Quantum-Relativity (qr),
The Last Tango of the Finite Graviton.
This page merely provides a very brief synopsis of my book of this name: ISBN-13: 978-1539399209 18th January 2017.
1) The Hunt for the Finite Graviton,
this is a graphical presentation of a thought experiment conducted by the author on the 26th April 2015.
A prequalification for following this thought experiment is a first class understanding of, and an intuitive ability to work with, Albert Einstein's 1915 General Theory of Relativity. You will find it easier to follow this material if you quickly skip to my tutorial sections linked throughout the page
Within the above mentioned thought experiment, we imagine our existing universe, but containing nothing but two observers and a single hydrogen atom. The travelling observer has zero angular momentum with respect to the atom and the reference observer maintains a balanced orbit of the atom. Neither observer has any spin with respect to the atom's centre. We imagine the travelling observer and our reference observer as each being of an infinitesimal mass, vastly smaller than a single hydrogen atom and containing no charge properties whatsoever. We can start at any range from the atom and allow the only gravity in the universe to accelerate the time-travelling observer towards the atom. As we approach close to the electron shell of the only matter in the universe, we observe a strange effect occurring within the shape of the space-time lying in the time-travelling observer's future. We can imagine circles of unit space or of unit time drawn into the space-time that the time-travelling observer is falling into. This imaginary space-time shape in his future space-time appears to the time-travelling observer to be like the inside a long straight high pressure gas transport pipe pointing downwards into an apparently bottomless pit (see the sketch above).
As our time-travelling observer passes through the only electron charge shell in the universe, nothing changes. The time-travelling observer falls on reaching a space-time scale that is about one part in 250 of the scale of the space-time that he started out at. At this fantastic gravitational space-time scale compression ratio he passes through the apparent charge face of the proton and once again, nothing changes. Soon we realise that he could free fall on accelerating back towards the event-horizon of time-zero for ever and nothing else will ever change for him with respect to his view ahead into his future on board our notional time travelling observer's reference platform, but that is the past history of our reference observer of course. The falling observer will always just see the same thing. Has the free falling observer's energy changed? Absolutely not, he still has the exact same total energy that he started out with. Has the time-travelling observer's local clock rate changed? No such change has occurred. However, from an observation taken from our reference observer's position, he appears to have exchanged almost his entire energy into the kinetic energy of the hopeless graviton free-fall. A signal from either the reference observer position or the time-travelling observer position would, from the each other's relativistic gravitational perspectives, become redshifted into almost utter oblivion.
A rather terrifying aspect of this thought experiment is that if we invert the time-travelling observer's gaze from down towards the graviton in his future and have him look up back the way that he came in from, back up towards the event-horizon of time-now where the reference observer is located, he is inverting his exponential view of his local space-time's relative apparent scale magnitudes. Therefore, his backwards facing view is identical to his forward facing view. From the time-travelling observer's current position deep in the infinite gravity hole, the event-horizon of time-now where everything real happens at the time surface of our universe, appears to the time-travelling observer, for all practical purposes, to be almost infinitely in his past-time.
A Strong and a Weak Nuclear Force? Really? How quaint!
The thought experiment shows that the reason that physicists think that there are three discrete forces in the universe is that they are bears of very little brain who have no ability with exponential arithmetic and are unable to appreciate Albert Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity. I mean none of this was rocket science. When I first heard about physicists thinking of these three manifestations of gravity as being separate and discrete forces I was only about 14 years old. I had been thinking of joining them but realised that I would just be joining a mad house of incompetent rascals. Why should I spend ten years being indoctrinated into material that I already knew was claptrap, before I would even be allowed to publish my own ideas? It would be like asking an infant sparrow to spend many years being taught how to fly by people who had no idea how to fly in the first place.
Dark energy? Really? How quaint!
Now, how is your confidence that the curved shape of the deep space red shifting that we see in our telescopes is caused by an imaginary dark energy accelerating force? The above thought experiment explains deep space red shifting curve as being caused by a macro-gravitational exponential deflation of the apparent prior space-time scale. The dark energy explanation clearly comes from bears of very little brain who had no ability to understand, or any intuitive ability to interpret Albert Einstein's rather-tough General Theory of Relativity. They used the Special Theory of Relativity to come up with the dark energy explanation, but the special theory is based upon the absurd notion that inertial mass consists of positive energy with respect to free space. The opposite is true. Einstein screwed up the polarity of the apparent relative kinetic energy with his otherwise quite good Special Theory, then got the General Theory correct but was then either too lazy or too incompetent to go back and correct the sign of the relative kinetic energy in the special theory. Kinetic energy is positive, but that is only because the energy in the matter is negative with respect to free-space, it is all lying within gravitational energy holes, but the special relativity effect is also negative. As two objects come into collision, the relativistic illusion of the other party’s mass dilation is forced to collapse.
If the proper explanation for deep space red shifting curve is a macro gravitational effect, and it definitely is, then everything that you have ever been told about or thought about cosmology was a load of utter nonsense, and it definitely was. The universe turns out to be a lot larger and older than their absurd notion that our own tiny little temporary planet has an age one third of the age of the universe. Oh, the planet is definitely about 4.6 billion years old, but the universe was not less than 10^70 years old before the event that caused the black-hole stars to form in the first place and all that was before any galaxy in the entire Cosmos had yet produced a single visible star.
Trust no silly stories, go and see it for yourself.
You see, at one point in her evolution, the universe did indeed blow up leaving the microwave relic in the Cosmic Microwave Background, but that was just a sort of temper tantrum, a little metamorphic phase that she needed to get through before she could move on and produce what you can now see in the sky at night. Well, in fact most people have never seen this. You will need to be out on a clear dark cold winter night with the dark of the Moon and at least 80 nautical miles from the nearest farm lights or ship navigation lights. You need the sun to be at least 60 degrees below the horizon. No silly little photograph or movie can do this any justice at all, you need to actually go and see it. Slow the yacht until the phosphorescence in the wake fades back to nothing and switch off every light on board by isolating the 12 volt and/or 24 volt master bus. If there are any back up instruments with batteries, you must force them into a hard power off condition so that they shine no more daft LEDs to blind you. Then while you are gazing at the fractal patterns of perhaps 100,000 stars, and dazzled by the Milky Way, you should play Elton John’s (I mean Bernie Taupin’s) “An Answer in the Sky” using your handy iPod.
2) The Hunt for the Black Hole Star,
this is a graphical presentation of the second thought experiment conducted by the author on the 26th April 2015.
Now, for the second thought experiment in this series of two. This is exactly like the first thought experiment but now we imagine our time-travelling observer as falling towards what others absurdly refer to as the event-horizon over a black hole super-star of say 50 million solar masses.
Relative to free-space, as the space-time gravitational deflation scale passes down through say 10^-18, we can clearly see that the so-called black-hole as just a very large star. What happens to actual proton plasma captured by this star by pole locking into its huge magnetic field? The protons or hadrons, or what ever you want to call them, impact massive particles within the star with more than enough energy to destroy both particles, leaving nothing but gamma photons in the wake of the hard collision. This energy is radiated off into the star's environment in the gamma band but by the time that the energy quanta depart the gravitational grip of the star, this energy has become deflated in apparent energy by the inevitable red shift factor of more than say 10^18 times into undetectably low energy levels (impossibly long wave lengths). The escape velocity of any black hole is certainly far less than the speed of light but by such a small margin (small only in the sense of our own absurdly myopic view of that) that we might imagine the star to be absent beneath an event horizon, it is obviously not absent and there is no event-horizon. The only aspects of the star that we can detect are the star's magnetic field caused by its vast toroidal spinning shape of proton plasma and the huge gravitational field.
3) Introducing qr-cosmology
Quantum-Relativity (qr) is a new subject within which we simply stop pretending that we do not know what time is and simply describe time as the recession into the past of anything that happened upon the event horizon of time-now. There are two kinds of cosmology, poppy cock cosmology and qr cosmology. With poppy cock cosmology we imagine instant creation v2.0. Within this poppy cock cosmology we start with nothing which then blows up into something and only 13.8 billion years later results in what we see now, including daffodils, the Moon and each other. Now, 13.8 billion years might seem like a very long time to you, but 13.8 billion years ago was just yesterday on any real cosmological time scale. It takes a very great amount of time for a galaxy to form. I found that I could model settlement into galactic form but it required about 10^80 years to happen. The other obvious problem with poppy cock cosmology is that it leaves no explanation for any star formation at all. Now I would have thought that to be a rather serious problem, but apparently people’s appetite for poppy cock seems to be insatiable.
In qr-cosmology we start with an infinite and utterly uniform 3d field of warm proton plasma that is about 50 times denser than we see in our limited field of view today. In qr-cosmology we do not speculate about the formation of the initial uniform field, we just say that it must have been there and leave it at that. You see, physicists have become over-obsessed with trying to understand how matter forms and have found that we can confirm our standard model of the atom by busting up hydrogen ions in the large hadron collider. There is only one problem, we can squeeze the toothpaste out of the tube and turn matter into gamma quanta that promptly depart the scene, hopefully before they tear someone's guts out. Well, could we ever put the toothpaste back in the tube by focussing gamma energy onto a target? The target would have to be a graviton and as I explained in part 1 of this article, no such object exists, the notional graviton turns out to be just the event-horizon of time-zero.
Well, they managed to reverse the polarity of matter into anti-matter, there is only one problem for them, they never knew what matter was in the first place. It is very possible that anti-matter is created within the galactic core blast and that some of the deep space intergalactic clouds are anti-matter. However, this is very unlikely to have been a stable situation as clouds of antimatter are highly attractive to matter and if ever there was a little anti-matter in the universe it never lasted long enough to make any difference.
Suppose that I knew nothing about how to make a perfect copy of a Ming Dynasty vase. At vast expense I buy up a great stock of these very rare vases. Then I think maybe I can learn how to make more by firing these vases at each other using a pair of catapults that I built. The governments are so impressed with me that they fund me to build a huge underground vase accelerator so that I can annihilate the vases more thoroughly and thereby discover the meaning of the universe. Now if this was an outline for a skit on Monty Python’s flying circus, it would be quite funny. The tragedy of this is that those twits in Geneva think that they are serious. CERN is a kind of magnet for the very types of people that I decided to avoid when I was 14 years old, people who think that one can learn anything by studding under professors who know in their hearts that they are incompetent rascals.
The First Stars in the Universe.
The vast black-hole gamma stars formed in the wake of the galactic core blast that was triggered by the passing intergalactic cross-fire wave, passing through any galaxy observable to us today about 295 billion years ago. The 13.8 billion year age quoted is nonsense, that is merely the exponential time-constant of the apparent exponential time-scale deflation and needs to be adjusted to 295 billion years in order to account for the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation being entangled with destroyed atoms that were lying within the path of the historic cross-fire wave and started life in free space as gamma quanta. The exponential deflation is merely an optical illusion caused by gravity on the whole universe macro scale. The cross-fire wave is probably still there, now passing out through almost 1.2 trillion light years in diameter.
Beyond this expanding sphere of cross firing lies the infinite universe of dark galaxies. We are close to the centre of the volume enclosed by the hollow globe of erupted galactic core bodies. The debris field left behind the cross-fire wave encloses a sphere containing about 50 times less matter density than within the infinite extent of the dark background mass in dark galactic form lying beyond the expanding sphere of cross-fire. The cross-fire apparent-wave-velocity is 1.i0/-1.i1, (that is one unit of space per unit of inverted imaginary historic depth). This is what you think of as c, but slightly less than that for any particles due to the finite nature of the cross-fire particle wave energy. The square of the gamma wave velocity is inverse one (-1).
One can think of the cross-fire wave as mainly consisting of gamma radiation but closely followed by a volume of proton plasma at very high energies moving out in a pair of symmetrical flat cones from each erupting galaxy core. The galactic core eruption is not strictly speaking a nuclear reaction, it is an annihilation reaction. With a hydrogen bomb or with a supernova, only a tiny fraction of the energy in the matter is released, in the galactic core blast almost all of the energy in the matter is released. Only hyper-cold (ca. 10^-18K) superconductive disks of dark matter in stable prograde galactic orbit survive the core blast to form the precursor cold-disk bodies of all the future bright stars, including new star formations that we still see occurring within our local galaxy today. The disks of dark matter are merely pure hydrogen condensate, these disks have a thickness to diameter aspect ratio of the order of say 10^16 because their temperature is about say 10^-18 Kelvin. The disk surface is superconductive forming a super-mirror that can effortlessly reflect a blast of gamma band energy. The disk has a vast positive charge and so also shrugs off minor bombardment by high energy hydrogen ions, however they are blown into smithereens where they lie in the way of the major ion blast.
The vast majority of the primordial galaxy mass is concentrated in the centre where the dark matter disks have collided with each other and formed into a cool central superstar of pure ionised hydrogen. This cool superstar is kind of stable and safe but rather useless. What happens to the superstar or galaxy core if any part of it gets raised to the kind of energies used in our LHC? You got it straight away, should that ever happen then the entire galaxy core would blow up in a great orgy of self annihilation. The superstar in the primordial galaxy centre has a vast positive charge and spins quite fast, it will have been toroidal rather than a sphere. This leads to, you guessed it, a huge magnetic field normal to the galactic plane. There is only one problem, the rest of the galaxy is rather disorganised and only contains dark disks that have stable non interfering galactic orbits with many way off the core galactic plane. There is also a vast array of minor clouds of warm hydrogen ions left over where there have been collisions outside the central core. All of this rubbish just has to go, and go it does. The minor clouds are often large enough to form their own black holes. Minor eruptions happen asynchronously to the main blast. It would be fun stuff to watch, should one be happy with a life expectancy of a few nanoseconds.
The black hole gamma stars form from a relatively small proportion of the energy in the galactic core eruption that fuses up and gets pumped up into the Polonium 218 condition and heavier. These heavy particles have insufficient energy and fail to escape the galaxy. They also have very low galactic angular momentum and so they are doomed to fall back into the galaxy core and collapse. As they collapse they become torn into shreds of proton plasma by their own tidal forces. The black holes are dustbins, clearing the galaxy of unwanted clouds of proton plasma while rejecting by inertial separation, any precious heavy atoms that have formed within the galaxy so far. Most of the heavy atoms in the galaxy are just atoms formed in the core blast that achieved a very high galactic orbit and took far longer to fall back into the galaxy core and arrived back to have their high perigee velocity turned into a new orbit on the galactic plane as they are rejected by the black hole magnetic field inertial separator. So while supernova eruptions are important in explaining the presence of asteroid material (tiny lumps of broken-up former planets etc.) they are either irrelevant or much less important in explaining the formation of heavy atoms within the galaxy. An individual galactic core blast is of the order of about 10^120 times larger than a modern supernova.
Pick anything at the high end of the periodic table and think of those atoms forming in the galactic core eruption and being blasted off into high galactic orbit with a huge diverse range of orbital energies. So the galaxy can retain atoms of any mass, it is just that heavy atoms with lower end orbital energy formed the black hole. Once the black hole is working, the gate slams shut, only hydrogen ions can get into the black hole after the magnetic gate slams shut. Nearly all the hydrogen in the core blast does escape the galaxy; where on earth did anybody else ever think that the vast intergalactic clouds came from?
There is absolutely nothing about our universe that is not at the very least 10^1,000 times larger than the utter nonsense proposed by our absurd so-called cosmologists today. These incredible people try to tell us that the whole universe is only three times older than our own very temporary little planet. This is just human hubris on an almost unimaginable scale of self-aggrandisement. We are all no doubt very important to our Universe, but we should try to avoid imagining that we can understand why by falsely explaining matters that lie almost infinitely beyond our pay grade.
How many are aware that astrophysicists have failed to explain any new star formation at all? Well, they are of course handicapped by an insane, nonsensical and false cosmological model. Despite 65 years of trying very hard using the most powerful supercomputers possible, they find that they are no nearer to explaining star formation than they were in 1799 when Laplace told them to ditch the Nebula Hypothesis because it quite simply does not work. Therefore, we are not dealing with the sharpest knives in the drawer here. What point was there in my publication of “Mass Compaction Mechanics” in 2015? I guess we are dealing here with people who have never read a book in their entire lives and so never learnt that Laplace advised them to drop the Nebula Hypothesis in a book he published in 1799. So, in fact I was wasting my time, even though actually writing that book (“Mass Compaction Mechanics”) ten years ago was a whole lot of fun. It only took me two weeks to type it out, but those two weeks were "the ride of my life", equalled only by the exquisite fun of seeing the birth of my four sons.
4) How did things go bump in the night.
As the universe achieved the cross-fire wave "ignition-sequence-fertile" condition by about 600 billion years ago, it would have had an age at that time of about 10^80 years. That period is to be thought of as the initial conditions settling period. Initial ignition was achieved by a single inter-galactic core mass hard impact. The initial ignition happened quite close to our galaxy, so the cross-fire wave took 295 billion years to get to where we see it now, and of course another 295 billion years to travel back for us to examine as the microwave relic today. Is the whole universe just one of those random things or was all this the original design intention? In my opinion, when the infinitely improbable keeps on happening, for example, the very presence of apparently salient cosmologists today, then we all need another theory for the probabilities.
One can only explain the presence of the Moon and 41 other major and generic unexplained enigmas in the solar system if one is willing to consider the infinitely improbable. The infinitely improbable explanation for the solar system is that a small black hole gamma star of about 10,000 solar masses struck the primordial star body while the gamma star’s vast magnetic field was pointing at the Mercury tidal rupture debris field. The gamma star is forced by the conservation of linear momentum to eject compensation mass, leaving us after a settling period, with a very pure stable low rotation rate Sun. This would have happened about 700 million years ago explaining the age of the crust of Venus, never mind the Cambrian explosion, never mind the Polonium 218 halos that formed within ancient crystals within the Mercury tidal rupture debris field, never mind instantly solving all the 40 other absolute enigmas.
My last 152 word paragraph is a stupendously abbreviated summary of my 85,000 word discussion pamphlet, ”Cracking the Hardest Puzzle in the Galaxy” 2013, now only available through the five UK statutory book depositories, though the author does still retain a few hard cover copies, the source files have been lost and I am not going to write that book again. If I did, it would change a great deal from what I had 12 years ago, so I would never need to refer to my original discussion pamphlet.
Background photo; an hypnotically distorted view of "the Great Jewels of the Pleiades".
At this trivial magnification, all distant stars should actually be represented by single pixels of light. The absurd astrophysical crowd is always desperate for more funding, as if their work had any value. Leaving this natural feature of the CCD to portray the stars as if they were thousands of times nearer than they actually are, is a deliberate ploy to try and maintain public interest in a subject of which they are in fact sublimely ignorant. For example; despite 60 years of trying very hard with powerful supercomputers, they are no nearer to explaining how any star forms in the first place than they were in 1730. Despite my publication of "Mass Compaction Mechanics" in 2015, nobody was interested. Nobody actually wants to know because not knowing is far more profitable for them than the actual boring routine facts of the matter.
