SEE, — HOW the complexities of
FIELD THEORIES HID from us the fact that relative motion (phase) between these spinning entities, in the micro & macro universe, gives us all the attractive and repulsive Fundamental Forces.
Field Theories in html:

Also, Field Theories in Word:

& Field Theories in Adobe pdf:

Fitzpatrick's 1966 book showed the relative motion laws of A. Ampčre unified the forces.
Fitz's first book in 1966

Fitz's 1966 book in PDF

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

R. B. Duncan Press


Back to page 1.

Page 6. of fifteen pages

Back to page 5. - - Page 7.

Continued from page 5.

"What you have is a balance between internal binding and binding with the macrocosm surroundings. . General Relativity is correct when it tells you that an entity gains relative mass when it is accelerated in regard to the surroundings. . It gains relative mass because each linkage with the surroundings gets stronger because each linkage is now a higher mass linkage - as seen from that particular reference frame."

"Three frequencies are of paramount importance: . The fast quark spin frequency that transmits inertial mass. . The electron spin frequency---slower, but yet a harmonic---that transmits magnetism and the electron wobble or oscillation frequency---slower than the electron spin frequency---that transmits light. . In the tri-quark entities (neutron & proton), the quark does not seem to wobble like the electron. . All of these frequencies cause distant tiny individual linkages that are very strong and momentarily attractive. . The energy of each electron has to match perfectly so strict impedance matching can also be observed in each of these quantum transfers just as in electronic theory. . The FREE e-books cover all this in more detail. . It is the harmonic nature of the electron's spin frequency that binds it to the quark nucleus and this is what we measure when we measure the electron's mass."

In our reference frame (this quark-electron sub-harmonic frequency world) the electron has little mass but not in its own spin/orbit frequency world. . There, it has a tremendous amount of inertial qualities (mass at that particular frequency). . And there it "sees" little of our space-time.

"Quantum theory is correct in stating that no energy is lost in that vast distance when an electron in a far away star binds with an electron in your eye to send you a quantum of light energy. Explanation The reason light intensity falls off with the square of the distance is because the number of electrons in the exact position and state to make the transfer at that precise time, falls off with the square of the distance. . In fact, as Milo Wolff proved, it falls off even a slight bit more than that. .This is also true with quarks that cause gravity and inertial mass with distinct, quanta type, strong, individual quark binding linkages. . With light and gyroscopic inertia only a slight percentage of these entities are aligned properly at the exact time to link and cause what we see as an invisible force. . But there are so many electrons and quarks in this universe that there will always be some electron to electron energy transfer giving us light and some quark to quark binding giving us inertia.

We get light---electron to electron binding---up to the point of the surface (event horizon) of a black hole. . But we continue to get macrocosm quark binding to our quarks here, even further inside the black hole. . All this quark binding to us here stops at the next point in the black hole, the singularity. So finally we get to the theoretical point of Hawking's singularity Explanation Just remember, we do get quark to quark regular attraction to a slight portion of the beginning of the black hole."

"There will also be some quark to quark extra strong linking giving us gyroscopic inertia."

"ALL quarks link with the macrocosm to give us inertial mass."

"A black hole Explanation becomes a far more interesting object using this new concept. . A black hole must contain far more mass than present scientists can even dream of. . But this gravitational attraction to us gets greatly diminished and then does not even exist past the point of Hawking's singularity. Explanation . It is at too high a spin/orbit frequency or you could also say it's in a different type gauge than we are."

String theorists would say it's in a different dimension or "brane" than we are.

"Stephen Hawking's singularity is the final theoretical area within a black hole that exists at the extreme high frequency end of our quark spin/orbit frequency band. . In a black hole the 1st important point is where the number of electrons available to transmit light to us gets diminished to the extent where light transfer to us is no longer possible. . Because the quark spin frequency is higher than the electron spin frequency, gravitational attraction, quark to quark binding (to us) will still exist beyond this 1st surface (event horizon) up to the 2nd important point, which is the singularity. . While there is NO gravitational attraction between us past the singularity portion of the black hole, there is something else - read on - that pertains to our gyroscopic inertia."

"Most of this black hole gravitational attraction to us continues well beyond the 1st important point, the event horizon. . It abruptly ends, however at the singularity, beyond which normal quark to quark binding to us no longer exists [where (seen by us) both light and gravitational attraction no longer exist]. . The black hole therefore consists of two distinct spin/orbit frequency spots. . At the 1st point (its surface) all electron binding is lost to us here. . Further within the black hole at the 2nd point (singularity), all regular quark binding is lost to us here. . In other words there is a lot more gravitational attraction inside these black holes that we normally do not even feel."

"What the folks in our universities are totally blind to is that we can and do detect more of this additional black hole (beyond the regular attraction area) via gyroscopic inertia. . There would be nowhere near as much gyroscopic inertia without these singularities all around us. . The reason for this is the tremendous gravity of the black hole itself, which because of Einstein's principle of equivalence must be equated with extra acceleration energy. . All of the spinning electrons and most of the spinning quarks in a black hole are at too high a spin/orbit frequency (different impedance) (from our point of view) for us to normally detect them. . They are simply at too high an energy level (too far toward the singularity end of the black hole). . I have explained in my e-books, at this site, exactly how the quarks in a spinning flywheel WILL detect and bind to these higher energy quarks in the macrocosm and undoubtedly most of these higher energy quarks are in these black holes thereby giving us such strong gyroscopic inertia."

"Each wobble or oscillation of the electron is a single light wave but the quark---in both inertia and gyroscopic inertia---gets pulled from the quark triumvirate like a piston being pulled out against a head of compressed air. . In any flywheel or gyro this translational motion is added so that certain portions of some quarks are now approaching the speed of light and thus have more mass. . The extra strong linking of these few quarks with similar higher mass quarks in the macrocosm gives us our gyroscopic inertia"

This new "A" Law way of thinking clearly shows you the correct relationship between gravitational mass and inertial mass. Explanation While they both depend on quarks linking with quarks in the surrounding "fixed stars", gravity depends on the additional linkage of quarks with other quarks in close ponderous objects as well.

The "A" Laws

"Another example that surroundings are entering into the picture is the fact that Niels Bohr Explanation was able to bring centrifugal force down below that magic level of Planck's constant and into the microcosm where he matched each orbital drop of an electron to a specific light frequency in the spectrum. Explanation But he could only do this with the single electron hydrogen and helium atoms. He couldn't do this with heavier atoms and molecules. . Why? . Because the surroundings changed too much. . The density-dependent, relativistic "Hartree approximations" are further proof that surroundings are entering into it and these "A" Laws are correct. . So surroundings are extremely important but present science seems to be totally disregarding this even though Einstein initially predicated his theory of general relativity on the surroundings being homogeneous and isotropic (more or less constant and evenly distributed throughout)."

" Surroundings, unwittingly, play an extremely important role in all of this... Unless you see this role then you will be forever blind to what mass and energy really are and you will never see the "big picture". . Present science disregards any influence from the surroundings. . This is the biggest condemnation of present science: . Today's science---in order to simplify the math---entirely discounts the role of surroundings in all of this and thereby blinds you to what is really going on. . We have different type quarks and neutrinos and present science totally ignores the role of unlike surroundings in this . . Once Milo Wolff's frequency math method is perfected and computerized then this will be considered something close to an infinite frequency, infinite energy universe of spherical standing wave entities. . It continually functions to keep all these entities on geodesics Explanation or to balance out what you see as energized motion. . Any motion that you produce has effects---ignored by present science---in both the microcosm and the macrocosm. . For instance, gyroscopic inertia is obtained via an interaction with quarks in the surrounding macrocosm. . It's in the T.O.E. e-book. . Read it. . It's FREE."

So we are pleased to bring you all of the above & more in Daniel P. Fitzpatrick's Theory of Everything. The new Aufbau Laws, therein, give you a simple, crystal-clear "big picture" of unification and they rest on a solid foundation set up by Andre Ampere, George Berkeley, Jean Foucault, Ernst Mach, James Clerk Maxwell, Wheeler, Feynman and Kurt Gödel. . These new "A" Laws not only show you exactly what gravity is but they also show Saul Perlmutter to be entirely correct when he recently claimed that we absolutely have Einstein's cosmological constant---a repulsive force---between all the stars and galaxies in this universe.

Fitzpatrick explains exactly how these "A" Laws show you not only why we have gravity but also why we have gravity's equal but opposite force, Einstein's cosmological constant---this repulsive force---between all the atoms, molecules, stars, galaxies and superclusters.

Fitzpatrick was the very first scientist to point out the fact that we will also have Einstein's principle of equivalence with this equal and opposite force of gravity.

He says, "Let's say we do have Einstein's 'cosmological constant', a repulsive force out there between everything. . Then because of Einstein's principle of equivalence, we would definitely see all the acceleration aspects of that force including a red shift. . Today's popular belief is that it's ALL expanding away from us here. . How can that be? . We are not the center of things. . So common sense tells you this is a repulsive force, steady state universe."

"It is difficult---especially for those with insufficient knowledge---to distinguish between a repulsive force type steady state universe and an accelerating, expanding universe."

"Yes, Perlmutter's acceleration clashes with present theory but it works beautifully with Einstein's original concept of a repulsive force, steady state universe."

So, says Fitzpatrick,
" Once you know that this is a repulsive force, steady state universe then Perlmutter's discovered acceleration makes perfect sense. "

D. P. Fitzpatrick states, "The problem then becomes one of getting an explanation for a Big Bang without us having an existing physically expanding universe today. . If surroundings are involved then there will be a certain amount of something akin to a type of friction with the surroundings. . So the solution to a present repulsive force type of steady state universe was shown to me in the last week of December of 1950 at the Miami Air Show where I saw William T. Piper, Explanation who founded the Piper Aircraft Corporation. . God knows how many airplanes he built from 1929 'til he died in 1970 but he built over 5,000 of his Piper Cubs just for the Government during World War ll. . He was about a week shy of his seventieth birthday when he demonstrated a short field landing at the Miami Air Show with one of his Piper airplanes. . I used what I saw that day to save myself once. . Piper brought his little Piper airplane in and touched down on the runway. Then as soon as he was down, he immediately hit the right brake as hard as he could. And I have never seen anything like that in all my life because now here was this Piper airplane that was suddenly transformed into a fast spinning top right in front of my eyes. . That airplane went no further down that runway. . All that energy now suddenly went into spinning that Piper airplane around like a giant top and it zipped round and round and round: It was the most incredible sight that I have ever seen. . They announced that he was going to demonstrate a short field landing but I had never expected to see anything like that. . Piper lived almost another twenty years after that too and died a year short of his 90th birthday. . I was ushered in to flying being trained in one of his yellow Piper Cubs Explanation and I almost exited this life early because of one of them too".

So did this initial expansion eventually turn into all this particle spinning and a repulsive force, steady state universe?

Fitzpatrick says, "It must have because an accelerating universe requires a PRESENT force and there is none. . A PAST force could cause a Big Bang but a PAST force could not cause this acceleration that Perlmutter's group found. . Others now have added even more proof to Perlmutter's findings. . So folks, the only answer to this accelerating expansion is that it is a perceived accelerating expansion caused by Einstein's principle of equivalence."

"What Saul Perlmutter really discovered was that we have a repulsive force type steady state universe exactly as Einstein originally claimed. . And that's a paradigm shift from the present most popular belief in this year of 2002."

"The 2. 73 degree Kelvin, Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation is evidence of the last Big Bang. . Hubble's red shift is definitely not giving any evidence whatsoever of any Big Bang. . That belief is simply another big blunder of our present scientists. . What the red shift is showing you is that more space-time is being constantly created all around you by the macrocosm than is being constantly created in this geodesic path that you are traveling with the earth. . This is also what general relativity is showing you."

"The big mistake was conforming present science to fit the most simplistic math methods. . The building principle is indeed simple yet this leads to a mathematical complexity of different symmetries of construction. . Each spin/orbital standing wave family of spherical entities must, therefore, exhibit a different symmetry of construction."

"Two steel balls bounce apart but two galaxies can pass right through each other. . This is because of the different symmetries of construction. . . And Stephen Wolfram is correct: Computers, someday, will show us exactly why we have these different symmetries."

"Our math led us more toward Faraday's idea of separate forces for the electron than to Ampere's idea of one force for everything. Math plus Faraday's concepts have certainly given us this wonderful world of science that we enjoy today. But our science laws and math seem only to work in singular reference frames with specific types of surroundings. . For instance Quantum mechanics works in the microcosm with QED Explanation using specific laws and math in specific surroundings of electrons. . QCD Explanation uses specific laws and specific math with specific surroundings of quarks. . The laws and math used with gravity seem only to work well inside our galaxy with our specific band of frequency surroundings. . This can be thought of as close to an infinite frequency, infinite energy universe and as you enlarge your viewing area---such as viewing galaxies---then you also are bringing in more lower frequency entities into this wave picture."

"You must view the macrocosm more as lower frequency entities rather than larger. . You must view the microcosm more as higher frequency entities rather than smaller. . You must view all the entities in both as merely spherical standing wave entities."

"No scientists today believe that the "Nash Equilibrium", Explanation given to us by John Nash, Explanation pertains to this entire universe but it does. . Using these new "A" Laws plus Milo Wolff's frequency math we can see that all these entities both in the microcosm and macrocosm remain separated because they have achieved an equilibrium of frequencies. . All this spin and orbiting in both the micro and macro worlds are caused by this Nash frequency Equilibrium"

* * * continued on page 7. * * *

CONTINUED on Page 7.

Click above for Page 7.

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