A Unified Field Theory
Summation of the Unified Field Theory
Experimental Test of the Unified Field Theory
The Unified Field theory is important because it leads to new forms of propulsion. A new form of propulsion then leads to a new source of clean renewable energy which is also inexhaustible. If we are to achieve this leap forward in our technology this will require us to go beyond the limits currently imposed upon our thinking by Einstein's Theory of Relativity.
According to the conventional wisdom the gravitational field is not an energy field, but rather it is a matter based field, such that ‘matter warps space' and then any matter found to be in motion through space will follow a path corresponding to the warps and curves of this warped ‘spacetime'. We do not have a Unified Field Theory because it is next to impossible to reconcile an anomalous matter based field with an energy field (the remaining fields described by our sciences are all energy fields and only gravitation is understood to be an anomalous matter based field).
The universal energy field is a recycling field wherein energy is constantly transformed from one state to another. Energy is never created or destroyed during this process, for it is only transformed from state to state. An example of this would be electromagnetic radiation, in the form of light from the sun, which is then transformed into electrical current by solar energy cells. Electrical energy can then be translated into radiant microwaves or heat energy on a stove top, and heat energy can also be transformed into momentum energy in a steam turbine generator to generate electrical current. Many circuit components have been invented over the course of the last century and a half the purpose of which is to translate the energy of the Universal Energy field from one state to another. We can imagine a circuit consisting of components which progressively translate energy from one state to another state and then finally comes full circle by translating the energy back into the original input state, completing one full cycle of such translations. In this way we demonstrate that the Universal Energy Field is a Unified Field, for it consists of only one form of energy which is expressed in many transitional forms.
According to current scientific understanding the one anomalous field is the matter based gravitational field, which is not a Unified Field and therefore sits in isolation from all other fields. Part of the reason for this state of affairs would be obscure to most people not versed in the intricacies of science, for much of the problem is mathematical, in that any attempt to include the matter based gravitational field generates absurd mathematical infinities that make no sense. (We will discuss the underlying problem later, but for now will suggest that the problem is found in an erroneous classical view of the universe inherent in Einstein's classical interpretation of the principle of relativity).
We can easily demonstrate that, in spite of the mathematical absurdities and difficulties, even so gravitation is just one more transitional phase of the overall Universal Energy Field (which then implies that gravitation cannot be an anomalous matter based field' but must be an energy field as well).
In the image above we schematically illustrate the workings of the Hoover Dam, as this device uses common electrical components to translate gravitational energy into electrical current, which could then be used to generate heat in a toaster or radiant forms of energy from light bulbs, and so on and so on. Water gains momentum and is accelerated by the gravitational field and then spins an electromagnetic turbine generator. The momentum energy that is lost by the water is transformed into electrical current. The source of this momentum energy is not the water itself, but rather this device is just a technologically backwards and very crude method employed to translate gravitational momentum energy into electrical current. (It is at this point that we will introduce the idea that the purpose of the Unified Field Theory is to encourage the development of new technology which skips all these redundant intermediate steps and instead transfers momentum energy directly from field to field. This will require a paradigm change in our current manner of scientific thinking).
In the image above we see a Newtonian Rocket Ship firing its thruster engines as it heads towards Neptune. This type of craft then shuts down its rocket engine and coasts through space all the way to Neptune because it has ‘conserved momentum' in what must be its ‘momentum energy field'. (Such ‘conserved momentum' is a form of stored energy which then must be ‘conserved' at some particular location.)
In the image above we see a natural object, which does not possess a Newtonian Rocket Engine, coasting through space, and then following the warped lines of the curved spacetime around a mass of matter. It continues to coast through space until such a time as forward progress is impeded by the debris field represented by the mass of matter.
An object has followed the curved lines of that spacetime and it has reached the surface of the mass of matter, where it was parked at the top of a cliff. It is no longer moving, no longer coasting through space, and has assumed a stationary motionless position at the top of the cliff, at which time it begins to experience the downward pull of the gravitational force field. When an object is coasting through spacetime, it experiences no gravitational force. One of example of this would be simulations of zero-G which are accomplished by causing a jet aircraft to plunge towards earth in free fall, at which time everyone in the jet begins to float in the same way that an astronaut coasting through space towards the moon begins to float in the space capsule. If the object were to roll off the cliff top, it would immediately begin to coast through spacetime, continuing its interrupted journey (interrupted by the blockage of the debris field which is the mass of matter). It would experience zero-G forces as it coasted through space time, until such a time as impacted the debris field at the bottom of the cliff. Forward progress would again be impeded by the debris field and the object would once again become stationary, at which time it would again experience the force of gravity.
We can see then that any object which is parked in a gravitational field possesses a constant ‘conserved momentum'. Whenever forward progress is no longer impeded by the presence of debris the object immediately begins to coast once again through spacetime, picking up right where it left off before its motion was interrupted by the blockage of a debris field. When it is stationary, and its progress is impeded, it still maintains a constant store of ‘conserved momentum', in that all objects parked on the surface of a gravitational body attempt to continue to coast through space following those warped lines of that spacetime, and the result is the creation of a the gravitational force.
When we consider these things it becomes clear that we cannot say that we understand gravity until such a time as we can answer the question, ‘why do objects coast through space?' For to understand ‘conserved momentum' is to understand the true nature of this gravitational force field, for the ‘G-force' experienced by a stationary object on the surface of gravitating body is just an expression of the conserved momentum which is a constant property of that object.
When you hear a train approaching it can make a sound much like a high pitched ‘weeeeee' and then as the train passes and the train is now moving away from your position, the sound will suddenly change to a lower pitched ‘woooooo'. The reason why this happens (the Doppler effect) is that as the train approaches, the sound waves are squeezed together because the train is moving towards you, and sound waves travel at a fixed speed (therefore the effect of the fixed speed of the sound wave added onto the velocity of the moving train, results in sound waves being produced that are ‘squished together' since they cannot be produced fast enough to keep ahead of that moving train). This results in a ‘higher frequency' and this produces a higher pitched sound. When the train is moving away from you the speed of the train is subtracted from the speed of the sound wave, resulting in a lower frequency sound.
The same thing happens with light waves. In the example above a moving rocket ship emits a blue shifted (high frequency) light wave, which is then detected by a detector. However because the rocket was moving away from the detector, the result is a lower frequency wave (it is detected as being red shifted light). In the image on the bottom we can see that there is an object sitting on the surface of a gravitational body. The object possesses conserved momentum, just as the rocket ship does, but it is not moving because its progress is blocked by a debris field. It emits a blue light wave which is then detected as being red shifted by a detector parked out in space. This effect is important in the design of satellite systems, for all signals sent to a satellite will be received at a red shifted frequency and in order for the satellite to function properly an understanding of the way that signals shift in a gravitational field is required.
A spacecraft is sitting stationary in space. The clock on board the stationary spacecraft is running faster. The exact identical twin of someone onboard that stationary spacecraft then boards another craft and travels through space at a high velocity, at which time the clock on board that moving spacecraft runs slower. When the exact identical twin returns, after spending what seemed like one hour onboard the moving spacecraft, he finds that one year has passed for his twin on board the stationary spacecraft. A clock is sitting in a gravitational field. It is running slower. A clock sitting outside the gravitational field is running faster.
A clock within the gravitational field functions in a manner which is equivalent to that of an object which is coasting through space. The clock runs slower. Electromagnetic radiation emitted from the surface of a gravitational body is red shifted in much the same way as the same radiation would be red shifted if emitted by an object coasting through space. These are two examples of the equivalence principle. Now if we keep in mind that an object parked on the surface of a gravitating body is in ‘virtual motion', and that such an object continues to possess ‘conserved momentum' then we can see that the reason for the equivalence principle is that an object sitting stationary on the surface of a gravitating body and an object coasting through space represent two exactly identical phenomenon, with the only difference being that the object coasting through space is free to move forward, while the object on the surface of the gravitating body has forward motion impeded by a debris field (and therefore experiences the constant gravitational force field). This is one more example which clarifies the point made previously, in that if we are to understand gravity we must understand why objects coast through space, for the gravitational force field is simply the constant acceleration experienced by an object coasting through space when that object is impeded in its forward motion by the presence of a debris field. The object continues to possess ‘conserved momentum' and therefore it continues to attempt to move, which generates this gravitational force field. It is in ‘virtual motion' through the field, and therefore it produces phenomenon exactly equivalent to that of an object which remains free to move through the spatial field.
Therefore the gravitational force field is the product of ‘conserved momentum' and such a force field cannot be adequately explained by the fact that a gravitational field is a ‘matter based field' in that ‘masses of matter' are said to ‘warp the spacetime'. Such an explanation only gives us a geometric explanation of how such an object might move through the spatial field but offers no explanation at all as to why such an object is moving in the first place. To find such an explanation we are required to invoke an energy field, which is the momentum field.
We know that a relationship exists between a gravitational field and a momentum field, for whenever energy is transferred through the Universal Energy Cycle by means of this mechanism of the ‘three dimensional warped space field' (the physical manifestation of this gravitational field) the results are always expressed in the form of a change of momentum. Examples of this include the fly-by maneuver which is a method of accelerating spacecraft by means of a donation of momentum energy from a gravitational field and the tidal interaction which results in a transfer of energy from one body to another body in orbit, such as the moon.
Every year the tidal interaction between the moon and the earth transfer momentum energy from the earth to the moon. The result is that the moon gains momentum and accelerates each year, which then causes the moon to climb into a slightly higher orbit (the moon gains a little over three centimeters in altitude each year, a result which has been precisely measured over the last four decades by employing mirrors placed on the moon by the Apollo program which are then used to bounce laser beams back to the earth). Results have been produced that also indicate that the earth moves several centimeters further away from the sun each year as the result of a similar tidal interaction (the sun donating energy to the earth in this instance). It is interesting to note that the tidal interaction results in a net gain by an orbiting body at the expense of the parent body.
It is also interesting to note that the moon is not seen belching smoke and fire out its backside as it accelerates through space. The Newtonian rocket is just one example of a redundant technological step introduced into a human process due to the fact that we remain to ignorant to be able to skip these redundant steps. The moon accelerates by means of a direct transfer of momentum from one momentum field to another momentum field, and the introduction of a redundant step into this process of transfer of momentum is not required. Therefore it logically follows that the next major leap forward must consist of doing away with our Newtonian devices, and the thinking that causes people to think that such devices are required (I cannot forget Carl Sagan stating emphatically that the Newtonian rocket would be our vehicle to the stars, a very backwards and myopic statement to have been made by a scientist, which then leads me to conclude that sooner or later the Cosmos television series will be relegated to antiquity and will in due course seem quite quaint, given that this statement was not the only dogmatic error to be pontificated upon in the course of that series of programs).
We must move through space like the moon moves through space. We must learn to properly understand and then to imitate nature. We must learn to transfer momentum energy directly from one momentum field to another, while skipping such very primitive and redundant steps as rubbing two sticks together to start something on fire. This will require a paradigm shift in the way we think about the gravitational field, for it will no longer be acceptable to think about gravitation as being ‘a matter based field' but rather we must accept that gravitation is an energy field and that gravitational field energy is just one more expression of energy in the Universal Energy Cycle. When we consider how gravitational energy is translated into electrical current by the Hoover Dam we can already see that there is nothing special about gravitation, but rather that a gravitational field must be just one more field in what must be a Unified Energy Field.
I have heard that discussion of ‘peak oil' is redundant, because even the most conservative estimates put the timing of ‘peak oil' at around the year 2030, after which time the world then experiences what is referred to as an ‘energy crisis'. As well most of the so called ‘green alternatives' are only ‘green' if you happen to be a human being, since most of these technologies, while they do not emit carbon, nevertheless disrupt nature and the creatures that live in the natural world would not find such disruptive technologies to be very green. For these reasons it is very important that a paradigm shift take place in our sciences in that people must change the way that they think about the gravitational field, which then requires a disruptive and uncomfortable revolution in our sciences (disruptive because scientists require grant money, which is always in short supply, and this requires scientists to write papers which are then papers which are rendered obsolete by wholesale revolutionary change in the sciences, which then causes scientists to become reactionary in their responses, which then slows down inevitable progress).
Many of the impediments in the way of further progress consist of mathematical problems in the sciences. This in turn is related to a prevailing belief that mathematics is a tool for solving scientific problems. This is an idealistic view of the power of mathematics and the problem that I have with this way of thinking is that it is not a very pragmatic approach, for it is possible to develop and employ a technology even though the abstract theory is not fully understood and therefore has not been described by intricate mathematics. Even so mathematical equations can be employed as a tool to criticism novel ideas with the claim being made that such ideas have been ‘debunked' because of the mathematical contradictions and objections. For this reason it is required that we ‘debunk' mathematics, or rather that we debunk the conventional wisdom which informs the mathematics if we are to have any hope of initiating the required paradigm shift. What this means is that we must critique Einstein's Theory of Relativity which is found to be the source of so many of these mathematical difficulties. We must even go so far as to commit the damnable heresy of debunking Einstein where this is required.
We have already outlined our first criticism of Einstein's theory of Gravity above in that this theory includes no explanation at all which would explain why it is that objects coast through space. We are told that objects coast through space, following the warped lines of that curved spacetime, but we are not told why such objects are found to be coasting through space. Therefore this is not saying much for if we are to understand the gravitational force field we must understand why objects insist on coasting through space even when they are parked on the surface of some gravitating body, for it is this persistent coasting through space that produces the gravitational force field. Any theory that fails to explain something as fundamental to gravitation as the gravitational force field is obviously a half baked theory of gravity. Therefore we can see that Einstein's theory describes the geometry of space and allows scientist to predict the path followed by some object which is coasting through space but says nothing at all about the nature of ‘conserved momentum'. To make matters worse such a narrow focus upon ‘matter based gravitation' which excludes the presence of an energy field impedes further understanding of the gravitational force field, and momentum in general, since this force field is just an expression of constant conserved momentum.
Most of the mathematical problems which impede progress towards a Unified Field Theory involve phenomenon that occur at very high energy levels. The equations produce meaningless mathematical infinities. The persistence of these problems is just nature's way of constantly reminding our scientists that our understanding of how the universe works is erroneous, in particular at high energy levels. Given that such equations only work at low energy levels and then collapse at high energy levels it would seem that our understanding of the universe is deeply flawed even at low energy levels, but we are able to ignore that problem because the mathematical models do not collapse at these lower energy levels, and thus appear to work.
Einstein's Theory of Relativity is a classical interpretation of the principle of relativity. What this means is that Einstein's theory should be called the ‘partial theory of relativity' or perhaps ‘the theory of the relative clock', for in Einstein's universe, which is the universe of truly classical physics, the only thing that is relative is the clock and everything else is therefore held to be fixed constants as truly classical physics requires. The alternative would be the full theory of relativity, where more than just some clock is relative, but that result in the demolition of the classical world view and the destruction of several centuries of work on truly classical physics. Therefore the acceptance of Einstein's classical interpretation is evidence for a strong theoretical bias in favor of classical physics and the entire classical anthropocentric world view that informs such classical physics, as well as a strong bias in favor of the belief that science consists of the discovery of inerrant truths which are then built upon by following generations in steps involving incremental progressive growth in our sciences. The alternative belief would be that sometimes science consists of the total destruction of what came before as being riddled with dreadful errors, and that such errors only seemed to be an inerrant scientific fact when interpreted through the lense of common anthropocentric thinking. It seemed quite correct and was in agreement with simple common sense.
Einstein was able to salvage centuries of classical physics by means of the simple device of assigning the required principle of relativity to a type of quarantine ward in the form of a hypothetical ‘fourth dimensional clock'. This fourth dimension was a relative dimension in that here one could shrink vectors and stretch vectors to ones heart content, while leaving the other three dimensions as fixed constants, as classical physics requires. Therefore, you see, it is two million light years to the Andromeda galaxy, as described by the three dimensions of classical physics, and as plotted on the axes of X, Y, and Z. X, Y, and Z are fixed constants, but the fourth dimension, call it T, is a relative dimension, and so while X, Y, and Z remain permanently fixed forever, nevertheless it is possible to stretch and contract vcctors along this T dimension, and that won't be a problem for classical physics, for X, Y, and Z remain fixed constants. The only problem that now remains is for someone to find some way of making the math work out right so that computers will not crash when the input is at high energy levels. The math works fine when you are at low energy levels. It is all very classical and turns out properly, just as simple common sense would dictate it should, but once you get up to those very high ‘relativistic' energy levels the whole mathematical system crashes.
What I am proposing as a solution to this perpetually troublesome enigmatic math problem is that we must give classical physics a thoroughly good trashing, and replace the partial theory of relativity, that theory of the relative clock, with the full theory of relativity. This will involve serious violations of the anthropocentric world view and violations of simple common sense, for what this means is that the Andromeda galaxy is not ‘two million light years distant', but rather the distance to Andromeda is relative.
We can either disprove this statement or prove this statement by conducting a conceptually simple experiment. Thanks to the work of Einstein all of classical physics is now found to be hanging precariously by a single thread. Does the fourth dimension really exist or was this relative clock dimension just a fictional theoretical device, the sole purpose of which was to facilitate the survival of classical physics (and the anthropocentric world view that informs classical physics) so that it would remain valid (or at least seem to remain valid) for at least one more century?
Before we describe this experiment it would be good to spend some time investigating some background information (anomalous experimental results that do not agree with current theory).
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?"
On the list of anomalous scientific results is the unexplained ‘Pioneer anomaly'. The two Pioneer spacecraft have been decelerating at a constant rate that causes them to fall behind by about 400,000 kilometers per year from their expected position in space. The calculated rate of deceleration is found to be mathematically equivalent to the result produced by employing ‘Hubble's constant' which then produces this rate of deceleration (Hubble's constant is employed to measure the ‘redshift'). Is this equivalence significant or just a random coincidence?
You may have heard about the search for the so called ‘dark matter of the universe'. The rotation of galaxies is measured by the ‘redshift', for those objects which are moving away faster in space emit radiation which is more ‘redshifted'.
Objects which are closer to the center of gravity orbit more quickly than objects further out from the center, as shown in the first image. However the observed orbit of the galaxies is shown in the second image. Galaxies rotate as though they were a single solid body, which then gives birth to the hypothesis of the ‘dark matter of the universe', which must compose most of the matter in a galaxy. According to this hypothesis the presence of all this dark matter then causes a galaxy to become similar to a single solid body with an anomalous observed rotation that you would expect to see if a galaxy was so full of dark matter that it would then rotate like a single solid body..
In the image above we see the expected ‘redshift curve' of galactic rotation (the dashed line) and we also the actually observed curve (the solid line). It would appear that the redshifting of light is a flat line, indicating an anomalous rotation of galaxies which then suggests that a great deal of ‘dark matter' must be present (the galaxy exhibits traits similar to that of one single solid body).
We see here three scientific anomalies that all have one thing in common, in that they all involve an anomalous redshift.
It was the production of anomalous results by the physics of the 19th century that led Albert Einstein to develop the Theory of Relativity. If an object was in motion, and a beam of light was sent out, and assuming that the object was moving in the opposite direction to that traveled by the beam of light, we would expect the beam of light to cross the distance and ‘arrive early'. However it was discovered that when objects are in motion the beam of light always arrives at the speed of light and crosses any distance as though it was moving at the speed of light, and the fact that the object is moving is irrelevant. Let's suppose that the distance to be covered by the beam of light was one hundred feet. The light will arrive at a detector one hundred feet away at the expected speed of light (some small fraction of a second). If the object is in motion such that the detector is moving towards the light source, this does not cause the beam of light to arrive early, for the beam of light still behaves as though it was covering the full one hundred feet, and therefore is traveling at the speed of light.
To explain this anomaly Albert Einstein proposed the existence of the ‘relative clock'. The principle of relativity was applied to this clock, which existed in a kind of ‘fourth dimension of the universe'. When an object is in motion, the clock slows down, and if we consider this slowing of the clock this explains the fact that the light beam always appears to travel at the speed of light (even though the object was in motion, time had slowed down, which then caused the light to arrive at the detector in the exact same fraction of a second it would take the light to travel one hundred feet if the object was stationary).
By proposing the existence of this ‘relative clock dimension' Albert Einstein was able to arrange a marriage between the fixed geometry of truly classical physics and the required principle of relativity. The fourth dimension then functioned like a quarantine ward for geometric relativity. The three dimensional geometry of space was fixed and invariant (all vectors had a fixed length) while the vectors along this fourth dimension of time were variable vectors (the time vector could be shorter or longer, and thus was a relative vector). What this meant was that the Andromeda Galaxy was two million light years distant, and this distance was a fixed and invariant constant (as defined along the fixed axes X, Y, and Z). However the time it took to travel to the Andromeda Galaxy was relative. One exact identical twin could travel to Andromeda, and if his velocity was high enough, thus causing his clock to slow down, he could make the trip to Andromeda and back in few hours, only to return to earth and find that millions and millions of years had passed, and his exact identical twin on earth was long gone. This is the classical interpretation of the principle of relativity proposed by Albert Einstein. Centuries of classical physics is able to coexist without a problem with this interpretation of the principle of relativity.
However over the course of the last centuries more anomalous results have been produced which must now bring into question Einstein's classical interpretation of the principle of relativity, and along with it the classical interpretation of fixed spatial geometry. It is possible to propose a solution to the current problems in our sciences by doing away with Einstein's partial theory of relativity (the theory of the relative clock dimension, since time is the only thing that is relative in Einstein's classical interpretation of the principle of relativity). We can accomplish this feat by doing away with Einstein's clock. The end result is that we wind up with the theory of total relativity, which then implies that the geometry of the universe itself is not fixed and invariant, as described by classical human physics, but rather it is the geometry of space itself which is relative. It then becomes possible to either refute or verify this new interpretation of the principle of relativity by conducting a very simple experiment which I will describe below. We do not need to speculate. We can make this determination with certainty. Either distance is relative or the clock is relative. One simple experiment will produce the correct answer.
There are already a number of indications that it is distance which is relative, and therefore the fourth dimensional relative clock is just a fictional scientific invention (the purpose of which was to protect classical physics from ruinous destruction when the principle of relativity was introduced into our sciences).
In the image above we see the world's fastest flash photograph, which is an image of several oscillations of a certain wavelength of light. Now in order for Einstein's mathematical system to hold together, it is required that we invent the theory known as ‘particle wave duality'. According to this enigmatic theory, light is both a particle (a photon) and a wave at the same time. If you try to measure a particle you get the result that light is a particle and if you try to measure a wave you get the result that light is a wave. Therefore it must be both a wave and particle at the same time. It also must be true that a photon (the particle of light) has ‘zero mass'. You cannot apply the equation E=MC2 to the energy of the photon. This is arbitrarily forbidden. I use the term ‘arbitrary' to describe this forbidden mathematical operation, for the only real reason that I can think of that one could not calculate the ‘mass equivalent' of a flying photon is because that cause a complete collapse of Einstein's mathematical system. We are forbidden to think of ‘the mass equivalent of a photon' because mathematics requires that this be forbidden. It is also forbidden to speak of the mass equivalent of the supposedly ‘massless' photon because in Einstein's system, no mass can travel at the speed of light, and if we wish to continue to use the fourth dimensional clock as a quarantine ward for the principle of relativity, and if we wish to maintain a fixed, and therefore truly classical system of geometry, we must not use the equation E-MC2 on a photon.
However if we dispose of Einstein's clock dimension and if we allow for the principle of the relativity of distance, then we can speak of the mass equivalent of a photon and it is not a problem, for the distance traveled by a photon is relative and the speed of light is irrelevant. The speed of light then becomes the speed of the propagation of a photon along this wave like path through the field, while the speed of the photon becomes the speed of the photon, which is actually faster than this ‘speed of light', which is just a measure of the speed of the propagation of this wave. We abandon particle wave duality and we assume that light is composed of particles (photons) and the wave function is simply the path taken through the field by this photon.
There is a high rise apartment located about two blocks away from where I live. I know that this high rise is a fixed distance away from my location, because I have the trustworthy testimony of those flying photons (particles of light). However those photons are not being completely honest, for photons with different momentum follow shorter or longer paths through the field. The distance covered by those photons is relative to their momentum, while only the wave function remains constant.
When we consider the Pioneer anomaly we can see that there appears to be an inverse relationship between the path followed by a ‘fermion' (which I define as a ‘mass of matter') and the path followed by a ‘boson' (which I define as a particle of energy). Now as the Pioneer spacecraft decelerates, this implies that the spacecraft is following an increasingly longer path. Now if the Pioneer craft is decelerating, and if we assume that the cause of the effect is the relativity of the geometry of space (the relativity of distance) then we can discount attempted Newtonian mechanical explanations (favored by classical physics for obvious reasons) for the spacecraft are not decelerating due to a loss of momentum, but rather the spacecraft are conserving momentum, while at the same time they are being forced to follow an increasingly longer path through the field. Now if it is true that the space craft are decelerating then it follows that the maximum potential velocity of the two spacecraft must be increasing (for it would require more momentum for the two Pioneer spacecraft to overcome the deceleration and maintain a constant velocity). Therefore it must be true that at the same time that the Pioneer spacecraft are decelerating the speed of light must be increasing (the maximum potential velocity). We can then see that as the spacecraft decelerates, the path of the light through the field must be redshifting, and since a redshifted path through the field is the shorter path the result is a constant relative acceleration of light. This then implies an inverse relationship such that as a mass of matter follows a longer path it must be true that a boson follows a shorter path.
In the example above we consider a mass of matter being dropped into increasingly powerful gravitational fields. The result is the constant relative acceleration of the mass of matter, with the acceleration increasing as the field strength increases. The end result of this process is that as gravitational field strength increases this produces the constant relative decrease in the fermion path length.
In the image above we revisit the spatial anomaly in a galaxy as described by those flying bosons, the photons. According to the photons, as gravitational field strength increases (near the very center of the galaxy) the path length increases. Now we know that if we drop a fermion (a mass of matter) into a powerful gravitational field it experiences a rapid acceleration, which implies that the path length decreases, which is the opposite to the report delivered by a photon, which is telling us that in a powerful gravitational field the path length increases. This is once again similar to the report given by the two Pioneer spacecraft which are moving away from the gravitational field of the sun, and are decelerating, which indicates an increasing path length, while the redshift suggests that in the weaker gravitational field the photons are accelerating (the path length is decreasing ie. becoming more redshifted).
From this we conclude that as far as momentum is concerned an inverse relationship is found to exist between fermions and bosons, in that if a fermion experiences an increase in momentum the result is ‘greater velocity', or what we would define as a shorter path through the field (which is the true meaning of velocity when interpreted according to the principle of the relativity of distance and relative geometry) while an increase in momentum for a boson results in a loss of relative velocity (the boson path becomes more blue shifted which is longer path through the field resulting in a constant relative deceleration).
According to the Special Theory of Relativity ‘space is homogenous' (which is another way of saying that the geometry of space is classical, invariant, and fixed) and so therefore we are not required to introduce ‘a velocity vector for electromagnetic radiation' (which is to say that the speed of light is not relative, but rather it is a fixed constant). However what the Pioneer effect is telling us is that space is not homogenous, and that therefore this assumption of Special Relativity is erroneous, and so whenever we wish to make a calculation that involves a vertical axis (and is not restricted to the two dimensional ‘flat' surface of a sphere) we must include a velocity vector for electromagnetic radiation (which is to say that space is not homogenous and that the speed of light is relative, referring here to the rate of propagation of the wave function, and not the photons which are following this path through the field). This is the true significance of the Pioneer anomaly. It is pointing out an error in the theory of Special Relativity.
Now it is possible to either prove or disprove the new theory of the relativity of distance by performing a simple experiment.
In the image above we see a very powerful electron gun firing ‘fermions' (little particles of matter having the property of mass) such as electrons at a detector, equipped with a very accurate clock. Now according to Einstein's classical interpretation of relativity, distance is fixed, and the clock is relative. Therefore no matter how powerful the gun becomes the electron can never reach the target ‘faster than the speed of light'. According to the theory of the relativity of distance, no such clock exists. All time is merely the product of motion through the field and all motion generates the time required for the motion to occur. Further, as momentum energy increases the path length through the field decreases. Therefore at the very highest energy levels the decreased path length generates a time which appears to be ‘faster than the speed of light'.
The result produced would be very similar to a classical Einstein graph, only inverted. At lower energy levels the results are quite similar to a linear fuction, which then creates the illusion that distance is a fixed constant and that something called ‘velocity' is increasing (according to the world view of classical physics). However at the very highest energy levels the spatial field begins to behave like a resonant amplifier of momentum energy, and the function becomes exponential.
What this means is that if you were to drop a fermion (a mass of matter) into a super powerful blackhole, it would achieve a super acceleration and impact the surface of the blackhole in a fraction of a second. The time required would be generated by the motion as it occurred since no clock actually exists in the universe. According to Einstein, it would take the fermion billions of years to slowly crawl into the blackhole, while to an observer on board a spacecraft plunging into the blackhole, the event would take a mere second or two (since the clock is relative but the geometry is fixed). Further more according to Einstein's classical interpretation, every fermion must follow the boson path, and since the path into a blackhole is the longest path for a boson, and would take billions and billions of years, therefore that must be how long it would take a mass of matter to fall into what common sense suggests must be the most powerful hole in the universe, and should therefore produce the most violent gravitational acceleration.
Currently modern physics is experiencing great problems at high energy levels. The mathematical equations completely collapse (producing meaningless infinity). I suggest here that the resolution of this problem is to be found by abandoning erroneous classical ideas concerning fixed geometry and instead accepting the strangeness of the principle of the relativity of distance, for such high energy problems are just nature's way of constantly reminding our scientists that their view of how the universe must behave at high energy levels is completely bogus.
It is possible that experiments have already been done which would verify the principle of the relativity of distance. It is known that Einstein's equations produce erroneous results when applied to certain experiments in quantum physics. This has led to the hypothesis that perhaps there must exists a ‘new form of time dilation' which is referred to as ‘electromagnetic time dilation', However we could compensate for the errors produced by postulating a relative path length that increases in length for bosons at higher field energy levels, which then explains the erroneous calculated ‘time dilation' without the need for inventing ‘electromagnetic time dilation'.
The Unified Field Theory is not simply an interesting and perhaps curious scientific abstraction. The recognition and acceptance of the Unified Field leads directly to new forms of propulsion and then directly towards new forms of energy which are truly green, clean, and inexhaustible. This is not a pipe dream, for the one of the purposes of the UFT is to enable us to transfer momentum directly from one momentum field to another momentum field, and this happens all the time in nature. For example the moon gains about 3 centimeters in orbital altitude each year by means of a direct transfer of momentum energy from the momentum field of the earth to the momentum field of the moon. It is a trivial matter to generate electricity using momentum energy and we do this all the time when we use the motion of water across a short distance of three dimensional space to then turn an electromagnetic turbine generator in the Hoover Dam. What the UFT proposes is that we skip these redundant primitive steps of our existing Newtonian technology, such as building dams or rubbing two sticks together to start something on fire, and transfer momentum directly from one field to another. Before we can achieve this we must rid ourselves of that one troublesome disunified Field that is the source of all the problems in our sciences today, the so called ‘gravitational field,' which is impossible to unify because it is said to be an ‘attractive matter based field' and given that it has ‘no repulsive force' is therefore enigmatic and impossible to reconcile with every other force, for these other forces are recognized as being energy fields with a different behavior.
You may have heard about the Smith Hydrogen Cloud which has entered the system of our Milky Way Galaxy with an expected impact date about 50,000 years from now. This cloud has wandered through the empty void of space for millions or perhaps even billions of years, and in all that time has not produced a single star. This is in spite of the fact that such a cloud has enough ‘gravitational mass' to form millions of stars or perhaps even one very large black hole. Now consider the behavior of gases. Hot gas expands, cooler gas contracts. There is no existing evidence to support the hypothesis that a ‘mass of matter' possesses some sort of inherent ‘attractive force' directed towards other masses which would then cause some hydrogen cloud to overcome the natural repulsive force we see in gases, and thus clump together to form a ‘gravitational mass'. Something is missing from our theory of gravity, and that something turns out to be the electromagnetic field (which is to say we are missing the Unified Field Theory). There is observational evidence to support this Unified Field Theory, which I present in the pages below, which is more than can be said in favor of that ‘matter based theory of gravity'.
Description of an Anti-Gravity Device
If the theory of the Unified Field is correct, then the problem of new forms of propulsion is simplified in an incredibly elegant design, which then renders the great complexity of older Newtonian devices redundant. This astonishing simplification of technology then implies that the Unified Field Theory results in an explosive technological revolution, with the main beneficiaries being the one billion of the poorest people in the world who are suffering such effects of primitive backwardness as perpetual malnourishment, and who could not be expected to benefit from primitive and overly complex Newtonian technology until many centuries has passed.
The simple explanation of the Anti-Gravitational propulsion is that it is a logically following consequence of the fact that a gravitational field is actually a disguised electromagnetic field and that what we call ‘matter' is actually a disguised form of energy (as described by the famous equation E=MC2). Therefore all that is required to cause a craft to float in the air is to combine the mass energy of the craft with the momentum energy of a powerful electromagnetic field, and because the field cannot distinguish any difference between energy in the form of mass or energy in the form of ‘momentum' the result is propulsion (similar to the way a primitive rocket exhibits an anti-gravity effect and rises in the field as its momentum increases).
Theoretical Description of an Anti-Gravity Device
This experiment is the fundamental and most important experiment to test the validity of the Unified Field Theory, and the only reason such an effect has not been observed is the energy level required of the embedded electromagnetic field required to levitate such a simple craft. Therefore to quote Einstein, on page 75 of his book Relativity...a popular exposition (he was speaking of the experiment to measure whether star light bends around the field of the sun)
"The examination of the correctness or otherwise of this
deduction is a problem of the greatest importance, the
early solution of which is to be expected of astronomers (scientists)."
This page on ‘anti-gravity' is a continuation of the page questioning whether or not a ‘gravitational force field' is a fictional scientific redundancy.
Does the Gravitational Force Really Exist?
The ‘Dark Energy' of the universe turns out to be the Unified Field.
Our current math equations have failed. For this reason it is required that we drop ‘Dark Matter' into the universe so that those failed equations can continue to be used in the future.
The Unified Field Theory requires of us that we refute Einstein's classical view of fixed geometry.
The following pages document the progress towards a solution to this problem.
Relativity of Distance
Experimental Refutation of Einstein's Classical Geometry
Older Summation of the Unified Field Theory
Theoretical Description of an 'Anti-Gravity' Device
Does the 'Gravitational Field' really exist?