International Journal of Physics

and Research (IJPR)

ISSN (P): 2250–0030; ISSN (E): 2319–4499
Vol. 11, Issue 1, Jun 2021, 21-34
© TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

GRAVITY AS SHOWN BY GLUONS: THE PROPOSED GRAVITY EQUATION

GEORGE F. HOUGHTON & ROBERT F. HOUGHTON

Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho, USA
ABSTRACT

Science has shown that there are many ideas about the concept of gravitational force. This paper presents a new formula
for the computation of gravitational force. Gravity is now described as the application of the gravitational time dilation
difference of every nucleon’s diameter times the strong force.

This paper presents the case for gluons as the quantum particle as the manifestation of gravity. In a pair of nu-
cleons or single nucleon, gluons form a strong force. Because of the time gradient, the gluon will travel further for the
portion of the nucleon further from the source of gravitational time dilation. More time for the gluon to travel implies
that the gluon needs to travel further.

This paper then compares the results of the proposed gravitational equation to classical calculations. Once the
results are compared, a further discussion occurs about the implementation of those results to other current series of
thoughts in physics.

Original Article
KEYWORDS: Gravity as Shown by Gluons & The Proposed Gravity Equation

Received: Feb 23, 2021; Accepted: May 13, 2021; Published: May 27, 2021; Paper Id.: IJPRJUN20213

INTRODUCTION

Sir Isaac Newton offered the world of science his calculation for gravity, and Newton’s formula has been used by
scientists for hundreds of years. Newton’s gravitational calculation is mass times mass over distance squared. The
result is then multiplied by a constant, which, in general terms, adjusts the units and the final calculation. Albert
Einstein offered a different perspective of gravity: curved space and gravitational time dilation. The authors of this
paper sought to create a formula for gravity that did not involve the use of a constant. This paper presents an alter-
native formula for gravity by combining Einstein’s concept of gravitational time dilation with the strong nuclear
force.

The quest to define gravity could be likened to the search for planets during the 19 th century. The discov-
ery of Uranus and Neptune was predicted based upon the observable discrepancies in the gravitational orbit of Sat-
urn and Uranus respectively. In gravity theory, we can observe the activity of gluons and see evidence of gravita-
tional time dilation (GTD) operating on a micro level. Thus, the force of gravity can be explained by the action of
GTD upon gluons.

This paper introduces the idea that gravity is simply an existing force stretched by more time. The direc-
tion and pull of a mass (M1) is always towards the other mass (M2) because of a time gradient. Mass 2 will always
be drawn to the slower time and pushed away from the faster time of M1.

This paper’s gravity equation is composed of the four parts that make up gravity and tie to Newton’s calcu-
lations. Both Newton and this paper reach the same conclusion for calculating gravity, but the two approaches are

www.tjprc.org editor@tjprc.org
22 George F. Houghton & Robert F. Houghton

from very different perspectives. The units come out equal to Newton’s gravity calculation without the need for a gravita-
tional constant.

The Search of and for Gravity

Gravity remains one of the unsolved mysteries of the universe [13]. A few ancients have been given credit for describing
gravity and falling objects [11]. But it was in 1687 that Sir Isaac Newton published a mathematical formula and described
the effects of gravity [9]. M1 x M2 over distance squared times Newton’s constant G revolutionized how scientists thought
about and calculated gravity. Then, in 1915, Albert Einstein described gravity as “space-time” [12]. Einstein stated that the
curvature of space caused the mass to orbit around other mass. He said that space itself was bent [3].

The Graviton

With the exception of gravity, there is a known elementary particle that mediates the natural forces: the photon for elec-
tromagnetism, the weak interaction by W and Z bozons, and the strong force by the gluon [6]. The knowledge that there is
a correlation between forces and particles has led to the search for the graviton [17]. The detection of gravitons poses
unique challenges to science, specifically, “the extraordinary weakness of the gravitational interaction makes the detection
of one gravitational quantum a remote proposition” [15].

Rothum and Boughn proposed a method for detecting gravitons. However, they realized that their theoretical pro-
posal would not realistically be possible. They reflected, “Throughout we have assumed an ideal detector, of 100-percent
efficiency, the mass of Jupiter. This is not reasonable” [15].

Dyson hypothesized the creation of a LIGO apparatus for the observation of gravitons. He, too, concluded that
construction of the device would not be feasible. He stated, “The separation between the two mirrors is less that the
Schwarzchild radius of each of them, the negative gravitational potential pulling them together is greater than Mc^2, and
they are bound to collapse into a black hole before the measurement can be completed” [5].

New Ideas about Gravity

While some scientists have searched for the graviton, other scientists have focused on producing new theories of gravity.

The traditional theories of gravity leave some unanswered questions. First, why do rotating galaxies seem to lack
the mass required to hold the speed of the outer circling stars? Centrifugal force indicated we were missing mass based on
Newton’s formula. Second, why are galaxies accelerating further into space after the Big Bang? Logically, distant galaxies
should be traveling at a steady pace or perhaps receding back toward us.

Clifton, et al., discuss these issues:

The limits of General Relativity have again come into focus with the emergence of the 'dark universe' scenario.
For almost thirty years there has existed evidence that, if gravity is governed by Einstein's field equations, there should be a
substantial amount of 'dark matter' in galaxies and clusters. More recently, 'dark energy' has also been found to be required
in order to explain the apparent accelerating expansion of the Universe. Indeed, if General Relativity is correct, it now
seems that around 96% of the Universe should be in the form of energy densities that do not interact electromagnetically.
Such an odd composition, favored at such high confidence, has led some to speculate on the possibility that General Rela-
tivity may not, in fact, be the correct theory of gravity to describe the Universe on the largest scales. The dark universe
maybe just another signal that we need to go beyond Einstein’s theory. [4]

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.8905 NAAS Rating: 4.00

Gravity as Shown by Gluons: The Proposed Gravity Equation 23

White states, “the classical theory of GR breaks down at extreme points in spacetime, such as at the center of a
black hole, or the big bang itself. In such places, the curvature of spacetime becomes infinite, which is not physically sen-
sible. It is thus widely thought that both the SM and GR are part of some larger theoretical framework, which may include
quantum effects for the gravitational force, in line with the other forces. One may attempt to turn GR into a quantum field
theory, such that gravity is carried by a graviton, analogous to the photon that carries the electromagnetic force in the SM”
[16].

Milgrom preferred to modify Newtonian physics rather than base his investigations on Einstein’s theories. He
said, “If a certain modified version of the Newtonian dynamics is used to describe the motion of bodies in a gravitational
field (of a galaxy, say), the observational results are reproduced with no need to assume hidden mass in appreciable quanti-
ties. Various characteristics of galaxies result with no further assumptions” [8].

Gravitational Time Dilation

With so many different approaches to the search for gravity, it is important to look back to the foundations of gravitational
theory. Albert Einstein gave us gravitational time dilation and the idea that time is not constant [3]. The study of gravita-
tional time dilation (GTD) can provide insight into how gravity works.

GTD is normally discussed in the context of large gravitational phenomena. However, GTD is everywhere. Bha-
wal states, “Time dilation is universal” [3]. "Gravitational time dilation occurs whenever there is a difference in the
strength of gravity, no matter how small that difference is” [18]. When discussing Gravitational Time Dilation, William
Astill wrote: “Whilst most objects that we encounter both in real life and the universe aren’t black holes the same principle
applies” [1].

Science does not normally look inward at GTD effects. Searches of scholar.google.com, JSTOR, ResearchGate,
and EBSCOhost using the following terms: “gravitational time dilation”, “observations of gravitational time dilation”;
“quantum systems gravitational time dilation”; and “classical transition gravitational time dilation” all demonstrate similar
results. Most of the top 10 search results were articles discussing GTD at macro levels, namely black holes and other large
gravitational objects. Very few results discussed GTD at the atomic, subatomic, or particle level. Maldacena said, “A
Quantum Theory of gravity is a holy grail for a certain breed of physicist because all physics except for gravity is well de-
scribed by quantum laws” [7].

The strong nuclear force occurs when the gluon pulls one nucleon towards the other nucleon [19]. If we apply
GTD to gluons, we can say that a gluon traveling in a faster time will travel further than an identical gluon traveling in a
slower time. To the gluon, it is all the same time. To the strong force, this means it is formed slightly more towards an M1.

