THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE UNIFIED FIELD

AND THE PRINCIPLE OF ITS DUAL INTERPRETATION

A.A. Nassikas
reviewed by J.J. Drigofias
Larissa Ed. Instit. oI Technology
10, Ethnikis Antistasseos str.
41 335 Larissa Greece
e-mail a.a.nasteilar.gr~
PUBLISHED IN SELECTED PAPERS OF III INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
"PROBLEMS OF SPACE TIME AND GRAVITATION". RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
ST. PETERSBURG RUSSIA. 1994
ABSTRACT
The hypothesis oI the uniIied Iield leads to the principle oI its dual interpretation according to
which "Any physical magnitude can be expressed, in a coordinate system oI a Euclidean space,
both as a spacetime and as a quantum magnitude". On the basis oI this principle a particle Iield can
be described through the whole oI its extent with spacetime wave Iunctions, and it is proved that the
product oI an eigenvalue oI the energy oI a particle Iield by the mean value oI the volume which
contains that energy is a constant. That constant is veriIied Ior the energy levels oI a proton and Ior
the rest energy oI an electron.
I. INTRODUCTION
The concept oI the uniIied Iield is not new |1|, |2|. However the studies oI the black holes and the
Big Bang theory revealed the necessity Ior the uniIication oI the general theory oI relativity (GRT)
with the quantum mechanics (QM) |3|, |4|. As is known the gauge principle interprets the QED |5|
but not gravitation; Attempts have been made using supersymmetry, to construct gauge theories but
they cannot overcome the requirement Ior renormalization |6|.The superstring theory |6| is
expected to give Iinite amplitudes without any need Ior renormalization; a rigorous prooI oI this
claim is as yet lacking. However the problem oI the uniIied Iield is not only mathematical; it is a
problem which relates to the substance oI the reality; possibly it is also a philosophical problem.
ThereIore new principles Ior the uniIied Iield could be useIul. The principles oI this paper are
based on the consequences derived Irom the hypothesis oI the uniIied Iield according to which the
nature oI the Universe is everywhere the same.
II. METHODOLOGY-PRINCIPLES
The methodology that is used to derive the consequences oI the hypothesis oI the uniIied Iield is
reductio ad absurdum. First it is assumed that the hypothesis oI the uniIied Iield, the GRT, and the
QM are all valid. That assumption leads to certain contradictions. These contradictions lead to the
necessary modiIication oI and correlation between the GRT and the QM in order that the
hypothesis oI the uniIied Iield be valid. These modiIications and correlations are mentioned in this
paper as consequences oI the present hypothesis. As long as the hypothesis is valid, these
consequences can be regarded as principles of the unified field. The hypothesis oI the uniIied
Iield implies a uniIied nature oI the Universe, which means that there does not exist any diIIerence
between matter and Iield. The latter is satisIied by the QM but not by the GRT, according to which
any Iield is a spacetime continuum created by some matter. Thus iI we were to uniIy the QM with
the GRT we could state the Iollowing consequence-principle oI the uniIied Iield:
Principle I. In the whole extent of a particle field there does not exist any privileged area, and
any spacetime of it contains energy due to the spacetime itself, which is matter.
More speciIically, and according to the experience gained hitherto, that principle suggests that
every spacetime can be regarded as a particle wave and vice versa, a Iact which is valid under the
Iollowing principles of the dual interpretation of the unified field:
Principle II. A particle field can be described, in a coordinate system of a Euclidean space,
through a spacetime wave function which is identical with the particle wave function of the
field.
Principle III. Any physical magnitude can be expressed, in a coordinate system of a
Euclidean space, both as a spacetime magnitude and as a quantum magnitude.
According to this hypothesis the GRT must be compatible with principles I, II, III. Thus we can
