[Kartazion (OP)]

Hello.


1 - Constitution of the gravitational oscillator:

This linear oscillator uses a particle of mass m oscillating vertically along the vector G of gravity. The oscillation has two phases. The first is the phase of the fall of the particle with the force G, and the second is the reverse phase which corresponds to the vertical ejection of the particle given by a pulse of energy E.

Rising oscillation of the particle = E
Descending oscillation of the particle = G.






Gravity is energy, but inverse to E for our case:

E - G = 0



Momentum of the particle in the oscillator:





Speed ​​and acceleration of the particle according to the constant g:





2 - Heisenberg uncertainty principle

The integration of the constant g and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle:




Momentum k given to the particle after the pulse:




Coherent states of the oscillator and the uncertainty principle:





3 - Electron and speed of light:

The quantum gravity called z would then make the particle fall from the surface, to then reappear thanks to the energy. As much the constant g has an acceleration on a relativistic object, then z would be a constant accelerating the quantum particle to reach the speed of light.

We can determine the amount of energy it would take to move the electron to c-1:





Quantum gravitational potential energy of the electron and constant z:





Part II

Substitution of the mechanical stress of impact and rebound caused by the particle during its fall, by a continuity of the kinetic energy of the particle towards the antimatter.





Kinetics of the particle at the bottom of the potential well, and avoidance of the singularity:





At x = 0 when the particle is going faster (don't rely on GIF for speed), its kinetic energy allows it not to fall into the singularity. Indeed his avoidance is done by his horizon. The force of gravity corresponds to the matter attracted towards this singularity, while the energy pushes it out.

Perhaps we could see in it some metric associated with Einstein-Cartan's theory in relation to the avoidance of this singularity.

[Origin]

Gravity is energy

What do you mean by that?

[Kartazion (OP)]

Gravity is energy

What do you mean by that?

I really mean that the force of gravity is energy. Indeed gravity is able to keep matter in the direction of its force field.

To move or maintain matter you need energy. I'm talking about gravity there, because you also need energy to be able to do exactly the same effect. Indeed and according to Einstein gravity is comparable to a vertical upward acceleration, which allows us to stay on the ground.

To check...

[Kartazion (OP)]

To run water from the mountains, does it take energy?

[Halc]

I really mean that the force of gravity is energy.

Force and energy are different things. Gravity is neither. All three have different units.

Indeed gravity is able to keep matter in the direction of its force field.

Gravity isn't a force field, else a small rock would weigh the same as a big one.

Your whole OP makes contradictions of units like that.

To move or maintain matter you need energy.

Not so. At a bare minimum, in order to move matter, one only needs to consider an object in a frame where it is already moving. Motion is relative to an abstract frame, not a physical thing.
Don't know what you mean by 'maintain'.

according to Einstein gravity is comparable to a vertical upward acceleration

Now you're equating gravity (the local gravitational field at least) to acceleration, not energy or force. That's far closer to the mark, at least in a Newtonian sense.

[Kartazion (OP)]

Ok. Gravity is gravity and energy is energy. But that does not prevent the operation of the oscillator.

Small remark it takes energy to counter the force of gravity, as for rockets, or hydrolytic dams which provides electrical energy thanks to the difference in level of water due to the force of gravity.

Don't know what you mean by 'maintain'.

Example, keep the earth at a good distance from the sun.

[puppypower]

A quantum universe saves time. If we had a continuous function universe and we needed to achieved very specific conditions for step A to become step B, a quantum universe, because of  fewer options, allows this change to occur faster. An analogy is having a 6-sided dice and an infinite sided dice and you need to roll a 6 to go home. It may take forever to roll a six with the infinite sides dice, but it may only take 6 tries or so with the six sided dice. This saves time.

Gravity is an acceleration with the units of acceleration a=d/t/t. This one part distance and two parts time. This second time vector has a connection to the time saving nature of quanta.

These two different time vectors can be easily seen within a star. General relativity tells us that space-time is most contracted in the core of the star and expands as we move outward. This time vector is t1.

The second time vector is connected to the atomic and energy vibrational frequencies which are fastest in the fusion core; t2. The t2 is going in the opposite direction as t1. Gravity causes a slower reference;t1, with faster frequencies; t2.

T2 by being connected to matter and energy frequencies, brings us in contact with the quantum platform of the universe, since these things are how quantum are expressed. We save time; quantum, while also speeding up time via faster frequency matter and energy. Space-time reference and t1, is not critical to this, since the laws of physics, quanta and t2, are the same in all references.

This bring up an interesting thought experiment. Say you were in moving SR reference where time appears to slow and distance appeared highly contracted. As we look out the window, we see a large amount of mass that appears distance contracted enough, to where fusion should begin, but there is no fusion. Mass is an invariant. This is a reference illusion since it  only uses t1 but lacks t2 to close the deal. SR is based on velocity which is d/t so its lacks t2.  Gravity does include the second time vector.

Your oscillator experiment intuitively uses time as the connecting variable. 

[Origin]

This second time vector has a connection to the time saving nature of quanta.

Time is not a vector.  Will you ever be able to learn this?  The line "time saving nature of quanta", is absurd.

The second time vector is connected to the atomic and energy vibrational frequencies which are fastest in the fusion core; t2. The t2 is going in the opposite direction as t1. Gravity causes a slower reference;t1, with faster frequencies; t2.

More ignorant word salad, no point in reading any further.

[Origin]

Gravity is energy, but inverse to E for our case:

E - G = 0

You might as well write:
Mass - Last Tuesday = 0
It makes as much sense.

[Kartazion (OP)]

You might as well write:
Mass - Last Tuesday = 0
It makes as much sense.

Unlike pure energy in varying amounts expressed in joule, gravity is only quantified energy. To find a transformation from gravity to energy. I'm working on it. I will take the example of the hydroelectric dam or the weight of the clock going down and providing energy.

Even wiki makes an approach https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_energy

[Bored chemist]

If you drilled a hole through the axis of the Earth from pole to pole, and put a long thin vacuum chamber in it then dropped an object into one end of that chamber , it would fall down the hole, picking up speed.
And it would be moving very fast when it reached the centre of the Earth so it would carry on going until it reached the other pole where it would stop, and then fall back down again
It would "bounce" back and to .
If the density of the Earth was constant (rather than increasing as you go down). the body would exhibit  simple harmonic motion.

As it did so, it would exchange potential for kinetic energy.
And so you could write that the gravitational potential energy - the kinetic energy =0


But it's not a very interesting system (and, of course, it's impossible).

I wonder if it's what the OP is on about.

[Kartazion (OP)]

If you drilled a hole through the axis of the Earth from pole to pole, and put a long thin vacuum chamber in it then dropped an object into one end of that chamber , it would fall down the hole, picking up speed.
And it would be moving very fast when it reached the centre of the Earth so it would carry on going until it reached the other pole where it would stop, and then fall back down again
It would "bounce" back and to .
If the density of the Earth was constant (rather than increasing as you go down). the body would exhibit  simple harmonic motion.

As it did so, it would exchange potential for kinetic energy.
And so you could write that the gravitational potential energy - the kinetic energy =0


But it's not a very interesting system (and, of course, it's impossible).

I wonder if it's what the OP is on about.

You cannot reach the other pole by simply falling. Indeed at the center of the earth gravity is reversed and once past the center you need energy E. Otherwise you would have your feet to send it to the pole at the end.

[Bored chemist]

You cannot reach the other pole by simply falling.

Yes you would.
It's simple energy conservation.

[Kartazion (OP)]

Yes you would.
It's simple energy conservation.

I misunderstood. So you have a fall caused by gravity from the north pole to the center, then a transformation into kinetic energy from the center to the south pole.

[Bored chemist]

... and then it falls back to the North Pole.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Mechanics/earthole.html

[Kartazion (OP)]

... and then it falls back to the North Pole.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Mechanics/earthole.html

Yes that's it. A kind of perpetual motion. But in my case for the opposite particle at the south pole, the problem remains in antimatter. More precisely on its location and its quantity which is not measured or observed. In addition there would be an overlap between matter and antimatter from south to north and north to the south. I had thought that the center of the earth was the point of antimatter. The problem being the path of fall and kinetics which does not suit the model.

[Bored chemist]

I had thought that the center of the earth was the point of antimatter.

They have nothing to do with eachother.
There is practically no antimatter at the centre of the Earth.

[Kartazion (OP)]

... There is practically no antimatter at the centre of the Earth.

There is practically no antimatter at all, into the universe.

[Bored chemist]

Tiny traces of it get formed (and then destroyed) in radioactive decay.

[evan_au]

gravity is only quantified energy

Physicists do think that gravity is quantised, with a hypothetical particle called the graviton.

The electromagnetic force is far more powerful than the gravitational field.
- Compared to the more familiar photon (force carrier for the electromagnetic force), the graviton carries very little energy.
- Our current technology has no way to detect individual gravitons
- But we can just detect the tsunami of gravitons unleashed by dramatic events like black holes merging

For our current technology, in our Solar System, you could just as easily treat gravity as being continuous (ie not quantised). It is only in extreme environments like the event horizon of a black hole that the quantised nature of gravitation will probably become important - but we don't know, because current formulations of quantised gravity don't work, either!

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graviton