—————————— read pre-print on research gate (new window) ——————————

• θ_si can be measured as the polarization angle of quantum entangled X-rays at the degenerate frequency of a maximal Bell state. As an angle θ_si=3.26239 rad ± 2 μrad; as a momentum θ_si=3.26239030392(48) kg m s^-1 and with respect to the Target Frame, θ_si has no units. The relation of angle and mass is mathematically demonstrated, as well, by No-Ping Chen, et. al.
• c is the speed of light which may also be written as c=n_Ll_f/n_Tt_f=299,792,458 m/s such that n_L=n_T=1 is physically significant.

• Q_L is the fractional portion of a count of l_f when engaging in a more precise calculation.
• n_Lr describes the count of l_f representative of the position of an observable with respect to the frame of a center of mass.
• S is the unknown constant when resolving a description of gravity, latter replaced with θ_si.
• r is the distance between an observer and a target.
• G is the gravitational constant, 6.6740779428(56) 10^-11m³kg^-1s^-2 such that its value considers the effects of length contraction associated with discrete measure at the upper count limit. Italicized G identifies a measure not at the limit (e.g., G=6.6738448362(53) 10^-11m³kg^-1s^-2 at the blackbody demarcation).

When classical expressions are written in terms of physically significant units of measure and counts of those measures, an expression and value for the gravitational constant can be resolved with quantum precision. There are two prerequisite inputs; they are c and θ_si.

A Measurement Quantization (MQ) description of the gravitational constant is resolved as a difference between two frames, the discrete Measurement Frame of the observer and the non-discrete Target Frame of the universe. We describe this difference as a function of the non-discrete count Q_L of a more precise calculation.

To this we add a new constant. Describing momentum with respect to the Measurement Frame of the observer, θ_si=3.26239030392(48) is also the angular measure of the polarization field with respect to the plain of X-rays when at their degenerate frequency. Measurements were first carried about by Shwartz and Harris and published in their 2011 paper entitled, Polarization Entangled Photons at X-Ray Energies.

Application of MQ offers us the ability to resolve descriptions of phenomena not just quantum in measure, but also cosmological. For instance, one may replace a description of fundamental mass m_f with terms defined with respect to the universe^{(1,Eq. 88)}. As demonstrated below, a description of fundamental mass then becomes a description of the diameter and age of the universe.

Importantly, scaling between frames is physically supported both by paradox and cross-epoch measurements. Paradoxes include descriptions of a speed of light that differ as a function of measurement scope (i.e., quantum, macroscopic and cosmological). As MQ recognizes that the speed of light is constant for all frames this paradox is avoided, but should scaling not be physically valid, this issue would have to be addressed.

A second support regards descriptions of properties of early universe phenomena compared to their measure in the present epoch. For this we offer several descriptions, a majority describing the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB). We can resolve a no parameter calculation of its age, quantity and present-day density and temperature. Correspondence between MQ calculations and measurement all align digit-for-digit and within the margin of uncertainty associated with each measure.

In short, we find support for scaling of the fundamental expression across all measurement domains.

Let us now turn our attention to the properties of gravity. While we have used the equality symbol in the initial expressions to describe gravitational curvature^{(1,Eq. 8)}, said descriptions carry a prerequisite understanding of the conditions associated with their measure. The reason for this relates to the length contraction associated with discrete measure.

We find the effects of length contraction physically relevant in all descriptions incorporating the measures of G or ħ^{(4,Sec. III.E)}. Specifically, the value of G is a function of distance associated with a phenomenon. In that G is typically measured macroscopically, for instance, where the measure of G is resolved at a distance of one meter, then the effects described by the Informativity differential are far less than the precision afforded. The same would be true if we measured the reduced Planck constant as a function of a quantum distance (i.e., blackbody radiation). Combining these two measures combines two frames of reference and therein we find disagreement in solutions to component terms. For instance, using Planck's unit expressions to solve for the value of G will produce different results.

We can solve the problem by resolving a value for G and ħ at a common distance, both as a function of an electromagnetic phenomenon (a quantum distance) or both with respect to a macroscopic distance. Typically we solve measures at their upper count limit. For the latter case, we do not italicize the term.

A second observation is realized when G is described in terms of the fundamental measures^{(4,Eqs. 67-79)}. We discover the expression for G has two components. First, there is the length to time ratio (l_f/t_f), which we refer to as the length frequency. Second, there is the mass to time frequency, which we refer to as the mass frequency (m_f/t_f). While such descriptions are sometimes presented in terms of fundamental measures, it is understood that we are referring to the corresponding count terms (i.e., the count frequency). As such, the gravitational constant is length frequency cubed - once for each spatial dimension - divided by the mass frequency.

The expression describes length, mass and their relation to time. The correlation between mass and time is one dimensional. But, the correlation between length and time is three dimensional, representative of each of the three physical dimensions that describe space^{(2,Eq. 102)}.

We will lastly note, there are mathematical arguments that support greater dimensions in a description of space. MQ offers new tools to physically validate such claims. Where the Informativity differential is a function of the Pythagorean theorem - dimensions two or greater - it follows that any mathematical model employing dimensions 2 or greater with respect to any dimension, must also account for the contraction of measure in that same dimension.