state the Iollowing principle :
Principle IV. In the whole extent of a particle field are valid only those consequences of the
GRT which are compatible with principles I, II, III.
Principles II, III include principle I because they hold that any spacetime can be regarded as a
particle wave which contains energy and which by its nature excludes the existence oI any
privileged area. II we were to extend the physical magnitudes to the non comprehensible part oI
reality, principle III would include principle II. However all principles are mentioned in this paper
because they are helpIul Ior better understanding. According to what was mentioned the existence
oI a spacetime implies the existence oI energy. Conversely we arrive at the Iollowing corollary I:
Corollary I. The existence or the non existence of energy implies the existence or the non
existence of spacetime- and consequently of any geometry.
This hypothesis Iacilitates the statistical interpretation oI space and time and the extension oI the
relativistic QM (RQM) to spacetime magnitudes; it must be noted that the conventional RQM |7|,
|8|, |9|, is based on the relativistic behaviour oI energy but ignores the relativistic behaviour oI
space and time.
However the issue oI what the diIIerence is between the gravitational (g) and the electromagnetic
(em) space arises, since according to this hypothesis they are both described in spacetime terms.
The answer to that question can be given on the supposition that real space has not only our known
dimensions but also dimensions that correspond to electromagnetism and to antimatter. Thus, every
phenomenon can be described, under the same principles, in spacetime terms but through its
relevant domain. In this paper the consequences oI the hypothesis oI the uniIied Iield are
investigated Ior the case oI a gravitational space, but according to what has been mentioned they
can apply to every space.
III. THE ENERGY OF SPACETIME
As spacetime oI reIerence oI a particle Iield we deIine a Euclidean spacetime to which through a
coordinate transIormation the Iield corresponds. This spacetime oI reIerence is not only a
geometrical notion, since according to the present hypothesis it is matter and any magnitude oI it in
the Iollowing will be denoted by the subscript
0
.
A point
0
A oI the spacetime oI reIerence by the action oI the Iield occupies a position
0
A A .
Thus we have the transIormation A A
0
through the transIormations ) ( I
i
i
D i
= and
i
D
A
i
0
A
dx dx which are not simply coordinate transIormations but transIormations oI
deIormity denoted by the superscript
D
. According to the GRT in the area oI point A these
transIormations can be regarded as Lorenz transIormations |1|, |10| denoted by the superscript '.
Thus Ior the invariant magnitude
2
A
ds we have:
j
A A ij
j '
A
i '
A ij
Dj
A
Di
A
D
ij
dx
i
dx dx dx dx dx g ds
2
A
= = =
where
D
j i
g the metric tensor which corresponds to the transIormations oI deIormity when these
are regarded as a coordinate system and
j i
Kronecker's symbol. Since the spacetime event which
is deIined by the quantities
Di
A
dx cannot correspond to two diIIerent spacetime events oI the
spacetime oI reIerence we have:
i
0
A
i
A
dx dx = .Thus we obtain:
2
0 A
j
0
A
i
0
A ij
j
A
i
A ij
j
A
i
A ij
Dj
A
Di
A
D
j i
2
A
ds dx dx dx dx ' dx ' dx dx dx g ds = = = = =
Thus the inIinitesimal spacetime d in the area A oI the Iield results Irom a spacetime
0
d oI
the area oI the point
0
A or oI the point A oI the spacetime oI reIerence by way oI a Lorenz
transIormation. The same holds true Ior the inIinitesimal spacetimes adjacent to d and
0
d (oI
the point
0
A ) respectively since they correspond through transIormations oI deIormity. According
to principles I, IV,
0
d and d contain energy
0
dE and dE which obey the GRT, according to
which the laws oI Physics are expressed equivalently in all systems oI coordinates and, oI course, in
systems deIined by a Lorenz transIormation. Thus it holds that the spacetime dO has energy dE
such that we have |11|:
) 1 (
v
1
dV
dV
tr
dE
dE
r
0
0 0
= = =

= =
) 2 ( tr . dV . DE tr . dV .
dV
dE
dE and
0 0 0
0
0
= =
where by t is denoted the time interval, by tr the relative time, by
r
v the relative volume and by
0
DE the energy density oI the spacetime oI reIerence.
As has been mentioned, to inIinitesimal neighboring spacetimes oI a Iield correspond inIinitesimal
neighboring spacetimes oI the space time oI reIerence, by way oI a Lorenz transIormation.
ThereIore eqn (2) can be integrated. Thus we have:
) 3 ( trdr DE trdV DE tr dE E
3
0
0 0 0 0

=

where
0
is the space in the Euclidean spacetime oI reIerence to which the Iield, through the
transIormations oI deIormity corresponds.
On the basis oI the above mentioned we may notice that a Iield can be described through a
coordinate system oI a euclidean spacetime oI reIerence by the aid oI the transIormations oI
deIormity with respect to the spacetime oI reIerence.
Elucidation
In this paper when we say description through a coordinate system of a euclidean spacetime
of reference we mean the description through the transformations of deformity which apply
on the euclidean spacetime of reference which has not been deformed by the action of the
field. Any magnitude of the field eg. relative time or relative length in a direction

n, is
described through a coordinate system of the spacetime of reference but corresponds to that
point of the field which is defined through the transformations of deformity. Thus the
principles II,III do apply, since the description oI a particle Iield according to the QM is achieved
by the aid oI a 1 wave Iunction through a coordinate system oI a euclidean space which has not
been deIormed by the action oI the Iield.
IV. THE UNCERTAINTY OF SPACETIME
The hypothesis oI the uniIied Iield, by deIinition, includes the quantum theory. According to the
uncertainty principle, no energy oI a particle Iield capable oI being
measured accurately in a given time exists |7|, |9|, and it holds that:
> t . E (4)
where t reIers to the spacetime oI reIerence. The hypothesis oI the uniIied Iield leads to the idea that
a particle Iield can also be regarded as a spacetime Iield. Thus according to principle III eqn(3) is
valid. Due to (3) and (4) it holds that:

0
3
0
DE / t . trdr >

. (5) Relation (5)

shows that no unique tr corresponds to every point oI a particle Iield at every instant t, Ior iI this
were the case it would not be possible Ior (9) to hold. According to the GRT, tr is described by a
continuous function. According to the present hypothesis which leads to inequality (5), tr is
discontinuous. As long as this hypothesis is valid the GRT is modiIied, and it is valid that a
particle Iield can be described with spacetime terms, i.e. its energy can be written in the Iorm oI
eqns, (1),(2), but it obeys inequalities (4), (5).
V. SPACETIME OPERATORS AND WAVE FUNCTION
According to principle III and to corollary I any spacetime magnitude can be expressed as a
quantum-statistical- magnitude. Thus using capital letters to denote the quantum - statistical -
magnitudes, the superscript to denote a local mean value and the symbol to denote a space
mean value , then Ior the case oI the relative time oI a particle Iield in an energy state E, we have :

E E E
TR TR =

(6)
According to principle III it is valid that:
E E
TR tr = (7)
Eqn(3), because oI the uncertainty principle, is valid Ior any t; thereIore it holds that:

3
0
E 0
dr ) r ( tr DE E

= (8)
and E
E 0
3
0
E
0
0
0
tr E dr ) r ( tr
V
V
DE = =

(9)
ThereIore we have:
0
E
E
E
tr = (10)
and because oI eqn(7)
0
E E
E
E
tr TR = = (11)
Thus because oI eqn(6,11) we have:

0
E
E
TR

= (12)
and
t E
i
E
E
TR
0 0

= =

(13)
TRis a particle magnitude and it expresses the relative time oI an observer moving on a particle oI
energy E with respect to the spacetime oI reIerence. II VR is the relative volume oI this observer
according to the SRT it holds :
E
E
TR
1
VR
0
= = (14)
Thus VR is a particle magnitude with operator :

= E / E VR
0
t /
1 iE
0

=

(15)
For
2
0
mc E = , eqn (14), expresses the Iormula known Irom the SRT. However that eqn
,according to this hypothesis, has sense only on condition that it is valid with respect to a matter
spacetime oI reIerence with energy
2
0
mc E = and not with respect to a Euclidean coordinate
system which is simply a geometrical notion.
Due to eqn (15) we have:
E 0 E
E E VR =

and
E
0
E E E
E
E
VR VR = =

(16)
For a relative length in a direction n

Irom the SRT it is known that:

2
2
n 2
2
2
n 2
n
E
P
c 1
c
v
1 LR = = (17)
In the Iorm oI operators eqn(17) takes the Iollowing Iorm:
2 2
2
n
2
2 2
n
t /
x /
c 1 ) LR (


=

(18)
By the aid oI this operator and the o wave Iunction possibly we can deIine the geometry oI a
particle Iield; however that is beyond the purposes oI this paper. Eqn (18) expresses the (relative
length)
2
operator with respect to a spacetime oI reIerence oI energy
2
0
mc E = .
In a euclidean reIerence space-time, on the basis oI elucidation I, Ior a relative spacetime
magnitude sr by deIinition it is valid that:

