Eternal UniversE System of uncreated Digits forces Them into a pattern of Recycling
Eternal UniversE System of uncreated Digits forces Them into a pattern of Recycling
where the digits are photons with mass
This particle system / atom model arises from reimagining the natural forces behind what's observed in magnets, also why electrons stay certain distances from nuclei in shells, as particles consist of eternal matter digits with no beginning. Developed in over 26,000 hours over the course of the past 13 years, this replaces Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and The Big Bang Theory, starting from the ground up.
This can be seen in the latest and most in-depth book from a series first launched in 2007, and is by far the clearest and most comprehensive effort that speaks to this subject matter: the 2018-2019 book, For the Sake of Civility, that caps another book effort that came just prior, Existence Uniformity that was written in 2015-2016—followed by the 2017 Materialist/Naturalist Periodic Table (seen at the top).
One of the things that people need to keep in mind about the configured nuclei within this kind of system—which system has no negative charge, only positive charge levels all the way down to no charge—is that since protons and neutrons are so close to one another in mass that they cannot be differentiated by their mass within any given nucleus. That means that the rules for how nuclei configure is different than what it is for the standard model's periodic table (which doesn't acknowledge in any way whatsoever that protons and neutrons take on a rigid formation when they make a nucleus).
One central rule guiding configurations is that neutrons cannot touch without causing radioactive decays, which instability is avoided more often than not when most individual cold nucleosynthesis processes occur. (Meanwhile, when a daughter isotope forms from an unstable isotope that decays so that its nucleons fall apart and must reconstitute with what's left in that specific location, the very same nucleosynthesis process that originally formed most all of the atoms we know occurs in that moment once again to automatically make whatever that combination of protons and neutrons will most naturally configure into). Therefore, since the rule is that neutrons must be kept apart by protons that generally wedge in between them in order to keep them quiet and make them stable, the number of protons in most given nuclei is generally always greater than the number of neutrons; all while what determines a type of element isn't the number of protons (as how the standard model postulates), but instead the specific kind of configuration that such nucleons form.
Every item, meaning everything—all that exists in the entire universe—besides literal space, has mass; all while literal space is considered the vacancy, vacancies or gaps between each object with mass that passes through it.
Such mediums with mass consist of digits (that should be called photons), which comprise all matter, whether as single (individual) units, on up to each composite; whereas composites have greater mass by those containing some number of those single digit photons within them.
All such photons range from no charge on up to having increasing levels of positive charge; while there is no such thing as negative charge.
Physics has been misled on this by religious influence telling the world that massless things exist.
About alleged Opposites: Such as Light/dark, I have already explained in my September 28th, 2019 blog. Left/right doesn't apply, as that is simply a way to characterize directions, not actually opposites, but a human way to speak of it as if those are opposites (according to that fallacious theme); fast/slow is variance in velocity, not in an actual opposite. Hot/cold is like light: one has more energy and the other has less, not in any way actual opposites.
Matter doesn't conform to the concept of opposites. The concept of opposites is an interpretation as well as something that is quite man-made. Matter digits take on charge by how they are processed. All you have to do is find the way for how those are naturally processed without any supernatural oversight to get charged or uncharged, which is being explained now.
So many of the things that are called "opposites" are the great abundance of something compared to much less of that abundance, which should not be referred to as opposites.
For the Sake of Civility presents the particle system and atom model in a more developed (its best completed) form. Only certain kinds of middle charged photons participate in visual light (four types of middle-charged photons), as others that are higher charged and lower charged connect to make various composites. The page just above can be viewed in the Eternal Matter Physics Section of the book, Existence Uniformity, (also in one of the blogs of this website). It should be noted that as this new model was first coming along, drawing molecules in a way that best represented its ongoing refinements and analysis was attempted to help show what was being postulated here, which was different from how the standard of the atom has exerted exerted its influence on how those to be drawn. Then later, after the New Periodic Table came along in 2017, it was realized that the atom placements within the various molecular structures was already represented correctly (mainly since X-rays were used to determine that); while this new model actually harmonized extremely well with most of how that has been done.
The uncropped version of this diagram with embedded explanation shows what a couple of larger atoms attached to cotton fibers look like when concentrated sunlight passes through them, also what water molecules look like in that same setting. Any of this can be repeated by anyone who may wish to do so while taking enough care to not damage their eyes when viewing all of this; which viewing was repeated twelve times during the summer of 2011—several times both with and without water added to the fabric. (This page can be viewed in both books, For the Sake of Civility as well as Existence Uniformity.) while there is also a somewhat lengthy, as well as in-depth, explanation in the blog on this website.
There is much to learn about gravity via the study of various known orbit velocities by moons, all while each one's distance from the primary planet that such individual moons orbit is factored in along with that. Nonetheless, comparing irregular moons to much more regular moons would fail to grant much insight at all about the nature of gravity. Therefore, in order to establish enough consistency so that certain conclusions might be drawn from some of the variances in a number of gravitational interactions between many moons and their primaries, a criteria for determining what a 'regular moon' must be like was required before any comparisons could be considered in order to grant anything new that might be learned about gravity.
When comparing variances in moon orbits over large mysterious bodies that are enveloped in a thick atmospheric type shroud, such as Jupiter and Saturn, compared to those type orbits over some with solid ice surfaces, like Uranus and Neptune, how such bodies (regular moons) orbit them helps with the analysis of such planets' interiors below their surfaces that are seen by us. The effect has been dubbed 'gravity intensification' here, which explanation does indeed appear to be a valid one.
A note to keep in mind regarding much of this: Most of the early and most influential scientists, at least during the era known as the Renaissance—so not counting any Greeks or early Muslims, who were either science or else mathematic-ally minded—were typically committed to some extent to believing that the Jewish/Christian Bible predominantly dispensed factual information. That had a profound effect on some of the positions they took relative to their scientific exploits, which worked to skew some of the views taken early on before some of those were passed along, due to the presence of religious influence on more than a few of them.
By the behavior of Jupiter's regular moons, compared to the behavior of the regular moons orbiting Saturn, Neptune and Uranus, the depth of Jupiter's outer gaseous sheath does look to be extremely deep; all while its rocky/metallic core looks to be immensely dense. Please check the blog page on this site where at the top an excerpt from For the Sake of Civility—that was written about the interior of Jupiter—can be found, so that anyone who cares to can explore this topic a bit more; also see the reasons why this can be so important since by getting that so wrong that can affect a host of additional topics in deleterious ways.
A note to keep in mind regarding much of this: It was a superstitious type, as well as a religious-influenced, position that was taken after Thomas Young's double-slit experiment had been conducted and was reported on. The interpretation was that if light came in waves that such waves could be massless. This an enormous mistake in scientific interpretations of nature!
Within the book, For the Sake of Civility, all of the first 24 elements—while treating protium, deuterium, tritium and helium-3 as all separate elements—have mathematical reasons for their nucleus configurations based on what has now been called attraction aggregates since the 2017 chart (the first chart in a series of three, with two more coming in the future) was completed; which applies a certain uniform methodology to measure the attraction force emanating from each side of these configured nuclei, as it subtracts (by dividing in half in regular intervals) from that force as distance increases—typically in relation to additional distance caused by one or more shells of orbiting/hovering type particles that also help keep other nearby and potentially attracted atoms away, or else at the very least those shells will lower the attraction strength between two or more atoms (i.e. the attraction emanating between their nuclei), in nearby atoms that could potentially bond.
This diagram-explanation combination is about cold nucleosythesis. As a nucleus begins to take its shape from whatever number of protons and neutrons are present in a small vicinity (before electrons can arrive and ward off further connections of such nucleons), since neutrons are the bad boys by having highly attracted interior to one another, yet higher repelling surfaces than protons have—all while protons have lower attracted interiors to one another, as well as lesser repelling surfaces, too—the neutrons present always try to attach first yet they can't because of those surfaces (as the tritium configuration indicates that its two neutrons would clap under those circumstances): the would-be attaching neutrons calm down as protons come in to intervene to allow solid connections. This means that there are always underlying spine neutrons within any configuration that has at least three neutrons in its center; all while there are many, many protons that serve as wedge protons intervening between any interior neutrons. Thus the rule: Neutrons in a configuration cannot touch or else their will be some form of generally those more common type radiation decays.
That Argon is a noble gas directly effects how its nucleus' protons and neutrons are configured, which dictates what AAs (attraction aggregates) for its various sides can be allowed. For if those are too strong then the element cannot function as a noble gas. Wherefore, when you go through the steps of adding up the rows of nucleons— while giving 25% more attraction power to each neutron over each proton—certain numbers that represent its AA for each one of its sides will emerge from any specific configuration that one might test to serve as a given element's most common isotope. A value of 272 is the cutoff point between what element will generally make a solid with its own kind of atoms nearby (or also more easily join with other more attractive type atoms to form a compound that takes on a solid form), which solids take stronger attractions than liquids and gases need. For if a side of a nucleus emits an attraction aggregate value of 271 at a given temperature and pressure (typically STP as well as NTP), then such a material will likely function as a liquid; while the cutoff between what functions as a liquid or a gas hasn't been determined for this just yet—only the boundary, in terms of attraction strength, between what serves as a solid material in comparison to a gas/liquid.
The diagram-explanation combination like this that appears in For the Sake of Civility assumed that readers might already understand the difference between DC and AC current, many of which would: that DC current runs through conducting wire in one continuous direction; while AC generally reverses directions 60 times a second (in common 60 Hertz systems). In September of 2019, it was realized that a more in-depth explanation of AC vs DC, relative to their respective commutators, would be called for as well. This allowed for an introduction on how and why electricity flows from atom to atom according to this atom model, which description came in its present form, as presented here, while writing For the Sake of Civility. Yet at an earlier stage of this, as is mentioned in this website's blog about the 2014 atom model parameters explanation, it was hypothesized then that an electric photon layer resided next to every atom nucleus, which concept was abandoned since that wasn't conducive to easy electric current transfers; also because each nucleon is already covered with electric photons on their surfaces, which would negate the need for a special layer of those hovering next to a nucleus just under the first spherical radio particle shell. Yet even if some single photons did hover there, electricity would still flow for the reasons now given and operate as how that is now described.
The orbital pattern of Trojans described here is much like how horseshoe orbits sometimes occur. This would work to sort, by Jupiter's gravity, all of these asteroids that get too close as how that is depicted on this page; which page appears in the book, For the Sake of Civility. There are some additional facets to this that concern those asteroid's velocity matching Jupiter's for the most part, which had to be explained here as well. Actually, one part of the correct explanation for that is on the moon orbit pages that are also on this webpage just above, when it comes to how some of the orbital velocities of smaller objects can match other much larger body's orbital velocity within certain parameters--how to determine that (which gives Relativity a certain amount of credit). But what so often overrides all of that is both orbital path as well as velocity perturbations that are caused by conjunctions between celestial bodies, particularly between larger ones (planets most notably when speaking of this solar system). Understanding how strong those conjunctions can be for certain intervals (some of which can be quite extended in some cases), so that those can be compared, comes by using the following equation: N (as in Newtons in the form of gravitational force) = (G*M1) (G*M2) / r^2 along with v (velocity) = the cube root of N (those Newtons of force) * C (the orbital circumference) / 3.075 root of r (the orbital radius).
The first one of these universe model pencil drawings appeared in my 2008 book, Endless Cycle Universe. The concept is a great one; but I soon learned that not only were the farthest galaxies away from us speeding up, but that some have been massively speeding up as they move on away from us. That caused me to alter, in this 2009 drawing, how that material (which included galaxies containing black holes, along with some stars and planets that some of which may not all be incorporated into those galactic black holes quite yet perhaps) races in toward this source collection, which changed how I drew the return pattern next to that source black hole—a black hole that greatly compresses its inner photons to the point that their shapes become more cube-like (than spherical) so that they push upon one another to eventually cause binary eruptions into space, i.e. eruptions of charged photons.
The writing of Endless Cycle Universe in 2008 marked this author's initial attempt to engage (or broach) the subject matter, or field, known as physics. I did so with three main hypotheses that were not yet accepted in science: (1) That every item, meaning everything, that exists in the entire universe, besides literal space—while literal space would be what should be called absolute emptiness between each object with mass that passes through such emptiness—all have mass; also (2) That such mediums with mass consist of digits (that should be called photons), which comprise all matter, whether single (as in individual) units on up to each composite that has greater mass by those connecting some number of those; as well as (3) That these photons range from no charge on up to high positive charge only, while there is no such thing as negative charge... all while contending that upon such a basis (or bases if you prefer) all scientific explanations should be founded on from now on, once this has been widely, and possibly even formally, adopted. When writing Endless Cycle Universe—which initiated these three integrally related theses, even though I was still a rank amateur when it came to science—this book did successfully launch these concepts, not as a literary success by any means; but rather as a way for me to launch into this subject matter as I started to explore this highly realistic possibility that no one else, as far as I know, had ever attempted. In doing so, when first trying to broach the topic of what all forms of radiation might be, in terms of their digits under this approach, as the rank amateur that I still was, some errors about some of the velocities of already well recognized forms of radiation were made by me—errors that didn't allow the concept to propagate in 2008 or 2009, as I first initiated the website with the domain: endlesscycleuniverse.com. However, by writing on such topic(s) via the early form of this that website, allowed me to move from studying one scientific topic into the next one, then on and on, as I made arguments that the above three theses were not only the correct approach but what truly exists also; which allowed me to invest some 20,000 hours of study in all of this, to afford me the ability to form arguments within a far more informed dialectic that's finally coalesced into what has become a fairly comprehensive collection of literature that can be freely accessed at a couple of locations on the web.
Meanwhile, the cost of doing this has been more loneliness than I would have wanted over the past eleven years, after having published Endless Cycle Universe in 2008 (which followed The Turning Tide, to initiate what I have been needing to do relative to religious subject matter), inasmuch as I feel that doing this is well worth it since it should end up benefiting many who still have had no idea how to view such matters, to then all too often end up caving into pressure applied to them from specious, as well as utterly manufactured, religious faiths.
A note to keep in mind regarding much of this: When a person was growing up, one who has been taught to adopt some form of religious faith as trustworthy, and then that person commits to that faith—not merely as a life business proposition or occupation (which is what nearly all who become ministers actually do since they are unknowingly taught to adopt that pattern at advanced learning institutions in that field), but as an actual endeavor in truth seeking relative to life and our existence; and then that said person finds out the long and the hard way that such faith isn't really true in a number of important respects, then that person must almost totally reconfigure his or her own view of most everything, if they care about what is actually real and true. In that kind of case, such a person will by that be flung toward the scientific community for answers, where he or she may, nevertheless, find some possible problems there as well while they are trying to reboot. Therefore, almost everything can become suspect as the person starts over trying to find the best way that he or she should take from now on; not just philosophically but with regard to how to approach all kinds of scientific topics as well, instead of simply adopting every single approach or item that's routinely taught at a higher leaning institution with regard to the broad field of science in general. So that person, due to their rough road experienced by having seriously adopted religious faith early on, but then being severely disappointed with that (as a guinea pig in some respects), will likely establish his or her own set of basic principles for the treatment of most any subject matter, rather than simply parroting what may be taught to them by any “official” source of information. That person will likely begin to weigh each thing that is taught to him or her for themselves, because in this case this is not simply about obtaining credentials for some kind of well-paying position, but rather about becoming a sort of actuary in some sense, one might call this.
This page represents a critical step in attaining this new atom model. The visual evidence for the model came during the summer of 2011. Yet interpreting what was seen and making that conform to both naturalistic and completely intuitive characteristics, that are echoed all around us in the macro world—which is in complete contrast to how quantum mechanics was set up during the 20th century (although we humans were certainly needing to rely on that former model first since this subject matter has been so hard to perfectly, or at least more nearly perfectly, crack), was a large and difficult challenge. What the step represented by this page achieved was a way establish size comparisons and distances on the atomic level—basically proportion-ality, which took the work that is presented in several other similar pages leading up to this one (which can be found in the book, Existence Uniformity, on pages 50-56).
One of the things that had to be decided was how many hovering/ orbiting type particles would take part in shells over a nucleus, according to how many protons it had, as well as how many neutrons it had. Eventually the number for that was adjusted to 100 per each proton and 125 per each neutron, which numbers finally worked out well for this kind of approach once those were applied.
However, what this page would at first supply, along with one more that accompanied it, was a way to establish the different shells over nuclei regarding which ones resided closer to a nucleus, and then which ones were in the next shell and so forth. What that eventually turned into was 7 types of radio shell particles that form spherical shells and primarily vibrate in place instead of them orbiting; though some can orbit in certain conditions just outside of their more natural spherical shell (which was observed on some warmer days during the visual evidence tests). That left four types of electrons, which are larger composites that radio shell particles (which electron shells was seen in the visual evidence as described in a page that is nearer to the top of his home page, which page relays those observation). All of that had to be defined in detail, i.e. digitally.
The spacing was eventually changed from what this page has presented while the Materialist/Naturalist Periodic Table was worked up during 2017. Also, once attraction aggregates were realized as the method for finding the best suited configurations for each type of atom's—each element's—leading isotopic form, several of the configurations changed from what is shown on this page as well. Also, one more key change is how that in this page (that was created in 2014) an electric layer was placed first right next to the nucleus, which concept for how electric current is passed from one atom to the next went on to be changed a great deal from how it was perceived when this page was written and drawn, to how that is now explained (along with the reasons for why that occurs in such a way) in For the Sake of Civility.
In 2016, it was finally realized what causes galaxies to spread apart as they cross out into space after having come from a central collection, from which their photons had been spewed. That is explained in one of the diagrams to the left and three rows above this one. Once that has been realized as the cause, then no other cause needs to be explored. That results in a very random course for all of the galaxies to take, which by the way all of them eventually turn back, due to gravity, and head back toward the collection they came from. That means a nice organized loop of galaxies turning and returning, like what has been shown so far in all of these universe model drawings, isn't the real pattern since it's not nearly as clean as that; though those do, however, all turn around and return.
Considered here massively important to discrediting Relativity from being both real or necessary, this page has now been included in the blog portion of this website, among the earliest of those that appear on its Home Page. For when you do the math, the tolerances for small variations in each measurement taken by GPS is greater than the impact that the daily adjustments said to be factored in for "relativistic effects'" thus it actually has no affect on the time allotted per each 1/10th second radio wave transmission. That means that saying that applying Relativity to GPS confirms the theory is a genuine phenomenon of nature relative to orbits, including various transmissions of electromagnetic radiation, is actually the opposite; and should be treated as superfluous, to the point of even being misleading to our understanding the true dynamics involved.
One of the chief reasons for Relativity
having been thought of as necessary
by Einstein was to help explain why
Mercury's perihelion advances.
This explains the real,
and also not counter intuitive
reason for why that happens.