a new unification concept
Robert B. Duncan
1.space-time & Ampere
I have written this because the existing descriptions of this new concept are far too long and extensive. This is not only my opinion but also the opinion of a great many other people as well. Because this text will be as short as possible, I can only give you the basic concept. I cannot give you any of the math. But I will do the best I can to describe this new unification concept to you and I'll try not to mince any words.
Please remember, I'm only the messenger describing this new unification concept. You can believe it or you can take all of this with a grain of salt. I am not a preacher trying to change your religion. I'm only the delivery person who is delivering the message.
This new unification concept is basically the belief that if you take Ampere's old laws and look at them in a new light, then this is all you really need to give you a new unification concept. This not only will unify the 4 fundamental forces but it also will unify ALL the invisible forces as well. It will show you what inertia is and gyroscopic inertia as well and this new insight is not even close to what most scientists believe today----so I've given you somewhat of a warning as to what you can expect if you insist on reading the rest of this.
This concept was evidently arrived at because of the belief that the mind could understand what Dirac once predicted would come about. He predicted that the human mind would eventually find some approximation as to how this entire universe works.
What kind of a universe is it, in which we can have general relativity, quantum mechanics, string theory, Newton's laws and reality as well?
You might not like this new concept answer, but I'm going to try to portray it to you anyway.
The group that put all this together feels the only possible type of universe that it could be is the following:
You must bring back the belief of George Berkeley and Ernst Mach that our surroundings cause our inertia and then you must go even further and say these surroundings also CREATE our space and our time as well.
Then you take Ampere's old laws and look at them in a new light and "presto" they show you exactly where space-time is created and where it is diminished.
But here's the thing: You can use these same laws in the microcosm or in the macrocosm or wherever. And this is certainly something that you cannot do with the rules of science that you have today. The discoverers of these new laws are not French and therefore didn't name them after Ampere. They call these new laws the Aufbau Laws. I'll try to stay far away from any national debates in this and mostly call them the "A" Laws
2.two recent discoveries
Recently scientists have discovered that this universe is not only seemingly expanding but this expansion is accelerating.
Einstein didn't know this. He thought it was only expanding. Even though this expansion is a small figure and the acceleration is also a tiny amount, this difference between a simple expansion from a past Big Bang force and an acceleration (which must be caused by a present force) is a BIG, BIG difference.
Some believe that if Einstein knew of this acceleration, that we seemingly see today, then you would have had a Theory of Everything published years ago by Einstein.
Again----because of the principle of equivalence.
Einstein would have seen it, claim the people behind this new idea.
If you cannot tell the difference between gravity and acceleration then you also will not be able to tell the difference between gravity's equal but opposite force and acceleration either.
The scientists who discovered this apparent acceleration said it must be Einstein's cosmological constant (an equal but opposite force of gravity). The cosmological constant is a repelling force between stars, galaxies and super-clusters. This force----Einstein visualized----kept everything apart much like everything in the microcosm repels everything else. These new "A"Laws that will be forthcoming will show you exactly why we will have Einstein's cosmological constant.
But here's something to think about: If there is this present cosmological force out there keeping everything apart then using the principle of equivalence we would not be able to tell the difference between that force out there and an accelerating universe.
This is why some seem to feel that if Einstein could only have known about this apparent acceleration then he would have seen the implications of his own principle of equivalence immediately.
So we may well be in a type of STATIC quasi steady-state universe.
With a past force having been solely caused by the Big Bang, there was no reason to even look for Einstein's cosmological constant. But now with this acceleration, you absolutely must. And you must also bring in the principle of equivalence now and this brings us full circle to the possibility----even a distinct probability----of a STATIC type of universe.
And once you have a STATIC type of universe then you are ready to utilize these new Aufbau Laws or "A" Laws.
Other recent observations have shown that the Fine Structure Constant has changed. The change isn't much. It's only a change to the fifth decimal place.
What this essentially points out is the possibility that your atomic realm is not stable and it may only have a life span of several hundred billion years or so. But "not to worry", we'll all be gone by then anyway.
And this brings us to another realization: What if this universe----the same as you----is also on borrowed time?
These Aufbau or "A" Laws show us it most probably is.
These "A" Laws seem to give us the answer that Dirac predicted we would eventually get. They give us an APPROXIMATE answer as to how this entire universe works from the microcosm (in which there is 99.9999% empty space) to the macrocosm (where there is also 99.9999% empty space).
Newton gave us the laws we satisfactorily used for several hundred years. We thought they were 100% correct until just before the beginning of the twentieth century when the Michelson-Morley experiment proved something was wrong. From then on we had to live with the fact that the speed of light was a constant. Now with the speed of light being the same regardless of the speed of the source or the observer, this science world has never been the same since.
OK, you have a world where the speed of light is a constant.
You also have a world of quantum mechanics, relativity, string theory and reality.
Construct me a picture of a universe that will incorporate ALL of the above into it.
What do you mean you can't?
The people who created this theory saw that Ampere gave you the foundation to building such a universe a long, long time ago when he invented electrical laws that did NOT use plus and minus charges or lines of force. And these people seem to think Ampere's Laws did an even better job of painting a picture of how all electrical devices worked than Faraday's rules ever did.
They also show you how the macrocosm works as well.
That is----these discoverers say----IF you can throw away this religion that your stone-age ancestors have imbrued into your minds.
Not only do you have to throw it away but you also have to throw it all away as well.
Not all the time, however, but you must clear your minds entirely of it when using these "A" Laws.
You must NEVER mix your old beliefs with these "A" Laws.
Use ALL of your old rules when figuring out things here on earth.
And use ALL of these brand new "A" Laws when trying to figure what is happening in a more extended portion of this universe.
Remember, these are both----ENTIRELY DIFFERENT CONCEPTS----so never, never, never mix the two.
3.a wave universe
Everyone working in quantum mechanics knows this is a wave universe.
It is time that we see WHY we use Newton's laws in the macrocosm.
The problem with Newton's laws is that they are another APPOXIMATION of what is happening.
I'll give you an example: When two steel balls come together, they collide and bounce apart. This collision and subsequent bouncing apart again looks simple not only to your mind but also in Newtonian physics.
There is a little problem with understanding the steel ball collision this way though. It didn't really happen this way.
Both steel balls SEEMED to collide and bounce away to you because your eyes were not fast enough to see the underlying REAL wave action.
You know that each of those iron atoms that those steel balls are made from are totally surrounded by electrons and I can assure you that not even one electron from one of those steel balls ever touched any electron from the other steel ball. That single collision that you saw was REALLY wave action at a distance from billions of electrons that pushed each other away. Not one electron ever touched another. Nothing REALLY touched even though you and today's physics scientists have the math for the collision and the aftermath.
This action at a distance becomes apparent with these new "A" Laws but not with your old physics rules.
Your old physics rules are fine here on this earth but they begin to fall all apart as soon as you try to take them much further into either the microcosm OR the macrocosm.
You can correct your physics rules with relativity corrections and this patched quilt framework is what our scientists are forced to use today in space. But even this fails as we look as far out as the galaxies. The outer portions of all of these galaxies are all rotating far too fast to be explained by gravity plus the relativity corrections.
So, says this Aufbau bunch, scientists----not wanting to say they might have done something wrong----came up with this ridiculous idea of "Dark Matter" to explain the fast outer portion rotation of the galaxies.
If we can see all these other galaxies then we KNOW this dark matter isn't there says this group believing in these "A" Laws.
This group claims today's scientists do not understand this thing they call gravity. They claim scientists don't understand inertia either but that's for the next chapter.
A good many people including George Berkeley and Ernst Mach and even Einstein before 1927, thought inertia was caused by all the rest of the universe.
These new "A" Laws show it is.
These "A" Laws are telling us that as our galaxy approaches the Andromeda galaxy----as it is doing----then all these extra stars added to our immediate surrounding will not only change our inertia but centrifugal force as well.
But this is nothing new because Niels Bohr discovered he could match all those spectral lines up with the various electron orbital drops of single atomic hydrogen and helium atoms but not with the heavier atoms.
Scientists of today say Niels Bohr was not supposed to take centrifugal force down into the microcosm past that magic level of Planck's constant----but he did.
Why couldn't Bohr match the electron orbital drops in the heavier atoms as well?
Because centrifugal force itself changed too much with the different surroundings in those heavier atoms, say this Aufbau bunch.
This Aufbau group claims that we will also find that not only centrifugal force but also inertia and gyroscopic inertia as well will all change appreciably as we approach the Andromeda galaxy.
Does our present scientific community see this?
No, I don't believe too many of them do.
If you take a modern gyroscope and place its axis perpendicular to the earth's axis then you will see this gyroscope make a complete rotation every 23 hours 56 minutes and 4.09 seconds or one sidereal day.
It's holding to the fixed stars but none of today's scientists----this Aufbau bunch says----can tell you the exact reason why.
Our scientists simply might not know what causes inertia or gyroscopic inertia but since I've read this new stuff, I'll paint you the new picture and I will show you exactly what this new concept says causes inertia and gyroscopic inertia in this little book that you are now reading
5.standing waves & piano keys
This new unification concept says many things that seem incredible:
This new concept says that this universe is built entirely of spherical, standing waves and these spherical standing waves exist like keys on a piano that has a keyboard of maybe infinite length.
Remember, I'm only the messenger!
Robert B. Duncan of Duncan Press