A Unified Field Theory
Experimental Verification of the Unified Field Theory
Beginning around April of 2010, in a few weeks time as I am writing this (mid March 2010) the Large Hadron Collider will be powered up to fifty percent power (which is double its present energy output). For reasons which will be explained in the following discussion, this event will prove to be very important for it provides the opportunity to test the predictions of the Unified Field Theory (the theory predicts various malfunctions of this device, which when verified would lead directly to a new green energy source and a new clean mode of propulsion to replace the aging and quite dirty Newtonian technology being employed today). Up to the present time the LHC has experienced malfunctions consistent with the predictions of the Unified Field Theory and we can expect these malfunctions to increase in magnitude as the device is powered up to 50 percent power in April of 2010 and then runs at one hundred percent power in 2012.
The following is a continuation of a discussion summarized briefly on the following page:
Experimental Test of the Unified Field Theory
Description of a simple experiment to test the Unified Field Theory
The Large Hadron Collider
The Large Hadron Collider is a 27 kilometer magnetic doughnut ring located in a tunnel excavated under the Alps mountain range in Europe (the device must be shielded by a a thick layer of rock to prevent high energy ‘cosmic rays' (high velocity particles of matter) contaminating the results of particle detection experiments).
The device uses hundreds of super cooled super conducting magnets to accelerate ionized gas particles to super high velocities before steering the speeding gas particles into a head on collision inside a series of special detectors (symbolically represented by the yellow ovals in the diagram above). ‘Masses of matter' are made of little tiny jigsaw puzzle pieces held together with a kind of ‘energy super glue' and the result of these violent collisions is to bust the atomic nuclei (ions, which consist of just the nucleus of the atoms) into tiny busted apart fragments of ‘mass' and small bits of quanta of energy (the ‘super glue' which always appears as fragments of a certain ‘size', a phenomenon referred to as the ‘quantization of energy', an effect which was first predicted by Albert Einstein and for which Einstein then won the Nobel Prize in physics). Both the particles of energy and the particles of ‘matter' can then be measured and analyzed by the detectors. This then gives researchers information on the composition of atoms (which are in turn made up even tinier bits and pieces, with the purpose of these violent collisions being to bust apart the super glue holding those bits together, making both the super glue and the tiny jig saw puzzle pieces of ‘matter' available for analysis).
In the earliest days of particle physics photographic emulsions were used on mountaintops to register the ‘streaks' and ‘trails' left by the only accelerated particles available for research in those days, which were called ‘cosmic rays' (accelerated particles from space). Today sophisticated detectors are used to gather data sets which are then analyzed and turned into graphic images by computers (the images look like a splatter pattern composed of the trails of all the bits and chunks and fragments flying off from the center of the explosive impact).
The LHC is the most powerful (and most expensive) device ever constructed by our sciences. Currently (mid-March, 2010) it is only running at one quarter power (about three and half trillion electron volts of collision energy), and already it has set new world records for the energy it generates. The device will be powered up to half of its total potential energy sometime later this month (end of March 2010) and will then be generating collision energies of close to seven trillion electron volts. It will then be operated a full power (14 trillion electron volts) sometime in 2012 or 2013 after being shut down for upgrades towards the end of 2011.
Introduction to the Unified Field Theory
For the purpose of the following analysis we define the ‘Unified Field Theory' as being a method of problem solving based upon the assumption that the universe is composed of an energy field and that all manifestations of this field are chameleon like manifestations of this one field, even when it might at first appear that they are not. We assume that the fundamental properties and characteristics that govern this energy field and determine its behavior, including its chameleon like shape shifting manifestations, all remain consistent and predictable no matter what form the energy field might take. This is similar to saying that it is always the same energy field and therefore its fundamental defining properties and characteristics never change. Therefore we expect consistency from the energy field to be exhibited by all observable phenomena, and so therefore a Unified Field Theory must reject any interpretation of the evidence that is inconsistent with this assumption of field consistency.
The task of a theoretical physicist is to generate a theory which is internally consistent, and the theory produced can then be used to generate predictions which can then be either verified or repudiated by means of experiment (it is therefore the task of the theorist to also generate descriptions of such experiments, for without experimental proposals such a theory would not qualify as a ‘scientific theory' but could instead be justifiably dismissed as speculation).
One criticism of the Unified Field Theory approach that you will often here is that it is based upon an ‘a priori assumption' that the field is a Unified Field, and maybe it is not, so therefore why bother. Of course this is correct for no Unified Field Theory would be a Unified Field Theory without such an ‘a priori asumption'. It is the task of the theorist who adopts this assumption to ensure that theory is internally consistent. It is the task of the experiment to justify or repudiate the Unified Field approach (this is not a philosophical debate).
Why the Unified Field Theory?
The purpose of this Unified Field Theory is to lay the theoretical foundations for a new clean and green technological revolution, focusing on the problems of new forms of propulsion and new forms of energy generation. These two problems are actually one and the same problem for ‘momentum' (motion) is the source of ‘energy generation' (think of the Hoover dam which generates ‘electrical current' or the wind turbine generator as examples of this principle). Therefore to solve the propulsion problem is to solve the energy generation problem, and vice versa. A new solution to these problems then leads to a new form of technology based upon these new principles which will be quite different from what we are accustomed to at present. Thus the Unified Field Theory is not some ivory tower parlor game but has real impacts on the everyday life of everyone. Nothing will ever be quite the same again, is one way to put it, and the world will change in ways people did not imagine before the time came for the Unified Field Theory to be put into practical everyday use.
Our technology has not fundamentally changed in centuries (your automobile is the direct descendant of some old steam engine first created centuries ago). These older ‘Newtonian' technologies are based heavily upon burning being employed to generate the energy of motion while at the same time generating toxic waste products (a physical approach to an energy problem which would be more suitably addressed by an ‘energy field' solution, skipping the redundant ‘physical physics', the older idea here being that first you rub two sticks together to burn something up and then use billions of small gaseous mallets to beat and pound on something or another, such as the internal guts of rockets or pistons, so as to generate these equal and opposite actions and reactions and so forth, and in this round about ‘physical way' you generate the energy required by a technological civilization).
The big drawbacks of this Newtonian technology is that it is filthy and produces all sorts of toxic waste products and even in its ‘green' forms (hydroelectric dams or pounding windmills with little equal and opposite wind particle mallets, and so on) it is only ‘green energy' if you are not a salmon or a bird (these forms of physical physics mallet based ‘green energy solutions' being ‘green' only in that they do not involve rubbing two sticks together to set something on fire thus producing carbon dioxide and particulate soot).
The Laws of Physics
According to the Unified Field Theory approach, the worst enemy of human progress and the worst enemy of science known as physics are the so called ‘laws of physics'. You see, we cannot have the Unified Field Theory because it violates the so called ‘laws' of this ‘classical physics'. Such ‘laws' were formed during the Fred Flintstone era of physics and the evidence already suggests that these laws are not laws at all, but better classified as ignorant error. That such repudiated laws still remain on the books of our science of physics is a curious development, and for this reason we have a growing catalogue of ‘unsolved mysteries of science' (so many of which involve momentum in some form of another). Not only are these ‘laws' being violated in each case of one of these ‘mysteries' but it turns out that the laws themselves are totally inconsistent with the fundamental assumption of the Unified Field Theory, which is that the field is one field and that its properties and characteristics remain the same no matter what form the chameleon might assume. Therefore a consistent Unified Field Theorist is required to reject one so called ‘law of physics' after another, in order to formulate a consistent theory, and it turns out that the theory only generates useful experiments when this approach is ruthlessly applied to dispose of any inconsistent prehistoric law. The fact these laws are already being violated and have been repudiated in each case of one of these scientific mysteries gives a theorist increased confidence when it comes to disposing of classical physics and its erroneous laws, for the universe disposes of those laws as well, and so therefore we can already make the ‘a priori assumption' that the laws of classical physics are no laws at all, and so therefore becoming an alleged law breaker is not a crime after all.
