Peter Dunn

Hello Brat the Rat I commend you for posting this thread - living, as you do, in one of the most heavily populated countries on the planet with a per capita consumption of Mother Earth's resources way, way below that of Europeans or Americans makes your argument all the more stronger. It should be us westerners that pay the price for the rape of the planet, we've taken it out, therefore its down to us to put it back in. Forget terraforming Mars - we should be making plans to terraform our home planet so that we can survive (as a race) long enough to get the F!!Ck off it. Yours peter Dunn

Can homeopathic SURGEONS perform heart by pass operations? I think not. (S)nuff said.

Hi guys Stop looking for perfection - whether in yourself or the girl of your dreams - it ain't there believe me. For two people to successfully share their lives they need to accept and understand their chosen partner's imperfections (smelly feet whatever) - its the little things - for the most part - that eventually destroy relationships. Forget the soaps, forget Hollywood, this isn'nt a rehearsal (we only come this way once), so make the most of it. Peter Dunn

I'm going for a sqrt

Hi Loki Surely plants do'nt 'base' their structure on anything; they are simply what they are - as nature intended (and hopefully edible). Whatever structure they do possess is probably more to do with structure at the molecular level which is reflected at higher levels (zooming out with your microscope) in fractal fashion. The recurrence of patterns and numbers in nature is a fascinating theme with, I think, the most amazing correlation being between early (neolithic) man's obsession with spiral patterns and the spiral patterns seen in particle accelerator detectors as 'bits' of particles spiral away to non existence (they disappear).

Hi Fafalone Did you actualy type all that stuff? Didn't your digits acquire a few blisters in the process? Your attention to detail and sustained manual dexterity is to be applauded. All the best Peter Dunn

Hi All I take it I'm under house arrest. As for kps to mps conversion Encarta (where I read about the speed of the solar wind etc) gives both - but as I've lost the disc I thought I'd tap into some of the enormous reservoir of grey matter out there and save myself a bit of bother. As for my age - well I'm a bit coy about that when talking to strange men over the ether. All the best Peter Dunn

Hi All I would just like to explain that my theory does not negate the invaluable contributions made to modern physics: such as the inverse square law and special and general relativity, by intellectual heavyweights such as Newton and Einstein etc. What I am trying to accomplish is to integrate all previous theories (theories that I understand in purely an interested layman’s terms) into one principle that explains the totality of existence in a single concept. My theory has a lot say about what I have termed oppositional forces but if you strip away, for a moment, the up-scaling force we are left with only the down-scaling force; it is this force that previous theories of gravitation are, in isolation, actually describing. Now we are all aware of the fact the present model has been seriously undermined by the discoveries that galaxies rotate faster at their rims than ought to be the case leading to the proposal that as much as 96% of matter is dark and not directly detectable (juxtapose this with the concept of critical density – i.e. there is just the right amount of matter in the Universe for it to exist in the first place) and that the expansion rate of the Universe is not slowing down as predicted - this has led to speculation that Einstein’s cosmological constant might, after all, be correct (when he knew, himself, that it wasn’t) or that there is a completely new force out there awaiting discovery. What we lay people, standing here watching from the side lines, are actually witnessing here is a desperate re-jigging of a theory that can no longer predict or account for the empirical evidence provided by the increasingly sophisticated and powerful observational tools being deployed. Who knows – if Einstein had lived long enough to have access to some of this evidence he might indeed conclude that there existed a counterbalancing up-scaling force. The jpeg that I have attached to this post is one that I chose not to include in my theory proper. This is because I could not justify the point I was trying to make with it - i.e. that Einstein’s famous equation could be illustrated in a purely physical manner within the framework of my theory. Perhaps there is, out there, someone who could. All the best Peter Dunn

Hi Sayonara I would be delighted if somebody could inject a bit of math into my theory. Also computer viruses attack computers - a related question - what firewall have you installed? Mine lets it through. All the best Peter Dunn

Question? How do you compute, to an exact value, the area of a circle? Pi is not the answer. The universe is not reducible to an equation. There is much that mathematics can predict because the universe is quantised by oppositional forces (they parcel everything out). Numbers are just another language ie agreed values. They do not invalidate other ways of seeing or understanding. Most importantly i am signing off because the WinBlaster worm is running riot on this side of the pond and its totally doing my head in! All the best Preparing to scan Peter Dunn

Hi Radical Eddy! I'm glad you like the pics. I put them together with Real Draw Pro if you're interested - its not very difficult to produce such images with the fills and other features of the Prog. All the best Peter Dunn

Hi Snorlax I'm a Brit could you run that by me again using mps instead of kps. Also there is no complete theory of gravity (the existence of the graviton is still to unproven) so why a constant for what is still conjecture. As for universal constants (there is now speculation that the speed of light can vary) there are heavyweight theorists out there who are, at last, beginning to call everything based on classical assumptions into question. In other words all bets are off and the field is opening up to new ideas and thinking. Also could you set out your argument in English as I do'nt speak math - I deal in concepts. Thanks for your input. All the best Peter Dunn

