For 4 Decades of my writings: click http://www.amperefitz.com/4.decades.htm

 

45 Years

of putting this

jigsaw puzzle together

 of unifying gravity with the other forces

 

While in high school I obtained my pilot's license, Amateur Radio licenses and a Second Class Radio Telephone License and I built my own radio transmitter of over 100 watts. I loved radio and understood standing waves. Knowing how standing waves worked proved to be a godsend in solving this puzzle.


I went from high school in 1950 into the Signal Corps and was discharged three years later, then went to Embry Riddle in Miami, under the G. I. Bill, to get my Aircraft and Powerplant licenses. With those licenses I got a job with National Airlines as mechanic.

So I'm really also an airplane mechanic who knows and loves radio and electronics.

In the 1960s I had a much cleaner job with Pan American Airways as a radio man. By that time I had been issued the government's top First Class Radio License # P1-7-4087 with RADAR endorsement enabling me to work on about any transmitter available. It was clear to me that we should be using Ampere's laws in radio instead of the non-intuitive Faraday concepts. I began this unification of gravity with the other forces jigsaw puzzle while working at Pan American in 1966: I solved an RCA RADAR Indicator problem and saw, in that result, the foundation stone that would one day be used to unify gravity with the other forces. I published a book showing this and there was a full page about it on page 29 in the Sunday, New York Times Book Review section of June 18th 1967. I even got a write up in the Pan Am Clipper about my book. Almost every college and university in the United States had a copy of this book as well.

Lincoln Barnett – who wrote general relativity articles for the Britannica – read my book and sent me his approval. I still have his letter.

In 1966 I showed the groundwork of how to unify gravity with the other forces in that book.

I saw & showed:

  1. Gravity was being caused by relative motion (but according to Robert Dicke, so had many others shown this).
  2. We had to return to the way Nobel Prize winner Niels Bohr saw the electron as a spherical, spinning entity and use Ampere's Laws for the electron's forces. (Use Ampere's Laws instead of the 14th century "lines of force" and "opposites attract" rules. It's not "opposites attract": it's parallel paths that attract, clearly shown by Ampere.)
  3. TRANSLATIONAL MOTION is the key we must use to dispense with the subset rules of Faraday. Instead use translational motion along with Ampere's relative motion laws, which are not subset concepts and therefore can also include gravity. (Ampere's Laws show which way both the earth and the electron spin. In 1985 Nobel prize winner Feynman understood the importance of using this concept of motion for unification: Look what he said about this in his famous QED. [Click QED red link.])
  4. The speed of light asymptote curve is of vital importance. Only with translational motion could one side of both ions and these spinning electrons be much higher up the speed of light asymptote curve than the other side of the ion or the electron.

All those four (4) above are needed to unify gravity with the other forces.

I've learned more since: knowledge about quarks arrived in 1974 and by 1997, when I got my first Britannica CD (Britannica DVDs came later.) I put more of the pieces of this jigsaw puzzle together. I saw and published that we get c2 because an important quark spin frequency is the square of the electron spin frequency and that quarks were using their spin along with those abovementioned early four (4) things to give us gravity and inertia. I had many discussions with Dr. Milo Wolff, who taught me the importance of the "Hubble Limit" and of the "spherical, scalar standing wave". Then I saw how electrons, quarks and the other particles had to be spherical, scalar, standing wave entities, which are composed of frequencies: the world I know best.

Gödel's Proof presents us with the biggest obstacle to unification: it tells us, in no uncertain terms, that unless we can see this entire universe, we will probably only obtain subset rules for our environment and not true scientific laws that will be able to do any unification. However, I saw that Bohr showed us the path through this roadblock, but it's not a road through; it's just a narrow path of strict parameters. Nevertheless, you can use this path to see approximately how our universe works. This approximate picture, was in fact, what Dirac predicted we'd find.

Also we can now see how a mathematical solution may finally be obtained to unify the forces; this is extremely important!

Over the years I’ve been able to add quite a few more new pieces to this now finished gravity jigsaw puzzle.

On Christmas day, in 2011, I put out this: http://www.amperefitz.com/abstract.htm

I found it hard to believe – in the early 1980s – that people were buying those early IBM personal computers when the Macintosh computer built by Steve Jobs was so much more intuitive, opening directly to a working desktop like we see it today. But he didn't have the advertising budget that IBM had. So the non-intuitive IBM computer, requiring a complicated set-up before you could even work with the windows desktop, was mainly what was being used then.

I find it hard to believe – today – that people are still using Faraday's laws when Ampere's Laws are far more intuitive. But, over the years, Faraday's laws have been given far more advertising weight. So those are mainly what are being used now.

We know something is seriously wrong when all our astronomy students are being taught – as Newton taught, that gravity acts INSTANTLY – because, the astronomy professors correctly say, if gravity acts as slow as the speed of light then this universe will not be stable. Yet each of these same universities are teaching all their other students that nothing can go faster than the speed of light. And this incongruity has been taught now for many decades.

And this is only the tip of the iceberg of of all these discrepant and inconsistent views of our universe by the ones who are presently running this science show.

All this told me a new paradigm change to our present science belief – where people agreed and worked together like we did on the airliners – was absolutely necessary.

Am I the only one who sees this present belief in a "universe structure" with this much disparity has to be wrong?

Before you can solve a problem you must first know what's happening. I saw early that no one had the slightest idea what was happening. No one had even arrived at first base yet. Neither had the warnings in Gödel's Proof been comprehended: top people were using math and subset laws that could never unify.

As I approach my 80th birthday I'm really thankful for all those healthy years in which I've been able to put all these pieces together and see – THE PERFECT UNIVERSE STRUCTURE – that has everything functioning together like on the airliners.

Modern airliners are complicated things and I learned that solving problems on them sometimes takes a lot of talking to many different experts. So too with solving this gravity problem. Numerous people in various fields helped me – by giving me some of these important pieces I needed – to put this jig saw puzzle, of unifying gravity with the other forces, entirely together. I thank all those people.

No one person completely understands an airliner so airline people in different fields must talk to each other. But too many scientists in unlike fields refuse to talk to each other. It was hard for me to believe the number of scientists who would not communicate with others in different fields.

My happiest days were working in line maintenance and troubleshooting the very latest airliners then being produced. Even back then as I fixed the last problem and signed off the final logbook write-up, thus clearing another airliner to again fly, I had a feeling that solving problems in this complicated universe could be done similar to solving problems on a complicated airliner. Knowing all these critical systems must be working together, like on an airliner, was the – KEY – that allowed me to troubleshoot and solve this particular gravity unification problem.

Instead of changing parts, ideas and mental pictures to get everything working perfectlly together as on the airliners, I simply kept changing ideas and building mental pictures and changing more ideas and building new mental pictures about this universe, for 45 years, until I got everything to work correctly together exactly like I did on those airliners to get them functioning properly.

In this NEW universe concept that I've found, everything is working together like on a modern airworthy airliner.

Nothing seems to be working together in the "picture of the universe" presently being disseminated by our universities.

Today in mid-February of 2012, I feel like I'm back working on the line again and I've just gotten another difficult one signed off and ready to go; this one, however took 45 years.

I haven't as yet condensed this entire, lengthy accomplishment down into one single paper. If providence grants me enough more life here then I intend to do so. But everything is here right now for everyone to read, spread throughout all my other papers that anyone can get free by clicking on the link at the top of this page.

I'm afraid what I've discovered is all too much of a paradigm shift away from the various popular subset science credos believed in today for me to ever think that I could make much headway against this present established science group even though I know, myself, that this is the authentic "Big Picture" of what's really going on.

Sam Goldwyn – who murdered the King's English – said to Billy Wilder, "If you make a movie and they don't want to come, you can't stop them."

Well, I spent 45 years finding out the truth but they won't want to believe it and I can't stop make them.

I'll give you an example: No chemist is going to believe me when I tell him or her that a sigma bond is a bond between a spin up and a spin down electron pair and that bond holds its same strength all the way to the Hubble limit (which is as far as we can see). It's the number of these pairs that obey the inverse square rule. Not only is this the truth but it's the real reason we have quantum theory. Even though this dispels the incompatibility between quantum and field theories, no theoretial physicist will believe this.

Although I feel I've won big in this 45 year old quest for knowledge, this science discovery, that I know is important, can't be sold to the present establishment because it's too much of a shift away from what they've been taught and firmly believe in.

What's hard for me to acknowledge, after putting this puzzle all together, is the fact that I've ended up in a real life "catch-22."

So now it's on to other things:

My son is taking me to see Neuschwanstein castle in May and he wants me to write a travel book; that's what I'm doing right now: http://www.amperefitz.com/travel.htm

 

Thank you,

Have a good day & visit my site at goodreads:

http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/276352

Click ANY of these links to get what you want

Read my book FREE:

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

or

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

& super popular now

DPFJr

a unification

QED

Fitzpatrick's First Book (FREE)

web page

 

Over 4 Decades of Fitzpatrick's Books, Papers & Thoughts:  http://www.amperefitz.com/4.decades.htm

And here's this page duplicated in Adobe.pdf:

http://www.amperefitz.com/4.decades.pdf

 

http://www.amperefitz.com/principle-of-equivalence.htm

http://www.amperefitz.com/acceleratingexpandinguniverse.htm

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

Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr.