° Author Koenraad M.L.L.

Van Spaendonck © 2025

° UA Universiteit Antwerpen Master in Design Sciences 1995
° Publication date August 12, 2025
° ISBN - edition 3 9789465313382
° Pages / Words / Graphs 16/1950/9
° Summary in 8 graphs p. 7 - 15

.1
 Is there a common ancestor
for
GR, QM and EMR [& strong nuclear force] ?

The problem seems to me how one can formulate statements

about a discontinuum without calling upon a continuum…
...but we still lack the mathematical structure unfortunately.
How much have I already plagued myself in this way !

Albert Einstein [1916, Letter to H.W. Dällenbach]

‘ SQT Scale-invariant Quantum Theory ‘

is the intellectual property of

Koenraad M.L.L.Van Spaendonck.

This work is published by Koenraad M.L.L. Van Spaendonck

Publishing extracts of this work is authorized only when this reference is included :

Van Spaendonck, K.M.L.L. [2025], SQT Scale-invariant Quantum Theory, Herenthout: K.M.L.L.
Van Spaendonck, ISBN 9789465312323.

[In addition references to the scribd links are possible.]

Bluesky : @koenraadvs1.bsky.social X : @KoenraadVS1

website : www.vanspaendonck.info email : kvanspaendonck1@gmail.com

.2
 The key

A specific generalisation of GR by solving the rotating disc problem differently.

The strategy

The concept of the toy model in SQT came to life when we applied

the De Broglie matter wave constraint (no overlapping waves)

to a compressible medium of discrete units (size-varying quanta)

which reacts to the presence of a gravitational well.

That led to such a geometrical exactness, that we could show how Einstein’s rotating disc

could hold contracting rods (quanta) not just tangentially BUT ALSO radially.

This newly obtained equal proportionality of circumference to radius (as #quanta)

prevents the disc from breaking, no curved surfaces needed anymore (!).

Using the equivalence principle, this feature now carries over into

the generalized performance of the gravitational field, and into other levels of scale.

From the map to the territory, cheating is difficult because the toy model is extremely

self-constraining, no curve-fitting, and no plethora of desired post-diction outcomes.

No time to read it all ?

Go straight to the slides on pages 7-15.

Assess for yourself the multi-functional characteristics

of one single unifying geometry, no curve-fitting involved.

The geometrical model stays exactly the same for every single one of the 6 characteristics.

.3
 Table of contents
Preface - “ Less is more IF less does more “ [P.5]

° Unifying features of the scale-invariant model : a ‘catch all’

A – 1 rule from 4 assumptions at the origin of the SQT-model [2D]

° Action-reaction principle, compressible & expandable units, matter wave constraint [P.6]

B – 6 unifying features of SQT-model on different scales of size

° Preliminary 1 & 2 : A causal principle for gravity - Discrete energy density ‘jumps’ [P.7]

° 1. Rotating disc solution : ‘Radial length contraction’ appears [P.9]

Thus radius stays proportional to circumference, when using discrete quanta

An exact discrete and Euclidean solution for the Eherenfest Paradox

° 2. Star : correct doubling of bending angle of light compared to Newton [P.10]

‘Time’ bending angle = exactly ‘spacial’ bending angle : doubling the angle

When using momentum transfer between quanta for propagation of light

° 3. Hydrogen : discrete E-levels of hydrogen excited states from simply counting quanta [P.11]

Exact discrete E-levels from sharply self-constrained model

Taken as pairs, the summation of quanta follows exactly : E = -13.6 eV / n²

° 4. Gamma γ derived from the SQT-model by comparing local quantum densities of the field [P.13]

We use Hooke’s Law to show this directly in the SQT-model

° 5. Galaxy : reïnterpreting redshift leads to a new prediction for star orbit velocities [P.14]

Gravitational redshift not only has a radial component

Model says there is a tangential component equal in size to the radial component

This reinterprets redshift in side-faced star orbit velocities : no DM necessary

° 6. Universe : accelerated expansion is only apparent with the compressed state [P.15]

Quantum size is always proportional to radius : Qsize ~ R : Redshift ~ Distance

Static equilibrium of contracted quanta mimics accelerated expansion : no DE

C – Conclusions [P.16]

D – References [P.17-19]

E – Appendices [P.20-33]

.4
 Preface
We present an overview of the 6 unifying features of a toy model of quantum gravity we developed over
at least 7 papers : the SQT-model. SQT stands for Scale-invariant Quantum Theory, a theory under
development. This work is a concise summary of the main features.

Crucial factor was to discover a means for the propagation of light in the model using the same discrete
elements (quanta) [ref.2 & ref.1 p.41 therein & Appendix 9]. A way to model gravity with discrete ‘quanta’,
from a causal principle (action of mass & reaction of field [ref.C]), evolved into several features with a specific
relevance for different scales of size : a scale-invariant model. See also Appendices 7 & 8.

Collectively those quanta entail local energy densities [ref. 2], applicable to several levels of scale of size as
it turns out (p.7-15). And they conform to known data and observations, plus a few surprises. The results
remain incomplete, and prone to erroneous interpretations, it is work in progress, be it with accurate
geometry and math.

The second meaning of ‘scale-invariant’ here, is the fact that the properties (laws, equasions,
correspondences,…) of the model are preserved under any change of size when a common multiplication
factor is applied.

This is what primarily separates our approach from several others :

-The method of Integrated Product Design is cast into a hybrid form of advanced problem solving.

As a product designer I combined my particular set of skills (design thinking, concept formation,
efficient creativity, idea building along a set of contraints,..), with scientific methods used in
theoretical and experimental phyiscs. [ Appendix 1 & ref. A,B ]

-We assign a well defined minimum of allowed behaviour to the quantum itself, from the start (1 rule).

Instead of quanta as merely ‘dead bits’ in a configuration, where characteristics need to be installed
by hand. This is done for specific reasons, see section A: 3 assumptions for the model. The result is
a strongly self-constraining model, without the need/possibility for curve-fitting.

-We are permanently guided by the following adagio: The road to simplicity is paved with complexity.

A labourious effort bans bolt-on solutions in favour of multi-functional simplicity: a ‘catch-all’.

Eventually, if you get things configured in a correct and unique way, then hopefully a synergy will
arise : the whole becomes more than the individual parts merely added together.

“ Less is more if less does more “

For each featured slide, we have indicated references to the original papers, in order to offer the reader a
chance to study more detailed information on the currently presented concise summary of SQT.

.5
A. – 1 rule from 4 assumptions at origin of SQT-model [in 2D]

Causal principle for gravity : Insert an incompressible sphere into a medium of compressible confined
quanta. Quanta behave according to 1 rule from 4 assumptions, thus invoking 6 unifying features,
mathematically exact, found within the SQT-model, with zero curve-fitting. See p.5-6 & see Appendix 8.

One rule : Perfectly ajacent, circular compressible quanta, fill the available space between any 2 ajacent
circumferences (or holographic layers), for all levels of scale of size, valid for 2 dimensions.

This yields a rigorous self-constraining model, both geometrically as well as mathematically.

ASSUMPTION 1 + conceptual origin

Density increase of the confined quantum-medium: by rotation or by inserting a larger sphere (mass)

- The rotation principle is inspired by formation of rotons in BEC’s, and by the rotating disk in Special
Relativity, and by the notion of gravity from angular momentum.
- The density increase is a conjectured consequence of Sakharov’s action-reaction principle of
‘vacuum quantum fluctuations in curved space’ [ref. C]. Additionally we assume it leads to an
equilibrium.
- Note: Inserting a sphere of larger density will induce the same effect by means of expelling internal
quanta from the sphere.

ASSUMPTION 2 + conceptual origin

Quanta have a compressible and expandable nature, always filling out the available space

- Compressible because that necessitates the mathematical formalism of relativistic effects.

This is derived by analogy : from the fact that the pressure coefficient of 2-dimensional sub-sonic
flow of an incompressible medium, needs to be compensated with the Prandtl-Glauert factor β.
With Cp = CpO / β to get the correct results for a compressible medium. [ref. D,E,F]
- ‘Filling the available space’ is inspired by the behaviour of gases, conjectured to be applicable in
some form for electrons or quanta also.

ASSUMPTION 3 + conceptual origin

The amount of quanta at each ‘allowed radius’ is a whole number of perfectly ajacent circular quanta

- Interpretation of the De Broglie matter wave constraint [ref. G,H & Ref.1 p.41 therein]
- Perfectly ajacent because overlapping units makes no physical sense.
- Perfectly circular because the quanta are conjectured to be formed as rotating units from a
background. Inspired further from quantum field theory a.o.

Remark : An ‘allowed radius’ in 2-D, is a holographic spherical layer in the original 3-D model. [ref. I & p.8]

ASSUMPTION 4 + conceptual origin

A compressible quantum of the field is conjectured to contain one or more incompressible units, with gas-
like behaviour : At maximum compression, the ultimate minimum quantum size is reached.

- No fixed ‘bit’ size : size-varying to obtain local densities.

- Mass and energy have to be interchangeable (E=mc²), so the fields needs constituants.
.6
B. – 6 unifying features of the SQT-model on different scales of size

° Preliminary 1: causal principle for gravity - discrete compressible medium [REF. 1-7]

.7
° Preliminary 2: discrete ‘jumps’ of allowed energy density of the quanta in the field [REF. 1-7]

[ mathematically exact and fully self-constraining ]

“ FLAT SPACE[TIME] “

4.1866 cm³ = 1 time 4/3R³pi = 8 times [4/3(R/2)³pi] = 64 times [4/3(R/4)³pi] (R= 1cm)

“ CURVED SPACE[TIME] “ The governing equasion

.8
 IMPORTANT : WE USE THE EXACT SAME UNCHANGED SQT-MODEL FOR ALL 6 FEATURES

1. Rotating disc solution : ‘Radial length contraction’ appears [Ref.8,9,10,1 & Appendix 5]

.9
2. Star : doubling of bending angle of light versus Newton [Ref. 11 & Ref. 2 & Appendix 4]

.10
3. Hydrogen : discrete E-levels of hydrogen excited states from counting quanta [Ref. 12,13]
[Remark: This is a limiting case, the elaboration to orbitals of higher order in 3D is the object of a future paper]

.11
Counting the quanta q not only litterally rolls out the exact ratios between the discrete energy levels of
hydrogen, as given by the known Bohr formula E = - 13.6 eV/n². But when each pair of quanta is counted
as 1, then the model also delivers exactly the numbers 2,8,18,32,50,… And that makes sense, because initially
[2 - p.23-27 therein] the quanta were conjectured to consist of left turning and right turning preconstituents
of mass with an expansive nature. Thus one could conjecture on pairing them up. Remark: the value 13.6
does not roll out of the model.

E1 = - 13.6 eV/1² = -13.6eV and the pair count in level 1 in our model = 1x4 /2 = 2

E2 = - 13.6 eV/2² = -3.4eV and the pair count in level 2 in our model = 2x8 /2 = 8

E3 = - 13.6 eV/3² = -1.51111111eV and the pair count in level 3 in our model = 3x12 /2 = 18

E4 = - 13.6 eV/4² = -0.85eV and the pair count in level 4 in our model = 4x16 /2 = 32

More importantly, we interpret what the above means in relation to the Hydrogen Spectral Series, using
the Lyman Series to make our point :

Rydberg Formula for the Lyman Series

1/λ = Rh [1-1/n²] And setting Rh equal to 1, we obtain : 1/λ = 1-1/n²

The inverses of the wavelengths of the emission lines corresponding to an electron dropping from energy
levels greater n than 1, to energy level n=1, equal 1/λ = 1-1/n² :

n=2 : 1/λ = 3/4

n=3 : 1/λ = 8/9

n=4 : 1/λ = 15/16

In our model, we interpret the dropping of the electron to a lower energy level, as a discrete change from
one energy density of quanta to another energy density of quanta, resulting in the expulsion (without
interpreting what ‘expelled’ means) of a photon with a certain energy level, and thus wavelength, according
to a certain ratio which we derive logically and directly from our model.

E2 counts 8 pairs of quanta

E1 counts 2 pairs of quanta

This is the only possible drop in energy density from E2 to a lower level. And 6 quanta are ‘lost’. Thus we
derive that 6 out of 8 quanta are expelled (without interpreting what ‘expelled’ means). That’s a ratio of 3/4,
exactly matching the Rydberg formula result for a drop from E2 to E1.

The next results are :

E3 counts 18 pairs of quanta.

E1 counts 2 pairs of quanta.

With a ratio of 16/18, due 16 quanta expelled. Exactly the Rydberg value of E3 to E1 : 8/9

E4 counts 32 pairs of quanta.

E1 counts 2 pairs of quanta.

With a ratio of 30/32, due 30 quanta expelled. Exactly the Rydberg value of E4 to E1 : 15/16.

.12
4. Gamma in the IST-model : by comparing local quantum densities [Ref.14,15,2 & Appendix 3]

[Remark:This is an improved derivation of Gamma γ compared to previous work, including Ap.3 p.25]

>> Surprise in Appendix 6 : γ² equals the radius R of any segmental arch. [with v/c = f the rise ]

.13
5. Galaxy : Reïnterpreting redshift gives new prediction for star orbit velocities [Ref.14,15,2]
‘Tangential length contraction-expansion’ in the rotating disc model becomes ‘tangential gravitational redshift’

In support: “The Lense-Thirring Precession in Strong Gravitational Fields” shows a velocity drop of frame dragging
proportional to distance r [r³ is for weak fields] using Kerr-Taub-NUT spacetime [Paper by author C. Chandrachur
Chakraborty, 28th Symposium on Relativistic Astrophysics, Geneva – Switserland – Dec.13-18, 2015]

.14
6. Universe : accelerated expansion is only apparent due to the compressed state [Ref.14,15,2]

[Remark: This extrapolation & interpretation is only valid with the notion of a center for the local universe,
which is currently not the general observation.]

.15
C. – Conclusions : Delete delete towards multi-functional essentials
1. Less is more if less does more, especially if there is no curve-fitting involved.
We have the picture of a multi-functional quantum of the field at the epicenter of unification in the SQT-model :

Unit of length of space ~ unit of momentum transfer for the propagation of light ~ unit of wavelength ~ unit of energy hence
local field energy density (°). In fact, the known relativistic effects already show that the elements above are intricately
intertwined through Gamma : length contraction, time dilatation, relativistic E-absorption, frequency of light.

