Dot-Wave Unified field theory

[Roadam]

Whats wrong with just going from outside to the inside? From all I have seen your dots have charge and mass directly derived from mass of known particles. Prove me wrong.

Your book received very strange review on amazon:

0 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars I cant believe it!!!!!, August 3, 2005
By B. Aaron - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
This man encountered Moses and and Jesus. The scientific data they gave him, he has studied for 24 years.

His forth book "Aliens within Us" provides mankind with a total understanding of God and our existence both in philosphical, religious, and scientific equations.

He is not a businessman. He merely does the job he was assigned and hope others will care to listen to what God has to say today.

I rarely have orgasmic reactions to science books.

You seemed to live an interesting life. From what I gather you must be around 70 years old. Still, do you have any rock solid evidence?

[Jay-qu]

A unified theory should be a little more self contained than what you propose - you should have a reason for the charge on your dots not just take the electron charge divide it by your dots and say there are x dots in an electron.. Also if dots are massless how does the electron get mass?

[jerrygg38]

Originally Posted by Roadam

Whats wrong with just going from outside to the inside? From all I have seen your dots have charge and mass directly derived from mass of known particles. Prove me wrong.

JG: Where else would I get the masses from. I started my work in my basement in Plainview NY while working for Sperry Gyro as an EE. I have no ability to make measurements. I must use the data from my physics books and the standard measurements available.

Once you know the mass of the bipolar dot from the radius of the universe, then it is easy to use the existing masses to calculate both the number of dots and the dot charges. I will show the calculations as long as people are interested.

Your book received very strange review on amazon:

JG: That is one person who does not like my philosophical solution to God and the Universe. In general I have many different solutions.

In 1994 My first book "The Natural God of Law, Love, and Truth" was published in India with a forward by Suresh Babu who is a son of a former prince of India.

In 2000 I published "Doppler Space Time" which a number of professors liked and was liked by many in England and especially Norway.

In 2001 I published "Science of God" which some liked. Others did not like my religious philosophy.

In 2005 I published "Aliens within Us" which describes the multi-light speed universe. Usually Quality books sells many to libraries and I give away most. That one review by the unknown person destroyed the potential sales. It now only sells for 95cents. However unfortunately in 2006 I realized my error in the equations.

Doppler Space Time started at Sperry Gyro. We had 1500 engineers, many mathematicians and several physicists. We also had the secret library with interesting physics experiments by MIT and others.

Sperry Gyro was an ivory tower. About 100 people discussed my work over many years from 1981 to 1993. Even today I still have a mathemathician friend who proof reads my work.

So it has been 27 years of work and I am still working on it. I still have a lot to do.



You seemed to live an interesting life. From what I gather you must be around 70 years old. Still, do you have any rock solid evidence?

JG: Yes. I will be 70 on Dec 24.
I worked for Con Edison. I designed 4kv lighting systems in the Bronx
I worked for the City of NY- I did the Long Island Expressway lighting. I did the Hutchinson River Parkway lighting. I did the 59th street Bridge. I walked the Verrezono Bridge when only the upper side steel rail existed. It was scarry as hell.
I worked at Sperry Gyro then Sperry Rand and later Unisys. I did the SDC/GMP signal data converter/gun mount processer for the Aegisl class destroyers. My 5 inch gun system worked the first time and everytime.
I fixed Polaris missle problems. I worked the Nexrad system. I worked the Ring Lazer Gyro. I worked the SAWS submarine system. It was a lot of fun until the big downsizing of 1993. 250 older Engineers thrown out one day. Yes we won a class action suit but only got pennies on the dollar. The judge said it was better to get something than nothing. The lawyers made out.
So I became a handyman part time. Right now I am out of work having moved to Cary NC from Virginia Beach. In the spring I will return to the handyman business so I can earn enough money to pay for the "Dot wave theory publication). It costs $6000 for 1000 books at McNaughton & Gunn.
It is my hobby.

I have my list of readers. There are a hundred people who buy my books as soon as I finish them. Quality books sells some. But I give most away. So it is a hobby and not a business.

In any event one Florida University agreed to review the book. Also Norway said they would study it. I am awaiting the military response. Unfortunately the photonic converter can be used to destroy incoming missles and enemy armies. It could be used for good or be a terrible weapon.

I have had fun at work and in my studies. If no one understands it or likes it, it doesn't matter much to me because I only have a few more years to go. If I was successful long ago, then I would be out of luck today. Others more brilliant then myself would have advanced far beyond me. So I would have nothing to do all these years. Once thing nice about the Dot-wave theory is that there are so many things to study and calculate.

[jerrygg38]

Originally Posted by Jay-qu

A unified theory should be a little more self contained than what you propose - you should have a reason for the charge on your dots not just take the electron charge divide it by your dots and say there are x dots in an electron.. Also if dots are massless how does the electron get mass?

JG: Good question. I see you think about things well. Let us look the time of the universe since big bang;

The force between two hydrogen atoms can be considered due to the interaction of the spinning electron of the first atom and the Bohr expansion velocity of the second atom and visa versa. This is an emperical best fit equation. It can be argued that it is not accurate enough but from an engineering viewpoint it is important to have a method to solve the radius of the universe since big bang.

F = 2 (Uo (QC/137.036) x (4 pi Q V*) / RR (2-14)

In equation 2-14 of the Dot-wave theory, the force between two hydrogen atoms can be looked as as an equivalent magnetic force of the electron in the Bohr orbit of atom one and the expansion of the Bohr orbit of atom 2. Likewise the force of the second atom electron interacts with the Bohr orbit expansion velocity of the first atom. Therefore the factor or 2 is involved.

Solving for V* , the Bohr orbit expansion velocity we get

V* = 1.053667E-28 meters per second
Since the Bohr orbit was basically zero after big bang, the time since big bang by this straight line Engineering approximation is
To = 5.02227E17 seconds
To = 15.9145 billion years.

The radius of the photonic field from the galaxy center to the outer radius of the galaxy is 1.50564E26

This is an engineering method. Future scientists can produce more accurate methods but I am limited to an Engineering model. As such the atom works whether the final radius of the universe is 20 percent higher or lower. It does not matter since first we make the photonic converter work and later we refine the theory to exact specificiations.

The smallest subparticle in the universe can have a wavelength either the radius of the universe or twice the radius. Using twice the radius we get
for h= 6.62608E-34, C = 2.9979E8
Energy of dot pair =6.59668E-52
The dot pair mass = 7.33982E-69kilograms

We can then calculate the dots per neutron as
# bipolar dots = Mn /Md = 2.28198E41
The proton has
#bipolar dots proton = 2.27883E41
# bipolar dots electron = 1.24109E38

That is the easy part.
(To be continued - sometimes all my work is lost so I transmit in sections)

[jerrygg38]

Reply continued:

Now we have the problem of finding how many charges exist in the electron and proton. the mass depends only on the bipolar dots. the plus and minus dots do not have the property of mass.

Now we must look at the Einsteinian energy of an electron as it reaches the proton radius. In Doppler Space Time the Einsteinian energy at a radius of
1.31959E-15 involves a speed of 0.9186C. Thus an electron absorbs energy from the electric field which brings it up to 0.9186C.
At 0.9186C the mass of the electron in the neutrons orbit is
Me*/Me = 2.53043 thus the mass/energy of the electron is
Me = 1.293 MEV

This means that most of the energy increase for the neutron is caused by the conversion of electrical charge into mass.

the mass of the neutrino is only 0.20178MEV

Scientists have not realized that the conversion from electrical energy in the proton/electron combination produces mass.

the delta mass for the conversion process is

Delta mass = Mn - (Me +Mp +M9neutrino) = 1.039356E-30

We now know that the delta mass is the product of the electrical energy

We know the dots per kilograms

We now can calculate the number of bi-polar dots in the difference

# mass difference bipolar dots = Difference /Md = 1.410605E38

Therefore there are 1.410605 pairs of dots which are split to form the plus dots and minus dots of the electron and proton.

Charge per dot = Q/#dots = 1.13144E-57 coulombs

It can be argued that these are only first order Engineering calculations. More fancy scientific calculations will change the numbers a cerain percentage. However when we build the first photonic converter, it does not matter if we get 20 percent more energy or 20 percent less energy out of it.
The important thing is that electrical energy produces mass and mass produces electrical energy.

[Roadam]

Where did you get Bohr expansion velocity, or at least who else uses it?

Even if it is true, this would mean that atoms are getting bigger, and so the universe is getting bigger and we are getting bigger, and thus we cant measure the difference of the size of an atom.

[Theory5]

But how do you support your theory without using circular reasoning?

More fancy scientific calculations will change the numbers a cerain percentage.

Care to elaborate on these "fancy" calculations?

And by Photonic converter do you mean one of those quantum cascade lasers? The quantum cascade lasers were thought of and were first demonstrated in 1994 by Jerome Faist, Federico Capasso, Deborah Sivco, Carlo Sirtori, Albert Hutchinson, and Alfred Cho at Bell Laboratories.
And I belive those lasers are being developed already.

Aegisl class destroyers

See this is why I have a reason to doubt you. There is no such thing as an aegis class destroyer, The aegis system and the ship that it is mounted on have no relation to each other. The first ships who where built with it were modeled after the Spruance-class destroyers.

I also find it interesting that you do not mention that you worked for Lockheed Martin.

You also mention that we are "close-minded" and only belive what we were taught. I belive I should mention, as it has been mentioned before and will be mentioned again, that we as a scientific community are VERY open minded. But our "flaw" is that we want theory's and other new idea's to be backed up by something other than circular reasoning.

if there is a "massless" atom photon or otherwise, does it exist? Everything has mass, no matter how small it is.

The big problem is that in order for man to survive upon this earth he must replace obsolete energy sources with proton to photonic converters.

But isnt photonics the science of generating, controlling, and detecting photons?

Please help me to understand this.
-Theory

[jerrygg38]

Originally Posted by Roadam

Where did you get Bohr expansion velocity, or at least who else uses it?

Even if it is true, this would mean that atoms are getting bigger, and so the universe is getting bigger and we are getting bigger, and thus we cant measure the difference of the size of an atom.

JG: From 1981 to 1989 I studied the numerical relationships between the constants of the universe. I had a lot of free time at Sperry. In general my job was to design great systems and solve the problems others could not solve. I did not have the regular job like the regular Engineers. With 1500 Engineers, scientists, and mathematicians there were at least 50 like myself (BSEE summa cum laude) or alternate. Thus weeks at a time I could devote myself to my studies and discussions with my fellow workers.
Many people got paid even when they had no work. One Engineer who had no work for several years was told by his boss that he had to work overtime. This excited him and he asked the boss what great job he was going to do. The boss told him "Do what you are doing now but more of it".
It was funny, When I worked at Arma for a short time they had a whole group of people who were ordered to do nothing. If they were caught doing some company business they would be fired on the spot. The government would come along to inspect to insure they were absolutely doing no work.
Then one day they had a problem with the LEM. The whole team went from standby to working hard to solve the problem.
So I had plenty of time since 1981 to 1993 to discuss dot wave theory with some extremely brilliant minds all day long at times. Now it is true we do not belong to the physics club. Thus this is my hobby.

Anyway it is my belief that the Bohr orbit is correct. A lot of other people believe it as well. (The Sperry club). When we look at the dot-wave at present, the size of the dot wave is:

Rn = 1.31959E-15 (radius of the neutron as a perfect sphere)
Volume of neutron = (4/3) pi (Rn)^3
Volume of Dot = (4/3) pi (Rd)^3
#dots per neutron = 2.28198E41
Therefore the size of a dot according to physics solutions for atoms
Size of dot today
Rd = Rn / (#bipolar dots)^0.3333
Rd = 2.15941E-29

When we go to the big bang, the dot size shrinks. The ratio of the mass of the proton today to the proton right after big bang is
Ratio = 1.35465E8meters

Therefore the size of the dot at big bang is
Rd = 2.15941E-29 / 1.35465E8 = 1.59407E-37meters

This should be the same size of the dot within a black hole.

As the dots expand, space expands. The center of the galaxies have black holes and in general are a constant distance apart. The galaxies expand as the dots expand. Thus at big bang (over a billion simultaneous explosions around the universe- not a single point), the forming galaxies were 1.35E8 smaller. They have expanded but the photonic wavefront of the universe moved at the speed of light to a radius of 15.9 billion light years.
Thus the physical universe does not change size. We exist from 15.9 billion years to 31.8 billion years for the photonic field. at full expansion this field compresses and erases the present universe. In the future it will be an antimatter universe.
The Indian picture of the snake eating its tail is true for the universe. The present universe will be eaten by the future universe forever. It is foolish to believe the far galaxie are moving at the speed of light away from us. This is against Einstein. They would have infinite energy if that was true. Thus Hubble & Company interpreted the red shift incorrectly. Radar Engineers have no problem understanding that. The mathematicians can go astray because they do not need to have physically realizable solutions.
Engineers need practical solutions. Thus an Engineering solution to the universe must be practical and must work. Galaxies flying apart at the speed of light is not physically realizable. It really does not matter because it was Engineers who got us to the moon using Newtons equations.
I am sorry to hurt the feelings of many great physicists but a time comes when people must look at the universe from a practical physically realizable viewpoint. The Quantum Mechanical solution based upon the double slit experiment is false. The great professor Fenn.... (forgot his name for the moment) said no-one could explain the double slit without quantum mechanics was foolish. The physical nature of the physical universe does not require the strange solution he proposed. It is funny. Engineers laugh at his solution. And they laugh at an expanding universe at light speed.
The radar data in the secret library verified Einsteins basic equations quite well. So we know that originally his non-expanding universe makes sense. He was just led astray by the Hubble data which he accepted. Sad.........
The Hubble data is true but all it shows is that the photonic field from the galaxies is expanding and that the field centers at the center of each galaxy. We then read the red shift because the photonic field of the far galaxies has expanded and in doing so lost energy per unit distance.
Oh well to answer your question, we are getting bigger and bigger common mode. This is why gravity exists. The expansion of the Bohr orbit encounters the dot-waves of space which push back upon it. The electrical equation of gravity is one solution. The more complex solution is a general gas type solution in which the dot wave hit the atoms continuously producing Heisenberg uncertainty reactions which continually change electrical energy into mechanical energy.
However this solution is for physicists. When we change the coulomb and the AC coulomb-kilogram into spins of radians per seconds, this is beyond my ability as an EE to write equations or describe the universe. Once the physicists understand the true physical nature of the universe, then they can write better equations from a scientific viewpoint then myself. Thus in the end the great mathematical and physics mind of millions of people can produce the final equations. All I do is reach into the beyond to produce the engineering solution.

[jerrygg38]

Originally Posted by Theory5

But how do you support your theory without using circular reasoning?

JG: I just tie my theory into existing theory. Thus it must agree with the data in my physics and electrical books. However I correct those books as required.


Care to elaborate on these "fancy" calculations?

JG: I just have and will show more calculations

And by Photonic converter do you mean one of those quantum cascade lasers? The quantum cascade lasers were thought of and were first demonstrated in 1994 by Jerome Faist, Federico Capasso, Deborah Sivco, Carlo Sirtori, Albert Hutchinson, and Alfred Cho at Bell Laboratories.
And I belive those lasers are being developed already.

JG: I have very limited knowledge of such things. Basically I learn of some new ideas from TV or limited books which I scan.


See this is why I have a reason to doubt you. There is no such thing as an aegis class destroyer, The aegis system and the ship that it is mounted on have no relation to each other. The first ships who where built with it were modeled after the Spruance-class destroyers.

JG: I am sorry. I forget things. I have to look at my resume. My system was used on the Beklnap and newer Aegis destroyers. I still have my Dept. of Navy Sea Systems command cup. It shows the gun for the CG26 Gun Weapon system. Even when I worked for Sperry, I paid little attention to the various names of the ships. I went on several of them but in general my Boss and the Senior Engineer did the communication with the Navy officials.
I did the design and they did the talking. And they had good memories and I never had a good memory for names. I remember faces quite well but cannot remember names at all.
Anyway the first system was the CSC in which we had a man in the gun. The SDC/GMP was unmaned and had to be waterproof as it was in the same room as the shells. I never saw the room. My boss did. I never saw the SDC/GMP aboard ship. I only saw the CSC aboard ship. They sent me to Dahlgren Virginia to discuss the hardware with the software people. The government programmers did the softward. The also sent me to Louisville to test out the gun. funny a navy gun in Louisville. They used to shoot down all the planes as they left the airport. Funny shooting down commercial airlines. So the system worked. They shot down all the targets. Of course no one was hurt. No one even knew that they were being shot down. A strange video game using the million dollar CSC to shoot down real planes. Everytime the computer told them they shot the plane down they would clap.


"I also find it interesting that you do not mention that you worked for Lockheed Martin."

JG: Lockheed Martin took over a lot. My older daughter works there. No I worked at Sperry Gyro which became Sperry Rand at Great Neck LI NY.
I forgot to say that in 1970-1972 I worked for Port of NT authority. I did the lighting towers at LaGuardia and the fuel pumping relay station which used old fashioned relay logic instead of modern computers. It was funny building computers out of relays. A whole building instead of modern electronics. They said the Local 3 electricians would not work computers.

Anyway Sperry Rand was taken over by Burroughs/Unisys. Then started the layoffs. It was still Unisys during the layoffs of 1993. I still have the Unisys lifetime medical plan. The Engineers union fought to maintain it and they won. I lost everything in 1993 because I was 2 weeks short of 55. However after 10 years we got a small class action settlement and I won back the lifetime medical plan for me and my wife.

You also mention that we are "close-minded" and only belive what we were taught. I belive I should mention, as it has been mentioned before and will be mentioned again, that we as a scientific community are VERY open minded. But our "flaw" is that we want theory's and other new idea's to be backed up by something other than circular reasoning.

JG: That sounds great. I do not know how old you are. One Chair at a leading Florida university was very honest. He said he was about my age and could not review the theory. He said he had a young professor that would review it. That is the problem. The people in power have 30 or 40 years behind them. To tell them that their understanding is wrong and that they have been preaching wrong ideas for 30 years, is too much for them to bear.

The young do have the ability to confront new ideas. This is especially true if they have not moved upward into the positions of power. However I may be a great problem solver but my wife thinks I am an idiot with respect to many things. So I am half idiot/half genius.


if there is a "massless" atom photon or otherwise, does it exist? Everything has mass, no matter how small it is.

JG: That is what you believe. Why do you believe this??? In order to find truth you must deny everything. Then you must build up truth slowly. You make a statement that everything has mass.
I say that is wrong. Everything has energy. The dot by itself has no mass. It only has momentum and energy. It has charge but no mass.

the bipolar dot does have mass. Thus energy takes two forms. Electrical energy without mass and mechanical energy with mass. That is where physics has gone astray. Unfortunately people make laws which seem to be true but are only partially true. Einsteins orbital laws are excellent but not Einsteins linear laws. So you have beautiful orbital laws and incorrect linear laws produced by the great Einstein.

Half truths are made into whole truths.So everyone learn half truths and half falsehoods.



But isnt photonics the science of generating, controlling, and detecting photons?

JG: I never heard the word until I thought it up a few months ago. Then I started hearing about it. I like the photonic converter to describe the conversion of mass into photonic energy.

Please help me to understand this.
-Theory

JG: I will try the best I can. I am limited in my ability to express myself. At sperry I had to describe how my designed worked. No one understand it. However we had technical writers. I would explain to them and they would produce the required technical books. I try my best but I do not always express myself well.

[Theory5]

First off, please do not change what I say or put in my quotes.

Second no other companies were mentioned in the making of the aegis system, only lockheed martian.In my research I meant to say.

JG: That is what you believe. Why do you believe this??? In order to find truth you must deny everything. Then you must build up truth slowly. You make a statement that everything has mass.
I say that is wrong. Everything has energy. The dot by itself has no mass. It only has momentum and energy. It has charge but no mass.

Einstin said that mass = energy
Also he said that Mass and Energy are the same thing.
And if you want to go around disproving einstin then you better have the math to prove it.

JG: I never heard the word until I thought it up a few months ago. Then I started hearing about it. I like the photonic converter to describe the conversion of mass into photonic energy.

Photonics isnt a type of energy as I said before it is the science of generating, controlling, and detecting photons

JG: I have very limited knowledge of such things. Basically I learn of some new ideas from TV or limited books which I scan.

TV? TV doesnt have many correct science "facts".
You should purchase some newer text books and read up on those if you are using your outdate book from 1960. A lot has changed since then.