Whilst the mass of an object is said to be constant the weight of
that object is said to change with gravity, a man weighing less in space
than on earth. If the basic principle underlying the Alice hypothesis (1),
that a fermionic (ordinary matter) state alternates with a bosonic (waves
or energy) state about once every attosecond, this thinking will have to
be revised .
Power may be increased either by increasing the amount of energy
being delivered to, for example, lift a boulder or by reducing the time in
which the energy is applied. Of these two ways the latter has infintely
greater potential to increase power than the former (2). The implication
is that the same applies to mass for Einstein's equation states that
E=MC2. In which case the mass density rate of the boulder would be the
same as its weight if the basic principle underlying the Alice hypothesis
were valid. The mass density rate would, in these circumstances, have to
increase in accordance with the laws of gravity in direct proportion with
the product of the mass of the boulder and the mass of the earth and in
indirect proportion with the square of the distance between them. The mass
density rate would also be expected to decrease in proportion with the
absolute temperature for as absolute zero is approached liquid gases defy
gravity by flowing out of their containers.
Defining quantum gravity is one of the remaining obstacles in search
for the elusive Theory of Everything, a theory which Steven Hawking
believes will have to include some exotic modification of the laws of
thermodynamics (3). Might including the effects of changing mass density
rate in accordance with the Alice hypothesis help to overcome some of the
remaining obstacles?
1. Patrick Bracken and Philip Thomas Time to move beyond the mind-
body split
BMJ 2002; 325: 1433-1434 (Electronic responses).
2. Mourou GA, Umstadter D. Extreme light. Scientific American updated from
May 2002, pp77-83.
3. Steven Hawking. The universe in a nutshell. Bantam Press, London, 2001.
Rapid Response:
Alice hypothesis: gravitational implications
Whilst the mass of an object is said to be constant the weight of
that object is said to change with gravity, a man weighing less in space
than on earth. If the basic principle underlying the Alice hypothesis (1),
that a fermionic (ordinary matter) state alternates with a bosonic (waves
or energy) state about once every attosecond, this thinking will have to
be revised .
Power may be increased either by increasing the amount of energy
being delivered to, for example, lift a boulder or by reducing the time in
which the energy is applied. Of these two ways the latter has infintely
greater potential to increase power than the former (2). The implication
is that the same applies to mass for Einstein's equation states that
E=MC2. In which case the mass density rate of the boulder would be the
same as its weight if the basic principle underlying the Alice hypothesis
were valid. The mass density rate would, in these circumstances, have to
increase in accordance with the laws of gravity in direct proportion with
the product of the mass of the boulder and the mass of the earth and in
indirect proportion with the square of the distance between them. The mass
density rate would also be expected to decrease in proportion with the
absolute temperature for as absolute zero is approached liquid gases defy
gravity by flowing out of their containers.
Defining quantum gravity is one of the remaining obstacles in search
for the elusive Theory of Everything, a theory which Steven Hawking
believes will have to include some exotic modification of the laws of
thermodynamics (3). Might including the effects of changing mass density
rate in accordance with the Alice hypothesis help to overcome some of the
remaining obstacles?
1. Patrick Bracken and Philip Thomas Time to move beyond the mind-
body split
BMJ 2002; 325: 1433-1434 (Electronic responses).
2. Mourou GA, Umstadter D. Extreme light. Scientific American updated from
May 2002, pp77-83.
3. Steven Hawking. The universe in a nutshell. Bantam Press, London, 2001.
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests