continued from page 1.
In the quantum
world the standard model Explanation
leaves a lot to be desired. . Not only that but we are being led entirely
in the wrong direction. . This present science offers no explanation as to
why we are forced to use relativity corrections (even in GPS). Explanation And
since it offers no answer as to why we have gravity or any of the other
invisible forces then what both Stephen Wolfram and Daniel Fitzpatrick point out becomes extremely important.
I
wrote this web page as an introduction to Fitzpatrick's e-books. . I know this is
a lengthy web page but in the past decades Fitzpatrick has written far more than
the few books herein displayed. . This long web page emphasizes some of
the more important ideas in those other publications that
you cannot get here. . So, in addition to these few e-books that you can
get here, I believe this protracted offering of mine is also well worth
reading.
How does Nobel Prize winner John F. Nash's concept
of "equilibrium"
Explanation also show us why all these atoms and stars stay
separated?
You'll have to read through this lengthy dissertation to see
why.
This web page is indeed a
long, detailed presentation. . But unlike most scientific journals, this
is sprinkled throughout with surprises. . So it's far less boring than
most things printed up by a university press. . It's also seasoned with a
few authentic scientific firsts, which should appeal to those with such
specialized tastes.
Lincoln
Barnett, who was a friend of Einstein, wrote the best seller "The Universe and Dr. Einstein " Explanation
and he wrote numerous articles on relativity for the Britannica. . Lincoln
Barnett wrote an encouraging letter to Daniel P.
Fitzpatrick Jr. when Fitzpatrick published his first book in
1966 showing that Ampere Explanation
essentially laid the cornerstone for a simple, understandable unified
field concept. You will find a full page in the Sunday Book Review section
of the New York Times devoted to Fitzpatrick's book. This page in the Times has a big picture of a galaxy
on it. . I forget which Sunday or even which month it was but I know the
year was 1967. . If someone finds it, please give me the date and I'll
update this web page.
Since his retirement, Fitzpatrick has put more of the pieces
of this great puzzle together and has finally given us "a New Kind of Science" predicted by
Stephen Wolfram.
Now, in this FREE
e-book, Fitzpatrick shows you
exactly why we have gravity and all the other invisible
forces.
"It's so simple. It's so
obvious. Why didn't I think of this?" will be the statement of a good
number of scientists in many universities as this gets further
attention.
These extremely simple Aufbau Laws or "A" Laws finally bring a clarity to the
reasons we have both magnetism and gravity. . All you have now is utter
confusion. . The majority of high school graduates today do not even know
that the north pole of the earth is really a south magnetic pole. Explanation
. With gravity the confusion is even worse because none in these
universities can tell you the real reason why the arms of these spiral
galaxies can exceed the speed of their escape velocity and still not fly
all apart.
Using these "A" Laws, a kid in grammar school can easily visualize both
magnetism and gravity correctly and understand far more of what is really
going on than all those being presently graduated in all the high schools
and all the universities.
The "A"
Laws
The Hartree approximations Explanation are
proof that a brand new type of frequency math general relativity must
replace the special relativity now being used in quantum mechanics. .
Using only special relativity, quantum scientists will disagree about the
distorted information that moves from that gauge (that TYPE of reference frame) to our reference frame here. . These easy to use "A" Laws show us the electron is in its own space-time Explanation
and not in our space-time. . Therefore we will not
see the correct aspects of the electron's spin in our space-time reference
frame.
Spin is presently viewed as simply a certain
movement of a solid. . We do not see the complex wave function involved. .
There is a complex wave function involved which these Aufbau or "A" Laws point out.
Milo Wolff correctly states "In Dirac's
theoretical work the spin of a particle is measured in units of angular
momentum, like rotating objects of human size. But particle spin is
uniquely a quantum phenomenon, different than human scale angular
momentum. Its value is fixed and independent of
particle mass or angular velocity."
"The reason that its
value is fixed and independent of particle mass or angular velocity is that the electron receives the majority of its inertial
qualities from its surrounding similar, same scalar frequency, electrons
and not from the surrounding quarks from which we receive our inertial
mass.
And present science has a bad problem with the
invariance of the space-time interval because gravitation - all the major
universities teach - is a force that acts instantly. . The
universities are saying the same thing that Tom VanFlandern, astro
physicist of the University of Maryland, is saying that gravity acts
instantly. . .One of the reasons is that this universe would not be stable
if it didn't. . The other reason is that light has aberration (proagation
delay) but gravitation does not, therefore, if gravity isn't acting
instantly then at least it must be acting far, far faster than the speed
of light.
Do you see what this means? . . It means that the
space-time interval, considering gravity, has to be far, far different
from our space-time interval in which we use the velocity c (speed of
light). . You must come to the conclusion that each one of Milo Wolff's
different scalar wave entities has a different space-time interval. .
There is no other conclusion." . D.
Fitzpatrick
The electron orbits
the tri-quark nucleus because of a similar quark-electron harmonic
frequency (which we correctly or incorrectly measure as the electron's
mass).
It is plain to see the "A"
Laws tell us that an entity's full inertial mass will
only exist in one gauge. . Inertial mass cannot be entirely transferred
out of any one particular spin/orbit frequency reference frame. . In other
words we simply do not see the entire correct inertial mass of the
electron in our reference frame. . Our reference frame is a quark-electron
subharmonic frequency. . The electron is a scalar wave composition of
waves at the de Broglie wavelength. These are at a much higher frequency
reference frame than our reference frame.
Or as Milo Wolff so accurately puts it: "The
frequency mc2/h of the waves was first proposed by
Schroedinger and deBroglie, proportional to the mass of the electron. This
frequency is the mass so that mass measurements are actually frequency
measurements. There is no mass 'substance' in nature."
The
quantum people, who do not understand this and who do not understand that
a different gauge means an entirely different space-time interval (different frequency space resonance) and
who understand nothing of general relativity nor of these new "A" Laws will claim that the spin of the
electron is different from the earth's spin. . It is and it isn't. . It is
not absolutely different and people who say it is, are absolutely wrong
and scientists Samuel Goudsmit and George Uhlenbeck were absolutely right:
. The electron spins exactly like the earth spins---but in its own
TYPE of space-time reference frame (gauge), Explanation
which is certainly not our reference frame.
Fitzpatrick spells it out to the quantum
experts in terms they understand. . He says, "The advantages of using a
new form of general relativity based on Milo
Wolff's math, over the special relativity now being
used in quantum mechanics, is that it will be more accurate than the
Hartree approximations. . It will allow one to quantize without fixing
another gauge, because this is essentially what general relativity does. .
It will also allow one to see that the same type distortion of space-time
that causes the earth's spin also causes the electron's spin. . It---like
the "A" Laws---will allow one to
clearly see that the spin of the smallest particle is really no different
from the spin of the largest super cluster."
Fitzpatrick then
continues:
"All the electron really has is a form of
gyroscopic inertia in its own spin/orbit frequency reference frame
(gauge) but we mistakenly
see this as magnetism and charge in this entirely different subset
reference frame of ours. . I've been explaining the essentials of this in
various publications since 1966."
"In 1925 Samuel Goudsmit
and George Uhlenbeck not only discovered that the electron was spinning
but they also saw they could determine the direction in which these
electrons were spinning. Explanation
This was the first time we could see our laws of magnetism were obscuring
the correct picture. . Our present laws of magnetism were derived long
before anyone even knew about electrons and these laws should have been
changed in 1925 with this discovery of the electron spin. . Unfortunately
this entire world seems perfectly content with its inept, bureaucratic
educational system and these laws of magnetism were never changed."
"If you look down at the north pole
face of a magnet the electrons causing the magnetism, in that magnet, will
all be spinning clockwise. . Do the same for a magnet with its south pole
facing you and the spins will all be counter-clockwise. . However, when
you reverse this south pole magnet and see it attracts the other magnet,
all the spins in both magnets are now clockwise from your point of view. .
So it's no longer opposites attracting once you reverse one of the
magnets. . Electrons in both magnets are spinning the SAME way when
these magnets are attracting. . The old idea of opposites
attracting should have gone out the window in 1925."
"High schools and universities still teach that in
magnetism opposites attract. . North and south poles
do seem to attract each other if you are ignorant about the
electron spin, but this is positively displaying the wrong message. .
Exactly the reverse picture that similar geodesic paths
attract is what is needed. . We know the spinning electron
Explanation
is the smallest unit of magnetism and these "A" Laws agree perfectly with what we know as fact. . An example
is that these electrons will only attract when they are "locked" in a
position so that the closest sides of each are going in the
same geodesic path. . These "A" Laws then show us the reason a polar attraction is the
strongest of any angular attraction: . In a polar attraction the
entire portions of both electrons are spinning in the
same geodesic path. . This is a far better and clearer explanation of
magnetism than that presently being taught."
"Also, by using this (Ampere's) description of
magnetism, you produce a method of unifying not only the invisible forces
of magnetism and gravity but the strong and weak forces as well and the
laws used in this method are called "Ampere's Laws", "the Aufbau Laws" or
simply the "A" Laws."
The
"A" Laws
"If you teach science then you have a
moral responsibility to teach your students that the attraction in
magnetism is caused by similar geodesic paths attracting and
NOT opposites attracting. . Poisoning the minds of millions
of kids with this ancient BACKWARDS assumption of magnetism has been the
biggest factor in preventing several generations of scientists from
finding the answer to Einstein's quest for a unified
field."
"It's been over 75 years now that scientists and
educators knew that electrons would attract other electrons when their
closest sides were moving the same way and this attraction is
stronger in a polar attraction where the entire portions of these
electrons are spinning in the same direction. . Yet they are still
preaching "opposites attract" almost the very reverse of
this."
"You cannot continue to preach an old legend and
claim that you are teaching science."
"When you know what
you are teaching is wrong, and actually the reverse is true, then you are
as guilty as those Nazi's in Nuremberg who said, "I was only obeying
orders."
"And this is only the tip of the iceberg of what
is wrong."
"Yes, you can use these old legends (like
opposite magnetic poles attract) as long as you match some math to them
but they will only work in one gauge (type of
reference frame). . Present science has matched
some math to many old legends. . People will eventually discover this. .
You cannot fool all the people all the
time."
"Only electrons that are perfectly FREE are able to
repel each other 100% of the time. Read the free
T.O.E. e-book to see why. . Electrons that get more or
less "locked" into a certain position, spin up or spin down on orbitals,
both attract and repel other electrons and act exactly like tiny magnets.
. These "locked" electrons---attracting other electrons---ALSO facilitate chemical bonding."
Once you know that two electrons attract
whenever the closest sides of these electrons are going in the same
geodesic path then it behooves one to ask the following question: . Will
all these other spinning entities, we see both in the microcosm and
macrocosm, behave the same way? . And the answer surprisingly comes out
YES.
The following is Fitzpatrick's 1st Law (of
relative motion) and it pertains to all of these
spinning entities we see in our universe whether they are in the microcosm
or the macrocosm.
Every perfectly
FREE spinning entity will always repel another same type,
same sized, perfectly FREE spinning entity. . All the invisible
attractive forces, in this entire universe, are derived
whenever these spinning entities lose some of their freedom and get
"locked" somewhat into a certain position in respect to their
surroundings.
Looking at this
entire universe, all the FREE spinning entities---no matter how large or
how small---repel all the other same sized similar entities just like the
electron. . Attractive forces come about after these entities get "locked"
somewhat into a certain geodesic path or position. . This is what all
these universities should be teaching today but they are not. . And this
is what this long web page and Fitzpatrick's e-books will explain to you if you take the time to read
them.
* * * continued on page 3. * * *
CONTINUED on Page
3.
Click above for Page 3.
Web Page with FREE e-books
