Theory of Gravity

Dear Madeline:

Thank you for your question.  I will do my best to keep my response as simple and straight forward as possible.  The basic postulate is outlined clearly in the paper that was attached and a more in depth description can be found in my book which is available as a download for free at

Sir Issac Newton made a very significant advance in gravity theory about 350 years ago.  He very accurately derived the equations that allow us to predict the force and behavior of gravity.  However, he personally felt he had failed at developing a complete theory of gravity because he did not discover a mechanism that explains how the force is conducted.

In 1915, Einstein completed the General Theory of Relativity which is actually an extension of Newton’s gravity theory.  In physics, Keplar theory is considered the 1st approximation, Newton is the 2nd approximation and Einstein is the 3rd approximation.  Each theory has built on the previous.  It is believed by physicists that there is a 4th approximation that has not yet been discovered that completes gravity theory.

Einstein’s primary contribution is that he now defined the force of gravity as a “bending” of space.  For some, curved space is merely the natural state of space that resides near a massive body.  However, the problem remains:  How does matter curve space?  There has to be some mechanism required to account for the “bending” of space.  Without it, gravity theory is not complete.

In mainstream physics, gravity theory says that the force is conducted by very small massless particles called gravitons.  Gravitons have not been experimentally proven and probably never will be.  Two problems- 1. their size is in the realm of the Planck unit and 2.  being without mass, how is a force conducted?  It is proven that a photon field accompanies magnetic force.  It is an extension of this observed nature that graviton theory is applied.

This is some background to help present the Dynamic Matter theory of gravity.  But first, we need one more piece of General Relativity for background.  Einstein’s gravity postulate was built on the postulate that inertial force and gravitational force are entirely equal.  What does this mean?  When you step on the accelerator pedal in your car you will be pushed back in your seat.  This is inertial force.  When you stand on the surface of the Earth you feel the force of gravity.  Einstein postulated that these two forces were equal.  Perhaps you have heard of his famous mind experiment of the man in the elevator in empty space.  If the elevator is accelerated at 9.8 meters/sec^2 then he will not know if the elevator is sitting on the surface of the Earth or it is accelerating through space.  His instruments will not indicate any difference.

THE LORENTZ TRANSFORMATION  This is key to understanding Gravity and how it could be causing a universal expansion of matter.  What the Lorentz Transformation means is that the stronger the gravitational field then the greater your mass…also the shorter your length and a longer second ticking on the clock.  For example, if you have one kilogram on the surface of the moon, it will measure one kilogram.  Note however that it will weight 1/6 of what it weighs on the surface of the Earth.  Weight and mass are two different things.  Now in Newton gravity one kilogram on the surface of the Moon will also be one kilogram on the surface of the Earth.  In Einstein’s gravity however, that one kilogram, from moving it from the weaker force of the Moon to the stronger gravitational force of the Earth will actually increase its mass a little tiny bit.  It will also make it smaller and its internal clock will be running slower.  However, this relativistic increase in mass is very significant.  It is possibly the same mechanism that could account for the perpetual ongoing increase of the mass of the Earth.  The relativistic increase in mass is a very real thing that has been proven ad infinitum.

Now we can summarize the force of gravity due to Dynamic Matter.  If all matter has a perpetual growth going on we could postulate that the “fuel” to perpetuate this growth is caused by an ongoing conversion of space to matter.  There is a significant equation in my research that says – space = Dm x mt^2.  This was derived from Newton’s law of gravity.  We know that mass and space are equal per E=mc^2.  My equation extends that to say that space is equal to matter.  Conveniently, all three – energy, space, and matter are all equal to each other and convertible to each other.

So if space is flowing inward to cause a perpetual growth of matter this does several things for us.

  1. It gives an explanation for how matter curves space. (Note:  curved space and flowing space are geometrically equivalent.)  It also extends the equivalence principle to 100% equivalency.  We know the two forces are completely equivalent.  With the Dynamic Matter postulate we can now say that the nature of their conduction is also equivalent:  they are both caused by relative motion of mass to space.
  2. If all matter is expanding with time, we then have a mechanism that explains the 10^16 kilogram per year increase in mass for the Earth. It also explains:
  3. the increasing altitude of the moon,
  4. the reason galaxies appear to be spinning too fast,
  5. why the Pioneer spacecraft are slowing down.

And many other momentum anomalies.

It is important to note that this very slow gradual increase in matter would be mostly transparent, which is why it is so difficult to detect.  Other explanations that offer more conventional processes for mass growth like atomic reactions, pair production, etc.  would not be very transparent.  The question was asked regarding Dynamic Matter, “would not the continental crust also be expanding at the same rate as the core?”  It appears that this can be explained by thermal expansion.  The Earth’s core is much hotter than the crust.  The ongoing expansion due to Dynamic Matter would be accompanied by a thermal expansion that would cause the core to expand at a faster rate than the crust and thus cause an increase in distances between the continents.

Gravity is the central to the Dynamic Matter postulate.  It is a very significant problem in physics and what all else revolves around.  While there are many applications of the Dynamic Matter postulate I suggest initial focus centers around Gravity.  Some of the applications are:

  1. Time – what is the physical mechanism behind time?
  2. Gravitational Constant. No theory to date predicts this number.  Dynamic Matter does
  3. The velocity of space in the heart of the atom
  4. The Universal Scalar field
  5. Dark Energy
  6. Dark Matter
  7. Five dimensional Kaluza Klein theory
  8. Quasars
  9. Quantum Matter
  10. Quantum gravity
  11. Variance of the speed of light with time
  12. Prehistoric life

The last two, although very intriguing to contemplate, are very low on the list of significance.

Maddy, I hope some or most of this makes sense to you.  If not, please let me know.  It is my desire to make my presentation as comprehensible as possible.


Jack Hohner


I received 5 very good questions regarding the Dynamic Matter postulate.

1: Is all mass being affected equally, all the time?

On page 3 refer to equation 2.2.  This is represents a significant outcome of my research.  By applying Newton’s law of gravity, the dimensions can be re-arranged by the simple application of algebra to show that space is proportional to mass.  There is no violation of mathematical principals in this deduction.  PHD college math professors have reviewed it and agreed.  However, some theoretical physicists bristle at it.  This is a surprise because it is just a basic balancing of dimensions, a discipline that is required math.   Later in the paper I show how this deduction can be extended to an equality.

This equation is the bedrock of the Dynamic Matter postulate.  Again, gravity is the center point of my research.  The Dynamic Matter postulate theorizes that the force of gravity is conducted by a relative motion of mass to space.  For this to happen, space may be converting to mass at the most basic level of matter …hadrons and quarks.

  1. Wouldn’t this also cause fossils to be more massive?

Yes it would.  On page 40 of my book (available for free at my website: I go through the mathematical analysis of the size of fossils.  It turns out that what is perceived as a 70 ton dinosaur 150 million years ago was actually about the size of an elephant.  Elephants represent the evolutionary limit of animal size in the present gravity environment.  The fossils have been growing in mass and volume with the eons.

  1.  How does a perpetual increase in mass explain  the different elements, in different proportions, on the various moons and planets?

This question is referenced to question 1.   If the postulated perpetual increase in matter is indeed happening, it probably is happening at the heart of the atom.  Basic matter is the same throughout the universe, but varies due to other factors, primarily temperature and pressure.

  1. An argument against all mass being equally affected all the time is the continents would still cover the entire surface of the Earth

This question is referred to the answer in question three.  It is an excellent question!   It is a significant issue to resolve the differential expansion rate between Earth’s crust and Earth’s core.  The Dynamic Matter postulate in its basic form theorizes a constant expansion for all matter through a conversion of space to mass and thereby outlining a mechanism for the conduction of gravity.  Space is not mass or energy…it is space.  However, it is equal to and convertible to mass and energy.  See equation 2.2 of my paper.  Space has no temperature.  So what happens when space is being converted to and added to the mass of a hadron of iron in the Earth’s core and a hadron of the granite elements in the crust?  That new mass is immediately exposed to the temperature of the host matter.  The core has a temperature of 10,800 degrees F.  The crust has a mean average temperature of about 200 to 300 degrees temperature depending on depth.  This would imply that the new matter from the gravity/space conversion would be expanding immediately upon conversion due to the temperature of the different hosts.  This rate of differential expansion can be calculated by applying the coefficient of expansion for the elements involved and the temperature differential.  This implies that there would be two causes for expansion – 1. The expansion due to the dynamic matter process.  2. The expansion due to temperature.

You are correct in your question in that if the expansion is completely equal, as per the basic Dynamic Matter postulate, then the continents would be expanding at the same rate as the core.  This would cause the dynamic matter expansion to be almost completely transparent, and it is except when large variations are entered into the observations such as size, distance and time.  i.e. spinning galaxies

However, when the temperature differential is added to the problem of Earth’s expansion then we would realize a rate of expansion of about 3 times greater for the core than the crust.

This is a good example of some of the problems in physics.  Often many factors have to be considered.  The Earth’s rotation is slowing.  In the 1920’s Jeffries theorized this was due to tidal friction.  This was later applied to the Moon’s increasing altitude.  Scientists jumped on this explanation as the complete answer…. similarly with subduction theory and many other problems in science.   The appendix in my book presents an extensive study of tidal friction.  It is very likely that the force of the ocean tides is responsible for only a small part of Earth’s slowing rotation, and almost no effect on the Moon.

  1. Why is the Moon gaining altitude?

This is covered in Chapter 13 of my book.  The Moon’s increasing distance is an “angular momentum” problem.  If we only calculated the Moon’s distance based on the dynamic matter effect,  then the distance would be decreasing….because both the Earth and Moon are increasing is size.  However, when it is resolved as an angular momentum problem and applying the Dynamic Matter constant, then the result is within 2% of what we observed by laser distancing measurements.