Foreword

There is nine parts of this, and I have restructured the text a little bit, but it's mostly verbatim from the original post here

As you can also find in this article, and as you read through this series of 9 articles, I started to develop the concept of the electron fog as being the force-mediating mechanism for the convergence that we call gravity, this comes in later articles. The date and time at the top of the article was when I started doing each write-up.

2016-04-07.21:35

I tried to describe the two primary Principles of my physics model, but after filling a page with writing I decided the picture in the photo was the important thing, the words are better here on my phone.

Division is the original Principle that I discovered back in about October 1999. What led to it was the premise that the universe is a three dimensional field of at any moment, finite size, but like the two dimensional surface of a sphere, or the circumference (ie, the edge) it is unbounded.

My initial concept was that if any given arbitrary axis of the field is a circle, so if you want to know why two objects Converge, ie Gravity, you must consider the complementary part being the longer axis, since two points on a circle split the circle in two, and except for the exact middle, one is longer than the other.

Thus the question arose, what if gravity is the product of pressure from the longer part of the common axis defined by their centers of gravity? A pressure differential that created a net sum of the complementary Principle, Convergence.

Convergence has its basis in the primary structure of matter. So I must first explain how it works. First concept is that space is composed of a disorderly primary particle, composed of a surface combined of three strings from each of the cardinal axes. On a spherical surface a position comes from the intersection of two vectors, in our 3d universe, three.

In order to consider what in a 3 dimensional hypersphere, folded in a circle, the unit of space that is primary is not a cube, but a tetrahedron. The position is an integral particle, with a boundary, and the extent of the boundary is an interstitual complement, the packing matrix is as a stack of spheres, and is therefore tetrahedral, and each particle is surrounded by 12 others.

Same as the cell division sequence, 1, 2, 4, 8, etc, powers of two.

Now, I always do my best thinking as I write, and with the exception of proofing I can never stand to re edit. But as I attempt to explain the model of spacetime, I every so often notice an aspect that I missed before. This time the question is packing matrices. It is simpler to just consider each cardinal axis individually. Dividing a circle in two, and then again, and again, is simple to visualise. Even a sphere surface is simple enough, but then after a three iterations you have equilateral triangles. Then translate this to a looped volume, a hypersphere, if you can imagine it.

If you picture such a field, and assuming you can see beyond the return of the axis to your own position, you will be looking at your back, looking at your back, etc. The matrix inherently forms a six axis symmetry. There is thus 12 cardinal vectors inherent in the geometry of a finite but unbounded volume. Thus the most fundamental geometry of spacetime is tetrahedral.

This is important because to be a matrix worthy of the name it must be stable over time. Thus if it is dividing evenly it must split from one into five identical tetrahedral subunits. This is the only way to divide a tetrahedron into parts where each new part has the same geometry as the original.

So in this realisation right away I must discard the pattern of simple power of two geometric division. If we start from the premise that spacetime is composed of a primary particle lacking mass or inertia, then each cycle of division each particle splits into five. This is a variant of the three dimensional cognate of the Sierpinsky Gasket, which divides into four. The variation is that each subunit also divides creating a constant geometric matrix. Immediately then I have to consider what is the ratio of volumes to surface of spheres packed thusly. What is the volume to surface ratio transition between each cycle?

This is where I am led back to the paper where I can solve the algebra defined by this question. I will be doing that shortly, but first I want to add a new concept.

The matrix is not perfectly symmetrical. We know this must be true because there is an inherent stochastic perturbation, this is the central Principle of Quantum Physics.

Along each of the four axes of this division process something makes it twist. This twist is not equal along each axis or again we wind up with a non perturbed model which cannot be describing our universe. The packing matrix therefore must be irregular, possessing twist, and this twist itself must be both fractal and irregular.

In three dimensions there is a minimum and sufficient three axes of rotation. What is the rule that governs this division of rotation? How do the 5 resultant new smaller units twist.

You might think it is a bit peculiar to describe the universe as a tetrahedral matrix, but it is inherent in the geometry derived from the first premise a finite but unbounded field composed of dividing units to create the complementary pressure that I described in the beginning of this article, the question, what if gravity is somehow caused by pressure?

This is a question that I will have to work on further. I had the idea that this was from a stochastic sequence the first and most famous being Fibonacci, which has a never repeating ratio between any two adjacent elements. It averages to the golden mean, but it never is exactly the golden mean.

Perhaps before I go too far into that, I will explain the model of particles in this endlessly dividing, or to us, ever expanding space matrix around us as I see it.

As implied by this new developent of division into 5, the central unit remains in one place. The four that split off, in a stable particle, are rotating in 1, 2 or 3 axes. If a particle has only 1, it is a radiative particle, electron or photon. If it has two, it is a proton, if it has three, it is a neutron. These are fundamental particles. I know there is supposedly smaller parts, called quarks, but these are the vectors of rotation in fact. They exist alone only very momentarily and collapse. They cannot exist except in combination in a stable arrangement.

I am suggesting that they are these three axes of rotation I just described. Three axes, two directions, gives you a fundamental 2^3 possible subtypes therefore, and this is exactly what my model implies. It is easiest to see how it could be modeled, a tic tac toe grid in the centre is zero, and each other is a rotation vector in the four axes of the four surfaces of the tetrahedron.

Since obviously you cannot destroy either an electron/photon or a neutron, these quarks are the rotational axis of protons. Two axes of rotation can be divided and will produce four quarks when you accelerate two atoms to near lightspeed, causing them to come closer to each other than their haromonic ratios permit, and the division axes are muddled and they then collapse.

This is not remarkable and in my opinion a collossal waste of time without a purpose to do so. Fusion research is a bit more useful, but it is so elusive because what they are trying to do is break the protons and release the electrons only. What usually happens is instead you get masses of photons, amongst which are infrared, which generates so much heat it destroys the containment device.

The words I would use to describe these two paragons of modern mainstream science energy research is crude, primitive and ignorant. They are trying to simply smash atoms apart. Like rape versus seduction. Charming those electrons would be a lot more productive. But this would require understanding how they work, and how they are bound to the atomic nucleus so firmly.

So, back to my model, each particle is a rotating, tetrahedral string of waves spiralling out from a center point. The moments of each vector of rotation is like the notes in a musical scale. These spiralling threads cannot be crossed without causing space to appear between them due to this paired opposition and the constant mostly neutral, average zero entropic spacetime particles.

Were there no mechanism for the particles to constantly seek toward each other they would fly apart at the speed of light. What happens is that these clusters of primary particles act like a pump or valve, and direct the stream of entropic space particles away from the intervening space between the centers, constantly moving back together as space pushes constantly outward.

In molecules and in other aggregating simple structures like metals, these geometries are sustained at a constant, within a margin that is, and the geometry appears to us as stable, and this is what we call the solid phase of matter.

When the association is more loose, and moves, but the geometry has a series of arrangements where between molecules there is the ability to form a net, you get the liquid phase. Water is the strongest because the same ratios exist between its component atoms as between molecules along three axes via hydrogen bonding. In principle all liquids have some analog of the hydrogen bond, in metals this bond is multi-directional allowing such high melting and boiling points.

Between these stable structures formed by proton/neutrons and the dance of orbiting electrons, photons also dance. When we sat a substance absorbs an electron, what this means is that it is harmonious with the geometry of the matter, and remains mostly in an orbit around it. By disturbing the matter we can make it release photons or electrons.

Electrons are highly harmonious with protons and neutrons, and as well as the task of redistributing the expanding space constantly away from the particular stable geometry. The last matter phase to mention is gas, which cannot form a two dimensional net. Solids are a three dimensional grid like a matrix, liquids are two dimensional and fold easily, anf gases do not form a matrix but bounce around like a myriad of balls within a shaken container, in space form a soft edged sphere.

This is why there are three basic phases of matter. What scientists call temperature is in fact the density of infrared photons dancing around the atoms. Each different type of atom and molecule has a geometry of potential associative bonds that are weaker in the presence of infrared than the ones between molecules in a constant three dimensional structure.

A block of metal is essentially a single molecule, indeed all solids are a single molecule, although in non-metals part of the bonding structure is hydrogen-type bonding. Infrared density dictates in a given situation how much of these bonds are stable and once most units of a coherent blob of matter only have single and a few triple axes of intermolecular or interatomic bonding, they become liquid, when they have one or less, they become a gas.

---

We can't stop here! This is Whale country!