=
3
0
dr ) t , r ( sr
V
1
sr
where
0
V is the volume oI the reIerence spacetime. For the probability density it is valid that
1 dr ) t , r ( P
3
=

. Thus we will have that:

) t , r ( P

=
3
0
3
dr ) t , r ( sr
V
1
dr sr and ) t , r ( P V sr ) t , r ( sr
0
= (19)
In order Ior principle II to be valid, the spacetime Iunction that describes the spacetime magnitudes
oI a particle Iield must be identical with the 1 wave Iunction oI the particle Iield.
Thus we must have:
=
tr
c ) t , r ( r (20)
where ) t , r ( r the complex relative time and
tr
c a quantity which can be calculated. Eqn (19) is
compatible with principle III on condition that
=

) t , r ( P . (21)
In Iact in that case because oI eqn(19) and principle III it is valid:
2
0 0 0
) t , r ( r TR V ) t , r ( P V TR ) t , r ( P V tr ) t , r ( tr = = = =

and =
2 / 1
0
) TR V ( ) t , r ( r (22)
According to the RQM in general we have:


) t , r ( P (23)
and thereIore it seems to be valid that:

2
) t , r ( r ) t , r ( tr (24)
However we may notice the Iollowing:
We write the Iunction 1 in the Iorm:
I R
+ =
where
I R
, are the real and the imaginary components oI 1. In the case in which the
imaginary axis is perpendicular to the real one we have that: = + =
2 / 1 2
I
2
R
2
) (
(25)
In the case in which the imaginary axis is not perpendicular to the real one we can have:
+ + = =
2 / 1
I R
2
I
2
R
2
) cos 2 ( ) t , r ( P (26)
and
2
) t , r ( r ) t , r ( tr =
where e the angle between the real and the imaginary axis. Of course, nothing compels us to
accept that the axis of an incomprehensible magnitude (imaginary axis) should be
perpendicular to the axis of the real magnitudes . On the contrary the physical sense of
various magnitudes gives sense to the complex representation. Thus we can state that the
spacetime wave Iunction oI a particle Iield, expressed in coordinate system oI a Euclidean space, is
identical with the particle wave Iunction and it is valid that
2
) t , r ( P = ; that eqn implies that the
complex representation oI the o Iunction is a variable complex representation in which the angle
is a Iunction oI (r,t) deIined by that equation.
VI. QUANTIZATION OF SPACE
Because oI eqn(16) and according to principle III we have:
E
E
VR vr
0
E E
= = (27)
The magnitude
E 0
VR V equals the mean value oI the particle volume
E
VR Ior particle
energy state E. Thus because oI eqn(27) we have:
E
V E=
0
V
0
E
The only real Euclidean space is the one Ior which 0 E
0

ThereIore
E
V E =
0 0
0
V , 0
0
E
VEg
V . E lim c

= (28)
where
VEg
c constant Ior all states oI all gravitational particle Iields, since it reIers to a common
state. In practice
0
V ,
0
E can be Iinite. However, Ior an isolated particle Iield the spacetime oI
reIerence-since it is matter and not only a geometrical notion- must ensue Irom the Iield itselI ;that
is possible in the case in which its characteristics correspond to the mean values oI an energy state
oI the Iield. Thus iI the values
0
V ,
0
E are Iinite, they correspond to an energy state oI the Iield.
From eqn(28) we have:

E
c
V
VEg
E
= (29)
Eqn (29) expresses the quantization oI space provided that Ior distinguished values oI energy
,..., E , E
2 1
correspond distinguished values oI volume ,... V , V
2 E 1 E

For
2
) unit length ( I = and L equal to the wavelength oI a particle whose energy 0 E
0
,
according to the present hypothesis, the volume =1 V
0
is possible to represent the volume oI a
particle Iield which contains energy
0
E ; the latter, according to the QM, has the Iorm = h E
0
.
, 0 V , 0 E
0 0
and c since c is the only velocity in order Ior a particle to
be compatible, according to this hypothesis, with the zero energy spacetime oI reIerence
( TR
0
E
0
= = which holds on condition that c v = ). Thus we have :

