Download Word Doc - Bodge It and Scarper Ltd

New Energy Sources. An Opportunity for SIGMA3 (North
Sea) Ltd and Aberdeen, Renewables Capital of Europe.
Some ideas by John Sinclair, Principal Engineer, SIGMA3 (North Sea) Ltd, first put
into the public domain in August 2003.
(Note I have added BOLD notes in parenthesis to clarify some points for the
people who are not Physicists. It may help to look at the diagram on the last page
first and keep this in mind as the discussion is progressing. I have also added
some background reading as attachments, unfortunately there is a lot of it but
I’d advise you to read all of it. John Sinclair 8/12/2006)
It is time we had a close look at Physics to see what has been going wrong. Why is it
that we look deeper and deeper into Nature via “particle” accelerators and yet are no
further forward than we were almost twenty years ago. What is it that is getting in our
way? In a word it is the concept of mass.
What is mass? It is something that has a few attributes as follow:
 It gives an object inertia, this is defined as the tendency of an object to
continue doing the same thing in the absence of external forces
 It gives an object a gravitational attractiveness
 It confuses the senses because we are made of the same “stuff” (this is very
important to note and is probably the most important point here)
 It supposedly appeared from nowhere in vast quantities, all at once
Now read through these attributes again with an open mind and then read the
following.
Can the concept of mass as described above be mimicked by simpler means than
assuming this “stuff” is actually there in any “real” sense. Well actually yes it can,
and very simply.
Let us assume that the world we see around us is purely conceptual in nature. But it
can’t be you say because I can hit a table with my hand and I can feel it, so it is there
isn’t it? Well, yes and no. Remember electric and magnetic fields are there in just as
real a sense as mass and yet we can never see them because they are only concepts
used to explain “reality”. No matter how powerful your micro-scope or whatever it’s
type you will never use them to see electric or magnetic fields, …… you can use them
to see only the effects of these fields. Try telling someone riding on a Maglev train
that a magnetic field is “only” a concept and the “mass” of the train is real and see
what they think. How can a concept lift “mass”, it can’t unless they are both concepts,
the magnetic field we “see” as such but the other, “mass”, we are prejudiced about.
Consider a flat pond of very large dimensions and consider a “bulge” of water say 1m
across in the shape of say a sombrero hat moving at constant velocity over the surface.
What do we “see”? A particle Physicist circling overhead in his helicopter “sees”
what looks remarkably like a “particle” moving in a vacuum, so it is a “particle” and
that’s that. (This is the basic position Physics has taken up to this date.)
1
What do you and I “see”? We “see” a bulge of water made up of a huge number of
wavelets coming from all directions across the surface of the pond and interacting to
produce near cancellation everywhere except at the point of the bulge. That is, we
“see” the Truth of the matter while the “particle” Physicist “sees” what he/she wants
to see.
I conjecture that the forces we feel when we hit a table are electric and magnetic
forces and another (spin) if this logic is followed through, see later. So the force we
feel can actually be thought to be produced by an interaction of concepts, your hands
“mass” and the “mass” of the table and these concepts interact via electric, magnetic
and spin fields. (Note if you are made of these same concepts, made of the same
stuff as matter, then whether matter is real or not real you will be affected by
those concepts as if they were real things. The discussion of what “you” really
are and how “you” can control a matter conceptual body can be left in the
realms of religion, let’s stick to the engineering and what we can see and more
importantly measure in real experiments)
Well this is boring already so let’s just cut to the chase. Wavelets on a vacuum.
Wavelets consisting of electric, magnetic and spin fields cross the vacuum of space
and these interact to produce our conserved “stuff”, not a sombrero hat shaped water
bulge this time but everything we see around us, ie the so called fundamental
particles, atoms, molecules, the planet earth moving through space, you and me, the
stars and so on. In other words every fundamental “particle” that makes you up is no
such thing, it is simply a conserved pattern riding the vacuum of space along with all
the rest. And “inter-particle” interactions help conserve these patterns by imperfect
mirroring effects. (Imperfect as in not total, note also that while we can all see for
ourselves light being “reflected” from a light mirror (electro-magnetic) I am
conjecturing that there are two other pure mirror forms, electro-spin and
magnetic-spin, and of course all the gradations in between)
So how does this idea help? I will explain how this can all work later but for now let’s
concentrate on how this idea helps us with the concept of “mass”. Consider a simple
case of a hand pushing a table, the vacuum wavelets add to produce your hand and the
table but when you move your hand to the table you feel a force as your hand hits the
table, why? The vacuum is in conflict, it cannot produce your hand and the table in
the same space, so it produces neither, instead it produces a force on your hand and
the table keeping them apart, that is they never fully touch. You have never touched
anything but vacuum forces in your whole life and neither has anyone else, you still
feel force and you can still squash an insect for example but you never touch the
insect. The fluids from an insects body can still get onto your hand however but that
initially is not because they touch it is because there are also forces that come into
play to hold things together slightly when the vacuum gap is very small. The fact you
can get fluid on your hand should not be assumed to mean that you are touching that
fluid, at least not initially. Now eventually of course after several seconds the fluid
will start to diffuse into your skin but that process is different from the initial force
process which is a conflict of information type effect. “Mass” is confusing for these
sorts of reasons but we must start to see these things as they are, not as we assume
them to be.
2
Now let’s consider a 1kg mass moving across a frictionless surface but in air, what
happens? Well clearly the mass slows down gradually due to interaction with the air,
…….. air resistance we call this and the greater the initial “mass” x “velocity” or
“momentum” figure the longer this slowdown takes. Now look at this the new way.
The “mass” actually just consists of conserved information, the air has conserved
information but less of it as it is less “dense”, clearly the vacuum needs information to
be stored somewhere to produce the “mass” and air from the vacuum of space as the
planet moves and the information is stored in the form of extremely partial (less than
one in a billion) mirroring effects with other “mass” in the universe, see later (but
remember although we have only loose resonant coupling with matter in this
universe, as measured by experiment, the overall effect of every other universe is
to provide a strong resonant “lock” holding us in this one reflection, this one
universe. Don’t worry if you don’t understand this, I only have a sort of feel for
what I mean here and that is all you need to progress). Now velocity is also a form
of information and so the moving mass has more information the faster we push it. So
we now see how “inertial mass” can be mimicked. The mass moves along the table, at
every step of the way the vacuum effectively asks itself the question, “who should be
there? The air in front of the “mass” or the “mass” itself?” and it answers it by acting
to balance information. So clearly at first the air is still and has a set information
content, then the “mass” moves through that part of the air and two things happen, the
moving “mass” loses information (velocity) and the air gains information in the form
of complex air movements due to turbulence, clearly to describe a complex air flow
on a computer program requires more information than a non-turbulent air flow. So
the “mass” gradually slows and the air gradually becomes more turbulent along the
path so we have mimicked the effect of inertial mass without any “mass” but simply
by manipulating the concept of information slightly. The “mass” comes to a halt when
its loss of information of motion (velocity) has been matched by an exactly equal rise
in air motion complexity.
All well and good but so what? Where does this get us that the concept of “mass”
doesn’t get us? Why change to this way of looking at things? Well for a start it gets us
round any requirement for mass appearing from nowhere in a big bang and gets us to
a purely conceptual view of “reality” which I find far more satisfactory, but there are
other benefits, lots of them. Let’s look at some unexplained experiments, consider
only two, Professor Eric Laithwaite’s experiment with rotating and non-rotating
flywheels that “lose” weight and the “cold fusion” experiments of Pons and
Fleishman. (See the attached reading matter for the stories surrounding these).
Now remember in this new way of looking at things we are conserving information,
not “mass”, so what happened during the flywheel experiments? A large flywheel was
lifted up by hand and shown to be heavy, various members of various Scientific
audiences were asked to “feel the weight” and all agreed it was heavy, about 20kg
actually. Now the flywheel was spun up to high speed and again people were asked to
lift it, all agreed the flywheel was substantially lighter when spinning indeed weighing
confirmed this, why? Einsteinian gravity does not make any distinction between
spinning and non-spinning masses. (So Einsteinian gravity is fundamentally
wrong, pure and simple) Well what happened was this, when the flywheel was not
spinning and it was lifted the vacuum finds it harder to recreate the flywheel because
we are moving it away from the mirroring provided by all other masses on the earth,
in other words we are trying to raise the information content of the whole system. The
3
information content of the vacuum needs balancing so to raise the flywheel, which
requires more information, we must destroy information somewhere else and that
somewhere else is in our arms. Complex sugars etc have high information content but
our cells break these down forming heat (dis-information) in the process, this heat
production matches the energy required to lift the flywheel. Put another way the
information balance is kept by raising the flywheel (more information required) at the
same time as we destroy sugar fuel information. When the flywheel is spun up to high
speed however the bearings are constantly converting the rotational information of the
flywheel into heat. So we see that any heat production in the bearing during a lift
offsets some of the information balance our arms had to formerly provide. In effect
fewer sugars must be destroyed in our arms as the bearing is helping the lift by
destroying rotational information from the flywheel and so we feel like we are doing
less work during the lift, because we are, ……. and so the flywheel feels lighter.
Measurements using weighing machines show these flywheel experiments produce
real effects, ie they are not imagination, flywheels really do become lighter if lifted
when spinning. (Note as Laithwaite progressed with these experiments he did
what any good engineer would do, he improved the bearings by making them
less lossy, …… these ideas predict that he did precisely the wrong thing in doing
this, increased bearing inefficiencies are required to see increased effects).
Pons and Fleishman performed the now famous “cold fusion” experiment which has
so far been replicated hundreds of times successfully and repeatably to a great extent
but never satisfactorily explained. This new idea does explain it in a basic form. All
“mass” we now see is simply conserved patterns of interaction on the vacuum sea,
that is the energy content is nothing of the sort, it is information content. So what we
have is an experiment where unwittingly Pons and Fleishman were shutting off the
matter in their now famous “jam jar” from interaction with the rest of the surrounding
matter of the Universe. This allowed the matter in the jar to “unwind” or decompose,
that is, the inherent information was allowed to leak away due to shutting off some of
the natural re-enforcement that allows matter to exist, that is the partial mirroring with
other matter was reduced to below the maintenance level. This mirroring takes place
by electric, magnetic and spin fields and I believe by injecting current into the metal
rods they had in the jar they had effectively partially shut-off the electric and
magnetic means of re-enforcement and so the material started to decompose, the
information (energy) leaked out and the process was mistakenly thought to be fusion
in nature. This idea is further supported by the fact that after several hours gamma
rays began to be emitted by the source rods and this immediately ceased when the rod
currents were shut-down. (Note also the Proton is supposed to decay at a
particular rate if the present particle theory is correct, ….. no such decay of even
a single Proton, never mind the thousands expected by now has ever been found,
this theory of matter re-inforcement predicts just this non-decay of the Proton in
normal circumstances, more evidence it is along the right lines).
What is the spin field? Well we all know of the anomalous nature of gyroscopes in a
gravitational field where they appear to “defy” gravity to some extent, it has always
seemed obvious to me that there is a link between gravity and angular momentum or
spin. This spin field can be thought of as existing in a higher dimension as we cannot
determine the spin of a rotating mass “from outside the box” though we can of course
with every other field eg electric or magnetic using voltage or magnetic probes.
(What I mean here is that if we have a closed box we cannot know the angular
4
momentum of what is in the box using an external sensor, we can of course
deduce it by moving the box about but that is not what I mean here by “from
outside the box”. We can sense magnetic and electric fields that escape from the
box easily but not spin. We couldn’t measure magnetic and electric fields up
until a few hundred years ago remember, the lack of a sensor does not imply the
thing does not exist, we can deduce it does exist and then design sensors for it as
we have always done in the past). Effectively all that we see around us consists of a
single electro-magnetic-spin object that constantly enfolds in on itself so creating all
that we see around us including what we call “particles” (actually the smallest
conserved units) and ourselves, this will be further explained later. But one
consequence of this is that spin can be taken out of the background vacuum state by
allowing water or some other liquid to fall in a gravitational field. Pons and Fleishman
had a bubbling liquid in their jar (boiling water) and this in itself probably helped to
shutdown one of the methods of matter re-enforcement, ……. the spin field.
Gravity itself starts to show itself here also as involving a spin component (what we
call Gravity has magnetic-and spin components much as light has electric and
magnetic components, in fact both are different aspects of the same electric-magneticspin constantly enfolding concept as described above). Many Gravitational theories
have been proposed that see Gravity as a pressure, a pushing force rather than a
pulling force, for the simple reason we can all see how a pressure can push things
down onto a planet but no-one, (absolutely no-one) can explain how Gravity can pull
things down. Gravity by this new idea is seen simply as a pressure holding us down,
these ideas have always floundered on the concept of “mass” but this is no more.
Clearly the more massive the planet the larger the force “pulling” us down. This can
only be mimicked by allowing the Gravitational pressure to interact only very weakly
with matter. The most recent experiments of inertial and Gravitational mass have
shown them to be equivalent to at least one part in a Billion, so let’s assume for now
that the interactive fraction is of that order. Think of this as tennis balls coming at you
from all directions including through the planet beneath your feet, what happens?
Well a billion and one tennis balls hit you on the head every pico-second let’s say, as
there is only vacuum (effectively) above your head, but only a billion tennis balls hit
you on the feet in the same period as one ball interacts with the mass of the planet. So
you are kept on the planet’s surface by that small offset of one tennis ball. Now
clearly if the planet was twice as massive but exactly the same size it would absorb
two tennis balls and so you would have a two tennis ball offset keeping you on the
planet’s surface. (Note it is changing this offset that allows gravity to reverse so
explaining solar flares etc etc etc and as I believe it does within cells as the copied
parts of a dividing cell are pulled apart very gently (no-one understands this at
present), ….. you don’t need much imagination to see that if cells do it this way
(still unproven but highly likely) we can tease large structures from the seabed
and continuously upward by controlling the offset using very strong (easily
achievable) magnetic fields and blue light, see later. Solar flares can involve the
ejection of 10,000 Billion tons of material at speeds of up to 2,000km/s so a
mechanism certainly exists for lifting off a few million Brents for example from
the surface of the sun and the “kick-start” is thought to be magnetic in nature).
So we have modelled a simple Gravitational effect fairly simply by this pressure
effect combined with weak interaction. If the interaction was very strong then no
matter how massive the planet you would always feel the same force no matter what
size or mass of the planet as all the tennis balls from below your feet would now be
5
absorbed by the planet and a constant force of one billion and one balls would hold
you down. Clearly this doesn’t happen, the more massive the planet the larger the
force you feel, so we must have a very weak interactive fraction as proposed above.
Also note that the “tennis balls” that interact with the planet don’t disappear, they
move into another reflection taking their information with them and leaving behind
“dis-information” or what we call heat, so this also explains why planet cores are
hotter, ie contain more “dis-information”, than they should have.
Note that as the Sun and the Earth sit in one another’s “tennis ball” shadows we
would see the correct Gravitational attractiveness here also, ie one that matches what
we see in reality. The masses of both the earth and the sun would appear on the
numerator of the equation and the square of the distance between them would appear
on the denominator. That is, the three dimensionality of space ensures if you double
the distance from a car or a Star or a planet will look as if it has ¼ of the area and so
the shadow effect will also be ¼ at double the distance. For example as a car recedes
from you the height of a car will appear to half as will the width and the so the area
appears to quarter. So we end up with the standard Newtonian force equation of
F=(M1 x M2) x G/D2. Where G is the Gravitational constant.
So why did all these pressure theories fail? The old idea, about three hundred years
old actually, was that if the planet earth was moving “against the flow” of these
Gravitons or whatever you want to call these pressure producing “particles” then the
Earth would gradually slow to a halt as they had to interact with matter to keep us on
the planet and so they must react differently with matter coming towards them at the
front end of our planet as it moves in orbit and the rear end as it recedes. No such
slow-down of the planet has ever been measured. The new ideas get rid of this
problem because remember force is seen here as an effect only of conflict of
information, ie does the vacuum become a table or your hand? But there is no conflict
in space, there is only the vacuum, so the Earth moves forward and the vacuum quite
happily “makes it” because there was nothing there to be in conflict with. Now of
course if you happen to be sitting in the way in a stationary spaceship you will
certainly see a conflict and you will be dead and the Earth will slow slightly in hitting
you but this is alright, it is not Gravity that is slowing the planet but information in the
form of you and your spaceship.
Now clearly if Gravity is a pressure and partial shadow effect as described with the
tennis balls above we can forget all about singularities within black holes as
something with no size, ie a singularity, cannot cast a shadow and so there would be
no Gravitational effect near these objects. This idea kills singularities and makes the
Maths of this theory far simpler than previous ideas. (Note Hawkins renounced a
belief in black holes (singularities) just over two years ago, …. He now believes in
brown holes, … so do we all). It also automatically explains planetary spins as spin
is part of the make-up of matter. Effectively by this new shadow effect idea of gravity
the gravitational force cannot increase inexorably to a level that it can crush matter
out of existence. The force of gravity therefore has strict upper limits that cannot be
breached.
Note also that this matter shadow effect also means that planets come together from a
cloud of dust much more quickly than we would expect from the present theories of
Gravity, and just as we actually find in reality. Also the shapes of galaxies and the
6
rotation rates of stars around the galactic centres are as we actually find them and all
this without recourse to “inventing” dark matter. (Imagine if every part of the earth
was turned to dust and the dust particles were spread out evenly into a sphere
the size of the sun say then any line drawn in any direction through that sphere
of dust would pass through exactly the same mass on its path as if the line were
drawn through the earth in the same vector direction. So two dust particles on
opposite sides of the dust cloud say would feel exactly the same offset force on
them as if they had been sitting on the formed planet’s surface due to this
shadow idea ie 1G of force pushing towards the centre. This is not the answer
that present gravity theories give, they would say the force would be 1/10,000th as
much so planets would take millions of years to form given all the conflicting
disturbances in a typical dust cloud. But the Hubble space telescope has seen
planets coming together in the final stages in only a few tens of days from dust
clouds so suggesting this shadow idea with its longer reach of gravity within dust
clouds is along the right lines).
This idea also explains why water going down a plug-hole sometimes spins and
sometimes doesn’t. (And why no-one has ever worked out the Maths for the spin
rates anywhere near correctly yet) Massive star collapses and explosions cause the
vacuum spin background to shift over the space of minutes, sometimes this will set
water spinning and sometimes the background disruptions will be missing and so
water will not spin. Clearly a deep bath will take longer than a minute to empty and is
almost bound to spin and some point and once started it seems to continue, but
shallow baths often don’t spin. The fact water sometimes spins and sometimes doesn’t
when falling in a gravitational field, try it yourself at home, shows that this effect is
not caused by the Earth spinning as many people assume. The Earth does always spin
after all so this cannot cause a spasmodic effect but random Star collapses or
explosions combined with spin shadow effects from the spinning earth arising out of
the vacuum can. We may find the quiescent background spin in our area of space
actually causes cancellation of the plughole spin rate not exactly on the Earth’s spin
equator but somewhere North or South of it. As you may realise water doesn’t spin
down the plughole at the Equator and it rotates in opposite directions in the Northern
and Southern hemispheres.
Why does the Earth stay in orbit then if force is all to do with conflict and there is no
conflict in the vacuum of space why are we “held” to the Sun as we are? Well
imagine that the Earth could magically be removed out to the space between the stars
we would see that the mirroring with other planets of the solar system and our Sun
would greatly reduce so leading to a much higher information requirement for the
Earth to be recreated out there. The vacuum therefore will only recreate the Earth in
this particular orbit at the moment as it is a minimum information path in space for the
Earth. Similarly for the other planets, they are where they are to minimise the effort of
the vacuum in recreating them. (This is similar to bent space-time but this new idea
is the correct one as it also predicts gyroscope behaviour which, as mentioned
above, Einsteinian gravity doesn’t). What about holistic planetary theories such as
Gaia? These sorts of theories have been looking for a mechanism to control the
climate to suit life, this theory allows that by actually moving the planet’s orbit ie
once life evolves perhaps the very fact life exists can keep the planet in an equitable
orbit. What is DNA except information after all, so the information content of the life
on Earth can affect the planet’s orbit by this new idea, and no need to think about
7
white or black daisies as planetary thermostats. Clearly DNA probably uses Gravity to
do much of what it does eg pulling apart copied strands and winding them up, DNA
would evolve to use any “free” resource such as Gravity. (No-one has a clue how
any of these cell DNA folding and teasing apart mechanisms work yet, including
me). All this would be controlled by mirroring effects within the genome, junk DNA
is almost certainly not junk after all, it may control matter mirroring effects so
controlling Gravity to do DNA’s bidding. Why else does junk DNA exist? Remember
DNA is not prejudiced, only our minds are, DNA doesn’t believe in “mass” any more
than I do. (This part is pure conjecture, experiments need to be done).
Other ideas arise from this such as explanations for solar flares, these may be
effectively “punch through” from Gravitons on the other side of the Sun interacting
with powerful magnetic fields within flare regions to change the interactive fraction of
Gravitons with matter so leading to flares. The magnetic effects we see are simply the
“pull down” effects of these flares, something else seems to push them up. (Again noone understands flares but they seem to have huge similarities with earthquakes
and sprites above thunderstorms). As the Sun is a net contributor of light to the
Universe we would see a net outflow of matter, ie matter may also move inward at
these points also but the net flow is outward. Sunspots may not just be colder regions
of the Sun, we may be losing some light to Graviton interaction leading to red-shift,
they are bound to look black.
Similarly it is now accepted that bluish lights are often seen over fault line areas
immediately prior to earthquakes, it is possible that stress in the rocks causes the blue
light above the surface due to some piezo-electric effect and this light in itself may
cause different Graviton interactions leading to the earthquake. Clearly if this is the
case, it may be possible to set earthquakes off at a time of our choosing by using
correctly coloured lights over the area under stress. Deaths in these earthquake zones
are caused by the unpredictability of the event and clearly if we could “predict them”
by actually setting them off to our timetable we could clear everyone from affected
areas prior to the quake. If this all sounds implausible ask yourself one question,
“What is the up and down movement of earthquakes about when we are not near a
subductive zone?”, in other words near a subductive zone we may expect vertical
movements as the seafloor rock moves under the continental crust but why on earth
would we see vertical movements in other earthquake regions away from these
subduction zones. Graviton interaction, that’s why. Remember I am proposing that
light and Gravity are linked somehow and so light should be able to affect Gravity at
some colours of light and it is a strange “coincidence” that the colour of light given
out by energetic “particles” in water (chernenkov radiation) is also blue. This light is
given off by the “particles” until they slow to the speed of light in the water at which
point the light ceases. The interaction of matter, Gravitons and blue light seems to be
linked somehow. (The reflection we live in seems to correspond to the one in
which blue light is of most importance, other reflections will be resonantly linked
more strongly to different colours of light including X-rays etc, ….. these other
harmonic reflections all help to balance one another and our reflection helps
balance them much as the moon balances the earth-moon system to minimise
pole-shifting).
8
Sprites above lightning strikes, where there are strong magnetic fields, probably work
a similar way. (Sprites are probably the best simple proof in nature of these
ideas).
Lensing of light, so far inexplicable by quantum Physics, can also be explained by
these new ideas as wherever we have a boundary that must be “recreated” as the earth
moves through the vacuum of space eg the boundary between air and glass of a lens
the additional information required to create the boundary causes the light to bend
under the influence of Gravity. This is a similar effect to planetary Gravitation but is
stronger due to the heightened interaction rate at the boundary. For example the shape
of a convex or concave lens seems to be correct to allow a tennis ball analogy such as
was used with planetary Gravity to operate to push light towards the thicker part of a
lens. Is this really just another “coincidence”? Now remember the shape of the lens
must be stored in the mirror-mirror interactions with the surrounding matter so the
electric-magnetic-spin vacuum field at the lens boundaries “knows” the shape of the
lens in a very real sense. So the light will be bent to suit the lens shape even though
the light at that point on the boundary wouldn’t be thought, in a more conventional
view of Physics, to “know” where the thickest part of the lens was.
Mirroring is at the heart of these affects and mirroring must be there for a purpose and
that purpose is to reduce information content. Remember in this theory everything is a
partial mirror, you, me, rocks, trees, water, and mirrors on the wall. When you look in
a light mirror what do you see? (Remember we also have electro-spin and
magnetic-spin mirrors and every gradation in between. We can understand this
in terms of light as we have mirrors at one end of the reflectivity scale and blackbody, ie totally absorbing, at the other. Similarly with the electro-spin and
magnetic-spin, we just don’t have eyes to see these or the gradations in these
that’s all but we can build sensors to do this, much as we use infra-red cameras
for light today to see things our eyes were not designed to see). You see you and
another Universe identical to this one but reversed, effectively we have two Universes
for the information content of one. But these two Universes we look at are not
interacting simply with one another, consider now another mirror on someone else’s
wall, they also see two universes and so on, in other words once we consider rocks,
water, air etc etc etc mirrors we effectively have an infinite number of mirror worlds
that exist purely to minimise the information content of the whole. In other words,
strange though it may sound, we have an infinite number of Universes in this Multiverse, for the information cost of only one half of one Universe. That is, to create an
infinity of Universes is twice as information efficient as creating one Universe.
Now all this sounds highly implausible until one remembers the form of ALL but
one of the standard equations for energy storage ½ CV2, ½ LI2, ½ MV2, ½ IW2, etc
etc etc we all know these don’t we. Then we have the other one E=MC2, do you see
something strange here? All the others are measured in the real world (this world
created by mirror mirror almost to infinity interactions) and are compared one with
another. We have a stored thing eg charge on a capacitor and the storee eg the
capacitance and we have a 1/2 that crops up everywhere. In other words any strange
ideas we may have had about electric charge for example are automatically cleansed
from our understanding by comparison with large chunky things like cars and rotating
masses etc that we can see and feel and all these energies must be equivalent. Now
remember we are talking about information not energy but the arguments are the
9
same. Now E=MC2 starts to look problematic, remember everything, including light
is now made from different aspects of the same “stuff” so why should it be a special
case and we are left asking the question what is wrong with this equation? It is
obvious really, there is a 1/2 missing. Einstein knew nothing of this new idea of
Physics, he knew nothing of the mirroring that made all of this Multi-verse possible,
he was wrong on this point, it really is that simple, he was wrong (remember it was he
himself who said he had a sneaking suspicion that none of his concepts would be
proved correct in the final analysis), so now we have E=1/2 MC2. Also since Energy
is now Information we have I=1/2 IC2 therefore C = 2 and this must tell us
something about the level of mirroring required to produce this reflection. Note also
that matter mirroring is almost certainly related to the natural log function
found in so many natural phenomenon at different scales from collections of
atoms to galaxy clusters.
Now of course we all know Einstein, despite what he thought, was actually partly
correct because the General Theory of Relativity has now been shown to be correct to
the Nth decimal place. Well yes, but what of it? That theory was designed amongst
other things to show how Mercury has it’s motion due to time dilation effects close to
the Sun, but note the problem here, the planet Mercury is a macroscopic “real” thing,
something we can all check, he had to get this right. In other words mirror world
effects are automatically accounted for in General Relativity if it is to get Mercury’s
orbital motion correct, which it does. But, and it is a huge BUT, E=MC 2 is based
purely on special relativity and Einstein’s maths and pictures on “particle accelerator”
photographs etc, these are not “real” things like a planet that you can hold in your
hand. He got it wrong. It is not a huge error but it is wrong, he was working from a
false premise, a non-mirror world premise, a single universe premise and not a multiverse premise.
The most accurate test of General Relativity to date has been in checking out the
movement of double star systems, such stars spiral inwards in a very specific way as
they lose mass. This new idea also spirals the stars inwards since as the stars lose
mass, ie information in the form of light and gravity waves etc etc etc to the rest of the
Multi-verse, the information content of this largely isolated star system falls and so
they spiral in, chicken and egg fashion, to satisfy the requirement to produce more
mirroring so they can be recreated with less information. Anything General relativity
can do this theory can do and more, and if you can understand a mirror you can
understand this theory. How many people understand General relativity? Very few.
Note also if everything is to sum to zero, because it came from Zero, that the person
you see in the mirror must be going back in pattern. Pattern being the term to describe
matter evolving in what we used to call time. If you take a three axis box with the
electric field on one axis, the magnetic field on the other axis and the spin field on the
other what would we see if we let a simulation of our reality run on? (this is a 3D
example that wouldn’t actually work but you get the idea, remember the spin field at
least effectively operates in a higher dimension) We would see patterns of interaction
occurring, the x-axis equations could be written in terms of the other two axis
components and similarly for the y-axis and z-axis equations. We would see matter in
effect being “created” as pattern conservation effects came into play as complexity,
note not time, but complexity, increased, first quarks, then gluons, then electrons,
10
protons, Gravity pushing each stage of the developments by pushing things together
to interact. These “particles” and atoms arise automatically from ongoing simple
reactions going on in a hugely interactive way and what else would we see?
Amazingly enough we see that time is nowhere to be seen, it isn’t on any of the three
axes we have here, only electric-magnetic-spin patterns. Time is an illusion that we
create in our heads as a tool to explain the ongoing interactions we see of the Earth
going round the Sun, turning on it’s axis and so on. We find this concept fits in pretty
well with the emerging patterns we see, it is simply a predictive tool we carry in our
heads. (Remember in a conceptual universe your thoughts have as much reality
as what is in front of you as everything you see has to be processed by your brain
and such processing is effectively zero dimensional as it has no up or down or
right or left or in or out. That is, to talk of the centre of a computer program is to
talk about a meaningless concept. We assume that a zero dimensional thing such
as a computer program or our minds, can exist in a three dimensional world, ….
they can’t, but a zero dimensional thing can exist in a zero dimensional world. So
the ideas that time or dimensions are a required part of the universe’s workings
are strong ones but are wrong ones all the same, they are concepts created by the
common parts of our minds produced by our common genes, our genes not only
build us they allow us to comprehend, experience, this same shared world. Note
this idea also allows an infinity of other realities to exist and to which we can
have no access at present because we are not genetically programmed to be able
to experience them.) But remember, as I said, for this to be a Zero sum game the
person you see in the mirror must be going back in pattern so when you drop a ball
the person in the mirror actually has the ball rise into their hand. That is we are used
to light that leaves us going forward in time (pattern actually) and we assume that
light from the mirror also goes forward in time (pattern), this is wrong it actually goes
back in pattern to make everything sum to zero. This is not some esoteric idea, it must
be this way for anything to exist. Which side of the mirror is more valid? Neither. We
are left with a world in which though we see here in this one reflection in which we
live that cause must precede effect, in fact that is a prejudiced viewpoint, things can
exist before we in this reflection would say they had been born, that is effect can
precede cause. In fact it is more correct to say cause and effect coexist in the overall
Multi-verse.
Notice also that this idea of an imperfect mirror-mirror to almost infinity conceptual
physics also explains many inexplicable quantum mechanical effects. In effect
quantum mechanics with all it’s complications of collapsing wave functions is
replaceable with some simple but highly interactive Arithmetic as everything interacts
with everything else. These ideas support the many world scenarios of quantum
mechanics that have been hypothesised to explain quantum computers etc and the
hypothesis of many worlds scenarios were the main reasons for Einstein doubting his
own work. (You can pop out now, today, and buy a quantum computer that can
do calculations in one second that your PC would take 10,000 years to perform
but no-one fully understands how they work except to hypothesise about an
infinity of other universes linked to this one and somehow the computations are
shared between all these universes, …. These mirror world ideas back up that
hypothesis and allow us to experiment on it for the first time).
Also note that a conceptual view of Physics tells us many strange things, for example
how much space do you need to store the concept of a star or a frog or a person and
11
where are these concepts kept? The answer is of course no space at all. A conceptual
Multi-verse has no physical size as we understand it, dimensions are also illusions of
our making to explain to ourselves how we interact with Stars and frogs and other
people. How can this be? Well quantum entanglement shows us that this idea may
very well be true however far fetched it sounds. Entangled “particles” communicate
“with one another” at faster than light speed, infinite speed as far as can be gathered
from experiment, a conceptual Physics such as this idea describes predicts this while
present “mass” based ideas of Physics fear this as it is inexplicable. A conceptual
Multi-verse has no physical size, size is simply a concept like any other and is no
more deserving than any other concept, and certainly not deserving of dimensions to
exist in. (Again entangled particles point us towards thoughts being similar to
particles in that they are conceptually linked together and so action at a distance
with zero time delay shows we have misunderstood dimensions. I believe in
believing in experiments and what they tell us about reality and not in believing
what I want these experiments to show. That after all is the definition of Science.
Unfortunately too many “Scientists” are not Scientists at all, they believe not in
experiments but instead in what they want to believe).
Such a Physics will certainly allow us to improve on the experiments of Pons and
Fleishman as we will have a much better understanding of what we must do to
improve the design of these “jam-jar” units as at present the teams designing them are
“working in the dark” as they have no inkling of what they are trying to achieve.
Remember the latest “jam-jars” are now working in over 100 labs around the
world, including at Los Alamos (of Hydrogen bomb fame), and they have power
outputs/unit volume up to 30 times greater than normal fission reactors but noone can yet explain how they work even now almost 20 years on from the initial
discovery. This theoretical basis gives us a starting point to explaining these units
and a lot more besides.
John Sinclair
Principal Electrical Engineer
SIGMA3 (North Sea) Ltd
Aberdeen
See Attachments Below For Some Additional Background to this. Note the language
has to be “chicken and egg” as this multi-verse has to have arisen from nothing, it has
to have “bootstrapped” into existence but persevere with it. Remember Einstein never
explained the constancy of the speed of light he simply accepted it as “fact” and used
this “fact” to develop his other ideas. My fundamental idea is that “Mass” is an
illusion but one that is difficult to understand as we are made of the same “stuff” but
once we accept this first simple step all sorts of things become explainable, including
inertia (an illusion caused by a misunderstanding of the fact mass actually arises
from ongoing creation from the flat vacuum using conserved information),
gravitational mass (an illusion caused by the method the vacuum uses to store the
information via mirroring with other matter), the “constancy” of the speed of light
and the work of Pons and Fleishman and Laithwaite and all the others who have been
“swept under the carpet”. Note also that if things are made from new so to speak as
the planet moves then that also goes for cancer cells and viral particles also and we
12
could probably learn to selectively delete important parts of these (particularly weak
atomic bonds) so debilitating them, ……. but that is probably some way off, say 5-10
years. This theory is unlikely to be “bang on the money” but it certainly seems to
explain a number of so far inexplicable things, but the Maths has still to be fully
worked out, though it will be based on the Maths of knots which is very well
advanced.
Consider the bumble bee, (see attached e-mail and paper) science/engineering said
until recently (supercomputer studies included) that it could not fly but by "tweaks"
here and there to the equations involving vortices riding on vortices they have just
made it lift off with a 2 or 3% excess lift capacity ie not very much lift capacity, well
in fact they did this two years or so ago. Bumble bee bodies are obviously extremely
clever to be able to do this, either that or they don't do it this way.
Bumble bees produce huge amounts of heat (dis-information) and using these ideas
this very thing is what is required to allow them (a closed energy system remember, ie
fuel and engine onboard the same frame) to fly easily as the information balance can
be kept more easily as the bee gets two forms of lift, the physical lift as worked out by
the super-computer "mass-based" equations and the hidden lift from the vacuum
balance effects of these ideas, remember bees get up to heat before they take off if
you've ever watched one flying "from cold". The additional lift provided would be
related to the efficiency of the bee's muscles ie highly efficient muscles and therefore
zero heat produced would be no use but lower efficiency muscle and more heat would
help with the lift, in fact the size/shape of wings, size/shape of muscle and the
efficiency of that muscle would all come into it and evolution would ensure the best
compromise was arrived at for all of these and for other factors. Hence in "my world",
this world, the bee can more easily fly and do whatever it wants but in "your world"
the bee can barely lift off and even then only by "tweaking" the equations but the real
crux of the matter is that in "your world" of "mass" based equations the bee cannot do
what we see real bees doing, .... ie the emperor has no clothes.
The question you have to ask is, "do bumble bees lie?" In Science the simplest
solution is usually the correct one and you have to admit a Physics based on multipleimperfect-mirroring (imperfect as in not total, there is none of the gambling aspect of
quantum mechanics in these ideas) is a lot simpler than one based on collapsing wave
functions that can't even tell you how a child's spinning top works or how a galaxy
has the shape it has or how a humble insect manages to fly so well. A Physics that
doesn't explain everything is not a Physics it is simply half-baked mumbo-jumbo,
these ideas are half-baked but they are not mumbo-jumbo.
13
Some Thoughts:
1. I talk about “particles” below, and “particles” splitting, but keep in mind there is
no such thing as a particle and they certainly never split, everything is one thing,
not derived from one thing, it is one thing.
2. I talk about time, though there is no such thing, time is a concept, a predictive tool
to allow our brains to plan ahead, it is all based on the concepts of cause and effect
and one thing following another, (patterns changing in "time", patterns do change
but time is not required to explain that, if we can say it may take a second or a
century but no-one can tell the way to spot the difference ie can show a
consequence of choosing one time frame over the other time is clearly exposed as
a concept of our making, an illusion) they don't in the overall multi-verse but we
find it useful in this particular universe because it is a partial view that
corresponds fairly well to what we see. Clearly there are slight exceptions but we
choose to ignore these, we call these coincidences or chance events or luck or
ghosts or what have you, these are shadows from the multi-verse, ..........clues, so
far ignored.
3. I talk about dimensions, there are no such things, the concept of dimensions is as
fundamental to our normal everyday understanding of this universe, as is time,
and every bit as flawed. The multi-verse has no need of them and neither do we.
4. I will not talk about "putting the numbers on this", because it is all about numbers,
isn't it, or at least some will say so.
5. Flat space dimensionality you could say is related to Pi (area of a circle goes up as
the square as does gravity )(but surely Pi could simply change its value to match
our universe whatever curvature it had and we would never know that it could be
any different, we are probably lucky not to live in a part of the universe where Pi
= 3 as we would be constantly in thrall to magic number theories.
Read the following in this light, we need a common language, but it is complicated by
the fact that the things we talk about do not actually exist in any real sense (but then
again neither do electric or magnetic fields) but we can still talk about them as if they
do to simplify things. (The talk below also has to straddle the reality you are used
to and the true underlying reality that I am introducing to you, so it uses terms
from both realities but keep in mind we do not need or want the concept of
dimensions now, this multi-verse can work only based on logical electromagnetic-spin associations and not on arbitrary things we have chosen to call
dimensions. Dimensions are higher concepts we have invented or rather our
shared DNA has “invented” and without which we could not comprehend one
another. Remember believe the experiments on dimensions (entangled particles
and instantaneous action at a distance when they are disentangled) not what you
have been brought up to believe ….. or want to believe. Start to see your body for
what it is, a set of DNA blinkers, but DNA also allowed you to think so allow
yourself to start thinking outside the “body box” you have been trapped in.)
If this Time-Light-Graviton (TLG) idea is correct where did it all “begin”?
Remember, this is one version of reality, if you can produce one that is self consistent
there is nothing to choose between that version and this TLG version, nothing.
The Multiverse “started” for want of a better concept in the middle (where it still is),
two zero dimensional objects (or 5D objects (see sheets at bottom), for it makes no
14
difference really, these things “created” the dimensions), mirror symmetric particles,
came into existence, they pulled apart from nothing, they were a positive TLG and a
negative TLG (call them what you will, “particle” and “anti-particle” is probably
good ) these included aspects of the three fields (concepts) we see, electric, magnetic
and angular momentum (spin) all enfolded into one. (Remember the thing enfolds
again and again but it helps to think of it as splitting into particles) The universe at
that time had no physical size as it consisted of zero dimensional particles it is still
zero dimensional and has only the appearance of dimensionality, the “dimensions”
evolved first probably simply by the two initial particles drawing apart from nothing
to start the dance (they summed to zero at each point in the drawing apart and still
sum to zero), dimension 1 was born at the precise points the particles separated, they
continued away from one another on dimension 1, they hit one another back to back
(remember, the universe is and was and always will be non-infinite but unbounded)
this " collision " took the form of a crossing and in crossing they produced two more
TLGs that shot off into dimension 2 and as they separated dimension 2 was born, all 4
particles crossed again in the middle and four more were born, they shot off into
dimension 3 and as they separated dimension 3 was born, and so it continued 8, 16,
32, 64 .................... As the TLGs expand in number they do not weaken, a concept is a
concept, you can't have a weakened concept of a dog, it is either a dog or it isn't, TLG
field weakening doesn't happen as it progresses, the conserved patterns (information)
contain the energy (information).
The multi-verse expands, not physically but complexity wise, there are more TLGs in
ever more angles from the centre, but as we have zero dimensions in reality there is
no centre anymore than we have a centre to a running computer program, the concept
is meaningless. The overall complexity continues to increase and increase and
increase, at some point, not a time, but a point in the complexity, patterns
spontaneously appear in the TLG interactions, the pace of complexity increase slows,
it happens at the same point in the pattern everywhere we have reached our first
condensation event (quarks and in the mirror worlds anti-quarks?), complexity
increase slows because we have created our first real information as we understand it
and there is therefore less to carry on with, (needs more thought this bit) complexity
starts to build again but slowly as the conserved patterns must be maintained and this
changes the TLG interactions. (Now this has been seen in simple computer
programs, simple rules such as the TLG interaction rules lead inevitably to
conservation of information at some point and these look like particles and even
do what we see particles doing in accelerators eg swapping small bits as they pass
one-another in space. So the idea of particles, ie conserved patterns, just
appearing at some point in the overall pattern development is not strange, the
universe has this mechanism built in somehow but we still have to understand it.
(It helps to think of this the “correct” way, ie as an enfolding of a multidimensional fabric which would produce identical “knots” (ie particles)
everywhere in pattern at once.)) And the process continues other condensation
events occur, (electrons and positrons?), then others (gluons and anti-gluons?) then
another (protons and anti- protons?), then another (neutrons and anti-neutrons?) and
so on until the first atom patterns emerge and at each step the TLG interactions in the
vacuum change slightly, all the TLGs (ie their constituent fields) whether they happen
to be part of the conserved pattern or on their way to the next one are the memory for
the conserved patterns (the TLGs making up the patterns change as they cross one
through another) sometimes in crossing they produce more TLGs but often now they
15
simply support the patterns. And the process continues. Still there is no time as we
understand it just TLG patterns. And since the first condensation event something has
been happening, the conserved patterns have been coming together "pushed" by a
particular TLG action we have called Gravity and it has aided each step of the
condensation events, as the patterns moved closer they were able to have more
complex interactions one with another and they formed the higher order particles, all
due to Gravity's initial "pushes".
The multi-verse has no beginning and no end, it started in the middle and remains in
the middle (space has been measured to be “flat” to an incredible degree and this is
astounding unless we are living in the middle of the pattern, then it makes sense, so
this is in a very real sense the middle, as is everywhere else in the Multi-verse of
course, the middle of pattern) this created the "beginning patterns" and the end
"patterns", as it still does today, the pattern condensation events have left their marks
in background TLGs ("Big Bang" infra-red light) that never interacted with the
evolved matter after the last "physical" condensation event (atoms). This is all a bit
vague and needs much more thought but you get my drift the afterglow of the "big
bang" can just as easily be "caused" by a building of complexity in time, light and
graviton as they bounce back and forth in what we call time but is actually pattern.
This is a much more satisfactory sort of idea than the idea of a start to time and a
finish, it started in the middle.
For every universe becoming more complex there is an "identical" one becoming less
complex and intelligent beings can live in either, your reflection in the mirror is a real
person but one travelling "back in time (backward in pattern)" just as we travel
"forward in time (forward in pattern)" but we cannot know which way is complex or
less complex, we do not know in which we reside. In this way, the effect of the mirror
worlds is to exactly half the information required to create either world, mirror or
exact anti-mirror since the original two TLGs were mirror images of one another and
lots of mirror image TLGs exist and only these will form the two worlds considered
here there is no extra information required so two identical worlds can be created for
the same information each going in opposite pattern directions.
What I am trying to do with these stories is show you how simple it is to make this
TLG idea consistent with what you know already from inertia, to General Relativistic
effects with double star systems, to a possible Scientific mechanism for homeopathic
effects (not in this document) that have now been shown to be real by laserspectroscopy, to "Big Bang" remnant events etc etc, you can look at all of these and
more phenomenon viewing them as information effects and arrive at exactly the same
conclusions as we have now for all of them but you leave open far more possibilities
for future explanations in Science and for Technological advancement generally than
if we stick with a non-conceptual Physics (that of course doesn't make it any more
likely to be correct, but it has more than the ring of truth about it now I think). I have
only introduced a slight twist to get here, and again, I have only used existing ideas.
The next few sheets describe how the three basic field concepts interact with one
another. Note I have left red comment notes to myself in the text as this is in effect
still a work-in-progress and it is important to show what I am thinking so that I and
other people can spot any errors more easily.
16
Note the paper has been made all-encompassing to give a feel for what is possible but clearly it
would need to be sectionalised to make it easier to understand the implications for each part of
Engineering, Medicine and Science. For example although we have had electrical motor machine
theory for many years now and those theories have quantified the magnitudes and direction of
torques produced within machines they haven't actually been based on underlying physical
principles but rules of thumb ie the theories haven't explained anything about how electrical
machines do what they do. These new ideas show that the rotor of a motor rotates due to
electromagnetic shading effects leading to the spin component of matter rotating the machine, ie
the electromagnetic shading changes the reference point for the recreation of the machine from
the vacuum as the earth moves forward in its orbit and the motor is therefore recreated spinning.
This is a similar effect to water falling down a plug-hole in a gravitational field and picking up
spin as it goes but that example uses spin shading due to the spin shadow cast by the recreation
from the vacuum background of the spinning earth. Note also that if matter can unwind to
produce heat we can probably unwind it to preferentially produce spin, ie an over-unity motor
may be possible using spin shading devices.
17
“Time” can be affected by interacting with Light via the Electric
Field and with the Graviton via the Angular Momentum Psueudo
Field
Note I’ve called the resonance of electric and spin fields “Time” (always in bold) as I
didn’t want to kill the word Time altogether but this resonance shouldn’t be confused
with our concept of time. The concept of time resides only in our heads and is a
predictive tool only. The “Time” spoken of here is purely a resonance of electric and
spin fields, bit confusing perhaps but I like a bit of messiness.
We all know gyroscopes (earth) precess at given rates dependant on the gravitational
field and the spin speed so precession time is somehow linked to Graviton.
Consider a shiny kettle. It gives out less radiative heat than a dull kettle but this may
be due to reduced pattern re-enforcement effects due to the shiny metallic surface
rather than the surface radiative effects that had been assumed to date. That is the fact
it reflects light so well may effectively slow down changes within the liquid including
internal thermal radiative effects so leading to less heat lost. Similarly “foil fresh”
food may actually work by delaying breakdown of food components due to reduced
pattern re-enforcement effects. How else can we explain that “foil fresh” food lasts
much longer than normally wrapped food, surely not just because it is very very
slightly more airtight than normal containers.
Time seems to be affected by shiny metallic surfaces, these “short out” the electric
field thus causing the effect. Note: superconductors would truly “short” the electric
field and we would see much increased effects in that case. Imagine Time to be like
water, if you let one little bit in you still get wet, ie it still has a major effect on you,
but with a superconductor you can keep dry and lots of things become possible that
weren’t possible when you were wet, you can become “Time dry”. That means we
can pin down one corner of the Time-Light-Graviton (TLG) fields triangle (see sketch
on bottom page) and if we can pin down one more, or partially pin it down as Pons
and Fleishman were probably unwittingly doing, hopefully start to see pattern
breakdown effects ie energy out.
18
Light can therefore be affected by interacting with “Time” via the
Electric Field and with Gravitons via the Magnetic Field
“Head on” “crossing” of many gravitons and a single light photon probably leads to redshift
of the light and the gravitons to becoming less capable of imparting a force to “matter” so
Gravitons from the other side of the Sun can punch through less opposed than normal so
creating flares, “matter” being seen here as a (mirror/mirror/mirror etc to almost infinity)
reflected conserved pattern in the Time/Light/Graviton vacuum sea, so the interaction
light/graviton here is probably magnetic in nature. Hence “matter” in bodies giving out light
such as stars may not have the same “mass” as that same “matter” here on earth or the overall
3D effect of all of this may be that the “mass” is the same, computer simulations are required,
this is way too complicated to follow the reactions through to the conclusions but the rules
will be pretty simple. Note our internal concept of time will be involved in this interaction
obviously but I don’t know enough about that reaction.
“Normal crossing” (90degrees) of many gravitons and a single photon leads to a sideways
force on the photon in the “direction” the gravitons are “travelling”.
Angles in between probably do something in between. Note that sunspots still look black
from an extreme angle (ie coming out from behind the sun) so the change from one behaviour
to another may not be linear.
Note “” above means concept only eg I believe the Universe has no “size” in any real sense of
the word, it is fantastically small or large (take your pick) or something in between, ie it
doesn’t matter, it is a concept, the universe is a pattern producing machine. And when we
come to run simulations informed from our actual evidence from the macro-world eg light
bends in lenses or light is redshifted when leaving stars, time is affected in some way by
“velocity” (a combined distance and time concept) and Time is affected at shiny or black
things etc etc , we should see the higher order concepts falling out naturally, eg matter,
dimensionality (as animals arise that can make use of the mind invented concept of
dimensionality), energy, particles etc etc . Note that electric fields form magnetic fields when
moved or varied and vice versa for magnetic fields ie they form electric fields, it is probable
that angular momentum is linked to these two also. I can't draw a seed for this as it requires
multidimensional knot theory or similar (string theory?) but a string theory of 13 seems
wrong, it must be five as some of the newer theories predict ie instead of having six primary
fields which all balance for balanced TLGs ( ie a plus magnetic, a minus magnetic, a plus
electric, a minus electric, a plus angular momentum and a minus angular momentum) the
fields must all be intertwinned, ie essentially the same thing in a higher dimension and that
thing that creates all of this must look mathematically like a constantly enfolding five-fold
symmetrical knot, it can be symmetrical because pattern is allowed to go either way and we
have equal numbers of particles and anti-particles etc etc. Maybe it would be impossible to
engineer with this concept, maybe we should engineer with TLGs but the foundation of that
engineering will be the maths of knots. Note that the thing must enfold in on itself as there
can be nothing “outside” this Multi-verse, that is this we see “around” us cannot consist of
TLG “particles” running about in “something” as what are they to run about in? The Multiverse must therefore be created by a multi-dimensional enfolding thing) We just have to
ensure we set up the correct initial concepts and the rules of the interactions of
Time/Light/Gravitons and we have to use a bit of flair in seeing the higher concepts for what
they are when they arise. For example we should see pattern conservation arise at some point
ie fundamental “particles”, and we should start to see them doing what we see in particle
accelerators ie swapping even smaller particles (even smaller conserved bits). The idea you
have to get your head around here is that “Physics” evolves, the fundamental rules probably
don’t but the concepts (matter etc ) certainly do.
19
Particle accelerators are bashing conserved patterns (particles) together of course they are
going to see “fireworks” but very confusing ones, we should start to “see the wood for the
trees” with “new ideas” like these it is staring us in the face now surely.
These ideas have one major advantage over some of the present ideas of Physics, we are not
bending theories to suit the facts (dark matter etc, sounds like the earth centred view before
Kepler came along and gave us elliptical orbits of the planets) and these new ideas are all
testable in some way.
Gravitons seem to be affected by strong magnetic fields, somehow locking these magnetic
fields out possibly using a ferromagnetic material surrounding a reactor vessel may allow us
pin down one corner of the TLG. I can’t see it being that easy though, but maybe we just have
to let it settle for some time to see what happens, the TLGs may react at first in a sort of
voltage on a capacitor way, ie their support function will fall off exponentially at a rate
dependant on how good the containment is so it may not have to be perfect to see some
effects, we can improve things as we come to understand what is happening. That means we
can pin down one corner of the TLG fields triangle and once at least one more is pinned down
we will hopefully start to see pattern breakdown effects ie energy out. See below.
20
Graviton can be affected by interacting with Light via the Magnetic
Field and with “Time” via the Angular Momentum Psueudo Field
We all know the “anomalous” behaviour of gyroscopes so angular momentum or
some more primary concept such as that related to Graviton.
Water and other liquids (water has many more modes of freedom of motion than any
other known liquid) falling in a gravitational field ie being pumped up to fall
downward around a vessel may allow us to cancel out background TLG spin effects.
Again this is a similar effect to the one mentioned for “Time” above, if you let one
little bit of spin in you get wet metaphorically speaking but if you can keep it all out
possibly using water falling in a gravitational field you can keep the containment
vessel dry in spin terms, you become “spin dry” (I know it sounds like a joke it is not,
these ideas must be memorable I will use any method I can think of to make them so,
even stealing common terms of usage). That means we can maybe pin down one
corner of the TLG fields triangle and triangle and once at least one more is pinned
down hopefully start to see pattern breakdown effects ie energy out.
21
TIME
LIGHT
ELECTRIC FIELD
ANGULAR
MOMENTUM PSEUDO
FIELD
MAGNETIC FIELD
GRAVITON
One bit of the proposed Engineering seed, the TLG.
I think that as a first step into this new world we can use these to
evolve, in Time and Light and Graviton, modelled solutions to
engineering problems but we have yet to work out all the
interactive rules.
22