1
A simple Gravitational toy-model (GTM)
mainly based on a new reinterpretation of the
Newtonian/ universal gravitational constant
(big G) which solves from “one-shot” the
cosmological constant problem, the hierarchy
problem, the dark energy problem and the
singularity problem (the GTMb variant of
GTM in brief)
* vg is considered to be approximately equal to (but lower than!) the
DOI: no DOI yet due to an RG platform temporary error
Article version: 1.0 (19.12.2019) (no matter this current paper
version, its latest variant can be always downloaded from this
URL; version 1.0 released on 19.12.2019)
* However (and different than by EGR), Stat1b emphasizes the co-
Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi1,2
(independent researcher)
* inertial reference-frames, for example: for a reference-frame that
For motivation of this Wikipedia-based paper format see URL
* with speed vx , the emitted GW will have a resultant (r) speed
0. Abstract (with main abbreviations used in
this paper)
This paper proposes a simple Gravitational toy-model (GTM)
mainly based on a new reinterpretation of the Newtonian/ universal
gravitational constant (aka “big G”) from the speed of gravity
(which is stated to be slightly variable but very close to the speed of
light in vacuum [c]), to which big G is directly proportional) and a
very high energetic vacuum density (to which G is inversely-
proportional). GTM inversely deduces c, big G and Planck constant
(h) from: (1) a finite tension of our 4D spacetime (4DST) fabric
(stated to be a sponge-like entity composed from intertwined
“rubber”-like micro-tubes [mt]); (2) a finite mt linear density and a
finite an non-infinitesimal diameter of any mt. GTM proposes
natural solutions to the cosmological constant problem (aka “the
vacuum energy density paradox”), the hierarchy problem, the dark
energy problem and the singularity problem: that is why GTM is
meant to be a "patch" for both Einstein's General relativity (EGR)
and quantum gravity theory (QGT). This paper continues (from
alternative angles of view!) the work of other past articles/preprints
of the same author [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15,
16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21]
***
1. The main statements/assumptions and
hypotheses of this simple Gravitational toy
model (GTM)
Statement no. 1a (Stat1a) of GTM. GTM assumes Einstein’s dimensional analysis (as previously rewritten), that big G may be in
General relativity (EGR) so that gravity is regarded by GTM as the fact a function of:
effect of the 4D spacetime (4DST) curvature generated by any
physical particle (PP) (or group of PPs) with non-zero rest
mass(es)/energy(ies) (nzrm) (nzrmPP/nzrmPPs): additionally
(and similarly to EGR), GTM considers that the ST curvature
generated by any nzrmPP is actually produced and maintained by
[1] Email: dr.dragoi@yahoo.com
[2] Main pages: dragoii.com (CV: cvrg.dragoii.com); rg.dragoii.com;
academia.dragoii.com; vixra.dragoii.com; gsj.dragoii.com
the constant emission of gravitational waves (GWs) by that emitter-
nzrmPP (which naturally and constantly moves by translation
and/or rotation and/ora vibration), NO MATTER IF GWs are
further decomposable into hypothetical (elementary) gravitons or
not.
*
Statement no. 1b (Stat1b) of GTM. No matter if
decomposable into gravitons or not, the emitted GWs (radiated by
any emitter nzrmPP) are assumed to have a finite non-zero speed of
propagation in our 3D space (aka the speed of gravity [ v g ]) AND
speed of light in vacuum (c), so that

( )
vg  c  2.99 108 m / s . Important co-statement (1).
statement that v g is frame-dependent and NOT the same in all
emits a GW towards an observer O while moving away from that O
vr = vg − vx when measured by O. Important co-statement
(2). Stat1b also emphasizes that v g of any chosen GW is
influenced by the average energetic density of the vacuum that
vibrates/oscillates (when that chosen GW passes through it) and it
may become very close but NEVER strictly equal to
( )
c  2.99 108 m / s . Important co-statement (3). Stat1b also
emphasizes that our 3D space (3DS) and the EGR-stated 4D
spacetime (4DST) both have a finite elasticity (associated with a
large-but-finite “force of tension”) and that is why propagation
velocities of waves (including GWs or photons) in vacuum c and
 
vg   c  cannot be other but finite.
 
