Every so often I get weird ideas that run through my head that I unfortunately don’t have enough information to make sense out of.

Speaking of …

Today on the CBC website there was an article on artificial gravity. It dawned on me that in every case where we want to create an artificial gravity environment, we do so through centrifugal force. The idea of a graviton is still theoretical and very difficult to tie to the other three fundamental forces (weak nuclear force, strong nuclear force, and the electromagnetic force).

However, what if the essence of the problem is more rudimentary than that. What if the problem of gravity is not a function of a some particle but a property of spin as it relates to the standard model of particle physics for the particles that are already known?

So for example, it is known in physics that at the start of the big bang, the creation of mass and the universe as we see it was the result of a small inconsistency of positive matter verses anti-matter. If we extend this analogy to the idea of spin, specifically with regards to the Higgs Boson, gravity could then be a function of a “centrifugal force” at a sub-atomic level resulting from a similar non-even distribution of particles wherein the spin of the particles in specific regions of space is skewed in a specific direction.

And before someone jumps on this, yes I understand that current theory suggests that the Higgs Boson doesn’t have a spin even though there is starting to be a growing body of evidence that suggests there may be more than one type of Higgs Boson. Notwithstanding, I’m just using this as a convenient exemplar as I don’t feel the principle works with any of the other particles in the standard model.

What we perceive as being dark matter could therefore be a representation of sub-atomic particles having a preponderance of Higgs field particles with positive spin (+) whereas what we are perceiving as dark energy representing sub-atomic particles having a preponderance of negative spin (-). As dark matter is assumed to be both a larger proportion of the universe than visible matter and less than dark energy, this could explain both the increase spin of galaxies and how they are not flying themselves apart, the spaces between galaxies, and the expansion of the universe.

This could imply that, in terms of a unification theory, the disconnect between gravity and the other three forces isn’t due to some missing property or particle of physics but rather the fact that they are not connected at all in the way physicists have been trying to combine them. Further, that extending that same analogy towards both anti-gravity and faster than light travel would be a function of our ability to create (for lack of a better example) a Higgs Field with an inverse polarity to that of the space-time that surrounds it.

By doing so not only would we cancel out gravity locally, but it could use the same principles to contract/expand space-time using the other three existing forces as we understand them today.

This is a gross oversimplification of something that is very complex. I don’t have the math to even begin to try to model this concept. I wish I did. I think this would be an interesting approach to the problem of gravity that may not have been considered yet. If correct however I think it would vastly simplify, at least the explanation of how/why gravity exists.

— Kevin