0 0
0
V , 0
0
E
VEg
V . E lim c

= c h lim h
, 0
= =

(30) Thus for a
spacetime of reference with finite
0
E we have finite
0 0
E / hc V =
VII. GRAVITATION
According to principle III the energy oI a Iield which corresponds to a cube dxdydz oI the
spacetime oI reIerence, can be expressed both with quantum-statistical- and spacetime terms. Thus
we have:

3
0
dr ) t , r ( tr DE =
3
dr ) t , r ( P E
and ) t , r ( P
DE
E
) t , r ( tr
0
= (31)
Eqn(31) can be generalized Ior a many bodies system and in that case ) t , r ( P represents the matter
position probability density. In the case oI a particle Iield ) t , r ( P can result Irom the Shrodinger
|9|relativistic equation.
The energy
3
dr ) t , r ( P E corresponds to a mass
3
2
dr ) t , r ( P
c
E
dm = . In order Ior that mass to
move in a direction
i
x Irom the energy level
3
dr ) t , r ( P E to the energy level
3
i
i
dr ) dx
x
) t , r ( P
) t , r ( P ( E

+ a Iorce
xi
g dm dF = is needed so that
i
dx dF equals the diIIerence oI
the mentioned energy.
xi
g can be interpreted as the component, in the direction
i
x , oI the mean
value oI the gravitational acceleration oI the Iield. Thus in general we have:
) t , r ( P
) t , r ( P
c
) t , r ( g
2
=

) t , r ( tr
) t , r ( tr
c
2
= (32)
For a body -corresponding to a volume dydz ) x x (
1 2
in the spacetime oI reIerence-in a Iield
with matter position probability density ) t , r ( P which takes the existence oI the body into account,
on the direction x a Iorce
x
F acts so that :
dydz ) ) t , r ( tr ) t , r ( tr ( DE dydz ) ) t , r ( P ) t , r ( P ( E dxdydz
x
P
E F
1
x
2
x
0
1
x
2
x
2
x
1
x
x
= =

=

The same is valid Ior any other direction. Thus we can say that the space with greater tr attracts
the body more than the space with lower tr . Since space is matter we may assume that it can be
split ,with a result the lowering oI its relative time. II this takes place in the space under the body
so that

2
tr <
1
tr then we will have an upward movement oI the body .
VIII. VERIFICATION
1. The behaviour of the proton and of the electron.
From classical mechanics - through which the Bohr's second condition holds Ior the hydrogen
atom - we have:

r 2
e
E
2
=

= d )
r
1
r
1
(
2
e
r 2
dr e
E
2
r
2
2
= =

(33)
Where E is the absolute value oI the total electron energy at radius r.
From eqn (33) we may notice that the same energy E holds on condition that the space deIined by
r r = and r contains energy ; the latter is valid on the present hypothesis. Eqn (33) is also
valid Ior the permitted energy levels ,... E , E
2 1
|7|,|8|,|9|. The permitted values oI energy
,... E , E
2 1
are precise Ior the case oI a proton. The values oI r are not real because they correspond
to a space which is deIined without taking into account the deIormation oI space. To every
permitted value oI E corresponds a permitted mean value
E 0 E
VR V V = .
E
V behaves as
a volume which belongs to a space with constant relative volume or constant energy density; but we
can notice that the energy density
4 2
E
r 8 / e dV / dE = is not constant Ior various r. For this reason
in order to calculate
E
V as a Iunction oI r we must Iind a proper transIormation I(r) so that:
dr ) r ( I 4 V d
) r ( E
= and

= dr ) r ( I 4 V
) r ( E
(34)
where V
Er ()
contains energy E r (). For a space with constant energy density it is valid that:
) r ( E
) r ( E
V d
V
) r ( E
) r ( dE = (35)
Because oI eqns(33), (34), (35), we have:

=
dr ) r ( I
) r ( I
r
1
which leads to Kr 4 V
) r ( E
= and Kdr 4 V d
) r ( E
= (36)
For 1 r = , dr 4 dr 1 4 dV
2
= = . Thus Ior 1 r = , dV corresponds to a space which satisIies eqn
(36). ThereIore Ior 1 r =
) r ( E
V d dV = and k1 . Due to eqn (36), k has units oI
2
) Length ( .
II, according to eqn(33), to
in
r r = corresponds a discrete permitted value oI energy , then by
deIinition it is valid that
E )
in
r ( E
V V = and because oI (34), (36), we have:
) r r ( 4 V d V r 4
in out
out
r
in
r
E E in
= = =