Li and Pang query, “If a theory can flow to Einstein’s theory only when a cosmological constant is introduced,
how can one avoid this cosmological constant?” [20]. This paper seeks to answer that question by proposing a new expla-
nation for gravity that focuses upon known forces and particles and relates back to classical ideas.

The Proposed Equation

Gravitational time dilation is a concept and formula offered by Einstein and Schwarzschild. This paper will show that grav-
ity is the result of each individual strong force in M2 interacting with the time gradient of M1.

The distance describing the time gradient for a nucleon between a pair of nucleons:

www.tjprc.org editor@tjprc.org
24 George F. Houghton & Robert F. Houghton

Due to the time effect of one nucleon affecting the second nucleon (and vice versa), the time bandwidth generated
by M1 is approximately 2.36 times longer than the radius for each nucleon in M2.

The time gradient band passing through two nucleons is presented. Three concepts are applied. First, that every
nucleon in a pair of nucleons receives the benefit of its own time gradient plus the companion nucleon’s time gradient. This
is because the gluons in a faster time band of both nucleons (which inhabit a larger time band than a single nucleon) then
affect each of the two nucleons. Second, the two nucleons in M2 are rotating 360 degrees from M1. From a perspective
horizontal to M1, there is less time band exposure. From a perspective vertical to M1, there is more time band exposure.
Third, a sphere has exposure to an intersecting time gradient of 2.3% more than the radius. The combination of these three
concepts equals 2.36 times the radius of each nucleon as the exposure to the time band gradient (gravitational time dilation)
by every nucleon.

Details

The gluon path approximates a cylinder with rounded ends (Diagram 1).

Diagram 1

For every pair of nucleons (proton and neutron) within Mass 2, the dotted line represents one of the probable glu-
on paths. This dotted line shows the outline of the cylinder for calculating the time gradient influence on both nucleons.

The time gradient calculation of 2.36 times the nucleon radius for each nucleon in M2:

In a pair of nucleons, the gluons originate in one nucleon and travel into the other nucleon and back again. So, this
band of time gradient from M1 passes through both nucleons, and each nucleon’s time band affects the other nucleon. The
calculation for each nucleon’s time gradient for the exposure of the gluon path to the time gradient band horizontal to M1
is 3/2 r. “r” is the radius of the nucleon. This is 2r for the cylinder without the hemisphere ends, plus 1/2 r for each of the
two hemispheres (total of 3r), all divided by two because there are two nucleons on the horizon. One nucleon is not adding
to the time benefit of the other nucleon if they are horizontal and share the same time band. The exposure of the cylinder
shape to the time gradient band vertically to M1 is 3r. The time band passes through both nucleons, and the added time of
the farther nucleon affects the closer nucleon. So, the calculation is not divided by 2 when the nucleons are in the vertical
position. Only one nucleon is on the horizon band when two nucleons are vertically positioned. Thus, the average of this
gluon path in rotation is 2.25 radius. Each nucleon of a nucleon pair will have a gravitational time dilation distance of 2.25

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.8905 NAAS Rating: 4.00

Gravity as Shown by Gluons: The Proposed Gravity Equation 25

times the nucleon radius. We arrive at this number by adding 3/2 r and 3r, and dividing the sum by 2.

A second calculation is needed to account for the average time distance in a sphere:

Calculating the distance of the time gradient passing through a nucleon:

For a nucleon (either as a helium atom or unpaired proton in heavy elements or one nucleon of a pair of nucleons),
the time gradient bandwidth from M1 passing through that single nucleon of M2 has more interaction at the middle of the
nucleon than at the poles of the nucleon. This is because we assume the nucleon has a spherical shape. This time band
passing through the nucleons calculates to an average linear distance of the radius of a sphere plus 2.3%. This is the same
calculation as for the volume of a sphere vs. a cube. So, the average (linear) distance of the time gradient passing through a
sphere is the radius plus 2.3%.

This volume representing the time gradient is the difference between the volumes of a sphere and a cube. If a nu-
cleon were the shape of a cube, the time band gradient would pass through the cube equally (if the cube were positioned
horizontally to the band). In a cube, the time gradient band would be the length of the side of the cube. As the time gradient
decreases, the exposure of the cube is still equal over the length of the side. (Note the time band itself is a curve. But as M1
is a substantial distance from M2, the calculation can assume the curvature is immaterial.) This time band is not the same
length with a sphere as with a cube. The time band length would average the radius of the sphere plus 2.3% more. This
paper has used a sphere as the calculation of gravitational time dilation on two occasions – the ends of the cylinder and by
rotating the two nucleons.

Within a pair of nucleons, the time gradient value is 2.25 plus twice 2.3%. This is 2.36 times the radius. 2.36
times the radius becomes the net distance for the exposure of the time gradient for a nucleon in M2.

One nucleon pulling another is not going to move the nucleons towards M1. But with an outside source of energy,
both nucleons are able to move beyond the current space they occupy. The strong force is shown as a force generated from
gluons traveling through the nucleons. Now, adding a time gradient, there is an additional force (we call gravity) that
changes the symmetry of the strong force. Forces add. The original strong force is separate from the added time producing
a longer gluon distance. This added distance is the secondary force from the time gradient from M1. Now, with an outside
source of energy, the nucleons move toward M1.

METHODS

To compare this paper’s proposal to Newton, three distance calculations were made: the force of gravity on a deuterium
atom at Earth’s surface, at 40,000 km, and 100,000 km from Earth’s surface. The following method was applied to each
calculation:

 Calculate the effect of GTD (gravitational time delay) on the strong force at a specific distance from M 1 (Mass 1)

o Follow Schwarzschild GTD equation (1) at two separate distances

o The difference between them (slope) is the effect of the time delay

 Calculate the # of nucleons in M2

 Calculate the force of gravity using two governing equations (2, 3)

www.tjprc.org editor@tjprc.org
26 George F. Houghton & Robert F. Houghton

 Calculate the total # of forces (M1 and M2) which is equal to 2

Schwarzschild GTD Equation

*Note: GTD, as used here, is a fraction of time passed at one location compared to the reference location. For example, a
GTD of 0.99 would mean that Location 2 experienced 99% of the time experienced at Location 1.

The Proposed Gravity Equation (PGE)

2: The total number of unique masses applying a force within the sample

Newton’s Gravity Equation

Table 1: The PGE Calculations (Using Schwarzschild GTD method)

Variable/Constant Value [Units] Description
R1 6,378,000 meters Distance from surface of earth to the center
rnuc 1.2E-15 meters Radius of nucleon
Fs 25000 Newtons Strong force holding two nucleons together
NA 6.022E23 Atoms/mol Avogadro’s number

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.8905 NAAS Rating: 4.00

Gravity as Shown by Gluons: The Proposed Gravity Equation 27

Table 1: Contd,.
MW 2.014 g/mol Mass of deuterium nucleus
G 6.674E-11 Nm2/kg2 Newton’s gravitational constant
Me 5.97E24 kg Mass of earth
c 3E8 m/s Speed of light in space
sec/yr 31536000 seconds Seconds per year

 Calculate the Schwarzschild radius

 Calculate two different gravitational time delays. Take the difference between the two. Divide the difference over

the distance between them ( ). This slope is the effect of gravitational time delay on the nucleus.

*Note: the authors used 1-GTD instead of GTD to have fewer significant digits, which is one of the limiting factors of cal-
culations this small. The theory and result remain unchanged.

 Now use the calculated in the PGE equation to find the force of gravity

These calculations were repeated at the other two distances (40k and 100k km from the surface) with the follow-
ing changes:

Table 2
Variable At surface 40,000 km 100,000 km
R1 6.378E6 m 4.6378E7 m 1.064E8 m

Newton Calculations

Table 3
Variable/Constant Value [Units] Description
G 6.674x10^-11 Nm^2 / kg^2 Gravitational constant
M1 5.97E24 kg Mass of earth
M2 3.34E-27 kg Mass of deuterium atom (see note below)
r 6,378,000 m Distance from surface to center of earth
*Note: mass of deuterium was calculated as follows:

www.tjprc.org editor@tjprc.org
28 George F. Houghton & Robert F. Houghton

Units analysis:

 Use Newton’s equation to solve for force of gravity

Table 4
km from Earth’s Surface Newton [N] PGE [N]
0 3.3E-26 3.3E-26
40,000 6.2E-28 6.1E-28
100,000 1.2E-28 1.02E-28

Summary of Calculations and Results

The PGE predicts the force of gravity on a deuterium atom within 4% of Newton’s equation at three distances from the
surface of the earth. The results are shown below.

