# 'Gravity as a zero-point-fluctuation force' of Puthoff and artificial gravity

## Recommended Posts

Hi all,

I would like to pose some questions about Gravity as a zero-point-fluctuation force of Puthoff.

The article: Zero Point Field cause an oscillation on fundamental particles. (electrons and quarks) and this cause a mutual interaction between those particles. Making the calculations Puthoff observes the correct dependence on distance. (r-2)

The questions are:  to simulate the presence of a particle outside a macroscopic object it should be sufficient to recreate the variable electromagnetic field that the particle would generate by oscillating. It would be enough to have such a field and the macroscopic object would be attracted by the gravity of the 'simulated particle'. Quite right? What are the practical difficulties in creating such a field?

I was motivated by the Louis Rancourt findings: basically it seems that light attract matter as a gravity source.

Edited by Giovanni

##### Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Giovanni said:

Quite right?

No, because gravity does not behave the way electromagnetism does, so you can’t model gravity by trying to reduce it to electromagnetic interactions - except perhaps as an approximation in the Newtonian regime, which is basically what this author has done.

15 hours ago, Giovanni said:

Making the calculations Puthoff observes the correct dependence on distance. (r-2)

The trouble with this is that gravity is not actually a force at all - it’s geodesic deviation, and hence a geometric property of spacetime. What this author has done here is re-create a Newtonian approximation; that is fine, but I don’t really see the point, since it is only an approximation in the low-energy, slow-velocity regime. The full behaviour of gravity, as described by General Relativity, cannot be modelled in this way.

##### Share on other sites

Yes you are right: the entire discussion is about the Newtonian approximation. In the past I have spoken with Puthoff about how to pass from Newton to his PV interpretation of GR. It should be possible. But is not the core of the discussion: here I would like to discuss the Newtonian approximation.

##### Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Giovanni said:

##### Share on other sites

Accessing the article costs \$ 25. Prove that I'm wrong it's impossible because I did not positively affirm anything: I just asked questions.

## Create an account

Register a new account