THESE SCIENCE 'REBELS", THAT NOW ARE RIGHT, MEET ON THE
" RIVER LINE". THE GREATER EVER SPEED IN INEGRATION A SCIENCE
IS HAPPENING HERE NOW; NOT WITHOUIT THE ACCULATED WORK
OF TEEMS AT FIVU FOR NEARLY 3 YEARS. WE WEE RECENTLY VISITED
BY THE US FEDERAL MARSHALS , BUT THEY CAN'T SPECIFY THEIR
CONTRIBUTION; NOT YET. FREQUENT GUESTS FROM CANADA ARE
NOT THAT COWBOYISH. WE DO RESOLVE SOCIAL CIONTRADICTIONS AS WELL. THE
COWBOYS ARE NOW FROM THE PROGRESIVE ERA WASHINGTON DC.


Not Quite Everything for a


Theory of Everything


but we do indeed


have a model


Here's the model:


The speed of gravity


An important part of the model has been given to us by our
astronomers. All the astronomical departments in all of the world's
universities teach their students -- what Newton said -- that gravity
acts instantly and this must be included in their math. There are
good
and substantial proofs that we simply would not have a stable
universe
if the speed of gravity was as slow as the speed of light.
Astronomers
are taught this and most of them accept this as a fact.


Light travels at 300, 000, 000 meters per second or 3x108 meters per
second.


Now let's square this 300, 000, 000 meters: And we get 90, 000, 000,
000, 000, 000 meters or 9x1016 meters.


Gravity, according to noted Yale astronomer Van Flandern may even be
acting at about a speed of 9x1016 meters per second and this would
appear to us as c2 or the speed of light squared. Tom Van Flandern
assured me, before he died, that this speed would be close enough to
instantly for most astronomers to accept. Van Flandern showed us --
while light had aberration -- there was no aberration with gravity
and
at a speed of 9x1016 meters per second, gravity would have no
aberration.


The question now becomes: How can gravity be acting at this
incredibly
fast and almost instantaneous speed of 9x1016 meters per second?


2. The answer is in what the tensor math of General Relativity
teaches
us


Here is a quote from the Britannica 1997 CD telling about Einstein's
tensor math which "led him to an essentially unique tensor equation
for the law of gravitation, in which gravitation emerged not as a
force but as a manifestation of the curvature of spacetime."


As you see in the above Britannica quote, there is no such thing as
force in the tensor math of General Relativity. Einstein assumed this
universe was homogeneous and isotropic. This means a certain average
space exists all throughout this universe. What you actually get --
greatly simplifying things -- is more space, than this average, where
repulsive force exists between two objects. In addition, there is
less
space, than this average, existing between two gravitational objects
that have an attractive force between them, thus we have the
spacetime
curvature in the above Britannica quote.


Saul Perlmutter has surmised, as in GR, that this repulsive force is
really out there resulting in a return of Einstein's cosmological
constant (exact equal but opposite repulsive force of gravity) --
between all the stars and galaxies keeping them apart -- and gravity
becomes -- as Einstein originally thought -- a bi-polar force like
all
the other invisible forces.


Does the Principle of Equivalence also apply to gravity's equal and
opposite force? Is this acceleration that Perlmutter's group
discovered also indistinguishable from that cosmological constant
force out there? The gravitational acceleration is only apparent; how
about this acceleration that Saul Perlmutter's group discovered?


If Einstein would have stayed on course then he could have even
predicted the acceleration that Perlmutter's group recently
discovered! But he didn't. He listened to the affenstahl thinking
that
Georges Lemâitre was filling the universities up with at that time.


For years Einstein told Lemâitre he was wrong but as more and more
scientists were won over by Lemâitre then Einstein made an abrupt 180
degree turn, which was ironic because if Einstein had stayed on
course
then he could even have predicted this acceleration that Perlmutter's
group finally discovered. If Einstein would have never listened to
Lemâitre then Einstein surely would have eventually seen that one
could not discern this cosmological constant force out there, holding
all the stars and galaxies apart, from an accelerating, expanding
universe. This is, after all, Einstein's own Principle of Equivalence
being applied to gravity's equal but opposte force. If Einstein had
stayed on his original route then he would have been able to put all
the pieces of the puzzle together and we would have had a Theory of
Everything long before this. It was Lemâitre who most certainly took
us all down the wrong road.


The important thing is that GR shows us the same thing that creates
force must also be creating space!


What is it?