(°) Conjecture: Hence atomic E-level transition frequency, a dry and unspectacular interpretation of ‘time’ in GR, staying as
close as possible to the experimental evidence, a comparison of energy densities. As opposed to ‘time’ as a tool of the mind
orderering the succession of events, past, present, future. Remember : no non-Euclidean jump from SR to GR (See p.9)

2. Generalizing General Relativity & Reducing to Newton within the SQT-model : Map to territory
We derived Gamma γ (Lorentz Factor) within the SQT-model using Hooke’s Law for ideal compressible springs.The pressure
of the consecutive displacements radially of the springs sets GR apart from Newton (See p.13,25,26). For Newtonian results
omit that pressure : simply count all the quanta (springs) within the SQT-model (See e.g. p.11). Also : the inverse square law
follows directly from the fact that quantum size ~ distance (See p.15) in the model 2D.

3. Bolt-on solutions are up for improvement because they don’t feature the necessary synergy.
The radial cosmological redshift in cosmology (sign of accelerated expansion) and the tangential Doppler shift in galaxies
(edge-faced V0 observations) are conjectured to be the “ tromp-l’euil “ of Dark Matter & Dark Energy (°) taken as 2 sides of
the same coin, or should I say quantum. They both dissolve in a concept of static features of compressed space inward,
misinterpreted as respectively an dynamic expansion outward, and as a tangential star orbit velocity component.

(°) Edwin Hubble (1929) first thought that ‘some property of space’ caused the redshift, not a receding picture. Fritz Zwicky
(1993) said ‘recession can explain things’, but was inclined to believing that ‘an unknown quantum factor’ caused the wave-
lengths to increase. This ‘unknown quantum factor’ is then our newly retreived ‘tangential component of gravitational redshift’
(combined with the radial effect of equal size, from solving the rotating disc problem differently). Thus generalizing General
Relativity, and inducing unification.

4. Further to be explored: SQT-model : compressible quanta mimicing the strong nuclear force
‘Attractive force increases when quarks are taken further apart’: not counterintuïtive with SQT. (See causal principle for gravity
page 7: now think of a size-increasing central mass M as quarks with a gas-like expanding behaviour). Quarks getting further
apart increases the displacement of each field quantum q : ideal compressible springs ~ Hooke’s Law. Thus increasing the
‘attractive force’ : the result of pressure radially inward from the compressible springs, keeping the quarks together. The further
the quarks are apart, the larger the displacement values, thus mimicing ‘elastic rubber band’ effect. (Analogy with item 4 p.13).

5. Dark Matter alternative using Hooke’s Law

See p.14

6. New prediction for star orbit velocities from a new interpretation of data. Testable ?
Face-on measurements of star orbit rotation are necessary as opposed to side-faced observations, to discern. Could the James
Webb Space Telescope or other techniques be capable of this? The prediction by SQT says star orbit velocity would show a
velocity drop : V0 ~ 1/r .

Expressed with the periods of stars : At double the distance r, the period T quadruples (traced angle to 1/4) instead of doubles
(traced angle to 1/2). Generalizing : T(xr) = (Tr)x² instead of T(xr) = (Tr)x .

T(xr) = period for the star to complete one full orbital round, at a distance x times r
T(r) = period for the star to complete one full orbital round, at reference distance r
xr = radial distance from the center of the rotating black hole.
x = multiplication factor for the reference distance r.
r = a reference distance > R (galactic bulge radius R)

.16
D. – References

Einstein, A.(1916), Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie, An. der Physik, 354 (7): 769–822

[ for Preface & 1 Rule from 3 Assumptions ]

[A] Integrated Product Design (IPD)

°Braet J. and Verhaert P. (2007), The practice of new products and new business, Acco, p.51,52

[B] Van Spaendonck, K.M.L.L. (June 2016), General Quantum Gravity - Version 1.1, Mol: K.M.L.L. Van Spaendonck, ISBN
9789402149999, 50 p. [Amazon], p. 5-7

https://www.scribd.com/document/343283628/General-Quantum-Gravity-Version-1-1-June-2016-Author-K-L-L-M-
Van-Spaendonck

[C] A.D. Sakharov “Vacuum Quantum Fluctuations In Curved Space And The Theory Of Gravitation”, Sov. Phys. Dokl.
12 (1968) 1040 [Dokl. Akad. Nauk Ser. Fiz. 177 (1968) 70], p.365].

[D] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prandtl%E2%80%93Glauert_transformation

[E] Göthert, B.H. (1940), "Ebene und räumliche Strömung bei hohen Unterschallgeschwindigkeiten: Erweiterung der
Prandtl'schen Regel" [Plane and Three-Dimensional Flow at High Subsonic Speeds: Extension of the Prandtl
Rule], Lilienthal Gesellschaft (in German), Berlin: Zentrale fuer Wissenschaftliches Berichtswesen (127)

[F] Glauert, H. (1928). "The Effect of Compressibility on the Lift of an Aerofoil". Proceedings of the Royal Society A:
Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. 118 (779): 113–119.

[G] De Broglie, Louis (1923). "Waves and quanta". Nature. 112 (2815): 540

[H] De Broglie, Louis (1925). "Recherches sur la théorie des Quanta". Annales de Physique (in French). 10 (3): 33.

[I] Van Spaendonck, K.M.L.L. (14/09/2017), A new breeding ground to uncover the discontinuum – essay for competition
‘Space and Time after Quantum Gravity’, Mol: K.M.L.L. Van Spaendonck
https://www.scribd.com/document/361404451/A-New-Breeding-Ground-to-Uncover-the-Discontinuum-Koen-Van-
Spaendonck , p.9,10,15,16

.17
[ for slides of Unifying features & Appendices ]

[1] Van Spaendonck, K.M.L.L. (January 2017), Emergent Gravity from Discrete Geometry [ EG from DG ], Mol: K.M.L.L.
Van Spaendonck, ISBN 9789402158601
https://www.scribd.com/document/343283196/EG-from-DG-K-M-L-L-Van-Spaendonck-ISBN-9789402158601-PDF

[2] Van Spaendonck, K.M.L.L. (14/09/2017), A new breeding ground to uncover the discontinuum – essay for competition
‘Space and Time after Quantum Gravity’, Mol: K.M.L.L. Van Spaendonck
https://www.scribd.com/document/361404451/A-New-Breeding-Ground-to-Uncover-the-Discontinuum-Koen-Van-
Spaendonck

[3] “Spacetime tells matter how to move; matter tells spacetime how to curve.” °John Archibald Wheeler and
Kenneth Ford (1998), Geons, black holes and quantum foam: A life in physics ., W. W. Norton. ISBN 0-393-04642-7 :
p.235

[4] “The need for causal principles, and the search for coherence.” °Smolin, L. (2015), Lessons from Einstein’s 1915
discovery of general relativity, Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics : http://arxiv.org/pdf/1512.07551.pdf : p.12
a.o.

[5] A.D. Sakharov “Vacuum Quantum Fluctuations In Curved Space And The Theory Of Gravitation”, Sov. Phys. Dokl.
12 (1968) 1040 [Dokl. Akad. Nauk Ser. Fiz. 177 (1968) 70], p.365].

[6] “How does discrete matter curve a continuum ?”

°T. Padmanabhan (2016), Exploring the Nature of Gravity., Pune University Campus – Ganeshkhind,
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1602.01474.pdf : p.23

[7] “How do systems self-organize ?”

°Heylighen F. (2008), Complexity and Self-organization, Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, M. J. Bates
& M. N. Maack (Taylor & Francis, 2008) : http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/Papers/ELIS-complexity.pdf
°Curriculum and publications of Prof. F. Heylighen: http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/SELFORG.html

°Note: A short informative video presentation on Complexity-science and Self-organization.

Link : https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/154803e74325c311?projector=1

[8] Einstein, A.(1905), Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper, Annalen der Physik 17, 322 (10): 891–921.

[9] Ehrenfest, Paul (1909), "Gleichförmige Rotation starrer Körper und Relativitätstheorie", Physikalische Zeitschrift 10,
918.

[10] Weinstein, G. (2015), Einstein's Uniformly Rotating Disk and the Hole Argument, p.2 [Link:
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1504/1504.03989.pdf]

.18
[11] Einstein, A. (1911), On the influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light, An.der Ph.35:p.898-908

[12] Discrete atomic energy levels – hydrogen

° Balmer, J.J. (1885), Annalen der Physik und Chemie, N.F. 25
° Rydberg, J.R. (1889), Den Kungliga Svenska Vetenskapsakademiens Handlingar 23 (11) °
Bohr, N. (1913), On the Constitution of Atoms and Molecules, Part II Systems Containing Only a Single Nucleus,
Philosophical Magazine 26 (153) – p.476-502

[13] Van Spaendonck, K.M.L.L. [2018], MQ [Mechanics of the quantum] – Property 5 - Hydrogen energy level ratios from
counting compressed quanta, Mol: K.M.L.L. Van Spaendonck, ISBN 9789402182491.

https://www.scribd.com/document/390899168/MQ-Mechanics-of-the-Quantum-Property-5-Hydrogen-Energy-Level-
Ratios-From-Counting-Compressed-Quanta-Scribd

[14] Van Spaendonck, K.M.L.L. (June 2016), Geometry of General Quantum Gravity features static universe with
accumulative expansion of spacial units and double deflection of light, Mol: K.M.L.L. Van Spaendonck [Amazon]
https://www.scribd.com/document/358588242/Geometry-of-GQG-Features-Static-Universe-With-Expansion-of-
Spacial-Units-and-Double-Deflection-of-Light

[15] Van Spaendonck, K.M.L.L. (June 2016), General Quantum Gravity - Version 1.1, Mol: K.M.L.L. Van Spaendonck,
ISBN 9789402149999, 50 p. [Amazon], p. 5-7

https://www.scribd.com/document/343283628/General-Quantum-Gravity-Version-1-1-June-2016-Author-K-L-L-M-
Van-Spaendonck

[16] Van Spaendonck, K.M.L.L. [2020], Galaxy rotation curves hide Rankine model, with the BTFR as a friction law in
disguise, Herenthout: K.M.L.L. Van Spaendonck, ISBN 9789402143270.
https://www.scribd.com/document/455830033/Galaxy-Rotation-Curves-Hide-Rankine-Model-With-the-BTFR-as-a-
Friction-Law-in-Disguise-1

[17] S.S. McGaugh 1, J.M. Schombert 2, G.D. Bothun 2, and W.J.G. de Blok 3,4[2000] ,The Baryonic Tully-FisherRelation.
Link for this work : https://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0003001.pdf

[18] Giaiotti, D.B. & Stel, F. [2006], The Rankine Vortex Model: University of Trieste - International Centre
forTheoretical Physics

[19] Couette flow : General explanation (Richardson, S.M.)

Link for this work : http://www.thermopedia.com/content/669/

.19
APPENDIX 1 : A HYBRID METHOD FOR HIGHER PROBLEM SOLVING
[ design thinking + scientific method ]

[Ref.2]

.20
APPENDIX 2 : INITIAL MATHEMATICAL SETUP OF THE SQT-MODEL
ADOPTED SYMBOLS in DCC
Discrete Contracting Coordinates [2D-reduction : XY-plane]

° DCC – Discrete Contracting Coordinates : (See Slides 1A above & 1B)

RQ = larger quantum radius Rq = smaller quantum radius
RQ1 = radius of quantum 1 = B RQ2 = radius of quantum 2 = D
Rm = radius of origin-circle = A Oc = origin-circle, with radius Rm
Co = centre of the origin-circle, and of the common polar coordinate system and the Carthesian system
Dr = radial distance Dr starting from q outward
n = number of ‘layers’ : number of consecutive circles containing the quanta
X = [RQ2 / RQ1] – 1 = size increase between 2 consecutive quanta
Remark: DCC consists of variable spherical isotropic coordinates (VSI-cs) which have 3 dimensions.
They contract [with an apparent expanding result] isotropically [symmetrically : with equal amounts in
the y direction (radially), x-direction and z-direction (tangentially)].

°2D reduction : Polar coordinate system : special case of isotropic units : circles
O = pole, coincides with Oc, also origin of Z-axis (‘into the page’) in spherical/polar coord. system
L = Polar axis L, also Y-axis in spherical/polar coordinate system by convention here
r = radial distance, length from the origin to (r,𝜑) (r, 𝜑) = radial coordinate

𝜑 = radial or azimutal angle (+ a polar angle 𝜃 for the spherical coordinate system - physics notation
Remark: 𝜑 = the angle : Where the minimum angle increment = 2𝜋Rm / # quanta q of circumference

.21
° What’s the size of quantum 2, given the size of quantum 1 [see equasion (6)]

So our radius of the next quantum is :

RQ2 = x – RQ1. (1)
With x found at the intersection of f(x) and g(x) : see equasion (4)

Deriving x from f(x) = g(x) : (The horizontal distance x in the XY-plane on Slide 1B)

f(x) = [ (RQ1/RM)x ] + RQ1 (2)

g(x) = x - RQ1 (3)

f(x) = g(x)
x - RQ1 = [ (RQ1/RM)x ] + RQ1
(RM/RM) x - (RQ1/RM) x = 2RQ1 ( We wrote x as (RM/RM) x )
[ (RM - RQ1) / RM ] x = 2RQ1
x = [ (2RQ1 RM) / (RM - RQ1) ] (4)

Size of RQ2 in RQ2 = x – RQ1 : see equasion (6)

° What’s the expansion rate X in RQ = Rq [(1 + X )^n] ? [ equasion (7) &image 1B ]

We can now derive the expansion rate X in RQ = Rq (1 + X )^n

X = [ (RQ2/RQ1) – 1 ] (5)
We derived : RQ2 = x – RQ1 ref. (1)
We derived : x = [ (2RQ1 RM) / (RM - RQ1) ] ref. (4)

Deriving RQ2 and X:

RQ2 = [ (2RQ1 RM) / (RM - RQ1) ] – RQ1 (4) into (1) = (6)

X = [ [ [ (2RQ1 RM) / (RM - RQ1) ] – RQ1 ] / RQ1 ] - 1 (6) into (5) = (7)

[Ref.1]
.22
[Ref.1]

REMARK ON THE MATH OF THE SQT-MODEL

The 2-dimensional SQT-model can also be expressed as a highly specific type of discrete log-polar
coördinates, but it takes some nuances as explained in paper “A new breeding ground to uncover the
discontinuum”. [ Ref.2 : see p.27 appendix 3 therein ].

My approach right from the start however, involved imagining what space(time) would look like if it
consisted of discrete elements, and how those elements (quanta) would get organized around a
gravitational well. A very ‘hands-on’ and ‘physical’ approach, which I then formalised into the IST-
geometry and accompanying equasions. [Ref.1 see p.41 therein]

Because obviously you don’t get the end result first, it takes a laborious effort of several years,
including ongoing mistakes and feedback loops. Nor do the interpretations and the dynamics of the
discrete energy steps and densities e.g. feature in such a ready-made alternative, nor does it display
any 3-dimensional origins.

But the basis of the 2D math already existed in an alternative formulation, hiding in plain sight !

[A referential paper, in a totally different context of e.g. camera software technology turning
omnidirectional images into panoramic images : DOI:10.1109/ICSIPA.2011.6144083
“A study of different unwarping methods for omnidirectional imaging“, page 429 ]. And as a non-trivial
‘fait divers’ to conclude this intermezzo : Log-polar mapping also shows up in the realm of retinal
mapping of the visual cortex of living organisms. Concerning the propagation of light, that’s interesting.

.23
APPENDIX 3 : CONCRETE EXAMPLE OF ENERGY DENSITY DIFFERENCES
[ map to territory : Deriving Gamma γ from the model using Hooke’s Law ]

Image made with CAD Rhinoceros 5.0 Commercial - Compressed quanta & Hooke’s Law (see also Item 4 p.13

.24
Special case : setting the size of field quantum q to π, or to π divided by a whole number
[ REMARK : The symbols refer to Appendix 2 p.21 & graph therein. ]

Why ? This way the #quanta N on a circumference is a whole number : 2πRM/N = π so N = 2RM.
Set N to 16 quanta per circumference, so the radius of the central mass is RM = 8 (80 in the CAD-app)
And q or Q1 is set to the value of π.
Governing equasion of the sizes of the quanta radially : Qn = q (1+x)^n (n has a value of 1 to 7 here)

1+X = [ [ [ (2RQ1 RM) / (RM - RQ1) ] – RQ1 ] / RQ1 ] - 1 = N + π / N – π when rearranging for Q1 = π.

MET
We can now calculate the sizes for all radial quanta from q to Q with scaling factor 1 + x = 1.4886.

Base layer 0 Qbase = π = 3.1416 set to 31.416 in the example (x10 to match the radius of 80)
Layer n=1 Q1 = Qbase [1+x] = 31.416 x 1.4886 = 46.7659 & displacement X1 = 15.3499
Layer n=2 Q2 = Q1 [1+x] = 46.3574 x 1.4886 = 69.6147
Layer n=3 Q3 = Q2 times 1.4886 = 103.6288
Layer n=4 Q4 = = 154.2620
Layer n=5 Q5 = = 229.6353
Layer n=6 Q6 = = 341.8375
Layer n=7 Q7 = = 508.8575
Obviously Qn = q (1+x)^n will give the same results.

Hooke’s Law :
The displacement X in F=kX represents the amount of compression from Qn to Qn-1 is [ Qn - Qn-1 ].
The total displacement Xn is equal to [ Q – q ] or [Q7 - Q7base ].
So adding up the individual displacements radially, gives you the total displacement.
This total displacement leads tot the total pressure, identified as ‘v’ in v/c or as 2GM/r in 2GM/rc².

So γ², or its gravitational counterpart, means uncompressed quantum Q / Q – compression of Q :

γ² = [ Q² / Q² – (total displacement Xn)² ] radially AND tangentially (2 ideal springs ~ Hooke).
Now reduce tot he radial direction of motion or compression, we take the root of Gamma.
Example with simple numbers:
γ² = [ Q² / Q² – (total displacement Xn)² ] = [ Q² / Q² – (Q-q)² ]
γ² = 16² / [ 16² - (16-2)² ] = 4.2667 so γ = 2.0656 as expected for v/c = 14/16.
Adding op the compressions : 8+4+2 = 14 = [ Q – q ] is the total displacement Xn.

.25
APPENDIX 4 : DOUBLED LIGHT BENDING ANGLE: EXTRA VISUAL FOR P.10

.26
APPENDIX 5 : ROTATING DISC : EXTRA VISUAL FOR P. 9
[ Tangential length contraction of the spheres or quanta (previously rods) appears. ]

[ Radius now remains exactly proportional to circumference (expressed as number of quanta). ]

[ No curved surface solution needed when jumping to GR because there are no non-Euclidean consequences. ]

.27
APPENDIX 6 : GAMMA SQUARED = RADIUS OF A SEGMENTAL ARCH

[ We left out all interpretations of the math, from the original paper. That part is up for future discussion. ]

We measured the weakness level of increasingly lower segmental arches [ R/(L/2) with L = 2 ], and

compared that γ ². This mounts up to measuring the length of the radius R of a segmental arch

for a lower and lower rise f. With constant span L this results in a larger and larger segmental arch

radius R, and consequently also a larger and larger √𝑅. No thickness assigned to the segmental arch.

We found an extremely close match. [measurements with CAD Rhinoceros 5.0 Commercial,see graphs]

In the table below we calculated the results. Using this correspondence : v/c = 1-f

Increasing the speed v towards the speed of light c, corresponds to a lower rise f of the segmental arch,

and thus to an increase of its radius R. There is a very small deviation from γ = 1 / [1 – v²/c²]^1/2.

For this check p.3 in the original paper and zoom in strongly, or check the table below on p.30.

Verifying which of the 2 methods corresponds best to the existing experimental data is interesting.

Whatever the interpretation may be, this highly accurate new link is intriguing and it should spark a

fundamental discussion on what seems to be an accumulation of a dynamic from the classical realm

of mechanical processes, or behaviour similar to it.

Link to the original paper, also found on Scribd :

Van Spaendonck, K.M.L.L. [2018], MQ [Mechanics of the quantum] – Property 6 - Relativistic mass increase
follows weakness curve of segmental arch, Mol: K.M.L.L. Van Spaendonck, ISBN 9789402158601.

.28
(P.2 in the original paper)

.29
Measured values : Comparing Gamma to √𝑅 of segmental arch & γ² to R
_______________________________________________________________________________________
V/C Speed 1/ γ γ Gamma √𝑹 R Radius γ²
1-f (f is arch height) 1 / [1 – v²/c²]^1/2 arch weakness R of segmental Arch

_______________________________________________________________________________________
γ & √𝑹 values very close > graph 2
0.1 0.994987473 1.005037815 1.00277615 R1 = 1.0055600 1.0101010

0.2 0.979795897 1.020620726 1.01242284 R2 = 1.0250000 1.0416666

Example: Red R in graph 1

0.3 0.953939201 1.048284837 1.03164432 R3 = 1.0642900 1.0989010

0.4 0.916515139 1.091089451 1.06457973 R4 = 1.1333300 1.1904761

0.5 0.866025404 1.154700538 1.11803399 R5 = 1.2500000 1.3333333

0.6 0.800000000 1.250000000 1.20415946 R6 = 1.4500000 1.5625000

0.7 0.714142843 1.400280084 1.34783901 R7 = 1.8166700 1.9607843

0.8 0.600000000 1.666666667 1.61245155 R8 = 2.6000000 2.7777777

0.9 0435889894 2.294157339 2.24722051 R9 = 5.0500000 5.2631578

0.91 0.414608249 2.411915354 2.36655023 5.6005600 5.8173356

0.92 0.391918359 2.551551815 2.50798724 6.2900000 6.5104166

0.93 0.367559519 2.720647809 2.67915285 7.1778600 7.4019245

0.94 0.341174442 2.931051909 2.89194225 8.3633300 8.5910652

0.95 0.312249900 3.202563076 3.16622804 10.025000 10.2564102

0.96 0.280000000 3.571428571 3.53836120 12.520000 12.7551020

0.97 0.243104916 4.113450349 4.08432002 16.681670 16.9204737

0.98 0.198997487 5.025189076 5.00099990 25.010000 25.2525252

0.99 0.141067360 7.088812050 7.07142136 50.005000 50.2512562

0.991 0.133861869 7.470387248 7.45386209 55.560060 55.8066856

0.992 0.126237871 7.921553132 7.90594713 62.504000 62.7510040

0.993 0.118114351 8.466371685 8.45174952 71.432070 71.6794495

0.994 0.109380071 9.142433242 9.12887342 83.336330 83.5840855

0.995 0.099874922 10.01252349 10.0001250 100.00250 100.2506248

0.996 0.089353232 11.19153703 11.1804293 125.00200 125.2505011

0.997 0.077401550 12.91963785 12.9100027 166.66817 166.9170422

0.998 0.063213923 15.81929993 15.8114199 250.00100 250.2502503

0.999 0.044710178 22.36627204 22.360691 500.00050 500.2501250

____________________________Copyright 2018 Koenraad Van Spaendonck________________________

(P.4 in the original paper)

.30
APPENDIX 7 : INVERSE SQUARE LAW FOR LIGHT & FOR NEWTON’S GRAVITY
At twice the distance: half the amount of light beams & 4 times less quanta.

.31
APPENDIX 8 : CAUSAL PRINCIPLE FOR GRAVITY: CONFIGURATION OF QUANTA
Insertion of mass forces quanta to compress and reconfigure their positions.

.32
APPENDIX 9 : QUANTA ‘PROPAGATE’ LIGHT USING NEWTON’S CRADLE

.33
NOTES

.34
NOTES

.35
NOTES

.36
NOTES

.37
NOTES

.38