The Theory of Steric Quantum Gravity and the Absence of a True Vacuum

In my last post I talked about gravity being a repulsive force on a smaller scale. Or specifically, when dealing with molecules of gas. In today’s post, I’m trying to represent gravity as steric phenomenon, where the curvature of spacetime is a result of space never being a true vacuum in the macroscopic scale. At least if vacuum is defined as an absence of particles.

This means that gravity isn’t primarily an attractive interaction, but a repulsive one. However, the repulsive interaction comes from small quantum objects (mostly molecules) that are in the scale of micrometers or below, whereas the attractive interaction comes from there being two (or more) large solid particles being suspended in a sea of these smaller quantum objects.

Any quantum object in the near-vacuum of space (not full vacuum, because no such thing exists) will have a gaseous nature. That is, it will have nothing inside of it. Or at least nothing in the scale of the particles that make up the quantum object. When talking about supramolecular quantum particles, they will contain no molecules inside them in the near-zero pressure of space. Subatomic particles are allowed.

However, this separation of solid objects and the quantum medium in which these are suspended breaks down when we introduce pressure. When you introduce pressure, such as close to a body with a huge mass (such as our planet Earth), these quantum objects can trap molecules inside of them. The reason being that the external pressure prevents the solids trapped inside these quantum objects (toruses or pseudo-toruses) from being released.

These quantum toruses are the main theoretical innovation in my manuscript/preprint in peer-review limbo. Here is the graphical representation of the equations that describe the entagled curving of moving helical arcs into a quantum torus:

I think I need to illustrate this shape with blender pretty soon and include the illustration in the manuscript. It seems people aren’t too good at converting schematics into 3D object in their heads.

Thus, it is the pressure, generated by external mass, that forces molecules to move in helical arced paths. This path is more like an ant trail, where the path is filled with molecules, with no space in between.  And the reason why the molecules don’t veer from their path is that their path is constrained primarily by the quantum torus they reside in: they can only move tangentially, or along the premade path. And the secondary constraint are the neighboring quantum toruses that prevent individual quantum toruses from unraveling.

And like they sometimes say about turtles, it’s quantum toruses all the way down. And at the smallest scale the ‘ants’ traveling the quantum paths are elementary particles of energy. However, these aren’t turtles either, but kaus, because of physical puns.

If we zoom out from the conditions of the surface of the earth up towards space, the pressure drops. Beyond the troposphere you can’t really have liquid water. Theoretically you could still have liquid water in the stratosphere, but beyond this, there’s no hope for liquids. However, the molecules in the gaseous phase still cannot be freed from their quantum entanglement. If you read the Wikipedia page, you wouldn’t get the idea that quantum entanglement also corresponds to molecular motion. Even though the Wikipedia page talks about quantum gravity, the reason it doesn’t talk about the quantum donuts of this post is because I still haven’t gotten the damn manuscript peer-reviewed by physisics and published. The only person who’s done peer-review on it has been a biologist and they’ve completely ignored the theoretical part. I fear that a theoretical physicist looking at the paper would say that the paper looks more like biology, chemistry and materials science, so I’m in a Catch-22, where there are no peer-reviewers understanding both (or all three) sides of the argument.

There is a possibility that the theory will be rejected until we’ve built a factory applying the theory and making commercial products with it. Then possibly someone will have to concede that perhaps the theory makes sense after all…