Is negative energy a consequence of gravitational energy? [closed]

Assumption

Treat all objects as a point. Gravitational constant = 6.67384 × 10^-11 m^3 kg^-1 s^-2 Acceleration of the object is 1 ms^-2

The setup

Imagine there are 2 identical objects with mass of 1 Kg each is separated by a distance denoted by a letter "d". In this setup there is only a force acting on both objects and is causing both objects to accelerate towards each other, assuming no external force is involved. The force pulling both objects towards each other is the gravitational force that is acting on each other, the gravitational force is stronger when "d" is smaller. Agree so far?

Kinetic energy

As the object is moving we can calculate its kinetic energy, this value is positive. The faster the object moves the more kinetic energy it has.

Potential energy

Since both objects are separated by a distance "d", we can also calculate their potential energy and we all know that this value is negative.

Law of conservation of energy

This is where I'm totally lost! when two objects fall towards each other from rest, their potential energy decreases at the same time their kinetic energy increases. If the value of potential energy is negative... in order not to violet the law of conservation of energy, there must be a negative value to balance out the equation so I guess it have to be the gravitational energy.

Question

Q1. Is negative energy related to gravitational energy?

Q2. Is the negative energy produced in Casimir effect related to gravitational energy?

Q3. It seem quantum vacuum cannot be zero, there must be a field and can it be the hypothetical force carrier of gravity a.k.a graviton?

P.S. I have recycled the original question and posted a new one instead, therefore all comments and answers which may appears irrelevant are actually based on the old question.

closed as off-topic by David Z♦Mar 23 '15 at 5:00

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

• "We deal with mainstream physics here. Questions about the general correctness of unpublished personal theories are off topic, although specific questions evaluating new theories in the context of established science are usually allowed. For more information, see Is non mainstream physics appropriate for this site?." – David Z
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

• well, you cannot break a system to see what would happen in that system – Jimmy360 Mar 23 '15 at 2:52
• so just say the clocks are photons – Jimmy360 Mar 23 '15 at 2:52
• your question is stated wrong. you have to ask "what if the limit of the speed approaches c" not "what if the speed was c". photons do not have an eigenzeit so you can not use them as clocks. – Yukterez Mar 23 '15 at 3:07
• @Jimmy360 my answer is that time perceived by these two photons (atomic clocks in disguise) is still the same at the moment they are accelerated to speed of light regardless of how much time passed of outside observer (Clock C), do correct me if I misinterpret Einstein general relativity thanks. – user6760 Mar 23 '15 at 3:09
• @СимонТыран "This is a hypothetical ques..." and "suppose it is possible to accel..." – user6760 Mar 23 '15 at 3:11

suppose it is possible to accelerate matter at speed of light

By this you must mean suppose that relativistic mechanics is, at its root, wrong.

What will the time reflects on these two clocks?

Since you've stipulated that relativistic mechanics is wrong, which incorrect, non-relativistic mechanics would you like to apply to this problem?

• Yes and No, "suppose" there is a loop hole in "relativistic mechanics", if you read my question I believe there is no violation of relativity only problem is the amount of energy required to accelerate mass to attain the speed of light. – user6760 Mar 23 '15 at 3:17
• @user6760 You are denying one of the key principles of SR to see what will happen in SR. That is like asking how electricity would work without electrons. – Jimmy360 Mar 23 '15 at 13:11
• @Jimmy360 I agreed with you so I'd flagged my question. But electricity is the flow of charged particles i.e. anti-proton and positron etc. I don't know how to delete this question any advise would be appreciated thanks. – user6760 Mar 23 '15 at 13:53
• @user6760 True, but usually when we talk about electricity we mean electrons. There should be a delete button right below the question. – Jimmy360 Mar 24 '15 at 2:20
• I'll let the moderator do the deletion, anyway I think my questions are naive in nature but it did not violate casualty and do correct me if I'm wrong are the scientists working with particle collider actually trying to accelerate protons (not to be confused with photons) to the speed of light so that they are able to generate sufficient energy to smash particles so that they can probe the existence of a parallel universe by studying the tiny black hole if they can be found. – user6760 Mar 25 '15 at 3:14