(37)
where
out
r the external radius in order Ior (37) to hold.
Thus we have:
in out
r 2 r = (38)
Because oI eqns (33), (37) it is valid:
hc c 2 e 2
r 2
e
r 4 E V c
2
in
2
in E VE
= = = = = (39)
Eqn (39) can be compared with eqn (30) . II an electric Iield were regarded as gravitational then
we should have
VEg
c hc. However, we Iind that hc c
VE
= because we do not regard the electric
charge as a mass and thereIore we must use a coeIIicient Ior this constant iI it is to reIer to an
electric Iield .
For a proton eqn (39) verifies that the product E V
E
is constant for every energy state a
fact which is in agreement with eqn(28) and consequently with the present hypothesis.
For the case oI an electron and Ior energy level
2
0
c m E = we should expect that:
E V
E
hc mc r 2
2
out
= = and
out
2
out
2
r
e
r
c
mc =

=

(40)
In Iact eqn (40) is valid because oI the Coulomb potential oI an electron on its external radius
|7|,|9|. This means that an electron at the energy level
2
0
c m E = behaves as a quantum
spacetime energy level, a fact which also verifies the present hypothesis.
2. Black holes
The black holes are so small that Q phenomena cannot be ignored |4|. Thus a black hole should be
regarded as a particle Iield. According to the hypothesis oI the uniIied Iield a black hole is regarded
as a particle Iield which radiates when it expands. In Iact according to eqn(28) we have:
E / c V
VEg E
=
This eqn implies that when E decreases,
E
V increases, and radiation is emitted in order Ior the
energy balance to be kept. The concept that black holes expand is compatible with the expansion
oI the Universe. II we compare a gravitational particle Iield with the electrical Iield which has been
mentioned we notice that the product GMm corresponds to c e
2
= . For that reason, that product
should be constant Ior any pair M,m oI any black hole. In the case that MmMp (Plank mass) we
have a black hole Ior which is valid that :

G
c
M
2
P

= |13| (41)
and thereIore c GM GmM
2
P
= = (42)
Replacing the Iactor
2
e by GMm in eqn(39) we have that Ior a gravitational Iield it is valid:

VEg
c hc GMm 2 E V
E
= = (43)
Eqn (43) verifies eqn(30) completely and consequently the present hypothesis.
According to eqn(37) we have:

in E
r 4 V = (44)
For
2
mc E = because oI (43) we have: GMm 2 hc mc r 4
2
in
= =
and
in
2
r 2
GM
c = (45)
Thus because oI eqns (43),(45) we have:

GM
c
r 4
hc
E
3
in

= (46)
The quantizized area oI energy E can be regarded as a radiating area due to the expansion oI the
black hole and corresponds to what is considered as the horizon oI the black hole. Thus we can
write: E k T , and because oI eqn (46) we have:

kGM
c
T
3

= (47)
where k is the Boltzmann constant. The temperature T, which has been calculated by Hawking, is:

kGM
c
8
1
kGM 8
c
T
3 3

= (48)
As we can notice, eqn(47), which is derived from the hypothesis of the unified field, and
Hawking's eqn(48), almost coincide. OI course it is important to investigate whether or not the
Iactor 8 / 1 exists. Eqn(48) is derived by the aid oI the GRT and the QM when those are used
separately and not as a uniIied whole. It must be noted that Hawking's radiation is accepted as
existing (e.g radiation coming Irom Cygnus X-1) but eqn(48) has not been experimentally
veriIied|3|,|13|.
According to eqn(32) Ior a constant in time symmetric spherical particle Iield we have:
r
) r ( P
) r ( P
c
g
2

and
E E
V d / ) V d ( P ) E ( P ) r ( P = where ) E ( P is the probability
that the Iield has energy E, ) V d ( P
E
is the probability that the particle exists in the area oI
volume
E
V d on condition that its energy is E, and ) r ( P is the matter position probability
density in the area oI volume
E
V d . Thus because oI eqns (36),(45) we have:

2
Mc / E ) E ( P = ,
out out
E E
r 4
1
dr 4
1
r 2
dr 4
V d / ) V d ( P

= ,
2
out
Mc r 2
E
) r ( P

=
and Ior r r
out
= ,
r
) r ( P
) r ( P
c
g
2

out
2
r
c
=
2
out
r
GM
= which expresses a Newtonian law.
Thus eqn(32) is verified in the case of black holes, a fact which verifies the present hypothesis.
However a black hole is regarded approximately as a point mass; thereIore eqn(32) is compatible
with the gravitational law oI any system which is simulated by point masses i.e. with Newton's law
in general. It must be noted that eqn(32) expresses the acceleration oI gravity with respect to a
coordinate system oI a Euclidean space; thereIore r
out
does not represents a real distance.
3. The "Locally Dominant Field"
According to P. Beckmann |14|, the speed oI light is not constant with respect to the observer,
but rather, with respect to the locally dominant Iield, a Iact which contradicts the SRT. It must be
noted that the SRT has recently been experimentally reIuted |15|,|16| . On this hypothesis every
space and therefore every "locally dominant field" is matter i.e. a kind of "ether" the
existence of which is incompatible with the SRT.
IX. DISCUSSION
1. With the present hypothesis the interpretation oI the duality oI matter is Iacilitated
As has been mentioned E / c Vreal
VEg
E
= . Thus Ior large values oI E we have small values oI
the real volume oI the particle Iield and vice versa; a particle Iield can have a large real volume, i.e.
it may be extensive, which corresponds to the concept oI a wave, or a small real volume, i.e., it may
be limited, which corresponds to the idea oI a particle. Thus the duality of matter does not
constitute a view that admits solely of a statistical interpretation 7], 9]. According to this
hypothesis there is indeed something that is vibrating and this is the quantum spacetime.
2. According to the shrondinger relativistic equation Ior an eigenvalue E we have that:
= +
2 4 2 2 2 2
E c m c . For A E
2
= > 0 we have
2 / 1
A E = and, because oI eqn
(30),
2 / 1
E
A / hc V = .The negative values oI
E
V can be regarded as corresponding to
antimatter. For B E
2
= < 0 we have
2 / 1
iB E = and
2 / 1
E
B / ihc V = . This case has sense
when it reIers to the charge space whose dimensions, and thereIore its volume, are
incomprehensible.
3. A question arises as to the meaning oI the phrase "space contains energy". A Iirst answer could
relate to the spacetime compatibility. The motion -including acceleration - oI a spacetime with
respect to an other implies the existence oI a relative time; conversely the existence oI a relative
time oI one spacetime with respect to another should imply a motion in order Ior those spacetimes
to be compatible. II we regard an atom as a spacetime system then the splitting oI the atom
corresponds to an abrupt exposition oI the split parts to the surrounding space i.e. to the abrupt
appearance oI a high relative time which creates all spacetime compatible kinds oI motion, such as
radiation and/or particle emission.
4. II this hypothesis is valid then a wider, philosophical, view oI spacetime is needed Ior its better
understanding. That could possibly have even a practical signiIicance.
X. CONCLUSIONS
From this paper the Iollowing conclusions can be drawn:
1. The main consequences oI the present hypothesis - which can be regarded as principles oI the
uniIied Iield as long as the hypothesis is valid - are:
Principle I. In the whole extent of a particle field there does not exist any privileged area, and
any spacetime of it contains energy due to the spacetime itself, which is matter.
Principle I. In the whole extent of a particle field there does not exist any privileged area, and
any spacetime of it contains energy due to the spacetime itself, which is matter.
Principle II. A particle field can be described through a spacetime wave function which is
identical with the particle wave function of the field.
Principle III. Any physical magnitude can be expressed, in a coordinate system of a
Euclidean space, both as a spacetime magnitude and as a quantum magnitude.
Principle IV. In the whole extent of a particle field are valid only those consequences of the
GRT which are compatible with principles I,II,III.
2. In a particle Iield, relative time ,relative volume and the square oI the relative length (in a
direction n

