One of the very best books, that has recently come out, is Dr. Milo Wolff's brand new book: Schrödinger's Universe.

I've now finished reading it and I predict that someday it will be ranked in importance right up there next to Newton's Principia.

I agree with the premise set forth in this book that this is indeed a scalar, standing wave, resonance universe that gives us the answer as to why we have all of our NATURAL LAWS.

Dr. Milo Wolff is correct: all electrons give and receive tiny bits of energy to and from each other, from as far away as the Hubble limit and they do this basically (in all directions) in a scalar manner. Milo has shown us conclusively that electrons are standing waves that keep reproducing themselves from electrons in their surroundings. Wolff has thereby shown us why this element of reproduction is so inherent to everything in our universe. He has also shown us why surroundings are so important. Thus, he has shown us the reason for Mach's principle. He's the very first person to give us a mathematical proof of Mach's principle as well. Also Dr. Wolff correctly reiterates, constantly throughout this book, that the electron is a scalar, standing wave, resonance that we see as a spherical waveform.

This is exactly the type of resonance universe that Schrödinger claimed we have.

There are even some more important "firsts" in Dr. Wolff's book as well.

We cannot see into the space-time realm (gauge) of the electron at all. However, we can learn its gauge rules. Quantum theory is built solely on our observances of tiny individual pieces of energy (quanta) that are either created or absorbed when balances in the electron's space-time realm have changed. This is all that realm (gauge) lets us see of it. From this, we know the electron "sees" itself far differently than we see what is happening in our space-time realm. The electron appears to "see" itself as both a wave type resonance and a sort of spherical spinning particle. Niels Bohr won the Nobel Prize for showing us how this particle aspect of it caused the various light colors. A bit later, Dirac showed us the spin fine structure of the electron.

Pardon my improper use of "see" for the electron but I believe it paints the best picture. We see both space and time in the electron's realm more highly compressed than our time and space. We see time and space in the quark's realm (another very different gauge) even more compressed than the electron's. Events in the microcosm happen much, much faster than events in our realm here; just as events in the macrocosm seem to happen slower than they do for us here on earth.

Niels Bohr won the Nobel Prize for seeing electrons as spinning, spherical particles on orbits. Better apply that concept again to see how this all works. I intend to use this concept, of Niels Bohr that gives the right answers, regardless of its diminution among my present peers. The modern movement away from the way Bohr saw it, is correct but if you move too far away from the orbiting, spinning particle that Bohr saw then you really lose sight of what's going on in a big way. You must understand that these things are acting as both particles and resonances depending on which gauge (space-time realm) you are looking from.

Niels Bohr showed us why we get colors but only for the monoatomic hydrogen and helium atoms; his method failed for the larger atoms. So his method is only an approximation but it did definitely point out to us why the colors were there. Ampere's Laws are an approximation too — until we get super computers that can work out the surroundings — but the important thing is that Ampere's concept retains the same basic rules in all the various gauges (space-time realms) of quantum theory whereas the rules we are now using in these various gauges do not. Ampere's Laws stay the same in all gauges as they do in our realm here. Thus Ampere's concept is showing you something for the first time just like Bohr showed.

Not only does Niels Bohr's concept show us why we have colors but the Bohr-Ampere concept together shows us what sigma and pi chemical bonding really are specifically: If we look at the electron the way Niels Bohr did then there is no mistaking the fact that a sigma bond is an equatorial bond that is always between a spin up and a spin down electron, which are spinning in the same equatorial plane.

As I read Wolff's book it was plain to see that Einstein was correct in 1954 when he 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."

Einstein was right: Physics cannot be based on the field principle alone! As Einstein correctly saw, the field is never a continuous structure: It's always a structure with absolute limits! You will clearly see this as we proceed. Ampere gave us a far better overall concept than the field but it was dismissed. Now we can see it should never have been because Ampere's concept is the approximation that Dirac predicted we would someday use to make this universe understandable. Ampere's concept should always be used as the overall set of rules that work in every limited bandwidth field in this — perhaps infinite — frequency universe of Schrödinger's.

In this Universe of Schrödinger's we see that any field will have bandwidth characteristics: it will have frequency parameters, which cannot be exceeded. You can only use the idea of a field if the frequency parameters are specified. Note: #11 in http://www.amperefitz.com/FitzUSR.htm #11. The more accuracy you want, the more you must narrow the range of frequencies involved. Also, the greater the frequency range you view, the less accuracy you will have (with present math). (Feynman taught us this one.) Quantum scientists know this one as the rule: "Before you quantize you must fix the gauge." http://www.amperefitz.com/quantize.htm

QED uses what is called the square of the amplitude. This correctly determines the spin up - spin down electron pairs that are in the correct position and lined up exactly right, having the correct impedance, to transfer energy, in a certain path, to and from certain points involved. Time is considered and so is space and also must be the fact that a very minute portion of the closest sides of both the emitting and receiving electrons involved, in a quantum energy transfer, will sense that they are both tangent to parallel lines and moving in the same direction at the same speed. What this tells us is that phase is critical. You'll see more about this a bit later.

To better understand this quantum of energy transfer, you should listen to the Feynman lectures. http://www.vega.org.uk/series/lectures/feynman/index.php

Then read this short part of Feynman's QED: http://www.rbduncan.com/feynm1.htm Notice how important this concept of motion is for unification! This makes a great deal of sense when you look at what Ampere found over a hundred years earlier.

I was reading the final chapter of Schrödinger's Universe where Milo Wolff asked, "What is the origin of space?"

There is no such thing as force in the tensor math of General Relativity. There is only more space, than average, where repulsive force exists between two objects. In addition, there is less space, than average, existing between two gravitational objects that have an attractive force between them. Saul Perlmutter has shown, as in GR, that if repulsive force is more space than average then we get Einstein's cosmological constant (exact opposite repulsive force of gravity) and gravity becomes a bi-polar force like all the other invisible forces.

This bi-polar aspect also exists in all the fundamental forces giving us our mistaken notion of having North or South poles for magnetism and + or - for charge. Mistaken notion? Yes! Two electrons, with the same spin on the same spin axis, magnetically attract because both spins are in phase and this polar attraction is strong because both entire electrons are spinning in phase with each other. Their entire spin frequencies are in phase. The equatorial side to side magnetic attraction of a spin up with a spin down electron is a weaker attraction — the same as the side to side attraction of two reversed pole magnets is a weaker attraction — because only the closest sides, of the electrons causing this magnetic phenomenon, are in phase. However, these magnetic binding strengths are reversed with sigma and pi chemical bondings because even though pi bonding — same spin, same spin axis, polar attraction — should be the more powerful bond it is not because it is a repetitious but periodic, polar positioning while a sigma bond — spin up with a spin down electron — is a steady equatorial bond over a much longer time period. Of course, this is viewing things as Nobel Laureate Niels Bohr saw them. Charge comes about because of similar circumstances of relative motion (phase relationship) too. All of our NATURAL LAWS stem from in phase and out of phase items with the surroundings giving an average out of phase conditioning. Therefore, force is simple: it's more space, than average, where repulsive force exists and less space, than average, where an attractive force exists, similar to GR.

Thus, the tensor math of GR shows you exactly what the origin of space is: It's telling us essentially that space and force are, in a way, equivalent. Isn't this a similar linking to mass and energy being equivalent in E=mc² ?

Space is nothing more than the "average force field" between surrounding entities while force is the same as in GR: force is the difference — either more or less — of this "average field" between certain separate entities. As we proceed, you will see that this concept of quanta is absolutely necessary to completely understand both space and force.

Einstein noted: "Gravity is a wave." Therefore, it has a certain frequency. This is the hidden secret of the origin of our NATURAL LAWS where each of the fundamental forces is in a different frequency band. Space also comes in different frequencies as well. This gives us four distinct, different gauges (frequency space-time realms). Now we not only see the reason for the gauge rules of quantum mechanics but we see it's somewhat similar to — a different frequency band acts as a different dimension — what the string theorists have been telling us.

Once you see this then you can solve the paradox of "action at a distance" where the past seemingly becomes involved both in obtaining light from distant stars and in the Feynman diagrams used in quantum mechanics.

Let's first start this tiny lesson by looking at an electron and its anti-particle the positron.

In this Schrödinger Universe, of frequency bands, the electron is entirely constructed from two distinct frequencies: its main scalar resonant frequency and its spin frequency. Fulbright Scholar Milo Wolff has mathematically proven these two distinct frequency resonances.

The positron also is built up of the same two: its main scalar frequency and its spin frequency.

But both the positron's main scalar and spin frequencies are 180 degrees out of phase with both the electron's main scalar and spin frequencies.

The people who have read my words on http://www.rbduncan.com/ and http://www.amperefitz.com know that you cannot even begin to understand this universe until you know exactly what space and time are. You must see the main scalar frequency of the electron as a clock that determines time. Then think of the spin frequency determining force and space. (It's the spin of the electron that causes the magnetic force.) Also, by reading, what you see in the above links, you will see what force the spin of the quark causes).

By reading what is in the above links you will also know what we see is an average time and space. Both time and space are really made up of numerous quanta bits, the same as energy. This concept of an average time and space, made up of numerous quanta bits of time and space, is extremely important in the correct understanding of both time and space. I'll explain this further as we proceed.

Let's view these electrons as Niels Bohr did, as spheres, even though we know they are a complicated Schrödinger type resonance.

Think of entire electrons as never being involved in light transfers. In fact, only very minute portions of the closest sides of the emitting and receiving electrons — one is spin up and the other spin down — are involved. And if these closest sides "see" themselves as moving at the same direction at the same frequency then they will also "see" themselves on the same Minkowski light cone. Thus, they will be able to transfer this quantum of light energy from one electron to the other.

Sigma chemical bonding is a proven fact. It must always be seen as a binding force between a spin up and a spin down electron whose very minute portions of their closest sides are going in the same direction. Light energy is also exchanged, exactly the same way, as a binding force: It's nothing more than a long distance sigma bond that ends up transferring a quantum of light energy. This transfer is between a spin up and a spin down electron where very minute portions of their closest sides are always going in the same direction.

One additional thing is very important and this is that energy only diminishes with the square of the distance when multiple numbers of electrons are involved. Why? Because it is these numbers involved, in the transfer, that fall off with the square of the distance. Between only two electrons, this quantum of sigma binding energy — a sigma bond — remains at the same strength out to the Hubble limit of distance. Now you see why a quantum of light energy does not diminish in intensity with distance: This is another quantum theory fact.

You see stars as being far away and their light as coming from the past. This is true and it is because the vast majority of the star's electrons are out of phase with your electrons. But that does not mean all of these very minute portions of the closest sides of those electrons are going to be out of phase with all the very minute portions of the closest sides of your electrons.

Quantum theory is trying to teach us all about this peculiar space-time setup, we are in, but we are slow learners.

It is of little importance if an electron on the distant star is in the past and the electron in your eye is in the present. What really matters is that they have opposite spins and that a very minute portion of the closest sides of the electron in your eye and the one on the star both "see" each other in the correct alignment. They also "see" their frequencies in the same phase sync so as to be on the same Minkowski light cone.

Only then can light energy be transmitted. See: Ampere's Laws

Observing it this way, as an in phase wormhole through various bits of average out of phase space quanta, you eliminate the necessity for aether, "action at a distance", time reversal and a lot of other nonsense.

However, you have to know exactly what space and time are to properly see this; thus knowing, that space is really the composition of space quanta bits, is extremely important! As Einstein said, "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one."

We are composed of electrons that are all resonating at a certain frequency. Believe it or not but we are nothing more than a good superheterodyne radio receiver and we think we see all this space and time that our ancestors have written all about for thousands of years. However, there are insurmountable problems with that old idea of space and time unless we see space and time are both caused, respectively, via phase differences in these spin and scalar frequencies.

The more out of phase the principle scalar frequencies of two electrons are, then the more time that exists between them.

Yes, the average time between an electron on that star and one in your eye are indeed very much out of phase — separated by much time — but not a very minute portion of the closest sides of the two, opposite spinning, light transferring electrons. These closest sides are exactly in phase with each other and "see" themselves existing at the same time and on the same Minkowski light cone.

Think of time and space as nothing more than both phase relationships in this scalar frequency and spin frequency universe of Schrödinger.

The closer the main scalar frequencies are, in phase, then the closer the items are to each other in time.

The same with spin frequencies: if no phase difference exists, between very minute portions of the spin frequencies of similar entities, then they are, in fact, in the same space.

As we deal with scalar resonances, they will give us a more exact concept of what space and time actually are. You can see why we must have the laws of relativity and why space and time must change with speed and/or mass.

Space and time are things that are constantly being produced by out of phase resonances. This is simply the way things are set up in this universe and this average space and time set up between everything remains basically the same. Nevertheless, a minor portion of it can be changed or you wouldn't have gravity or any other type force. So very small portions of it can be changed and are changed to give you the various forces. Only the mean or average setup remains the same. The tensor math of general relativity is virtual proof it works like this.

You can't remove the average space and time between everything. However, a tiny bit of space and time can be removed. Moreover, a tiny bit is removed, from a very minute portion of the closest sides of two electrons with opposite spins in the same equatorial spin plane. That's exactly why we have sigma bonding along with heat and light and the radio wave spectrum.

This is how sigma bonding is produced and how light and heat are transferred. You must think of each quantum of energy as Einstein's photon or a direct transfer between two electrons, whose very minute portions "see" themselves both in the same place at the same time. It's as simple as that.

We can no longer think of light, traveling from place to place, in a waveform. It does not travel, in a transverse manner, like water waves on top of water or, in a longitudinal way, as sound waves through air or even like high or low frequency electrical waves through wires. We know it is a quantum transfer. Scientists of the future, who will learn more about space and time than today's scientists know, will see each quantum transfer of light between electrons not as a wave but as Einstein's photon or a direct transfer.

These scalar, standing wave entities are actual waveforms. And light is a waveform while in your eye but please do not think of it as a wave while each quantum of light is being transferred through a vacuum. You must not see each quantum of light as a wave! You must see it as Einstein's photon or a direct transfer through the vacuum because it acts first as a sigma bond, which is a binding force. This long distance sigma bond between the two opposite spinning electrons is the vital element that effects the quantum energy transfer. In the future, it will be seen as a Schrödinger resonance reaction. So I guess Viv Pope is right, after all, about preaching this fact to us.

As this energy transfer of light, from a distant star in the past, comes to your eye, in the present, then something else important happens as well in this Universe of Schrödinger's. There is then a balance reaction in the total average phase shift of the electrons in that past to the total average phase of the scalar frequency, of all the electrons, in your present time.

Using sunlight, we are pulling enormous energy out of the past, although it's only a few minutes in the past. However, the universe balances this out as well with a simple average phase change.

The quark's frequencies are higher than the electron's. This gives it an entirely different frequency band or space-time realm (gauge) from the electron's. Our space-time realm — where h or Planck's Constant is our high frequency limit — is a lower harmonic frequency of the basic frequency of both the quark and electron. To see the big picture you absolutely must understand the quantum concept of gauges or space-time realms. Once you do see this Universe of Schrödinger's, then you can see the big picture and thus see how it all works.

Our NATURAL LAWS have gauge limits as well: Planck's Constant or h being our high frequency limit and the galaxies in the macrocosm being our low frequency limit because our gravitational laws cease working correctly in those galaxies: We see the spiral arms of spiral galaxies as going faster than their escape velocity and this is impossible.

Schrödinger's Universe shows us that Mach's principle (same frequency surroundings) is not only necessary for inertia, but gravity and all the other invisible forces as well. Add to this what Van Flandern Van Flandern is telling us about the speed of gravity: Then you see exactly what c² really is and why we must have the Principle of Equivalence or why both gravity and its exact opposite force, Einstein's cosmological constant, must also be seen by us as associated with the element of acceleration. I guess Saul Perlmutter Saul Perlmutter was the first to see this.

It's really simple when you see how it all works and when you do see exactly how it works then you'll also see this is a true Theory of Everything.

Is A. Garrett Lisi's mathematical Theory of Everything spherical model really a model of Dr. Milo Wolff's spherical, scalar, standing wave resonance?

Perhaps it is. Better check this link out: http://www.rbduncan.com/lisiimp.htm

Remember, this is a Schrödinger frequency Universe. We know the electron is affected by its lower orbital frequencies and the higher frequency quark nucleus. If these lower and higher harmonic frequencies also help determine that we see the electron as a spherical particle then we have reason to believe that we will also see A. Garrett Lisi's mathematical solution to unifying the 4 forces, of higher and lower frequencies, as a spherical model. And this is exactly what we do see indeed.

Here's a short FREE e-book for you that you'll love:

OUR AMAZING RESONANT UNIVERSE

(Click red link above for FREE e-book.)

What is so incredible about this was that in 1966, while trouble shooting in the avionics section of Pan American Airlines, I discovered the first important relative motion part of this and published it in 1966-1967. Fitzpatrick's First Book In the Sunday Book Review Section of the New York Times, of June 18, 1967 on page 29, there was a full page devoted only to my book. Thousands of those books were in most of the universities of America then too. I now know it's phase differences that make us see the relative motion aspect of it that I first noticed in 1966. I hereby thank all the scientists in all the universities for not latching on to this relative motion concept way back then and allowing me the 40 plus years that I needed to invalidate all the arguments against relative motion and completely work out this system, the universe uses, all on my own.

The absolute proof of this will come as soon as it is discovered that all binary stars of the same mass have opposite spins.

http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/276352

Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr.