Physics Topics:

·      Inertia and Gravity;

·      Negative Mass (“Unmatter”);

·      Particle Properties; and

·     Time.                                    

9 May 2018 Version


Robert M. Hartranft                  Scott W. Hartranft

Simsbury CT 06070                  Aloha OR 97006




INERTIA AND GRAVITY:  Inertial mass and gravitational mass seem like unrelated properties, but are identical even in extremely precise experiments. 


We suggest here that inertia is simply self-gravity.  We further suggest that the graviton has mass zero.


Suppose a very large physicist decided that the planet Earth should be treated as a particle – the “earthon”.  The earthon has very high inertia because it has self-gravity.  At the other extreme, a very small physicist, working at Plank scale – 10-35 meters – would have the same conclusion about particles like electrons and quarks, whose immense relative size would cause them to interact with their own gravitons.


In short, inertia is the result of self-gravity.  Inertial mass is equal to gravitational mass because they derive from the same process – gravity:  self-gravity in one case; external gravity in the other.


Consider now the photon and the postulated graviton.  The photon is the carrier of the electromagnetic force, but it has zero electric charge, and does not itself experience the electromagnetic force.  For example, a light beam can pass through an intense magnetic field with no effect on either the light or the field.


By analogy, the graviton should have zero net mass, even including relativistic effects, and should not itself experience gravity.


NEGATIVE MASS:  Many readers struggle with the concept of negative mass material – which we further divide into Unmatter and Anti-Unmatter.

It is important to know that – as best we can determine – we are unique in using this concept for half of the universe.  Every other physicist – dead or alive – denied or ignored such things.  And where we think the current Standard Model is an obvious failure, they think it is the best current model.  So being confused by negative mass puts you in excellent company.  That said …


The explanation begins with familiar things:

·       Positive and Negative electric charges;

·       North and South magnetic poles; and,

·       Clockwise and Counter-Clockwise rotations.

There’s nary a scary thing in sight.


Now consider what happens when a simple linear solenoid energizes:  a North Pole and a South Pole appear

                               – from  ZERO  initial Magnetic Poles.

Now see Figure 1:


Unmatter and Anti-Unmatter are just analogues of the three other negative components listed above them.


Now see Figure 2 for the interactions:




The path is familiar: annihilation of positive mass material –  an electron and a positron to two gammas; etc. 

The        path is annihilation of negative mass material. 

The        path is cancellation of normal matter – an electron and an unelectron to empty void; etc. 

And        is cancellation of anti-matter.


The Big Bang produced two exactly concentric, mutually gravitationally repulsive, inter-meshed, expanding spheres:    

 · One of positive mass Matter and Anti-Matter.                            · One of negative mass Unmatter and Anti-Unmatter


PARTICLE PROPERTIES:  Like particles appear to have identical properties everywhere and always.  For example, the charge on all electrons is exactly equal.  In the model presented earlier, the Creation Event is asserted to be the creation of the laws of physics.  These may have included all particle properties as explicitly defined values, or they may have been established in some measure by the process. Such a scenario would probably have involved a forced uniformity just after the Big Bang began by reason of the small size of the universe (say at 10-15 meters diameter), with those values then ”frozen” by an expansion process where every point experienced the same forces.


However done, the effect simplifies life for physicists and theologians alike:

Physics:  As a general pattern, the laws of physics appear to be few, simple, and understandable.

Theology:   The Creator means His work to be understood.


 TIME:  In an earlier paper, the authors proposed a model where the laws of physics – after their creation – were invariant at all times and everywhere in the universe.  And in this model, the sum of each fundamental particle property over the entire universe is zero.


These Physical Properties were conserved – did not change – for both the entire universe and for individual particle interactions.


But Time does change:

       ·            Perhaps continuously,

perhaps in ultra-short quantized steps.

       ·            With a uniform base rate, and uniform relativity effects.

       ·            Always and everywhere, in both positive and negative mass regions.  And,

       ·            Never backwards.


Time is Change, and is therefore measured by periodically regular changes:   historically by the rotation of the Earth on its axis (the day) and by the revolution of the Earth around the Sun (the year); and more recently by atomic vibration methods.


However measured, time appears as change throughout the universe.  Similarly, mass causes gravitational attraction and repulsion throughout the universe.  Electrical charges and magnetic poles cause electro-magnetic effects throughout the universe.  Etc.


Some may object – quite correctly – that the model describes how time behaves and how time affects the universe, but the model does not describe what time is.  We merely note that descriptions of all the other fundamental properties are similarly deficient.  For example, while all major models describe the inertial and external gravitational effects of mass, none explain what mass is.


About the authors:  Both authors are graduates of the Cornell University College of Engineering:  Robert in Engineering Physics in 1966; Scott in Electrical and Computer Engineering in 2001.  Robert is Scott’s father.


This work was made possible by the tireless support of Dr. Martha Hartranft (Robert’s wife, Scott’s mother).