Sunday, February 3, 2013

Provocation Spreads the Theory of Something and a New Electron Picture

Under the blog post from January 5th you find comments relating to this post from Anonymous/James and Ta Wan, together with my replies that you may want to catch up with before reading this. I have been busy with other things since the excitement after the short video, the face book spread and Lumo’s tennis racket attack a month ago.

All of that was good, since there were many downloads of the both the Summary and of the full Theory of Something document, which I hope mean that some scientists and other interested actually are reading the ToS. Both documents are now updated to version 1.4, including the new electron picture below and some minor adjustments. 

Ta Wan gave this comment about the Theory of Something below:
"if it's dead wrong, it's interesting and creative." dead right. it is interesting and creative. I'd love for it to be right.  as said above also. in 100 pages and with all the maths it must be easy to prove wrong if it is wrong.  I think nature works this way. at least it would be cool if it did. come on those who can review with authority, take a look. just over 100 pages. nothing to lose, a lot to gain.

I can only agree. The ToS is clear and simple enough to be understood, challenged or confirmed. Although already more supported than other theories, there are many, many computer simulations that could be done, experiments to do, old data to be checked and continuation, improvements and developments of the ToS to done. Some will come soon.

Also, the ToS is not a small incremental advance in a specific field (which seems to be what the peer-review system is about), but a major rewrite of the last 100 years research of the fundamentals of Nature. That is like saying that thousands of scientists have been marching in an ever more complex, obscure direction, missing the obvious, much simpler solution. That is of course not easily swallowed and digested, but questioned just by definition.
I guess many still have the ToS in the unread crackpot pile, for the simple reason it is too good to be true. Actually, I have received no qualified major objections yet - NO! The ToS gets some appreciation and of course some “rubbish comments” from those that has not opened it, and persons like A-Anonymous that has replaced knowledge and curiosity with obscene language.   

I am hoping for some influential scientists to speak up, but that seems to take time to happen. It is a large and daring step to take – but one cannot look away and ignore forever, especially if there is provocation and the ToS is being spread. Next video in progress may provoke some…

Lumo’s (Lubos Motl’s) review of his self-invented tennis racket theory, the TrT, gave many Theory of Something visitors and face book friends - and tennis-related ads on his blog J  I am still awaiting his return though; He does have a brain and knowledge in this field even if it is very narrowed at string-theory as the only way.

Lumo did one interesting statement: “A true description of Nature isn't necessarily easy to be visualized.” That is certainly the general view, and was also mine until a year ago, since quantum mechanics took over in the last 100 years.

However, I got highly surprised during the development of the ToS, that the smallest in Nature actually could be understood and visualized:
- The photon as the rotation of a negtrino in the Grid (ToS 3.1.3)
- All particle cores just made up of “negtrino magnets” (ToS 4)
- Grid rooms and the very nature of mass and gravity (ToS 4)
- Dark energy just being a tiny charge overpressure in the Grid (ToS 5)
- Gravity – curved space-time – simply being reduced negtrino density in the Grid (ToS 4.3.5)
- Energy being magnetic moment density, and its conservation by the Grid (ToS 6.3)
- A black hole just being positive charge, postrinos, i.e. anti-matter (ToS 4.7.2)

One example of such visualization is the new picture of the electron I made few days ago and is publishing now. After some thinking and sleep on how the 9 negtrinos in the electron Grid room could be arranged, I came up with the picture shown. With some “childish touch and feel”-understanding how electrostatic and magnetic forces work, it is not hard to understand the outlined locations and directions of the grey/white negtrinos in its Grid room. The magnetic energy, 57 keV, of those 9 negtrinos coupled to the electron instead of to the Grid, gives the electron its mass of 9 x 57 = 511 keV. We can also see how 6 additional negtrinos in the Grid are pushed away by electrostatic forces, giving the electron its visible charge:  -9/3e in the core +6/3e pushed-off = -3/3e = -1e. (See figures 28 – 29 in the ToS.)

With this visualization of the electron, the wave-like behavior of an electron can also be understood. The electron is not just a point particle with < 1 fm (10-15 m) size. It is an irregular 35 pm (35 x 10-12 m) 35 thousand times larger structure, shaking up the Grid when moving, thus creating electromagnetic waves that certainly can move through two slits even if the electron core just goes through one of the slits.

With a single particle, the negtrino having only charge and magnetic momentum as qualities (in addition to its very small size), the ToS becomes simple. The ToS explains far more than any other theory – even what was thought to be fundamental physical laws that “just exits” has been derived from the simple ToS model. In the ToS there is just one force, one fundamental law (ToS 8.2) and no fine-tuned constants at all. The ToS stays in 3 room dimensions, time and electrical charge and I claim that is all needed for universes to exist, http://bit.ly/TheCreation. That should provoke! 

Saturday, January 5, 2013

The above article confirms the ToS view that space is a "quite stable and calm" place as discussed at the Viewers Q&A November 19. There is no Quantum Foam when the Grid is in place!

Facebook Page Now Open and Lumo's Tennis Racket


I have now opened a Theory of Something facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/pages/Theory-of-Something/421818067874247. I am not sure how active I will be able to be there though.

And today famous Lubos Motl posted a long blog entry about the Theory of Something, having interpreted the magnifying glass in the picture below (from the video http://youtu.be/q5pyRlqSbeE) as a 2 dimensional tennis racket thing!? I actually believe Lumo's is a lot smarter than that, if he just would open the ToS, which he apparently had not, when writing the blog entry. 

Below is my response to: http://motls.blogspot.com/2013/01/theory-of-something-qm-has-reached.html.  It was still "awaiting moderation" when I wrote this. Hope he publishes it and responds after reading up on the ToS.

I would like to see real reviews from the scientific community, even if Lumo is a bit controversial after calling scientific colleagues crackpots too many times.

Hi Lumo, G.D. Tosman of Theory of Something is here. Good of you to have a look, but please look deeper! The picture does not show a TENNIS RACKET – It is a magnifying glass and the structure inside is 3 dimensional (even if your screen is 2D…). 

The tennis racket view is an original approach though. :) Other approaches yielding similar conclusions are usually based on that “the Theory of Something is too good to be true” (or explains too much and even changes the fundamentals), so it must be crackpot.   (long continuation after Read more)

Monday, December 31, 2012

Theories Based on Quantum Mechanics Have Reached Their Limits


We published a short video (http://youtu.be/q5pyRlqSbeE) and sent out a press release to illustrate how a simple particle is a complex structure, with mass surrounding the particle rather than being inside the particle.

That is why we have the mysteries of the quantum world: Uncertainty, dislocality, with both a particle and a wave behavior. Quantum mechanics based theories can hardly be on the right track of describing mass and are very far from incorporating gravity.


Albert Einstein stated that Quantum Mechanics could not be a complete theory, when introduced around 100 years ago. In the Theory of Something, we thank James Clerk Maxwell for completing classic electromagnetism 150 years ago. Electricity is Everything!

The previous blog entry, how I derived Newton’s fundamental physical laws, both F=ma and the gravity law, is still popular. Electricity is now the top law from which all other laws should be able to derive – Even Quantum Mechanics!

A Happy New Year, /G.D. Tosman

Monday, November 26, 2012

Two press releases teaching about the mysterious dark energy are published today:

and

The dark energy certainly does more than accelerate distant galaxies – still it is just a tiny 10-50 additional charge density in the Grid.

For viewers that want to dig deeper, I recommend the ToS Summary that also lists the support and proofs of the Theory of Something.

Here are a few pointers to the details discussed in the above releases (into the Theory of Something):
ToS section 3: The Grid of Charge particles
ToS section 3.1.1: The Photon and Planck’s Constant Showing Up
ToS section 4.3: The Mass of Particles and Generation of Gravity
ToS section 5: Dark Energy, F=ma and the Gravity Law
ToS section 6.1: Tying Cosmology to the Quantum World – Planck’s Constant and the Revised View on Mass (See also the Introduction above.)

A popular question is still whether I have confused Weight and Mass, which is best addressed at the previousblog entry. The ToS proves that they are equal, by deriving both F=ma and the gravity law from electricity. Newton’s fundamental mechanical laws of physics are not fundamental anymore – They are derived from electricity, which is the fundamental law of physics!

Monday, October 22, 2012

The Michaelson-Morely Experiments and Special Relativity


At the Viewer’s Q&A page, I just added a response to the popular question whether the hundred year’s old Michelson–Morley experiments and Einstein’s special relativity are in conflict with the ToS. They are NOT – but they have been misinterpreted. They actually confirm the ToS and remove the mystery around them. There is a reality and we can now understand why the speed of light always has been measured to be the same, independent of movements of the light source (true) and of the observer. That latter is a systematic measurement flaw because the Grid rooms around matter have not been known before the ToS.

New experiments are proposed to show the existence of the Grid rooms surrounding matter objects and that the speed of light certainly varies with movements of the observer – when measured outside of the observer’s Grid room. The speed of light is simply constant in relation to the Grid – just as expected with an “aether” – the medium in which light propagates.

The experiments can also confirm the ToS prediction that most of the mass is outside of an object and that the space contributes with 96.4 kg/m3.

The second most popular question is whether I have confused Weight and Mass, which is best addressed at the previous blog entry. The ToS proves that they are equal, by deriving both F=ma and the gravity law from electricity.

Newton’s fundamental mechanical laws of physics are not fundamental anymore – They are derived from electricity, which is the fundamental law of physics! In addition, the force accelerating distant galaxies (attributed to the dark energy) is predicted and derived. That is a third force acting upon mass, the one and only mass that also gravity and Newton’s second law motion (F=ma) acts upon.

Friday, October 12, 2012

THERE IS AN UNDERSTANDABLE REALITY BEHIND MASS AND GRAVITY!

The Theory of Something radically changes our view on reality - It actually provides a reality that is missing in other current descriptions of the Grand Design. Sometimes, the "the Earth can't be round - We know it is flat"-attitude triggers an attack that gives a good opportunity to explain...

I got the following comments:

This stuff is hilarious! Too bad they don't give Nobel Prizes in Physics for comedy. This would win, hands down!

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Time to Bring the ToS Outside the US - Now UK

The press release last month from Theory of Something was only distributed in the US where 75% of the clicks are coming from. Today it is going out to the UK. Viewers from the press release are welcomed here.

I have updated the Summery of the ToS to version 1.1, mainly by adding a summary of the limitations and generalization of electromagnetism and Something out Nothing (ToS 8) and the Creation (ToS 9) as section 2.11 in the Summary.

I have also updated the full Theory of Something document to version 1.2 by adjusting some pictures and texts. I also added some paragraphs in relation to the discussions with TinaK below, like the historic mistake of adding current (A) as base unit in 1933-1946, going from 3 to 4 units, without making kg for mass a derived unit (new ToS 6.2.1). 

kg is As2/mand staying with only 3 base units, would have changed science! Length (m), time (s) and charge (C=As) are the base units in the ToS and there is only One Force, the electromagnetic. 

Another addition to ToS 8.2.2 is the remarkable match of the 1.4 pm reach of the force between negtrinos in composed particles (from simple electromagnetic estimations) compared to the reach of the Strong Force in the Standard Model that TinaK pointed out below.

The Nobel Prize in physics will be announced today. My guess is that the committee awaits the final results from CERN and LHC before giving it to "the Higgs". How will I otherwise handle my suspicion in ToS 4.4.2, that the bump at 125.3 GeV just is four different short lived heavy particles that each happens to have a mass centered in the announced 125.3±0.6 GeV/c2 range?

Saturday, October 6, 2012

New highly interesting comment by TinaK (comment to last post):

Thanks again for your responses. I have read all of the 112 pages of the ToS and we really need to revise our view on reality – You have discovered the reality behind the mysticism and major questions from the smallest particle to the whole universe. I don’t see how the derived mechanical physical laws and much more can be disputed – has anyone done that?”

GD: If some are disputing the ToS reality with all proofs and numbers matching, where are they hiding? 

“When coming to chapter 8.2.2, I really got shocked (again) when you show that simple

Thursday, October 4, 2012

I got a very interesting comment from TinaK (see below, more added now):

"I found this amazing Theory of Something 3 days ago via a WOW remark at Yahoo News. I have not read all yet but to me this looks like you are closing up after Einstein and that quantum physics lead all scientists into a gigantic ghost hunt! You seem to even finishing Maxwell’s work 150 years ago and getting Einstein’s findings into a “Something” that can be understood and you are showing. Isn’t that the case?"

GD: Thanks for your kind and observant observation, even if I would not express it as a “gigantic ghost hunt” :-)  Some things are difficult to understand and grasp when everyone is going in the same direction.

"One of the most amazing things I see is that “there is no mass”. kg = As^2/m^3! When thinking about that, isn’t it strange that kg shows up in a pure simple electric law like Coloumb’s? The force between two charges doesn’t have anything to do with mass, yet both in force F and epsilon-zero the kg comes in. Kg should have been eliminated already then, shouldn’t it? How could that have happened?"

GD: Your comment on Coulomb’s law (that the force between static electric charges of course should not include mass - kg - at all) is very noteworthy and interesting. That should have been observed and sorted out long ago. 

I looked it up and it seems that “mistake” happened when Current (A) was added as a base unit in 1933-1946 (the World War II came in between). Having just the 3 base units Length (m or cm), Time (s) and Mass (kg or g) before (Even for electrical units!) lead to confusing systems, so Current (A) was added. But one should then have made kg a derived unit As2/m3 and stayed with only 3 base units instead of increasing them to 4.

Maybe that would have stopped the “ghost hunt” trying to find mass and gravity in particles, when they are mechanisms.

Maybe I will do a table to show what happens when eliminating one of the four base units - You can actually eliminate anyone of them, but only replacing kg with As2/m3 makes sense and a very beautiful system, see the table at Viewer's Q&A.

More from TinaK, October 4:
"Thanks for your responses! What about Quantum Mechanics and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle in 1927, didn’t that contribute to the scientific “ghost hunt” where everyone still is going (String Theory and QLG latest)? I saw some views on that your Q&A page: > Does Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle Apply?"

GD: Yes, my comment is at Viewer's Q&A.

We electricians know that we cannot understand some things by just looking at frequencies on a spectrum analyzer (like using your ears but closing your eyes) (=Quantum Mechanics). To understand the reality, you also (firstly) need to use an oscilloscope and look at a signal in the time domain (like using your eyes) (=classical electricity or mechanics). You cannot find out how a violin is designed just by analyzing its frequencies, without even knowing whether it is a tape recorder, an iPod or a real violin you are trying to describe! 

I don’t understand why current quantum theories don’t consider that and realize that such methods have their limits. It may never be possible to describe mechanisms such as Einstein’s gravity (and now also Mass in the ToS 4.3) using Quantum Mechanics.

But Quantum Mechanics has made valuable predictions which have been confirmed in experiments when you don’t have a clue of what it is you are describing :-)  But I don’t think it is applicable to more complex things.

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Time to Bring the ToS to the Public and Scientific Community


Today theoryofsomething.com is sending out a press release. Let’s see if it reaches the right public and scientific community.

I made a Summaryof the ToS that is lot lighter and quicker to read and grasp, and also lists the support and proofs of the ToS.

The strongest proof that there is something out there - the negtrino in the Grid - something important spaced 10.15 picometer apart, was a big surprise to me find out. I was doing some cosmological calculations, and suddenly, I saw the number of Planck’s constant showing up, 1.0545x10-34!? Where did that come from? But the units were all wrong – not the Js that it should be.

It actually took quite long time before I understood what it meant - the dark energy in the universe per negtrino and revolution – and that mass is not a quality of particles, kg is not a base unit:

What has surprised me most when developing the ToS over the last 9 months, is not that I get away with one particle and one force and that it is all electricity. The mass being outside an object instead of inside the object is of course very surprising, but most surprising is that when discovering the smallest at the very bottom level, I could actually understand things and physical laws that I never thought was possible to get a clear picture of.

Now I understand and hope the reader of the ToS also will be able to understand:
-          Why the negative electron does not fall into the positive atom nucleus
-          How particles are composed
-          The nature and mechanism of mass and gravity
-          What a photon actually is
-          Why space-time curves and the speed of light is measured to be 
           constant in relation to everything
-          What Planck’s constant is
-          What a black hole is
-          What dark matter can be
-          Where the antimatter is
-          The Big Bang and the possible origin of our universe
-          What makes up space itself
-          Why F=ma, what energy is and the origin of our laws of physics


Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Energy is Magnetic Moment Density!

Energy – the “number of something” that cannot be created or destroyed, but converted into different forms – is essential in the reality we live in. But what is the underlying mechanism? It is said that energy is mass via the universal speed of light, c – Einstein’s mass energy equivalence E=mc2. However, mass is just one form that energy shows up as (ToS 4.3.6) – It is not the general underlying mechanism of energy.

After the ToS discovery that mass is a mechanism (ToS 4.3) – not a quality of a particle – that has a profound impact of our understanding of the reality we live in. The consequence, that kg we thought was a base unit, really is the same as As2/m3, also simplifies most other quantities. In ToS 6.2 I provide a table of the new units after kg is exchanged for As2/m3. The unit for energy J comes out as A/m instead m2kg/s2 (or VAs)!

Under TopViews I have entered an overview description of the underlying mechanism of energy.
The short and simple explanation is that our elementary charge particle (the negtrino) also comes with a certain magnetic moment 1930 Bohr magneton or 1.79x10-20 Am2 (ToS 3.1.1.1). Its density is Am2/m3=A/m, the unit of energy in the ToS!

Friday, August 17, 2012

How Can I Even Consider Disposing kg – the Unit of Mass?


I’ve been stating as the most astonishing consequence of the ToS, that kg is not a base (SI)-unit, instead kg = As2/m3. It is enough with s (seconds), m (meters), A (ampere, where charge is As or C) – We “don’t need” kg (kilogram for mass).

From those who have looked into the ToS – I have gotten the very relevant question/requests: (1) How can I even consider such a crazy thing – Please explain, Overview-level or at least Top to down! (I will try); (2) Are you sure? (Yes!), (3) Can you prove it? (Yes!), (4) Are you crazy? (I dunno…)

Under the TopViews page I have put in (1) to (3) – Here is the summary:

It is about which the fundamental qualities are and what is created “by mechanisms”. We are used to having time (s), length (m), current (A, or Charge As=C) and mass (kg) as fundamental qualities and of those fundamentals more complex structures are formed via mechanisms. Now I say mass (kg) is a mechanism, not a fundamental quality.   

Einstein showed that gravity is a mechanism. It is not a fundamental quality of an object - The mechanism is that space-time curves around an object. Mysterious, yes, but the ToS even explains the underlying mechanism of this curving around an object!

Monday, August 13, 2012

Yes, Electricity is Everything


The summary of the Theory of Something – the ToS – is that electricity, with its laws and equations that have been known for 150 years, is making up everything from the smallest particle to the whole universe or universes.

The ToS – Download it and read! – makes an effort to show, explain, describe, put some math to (in this context rather simple) and provide some proofs of the “the how and why”. The preface gives some background.


The scope of the Theory of Something is not narrow – it is almost Everything, including hot topics like the Higgs particle, dark matter, dark energy, black holes and universes. Starting from the smallest, the one and only fundamental charge particle – the negtrino that fills up all space in a cubic Grid and also is the building block of all other particles and matter – the ToS ends with the universes. The ToS even tries to explain how there can be Something out of Nothing – the origin of our universe - and proposes the equation for Everything.



And Yes, the Theory of Something Does Change Our View of Reality


The most radical change is that matter is electricity. Mass is not a basic quality of a particle - nothing in itself! We need no kilograms – kg is As2/m3 in the ToS!

And the most hands-on radical change is that the mass and energy (E=mc2) of matter is not inside an object, but surrounding it! It is the Grid that gives mass to matter and it can only contribute with 96 kg/m3. A 75 kg man has his mass in a 700 liter “Grid room” always surrounding him.  And the densest objects can only have 0.5% of their mass inside the object itself. The Grid room around a head is as large as the Gloria in the mosaic in the picture… (There are Grid rooms around all objects – dead or alive – it is just the density that counts.)

I think having the mass and energy surrounding an object (instead of them being a quality of the object itself) is one cause to why we haven’t found the ToS solution until now. Instead we have made more and more complex attempts to find solutions within quantum mechanics and string theory. In comparison, the ToS model is very simple and clean: One particle, one force and 150 years old classic electromagnetic theory applies.

Einstein solved the mystery of gravity (that didn’t follow Newton’s law close to objects) by placing the source of the gravity field outside the matter – He called it that space-time is curved around matter. In the ToS that is the changed negtrino density in the Grid – The Grid that makes up the space.

Now, in the ToS, I also place the source of the mass outside the matter – It is in the Grid room. It takes time to get used to, but that’s the trick! All forces on matter, gravity, F=ma and even the recently found acceleration of distant galaxies, acts on the Grid room encapsulating matter, not on the particle or object itself.

Another cause of the complex models until today, is that we haven’t seen that we live in a universe of with only negatively charged particles. The positively charged particles – the antimatter - are in other universes, and the positive charge we see in the protons, is a hole-mechanism (like in transistors).
With this understanding of matter and charge, it is sufficient with one particle, one force and, I think, one equation to explain the universe and its origin.

Yes, There Are Proofs of the ToS – and More Must Come


Had we not been so used to Newton’s second law of motion, F=ma, I would say that is the proof. It is a consequence of the ToS and is now derived for the very first time (using classic electromagnetic theory)!

The size and electron energy levels of atoms are determined by the ToS (a correct estimate is given for the hydrogen atom based on that negtrinos fill up space and that the proton and electron are made up by negtrinos as described in the ToS).

More exclusive things, like that the force accelerating distant galaxies (believed to be caused by dark energy) follows the simple law: F= m4c2r/(3R2-r2(R is the radius of the universe), remains to be verified against measured data.

A very hands-on support for the ToS is that it predicts a maximum density of atomic matter and that the densest substance known – Osmium – has a density of 99.7% of its possible maximum.

But most of all, the best proof is that Planck’s constant - that determines the energy in the photon (E=hf), that shows up in every quantum mechanics formula and is measured and verified in about 5 different ways - comes out of the dark energy in the universe (the missing 72.8% of critical density for a flat universe) split up on each negtrino in the universe via the fundamental electrical permittivity constant ε0 and the electron charge! That expression also shows that kg is As2/m3 (as it should be) now when mass and gravity are made of electricity (gravity is unified with the other forces into just one – the electromagnetic force).

Real Time Web Analytics