Theoretical Bias

Let's assume that your mother's house was sixty miles away and that you traveled at sixty miles per hour. You would arrive in one hour. Let us suppose that you were to travel at one hundred and twenty miles per hour. You would arrive in one half hour. As we can see the distance to your mother's house is a fixed constant, while your velocity and your time are variable, with time being relative in relationship to your velocity.

Now let us suppose that we consider time to be a creation of the energy field, much like a baked potato or anything else that exists in the universe. A strong relationship exists between this ‘time' and field density, in that the pendulum swings more slowly in high density regions of the field (clocks slow down) which suggests that the pendulum is swinging through gluey syrup. If we cracked open the hood, and stripped the clock down to its gears, what would we discover? Where is this pendulum located? How does it function? I make the suggestion here that ‘time' is a secondary by-product, and therefore has no independent reality of its own, and that all motion in the universe generates the time required for this motion to occur.

This leads to the conclusion that Einstein was wrong, and that ‘space' is not ‘homogenous' and that, contrary to Einstein's fundamental postulate, we do need to assign a velocity vector to electromagnetic radiation (which is to say that the speed of light is relative and changes from one relative frame to another). The rate at which motion generated by quantum processes can occur is dependant upon surrounding field density which impedes the communication of information between quantum processes (the exchange of bosons, such as photons) and this is our pendulum, which swings slowly in a vat of gluey syrup and more quickly as the syrup becomes more dilute (in lower density regions of the field).

With this nuts and bolts explanation of the time like phenomenon, we can then dispose of this idea that the universe comes with clock included and that energy field and clock form a team with clock ticks doling out time so that there is enough time for field motion to occur. Rather we consider the clock to be a creation of the energy field, much like a baked potato is a creation of this energy field. With these thoughts in mind, we then dispose of the so called fourth dimension of the universe, and consider such a scientific fiction to have been made redundant.

Now let us see what conclusions we must now draw as a consequence of throwing out this alleged fourth dimension. You drive to your mom's house. It is sixty miles. Your momentum is such that your motion through the field generates a time your brain then interprets to be ‘one hour', which indicates that the distance you covered was sixty miles. You increase your momentum such that your motion through the field generates a time you experience as being ‘one half hour' which indicates that the distance you covered was thirty miles.

It is well known that Albert Einstein had a powerful theoretical bias against the relativity of distance. We can therefore see how useful it is to have a fourth dimension of time and a universe that comes with a clock included. When you toss out Einstein's clock you are left with the relativity of distance, a concept Einstein abhorred. By including this clock Einstein made the attempt to arrange a marriage between classical physics and the principle of relativity, with classical physics making the transition virtually intact. That a divorce is required is best demonstrated by all that chronic choking on Einstein that our sciences have been doing for decades, with the problems just getting worse as time goes by.

Let us compare out two possible universes, one with clock and one without clock. In Einstein's universe you drop some fermion into a gigantic fermion hole at the center of the galaxy. Now all fermions must follow the boson path, this being required if such a marriage as the one proposed by Einstein is to be consummated. Therefore the fermion will take two billion years to crawl down that hole, while the fermion path is shoved out of the universe and forced to occur along some fictional fourth dimension. You see an interesting illusion will be produced in that in the fourth dimension the fermion will go screaming down that black hole and smack the bottom perhaps in a mere matter of seconds. Of course in the real universe the fermion actually took two billion years to crawl like a snail down that hole, being a fermion forced onto the boson path, which is required if such a marriage is to be happy and harmonious. Of course such a marriage has not proven to be harmonious and those two mismatched partners are found to be in constant conflict.

Now a green sweater is not actually a green sweater, but rather ‘green' is an interpretation placed upon a certain frequency of electromagnetic radiation by the neurons in the human brain. We assume that everything that exists in the universe is a creation of the energy field, and therefore a ‘three dimensional space' is also an arrangement of field energy which is then interpreted, with the help of those helpful bosons, as ‘a three dimensional void'.





In the image above we drop fermions (masses of matter) into fermion holes (gravitational fields). As the field intensity increases, the rate of acceleration experienced by fermions increases, and this produces the effect of a constant relative decrease in the fermion path length. We make this assumption because the fermion in motion through this field has ‘conserved momentum' and yet it experiences acceleration. In the universe with no clock included we are then forced to move the fermion path out of the fourth dimension and back into the real world, with all the shattering consequences for ‘classical physics' that then must follow. The fermion will go screaming down into that black hole achieving a virtually infinite velocity and impacting the surface of that enormous hole in what we would perceive as a virtually instantaneous time.

An objection will then be raised in that no fermion can fail to follow the boson path, which is to say that no fermion can ‘travel faster than the speed of light'. However, when you consider that the distance covered by that fermion was relative, and that fermions do not travel across three dimensional space but are in motion in an enigmatic energy field, it turns out that such an objection is bogus, and is the product of a strong theoretical bias against the relativity of distance. This bias is the product of nothing more than the accumulation of mundane everyday experience and therefore an anthropocentric projection onto the energy field.

That this theoretical bias in favor of classical physics produces bogus science is best demonstrated by all that choking on Einstein that is characteristic of twentieth century science, and is also demonstrated by the type of nonsense such a biased theory produces at very high energy levels, which then requires all that ‘remormalization' of such badly behaved math equations, while everyone is baffled by the problem and wonders what could possibly be wrong in our sciences. The reason why no solution is ever found is because the solution is so bizarre as to be almost incomprehensible. The solution is such a total violation of ‘normal common sense' that the correct solution is always rejected and the end result is the production of a large number of really weird sounding theories, since it would appear that the universe does require some kind of weird explanation. This only turns out to be a problem when science generates countless weird ideas instead of just one really good weird idea, since at the end of it all only one really super weird idea is all that science requires, for science requires an accurate theoretical description of the universe, and has no real use for all the hundreds of weird sounding speculations that must be generated while the search continues for that one really weird explanation that is the correct solution.

Gravitation as a Velocity Field

Effects generated by a gravitational field are duplicated by an object moving through space with a certain velocity. If we wish to understand why this would be the case we must put aside certain ancient biases which lead us to expect a clock work universe which operates like a finely crafted Swiss watch. These biases were expressions of a certain sentimental theological view which held that God, an expert craftsman, would of course design the very finest and best calibrated Swiss Watch, and therefore it was the job of a scientist to study the Harmony of the Spheres so as to allow us all the marvel at the perfection of natural law.

A gravitational field is a contradiction in the universe, in that any ‘mass of matter', no matter the size or the manner in which that ‘mass' is organized, represents a discontinuity in the energy field (here we make an assumption that the universe is an energy field which has now become quantized). The assumption here is similar to that described as a ‘Higgs Field' in particular physics, with the difference being that for the purposes of this theory we assume that the same ‘Higgs Mechanism' that ‘gives matter its property of being a mass' is the same mechanism that gives a ‘mass of masses' its mass (the gravitational field) for a tiny particle represents a field discontinuity as does a large mass of masses.

A moving object traveling at a certain velocity also represents a field discontinuity, and therefore it is shoved from location to location within the field (transferring the problem from location to location within the field, where the process continues). It is for this reason that we make the assumption that the gravitational field exhibits the behavior of a moving body with a certain velocity, for a gravitational field is a field with a virtual velocity. That this virtual velocity exists is demonstrated best by that perpetual force field experienced by any body at rest on the surface of such a body, and therefore not in motion. You should be moving with a certain velocity in a gravitational field, for an object within such a field represents a field discontinuity which must then be pushed and shoved around.

We can see then that the universe is not constructed like a fine Swiss watch, but rather that the universe is the product of an intractable contradiction (the disharmony of the spheres, the unnatural law) in that masses of matter should not exist, and yet they do, and the result is the creation of an energy field in a constant search for perfect field entropy that is impossible to ever achieve. This then generates perpetual motion which is the exact opposite of the desired state of entropy. The gravitational field is a velocity field then because the gravitational field is a Don Quixote field. Those masses of matters must be pushed around so that field entropy can be restored, and that if that means pushing some mass of matter when it is stuck together in a big lump, and thus unable to move, then so be it. That Don Quixote field will then be found pushing that mass while attempting to achieve a virtual velocity by imparting motion to a motionless mass. The effect is similar to that of the irresistible force attempting to push the immovable object.

The Story of Pop and Fresh

You may have heard stories circulating concerning Pop and Fresh, the Pop-up electron, the now you see it now you don't electron, the electron that possesses apparent ‘infinite velocity' in that Pop and Fresh has this inexplicable habit of suddenly popping up somewhere apparently having covered the distance between two points in apparent zero time with an apparent infinite velocity.

Controversy then ensues and it would be suggested that the experiment was obviously producing erroneous results, and therefore the search for answers involves finding out what went wrong, how the experiment was designed in the wrong way, how we interpreted the results incorrectly, and so on.

The Cosmic Ray Anomaly

Cosmic Rays are bits of matter accelerated to energy levels one hundred million to even one billion times the energy level achieved in particle accelerators on earth. The Large Hadron Collider accelerates protons to within one millionth of one percent of the speed of light. Cosmic Rays, we are told, travel at ‘almost the speed of light', the idea here being that even if you pushed some particle one hundred million times harder than the LHC that particle would only come within one trillionth of one percent of the speed of light as the result of all that extra pushing.

There is a controversy involved in the interpretation of the data set generated by the study of these cosmic rays, in that, according to conventional theory, very high energy cosmic rays should be destroyed (reduced to lower energy levels) before reaching the earth, having been involved in collisions out in space, which then suggests that such rays must be produced by a local source. It has been suggested that such cosmic rays are evenly distributed much like the background radiation, and this then led to the hypothesis that the very high energy particles emitted by this local source were twisted by the galactic magnetic field making it seem like they were coming from distant points in the universe rather than a local source.

A new data set suggests that the cosmic rays originate in active black holes (that percentage of galaxies that include an active quasar) in that the distribution is not entirely random but rather the most super energetic cosmic rays are found to be clustered around the spots in the sky where such quasars are found.

Now if we accept the principle of the relativity of distance, then we can see that in a sense these super energetic particles are ‘local' and that they bring news from a far off galaxy that is very recent and therefore much more up to date than the news delivered by some boson, which only reports on things that happened millions or even billions of years ago, for the boson follows the boson path and generates millions and billions of years of this time while doing so.

Experiment

I have always thought that there are to many theories, not enough experiments. Now the way to deal with a scientist is not to regal that scientist with some weird idea. I am a very busy person myself, and therefore I have no time for theories. If I see something that purports to be a ‘Unified Field Theory', or any kind of theory about anything at all, and that is all that it is (a theory) then I ignore it. The correct way to deal with scientists is to suspend a piano over their heads by means of a slender wire, and then leave behind a pair of scissors. That way everyone can worry that perhaps someone might pick up the scissors and cut the wire, thus causing the suspended piano to drop. Hanging pianos is the best way to rivet the attention, while hanging theories is not. It is for this reason that I am always on the look out for a grand piano. I leave behind a pair of scissors because I am only a highly abstract theorist myself, and do not actually conduct experiments, which would require grant money and facilities and so on. I also believe that keeping things at the very highest level of abstraction is required for it is the only way to deal with the truly mind numbing complexity of modern science, which could result in a person becoming bogged down perpetually in some infinity of minutia, thus resulting in the generation of a theory in perhaps one century, with a little luck included.





As I look out my window I can see that there is a building located about two blocks down the street. I know that this building is located at a distance of two city blocks because I rely upon the trustworthy testimony of those flying bosons, the photons. However at the same time I make note of the fact that when a photon testifies that distance is not relative, but rather is a fixed constant, that photon is not being completely honest, in that a red shifted path through the field is a shorter path through the field than the longer path navigated by a blue shifted photon. I am making the assumption here that the so called ‘speed of light' is actually a measurement of the propagation of this wave like photon path. I am also assuming that a photon has a meaningful momentum which implies that a photon possesses a velocity vector. It would appear, that the momentum and thus the velocity vector of a boson, like that photon, is found to be in an inverse relationship to the velocity vector of a fermion, in that a lower momentum photon translates into a shorter path through the field (or an effective relative acceleration). I also make the theoretical assumption that the only reason a photon must have ‘zero mass' and a meaningless momentum is due to theoretical bias against the concept of the relativity of distance (for this is the consequence that emerges when one disposes of these traditional Einstein concepts).





Now let us suppose that I want a second opinion as to the actual distance in this supposedly ‘three dimensional space', and therefore I decided to consult a fermion, instead of relying exclusively upon the interpretation my brain places upon the testimony delivered by those photons. In this case I imagine that I have created an electron gun. I have a dial to control the energy level of the fermions (so as to increase and decrease the energy) and I have a detector with a very precise clock located on the building two blocks down the street.





We will assume that this building is like your mother's house. I will begin to generate different results describing the distance between the gun and the detector, and the time generated will correspond to the relative increase or decrease in distance. I will assemble a data set, and the result will be the production of a graph very similar to those Einstein graphs, only inverted (as the fermion time heads towards some unattainable infinity, the reason for this being that the fermion is in motion through the field, and therefore can never generate a truly zero, or instantaneous time, so that no matter how hard one pushed that fermion, the result would always be the generation of some time, even if the time was only a tiny fraction of some picosecond...for this reason we must assume that Pop and Fresh, the pop up electron, never shows up instantly, and never pops up ‘out of nowhere', but rather the clock was inadequate).





One way to compensate for an inadequate clock would be to conduct the experiment out in space. Space is hardly a vacuum, and there are possible collisions to consider. However if super high energy cosmic rays can on occasion make the trip, we assume that our generated fermions will sometimes survive. If we fire the gun like a machine gun, it could be that the effect will be similar to that of a snow plow clearing a path through the field, with the result that the vacuum of space becomes much more like a vacuum. We make the assumption that as we move the detector farther away, we must increase the energy level if we wish to generate an equivalent time (which would suggest that the relativity of distance is dependant upon both the energy level of the momentum field of the fermion, as well as some underlying field geometry or underlying field property which determines the energy required to generate motion within the field from one point to another).

One of the potential problems associated with conducting such an experiment, is that it could turn out to be the billion dollar experiment (expensive clock, expensive gun), for we would expect the most bizarre manifestations of time dilation and the relativity of distance to occur at the very highest energy levels. However the controversy over the existence (or not) of Pop and Fresh, the pop up electron, gives me confidence that such an experiment might be feasible even today, for while we might not be able to reproduce the effects at truly fantastic energy levels (such as those found in energetic cosmic rays) all we need to do is to systematically make Pop and Fresh ‘travel faster than the speed of light', while assembling a data set and generating the required mathematical equation.