All equations of theoretical physics exist on the basis of the accepted units of measurement, which are the most primary physical constants. They are chosen and defined by us in our local time-spatial region “near the surface of the Earth”.
As will be demonstrated in this chapter, the units of the measurement systems are constant, however, only in a local time-spatial region, where the intensity of the gravitational field is the same and constant. In fact, the uniform intensity of the gravitational field and the accuracy of the defined units of measurement determine the faithfulness and the mathematical accuracy of the equations of the theoretical physics in our local region. What is more, the accuracy of the equations of theoretical physics creates and confirms our perception of “absoluteness” not only for space and time, but also for the “fundamental” physical constants, like the speed of light in vacuum.
The validity of any equation of theoretical physics is proved by experimental verification of the result of the solution of this equation. In our local region “near the surface of the Earth”, the accuracy of the solutions of the physics equations (the results are the physical quantities values), depends only on the accuracy of the definition of the units of measurement. However, if we use equations of the theoretical physics outside our local region “near the Earth’s surface” (outside the local region where the measurement units are defined), the accuracy of the solutions of these equations also depends on the deviation of the measurement units in the field of their application. In this sense, Newton’s formula for universal gravitation (equation (2)), is sufficiently accurate within the Solar System. This formula is still used in launching satellites around the Earth, even when sending probes to the planets of the Solar System. This is because, within the Solar System, the deviation of the measurement units, used in the equations for calculations, is within the limits allowed by these practical applications (the units of measurement are defined in the third planet from the Sun). This is because, within the Solar system (except the Mercury, the nearest to the Sun and at the same time a small planet), the deviation of the measurement units used in the equations in these calculations is within the permissible for these practical applications (although the units of measurement are defined on the surface of the third planet from the Sun).
The case with the orbit of the planet Mercury is different. It is the closest planet to the Sun. The influence of the Sun’s gravity is much greater on the planet Mercury (depends on the square of the distance to the Sun), i.e., it is significantly different from the influence of the Sun’s gravity on the Earth and the other planets. That is why its orbit deviates from the calculations we make under Newton’s law of universal gravitation. In 1915, however, Einstein applied the equations of the general theory of relativity and found the response to this deviation: the result of applying the equations of the general theory of relativity coincides much more precisely with the observations. But this is still within the Solar System – where the units of measurement, as well as the fundamental physical constants, do not undergo significant changes.
However, if we look at the entire Universe, with all the regions with unimaginable differences in gravitation, which means unimaginable differences in the units of measurement… it is obvious that the equations of General relativity are not applicable to the entire Universe. This is because in the equations of the General theory of relativity the constant measurement units are used, which are defined on a small planet in a Solar system on the outskirts of one of the millions of galaxies!
Therefore, in our desire to describe the physical reality in the Universe:
We cannot fail to reach the idea that, besides in the micro-world (described by the quantum theory),
the uncertainty exists also in the macro-world!
But let us analyze the influence of gravity on the propagation of electromagnetic radiation and on the electromagnetic properties of atoms.
On the definition of the base measurement units of time and length
As has been pointed out many times, the units of measurement are the primary physical constants we have defined and chosen to be constants! It is with the help of these primary physical constants we have the possibility to use mathematics in the field of physics.
The most widely used today is the International System of Measurement Units “SI” (from the French name Système International d’unités). It is based and is an extension of the MKS system – “meter-kilogram-second”. Today, in the SI-system, the base unit of length “meter” and the base unit of time “second” are defined by the characteristics of certain electromagnetic radiation (frequency, wavelength, speed of light).
When defining the base units “metre” and “second”, it is necessary to distinguish the two main characteristics of each electromagnetic radiation: its “time period” and its “spatial period”. The “time period” of electromagnetic radiation at its propagation in vacuum, is the duration of a period of oscillation, and it is represented by the physical magnitude of the frequency. The “spatial period” is the length of a period of oscillation, and it is represented by the other characteristic of electromagnetic radiation ‒ the wavelength. The correlation between them is the local physical constant “the speed of light in vacuum” (in the frame of reference related to the stationary space), which is a local constant in our time-spatial region for the entire spectrum of electromagnetic radiation. However, the measured speed of light is not the same in all directions in the reference system related to the Earth’s surface. Therefore, the determination of the speed of light in a vacuum in SI is not refined… and hence, the definition of the base unit of length “meter” through the speed of light in vacuum is not acceptable. On this basis, the definition of the unit of length “meter” through a wavelength of certain electromagnetic radiation, given by the 11th meeting of the General Conference on Weights and Measures (CGPM), in 1960, Resolution 6, is the correct one:
“The metre is the length equal to 1650763.73 wavelengths in vacuum of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the levels 2p10 and 5d5 of the krypton 86 atom.” (11th meeting of the CGPM, Resolution 6, 1960).
The base unit of time “second” is also defined by the characteristic (frequency) of a specific electromagnetic radiation:
“The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom, at rest at a thermodynamic temperature of 00K .” (13th meeting of the CGPM, Resolution 1, 1967/68).
Note 1: The choice of this electromagnetic radiation as a “standard radiation” (between these two levels of caesium-133 atom) when defining the “second” in the International System of Units (SI), is due to the convenience of experimental realization of such a definition.
Note 2: The base unit of length “meter” can be defined by fixing a specified number of wavelengths of random electromagnetic radiation from the electromagnetic spectrum, too, although the number of “wavelengths” for the preselected “meter” will be different for the different electromagnetic radiation.
So we can define the base unit of length “meter”, by means of the electromagnetic radiation, which we use to define the base unit of time, the “second”, – this will be done for the convenience of the applying logic for analysis, which is presented in chapter 11 of the book. The thus-defined unit of length “meter” will be exactly the same as the one accepted by BIPM:
We can define the unit of length “the metre” in the following way:
“The metre is the length, equal to 30.66331899 wavelengths of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom in a vacuum, at rest, at a temperature of 0оK.” (Sharlanov, 2012a).
Convention: Let the electromagnetic radiation used to define the unit of length be the same as the electromagnetic radiation, used for the definition of the unit of time, and let us call it in this book “standard radiation”. It can be the radiation used in the International System of Units (SI) to define the unit of time (between these same two levels of cesium-133 atom).
Using the so-called “standard radiation”, let us denote the number of wavelengths (the length of 30.66331899 “spatial periods” when defining the “meter”), with Nm_s. For any other radiation from the electromagnetic spectrum, the number of wavelengths for the so-defined “meter” will be different, and let us denote it with Nm_i.
Similarly, let us denote the duration of 9,192,631,770 “time periods” of this “standard radiation”, with Ns_s (the total duration of which is equal to one “second”). For any other radiation from the electromagnetic spectrum, the number of periods for one “second” will be different, and let us denote it with Ns_i.
Thus, in our local time-spatial region“near the surface of the Earth” (where the gravitational force is the same), the local constant “speed of electromagnetic radiation in vacuum” is the same for the whole electromagnetic spectrum:
Here we can recall that the “speed of the electromagnetic radiation in vacuum” (c = λν) is the constant correlation between the frequency and the wavelength of each electromagnetic radiation for the whole electromagnetic spectrum, which is a “local constant in any time-spatial region with a uniform intensity of the gravitational field”.
Unfortunately, our vision of the physical reality in the Universe is based on our local time-spatial perception of “absoluteness”. The perception of “absoluteness” (not only of the time and space) is a result of the irrefutability of all the “mathematical and experimental evidence” about the constancy of all local physical constants in our local time-spatial domain“near the Earth’s surface”. In fact, all of this evidence, in turn, is based on the unchangeability (constancy) of the local units of measurement in the regions with the same (uniform) intensity of the gravitational field.
We can see, however, that if we define the measurement units in the same way, by means of the characteristics of the electromagnetic radiation (frequency, wavelength), in time-spatial regions with different intensity of the gravitational field – the measurement units will be different. This means too, that the local physical constants in these time-spatial regions will be different if we measure them with the units of measurement defined in our time-spatial region… (it is analyzed in detail in chapter 11 of the book).
It turns out that we are misled to adopt that the local physical constants are fundamental, universal and unchangeable for all the Universe (like the local constant speed of light in vacuum). This also applies to the “vacuum permittivity” (the dielectric constant ε0), to the “vacuum permeability” (the magnetic constant μ0), and to all “fundamental physical constants”, which are in fact “local physical constants”.
In the following three Webpages we will theoretically analyze the influence of gravitation on the propagation of electromagnetic radiation and on the electromagnetic properties of atoms within three regions with different intensity of the gravitational field (but with uniform intensity inside each of the regions):
• in our local (reference) region“near the Earth’s surface”, where the gravitational force is approximately the same, and where we have defined the units of measurement (our primary physical constants);
• in regions, where the gravitation is weaker compared to others;
• in regions, where the gravitation is stronger compared to others.
The logic presented in the above webpages about the influence of gravitation on the propagation of electromagnetic radiation (in regions with a uniform gravitational field, in regions with weaker gravitation, and in regions with stronger gravitation), fully coincides with the views of the supporters of the cosmological theory of the “Big Bang”: