Download page for "Beyond Einstein: non-local physics" © 2015, 2019 by Brian Fraser

(Last modified 5-12-2019)

(Last modified 5-12-2019)

Download:

Click this link to download BeyondEinstein.pdf (Registration: TX 8-223-345)

The paper can also be downloaded from:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309533409_Beyond_Einstein_non-local_physics

https://www.academia.edu/29945530/Beyond_Einstein_non-local_physics

Format:

The document format supports printing of two pages per sheet, and binding on the left long edge.

Intended audience:

1. People who enjoy science, especially physics.

2. People who teach physics, especially at the highschool and college level.

3. People who want our society to progress, and who want to eliminate blindspots and misconceptions.

Errata:

Not mentioned in the article:

Click this link to download BeyondEinstein.pdf (Registration: TX 8-223-345)

The paper can also be downloaded from:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309533409_Beyond_Einstein_non-local_physics

https://www.academia.edu/29945530/Beyond_Einstein_non-local_physics

Format:

The document format supports printing of two pages per sheet, and binding on the left long edge.

Intended audience:

1. People who enjoy science, especially physics.

2. People who teach physics, especially at the highschool and college level.

3. People who want our society to progress, and who want to eliminate blindspots and misconceptions.

Errata:

page
2: In the phrase "the Universe really does have non-casual, non-local
behaviors", the words "non-casual" should be deleted. The word
"casual" was an unintented mis-spelling of "causal"; Even so, the
non-local events described are clearly caused by the experimental conditions imposed by the experimenter.

pages 8 and 22: the words "gravity waves" should be changed to "gravitational waves"

pages 8 and 22: the words "gravity waves" should be changed to "gravitational waves"

Not mentioned in the article:

- There is also a diffuse Far Ultraviolet (FUV) background:

“the source of a substantial fraction of the FUV background radiation
remains a mystery. The radiation is remarkably uniform at both far
northern and far southern Galactic latitudes…” See “The Mystery of the
Cosmic Diffuse Ultraviolet Background Radiation”, Richard Conn Henry,
Jayant Murthy, James Overduin, Joshua Tyler (2014)
arxiv.org/abs/1404.5714

- Another thought about a two-in-one (local + non-local) Universe:

“What we know as the universe could actually be just one of a pair that
exists in the same space but at different times.” (Science News, July
25, 2015, p. 17 “Times Arrow”.)

- High redshift objects:

Quasars, certain galaxies, and gamma
ray bursters have redshifts above z = 1. Example: the quasar ULAS J1120+0641, is at *z* = 7.1 The "non-local" interpretation is that this kind of
redshift represents motion at 7 times the speed of light.
The "local" interpretation is that these redshifts are Hubble
shifts (indicative of distance) and should be "corrected" to less than
light speed. (Refs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift#Highest_redshifts ; http://www.spacetelescope.org/news/heic1219/ see note 3 )

http://scripturalphysics.org/qm/qmconcpt.htm#OriginOfIntrinsicSpin

http://scripturalphysics.org/qm/qmconcpt.htm#PhotonSpinSystem

http://scripturalphysics.org/qm/qmconcpt.htm#AtomicSpinSystem

http://scripturalphysics.org/qm/qmconcpt.htm#CommutationAngularMomentum

http://scripturalphysics.org/qm/qmconcpt.htm#RotationsOfRotations

http://scripturalphysics.org/qm/qmconcpt.htm#SpeculationWeaknessGravity

http://scripturalphysics.org/qm/qmconcpt.htm#PhotonSpinSystem

http://scripturalphysics.org/qm/qmconcpt.htm#AtomicSpinSystem

http://scripturalphysics.org/qm/qmconcpt.htm#CommutationAngularMomentum

http://scripturalphysics.org/qm/qmconcpt.htm#RotationsOfRotations

http://scripturalphysics.org/qm/qmconcpt.htm#SpeculationWeaknessGravity

- GPS and Revativity

"Relativity in the Global Positioning System", Neil Ashby (2003) https://www.scribd.com/document/341471736/Ashby-2003

- "Physicists extend special relativity beyond the speed of light" http://phys.org/news/2012-10-physicists-special-relativity.html#nRlv

"Although the theories cannot answer what happens at *c*,
the scientists suspect that an object crossing the "light barrier" may
have some very interesting consequences. They compare our current
understanding of this boundary to that of an object crossing the sound
barrier for the first time, an event that was highly disputed before it
was achieved in 1947.

"People wondered what would happen," Hill said. "Were we all going to disintegrate? Would the plane fall apart? It turns out passing through the speed of sound led to a big bang. I suspect going through the speed of light will be more interesting. I have a feeling the world will change in some dramatic way as we move through the speed of light. All sorts of things could happen. Time and space could interchange."

- Quantum Teleportation:

"Quantum
teleportation relies on the strange nature of quantum physics, which
finds that the fundamental building blocks of the universe can
essentially exist in two or more places at once." http://www.livescience.com/52259-quantum-teleportation-sets-distance-record.html

- Non-locality:

'How Einstein Revealed the Universe's Strange "Nonlocality" ', George Musser (November 1, 2015) http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-einstein-revealed-the-universe-s-strange-nonlocality/

"The
world we experience possesses all the qualities of locality. We have a
strong sense of place and of the relations among places. . . . And yet
multiple branches of physics now suggest that, at a deeper level, there
may be no such thing as place and no such thing as distance. Physics
experiments can bind the fate of two particles together so that they
behave like a pair of magic coins. . . . They act in a coordinated way
even though no force passes through the space between them. Those
particles might zip off to opposite sides of the universe, and still
they act in unison. The particles violate locality—they transcend space."

- Gravitational waves missing in action

"After 11 years, physicists must rethink gravitational waves", Graham Templeton (September 29, 2015) http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/215169-after-11-years-physicists-must-rethink-gravitational-waves

"Could the theory which predicted gravitational waves be wrong?" https://www.theguardian.com/science/life-and-physics/2017/oct/03/could-the-theory-which-predicted-gravitational-waves-be-wrong

"Experimental Confirmation of the Doubts about Authenticity of Event GW150914", Lukanenkov, A.V. (2017). Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics, 5, 538-550. https://doi.org/10.4236/jamp.2017.52046 http://file.scirp.org/pdf/JAMP_2017022815573592.pdf

Search for Gravitational Waves Associated with Gamma-Ray Bursts During the First Advanced LIGO Observing Run and Implications for the Origin of GRB 150906B

If gravity propagated at the speed of light instead of instantaneously, the effects on orbits of satelites and solar system planets would be very obvious. However, these are relatively small systems. Instead of a solar system, consider the effects on something the size of a galaxy:

"Could the theory which predicted gravitational waves be wrong?" https://www.theguardian.com/science/life-and-physics/2017/oct/03/could-the-theory-which-predicted-gravitational-waves-be-wrong

"Experimental Confirmation of the Doubts about Authenticity of Event GW150914", Lukanenkov, A.V. (2017). Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics, 5, 538-550. https://doi.org/10.4236/jamp.2017.52046 http://file.scirp.org/pdf/JAMP_2017022815573592.pdf

Search for Gravitational Waves Associated with Gamma-Ray Bursts During the First Advanced LIGO Observing Run and Implications for the Origin of GRB 150906B

"We present the
results of the search for gravitational waves (GWs) associated with
γ-ray bursts detected during the first observing run of the Advanced
Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO). We find no
evidence of a GW signal for any of the 41 γ-ray bursts for which LIGO
data are available with sufficient duration."

https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.07947

https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.07947

If gravity propagated at the speed of light instead of instantaneously, the effects on orbits of satelites and solar system planets would be very obvious. However, these are relatively small systems. Instead of a solar system, consider the effects on something the size of a galaxy:

We know, the
solar system and other stars are orbiting around the center of the
Milky Way and the radius of the Milky Way is larger than 5☓10^{4} light-year. . . . But, we know, the Milky Way is moving with a speed on the level of 5☓10^{2}km/s.[6]
Therefore, the distance between the retarded position and present
position of the center of the Milky way is . . . 25 light-year.
And, a galaxy is usually older than . . . 1☓10^{10} years . . . . The distance between the retarded and present positions of this center should become larger than 5 x 10^{6}
ly. In this case, a spiral galaxy could not maintain with the form of a
disc. Instead, it was a very long strip along the direction of the
galaxy moving. However, no galaxy has become such a long strip one.
("The speed of gravit;y: An observation on galaxy motions
", Yin Zhu (September 2016) DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.30917.45287
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308409482_The_speed_of_gravity_An_observation_on_galaxy_motions )

A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF LIGO'S RECENT DETECTION OF
GRAVITATIONAL WAVES CAUSED BY MERGING BLACK HOLES”, Stephen J. Crothers (4
March 2016) http://vixra.org/pdf/1603.0127v4.pdf

**Abstract** The LIGO
Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration have announced that on 14
September 2015, LIGO detected an Einstein gravitational wave directly for the
first time, with the first observation of a binary black hole merger. The
announcement was made with much media attention. Not so long ago similar media
excitement surrounded the announcement by the BICEP2 Team of detection of
primordial gravitational waves imprinted in Bmode polarisations of a Cosmic Microwave
Background, which proved to be naught. . . .The insurmountable problem for the credibility of LIGO's
claims is the questionable character of the theoretical assumptions upon which
they are based. In
this paper various arguments are presented according to which the basic
theoretical assumptions, and the consequential claims of detecting
gravitational waves, are proven false. The apparent detection by the LIGO-Virgo Collaborations
is not related to gravitational waves or to the collision and merger of black
holes.

**Appendix A**

. . .

^{8}
m/s) in order to satisfy the presupposition that propagation is at speed c.
There is no a priori reason why this particular set of coordinates is better
than any other. The sole purpose for the choice is to obtain the desired and
presupposed result.

*All
the coordinate-systems differ from Galilean coordinates by small quantities of
the first order. The potentials g _{μν} pertain not only to the
gravitational influence which has objective reality, but also to the
coordinate-system which we select arbitrarily. We can ‘propagate’
coordinate-changes with the speed of thought, and these may be mixed up at will
with the more dilatory propagation discussed above. There does not seem to be
any way of distinguishing a physical and a conventional part in the changes of
g_{μν}. “The statement that in the relativity theory gravitational
waves are propagated with the speed of light has, I believe, been based
entirely upon the foregoing investigation; but it will be seen that it is only
true in a very conventional sense. If coordinates are chosen so as to satisfy a
certain condition which has no very clear geometrical importance, the speed is
that of light; if the coordinates are slightly different the speed is
altogether different from that of light. The result stands or falls by the choice of coordinates
and, so far as can be judged, the coordinates here used were purposely
introduced in order to obtain the simplification which results from
representing the propagation as occurring with the speed of light. The argument
thus follows a vicious circle.” *Eddington [38 §57]

7.–
There is a widespread and erroneous conviction (see e.g. Fock [3],
p.194) according to which in GR gravitation is propagated with the
speed of light in vacuo, i.e. with the speed of light in empty space of
SR. The supporters of this false opinion claim that it follows, e.g.,
from eqs.(4) and (5), when interpreted as differential equations of
wave fronts and rays of GW’s. Now, this is trivially wrong even from
the viewpoint of the believers in the physical existence of GW’s,
because eqs. (4) and (5) – quite independently of their interpretation–
affirm in reality that the concerned wave fronts and rays have a
propagation velocity that depends on the metric tensor g_{jk}(x),
even if this tensor has the form of a mathematical undulation. The
non-existence of physical GW’s has the following consequence: if we
displace a mass, its gravitational field and the related curvature of
the interested manifold displace themselves along with
the mass: under this respect Einstein field and Newton
field behave in an identical way [11].

. . . It is regrettable that various physicists insist on publishing useless considerations and computations on h_{jk}–waves
[13]. It is time that astrophysical community desist from beating the
air – and from squandering the money of the taxpayers.

"Experimental Repeal of the Speed Limit for Gravitational, Electrodynamic, and Quantum Field Interactions", Foundations of Physics,Tom Van Flandern, Jean-Pierre Vigier, July 2002, Volume 32, Issue 7, pp 1031–1068. . . It is regrettable that various physicists insist on publishing useless considerations and computations on h

Abstract ( https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1016530625645 )

General relativity has a geometric and a field interpretation. If angular momentum conservation is invoked in the geometric interpretation to explain experiments, the causality principle is violated. The field interpretation avoids this problem by allowing faster-than-light propagation of gravity in forward time. All existing experiments are in agreement with that interpretation. This implies the existence of real superluminal propagation and communication of particles and fields, free of causality problems. The introduction of real physical faster-than-light propagation into gravitation, electrodynamics and quantum theory has important consequences for physics.

General relativity has a geometric and a field interpretation. If angular momentum conservation is invoked in the geometric interpretation to explain experiments, the causality principle is violated. The field interpretation avoids this problem by allowing faster-than-light propagation of gravity in forward time. All existing experiments are in agreement with that interpretation. This implies the existence of real superluminal propagation and communication of particles and fields, free of causality problems. The introduction of real physical faster-than-light propagation into gravitation, electrodynamics and quantum theory has important consequences for physics.

Einstein, Relativity and Absolute Simultaneity, edited by William Lane Craig and Quentin Smith (2008) "Global Positioning System and the twins’ paradox", Tom Van Flandern

.
. . it is entirely possible that reality is Lorentzian, not
Einsteinian, with respect to the relativity of motion. In that case,
physics may have no speed limit when the driving forces are
gravitational or electrodynamic rather than electromagnetic in nature.
And that may be the most important thing that the GPS has helped us to
appreciate.

"On the Signal Processing Operations in LIGO signals", Akhila Raman (Nov 2017) https://arxiv.org/pdf/1711.07421.pdf

Abstract. This article analyzes the data for the five gravitational wave (GW) events detected in Hanford(H1), Livingston(L1) and Virgo(V1) detectors by the LIGO1 collaboration. It is shown that GW170814, GW170817, GW151226 and GW170104 are very weak signals whose amplitude does not rise significantly during the GW event, and they are indistinguishable from non-stationary detector noise.

"A mandatory project proposal for ESA and NASA" , Ahmet Yalcin (12-11-17) Reasearchgate.net https://www.researchgate.net/post/Am_I_the_only_one_that_is_doubtful_of_LIGOs_detection_of_gravitational_wave_GW150914...

The second problem is the speed of the
gravitational waves. Einstein states that the speed of these waves is the same
as the speed of light. Unfortunately, there is no consensus on this issue too.
This also has very justified reasons. Firstly, there is a fundamental
difference between the propagation of light and the gravitational waves. Light
propagates in a form of quanta called photon. A photon emitted from its source,
which is probably millions of light years away, is the same as the one reaching
our eyes. It is photon entity energy that brings it to us from millions of
light years away. The photon is still the same photon because it keeps total
entity energy along its route. However, the quantum structure of the
gravitational field has not yet been observed. It is likely that the space
fabric is the one to allow the emission of the gravitational energy. It is the
most important evidence that the gravitational field does not lead to the loss
of mass, while radiation does. Propagation of the gravitational energy by the
space texture also reduces its probability of propagation at a constant speed,
i.e., as the gravitational waves propagate, the speed will decrease. Why?

. . .

How can this controversy regarding the gravitational waves end? It is important to end because it leads to unnecessary time and resource loss. This is the reason I suggest a project to ESA and NASA. It is not necessary only but obligatory. The project is a different and simpler renewal of what these organizations have done before.

. . . Now, with remote sensing, the gravity acceleration can be measured more sensitively than ever. Therefore this is certainly an achievable proposal.

. . .

How can this controversy regarding the gravitational waves end? It is important to end because it leads to unnecessary time and resource loss. This is the reason I suggest a project to ESA and NASA. It is not necessary only but obligatory. The project is a different and simpler renewal of what these organizations have done before.

. . . Now, with remote sensing, the gravity acceleration can be measured more sensitively than ever. Therefore this is certainly an achievable proposal.

- Mass can store (absorb) energy and momentum, but the reverse is not true.

Mass has the dimensions of t^{3}/s^{3} . Momentum has the dimensions of t^{2}/s^{2} . Energy is t^{1}/s^{1}
.
Logically then, mass has enough dimensional freedom to absorb (or
store) a massless particle (having only momentum) and it could also
absorb a photon of energy. But the reverse is not true. Photons cannot
store mass, nor can massless particles store mass. Massless
particles, like the neutrino, however, can acquire more energy (as in
Beta decay).
And if a massless particle becomes part of a massive system (like
an atom) it may contribute to an increase in the mass of that system,
even though it has no mass by itself.

- A non-local alternative to the nuclear model of the atom

The common nuclear model of the atom is based on the concept of locality ("touching is space"), not non-locality.

Go back to Rutherford's original experiment (circa 1911) . He discovered that a material aggregate (gold foil) has an array of tiny massive objects ("kernels") in it, each containing most of the mass of the atom, and each separated by plenty of "space" (or some kind of emptiness) . What were these massive objects? The previously existing model was based on spatial contract, viz. atoms in an aggregate are pictured as touching each other, like billiard balls in a shoe box. The volume of a ball could be estimated by calculations from soap film experiments and by known molar volumes of metals. Rutherford found something that was 10,000 times smaller in diameter than that implied by this volume. Both picutures had factual support and so the tiny massive objects became "nuclei". Hence, the atom "has" a nucleus.

But that is not what his picture really showed. The tiny massive objects, which contain virtually all the mass of the atom, and ultimately account for all the properties of the atom, could be the atoms themselves! The "emptiness" is simply between the atoms, not within the atoms. Physicists could have developed a whole new different form of atomic physics if they had accepted this realization! But historically, they were neither fluent nor comfortable with the concept of non-locality.

Some years later, quantum mechanics began to be developed. It had features that clearly pointed to a non-locality model. Originally, electron orbits were thought to be clearly defined (like the orbits of planets around the Sun), but later the orbits turned into a fuzzy "electron cloud"; it was not that the electron orbits could not be found and measured, but it was that they did not have any sort of actual spatial trajectory in the first place. Later, more and more conceptual problems developed with the atomic electrons. It now seems that this model should be discarded and a new one created based on the concept of non-locality. Atoms exist and they can have various energy levels based on different types of intrinsic spin systems (see links above). Electrons can be an agent to express those energy levels without actually being "parts" of an atom (any more than a gamma ray is a "part" of the atom). A conceptually "cleaner" model of the atom could lead to additional useful insights that are not readily apparent in the current model.

Go back to Rutherford's original experiment (circa 1911) . He discovered that a material aggregate (gold foil) has an array of tiny massive objects ("kernels") in it, each containing most of the mass of the atom, and each separated by plenty of "space" (or some kind of emptiness) . What were these massive objects? The previously existing model was based on spatial contract, viz. atoms in an aggregate are pictured as touching each other, like billiard balls in a shoe box. The volume of a ball could be estimated by calculations from soap film experiments and by known molar volumes of metals. Rutherford found something that was 10,000 times smaller in diameter than that implied by this volume. Both picutures had factual support and so the tiny massive objects became "nuclei". Hence, the atom "has" a nucleus.

But that is not what his picture really showed. The tiny massive objects, which contain virtually all the mass of the atom, and ultimately account for all the properties of the atom, could be the atoms themselves! The "emptiness" is simply between the atoms, not within the atoms. Physicists could have developed a whole new different form of atomic physics if they had accepted this realization! But historically, they were neither fluent nor comfortable with the concept of non-locality.

Some years later, quantum mechanics began to be developed. It had features that clearly pointed to a non-locality model. Originally, electron orbits were thought to be clearly defined (like the orbits of planets around the Sun), but later the orbits turned into a fuzzy "electron cloud"; it was not that the electron orbits could not be found and measured, but it was that they did not have any sort of actual spatial trajectory in the first place. Later, more and more conceptual problems developed with the atomic electrons. It now seems that this model should be discarded and a new one created based on the concept of non-locality. Atoms exist and they can have various energy levels based on different types of intrinsic spin systems (see links above). Electrons can be an agent to express those energy levels without actually being "parts" of an atom (any more than a gamma ray is a "part" of the atom). A conceptually "cleaner" model of the atom could lead to additional useful insights that are not readily apparent in the current model.

- Alternatives to Newton's gravity (MOND theories )

"Milgrom noted that this discrepancy could be resolved if the gravitational force . . . came to vary inversely with radius (as opposed to the inverse square of the radius, as in Newton's Law of Gravity). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Newtonian_dynamics

"Milgrom’s correction allows gravitational attraction to fall off with distance more slowly than expected (rather than falling off with the square of distance as per Newton) when the local gravitational acceleration falls below an extremely low threshold. This threshold could be linked to other cosmological properties such as the ‘dark energy’ that accounts for the accelerating expansion of the Universe. "

"Has dogma derailed the scientific search for dark-matter?" Corey S. Powell, ed. https://aeon.co/ideas/has-dogma-derailed-the-scientific-search-for-dark-matter

"MOND, however, proposes that, at very large radii and small accelerations, gravity decays with distance more slowly than Newton’s inverse square law. This removes the need for dark matter, providing a clear explanation for the tight non-Newtonian correlation between visible matter and radial acceleration." "Galaxy rotation study rules out modified gravity, or does it?" 21 Jun 2018 https://physicsworld.com/a/galaxy-rotation-study-rules-out-modified-gravity-or-does-it/

"Milgrom’s correction allows gravitational attraction to fall off with distance more slowly than expected (rather than falling off with the square of distance as per Newton) when the local gravitational acceleration falls below an extremely low threshold. This threshold could be linked to other cosmological properties such as the ‘dark energy’ that accounts for the accelerating expansion of the Universe. "

"Has dogma derailed the scientific search for dark-matter?" Corey S. Powell, ed. https://aeon.co/ideas/has-dogma-derailed-the-scientific-search-for-dark-matter

"MOND, however, proposes that, at very large radii and small accelerations, gravity decays with distance more slowly than Newton’s inverse square law. This removes the need for dark matter, providing a clear explanation for the tight non-Newtonian correlation between visible matter and radial acceleration." "Galaxy rotation study rules out modified gravity, or does it?" 21 Jun 2018 https://physicsworld.com/a/galaxy-rotation-study-rules-out-modified-gravity-or-does-it/

- Why is the speed of light limited to c and not to some other value?

A partial answer: the speed of light equates to the value of 1/1. It is what the speed of light actually is. And this is a number with special properties.

Related: TOP Secret Things about Mathematics you didn't Know - Full Documentary http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9bqIYbDuns

1. Only 1 is equal to its reciprocal

2. Only 1 has the property of 1^{0} = 1^{1} = 1^{2} = 1^{3}

The real question: why do humans equate this to 186,000 miles per second?2. Only 1 has the property of 1

Related: TOP Secret Things about Mathematics you didn't Know - Full Documentary http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9bqIYbDuns

- Can stationary charges radiate electromagnetic radiation?

I
walk across a carpet and then touch a doorknob. A big fat spark leaps
from my hand to the doorknob. The doorknob is now charged. It is also
being accelerated at 9.8 m/sec^2 (like everything else on this planet).
We are told that "accelerated charges radiate eletromagnetic
radiation". Hence the questions:

1. Does the doorknob radiate as long as it retains the charge? Why or why not?

2. Is it possible to accelerate an object without having it change speed, position, or direction in space? (this is related to the "motionless motion" discussed in Beyond Einstein)

3. Suppose the doorknob remains stationary, but the remainder of the room moves or oscillates. Is radiation present? Does this relate to the question of absolute motion?

4. Does this question relate to a "change of direction of motion" or a "change of dimension of motion"? See "Origin of Intrinsic Spin" for some insights.

2. Is it possible to accelerate an object without having it change speed, position, or direction in space? (this is related to the "motionless motion" discussed in Beyond Einstein)

3. Suppose the doorknob remains stationary, but the remainder of the room moves or oscillates. Is radiation present? Does this relate to the question of absolute motion?

4. Does this question relate to a "change of direction of motion" or a "change of dimension of motion"? See "Origin of Intrinsic Spin" for some insights.

- Insights from other space/time theories

See: http://scripturalphysics.org/4v4a/ADVPROP.html#UFOPhysics_2

http://scripturalphysics.org/4v4a/ADVPROP.html#GeometrySpaceTimeMotion

http://scripturalphysics.org/4v4a/ADVPROP.html#GeometrySpaceTimeMotion

- The Periodic Table is misssing a row

The Periodic Table displayed in chemistry and physics classrooms has only one row based on 1^{2} . The others based on 2^{2}, 3^{2}, and 4^{2 }each have two
rows. The reason for the missing row was not given in the
article. The missing row represents massless particles. These do not
have sufficient intrinsic spin systems to qualify as mass. They
therefore cannot come to rest in a gravitational reference system and
do not have "chemical" properties.

- Where is the antimatter?

Symmetry
considerations suggest that antimatter would be just as likely to exist
and matter. So where is it? It is actually here with us in our everyday
living space. It is not really "anti" matter, but "inverted" matter.
That is, it has space/time relationships that are inverted (time/space)
from our perspective. It is represented by an "inverted Periodic
table" (and the masses, as seen from our perspective, can be worked out
in terms of natural quantities as explained elsewhere in the article).
These are all "non-local" to our gravitational reference system and fly
through our system atom-by-atom at the speed of light much like the
massless particles of our own system. And instead of low energies, they
may have extremely high energies. Their distribution in our space is
essentially homogeneous and isotropic. We call them "cosmic rays".

3. It must clarify a fundamental
relationship between intrinsic rotation (spin) and translational motion. (See Origin of intrinsic spin ; Some thoughts
about intrinsic spin ; Effects of Spin )

^{1} = 1^{2} = 1^{3} ),
etc. (See #UFO Physics ; The Problem of
Quantum Reality ; The Problem of Quantum Locality ; The Problem of Quantum
Probability ; The Problem of Quantum Uncertainty ; #PythagoreanProblem )

*Linear
and Geometric Algebra*, Alan MacDonald (2010) Preface )

"Even
though Gibbs was able to reduce Maxwell’s twelve equations down to
four, as mentioned,
his formalism for vectors had significant structural limitations. For
example, the
cross product only applies in three dimensional space, because in four
dimensions there is
an infinity of perpendicular vectors. However, probably most serious in
terms of students
learning physics, is that, conventional vectors do not integrate with
established algebraic
intuitions regarding basic operations. That is, there is no division
operation, the cross product
does not apply in two dimensions and one cannot freely add vectors to
previously known
algebraic elements (scalars), so that vector algebra becomes a
monolithic structure unto
itself. Hence the intuitive understanding of physics concepts, as well
as general geometric
understanding, which depends on the understanding of vectors, is
significantly reduced.
Historically, as vectors became more popular in physics and in various
other fields, new
scientific discoveries such as quantum mechanics and relativity meant
that vector analysis
needed to be supplemented by a basket of other mathematical techniques
such as: tensors,
spinors, matrix algebra, Hilbert spaces, differential forms etc. As
noted in 7
, ‘The result is a
bewildering plethora of mathematical techniques which require much
learning and teaching,
which tend to fragment the subject and which embody wasteful overlaps
and requirements
of translation’. " ( "A simplified approach to electromagnetism
using geometric algebra", James M. Chappell, Azhar Iqbal, Derek Abbott
(November 11, 2010) https://arxiv.org/pdf/1010.4947.pdf See also: Vectors and Beyond: Geometric Algebra and its
Philosophical Significance,
Peter Simons, dialectica Vol. 63, N° 4 (2010), pp. 381–395
DOI: 10.1111/j.1746-8361.2009.01214.x http://www.tara.tcd.ie/bitstream/handle/2262/61825/Vectors%20and%20Beyond%20as%20Printed.pdf?sequence=1 )

_____

All
of this could keep an army of scientists, mathematicians, and engineers busy
for 100 years. It is the scientific equivalent of "fill the Earth and
subdue it" or staffing a newly discovered planet.

These
are the things of God, and God will give us assistance just for the asking:

*Bible in Basic English*,
Jeremiah 33:3)

"Though your beginning was insignificant, Yet your end will increase greatly.

Job 8:7, NASB

"the ant" has "no chief, officer, or ruler" (Proverbs 6:6-7, NASB

So, get to work!

Job 8:7, NASB

"the ant" has "no chief, officer, or ruler" (Proverbs 6:6-7, NASB

So, get to work!