Hi Sayo Thanks for the remove! Figure 3 re-visited. I’ve re-posted figure 3, in what - I hope - is a clearer format, because I don’t think that the original adequately illustrates how it relates to all the other elements of my theory. I should also explain that all the figures that illustrate my work are representational and that they should not be construed to be actual depictions of the, as yet, invisible entities that I am describing. Non-space, or non-existence, is a real state or actuality that must be incorporated into any theory that attempts to explain reality for without it the theory would be incomplete. Figure 3, then, is a scale schematic of that reality but it should be understood that non-space is not solely confined to levels 1 and 5 – infinity cannot be demarcated and there can be no punctuations in eternity - rather it should be regarded as being all pervasive throughout the quantum continuum and that our reality: the interloper that destroyed the perfect symmetry of the void, is merely superimposed upon it like a double exposure. I’d like to thank all the readers that have viewed this piece – regardless of whether they agree or disagree with anything that I’ve had to say – for their time and interest. All best Peter Dunn

Now I would like to discuss the geometric continuity of space-time at all levels of scale. There is a basic shape – what I think of as the cosmic paradigm – that recurs at every level and this is the torus. When we look at undistorted particles we are looking at inversionally rotating tori formed by oppositional forces, we see this same pattern again with the magnetic lines of force surrounding a bar magnet, the magnetospheres of planets and stars are, when undistorted, inversionally rotating tori and, at the highest level of scale yet seen, the basic shape of a jet galaxies monstrously accelerated magnetosphere can safely be inferred to be such a torus. So, in fractal fashion – where the part reflects the whole, I think it would be safe to assume that the essential geometry of the entire Universe - a geometry dictated by oppositional forces – is an inversionally rotating torus. At this point I would ask the reader to consider a rather curious correlation, if you run the inverse square law backwards what you get is that, with each halving of the distance between two bodies, gravitational force intensifies fourfold; compare this with Maxwell’s assertion that when a magnetic object is compressed to half its original size, in effect – halving the distance between its composite molecules and atoms, magnetic force also increases fourfold. This is not mere coincidence - this is a direct correlation which tells us that gravity and electromagnetism are related forces. What, then, is the nature of this relationship? With the present: Newtonian, modified by Einstein model, gravity – when fully understood with gravitons captured and classified – would take its place in the unification of forces along with the electromagnetic, electroweak and strong forces etc. With my model gravity – when understood in terms of oppositional forces – is defined as being the overarching unifying force with all forces and phenomena, including matter and energy and the very fabric of space-time becoming merged into a single continuum stretching between the infinity within and the infinity without. The only question, then, that remains to be answered is – how did it all come about? What was it that occurred within non-space that led to the creation of our world with all its ethereal beauty and ordered chaos, its staggering scale and breathtaking sweep across space and time? Well nothing much really needed to happen – all that was required was for non-space to move, for whichever way it moved would be in opposition to itself - and so it was that the symmetry of the void was broken. I personally believe that the Universe has to exist in order to define its very antithesis: the directionless, dimensionless quantum void that I call non-space – in effect the Cosmos exists to quantify absolute nothingness. So what about the future? The Universe had a beginning; will it have an end? There is a bizarre sting in the tail here for the answer to that question is both yes and no. For those of us that live within it the end will come with a combination of heat death: as the Universe flies apart – and mini crunches as the crushing embrace of millions of black holes mop up the residual Universe. But for our sentient non-space entity (remember him?) for whom time cannot pass – the Universe will be a tiny spark shining forever in an otherwise featureless void.

I would like, now, to explain how oppositional forces combine individual particles into atomic structure. I once heard the quark described as being like Lewis Carroll’s Cheshire cat whose smile remains after the cat, itself, has disappeared. This is an apt description for the technology required to view this entity directly is still a long way off for the quark resides at the level of scale where space-time becomes both permeable and particulate (sparticles are the smallest viewable entities; anything smaller cannot exist within space-time). Figure 10 above depicts this level and the structured space-time (sub-atomic scale) level. It takes the combined masses of three quarks to make an entity: such as a proton or neutron, that is stable and possesses enough ‘presence’ to exist in the lower reaches of the microcosmic Universe; combinations of two quarks (virtual particles?) are probably short lived relationships that fall apart because the up-scaling force pushes them away from one another. With three quarks present the down-scaling force has enough mass to get to grips with so the down-scaling matrix centred on them cannot be overcome by their individual up-scaling matrices and so they become, in effect, a single, tertiary entity with overlapping matrices that comprise, at the level above, the focal localities of protons and neutrons. Figure 11 uses cogwheels to represent the focal localities/particles that make up the atom. This is to illustrate why particles of opposite charge ‘mesh’ and particles of like charge rebound from one another. It will be seen that particles of like charge: such as the two protons (see note 1 below) – top left, have the same angular momentum yet, when brought together, at the point of contact they are actually moving in opposite directions so their respective energies cannot ‘mesh’ and they rebound. The respective energies of particles of unlike charge: such as the proton and electron – top right, do mesh and if brought together would explode in a shower of photons. The neutron, however, has no integral spin of it’s own but still rotates as it is forced to adopt negative spin by being in close proximity to the protons in the nucleus. The negative spin of the neutron contributes to the prevention of electrons and protons coming into contact with one another. There is, though, another mechanism which prevents the electrons from approaching the protons in the nucleus too closely; when they approach the nucleus they are also approaching each other so their inability to come together renders them something akin to the bricks in an arch by forming a self supporting structure (see note 2 below). The different charges associated with atomic particles: i.e. positive, negative and neutral, are not dictated by their angular momentum alone but also by whether they are slightly up-scale or down-scale dominant – inversional bias also dictates angularity - with the neutron carrying no inversional bias; this is why it is the least interactive of the three specie and why it rapidly decays outside the nucleus as it cannot relieve the stresses induced by inversional rotation. When energy is introduced into such a system the electrons move away from the nucleus because their energy/mass equivalence has increased and they move to a higher oscillatory state (the bricks in the arch – and therefore the arch – actually get bigger). The, now more powerful (more mass means more force brought to bear), down-scaling matrix centred on the aggregate mass of the entire atom reacts to this situation by contracting which forces photon emission and a return to the more stable ground state. Figure 12 depicts an atomic nucleus with two orbiting electrons. The arrows represent the up-scaling and down-scaling matrices, centred on the nucleus, as they spiral outward and inward. The two electrons depicted – which would, at their ground state, resemble inversionally rotating tori (see note 3 below) - are distorted, or stretched by the actions of the down-scaling matrix as it carries them toward the nucleus and constrained by the up-scaling matrix sliding past them, in the opposite direction, on either side. When an electron’s mass is increased by a close encounter with another electron (mass is transmitted through their overlapping matrices – see paragraphs one and two page nine) - or an induction of electromagnetic energy (e.g. thermal) from an outside source - it becomes up-scale dominant and so must jump across from the down-scaling spiral onto the up-scaling spiral (this equates with a changed quantum state) so that it can move away from the nucleus. What happens next is dependent upon how much extra energy (energy equals stress/mass) the electron has received; below a certain quotient the electron well remain constrained within the down-scaling matrix centred upon the atoms aggregate mass and it will be forced to lower its quantum state by photon emission (an up-scaling event) – above that quotient the electron moves, energetically, away from the nucleus at escape velocity to break free from the system altogether and become either a free radical, one of a pair or, in a molecular environment, dislodge, by stress/mass transferral, an electron from a neighbouring atom into which it then becomes integrated. There will be times, of course, when photon emission and ejection from the quantum system occur simultaneously Atoms, we are aware, combine to form molecules by electron exchange; my model of this process is described above. All the activity depicted occurs at a bewildering speed as the electron is a frenetically busy entity as it careers around the nucleus jumping across quantum states with its oscillatory condition constantly in flux. It is the ability of the electron, however, to both integrate itself into atomic structure and, when in free radical mode, to rip another electron out of a quantum system to form a pair that provides for its most important function: driving forward molecular evolution. When a free radical rips out an electron from a molecule the molecule is forced to recombine or mutate to form a new molecule and it is this process: relentless mutation - that gives rise to complex molecules such as DNA. It would be reasonable to assume that electrons behave in pretty much the same way regardless of where their focal localities happen to be in the Universe; it would also, then, be reasonable to assume that the process described above has been replicated elsewhere in the Cosmos which would, moreover, mean that we are not alone and that there is life out there. Further to this, because the electron’s creational drive is ever toward complexity, some of that life will be intelligent. Perhaps, one day, utilising space ripping technology and quantum transpositioning we will actually get out there to meet them. Notes 1. The repulsive force exerted by the protons in the nucleus is overcome by three factors: 1) At the quark level the down-scaling matrix centred on the aggregate mass of the combination of quark triplets that constitute the nucleic particles is very strong as it is almost at the end of its long journey through space-time and is about to re-enter non-space. 2) The down-scaling matrix centred on the aggregate mass of the entire atom is supplemented by the matrix centred on the nucleus alone and the matrices of the individual nucleic particles. 3) The protons themselves can, momentarily, reduce their repulsiveness by transferring mass to each other - this mass in transit is known to particle physics as pions with the same function performed at the quark level by mass transferrals known as gluons. All of these phenomena – taken together – constitute the strong force. 2. Some readers might, at this point, be thinking ‘What about hydrogen – that has only one electron and proton?’ My answer to this question is that hydrogen atoms are probably self destructing on massive scales in the hearts of stars all the time but hydrogen elsewhere mostly exists in molecular form so the electrons are preoccupied swapping nuclei. 3. All entities are prone to becoming distorted by the actions of other entities in their environment and so will only rarely appear to be tori (doughnut shapes). There will also be occasions when the matrices (field) of a particle have two or more focal localities (superposition). Next post: the geometry of space-time.

Hi All Disregard last post - posted in error (incomplete) I would be grateful if someone could remove it. Done! Sayo

Duality can also be explained in terms of the omnipresent matrices associated with a particle/focal locality. When an electron is fired at a detector screen through a single slit the screen registers one hit – this is a space-time frame of reference measurement so the wave function collapses and only the focal locality (particle) is detected. When, on the other hand, an electron is fired at the screen through two slits the outcome is a more holistic, non-space frame of reference measurement for the screen registers two hits and an interference pattern because we are now seeing the matrices but not their focal locality. We will probably never be able to detect a particle’s locality whilst also measuring its speed and trajectory; this is because we could never view the particle from outside of space-time; for this is what we would have to do – only an observer positioned in non-space could view the particle in its entirety - and only then if the observer was capable of viewing the particle from every angle simultaneously in cubist fashion. We might, in due course, develop detection methods that decrease the amount of uncertainty inherent in pinpointing the whereabouts whilst observing the behaviour of quantum particles but, as with squaring the circle, it will never be an exact science so the uncertainty principle will remain. Another problematic issue that besets all previous astrophysical models is critical density for the allowed total mass parameters for the Cosmos are so constrained that the continuing existence of the Universe is, well, nothing short of a miracle. With the non-spatial model, on the other hand, the self-adjusting dynamics of oppositional forces allow for the Cosmos – in one form or another - to come into being, and endure, no matter how much mass is present for them to work with. Structure, and the lack of it, is also the product of these forces for in the nascent, proto Universe oppositional forces exploited the density fluctuations – with the up-scaling force, welling up from within, transforming the relatively low density regions into the great voids and inter-galactic spaces and the down-scaling force, cascading inward from without, creating galactic clusters and the great walls of galaxies in the higher density regions. We must not forget that there is also structural scale to be considered – it is not just there simply because it is there, it needed to be created - for scale is a form of quantisation and came about because expanding and contracting matrices, moving in opposition to one another with space-time sandwiched in between, stratified, or layered the Universe at the different levels of scale ranging from the quark, discontinuous space-time level (level 3 figure 3 - see note below) right up through the structured space-time level (level 2 figure 3) that, itself, can be subdivided into the microcosmic levels i.e. subatomic, atomic and molecular – and the macrocosmic levels i.e. planetary, star system, galactic, galactic cluster, super galactic cluster and the super macrocosmic universal levels of scale. Another problem that can only be properly addressed by my model of quantum reality is the question surrounding the antimatter created, along with matter, in the very early, embryonic Universe. What happened to it – where did it all go? To answer these questions I am going to ask the reader to envisage a different way in which an alternative Universe might expand – bearing in mind that this alternative Cosmos exists, like ours, within a non-dimensional ‘space’. Imagine our alternative reality to be the contents of a sphere, at the exact centre of the sphere there is a point that is receding from every point on the sphere’s inner surface – what we are looking at here is a Universe that is, from our view point, contracting or expanding inward – not outward. This is precisely what happened to all the antimatter. The cosmic conflagration that would have occurred had antimatter and matter came into direct contact was avoided because the spatial and temporal dimensionality of antimatter, along with its inversely charged particles, is the diametric inversion of matter’s dimensionality. Put simply they both went their separate ways. A denizen of such an antimatter Universe would not, of course, perceive his world to be shrinking – although, if he had an inkling of our existence, he might attribute such a property to ours. Notes: I will be reposting figure three in a clearer format in the last instalment. Next post: quark combinations, atomic structure and the carrier particles

Hi All I haven't got a clue as to what the original post in this thread is about (seems to me somebody 's pulling someone elses plonker) but as for weighing the graviton if it was discovered and found to possess mass - i. e. could be weighed - then the standard model of particle physics would be virtually destroyed - the 'known' mass of every other particle (eg gluon, pion etc) would have to be recalculated. Also, it would seem (from reading New Scientist, Scientific American etc), that the concept of any universal constants having any concrete validity is under serious review. All the best Peter Dunn

Successfully generating a quantum bubble will depend, entirely, upon the way in which polarised quantum particles (see figure 5) propel themselves through space. The model of how they achieve this (see figure eight below) that I am going to put forward: ingestion - is, I believe, logical and consistent with everything that I have already said. Figure 8 illustrates the way in which, I believe, polarised (inversionally rotating) quantum particles achieve mobility – the down-scaling force enters the waveform from the ‘front’ along its line of travel whilst the up-scaling force exits from the ‘rear’ – this has the effect of sucking in, or ingesting, sparticles from the front and forcefully expelling them at the ‘back’ in much the same way as a turbofan jet engine ingests and expels air. Before I can explain how this phenomenon can be exploited to generate a quantum bubble, however, we need to ask ourselves a question. When an aircraft flies through the air its aerodynamics cause the atmosphere to flow around it; now consider a spacecraft moving through space – when the spacecraft: that, naturally, has its own internal space, travels through the partial vacuum of space-time does space move out of the way? The answer to this question is really quite obvious – space is constituted by sparticles that have less mass than the super penetrative neutrino so space would not flow around the spacecraft – it would flow through it travelling in the opposite direction. This is what must be prevented in order to generate a quantum bubble; ‘empty space’ must be forced to flow around the craft and not through it. Figure 9 illustrates how this could be achieved. Figure 9 depicts a craft that employs what I call ‘space ripping’ technology. The purple cloud around the craft represents a field of polarised quantum particles that are fixed, or maintained in stasis – electromagnetically - relative to the spacecraft. Now if the particle field can be made super efficient then all the sparticles along the craft’s line of travel will be deflected around it and the craft will be, in effect, travelling through a ‘space’ outside of space-time altogether inside a quantum bubble. This can be looked at another way: remember Einstein’s relativistic observer on a train for whom the station arrives at the train and not vice versa? Well this is what is really happening here – non-space is devoid of dimensions so an object within it cannot ‘go’ anywhere; space-time does, however, possess dimensionality so it would have to move relative to our spaceship. Such a craft would also have some rather peculiar capabilities: because the craft is isolated from space-time the laws of physics – such as the inertial law - would not apply rendering it capable of travelling and manoeuvring at tremendous speeds without throwing and crushing any occupants against the craft’s inner bulkheads – it would also be invisible to an observer within space-time – lastly, and most bizarrely, it would probably be capable of passing straight through any space-time obstacles: such as a planet, as if it wasn’t there. Quantum transpositioning or teleportation will, one day, be possible because of the omnipresence of quantum entities. The omnipresence of particles, photons and sparticles comes about for two reasons – the first of which is that, in a non-spatial frame of reference, everything is the same size as non-space is dimensionless so a galactic super cluster does not take up any more ‘room’ in this infinite ‘space’ than, say, an electron. In the second instance it must be remembered that all entities are the product of their matrices which stretch – both spatially and temporally (see note below) - upward and outward, and downward and inward between infinities (and so brings them all into contact with one another i.e. all physical entities are in touch or ‘aware’ of every other physical entity within space-time [aka quantum entanglement]). So when it comes to the instantaneous transpositioning of a man across both space and time all we are really doing is sending the man to a place where he already exists. The trick will be to learn how to isolate a man (isolation is required because his constituent particles need to disentangled from every other waveform in space-time - see note below): within a quantum bubble, from space-time and then refocus the focal points (localities) of all the matrices that make up his constituent sub-atomic particles at a predetermined point in space and time, in effect deliberately collapsing the wave function of a mans constituent particles (re-entangling him) elsewhere. Notes. A brief note about time: Time is simply change: evolution brought about by the motion (movement) imparted to all things by oppositional forces; time slows down for an observer approaching light speed because it is incremental or quantised with successive events equating with a succession of single quantum states so an observer travelling at or near light speed is actually catching up with rate of change (a cinematographer slows down the action by increasing the film speed in much the same manner). Until all the implications of super positioning all the constituent particles of a person (i.e. having them exist in two places simultaneously) are understood isolation is the only way to go. Next post: duality and the collapse of the wave function, antimatter, critical density, the uncertainty principle and structure and scale.

We must now, then, introduce a totally new entity into the pantheon of particles – so, dear reader, let’s hear it for the sparticle (laugh if you must). Figure 6 illustrates the relationship between the three basic entities (closed waveforms) that populate the Cosmos. Material particles exist at a comparatively low – when compared with other entities – oscillatory state which gives them a high tangibility factor: by this I mean that their presence has a greater effect on, or is ‘felt’ more by, their environment. Photons exist at a much higher oscillatory state which gives them a much lower tangibility factor than material particles. The sparticle, which only possesses a miniscule amount of mass: probably a lot less than that of a neutrino, exists at a very high oscillatory state which renders it virtually intangible. If the reader is wondering where these extremely nebulous entities reside then please return to the post 2 diagram third level up which represents unstructured, permeable space-time - it is here at the sub-microcosmic scale - where space-time resembles a storm wracked ocean that the chaotically heaving, unimaginable hordes of sparticles are to be found. Although the mass of a single sparticle is negligible, there are enough of them out there, when the vastness of ‘empty space’ is taken into consideration to supply virtually all of the missing mass. I use the phrase ‘virtually all’ in the paragraph above for a reason and that is that there really needn’t be that much missing; certainly not ninety six percent. When examining structure in the Universe the dynamics of oppositional forces: the dynamics that actually engender structure in the first place, cannot be left out of the equation. Take, for instance, a classic spiral galaxy (it was the discovery that these structures rotate faster at their rims than ought to be the case that led to the quest for dark matter) that is, as are all things, embedded at the centre of a massive down-scaling gravitational matrix that is, itself, counterbalanced by the up-scaling forces emanating from every single zero point that the galaxy encompasses. The same arrangement applies to all the star systems that constitute the galaxy. This counterbalancing of forces provides the galaxy, and all its sub-structures, with a certain amount of elastic rigidity that protects it from becoming distorted because the spatial relationships of objects within it: such as individual stars and planets, will be maintained. The accelerating expansion rate of the Universe is due, in part, to the action of up-scaling forces operating at the super macrocosmic scale - but it is not the sole culprit responsible for this phenomenon. Sparticles, and the way they behave, are the main villains of the piece for it is the exponentially accelerating propagation of these spectral entities that is forcing the Cosmos to, quite literally, grow in size. Figure 7 depicts the process of propagation. Being extremely nebulous, high oscillatory state waveforms they are prone, to higher degree than other entities, to distortion – to becoming stretched and twisted when affected by the matrices associated with other sparticles, particles and photons and this often leads to a single sparticle finding itself split into two separate entities (down-scaling forces will always close the circle) in an almost organic, asexual manner. The respective masses possessed by each of the resultant pair will not, necessarily, be half that of their parent sparticle because their matrices will simply adjust to the situation by increasing the amount of compressive and expansive force (which equates with mass) brought to bear. NB I wasn’t aware when I decided to call space-time particles sparticles that the term was already being used to denote super particles (dark matter). In my next post I will be covering two subjects that have truly massive implications for both the future of space travel, in particular, and the human race in general: faster than light travel (quantum bubble generation) and teleportation across both space and time (along with, of course, an explanation of what actually constitutes time) – a process that I call quantum transpositioning.

My model of the fundamental nature of matter, then, is a little like string theory only without the strings. Oppositional forces, when expanding and contracting between infinities (the top and bottom levels of the diagram- post 2) manage to avoid a direct confrontation for most of their journey through space-time - that is until they meet at a point just little above the quantum threshold – here there is no room for manoeuvre and they are forced to pass directly through each other – this causes non-space to vibrate (the reader should make a mental note, here, that vibration is a form of movement – movement is the absolute bottom line) producing what I call resonant potential. This is the ultimate form of matter, energy and, as I shall explain later, the very fabric of space-time itself. There is also, though, another from of movement forced upon closed waveforms by oppositional forces: a form of movement that I call static inversional rotation. Please look at figure 4. It depicts a closed waveform and the oppositional forces that both create the waveform and dictate its behaviour. The down-scaling force is represented by the red arrows and the up-scaling force is indicated by the yellow. It will be seen that the down-scaling force applied at points A and B will tend to twist (inversionally rotate) the waveform in the same direction as the up-scaling force at points G and H - whilst the forces exerted at all other points are oppositional. Now it is highly unlikely that this results in the opposing forces simply cancelling each other out; what is probably going on here is that oppositional forces are inducing stresses (increasing the particles energy quotient) that the waveform must somehow allay. To rid itself of this excessive induced stress (force) the particle will reach out, through the medium of its matrices (see notes below) and transmit the unwanted tension to another particle in its vicinity. This is why particles: such as paired electrons and those in the nucleus, form alliances – this arrangement allows them to rapidly pass unwanted, destabilising energy backward and forward in order to maintain a lower, more stable quantum state. It should be noted that it is these processes that allow for particles to ‘communicate’ at a distance: a phenomenon now recognised as quantum entanglement. When there is no target particle to be manipulated stress can be alleviated by self propulsion through space but before it can do this a particle must first become polarised (see figure 5 below). Polarisation occurs after a particle has been struck or otherwise influenced by another entity or force; this causes its matrices to conform or come into phase so that the down-scaling force enters the waveform from one side whilst the up-scaling force exits from the other. I will be returning to this phenomenon later when I deal with how to generate a quantum bubble. Particles, then, are highly unstable, extremely agitated oscillatory entities that can only continue to exist by constantly readjusting their own energy levels by influencing their environment; in short, they like to make their presence felt. There will be times, however, when a particle is overwhelmed by an induction of energy from an outside agency that results in an exponential increase of the up-scaling force and an oscillatory state to high to be sustained; the particle is then transformed into radiant energy and the down-scaling force reacts to the situation by forming matrices throughout the resultant energy field that divide it up into discrete quanta (photons). I will have more to say about particles later but I would like, now, to move on and deal with two of the big questions that are, at present, taxing the ingenuity of cosmologists: the conundrums surrounding dark matter and dark energy. There are several theories as to where the missing mass - which some put as high as ninety-six per cent - resides and what it is made of; and much speculation about the nature of the force that is driving the accelerating expansion of the Universe. I am going to ignore all of them and present my own hypothesis for my version is wholly compatible, both with what I have already said, and what I shall be saying hereafter. I will start by posing two questions – if gravity is only generated by, and can only act upon, mass then how can gravity warp space-time? If space-time is devoid of mass and presence (tangibility) what is it that gravity actually gets a hold of in order bend it to the characteristic curvature found in classical relativity? The only possible answers to these questions is that space (lets forget the time element for now) does, indeed, possess mass and must also, therefore, possess some form of physical, quantised (particulate) structure. Notes: The matrices associated with a particle correspond, directly, with Clerk Maxwell’s field interpretation of these phenomena Next post: enter (my version of) f the sparticle.

All entities and structures, regardless of their size: from galactic super clusters to the smallest quantum particles, reside at the centre of these down-scaling matrices the strength of which depends on the amount of mass present: with more mass equalling greater compressive force being brought to bear. I will explain where this force is generated with the aid of a diagram (see below). The figure represents a scale schematic of the Quantum Universe. The level that we are interested at the moment is at the top (non-space/infinity); this corresponds to the ‘space’ beyond the farthest flung galaxies: the ‘space’ that the cosmos is expanding into. It also equates with the future because this is where we are going. The down-scaling force is generated here to come sweeping backward - at light speed - through entropic time exerting macrocosmic to microcosmic compression, not only upon the entirety of space-time itself, but also on every single structure and entity within it. This is, of course, the force that - if left unimpeded - would have brought about the big crunch. We now know that this is not going to happen. The reason for this is that the down-scaling force is counter-balanced by an up-scaling force that originates in the past – from before the dawn of creation. Please look at the bottom - level this represents the ‘space’ below space-time: the infinitely small ‘space’ below the quantum sea of potential (next level up), the up-scaling force is generated here to burst through into space-time from all the infinitely small points – including those occupied by quantum particles – encompassed by the Cosmos. This also equates with the past because this is the ‘space’ from where all things originated. The up-scaling force spirals upward and outward from here driving microcosmic to macrocosmic expansion. My readers should not be unduly worried, here, if they perceive the picture that I am attempting to paint to be unclear; it will become sharper as I describe how oppositional forces – the forces depicted above acting in conjunction – create, shape and dictate the behaviour of quantum particles. Before I do this, however, I will first have to introduce the reader to my concept of angular momentum – why everything that exists rotates or, to put it more accurately – why everything occupies a rotating space. When the oppositional forces associated with an entity or structure - i.e. the down-scaling force that contracts inward (think of a contracting sphere) and the up-scaling force (think of an expanding sphere) that expands outward – collide they resolve the impasse by simply turning aside, this shearing effect then becomes rotational, like a massive storm system, because the inflowing and out flowing processes are relentless and they cannot side step each other forever.

What would Sir Isaac Newton, or, for that matter, Albert Einstein, have made of the recent disturbing cosmological discoveries that have required the introduction of the concepts of dark matter and dark energy into scientific nomenclature? They were both, after all, classical theorists and deeply religious men whom believed in a benign creator that had provided: for mankind, a chronographically ordered Universe that would exist forever. So how then, would their exquisitely ordered intellects have coped with the apocalyptic images: provided by the Hubble space telescope and other observational tools, of entire galaxies cart wheeling through one another or of jet galaxies whose plumes of plasma - spewing out from the galactic poles, give evidence of their monstrously accelerated magnetospheres that will surely, one day, bring about their destruction? The answers to the rhetorical questions posed above would be, by their nature, debateable and open to interpretation whereas the answers that we need; when trying to reconcile the legacy of the fathers of modern physics with the mounting empirical evidence that confronts and confounds us, must be precise and all embracing. I would argue that, in order to construct a model of quantum reality that works at all levels of scale, we must be prepared to be radically dynamic in our approach and thinking for this would reflect what we are actually seeing: the Universe is not always orderly and benign - it is often chaotic and cataclysmic events are commonplace. We must also be prepared to accept that the inverse square law and relativity: the very foundation stones of the modern theory, whilst not being entirely wrong, are not entirely right either. The theory that I am about to set before the reader is radical in the extreme for it challenges some of the most fundamental tenets of modern physics and cosmology. Because of this I would ask for the reader’s forbearance and for a willingness, on their part, to dare to think the unthinkable. The promise I make to the reader is that this will be a worthwhile exercise for my theory addresses all the major questions left unresolved by the standard cosmological model – questions such as: what happened to all the antimatter at the dawn of creation, why the expansion rate of the Universe is accelerating, where and what is the missing mass, duality and the collapse of the wave function and the most basic, fundamental nature of matter, energy (photons) and the space-time continuum. I will also demonstrate how it may be possible to travel faster than light (generate a quantum bubble) and teleport a man across both space and time (seriously!). Lastly, and most importantly, my theory integrates the forces that shape and dictate the behaviour of the microcosmic, quantum world with gravitation in the macrocosmic Universe. The simple postulate that I base my theory upon is that gravity is the physical manifestation of the Universe’s tendency to return to its original, zero energy, ground state. This is where it will become difficult for the reader for I am, here, referring to the state of ‘things’ before the big bang and I know that student cosmologists and physicists etc have been told, by their mentors, to completely ignore what may or may not exist outside of space-time. To me this exhortation is like that of the cartographers of old whom would have it ‘look not here, for here be monsters’. I would argue that we simply cannot ignore that which lies outside: the only truly infinite ‘thing’ for it is part and parcel of our own reality, it is the obverse of the Universe, it is the very warp and weft upon which the tapestry of the Cosmos is woven. The idea, anyway, that their lies out there beyond our perception a reality separate from our own is not a totally alien notion. With the advent of the tunnelling electron microscope scientists can now gaze upon the realms of the sub-atomic world – with even greater magnifications, they argue, space-time will be revealed to have a foam like texture (‘foam like’ suggests, to me, full of bubbles or voids; what lies within these voids?) – lower still, they speculate, lies the sea of quantum potential where phantom particles flicker into and out of existence. And beyond that? The reader is, at this point, probably thinking, ‘How can absolute nothingness, which is totally devoid of any properties, have any influence upon the world’? Well the fact that it can, indeed, have an enormous effect upon the Universe is due to two attributes that – what I shall term – non-space does possess: firstly it is, along with space-time, mutually preclusive, the one should not exist alongside the other (the fact that they do co-exist will seem even more bizarre when I describe, later, how the latter is actually composed of the former), and it also possesses what I call non properties, as opposed to no properties, in that it is totally dimensionless. Now this might seem a little bit nonsensical but it is this lack of dimensionality that allows for - amongst other things - phenomena such as the parting of the ways between anti-matter and matter at the dawn of creation and the omnipresence of quantum particles: both of which I will explain fully later. I am now going to attempt to persuade the reader that one of the most fundamental, centuries old principles of physics and cosmology is basically wrong – but before I do I would, once again, ask for the readers forbearance and implore them not to give up on me at this point for the answers to the questions posed by the latest empirical evidence and the answers to questions that will be, here, posed for the very first time are all, I can assure them, contained herein. It has long been thought that gravity is a force generated by – and acting upon – mass. This is wrong, although it would be correct to say that gravitational effects can only be witnessed in the presence of mass. Now I know that the reader will have very serious reservations about taking this on board but before they reject this assertion they should check out the following calculations. For an object to escape the Earth’s gravitational embrace it must travel at a speed of at least 6.94 miles per second. Now the Sun’s mass has been calculated at 333,400 times that of the Earth’s. Ergo for an object to leave the Sun behind it must travel at a speed of 6.94 miles per second multiplied by 333,400. This gives us a velocity of 2,313,796 miles per second or, to put it another way, a speed that is very nearly twelve and half times the speed of light. Present theory dictates that physical entities cannot travel at such velocities. We are also aware that particles: e.g. the solar wind (calculated at a velocity of 400 miles a second) and coronal mass ejections (calculated at a speed of 600 miles a second) are streaming outward from the sun all the time. So just what, exactly, is going on here? There is, also, something else to consider. Gravitational force, it has been proposed, is transmitted via a particle: the graviton. The question that I would like to see answered concerning this rather curious little beast is – how is it expected to behave? Is it emitted by one gravitational mass to zoom across space and impact on another and then somehow exert an attractive force, upon its target, in order drag it back from whence it came? This would imply that gravitons possess either a memory i.e. that they can actually remember where they came from or that they carry a signature that makes them unique to their point of origin. This model, it would now seem, is highly improbable because gravitational effects propagate at the speed of light so transmission via a material particle would be virtually impossible. Then there is another question. Why have gravitons never been detected? Surely they must possess a substantial amount of mass and be one of the most abundant particles in the cosmos; wouldn’t this make them very hard to miss? The obvious truth of the matter is that, if they existed at all, we would be literally tripping over them. The last point that I would like to make about gravitons is this – if these particles are generated by massive bodies then surely, in accordance with the conservation law, the bodies would have to give up some of their mass in the process – this would mean that, over time, celestial bodies would evaporate and the Universe would, over the eons, become by dominated by a single entity: the graviton! No, the case for the existence of gravitons is unproven and will remain so. What we need now is a model of gravity that subsumes everything that exists – that integrates all phenomena – under a single overarching principle: that principle or law being – as I have already stated in the postulate I set out earlier – all things exist at their ground state and, if disturbed by some outside agency, will always return to that ground state. This cosmological imperative applies at every level of scale: from the microcosmic world of quantum particles right up to the super macrocosmic scale of the quantum Universe in its entirety. So, to all those readers that have stuck with me this far, welcome to the quantum continuum. How would, then, the void react to the presence of space-time - along with all its attendant structures and entities - within it. To make the answer to this question a little bit more palatable and, hopefully, to render the envisagement of the bizarre nature of being less disorientating for the reader, I am going to introduce a rhetorical device into the narrative: this will take the form of sentient non-space entity whose viewpoint – outside looking in, as it were, is an inversion or the diametric opposite of ours. So how would our sentient non-space entity perceive our world, just what, exactly, is the nature of the relationship between his side of the looking glass and ours? To find the answer to this question we need to invert the laws of nature as they apply to us for what we perceive to be solid, to have presence and mass such as a planet, is perceived by our sentient non-space entity to be a void or an empty spherical zone where his own reality bears no remit. Non-space reacts to this situation by applying compressive, down-scaling force (this is only one facet of the whole picture; I will be introducing up-scaling forces shortly) upon the interloping mass in an attempt to displace it from space-time and reinstate the symmetrical integrity of the void. So gravity, rather than being an attractive force, has now become compressive; with this model a spacecraft rising up from a planet’s surface must overcome an incoming current of down-scaling non-space dragging along (warping) space-time in its wake. I will now demonstrate, with the aid of diagrams (see below) how this works. The two diagrams below illustrate how down-scaling gravitational matrices behave within space-time at the macrocosmic level of scale. Figure 1 depicts a matrix centred on the Moon that also down-scales through the Earth thus generating the tidal phenomena with which we are familiar. The concentric circles that would, in four dimensions, be spherical shells are only there as a visual aid to understanding what is happening – the actual non-spatial inflowing process itself is continuous and not demarcated in any way; I will, however, for clarities sake stick with circles. As the circles contract and shrink wrap the Moon they pass through, and exert compressive force upon, the Earth. This has the effect of slightly squashing our home planet and creates tidal bulges on the side facing the Moon and the side furthest away. The only explanation I have ever read for this antipodean bulge is that it is ‘left behind’ as the Earth falls down the Moon’s gravitational well. I find this explanation to be preposterous because this kind of distortion: similar to the way a water filled balloon is deformed when thrown, would only occur if the Earth was plummeting toward the Moon and Armageddon. My model, I would argue, is more logical for a down-scaling matrix would exert compressive force between points A and B - although the resultant bulge should be flatter and cover a wider area than the bulge on the side facing the Moon. Figure 2 depicts the way in which the path of a photon is deflected when crossing the down-scaling field centred on a star. The photon behaves in exactly the same way as Einstein predicted but for different reasons – think of a swimmer who intends to swim across a river from point A to point B directly opposite but, upon entering the water, finds the current to be stronger than anticipated and so only manages to emerge from the river at point C downstream. Reader! Please do not post replies to this thread until the last instalment has been posted. Peter Dunn

We actually know a lot less than we think we do. This is because we have names for things for which we do not have a complete understanding. Take, for instance, the space aspect of space-time. Space has to be more than just 'room' (ie to move, breathe etc) - it must possess some form of physicality otherwise it could not be acted upon (warped) by gravity. Therefore, if we have no concrete definition of what space: the most fundamental of mediums in which everything else exists, actually is then can we be said to understand anything at all because the most important relationship between any two objects (from quantum particles to planets) is their spatial relationship to one another. There are many such instances where; because we have a name for something, we assume that we (or at least somebody somewhere) has a complete understanding of that phenomenon. Many people also make the mistake of assuming that certain things do not need explanation - that their true nature is self evident - when it is not. So - 'what's in a name?" - take a closer look and assume nothing. All the best Peter Dunn

Hi Sayonara re: thrust Read first post this thread. All the best Peter Dunn