The electric universe provides me with correcting reference frames for theoretical and philosophical development.
The fundamental one s the derivation of plasma from space as the Shunya field.
The Shunya field is a multipolar fractal rotational motion field. For any pole or point in the field multiple rotational motions are exhibited as self motivating and self organising behaviours. I consciously perceive three motions acting at a point : one acting rotationally at right angles to the second one, and a third acting as a rotational resultant of the first 2 mentioned. These 3 self motivations generate vorticular motions around a smaller fractal region, some vortices will move points/poles into entrainment with the central fractal region other vortices will move points/ poles out of entrainment with the fractal region at the centre. These two motions in particular will specify the electric and magnetic field effects of a fractal plasma regional disposition.
Within the vortices the resultant radial motion which is kind of centripetal or centrifugal represent the electric field motions. The resultant tangential motions to the vortices represent the magnetic field motions. Since the centripetal motions are dynamically perturbed ther resultant vortices have an elongated elliptical shape in some circumstances. This may cause the electric field motions to be elongated along the motion of the dynamic centripetal centre, and the magnetic motions to become elliptically helical. These motions are superpositional and represent models of charge motions in a plasma.
The experience of a material plasma derives from the fractal regional and scale behaviours of the motion field. These fractal regional field behaviours discretise an invisible field structure into an intensity disposition in the field. These intensities as fractal regions, behave like neutral or charged electic particles exhibiting magnetic field behaviours in the dynamic mode.
These charged fractal particles exist at all scales in the Shunya field, but tend to show clumsiness in disposition according to scale.
At what scale one reaches the Planck length I do not know, but once we do the clumpiness and intensities become apprehensible by tools we use in our research and we in fact enter the Quantum level of plasma disposition. Beyond that we have to use a very much larger scale to derive the fractal fermion and baryon structures of plasma intensities. Here the electric and the magnetic motion fields becomes discernible by our own eye sensory mesh, and other representation systems.
The study of Astrology is the philosophy of Electromagnetism, and by this i mean that the philosophy of the vortex brings forth the spaciometry of the vortex which is the spaciometry of electromagnetism. By spaciometry i mean those interactive Procedures which i invoke/enyoke to draw forth the principles and rules of the Philosophies of form/idea and quantity of magnitude. And fundamental to these rules is the philosophy of the Monad/metron by which all form and magnitude is fractalised into some Mosaic by which i may model and describe my experiential continuum and my dynamical response of rhythmical singing,dancing or exclaiming to the dynamics of the universe.
That the sphere should uniquely distinguish itself as a harmonising monad is mystical, mythical and magical all at once for it is a rare "perfection" of form/idea in an electromagnetic universe, and it is the Nexux of the children of Shunya in My Shunya model of the field of space.
I now can attempt to define motions above the planck scale.
Any linear-radial motion, or motion that on a finite scale apeears to be linear is defined as an electrical motion.
Ani curved-rotational motion or motion on a finite scale that appears to curve is defined as a magnetic motion.
Motions are observed in relation to fractal regions of varying sizes at varying scales and those that move linearly and or radially from a central region are said to be under electric field motion, while those that move rotational around a central region in dynamic motion are said to be in magnetic field motion.
Should a rotational motion appear around an apparently stationary region such motion is said to be in mechanical rotational motion by whatever mechanical means is evident. If no mechanical means is evident then the rotational motion is indeterminate but assumed to be of some complex electromagnetic means if electric and magnetic field motions are evident in the environs. In this case the assumption of static status for the central region has to be determined relativistically.
Thus in this scenario, what is considered as gravitational motion would be defined as complex electromagnetic field motions in some relativistic sense.
vortex (vôr`tĕks), mass of fluid in whirling or rotary motion. To simplify the analysis, vortex motion usually describes motions in a frictionless fluid. In such cases the absence of friction would make it impossible to create or to destroy vortex motion. Motion in such a fluid would be a permanent flow pattern; the velocity of the fluid element instantaneously passing through a given point in space would be constant in time. Lines drawn so that their direction is that of the axis of rotation of the fluid are called vortex lines, and if these lines close on themselves they are called vortex rings. Hermann von Helmholtz was probably the first to investigate the properties of vortex motion; Lord Kelvin developed a theory of the material atom as a vortex ring; and J. C. Maxwell worked out a theory of electromagnetism, assuming that every magnetic tube of force was a vortex with an axis of rotation coinciding with the direction of the force. Many properties have been mathematically proved for the perfect frictionless fluid. In practice, however, their full realization is impossible because no frictionless fluid exists. To maintain a vortex motion a continuous energy supply to overcome friction is needed. A smoke ring is a familiar example of a typical vortex motion in which the medium is air. In this case the rings are stable for a short time because of the comparatively slight friction in air. An illustration of vortex motion in a liquid medium is the small whirlpool formed by water as it drains from a wash basin. In nature, illustrations of vortical motion on a larger scale are seen in waterspouts, whirlpools, and tornadoes. Investigations of sunspots reveal enormous vortices in the gases surrounding them. The principles of vortex motion are applied in aerodynamics, e.g., to explain the movement of air behind the trailing edge of a wing.
Maxwell “had not expected to extend his paper On Physical Lines of Force beyond Parts 1 and 2” but in the summer of 1861 he began extending his mechanical model to cover “electrostatics, displacement current and waves” [Part 3] and used “his model to explain why polarized light waves change their plane of vibration when they pass through a strong magnetic field [Part 4]” (Basil Mahon, The Man who Changed Everything: The Life of James Clerk Maxwell). NOTE: The present volume contains only Parts 1 and 2, not Parts 3 and 4 which were conceived later and published in the following year (1862).
http://www.bookpump.com/upb/pdf-b/1126751b.pdf vortex theory.
The cornerstone of the hyperdimensional model (as applied to the problem of “unexplained” astrophysical energy sources) is that historically, there is a perfectly natural explanation for such “anomalous energy” appearing in celestial bodies … which, unfortunately, hasn’t been seriously considered by Science for over 100 years:
The existence of unseen hyperspatial realities … that, through information transfer between dimensions, are the literal “foundation substrate” maintaining the reality of everything in this dimension.
The mathematical and physical parameters required for such “information/energy gating” into this spatial dimension from potential “n-dimensions” were primarily founded in the pioneering work of several 19th Century founders of modern mathematics and physics: among these, German mathematician Georg Riemann; Scottish physicist Sir William Thompson (who would eventually be Knighted by the British Crown as “Baron Kelvin of Largs” for his scientific and technological contributions); Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell; and British mathematician Sir William Rowan Hamilton.
In 1867 Thompson, following decades of inquiry into the fundamental properties of both matter and the space between, proposed a radical new explanation for the most fundamental properties of solid objects — the existence of “the vortex atom.” This was in direct contradiction to then prevailing 19th Century theories of matter, in which atoms were still viewed as infinitesimal “small, hard bodies [as] imagined by [the Roman poet] Lucretius, and endorsed by Newton …” Thompson’s “vortex atoms” were envisioned, instead, as tiny, self-sustaining “whirlpools” in the so-called “aether” — which Thompson and his 19th Century contemporaries increasingly believed extended throughout the Universe as an all-pervasive, incompressible fluid.
Even as Thompson published his revolutionary model for the atom, Maxwell, building on Thompson’s earlier explorations of the underlying properties of this “aetheric fluid,” was well on the way to devising a highly successful “mechanical” vortex model of the “incompressible aether” itself, in which Thompson’s vortex atom could live — a model derived in part from the laboratory-observed elastic and dynamical properties of solids. Ultimately, in 1873, he would succeed in uniting a couple hundred years of electrical and magnetic scientific observations into a comprehensive, overarching electromagnetic theory of light vibrations … carried across space by this “incompressible and highly stressed universal aetheric fluid …”
Maxwell’s mathematical basis for his triumphant unification of these two great mystery forces of 19th Century physics were “quaternions” — a term invented (adopted would be a more precise description) in the 1840s by mathematician Sir William Rowan Hamilton, for “an ordered pair of complex numbers” (quaternion = four). Complex numbers themselves, according to Hamilton’s clarifications of long-mysterious terms such as “imaginary” and “real” numbers utilized in earlier definitions, were nothing more than “pairs of real numbers which are added or multiplied according to certain formal rules.” In 1897, A.S. Hathaway formally extended Hamilton’s ideas regarding quaternions as “sets of four real numbers” to the idea of four spatial dimensions, in a paper entitled “Quaternions as numbers of four-dimensional space,” published in the Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society [4 (1887), 54-7].
It is obvious from Maxwell’s own writings that, even before Hathaway’s formalization, his choice of quaternions as mathematical operators for his electromagnetic theory was based on his belief that three-dimensional physical phenomena (including even perhaps the basis of human consciousness itself) are dependent upon higher dimensional realities. For, in honor of another great mathematician of the time, multi-dimensional geometer Arthur Cayley, Maxwell wrote …
“Oh WRETCHED race of men, to space confined!
What honour can ye pay to him, whose mind
To that which lies beyond hath penetrated?
The symbols he hath formed shall sound his praise,
And lead him on through unimagined ways
To conquests new, in worlds not yet created.
First, ye Determinants! In ordered row
And massive column ranged, before him go,
To form a phalanx for his safe protection.
Ye powers of the nth roots of – 1!
Around his head in ceaseless* cycles run,
As unembodied spirits of direction.
And you, ye undevelopable scrolls!
Above the host wave your emblazoned rolls,
Ruled for the record of his bright inventions.
Ye cubic surfaces! By threes and nines
Draw round his camp your seven-and-twenty lines-
The seal of Solomon in three dimensions.
March on, symbolic host! With step sublime,
Up to the flaming bounds of Space and Time!
There pause, until by Dickenson depicted,
In two dimensions, we the form may trace
Of him whose soul, too large for vulgar space,
In n dimensions flourished unrestricted.”
– James Clerk Maxwell
To the Committee of the Cayley Portrait Fund — 1887
Confirmation that Maxwell’s “hyper-dimensional” inquiries extended far beyond “mere” physical interactions can be seen from another of his “unknown” poems …
“My soul is an entangled knot,
Upon a liquid vortex wrought
By Intellect in the Unseen residing.
And thine doth like a convict sit,
With marlinspike untwisting it,
Only to find its knottiness abiding;
Since all the tool for its untying
In four-dimensional space are lying.”
In another work (“The Aether,” 1876), Maxwell underscored the “ultimate” significance of these inquiries …
“Whether this vast homogeneous expanse of isotropic matter [the aether] is fitted not only to be a medium of physical Interaction between distant bodies, and to fulfill other physical functions of which, perhaps we have as yet no conception, but also as the authors of The Unseen Universe seem to suggest, to constitute the material organism of beings excercising functions of life and mind as high or higher than ours are at resent, is a question far transcending the limits of physical speculation …”
This startling connection — between Maxwell’s demonstrably deep interest in questions “hyperdimensional,” including his direct homage to one of his scientific mentors’, Arthur Cayley’s hyperdimensional geometry (the “27 lines on the general cubic surface” problem — see diagram, right); and our rediscovery over a century later of that same geometry … at a place called “Cydonia” … on Mars — is nothing short of astonishing. But, if you doubt such a compelling connection, just reread those key lines–
“…Ye cubic surfaces! By threes and nines, Draw round his camp your seven-and-twenty lines- The seal of Solomon in three dimensions [emphasis added] ..”
Which, of course, are nothing less than the geometrical and mathematical underpinnings of the infamous “circumscribed tetrahedral latitude” memoralized all over Cydonia … 19.5 degrees, the identical, hyper-dimensional quaternion geometry whose physical effects (see below) we have now rediscovered all across the solar system … and beyond!
In a tragedy for science (if not for society in general) whose outlines we are only now beginning to appreciate, after Maxwell’s death, two other 19th Century “mathematical physicists” — Oliver Heaviside and William Gibbs — “streamlined” Maxwell’s original equations down to four simple (if woefully incomplete!) expressions. Because Heaviside openly felt the quaternions were “an abomination” — never fully understanding the linkage between the critical scalar and vector components in Maxwell’s use of them to describe the potentials of empty space (“apples and oranges,” he termed them) — he eliminated over 200 quaternions from Maxwell’s original theory in his attempted “simplification.”
[Oliver Heaviside, described by Scientific American (Sept. 1950) as "self-taught and … never connected with any university … had [however] a remarkable and inexplicable ability (which was possessed also by Newton and Laplace …) to arrive at mathematical results of considerable complexity without going through any conscious process of proof …” According to other observers, Heaviside actually felt that Maxwell’s use of quaternions and their description of the “potentials” of space was “… mystical, and should be murdered from the theory …” which — by drastically editing Maxwell’s original work after the latter’s untimely death (from cancer), excising the scalar component of the quaternions and eliminating the hyperspatial characteristics of the directional (vector) components — Oliver Heaviside effectively accomplished singlehanded.]
This means, of course, that the four surviving “classic” Maxwell’s Equations — which appear in every electrical and physics text the world over, as the underpinnings of all 20th Century electrical and electromagnetic engineering, from radio to radar, from television to computer science, if not inclusive of every “hard” science from physics to chemistry to astrophysics that deals with electromagnetic radiative processes — never appeared in any original Maxwell’ paper or treatise! They are, in fact–
Lest anyone doubt this is the case, they merely have to read a highly revealing paper on the subject by another renowned British mathematical physicist of this century, Sir Edmund Whittaker, titled simply “Oliver Heaviside” (Bulletin of the Calcutta Mathematical Society, Vol. 20, 1928-29, p.202); or, another overview of Heaviside by Paul J. Nahin, “Oliver Heaviside: Sage in Solitude” (IEEE Press, New York, 1988, p.9, note 3.).
The end result was that physics lost its promising theoretical beginnings to becoming truly “hyperdimensional” physics … over a century ago … and all that that implies.
Georg Bernard Riemann mathematically initiated the 19th Century scientific community (if not the rest of Victorian society) into the “unsettling” idea of “hyperspace,” on June 10, 1854. In a seminal presentation made at the University of Gottinggen in Germany, Riemann put forth the first mathematical description of the possibility of “higher, unseen dimensions …” under the deceptively simple title: “On the Hypotheses Which Lie at the Foundation of Geometry.”
Riemann’s paper was a fundamental assault on the 2000-year old assumptions of “Euclidian Geometry” — the ordered, rectilinear laws of “ordinary” three dimensional reality. In its place, Riemann proposed a four-dimensional reality (of which our 3-D reality was merely a “subset”), in which the geometric rules were radically different, but also internally self-consistent. Even more radical: Riemann proposed that the basic laws of nature in 3-space, the three mysterious forces then known to physics — electrostatics, magnetism and gravity — were all fundamentally united in 4-space, and merely “looked different” because of the resulting “crumpled geometry” of our three-dimensional reality …
In terms of actual physics, Riemann was suggesting something clearly revolutionary: a major break with Newton’s “force creates action-at-a-distance” theories of the time, which had been proposed to explain the “magical” properties of magnetic and electrical attraction and repulsion, gravitationally-curved motions of planets … and falling apples, for over 200 years; in place of Newton, Riemann was proposing that such “apparent forces’” are a direct result of objects moving through 3-space “geometry” … distorted by the intruding geometry of “4-space!”
It is clear that Maxwell and other “giants” of 19th Century physics (Kelvin, for one), as well as an entire contemporary generation of 19th Century mathematicians (like Cayle, Tait, etc.) , took Riemann’s ideas very much to heart; Maxwell’s original selection of 4-space quaternions as the mathematical operators for his force equations and descriptions of electrical and magnetic interaction, clearly demonstrate his belief in Riemann’s approach; and, his surprising literary excursions into poetry — vividly extolling the implications of “higher-dimensional realities” … including musings on their relationship to the ultimate origin of the human soul (above) — emphatically confirm this outlook.
So, how can modern “hyperdimensional physicists” — like Michio Kaku, at City College of the City University of New York — representative of an entirely new generation of physical scientists now reexamining these century-old implications of “hyperspatial geometries” for generating the basic laws of Reality itself, almost casually claim:
“… In retrospect, Riemann’s famous lecture was popularized to a wide audience via mystics, philosophers and artists, but did little to further our understanding of nature … First, there was no attempt to use hyperspace to simplify the laws of nature. Without Riemann’s original guiding principle — that the laws of nature become simple in higher dimensions — scientists during this period were groping in the dark. Riemann’s seminal idea of using geometry — that is, crumpled hyperspace — to explain the essence of a a force’ was forgotten during those years … The mathematical apparatus developed by Riemann became a province of pure mathematics, contrary to Riemann’s original intentions. Without field theory, you cannot make any predictions with hyperspace [emphasis added]…”
– M. Kaku, “Hyperspace”
[ Doubleday (Anchor Books): New York, 1994]
Kaku’s statement belies the entire “modern” outlook on 19th Century physics, and leaves the distinct impression of an apparently unconscious “bias” similar to Heaviside’s, regarding Maxwell’s actual treatment of such matters; certainly, in completely ignoring Maxwell’s true discussion of the importance of the underlying four-dimensional “scalar potentials” for creating such “fields.” And remember: Heaviside also thought of such “potentials” as … “mystical …”
The use of little-known Hamiltonian 4-space quaternions, to represent the effect of “scalar potentials” on electric charges (as opposed to Heaviside’s vectorial descriptions of direct “electric force fields”) obviously have led to great confusion; because … Maxwell’s “scalar potentials” are, of course, nothing short of exactly what Riemann initially proposed–
Quantifiable “geometric spatial distortions” … the exact marriage of hyperspatial geometry and field theory that Kaku and others mistakenly believe (because they’re basing their analysis on Heaviside’s surviving vectorial version of Maxwell’s original “Equations”) is totally missing from this greatest achievement of 19th Century physics!
The major source of confusion surrounding Maxwell’s actual Theory, versus what Heaviside reduced it to, is its math — a notation system perhaps best described by H.J. Josephs (“The Heaviside Papers found at Paignton in 1957,” Electromagnetic Theory by Oliver Heaviside, Including an account of Heaviside’s unpublished notes for a fourth volume, and with a forward by Sir Edmund Whittaker, Vol. III, Third Edition, Chelsea Publishing Co., New York, 1971).
According to Josephs:
“Hamilton’s algebra of quaternions, unlike Heaviside’s algebra of vectors, is not a mere abbreviated mode of expressing Cartesian analysis, but is an independent branch of mathematics with its own rules of operation and its own special theorems. A quaternion is, in fact, a generalized or hypercomplex number … [emphasis added]“
And, you will remember, in 1897 Hathaway published a paper specifically identifying these hypercomplex numbers as “… numbers in four-dimensional space” (above). Thus, modern physics’ apparent ignorance of Maxwell’s 19th Century success — a mathematically-based, four-dimensional “field-theory” — would seem to originate from a basic lack of knowledge of the true nature of Hamilton’s quaternion algebra itself!
[Apparently, unless a "hyperdimensional theory" is narrowly expressed in terms of a separate technique Riemann himself invented for his own N-dimensional mapping — the so-called "metric tensor" — modern physicists don't seem to be able to recognize it as a valid higher-dimensional model … not even when it was written in its own, specifically-designed, four-dimensional mathematical notation! (Riemann's "metric tensor," BTW, is essentially a graphical checkerboard composed, for a 4-space description, of 16 numbers defining, for instance, field strength at each point in that four-dimensional space. It is NOT written in quaternions.)
And, unless you track down an original 1873 copy of Maxwell's "Treatise," there is no easy way to verify the existence of Maxwell's "hyperdimensional" quaternion notation; for, by 1892, the Third Edition incorporated a "correction" to Maxwell's original use of "scalar potentials" (contributed by George Francis Fitzgerald — whom Heaviside heavily admired) — thus removing a crucial distinction between 4-space "geometric potential," and a 3-space "vector field," from all subsequent "Maxwellian theory." Which is why Kaku apparently doesn't realize that Maxwell's original equations were, in fact, the first geometric 4-space field theory … expressed in specific 4-space terms … the language of quaternions!
Just another measure of Heaviside's effectiveness …]
One of the difficulties of proposing a “higher dimension” is that, inevitably, people (and scientists are people!), will ask: “Ok, where is it? Where is the fourth dimension’ ..?”
One of the most persistent objections to the 4-space geometries of Riemann, Cayley, Tait … and Maxwell, was that no experimental proof of a “fourth dimension” was readily apparent; one of the more easily understandable aspects of “higher dimensionality” was that, a being from a “lower dimension” (a two-dimensional “Flatlander,” for instance) entering our “higher” three-dimensional reality, would appear to vanish instantly from the lower-dimensional world (and, consequently, appear just as suddenly in the higher dimension — but geometrically distorted.) When she returned to her own dimension, she would just as “magically” reappear …
Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your perspective …) to the scientific mind, people in our dimension don’t just “turn a corner one day … and promptly vanish into Riemann’s fourth dimension.’” While mathematically derivable and beautifully consistent, to “experimentalists” (and all real science ultimately has to be based on verifiable, independently repeatable experiments) there seemed no testable, physical proof of “hyperdimensional physics.”
Thus “hyperspace”– as a potential solution to unifying the major laws of physics — after Maxwell’s death, and the major rewriting of his Theory, quietly disappeared … not to resurface for almost half a century …
Until April of 1919.
At that time, a remarkable letter was delivered to one “Albert Einstein.” Written by an obscure mathematician at the University of Konigsberg in Germany, Theodr Kaluza, the letter’s first few lines offered a startling solution (at least, to Einstein — unknowing of Maxwell’s original quaternion equations) to one of physics’ still most intractable problems: the mathematical unification of his own theory of gravity with Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetic radiation … via introduction of a fifth dimension. (Because Einstein, in formulating the General and Special Theory of Relativity in the intervening years since Riemann, had already appropriated time as the “fourth dimension,” Kaluza was forced to specify his additional spatial dimension as “the fifth.” In fact, this was the same spatial dimension as the 4-space designations used by Maxwell and his colleagues in their models … over 50 years before.)
Despite its stunning (Einstein mulled over the paper’s implications for more than two years, before finally supporting its scientific publication) mathematical success, in apparently — finally — uniting “gravity” and “light,” the same question, “OK, where is it?” was asked of Kaluza as had been asked of Riemann, over 60 years before; because, there was no overt experimental proof (for instance, people and things up and “disappearing”) of the physical existence of another spatial dimension. To which Kaluza this time had a very clever answer: he proposed that this “fourth dimension” — unlike the other three we are familiar with — somehow had collapsed down to a tiny circle … “smaller than the smallest atom …”
In 1926, another essentially unknown mathematician, Oskar Klein, was investigating the peculiar implications of Kaluza’s ideas in the context of the newly-invented atomic theory of “quantum mechanics.” [Klein was a specialist in the truly arcane field of mathematical topology — the higher dimensional surfaces of objects; the twisted 3-D topology of the 2-D surface of a "Klein Bottle" is named specifically in his honor]. Quantum mechanics had just been proposed a year or so before Klein’s further topological investigation of Kaluza’s ideas, by Max Planck and many others rebelling against perceived limitations of Maxwell’s (remember, heavily sanitized by Gibbs and Heaviside) classical Electromagnetic Theory. The “quantum mechanics ” theory would eventually become a highly successful (if bizarre, by common-sense standards) non-geometric effort to describe interactions between “fundamental particles,” exchanging “forces” through discrete “quantitized” particles and energy in the sub-atomic world. Eventually, combining the two inquiries, Klein theorized that, if it truly existed, Kaluza’s new dimension likely had somehow collapsed down to the “Planck length” itself — supposedly the smallest possible size allowed by these fundamental interactions. However, that size was only about … 10-33 cm long!
Thus, the main obstacle to experimental verification of the Kaluza-Klein Theory (and the reason why people simply didn’t “walk into the fourth dimension”), was that quantum mechanics calculations affirmed that the only way to physically probe such an infinitesimally tiny dimension was with a new machine … an “atom smasher.” There was only one small “technical” problem …
The energy required would exceed the output of all the power plants on Earth … and then some!
Thus, the brief “blip” of new interest in “hyperdimensional physics” — the discussions of Kaluza-Klein among physicists and topologists — “dropped through the floor” by the 1930′s. This occurred both because of Klein’s “proof” of the apparent impossibility of any direct experimental verification of additional dimensions … and because of the dramatic revolution then sweeping the increasingly technological world of Big Science–
The flood of “verifications”gushing forth from atom smashers all around the world, feverishly engaged in probing the new area the experimentalists apparently could verify: the multiplying populations of “fundamental particles”spawned by the bizarre mathematical world (even more bizarre than “N-dimensions”) of Quantum Mechanics.
30 more years would pass … before (almost by mathematical “accident”) in 1968, the current mainstream “flap” of renewed scientific interest in “hyperspace” would be, like the legendary Phoenix, “magically” reborn — a theory now known as “Superstrings” … in which fundamental particles, and “fields,” are viewed as hyperspace vibrations of infinitesimal, multi-dimensional strings … From those relatively inauspicious beginnings, stretching across more than 60 years, the current focus of scientific research papers on “hyperspace” — from continued research into updated versions of the old “Kaluza-Klein Theory”; to discussions of the much newer “Supergravity” hyperspace unification model; to the exotic “String Theory” itself — has grown geometrically (over 5000 papers by 1994 alone, according to Michio Kaku — see above). This much attention to a subject involving realities you can’t even see, represents nothing short of a fundamental psychological revolution sweeping across a major segment of the worldwide scientific community.
For most physicists currently interested in the problem, the “Superstring” hyper-dimensional model has overwhelming advantages over all its predecessors. Besides effectively unifying all the known forces of the Universe … from electromagnetism to the nuclear force … in a literally beautiful “ultimate”picture of Reality, it also makes a specific prediction about the total number of N-dimensions that can form:
“Ten” (or “26,” depending on the rotation of the “strings”).
The bad news is: they can’t be tested either …
As all ten dimensions are curled up (in the model) inside the same experimentally unreachable “Planck length” which spelled the scientific demise of the original Kaluza-Klein …
This, then is the current situation.
The “hottest” mainstream scientific theory to come along in more than half a century, the next best thing to a “Theory of Everything” (and seriously attempting to become precisely that …), is not only a Hyperdimensional Model of Reality … it is another one which, by its fundamental nature–
Can’t scientifically be tested!
While a “hyperdimensional model” which can be tested easily — as this paper will unequivocally show — for over a 100 years has been systematically ignored.
Is it just us … or is there something truly wrong with this picture?
Lt. Col Thomas E. Bearden, retired army officer and physicist, has been perhaps the most vocal recent proponent for restoring integrity to the scientific and historical record regarding James Clerk Maxwell — by widely promulgating his original equations; in a series of meticulously documented papers on the subject, going back at least 20 years, Bearden has carried on a relentless one-man research effort regarding what Maxwell really claimed. His painstaking, literally thousands of man-hours of original source documentation has led directly to the following, startling conclusion:
Maxwell’s original theory is, in fact, the true, so-called “Holy Grail” of physics … the first successful unified field theory in the history of Science … a fact apparently completely unknown to the current proponents of “Kaluza-Klein,” “Supergravity,” and “Superstring” ideas ….
Just how successful, Bearden documents below:
” … In discarding the scalar component of the quaternion, Heaviside and Gibbs unwittingly discarded the unified EM/G [electromagnetic/ gravitational] portion of Maxwell’s theory that arises when the translation/directional components of two interacting quaternions reduce to zero, but the scalar resultant remains and infolds a deterministic, dynamic structure that is a function of oppositive directional/translational components. In the infolding of EM energy inside a scalar potential, a structured scalar potential results, almost precisely as later shown by Whittaker but unnoticed by the scientific community. The simple vector equations produced by Heaviside and Gibbs captured only that subset of Maxwell’s theory where EM and gravitation are mutually exclusive. In that subset, electromagnetic circuits and equipment will not ever, and cannot ever, produce gravitational or inertial effects in materials and equipment.
“Brutally, not a single one of those Heaviside/ Gibbs equations ever appeared in a paper or book by James Clerk Maxwell, even though the severely restricted Heaviside/Gibbs interpretation is universally and erroneously taught in all Western universities as Maxwell’s theory.
“As a result of this artificial restriction of Maxwell’s theory, Einstein also inadvertently restricted his theory of general relativity, forever preventing the unification of electromagnetics and relativity. He also essentially prevented the present restricted general relativity from ever becoming an experimental, engineerable science on the laboratory bench, since a hidden internalized electromagnetics causing a deterministically structured local spacetime curvature was excluded.
“Quantum mechanics used only the Heaviside/ Gibbs externalized electromagnetics and completely missed Maxwell’s internalized and ordered electromagnetics enfolded inside a structured scalar potential. Accordingly, QM [quantum mechanics] maintained its Gibbs statistics of quantum change, which is nonchaotic a priori. Quantum physicists by and large excluded Bohm’s hidden variable theory, which conceivably could have offered the potential of engineering quantum change — engineering physical reality itself.
“Each of these major scientific disciplines missed and excluded a subset of their disciplinary area, because they did not have the scalar component of the quaternion to incorporate. Further, they completely missed the significance of the Whittaker approach, which already shows how to apply and engineer the very subsets they had excluded.
“What now exists in these areas are three separate, inconsistent disciplines. Each of them unwittingly excluded a vital part of its discipline, which was the unified field part. Ironically, then, present physicists continue to exert great effort to find the missing key to unification of the three disciplines, but find it hopeless, because these special subsets are already contradictory to one another, as is quite well-known to foundations physicists.
“Obviously, if one wishes to unify physics, one must add back the unintentionally excluded, unifying subsets to each discipline. Interestingly, all three needed subsets turn out to be one and the same …”
– T.E. Bearden, “Possible Whittaker Unification of
Electromagnetics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics,“
(Association of Distinguished American Scientists
2311 Big Cove Road, Huntsville, Alabama, 35801)
Given Bearden’s analysis — what did we actually lose … when science “inadvertently lost Maxwell ..?”
We must not dupe our senses with the illusions of a notion called time. The dynamical universe is not bound or involved with time, but solely with change in sequential order. Why do phenomenon exhibit this sequential structural and spatial change? This is a question beyond our ability to analyse, but we can clearly apprehend it as tautologically fundamental and self organizing, From this principle we may epprehend our involvement and interaction with these sequential changes as fundamentally recording or keeping records. It is this semi sequential keeping of records that we denote by the old word TYME, from which we have developed the modern notions of time as a fourth dimension. such a notion is corrupt and corrupting . Sequential recordsare records of dimensional measurements by tools which dimension space. The mis interpretation of dimensioning has led to fanciful notions of rrcord keeping and even more fanciful notions of time and space! We may analyse or discretize a dynamical system into space and change in space only if we develop a sequential analytical tool. Our unconscious inteaction and proprioception has many sequential tools available through the sensory mesh networks and their functioning, Un addition we have been able to develop tools like audio and video recorders that sequentially record changes in space.