with respect to the spacetime oI reIerence with energy

2
0 0
c m E = ) have operators:
t E
i
TR
0

, VR

t /
1 iE
0

=

and
2 2
2
n
2
2 2
n
t /
x /
c 1 ) LR (


=

respectively.
3. a. The complex relative time is:
=
2 / 1
0
) TR V ( ) t , r ( r
b. It is valid that: ) t , r ( P
DE
E
TR V ) t , r ( r ) t , r ( tr
0
2
0
2
= = = .
c.
2
) t , r ( P = on condition that the complex representation oI is a variable complex
representation in which the angle between the real and the imaginary axis is a
Iunction oI (r,t) deIined by that equation.
4. The acceleration oI gravity in a matter spacetime system is:
) t , r ( tr
) t , r ( tr
c
) t , r ( P
) t , r ( P
c
) t , r ( g
2 2
= =

where ) t , r ( P is the matter position probability density oI the system.

5. The product oI an energy eigenvalue oI gravitational particle Iield by the mean value oI the
volume which contains this energy, measured in the image oI the Iield, is the constant hc c
VEg
= .
This is veriIied in the case oI the energy levels oI a proton, in the case oI the rest energy oI an
electron, and in the case oI black holes when the latter are viewed as particle Iields.
6. Hawking's radiation can be interpreted as result oI the black holes' expansion when the latter are
viewed as particle Iields.
7. Any space is matter i.e. a kind oI "ether" which is incompatible with the SRT; the latter has
recently been experimentally reIuted.
XI. KEY TO SYMBOLS
u Fine structure constant 1/137
c Speed oI light
VEg
c Particle constant
0
DE Energy density oI the space time oI reIerence
e Electron charge
E Energy
g

Acceleration oI gravity
0
E Energy level oI spacetime oI reIerence
h Plank's constant
h/2a
m Mass
LR Quantum- statistical- relative length
n
P Particle momentum in a direction n

P(r,t) Position probability density

) r ( P
E
Position probability density Ior energy state E
r Position
t Time in the spacetime oI reIerence
tr Relative time
TR Quantum -statistical-relative time
t Time interval
r Complex relative time
v Speed
V Volume
r
v Relative volume
Vr Quantum - statistical-relative volume
Wave Iunction
O Spacetime
Space mean value
Subscripts:
0
Space time oI reIerence
Superscripts:
Local mean value
` Operator
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author wishes to thank ProI. K. Manolikas, Dr. G. Mitsioulis, Dr. X. Spiliotis and Mr. Y.
Leloudas Ior their useIul discussions.
REFERENCES
|1| A. Einstein, L. InIeld. The Evolution oI Physics. Greek translation ed. Dodoni.
|2| P. Frank 1958, Einstein. BiograIy. Greek translation ed. kipseli.
|3| S. W. Hawking 1988. A BrieI History oI Time - Irom the Big Bang to Black
Holes. Bantam Books.
|4| S.Hawking . 1976. Breakdown oI predictability in gravitational collapse. Physical
Review D14,2460
|5| R. Feynman.1985. QED. Princeton University Press.
|6| J.V.Narlikar, and T. Padmanabham, 1986. Gravity, gauge theories and quantum
cosmology. Reidel, Dortrecht
|7| S. Trahanas,1991 . Quantum Mechanics I. Publ. Univ. oI Creta, Creece.
|8| S. Trahanas,1990 . Relativistic Quantum Mechanics I. Publ. Univ. oI Creta, Creece.
|9| L.I.ShiII,1968. Quantum mechanics. McGraw Hill, N.Y.
|10| R. Adler, M. Bazin and M. shiIIer, 1965. Introduction to General Relativity.
McGraw Hill N.Y.
|11| W. T. Grandy, 1970. Introduction to Electrodynamics and Radiation. Academic
Press N.Y.
|12| J.D. Bjorken and S.D. Drell, 1964. Relativistic Quantum Mechanics, McGraw
Hill, N.Y.
|13| Kenyon I.,1990. General Relativity. OxIord University Press.
|14| P. Beckmann, 1987. Einstein plus two. The Golem Press, Boulder Colorado.
|15| H.C.Hayden, 1993. Stellar Aberration. Galilean Electrodynamics. Vol.4, no.5.
|16| S.A.Tolchenikova-Murri,1993.The Doppler Observations oI Venus Contradict
the SRT. Galilean Electrodynamics. Vol.4, no1.