d t2

t

t

d

K W .St T .

dT dt ( t )

Hα

1

T U4( t ) K W .St T .ln H α .t .

t

2

1

2

5 .µ .

2

5 .µ

. H .H

β α

µ

5 .µ

2

1

2

1

1

2

0

t2

e

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

1

. 1

Hα

1

.t2

2

. 5 .µ 2 .ln H .t . 5 .µ 2 . 5 .µ 2

α

352

3

2

2

2

15.µ . 5 .µ

2

2

www.deltagroupengineering.com

K W .St T .

1 . 1

t

3

t

µ

5

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

t3

e

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

. 5 .µ 2 .ln H .t . 5 .µ 2 . 5 .µ 2

α

3

dT2 dt2 t 2 = 0

s

4.196153

10

s

6.205726

1

=

dT2 dt2 t 1

=

dT2 dt2 t 2

. 114

2.02615310

K

0

2

s

. 112

8.77595210

dT2 dt2 t 3

2

K

3

0

K

. 72

1.05719310

s

. 71

9.25283810

dT3 dt3

. 116

7.65967810

2

. 74

1.32321810

Hα

dT dt t 3

Hα

0

1

dT dt t 2

t3

dT2 dt2

2

s

dT dt t 1

42 .

2

2

15.µ . 5 .µ

dT3 dt3 t 3 = 0

2

dT dt

0.364697

t2

K

s

2.206287

2

. 1

Hα

2

1

=

2

2

15.µ . 5 .µ

2

2

K

dT dt t 1 = 0

t1

2

2

2

2

5 .µ .ln H α .t . 5 .µ . 5 .µ 3

2

K W .St T .

2

5 .µ . 3

t

t

dT3 dt3 ( t )

Hα

3

1

. 159

6.22716710

Hα

dT3 dt3 t 1

=

. 156

3.77545710

K

.

1.45285710

s

155

dT3 dt3 t 2

3

0

dT3 dt3 t 3

T U2 H α

T U2

T U2

T U2

1

0

t1

=

1

t2

. 31

3.19551810

( K)

. 31

3.03432210

4

. 34 ( K )

T U2 10 .H α = 7.41414610

. 31

2.83254210

1

t3

4

10 .H α

1

= 0.364697 10

46 .

s

T U2 H U2 R o , M G

= 2.724752 ( K )

See Fig. 4.24 – 4.35.

353

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Hα

T U3( H ) K W .St T .ln

Hα

. 2

d

d

.H5 µ

K W .St T .ln

T U3( H )

dH

dH

H

9

. H5

H

5 .µ

Hα

. 2

d

.H5 µ K .St . H

K W .St T .ln

W T

dH

H

H

5 .µ

H

K W .St T .

d

d

T U3( H ) .

t

dH

d T U4( t )

5 .µ

5 .µ

2

H

µ

( H .t )

.

2

5 .µ .

t

µ

2

. 5 .ln H .t .µ 2

α

2

H

1

Hα

1

.µ 2

1

Hα

. 5 .ln

.µ 2

1

H

µ

2

. 5 .ln H .t .µ 2

α

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

5 .ln

1 . 1

t t5

1

2

H

1

t . . 5 .µ 2 . . H α . 2

(H t)

5 ln

µ

H

H

1

. 5 .ln H .t .µ 2

α

.µ 2

H

1

. 5 .ln H .t .µ 2

α

.µ 2

1

H

H

1 . 1

t t5

H

2

Hα

. 5 .ln

H

d

H

dt

µ

Hα

. 5 .ln

5 .µ

.µ 2

.µ 2

H

H

H

1 . 1

t t5

K W .St T .

Hα

. 5 .ln

Hα

. 5 .ln

2

1 . 1

K W .St T .

t t5

2

H

K W .St T .

2

d

H

dt

1

1

1

2

t

H

1

1

H γ .H α

H

5 .ln H α .

Hα

d

H

dt

H α.

dH dt H γ

1

H γ .H α

5 .µ

.

2

.

5 .ln

1

H γ .H α

Hα

.µ 2

1

1

Hα

2

H α .H γ

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2

2

Hγ

.

5µ

Hγ

2

H α .H γ

d

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2

2

dH γ

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

1

.µ 2

.

Hγ Hα

1

Hα

1

Hγ

d

dH dt H γ

dH γ

2

H α .H γ

d

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2

2

dH γ

Hγ

.

5µ

Hγ

2

2

5 .µ

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2 . 1

Hγ

5 .µ

2

1

1

Hα

Hγ

2

2

5 .µ

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2 . 1

Hγ

5 .µ

2

1

0

1

Hγ e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

354

1

1

t4

e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

. 1

Hα

www.deltagroupengineering.com

dH2 dt2

d

2

d

H

d t2

2

H

d

dt

H

d t2

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

.

. 2

5µ .

( H .t )

t

5 .ln

Hα

.µ 2

1

1

H

H

d

dt

.

. 2

5µ .

( H .t )

t

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

Hα

5 .ln

1

H

2

2

5 .µ . ln H α .t . 5 .µ

.

. 2

.µ 2

5µ .2

( H .t )

t

1

Hα

5 .ln

H

d

2

H

H α.

1

H γ .H α

2

5 .µ . ln H α .

5 .µ

.

2

.

1

H γ .H α

H α .H γ

d

. 5.µ 2 . ln 1 . 5 .µ 2

2

dH γ

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

3

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

Let:

Hγ Hβ

1

1

1

Hα

2

ln

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

1

3

H α .H γ

. 5 .µ 2 . 5.µ 2 . 5.µ 2 .ln 1

2

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

1

Hγ

1

2 .ln

t5

4

2

ln

1

Hγ

1

2 .ln

1

4

2

Hγ

0

Hγ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

.µ 2

1

Hα

2

1

1

. 5 .µ 2

.

Hγ Hα

5 .ln

2

3

H α .H γ

. 5 .µ 2 . 5 .µ 2 . 5 .µ 2 .ln 1

2

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

Hγ e

2

3

2

H α .H γ

. 5 .µ 2 . ln 1 . 5 .µ 2

2

Hγ

.

5µ

Hγ

dH2 dt2 H γ

.µ 2

2

H

Hα

d t2

1

e

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

1

2

. 1

Hα

η

Computational environment initialisation value → η

4.595349

Given

dH dt

H U2 R o , M G

Hα

H U2 R o , M G

η

η

1

Find( η )

355

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1

t1

e

2

5 .µ .

Hα

10 .µ

t2

1

e

2

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

t3 e

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

. 1

Hα

2.206287 2.206287

4.196153 4.196153

2

2

3

= 6.205726 6.205726

. 1

Hα

e

t5 e

s

8.385263 8.385263

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

42 .

20.932666 20.932666

1

t4

10

1

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

. 1

Hα

2

1

2

. 1

Hα

1

dH dt t 1 .H α

1

dH dt e

5 .µ

10 .µ

dH dt t 2 .H α

1

dH dt e

2

2

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt t 3 .H α

1

dH dt e

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

3

2

1

dH dt t 4 .H α

1

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt t 5 .H α

η = 4.595349

1

dH dt e

1

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt

. 68

7.50137510

. 68

7.50137510

. 83

9.06689310

. 83

9.06689310

= 1.22575310

. 84

. 84

1.22575310

. 84

1.55351810

. 84

1.55351810

. 84

1.38436210

. 84

1.38436210

2

Hz

2

1

H U2 R o , M G

2

η

= 4.726505 10

36 .

2

Hz

Hα

356

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1

dH2 dt2 t 1 .H α

1

dH2 dt2 e

2

5 .µ

10 .µ

dH2 dt2 t 2 .H α

1

2

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH2 dt2 e

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

dH2 dt2 t 3 .H α

1

dH2 dt2 e

. 125

8.50679910

0

0

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

. 125

8.50679910

=

2

3

1

dH2 dt2 t 4 .H α

1

dH2 dt2 e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH2 dt2 t 5 .H α

dH2 dt2

1

dH2 dt2 e

1

. 125

1.16257810

. 124

8.2461110

. 124

8.2461110

. 125

1.33162810

. 125

1.33162810

3

Hz

2

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

.

1.16257810

125

2

1

η

H U2 R o , M G

3

= 0 Hz

Hα

See Fig. 4.36 – 4.45.

H

d

d 1

H

dt

dt t

1

t

1

t

2

H

2

Hα

d

H

dt

H

=1

η

dH dt 1

η

dH dt 1

η

H U2 R o , M G

dH dt

=

. 61

8.46094110

67.084257

km

.

s Mpc

Hα

See Fig. 4.46, 4.47.

Checking errors yields,

H

d

H

dt

( H .t )

5 .µ

.

2

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

.t

5 .ln

Hα

.µ

2

5 .µ

1

H

2

. 5 .ln

H

Hα

.µ 2

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

1 dH

H

t

1

5 .µ

2

1

dt

.t

H

5 .µ

H

2

. 5 .ln

H

5 .µ

H

2

.ln

Hα

.µ 2

H

Hα

H

5 .µ

1 dH H

2

.ln

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

Hα

H

ln H α .t

t

5 .µ

2

t

has the solution:

H

5 .µ

2

.t

1

dt

ln H α .t

t

5 .µ

2

1

t

357

www.deltagroupengineering.com

T U2

η

T U2

dH dt 1

dH dt

T U3( 1 )

T U3

dH dt

e

dH dt e

dH dt

T U2

dH dt

dH dt

1

T U3 e

η

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

T U3 e

0

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

0

. 31 3.19551810

. 31

2.97174510

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

3

2

= 3.18632310

. 31 3.03432210

. 31 ( K )

1

. 31 2.83254210

. 31

3.18071410

η

2

5 .µ

10 .µ

1

2

T U3 e

T U3

Hα

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

η

H U2 R o , M G

1

T U2

Hα

η

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

e

( K)

T U3( 1 )

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

T U2

0 2.724752

H U2 R o , M G

2

5 .µ

10 .µ

0 2.724751

=

dH dt 1

1

T U2

Hα

η

T U2

T U2

η

H U2 R o , M G

2

3

2.724751

2.724752

2

H U2 R o , M G

Hα

η

2

5 .µ

e

1 = 7.002696 ( % )

1

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

See Fig. 4.48, 4.49.

dH dt H γ

2

H α .H γ

. 5 .ln

0

Hγ

t7

t 7 = 2.206287 10

=1

t1

1

.µ 2

1

Hγ e

0

Hγ

2

5 .µ

1

1

42 .

s

Hγ Hβ

η

η

2

5 .µ

t7

e

2

5 .µ .

1

Hα

ln H γ

ln t 7 .H α

1

ln H β

ln t 1 .H α

1

1

1

ln t 7 .H α

1

ln t 1 .H α

1

=1

2

H α .e

e

2

1

. 5 .ln

2

5 .µ

1

5 .µ

5 .µ

2

.µ 2

. 68 Hz2

1 = 7.50137510

1

e

5 .µ

2

358

www.deltagroupengineering.com

4

2.

dH dt H γ

Hα Hγ

4 .µ

2

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2

Hγ

2.

1

5.

Hα e

1

5 .ln

5 .µ

2

1

4

Hα e

. 68 Hz2

1 = 7.50137510

1

e

2.

.µ 2

5.

5 .ln e

5 .µ

2

.µ 2

1

5 .ln

2

1 = 0 Hz

. 1

3

1

1

5.

2

1 =0

2

3

e

1st Derivative of the Hubble Constant

10

42

t 1 .10

8

Scaled Derivative (Hz^2)

6

4

dH dt H β

10

η

79

2

0

0

2

4

2.20624

2.20625

2.20626

2.20627

2.20628

2.20629

2.2063

2.20631

2.20632

η

H β .H α

1

2.20633

2.20634

2.20635

2.20636

2.20637

2.20638

.1042

Scaled Cosmological Age (s)

Hα

=

dH dt t 4 .H α

1

Hα

H U2 R o , M G

H0

=

1

=

. 123

1.47916710

71

2

km

s .Mpc

km

s .Mpc

1

2

.

1.55351810

84

Hα

dH dt

H U2 R o , M G

2

H0

359

.

3.84599410

61

1

. 84

7.51858710

=

. 61

8.46094110

=

dH dt t 4 .H α

dH dt t 4 .H α

. 123

7.15875210

67.084304

Hα

( Hz)

Hα

1

2

dH dt t 4 .H α

.

1.24640210

42

= 2.199936

dH dt t 4 .H α

Hα

. 42

2.74200410

km

.

s Mpc

2

Hz

2

t 4 .H α

2

=

= 4.839718

1

. 3

4.50030410

3

5.041.10

km

s .Mpc

2

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1

Hα

t1

3.646967

= 22.062867

10

1

43 .

s

9

= 14.575885 10 .yr

H U2 R o , M G

209.326658

t4

A U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h .H U2 R o , M G = 1

T U2 H α

T U2 t 1

1

T U2 t 4

1

0

. 31

3.19551810

. 31

= 2.05994510

2.724752

T U2 H U2 R o , M G

T U3 H U2 R o , M G .H α

c.

( K)

t1

t4

=

6.614281

10

62.754553

34 .

m

2.724752

1

2.725

T0

t

16.326238

c . 1

=

154.899031

λh t4

c

H U2 R o , M G

9

= 14.575885 10 .Lyr

R U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h .H U2 R o , M G

=1

c

**8. History of the Universe
**

T U2 H α = 0 ( K )

1

T U2

10

T U2

10 .

T U2

1

. 15 ( K )

= 3.43308810

31

1

13 .

1

9.

5 .10 ( yr )

( K)

1

T U2

10

T U2

(s)

1

.

= 1.92400510

28

34 .

( K)

(s)

. 9 ( K)

= 1.01325410

2.

10 ( s )

= 978.724031 ( K )

10 ( s )

T U2

.

= 3.19551810

t1

T U2

1

9.

= 11.838588 ( K )

10 ( yr )

= 4.898955 ( K )

T U2 H U2 R o , M G

360

= 2.724752 ( K )

www.deltagroupengineering.com

T U2

1

.

1 (s)

1

1 .( day )

T U2

T U2

1

31.( day )

T U2

T U2

1 .( yr )

1

T U2

2

10 .( yr )

1

T U2

1

1

. 7 521.528169

2.52413210

41.823796

. 4

8.07751510

11.838588

9

10 .( yr )

. 4

2.29089210

3.35005

1

. 3

6.49496110

0.947724

( K)

10 .

( yr )

1

11 .

10

1

= 1.00307810

.

1

10

=

147.71262

6

8

10 .( yr )

T U2

1

.

116 ( day )

. 6

3.86401510

1

T U2

10 ( yr )

T U2

. 10 1.84076810

. 3

1.2497710

7.

T U2

4.

6

10 .( yr )

10 ( yr )

10 ( yr )

T U2

1

T U2

3.

T U2

5.

10 ( yr )

T U2

1

1

T U2

( yr )

. 6

1.87808710

.

3.98831410

( K)

7

TL

9. “ML, rL, tL, tEGM”

5

C Ω_J1 r 1 , M 1

M1

C Ω_J1 r 2 , M 2

26

r1

R EGM

M 2 M 1.

26

r2

R U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

. 71 ( kg )

M L = 4.86482110

tL

5

M2

rL

rL

.

t L = 7.6372910

19

c

M EGM

2

R EGM.c

=1

t EGM

ML

.

r1

K m.M G.

M EGM

r2

r1

R EGM

K λ .R o

5 5

.

R EGM

K λ .R o

M U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

A U K λ .R o , λ x.λ h , K m.M G, m x.m h

2 .G

M EGM

5 5

. 19 109 .Lyr

r L = 7.6372910

R BH M L

9

10 .yr

r2

t EGM

=1

R EGM

c

2

R EGM.c

2 .G

t EGM

R EGM

c

M L M EGM

rL

tL

R EGM t EGM

361

www.deltagroupengineering.com

ML

M EGM

. 18

5.23967510

rL

tL

= 5.23967510

. 18

R EGM

. 18

5.23967510

tL

. 6

= 1.86196810

TL

t EGM

**10. Radio astronomy
**

9

9

9

5

M

St J .

St J .

26

r

M

M

9

M

St J .

26

St G.

St J .

9

5

5

26

5

2

St G.

9

ω Ω_3

M

M

St J .

5

2

26

9

5

.

ω Ω_3

26

St G

M

5

5

2

9

ω Ω_3

26

M

5

ω Ω_3

.

26

St G

M

5

9

2

26 9

M

M

St J .ω Ω_3

5

St J .St G

45

26

5

52

26

5

.St 5

G

M

1

.

27

5

26

5

26

.St 5

G

9

1

5

St J .ω Ω_3 .

27

M

5

26

.St 5

G

4

5

4

9 .c .ω Ω

5.

5.

.ω

Ω_3 St G M

.

4π

3

5

.St 5

G

2

9 .c .

9

St G .St G

.

4π

4

5

52

1

9

M

26

26 9

5

St J .ω Ω_3 .

M

5

St J .ω Ω_3 .

26

5

26

45

9 .c .

St G

4 .π

4

4

5

5

9 .c .

4 .π

4

C Ω_Jω ω Ω_3 , M

ω Ω_3

4.

St G M

3

5

.ω

Ω_3

5.2

C Ω_Jω ω Ω_3 , M

4

9 .c . ω Ω_3

4 .π St 0.8 .M 0.6

G

10

10

C Ω_Jω ω Ω_4 10 .M S , 10 .M S = 180.283336( nJy )

Checking errors yields,

362

www.deltagroupengineering.com

5

M

St J .

Test 1 ω Ω_3 , M

9

St G.

M

ω Ω_3

27

.M

45

9

Test 2 3 .( EHz) , M S = 5.438023 10

43 .

Jy

Test 3 3 .( EHz) , M S

Test 2 ω Ω_3 , M

Test 1 ω Ω_3 , M

C Ω_Jω 3 .( EHz) , M S = 5.438023 10

.

1 = 5.70654610

43 .

12

12

(%)

C Ω_Jω ω Ω_3 , M

.

1 = 3.66373610

10

10

C Ω_Jω ω Ω_4 10 .M S , 10 .M S

(%)

Jy

.

1 = 2.0428110

Test 4 3 .( EHz) , M S

Jy

43 .

Test 2 ω Ω_3 , M

Test 5 ω Ω_3 , M

C Ω_Jω ω Ω_3 , M

Test 5 3 .( EHz) , M S

5

45

2

Test 1 ω Ω_3 , M

Test 4 ω Ω_3 , M

26

45 .

ω Ω_3

Test 1 3 .( EHz) , M S = 5.438023 10

Test 3 ω Ω_3 , M

St J .St G

Test 2 ω Ω_3 , M

26

26

10

10

C Ω_J1 R BH 10 .M S , 10 .M S

12

(%)

= 0.999999999999968

**ix. Gravitational Cosmology
**

G.M E G.M M

2

2

r4

r4

r5

r4

r4

r5

=

. 5

3.46028110

.

3.83719110

4

( km)

a EGM_ωΩ r 5 , M M

0 .( s ) ,

=

T PV 1 , r 4 , M E

500

a PV( r , M , t )

D E2M. M M .M E

i .

g r 4, M E

g r 5, M M

.

3.33165310

3

.

3.33165310

3

.. T PV 1 , r 4 , M E

C PV n PV, r , M .e

=

. 3

3.33165310

.

3.33165310

m

s

r5

M M .M E

MM

a EGM_ωΩ r 4 , M E

t

r 5 D E2M

3

m

s

2

g r 4, M E

r4

g r 5, M M = 0

m

s

a EGM_ωΩ r 4 , M E

2

D E2M

a EGM_ωΩ r 5 , M M = 0

2

m

s

N

21

n PV

N, 2

2

N .. N

π .n PV .ω PV( 1 , r , M ) .t .i

n PV

363

www.deltagroupengineering.com

**Harmonic Acc. & Grav. Interference
**

T PV 1 , r 5 , M M

Acceleration

a PV r 4 , M E , t

a PV r 5 , M M , t

a PV r 4 , M E , t

a PV r 5 , M M , t

t

Time

**Gravitational Acceleration due to The Earth
**

Gravitational Acceleration due to The Moon

Resultant Acceleration (Interference)

0

ξ

9

a g ( r , M , φ, t )

g av ( r , M )

t

0 .( s ) ,

ξ .T Ω r 5 , M M

200

.. ξ .T Ω r 5 , M M

π

g ( r , M ) . .sin 2 .π .ω Ω ( r , M ) .t

2

2

T Ω ( r, M )

φ

1.

T Ω ( r, M )

2

.

0 .( s )

g av R E, M E = 9.809009

m

s

2

a g( r, M , 0 , t ) d t

ω Ω r 4 , M E = 56.499573 ( YHz) ω Ω r 5 , M M = 72.138509( YHz)

Conjugate WaveFunction Acc. Pairs

a g r 4, M E, 0, t

Acceleration

φ

a g r 4, M E, 0, t

a g r 5, M M, π , t

a g r 5, M M, π , t

t

Time

**+ve WaveFunction From The Earth
**

-ve WaveFunction From The Earth

+ve WaveFunction From The Moon

-ve WaveFunction From The Moon

364

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Conjugate WaveFunction Acc. Beats

Acceleration

a g r 4, M E, φ , t

a g r 5, M M, π , t

a g r 4, M E, φ , t

a g r 5, M M, π , t

t

Time

**+ve WaveFunction Interference Beat
**

-ve WaveFunction Interference Beat (Conjugate)

x. Particle Cosmology

h

tL

m γγ

5

m γγ2

r e.

r γγ2

h

m γγ2

m gg2

tL

m γγ2

2 .m γγ2

m gg2

2

r gg2

2

m e .c

5

r γγ2

4 .r γγ2

r gg2

r γγ2

λh

λh

r γγ2

2 .r γγ2

K λ .λ h

K λ .λ h

2 .r γγ2

λh

r gg2

2 .r γγ2

0.178967

=

0.357933

0.236148

2 .r γγ2

(%)

λh

7.250508

9.567103

246.127068

2 .r gg2

0.472296

K λ .λ h

211.731798

λh

λh

2 .r gg2

E Ω ( r, M )

Qγ

h .ω Ω ( r , M )

Q γ r ε, m e

N γ( r, M )

Qγ

E Ω ( r, M )

mγ

= 2.655018 10

eV

38 .

m

423.463597

r gg2

2 .r gg2

10

51 .

279.381783

=

0.406294

2 .r gg2

10

3.431956

324.766614

λh

K λ .λ h

1.715978

558.763566

λh

0.307913

=

=

30

Qe

365

Q γ( r, M )

Q γ_PDG

Qe

N γ( r, M )

5 .10

30 .

Qe

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Q γ_PDG

= 1.883226

Q γγ( r , M )

Qγ

Q γγ

tL

Qγ

Q γ( r, M )

N γ( r, M )

2

Q γγ = 1.129394 10

Qe

m γγ

Q γγ

m γγ

T L m γγ2 Q γγ2

m γγ2

Q γγ2 = 6.065593 10

mγ

85 .

C

Q γγ2

78 .

C

Q γ( r, M )

Q γγ( r , M )

Q γγ

2

Qe

= 7.049122 10

60

Qe

.

= 1.86196810

6

= 3.785846 10

Q γγ2

mγ

66

Q γγ

m γγ

.m

γγ2

2

ω Ω r e, m e

.m

γγ

ω Ω r ε, m e

E Ω r ε,me

Qe

2

E Ω r ε, m e

ω Ω r e, m e

.m

γγ

ω Ω r ε, m e

ω Ω r e, m e

mγ

2

h .m γγ

=

1.525768

1.525768

10

46 .

eV

E Ω r e, m e

mγ

2

mγ

h .m γγ

mγ

m γγ

2

=

0.165603

0.165603

( µJ )

m γγ

Qe

ω Ω r e,m e

2

E Ω r e, m e

=

249.926816

249.926816

me

( YHz)

2.

c Q γγ

=

. 11

1.7588210

C

198.286288

kg

m γγ

NOTES

366

www.deltagroupengineering.com

b. Calculation engine

i. Computational environment

NOTE: KNOWLEDGE OF MATHCAD IS REQUIRED AND ASSUMED

•

•

•

**Convergence Tolerance (TOL): 0.001.
**

Constraint Tolerance (CTOL): 0.001.

Calculation Display Tolerance: 6 figures – unless otherwise indicated.

ii. Standard relationships

1

A0

c

r0

H0

H0

M

ρ m( r , M )

ω VL λ VL

c

9

A 0 = 13.772016 10 .yr

V( r )

2

r

M .c

E( M )

2

G.M

g( r , M )

λ VL

2 .G.M

R BH( M )

V( r )

c

4. . 3

πr

3

E γ ( ω ) h .ω

2

9

r 0 = 13.772016 10 .Lyr

**iii. Derived constants
**

4 . 2

6

π 3

λx

3.

St G

λx

mx

3 .ω h

4 .π .h

2

. c

2

Hα

2

4

St J

10 .µ

t1

e

1

t2

Hα

e

2

t4

e

1

µ

3

1

r3

. 1

Hα

λ x.λ h

= 3.646967 10

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

245

10

5

m.s

t5

M3

43 .

Hα

St g = 1.828935

2

9

9

s

m x.m h

c.

St BH

e

6

3

3 .ω h

13 2

2 .π .c

9

c .St G

( 2 .G)

1

. 1

Hα

t3

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

ng

St T

5

1

. 1

Hα

2

mx

3

9

10 .yr

224 .

St G = 8.146982 10

2

2

3

2

. 1

Hα

1

λx

13

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

8

.

T L = 4.10173110

e

4. 3. 1 . λ x

3 4 c5 π .λ 2

h

3

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

St g

m γγ

1

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

h

TL

λx

9 .c .

St G

4 .π

9

1

2

5 .µ .

ωh

5

m

2. 9

kg s

367

=

t7

2.698709

1.349354

e

5 .µ

2

. 1

Hα

.

H α = 8.46094110

61

km

.

s Mpc

.

T L.H 0 = 2.97830810

12

1 . St G

G

.

1 = 3.33066910

14

(%)

St g

www.deltagroupengineering.com

146 . kg

9

St J = 1.093567 10

4 . 26

s

m

3

18

119

s

10 .

r 3 = 1.093333 10

kg

.

St BH = 4.83080210

.

M 3 = 7.36147410

ym

8

.

St T = 6.35557910

9

3

95

s

5

9

m

( kg )

1

t1

e

5 .µ

10 .µ

t2

e

2

. 1

Hα

2

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

t3 e

. 1

Hα

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2.206287 2.206287

2

3

2

. 1

Hα

4.196153 4.196153

=

1

t4

e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

t5 e

1

4

. 1

Hα

6.205726 6.205726

10

20.932666 20.932666

t7

42 .

s

=1

t1

8.385263 8.385263

2.206287 2.206287

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

. 1

Hα

1

t7

e

2

5 .µ .

1

Hα

iv. Base approximations / simplifications

Ω 1( r , M )

6 .c

r .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

C Ω_1( r , M )

G.M .

2

r

T Ω_1( r , M )

3

.

3 .M .c

2

.

π n Ω_1( r , M )

ω Ω_1( r , M )

Ω 1 R M,M M

Ω 1 R E, M E

Ω R M, M M

Ω R E, M E

Ω 1 R J, M J

Ω 1 R S, M S

Ω R J, M J

Ω R S, M S

Ω R NS , M NS

n Ω_1( r , M )

2 .π .h .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

1

Ω 1 R NS , M NS

2

ω Ω_1( r , M )

λ Ω_1( r , M )

1=

Ω 1( r , M )

12

n Ω_1( r , M ) .ω PV( 1 , r , M )

c

ω Ω_1( r , M )

1

K Depp ( r , M )

1

. 14 4.44089210

.

6.66133810

14

. 14 6.66133810

.

4.44089210

14

2 .G.M

r .c

2

(%)

1 = 0 (%)

368

www.deltagroupengineering.com

n Ω_1 R M , M M

n Ω_1 R E, M E

n Ω R M,M M

n Ω R E, M E

n Ω_1 R J , M J

n Ω_1 R S , M S

n Ω R J, M J

n Ω R S, M S

n Ω_1 R NS , M NS

n Ω R NS , M NS

ω Ω_1 R E, M E

ω Ω R M,M M

ω Ω R E, M E

ω Ω_1 R J , M J

ω Ω_1 R S , M S

ω Ω R J, M J

ω Ω R S, M S

ω Ω R NS , M NS

T Ω_1 R E, M E

T Ω R M,M M

T Ω R E, M E

T Ω_1 R J , M J

T Ω_1 R S , M S

T Ω R J, M J

T Ω R S, M S

T Ω R NS , M NS

λ Ω_1 R E, M E

λ Ω R M,M M

λ Ω R E, M E

λ Ω_1 R J , M J

λ Ω_1 R S , M S

λ Ω R J, M J

λ Ω R S, M S

λ Ω R NS , M NS

.

2.22044610

14

.

4.44089210

14

.

8.88178410

14

(%)

1=

.

6.66133810

14

.

2.22044610

14

.

6.66133810

14

.

8.88178410

14

(%)

1=

.

7.77156110

14

.

2.22044610

14

.

5.55111510

14

.

7.77156110

14

.

7.77156110

14

.

2.22044610

14

.

6.66133810

14

.

7.77156110

14

(%)

1 = 0 (%)

λ Ω_1 R M , M M

λ Ω_1 R NS , M NS

14

1 = 0 (%)

T Ω_1 R M , M M

T Ω_1 R NS , M NS

.

6.66133810

1 = 0 (%)

ω Ω_1 R M , M M

ω Ω_1 R NS , M NS

1=

1=

K Depp R E, M E

1 = 0 (%)

K PV R E, M E

=

(%)

1.00000000069601

1.00000000069601

**v. SBH mass and radius
**

3

ρS

ρ m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

r S M BH

. 94 kg

ρ m λ x.λ h , m x.m h = 1.34467810

3

m

3 .M BH

4 .π .ρ S

M BH r S

4. .

3

π ρ S .r S

3

. 87 ( YPa)

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h = 1.20853710

369

www.deltagroupengineering.com

r S m x.m h

ρ m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

. 90

= 9.55041510

ρ m R S, M S

0

rS MS

.

3.28046310

=

5.

r S 10 M S

1=

144.219703

.

4.21884710

(%)

13

r S mh

( am)

0.015227

0.706754

10

r S 10 .M S

r S mh

1 . r m .m

S x h

λh

λx

4

1 = 22.109851 ( % )

R BH m h

M BH r ε

M BH r π

M BH r ν

M BH r µ

. 43 3.22881910

. 49 3.18519310

. 49 3.12378410

. 43

9.27104510

M BH r τ

M BH r en

M BH r µn

M BH r τn

. 44 4.88723910

. 37 1.58452310

. 40 4.23240210

. 41

1.03305410

M BH r uq

M BH r dq

M BH r sq

M BH r cq

= 2.55332710

. 40 5.86600510

. 40 3.94279810

. 40 7.32116510

. 40

M BH r bq

M BH r tq

M BH r W

M BH r Z

. 40 4.52155110

. 40 1.19243610

. 41 6.74112410

. 40

6.91875410

M BH r H

M BH r e

M BH r Bohr

M BH r gg

. 40 1.26038310

. 51 8.34661610

. 63 1.64821910

. 9

4.68486410

( kg )

M BH r ε

M BH r π

M BH r ν

M BH r µ

. 13 1.62379510

. 19 1.60185510

. 19 1.57097210

. 13

4.66247210

M BH r τ

M BH r en

M BH r µn

M BH r τn

. 13 2.45782610

. 7

5.19529810

1 . M

BH r uq

M BH r dq

M BH r sq

M BH r cq

= 1.28408510

. 10 2.95005410

. 10 1.9828610

. 10 3.68186410

. 10

M BH r bq

M BH r tq

M BH r W

M BH r Z

. 10 2.27391910

. 10 5.99684310

. 10 3.39015710

. 10

3.47948910

M BH r H

M BH r e

M BH r Bohr

M BH r gg

. 10

2.3560510

MS

. 20

6.3385510

. 9 2.12850410

. 11

7.96867110

. 33

4.1975710

14.554628

. 6

5.06892810

R BH M BH r τn

16.217926

.

7.67248410

R BH M BH r sq

R BH M BH r cq

= 4.00847210

.

R BH M BH r tq

R BH M BH r W

R BH M BH r Z

0.010862

R BH M BH r e

R BH M BH r Bohr

R BH M BH r gg

.

7.35477510

R BH M BH r ε

R BH M BH r π

R BH M BH r ν

R BH M BH r µ

R BH M BH r τ

R BH M BH r en

R BH M BH r µn

R BH M BH r uq

R BH M BH r dq

R BH M BH r bq

R BH M BH r H

3

3

6

.

9.2090510

3

.

7.0983910

3

.

1.97867710

8

0

. 6

5.0004410

4.904034

.

2.48754410

3

0.066445

.

6.18980410

3

0.011494 ( Lyr )

0.01872

0.010583

.

1.31033610

21

0

vi. “nΩ”

1

1

3 9

n Ω_2( r , M )

n Ω_4 M BH

n BH M BH

1. 3

2

7

2

.

π .m h

M

7

9

. r

λh

n Ω_2 r S M BH , M BH

n Ω_5 M BH

n Ω_4 M BH

3

9

9

n Ω_3 λ x

n Ω_5 M BH

π.

3.

2

2

2

n Ω_2 R BH M BH , M BH

n Ω_2 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

n Ω_2 r S m x.m h , m x.m h

n Ω_2 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

n Ω_2 R BH m x.m h , m x.m h

370

λx

1=

.

3.33066910

13

. 14

4.44089210

(%)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

n Ω_2 r S m x.m h , m x.m h

n Ω_2 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

n Ω_2 r S M S , M S

n Ω_2 R BH M S , M S

5

5

n Ω_2 r S 10 .M S , 10 .M S

5

5

n Ω_2 R BH 10 .M S , 10 .M S

10

10

n Ω_2 r S 10 .M S , 10 .M S

10

10

n Ω_2 R BH 10 .M S , 10 .M S

n Ω_3

n Ω_3

1

1

.

. 24

9.00254210

3.51086810

5

=

. 6 1.93953910

. 28

1.93265910

. 7 4.1786110

. 31

1.06388810

1

3

0.248017

1

0.324994

2

=

n Ω_3( 1 )

0.515897

0.818935

n Ω_3( 2 )

1

n Ω_3 λ x

1.073108

n Ω_3( 3 )

n Ω_4 m x.m h

n Ω_5 m x.m h

n BH m x.m h

n Ω_4 M S

n Ω_5 M S

n BH M S

5

n Ω_4 10 .M S

5

n Ω_5 10 .M S

5

n BH 10 .M S

10

n Ω_4 10 .M S

10

n Ω_5 10 .M S

10

n BH 10 .M S

1

=

1

1

. 5 9.00254210

. 24 2.56419310

. 19

3.51086810

. 6 1.93953910

. 28 1.0035610

. 22

1.93265910

. 7 4.1786110

. 31 3.92767810

. 24

1.06388810

**vii. “ωΩ, TΩ, λΩ”
**

2 .c .

n PV.

g( r, M )

2

π .r

3

ω PV2 n PV, r , M

9 M

St G .

ω Ω_7 M BH

ω PV_1 M BH

ω Ω_4 M BH

St BH.

9

5

r

ω Ω_5 M BH

1.

2

St g .g ( r , M )

r

2

1

ω Ω_3( r , M )

9

ω Ω_2( r , M )

3

9

ω Ω_3 r S M BH , M BH

ω Ω_4 M BH

n Ω_5 M BH

ω Ω_6 M BH

ω BH M BH

1

M BH

ω Ω_5 M BH

n Ω_4 M BH

ω Ω_5 M BH

ω Ω_4 M BH

ω Ω_6 M BH

ω Ω_7 M BH

371

www.deltagroupengineering.com

ω PV2 1 , R M , M M

ω PV2 1 , R E, M E

ω PV 1 , R M , M M

ω PV 1 , R E, M E

ω PV2 1 , R J , M J

ω PV2 1 , R S , M S

ω PV 1 , R J , M J

ω PV 1 , R S , M S

ω PV2 1 , R NS , M NS

ω PV 1 , R NS , M NS

1=

.

3.14037710

9

.

6.96004310

8

.

1.9723310

6

.

2.12158610

4

1 = 7.117159 ( % )

ω PV2 n Ω R M , M M , R M , M M

ω PV2 n Ω R E, M E , R E, M E

ω Ω_3 R M , M M

ω Ω_3 R E, M E

ω PV2 n Ω R J , M J , R J , M J

ω PV2 n Ω R S , M S , R S , M S

ω Ω_3 R J , M J

ω Ω_3 R S , M S

ω PV2 n Ω R NS , M NS , R NS , M NS

ω Ω_2 R M , M M

ω Ω_2 R E, M E

ω Ω_1 R M , M M

ω Ω_1 R E, M E

ω Ω_2 R J , M J

ω Ω_2 R S , M S

ω Ω_1 R J , M J

ω Ω_1 R S , M S

ω Ω_1 R NS , M NS

1=

.

4.1871410

9

.

9.2800510

8

. 6

2.62977310

.

2.8287810

4

1=

.

1.04678510

9

.

2.32001510

8

.

6.57443310

7

.

7.07196310

5

(%)

1 = 2.491576 ( % )

ω Ω_3 R M , M M

ω Ω_3 R E, M E

ω Ω_2 R M , M M

ω Ω_2 R E, M E

ω Ω_3 R J , M J

ω Ω_3 R S , M S

ω Ω_2 R J , M J

ω Ω_2 R S , M S

1=

. 14

8.88178410

.

1.11022310

13

. 13

1.11022310

.

1.11022310

13

(%)

ω Ω_4 m x.m h

ω Ω_3 R NS , M NS

ω Ω_2 R NS , M NS

.

1 = 6.66133810

14

(%)

1

ω Ω_3 λ x.λ h , m x.m h

.

ω Ω_5 m x.m h

ω Ω_6 m x.m h

ω Ω_7 m x.m h

ω Ω_3 r 0 , m x.m h

.

7.88327910

ω Ω_3 r 0 , M S

5

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10 .M S

(%)

1 = 9.375146 ( % )

ω Ω_3 R NS , M NS

ω Ω_2 R NS , M NS

(%)

=

1

=

1

1

1

10

0.163994

( EHz)

2.118067

27.355887

372

www.deltagroupengineering.com

ω Ω_3 r 0 , m x.m h

ω Ω_3 r 0 , m x.m h

ω VL( 400 ( nm ) )

ω VL( 750 ( nm ) )

ω Ω_3 r 0 , M S

ω Ω_3 r 0 , M S

ω VL( 400 ( nm ) )

ω VL( 750 ( nm ) )

5.

.

1.05183110

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10 M S

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10 M S

ω VL( 400 ( nm ) )

ω VL( 750 ( nm ) )

10

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_3 r 0 , 10 .M S

ω VL( 400 ( nm ) )

ω VL( 750 ( nm ) )

. 3

5.29883310

. 4

3.64997710

. 4

6.84370610

ω Ω_6 m x.m h

ω Ω_7 m x.m h

ω Ω_4 M S

ω Ω_5 M S

ω Ω_6 M S

ω Ω_7 M S

5.

410.269418

.

2.82604410

ω Ω_5 m x.m h

5.

. 42 1.87219710

. 42 1.87219710

. 42 1.87219710

. 42

1.87219710

=

5.

ω Ω_4 10 M S

ω Ω_5 10 M S

ω Ω_6 10 M S

ω Ω_7 10 M S

10

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_5 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_6 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_7 10 .M S

. 29 4.55727410

. 43 1.29804810

. 38 6.93112610

. 4

6.23977510

. 28 6.9805610

. 43 3.61189510

. 37

1.34431910

ω Ω_5 m x.m h

ω Ω_6 m x.m h

ω Ω_7 m x.m h

ω Ω_4 M S

ω Ω_5 M S

ω Ω_6 M S

ω Ω_7 M S

5

ω Ω_5 10 .M S

5

ω Ω_6 10 .M S

5

ω Ω_7 10 .M S

10 .

10 .

ω Ω_5 10 M S

ω BH m x.m h

ω PV_1 m x.m h

ω BH M S

ω PV_1 M S

5

ω BH 10 .M S

5

ω PV_1 10 .M S

10

ω BH 10 .M S

10

ω PV_1 10 .M S

ω Ω_4 10 M S

10 .

0.253004

14

.

6.158585 1.75414910

5

0

.

1.81667910

15

.

9.433354 4.88102410

6

0

.

14.44945 1.35817410

6

0

ω Ω_7 10 M S

1

0

1

.

7.30358710

. 33

1.8727810

13

=

=

0.253004

6

.

8.43227510

10 .

ω Ω_6 10 M S

0.253004

0.253004

( Hz)

0.693113

. 26 1.06924110

. 44 1.00503110

. 37 6.93112610

.

2.89624710

ω Ω_4 m x.m h

1 .

5

ω h ω Ω_4 10 .M S

6

3

ω Ω_4 m x.m h

5.

.

1.97218410

218.810356

=

5.

6

. 15 5.21112310

. 37

5.19263810

. 17 1.45002610

. 42

3.69181510

viii. Gravitation

r .

9

ω Ω_2( r , M )

St g

a EGM_ωΩ( r , M )

a g ( r , M , φ, t )

g av ( r , M )

MM

π

g ( r , M ) . .sin 2 .π .ω Ω ( r , M ) .t

2

2

T Ω ( r, M )

D E2M. M M .M E

r4

r5

M M .M E

D E2M r 4

φ

1.

T Ω ( r, M )

2

.

0 .( s )

a g( r, M , 0 , t ) d t

a EGM_ωΩ R M , M M

a EGM_ωΩ R E, M E

g R M,M M

g R E, M E

a EGM_ωΩ R J , M J

a EGM_ωΩ R S , M S

g R J, M J

g R S, M S

1=

.

1.49880110

12

.

1.49880110

12

.

1.5432110

12

.

1.57651710

12

373

(%)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

a EGM_ωΩ R NS, M NS

.

1 = 1.65423210

g R NS, M NS

g r 4, M E

g r 5, M M

=

. 3

3.33165310

m

. 3

3.33165310

a EGM_ωΩ r 4 , M E

=

a EGM_ωΩ r 5 , M M

g av R E, M E = 9.809009

s

r5

=

. 5

3.46028110

. 4

3.83719110

g r 5, M M = 0

.

3.33165310

3

m

s

a EGM_ωΩ r 4 , M E

2

( km)

m

s

3

s

r4

( %)

g r 4, M E

2

.

3.33165310

m

12

2

m

a EGM_ωΩ r 5 , M M = 0

s

2

ω Ω r 4 , M E = 56.499573 ( YHz) ω Ω r 5 , M M = 72.138509 ( YHz)

2

**ix. Flux intensity
**

5

r ω ω Ω_3 , M

St G.

M

2

ω Ω_3

C Ω_J ( r , M )

9

2 d

λ Ω ( r , M ) . U m( r , M )

dr

5

C Ω_J1( r , M )

St J .

M

5.2

9

C Ω_Jω ω Ω_3 , M

26

r

9

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h

=

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h

r ω ( 400 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h

1 . ω VL

r 0 r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h

0.239057

0.741144

=

( Lyr)

.

1.73581410

11

.

5.38152510

11

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , M S

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , M S

5

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

5

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

10

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

10

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , M S

1 . r 30.( PHz) , 105 .M

ω

S

r0

10

r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S

5

. 5

2.2445.10 6.95860210

**= 2.2445.107 6.95860210
**

. 7

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , M S

1 . r ω ( 400 ( nm ) ) , 105 .M

ω VL

S

r0

10

r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm) ) , 10 .M S

r ω 30.( PHz) , M S

4

9 .c . ω Ω_3

4 .π St 0.8 .M 0.6

G

5

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

10

r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , 10 .M S

r ω 30.( EHz) , M S

5

r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

10

r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

9

10 .Lyr

9

. 9

2.2445.10 6.95860210

. 4 5.05271110

. 4

1.62975410

= 1.62975410

. 6 5.05271110

. 6

. 8 5.05271110

. 8

1.62975410

21.2751776034345 8.46980075872643.10

5

= 2.12751776034345

.103 8.46980075872643.10

3

.105

2.12751776034345

374

0.846980075872643

www.deltagroupengineering.com

r ω 30.( PHz) , m x.m h

=

r ω 30.( EHz) , m x.m h

. 6

2.95234410

r 30.( PHz) , m x.m h

1 . ω

r 0 r ω 30.( EHz) , m x.m h

3

10 .km

11.753495

r ω 30.( PHz) , M S

r ω 30.( EHz) , M S

5

r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S

5

r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

10

r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S

10

r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

r ω 30.( PHz) , M S

1 . r 30.( PHz) , 105 .M

ω

S

r0

10

r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S

. 5

2.93002110

= 2.93002110

.

