This paper presents the Deceleron Interaction Theory (DIT), a conceptual-theoretical framework that offers a causal-mechanical alternative to the geometric interpretation of gravity. The theory is founded on the hypothesis of a universally interacting massless particle—the deceleron. It posits that the local density of the deceleron field modulates the local energy density of the quantum vacuum. Consequently, the theory introduces the Weak Deceleron Force as a result of these field interactions acting on the vacuum. This opens the possibility of explaining both Gravity and the Casimir effect according to the same fundamental principles, identifying them as distinct regimes of a single vacuum-mediated interaction. A significant potential confirmation of this framework is its ability to explain galactic dynamics. By analyzing the galaxy as a distributed deceleron field source, the theory offers a mechanical solution to the Dark Matter problem. It posits that the vacuum exhibits a logarithmic response to the exponentially decaying deceleron field of the galactic disk. As a direct mechanical consequence, this mechanism produces a background acceleration that maintains flat rotation curves without invoking any unseen mass. This framework also resolves the Bullet Cluster anomaly, attributing the observed separation of gravitational lensing from baryonic gas to the distinct field efficiencies of diffuse clouds versus stellar disks. Furthermore, the theory offers a resolution to the Vacuum Catastrophe. It identifies the omnipresent Cosmic Deceleron Field as a physical filter that naturally restricts the interaction of vacuum fluctuations. This mechanism prevents the immense theoretical energy of the quantum vacuum from manifesting as a macroscopic force. In parallel, the theory offers a logical explanation for inertia. It redefines mass as "Emission Potential"—the capacity of matter to generate the deceleron field. This definition provides a mechanical origin for inertia as a reactive force against self-generated field interactions, rendering the Equivalence Principle a necessary derivation rather than a postulate. This work establishes the foundational theoretical framework for these mechanical principles. The extension of the theory to kinematics, optics, and the physical nature of time is reserved for Part II.
Spigel Branimir (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: