Science Forums

# Is Physics Incomplete?

## Recommended Posts

All the big guns for this discussion are stored elsewhere,

The short form (Adobe Acrobat pdf).

The long form (history, rigor, subsidiary topics, clickable citations; on the Web)

Here we go... The Equivalence Principle (EP) *postulates* gravitational mass (try lifting a car) is fundamentally indistinguishable from inertial mass (try pushing a car). All local test bodies - ball bearings, feathers, photons - thereby fall identically in vacuum. General Relativity immediately follows as an inevitable consequence. Everything else is details.

If the EP is counter-demonstrated at will, General Relativity loses its founding postulate. Drop two things in vacuum, see one fall "sidways" or too fast/slow compared to the other, and General Relatvity is thereby falsified. Poof!

Do all local test bodies really fall identically in vacuum (pursue parallel geodesic trajectories)? We can cleverly measure the difference in trajectories between two (sets of) test bodies accurate to one in ten trillion relative (yup, 10^(-13) accuracy) with an Eotvos balance. Everything to date comes out a perfect null result within experimental error. General Relativity has a perfect track record no matter how weird its predictions seem.

Lots of people have looked very hard at almost everything

However... Every physical property originates in a mathematical symmetry, and vice-versa (Noether's theorem). A list of all symmetries gives a list of all test mass properties - and physics missed testing one against the Equivalence Principle! Nobody knows if right-handed objects vs. left-handed objects fall identically. More specifically, we must go beyond handedness (chirality; one coordinate axis inverted in a mirror image) to full parity (all three coordinate axes inverted).

Will parity pair test masses fall identically? Does a left shoe fit identically on a left or right foot? Is spacetime handed (chiral)? Nobody has ever looked! Wouldn't it be fine if Einstein made an omission in his theory? Euclid goofed that way.

Euclid postulated that given a straight line and a point not on that line, only one line could be drawn through that point parallel to the original line (not quite in those words). If you accept this you get plane geometry, and plane geometry contains no mistakes. If you don't assume Euclid's Fifth (Parallel) Postulate, you get elliptic (no parallel lines) or hyperbolic (infinite parallel lines) geometries. They also work perfectly, and with broader application.

General Relatvity models spacetime as general covariance (scale-independent symmetry under all smooth coordinate transformations). We calculate that parity pair tellurium single crystals are maximally unlike each other, arising from the discontinuous symmetry of parity. Can spacetime geometry fall to test mass geometry? Can Einstein and spacetime curvature be overthrown on a technicality as Euclid was shown to be a special case of more general geometries?

The parity Eotvos experiment would be an interesting adventure - conducted in existing apparatus run SOP by its academic keepers using commercial materals. Parity has embarassingly overturned physics theory in the past.

Everybody was really surprised!

Do you think test mass parity has one more surprise awaiting discovery? We've got the calculated numbers. The experiment can be done as are others of tis kind. So

##### Share on other sites

• 3 weeks later...

Both the long proposal and the Acrobat *.pfd the short form have been updated with more supporting data. Conclusions remain unchanged - a simple experiment in existing apparatus may bring down General Relativity by falsifying its founding hypothesis (the Equvalence Principle - all bodies fall identically in vacuum). Somebody should look.

We hope to calculate larger crystal lattice volumes. 14,600 atoms is nice, but 100,000 or a million atoms would be nicer. This requires significantly reworking 476K of Fortran source code just to obtain lattice atomic coordinates (limited by Windoze dreadful memory allocation). It will be a while...

##### Share on other sites

• 1 month later...

Physics wold have a new body if people would see what I've figured out using only thought experiments in the tradition of Albert Einstein. I have the stuff posted on my web site and the majority of it posted in this forum. Check it out and tell me what you think.