Dot-Wave Unified field theory

[jerrygg38]

Moderation note: this thread was moved from the Alternative Theories forum because the ideas it presents, while interesting, neither make predictions that can be scientifically tested, and thus constitute a scientific theory, nor are supported by links or references.

In this forum (unless I get thrown out) I will present the dot-wave unified field theory. (A lot of groups do not like new ideas which shakes up their whole inner being of what they believed)

I will present the theory in small parts so that individuals can question or comments or disagree.

Let us start with the basic premise of the dot-wave theory. If we break apart all the subparticles to the very core until it is subdivided to the smallest entity which is beyond measurements, what will we find?

It is silly to believe that mathematicians can produce a set of subparticles which explain everything. The complicated mathematical rules of quantum mechanics are rules pertaining to rather large and energetic quantities.

As we move downward to the basic structure of the universe we find three thing. There is a plus dot of 1.13144E-57 coulombs (calculations will be shown later) This dot is a point charge. It is massless. Thus photons are composed of plus and minus dots. The minus dot has the same charge but is negative.
The third ingredient is the bipolar dot. This bipolar dot is the combination of a plus dot and a minus dot. It has no charge. The mass of the bipolar dot is
Md= 7.33982E-69kilograms.

The whole universe is composed of these three things. The bipolar dot has no DC charge. It does have spin, mass, mechanical energy.

The interesting thing is that a plus dot and a minus dot form a bipolar dot. Thus electrical energy can turn into mechanical energy.
In the cyclotron electrical energy added to an electron causes Einsteinian mass increase. Thus the electrical world is sister of the mechanical world. In effect we can replace kilograms with AC coulombs. Thus kilograms and AC coulombs are equivalent. This is different from DC coulombs.

The conversion from kilograms to AC coulombs permit us to write equations for gravity, the radius of the universe, the cycle time of the universe, etc.

[Jay-qu]

Hang on hang on.. you just said three things - but then say the third thing is composed of the first two things.. So is there two or three?

Also you say a photon is made of a plus and minus dot and is massless - how then is this third dipole thing, also made of the plus and minus dot massive? you just contradicted yourself..

[jerrygg38]

Originally Posted by Jay-qu

Hang on hang on.. you just said three things - but then say the third thing is composed of the first two things.. So is there two or three?

Also you say a photon is made of a plus and minus dot and is massless - how then is this third dipole thing, also made of the plus and minus dot massive? you just contradicted yourself..

JG: The entire universe is made up of two things so that if all things were placed at a single point, the entire universe would erase into nothingness.
If all the dots were placed together at a single point we would return to an original big bang which is prior to the cyclical universe.

Two things one plus and one minus combine in a "Well" to produce the third thing which is the bipolar dot. Everything we see is made up of these three things. Continuously there is an interchange between the electrical world and the mechanical world. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle is the result of mass/electrical energy changes continuously.

The photon is composed of dots along. Thus they have momentum and energy but are massless. When we combine plus dots and minus dots in a "well" you get a neutral charge bipolar dot. This has a pulsating waveshape or AC type field. It is this AC pulsating field which has the property of mass.

When we look at the dots in a "well) we see that they spin around each and form gyroscopic action. This is what gives them inertia and mass.
Thanks for the question.

[Jay-qu]

Ok, pretending that makes sense, lets see what this theory can do.

Can you calculate/predict the charge of the electron? what about its mass?

What makes your theory an improvement on other physical theories?

[InfiniteNow]

Jay - He can't. He just got himself banned at another forum for his dot-wave thing, and his inability to defend it and avoid circular reasoning. No math, no evidence, no citation... even admissions that he cannot support it, so they banned his ass. That's when he came here to Hypo to attempt selling his snake oil to all of you.

[Roadam]

(as I have just recently argued with another theorist I will just try not to notice this thread)

[jerrygg38]

Originally Posted by Jay-qu

Ok, pretending that makes sense, lets see what this theory can do.

Can you calculate/predict the charge of the electron? what about its mass?

What makes your theory an improvement on other physical theories?

JG: The charge of the electron is a given measurement. Years ago I studied the mathematical relationships between the constants but there are always error terms. I use the charge of the electron to tell how many minus dots are in the electron and proton. Thus:

#dots per electron = 1.60219E-19 / 1.13144E-57 = 1.41605E38 dots per electron and proton. Likewise I calculate the number of bipolar dots in the electron, proton and neutron using the bipolar dot mass.
#bipolar dots neutron = 1.67493EE-27 / 7.33982E-69 = 2.28198E41
#bipolar dots proton = 2.27883E41
#bipolar dots electron = 1.24109E38

Twice the radius of the universe is the wavelength of the bipolar dot
therefore
Rgalaxy outer sphere = radius of the universe to the very center or the outer sphere = 1.50564E26

Thus the bipolar dot is directly calculated from the radius of the universe and visa versa. (We live on a surface of a sphere 100 billion light years in circumference.

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. The dot theory shows the dot structure of the proton from an Einsteinian energy viewpoint which shows that 3.482MEV added spherically to a proton will produce 938.272MEV of photonic energy. This is not added by linear accelerators but by spherical pulsating electromagnetic fields.
Once the dot structure of the universe is understood and the photonic energy sources mass produced there will be no more need for oil or coal to power the Earth.
Our spaceships can travel on a beam of light. The beam is dangerous when in operation but once it is shut off the photonic engine is non-radioactive. Thus any fuel such as water or iron can be used.
We can get to the moon in 3.5 hours. We will ride the light beam at constant acceleration of G. Halfway to the moon we will reverse to a deceleration of -g. Thus except for a reversal of one minute, we will never be weightless. The photonic fuel cell is a very gentle method of space travel.
In Doppler Space Time 2000 we can get to Mars or Venus in a little over 2 days. Pluto requires 25 days. We can also get to Alpha Centauri in reasonable time.

[jerrygg38]

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

Jay - He can't. He just got himself banned at another forum for his dot-wave thing, and his inability to defend it and avoid circular reasoning. No math, no evidence, no citation... even admissions that he cannot support it, so they banned his ass. That's when he came here to Hypo to attempt selling his snake oil to all of you.

JG: If you want the math just pick up Dopple Space Time in used books stores. You can also get it on Amazon.com. It is out of print but quite available. I have no financial interest in it. It was printed once and will never be reprinted.

I have been banned by so many groups over the years. I have all the equations. My manuscript has been sent to 100 universities. In another year or so it will be published.

Unfortunately most people are preconditioned to believe the status quo. That is fine. This will not produce the photonic engine. Perhaps in another hundred years the powers that be will realize that the universe is a simple place. Then we can move forward. On the other hand global warming may destroy everything before then.

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by jerrygg38

JG: If you want the math just pick up Dopple Space Time in used books stores.

Is that the physics textbook from 1960 that you said you're using, the one that's outdated and wrong on several important points?

[jerrygg38]

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

Is that the physics textbook from 1960 that you said you're using, the one that's outdated and wrong on several important points?

"Doppler Space Time" copyright 2000 is my book by Starway Scientific Press. That was after 25 years of writing. The trouble is that there are three basic conversion solutions.
M = Q (kilograms = AC charge)
M = QC (kilograms = AC charge times the speed of light)
M = Q/C (kilograms = AC charge divided by the speed of light)

Einstein believed that mass and charge were sisters. That means mass can become charges and charges can become mass. It does not mean that mass is a DC charge.
Of course we are still stuck with four different things since AC charge is not DC charge but derived from it. As I put the Dot-Wave theory on the internet, I see that it is confusing to people. In addition Some of the professors responded saying they could not understand what I am saying.

Thus I have to rewrite my words in order to get the point across better. The internet is good for me to discuss the various point before the Dot Wave theory is published. I usually buy 1000 to 1500 books at McNaughton &Gunn. Most I give away to university libraries because this is my hobby adventure. I do not make any money. It costs me tens of thousands over the years. All hobbies cost money.

My 1960 textbooks written by Weidner professor of Rutgers and Sell professor of State University at Geneseo, NY contain the data would has not really changed. It does not contain string theory. It has basic quantum mechanics. Most important to me is the data.
Are you saying that the u-meson shower data is different now that in 1960?
Has Einsteins theory changed since 1960? I may be wrong but to me the other thing which changed is that people got set in their ways. They became over-educated in subparticle theory. That is not my interest. I am interested in the basic structure of matter.
The basic structure can produce an infinity of subparticles. It can produce black holes and stars and planets beyond the imagination. Who cares to understand all the variations that can be produced by the dots. It is important to understand the dots themselves.
Once you understand the dots and dot-waves then you can move ahead. Look at what they are doing at CERN. Look at all the money to build the greatest proton smasher. All I need is 10 billion dollars and I can build the first
proton to photonic energy source.
Someday the scientists will realize that they most go to the basics. They will then discover the dots. I sent my work out to many European Institutions. They will review it. Sometimes it will take a year or more before I get responses. Doppler Space Time got many good responses but I did not understand how the plus dot and the minus dot combine to produce the bipolar dot. I did not understand that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle was the result of mechanical energy continually converting into electrical energy.
The scientists went astray when they omitted the Einsteian energy increase from the Bohr model.
Oh well. Most people give me three seconds. They they decide what I say does not agree with what they have been taught. I understand that. They cannot overcome their programming. Few people have the ability to do that.
They cannot think on their own. We are only programmed robots. We do not compute! A few of us think beyond our programming.
Often when I solved problems at work that other could not solve, they believed that I used whitchcraft. When I designed logic circuits in my head, they could not understand how the things I designed worked perfectly since my designs are not conventional.
I solve the rubic cube by merely spinning the sides without any thought whatsoever.
So it is self evident to me that two dots produce the universe and two dots produce the bipolar dot. One thing good from Brian Greene the Elegant Universs on page 203
"Rutherford said: "If you cannot explain a result in simple non-technical terms then you really don't understand it". On page 130 he states
"There are other physicists who are deeply unsettled by the fact that the two foundational pillars of physics are at their core fundamentally incompatible. (general relativity and quantum mechanics)

So there is hope for man. They have gone astray for the last fifty years. My work will go out and things will change. Many will deny me but eventually man will come to understand the truth of what I say.