reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

The Basic Implications Of E=Total[m(1 + D)]

a recapitulation

A. Its essential statement

"Extrapolation of the expansion of the universe backwards in time to the early hot dense "Big Bang" phase, using general relativity, yields an infinite density and temperature at a finite time in the past. At age 10^-35 seconds the Universe begins with a cataclysm that generates space and...

view entire post

The Basic Implications Of E=Total[m(1 + D)]

a recapitulation

A. Its essential statement

"Extrapolation of the expansion of the universe backwards in time to the early hot dense "Big Bang" phase, using general relativity, yields an infinite density and temperature at a finite time in the past. At age 10^-35 seconds the Universe begins with a cataclysm that generates space and time, as well as all the matter and energy the Universe will ever hold."

E = Energy content of the universe

m = mass content of the universe

D = distance, Total = in all spatial directions, from the point of Big-Bang, of singularity's energy-mass superposition

At D=0, E was = m and both E and m were, together, all the energy and matter the Universe will ever hold. Since the onset of the cataclysm, E remains constant and m diminishes as D increases.

The increase of D is the initial inflation, followed by the ongoing expansion, of what became the galactic clusters.

At 10^-35 seconds, D was already a fraction of a second above zero. This is when gravity starts. This is what started gravity. At this instance starts the energetic space texture, starts the straining of the space texture, and starts the space-texture-memory, gravity, that most probably will eventually overcome expansion and initiate re-impansion back to singularity.

B. Some of its further essential implications beyond Einstein-Hubble and re classical-quantum physics

And again and again : "On The Origin Of Origins"

http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/16
0/122.page#2753

1. It promotes commonsensical scientific critical thinking beyond Einstein-Hubble.

The universe is the archetype of quantum within classical physics, which is the fractal oneness of the universe.

Astronomically there are two physics. A classical Newtonian physics behaviour of and between galactic clusters, and a quantum physics behaviour WITHIN the galactic clusters.

The onset of big-bang's inflation, the cataclysmic resolution of the Original Superposition, started gravity, with formation - BY DISPERSION - of galactic clusters that behave as classical Newtonian bodies and continuously reconvert their original pre-inflation masses back to energy, thus fueling the galactic clusters expansion, and with endless quantum-within-classical intertwined evolutions WITHIN the clusters in attempt to delay-resist this reconversion.

2. There is no call, no need, for any dark energy. The energy of the universe is conserved. The mass of the universe is conserved in the form of energy, the energy fueling the clusters expansion. At the next universal singularity, at the next D = 0, there will again be E = m for a small fraction of a second...just wait and see...

Following Newton (1) gravity is decreased when mass is decreased and (2) acceleration of a body is given by dividing the force acting upon it by its mass. By plain common sense the combination of those two 'laws' may explain the accelerating cosmic expansion of galaxy clusters and the laws that drive it, based on the E/ m/ D relationship suggested above..

3. There is no call, no need, for a Higgs Particle.

The resolution of energy-mass superposition is reverted when D = 0. Shockingly sad, but must be soberingly faced rationally.

C. Its implications re the origin and nature of life beyond Darwin, re selection for survival

For Nature, Earth's biosphere is one of the many ways of temporarily constraining an amount of energy within a galaxy within a galactic cluster, for thus avoiding, as long as possible, spending this particularly constrained amount as part of the fuel that maintains the clusters expansion.

Genes are THE Earth's organisms and ALL other organisms are their temporary take-offs.

For Nature genes are genes are genes. None are more or less important than the others. Genes and their take-offs, all Earth organisms, are temporary energy packages and the more of them there are the more enhanced is the biosphere, Earth's life, Earth's temporary storage of constrained energy. This is the origin, the archetype, of selected modes of survival.

The early genes came into being by solar energy and lived a very long period solely on direct solar energy. Metabolic energy, the indirect exploitation of solar energy, evolved at a much later phase in the evolution of Earth's biosphere.

Dov Henis

(Comments from 22nd century)

Updated Life's Manifest May 2009

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=14988&st=480&#e
ntry412704

http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/
140/122.page#2321

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

Dear Glenn Starkman, where are you? There is no excluding my ideas from consideration in your decision. Let's keep it fair, honest, and credible.

Witness the following:

This enire post has very serious and direct bearing upon the authenticity/limits of General Relativity.

What of the fact that astronomical observations may necessarily be reducing/isolating/narrowing our...

view entire post

Dear Glenn Starkman, where are you? There is no excluding my ideas from consideration in your decision. Let's keep it fair, honest, and credible.

Witness the following:

This enire post has very serious and direct bearing upon the authenticity/limits of General Relativity.

What of the fact that astronomical observations may necessarily be reducing/isolating/narrowing our capacity for understanding due the fact that they are similar to thought -- in other words, they are interactive creations of thought, to a significant extent. Does this not result in inconsistency, narrowness, and unpredictabiity regarding experience/thought/understanding? Thoughts are relatively shifting and variable. Likewise, astronomical observations are all over the place and are creating a mess of theory/ideas/thinking. Dreams make thought more like sensory experience in general. Astronomical observations have significant similarities with dreams.

Also note the relative unpredictability of both astronomical observations and dream experience.

The dream seems to allow for what happened in the past -- to occur as a comprehensive approximation/likeness thereof -- in the future. The dream involves, and is demonstrative of, our becoming other than we are. Dreams add to the integrated extensiveness of thought, being, and experience. Clearly, this is why they unify electromagnetism amd gravity. Electromagneitsm/light and gravity are fundamental to life; they are united in the dream. My unification is fundamental, simple, comprehensive, complete, and consistent. In fact, my unification is more true or accurate/complete than either Einstein's theory or Maxwell's theory because it completes both of these theories and also enjoins the whole. Physicists, of all people, should know that you have to consider the totality of the system/experience.

As in the dream, do astronomical observations not relate to/involve how a smaller space is made larger and a larger space is made smaller?

You have to be bold when it comes to the truth, as you know.

The distinctions that I have made/identified -- between dream and waking experience -- are very useful/important (as I have shown) -- these distinctions are not to be confused, obliterated, or removed. I did not say that waking experience is a dream; dreams fade as do memories; importantly, we ultimately fade in time as well. Dreams are real; they are what they are. If our experience is not real, then what is? No two people ever see or experience the same thing anyway, whether while waking or in the dream.

THINK about it. There is then, ultimately, no true distinction between interior and exterior. The integrated and natural extensiveness of being and experience go hand-in-hand in and with time. It is that simple.

Note that the constant energy and lighting during dream experience --- and no fatigue, tiredness, or lack of energy --- is consistent with unifying and fundamentally balancing electromagnetism/light, energy, and gravity/feeling.

Reality must be understood (in varying degrees, of course) as involving (or pertaining to) what is the integrated extensiveness of being and experience (including thought). There is another critical dictionary definition. This definition clearly identifies the dream as real.

The dream is structured like memory. However, a new and much expanded definition/understanding of memory is definitely in order. (I have clearly shown this). Memory adds to the integrated extensiveness of experience and thought; memory integrates experience.

Dreams add to the integrated extensiveness of being, thought, and experience (and space) in and with time by making sensory experience in general (including electromagnetism and gravity) more like thought. This is seen in the past/present/future extensiveness of the thoughts of true genius, and in keeping with the increased predictability of events/experience as well.

The above paragraph is yet another example of the superior thoroughness of my explanation regarding said unification.

This is why the dream is unfathomably brilliant; for this is in keeping with the fact that it is the manifestation/experience of the unification of gravity and electromagnetism/light. On balance, however, thought is reduced in the dream.

In the case of the highest/true/ideal form of genius, the integrated extensiveness of thinking/thought towers over others. This form of genius is

exceedingly rare.

See:

The Dream Fundamentally Balances and Unifies Gravity and Electromagnetism http://radicalacademy.com/studentrefphilfmd13.htm

I again await your reply.

Frank

view post as summary

reply to this thread

LIPP

“THE CONEY ISLAND GREEN THEORY”

A Summary of the Years (a technical paper)

I. A Very Brief Overview ……………………………………………………….. 2

II. The Concepts ………………………………………………………………….… 7

III. The Philosophical Theory: Matter x Time = Space ………………………….. 9

IV. The Quantification of Mass to Space ………………………………………… 10

V. Synthesis of...

view entire post

LIPP

“THE CONEY ISLAND GREEN THEORY”

A Summary of the Years (a technical paper)

I. A Very Brief Overview ……………………………………………………….. 2

II. The Concepts ………………………………………………………………….… 7

III. The Philosophical Theory: Matter x Time = Space ………………………….. 9

IV. The Quantification of Mass to Space ………………………………………… 10

V. Synthesis of Gravity into the normal realm: Fourth Law of Motion ………. 12

VI. Experiments and Data …………………………………………………………. 16

VII. Mathematics …………………………………………………………………… 18

VIII. On Implications ………………..………………………………………........... 23

IX. On the Synthesis of Fundamental Interaction between Forces ……………... 24



X. Other…………….……………………………………………………………..... 27

XI. The Coney Island Green Theory’s Rollover Addendum Number 1…………..29

I. A Very Brief Overview

The following is intended to supplement, not supplant, the Standard Model:

Given the nature of TheTheory, the starting single point postulate is as follows:

POSTULATE I:

BELIEVE IT OR NOT!

Or, if we are to expand “Postulate I” to be in support of The Theory, then two postulates occur as follows:

POSTULATE II:

1) If you believe it, it is true.

2) I believe it!

And for skeptics:

POSTULATE III:

1) If you believe it, it is true.

2) I don't believe it!

a) An Overview:

The Theory does not anticipate even the slightest partial concurrence of the community as the outright acceptance of The Theory is both highly unlikely and a bit undesirable, given the scientific inertia it displaces. Thus, The Theory is offered as a starting point for those enticed to extend its significance, if any. It remains for astronomical data, philosophy, and experimentation and further research and rationale to solidify The Theory. Others are welcome to use this paper as base camp one.

The Theory apologizes for the complete confusion with which it presents itself, but recognizes that it is thought, along with the elation of that thought, in motion so to speak. It is a perception of nature and wishes to attain synergy with the Standard Model.

The Theory builds upon new interpretations of the works and efforts of Lorentz, Einstein, and others, and The Theory is further backed up by significant rationale along with the means by which The Theory can be astronomically verified.

One of The Theory’s shortcomings is a lack of mathematics, as well its complete integration into “Today’s Physics” (i.e. QED). This is a direct result of the author’s complete lack of basic math skills {while the author failed a simple college course in calculus, notes such as “positive infinity meets (is equal to) negative infinity at the Tangent of 90 degrees” are found scratched in the textbook’s margin columns}, lack of knowledge in physics overall (the author has little to no formal education), all compounded by the comprehensive and thoroughly mind-boggling comprehension that The Theory requires for it to be fully understood, even by the author himself. However, Faraday prevailed under similar circumstances and so the author attempts tomorrow's physics, all the while utilizing a basic grasp of the offered science (i.e. materialization, pair annihilation, quantum, fusion, relativity, space-time continuum, conservation of angular momentum, E=mc2, etc.).

Time dilation is also touched upon but not mentioned in great detail. Essentially where MT=S, where time is a forward arrow vector quantity, and M through length contraction, S is born! Quantum appears to fit the picture well. The author views TIME as movement dependent. This, where M=Mass, T=Time, and S=Space.

The book that firmly planted the author’s theory was The Universe and Dr. Einstein by Lincoln Barnett, forward by Albert Einstein - all this in the late seventies. The theoretical portion of MT=S started out from a simple "rate multiplied by time is equal to distance" concept, from there, the speed of light multiplied by time is equal to distance; speed of light multiplied by time is equal to Space; speed of light (photon) multiplied by time is equal to Space; speed of light (photon/mass/infinite mass/matter) multiplied by Time is equal to Space; and finally Matter multiplied by Time is equal to Space, MT=S. The actual quantification of mass into a spatial volume came more recently.

The author’s thinking parallels that of Kinetic Energy = 1/2 mv2, so all the Energy must equal all the mass (not just half of it) multiplied by the highest velocity possible, or that of light, for…., E=mc2! This would also mean that Potential Energy is also equal to 1/2mv2, which confirms that PE + KE = “E” = mc2, thus maintaining appropriate symmetry. The above checks because any loss of KE to PE, can simultaneously be considered a loss of PE to KE, depending upon the view. But why digress this early.

The paper includes MT=S, Time as a forward/reverse vector quantity, The Proportionality Law Of Motion, A New View of Entropy (disorder to order), The Quantification of Mass to Space, The Fourth Law of Motion, Gravity into the Normal Realm, A Desire to Reach Time Equilibrium as the cause of all Motion, Explanation of Dark Energy and Dark Matter, thoughts “On Forces” and further notations by the author.

The author is not a chemist, physicist, nor other but rather enjoys thinking about/conceptionalizing upon physics, inclusive of matter/time/space/ dark energy/dark matter/relativity, etc.

Astrophysicists willing and able to further strengthen and/or dispute The Theory with observed data from the experiments offered are cheerfully invited.

In the author’s own words:

My theory goes back some time. Essentially, as mass approaches the speed of light, all that mass is shed and is converted into space. This follows Lorentz transformation (length contraction along the x axis). So, my equation (MT=S) is to be held in agreement with the speed of light (c), and is understood to be both on a cosmic scale as well as a micro scale, wherever photons reside. Essentially where MT=S, where time is a forward arrow vector quantity, and M through length contraction, S is born! The Big Bang! Remember, the cosmic scale is simply an accumulation of its micro components.

According to my Fourth Law of Motion, I would view radiation as just another version of gravity, and for that matter, all movement/motion. The radiation half life is consistent because the background radiation field permeating all space (remember, space is another form of matter according to my quantification) provides the motivating equilibrium field necessary to continue decay [I suggest that we can stop this decay under the right circumstances - for instance, remove the subject matter (i.e. Radium) from all background radiation (way deep underground), further place it in a vacuum, remove its electrons, remove it from “seeing” any disequilibriating force tendency and the decay should stop].

I believe The Theory to be true (Postulate II- 2) for the thought is fully original and the rationale as I have currently prepared it. While the "well thought out” rationale, axioms, postulates etc. may not be casually comprehensible, The Theory is solid and works to explain a number of observations. In fact, it builds upon Einstein/Lorentz, and others, and offers solutions to dark matter/dark energy while at the same time combines the space-time continuum with the mass-energy equivalence (E=mc2). The net result is MT=S.

We can still look for the "Graviton", and find countless upon countless of new particle offspring from particle collider collisions, but essentially after all is said and done, we find that we are also entitled to view everything as a permutation of the Time/Space/Matter field density (Do not misinterpret, I am all for the CERN LHC).

“The Theory” looks forward and into this relationship between Time, Space and Matter. It looks at the root of Matter, and finds its tangible components to consist of Space and Time.

The next time you look up at the heaven’s stars, remember that the immediate space surrounding them is still being created from the stars’ mass as matter unfolds into it becoming the space itself, this as the speed of light emanating from the star reaches “c” value. As a percentage of the speed of light is reached, the dark matter (more massive) is neatly unfolded, with the dark energy (pure space) all unfolding at the speed of light. Through this reasoning The Theory explains why Dark Matter Halos appear nearer to massive bodies and not in pure open space. The reason being is that the massive photons shed less mass at the beginning of their journey (i.e. before the mass reaches full “c” value”), and retains some value of matter, as “dark matter”. During light’s journey, the light attempts to attain equilibrium by finding the nearest possible equilibrium-creating field. In cruder terms, it “sticks around for a while”, thus the Dark Matter is created. The Theory dictates that the Lorentz transformation equations are fully true! As length contracts, space unfolds! While most of the spatial volume of the current “Our Universe” ( as opposed to the philosophized “Many Universes” or “Parallel Universes”) was created during the Big Bang, it still casually unfolds today through the process described as “MT=S” (perhaps your de-materialization) , and through the materialization of our “space-time-matter-light-microphotonic-structural-macrogrowt
h–wave-field-theory”, through the process “S/T=M”, space also again becomes matter, and it is this most common occurrence at the micro-scale, upon which the macro is built.

It also appears that the Space /Time/ Matter permutations/combinations are sufficiently large enough so as to allow for the multitude of realities that we consciously see around us.

b) On Dark Matter/Dark Energy Specifically

According to “The Theory”, in line with length contraction, relativity, Lorentz transformations, Lipp's Mass to Space conversion, etc. the dark matter (i.e. 25% of space) is created by matter approaching but not reaching the speed of light, whereas the dark energy (i.e. 75% of space) is created by matter reaching the last percentages (i.e. 90-100%) of the speed of light. At the speed of light, one becomes time (this, since nothing moves relative to this going rate speed "c", so all stands still relatively speaking, and stillness means that no Time has transpired, much in the same way that a house left by it's occupants in the year 1910 will have preserved its time within that era). So my equation MT=S reduces to matter at the speed of light [(i.e. multiplied by Time) (MT in my equation represents matter at the speed of light - coincident with Rate x Time = Distance, so MT is photon at the rate of light (mass @ “c”) = Space)] is equal to Space. Matter to Space! Theologically speaking, “God is light”. The God-given light gives us space, time & matter – to please the Vatican.



Hence the dark matter (the gravitational pulling matter) is found at slower speeds whereas the dark energy (the expanding matter responsible for the expansion of the universe - Hubble et. al) is a direct result of the matter at much higher speeds (those approaching the speed of light). Essentially, there is no definite boundary between the two (dark matter & dark energy), and one must think of dense matter at zero rest speeds (i.e. you & me), with spatial matter (space itself) reached at the speed of light. In between, there are essentially many (perhaps infinite?) of these "forms of matter", dependent upon the rate of speed of the matter. To light, all stands still and there is no Time, for if there is no movement, nothing has changed by which time can be measured. Time is of course movement (rate) dependent.



With regard to the Lorentz association with Dark Matter to Dark Energy: Matter unfolds into Space - and depending upon matter reaching what exact percentage of "c", it either becomes more massive space (Dark Matter - lower "c" rate), or more spatial matter space (Dark Energy w/expansion properties), with pure space unfolding at the rate "c"! , this since as one reaches "c", one becomes "Time", and as viewed by the citizen at rest (you & I), matter becomes space (MT=S).

If there was a primordial near infinite point mass of matter, and it represented all that is, with anything outside the point being nonexistent - neither Time nor Space nor more Matter, and if that point now expands, Space has been created - however, it is only created at the expense of the matter point - mass has been lost, and through Time, Space has been created (again MT=S). Conceptually, this is the Big Bang.



The Theory, “Matter multiplied by Time is equal to Space! (MT=S, M=S/T, T=S/M)”, as previously forwarded to Scientific American, bits and pieces to Princeton, Hawkings, and along the way to other random parties via various emails, should be perused at least once by interested and/or uninterested parties, this especially since the mathematical determination and quantification of the equivalency has been added, all accompanied by The Fourth Law of Motion.

For your enjoyment, here is my theory. Basically, it describes a "fourth law of motion", and quantifies mass to space, which explains the missing Dark Matter/Dark Energy and also offers a satisfactory reason as to why the Universe is expanding. From a theological point of view, it also views entropy as things proceeding from disorder to order, and not vice versa - the customary viewpoint. Lastly, and this is critically important, look deep into my explanation/wording of the "fourth law", and you can see that everything can be considered the same entity, the same particle-wave-field-space-time-matter, which simplifies the current confusion.

Of course there is the Final Law of Everything “A” (FLEA) that will always be a work in progress and noted herein conceptually only as an introduction. The Final Law of Everything “A” cannot be finalized even when philosophically categorizing everything as one point, one particle, one consciousness, synthesizing Philosophy, Religion, and Physics et. al… That it cannot be finalized is as close to the final law as we shall endeavor to comprehend. Thus the reader must understand now that it is not the intention of this paper to address FLEA any farther than we have already.

END – A Very Brief Overview

II. The Concepts

Concepts for the reader to focus on:

1) Fourth Law of Motion

2) Everything is the same, only their interaction with other “same particles” is what determines the unique conglomerate of stuff that we see

3) Everything moving toward equilibrium

4) Entropy as disorder to order, not vice versa

5) MT=S, Matter multiplied by Time is equal to Space

6) Quantification of mass to spatial volume (a real quantification based on atomic radii & loss of mass in E=mc2, of course compensated for density variations)

7) Explanation of expanding universe & dark matter & dark energy

8) Law of Proportionality

9) Cause of all Motion

10) Synthesis of Space-Time continuum with the mass –energy equation (E=mc2)

11) Synthesis of Fundamental Interaction between Forces

A new view of physics...

For thought:

A) The probability that separate and distinct particles (electrons, protons, neutrons, quarks, leptons, neutrinos, anti-neutrinos, photons, etc.) exist solely and exclusively by themselves, retain their own distinct properties, and have, on their own accord, “found” their way into each and every atom- electrons around the outer orbit, protons / neutrons in the nucleus core is simply “Ridiculous”. The probabilities are just too astronomical. Absolutely “Ridiculous”! Great for explaining things, mathematically & fundamentally correct when determining outcomes (i.e. chemistry, fusion, etc.), but the questions remains: Is there a simpler way to examine and explain the universe, both on a macro and micro level? A one-particle view of nature using a view of entropy in which time equilibrium is the motivating factor is included in The Theory.

B) Theory rather states that “everything is the same” (Defined in The Theory as Godrop), one particle only! As close to God as physics, with all its metaphysical origins, and in the context of this paper, may reach. The next step may be God, fusing theology, philosophy, religion, and physics, as one, as God, and for the atheists, as nothing, for nothing and pure being are one and the same, as a past philosopher notes.

C) That the constituent subunits of the Godrop are godroplets {if you remain averse to risk, and do not wish to view The Theory in terms of the Godrop and godroplets, at your option simply feel free to substitute Thing One and Things Two} defined for the purpose of introducing the necessary means to explain the interaction of these sub-units, as one unit “sees” another. That based on the relative nature of these “same any particles” {(godroplets) (Theory defines particles of the Godrop as godroplets, since we are to break down the single one and only Godrop into its fundamental and many sub-component godroplets for the purpose of taking apart/understanding our world)} as they are relative to one another “same any particles” (godroplets = things two) actually determines what the overall property outcome will be. That outcome is determined by the new Fourth Law of Motion. This new law allows us to consolidate all of the known particles into these subunits of the single Godrop; these subunits are the godroplets.

D) Consider Sir Newton’s first three laws and then his Law of Gravity – appearing to hang away by itself. Then consider the lack of a law that explains “spontaneous motion” (as defined in theory). Then recognize that the fundamental nature of movement (from no movement) is so much so at the very root of nature, and therefore the science of Physics overall, that it must be the result of a single phenomenon. That to find motion from no motion is at the root of nature, and can be explained from a single law. This philosophy parallels that philosophy wherein “an object at rest shall remain at rest and an object in uniform motion in a straight line shall maintain that motion unless acted upon by an outside force”. This new law equates the motion of metal filings near a magnet, to gravity, to the reason chemistry takes place, to fusion, in fact, to motion itself.

To help understand these concepts this technical paper attempts to approach the subject in an easy step-by-step manner.

END - Concepts

III. The Philosophical Theory: Matter x Time = Space

a) Matter X Time = Space:

Now we must understand the philosophical concept of a piece matter moving away from itself (getting smaller and smaller); now take this out to infinity (the nth degree) & the matter approaches space. It becomes space! That was also one of the foundations of the philosophical MT=S. Today however, we have an actual quantification!

“The Theory” MT=S is very close to Einstein's view of matter warping space-time, except that it goes one step further. Matter doesn't warp the space-time continuum; rather the curvature of space-time is curvature, yes, but further, it is this Space and Time that is actually converting into Matter! And, since everything is everything else, it all makes sense! The Theory combines the Space –Time Continuum with the fundamental units of the Mass-Energy Equation. The basic fundamentals are: matter (mass), time (seconds), and space (length). The Theory equation relates all fundamental units in one equation, and the equation must be understood to be in terms of light speed. This notation should be self-evident and is critical to the understanding of The Theory.

MT=S as a philosophical concept was pondered in the late seventies and in short takes the idea that matter moving infinitely apart (to the nth degree) progresses toward it becoming space; this philosophy was formulated into the MT=S equation. A short paper on MT=S was submitted to Scientific American and was politely turned down as the publisher noted that only “accepted” theories are printed. Now, since the first postulate of The Theory is “Believe It or Not”, The Theory cannot be disputed and must be accepted, albeit in either option.

On Matter and Time in an expanding universe: MATTER multiplied by TIME is SPACE.

(In other words, the entropy cycle has been completed) (Equilibrium has been reached).

Until recently the true quantification of the Matter x Time = Space equation languished in scientific history as merely “theorhectorical” hearsay. It is the quantification that now supports the above philosophical theory. And with that quantification, comes the probable means by which observed data can further substantiate and/or repudiate The Theory.

Matter has often been described as that which “Occupies space and has mass”: The inherent contradiction of this definition is all too apparent unless each is a manifestation of the other. Matter could occupy matter and have no further relationship to space. But as soon as Matter occupies Space, it is by default a manifestation of Space!

END - The Philosophical Theory: Matter x Time = Space

IV. The Quantification of Mass to Space

The following is offered as a way to quantify a mass-to-space relationship and serves to apply physical meaning to Lipp’s MT=S equation. And it serves to introduce all the repercussions associated with such a drastically new approach to the understanding of nature. It further stresses the basic notion that everything conceived must be able to be portrayed as a form of anything else conceived. The actual quantification is mathematical and appears in the mathematical Section of this technical paper.

As far as further rationale for the quantification of mass to space is concerned, from E=mc2, one can view energy only as an ability to do work (in Joules), however, if mass is used up, gone, poof, one still needs a reaffirmation that the basics are taken care of, namely, time-space-matter, (seconds, meters, Kilograms) for everything shall be forever bound to these three fundamentals. It is these three fundamentals that create the foundation upon which all observable data and experimentation and the overall history of all the sciences combined are based upon. The absolute need for this reaffirmation correlates strongly with The Theory. One simply cannot have mass disappear without it affecting time & space. The concept of energy is great (E=mc2), but what about the fundamentals. The Theory quantifies mass into a volume of space and makes one feel much more comfortable now that the fundamentals are maintained. At the same time, The Theory does offer a viable solution to the dark matter/dark energy problem, as well as a reason for the Hubble expansion.

A much less than mediocre study of length contraction, relativity, photons, infinite mass, etc. has led to the mechanics by which Mass turns to Space.

Essentially, the dynamics of the mechanics can best be understood by Einsteinium length contraction. Be it herein adopted that the photon does not have a rest mass of zero, rather, its rest mass is somewhat substantial, and it loses that mass through the process of length contraction, as it travels the speed of light and becomes Space!

As length is contracting, space is born. As the rest mass disappears, it becomes space. The problem of mass attaining the speed of light, with its associated infinite energy concerns, can be resolved, if that mass turns into space. Then, the photon could have a rest mass, and it is this rest mass that turns into space, via the “energy” associated with that famous equation E=mc2.

Energy is not one of the three fundamentals; rather it is a concept of their transition, of work done, in Joules. Energy is not one of the three fundamentals. This cannot be overstated.

This technical paper offers the Fourth Law of Motion, equations MT=S, T=S/M, M=S/T, an actual atomic mass unit quantification into a real spatial quantity (the CUPI), as well as an explanation of the Expanding Universe, dark matter, and dark energy. We shall also add the forgoing as an explanation of the Mysterious Force and it is well noted that the dynamics of “mass to space” conversions, as well as “space to mass” conversions occur everywhere, both on a macro level, as well as micro! Perhaps this fits into your materialization / de-materialization, pair annihilation, and/or vacuum energy.

Now we introduce the Fourth Law of Motion.

END - The Quantification of Mass to Space

V. Synthesis of Gravity into the normal realm: Fourth Law of Motion

After having spent three full years dropping various objects onto my lab bench at “The Laboratory” as well as stretching and releasing rubber bands, etc. thinking, thinking, thinking, with associated hopes to obtain some realization as to what is happening with gravity, unified field theory, etc., the following realization materialized very distinctly and as a direct result of the fruits of those long efforts:

The following is a general outline:

Pertinent Components:

I. There is but One Particle and that I term a GODROP (Thing One).

II. All else is a part thereof and this I term GODROPLETS (Things Two).

III. Knowing Sir Newton’s three Laws of Motion and his theory of Gravity.

IV. To Sir Newton’s three Laws is added the following Fourth Law of Spontaneous Motion (of course it’s not spontaneous – it’s just the name):

a)

FOURTH LAW OF SPONTANEOUS MOTION:

ANY accumulation of matter (i.e. pencil) occupying space and without motion with respect to its directly accompanying surrounding frame of field reference, which when allowed to be free of another holding field (the hand in this case being the holding field), and which then moves (the pencil in this case) with respect to that initial surrounding frame of field reference, are ALL THEMSELVES ABIDING BY the SAME PHYSICAL FORCE (tendency). That force being and the motion of the object also being according to the following:

The Spontaneous Motion will proceed from one pressure gradient {field densities with high Time “T” value variations per unit volume}to another pressure gradient {field densities with a different Time “T” value variations per unit volume}, {and/or the same “Time” density per unit volume space but with different volumes observed}, {and/or equal volumes observed (i.e. same volume but different pressures = more time per given space!)} until such time that they ( the reactive parties) reach equilibrium with one another (in this case, the pencil reaching equilibrium with the desk and now resting on the desk). The pressure difference being the relative field pressure between the two fields, AS PERCEIVED ONE FIELD TO ANOTHER. The field itself being the amount of matter per given volume of space (or, per MT=S, this represents the amount of Time per given volume of space). Here, the concept of pressure is being applied not only to gaseous elements but to all of matter, and in a field-like manner.

This Spontaneous Motion holds true for: objects released in air (at my desk) (Gravity), objects released in space (no movement is equal to equilibrium between perceived fields), electricity through copper wire, light through fiber optics, a rubber band stretched and released, Big Bang, metal fillings allowed to be free within a magnetic field until their movement is so stabilized, beta radiation, a burning match, a bubble of air under the water and released to allow it to "float" to the surface, the combining of elements and all of chemistry, and

ALL ELSE, WHEREIN PARTICLES/FIELDS/OBJECTS WITHOUT MOTION RELATIVE TO THEIR INITIAL SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT THEN FIND MOTION, UNTIL SUCH RELATIVISTIC FIELDS OF THE ENVIRONMENT HAVE BEEN STABILIZED TO REACH EQUILIBRIUM (TIME!) AS PERCIEVED ONE FIELD TO ANOTHER. This equilibrium appears consistent with entropy, however, “The Theory” views entropy as a sate whereby things are moving from a state of disorder to a state of order, or equilibrium, a very ordered state, a very very ordered state. Entropy - disorder to order.



Using I and II above, along with Sir Newton's three Laws, and substituting the Law of Spontaneous Motion for Sir Newton's Law of Gravity, all things may be better understood. The four laws of motion now include gravity, radiation, etc. etc., and can be applied to everything.

Part of “FLEA” in four simple laws of motion. The concepts of gluons, electrons, protons, leptons, quarks, elements, etc. as these particles have been described as such to “explain” our world, are still simply variations on the underlying MT=S theme. In the current Standard Model, there is no end to the number of particles, simply keep simply colliding, and for that subject, why not simply extend the standard model upward and outward to the cosmic scale, where the planets themselves can be considered particles to the solar system and solar systems particles to the galaxies, for this is what the Standard Model offers, but on the micro way down, not the macro way up.

“The Theory” rather states that there are only GODROPLETS in a GODROP, following Newton’s Laws 1, 2, and 3, and the above Law of Spontaneous Motion, now Law Number 4. The pressure differences explain why one particle needs an anti-particle, why a south pole needs a north pole, etc., since things are being viewed with respect one pressure gradient to another.

From the above, one can see that there are no gravitons; rather only Godroplets (Things Two) trying to reach equilibrium with each other and within the Godrop (Thing One). The Standard Model is Not Wrong, but the One Particle Aspect of The Theory Consolidates!

The law of gravity & the law of charges are not arbitrarily so very identical, rather they are explaining the same thing, though on different scales. The Theory looks at “m” and “q” not as “m” and “q” but as time-field densities. And the further these fields are apart (r^2), the less direct they “see” each other.

b)

On Motion Alone

All motion is simply the rate at which equilibrium is attempting to be reached. The greater the mis-equilibrium, the greater the rate of motion (the reason for catalyst in chemistry) to have the constituent particles/fields reach equilibrium. The ball dropped on the moon (as perceived by the ball to the moon) has less of a mis-equilibrium than the same ball looking at the earth, consequently, the resultant motion is also less. The greatest mis-equilibrium possible is that of the electromagnetic spectrum, wherein the rate at which equilibrium is met is the speed of light (c). My offer, though rather obscured, is to the effect, can someone create a mathematical model/formula which determines the rate at which motion will arise, when one knows the equilibrium difference between fields (mis-equilibrium). All motion is a direct result of equilibrium being attempted to be reached (i.e. a thrown football, gravity, catalyst reactions, and speed of light).

Perhaps with respect to gravity, and synthesis with strong force, weak force, and electromagnetism, monopoles etc. one can consider the fact that a body resting on the earth’s surface, having been dropped accordingly, that that body itself does not proceed directly to the center of the earth, to the gravitational center that is, that this represents a link analogy to a repulsive force, as is viewed by a positive nucleus, with a surrounding field of negative electrons. In this case, the body so dropped would be the electrons, and the center of earth’s gravity, the very center of earth, would be the positive nucleus. Here justification through this analogy may view gravity as a repulsive force, thus further strengthening the notion that one is seeing the same thing in electric fields as we are in gravity – The Theory simply states it is the way we look at it.

c)

More

Consider this input:

Find two things (particles, fields, softballs, ants, etc.) going at the same rate (speed), and even though these things may be totally different (i.e. ball dropping, car moving,

hurricane movement, etc.), and we can positively state that the proportionality of these two different systems attempting to reach equilibrium, (ball to ground, car to stop, hurricane to New Orleans), as perceived one equilibrium to the dis-equilibrium (mis-equilibrium & dis-equilibrium are used interchangeably in this technical paper) they are attempting to reach equilibrium with, are the same (when they at the same speed - obviously when the car stops their proportionality of equilibrium-disequilibrium is now different & all bets are off!). This leads to:

Lipp's Law of Proportionality

The states of any two systems having the same rate of motion see equal states of equilibrium to dis-equilibrium.

(Internal note: The tie in with constant motion appears elsewhere in this paper)

So the above is the reason for all motion, and their rates, & explains Gravity!

END -Synthesis of Gravity into the normal realm: Fourth Law of Motion

VI. Experiments and Data

Request 1:

The Theory views new Bohr "orbits"/ "energy levels" as creating that space at the expense of mass/energy, thus creating space in discrete Planck-like volumes. It is suggested that someone, using the quantification number (CUPI) provided in The Theory, re-calculate the resultant energy level volumetric changes, and confirm consistency between those now known volumes (new radii/energy levels/wavelengths, etc.), and those energy level volumes the quantification would thus provide, as calculated using CUPI. If there is consistency, this may lend credibility to The Theory. Note that where utilizing "known new quantum energy levels with their known new radii", to compare with calculated quantum volumetric spatial changes using the CUPI conversion factor (quantification) and known energy levels, please don't forget to compensate for density variations as had been done when formulating the CUPI.