It's the spin/orbit frequencies!


The electron orbitals just about cancel each other out leaving the
electron spin frequency as the main cause of magnetic force but it's
general knowledge that the orbital frequencies also cause the
magnetic
force.


What is not general knowledge yet is that the electron's charge may
very well be caused by relative translational motion (see these two
links: Phil Fraley and Relative Motion). If this is indeed true then
the spins and orbits of other items besides electrons also create
force and space. Once you see this then you can actually begin to see
a model for a Theory of Everything. We should have listened more
closely to what Feynman said about motion. See: QED


Using this model, the smallest space that we will be able to see is a
'Planck length', which is being produced by electron orbital
frequencies. Probably the majority of the space we see is being
produced by the spin frequencies of the stars. So our space becomes a
limited bandspread in a Schrödinger type of frequency universe.


A big lesson here is that our space is limited from the high orbiting
frequencies of the electrons to the lower spin frequencies of the
stars. These are the parameters -- or the bandspread -- of our
spacetime realm.


We have to divide this universe into spacetime realms (frequency
bandwidths). The string theory folks will understand this.


We can't see into the spacetime realm of the quark because the
quark's
spin frequency is simply too high for our spacetime realm but as
Wheeler and Feynman showed us, we cannot measure what is outside of
our spacetime realm but we certainly can detect it and we do: We
detect this quark produced space as c2 or acceleration. If this model
is correct then motion is something that only exists, and can be
measured, inside of one particular spacetime realm but it can be
detected outside that realm. Actual motion and translational motion
may exist in the microcosm after all. We detect this microcosm motion
-- in our lower frequency realm -- as magnetism and charge.


We also have failed to see the force/space being produced by the
galactic spin frequencies. Proof of this is that we are measuring the
speed of spiral galaxy arms as going faster than their escape
velocity
and this is impossible.


Not seeing this extra galactic-spin force/space produced a flaw in R.
T. Cahill's Quantum Foam Theory Cahill. Cahill violated the all
important caveat that Wheeler, Feynman and Quantum Theory have
proven:
You must not use conventional measurements outside of our spacetime
realm where the spacetime interval is entirely different. Even though
Cahill did make this misatke, he did indeed get the speed of gravity
right.


In this model, electron spin frequencies produce magnetic force, and
the spins of the various stars and galaxies produce Einstein's
cosmological constant or this repulsive force between all the stars
and galaxies, holding them apart, while the quark spins give us the
vast majority of our gravitational and inertial forces (inertial
mass).


Evidently there are at least two quark spin frequencies that -- at
the
exterior of a proton or neutron -- combine to form a harmonic that is
the square of the electron's spin frequency.


Electrons are producing space -- that we see -- at the rate of the
speed of light or c.


Quarks are producing space -- too high in frequency for us to see --
at the rate of 9x1016 meters per second or what we see as the speed
of
light squared or c2. Even though we cannot see this space, we can
detect an orbit change or spin shift, where mass is changed into
energy via Einstein's formula E=mc2.


Thus as you see the origin of c2 then Einstein's formula E=mc2 makes
perfect sense.


All the fundamental forces can be seen as behaving exactly the same
way by using the laws of Andre M. Ampčre. Ampere's Laws and
considering particles as scalar, standing waves as Dr. Milo Wolff's
Web Site suggests. But even then we do not as yet have quite
everything to completely figure out this 'Theory of Everything' in
this Schrödinger type frequency universe.


Be sure to read: http://www.amperefitz.com/acceleratingexpandinguniverse.htm


See this short, clear picture: http://www.amperefitz.com/principle-of-equivalence.htm


Also http://www.amperefitz.com/aphaseuniverse.htm


And http://www.rbduncan.com/schrod.htm


& http://www.amperefitz.com/assymfree.htm


There's a lot more too.


And this you can find out by buying my latest book Universities
Asleep
at the Switch at Amazon.com or by reading it FREE simply by clicking
the following links:


http://www.amperefitz.com/unvasleep.htm (This link is faster if you
have dial up.)


http://www.amperefitz.com/ua_20071020_ck_ds_jm_ds.pdf (This is the
book FREE in Adobe.).


Web pages are at: http://www.amperefitz.com & http://www.rbduncan.com


Thanks for reading this. Let me know what YOU think. e-mail is
Th1n...@indiainfo.com


This page can be copied and published by anyone as long as it is
copied and published in its entirety.


Feb. 23, 2010


Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr.