1966 book showed the
relative motion laws of A. Ampère unified the forces.
Fitz's first book in 1966
Fitz's 1966 book in Word . . . . . . . . . . . Fitz's 1966 book in PDF
WIMPs in Word . . . . May 9, 2019 ALL you need to . . . . WIMPs in PDF
know about Dark Matter particles - (WIMPs).

This was the way the site --below-- looked many years ago. - - Dan Fitz.

EVERYTHING here is FREE, & NO pop up ads with these either.

This was the way the site --below-- looked many years ago. - - Dan Fitz.

R. B. Duncan Press

Page 2. of 15 pages
Back to Page 1.

Basics: in various languages
More languages on page 3.

a New Kind of Science


Leggi dell'Ampère

Leyes Del Amperio

Page 2.
Click for Page 3.

To get what you want:
Click on any of the blue links.

Amperen Lag

Die Aufbau Gesetze

Fitz's Theory of Everything



continued from page 1B.

These Aufbau Laws or "A" Laws lead us directly to Milo Wolff's concept, which in Wolff's words is "a proposal that was popular sixty years ago among the pioneers of quantum theory: namely that matter consisted of wave structures in space. Thus, it was proposed that matter substance, mass and charge, did not exist but were properties of the wave structure. Wyle, Schroedinger, Clifford, and Einstein were among those who believed that particles were a wave structure. Their belief was consistent with quantum theory, since the mathematics of quantum theory does not depend on the existence of particle substance or charge substance. In short, they proposed that quantum waves are real and mass/charge were mere appearances; 'Schaumkommen' in the words of Schroedinger. The reality of quantum waves, as suggested by Cramer (1986), supports the original concept of W. K. Clifford (1876) that all matter is simply 'undulations in the fabric of space'."

There's a renewal of interest in W. K. Clifford's concept now. Explanation

These simple "A" Laws show us that the abovementioned concept is probably true. . These Aufbau (Construction) Laws or "A" Laws show us how an entire universe could be constructed from nothing but spherical standing wave entities.

The "A" Laws

And this is consistent with Milo Wolff's opinion as well because he shows that particles can be formed by scalar quantum waves combining to form a standing wave

Tallyho4477 read Dan Fitzpatrick's e-book and wrote, "This science is so interesting. . I can't get over the concept. . It is as radical as it is elegant! . I'm sure my brain will now be preoccupied with this for some time to come. . Good show! . Does anybody know of more on this? . I'd like to see and read more of it. . I would like to know how this flies in the community; what they think of it; what they have to say about it."

So would I, tallyho. .. So would I.

"Robert Dicke Explanation was one scientist with all the tools, who knew and argued with Einstein, but who specifically ruled out the correct answer because he listened to his peers when he should have looked at the evidence that was all around him. . This is a spin/orbit frequency, "tuned circuit" universe and we are tuned to this wave universe much the same as a superheterodyne radio. . All repelling forces can be seen as maximum space-time creations exactly like a (high impedance) parallel tuned circuit with entities moving on geodesics 180 degrees out of phase with each other. . All attractive forces, such as gravity, can be viewed as a minimum of space-time creation overwhelmingly similar to a (low impedance) series tuned circuit with entities moving on geodesics in phase with each other.

Future super-computers, that will count the in phase vector waves (minimum space-time creation) and out of phase vector waves (maximum space-time creation) will be far superior to the tensor math of general relativity and all of present quantum mechanics.

This is essentially what these "A" Laws do now because they allow your mind to move completely out of your space-time realm and into these other space-time realms. . String theory tells us about these extra dimensions and this new concept allows your mind to see things CORRECTLY: as 3-D and time in every space-time realm." .
D. P. Fitzpatrick Jr.

Milo Wolff says, "The dual particle/wave nature of the electron has long been a paradox in physics. It is now seen that the electron consists entirely of a structure of spherical waves whose behavior creates their particle-like appearance. The correctness of this structure is supported by the physical laws which originate from this wave structure, including quantum theory, special relativity, electric force, gravity, and magnetism. This type of structure is termed a Space Resonance."

The Aufbau ("A") Laws show us that ALL permanent entities are also space resonances (spherical standing waves). . Furthermore these Aufbau Laws show us that different type entities are merely space resonances at different frequencies.

Here's what this, essentially, is all about:

Science depends on having standard units of time, mass and length. . Einstein showed us, unfortunately, that this standard was in trouble because these units seemed to vary. . Fitzpatrick's 1966 Laws --- now the "A" Laws show us the universe itself does indeed standardize units of time, mass and length but only within designated spin/orbit frequency parameters. . By also standardizing time, mass and length at each spin/orbit frequency --- instead of arbitrarily fixing the gauge --- future super computers will be able to exactly copy this example and mathematically unify the four fundamental forces to a precision undreamed of.

These Aufbau Laws or "A" Laws keep things simple, therefore they obey the principle of "Occam's Razor". Explanation . Present science is anything but simple.

Fitzpatrick shows us that --- by using a single reference frame view --- present science is forced into this complexity.

The Achilles heel of our present science is its single, subset reference frame viewpoint. . While this simplifies the math, it also obfuscates the correct frequency viewpoint.

Fitzpatrick says, "The victory of present science's mathematical achievements, using a single reference frame, is a Pyrrhic victory because it has obscured the very universal laws that enable us to easily see what is really going on in this universe.".

The single reference frame idea would be fine providing all reference frames were exactly the same but they are NOT. . They are only the same in special situations where speed, mass and surroundings remain essentially unchanged.

General Relativity has proven that when speed and/or mass changes then the amount of space-time also changes and this makes various different reference frames seem to act differently --- sometimes quite differently.

And if you insist on viewing everything ONLY from your own reference frame, as present science insists on doing, then you most certainly will not see how this entire universe is functioning.

In its present form this Aufbau concept is like a slide rule that gives you a fast approximation of the same results that general relativity gives you. . Not only that, but unbelievably, it works in the microcosm as well as in the macrocosm. . It may turn out to be as close to Einstein's unobtained unified field theory Explanation as scientists will ever perfect. . It does indeed unify the four fundamental forces. Explanation

Of extreme importance is the recently discovered ACCELERATION of this expanding universe Explanation and Einstein's "cosmological constant" Explanation which this discovered acceleration necessitates. . Keep reading this web page for Fitzpatrick's crystal clear, SENSIBLE answer to this perplexing enigma.

Present science is correct if you want to view everything from a single reference frame but present science does indeed restrict your view to a single, subset reference frame. . These Aufbau Laws or "A" Laws do NOT.

We've known, for almost a hundred years, that in the microcosm, frequencies are of paramount importance. . These easy to use Aufbau Laws or "A" Laws show us that this is a frequency universe, not only in the microcosm but all throughout this universe. . This is something we seem to have entirely missed.

Quantum scientists have learned that in such a frequency universe you cannot quantize without fixing the gauge. Explanation . The rest of the scientific world, unfortunately, hasn't learned that yet.

This means that the quantum scientists who say the electron spin is different from the earth's spin are correct but not entirely correct. . Motion in one gauge is not the same as motion in a different gauge. . Present science fails to elucidate this correctly. . Only these "A" Laws show you the manner in which motion is gauge specific.

The "A" Laws

Ampere's 1825 Laws

What you cannot quantize without fixing the gauge. also means is that our view of things from here, on this earth, is merely a subset view and all our precious science laws are merely subset rules that only work within certain parameters (gauge) Explanation. . For instance, these Aufbau Laws or "A" Laws solve one of our biggest gravitational problems. . They do this by showing us that our law of gravity is merely a subset rule and that gravity will only be a constant force within certain parameters (gauge) inside our Milky Way galaxy. . More about this later.

Positive proof of the validity of these Aufbau Laws or "A" Laws is the electron orientation in both sigma and pi types of chemical bonding. (Read the FREE e-books.).

"A New Kind of Science" Explanation is the name of the latest & best selling science book written by theoretical physicist Stephen Wolfram Explanation . He claims, with future computers, we will find a simple & obvious answer as to how this universe really works. But the present math and science has been of little use in this quest. Stephen Wolfram says we need "a New Kind of Science ".

All things built with Tinker Toys will have a certain symmetry of construction. . Things built with Lego Blocks will have a different symmetry of construction. . Humans live in a universe built essentially from point-sized quarks and electrons. . We have discovered some aspects of this quark-electron symmetry of construction and mistakenly labeled some of these subset rules as universal laws. . Present science is really nothing more than the total collection of all these subset rules and the sundry math methods matched to them.

We can develop various types of math to match all the various subset rules handed to us by our ancestors. . This is precisely what modern day scientists have been busy doing.

Because present science has made impressive accomplishments, this old bureaucratic university system is seen as the ultimate authority. . People --- even top scientists --- simply will not question the supreme authority. . The evidence of how this universe really works is all around us, yet few will question any old scientific beliefs. . Few will look at any evidence contrary to established beliefs. . You will see a good example of this as we look at the cause of magnetism shortly.

In the future, giant super computers will be set up to work out exactly how all these spherical standing wave, point sized quarks and electrons actually build our universe. . The frequency aspect of it is so complicated that no human mind can possibly understand it. . This is why Stephen Wolfram is correct when he tells us that we will learn how everything works from future super computers.

But NOW even before these future, giant super computers arrive, these "A" Laws presently show us exactly how and why this myriad mixture of waves produces this universe that we see all around us.

Prevalent today is our ancestor's view, in a slightly modified form, that present science gives us from a single, subset reference frame. . The view of present science is really only an approximation of what's going on frequency wise. . It's a good enough approximation if you don't want to look too far from your own reference frame. . However, these "A" Laws, will give you the best approximation if you want to view how things are working in all the different TYPES of reference frames (different GAUGES) Explanation throughout this entire universe.

Stop for a moment and think. . If this universe is really a frequency universe all throughout, then we have yet to find out what all these terms such as motion, distance, speed, acceleration, larger and smaller really mean in terms of this frequency universe.

Also you must only use these terms such as motion, distance, speed, acceleration, larger and smaller within one certain gauge because these terms are only good within certain parameters.

Stop once more and think again. . If all the various particles in this universe are really spherical standing waves (space resonances), as quantum science has proven, then we should see ways in which all these spherical standing wave particles act similarly --- and we do. . But you'll have to keep reading to find this.

Stop for a third time and think about these waves because if everything however small is made from waves then there can be no such thing as the smallest particle and what you have instead is a universe composed of a frequency spectrum of infinite span.

You will also have spherical standing wave entities (space resonances) at regular intervals like keys on a piano with a keyboard of infinite length.

Before you say NO to this, you will find --- if you keep reading --- that if this is indeed such an infinite frequency universe then all our present problems, handed to us by our present science, get suitably solved.

Within this infinite frequency spectrum is this particular quark-electron subharmonic frequency --- OUR WORLD --- from which we discern certain spherical standing wave entities as solids. . But quantum mechanics has shown they are really waves. . With this Aufbau Law or "A" Law concept you can easily visualize these spherical standing wave entities (space resonances) acting as BOTH waves and particles.

The "A" Laws

Ampere's 1825 Laws

You will never understand how this entire universe works unless you can see things as BOTH waves and particles. . This new Aufbau Law or "A" Law concept is the only method by which entities can be easily viewed as BOTH waves and particles (space resonances). . Present science fails in this respect.

What both Stephen Wolfram and Daniel P. Fitzpatrick see is that our present science is nothing more than a vast collection of subset rules matched to various types of math. . These two scientists seem to be the very first people to realize that future super computers, programmed with a completely revised "New Kind of Science", will be the tools necessary for us to get an accurate picture of what is really going on in this universe.

Yes, our present science gives us all the math to tell us exactly how much attraction we are going to have with magnetism or with gravity. . But present science fails to tell us exactly why the spinning electron Explanation gives us this invisible force of magnetism or why a preponderance of mass gives this invisible force of gravity.

Your mind has two easy ways to view this frequency universe. . Either the present science view from a single subset reference frame or this "A" Law view. . You lose things and gain things with both views.

These two views are entirely different, widely divergent views. . But BOTH views are needed for the human mind to properly understand this entire universe.

If Fitzpatrick's theory is right then all binary stars of the same mass must have opposite spins from each other with their closest sides going in the same direction (like gears meshing and not clashing). None of the other stars, according to Fitzpatrick's hypothesis, will be spinning this way with its closest neighbor star.

If I was an astronomer, with the very latest spectrographic equipment, then I would most certainly be checking this out now.

was not e=mc2 or Relativity
but it was something he discovered about a year before he died:

In 1954
Einstein Said: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept, i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics."

This is also the essense of what Fitzpatrick is saying, "You cannot use Faraday's field concept to unify the invisible forces. You must use Ampere's relative motion concept, which turns out to be a phase relationship."

The words below are the final words in Stephen Wolfram's 1,000 page, best selling book "A New Kind of Science".

"Looking at the progress of science over the course of history one might assume that it would only be a matter of time before everything would somehow be predicted by science. But the Principle of Computational Equivalence--and the phenomenon of computational irreducibility--now shows that this will never happen.

There will always be details that can be reduced further--and that will allow science to continue to show progress. But we now know that there are some fundamental boundaries to science and knowledge.

And indeed in the end the Principle of Computational Equivalence encapsulates both the ultimate power and the ultimate weakness of science. For it implies that all the wonders of our universe can in effect be captured by simple rules, yet it shows that there can be no way to know all the consequences of these rules, except in effect just to watch and see how they unfold."

Stephen Wolfram's basic premise -- all throughout his massive book -- is that there are simple rules as to how this ENTIRE universe works.

Fitzpatrick says the very same thing plus he gives you these few, simple rules predicted by Stephen Wolfram.

What you have, says Fitzpatrick, is a seemingly unlimited spectrum of spinning, scalar, standing wave resonances, similar to the meson resonances except these are stable. All of these spinning, scalar, standing wave resonances have gyroscopic reaction and obey Ampere's Laws.

This is all you really need to build the universe you see all around you.

This is an extremely simple universe providing you look at it as a scalar, standing wave universe.

As Dr. Milo Wolff showed, each electron is a scalar standing wave entity giving and receiving energy to and from other surrounding electrons out to the Hubble limit (a finite amount).

But each electron has spin, which IS also scalar in respect to the TOTAL of the surrounding electrons but spin is NOT scalar to individual electrons and therein lies the rub.

A greater difference in TIME is simply more out of phase with the principal scalar frequency and a greater distance (more space) is merely more out of phase with the spin frequency.

Repulsive force equates with more space just like the tensor math in GR.

Attractive force equates with less space like the tensor math as well.

Believe it or not, it is as simple as that.

Stephen Wolfram is absolutely right, it turns out.

There are two ways to view this universe

  1. Using our present science view obtained as everything is portrayed in one frequency, spin/orbit, spacetime reference frame.

    The advantage of using this present science method is that today's math can be used for accurate answers providing you do keep within certain parameters and do not venture into another frequency, spin/orbit, spacetime realm (microcosm).

    The disadvantage of this present science method is that by using this method you are condemned to seeing 4 different fundamental forces instead of seeing it all as one type of force.

  2. Viewing the various different frequency, spin/orbit reference frames as if a type of motion existed in each of them.
    (Using motion in the microcosm is far superior to plus and minus charges and lines of force if you wish to see the "big picture" approximation that Dirac predicted.)

The advantage of using this method is that all forces can be seen simply as one type of force. See Ampere's Universal Particle/Motion Law

The disadvantage of this method is that no present math is available to give us an accurate picture of things using this model.

Nobel prize winner Feynman understood the importance of using the concept of motion for unification. Look what he said about this in his famous QED


Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr.


Gravity Probe B is now in orbit to determine what John Wheeler calls " Gravitomagnetism" . . A new force? . Einstein said it should be simpler. . Believe it or not it is simple if you look at it the way Ampere did. . I'll give you a much better way to understand what is really going on in this universe. . But you will have to bear with me over a few rough stepping stones.

If you want a simple picture of how this complicated universe is working then absolutely nothing gives you a better model than Ampere's laws, that we'll look at.

Read this web page and it will easily explain, to you, this rich theory where distances and dimensions ". . .are not fixed concepts but fluid entities that shift with our point of view".

Yes, this is a frequency or resonance universe much like that which Dr. Milo Wolff is portraying but our concepts of distances and time will be based entirely upon the spin/orbit frequencies of the particles from which we are constructed.

Even the spacetime interval will change with the change to another particle's spin/orbit frequency.

For instance, the spacetime interval represented by the constant c in our realm, of the electron, will change to the spacetime interval represented by the constant c2 in the realm of the quark. .

Daniel P. Fitzpatrick's Theory of Everything greatly simplifies science. . Using these simple Aufbau Laws or "A" Laws, you can actually understand how everything in this universe works including special relativity (easiest to learn) and general relativity Explanation (hardest to learn).

Fitzpatrick's "A" Laws - that have many of the aspects of string theory - give us the very first, simple, understandable unified field answer because they see forces as spacetime creations similar to general relativity.

* * * continued on page 3. * * *

CONTINUED on Page 3.

Click above for Page 3.


*~~~* *~~~* *~~~* *~~~* *~~~* *~~~* *~~~*