Important note on Stat1a and Stat1b. Stat1a and Stat1b both
compose Stat1: as anyone can observe, the content of Stat1 is also
widely accepted by the mainstream, so that GTM is partially based
on the mainstream modern physics.
*
Observation no. 1 (Obs1) of GTM. The big G scalar
G  6.674 10−11 m3kg −1s −2 has a combination of measure-
(m / s) 2
−1 −2
units m kg
3
s = which suggests, by using simple
kg / m
(1) a squared universal constant (or approximately constant)
speed (UCS) AND
(2) a finite non-zero massic linear density.
**
Statement no. 2 (Stat2) of GTM. Based on Obs1, this paper

(
identifies UCS with vg  c  2.99  10 m / s , thus big G is
8
)
 2

redefined by Stat2a as a function (f) of vg  2.99  10 m / s

8

Fg ( x ) =
( vg1 / d − H0 )( vg 2 / d − H0 ) m m
1 2 : because
G
( ) = f ( c )
redef .
such as: G = G f = f vg 2 2
and

estim.
v g1  v g 2 (and formally equal to a generic geometric
G / c = G
2 −1
, implying G = c / G  10
2 27
( kg / m ) . 
Prediction no.”0” (Pred0) (named as such because of its mean/average vg = vg1  vg 2  c ), Gx may be further
importance), which offers the Explanation no. “0a” (Expln0a)
( vg − H 0 d ) ( c − H 0 d )
2 2
of GTM on the accelerated expansion of our observable
universe (OU) and the dark energy problem. Based on Stat1 and
simplified as Gx (d )   so that
Stat2, GTM predicts that two POs (with non-zero rest masses m1 G G
and m2 respectively) which depart from one another with a
Fg ( x ) may be ALSO further simplified to
relative speed vx  vg (1,2) will attract each other in a specific

( vg − H 0 d ) ( vg / d − H 0 )
2 2
instant (at which they find at distance d from one another) with a m1m2
Fg ( x )   m1m2 or
m1m2 G d2 G
slightly weaker gravitational force Fg ( x ) = Gx , with
d2
(c / d − H0 )
2

Gx =
( vg1 − vx )( vg 2 − vx ) (  G ) even to Fg ( x ) 
G
m1m2 .
: (Expln0a) this fact
G
 ( c − H d )2 
Graph. The variation of Gx ( d )    can be
elegantly explains the accelerated expansion of our observable 0
universe (OU) (AE-OU) (and thus the dark energy problem) by the   
fact that any two POs which depart from each other with a relative  G 
speed vx  vg (1,2) will attract each other more and more graphed for a large spectrum of macroscopic distances
d  1m, DOU  up to the (diametric) distance DOU = 2 ROU
weakly, because gravity weakens when vx increases which creates
between two POs that are located at the margins of our OU (with
an accelerational effect so that vx will increase with inter-distance
radius ROU  10 m ) and diametrically opposed (see next
26
d (in each moment) such as vx  d and
image/graph/figure).
Fg ( x )  Gx  1/ vx  1/ d : in the same time, POs which have
the “luck” to be much closer to each other than d will tend to get 40
closer to each other (and “agglutinate” into solar systems, galaxies,
etc) due to this distance-dependent gravitational gradient defined by
Gx  1/ d . At cosmic scales, the vx  d proportionality is 30

actually defined by the Hubble constant

G_x( d)
H 0  69.8(km / s ) / Mpc [URL2] such as vx = H 0 d , so G
20

that Gx can be rewritten as

( )( )
10
v g1 − H 0 d v g 2 − H 0 d
Gx ( d ) = and Fg ( x ) can be
G 0
26 26 26 26
210 410 610 810
ALSO rewritten as

( vg1 − H0d )( vg 2 − H 0d ) m1m2

d

Figure 1. The variation of the ratio Gx ( d ) / G for

Fg ( x ) = which gets
G d 2
d  1m, DOU  .
simplified as **
 3
Statement no. 3b (Stat3b) of GTM – the 2nd (“b”)
ratio with  mt such as Tmt / mt  vg ): the redefined big G
interpretation of G . Definition. One may easily observe that
is also modeled as an mt-assigned big G
 estim. 
G  = c 2 / G  1027 ( kg / m )  has the dimensions of a def .
  Gmt = vg 2 /  mt = Tmt /  mt 2 (  G ) ; at least on other author
linear density of a string (that may even be stretched/vibrate): GTM
defines/interprets/models/describes this tensioned “string” as a 4D has considered the possibility FPl = T4 DST ( pres ) [URL1a,
cylindrical “micro-tube” [URL1, URL2, URL3] (mt[s]) of our
4DST fabric (which 4DST is modeled by GTM as a conglomerate URL1b, URL1c]; in other words, GTM considers that c, vg and
mt and  mt ; the
composed from a huge number of intertwined micro-tubes (mts) big G are actually indirect measures of T
def .
mt = G   1027 ( kg / m ) 
relatively small value of big G is thus NOT incompatible but, at
with mt density : the only contrary, highly “compatible” with a universe possessing a very
large energetic density at quantum and subquantum scales. “Add-
solution to avoid the infinite density paradox of mts (by avoiding
on”. Stat3b additionally launches the hypothesis that even the
the physical ambiguity-derived paradox of defining the density of a
Planck constant h (and the quantized character of
string/mt with zero or infinitesimal thickness: see also singularity
light/photons/electromagnetic field [EMF]) may be actually
problem/paradox) is for GTM to co-state that all mts actually have
determined by a plausible quantization of our 4DST (as composed
very small but finite and non-infinitesimal constant
from 4D mts) such as:
thickness/diameter in our observable 3D space (3DS) (no matter if

( )
finite [BUT not infinitesimal!] or infinite in length) which is redef .
estimated to be equal to the Planck length so that hmt = Tmt  mt  4 2mt 4 (  h ) . Interestingly, this
estim.
mt = lPl  G / c3  1.62 10−35 m  . Stat3b. Based on (redefined) hmt doesn’t depend on the (possibly infinite) length of
  an mt, BUT only depends on its thickness^4, which suggests that
these previous definitions, GTM states that the finite maximum mt are probably “granular” consisting of small units which are
speed v ( max )
allowed in our OU (for any wave to travel on any called “space-voxels” (SVs) in GTM, with a hypersphere-like or a
mt of our 4DST, a maximum speed to which BOTH c and v g are torus-like SV having a 4D (hyper)volume VSV = 4 mt
2 4
so

approximately equal) IS actually determined/caused by an average redef . def .

fundamental tension of any mt of our 4DST (from this present that hmt = hSV = Tmt   mt  VSV (  h ) .
epoch of our OU) analogously to Vincenzo Galilei’s classical
*
formula (defining the [maximum] velocity vmax[ m / s ] = T /  Important explanation no.”0b” (Expln0b) (named as such
because of its important advantage of GTM) on the equivalence
of propagation of a wave in a string with linear density [ kg / m] between the gravitational mass and the inertial mass of any
observed physical object (PO). GTM explains (and co-predicts!)
and tensioned by a force of tension T[ Newtons ] , with this Galilei’s gravitational mass to be exactly equal to the inertial mass (the
formula being valid only for those vibrations of small amplitude as equivalence principle [EP] of EGR) because any PO of our OU is
both GWs and photons are) such as actually composed from a relatively fixed number of SVs (when
observed/measured in a very narrow time interval) which
 redef . subcomponent SVs react the same (and remain grouped in that PO)
vg  c = vmax = Tmt /  mt : GTM inversely estimates the when they are exposed to both a gravitational field (GF) or a non-
gravitational field (nGF) which accelerates that PO: EP is stated
average tension Tmt (from all mts of our OU) such as
by GTM to be actually an indirect subtle proof of the quantization
estim. of our 4DST (similarly to the Planck constant h being also
Tmt = c 2 G = c 4 / G  1.211044 N (with Tmt being considered by GTM a proof of 4DST quantization).
**
actually equal to the so-called Planck force Observation no. 2 (Obs2) of GTM on a strong link between
FPl = mPl c / t Pl = c 4 / G  1.211044 N ) and interprets Einstein’s General Relativity (EGR) and quantum
chromodynamics (QCD) [1 above]. It is well
Tmt as being the present average “inner” tension of our 4DST known/demonstrated that ~99% of a nucleon (proton [p] or neutron
which is actually a huge tension which makes our 4DST quite [n]) rest mass m
“rigid” (with very low elasticity in the present epoch of our
( )
p / n (which m p / n is actually the inertial mass
observable universe [OU]). Note. Stat3b is close to EGR in the of a nucleon measured by an observer which is “at rest” in respect
sense that it is quite intuitive for big G to depend direct- to that nucleon) IS IN FACT produced by BOTH, primarily, the
proportionally with the speed of gravity v g ( ) kinetic energy of their subcomponent gluons (the quanta of the
and inverse- strong nuclear field [SNF], which gluons bind “nucleonic” up and
proportionally with the rigidness of vacuum (measured by the huge- down quarks together, by the so called quantum chromodynamics
but-finite Planck-“tension” of mts-based sponge-like 4DST vacuum binding energy which is actually the SNF energy) and, secondarily,
the kinetic energy of quarks: tertiarly, only the rest of ~1% of
Tmt  = FPl  which further determines vg by its relatively fixed
 4

m p /n is due to the rest masses of all its subcomponent quarks, asymmetric “jigsaw”-like GWs(1,2) produce a resultant attractive
gravitational field (GF). In other words, the gravitational
HOWEVER all ( 99% + 1% ) m p / n couples gravitationally attraction is stated to be indissolubly related to a concomitant
repulsive antigravity field (AGF) and what we normally measure is
[URL2]
(because the gravitational mass and inertial mass of a nucleon the slight positive difference between GF and AGF (which
were experimentally proved to be equal, at least in the error limit of repulsive AGF is slightly surpassed by the concomitant attractive
the experiments) SO THAT it is almost obvious that the movement GF): the attractive GF is thus explained as a resultant of the
of both gluons and quarks actually produces a large set of GF>AGF strength difference, also explained by the asymmetry of
constantly emitted GWs (by that “stressed” local ST) which GWs the emitted GWs(1,2) (with “ups” lower and shorter than their
further generate a spacetime (ST) micro-deformation (micro- “downs”).
curvature [micro-C/micro-STC] definable by a set of geodesics) *
AND it is that micro-STC which generates (micro-)gravity which Prediction no.2a (Pred2a) of GTM, as based on Obs2 of
SHOULD NOT be treated as a real force, but only the consequence GTM. GTM predicts that an (artificially) induced general quantum
of STC, as it is treated by the successful Einstein’s General entanglement (of all real quarks of all nucleons forming a chosen
Relativity (EGR): in other words, EGR and quantum composite/non-elementary PO1) may induce a resultant GW1 with
chromodynamics (QCD) (the quark-gluon model of hadrons) are much higher amplitude (than the natural emitted by that same PO1
compatible and EGR somehow anticipated QCD by also predicting alternatively composed from non-entangled quarks) and thus may
STCs not only at large macrocosmic scales (macro-STCs), but also slightly decrease the value of  mt in all SVs (composing the
micro-STCs at microcosmic scales. In the case of Newtonian
surrounding space of that emitter-PO) producing a secondary
mm
gravitational force Fg = G 1 2 2 for example, although both
increase of the numerical value of the redefined big G
r  def . 
Gmt  = G f = vg 2 /  mt  (which implies a PO-generated
m1 and m2 are considered point-like (in respect to the distance r  
between those two masses), each mass ( m1, m2 ) is approximately gravitational field [GF] with slightly higher strength): this higher-

( )
amplitude resultant GW1 (generated and emitted by PO1) may
the sum  m p/n of all its subcomponent nucleons, because the created an attractive “pit/basin” between PO1 and any other PO2
(located at a straight linear distance d in respect to PO1).
electrons (with rest mass me  m p /n / 1837 ) have a very small *
contribution (<1/1000) of the total rest energy (implicitly mass) of Prediction no.2b (Pred2b) of GTM, as also based on Obs2 of
atoms (with nucleons at rest): it is also clear that any macro-STC GTM. In contrast, GTM predicts that a chosen extremely cooled
generated by a macrocosmic mass may be modeled as the resultant PO1 (composed from extremely cooled atoms and quarks
of all micro-STCs generated by all micro-GWs emitted by each implicitly) may generate a resultant GW with significantly lower
nucleon (subcomponent of that mass) in part: all these micro-GWs amplitude (than the natural resultant GW emitted by that same PO1
at room temperature for example): a low-amplitude resultant GW1
are emitted by PO1 (with mass m1 ) simultaneously in all 3
may imply a slightly relatively higher  mt (when compared to the
directions of our 3D space so that they dissipate on a 3D spherical
surface with progressively growing area of emission (em) normal resultant GW1 emitted by that same PO1 from a non-
entangled and non-cooled state).
Aem = 4 r 2 until reaching a target PO2 (with mass m2 and ***
Explanation no.3 (Expln3) of GTM on the apparently
located at distance r of PO1), explaining the inverse square law
paradoxal divergence of the experimental values of big G.
(ISL) of gravity in a flat 3D Euclidean space, such as
Based on Stat1, Stat2 and Stat3b, GTM also proposes an alternative
m1m2 m1m2 m1m2 plausible explanation to the apparent paradox of the
Fg = 4 G = 4 G = G . Important divergent variation of experimental G values, „despite” constant
Aem 4 r 2 r2 improvements in the measurement systems: the redefined
 def . 
composing the Gmt  = G f = vg /  mt 
2
note. Actually, the ratios m1 / r and m2 / r varies direct-proportionally (and
 
Fg scalar have also the significance of massic linear densities
exponentially!) with the square of v g and inverse-proportionally
which determine the amplitude of GWs1 and GWs2 respectively
(and thus the amplitude of 4DST curvature and magnitude of with  mt AND both v g and  mt may slightly vary when any
Fg implicitly). experiment (of determining big G) takes place on Earth, while
Earth moves through various regions of our 4DST (by moving
*
around its axis, around the Sun WHILE simultaneous movement of
Explanation no.2 (Expln2) of GTM. GTM explains the
gravitational attraction between any two distinct PO1 and PO2 by our solar system in our galaxy etc). More specifically, the distance
proposing a mechanism in which both GWs1 (emitted by PO1) and d between the two (experimentally) tested POs (with masses m1
GWs2 (emitted by PO2) have a relatively asymmetrical shape with and m respectively) is measured using photons at the speed of
shorter and/or lower “ups” BUT longer and/or deeper “downs” 2
which attract those PO1 and PO2 to each other (as mediated by the light c (by using laser-based measurements): that is why, in the
“downs” of those GWs1 and GWs2) MORE THAN rejecting those
same PO1 and PO2 (by the “ups” of those GWs1 and GWs2): these
 5

from inside our OU: in the meanwhile, Gmt ( pres ) will

vg 2 m1m2 vg 2 m1m2
Gmt -based scalar Fg =    (with significantly grow outside our OU so that GTMb predicts a future
mt d 2 mt ( ct )2 decelerated expansion of our universe, followed by a
deflation/contraction and then a Big Crunch (all being the “puzzle”
vg = vg1vg 2 being defined as a geometric mean) appears the parts of a global Big Bounce prediction). Important note. Pred4
has at least one point in common with Dirac’s large numbers
2 2 hypothesis (DLNH), as GTMb predicts (by Pred4) that physical
vg  vg 
ratio 2
=   which may plausibly alter the experimental constants are actually not constant and that their values actually
depend on the age of the Universe (GTMb thus sustains that Dirac
c  c  was right in at least one essential aspect: the variation of the
big G values up to deviations of ±(0.1%-0.2%) (as measured by universal constants!); however, Pred4 DOESN’T imply that
various highly-accurate experiments in the last decade). Some small
G  1/ tU (as DLNH predicts), BUT exactly the contrary, that
variations of  mt may also occur in some regions of our 3DS
“scanned” by Earth in its various movements (concomitant to the G  tU ; also, Pred4 DOESN’T imply that the mass of OU
big G determination experiments taking place on Earth).
( )
Prediction. The larger big G experimental values are predicted to M OU is proportional to the square of the universe's age tOU ( )
correspond to those experiments in which v g reaches its closest
( M OU  tOU , as DLNH predicts).
2
values to c. ***
**
Prediction no.4 (Pred4) of GTMb (concerning a Big Bounce
2. References
universe). Based on its specific redefinitions/interpretations (of (partially integrated as Wikipedia URLs in
Planck force FPl being the present finite tension of the mt-based the text)

4DST “fabric so that Tmt = FPl  1.2110

44
N ”, with present [1] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (July 2019). (SGUM - version 1.0 - 9.07.2019 -
10 pages) A "Simply…Gravitonic" Universe (toy-)Model (SGUM).
vg ( pres )  c pres = vmax( pres ) = Tmt ( pres ) /  mt ( pres ) and
Wiki-like Research Gate preprint. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28671.36003.
URL1a (Research Gate source), URL1b (Academia source), URL1c (Vixra

( )
source), URL1d (GSJournal source).
Gmt ( pres ) = vg ( pres ) 2 / mt ( pres ) = Tmt ( pres ) / mt ( pres ) 2
[2] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (October 2019). (MUM - short version 1.0 -
being all finite because of the finitude of the average Tmt ( pres ) ; 22.10.2019 - 4 A4 pages without references) A "Mirrored" Universe
(toy-)Model (MUM) based on a relative big G, a variable quantum big
[see also: URL1a, URL1b, URL1c]), GTMb predicts that: while ou G and a finite mass ambitus of our universe (short variant of the
OU/4DST dilates with time, the average mt tension Tmt of all mts original full preprint). Research Gate preprint with DOI:
(of our 4DST) will also progressively increase with the age/aging 10.13140/RG.2.2.11788.05763. URL1a (Research Gate main source),

of our OU ( tOU ) so that Tmt  tOU and

URL1b (Academia secondary source). URL1c (Vixra secondary source),
URL1d (GSJ secondary source), URL1e (dragoii.com latest variant
source).
Tmt ( future)  Tmt ( present ) , which also imply
[3] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (October 2019). (MUM – [long] version 1.0 -
vmax( future)  vmax( present ) , Gmt ( future)  Gmt ( present ) and 21.10.2019 - 7 A4 pages) A "Mirrored" Universe (toy-)Model (MUM)
based on a relative big G, a variable quantum big G and a finite mass
mt ( future)  mt ( present ) (a “rarefaction” of mts of our ambitus of our universe. Research Gate preprint with DOI:
10.13140/RG.2.2.35738.18885. URL1a (Research Gate main source),
4DST), meaning that both (
vmax  c  vg ) and URL1b (Academia secondary source). URL1c (Vixra secondary source),
URL1d (GSJ secondary source), URL1e (dragoii.com latest variant
(
Gmt ( pres ) = vg ( pres ) 2 / mt ( pres )  Tmt ( pres ) / mt ( pres ) 2
) source).

[4] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (August 2019). (DRH – v 1.0 - 28.08.2019 - 4

will grow, with Gmt ( pres ) growing much faster (exponentially
pages A4) A Dimensional Relativity Hypothesis (DRH), Research Gate
faster) than vg ( pres ) (because the concomitant increase of preprint with DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30254.87368. URL1a (Research
Gate main source), URL1b (Academia secondary source), URL1c (Vixra
vg ( pres ) plus decrease of mt ( pres ) ); because of an increasing of secondary source), URL1d (dragoii.com latest variant source), URL1e
(GSJ secondary source).
vmax( present ) outside/beyond the borders of our OU, the speed of
[5] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (August 2019). (ACUM - version 1.0 -
those galaxies (from beyond our OU) won’t surpass this increased
25.08.2019 - 7 pages) An elegant Adimensional Cyclic Universe (toy-)
vmax( present ) so that the galaxies from outside our OU won’t Model (ACUM) mainly based on the electrograviton hypothesis
decouple gravitationally and electromagnetically from the galaxies (EGH), the quantized gravitational waves hypothesis (QGW-Hyp) and
the dimensional relativity hypothesis (DRH). Research Gate preprint
 6

with DOI 10.13140/RG.2.2.13834.82881. URL1a (Research Gate main preprint. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13114.39365. URL (Research Gate
source), URL1b (Academia secondary source), URL1c (Vixra secondary source).
source), URL1d (dragoii.com latest variant source), URL1e (GSJ
secondary source). [14] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (May 2017). (version 1.1 – 12 pages –
5.06.2017) A preonic toy model of all known elementary particles
[6] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (June 2019). (LifeAsEmergent - version 1.0 - 6 based on 1D and 2D branes. Research Gate preprint. DOI:
pages - 20.06.2019) On the very low probability of complex life forms 10.13140/RG.2.2.26817.97123. URL.
to be just emergent phenomena and about the "continuous" versus
"intermittent" free will. Wiki-like Research Gate preprint. DOI: [15] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (May 2017). (version 2.3 – 12 pages –
10.13140/RG.2.2.22592.58887. URL1a (Research Gate source), URL1b 6.06.2017) A cyclic toy model of the universe based on a quantized
(Academia source), URL1c (Vixra source), URL1d (GSJournal source). spacetime predesigned for life (technical essay). Research Gate preprint
– Version: 2.3, In Progress. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22391.83369. URL
[7] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (April 2019). (LFs and gravity – working paper (Research Gate source).
– variant 1.0 – 7 pages – 13.04.2019) Life forms, “hybrid” causality,
gravity and hierarchical parallel universes. Research Gate preprint. [16] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (April 2017). (version 2.0 – 28 pages –
DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19089.28009. URLs: URL1a (Research Gate 9.05.2017) A cyclic toy model of the universe predesigned for life,
source), URL1b (Academia source), URL1c (Vixra source), URL1d based on preonic quantized branes and a very strong 2D gravitational
(GSJournal source). field as a candidate for a unified primordial field. Research Gate
preprint – Version: 2.0, In Progress. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.24084.30087.
[8] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (January 2019). (eSR – short version – 4 pages – URL (Research Gate source).
3.01.2018) An extended Special relativity (eSR) containing a set of
universal equivalence principles and predicting a quantized spacetime. [17] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (February 2017). (BIDUM 3.2 full – Part A –
Research Gate preprint. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29665.35686. URL 18 pages – last update on: 23.02.2017) A Bio-Info-Digital Universe (toy-
(Research Gate source). )Model – towards a transdisciplinary TOE centered on life
phenomenon – Part A. Research Gate preprint. DOI:
[9] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (December 2018). (eSR – version 1.0 – 6 pages 10.13140/RG.2.2.23869.26082. URL (Research Gate source)
– 20.12.2018) An extended Special relativity (eSR) containing a set of
universal equivalence principles and predicting a quantized spacetime. [18] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (February 2017). (BIDUM 3.2 full – Part B –
Research Gate preprint. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10208.53764. URL 20 pages – last update on: 23.02.2017) A Bio-Info-Digital Universe (toy-
(Research Gate source). )Model – towards a transdisciplinary TOE centered on life
phenomenon – Part B. Research Gate preprint . DOI:
[10] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (December 2018). (eZEH article-like preprint – 10.13140/RG.2.2.35013.65760/1. URL (Research Gate source).
version 1.0 – 8 pages -12.12.2018) An extended zero-energy hypothesis
predicting the existence of negative-energy gravitons and possibly [19] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (September 2016). (BIDUM 3.1 beta version –
explaining the accelerated expansion of our universe. Research Gate 24 pages – data) A toy model of the universe based on a large numbers
preprint. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36245.99044. URL (Research Gate hypothesis inspired by Edward Teller – towards a TOE centered on
source). life phenomenon. Research Gate preprint. DOI: (see other related DOIs
10.13140/RG.2.2.23869.26082 [URL2] and 10.13140/RG.2.2.35013.65760/1
[11] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (August 2018). (IP-GP – version 1.0 – 15 pages [URL2]). URL (Research Gate source).
– 14.08.2018) On the intrinsic paradox of the geometric point
definition (solved using the Included Middle Logic) as the main cause [20] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (May 2018). (DVTM – PSIJ – Short Research
of Euclid’s postulate “inaccuracy”, allowing the existence not only of Article – 30.05.2018 – 19 pages) (Toy-model) A Simple “Digital”
non-Euclidean geometries but also of a new “t-metamathematics” used Vacuum Composed of Space Voxels with Quantized Energetic States
to redefine the basics of General relativity, Quantum field theory, (Physical Science International Journal, ISSN: 2348-0130, Vol.: 18, Issue.:
Superstring theories and M-theory. Research Gate preprint. DOI: 1). DOI: 10.9734/PSIJ/2018/41391. URL0 (original source); URL1
10.13140/RG.2.2.32439.42405. URL (Research Gate source). (Research Gate source);

[12] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (August 2018). (eZEH – version 1.0 – 10 pages
– 2.08.2018) An extended zero-energy hypothesis: on some possible
quantum implications of a zero-energy universe, including the
existence of negative-energy spin-1 gravitons (as the main spacetime
“creators”) and a (macrocosmic) black-hole (bh) Casimir effect
(bhCE) which may explain the accelerated expansion of our universe.
Research Gate preprint. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31515.36642. URL
(Research Gate source).
[21] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (July 2017). (PSIJ – Short Research Article –
29.07.2017) On a Plausible Triple Electro-gravito-informational
Significance of the Fine Structure Constant (Physical Science
International Journal, ISSN: 2348-0130, Vol. 15, Issue 3). DOI:
10.9734/PSIJ/2017/34613 (URL-CrossRef.org). URL0 (original source);
URL1 (Research Gate source);

[13] Andrei-Lucian Drăgoi (September 2017). (FSC-TS – preprint –

version 7.2 – 28 pages – 15.09.2017) On a plausible triple electro-
gravito-informational significance of the fine structure constant and its
implications in a plausible four fields unification pattern at Planck
scale and the existence of life forms in our universe. Research Gate