7

5

r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

10

r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

.

21.275178 8.46980110

5

= 2.12751810

. 3 8.46980110

.

3

. 5

2.12751810

0.84698

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M M

C Ω_J R S , M M

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M E

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M J

.

2.95903310

6

.

9.40034410

4

1=

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M J

C Ω_J1 R S , M E

C Ω_J R S , M E

C Ω_J1 R S , M J

(%)

C Ω_J1 R S , M S

0.979587

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M S

C Ω_J R S , M S

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M NS

C Ω_J1 R S , M NS

C Ω_J 100.( km) , M NS

C Ω_J R S , M NS

C Ω_Jω ω VL( 400 ( nm) ) , m x.m h

C Ω_J1 r ω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h , m x.m h

C Ω_Jω 30.( PHz) , m x.m h

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( PHz) , m x.m h , m x.m h

C Ω_Jω 30.( PHz) , M S

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( PHz) , M S , M S

C Ω_Jω ω VL( 750 ( nm) ) , m x.m h

C Ω_J1 r ω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h , m x.m h

C Ω_Jω 30.( EHz) , m x.m h

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( EHz) , m x.m h , m x.m h

C Ω_Jω 30.( EHz) , M S

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( EHz) , M S , M S

5

C Ω_Jω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S

5

C Ω_Jω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

5

5

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S , 10 .M S

5

5

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S , 10 .M S

10

C Ω_Jω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S

10

C Ω_Jω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

10

10

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S , 10 .M S

10

10

C Ω_J1 r ω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S , 10 .M S

C Ω_J1 r 0 , m x.m h

10

C Ω_J1 r 0 , 10 .M S

1=

.

3.57491810

12

.

4.23150410

10

.

1.35061710

7

.

1.41439110

4

.

1.41439110

4

(%)

.

1.90958410

12

.

1.92068610

12

.

1.9428910

12

.

1.93178810

12

.

1.58761910

12

.

1.59872110

12

.

1.50990310

12

.

1.50990310

12

.

1.48769910

12

.

1.50990310

12

(%)

0

C Ω_J1 r 0 , M S

5

C Ω_J1 r 0 , 10 .M S

1=

C Ω_J R S , M J

0.979587

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M S

0

6

10 .Lyr

116.646228

C Ω_J1 R S , M M

8

14

1.166462

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M M

.

3.63872410

.

2.2659710

. 9 1.16646210

. 4

2.93002110

r ω 30.( EHz) , M S

C Ω_J1 100.( km) , M E

=

=

.

1.48429110

5

.

8.89809310

3

10

20 .

yJy

5.334267

375

www.deltagroupengineering.com

1

C Ω_J1 r 0 , m x.m h

. 26

2.24315810

1

10

C Ω_J1 r 0 , 10 .M S .

C Ω_J1 r 0 , M S

= 3.59381410

. 5

599.48425

1

5

C Ω_J1 r 0 , 10 .M S

C Ω_Jω ω VL( 400 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h

=

C Ω_Jω ω VL( 750 ( nm ) ) , m x.m h

28.979765

1.102778

10

16 .

yJy

C Ω_Jω 30.( EHz) , m x.m h = 2.479532 ( fJy )

7

C Ω_Jω 30.( PHz) , m x.m h = 6.228302 10 .yJy

C Ω_Jω 30.( PHz) , M S

5.

2.164916

C Ω_Jω 30.( PHz) , 10 M S

.

= 2.16491610

3

10

C Ω_Jω 30.( PHz) , 10 .M S

.

2.16491610

6

C Ω_Jω 30.( EHz) , M S

5.

10

29 .

10

14 .

yJy

8.618686

C Ω_Jω 30.( EHz) , 10 M S

.

= 8.61868610

3

10

C Ω_Jω 30.( EHz) , 10 .M S

.

8.61868610

6

10

10

C Ω_Jω ω Ω_4 10 .M S , 10 .M S

10

10

C Ω_J1 R BH 10 .M S , 10 .M S

yJy

= 0.999999999999968

**x. Photon and Graviton populations
**

ω g( M )

M .c

2 .h

2

n gg ( M )

ω g m x.m h

. 18

4.99252510

ωg MS

. 56

1.34855310

5

ω g 10 .M S

10

ω g 10 .M S

=

. 61

1.34855310

T L.ω g ( M )

n γγ( M )

2 .n gg ( M )

( YHz)

. 66

1.34855310

376

www.deltagroupengineering.com

ω g m x.m h

ω Ω_4 m x.m h

ω g m x.m h

ω Ω_5 m x.m h

ωg MS

ωg MS

2.666667

50

ω Ω_5 M S

. 36

2.95912210

. 57

1.0031510

5

ω g 10 .M S

. 63

4.65620810

5

ω Ω_5 10 .M S

2.666667

ω Ω_4 M S

.

2.1612210

=

5

ω g 10 .M S

5

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

=

. 46

1.26122510

10

ω g 10 .M S

10

ω g 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_4 10 .M S

10

ω Ω_5 10 .M S

n gg m x.m h

. 72

6.46222510

n γγ m x.m h

n gg M S

. 110

1.7455410

n γγ M S

. 115

1.7455410

5

n γγ 10 .M S

. 120

1.7455410

10

n γγ 10 .M S

=

5

n gg 10 .M S

10

n gg 10 .M S

. 41

1.93186910

. 73

1.29244510

. 110

3.4910810

=

. 115

3.4910810

. 120

3.4910810

**xi. Hubble constant and CMBR temperature
**

r 2( r )

K λ .r

K m.M

M 2( M )

5

5

K U( r , M )

A U( r , M )

1

ln

9

2

7

.ln n

Ω_2 r 2( r ) , M 2( M )

TL

K U( r , M )

R U( r , M )

5

Hα

K T( r , M )

n g .ln

T U( r , M )

K T( r , M ) .T W ( r , M )

M U( r , M )

H U5( r , M )

T U5( r , M )

KW

c

µ

( 3 .π )

7 .µ .

256

µ

32

2

.

.ln

. 4µ

H U5( r , M ) λ h

Hα

2 .µ

.

r3

1

π .H α

H U( r , M )

1

A U( r , M )

KW

λ Ω_1 R U( r , M ) , M 3

3 .H U( r , M )

2

8 .π .G

K W .St T .ln

T U2( H )

. µ m

.ln ( 3 π ) . h

4

M

9

r 2( r )

c .A U( r , M )

ρ U( r , M )

V R U( r , M ) .ρ U( r , M )

.

M 2( M )

T W( r, M )

H U( r , M )

1 .

ln

TL

M3

3.

26

9

µ

. 2

.H5 µ

H

7 .µ

2

. r

λh

2 .µ

Hα

2

2

7 .µ

5

.

mh

M

5 .µ

2

. r

λh

2

26 .µ

. 2

.H ( r , M ) 5 µ

U5

377

www.deltagroupengineering.com

K W .St T .

dT dt ( t )

2

5 .ln H α .t .µ

t

5 .µ

2

1

K W .St T .

dT2 dt2 ( t )

2

2

5 .µ . ln H α .t . 5 .µ

.t

t

dT3 dt3 ( t )

2

2

2

5 .µ .ln H α .t . 5 .µ . 5 .µ 3

2

K W .St T .

2

5 .µ . 3

t

t

dH dt H γ

2

H α .H γ

. 5 .ln 1 .µ 2

2

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

2

2

15.µ . 5 .µ

dH2 dt2 H γ

1

5 .µ

2

1

2

1

.t2

2

2

3

2

H α .H γ

. 5 .µ 2 . ln 1 . 5 .µ 2

2

Hγ

5 .µ

Hγ

1

2

1

Given

T U2 H U r x1.R o , M G

T U2 H U R o , m g1 .M G

T U2 H U r x2.R o , M G

T U2 H U R o , m g2 .M G

∆T 0

T0

T0

∆T 0

r x1

r x2

m g1

Find r x1, r x2, m g1 , m g2

m g2

Given

T U2 H U r x1.R o , m g1 .M G

T U2 H U r x1.R o , m g2 .M G

∆T 0

T0

T U2 H U r x2.R o , m g1 .M G

T U2 H U r x2.R o , m g2 .M G

T0

∆T 0

r x3

r x4

m g3

Find r x1, r x2, m g1 , m g2

m g4

Given

T U2 H U r x1.R o , m g1 .M G

r x5

m g5

T0

Find r x1, m g1

T U2 H U R o

T U2 H U R o

1

∆R o , .K m.M G

3

1

∆R o , .K m.M G

3

r x1

=

2.733025

2.741859

r x2

( K)

m g1

m g2

378

0.989364

=

1.017883

1.057292

0.911791

www.deltagroupengineering.com

T U2 H U r x1.R o , M G

T U2 H U r x2.R o , M G

T U2 H U R o , m g1 .M G

T U2 H U R o , m g2 .M G

2.724

=

2.726

2.724

m g3

7.914908

8.143063

( kpc )

1.063645 5.729219

1.788292

=

(%)

8.820858

2.724

2.726

( K)

0.977007

r x3

=

r x4

r x5

7.879647

8.106786

T U2 H U r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

1.052361

MG

. 11

M G m g3

5.8620410

.

=

M S m g4

. 11

5.8620410

( kpc )

1.013403

=

m g5

m g5 .

=

T U2 H U r x3.R o , m g3 .M G

T U2 H U r x4.R o , m g4 .M G

0.977007

m g4

R o.

1=

r x2 m g2

1.013348

=

r x2

r x1 m g1

0.984956

r x4

r x1

2.726

. 11

M G m g1

6.34375310

.

=

M S m g2

. 11

5.47074910

r x3

R o.

( K)

r x5

. 11

= 6.31416710

m g5

MS

1=

r x3 m g3

r x4 m g4

5.236123

( %)

1.50441 2.29934

1.334822 2.29934

( %)

r x5.R o = 8.107221 ( kpc )

= 2.725 ( K )

1.340256

1=

H U r x5.R o , m g5 .M G = 67.095419

km

.

s Mpc

Given

dH dt

H U R o,M G

η

Hα

1

H U R o,M G

η

Find( η )

9

A U R o , M G = 14.575885 10 .yr

ρ U R o , M G = 8.453235 10

33 .

9

R U R o , M G = 14.575885 10 .Lyr

kg

3

.

M U R o , M G = 9.28458610

52

( kg )

cm

H U R o,M G

1

H U R o , .M G

3

=

67.084304

67.753267

km

.

s Mpc

T U R o,M G

1

T U R o , .M G

3

379

=

2.724752

2.739618

( K)

www.deltagroupengineering.com

H U R o,M G

T U R o,M G

H0

T0

H U R o,M G

T U R o,M G

1

H U R o , .M G

3

1

T U R o , .M G

3

T U2 H U R o

.

5.515064 9.08391310

0.987352

3

(%)

0.542607

∆R o , M G

2.720213

T U2 H U R o , M G

T U2 H U R o

1=

2.724752

∆R o , M G

H U5 R o , M G

H U5 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

= 2.729021 ( K )

1

T U2 H U R o , .M G

3

2.739618

=

67.084304

km

67.095419

s .Mpc

2.810842

T U2 H 0

H U5 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

T U5 R o , M G

T U5 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

=

2.724752

2.725

H0

( K)

1=

T U5 r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

5.499409

.

8.3739910

9

(%)

T0

T U2 H α

T U2 t 1

dT dt

0

1

.

3.19551810

31

T U2 t 2

1

T U2 t 3

1

T U2 t 4

1

. 31

2.05994510

T U2 t 5

1

. 31

2.65086510

dT2 dt2

.

3.03432210

.

2.83254210

dT2 dt2 t 2

. 114

2.02615310

dT2 dt2 t 3

dT2 dt2 t 4

dT2 dt2 t 5

0

.

8.77595210

112

s

dT3 dt3 t 3

. 112

1.612210

dT3 dt3 t 4

. 112

7.1945910

dT3 dt3 t 5

380

s

1

. 159

6.22716710

Hα

dT3 dt3 t 2

2

.

9.25283810

. 71

7.47950610

. 156

3.77545710

dT3 dt3 t 1

K

K

. 71

3.03728910

dT dt t 5

dT3 dt3

. 72

1.05719310

71

dT dt t 4

. 116

7.65967810

=

=

dT dt t 3

1

dT2 dt2 t 1

0

dT dt t 2

( K)

31

Hα

. 74

1.32321810

dT dt t 1

31

=

1

Hα

=

. 155

1.45285710

K

0

s

3

. 153

1.48902210

. 153

9.53337910

www.deltagroupengineering.com

dH dt ( 1 )

dH dt e

0

1

dH dt t 1 .H α

1

dH dt e

5 .µ

10 .µ

dH dt t 2 .H α

1

dH dt e

2

2

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt t 3 .H α

1

dH dt e

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

=

2

3

2

1

dH dt t 4 .H α

1

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt t 5 .H α

1

dH dt e

1

dH2 dt2 e

. 123

7.15875210

. 107

7.14236410

. 107

7.14236410

. 122

8.63295710

. 122

8.63295710

. 123

1.16708910

. 123

1.16708910

. 123

1.47916710

. 123

1.47916710

. 123

1.31810810

. 123

1.31810810

km

s .Mpc

2

2

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH2 dt2 ( 1 )

. 123

7.15875210

1

2

0

1

dH2 dt2 t 1 .H α

1

dH2 dt2 e

5 .µ

10 .µ

dH2 dt2 t 2 .H α

1

dH2 dt2 e

2

2

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

dH2 dt2 t 3 .H α

1

dH2 dt2 e

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

=

2

3

2

1

dH2 dt2 t 4 .H α

1

dH2 dt2 e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH2 dt2 t 5 .H α

dH dt

1

H U R o,M G

Hα

Hα

dH2 dt2 e

1

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

η

. 3

= 4.50029710

km

.

s Mpc

. 186

1.27869510

. 186

1.27869510

. 184

2.49929710

. 184

2.49929710

0

0

.

3.41565310

.

3.41565310

. 183

2.42270610

. 183

2.42270610

. 183

3.91232210

. 183

3.91232210

183

183

km

s .Mpc

3

2

1

2

2

dH2 dt2

H U R o,M G

Hα

η

=0

km

.

s Mpc

3

=1

η

dH dt 1

381

www.deltagroupengineering.com

η

dH dt 1

η

1

dH dt e

5 .µ

10 .µ

2

η

2

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt e

. 61

2.55267410

η

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt e

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

km

.

s Mpc

. 60

4.13447210

. 60

9.11289510

1

67.084257

η

4

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt

= 1.16926910

. 61

2

3

η

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt e

. 61

1.59787310

2

1

dH dt e

. 61

8.46094110

1

2

1

H U R o,M G

2

η

Hα

Hα

Hα

. 61

8.46094110

dH dt t 4 .H α

1

. 61

= 3.84599410

67.084304

H U R o,M G

dH dt t 4 .H α

km

s .Mpc

H U R o,M G

71

H0

2

2

H0

. 123

7.15875210

1

2

=

. 123

1.47916710

. 3

4.50030410

km

s .Mpc

2

3

5.041.10

1

H α.

dH dt t 4 .H α

1

=

Hα

dH dt t 4 .H α

2.199936

4.839718

1

382

www.deltagroupengineering.com

η

T U2

dH dt 1

η

1

T U2

5 .µ

dH dt e

10 .µ

T U2

2

η

2

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt e

. 31

2.97174510

η

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

T U2

2

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

T U2

2.724751

η

2

2

3

2

η

H U R o,M G

dH dt

. 31

3.18071410

1

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt e

. 31

2.72300610

η

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

T U2

= 3.18071410

. 31 ( K )

2

3

1

T U2

. 31

3.18632310

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt e

0

1

Hα

η

1

1

T U2 t 1

1

.T

U2

dH dt e

5 .µ

10 .µ

1

T U2 t 2

1

.T

U2

dH dt e

2

η

2

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

η

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

1

T U2 t 3

1

.T

U2

dH dt e

1

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

3

1

T U2 t 4

η

1

.T

U2

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

T U2 t 5

.T

U2

1

T U2 H U R o , M G

dH dt e

.T

U2

(%)

32.18827

.

3.90264410

5

η

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

dH dt

12.291857

19.987768

1

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

1

5.00939

2

1=

1

1

7.002696

2

2

3

2

H U R o,M G

η

Hα

383

www.deltagroupengineering.com

T U2 H α

1

T U2

13 .

10 ( s )

1

T U2

10

10

10 .

(s)

1

T U2

1

T U2

1

.

31 ( day )

T U2

T U2

1 .( yr )

1

T U2

2

10 .( yr )

1

T U2

3.

1

. 9

1.01325410

2.724752

( K)

1

1

6.

10 ( yr )

. 10 1.84076810

. 3

1.2497710

1

. 7 521.528169

2.52413210

7.

. 6

3.86401510

147.71262

= 1.00307810

. 6

41.823796

. 4

8.07751510

11.838588

9

10 .( yr )

.

2.29089210

3.35005

1

.

6.49496110

0.947724

1

8

10 .( yr )

1

=

1

3

( yr )

11 .

10

1

116.( day )

4

( K)

1

T U2

4.

T U2

4.898955

5.

10

10 ( yr )

T U2

. 15

3.43308810

10 .

10 ( yr )

T U2

9

5 .10 .( yr )

10 ( yr )

1

T U2

11.838588

10 ( yr )

1 .( day )

T U2

1

T U2

1 .( s )

1

T U2

=

T U2 H U R o , M G

2

10 .( s )

T U2

T U2

T U2

.

1.92400510

28

9

10 .( yr )

(s)

1

T U2

T U2

34 .

978.724031

0

1

T U2

( yr )

. 6

1.87808710

.

3.98831410

7

( K)

TL

**xii. SBH temperature
**

Th

T BH( M )

Th

( 4 .π )

.

2

mh

M

. 30 ( K )

= 1.66667410

2

8 .π .λ x

4

T SPBH

.

1. mh c

κ h .ω h

2

c.

U m λ x.λ h , m x.m h

σ

=

. 32

3.55137410

. 32

3.55137410

T BH m x.m h

. 30 ( K )

T BH m x.m h = 1.66667410

h .c

( K)

=1

3

2

16.π .κ .G.m x.m h

10

T BH 10 .M S

h .c

3

T U2

=1

1

t1

T BH m x.m h

T U2

= 19.173025

1

t1

6 .π .T BH m x.m h

1 = 1.716054 ( % )

2

10

16.π .κ .G.10 .M S

384

www.deltagroupengineering.com

T U2

1

t1

3 .T h

T SPBH

. 31 ( K )

T SPBH = 5.02766910

1 = 1.716054 ( % )

T BH m x.m h

= 30.165887

4 .π .λ x

T SPBH

T U2

Hα

. 31 ( K )

K ω T SPBH = 3.20071410

= 1.57335

1

T U2

t1

4

.

π

T U2

3

K ω .T SPBH

3.

1

6 .c

. 31 ( K )

= 3.20071410

π .σ .G

t1

2 K

W

.c .

5 G.κ

1 . 15 .

h .c

λ x 4 .π κ .K W

15 .

h .c

= 2.659782

4 .π κ .K W

1 = 0.248248 ( % )

1 = 1.442436 ( % )

T BH m e

T BH m p

T BH m n

T BH m µ

T BH m τ

T BH m en

T BH m µn

T BH m τn

T BH m uq

T BH m dq

T BH m sq

T BH m cq

T BH m bq

T BH m tq

T BH m W

T BH m Z

T BH m H

T SPBH

=

t1

2

c . KW

. 31 ( K )

= 3.18758510

5 G.κ

3

1

1 = 0.162602 ( % )

1

. 47

6.01617410

. 31

5.02766910

. 53 7.33529610

. 49 7.32519910

. 49 6.51392110

. 50

1.34687210

=

. 49 2.29416810

. 58 3.6223710

. 53 3.78159510

. 51

3.87312710

. 52 9.81839510

. 51 6.04208910

. 50 5.81830810

. 49

1.96367910

( K)

. 49 3.8570310

. 47 8.55766610

. 47 7.54763110

. 47

1.67121610

( K)

xiii. ZPF

Ω EGM

ρ U r x5.R o , m g5 .M G

3 .c .

Ω ZPF .

H U R o,M G

8 .π .G

2

U ZPF

Ω EGM

Ω PDG

Ω PDG

ρ U R o,M G

= 0.997339

U ZPF = 251.778016

U ZPF = 842.934914

yJ

3

2

Ω ZPF

1.003

.

Ω ZPF = 3.31400710

4

U ZPF = 251.778016( fPa )

U ZPF = 2.51778 10

13 .

U ZPF = 0.251778

mJ

U ZPF = 251.778016

3

km

EJ

. 12

U ZPF = 7.39723510

AU

Ω EGM

Ω EGM = 1.000331

mm

3

1

fJ

3

m

YJ

pc

385

Pa

3

www.deltagroupengineering.com

. 41

U ZPF = 6.60189810

YJ

R U R o,M G

3

**xiv. Cosmological limits
**

M U R o,M G

M EGM

ML

R EGM

K m.M G.

K λ .R o

R U R o,M G

R EGM

5 5

.

R EGM

rL

K λ .R o

. 71 ( kg )

M L = 4.86482110

t EGM

R BH M L

. 19 109 .Lyr

r L = 7.6372910

A U R o,M G

rL

tL

c

. 19 109 .yr

t L = 7.6372910

ML

M EGM

M EGM

2

R EGM.c

t EGM

=1

2 .G

. 18

5.23967510

rL

=1

R EGM

R EGM

c

tL

tL

= 5.23967510

. 18

. 6

= 1.86196810

TL

. 18

5.23967510

t EGM

**xv. Particle Cosmology
**

5

m γγ2

h

tL

E Ω ( r, M )

Qγ

m gg2

h .ω Ω ( r , M )

Q γ r ε, m e

Q γ_PDG

5 .10

2 .m γγ2

r γγ2

N γ( r, M )

Q γγ ( r , M )

30 .

Qe

r e.

m γγ2

m e .c

mγ

m gg2

1.715978

3.431956

4 .r γγ2

5

Q γ( r, M )

Q γγ

N γ( r, M )

=

r gg2

2

E Ω ( r, M )

Q γ( r, M )

m γγ2

2

10

386

51 .

eV

Qγ

Qe

N γ( r, M )

2

Qe

Q γγ2

r γγ2

r gg2

Q γγ

m γγ

=

.m

γγ2

7.250508

9.567103

10

38 .

m

www.deltagroupengineering.com

r γγ2

λh

λh

r γγ2

2 .r γγ2

K λ .λ h

K λ .λ h

2 .r γγ2

0.178967

2 .r γγ2

λh

=

r gg2

0.357933

0.236148

558.763566

λh

0.307913

324.766614

2 .r γγ2

(%)

279.381783

=

λh

423.463597

λh

0.406294

r gg2

246.127068

2 .r gg2

0.472296

K λ .λ h

211.731798

K λ .λ h

2 .r gg2

2 .r gg2

λh

λh

2 .r gg2

Qγ

= 2.655018 10

Q γ_PDG

30

Qe

Q γγ

Q γγ = 1.129394 10

= 1.883226

Qγ

= 7.049122 10

m γγ

60

Qe

.

= 1.86196810

6

Q γγ2

Q γγ2 = 6.065593 10

m γγ2

mγ

= 3.785846 10

ω Ω r e, m e

.m

γγ

ω Ω r ε, m e

Qe

E Ω r e, m e

mγ

2

C

85 .

C

2

E Ω r ε, m e

66

78 .

=

1.525768

1.525768

10

46 .

eV

ω Ω r e,m e

=

0.165603

0.165603

( µJ )

mγ

2

=

h .m γγ

m γγ

249.926816

249.926816

( YHz)

Qe

me

2.

c Q γγ

=

. 11

1.7588210

C

198.286288

kg

m γγ

387

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

388

www.deltagroupengineering.com

•

MathCad 12

c. High precision calculation engine

i. Computational environment

**NOTE: KNOWLEDGE OF MATHCAD IS REQUIRED AND ASSUMED
**

•

•

•

**Convergence Tolerance (TOL): 10-14.
**

Constraint Tolerance (CTOL): 10-14.

Calculation Display Tolerance: 6 figures – unless otherwise indicated.

ii. Astronomical statistics

H0 := 71⋅

s ⋅ Mpc

∆H0 := 2⋅

s ⋅ Mpc

km

km

∆T0 := 0.001( K)

T0 := 2.725⋅ ( K)

H0 − ∆H0 = 69

s ⋅ Mpc

km

T0 + ∆T0 = 2.726( K)

iii. Derived constants

µ :=

λx := 4⋅

1

2⋅ µ

µ

π

3

Stt := 2⋅ ωh ⋅

4

µ

3⋅ π

2

7

⋅

2

Hα :=

ωh

TL :=

λx

h

mγγ

9

c

iv. Algorithm

7⋅ µ

2

2

2

2

2

5⋅ µ

7⋅ µ µ

µ m µ

7⋅ µ

26⋅ µ

m

(

)

(

)

1

h

3⋅ π ⋅ 32 ⋅ ln 3⋅ π ⋅ h ⋅ r

r

HU5( r , M) :=

⋅ ln

4 M λ ⋅ M ⋅ λ

TL

256

h

h

H

(

r

,

M

)

U5

KT ( r , M) := 8⋅ µ ⋅ ln

Hα

TU( r , M ) := KT ( r , M ) ⋅ TW( r , M )

TW( r , M) :=

KW

c

HU5 ( r , M)

λΩ

,

λx

2

⋅ mh

Hα 9

5

⋅ Stt ⋅ H

H

TU2( H) := KW⋅ ln

HU5( Ro , MG) 67.084134 km

=

HU5( Ro , µ ⋅ M G) 67.753095 s ⋅ Mpc

TU( Ro , MG) 2.724749

=

( K)

TU( Ro , µ ⋅ MG) 2.739614

HU5( Ro , M G)

−2.776618 ( %)

−1=

H0 − ∆H0 HU5( Ro , µ ⋅ MG)

−1.807108

1

5

TU( Ro , M G)

−0.045904 ( %)

−1=

T0 + ∆T0 TU( Ro , µ ⋅ MG)

0.499413

1

⋅

389

⋅

www.deltagroupengineering.com

TU2( H0 − ∆H0)

TU2( H0)

∆H

TU2 H0 + 0

2

2.767146

= 2.810842 ( K)

2.832481

H0 − ∆H0

H0

∆H

H0 + 0

2

69

km

= 71

s ⋅ Mpc

72

d. Various forms of the derived constants

4 ⋅

6π

4⋅ µ ⋅

π 2.698709 2.698709

=

6

2⋅ µ 2.698709 2.698709

4⋅

µ

µ

π

π

2

4

3

3

⋅

6

µ

6

2

1

⋅ 1 ⋅ 4⋅ µ

c3 π⋅ Hα λh

7

9

4 2 2

2⋅ ωh ⋅ µ ⋅ c

3⋅ π

5

7

1 ⋅ 4 ⋅ 2

4 c µ

3⋅ π

λh

6.355579× 1095

5

s

= 6.355579× 1095

9

6.355579× 1095 m

NOTES

390

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Periodic Table of the Elements

391

www.deltagroupengineering.com

NOTES

392

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.1.5.1 “TU3 vs. Hβ”: Figure 4.22
**

Av. Cosmological Temperature

1

31

3.5 .10

e

5 .µ

2

3 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

2.5 .1031

31

2 .10

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

1.5 .1031

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1

0.1

0.01

1 .10 3

Hβ

Dimensionless Range Variable

1 .10 4

1 .10 5

1 .10 6

**Average Cosmological Temperature
**

Maximum Av. Cosmological Temperature

393

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.1.5.2 “TU3 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.23
**

Av. Cosmological Temperature vs. Age

1

31

3.5 .10

2

1

Hα

e

5 .µ . 1

Hα

3 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

2.5 .1031

31

2 .10

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

1.5 .1031

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

394

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.2.5.1 “TU3 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.24
**

Av. Cosmological Temperature vs. Age

1

Hα

31

3.5 .10

t1

3 .1031

2.5 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

T U3 e

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

31

2 .10

2

10 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

1.5 .1031

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

2

.

.

.

.

.

2

5µ 5µ 5µ

3

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

395

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.2.5.2 “TU3 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (iii): Figure 4.25
**

Av. Cosmological Temperature vs. Age

t2

31

3.5 .10

t3

3 .1031

2.5 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

T U3 e

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

31

2 .10

2

10 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

1.5 .1031

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

2

.

.

.

.

.

2

5µ 5µ 5µ

3

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

396

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.2.5.3 “TU3 vs. H = (HβHα)” (i): Figure 4.26
**

Av. Cosmological Temp. vs. Hubble Cons.

31

3.5 .10

1

t1

Hα

31

3 .10

2.5 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

2

5 .µ

2 .1031

2

T U3 e

T U3 e

10 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

31

2

2

1.5 .10

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

3

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .1043

1 .1042

1 .1041

1 .1040

1 .1039

1 .1038

1 .1037

1 .1036

H β .H α

Hubble Constant (Hz)

397

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.2.5.4 “TU3 vs. H = (HβHα)” (ii): Figure 4.27
**

Av. Cosmological Temp. vs. Hubble Cons.

31

3.5 .10

1

1

t2 t3

31

3 .10

2.5 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

2

5 .µ

2 .1031

2

T U3 e

T U3 e

10 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

31

2

2

1.5 .10

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

3

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .1043

1 .1042

1 .1041

1 .1040

1 .1039

1 .1038

1 .1037

1 .1036

H β .H α

Hubble Constant (Hz)

398

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.2.5.5 “TU3 vs. r = (HβHα)-1c” (i): Figure 4.28
**

Av. Cosmological Temperature vs. Size

c

Hα

31

3.5 .10

t 1 .c

31

3 .10

2.5 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

2

5 .µ

2 .1031

2

T U3 e

T U3 e

10 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

31

1.5 .10

2

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

3

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .10 34

1 .10 33

1 .10 32

1 .10 31

1 .10 30

1 .10 29

1 .10 28

1 .10 27

1.

c

H β .H α

EGM Cosmological Size (m)

399

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.2.5.6 “TU3 vs. r = (HβHα)-1c” (ii): Figure 4.29
**

Av. Cosmological Temperature vs. Size

31

3.5 .10

t 2 .c t 3 .c

31

3 .10

2.5 .1031

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

2

5 .µ

2 .1031

2

T U3 e

T U3 e

10 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

31

1.5 .10

2

2

2

15 .µ . 5 .µ

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

3

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .10 34

1 .10 33

1 .10 32

1 .10 31

1 .10 30

1 .10 29

1 .10 28

1 .10 27

1.

c

H β .H α

EGM Cosmological Size (m)

400

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.2.5.7 “dTU4/dt vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.30
**

1st Derivative of Av. Cosmological Temp.

1 .1072

t1

t2

71

8 .10

6 .1071

4 .1071

71

2 .10

dT dt

H β .H α

1

0

(K/s)

dT dt t 1

dT dt t 2

dT dt t 3

2 .1071

4 .1071

71

6 .10

71

8 .10

1 .1072

72

1.2 .10

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

401

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.2.5.8 “dTU4/dt vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.31
**

1st Derivative of Av. Cosmological Temp.

1 .1072

t2

t3

71

8 .10

6 .1071

4 .1071

71

2 .10

dT dt

H β .H α

1

0

(K/s)

dT dt t 1

dT dt t 2

dT dt t 3

2 .1071

4 .1071

71

6 .10

71

8 .10

1 .1072

72

1.2 .10

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

402

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.2.5.9 “d2TU4/dt2 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.32
**

2nd Derivative of Av. Cosmological Temp.

113

5 .10

t1

t2

0

113

5 .10

(K/s^2)

dT2 dt2

H β .H α

1

1 .10114

dT2 dt2 t 1

dT2 dt2 t 2

dT2 dt2 t 3

114

1.5 .10

2 .10114

114

2.5 .10

114

3 .10

2 .10 42

3 .10 42

4 .10 42

5 .10 42

6 .10 42

7 .10 42

8 .10 42

9 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

403

1.1 .10 41 1.2 .10 41 1.3 .10 41 1.4 .10 41 1.5 .10 41

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.2.5.10 “d2TU4/dt2 vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.33
**

2nd Derivative of Av. Cosmological Temp.

113

5 .10

t2

t3

0

113

5 .10

(K/s^2)

dT2 dt2

H β .H α

1

1 .10114

dT2 dt2 t 1

dT2 dt2 t 2

dT2 dt2 t 3

114

1.5 .10

2 .10114

114

2.5 .10

114

3 .10

2 .10 42

3 .10 42

4 .10 42

5 .10 42

6 .10 42

7 .10 42

8 .10 42

9 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

404

1.1 .10 41 1.2 .10 41 1.3 .10 41 1.4 .10 41 1.5 .10 41

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.2.5.11 “|d3TU4/dt3| vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.34
**

3rd Derivative of Av. Cosmological Temp.

157

1 .10

t1

t2

156

1 .10

(K/s^3)

dT3 dt3

H β .H α

1 .10155

1

dT3 dt3 t 1

dT3 dt3 t 2

1 .10154

153

1 .10

152

1 .10

2 .10 42

3 .10 42

4 .10 42

5 .10 42

6 .10 42

7 .10 42

8 .10 42

9 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

1.1 .10 41

1.2 .10 41

1.3 .10 41

1.4 .10 41

1.5 .10 41

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

405

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.2.5.12 “|d3TU4/dt3| vs. t = (HβHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.35
**

3rd Derivative of Av. Cosmological Temp.

157

1 .10

t2

t3

156

1 .10

(K/s^3)

dT3 dt3

H β .H α

1 .10155

1

dT3 dt3 t 1

dT3 dt3 t 2

1 .10154

153

1 .10

152

1 .10

2 .10 42

3 .10 42

4 .10 42

5 .10 42

6 .10 42

7 .10 42

8 .10 42

9 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

1.1 .10 41

1.2 .10 41

1.3 .10 41

1.4 .10 41

1.5 .10 41

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

406

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.3.6.1 “dH/dt vs. (HβηHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.36
**

1st Derivative of the Hubble Constant

1.6 .1084

t1

t4

84

1.4 .10

84

1.2 .10

dH dt H β

(Hz^2)

dH dt e

dH dt e

dH dt e

η

5 .µ

1

2

1 .1084

1

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

8 .1083

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

1

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

83

6 .10

83

4 .10

2 .1083

0

0

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

407

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.3.6.2 “dH/dt vs. (HβηHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.37
**

1st Derivative of the Hubble Constant

2 .1084

1

Hα

t1

84

1 .10

0

0

dH dt H β

(Hz^2)

dH dt e

η

5 .µ

1

2

1 .1084

1

84

2 .10

1

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

3 .1084

2

dH dt e

1

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

1

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

84

4 .10

5 .1084

6 .1084

84

7 .10

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

408

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.3.6.3 “dH/dt vs. (HβηHα)-1” (iii): Figure 4.38
**

1st Derivative of the Hubble Constant

2 .1084

t2

t3

84

1 .10

0

0

dH dt H β

(Hz^2)

dH dt e

η

5 .µ

1

2

1 .1084

1

84

2 .10

1

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

3 .1084

2

dH dt e

1

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

1

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

84

4 .10

5 .1084

6 .1084

84

7 .10

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

409

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.3.6.4 “dH/dt vs. (HβηHα)-1” (iv): Figure 4.39
**

1st Derivative of the Hubble Constant

2 .1084

t5

t4

84

1 .10

0

0

dH dt H β

(Hz^2)

dH dt e

η

5 .µ

1

2

1 .1084

1

84

2 .10

1

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

3 .1084

2

dH dt e

1

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

1

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

2

84

4 .10

5 .1084

6 .1084

84

7 .10

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

410

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.3.6.5 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.40
**

2nd Derivative of the Hubble Constant

1

Hα

4 .10127

t1

127

3.5 .10

3 .10127

(Hz^3)

2.5 .10127

dH2 dt2 H β

η

127

2 .10

127

1.5 .10

1 .10127

5 .10126

0

0

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

411

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.3.6.6 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.41
**

2nd Derivative of the Hubble Constant

t2

4 .10127

t3

127

3.5 .10

3 .10127

(Hz^3)

2.5 .10127

dH2 dt2 H β

η

127

2 .10

127

1.5 .10

1 .10127

5 .10126

0

0

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

412

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.3.6.7 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (iii): Figure 4.42
**

2nd Derivative of the Hubble Constant

t5

4 .10127

t4

127

3.5 .10

3 .10127

(Hz^3)

2.5 .10127

dH2 dt2 H β

η

127

2 .10

127

1.5 .10

1 .10127

5 .10126

0

0

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

413

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.3.6.8 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (iv): Figure 4.43
**

2nd Derivative of the Hubble Constant

125

8 .10

t1

t2

7 .10125

125

6 .10

dH2 dt2 H β

(Hz^3)

dH2 dt2 e

dH2 dt2 e

dH2 dt2 e

η

5 .µ

1

2

125

5 .10

1

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4 .10125

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

.

.

.

.

.

2

5µ 5µ 5µ

1

125

3 .10

2 .10125

1 .10125

0

0

1 .10125

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

414

1 .10 40

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.3.6.9 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (v): Figure 4.44
**

2nd Derivative of the Hubble Constant

125

8 .10

t3

t4

7 .10125

125

6 .10

dH2 dt2 H β

(Hz^3)

dH2 dt2 e

dH2 dt2 e

dH2 dt2 e

η

5 .µ

1

2

125

5 .10

1

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4 .10125

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

.

.

.

.

.

2

5µ 5µ 5µ

1

125

3 .10

2 .10125

1 .10125

0

0

1 .10125

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

415

1 .10 40

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

**8.3.6.10 “d2H/dt2 vs. (HβηHα)-1” (vi): Figure 4.45
**

2nd Derivative of the Hubble Constant

125

8 .10

t5

7 .10125

125

6 .10

dH2 dt2 H β

(Hz^3)

dH2 dt2 e

dH2 dt2 e

dH2 dt2 e

η

5 .µ

1

2

125

5 .10

1

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4 .10125

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

.

.

.

.

.

2

5µ 5µ 5µ

1

125

3 .10

2 .10125

1 .10125

0

0

1 .10125

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

416

1 .10 40

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

8.3.6.11 “|H| vs. (HβηHα)-1” (i): Figure 4.46

Mag. of Hubble Cons. vs. Cosm. Age

2.5 .1042

1

Hα

t1

42

2 .10

dH dt H β

dH dt e

5 .µ

η

1

2

1

1.5 .1042

(Hz)

1

dH dt e

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

42

1 .10

5 .1041

0

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

1 .10 35

1 .10 34

1 .10 33

1 .10 32

1 .10 31

1 .10 30

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

417

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

8.3.6.12 “|H| vs. (HβηHα)-1” (ii): Figure 4.47

Mag. of Hubble Cons. vs. Cosm. Age

2.5 .1042

1

Hα

t4

42

2 .10

dH dt H β

dH dt e

5 .µ

η

1

2

1

1.5 .1042

(Hz)

1

dH dt e

dH dt e

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ

4

2

2

2

2

2

5 .µ . 5 .µ . 5 .µ

1

42

1 .10

5 .1041

0

1 .10 43

1 .10 42

1 .10 41

1 .10 40

1 .10 39

1 .10 38

1 .10 37

1 .10 36

1

1 .10 35

1 .10 34

1 .10 33

1 .10 32

1 .10 31

1 .10 30

η

H β .H α

Cosmological Age (s)

418

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

8.3.6.13 “TU2,3 vs. |H|”: Figure 4.48

Av. Cosmological Temp. vs. Hubble Cons.

31

3.5 .10

1

t1

Hα

31

3 .10

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

2.5 .1031

T U2

dH dt H β

η

2 .1031

T U3 H β

1

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

31

1.5 .10

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .1043

1 .1042

1 .1041

1 .1040

1 .1039

1 .1038

1 .1037

1 .1036

η

dH dt H β

, H β .H α

Hubble Constant (Hz)

419

www.deltagroupengineering.com

Quick Reference Graphs

8.3.6.14 “TU2 vs. |H|”: Figure 4.49

Av. Cosmological Temp. vs. Hubble Cons.

31

3.5 .10

1

t1

Hα

31

3 .10

Av. Cosmological Temperature (K)

2.5 .1031

T U2

dH dt H β

η 2 .1031

1

T U3 e

5 .µ

2

31

1.5 .10

31

1 .10

5 .1030

1 .1043

1 .1042

1 .1041

1 .1040

1 .1039

1 .1038

1 .1037

1 .1036

η

dH dt H β

Hubble Constant (Hz)

420

www.deltagroupengineering.com

90000

ID: 795547

www.lulu.com

9 781847 534033

Quinta Essentia: A Practical Guide to Space-Time Engineering - Part 4

ISBN 978-1-84753-403-3

- Antarctic Sun Feb 2001Uploaded bysirjsslut
- On Measuring the CMB Temperature at Redshift 0.89Uploaded byAsad
- Quinta Essentia - Part 2Uploaded bydgE
- book review.docxUploaded byAnonymous BtN6rCarA
- Young and HotUploaded byJessica Jones
- The vortex theory of matterUploaded byTudor Vasile
- Whisper From the First Stars Sets Off Loud Dark Matter Debate 20180329Uploaded byckrich_991960
- 50 Greatest Mysteries in the Universe 2012.pdfUploaded bykonohateo
- Quinta Essentia - Part 3Uploaded bydgE
- The Plasma UniverseUploaded byAriam Maria
- the Expanding Space Time Theory MasreliezUploaded byjoero
- Carl H. Gibson and Rudolph E. Schild- Hydro-Gravitational Dynamics of Planets and Dark EnergyUploaded byPlunart
- Neil DeGrasse Tyson-Astrophysics for People in a Hurry-W. W. Norton & Co (2017)Uploaded byAnonymous rp91y4Vs
- ECA QaUploaded byHammerv1
- Quinta Essentia - Part 1Uploaded bydgE
- E%3Dmc%5E2 is Not Einstein DiscoveryUploaded byapi-3728411
- albert einsteinUploaded byapi-282712235
- EssayUploaded byCristhian García Quintero
- Pranayam AUploaded byDebasis Soor
- designing the capacity for lifeUploaded bysam iam / Salvatore Gerard Micheal
- Creation vs Evolution Timeline - Kent HovindUploaded byMagnentius
- Kinetic Energy of a Moving Charged Particle and a Mass-energy Equivalence Law as E = 1/2 mc^2Uploaded bydssgss
- Dynamic Analysis of an Offshore Wind Turbine: Wind-Waves Nonlinear InteractionsUploaded byKtk Zad
- Allegato_110143Uploaded byFábio Goedel
- Explanation of the INTROSPECT-Biospect GraphsUploaded byOBERON-INTROSPECT-BIOSPECT
- The best pro God argument.Uploaded byCasey Sharp
- R7221904 Signals and SystemsUploaded bysubbu
- UniverseUploaded byHakan Ka
- time domaUploaded byJoshua Dusari
- The New Earth the Higher KnowledgeUploaded byEusebio Quino Perca

- Polarizable Vacuum (PV) and the Reissner-Nordstrom SolutionUploaded bydgE
- Polarizable Vacuum (PV) and the Schwarzschild SolutionUploaded bydgE
- The Natural Philosophy of the Cosmos (Graphs) (C)Uploaded bydgE
- The Natural Philosophy of the Cosmos (A)Uploaded bydgE
- The Natural Philosophy of the Cosmos (C)Uploaded bydgE
- SPIE 2011Uploaded bydgE
- Derivation of ElectroMagnetic RadiiUploaded bydgE
- Derivation of the Photon Mass-Energy ThresholdUploaded by