Table 5: Compared Force of Gravity Results

km from Earth’s Surface Newton [N] PGE [N]
0 3.3E-26 3.3E-26
40,000 6.2E-28 6.1E-28
100,000 1.2E-28 1.02E-28

Figure 1: A Comparison of Methods of Calculating the Force of Gravity

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.8905 NAAS Rating: 4.00

Gravity as Shown by Gluons: The Proposed Gravity Equation 29

Explanation about the Proposed Gravity Equation

The strong force exists when gluons travel through nucleons, and a time gradient is formed by all mass. Gravity is the re-
sult of the interaction of the time gradient across the strong force. The greater the delta of time, the greater the gravity.

Mass 1 is the carrier of the time dilation gradient going from a slower time at Mass 1 to a faster time in outer
space. Mass 2 is the carrier of the strong force. Gravity is not mass times mass depending on distance, but gravity is the
time gradient’s effect on the formation (the position) of the strong force. Gravitational time dilation at a distance from M1
accounts for the mass of M1 and the distance (squared). The nucleons of M2 account for the mass of M2. With PGE no
adjustments (constants) are needed.

The gluons are traveling through a time gradient. This time gradient is becoming slower as the gluon travels to-
ward M1. More time away from M1 offers more distance for the gluons to travel.

The time gradient is described as faster when there is a further distance from M1. This faster time can also be de-
scribed as “more time” to the outside observer. With more time, the gluon traveling through the nucleons and forming the
strong force away from M1 will travel farther. Thus, in a time gradient, the strong force forms slightly more towards M1.

Feynman states [10] that there is a bond between the two nucleons. He describes this as the exchange of particles
called Pions. This paper proposes that with more time, the gluons travel farther, shifting the Pions towards M1, shifting the
nucleons toward M1. Thus, M1 attracts M2 and vice versa. Forces add. The strong force is very large, and the gravitational
pull is very small – but always toward M1 and always an additional force.

A single nucleon, such as the proton from a hydrogen atom, is comprised of three subatomic particles held togeth-
er by the strong force. So, one nucleon has the strong force. The strong force also pulls two nucleons towards each other,
always in the direction of M1. That means each of the strong forces within M2 not only hold the nucleons together, but
also (because of the time gradient) offer a very small additional pull to the underlying nucleons in the direction of M1.

The Mechanics behind why one Mass Attracts another Mass

In a pair of nucleons, (a proton and neutron), half of each nucleon is always farther away from M1 than the closer
half of the nucleon. And depending on rotation of the pair, sometimes one whole nucleon will be in a faster time band than
the other nucleon. Thus, the gluons traveling from one nucleon into another will always travel from one time band into
another. Those gluons in M2 further from M1 have literally more time and travel further. This all happens in the time gra-
dient difference of approximately a little more than the nucleon’s diameter.

This paper states that there is a slight additional energy used by the gluon from faster time and supplied by an out-
side source. M1’s time gradient is the outside source.

It is the difference in time that causes this additional force we call gravity to pull each nucleon in M2 towards M1.

CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSIONS

The PGE can start to fill in our knowledge and thoughts about massive gravitational anomalies.

Dark Matter

Dark matter seems to be an unresolved problem for physicists. In comparison to the rate of rotation of stars on the outer
edge of galaxies, the suns are traveling too fast. There is not enough observable mass to account for the observable effects

www.tjprc.org editor@tjprc.org
30 George F. Houghton & Robert F. Houghton

of gravity. Given Newton’s classic gravitational formula, the amount of gravity (as mass) necessary to contain the distant
stars based on centrifugal force is too little. The extra mass needed is perhaps up to ten times more than the Hubble tele-
scope has observed. Other mathematical models compensate for this discrepancy by hypothesizing the existence of dark
matter. Another hypothesis is that our galaxy might have large dead stars that account for ten times the observable mass.
But it is unlikely we are missing large amounts of dark mass we cannot see because the light from stars does not appear to
be bending around multiple dark spots.

