Historical research guide · 0412 · 2023
Energy does not have a Gravitational Mass (Flaw of the Einstein’s gravitational theory)
Takaaki Musha
In one minute
Takaaki Musha asks whether gravity can arise from exchanges of momentum between matter and the zero-point field. He starts from the enormous curvature predicted by inserting a Planck-frequency vacuum-energy estimate into the gravitational field equations. His alternative treats matter as modifying a surrounding momentum flux and derives an inverse-square attraction without introducing spacetime curvature. In that model, the gravitational constant depends on the vacuum’s equivalent mass density and a response time. Musha argues that vacuum energy itself need not act as gravitational mass. The paper develops this mechanism mathematically and connects it to his earlier work on changing the gravitational constant with electromagnetic fields. A measurement of that change is the experimental question the model raises.
Connection
A matter–vacuum momentum exchange gives the gravity discussion a specific mechanism. Its dependence on vacuum parameters points to a measurable change in gravitational coupling.
From the source
Musha starts from the huge curvature obtained with a Planck-frequency vacuum cutoff in the field equations. He uses this mismatch to motivate a different matter–vacuum interaction model.Vacuum curvature; Eqs. 3–5
He models gravity as momentum transfer between matter and virtual particles of the zero-point field, adapting a matter–fluid analogy to the vacuum.Matter–vacuum interaction; Eqs. 6–9
Within his model, the resulting force follows the inverse-square law without introducing spacetime curvature. The expression for G depends on an equivalent vacuum mass density and the square of a retardation time.Matter–vacuum interaction; Eq. 10
Changing the assumed vacuum cutoff or retardation time changes G in the model. Musha connects this dependence to his earlier paper on strong electromagnetic fields.Paragraph after Eq. 10; reference 5
Musha uses the radiation of an accelerated charge to question the equivalence principle within his alternative framework. This is an argument about the model’s foundations.Equivalence-principle discussion
His concluding arguments concern gravitons and a tachyon-based account of stellar collapse that opposes singularity formation. These are theoretical extensions of the proposed mechanism.Closing discussion; conclusion
The way in
https://doi.org/10.51542/ijscia.v4i2.2How to cite it
Takaaki Musha (2023) Energy does not have a Gravitational Mass (Flaw of the Einstein’s gravitational theory) doi:10.51542/ijscia.v4i2.2