The Unified Field Theory for the Layperson
However, because it is required that a Unified Field Theorist ‘break the laws of physics' I have long ago decided to go over the heads of the scientific establishment and employ the tactic of explaining the Unified Field Theory to the average person. In this way in order to avoid further poisoning of the well with my nonsense, and eliminate possible problems in getting John Q. Taxpayer to continue to supply funds for the kinds of ‘pure research' no big multinational corporation will fund, it will become necessary for our scientists to conduct the experiments required to rule out the Unified Field Theory once and for all, if for no other reason than to get rid of me once and for all. This modus operandi is quite acceptable to me, for I am an abstract theoretical physicist who requires experimental validation or repudiation of my theory, so we can all be assured that at least when we reject the approach of the Unified Field Theory we are all heading in the right direction. I would like to be convinced of that as well, if it turned out to be true, so that I don't need to be wasting my time pursuing a feral canard.
The Large Hadron Collider: An Experiment in Unified Field Physics
Lately I have revised my approach somewhat, since there are certain experiments that will be conducted without any pressure being applied by yours truly, for it turns out that if the particle physics community just goes about business as usual, the Unified Field Theory will be tested at the same time. This is convenient for the types of experiments that are required to test the assumptions of the Unified Field Theory would cost billions and billions of dollars in order to generate the enormous energy levels required for experiments in Unified Field Physics, and so therefore it is good that such billions have already been spent. This means that there is no necessity to become Don Quixote lobbying for billions for experiments that violate the laws of physics, and therefore would be a big waste of money. Fortunately I no longer need concern myself with that whole business of tilting against wind mills for the Large Hadron Collider experiment is already underway.
All manifestations of the energy field include both a ‘centripetal' (pulling) force and a ‘centrifugal' (pushing) force, with the one anomalous field being that ‘gravity field', which, we are told is a one way attractive mass of matter force field which can therefore generate only ‘centripetal' (attractive) forces (which means then that in this ‘gravity' field things can only fall down and can never, ever fall up, which would be ridiculous especially given that you never see such things, no, never, not ever). If this was true then we must give up on a Unified Field Theory, for the fundamental assumption of equality of field properties has been violated. At the very least we must give up on this version of the Unified Field Theory, for it is based upon the a priori assumption of field equivalence, no matter what form the chameleon might assume, and so if there was to be some other Unified Field Theory it would have to assume an as yet unknown theoretical form (all the other forces exhibit this field equality except for that gravity which does not, for some reason).
Now we do see things falling up in a gravity field. Objects that ‘gain momentum', such as rockets, go up and not down, since apparently when you have ‘gained momentum' that is, for all practical purposes, equivalent to ‘anti-gravity'.
When we speak of ‘momentum' we are describing an energy state and when speak of ‘gaining momentum' we are alluding to an energy field where stored momentum energy is either gained or lost. We can think of the universe as consisting of energy in two forms, the first being the ‘mass field' (matter) and the second being liberated or ‘free energy'. We know that it is possible to go back and forth between these two states (‘free energy' in the form of high energy gamma wavelengths, can be employed to form two masses of matter, an electron-positron pair (matter and anti-matter) which if then recombined destroy each other to produce once again high energy gamma wavelengths of free energy. Momentum is in the form of this ‘free energy' which has the ability to loosely bind itself to a mass field (to matter) in which case we say that the mass field has ‘gained momentum' (which is a description of the increase in density of this loosely bound free energy). To ‘lose momentum' is to have this matter field shed free energy (for the free energy differs from the matter field in that the free energy is mobile while the mass field remains fixed unless matter encounters anti-matter or fusion occurs between two masses in a high energy environment).
When energy is in the ‘matter form' the mediating field is referred to as ‘the gravity field' and when energy is in the free state (it has mobility) the mediating field is referred to as ‘the electromagnetic field.' Now given that ‘gaining momentum' (free energy attached to a matter field) produces results equivalent to ‘anti-gravity' (objects move up instead of falling down) it therefore just logically follows from this that binding a propulsive device in a very powerful electromagnetic field would be equivalent to ‘gaining momentum' which means that such a device would rise in the field.
Above is a screen capture of an experiment which involved placing a frog within an extremely powerful electromagnetic field which then produced a result exactly equivalent to creating a pocket of ‘zero-G'. The frog is floating, as though the frog was on the space station or with the astronauts in a space capsule on the way to the moon.
You may be interested in watching the You-tube video of what I am calling the ‘zero-G' frog experiment. You can watch the video by clicking the following link. Floating Frog
Now there are those who call this the ‘maglev frog' and therefore, they insist that what we see here is not a genuine zero-G frog but a clever simulation of a zero-G frog. Apparently the simulation of zero-G requires the employment of electromagnetism and given that there is no ‘Unified Field Theory' and gravity is therefore a special force field all to itself, this is not a real zero-G frog, but rather a simulated zero-G frog.
The perspective of the Unified Field Theory offers the following analysis. For some reason having to do with human psychology, the so called ‘laws of physics' are able to withstand any and all contrary evidence. Either the anomaly which refutes these laws will be parked on a shelf labeled ‘unsolved mysteries' (the assumption being that it will someday be solved, which then allows us to continue to use those faulty laws in the meantim) or some excuse will be manufactured that will refute the visible evidence and salvage the erroneous law. For this reason the human race was able to manufacture a zero-G frog and not even realize that it was a zero-G frog (for their laws demanded that this be a ‘maglev frog' and so therefore it became a maglev frog, which was a good result, because it meant that such a frog would not have to be included as one more entry on the list of unsolved mysteries).
If the assumption of the Unified Field Theory is correct then it must be true that ‘gaining momentum' is equivalent to ‘a stronger electromagnetic field' and just as it was possible to nullify gravity with a powerful electromagnetic field, it would also be possible to create ‘gravitational repulsion' or ‘anti-gravity' by employing a sufficiently powerful electromagnetic field (such a field, being the manifest mediating field of free energy, would mimic the effects of ‘gained momentum').
We can test this theoretical prediction using the Large Hadron Collider as our tool (the device generates the most powerful electromagnetic field ever created by our science).
According to the theoretical predictions of the Unified Field Theory, the Large Hadron Collider has become the model for a new form of propulsion (an ‘anti-gravity device'). The powerful magnetic field has become so strong that it is generating a repulsive force which pushes up on the collider (in effect the magnetic coils are attempting to achieve a higher orbital state by lifting off from the ground).
Shortly after the device was first powered up in 2008, it suffered a catastrophic accident. You can see clear evidence for upward momentum which damaged about one hundred magnets in the device by ripping out the floor bolts.
In the image above we represent the interpretation of the Unified Field Theory as applied to this catastrophic accident. The upward (centrifugal) force generated by this gained momentum (encapsulated in the electromagnetic field itself) was so powerful it was capable of ripping out the floor bolts. The machine was shut down for a year for repairs, and one of the repairs done was to install more bolts to secure the magnets to the floor plating.
In March, 2010, the collider again suffered another glitch, when the heat sensors were triggered and caused a quench of the magnets. The collider must be cooled to less than 2 degrees above absolute zero in order to become ‘super conductors' and if the temperature were to rise to even 8 or 9 degrees above absolute zero the super conducting field would collapse resulting in the catastrophic destruction of the device as the magnets were unable to deal with the super conductive energy charge and melted into hot slag. The problem was blamed on faulty filters in the cyrogenic cooling system combined with an easily panic stricken computer algorithm which was adjusted upwards so as to avoid a hair trigger response in the future.
Therefore this leads us to propose a simple and very inexpensive test of the predictions of the Unified Field Theory. According to this theory, mechanical stress on the bolts in the floor plating produces heat and so therefore the installation of simple temperature probes on the bolts and the surrounding floor plating would be a sufficient stress test to determine whether or not a powerful electromagnetic field is equivalent to ‘gaining momentum'. At the beginning of April, 2010, the machine energy will be increased from 25 percent to 50 percent, at which time the stress should increase (due to an increase in this gain of momentum) with the result being increase production of anomalous heating and another detectable rise in temperature within the device as the length of operating time increases, with a good probability that the machine may only be able to function for a certain number of hours before being manually ‘quenched' (the energy in the magnets is dumped) to allow the bolts and floor plating to cool.
You can see clearly that this Unified Field Theory qualifies as a scientific theory, for it generates testable predictions, and it is not mere speculation for the predictions can be either verified or refuted by means of experimentation (no stress in the floor bolts, no heat production, no Unified Field Theory).
An Introduction to Unified Field Physics
The analysis employing the methods of the Unified Field Theory (and its fundamental assumption of field equivalence in the expression of fundamental properties) suggests that the Large Hadron Collider is both proof in principle of a new form of propulsion and the anomalous heat generated by the mechanical stress on the device also indicates that the Large Hadron Collider is also a primitive prototype for a totally new form of energy generation (based upon direct transfer of momentum energy from field to field without the need for the redundant intervention of some matter based mallet pounding technique).
In order to make Unified Field Physics more comprehensible to the average person a brief discussion of some relevant topics follows.
When NASA shoots rockets out into space, the rocket engines are only turned on during the launch phase. Once the rocket is out in space and is on its way to the moon, or to some other planet, the rocket engines are turned off, and the rocket just continues to coast along all the way to Jupiter or the moon, because, we are told, the rocket now has ‘conserved momentum', which means that you don't need rocket engines anymore, because the rocket will just keep on gliding through space.
The Encyclopedia Britannica has an a very brief entry on the subject of ‘conserved momentum', and the reason why the entry is so brief is that our sciences do not really have much to say about ‘conserved momentum', and so therefore a few short paragraphs will do. We are told that we know that there is a conserved momentum, for that stunt of turning off rocket engines and leaving rockets to coast through that space-time with engines off has worked so many times, that we can say with complete confidence that we have some of that ‘conserved momentum'. We also have these lovely mathematical equations which we have inherited from classical physics that work perfectly every time. Other than that, there isn't much to be said about ‘conserved momentum' because no one knows much about it.
No science so far has been able to explain ‘conserved momentum' for there is no science that has gone deep enough into the layer cake to begin the direct study of the energy field itself, and since ‘momentum' is the description of an energy state and ‘conserved momentum' is the description of an energy field, we therefore don't know much about such things today.
The Pioneer Anomaly
We developed a lovely system of physics, the origins of which can be traced back to the contributions of such early primitive scientists, such as Galileo and Isaac Newton, from whom we inherited both thought concepts concerning momentum, as well as math equations which are just a translation of these intellectual concepts into another language, the language of mathematics. The technique is similar to that of translating from Greek to Russian.
No sooner did humanity fire their first primitive tin cans out into space than we discovered that our lovely ancient science of physics, inherited from the 16th and 17th centuries, was erroneous. For you see the Pioneer Spacecraft have no sophisticated guidance correction systems for back in those days computers were the size of walk in freezers, and so therefore these two tin cans were found to be totally at the mercy of the universe. If the universe was to make a mistake and contradict the science of physics, it would be impossible for those two primitive tin cans to correct the navigational errors. It is for this reason that we find that the Pioneer spacecraft are not obeying the so called ‘law of the conservation of momentum' but instead the two space craft have been applying the brakes and are coasting to a stop out in space, which contradicts Galileo and Newton and Albert Einstein, for Einstein agreed with Galileo and Newton and their very classical interpretation of the meaning of ‘momentum' and its ‘conservation'.
It is for this reason that for close to forty years the Pioneer Anomaly has been included on the list of ‘unsolved scientific mysteries'. While it is correct that the truth about ‘momentum' remains an unsolved mystery of science, there is at least one mystery that has been solved, for we do know for certain that our science of physics is seriously in error, and therefore our sciences are overdue for a total overhaul, for now that we have received some authoritative feedback from the universe we do not need to be in any doubt that this is most certainly true.
The Inverse Square Law
An understanding of what is meant by ‘the inverse square law' is fundamental to understanding the Unified Field Theory for all energy fields are found to have density distribution that corresponds to the requirements of this law. The function is exponential (a linear component combined with a sharp steep curve describing changing field density, which increases near field center). Let's suppose that you move a light source twice the distance away from a certain point. The light falling on that point will be reduced by one quarter. The amount of the light remains constant but it spreads out and therefore the field becomes less dense. Twice the distance is 2. Now if you ‘invert' the number two, you get the fraction 1/2. If you square this fraction (multiply it by itself) you get the fraction 1/4 (with 1/4 being the inverse square of 2). Therefore if you increase the distance 3 times, you get 1/9 the illumination at any particular point (1/3 square is 1/9) and so on.
The above diagrams are intended to illustrate the density distribution of an energy field described by this law. There is something like a dense energetic singularity (a dense point concentration of energy) at the center of the field surrounded by a cloud of energy that grows increasingly thinner as you move out from the center (as suggested by the image on the left). You may have heard of Einstein's ‘warped spacetime'. The so called ‘vacuum of space' has a geometry which also corresponds to this law, and the image on the right is intended to suggest why this ‘space' would be warped (the inverse square law is an exponential function, and the field density does not decrease in a linear fashion but rather rapidly, as is the case for an exponential function....the result is the creation of a ‘stretched' or ‘warped' geometric image of this pheonomenon).
A typical battery cell consists of a region of low energy density (a region of deficit) symbolized by the grey area, and a higher energy density zone (symbolized in white). The result, when a circuit is completed is the creation of a voltage potential and energy will flow from the surplus to the deficit region. Some device is normally inserted into the circuit to intercept the flow of current so that it can be used for some useful purpose (such a device being symbolized by the blue box). The battery will operate until equality is achieved between the surplus and deficit regions at which time no potential difference will exist and the movement of energy will cease. You can see a similar behavior in the energy field if you were to drop an ice cube into a glass of water. The ice will melt, and eventually the glass of water will reach a state of equilibrium with the surrounding environment (it will stabilize at room temperature) at which point no potential difference in the field remains.
All field motion occurs as the energy field attempts to maintain equilibrium in field density. Ultimately the field must correspond to the distribution described by the inverse square law, however since the field is ‘quantized' (it has become many fields) this result becomes impossible to achieve in practice, and the result is then perpetual field motion (the field becomes like Don Quixote, perpetually tilting at windmills). In the diagram above we illustrate the magnetic field and the electric field ‘forces', which are at right angles to one another. The purpose of the magnetic field is to respond to changes in field density (potential differences) doing so in such a way as to achieve the desired final result of field equilibrium (what the field considers a correct density distribution of energy). The role of the electric field is to transfer energy within the field. You never have such a transfer of energy (a current) without a corresponding magnetic field being generated at the same time, and the reverse is also true, for wherever a magnetic field is present, currents of energy are on the move within a field.
The Hoover Dam
The Hoover Dam uses ‘momentum' in the form of the motion of moving water allowed to fall down upon and spin electromagnetic turbine generators to generate electrical current, which is just momentum once again, this time in the form of flying electrons moving through a circuit in some wires (momentum having been transferred from a moving current of water to a moving current of electrons).
If you pick up a rock and then drop it on the ground, it will impact the ground and perhaps kick up a small cloud of dust. If you were to drop the same rock from very high in the atmosphere, the rock would begin to fall towards the surface of the earth, and the rock would be constantly accelerating as it descended. Finally the enormous velocity of the falling rock would generate so much air friction that the rock would burst into flames and then when hit impacted the surface it would generate an explosive impact. B y dropping the same rock from a high altitude it became a highly energetic, high velocity projectile.
If you were to drop a hammer and a feather onto the surface of the moon (as the Apollo astronauts did) both the hammer and the feather would fall to the surface at the same rate of acceleration and would make impact at exactly the same moment.
On the left we see iron in red which is descending and accelerating as it falls, and on the right in blue we see hydrogen which is rising in the field and which is decelerating as it rises. A balloon full of hydrogen or helium gas, such as a weather balloon experiences a sudden burst of velocity when released and rockets rapidly upwards, slowing as it rises until finally it coast to a stop at a certain altitude. There is little free hydrogen or helium gas found in the earth's atmosphere for these gases rise so high in the field that they interact with the solar wind and are blown off our into space. Only the weight of the instruments causes a weather balloon to hover at a fixed position high within the earth's atmosphere.
The Myth of Conserved Momentum
Consider the example of a tossed basketball. You give the basketball some of that ‘conserved momentum' by tossing the basketball into the air. Unfortunately you made the mistake of tossing that basketball upwards in what has been called ‘a gravitational field' and since ‘gravity' is some sort of momentum sucking field, the ‘conserved momentum' will be sucked right out of that basketball. This won't happen right away because the ‘force of gravity' can only suck a little momentum out of a basketball a little at a time. After sucking the momentum out of your tossed basketball the ‘force of gravity' will then become a momentum adding field, adding momentum back into your basketball, not all at once, but once again just a little at a time. It would seem that a ‘gravity field' is a fussy field and will suck the conserved momentum out of any object moving up and will only add momentum to an object moving down, which apparently was the correct direction of travel. Therefore we can see that this ‘force of gravity' is both a sucking and an adding field and has the ability to suck momentum and add momentum.
On the left we see iron which is falling down in the ‘gravity field' and is ‘gaining momentum' and accelerating as it falls. Here it is quite clear that the gravity field is ‘adding momentum'. On the right we see hydrogen or helium which is falling up in the gravity field and which is decelerating as it rises, so in this case we can see that this gravity field is once sucking the momentum out of that hydrogen or helium, just as it does when you toss up a basketball. The difference between hydrogen or helium is that you don't need to toss helium up in the air to give it ‘conserved momentum', you just need to let go, just as you let go of iron, and the helium will then begin to fall up. In this example we can clearly see that those objects that fall up get the momentum sucked right out of the ‘conserved momentum field' while objects that fall down ‘gain momentum' and we can also see that some objects, such as iron or a basketball need to be tossed if they are to move up while some objects such as helium do not need to be tossed, they just need to be ‘dropped'.
Archimedes was asked to find someway to determine if a gold crown was made of pure gold or if some of the gold had been stolen by the goldsmith and replaced with some other metal, such as silver. Archimedes discovered that if you dropped a gold crown into a bucket of water and then weighed the amount of water displaced by the gold crown, the weight of the water was equivalent to the weight of the gold crown. The amount of water displaced was not dependant upon the size or shape of an object but rather was determined by its density.
Now given that E equals MC squared it just logically follows that if ‘M' (the density of some of mass) is equivalent to a given quantity of energy (E) then it must be true that a relationship exists between ‘energy' and ‘space' in such a way that you can only have so much energy in so much space, otherwise a displacement will occur. Given that the energy field obeys the density distribution of the inverse square law it logically follows from this that this displacement is a relative function in that it is relative to the field density in which this displacement occurs.
In the image on the left we see the result of this displacement sorting taking place in some body of water, where an iron bar (red) drops to the bottom of the field, a green object is found floating at some certain ideal position within the midst of the field (green) and a wooden stick is found floating on top of the water (brown). On the right we see a helium filled weather balloon. When it is released near the surface of the earth it experiences a sudden burst of total potential velocity (minus any air resistance) and begins to rocket upwards at great speed. The weather balloon decelerates as it rises and finally coasts to a stop at a certain point within the field and enters into a stable orbital state. We know that helium alone will continue to climb upwards in the field until finally it interacts with the solar wind and is blown off into space (hydrogen and helium almost do not exist in the earth's atmosphere for this reason). Therefore it becomes clear that the ‘parking spot' of some mass within a density sorted mass field is a composite function (a balance between the ‘up' of hydrogen or helium in some balloon and the ‘down' of the instruments which prevent the helium from rising up so far in the field that it escapes out into space). We can think of this density position as being described by a mathematical function in which you can ‘add' or subtract (the difference is relative) density values to arrive at a final composite density field position.
Given the equivalence of energy and mass (E=MC2) and given the characteristic energy sorting field described by the Inverse Square Law, it just logically follows from this that energy displaces energy just as mass displaces mass. Now let us assume that some free energy field becomes attached to a local mass field, such as a rocket ship. Both the free energy (the momentum) and the mass (the rocket) now form a bound local field, for there are rules governing the exchange of momentum between these mass fields (the exchange process is ‘quantized' which means that it can only happen in little discrete steps which exchange little packages (‘bosons') of momentum energy one little package at a time. Therefore when a free energy field becomes ‘attached' to a mass field it remains stuck to the mass field, not forever and ever, but at least for a period of time).
In the image above we watch what happens as the free energy field attached to the rocket grows in strength and the attached energy field density increases. Displacement occurs and a centrifugal (upwards) force is generated which begins to expel anomalous energy density from the total earth field. We show the density of the surrounding earth field on the left in the form of a bar suggesting the density distribution described by this Inverse Square Law (with dark red meaning dense and pale pinks and whites meaning decreasing energy density the higher up you go in the field). As the density of the attached rocket free energy field increases (it gains ‘momentum') the strength of the centrifugal force generated by the earth's field increases and the rate of expulsion of the rocket anomaly from the earth field increases ( the rocket ‘accelerates').
Now let us suppose that we were to suddenly shut down the rocket engine in mid-flight. You might assume that such a rocket has the ‘conserved momentum' and will therefore coast along through space at a certain fixed velocity (whatever the velocity might have been when the rocket engines were shut down). This is not what will happen.
Consider the example of a battery cell. There is a low energy density region in the cell (grey) and high density region (white) which means that there is a potential difference in field density between these two cells which means that a ‘voltage' potential exists. If you ‘close a circuit' allowing these two fields to come into contact then a current will flow from the high density region towards the low density region (and normally this flow will interrupted by some device that will use the current before it can reach the low density zone). When the excess energy in the white zone is depleted in this fashion, and no more potential difference exists we say that the battery is now dead. Something similar happens if you leave a cup of hot or cold water to sit out for a time. Transfer of energy will take place to achieve total field balance and will not stop until the cup of water reaches ‘room temperature' (we can think of the difference in temperature having created a type of ‘heat voltage' which then causes a ‘current of heat' to flow from a high density region (warmer) to a low density region (colder) such that the simple act of setting out a glass of cold or hot water is in effect much like creating a battery cell).
On of the most fundamental assumptions of the Unified Field Theory is that the field is a Unified Field, even though it possesses the traits of a metamorphic shape shifting chameleon. Our tool box contains circuit components that can translate ‘flying free energy' to ‘electrical current' (the solar cell) which can then be translated into ‘heat' (a toaster) or ‘momentum' (such as the motion of water in a coffee pot or the spinning motor of a vacuum clearner) or back once again into ‘light', such as in a light bulb, or ‘mechanical stress' can be translated into electrical current, heat back into light (the incandescent light bulb) or heat into ‘electrical current', and so and so on and so on. These translations form a cycle and therefore you might suppose that it is perfectly logical that we have ‘the Unified Field Theory' to explain it all, and that would be true, if it were not for that one troublesome one way force field that prevents this from happening, the disunified field known as ‘gravity', which turns out to be the source of the problem. You see ‘gravity' has only an ‘attraction' and never a ‘repulsion' and therefore cannot be ‘unified' and understood as just one more manifestation of that chameleon known as ‘energy'.
It is interesting to note that this has never stopped us from converting ‘gravity' to other forms of energy which can then complete the universal circle of energy by undergoing effortless translations from one form to another. This ‘gravity' is used as an effective substitute for rocket fuel when space craft ‘gain momentum' using ‘the flyby maneuver' and we also power coffee pots and toasters by translating the ‘falling of water' to spin electromagnetic turbines in the Hoover Dam which then generates usable ‘electrical current'.
Now because one of the most fundamental assumptions of any ‘Unified Field Theory' is that the field is a unified field, we can therefore apply the same principles which apply to energy in all of its forms to a supposedly ‘conserved momentum field' for we know that it is just the same energy field exhibiting the chameleon like ability to manifest in different forms, and so therefore the essential properties and characteristics of that energy field remain the same at all times as do the properties and characteristics that allow the energy field to perform chameleon like changes from one form to another like a shape shifting energy field (going from light to electrical current in a solar cell, for example, or from momentum to electrical current and then back to light again when the Hoover Dam is employed to light your light bulb, and so on).
There are rules governing this energy field in that transfer of free energy is ‘quantized' (which means that it is not smooth and continuous but rather it must take place through the exchange of tiny packages or particles which must be exchanged one after another in a very specific manner).
A rocket engine is most efficient when there is perfect balance of forces within the rocket engine (such that the force being sent out through the back of the rocket in the form of exhaust is exactly equivalent to the force being exerted in the opposite direction to push the rocket up. Now let's assume that the ‘force of gravity' is pulling the rocket down with a force of one G. At launch it is typical for a rocket to exert an upward force of a little more than 1 G of acceleration and if we assume that we will just allow ‘gravity' to use the quantized transfer mechanism to rob us of 1 G while at the same time we generate an extra 1 G for our own use, we could then expect to ‘gain momentum' at a rate of 1 G. You see ‘gravity' can only rob us of a quantized amount of momentum a little bit at a time and the rate of transfer seems to be related to the force employed, which on earth's surface is fixed at 1 G so as long as we are adding energy to our momentum field at a rate of greater than this minimum value of 1 G we will increase the density of our attached free energy momentum field. So then we could allow our rocket to be robbed of 1 G by this momentum sucking field known as ‘gravity' and then we could 0.1 percent G of extra momentum and we could crawl into space slowly like a snail, which would cost a fortune in rocket fuel, and so is never done.
According to Einstein (in the Special Theory of Relativity) there was no ‘aether' (a type of medium out in space which participated in motion through space) but rather we assume that there is ‘self motion' in an object and that objects move in some unexplained way because they possess this ‘self motion'. We are also told that ‘gravity is attractive only' and that rockets move through space under their own power, and that the space a rocket moves through is neutral and plays no part in motion (there is no ‘aether', which is to say there is no spatial component to the momentum field). Therefore a rocket moves up because it has ‘conserved momentum' (which isn't saying much, but is actually very strange) while this ‘gravity field' is limited by its one way attractive force field to only tugging downwards on moving rockets. We can see here then that the surrounding environment of the spatial field does participate in momentum, but is for some reason arbitrarily limited to this momentum sucking business by pulling down only one direction while at the same time sucking the momentum out of rising rockets. Apparently this is the way it must work.
According to the Unified Field Theory, it would simple enough to go the extra step, and since we already grant ‘gravity' our permission to suck momentum and be a ‘pulling field', in effect we have one half of an ‘aether field' already, and so therefore we might as well just go the extra step and give the ‘gravity aether field' permission to be a pushing force as well, thus becoming a more consistent two way force field and therefore making it possible to unify gravity.
As a result of this we will be generating a new force in the earth's momentum field, a centrifugal (upwards or pushing) force. The force that was robbing us continually of 1 G of our momentum after launch was a centripetal (pulling) force (they call it ‘gravity') while this centrifugal force now generated by the earth's momentum field is a pushing force (they don't have a name for it, because it is said that it does not exist).
If you shut down your rocket engines this centrifugal pushing force will not disappear and you will seem to have some of that ‘conserved momentum', at least for a short time, as your rocket behaves like the basketball and ‘loses momentum' and begins to decelerate to a stop. As soon as that centripetal force has had enough time to suck the momentum energy out of your momentum field (one quanta at a time) the centrifugal force will vanish and your momentum field will now be in a state of equality with the surrounding momentum field of the earth (for by ‘gaining momentum' you were in effect creating a battery. When no more potential difference exists between your rocket's momentum field and the surrounding earth momentum field, the centrifugal force vanishes and you have lost all of your ‘conserved momentum' and the time has come for the centripetal force to begin to do its job of getting your rocket properly sorted within a sorted mass field according to the requirements of the Inverse Square Law. Rockets are quite dense, unlike weather balloons and so therefore your rocket must be sorted somewhere below the surface of the earth. We suggest here that even a ‘mass field' composed of matter must be sorted according to the rules of the Inverse Square Law (light helium at the top of the properly sorted field and dense iron somewhere below the visible surface of the earth).
Now once your rocket has come to a full stop the centripetal force will now begin to ‘sort' the rocket according to density for the rocket will be found to be parked on the spot where a helium filled weather balloon is parked, which is the wrong place to park some rocket (this being a low density region of the mass field and a rocket, as we know, is much more dense than a helium balloon and therefore is parked on the wrong spot). The rocket then is pulled by this centripetal force to a lower region of the field, with higher density, which is where it belongs, and once again this happens at a certain fixed rate, one quanta of momentum energy at a time. At each step the rocket momentum field is brought into equilibrium with the density of the earth's momentum field, which requires a transfer of momentum from the earth field to the rocket field.
We can see here that motion is the mechanism by which ‘transfer of momentum' occurs and that motion and momentum transfer are therefore equivalent. This then leads us to draw the conclusion that ‘the so called law of the conservation of momentum' is a myth for whenever motion is occurring through a gradient and constantly changing field, transfer of momentum quanta is occurring at the same time. In this way the momentum field of the rocket and the surrounding momentum field of the earth act like two cells of a battery and energy is in motion to constantly maintain field equilibrium.
Now someone might suggest that ‘conserved momentum' is only impossible in some ‘gravity field' this being due to the fact that gravity will suck the conserved momentum right out of some object. Once you get away from the momentum sucking force known as gravity, then, finally, you will have some of that conserved momentum. Therefore we could leave a rocket ship, such as those two primitive tin cans known as the Pioneer space craft, to coast for perhaps billions of years at a fixed and invariant constant velocity, as classical physics tells us rockets must do. No sooner did humans fire their first primitive tin cans out into space than we found out that the classical idea of ‘conserved momentum' is a myth, for the two Pioneer craft are both decelerating at a constant rate, and those two tossed tin cans are behaving like a tossed basketball.
It turns out that momentum sucking occurs even out in deep space, and the Unified Field Theory is required to explain this effect, for the spatial field, being the largest visible manifestation of a field that exists in the universe, is an ‘aether field' (a ‘momentum field') and in this sense is no different than the space close to the surface of the earth. It behaves the same way. The ‘momentum sucking' occurs in a more linear fashion (resembling a fixed constant) because the Inverse Square Law describes a function (momentum sucking rate in this example) which is an exponential function, which means that in deep space the function flattens out and comes to resemble a linear function, as illustrated in the example above. Therefore the behavior of the Pioneer spacecraft is identical to the behavior of the spacecraft at the time of launch from earth, the only difference being the change in magnitude of this momentum sucking effect.
The two Pioneer spacecraft are like ‘charged battery cells' and we know that a ‘voltage' potential will exist if some ‘charged cell' is exposed to another cell with a ‘lower density charge' and this potential difference generates a current of energy transfer. The Pioneer craft will ‘lose momentum' and decelerate until finally they coast to a stop. This transfer is ‘quantized' and therefore can only occur in small discrete packages with the rate of transfer dependant upon the density differential (the voltage potential) with a higher voltage (greater density differential) generating a high current. Therefore we can see that the only difference between the Pioneer craft in deep space or at launch down on earth is the density of the external field cell. In deep space the two Pioneer craft resemble charged cells moving through a lower density spatial cell and therefore they are getting the momentum energy sucked right out of them by the surrounding ‘aether' (the spatial momentum field) a process that will continue as long as this potential ‘voltage' difference exists (the two craft will continue to coast to a stop as the momentum is slowly sucked out of the craft in a manner consistent with a fixed quantized step by step function).
The theory of ‘constant invariant conserved momentum' has been invalidated by the actual evidence of rocket behavior in space, which also means that Albert Einstein has been invalidated, for space is not neutral or homogenous (the same momentum producing the same results everywhere). ‘Conserved momentum' is one of the great barriers which prevent the acceptance of the Unified Field Theory, for the very idea that an object could conserve an energy charge despite potential differences in cell density is contradictory to the behavior exhibited by this energy field in every other manifestation of this field. Fortunately our earliest classical physicists and their archaic primitive theory of ‘conserved momentum' has been definitively refuted by the actual evidence, which in turn validates the Unified Field Theory which requires exactly the sort of transfer of momentum between high and low potential fields that we actually observe at work in the universe.
If an object is tossed horizontally and a second object is simply dropped vertically towards the surface of the earth, both the object moving horizontally and the object simply dropped vertically will descend to the earth at exactly the same rate of acceleration and both objects will impact the surface at exactly the same time.
It might be possible that a balanced loss and gain of momentum can take place creating the illusion of ‘conserved momentum', and this would have to take place on the horizontal axis which would then describe the motion of an object oscillating in a zig zag pattern around the central axis of a ‘perfect orbit' (gaining and losing momentum at equal rates, which seems to be required, for it would seem that motion is the mechanism by which transfer of momentum takes place).
A Density Sorted Mass Field
If a basketball is tossed upwards the ball begins to decelerate as it rises and finally comes to a full stop for an instant and then the basketball begins to move again and accelerates as it falls. The two Pioneer spacecraft are like primitive tin cans which have been tossed up much like a basketball. The Pioneer spacecraft have no sophisticated guidance systems to make course corrections and therefore once they have been tossed the fate of the spacecraft lies with the nature of the universe itself. The Pioneer spacecraft are behaving like a tossed basketball and are decelerating in the field as they rise, falling behind by about 400,000 kilometers every year (the rate corresponding to the mathematical calculation that employs Hubble's constant, a value used to calculate the value of red-shifting of light due to spatial dilation or expansion).
Momentum is the description of energy state and conserved momentum is the description of an energy field. For the purpose of analyzing this problem from the perspective of the Unified Field Theory, we assume the existence of the momentum field which must permeate all space. This momentum field is a manifestation of the Unified Field, and therefore must exhibit behavior commonly expected of such a field. We would expect to see similar behavior being manifested by the field for similar reasons in every case we examine.
We symbolize the momentum field of the earth as a gradient field which obeys the density requirements of the inverse square law and is therefore darker red (more dense) close to the center of the field at the bottom of the image, and then the field density falls further from the center (towards the top of the image with this decreasing density symbolized by lighter shades). On the right we see hydrogen (blue) surrounded by its own momentum field (such momentum fields being common to all mass). As the hydrogen rises it decelerates and loses energy to the surrounding momentum field. Wherever there is potential difference in field densities, energy transfer will occur (an example of this a common battery cell with a ‘positive' and a ‘negative' pole...energy transfer will occur until such a time as no potential difference in energy density exists at which time we say that the battery is dead, for it has achieved field equilibrium). In order to maintain field equilibrium hydrogen must lose momentum energy to the surrounding momentum field and such transfer of energy must continue for as long as the hydrogen is in motion through the momentum field (for the field is a gradient with surrounding field density decreasing as altitude increases).
On the right, symbolized in red, we see iron falling in the momentum field and accelerating as it descends. In order for field equilibrium to be maintained the field must move energy to the momentum field of the iron, and this transfer must continue for as long as the iron is in motion
The image above shows a plot of the densities of atoms listed on the periodic chart of elements. The density distribution closely approximates a linear function with the lowest density element (hydrogen) the first point at the bottom left of the graph.
In the image above we symbolize the increasing densities of the elements using darker shades of brown or grey. We pretend that the green line symbolizes the visible surface of the earth. The Inverse Square Law describes a density distribution where the highest density is located at the center of the field and the lowest density at the top of the field, and given that we accept that E equals MC squared (mass is a form of concentrated energy) we also assume that this common density distribution function must also apply to a mass field, since a mass field is just another manifestation of the Unified Energy Field. We also know that the field operates to generate forces and movement of energy in order to maintain field densities (an example is the magnetic field which controls the flow of current in the electric field). The required mass field position of hydrogen, on the left, symbolized by the blue color, is at the top of the field (the lowest density region) and so if hydrogen was released at the surface of the earth a force would be generated so as to move hydrogen up in the field while at the same initiating a transfer of field energy from hydrogen to the surrounding field so as to maintain field equilibrium (field equality between the hydrogen momentum field and the earth's momentum field). When hydrogen decelerated and hypothetically came to a full stop at the ideal field position it would rest in total field equilibrium having lost momentum field energy during the process of motion.
On the right side of the image we symbolize iron in red and the ideal field position of iron we position somewhere below the visible surface of the earth. Iron must therefore be in motion down towards a point somewhere deep within the earth and iron will gain energy from the momentum field of the earth (it will accelerate as it falls) so as to maintain field equality as this falling motion occurs. When iron impacts the visible surface of the earth it will continue to experience a constant acceleration force because it retains potential motion for a potential field difference still exists (the mass field has not been properly sorted for iron remains trapped on the surface where motion is blocked and the proper sorted position of iron within a properly sorted mass field obeying the requirements of this Inverse Square Law still lies somewhere below the visible surface of the earth.
The reason why a rock does not experience great acceleration when you pick it up and drop it is that the rock is already at close to field equilibrium with the surface of the earth and since it has less distance to fall it requires less energy transfer and therefore gains less momentum energy from the surrounding field, while a rock high in the atmosphere has further to fall and is in a low density region much further from the higher density region near the surface and therefore gains more energy as it is in motion and accelerates to a much higher velocity as energy is transferred for a much longer period of time (the longer distance required to reach the surface) which then results in a much higher gain in velocity.
The momentum force exerted upon a chunk of iron sitting upon the surface of the earth has a directional component (the direction of potential motion) which is pointing down. If you were to pick up a heavy chunk of iron and lift it from the surface you must counteract this downward force with an equally effective force generated by your arm muscles to pull the chunk of iron upwards. The force required will increase as the size of the chunk of iron increases in size, for you must exert a force on every single iron atom sufficient to cause a transfer of momentum from iron atom to the momentum field so that as you raise the iron to lower density regions the iron momentum field will have lost enough energy to remain in equilibrium with the surrounding field. A force field is involved in all transfer of energy and in this case your arm muscles must supply the force which increases as the number of iron atoms increases (the iron becomes ‘heavier'). The amount of calories you must burn in your arm muscles to raise the ‘heavy' lump of iron must be equivalent to the amount of energy all the iron atoms must transfer to the surrounding momentum field in order to remain in field equilibrium. Therefore the more iron atoms there are (the larger the chunk of iron) the more calories you must burn to move the iron (and the ‘heavier' the iron feels).
What is implied here is that motion is equivalent to the transfer of momentum. The ‘law of the conservation of momentum is a myth' for a mass must either be accelerating or decelerating if motion is occurring (we can see this principle clearly at work in the example of the two Pioneer Spacecraft, for the spacecraft have not been coasting along at some ‘constant fixed velocity' because the have ‘conserved momentum', as that myth of classical physics would have us believe should have been the case. No sooner did we shoot our first primitive rockets out on deep space journeys than we quickly discovered that this primitive idea was erroneous. This is the true significance of the Pioneer Anomaly. The universe is correcting our erroneous physics and some of the faulty ideas that were the product of a juvenile science still in its infancy. For some reason our sciences still find this simple concept to be impossible to accept and so therefore the Pioneer lesson becomes the insoluble Pioneer problem.
The Hoover Dam
One of the most fundamental assumptions that must be made by a Unified Field Theorist, is that the field is a unified field, which means that there are not many fields of different kinds but rather just one field which then manifests in different forms while always retaining the exact same properties and characteristic behavior patterns. When generating an abstract theory in the field of physics it is only required that the theory be internally consistent and that it generate testable scientific predictions which can be either refuted or justified by means of experimentation (otherwise such a theory would be empty speculation). The one field, for the purposes of this theory, we will call ‘the momentum field'.
How does the Hoover Dam transfer momentum from ‘the motion of falling water' to momentum in the form of a current of moving electrons? According to the interpretation of classical physics (which has no ‘aether', which is to say, no momentum field, the water gains some ill defined property called ‘potential energy' which somehow gets into the water by the ‘force' that lifts the water to a height (for example the heat of evaporation becomes ‘potential energy' inside the water). This interpretation is required for gravity cannot transfer energy to the water for this would result in a loss of gravity, and since gravity is just a ‘mass attraction force', and the planet cannot lose mass to generate electricity, therefore the water must have this ‘potential energy'.
According to the Unified Field Theory the water and the momentum field of the earth are like two cells in a battery. Potential motion exists in a rotor blade of an electromagnetic turbine generator, so that if it is struck by moving water, a transfer of momentum occurs, much like one billiard ball striking a second (the momentum is transferred to the second ball which then begins to move). However the water, having lost momentum energy to the rotor blade has now become like the deficit cell in a battery and so therefore a momentum voltage state exists, and the earth's momentum field must achieve equilibrium between fields by replacing the momentum energy lost by the water molecule. The water molecule must continue to be sorted in the mass field according to the requirements of the Inverse Square Law when this law is applied to masses of matter located in fields, and so the water must continue to experience this centripetal force, which means that momentum must continue to be transferred into pushing down on the spinning rotor blades of turbine generator.
In this way the Hoover Dam transfers momentum to electrical current (the momentum of moving electrons) by decreasing the momentum field of the earth.
Just as an aside here, it would take 4 trillion years to suck all the free energy attached to the earth's mass field at current rates of consumption. As well the earth gains momentum from the sun every year, in an amount that dwarfs human energy consumption, and so if the principles of the Unified Field Theory were employed to create a new source of energy by tapping directly into the earth's momentum field, the most we could hope to do would be to help to stabilize the earth's orbit around the sun, or at the very least decrease the rate at which the earth is gradually spiraling away from the sun.
The Moon as a Model for a Propulsion System
In the image above we see an object than has ‘momentum' insufficient to maintain ‘orbit' and as a result the object is ‘losing momentum' to that momentum sucking field known as ‘gravity' and is spiraling down in orbit, before finally impacting the surface of the gravitating body. What this suggests is that for a density sorting field such as that ‘gravity', one way to force some mass to obey the Inverse Square Law in a properly sorted mass field would be to suck the momentum right out of that orbiting mass and cause it to crash to the surface of that planet. At that time an attempt will be made to continue sorting that mass, and since the attempt would be unsuccessful, because there is to much debris blocking further motion of the mass, the mass would then experience a constant acceleration force (this acceleration force, the ‘g force' of gravity as it is called, only works on objects that are not in motion through the field. For example, zero G experiments can be conducted for a few minutes on a jet that is allowed to plunge towards earth with its engines shut down, for the ‘g force' is only felt by objects that are not moving but should be moving). In this way we can see that the ‘gravity field' (as it was called) was a type of Don Quixote field, for this density sorting operation is real easy to do with free mobile energy but next to impossible to do with energy in the form of masses of matter, and for this reason a perpetual mass sorting force field was generated (‘gravity' was tilting at wind mills).
The Apollo astronauts left mirrors on the surface of the moon off of which laser beams have been bounced for decades, allowing us to get a precise fix on the orbit of the moon. It turns out that the moon is rising in orbit at a rate of over 3 centimeters per year. What this suggests is that motion is equivalent to the transfer of momentum, and so therefore when an object has momentum energy to maintain orbit, such an object cannot be sorted properly within a sorted mass field and so therefore the solution must become to expel the offending mass and hurl it right out of the mass field. This expulsion can only happen a little at a time for the transfer of momentum is quantized (which means that it can only move in tiny packages, one at a time as it were, with the rate of transfer limited by the field strength of the donating field).
According to the Unified Field Theory, the Large Hadron Collider is like the moon. It's momentum field (caused by its powerful magnets) has crossed the critical threshold that separates attraction and explusion, so the earth's momentum field is now attempting to expel the collider (by generating an upwards pushing centrifugal force). Since it would appear that no motion can occur without transfer of momentum taking place, this requires that the earth's momentum field add momentum to any object that already has to much momentum, and while this is a sacrifice, it is also the only way to finally get rid of the offending object that is so disturbing proper field equilibrium.
In this way we can see that the way to design a new form of propulsive craft is to generate a powerful electromagnetic field upon ‘lift off' and then allow the earth's momentum field to then respond by donating the energy required to push us up into a higher and higher orbit. We do not need to ‘burn fuel' after the initial lift off. When we want to land we need to ‘quench' our magnets (drain the energy into a battery cell of some kind) so that our field is weak enough to fall below the critical orbital threshold and at this time the earth will begin to exert a centripetal force that pulls us down through the field. We do want to land in one piece and so to avoid a crash landing we must generate an oscillating field (causing the earth's momentum field to cycle between ‘pulling' and ‘pushing', generating alternating centripetal and centrifugal forces) which would then allow us to make a soft controlled landing.
We can use the Large Hadron Collider to validate the theory that the ‘gravity field' is a momentum field, and thus part of the Unified Field (which we will refer to as the one momentum field of the universe, such momentum being required to constantly move energy around so as to make the Don Quixote attempt to maintain field equilibrium all over the universe). We can test the bolts on the Large Hadron Collider for the generation of heat caused by stress due to the centrifugal force (upward ‘antigravity' push being exerted on the collider because of its ‘gain in momentum' caused by its powerful enveloping cloak of free energy stored in its magnetic field). We can also check for the existence of a similar force on the opposite side of the earth field to that of the collider. (You will notice that I say the opposite side of the earth field, and not the earth mass, for as you can see from the orbital dance of Pluto and Charon around a field center, it is field center that matters here and not mass center).
We can determine whether or not such a centrifugal force exists, and whether it is a push force transfer of momentum that is responsible for the spiral orbit of the moon by checking for similar effects being generated by the Large Hadron Collider. There are two tidal bulges generated by the process of the earth transferring momentum to the moon. One tidal bulge rises up towards the moon and the second tidal bulge occurs on the opposite side of the planet, as shown in the illustration on the left. According to the Unified Field Theory, the reason why this second bulge exists on the opposing side of the planet is that as momentum energy is transferred to the moon, energy is also constantly moving throughout the entire earth momentum system (symbolized by the yellow arrows) for the purpose of maintaining the field equilibrium of the earth energy system through field balancing. As we know this is a fussy energy field and cannot tolerate ‘density holes' in the field, and such a low density region always generates a ‘voltage potential' and then a transfer of energy. When the earth donates momentum to the moon, the result is a creation of a deficit zone, and the effects of constantly refilling that energy hole are felt throughout the entire earth energy system, as the density of energy must be constantly rebalanced with a kind of domino effect taking place where the movement of some energy in one spot triggers movement of energy from the spot next to that spot and so on.
If this interpretation was true, and given that the Large Hadron Collider would also be experiencing the same centrifugal (upward pushing) force as is being exerted upon the moon, then it logically follows that we should find a doughnut shaped ring of equal centrifugal force made manifest on the opposite of the earth's energy field. This should cause a ‘tidal bulge' in a pool of water or perhaps mercury (which might be interesting to watch) and might even cause a very viscous fluid such as mercury (half way between a solid and a fluid) to rise up in the air like a levitating helium balloon.
The Cavendish Experiment
The Cavendish Experiment has led to the belief that stars are formed by the attractive mass force that exists between little masses of hydrogen molecules that have a mass attraction force that causes them to collapse and form stars under the weight of their own enormous ‘gravitational mass'. When a large led mass was moved closer to a smaller lead ball, the smaller lead ball which was allowed to swing freely on an axis would then move closer to the larger lead ball, and by measuring the distance the smaller mass moved (its attraction to the larger lead ball) Cavendish was able to make the first calculation of what later became known as ‘the gravitational constant' (this being the attractive force of masses for each other, as described by Newton's theory of gravity). This idea of the gravitational constant was left undisturbed by Einstein, who included this number in his mathematical formulas found in the theory of General Relativity (Einstein's theory of gravitation).
In this image we see the Smith Hydrogen Cloud heading towards a collision with the suburbs of our Milky Way Galaxy in about fifty thousand years.
One thing you might notice is that the Smith Hydrogen Cloud is a cloud. This is stating the obvious and what this means is that within this cloud there must exist a balance of ‘attractive mass forces' and ‘repulsive mass forces' (this being required if a cloud is to maintain its shape). The cloud could have only ‘attractive mass forces', and collapse into one massive black hole (the cloud has enough hydrogen to make millions of stars). Or the cloud could dissipate and become randomly scattered hydrogen molecules. It does neither, because there exists a balance between attractive and repulsive ‘mass forces' which then results in a cloud formation.
We can see that a relationship exists between free energy and mass attraction or mass repulsion. On the right we see masses with little repulsion, a Bose Einstein Condensate, where the temperature of some gas has been brought to close to absolute zero, and all repulsion between masses disappears and the mass forms one single homogenous lump and behaves like one single atom exhibiting strange properties. As the atoms are allowed to warm, ‘hot gas expands', which is an effect equivalent to ‘greater mass repulsive force', as the masses require more space (this requirement for ‘more space' being equivalent to a repulsive force).
We can also see that the leading head of the Smith Hydrogen cloud is experiencing greater ‘mass attraction' (the cloud is becoming cone shaped) and so therefore we can assume that as momentum field strength increases, mass attraction increases and mass repulsive forces decrease, resulting in a more compressed cloud with a greater density packed into a smaller size.
The image above was taken just a few years ago by the Spitzer Space Telescope and shows an electromagnetic space tornado which is at work forcing ionized hydrogen atoms to conform to the density requirements of an energy field which conforms to the Inverse Square Law distribution schema. These are obviously ionized hydrogen atoms (stripped of electrons, leaving just the unbalanced, and thus ‘charged' nucleus behind). The reason why the electrons have left the atom is that in a high energy environment, electrons absorb energy like little sponges and then they get kicked out of the atom much as the moon is being expelled by the earth (as electrons gain momentum energy, they go into higher and higher ‘orbits' around the nucleus, until finally they break free altogether and become free flying electrons flowing in an electrical current towards some low density region of the field (a low voltage) where the electrons will work to restore field equality (filling in that low voltage hole with extra energy...electrons with surplus momentum always follow a path towards some low voltage low energy density spot in the field).
A nucleus which has lost electrons is now in a low energy state and such a nucleus will move towards a high energy zone (a high voltage or a region of surplus energy, the opposite of the path followed by an electron carrying surplus energy). This then leads the nucleus to follow a path which spirals around a magnetic field line (as such stripped nucleus do in particle accelerators such as the Large Hadron Collider). Such ‘charged particles' are unable to break free from the field for only by following the field can they gain the energy they require to restore lost field equilibrium, and so therefore such a space tornado is able to force such ionized hydrogen nuclei to conform to the energy distribution described the field of such a tornado (dense at the field center, less dense the further one moves from the center). In this way ionized hydrogen is compelled to form a star by being forced to follow the field path defined for it by a properly sorted electromagnetic energy field.
The result is then fusion, for hydrogen belongs at the top of a properly sorted mass field, and when forced down deep into the constantly growing star, the only solution to a lack of field equilibrium once some critical threshold is crossed is for hydrogen to undergo fusion and become helium, a slightly heavier element that has an easier time surviving deeper in some constantly growing mass field. Fusion then functions as a kind of solution to poor mass field sorting (since it is the electromagnetic field that governs the field of a star while holding the ioned gas hostage, and that this is true is demonstrated by the fact that the mass of matter erupts into explosive flames in such a badly sorted mass field). None of this has anything to do with a one way attractive mass force, and we must assume that even planets probably began by a process of ionization and that once a ‘warped path' through space was created by this field, it would be a simple matter for passing objects to roll down this ‘hole' and continue to build up the mass.
If we conclude that ‘mass attraction' is relative to momentum field density, then we must also conclude that the gravitational constant ‘G' is not a constant at all, but rather G is the relative mass attraction value imposed upon the solar system by the sun, which in turn is a star in orbit on the outskirts of the Milky Way galaxy (a low density region of the galactic momentum field) which then would suggest that the ‘G' value of the sun is relative to the position of the sun in the galaxy.
The Galaxy Rotation Anomaly
When a train is approaching you, it makes a high pitched ‘weeee' sound (the waves are being pushed together by the additive velocity of the approaching train, creating a higher wave frequency). Similarly, when the train is moving away from you suddenly the pitch of the sound drops to a lower bass frequency (wooooooo) because the wave frequency is being decreased because the velocity of the train is no longer additive but rather subtracted from the wave, resulting in a lower frequency sound (the wave is compressed and squashed together as the train approaches your position, and then the wave is stretched out and pulled apart by the velocity of the train when the train is moving away from your position, resulting in a lower pitched sound). In a similar way a object moving away red shifts light (reduces its frequency resulting in a longer wave length) while an object moving towards your position will blue shift light (resulting in a higher frequency of light and a shorter wavelength).
We therefore expect the red shift curve of a galaxy to be a curve, such as in the top graph, for the objects near the center are moving much faster and therefore when they are rotating away from us, they would be much more red shifted, while the slower moving objects near the edge of the galaxy would be moving away while rotating at a much slower speed, thus being much less red shifted. What we actually see is a flat line graph where all points in the galaxy are equally red shifted.
On the left we see the typical pattern of objects in orbit, where an object closer to the center of the field orbits much more quickly while an object further away follows a slower orbital path. On the right we see the actual observed orbital velocity of galaxies. The velocity of objects at the center or perimeter of the field are identical. The galaxy seems to rotate as though it was one single mass.
The graph of the red shift (or the velocity of rotation of galaxies should be a curve) with higher velocity objects near the center of the galaxy more red shifted (they were rotating away from out position much faster) while the slower rotation of objects at the edge was much less red shifted (because of the lower velocity). This pattern is required if Galileo and Newton and Albert Einstein are to be proven correct in their fundamental assumptions concerning the nature of space and the nature of ‘conserved momentum' and there interpretation of ‘gravity' as being a kind of constant attractive mass force which is the same all over the universe.
Now we don't know much about ‘momentum' but we do have these math equations we have inherited, and if we assume that our math equations, and our fundamental assumptions which have been translated into the language of math (from Greek to Russian) are correct, then it must be true that there is this ‘dark matter of the universe', for if you add invisible dark matter to galaxies, then you can still use the math equations. Otherwise it would have to be true that the universe was sending us a message, and this time the universe was telling us that Einstein was wrong, for Einstein's math equations lie in a heap of ruins until such a time as someone adds dark matter to galaxies so that can rotate like large planets.
The underlying assumption of this dark matter hypothesis is that our math equations are excellent, and therefore the universe must change to adapt. We can see that the galactic rotation problem is related to the Pioneer Anomaly, in that both involve an anomaly in momentum (the way things are supposed to move in space as described by our primitive classical physics), and even today, we still just don't know anything at all about momentum, and so therefore both anomalies must be included on the list of unsolved scientific mysteries.
We know that Einstein works just fine in the local neighborhood, but once you use those gravitational equations, which include this gravitational constant and apply them to a galaxy, the whole system collapses and must be rescued by ‘dark matter', a kind of piece meal solution to solving momentum anomalies (one at a time, isolate and then divide and conquer).
For the last few decades there has been controversy concerning the existence of what appears to be distant quasars which are located in the center of nearby galaxies. This does not make sense (according to the geometry of space described by ‘classical physics'). How could a ‘high red shift quasar' be located in a ‘low red shift galaxy'. Discovery Poses Cosmic Puzzle: Can A 'Distant' Quasar Lie Within A Nearby Galaxy?. "How could a galaxy 300 million light years away contain a stellar object several billion light years away?"
The universe is sending us two different messages here, and both are telling us the same thing. There is an anomaly in the expected gravitational red shift, which is the same thing as telling us that the value of G is not a ‘gravitational constant', but rather that G is relative to momentum field energy. G is much greater at the central core of a galaxy. This means that paths through the field are longer for ‘bosons' (particles of energy such as photons of light) while given the correspondingly greater acceleration of masses the math path would become shorter and shorter near galactic center (which is another way of saying that as far as momentum is concerned, given the increasing field strength, you would get more bang for your buck at field center than out in the suburbs of some galaxy where our earth is located.
Now even when the universe sends the same message twice, that does not mean that the message will be accepted and received for we must generate an experiment to confirm our interpretation is correct. I would suggest that since the Large Hadron Collider will be found to be generating a completely unexpected gravitational field anomaly (a centrifugal force) that perhaps it might be a good idea to do the Cavendish Experiment again and again in a location very near the field distortion created by the collider anomaly, while doing so at different energy levels to confirm whether or not it is true that the value of G varies with the momentum field (the best place to do this would be in a location where there is an uncorrected field anomaly).
This discussion is continued on the following pages:
The Aether Hypothesis
Older Summation of the Unified Field Theory
Theoretical Description of an 'Anti-Gravity' Device
Does the 'Gravitational Field' really exist?
The Living Resurrection: A Manifesto