Request 2:

For the Astrophysicists, The Theory offers a reason for the expanding universe as well as a solution to the dark matter problem. If someone can distinguish the rate of spatial expansion near a large star versus a small one (of lesser mass to energy), this shall constitute physical proof of The Theory. Things would be expanding quicker around the large star.

If any astrophysicists, when looking for stars to compare, wherein it is stated above that there should be more expansion around the large stars, obviously, since all stars are expanding to create space, {wherein it is stated "all stars are expanding to create space" naturally, this is taken to mean "mass depletion to space creation in accordance with MT=S and the CUPI" and not simply to be taken as "all stars are expanding to create space" as in maybe an exploding supernova} the stars (galaxies, systems, etc.) to be compared must be very near each other such that they both see the exact expansion that the other may see by virtue of systems nearby (because if they are in different parts of a system, they would be discombobulated by different expansions from other systems expanding in different ways) Thus, the two stars to be compared must be close enough to be able to state, "these stars see everywhere the exact expansion the other does", thus any difference in their measured expansion rates are attributable to there own spatial expansion rates. The red shift on the larger star should be greater, because it is creating more space than the little star. It is losing more mass/energy; it is moving farther away faster and so the Red Shift will be greater. However, note too the two sources to be compared must not gravitationally disrupt each other such that this interferes with what we are seeking to verify, namely the difference in expansion.

Request 3:

I ask someone to mathematically determine the proportionality of motion based on gravity & the speed of light, with the following in mind: Here, I see all motion as simply the rate at which equilibrium is attempting to be reached. The greater the disequilibrium, the greater the rate of motion (the reason for catalyst in chemistry- surface area, etc. etc.) will ensue in order to have the constituent particles/field reach equilibrium. The ball dropped on the moon (as perceived by the ball to the moon) has less disequilibrium than the same ball looking at the earth, consequently, the resultant motion is also less. The greatest disequilibrium possible is that of the electromagnetic spectrum, wherein the rate at which equilibrium is met is the speed of light (c). This much we have gone over. My “Request 3”, though rather obscured, is to the effect, “can someone create a mathematical model/formula which determines the rate at which motion will arise, when one knows the equilibrium difference between fields (disequilibrium). All motion is a direct result of equilibrium being attempted to be reached (a thrown Football, a soccer ball, gravity, catalyst reactions, and speeds of light). If there is no disequilibrium, constant motion (no motion) – (constant motion and no motion are the same w/respect to acceleration), remains constant, and an object remains at rest if at rest (First Law). What The Theory states among other things is that it is a desire to reach Time Equilibrium that motivates motion, as perceived one field to another.

In conjunction with Request 3, note that the Request requests an equation adopting/relating the speed of light into the picture, which would further expand the "fourth law" to state the equation whereby “the speed at which equilibrium is attained is directly related to, and dependent upon, the difference in perceived particle-wave-field-space-time-matter stuff, toward other stuff.” Since we know the velocity with which a mass dropped on the earth is, and the velocity with which it falls on the moon as well, and the speed of light, and so too the correlation of speeds must be relatively proportional to one another (when equilibriums are being attained that is), and since my math is rather bad, could someone try to find this correlation? Here, Lipp’s Law of Proportionality may help as a starting point.



There is no data here in the Experiments and Data section! The data must be elsewhere!

END - Experiments and Data

VII. Mathematics

The math is rudimentary, and is presented more or less as it originally appeared in handwritten notes. The math will remain rudimentary until such time as others articulate in the field may choose to present it in a more eloquent manner, refining the calculations accordingly, and further clarifying the intentions of the author (i.e. author’s attempt at a crude countercheck on the astronomical scale, using calculated values of the CUPI, with its defined value as 1u = 541,380,958.7 pm cubed, and a known mass of the Universe).

The Approach:

Using page 1045 Chapter 44 of College Physics (half of which I don’t understand yet!) 7th Edition Sears/Zemansky/Young Nuclear Fusion 44-7 Where Four Hydrogen atoms proceed to One Helium atom + loss of mass & release of energy.

1. I equated spatial volumes compensated by density to find the difference in spherical volumes of Helium & Hydrogen. Then, I equated this spatial difference to a loss of mass & release of energy (25.7 MeV).

This is the Missing Matter of the Universe!! & proves II. Matter x Time = Space (MT=S)

Mass to Space via

0.02762 u = 14,952,942.08 pm cubed



Or, 1u = 541,380,958.7 pm cubed

Mass to space!!!!

The math:

Values From page 1045 Fusion 7th Edition Sears/Zemansky/Young Nuclear Fusion 44-7

Mass of 4 Hydrogen = 4.03132u

Mass of 1 Helium=4.00370u

Mass difference= 0.02762u

Energy= 25.7 MeV

Atomic Radius (from Googled sites)

Helium= 128pm

Hydrogen= 37.3pm ratio of 3.431 to 1

Density Helium = .1785

Hydrogen = .08988

= ratio of 1.98598 to 1

Note: make it easy & use two to one ratio

Calculate Spherical volume 4 pi r cubed/3

Helium = (4) (3.14) (128 cubed) /3

Hydrogen (4) (3.14) (37.3 cubed) /3

Helium = 8,780,076.373 pm cubed

Hydrogen = 651,802.67 pm cubed

Then: multiply by four hydrogen atoms (four were in the fusion process)

= 2,607,210.67 pm cubed

Atomic spherical spatial volume of four H & one He without density compensation.

H- 2,607,210.67 pm cubed pico meters cubed

He - 8,780,076.373 pm cubed

Then: Compensate for Density

Density Helium = .1785

Hydrogen = .08988

Since Helium is denser, to compensate, we find average spatial density (2 to 1) & double the Helium volume so that - 8,780,076.373 pm cubed x 2 = 17,560,152.75 pm cubed

Subtract the volume of Hydrogen!!

17,560,152.75 pm cubed minus 2,607,210.67 pm cubed = 14,952,942.08 pm cubed

Ergo:

Mass 0.02762u has turned into 14,952,942.08 pm cubed of Space !!

Equating energy to mass to space

0.02762u = 25.7MeV= 14,952,942.08 pm cubed of space!!!!!!

(Mass) (Energy) (Space)

Internal Notes: same molar volume for H & He of 22423.5 cm cubed per mole

1u = unified atomic mass or Dalton (Da)

1u = 1.66053 x 10 to the negative 27 Kg = about 931.49 MeV

Mass of known Universe 1.6 x 10 60th kg

Volume of Universe 4.2 x 10 69 cubic miles (these values googled)

1u = 541,380,958.7 pm cubed

using mass above 1.6 x10 60th/ 10 to the minus 27th = 1.6 x 10 87th

1.6 x 10 87th x 1.4 x10 7th = universal volume of 2.24 x 10 94th pm cubed

What we do with the gamma radiation is described in The Theory and relates to the actual mechanism by which space is created from matter, and explains dark matter/dark energy.



In any event, through the use of atomic radius, nuclear fusion values, page 1045, “Googled” values of radius & density, calculated spherical volumes, finding difference, compensating for density, We Have;

Statistical Confirmation that

1u = 541,380,958.7 pm cubed

***MASS to SPACE***

Ergo : the continuum broken !! Breaking the space-time continuum is key to The Theory.

Internal Note:

The Space-Time continuum must be broken for matter to become space.

Documented March 25, 2007

Discovered Saturday night March 24, 2007 at about 10 pm EST

Finalized by 1 am Sunday

Comments Pertaining

The CUPI represents that spatial volumetric quantity associated with one atomic mass unit.

As far as the Universal Expansion is concerned, matter is turning into space, expanding shall we say, this according to our mass to space conversion.

The Mathematical Equation: M x T = S, or MT = S, or Matter multiplied by Time is equal to Space (in an expanding universe).



The constructs of Matter are Space and Time.

The constructs of Space are Matter and Time.

The constructs of Time are Matter and Space:

Space is equal to Matter multiplied by Time

Matter is equal to Space divided by Time.

Time is equal to Space divided by Matter.

The Three Equations:

1. S=MT (Big Bang) (forward “T” vector)

2. M=S/T (Big Crunch / Black Holes) (reverse “T” vector)

3. T=S/M (The Means, “T” as an arrow vector quantity)

Everything must be interchangeable. Everything is the same. There is only one particle.

On length contraction & Time:

Given: Note that gamma can never reach zero. As the velocity of the body approaches c, the time dilation grows very big; however, the velocity can never be c! If v were equal to c, gamma would be equal to zero, which is an undefined result.

The Theory: The undefined result is that mass, through the use of time as a forward vector and dilating quantity, has turned into Space according to MT=S



On:



The formula for determining time dilation in special relativity is:



where

is the time interval between two colocal events (i.e. happening at the same place) for an observer in some inertial frame (e.g. ticks on his clock),

is the time interval between those same events, as measured by another observer, inertially moving with velocity v with respect to the former observer,

is the relative velocity between the observer and the moving clock,

is the speed of light, and

is the Lorentz factor.

Experiments for further verification are politely offered (see Experiments & Data Section)

END – Mathematics

VIII. On Implications

The Theory is not without a deep problematic philosophical consequence, namely that we can reduce matter to simple permutations of space and time, such that when I walk down Main Street, I must avoid thinking of this nature, for to reduce matter to space and time, taking away all its particle-like material qualities, akin to removing flesh itself, I literally find myself consisting of simply "Space". This is quite disturbing, perhaps much more so than the results of the Michelson/Morley experiment wherein the rate nature of light was found to be the same without regard to the aether flow, leading to the only explanation of "contraction of length".

For it is this length contraction, heretofore prior to The Theory not taken literally to mean that “length contracts into the dematerialization of matter into space”, that the hat of

The Theory is hung upon, placing full value on its true meaning.

The Theory thus builds upon the past efforts of others. I should like to think that Einstein would have come to the same conclusion if in 05’ he was aware of Hubble's Universal Red Shift expansion. But, seeing a static universe was the only one known at the time, Einstein was not in a position to carry the events further. One can also see that there is a vindication in The Theory, namely that Einstein is now playing dice with God.

That quantum jumps as interpreted by the MT=S equation now take into consideration the discrete spatial changes of Bohr’s new orbital configurations, at the expense of mass, simultaneously places physics back into Einstein’s world view, namely that: “God does not play dice with the Universe”.

So, for the purpose of being, I shall still consider myself as consisting of matter. That way, one may still carry on ones life with a concreteness of being and breathe the fresh air. So too, a cold beer shall continue to retain all of its properties and full potential.

Other:

Space Travel at the speed of light, when slowing, matter materializes likewise into what it was. Also, we can travel at the speed of light as long as we place ourselves inside an inertial frame of reference that is light (hence, the light bands around "flying saucers". They travel within an inertial light frame of reference). Coincidence?

END - On Implications

IX. On the Synthesis of Fundamental Interaction between Forces

1.…Their magnitude and behavior vary greatly, as described in the table below. Both magnitude ("relative strength") and "range", as given in the table, have some meaning only within a rather complex framework of ideas.

2.….It should be noted that the table below lists properties of a conceptual model that is still subject to research in modern physics…. Above 1 & 2 From Wikepedia

Readers Take Note –

The Paper shall now attempt an understanding of the strength of the fundamental forces, seeking to find an equivalency among them ( i.e. a synthesis of the forces – unified field theory , etc. etc.)

If we use the Gravitational equation F=m1m2/r^2, we use mass as defined in ancient times, that being (blah, blah blah… one liter of water, Mass is a fundamental concept in physics, roughly corresponding to the intuitive idea of how much matter there is in an object, inertia etc.)

View the concept of mass here on earth ( as well as when viewing the fundamental forces) as not being the density per unit volume. Rather, view it as the “density per density per unit volume”. So, if gravity is given a relative strength “1” in the following table, it can be seen that the strong force has a density field 10^38 times that of the field we live with here on earth (i.e. that field under which we defined the mass unit & put in the gravity equation). This strong force field of 10^38 should also correspond to a frequency 10^38 times higher than the frequency of “our kilogram”. Likewise for the resonance, with an inverse to the wavelength ( our kilogram has a wavelength 10^38 times longer than that of the strong force).

So, one cannot use the F=m1m2/r^2 equation for determining eqivalency without first compensating for this variation. One should not be thinking in terms of mass here, but in terms of field density. If one does think in terms of mass, one must first compensate for field density. When one does, the equivalency of gravity, strong, weak, & electromagnetic, are the same.

If we were to “weigh” a proton (strong force), it would be astronomical were a given volume (compensated for density) be correlated to our kilogram. A guess is that currently the community has used one reference (the kilogram) where another should have been used. Obviously this would result in the gravitational field appearing very weak as compared to the strong force. The fact is, our density (kilogram) is so much more so simply “space”, as compared to the proton, that, were this compensated for, the forces would be equal. So much more so for a black hole. Its gravitational field appears countless times stronger than the F=m1m2/r^2 equation. Likewise for the weak/electromagnetic, etc.

Can someone confirm that the resonant frequency for the proton is 10^38 higher than the frequency of the kilogram. That the resonant frequency for the W & Z bosons is 10^25 higher than the frequency of the kilogram. That the resonant frequency for the photons (at light frequency) is 10^36 higher than the frequency of the kilogram. That the resonant frequency for the photon (at light frequency) is 10^2 lower than the frequency of the proton. Etc. etc. Or am I off base here with my understanding of your “resonance frequency”?

Note: Where it is said “proton” in the above examples, please replace that with the mediator “gluon” since that is what appears in the table below.

Of course gravity is going to have the lowest relative strength; Gravity is based on a mass in Kilograms for m1 & m2 and the Kilogram is mostly “Space”, especially as compared to the other forces. These other forces cannot use the Kilogram unless that spatial difference is compensated for. If we want to, we can find more “forces” everywhere – the “force” between the helium balloon & its rising to the ceiling. & as many “particles” as we like – just keep colliding. Under our current scenario, the earth itself is a particle, the moon a particle, each galaxy a particle, the universe a particle!

And of course, The Theory states that all the Matter the forces represent, are simple permutations of Space and Time, not of a space-time continuum, as The Theory has just shown that space, matter, & time are to be considered distinct manifestations of each other. Thus the space-time continuum has been combined with the mass–energy equivalence (E=mc2).



Table 1

Interaction Current Theory Mediators Relative Strength[1]

Long-Distance Behavior Range(m)

Strong

Quantum chromodynamics

(QCD) gluons

1038 1

(see discussion below)

10-15

Electromagnetic

Quantum electrodynamics

(QED) photons

1036

infinite

Weak

Electroweak Theory

W and Z bosons

1025

10-18

Gravitation

General Relativity

(GR) gravitons (not yet discovered) 1

END - IX. On the Synthesis of Fundamental Interaction between Forces

X. Other & the End

A) Planck’s Constant:

The author potentially views Planck’s constant (h), as being the rate of spatial change.

Recognize this is only a “try” at a general concept

E=hv or, E=hf Energy = Plancks constant x frequency (blackbody radiation)

E=mc2

hf=mc2

MT=S (The Theory)

M=S/T

m=S/T (here I'm am just trying to get a reference of concepts)

hf=Sc2/T

hf=(Sc2) x 1/T

f=1/T (frequency = one over Time)

cancel out f & 1/T & we get

h= Sc2

Or, as a result, it may be viewed that Planck’s constant represents a possible ["rate (from the field c2) of spatial (from the field Space(S) change"], consistent with energy level quantum jumps! But, that would also mean that

S=h/c2

As well as c2= h/S

The Theory does not know where the above may lead as it represents a work in progress that may be discarded as needed.

B) On Sonoluminescence:

The implosion of the bubble, which thus creates the photon release is consistent with -and get ready for this - as you might presume, the CUPI quantification.

Can someone repeat the experiments to show that the larger bubbles create more light, and that their implosion characteristics create that amount of energy consistent with the volumetric properties associated with space to energy equivalents? This may be a way to create unlimited energy from pure space. The bubbles can be "vacuumed" to show that we are actually getting the energy from the pure Space.

Who cares if it isn't neutron fusion based. Let's just get free energy for the world before it implodes! Anyhow, according to this movie, the Teleyarkhan technical paper is described in the March 8, 2002 edition of Science, in case you are interested. This sonoluminescence is new to this technical paper.

Keep the bubble implosion - "disappearance of space to re-emergence of material energy - in the form of photons" in mind when watching "An experiment to save the world". (see: www.onlinedocumentaries4u.com)

C) Great Stuff

Somewhere… over the rainbow…, The future of this paper, ongoing & never finished, may one day include ideas on time travel, worm holes, teleportation, parallel universes, tenth dimensions, black holes, the Philadelphia Experiment, string theory, M-theory, Tesla energy, more on Einstein, To Infinity and Beyond! At the very least we shall turn our endeavors toward an understanding of the wave particle duality of nature and the Double-Slit experiment. And,

You are all welcome aboard! Take this paper where you may.

Einstein shall be vindicated as it appears that in light of these revelations, a review of the Copenhagen Interpretation is in order.

God does not play dice with the Universe; HE plays dice with Albert Einstein.

Dedicated to my dear wife (CUPI).

The Coney Island Green Theory’s Rollover Addendum Number 1

The Coney Island Green Theory’s Link to Venturi & Bernoulli

Herein I add some sort of corroborating link to the Venturi & Bernoilli effects (I find this particularly interesting as the rate versus pressure concept, when given the highest rate possible "c", and the lowest pressure "pure vacuum or pure space" - there is a matching parallel link here somewhere within the MT=S equation- recall that the understanding of MT =S is that it takes place at the speed of light - the paper is very specific on this.

Somehow, not sure, the Venturi principle comes into play in my theory - (ie. the rate at which something flows creates different pressure gradients - the higher the rate, the lower the pressure:

The Venturi effect is the reduction in fluid pressure that results when a fluid flows through a constricted section of pipe. The fluid velocity must increase through the constriction to satisfy the equation of continuity, while its pressure must decrease due to conservation of energy: the gain in kinetic energy is balanced by a drop in pressure or a pressure gradient force. An equation for the drop in pressure due to venturi effect may be derived from a combination of Bernoulli's principle and the equation of continuity.

So, in conjunction with my theory, it appears too coincidental that the highest rate at which matter can reach, that of “c”, and the resultant space that manifests from that rate (per my theory MT=S), creates the extremely low pressure of Space ( i.e. pure vacuum). Highest rate possible, that of "c" = lowest pressure possible, that of a pure vacuum or, Space. Venturi as applied to the Coney Island Green Theory! MT=S!!!!

Highest rate transforms to lowest pressure. Hmmmm, something must be up.

So, I see this as some sort of corroborating evidence in support of my theory. On top of the other stuff I expressed in earlier writings. Bernoulli too. Same idea – airplane wings…

Altogether, there is a supporting near scientific infrastructure of more than sheer nonsense surrounding the theory, and one should get that “fuzzy feeling” that warrants that the community take a closer look at the theory, and not dismiss it outright before breakfast.

The Coney Island Green Theory’s Balloon Experiment

Magical inflating balloons

(from Online Google)

One of the first things a little scientist should learn is that heat causes things to expand (get bigger) and cold causes things to contract (get smaller). Things such as air will contract and take up less room when cooled. Similarly, things will expand when they get hot. If you don't believe this, carefully observe Dad's head the next time you break one of his expensive tools (Reeko tip - observe from a distance). Ok, so Reeko's gonna save you some heartache. Rather than test this by breaking one of Dad's tools, let's try the following experiment instead.

Fill the bottle with hot water.

Fill the bowl with cold water.

Let both sit for one minute. Then empty out the bottle.

Stretch a balloon over the mouth of the bottle.

Set the bottle in the bowl of cold water.

Yes, Yes. Not quite as amazing as Dad's expanding head but still pretty cool.

The warm water heats the bottle. When the water is poured out the heated bottle then heats the air inside of it. When the bottle is placed in the cold water, the air inside the bottle cools and contracts (gets smaller and takes up less room), causing outside air to be drawn in, pulling the balloon in and inflating it inside the bottle.

Parent's Note. Expansion is an increase in the size of a body without the addition of material to the body. Most solids and liquids expand when they are heated and contract when they are cooled. Gases also expand when they are heated at a constant pressure. If a gas is heated in a container that prevents expansion, the pressure of the gas increases.

Heat causes expansion because it increases the vibrations of a material's atoms or molecules. In a gas, heat also increases the speed at which the atoms or molecules move about. The increased movement forces the atoms or molecules farther apart and the body becomes larger.

END GOOGLED INFO

ENTER START: The Coney Island Green Theory

OK, so we have one balloon, tied off so no air can escape, nor get in.

Now picture that same balloon in two different scenarios:

1) one cold deflated and limp, and 2) the second scenario heat (energy) external to the balloon has been added, making this second scenario filled with an increased volume, expanded because of the heat. These two scenarios are most familiar.

Question? Where did the increase in space come from? (i.e. the new expanded volume in the heated balloon).

We apply external energy to a volume that starts of with a set volume of space, and get a new greater volume of "expanded space". Simple physics? To my knowledge, this is explained by the notation above as follows:

Heat causes expansion because it increases the vibrations of a material's atoms or molecules. In a gas, heat also increases the speed at which the atoms or molecules move about. The increased movement forces the atoms or molecules farther apart and the body becomes larger.

My second question: If we start off with a set volume of space, how could simple particle movement lead to an increase of spatial volume? Am I to believe that particles bouncing around at greater speeds bounce off the interior balloon wall and make it bigger, and that this is where the internal "new internal expanded space" comes from?

And here is the link to my theory.

I am more apt to believe that the added energy increases the atomic radii of each of the internal particles, and that this creates additional space, with the loss of the external energy, and that the discrete amount of energy added, correlates to increased atomic radii ( i.e. space is created!). Now, I can understand the reason why there is more special volume inside the balloon. Energy to Space! The Theory (The Coney Island Green Theory that is). Does it correlate with CUPI ??

Or am I to believe that the particles are simply bouncing off the walls more, and into each other, forcing them farther apart. Farther apart from what I ask- we started off with a set volume of space - how does there simply bouncing off each other magically create more space????? How can this create additional space inside the balloon?????

What am I missing here? (Besides a basic education) Is there anything here that should be considered for my theory?

a) Pressure versus Mass.

Pressure versus mass. Density goes down; mass at rate ________ actually deceases. At "c", mass decreases altogether. Someone needs to obtain the math parabola on this, using the Lorentz x-axis length contraction: this will be the same ratio as length contraction!

The Coney Island Green Theory’s Link to Biblical Years

Biblical time bubble: If the spatial bubbles are cumulative, and do not represent a straight line of process to the end of the Universe (your current thought), rather, use the many “bubbles upon bubbles”- “additive in nature”-“Coney Island Green Theory” policy to obtain the end resultant “One Giant Universal Bubble”, and if we “rescind” for a lack of better word, these little bubbles, reeling them in like many fishermen reeling in many fishing lines (as opposed to the current one fishing one theory), do we not end up with a time nearer to the Biblical years as opposed to billions of years?

Perhaps using the theory’s “light based matter” turned into “many individual bubbles of space” view.., if we pull back all bubbles, do we end up with biblical years? I.e. 6000 years? If each bubble were additive how would the new dimension be expressed, how many years would we have? Please figure.

The Coney Island Green Theory’s Space-Time/ Mass to Energy Equation Genetic Similarities

Recall that “The Theory” stated that it combined the space-time continuum with the mass-energy equation, to get the resultant MT=S equation. The following is some straightforward corroborating evidence, or is it merely coincidence? What do you think?

As regards the space-time continuum and current thought, and the mass energy equation (E=mc2), and the notion that matter warps space-time, it can be seen that since the "Time" portion of the space-time continuum is "c" rate dependent(different velocities give different time relative to stationary observers) and since E=mc2, it is readily apparent that both entities (space-time & E=mc2) correlate/manifest to one another through their common benefactor "c"! Since rates vary( velocities of matter), Space-time is not constant but varies according to varying rates of "c" (of course "c" is "c" and I use varying rates of "c" to mean that mass does not always travel at "c". So, consider it a % of "c" , that's what I'm saying. Space-time is not constant but varies according to varying rates of Time( based on the varying rates of matter, that at pure “c" turns to pure space (the darkest of Dark Energy) while Dark matter is found at lower "c" values - OK we'll call them "d", "e" and "g" why not. Time is apparent in E=mc2, because Time and "c" are one and the same.

The Coney Island Green Theory’s Forth Law of Motion and Carnot

The Forth Law predicts that you can’t get work out of a body in constant equilibrium. You must create a point of mis-equilibrium. ( internal note: Continue work on this)

The Coney Island Green Theory’s Fun Section

With respect to the scientific inquiry into alien landings, the details of which you are probably aware, as regards the hearsay that is, note the following:

1: these are human craft from earth, designed by man. They leave earth’s orbit at a rate less than the speed of light and return at a greater speed nearer to "c". Thus they arrive in the past.

2: By varying their rate of return, they arrive at different times in history & thus are thoroughly documented, even through to this date, and Roswell.

3: A look at the design of what is reported, drawn through history, etc. will tell us exactly how to design our craft

Saucer-like, with a light band around the edges, as the humans will be "inside the light frame of inertia" & so will not feel the full effect of the near "c" rates of travel. Just like we don't feel the that we are moving at 1000 miles per hour as the earth turns. So too within the light frame of inertia they earth astronauts-aliens will not fell the effect.

Consistency of craft through the ages: Coincidence? Hardly! Our future travelers brought our history back to early man (a looped feedback of history)

The large heads on the aliens small bodies are due to our astronauts having to lay flat down in their saucers. Lorentz expansion, in this case as the craft slows, rather than contraction along the x-axis through mis-desi

view post as summary

reply to this thread

continuation of Lipp - The Coney Island Green Theory

The large heads on the aliens small bodies are due to our astronauts having to lay flat down in their saucers. Lorentz expansion, in this case as the craft slows, rather than contraction along the x-axis through mis-design, the alien (our own astronauts!) heads expand while the lower extremities are smaller. These are true known effects...

view entire post

continuation of Lipp - The Coney Island Green Theory

The large heads on the aliens small bodies are due to our astronauts having to lay flat down in their saucers. Lorentz expansion, in this case as the craft slows, rather than contraction along the x-axis through mis-design, the alien (our own astronauts!) heads expand while the lower extremities are smaller. These are true known effects of traveling at “c”. This is Lorentz at work!

The aliens are us. We will send craft out to space & return at varying speeds greater than that which we left, thereby placing the travelers at different eras in the past. These have already been documented! If we leave at "c" and return at slower speeds, our travelers will end up in the future & everyone on earth will be old or generations beyond.

This is a scientific attempt at a scientific explanation of observed phenomenon here on earth. What reality is I don't know? The above is only an attempt at explaining what may be true. My guess is that the military already knows this. The aliens are us!

The Coney Island Green Theory’s Explanation as to Why E=mc²

(this may have been sent with prior material & still needs work – in fact, the whole thing needs work!)

In conjunction with the reading of this short technical paper, to be incorporated into

The Theory as time permits ( possibly next week), please be advised that to understand Why E=mc², conceptually speaking that is, one must first have at least some understanding of the nature of light, that is, as its rate “c” is understood to affect TIME (you know – the old spacecraft trip where your brother goes out into outer space at the speed of light and comes back as a baby, while here on Earth you’re a immature forty-nine year old, working on your theories). It will also help if you have read and understand The Theory and “Believe It”! If you do not “Believe It” , you may not believe in this explanation as to why E=mc².

So, with the idea in mind that you have some understanding of relativity, here is Why E=mc². (note that I finally found that if you press ALT+0178, you get the “squared” sign – I will update The Theory accordingly to remove E=mc2 & replace with E=mc², I was always wondering how “they” did that. ) .

E=mc² because all the energy (motion) for a closed loop “there & back”, of matter (mass) @ “c” value represents {and here I shall use Big M, to represent all the Matter (mass) in the Universe), that Matter proceeding to its turning into Space (MT=S) and then that resultant Space turning back again into Matter (S/T=M). The loop has made a full circle, Matter to Space, and back again to Matter, thus representing all the movement (Energy) possible in the Universe. Matter to Space, Space to Matter! We start with mass, proceed through all forward vector TIME, then back through reverse vector TIME, and so all the ENERGY=MATTER x TIME (forward vector) x TIME (reverse vector), or, E= MT² , equivalent to E=mc², for those understanding time as it relates to “c”.

So, all of “E”, the one single full closed loop being “Matter to Space and Back Again into that Same Matter” {(MT=S), then M=S/T}is equivalent to E=MT² (your E=mc²), and conceptually, this is Why E=mc²! Remember that “T” is “c”, since as one reaches “c” value, one becomes Time itself, in that at “c” perspective, nothing else moves in relation to “c”, and “no movement” is equivalent to “nothing has changed” is equivalent to “nothing has happened” is equivalent to “no time has transpired”, only TIME itself doesn’t age, mass has become one with TIME.

So much for the explanation, now the math:

MT=S

S/T=M

E=MT² (I am equating this equation to your E=mc², conceptually speaking and for the reasons and rationale stated above)

E/T² = MT²/T² (here we are dividing both sides of the above equation by T² to get one side of the equation to be “M”) Then we have:

M = E/T² (now we substitute in my equation MT=S, to get the below equation):

(E/T²) (T) = S (simplify):

E/T = S (substitute MT for S, from MT=S)

MT= E/T

Multiply both sides by “T”

MT² = E or,

E = MT²

Or,

E=mc² !!!

All the energy possible, Matter to Space, back to Matter (all movement possible is all Energy!). The above correlates strongly with The Theory.

The why of E=mc² has just been explained.

THE ABOVE WAS FOLLOWED BY AN E-MAIL STATING:

I'm running off to work so this has to be quick. Yesterday's concepts are correct, but I'm now wondering about the math. Yes, where E=mc², this equates to mass proceeding to it becoming Space & back again into Matter, thus representing all possible movement, all "E", in one full non-repeating loop of motion (energy, "E"). This I am sure of. This is what E=mc² visually represents.

But, I am questioning my math as it relates to E=MT².

Let’s try a different approach.

PE + KE = E

MT + S/T = E (here I am equating a potential energy & a kinetic energy, one being my MT equation & one being my S/T equation, it doesn't matter which is which, pick one arbitrarily - both from The Theory)

( this PE + KE represents all "E" in the Universe, all Universal movement possible , without any repetition or duplication of movement - i.e. all motion is only counted once, this is all "E" possible in the entire Universe, i.e. Matter to Space and back again )

OK, then:

MT + S/T = E

MT = E - S/T

Multiply both sides by T

MT² = E - S

Add S to both sides

MT² + S = E (this equation differs from yesterday's!!!) (is my math wrong or is it my rationale? - I prefer the PE + KE approach though, since the reasoning is flawless - but why is my equation different?)

Is E= mc² equivalent to MT² or to MT² - S ?????

If S can be considered nothing (zero), then once again E = MT², but this introduces problems above where S/T would also equal zero, which would make E = MT????

Using the Kinetic Energy + Potential Energy concept herein introduced, I can only justify that: E = MT² - S !!!!

I would really like it to be E = mc² = MT² but I don't have that mathematical rationale.

Right now, until I figure this out, E = mc² = MT² - S

HELP!!!

If anyone can shed light on my math, HELP

THX

DOUG

WHICH WAS FOLLOWED BY AN E-MAIL STATING:

That shows you how bad my math is!!! Somehow I went from

E = mc² = MT² + S to "-S" DUH!

E = MT² + S until further notice...

Sorry

NOW FOLLOWED BY MY FINAL THOUGHTS & RATIONALE

Thus far we have confirmed that PE + KE = E

As a result we have our equation: E = MT² + S

Remember, we are trying to visualize what earthly bound physical representation Einstein’s famous equation represents. We have already stated that it represents all energy possible in the Universe (all motion). We have correlated that physical representation to The Theory, whereby MT=S & back again to that same matter, via the equation M=S/T.

We want to have E= mc² equivalent to our conceptual equation E = MT².

But, through our KE + PE = E concept, we were left with E = MT² + S

This is where we left after much confusion.

We can do two things: We can rationalize removing “S” from our equation, which is what we are going to do, as I don’t think it would be too kind to add “S” to the mc² side of Einstein’s equation, which would be our other option.

So, here goes:

We rationalize that “S” by and of itself being a point of singularity in the spatial mode, with no “T”, no “c”, “no rate”, “no motion”, “no movement” associated with it, only “S” by and of itself. Therefore, “S” alone has no associated energy (E) , for no “T”, no “c”, “no rate”, “no motion”, “no movement” to go along with “S” leaves “S” by itself. And by itself, “S” has no energy associated with it (it would be as if v = 0 in the equation KE = ½ mv²). In this case “v” would represent the above noted, no “T”, no “c”, “no rate”, “no motion”, “no movement”.

Then, with “S” having no energy, essentially “S” is equal to zero. Presto, we’re back again to E = MT² + S, except this time E = MT² + 0 = E = MT² . Voila!

E = mc² = MT² + S , where “S” is equal to zero with respect to energy (because there is no motion to go along with it). “S” as a point of singularity does not add to “E”. We have already taken that into consideration when we have gone through the “M” cycle, through forward vector time and back again. The only remaining aspect of our loop is “stationary S”, which has no energy associated with it, neither potential nor kinetic, because, our forward/ reverse vector time “M” loop already contemplates that “S” point of singularity.

“S” represents that point where all “M” has turned into “S” through our MT=S equation, and simply adding “S” to the MT² “there & back” loop, apparently doesn’t add any energy, and this for the rationale stated above.

Sadly, if I am wrong about whether or not “S” adds any energy to the E = MT² + S equation, and if we are to believe the conceptual theory that E = mc² = MT², then we must adjust E = mc² to also reflect that “S” point of singularity, and then nobody will talk to me (i.e. E = mc² + S). That’s not going to happen.

So, to make it easier, E = mc² = MT², where the MT² represents all forward & reverse motion in the Universe (matter to space & back again to matter). Note that I have been using big M to represent all matter in the Universe, however, theoretically, it should work for little “m” as well.

Also, note that I deal in nearly basic math equations, but tend to approach the science through a conceptualized visualization of what is actually occurring in nature. Thus, when I am given an equation E = mc², I have to look at it in terms of what it visually represents, and being bound to the three fundamentals (time, length, mass), I must work with these concepts.

I believe the above can only be understood if you are at least aware of my paper “summary of the years” (i.e. The Theory).

I can’t do your math; I can’t think in terms of ten or eleven dimensions, and so I’ll probably never understand your physics, but, the simplicity of the above physics – if you can call it that, perhaps “natural philosophy” is a better term, and holding firm to the three fundamentals, albeit with added imagination, I have attempted to describe :

WHY E = mc²



If any of you have a simpler and better conceptual description as to why E = mc², I would be grateful if you would send me in the right direction.

I QUIT !

Douglas W Lipp 2009 All Rights Reserved

view post as summary

reply to this thread

reply to this thread

reply to this thread