This paper offers a new approach. If gravity can be expressed as a time gradient across a nucleon, all we need is a
faster time to account for the missing mass. Scientists know the time difference, down to the picosecond, of an object pro-
jected from earth into space. Possibly in the vast outer reaches of distant space, time is faster than previously thought. A
clock inside a distant satellite would tell us if time is indeed faster. Thus, this paper would suggest it is possible that more
time, not more mass, accounts for dark matter.

Dark Energy

Scientists were hoping the Hubble telescope would answer another question: are the distant galaxies traveling
away at a constant rate of speed or receding back towards us due to gravity? It is logical to suppose that the distant galaxies
would be traveling away from us at a constant speed if the Big Bang had been a single event and was the only source of
acceleration of distant galaxies. Conversely, if gravity was pulling distant galaxies toward us, we would see a blue shift in
the light spectrum of those galaxies. Hubble’s data unexpectedly revealed a red shift, meaning that the galaxies are actually
accelerating away from us. One explanation from scientists is that there could be multiple universes, and those on the edge
of our universe are pulling the galaxies away at greater and greater speeds. Another thought is that there is a push from the
dark energy within our universe that is accelerating the galaxies outward.

This paper might offer another scientific conclusion to ponder. If there was a faster than expected time in outer
space, we would see a red frequency from distant galaxies because time in distant space is faster and stretched. The new
equation for gravity could imply that time is not constant or linear everywhere in the universe. Therefore, we could hy-
pothesize that the actual frequency after adjusting for faster time would be more in the blue range. This blue frequency
would be corrected with the Doppler calculation adjustment. If correct, there would be no need for dark energy. This con-
cept of time, suggested by the new equation, would allow us to interpret the red shift of distant galaxies as actually reced-
ing back toward us. Dark energy simply becomes moot due to the adjustment for the Doppler affect.

Black Holes

Scientists hypothesize that black holes contain huge amounts of mass. This hypothesis is based on the observation
that black holes exert an extremely strong gravitational pull. According to Newton’s mass times mass formula for gravity,
this gravitational pull justifies the idea of a great mass.

One theory is that, because of the large mass of a black hole, time stands still within the black hole. This paper
raises the possibility that time stands still within a black hole simply because time moves at different speeds at different
places in the universe, and the time difference between the center of the black hole and the surrounding space creates the
gravitational pull.

The gravity equation offered in this paper describes gravity as the time difference applied to a nucleon’s strong
force. Farther away from the black hole, time would speed up, causing a gravitational pull towards the black hole. This

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.8905 NAAS Rating: 4.00

Gravity as Shown by Gluons: The Proposed Gravity Equation 31

effect would result from the time gradient difference through the remaining time as time gets faster. The event horizon of a
black hole might actually indicate the first time gradient difference from the center of the black hole. That possibly ac-
counts for the bending of light around the black hole, but not through it. Current theories on gravity postulate that light
cannot escape a black hole because the intense gravity pull prevents the photon from escaping. This paper suggests an al-
ternative: light does not escape a black hole because, in a black hole, time stands still and the frequency of the photon is
infinite.

REFERENCES

1. Astill. W. (2011). Explaining Gravitational Time Dilation Geometrically. As retrieved on October 24, 2020 from
https://users.sussex.ac.uk/~waa22/relativity/Explaining_Gravitational_Time_Dilation_Geometrically.html

2. Ashwani Sharma & M. A. Murtaza, “Modeling and Finite Element Analysis of Vertical Axis Wind Turbine Rotor Configura-
tions ”,International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering Research and Development (IJMPERD),Vol. 6, Issue
3,pp, 23-34

3. Bernstein, J. (2012), “The Reluctant Father of Black Holes" in SA Special Editions 17, 1s, 4-11 (July 2012)
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0407-4sp

4. Atul N. Meshram, D. N. Raut & S. K. Mahajan, “Factors Affecting the Formation of Gas Porosity in A356 Alloy Wheel by
Gravity Die Casting”,International Journal of Metallurgical & Materials Science and Engineering (IJMMSE),Vol. 8, Issue
4,pp, 1-4

5. Bhawal, B. (2016). Physics: How Time Dilation Affects Quantum Superpositions. As retrieved on October 24, 2020 from
http://www.2physics.com/2015/09/how-time-dilation-affects-quantum.html

6. Adnan Dawood M. Al-Edary & Myieh Shbib Al-Shmarie, “Estimate the Gravity Model of the United States of America and
Some Countries for the Period from 1991-2011 -An Econometric Study”,International Journal of Humanities and Social Sci-
ences (IJHSS),Vol. 3, Issue 2,pp, 101-116

7. Clifton, T., Ferreira, P. G., Padilla, A., & Skordis, C. (2012). Modified gravity and cosmology. Physics reports, 513(1-3), 1-
189.

8. Ahsana Fathima K M & Shibi Varghese, “Behavioural Study of Steel Fiber and Polypropylene Fiber Reinforced Con-
crete”,IMPACT: International Journal of Research in Engineering & Technology (IMPACT: IJRET),Vol. 2, Issue 10,pp, 17-
24

9. Dyson, F. (8 October 2013). "Is a Graviton Detectable?" International Journal of Modern Physics A. 28 (25): 1330041–1–
1330035–14. Bibcode: 2013IJMPA..2830041D. doi: 10.1142/S0217751X1330041X.

10. Feynman, R. P.; Morinigo, F. B.; Wagner, W. G.; Hatfield, B. (1995). Feynman Lectures on Gravitation. Addison-Wesley.
ISBN 0-201-62734-5

11. Maldacena, J. (2005). The Illusion of Gravity. Scientific American, 293(5), 56-63. Retrieved July 25, 2020, from
www.jstor.org/stable/26061221

12. Milgrom, M. (1983). A modification of the Newtonian dynamics as a possible alternative to the hidden mass hypothesis. The
Astrophysical Journal, 270, 365-370.

13. Newton, I. (1687). Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica.

14. Nave, C. (1999). Fundamental Forces. As retrieved on October 26, 2020 from http://hyperphysics.phy-

www.tjprc.org editor@tjprc.org
32 George F. Houghton & Robert F. Houghton

astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Forces/funfor.html

15. Netz, R., & Noel, W. (2011). The Archimedes codex: revealing the secrets of the world's greatest palimpsest. Hachette UK.

16. Pais, Abraham (1982), 'Subtle is the Lord ...' The Science and life of Albert Einstein, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-
853907-X

17. Panek, R. (2019). The Trouble with Gravity: Solving the Mystery Beneath Our Feet. Houghton Mifflin.

18. Panek, R. (2011). The 4 percent universe: Dark matter, dark energy, and the race to discover the rest of reality. Houghton Mif-
flin Harcourt.

19. Rothman, T.; Boughn, S. (2006). "Can Gravitons be Detected?". Foundations of Physics. 36 (12): 1801–1825. arXiv:gr-
qc/0601043. Bibcode: 2006FoPh..36.1801R. doi:10.1007/s10701-006-9081-9

20. White, C. D. (2018). The double copy: gravity from gluons. Contemporary Physics, 59(2), 109-125.

21. Zee, A. (2010). Quantum field theory in a nutshell (Vol. 7). Princeton University Press.

22. Baird. C. (2019) Does time go faster at the top of a building compared to the bottom?
https://wtamu.edu/~cbaird/sq/2013/06/24/does-time-go-faster-at-the-top-of-a-building-compared-to-the-bottom/ retrieved Sep-
tember 15 2020

23. Stubbs, W. L. (2008). Nuclear Alternative: Redesigning Our Model of the Structure of Matter. Xlibris Corporation.

24. Li, M., & Pang, Y. (2009). A trouble with Hořava-Lifshitz gravity. Journal of High Energy Physics, 2009(08), 015.

DECLARATIONS

If any of the sections are not relevant to your manuscript, please include the heading and write 'Not applicable' for that sec-
tion.

To be used for non-life science journals

Funding: Not applicable

Conflicts of interest/Competing interests: not applicable

Availability of data and material: January, 1,2021

Code availability: not applicable

Authors' contributions (optional: please review the submission guidelines from the journal whether statements are man-
datory)

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.8905 NAAS Rating: 4.00