Reinstatement of the Abandoned Cosmological Constant

& Unified (Steady State) Field Theory. The New Gravity

1 - Contents
*Copyright © December 1999 (*Previous copyrights 1959, '60, '66, '70, '79 '85 & '88.)
*By Kent B. Robertson Published by Great Continental
Eurasian Green Grass RiverDragon Productions Unlimited

Cover design & special effects by Austin P. Torney

*******************
A proposed resolution to an ongoing 4-dimensional space-time gridlock. © By K.
B. Robertson.
____________________________________________________________

formerly entitled:

The New Gravity,

Gravity Is the 4th Dimension

Extraterrestrial Physics 101

Copyright © 1959, '60, '66, '70, '79, '85, '99, 2005 & 2006 by *K B Robertson
(* Aka, the White Mongol, That Rascal Puff, etceteras. All rights reserved. With
acknowledgement, may be reproduced for educational and non-commercial purposes.)

(Please Note: Work In Progress. Gravity is the 4-D space-time continuum.

By popular request of distinguished readers, the introductory material to
this anthological and narrative work has been abbreviated to accommodate
an easier beginning - toward a remarkably comprehensive and
unprecedented understanding of post graduate information in later
segments of this non-mathematical approach to theoretical physics in
general, and Einstein's work in particular - the two considerations of which
are inseparable. For the most part, the math in this subject is already
history, what remains to be translated is the comprehensive meaning of the
existing documentary references and math. It is the objective of this work
to present a tenable non-mathematical interpretation, which, the reader will
note, is all based on the same self-revealing premise.)
Since 1959, the work has been small press printed, internationally
distributed and sold out of print in ten hard copy editions of essays and
books. This is a publicly accessible presentation, with an invitation to
whoever may care to correct, corroborate or otherwise comment upon.

--------------------------------------------

2 - Contents
 CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION - Page 5

Chapter One - Page 13

FROM NEWTON TO EINSTEIN
THE GRAVITATIONAL ALTERNATIVE

Chapter Two - Page 44

THE 4-DIMENSIONAL REPRISE

Chapter Three - Page 62

“OBVIOUSLY MATTER IS NOT EXPANDING”

Chapter Four - Page 91

FINDING THE 5th & 6th DIMENSIONS

Chapter Five - Page 107

MAXWELL’S ACTION AT A DISTANCE, LAMBDA,
& NON ABSOLUTE SPACE-TIME DILATION

Chapter Six - Page 138

THE COSMOLOGICAL CONSTANT & GEODESICS

Chapter Seven - Page 154

THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE, INERTIA, GRAVITY & E=MC2

Chapter Eight - Page 168

THE BIG BANG IS WRONG THE SIGHT AND SOUND OF THE
‘INCOMPREHENSIBLE’ 4TH DIMENSION

Chapter Nine - Page 196

REINSTATEMENT OF THE STEADY STATE
& UNIFIED FIELD THEORIES

Chapter Ten - Page 216

THE DIVISORY DILEMMA OF LARGE & SMALL FORCES

Chapter Eleven - Page 223

QUANTUM MECHANICS RECONSIDERED FROM
4-D PARTICLE TO 5 & 6-D FIELD Part I

3 - Contents
 Chapter Twelve - Page 232
QUANTUM MECHANICS RECONSIDERED FROM
4-D PARTICLE TO 5 & 6-D FIELD Part II

Chapter Thirteen - Page 236

QUANTUM WAVE & FIELD MECHANICS

Chapter Fourteen - Page 244

AUXILIARY INFORMATION
EPILOGUE Part I

Chapter Fifteen - Page 256

EPILOGUE Part II

Chapter Sixteen - Page 263

AFTERWARD

Chapter Seventeen - Page 271

AFTERWARD Part II

Chapter Eighteen - Page 278

AFTERWARD Part III

Chapter Nineteen - Page 286

AFTERWARD Part IV

Chapter Twenty - Page 295

ART, PROSE & POETRY OF THE
4-D SPACE-TIME CONTINUUM

**************************

4 - Contents
 INTRODUCTION
4-D accelerating expansion to macrocosmic infinity.

Copyright 1968 by Masao Komura.

Special Effects Copyright 2007 by Austin P. Torney

5 - Contents
An ensemble of systems. A Hierarchy of multi-moment
4-D space-time surfaces. - K.B.R.

("We cannot visualize such a curved space, because

humanity is not 4-dimensional" - Time-Life Science Series,
p. 172)

TOTAL FIELD THEORY - No Space Empty Of Field.

(The statement 'Gravity is the 4th Dimension', includes time
& motion)
The Reinstatement of Einstein's Presently Abandoned
Unified Field (Steady State) Theory.
by K. B. Robertson

"Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are

spatially extended." - Einstein

"There is no space empty of field." - Einstein

"In his novel, THE SEARCH, C.P. Snow describes the reaction of a
student in class on hearing the physics professor say he is not sure
whether some of the subject matter in the course is right. This
indication of disagreement of those inside physics comes as a
surprise to the student; he has heard of past scientific controversies,
but the current science which he is studying seemed to lack them
altogether, as if scientist-authorities backed it up by unanimous vote.
'Science', writes Snow, 'had seemed to be without people or
contradictions.'
"The knowledge that physics is not as unanimous or bloodless as it
may appear from the outside came as a surprise to me also. I wanted
to know more..."
- Barbara Lovett Cline, THE MEN WHO MADE A NEW
PHYSICS, Preface

“History shows clearly that the advances of science have always

been frustrated by the tyrannical influences of certain preconceived
notions which were turned in to unassailable dogmas. For that reason

6 - Contents
alone, every serious scientist should periodically make a profound
reexamination of his basic principles.” – Louis de Broglie, NEW
PERSPECTIVES IN PHYSICS

Speaking at the 2005 Solvay conference David Gross (Nobel

laureate) said:
"We are in a period of utter confusion...These equations tell us
nothing about where space and time come from and describe nothing
we would recognize. At best, string theory depicts the way particles
might interact in a collection of hypothetical universes...we are
missing something fundamental."

Excerpts from The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, by Thomas S.

Kuhn, from paragraph 1:
"Research is therefore not about discovering the unknown, but rather
a strenuous and devoted attempt to force nature into the conceptual
boxes supplied by professional education".

"In the history of physical science, no published and allegedly

'recognized and acknowledged' scientific theory has been so
misinterpreted, and consequently so misunderstood and
underestimated as the Special and General Theories of Relativity
(1905 - 1916) by Albert Einstein." - K. B. Robertson (KBR)
...........................

7 - Contents
 Abbreviated Reviews

"There is nothing new about Newton's Classical Mechanical gravity or

Einstein's 4th dimension of time, except preeminent non-
mathematical proof that they are one and the same. The New
Gravity Is The 4th SpaceTime Dimension." - K.B. Robertson, Ibid.

"It's still the same old universe, but gravity is the 4th dimension of
that same old universe. I'm grateful for the indelible change in my
perception of it. It may be impossible to overstate the importance of
this book. The one, two three and X Y Z of comprehensive infinity."
- Mark Stephen Halfon, Ph.D., Philosophy (*Nassau University),
Brooklyn, New York. (*1977 - 2007)

"An ambitious new treatise on the otherwise seasoned subjects of

Space & Time. We are not qualified to evaluate it, but are pleased to
see it in this (at that time 'comic book') format." - THE WHOLE
EARTH CATALOGUE, Portola Institute, 1970 - ‘71

"An unprecedented and awesomely credible non-mathematical theory

which matter-of-factly proves that gravity is the 4th dimension of time,
then forthwith discovers the previously unrecognized - therefore
unidentified - 5th & 6th dimensions of electricity and magnetism."
- Dr. John Shaw, Chemistry Prof. 1971, University Of California @
Berkeley

"Gravity is The 4th Dimension' - A documentary scientific 'Future

Shock'; major conceptual breakthrough. It must be disqualified or
formally acknowledged at the foundations of modern theoretical
physics; there is no middle ground. So advanced it's simple."
- Mark Vukovic, Electronics Tech, U.S.N. USS Shasta (AE-33), San
Francisco, CA.

8 - Contents
"This book has clearly made a formerly mystified theoretical physics
truly comprehensible to anyone with high school reading skills and
'street people' in general. Beyond its overt revolutionary scientific
import, the social implications are also profound. Bound to surprise
and constructively influence an enormous number of people for a
very long time. Ignoring or denying it won't make it go away. Now I
know what E=MC squared means." - Don Donahue, original printer
and publisher of ZAP Comix, San Francisco

"Gravity really is the 4th dimension, and levity and mirth use to be the
5th and 6th dimensions, until K.B. Robertson proved them to be
electricity & magnetism, respectively." - Herb Caen, The San
Francisco CHRONICLE

"Not without levity, the sharp shooting author expertly documents

his academic and historical subject; then - suddenly - the reader is
experientially surrounded by it. There is no intellectual escape from
the 4-D space-time continuum anymore, in or out of an ignorant or
uninterested yawn. The very act of reading these words is directly
and physically sustained by it. Observing various responses of
others, in the early stages of recognizing it, is a recreation in itself.
The informal narrative is a social liberation. The conservative
elements don't like it already."
- Sallie Taylor Melinda Bryan, 1979

"Academic L.S.D. in a Stockholm punch bowl, and everybody's

invited. Ready or not there is no way out of this but through it. A
scientific Odyssey. The most remarkable fact about 'The New Gravity'
is that it was not discovered and written fifty or more years earlier."
- Gregory Nageotte, Ph.D. Philosophy, Santa Barbara, CA. 1979

"I am unable to disqualify it."

- Dr. Richard Feynman, 1966, Professor Emeritus, Cal Tech

9 - Contents
 "It reads a hell of a lot more easily and comprehensively than
anything else of the subject of Einstein's Relativity. Reads at least as
easily as the brass tacks section of any good sci. fi. mag., and it is not
science fiction."
- Travis T. Hipp, KSAN radio, San Francisco, 1970

"The old saw, 'There is no gravity, the earth sucks', is no longer

tractable. The New Gravity (Is The 4th space-time Dimension) is the
old gravity, in a pushy new paradigm of Einstein's 4 dimensional
space-time continuum. Guaranteed to illuminate even the most
diffident mind. It will chancelessly see you and raise you indefinitely.
The New Gravity will never let you down." - Arthur Kretchmer, 1979,
Article Editor, PLAYBOY Magazine

“KBR, I have read all of your posts and the entire many posts on the
cosmological constant. I agree, much of what you have written is how
I also see one interpretation of Einstein’s thinking. You have probably
described most of it better than anyone before you, including Einstein
himself, yet you have offered little new, to someone like my self, who
long ago figured out Einstein’s thinking, most the same as you.”
- Lloyd Gillespie, THEORY OF EVERYTHING Forum, 2007

“Is gravity really the 4th dimension? Or has the author only cleverly
built his theory around reality so that no one can tell the difference?”
- K.B. Robertson (RascalPuff)

________________________

10 - Contents
 From: Associate Professor BenTheMan To RascalPuff,
4/18/07

Rascal ---

It is not clear to me that you have done anything but quote

outdated references.

And, to be clear, Newton NEVER based ANYTHING on a

graviton. One of the biggest problems Newton had with his own
work was that he had no idea concerning what gravity actually
WAS.

Sometimes you eat the bahr, and, well, sometimes he eats you.
---Anon

From RascalPuff to BenTheMan:

Dear BenTheMan:

The point of the 'outdated' references is they're retrieved from

the trashcan and being put back on the slate. The increasingly
desperate big bangers are plundering key features of what was
previously abandoned; while continuing on with their bankrupt
(originally presented) 'big bang', which now only vaguely
resembles its initial inception and presentation.

Enter (collectively) in google: Cosmological Constant Lambda

Expanding universe big bang acceleration red shift dark energy
Friedmann Lemaitre Robertson Walker.

Enter in google: 'Einstein was right after all - maybe'.

11 - Contents
 I am fully aware of:
'The idea that matter can act at a distance across space to
influence other matter is to me so great an absurdity that no man
with a competent facility for thinking could ever fall into it'. -
Newton, Paraphrased.

The animus mundi.

Newton repeatedly, deliberately and emphatically clarified that

'gravity' was a complete mystery to him.

It is clear that your only respite is the statement of the obvious

that you've extended. Thank you for your seasoned views.
--------------------------
http://www.toequest.com/forum/ethics/2840-imitation-compliment-plagiarism-something-else.html
_______________

"There was a young lady named Bright. Who moved much faster
than light. She departed one day, in a relative way, and returned
on the previous night." - Eric Buller, 1923

*******************
San Francisco City College, Small Theater Auditorium.
Greenpeace Benefit
(Expanded edition)

********

October 1976

12 - Contents
 Chapter One
From Newton to Einstein
The Gravitational Alternative
"Not long ago I was kindly admonished that
the subject of this evenings' discussion - which
is Einstein's 4-Dimensional Space-Time
Continuum - is far too technically specialized
and complicated for the majority of most
otherwise knowledgeable persons: that, if I
ever attempted to lecture it to an open
audience, any such attempt would inevitably
fail and moreover, quite possibly bore people
to sleep. Such talk does not discourage me
however; permit me to tell you why.
There's bound to be a few people here
tonight, who need to catch up on some sleep.
Of the few well intended critics who have made
these heavy lidded predictions, none have read
my book or attended my lectures. It's their
jobs they sleep on. Such relaxed and yawning,
recreationally preoccupied forecasts faithfully
represent the fashionable response to any
proposal that the 4-D space-time continuum
can be identified or substantially
communicated: without mathematics. Like
gravity, the 4th Dimension is formally assigned

13 - Contents
to non-mathematical incomprehensibility.
Hence, any suggestion that the fourth
dimension is non-mathematically approachable
is immediately evaluated by the knowing as
the mark of a rank scientific novice - someone
who does not know enough mathematics to
understand that the 4th dimension is
comprehensively accessible, only to those who
do (know enough mathematics). These
foregone determinations stem from the fact
that there is not even the slightest history of
any unsuccessful attempts to non-
mathematically identify the 4th Dimension, let
alone any successful one. No such
accomplishments are anticipated.
The 4th Dimension is correctly equated with
time and motion, while formally and
consistently relegated to be non-
mathematically incomprehensible and even
unimaginable. An abstraction on the face of a
speculative wrist watch - in those 3-
dimensionally timeless words (George Gamow,
GRAVITY)...
The reason why none of my somnambulant
critics - most of them confidentially vanquished
physicists and/or Big Bang advocates-
(explosive beginners and entropic enders) have

14 - Contents
troubled themselves with reading or attending
my lectures. Hopefully, this accounts for all of
the more serious and important matters; so
that we may address ourselves, if you will, to
all of this allegory insensibility, idle chatter,
inane scrawl and/or ranting bombast about
gravity being the 4th Dimension.

Gravity is the 4th dimension

"That is an unprecedented statement. The only
thing gravity and the 4th Dimension are
presently recognized to have in common as far
as academic physics is concerned, is what is
not known about them. Specifically: neither
gravity nor the 4th Dimension has ever been
non mathematically identified. It is
acknowledged that they exist, it is
mathematically and elaborately described what
they do, but it is not and it has never been
comprehended what they are.
On the other hand, it is my intention to
generate and popularize only one particularly
prominent and inevitable question around the
unprecedented statement that Gravity Is the
4th Dimension, and that question is:
Didn't we know that before? And, if not: why
not?

15 - Contents
 If the statement, 'Gravity is the 4th
Dimension' is incorrect, why has it never been
disqualified? No one is being asked, neither of
course is anyone obliged to accept or believe
that gravity is the 4th Dimension. When any
one at any time finds this statement seriously
credible it is not because I said so, or due to
the introduction of a lot of new or ponderous
ideas.
The statement is found credible when it is
revealed and recognized as the inevitable and
quite overwhelming import of a wealth of
simple, fundamental and familiar facts. Well
known but hitherto unrelated facts, which,
when related, reveal quite unexpected but
equally unavoidable, imminent and overdue;
still remarkably unrecognized (and as we shall
see, stubbornly and apocryphally denied)
conclusions.
Terra Incognita, revisited and Re-Cognized
(Here be unslayable Old World dragons):
As a place to start, I will cite three facts; the
first of which is an excerpt concerning gravity,
which is extracted verbatim from the 2nd and
3rd pages of Isaac Newton's three page (non-
mathematical) Preface to The PRINCIPIA
MATHEMATICA.

16 - Contents
 Then, we will review Albert Einstein's'
definition of gravity from his GENERAL
PRINCIPLE OF RELATIVITY.
Thirdly, we will review the mathematical-
geometric definition of dimensions, to
determine if and how the definition for physical
dimensions relates to Einstein's' renowned 4th
Dimension. We will summarily consider if and
how the 4th Dimension relates to what Newton
and Einstein have independently and formally
offered, in the PRINCIPIA MATHEMATICA and
the GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF RELATIVITY
respectively, as their two centuries divided
considerations of the identity of gravity.
Respectfully submitted here, that if you will
simply permit presentation of the above
subjects, the non-mathematical identity of
gravity, and the non-mathematical identity of
the 4th Dimension, will be revealed and proven
to fulfill the engagement, comprehension and
agreement of the majority of intellectual
facilities present here this evening. I submit
furthermore that this proof will self-explicitly
and irrevocably include the statements:
GRAVITY IS THE 4TH DIMENSION.
ELECTRICITY IS THE 5th DIMENSION.
MAGNETISM IS THE 6th DIMENSION;

17 - Contents
proceeding from there, to find the floundering
Big Bang Theory an assemblage of pilfered
principles alleged to be abandoned and of no
further use to the advancement of science.
Finally, I respectfully submit that the
unfolding all of the above proposals will be
accomplished in the next approximately
seventy minutes (discourse time actual) or less
(This dissertation is amplified from the original
presentation).
The forthcoming excerpt from Newton's
Preface to The PRINCIPIA MATHEMATICA is
precluded here with the clarification that, even
today, gravity is colloquially thought-of and
popularly accepted definitively as a pulling
force of attraction; originating at the centers of
individual material objects (particles - charges;
systems of same); the force of which increases
proportionately with increasing mass values.
This definition has always been a categorical
presumption applied to the unknown identity of
gravity, for the sake of convenience and for
apparent lack of any other alternative
definition.
Newton himself understandably had difficulty
accepting the existence of an 'invisible force'

18 - Contents
which he describes as 'occult', having the
power to move apples and planets. Above all,
he (very specifically) found - proved - the large
force of the orbiting moon directly linked to the
same mysterious force applying to the apple's
inspiration for falling, above and upon the
earth's surface - the aquatic, atmospheric and
terrestrial tides; the planets orbiting the sun.
It was formerly thought that gravitational
forces acting on earth were much different
than forces acting elsewhere in the larger
realm of solar system and universe. Newton,
established for the first time, that it - the
universal realms of the large and small - is all
connected by a singular, commonly acting,
unidentified invisible force. That is the gist of
Newton's discovery - the proven extrapolation
of the same force that causes relatively
miniscule apples to fall, also causing the
orbiting of the relatively enormous planets.
(“The ‘thump’ of a great apple, in the stillness
of a crisp October morn - motivated only by
the mere necessity of perfect ripeness.”
- Hawthorne.)
Newton, finally acknowledged the conditional
existence of gravity; only because his own

19 - Contents
newly invented calculus confirmed that, indeed
the same force that motivationally generates
falling apples, does likewise generate and
sustain the orbits of planets. Yet, as we are
about to be reminded, Newton took great care
to point out that he did not know or purport to
know the identity of gravity, and that his
mathematical address to gravity is not
concerned with or dependent upon its causal
identity, or, its direction...
Newton’s thoughts on ‘the occult (pre ‘Field
Physics' recognized) force (Maxwell’s
Electromagnetic Field, omni-directionally
projecting <in the pattern of a spider-web> at
light speed out of all material entities)’:

20 - Contents
Special effects by Austin P. Torney

“It is inconceivable, that inanimate brute

matter should, without the mediation of
something else, which is not material, operate
upon, and affect other matter without mutual
contact. “And this is one reason why I desired
that you would not ascribe inanimate gravity
to me. That gravity should be innate, inherent,
and essential to matter , so that one body may
act upon another, at a distance through a
vacuum, without the mediation of anything
else, by and through which their action and
force may be conveyed from one to another, is

21 - Contents
to me so great an absurdity that I believe no
man who has in philosophical matters a
competent faculty for thinking, can ever fall
into it. Gravity must be caused by an agent
acting constantly according to certain laws;
but whether this agent be material or
immaterial, I have left to the consideration of
my readers.”
- Isaac Newton, On Gravity.
As we shall see, the popular term 'Newtonian
concept of attraction (a pulling force)', as
applied to gravity, was never unconditionally
endorsed by Newton. The concept of gravity as
'a pulling force of attraction' remains a
speculative though understandably popular
term, coined by Newton's beneficiaries. All of
this is to say that the conceptualization of
gravity as any sort of pulling force of attraction
was not Newton's resolute conceptual or by
any means exclusive definition of gravity. Allow
the derivation of this last statement to be
further qualified:
I wish to cite at this time what is to say the
least, a most interesting alternative concept
concerning the identity of (what Newton was
always careful to call 'universal') gravity. An
otherwise completely ignored statement which

22 - Contents
might even be correctly categorized as
'obscure', or 'inconsequential'. Were it not for
the fact that this statement is made by Sir
Isaac Newton. And, were it not for the fact that
this statement is included in the very (3 page,
non-mathematical) Preface to The PRINCIPIA
MATHEMATICA.

23 - Contents
Special effects by Austin P. Torney

24 - Contents
 From the beginning of the 1st to the end of
the 2nd page of Newton's three page Preface
to The PRINCIPIA MATHEMATICA, Newton is
discussing the motions of falling objects and
orbiting planets; by way of his applied
mathematical descriptions of the effects of the
force of gravity. At this time, Newton offers the
following statement about what causes the
gravitationally induced motions of planets &
apples, quote:
Last sentence of first paragraph, verbatim,
translated to English from the Latin…
“For I am induced by many reasons to suspect
that they may all depend on certain forces by
which the particles of bodies, by some causes
hitherto unknown, are either mutually impelled
towards each other and cohere in regular
figures, or, are mutually repelled and recede
from each other; which forces being unknown,
philosophers have hitherto attempted the
search of Nature in vain."
That quote and its extraction will henceforth
be referred to here, as THE GRAVITATIONAL
ALTERNATIVE. Not my gravitational
alternative; Newton's Gravitational Alternative
to be exact. I repeat the quote (of particles
and systems-of-particles: of matter), 'are

25 - Contents
either mutually impelled towards each other
and cohere in regular figures (orbits;
juxtapositions), or, are mutually repelled and
recede from each other.'
It implies directly and categorically, that
gravity may in fact be the opposite of the
universally considered impelling or 'pulling
force of attraction'; that is to say, Isaac
Newton and his formal definitions, directly and
resolutely suggest that gravity may in fact be
a repelling or pushing force.
It is difficult to over dramatize the very
existence of this statement, its author, and
especially its contextual implications. It
categorically allows that everything Newton
mathematically confirms and describes in The
PRINCIPIA MATHEMATICA - from orbiting
planets, falling apples, aquatic, terrestrial, and
atmospheric tides - all the large and small
phenomena of gravity - is caused by one of
two kinds of forces: the conventionally
considered impelling or pulling force of
attraction, or, its exact opposite, a repelling/
pushing force. That is fact #1.
Fact #1 evokes at least one question:
Allowing possible advantage in Newton's
Gravitational Alternative that gravity may in

26 - Contents
fact be a repelling (pushing) force rather than
an impelling (pulling) force, how might any
such advantage be experienced and applied?
That question and its derivation might still be
deemed obscure and inconsequential, if its
direct unequivocal answer did not exist, most
profoundly, at the heart-foundation of the
latest and most advanced generalized theory of
gravity in the history of Physical Science. That
being Albert Einstein's GENERAL THEORY OF
RELATIVITY.
In the first quarter of this century, Albert
Einstein, in observing the already well known
inversely proportional equivalence of
gravitational and inertial mass values (which
will be explained, shortly), described this
equivalence as: 'an astonishing coincidence',
and then applied the cause of his astonishment
to the monumental task of formulating an
unprecedented theoretical generalization
concerning the identity of gravity. That, being
none other than the General Principle Of
Relativity; which principle is quite literally the
foundation upon which rests Einstein's entire
General Theory of Relativity. The most
advanced statement about gravity, to date.

27 - Contents
 The General Principle is also misnomered as
the 'Equivalence Hypothesis', or, more
appropriately, 'The Principle Of Equivalence',
which states: 'There is no way to distinguish
the effects produced by the inertial force of
acceleration (a pushing/repelling force) from
the effects produced by gravitational force
(assumed to be a 'pulling/impelling force:
identity unknown').
For those already familiar with the General
Principle of Relativity that is clear enough. But,
to the uninitiated it may sound a bit
complicated. Fortunately, there is a simple and
excellent demonstration which clarifies the
import of this statement. The explanation
originally used by Einstein to point out the
meaning and implications of the GENERAL
THEORY OF RELATIVITY, is since then often
utilized by relativist writers and physicists for
the same reason. The explanation spoken of
here is popularly termed 'the elevator analogy'.

28 - Contents
 Special effects by Austin P. Torney

Illustrations A & B
An elevator car is depicted as falling down the
shaft of a very high building after having
parted its restraining cables. A group of human
passengers perform experiments. They hold
out objects and release their grip on them -
the objects (cannonballs, bb-shots, pound of
butter, wristwatch, etc.) remain suspended in
midair; they do not accelerate downward.
Because, all of the released objects are falling

29 - Contents
within and along-with the elevator and its
passengers at 32 ft. per-second-per-second
(16 ft per second, squared); in accordance
with Newton's laws of gravitation (on or of,
earth).
The observers in the elevator are unaware of
their predicament. They understand and
explain the suspension of objects and
themselves in mid-air, by presuming they are
outside the gravitational influence of the earth,
and logically conclude that they are 'free-
floating' in deep outer space where there is no
significantly measurable force of gravity at all
(a *macrocosmic weak force - the opposite of
*microcosmic strong nuclear binding force; *
generally misperceived as being unrelated; two
different kinds of forces. The record proves
they are qualitatively the same force,
quantitatively occurring in two different - large
and small/ tenuously thin and densely
compacted - places/coordinate systems)...
Refer to Illustration A
It is an apparently sensible conclusion - that
they are in a coordinate system which is free-
floating in deep space. In leaping from the
floor, they float smoothly toward the ceiling
with a velocity directly proportional to the vigor

30 - Contents
of their individual leaps. If/when they push a
suspended/floating object in any direction, that
object continues to move in a straight line with
uniform velocity, until it strikes the wall of the
elevator car. Galileo's and Newton's Laws Of
Inertia prevail exclusive of gravity, and are
obeyed.
Newton's Laws of Gravity are pointless to
consider in the elevator at this time; because
there are no significantly measurable
gravitational effects in it, to influence its
passengers and their experiments. The
environment of the interior elevator is
therefore purely and exclusively an inertial
system, destitute of gravity and gravitational
effects.
THERE IS NO WAY FOR THE OBSERVERS
INSIDE THE ELEVATOR TO DETERMINE
WHETHER THEY ARE FALLING IN A
GRAVITATIONAL FIELD (as they actually are),
OR SIMPLY 'FREE-FLOATING' IN THE VOID OF
DEEP SPACE, FREE OF ANY GRAVITATIONAL
INFLUENCE WHATSOEVER.
Then Einstein alters the situation of the
elevator and its passengers. (Refer to
Illustration B) This time the experimenting
passengers are still in the elevator, but they

31 - Contents
actually are in the void of deep space, far away
from any appreciable gravitational influence. A
cable is attached to the roof of the elevator car
and an arbitrary force winches-in the cable at
32 feet per-second squared (the descent rate
of free falling objects on earth). The elevator is
therefore accelerating 'upward' through space
(any direction in which the elevator car
happens to be pulled by the cable, is 'upward'
relative to the passengers within it). Again, the
observers within the elevator have no idea
where they are, and again they evaluate their
situation by performing experiments. Their feet
now rest firmly on the floor; they now have
their 'normal' (as experienced on earth) body
weight to support. Confirmed by scaled weight
measurement (The observers are actually
measuring and obtaining inert mass values;
not realizing they are not measuring
gravitational mass values): their coordinate
system having found the two values identical
under the accelerating circumstances;
indistinguishable from each other.
Inertial & Gravitational Mass Values; which
are not supposed to have anything to do with
each other, are likewise indistinguishable at
this *juncture; which Einstein called

32 - Contents
*’astonishing’ - the *coincidental confluence of
two different methods of measuring and
defining mass value; arriving at exactly the
same - unrelated coordinates. *A pound of
butter offers exactly a pound of resistance to
acceleration: when the acceleration exactly -
and 'coincidentally' - equals the descent rate of
objects in free-fall @ 32' per second squared,
on earth.
When the passenger’s in Einstein’s elevator
jump, they do not float to the ceiling because
the floor is constantly accelerating upward
beneath them at the descent-rate for free-
falling objects on earth. When the observers
and various objects are weighed on a standard
scale within the elevator at this time, they all
have their 'normal' earth-weight (heavy mass
value ); due to their resistance - generated by
physical matter - negative inertia: the
tendency of all bodies at rest to remain at rest
and offer resistance to outside forces acting
upon them, including non-uniform motion.
That is to say: inert mass value , opposing the
acceleration (non-uniform motion) of the
elevator floor.
If the elevator were accelerating at less than
32 ft. per-second, the objects and observers

33 - Contents
would weigh correspondingly less than their
normal earth weight. If the elevator were
accelerating at more than 32 ft. per-second,
the objects and observers would weigh
correspondingly more than their normal earth
weight. When the observers in the test
elevator release objects from their grip, the
objects appear to descend vertically -
'fall'/accelerate-'downward' @ 32 ft. per-
second (per second). When objects are tossed
or pushed in a horizontal direction, those
objects do not move in a straight line in
accordance with the laws of inertia; instead the
paths of the tossed objects - due to the
acceleration of the elevator car - describe a
parabolic curve; descending vertically at 32
feet per second squared, relative to the floor;
in accordance with the laws of gravitation.
The observers remain unaware that their room
is accelerating (ascending ever-faster) through
deep space. They understandably conclude
from direct experience and experimentation,
that they are situated in quite ordinary
circumstances in a windowless room on earth,
influenced by conventional gravity.
THERE IS NO WAY FOR THE OBSERVERS TO
DETERMINE FROM WITHIN THE ELEVATOR

34 - Contents
(coordinate system) WHETHER THEY ARE AT
REST IN THE EARTH'S GRAVITATIONAL FIELD;
WHERE ALL OBJECTS ARE 'PULLED'
DOWNWARD @ 32 ft. per-second BY GRAVITY,
or: WHETHER THEY ARE ACCELERATING IN AN
INERTIAL SYSTEM (which they are in this case,
@ 32 ft. per-second squared): WHERE THERE
IS NO GRAVITY WHATSOEVER.
From his imaginative and now renowned
'elevator analogy', Einstein formulated a
conclusion of unprecedented theoretical
importance; that being: The General Principle
of Relativity: THERE IS NO WAY TO
DISTINGUISH THE MOTION PRODUCED BY
INERTIAL FORCES (acceleration/ centrifugal
and centripetal force), FROM MOTION
PRODUCED BY GRAVITATIONAL FORCE. This is
the General Principle of Relativity. Fact #2.
It borders on being a statement of the
obvious, but we are about to see that
sometimes it isn't so obvious at all. That
people in general everywhere, actively refuse
to recognize it, altogether - the greatest
problem - and the most importantly
unrecognized solution - in science, since 1916.

35 - Contents
 It is particularly noteworthy, because the
Classical and Contemporary popular concept of
UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION remains, that is to
say, continues to be, a 'pulling force of
attraction'. Yet, here we find Contemporary
Theoretical Physics - specifically Einstein's
General Theory of Relativity - equating gravity
with acceleration as - and which is - a 'pushing
or repelling force'.
That is to say, in 1686, Newton categorically
and formally allowed that gravity 'may be' in
fact a repelling force. Then, in 1916, we have
Einstein's General Principle of Relativity
equating gravity with acceleration, which is,
once again, a repelling force. What I call:
Newton's Gravitational Alternative - and
Einstein's General Theory; on the same table.
Historically 220 years apart. Lightning struck in
the same place - ominously joined, since the
resiliently unrecognized and stubbornly
unattended opportunity afforded, in The
(Einstein's) General Theory, of 1916.

36 - Contents
 Isaac's apple in Albert's elevator

F=GMM
____________

r squared

Special Effects by Austin Torney Illustration copyright 1969 - 2007 by K.B.Robertson

Again, this elicits a question: If we are to

seriously consider gravity as a repelling force,
how might it be meaningfully construed as
such? That is to say, how do we apply
Newton's Gravitational Alternative, combined
with Einstein's General Principle, to correspond
with the anthropomorphic Gravitational
Experience?
We will return to this question and its answer
by way of a brief comparative investigation of

37 - Contents
what relationship if any exists between
Einstein's concept of gravity, derived from the
General Theory of Relativity, and Einstein's
concept of the 4th Dimension, which is also, as
we shall see, more than coincidentally derived
from the General Theory of Relativity.
A brief review the definition of dimensions as
applied to the three recognized dimensions of
space, follows. Let it be qualified firstly that, in
colloquial language, the term 'dimensions' may
be correctly applied to any number of
descriptions, such as 'dimensions' of music or
thought or color for example. But, in physics
there is only one definition for dimensions,
which we will reconsider, immediately after the
following statement concerning contemporary
academic physics and its representative
posturing toward the subject of the (Einstein's)
allegedly 'acknowledged' *4th Dimension (*of
'time and motion'). Mathematicians and
physicists are of the consensus agreement
that, when the definition of the 4th Dimension
is applied to Reality-At-Large as Einstein
proved it is in fact, then one automatically
departs the realm of conscious experience and
comprehensibility. This is the reason for
example, that in one renowned case the

38 - Contents
reputedly omniscient, ever-present yet
conceptually elusive 4th Dimension was
professionally referenced as, 'a mathematical
abstraction on anyone's wrist-watch'.
This is also the reason the 4th Dimension is a
favorite conscript among science fiction writers
and metaphysicists. There is unflappable
security in speculations and improvisations of a
subject, about which there is no recognized
non-mathematical comprehension; no
recognized absolutes or authorities (when the
allegory expert falsely emerges everywhere,
waxing of discovery, while claiming his subject
is functionally unfindable). A haven for
befuddled academic refugees: a jingoistic
proving ground that endorses (and/or
ambivalently disqualifies) everything and/or
anything; according to the needs of the
sometimes desperately ignorant, pretentious,
scientifically name-saked 'authorities' and
historical revisionists. Innocent ignorance is
exonerated in this consideration.
No discourse on the 4th Dimension, whether
physics or science fiction, would be complete
without directly suggesting that it is
'unimaginable', or, 'incomprehensible', or
'something else', or 'someplace else' ('far out').

39 - Contents
 Yet, it is agreed that the 4th Dimension is
'time & motion'; somehow integrally combined
with the 3 recognized Dimensions of Space;
existing always and everywhere. Therefore we
need very little imagination or faith in Einstein,
to know that we are perpetually witnessing
and experiencing the 4th Dimension, in simply
being conscious of the reality we are part of;
by which we are constantly surrounded. We
can correctly go one step further. We can be
confident that the 4th Dimension has been,
and continues to be overlooked. That is, we
can know that some very fundamental
constituent or phenomenon of reality - with
which we are all familiar, but which has yet to
be recognized, is the 4th Dimension - the 4-
Dimensional space-time continuum to be
exact.
Today's physical scientists tell us that 'the 4th
Dimension is time and motion'. They say this
because they know Einstein proved it
mathematically. But it is not a non-
mathematically satisfactory answer, because it
does not contribute to any further
comprehension of what the 4th Dimension is,
relative to the colloquial 3-Dimensional
Experience. Time and Motion are measurable

40 - Contents
and comprehensible in Three Dimensions. Why
not in 4? What is it about proven and
measured 4-dimensional reality that has not
been recognized? Why has it not been
recognized?

NOTE:
All of the below authorities proclaim that the
4th Dimension is non-mathematically
'incomprehensible', even 'unimaginable'.
Readers are cautioned against concluding that
these authorities are right, and encouraged to
read the accompanying discourse, and draw
their own non-mathematically facilitated
conclusions.

"In 1916, Albert Einstein published his

General Relativity, a mathematical theory of
gravitation which replaced Newtonian concepts
with abstractions so difficult that it took a
decade even for most mathematicians to grasp
them. The essence of Einstein's theory was
that the presence of matter distorts space and
makes it curve. The concept of space curvature
stemmed from many dimensional, non-
straight-line geometry created abstractly
through equations. Just as a surface can curve
in ordinary 3-Dimensional space, so in non-
41 - Contents
Euclidean geometry a 3-Dimensional space can
itself curve in 4-dimensional space. No one can
visualize such a curved space because
humanity is not 4-Dimensional..."
- LIFE Science Library, THE UNIVERSE, p. 179

"When events occur in 3-Dimensional Space it

is not possible to draw an actual graph of 4-
Dimensional space-time, but mathematicians
have ways of handling such graphs without
actually drawing them."
- Martin Gardner, RELATIVITY FOR THE
MILLION, p. 98

"The 4-Dimensional world of relativistic

physics is the world where force and matter
are unified; where matter can appear as
discontinuous particles or as a continuous field.
In these cases, however, we can no longer
visualize the unity very well. Physicists can
'experience' the 4-Dimensional space-time
world throughout the abstract mathematical
formalism of their theories, but their visual
imaginations - like everybody else's - is limited
to the 3-Dimensional world of the senses. Our
language and thought patterns have evolved in
this 3-Dimensional world and therefore we find
it extremely hard to deal with the 4-

42 - Contents
Dimensional reality of Relativistic Physics."
- Fritjov Capra, THE TAO OF PHYSICS, P 150

"This concept is very difficult to visualize. It is

a consequence of the 4-Dimensional space-
time character of the sub-atomic world and
neither our intuition nor our language can deal
with this image very well."
- Capra, THE TAO OF PHYSICS, p. 80

"In the General Theory of Relativity, the

framework of the Special Theory is extended to
include gravity. The effect of gravity, according
to General Relativity, is to make space-time
curved. This, again, is extremely hard to
imagine. We can easily imagine a 3-
Dimensionally curved surface, such as the
surface of an egg. The meaning of the word
'curvature' for 2-Dimensional curved surfaces
is thus quite clear; but when it comes to 3-
Dimensional space - let alone 4-Dimensional
space-time - our imagination abandons us.
Since we cannot look at 3-Dimensional space
'from outside', we cannot imagine how it could
be 'bent' in some direction."
- Ibid, p. 173

"The reader is cautioned against concluding

that time is an additional physical dimension in
43 - Contents
the sense that it can be seen and felt like a
material object. No one in our universe can see
in 4 Dimensions or more because of the way
our universe is constructed."
- James A. Coleman, RELATIVITY FOR THE
LAYMAN, p. 69

Chapter Two
THE 4-DIMENSIONAL REPRISE
The mathematical definition for the 4th
Dimension is also the geometric definition. In
order to consider the geometric definition for
the 4th Dimension we will first review the
singularly scientific and formal definition for
the Three recognized Dimensions of Space.
Then we will consider the 4th Dimension's
relationship if any, to Einstein's General
Principle of Relativity and/or Newton's
Gravitational Alternative. ( Refer to
Illustrations 1 & 2)

The (only known; geometric; metrically

spatial) definition for physical dimensions,
begins with no dimensions whatsoever -
specifically a geometric point. We will call it
'point zero ('0'). Any motion of point '0' will
inevitably be at right angles from itself, and,
44 - Contents
any motion, at any speed, for any length of
time, generates a One Dimensional Straight
Line 'O' - 'A', of arbitrary length.
It cannot be a curved line yet, because it has
no dimension(s) to curve into. It may become
a longer or shorter One Dimensional Straight
Line, but it cannot change its dimensional
quality until it moves at right angles (90
degrees, perpendicular) from itself (again).
Then it generates a Two Dimensional Plane 'A'-
'B'. When a Two Dimensional Plane ('A'-'B')
moves at right angles to itself (yet a third
time), it generates a Space and/or Solid 'B'-'C'
of Three Dimensions. (Picture a line-drawn
cube; progressively generated from 0
dimensions to 3-Dimensions: by the right
angle extrapolation of the geometric point 0, to
0-A, generating a One Dimensional Straight
Line <0------->A>. The Straight Line 0-A then
moving at right angles to itself, generating A-B
Two Dimensional Plane. The Two Dimensional
Plane A-B moving at right angles to itself B-C;
generating a Three Dimensional Solid, occupied
or occupiable-by 3-dimensional matter).
The rule here is the right angle/perpendicular
projection of each dimension from out of the
preceding dimension. This is how physical

45 - Contents
dimensions are generated, hence, this is their
singular physical and philological definition.
That leaves us here and now with the
conceptual-geometric credentials to
contemplate the three recognizable Dimensions
of Space occupied - or occupiable - by matter;
familiar enough concept; by-way of its
Universal physical-conditional manifestation in
the entire reception of physical-sensory,
instrumental and therefore psychological-
conceptual human experience (at large).
Knowing; not speculating, that we are obliged
by the laws of geometry, combined with
Einstein's (allegedly 'acknowledged') proof that
the entire physical Universe is 4-Dimensional:
not merely to 'consider', but to find, observe
and experience the physical as well as spatial
Three Dimensions of Space moving at right
angles from themselves. This is not a mere
idea, or consideration, or project; it is an
ultimatum: THE 4-DIMENSIONAL ULTIMATUM.
Because, it demands without ambiguity or
equivocation, that the entire recognized
physical 3-Dimensional Universe of Space and
Matter, must be and is moving at right angles
from itself in one of two possible 4-
Dimensional directions: that of overall 4-

46 - Contents
Dimensional contraction, where everything
recognizable as 3-Dimensional, is constantly
growing smaller (moving at right angles from
all three of it's recognized dimensions)...
Or, the direction of overall 4-Dimensional
expansion, where everything recognizable as
3-Dimensional, is constantly growing larger
(moving at right angles, constantly, to all three
of its recognized dimensional coordinates).
Do we see or measure - do we recognize - 3-
Dimensional reality as moving at right angles
from itself; shrinking ever-smaller with 4-
Dimensional contraction, or, growing ever-
larger with 4-Dimensional expansion?
The unanimous and seemingly inevitable
answer to this (apparently absurd and
pointless) question, since Einstein required it,
has uniformly been (as will be *documented,
shortly), *“No, we do not observe or measure
3-Dimensional reality as 4-Dimensional.
Obviously matter is not expanding. If the
universe is made up of a number of disturbed
areas, by now it would have spread
indefinitely."

47 - Contents
48 - Contents
 Furthermore, it is uniformly agreed, we
cannot measure, comprehend, or even imagine
the 4th Dimension; nor will we ever. The 4th
Dimension is declared to be non-
mathematically incomprehensible; descriptively
inaccessible without a mathematically
encrypted frame of reference. (Refer, the half
dozen mistaken quotes from authorities, at the
back cover of this book.) The Three recognized
Dimensions Of Space must move at right
angles from themselves - that is to say,
expand or contract, in order to fulfill the only
definition there is for any geometric or
mathematical consideration of - or address to -
a physically prevailing 4th Dimension...

49 - Contents
Of which, in the meantime, prevails
ubiquitously: we are abundantly reassured that
Einstein left no doubt.
Probably safe to presume that some of you
who are not snoozing, already have more than
a vague idea of what's next, and if so - you're
quite right of course. The resolve is exactly as
simple as it is inescapable. Einstein's GENERAL
PRINCIPLE OF RELATIVITY equates gravity
with acceleration. Einstein's 4th Dimension
demands overall right-angle motion of the
Three recognized Dimensions of Space: in one
of two possible 4-Dimensional directions
(Overall expansion or overall contraction).
Since objects do not fall 'upward' and away
from 3-D Matter, this rules out overall 4-
Dimensional contraction. Objects do fall
'downward' toward the center of 3-D Matter;
therefore (as is): a physically (materially)
expanding Universe. identity (the source) of
the observed, measured, acknowledged,
recognized spatially expanding universe.

50 - Contents
 The conclusion is without precedent -
although it has many historically noted
revolutionary counterparts and parallels, in the
history of Western Science. Recognizing the
four dimensional space time continuum as
being gravity, and conversely, is and has been
patently unavoidable since its remarkably
progressive advent; for the reasons provided
herein (Refer to Illustrations 3 & 4)
The material as well as spatial Universe is 4-
Dimensionally expanding; it is this 4-
Dimensional accelerating expansion that
generates the force experienced and
recognized as gravity. Hence objects do not fall
to earth; the earth - instead - accelerates

51 - Contents
upwardly and overtakes them (just as the floor
does in Einstein's elevator).
Gravity is the 4-D space-time Dimension.
If anyone asks or demands from this point
onward, that this statement must or need be
proven, they are reminded that this has
already been accomplished, by Einstein, and
Newton, and the laws of mathematics and
geometry; at - by definition - their most
fundamental, physically definitive level. We
have simply taken Einstein's renowned
accomplishments and recommendations
seriously enough to actually apply-them-to and
recognize-them-within, the human
Gravitational Experience.

The Question is no longer, 'What & Where is

the 4th Dimension in my own experience?'
Einstein proved that it is time and motion;
applicable to: Everything; Everywhere. The
Question regarding the 4th D. is:
'What & Where is it not?'
"I feel sure we have to return to the program
which may be described properly as the
Maxwellian - namely the description of physical
reality in terms of fields without particles."

52 - Contents
- Albert Einstein, IDEAS & OPINIONS, p. 270
The challenge is no longer to prove that
matter is an ever expanding field and that
gravity is consequently the 4-D space-time
dimension. The challenge is to prove that this
is not the ongoing universal reality as we
perpetually experience and witness it - all of
the observed, experienced and audible effects
of gravity as we know it; without previous
recognition.
Approximately forty-five minutes remain of
the allotted time to prove that gravity is the 4-
D space-time Dimension. I respectfully submit,
that; if you will permit me to do so, I will prove
that gravity is the 4th Dimension, nine more
times in the remainder of the allotted seventy
minutes.
Past Is Prologue (Study History).
Gravity is the 4th space-time Dimension
because physical matter itself is 4-
Dimensional. As Einstein proved and the
institution of academic physics (presently
insists - while simultaneously refusing to
recognize it) acknowledged sixty-five years
and five months ago (as of 10/'76 when this
discourse was publicly delivered).

53 - Contents
 This means literally, that we are able to make
a seemingly absurd prediction with complete
confidence that it is not absurd - or even a
prediction - at all, but rather an inevitability.
That inevitability being that the fundamental
material constituents of all apparently solid
Universal Matter, i.e., neutrons, protons
electrons and all other so-called 'sub-atomic
particles', are not 3-Dimensionally static solids
- billiard ball like 'particles' - at all, but rather,
surfaceless electromagnetic charges without
distinct boundaries: 4-Dimensionally
accelerating fields - projecting/extending the
previously unidentified 5th & 6th dimensions of
electricity and magnetism respectively, as we
shall soon discover; forthwith.
Presently, we will consider further proof that
physical, corporeal matter is a perpetually
expanding, accelerating field...
Introducing an abbreviated but entirely
accurate description of yet another proven and
still unrecognized fact, furthermore and
categorically confirming that Matter is 4-
Dimensionally expanding. The most popular
sources include a renowned book on physics
written by the late and eminent journalist-

54 - Contents
mathematician, J.W.N. Sullivan. It is very
appropriately entitled, THE LIMITATIONS OF
SCIENCE. On pages 100 and 101 of the hard
cover edition of that title, the author is
describing an experiment and discovery
(entailing the controlled *bombardment of
singular-atomic-thickness Gold plates/
filaments; *with subatomic particles –
imparting concentric circles on the gold
sheets); originally fulfilled by physicist, G.P.
Thompson (Incidentally, G.P. Thompson is not
to be confused with his father, J. J. Thompson
who was the discoverer of the electron some
decades earlier).
What G.P. Thompson did in 1937, when
technology finally permitted him to be the first
to access and measurably record the sub
atomic/microcosmic realm of so-called
'particles (electrons, protons, neutrons; et al -
sub-atomic particles)', was to overtly and
experimentally discover and mathematically
and repeatedly re-confirm that the ultimate
physical constituents of matter - that is,
neutrons, protons, and electrons - are not
reducible to the anticipated microcosmic, 3-
dimensional ‘particles’ having specifically
defined boundary-surfaces; discontinuous from

55 - Contents
surrounding space. Instead, G.P. Thompson,
discovered that neutrons, protons and
electrons are microcosmic charges of
undulating electric field energy - 'charges'
('disturbed areas'), having no definite
boundary surfaces whatsoever separating
them from their surrounding space.
The immediate below illustrations are excerpted from Geoff Haselhurst's
Wave Structure of Matter
Two Dimensional Cross Section of spherical standing wave.
(Interior becomes increasingly more dense with approach to center,
squared to microcosmic infinity. - K. B. Robertson 5/18/07 Re: 'Wavicle')

+ =
This diagram shows how the In-Waves and Out-Waves form a Standing Wave around the
Wave-Center 'particle'
_______________________________________________________

http://www.spaceandmotion.com/help/introduction-physics-philosophy-metaphysics-space.htm

56 - Contents
 Because of the outcome of G.P. Thompson's
original experiment and many other related
experiments since then, physical science today
formally recognizes, acknowledges, and
categorically states, that two or more physical
entities - be they individual neutrons, protons
or electrons, or billiard balls in collision, or
juggernauts moving in opposite directions at
90 miles per hour and colliding head-on: do
not actually touch or contact one another.

The subjective term touch', and even the

objective term 'contact' directly imply and
require one surface meeting another surface.

Of course, for all subjective purposes in the

human experience, the terms 'touch' and
'contact' are entirely acceptable. We observe
that apparently solid 3-Dimensional substance
has apparently discontinuous surfaces,
therefore we intelligently - but in this case
incorrectly - assume that all solid material
substance including that of our own bodies, is
ultimately constituted-of and reducible-to solid
3-D particles; also having specifically defined
surface-boundaries, discontinuous from
surrounding space. G.P. Thompson's original

57 - Contents
discovery that there are only charges of
electricity which somehow influence each other
at-a-distance-across space, evoked the
following commentary from Lord Bertrand
Russell:
"No two particles of matter ever come into
*contact.
When they get too close, they move off".
- p.126 THE ABC OF RELATIVITY.
(Refer to illustration 7. Two charges/particles;
in mutually oppositional collision. There is no
‘surface contact’.)

58 - Contents
 Special effects by Austin P. Torney

All of this is to review and clarify the context

in which it is an observed and acknowledged
physical fact that no two or more physical
entities ever actually touch or contact each
other. The conclusion of 'touching', or
'contacting' is reached by way of the field
produced by atomic and sub-atomic structures
- which Thompson refers to as 'disturbed
areas' - a physical constituent of those
structures. Although it is proven that any two
or more material systems never actually
contact each other, it is invariably observed
and agreed that they do have, to say the least,
an 'influence' on one another. Which influence
must, because they do not touch or contact, be
attributed to conflicting field forces.
"There is no such thing as space 'empty of
field'. Space-time does not claim existence on
its own, but only as a structural quality of the
field". - Albert Einstein, IDEAS & OPINIONS, p.
375
For this reason, any answer to any question
or consideration of whether or not two or more
bodies touch, is entirely dependent upon the
popular as well as literal interpretation of what
is actually meant or circumspectly intended - in
59 - Contents
what qualified context - by and in the
practiced; applied terms: 'Matter' and/or
'physicality'. Discontinuity is, as a concept,
displacing continuity; where the latter
manifests in patently measured reality. A
political coup in theoretical physics - Nobel
Prize material in the Quick-Fix department of
hasty discoveries. A series of historically
obscure quick fixes (little denials), culminating
into what only now emerges as a major
oversight, if not cover-up. A Real Sign of the
Virtually Artificial ('L.H. Oswald acted alone')
Times ('JFK shot himself').
Ostensibly, contemporary physics refuses to
acknowledge or term an energetic field entity,
Matter (instead, grotesquely calling it an
'unstable; disturbed area'), even though that
field entity disallows the simultaneous
occupation of its space by any other field
entity. That is to say summarily, two qualities
observed of field entities are quite literally the
formal definition of matter. That definition
being: 'That which possesses inertia and
occupationally demands 3-Dimensions of
Space'.
That is Fact #3.
There is still more to this.

60 - Contents
 Sullivan comments furthermore on pages 103
& 104 of THE LIMITATIONS OF SCIENCE:
"These disturbed areas which are discovered to
demand 3-Dimensions of Space indicate the
position of the electron; yet we cannot state
that the disturbed area is the electron.
Because any such locality has a tendency to
spread, and if the matter of the universe were
a number of disturbed areas, by now it would
have spread indefinitely."
Holy Smokes! The church is on fire?
Thompson (as described by Sullivan, Ibid.),
repeatedly checks the experiment and its
mathematical confirmation; repeatedly gets
the same results, and then dismisses the entire
finding…
Perished the disturbing thought; before it
spread indefinitely. Along with everything else
that couldn't possibly be expanding - even
though he just proved otherwise. Rescued the
physical universe from 4 dimensional
expansion. Been keeping General Relativity's
most famous dimension, motionlessly
suspended in three static, tenaciously non-
expanding, glazed & permafrosted dimensions,
ever since.

61 - Contents
 Chapter Three
OBVIOUSLY MATTER IS NOT EXPANDING
'TIME Magazine’s Man of the Century':
Einstein's 4-D universe is not an option in
today's academia. Banned from the classroom.
Why? Because it can't - mustn't - be where it
is: everywhere.
The entire (perpetually ignored or actively
dismissed) finding is Albert Einstein's allegedly
'immeasurable' and 'incomprehensible' 4-
Dimensional Space-Time Continuum. The
physically (spatially and materially) expanding
universe...
What is happening here and ever since, is,
G.P. Thompson, with J.W.N. Sullivan and the
entire scientific community looking over his
shoulder, is opting to subjectively over-rule
and contradict the objectively proven and
demonstrated, prevailing conditional reality, on
the now very familiar and equally over-
employed and foregone premise that it
subjectively appears 'obvious' that Physical
Reality-At-Large 'is not' (4-Dimensionally)
expanding.
That is to say, Thompson did not simply fail
to recognize and acknowledge the direct

62 - Contents
implications of his discovery. He, and J.W.N.
Sullivan refused, and all physicists since then
continue to refuse to recognize and
acknowledge its meaning and its abundantly
measurable, observable, even prosaically
*audible manifestations. (The very *sound of
4-D gravity is revealed, before this dissertation
closes.) This is contrary to scientific method.
And, Sullivan is not through, yet...
I won't blame any who may not believe this
next quote. I don't believe it either, and it's on
pages 103 & 104 of THE LIMITATIONS OF
SCIENCE. Author, J.W.N. Sullivan, summarily
endorses Thompson's dismissal of the
experimental results (2+2 must equal 5).
"As long as we are considering an individual
electron, we could be misled into thinking that
its waves are physical realities. Each electron
in fact demands a 3-Dimensional Space to
itself. This makes it obvious that these waves
are merely a mathematical phantom;
consequently it is profoundly disconcerting to
find that experiment confirms their existence.
The apparent congruity between calculation
and experiment must be in some sense
illusory. It is extremely difficult to avoid the
conclusion that the experiments and their
results have yet to receive their proper

63 - Contents
interpretation." - Pages 103 & 104 of THE
LIMITATIONS OF SCIENCE, by J.W.N. Sullivan
Here's a portion of a google obtained, 1993 review, by Maura Flannery:
I'd like to discuss a book that I first saw on the bookshelf of a colleague.
It's a paperback called The Limitations of Science by J.W.N. Sullivan. It's a
1963 reprint (New York: Mentor) of a book which originally appeared in
1933. It caught my eye because I had read another book by Sullivan, the
second volume in the series called Aspects of Science (New York: Knopf,
1926). I really enjoyed it, and so I considered borrowing Limitations, but
never got around to it. When I came across it in a used bookstore in
Madison, Wisconsin (which is full of bookstores) at $1.50, I couldn't resist.
On the back cover, Sullivan is described as "a mathematician, philosopher,
and musician, who was called at his death by TIME magazine, 'one of the
world's four or five most brilliant interpreters of physics to the world of
common men.' I had never heard of him until I read an article on the
beauty of physics by S. Chandrasekhar, who quotes Sullivan (Physics Today,
32 [1979], p.25). Since I'm interested in the aesthetics of science, I
followed up on the quote and came to Aspects of Science, which is a
collection of essays. I enjoyed it because Sullivan was saying in 1926 many
things which I think still need saying today: that science is an exciting,
passionate occupation that is it more than laws and facts presented in a dry
form.

“These disturbed areas which are discovered

to demand 3-Dimensions of Space indicate the
position of the electron; yet we cannot state
that the disturbed area is the electron.
Because any such locality has a tendency to
spread, and if the matter of the universe were
a number of disturbed areas, by now it would
have spread indefinitely." – Sullivan, Ibid
(Indeed it has, and so it will continue,
maintaining the same relatively uniform
density, from one moment to the next, ad
infinitum - yesterday's square mile is much
smaller and more dense than today's, and
today's is much smaller and more dense than
tomorrow's; squared. All frames of reference
64 - Contents
remaining relatively equal; the infinitely small
being no less endless and dense than the
infinitely large is endlessly more thin and
tenuous... Electromagnetic gravity is relatively
stronger in the comparative earlier moments
and relatively weaker in the comparative later
moments of the continuous universal
expansion. The value of time also varies,
corresponding with the value of space it occurs
in. More will be said about this, later.)
That is fact #4.
(How they do carry on.)
‘Extremely Difficult To Avoid Unstable
Disturbed Areas in The Recent, Profoundly
Disconcerting History Of Science, Which Have
Yet To Receive Their Proper Interpretation.’
Continued:
P.D. Ouspensky, has the same kind of trouble
in his NEW MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE. An
entire chapter entitled, The 4th Dimension.
P.D. Ouspensky sets an awkward, out of
character example of being so near and yet so
far...
“It is difficult to describe even approximately
the significance which the discovery of the 4th
perpendicular in our Universe would have for
our knowledge. The conquest of the air.

65 - Contents
Hearing and seeing at a distance establishing
connections with other planets (How about if
we start with establishing connections on this
planet?) or with other solar systems; all of this
is nothing compared with the discovery of a
new dimension.”
(What about the 4th dimension of space-time-
gravity, the 5th of electricity, the 6th of
magnetism? How much less are all those
projected ‘nothings’, compared with this
ensemble of newly discovered physical
dimensions?)
Ouspensky continues:
“But so far it ('the discovery of a new
dimension') has not been made."

What We Must Do:

“We must recognize that we are helpless
before the riddle of the 4th dimension, and we
must try to examine the problem within the
limits accessible to us.” - P.D. Ouspensky,
Chapter: THE 4TH DIMENSION, in the title: A
NEW MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE. p. 68
(*With all due respect, sir: How about a drop
in the bucket?

66 - Contents
 + = This rough diagram shows how
the In-Waves and Out-Waves form a Standing
Wave around the Wave-Center 'particle'.
- Geoff Haselhurst
All the answers are there, looking up at the
observer - ut infra, ut supra - not caring a
ripple if the answers therein are recognized or
not... The specific import of this statement will
be clarified with the progression of this report.)
“The most incomprehensible thing about the
world is that it is comprehensible.” - Albert
Einstein, IN SCHLIPP (1949) p. 112
For an even more detailed documentary of
the remarkably employed Art of Missing The 4-
Dimensional Point, refer pages 69 thru 97 in
P.D. Ouspensky’s A NEW MODEL OF THE
UNIVERSE. This is a very well written and
illustrated book and chapter (The 4th
Dimension), by a deservedly esteemed and
dedicated author - well worth reading.
Ouspensky exemplifies and dramatizes the
standard refusal to recognize what is a proven
- over-ruling result of objective experiment and
mathematics with subjective
misunderstandings.

67 - Contents
 How 'misled we can be into thinking that
waves are physical realities.' Whereas, physical
reality at large is ‘obviously not expanding.’
'Clarifying' that all experimental proofs of the
expansion of the physical universe at large -
what is unanimously encountered and
uniformly denied here - are merely
'mathematical phantoms.' The 'profound
disconcertion' being that there's something
here that isn't being recognized, and we
(formally recognized scientists) apprehend that
someone is going to run into it (provide the
illusory ‘phantom’ with its so far rejected and
actively denied, long belated 'proper
interpretation', and non-mathematically make
it conceptually accessible to everyone), before
we do (Boo?).

‘We could be misled into thinking’...

Readers may draw their own conclusions,
regarding the meaning and import of
Buckminster Fuller's below quoted statement,
regarding the geometrically considered 4th
dimension (which is usually represented by a
graphic illustration of a cube, or 'super/hyper-
cube', and which in fact, as Fuller clarifies,

68 - Contents
may be represented by any shape
whatsoever...).
"In reality, mathematics can say very little
about the 4th dimension. There is nothing in
the hypothesis of the 4th dimension that would
make it inadmissable from a mathematical
point of view, this hypothesis does not
contradict any of the accepted axioms and,
because of this, does not meet with particular
opposition on the part of mathematics.
Mathematicians even admit the possibility of
establishing the relationship that should exist
between 3-D and 4-D space, i.e., certain
properties of the 4th Dimension. But they do
all this in a very general and indefinite form.
No exact definition of the 4th Dimension exists
in mathematics...
"The basis of the denial of the fourth
dimension, which has been supported by the
theoretical and fallacious plane and cubical
geometry, has been the inability to produce an
additional or fourth perpendicular to a cube, as
the basis of an additional power multiplication,
whereas, poor little plane arithmetic and
algebra, without geometrical reference, being
abstract, indicate the perfect ability to do so...

69 - Contents
 "Very rightly do they do so, for if the
geometrist will go back to his first
perpendicular, he will find it perpendicular to a
sphere, for did he not assume a dot as his first
basis of a geometrical theorem, which if
conceded at all, must be spheroidal. Matter, if
existent at all (and we cannot fallaciously
assume a truth that is not), must be
spheroidal. Surely the 'PlaneAndSolid'
geometrist does not claim his 'dot' or 'point' to
be cubical, for then he would have no further
cause for his progressive antics.

70 - Contents
Special effects by Austin P. Torney

We see that there is no cubism, and that we

can have as many perpendiculars to the inside
or outside of the sphere as we may wish. Each
power raising, or root taking, is on the basis of
spheroidal increase or decrease by that many
units of its radial or time dimension. The only
'straight line' then is the radial or time line,
demonstrated by spheroidal dissection on its
radial axis. There is also much laughter at the

71 - Contents
'Plane&Solids'" - R. Buckminster Fuller, 4-D
TIMELOCK, p. 17
Apparently, what Fuller is qualifying, is that,
although a geometric point does not exist, it is
not square, it is round. Otherwise the motion
of the square point A, to generate a Straight
Line A --->B, begins a sequence of unnatural
cubism, proceeding all the way up to the 4-D
'supercube'.
Fuller seems to be reminding us that the
perpendicular - right angle - Euclidian law of
(the extrapolation of) dimensions, can and
does proceed from any shape at all; the three
recognized dimensions of space being 4
dimensional and of a quasi infinite number of
shapes and sizes.
The reader is encouraged to look up
Buckminster Fuller in 'Who's Who'? The
majority of entries have a few paragraphs of
fine print - whereas Fuller's achievements fill
the page. He is not a man to be
underestimated.
How ‘Indefinitely Spreadable’ It Is...
George Gamow, in one mighty peculiar
paragrah, shows us what's wrong with
Einstein's Cosmological contribution.

72 - Contents
 "Einstein's Cosmological Constant is unstable,
and might *start expanding or contracting at
the slightest provocation." - George Gamow,
THE CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE, p. 26
(((Say When?)))
Refer: As You (Squarely) Like It, by William
Shakespeare.
Dear George Gamow:
Please do let us know when and where it
*stops.
( Here it comes again.)
4-D MassField Doppler Effect
Consider the physical definition of an
expanding field. The singular definition for all
expanding field systems is: A measurable and
definable area or system of or within space,
which is inherently and constantly growing
larger (or smaller). Such definable field areas
of space may have any number of
dissimilarities. But all manifestations of
expanding field energy have in common one
inevitable characteristic.
Consider the comparative relationship of two
otherwise totally unrelated fields. Specifically,
we will compare the qualities of an expanding

73 - Contents
field of sound with that of an expanding field of
electromagnetism - which is light.

Special effects by Austin P. Torney

If these sound waves were light, it would be shifted toward
red, from a receding source, and shifted toward blue, with an
approaching source.

In the example of a field of sound, consider a

simple mechanical alarm clock which is ringing,
but not otherwise moving relative to an
observer. The innermost circle represents the
outside diameter of the alarm clock itself; of
course the concentricity's emanating from
center - the ringing alarm clock - represent the
systematic structure of sound waves projecting
omni-directionally from it. In the case of
sound, the field is expanding from the alarm
clock @ slightly less than 1,100 ft. per-second.
Note, that the sound-Field system which is
circumscribed by and contained within the area
encompassed by the outermost (largest;
oldest) sound wave is completely symmetrical
(illustration 5); that is to say, it has the same
74 - Contents
uniform structure in any direction from the
center-source and throughout all of its parts.
Now consider the above diagram of a ringing
alarm clock as a source of light, rather than
sound. Whereas, light does not require a
conducting medium to support its motion
through space from its source, and sound
does, and, whereas light moves at 186,282
miles-per-second as compared to the 1,100
foot seconds of sound. Nevertheless, what
these two comparatively considered fields do
have in common becomes graphically evident
when either or both of them are in motion
relative to an observer. That commonalty is a
well known phenomenon, originally discovered
in the mid-1800's by the Austrian physicist,
Christian J. Doppler. This phenomenon is
acknowledged to be invariably characteristic of
all expanding fields. It is called 'Doppler effect',
or sometimes 'Doppler shift/ contraction'. The
definition of which is: The contraction of any
field system in the direction of its motion at a
rate increasingly proportional to the velocity of
its (center) source.
When we consider the field source to be a
ringing alarm clock, we observe in that case
the indicated left-to-right motion of the alarm

75 - Contents
clock - or the right-to-left motion of the
observer - to be approximately one half the
speed of sound. When we consider the moving
source of the field to be a light-field source
rather than a sound-field source; we may then
consider the left-to-right moving source or the
right-to-left moving observer to be moving at
approximately 4/5ths the speed of light.
Under these circumstances, the field is no
longer symmetrical. The structure is not
uniform in all directions from the source and
throughout all of its parts. It is instead
contracted in the direction of its motion; the
contraction ratio corroborates to relative
speed; forming a non-symmetrical field
system; reasonably approximated in the
referenced illustration.
Let it be emphasized here that Doppler
contraction is not and has never been applied
to, or recognized as, applicable to Matter
(Matter is stringently relegated as a static,
non-expanding 'particle', not a field).
I have said that Einstein proved that matter
is 4-Dimensional. Yet, I have also said that
Doppler effect has never been applied to
matter.

76 - Contents
 This can only mean that Doppler effect is not
applicable to matter; for the inevitable reason
that matter is not an accelerating 4-
Dimensional field after all. Or, that Doppler
field contraction is actually applicable-to and
exhibited-by matter, but that this application -
like the 4th Dimension itself - has yet to be
recognized. Another 4-DIMENSIONAL
ULTIMATUM.

Pivot or Divot, continued:

Either, matter is found to exhibit Doppler shift
and is therefore reconfirmed to be 4-
Dimensional. Or, matter does not exhibit any
evidence of Doppler shift, and, therefore,
cannot possibly be a 4-Dimensionally
expanding; accelerating field. Presently
introducing for review one of the several
unexpectedly discovered prevailing conditions
of reality; derived yet once again directly from
Einstein's combined Theories of Relativity. Its
original technical derivations are the
mathematical equations of the Dutch physicist,
Hendrik Antoon Lorentz. Einstein's functional
incorporation of the Lorentz equations within
Relativity Theory, are, for this reason now

77 - Contents
totally acknowledged among and familiar-to
the 'physical science community' at large.
Specifically these equations are termed, 'the
Lorentz/Lorentzian Electromagnetic Equations'.
Successfully and covariantly employed by
Einstein, combined with Maxwell's
electromagnetic equations, to describe the
behavior of sub-atomic particles (charges of
electricity).
Although H. A. Lorentz originally intended
their application exclusively to moving sources
(particles/charges) of electromagnetism or
light, Einstein, very interestingly found another
and quite unexpected application for them.
Specifically, Einstein discovered that
Lorentzian Electromagnetic Field
Transformations are descriptively applicable to
matter (in motion) itself. (The term, 'Lorentz
Transformations' may sound somewhat
formidable. What is mathematically and
faithfully described here is still - non-
mathematically - already familiar. To quote
non-mathematically, what Lorentz
Transformations describe, by way of what
Einstein categorically proved: 'Matter:
contracts in the direction of its motion at a rate
increasingly proportional to its velocity'.

78 - Contents
 That is to say, matter, be it rocket or
rhinoceros, and all of its contents, contracts in
the direction of its motion at a Lorentzian
measured rate increasingly proportional to its
velocity. A brief but excellent non-
mathematical elaboration of this fact can be
found on page 190 of THE EVOLUTION OF
PHYSICS, by Albert Einstein and Leopold
Infeld. More elaborate documentation of this
fact is available in any advanced physics text
on Relativity. Fact #5.
I call this Einsteinian phenomenon of the
Lorentzian contraction of Matter, 'MassField
Doppler Effect'. It not only re-confirms that
Matter is a 4-dimensionally expanding field, it
also proves once again that gravity is the 4th
Dimension.
“What has Einstein done to these
fundamental concepts (of space & time)?
He has introduced a correlation or connecting
link between what have always been supposed
to be separate and distinct ideas. In the first
place, he asserts that as we move about, the
geometrical properties of space, as evidenced
by figures drawn in it, will alter by an amount,
depending on the speed of the observer’s
motion, thus (through the concept of velocity)

79 - Contents
linking space with time. He also asserts in the
second place that the flow of time, always
regarded as invariable, will likewise alter with
the motion of the observer, again linking time
with space.
For example, suppose that we, with our
instruments for measuring space and time, are
located on a platform which we believe to be
stationary. We can not be altogether certain of
this, for there is no other visible object in the
universe save another similar platform carrying
an observer likewise equipped: but when we
observe relative motion between our platform
and the other it pleases our intuition to
suppose our platform at rest and to ascribe all
the motion to the other.
Einstein asserts that if this relative velocity
were great enough we might notice some
strange happenings on the other platform.
True, a rather high velocity would be
necessary, something comparable with the
speed of light, say, 100,000 miles per second;
and it is tacitly assumed that we would be able
to get a glimpse of a moving system as it
flashed by. Granting this, what would we see?
Einstein asserts that if there were a circle
painted on the moving platform it would
appear to us as an ellipse with its short

80 - Contents
diameter in the direction of its motion. The
amount of this shortening would depend upon
the speed with which the system is moving,
being quite imperceptible at ordinary speeds.
In the limit, as the speed approached that of
light, the circle would flatten completely into a
straight line – its diameter perpendicular to the
direction of its motion.
Of this shortening, says Einstein, the moving
observer will be unconscious, for not only is
the circle flattened in the direction of motion,
but the platform itself and all it carries
(including the observer), share in this
shortening. Even the observer’s measuring rod
is not exempt. Laid along the diameter of the
circle which is perpendicular to the line of
motion it would indicate, say, ten centimeters;
placed along the shortened diameter, the rod,
being itself now shortened in the same ratio,
would apparently indicate the same length as
before, and the moving observer would have
no suspicion of what we might be seeing. In
fact, he might with equal right suppose himself
stationary and lay all the motion to the account
of our platform. And if we had a circle painted
on our floor it would appear flattened to him,
though not to us.

81 - Contents
 Again, the clock on the other observer’s
platform would exhibit to us, though not to
him, an equally eccentric behavior. Suppose
that other platform stopped opposite us long
enough for a comparison of clocks, and then
backing off to get a start, flashed by us at high
speed. As it passed we would see that the
other clock was apparently slow as compared
with ours, but of this the moving observer
would be unconscious.
But could he not observe our clock?
Certainly, just as easily as we could see his.
And would he not see that our clock was
faster than his? ‘No,’ says Einstein. ‘On the
contrary, he would take it to be slower.’
Here is a paradox indeed! A’s clock appears
slow to B while at the same time B’s clock
appears slow to A! Which is right?
To this question Einstein answers
indifferently:
‘Either. It all depends on the point of view.’ “
- Paul R. Heyl, SPACE, TIME and EINSTEIN, pp.
2&3
One may quite reasonably ask why Einstein's
successful and renowned applications of
Lorentz electromagnetic Field Transformations

82 - Contents
to Matter have never been recognized as
MassField Doppler Effect.
That is an extremely relevant question, and it
has an equally fascinating and yet familiar
'answer' - that being that anyone and everyone
can 'see' and therefore 'knows' that Matter,
that is to say, physical reality at large 'is not'
expanding. (The explanation for the eccentric
behavior of time – non-absolute time and its
relationship with non-absolute space – will be
addressed with the progression of this
missive.)
The contemporary 4-Dimensional dilemma
unmistakably resembles the pre-heliocentric
era (before Copernicus - 1473 - 1543), where
everyone and anyone could 'see' and therefore
'knew' that the entire cosmological universe -
the entire heavenly celestial vault - revolved
around the earth, east to west; every 24 hours
(rather than the earth revolving on its own
axis, west to east; creating the illusion that the
universe is revolving around it).
"It is all right to consider, but not to believe
(they say): none of what you hear second
hand, and half of what you see first hand." - A
Persian parable, paraphrased (Author
unknown). The only distinction in this presently

83 - Contents
subjected case, being of course, that everyone
and anyone can 'see' and therefore 'knows'
that universal matter is not - certainly
including people are not - expanding (4-
Dimensional) field(s).

"In physics, particularly modern physics, the

mathematical expression is apt to come first,
its full implications only being understood
afterward." - Barbara Lovettt Cline, THE MEN
WHO MADE A NEW PHYSICS
Such a 'disturbing dynamic' would indeed
have a dramatically endless, prohibitively
incredible tendency to 'expansively spread'.

84 - Contents
 The very thought is perilously perishable.
Ostensibly, everything is not expanding. The 4
dimensionally proven experimental results are
discarded the moment it is 3 dimensionally
subjected.
“History shows clearly that the advances of
Science have always been frustrated by the
tyrannical influences of certain preconceived
notions which were turned into unassailable
dogmas. For that reason alone, every serious
scientist should periodically make a profound
re-examination of his or her basic principles.” -
H. Louis DeBroglie, NEW PERSPECTIVES IN
PHYSICS, Basic Books, New York, 1962
"It is evident that the popular conviction that
a generalized field theory is unable to explain
the problems of the discontinuous structure of
matter and quantum mechanics rests upon
prejudice." - Albert Einstein, PHYSICS &
REALITY

“We no longer think that physical action is

explainable in terms of little hard balls which
are the centers of all kinds of forces. A much
more abstract kind of concept is demanded in
which the particle is no longer something that
can be considered in isolation but rather as a

85 - Contents
part of an all-embracing entity called a ‘field’.
In this development Einstein’s thought
construction played a vital role.
“When Minkowski in 1908 demonstrated that
Einstein’s new theory was equivalent to a
geometrical approach uniting space and time in
one single entity (4-D space-time), the voices
for a ‘physical’ explanation of relativity fell
silent, since it now became obvious that an
explanation in physical terms cannot be given.”
- Cornelius Lanczos, ALBERT EINSTEIN and the
COSMIC ORDER
Electrons, protons and neutrons invariably
generate and project electromagnetic fields. In
Newton's era and long afterwards, the
phenomenon of electromagnetism generated
by alleged 3-D 'particles' was completely
mysterious. Newton specifically addresses that
mystery. Matter, be it what Newton called
'particle', or systems of particles such as a
planet or star, is simply represented here
(Refer Illustration 8), by and within this solid
circle suspended in the center of an otherwise
blank page (orbited by question marks
suspended in statically suspended - non-
expanding – unstructured space). These
Newtonian question marks were before the

86 - Contents
advent of Field Physics, established by Maxwell
(refer illustration 9).

The existence, structure and dynamics of the

electromagnetic field was firstly and most
successfully recognized and described in
relation to Space and Time by the differential
equations of the Scot, James Clerk Maxwell, in
1873. The matter (particle, electron, neutron,
proton, mass-point) at the center, generates
the apparent and familiar 'spider-web pattern'
of radiating electromagnetic field energy
projecting omni-directionally from its center
source (matter generates electricity and
gravity proportionate to its - the measured
source's - given mass value; size, density.

87 - Contents
Refer to Illustration 9, above and below…)

Special effects by Austin P. Torney

With the 'spider' at the center representing

the field-generating particle (charge of
electricity having no distinct boundaries,
growing increasingly dense as you approach its
center; having no surface, separating it from
<but rather diffusing into> surrounding space)
at the source of Maxwell's omni-directionally
projecting electromagnetic field.

88 - Contents
 Incidentally, it was presumed in the
Newtonian Classical Mechanical era, that
gravity (F - the unidentified Force in the since
adopted universal Newtonian formula for
gravity: F=GMM over R2: Force = Gravity x
Mass x Motion; squared) propagated across
Space instantaneously, out of said particles
and/or combined systems of particles. It is
since then proven and acknowledged that
whatever gravity is (it is politically prohibited
from being electricity, or electromagnetism):
also moves at the same omni-directional
velocity from Matter, as does electromagnetic
or light energy. Newton unarguably mastered
the description of gravitational effects, while he
did not pretend to know, and was careful about
specifying that he did not know the causal
identity - or even the directional vector - of F
(Force=Universal Gravitation).

“Are gravitational waves divided into discrete

energy packets, or quanta, as electromagnetic
waves are? This question, which is as old as
the quantum theory, was finally answered in
1960, by Dirac. He succeeded in quantizing the
gravitational field equations, and showed that
the energy of gravity quanta, or ‘gravitons’, is
equal to Planck’s constant ‘h’, times their

89 - Contents
frequency – the same expression that gives
the energy of light quanta or photons.”
- Isaac Asimov, UNDERSTANDING PHYSICS, p.
164

Until further notice, no one besides this record

and apparently those influenced by its
international distribution since 1959, seems to
have allowed for the offered gravitational
alternative (that gravity might actually be a
repelling force: that Newton's famous findings
allow for that unknown, unpursued possibility;
from the preface to the PRINCIPIA); since
Newton made a noteworthy point of offering it.
No one on campus is allowed to sharpen a
pencil on this dull note. It might awaken the
big eared – electromagnetically bewildered -
snoozing Physics teacher.
Mr. Spock has not left the Berkeley or
Lawrence Livermore building or black hole
engulfed holodeck? Obviously the earth is not
moving rotationally on its own axis; generating
the illusion imparted on all of its inhabitants
that the universal celestial vault is rotating
around the earth; rather than conversely. The
archaic, pre Copernican era resides with us
ever since, as a place to start realizing that

90 - Contents
sometimes we misunderstand things as being
the other way around, from the way things
really are.
"According to the General Theory of
Relativity, the concept of space detached from
any physical content does not exist. The
physical reality of space is represented by a
field."
- Albert Einstein, IDEAS & OPINIONS, p. 348
Gravity on or near a major gravitational
mass: acting as a repelling force, rather than
an impelling force - an alternative directional
vector. Newton allows for it. Einstein requires
it. But Carl Sagen and his friends don't allow
for or require it. On the contrary, they reject it
altogether.

Chapter Four
FINDING THE 5th and 6th DIMENSIONS
"Since the General Theory of Relativity
implies the representation of physical reality by
a continuous field, the concept of particles or
material points cannot play a fundamental
part. The particle can only appear as a limited
region in space in which the field strength or
the energy density is particularly high."

91 - Contents
- Albert Einstein, IDEAS & OPINIONS, p. 348
Having One's Tea While Spilling It Also,
continued:
'Obviously the universe is not made up of a
bunch of disturbed areas. Because, if it was, by
now it would have *spread indefinitely.' -
J.W.N Sullivan (THE LIMITATIONS OF
SCIENCE) and G.P. Thompson
(A *tensor equation - *4th coordinate; of time
and motion - applicable where only three
coordinates were previously perceived.)

Note: the ‘obvious’ is not put into words here.

The obvious, being that the physical - as well
as spatial - universe is found to be *expanding.
Whereas, that inevitably *descriptive word -
expanding - is displaced with 'spread
indefinitely'.
Note also, J.W.N. Sullivan's (LIMITATIONS OF
SCIENCE) and George Gamow's (GRAVITY)
reference to expanding charges of electricity
(particles): they are not called that. Instead,
they are obliquely referred to as 'unstable', and
'disturbed areas' (On medical hold?) - New Age
Verbal Judoists?

92 - Contents
 Conversely: becoming exactly as three
dimensionally small, as the universe becomes
four dimensionally larger around a given 3-D
entity (Refer Schwartzchild radius). Squared.
(Refer: Black holes: Where Mr. Flatlander &
Co. do bullish business and bearish residence
without the 4th dimension.) The so called
'indefinite spread' is in fact very well defined.
Refer, Sir Isaac Newton's gravitational
alternative, and Albert Einstein's four
dimensional acceleration, and so forth,
squared: proving a steady state universe;
discovering the 5th & 6th dimensions (which
will be identified with the progression of this
missive), allowing a causal explanation for
black hole singularities, etceteras.
Having to do, for example, with anytime
anyone drops - or in any way projects, or hurls
- anything at all at any time, anywhere
on/near this planet.
"Physics is what physicists do". - Dr. Peter
Bergmann, GRAVITATION.
Every time the impatient mathematician at
the blackboard drops his chalk, the reputed,
immeasurable and incomprehensible answer
continues to elude his precipitating powers of
observation. Finding Dr. Livingston, patrolling

93 - Contents
vigilantly on the popularly presumptuous river
of denial.
Another Statically Overlooked, Expanding
Ultimatum:
Thereby and thence, it was Maxwell from
whom we learned that the presumed static
field, already known to originate-with and
project-from Matter, is actually expanding,
Thereby generating a perfect Natural
expression of the geometric LAW OF THE
INVERSE SQUARE. Projecting and distributing
the same amount of energy, omni-directionally
from matter sources; over an increasingly
greater area, at the speed of light.
An outwardly unfolding field in time, inversely
squared in space, per light wave and/or system
of light waves, without end... Finite (at any
given moment in space) but unbounded (in
Past microcosmic and Future Macrocosmic
time).
"An electromagnetic wave is a double wave:
electric and magnetic field strengths travel
together at right angles each to the other and
are intimately interwoven (*inseparable). Thus
light is electromagnetic field : traveling
through space from out of electromagnetic

94 - Contents
charges (*called 'particles') which have
produced (*generated) them... these two sets
of force lines are respectively analogous in
familiar gravitational terms, to the lines down
which falling objects drop perpendicular to a
surface (as of the earth) and contrariwise to
the path lines of moons or satellites orbiting
parallel to the same surface." - Guy Murchie,
MUSIC OF THE SPHERES (including illustation -
electricity and magnetism as the 5th & 6th
dimensions will be further issued with the
progression of this missive. Please take note
that the fields generated by the center source
charges prevent those charges from ever
contacting each other - there is no surface to
surface 'touch', because there are no specific
surfaces. The charges become infinitely more
dense as their centers are approached).

95 - Contents
 It is noteworthy also that the Inverse Square
Law of ElectroMagnetism, like its velocity (that
of light), is likewise, equally applicable to
gravity; whatever else gravity may be. It is
emphasized here that gravity is not
acknowledged or recognized to be
electromagnetism. We will return shortly to
further consider this vainly grid-locked,
conceptually superstitious, Ivy League
mesmerizing bogey.

96 - Contents
 The question arises, 'if' everything is actually
expanding constantly, than how can this
uniform expansion be observed, comprehended
and/or non-mathematically measured? Are we
not returned to not knowing and not being able
to know whether or not MACDONALD'S pan
fried BIG MAC's are expanding? Doesn't the
consumer have a right to know (a meaty need
to lean upon), one way or the other, about a
rare consideration like this? If it is knowable,
how may it be recognized? We will return to
this beefy question and its unprecedented
answers shortly, by way of the following, brief,
introductory considerations.
"Why could it not be as true to say that the
earth falls up to meet things in the sky, as that
things in the sky fall down to the earth? Is not
that simple relativity? Or am I too full of apple
juice? It is relativity, but perhaps it is not so
very simple. For, although the apple is
regarded as moving downward, can one...
could one possibly justify a claim that the earth
is accelerating upward just as much?

On the face of it, upward terrestrial

acceleration would seem quite impossible for
more than a very small portion of the earth,

97 - Contents
since upward, globally speaking, is not one
direction, but every direction. In fact, if the
earth's surface is accelerating upward all
around the earth, the earth as a whole must be
exploding. Which it obviously is not."
- Guy Murchie, MUSIC OF THE SPHERES
Murchie's work is a voluminous, superb labor
of scientific love; this author has learned much
from him, yet he suffers, like all the rest, not
from being 'too full of apple juice', but rather,
from not enough of it.
Without exception, every single approach to
and encounter with this problem is dismissed,
upside down and backwards - even the
questions and attitudes addressing it. Without
allusion to Guy Murchie, the mathematically
mesmerized monkey has located, palmed and
fisted his 4-D prize inside the narrow necked
jar, but adamantly refuses to open his hand in
the required effort to remove same. The
unrecognized solution is mathematically proven
and located; whereas the numbers-fixated
primate deigns not to liberate the discovered
genie; he insists that he cannot. All the while
refusing to open his hand, let go of his
subjectively incapacitating instincts, so that he
may then non-mathematically remove his

98 - Contents
hand, invert the jar, and let gravity do the
rest...
In the history of particle expeditions, each
one adventures into and returns with
electromagnetic charges - 'matter-fields' -
fulfilling all of the formal qualities of particular
('discontinuous, 3-D surface-boundaried,
'static' <'standing field' perceived>) 'matter':
which has never been found. An entire,
academically massive discipline of particle
physics, abundant with Ph.D's, is 'based' on a
so far mythologically subjective presumption -
'the particle' - that remains in suspension to be
empirically established. 'Particle Physics', has
yet to present itself as a tractable hypothesis,
let alone any kind of tenable 'Theory'. Yet 'the
particle' remains the dominant paradigm over
the universally emerged, manifestly ubiquitous
'field', or 'charge'. If 'physics is what physicists
do', as Dr. Bergmann proclaims, they are
collectively residing in a (Einstein’s formerly
speculated) house of cards, a sky castle of
sand; applauding and paying homage to a
hoax that makes the Piltdown Man a
nominated candidate for the Nobel Prize.
The formula with which Maxwell successfully
described and predicted the structure and

99 - Contents
dynamics of the previously unknown
(presumed static) ElectroMagnetic Field are
now of course very well renowned as,
'Maxwell's ElectroMagnetic Equations';
describing the much controversied, newly
recognized and acknowledged field forces.
In consideration of what Einstein called a
'TOTAL FIELD THEORY', it is consistently said
that Maxwell's ElectroMagnetic Equations are
not (POST-FIELD PHYSICS) applicable to the
alleged 3-D static 'particles', because Maxwell's
Equations describe expanding energy
exclusively, and, 'therefore break-down at the
non-expanding surface of the particle' - the in-
place, 4th dimension-excluding, 3-dimensional
filibuster.
“The unsatisfactory part of the total field
theory showed up externally by the necessity
of assuming finite dimensions for the particles
in order to prevent the electromagnetic field
existing at their surfaces from becoming
infinitely large." - Albert Einstein, OUT OF MY
LATER YEARS, p. 77
Yet, since Maxwell, we long ago unexpectedly
discovered that the alleged 3-D ‘particle’ does
not have a surface, and in fact is not a particle

100 - Contents
at all, but an electrical charge of energy which
simply becomes increasingly more dense
towards its center. A charge of electricity
fulfilling the formal *definition of particular
matter (*that which occupies 3 or more
dimensions of space and inertially opposes a
resistance to non-uniform motion): ostensibly,
having been doing this, all along, as it were.
That is Fact #6.
Cogent quotes, worthy of repeating:
"What appears certain to me in the
foundations of any consistent field theory, the
particle concept must not appear in addition to
the field concept. The whole theory must be
based solely on partial differential equations
and their *singularity free solutions (*no
discontinuous, 3-dimensionally static
particles)." - A. Einstein, IDEAS & OPINIONS,
p. 306.
"It is evident that the popular conviction that
a generalized field theory is unable to explain
the problems of the discontinuous structure of
matter and quantum mechanics rests upon
prejudice." - A. Einstein, PHYSICS & REALITY
We keep finding new ways to make the same
mistake - sternly defining the universe for

101 - Contents
Mother Nature, informing her of her ways and
limitations; what is expected of her.
Here's how it happens all the time:
The non-mathematical identification of the
4th space-time Dimension enables among
other things, the unprecedented discovery and
identification of two previously unrecognized
Dimensions of Reality - the 5th & 6th
dimensions of electricity and magnetism -
physically extending beyond the 4th dimension
of corporeal ('apparently 3-D') matter.

102 - Contents
 Again, these two 'new' Dimensions are not
really 'unknown' or 'inexperienced' at all;
merely unrecognized. In compliance with the
103 - Contents
geometric definition for dimensions, if anything
moves at right angles to; perpendicular from
the 4th Dimension (of matter), then whatever
that something is, is also the 5th Dimension.
Indeed, something does move at right angles
out of 4-D matter - that something being
electricity, therefore, electricity is the 5th
dimension. In turn, whatever may move at
right angles to the 5th dimension of electricity,
is the 6th dimension - that being magnetism.
That is to say, electromagnetism moving out of
4-D matter, is 5 and 6 dimensional.

After Maxwell we learned of the existence and

especially the structural quality and dynamics
of the electromagnetic field. The matter

104 - Contents
(particle, electron, neutron, proton, mass-
point) at the center, generates the apparent
and familiar spider-web pattern of radiating
electromagnetic field energy projecting omni-
directionally from its center source (matter
generates electricity and gravity proportionate
to its - the measured source's - given mass
value; size, density).
Prior to this time, Michael Faraday had
already recognized the existence of some force
originating in material bodies and projecting
out of them across Space - but he had also
considered this ' force' to be static; that is to
say, 'non-expanding' (pre Field Physics).
Moreover, Faraday had no idea of the
structure and/or shape/ pattern of the
electromagnetic field. Maxwell, on the other
hand, proved that electromagnetic fields
possess a characteristic and predictable shape
and intensity ('field density') in (Classical)
Space & Time, and are projected continuously
and omni-directionally outward from their
alleged 3-D 'particle' sources at a finite
velocity; that being 186,282 m.p.s... Along
Came The Untangled Weave, Warp & Woof.
Creating an interestingly similar pattern; as
that structural transverse projection, so

105 - Contents
characteristically like a spider-spun web (A
natural expression of the inverse square law;
projected omni-directionally from its source;
uniformly more dispersed with distance)...

Special effects by Austin P. Torney

106 - Contents
 Chapter Five
MAXWELL’S ACTION AT A DISTANCE,
LAMBDA, & NON ABSOLUTE SPACETIME
DILATION

With the spider at the center representing the

field-generating particle (charge of electricity
having no distinct boundaries, growing
increasingly dense as you approach its center;
having no surface, separating it from <but
rather diffusing into> surrounding space) at
the source of Maxwell's omni-directionally
projecting electromagnetic field.
Specifically, we learned from Maxwell that
something does in fact move at right angles
out of (4-D) matter, and that 'something' is
electricity. Therefore Electricity Is The 5th
Dimension. Again, in compliance with the
geometric definition for Dimensions, if any
measurable entity moves at right angles
from/to the 5th - whatever else it may be: it is
also the 6th dimension. Indeed. Something
does (invariably) move at right angles
to/perpendicular from 5 dimensional electricity,
and that something is magnetism. Therefore,
magnetism is The 6th Dimension. (Electricity
and magnetism - until further notice - always

107 - Contents
accompany one another; at right angles,
bumper to bumper and side by side.)
Of course, in order to recognize and identify
the 5th & 6th Dimensions of Electricity &
Magnetism, one must first of all acknowledge
and recognize The 4th Dimension of expanding
Matter & accelerating Gravity.
From which is projected the 5th and 6th
physical dimensions of electromagnetic reality:
Acting at a distance across space; projecting
the law of the inverse square; at the speed of
light; 'just like gravity.' In fact, finding gravity
and electromagnetism to be, in every sense of
the word, one and the same (Dirac’s quantum
‘gravitons’ – Planck’s photo-electric constant
‘h’): a unified field.
We may - presently opportune to - know,
gravity on earth is caused by the
electromagnetic 4-Dimensional acceleration of
Matter. This generates a mechanical pushing or
repelling force on or near the surface of major
gravitational masses (such as planets); as
clarified within Einstein's elevators of The
General Principle.
But, how does this account for action-at-a-
distance across Space; generating

108 - Contents
atmospheric, oceanic and terrestrial tidal
effects for example, and sustaining the orbiting
of the planets? *Why don't their orbits
collapse? Why don't they all (stellar objects,
galaxies, stars, et al) collapse upon and/or
collide with each other, through mutual
gravitational attraction? As Isaac Newton
himself asked, and openly considered to be the
major unresolved flaw in his own revolutionary
system...
*Two and a quarter centuries later, Einstein
resolved Newton's problem with the
Cosmological Constant - a repelling force
paralleling conventionally perceived gravity,
but acting in the opposite direction; paralleling
the vector of a positive charge; in contrast to
the impelling force generated by a negative
charge.

“This was the introduction of a fresh term in

the field equations of General Relativity, the
‘cosmological constant’, which represents a
repelling force, which, contrary to ordinary
gravitational attraction, increases with the
distance between objects. The value given to
this term determines the character of the
universe which is produced, and from the first

109 - Contents
it was a matter of controversy.” – Ronald W.
Clark, EINSTEIN: The Life & Times, p. 269
The answer to Newton's question is not in the
4-dimensional MassField gravity, on or near
the surface of expansively accelerating
material systems - but rather the 5 & 6
dimensional ElectroMagnetic field generated by
and projecting at right angles from material - 4
dimensional - sources (particles, charges;
systems of same).
That is to say, material bodies on or near the
apparent surface of matter are gravitationally
influenced to 'fall', or remain (mechanically-
inertially) pinned against the earth's 4-
Dimensionally accelerating surface. On the
other hand, action-at-a-distance - specifically
tidal effects and the orbiting of planets &
moons - is gravitationally motivated by the
push and pull of the 5th & 6th Dimensions of
electricity and magnetism, respectively.
Another way of realizing this - when you are
near and above a large 4-dimensional
MassField, you fall, until your orbital vector
'outweighs' (transcends) the influence of
gravity. Then your orbit is permanent; that is
to say, you do not fall back to earth, but

110 - Contents
rather, around it, having gone ballistically
orbital.
Wikipedia
• Have questions? Find out how to ask questions and get answers. •

Jump to: navigation, search

Newton's cannonball was a thought experimentIsaac Newton used to hypothesize that
the force of gravity was universal, and it was the key force for planetary motion.
[edit] The experiment

In this experiment Newton visualizes a cannon on top of a very high mountain.

If there were no force of gravitation the cannonball should follow a straight line away
from Earth.
So long as there is a gravitational force acting on the cannon ball, it will follow
different paths depending on its initial velocity.

1. If the speed is low, it will simply fall back on Earth. (A and B)

2. If the speed equals some threshold orbital velocity it will go on circling around the Earth along
a fixed circular orbit just like the moon. (C)
3. If the speed is higher than the orbital velocity, but not high enough to leave Earth altogether
(lower than the escape velocity) it will continue rotating around Earth along an elliptical orbit.
(D)
4. If the speed is very high, it will indeed leave Earth. (E)

Summarily, in the case of permanent orbit

you are repelled away from 4-D MassField

111 - Contents
Earth and kept in (ever enlarging, spiral
shaped) orbit by the 5th & 6th Dimensions of
ElectroMagnetism. The ElectroMagnetic fields
of the planets (for example) are reciprocally
conflicting with the electromagnetic field of the
Sun (emits about one billion tons of radiantly
transitory energy every four minutes). Hence,
planets cannot fall into the Sun; due to their
mutual opposition from (and toward) it - and
they cannot escape it either.
Wikipedia

The magnetosphere shields the surface of the Earth from the charged particles of the solar wind. It is
compressed on the day (Sun) side due to the force of the arriving particles, and extended on the night
side. (Image not to scale.)

The retinue of planets arranged exactly about

the sun in the orders and orbits of Newton's
indomitably calculated, universally gravitating
retainer; unarguably caused by a pulling force
or a pushing force. Or, a combined pulling and
pushing force…

Newton’s 3rd Law: “To every action there is

always opposed an equal reaction; or the

112 - Contents
mutual action of two bodies upon each other
are always equal, and directed to contrary
parts.”

Mechanically pushing at near distances and

electromagnetically pulling and/or pushing at
far distances... (In Nature we find a positive
charge projecting a repelling force and a
negative charge generating an impelling force.
Gravitational impelling forces are actively
present on, near and within the surface of the
earth – a test object suspended from a plumb-
bob does in fact gravitate toward a mountain
range, for example, and there certainly seems
to be an impelling force involved in aquatic,
atmospheric and terrestrial tides; but the
repelling force of 4-D expansion is dominant).
The fields from isolated, individual charges look like this:

When there is more than one

charge in a region, the electric field lines will not be straight lines; they will curve in response
to the different charges. In every case, though, the field is highest where the field lines are
close together, and decreases as the lines get further apart.
physics.bu.edu/~duffy/PY106/Electricfield.html

113 - Contents
__________________________

The isolated positive charge is confined to it's location -

exhibiting negative inertia (a tendency to remain at rest;
resisting outside forces) - by the recoil of omni-directionally
expanding electrical energy.

The isolated negative charge is confined to its location - also

exhibiting negative inertia (a resistance to outside forces) by
the omni-directional influx of electrical energy. – KBR

Special effects by Austin P. Torney

114 - Contents
Hypothetical dark energy is imo, another word
for the formerly abandoned Lambda
Cosmological Constant (/\), which is
functionally back in service, as I have
previously noted, unabashedly retrieved from
obscurity and now referred to along side
'quintessence' and activated as 'LCDM' -
Lambda Cold Dark Matter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/19419

Please observe the fait accompli

reinstatement of Einstein's 'abandoned'
Cosmological Constant, as this work predicted
- along with an accelerating universe - over 45
years ago.

Due to their reciprocal acceleration against

each and other's electromagnetic and/or
radiation fields, extending beyond four
dimensional matter; across space (acting at a
distance) - fulfilling the definition for the fifth
and sixth dimensions; as electromagnetism
acting at a distance; commensurate with
Newtonian-Einsteinian - and other formally
proven and recognized and/or recognizable -
definition(s) of universal gravity; including the

115 - Contents
presently abandoned now reinstated
Cosmological Constant.
Regarding the tenability of gravitation as an
impelling force, paralleled by the Cosmological
Constant as a repelling force, a natural and
complementary occurrence of this apparently
incongruous ambiguity exists and prevails in
the fact that omni-directional electric field lines
around a positive charge are directed away
from the center of the charge; whereas, the
field lines around a negative charge move
inward, toward the center of the charge
A characteristic of the (reinstated)
Cosmological Constant is that its effect
increases with distance. Its application to the
accelerating expansion of the spatial universe
corroborates this characteristic.
The increase of speed with distance can be
demonstrated with an expanding yardstick, the
more it expands, the faster its ends move
away from each other.
This principle of accelerating expansion is also
applicable to the expansion of matter - why
gravity is acceleration.
------------

116 - Contents
 Another look at the structure of a snail or
nautilus shell, and/or the arms of spiral
galaxies (What an @ sign geometrically
describes the structural shape of): A
consequence of this is the realization of the
actual 4-D path of any orbiting body - electron,
moon, planet - as compared to what we
perceive in 3 presumably static Dimensions of
Space. That is to say, because of the
unrecognized 4-Dimensional acceleration of
Matter, and the extensionally functional 5 & 6
Dimensional space separating it from other
matter, the path of any orbiting body is not
characteristically circular - O - or ellipsoidal - 0
- as it is 3-Dimensionally observed or
understood to be.
Instead, the MassField Concept recognizes
that the path in Space-Time of every orbiting
body exists 4-Dimensionally as an accelerating
- ever enlarging - spiral (@ - see immediate
below illustration): the distance of space
opening up between the orbiting body and its
point of orbit, is no more recognized and
accounted for, than the ever ongoing physical
enlargement of the orbiting body and its point
of orbit (the dominant mass of two considered
gravitational masses; each actually orbiting a

117 - Contents
common center of gravity between the two - or
more - centers).
4-D HyperOrbital path.

It is important to recognize that a spiral that

does not exponentially enlarge, such as the
'Archimedes spiral', illustrated below, is not to
be confused with the accelerating -
exponentially enlarging/ extrapolating - spiral
illustrated here, above. It is the difference
between uniform enlargement and non-
uniform, accelerating enlargement - both of
which are expanding, but only the above of
which is accelerating - ever faster - in its
expansion.

118 - Contents
Polar equation: r = a
SPECULATIVE NOTE:
The loss of 43° of arc per century in the
elliptical extreme orbit of Mercury (the shortest
of planetary years in the solar system) - and
correspondingly more reduced losses for the
planets correspondingly further from the Sun -
appears resolvable in the (illustrated,
uncompensated for) 4-D HyperOrbitalPath.
Likewise, the accelerating (equiangular) spiral
- @ - as applied to Mendelyev's *Periodic Table
of Elements exhibits this structure - very
comparable to the shape of a spiraling snail
shell, and/or internal structure of the mature
*chambered nautilus (pompileus linnae).
119 - Contents
Special effects by Austin P. Torney

Accelerating spirals commonly occur in

biologically growing, 4-dimensionally
expressed nature. This example of planetary
field reciprocally and physically conflicting with
solar field, and lunar mass reciprocally and
physically conflicting with hosting planetary
field, is already directly experienced in the
proven, acknowledged fact that two or more
physical bodies never ‘contact’ each other. Due
to conflicting field forces of surfaceless
electrical charges: disallowing the

120 - Contents
simultaneous occupation of their space by any
other field-charge.

Special effects by Austin P. Torney

121 - Contents
An Expansive 4-D Thought Problem With a
Dilatory Solution:
The realm of the very small - microcosms - is
said to host strong forces acting at very short
distances; that are not considered to be
related to large, 'weak forces of gravity', said
to exist only in very large spaces and act at
large distances in the very large - macrocosmic
- spaces and times. So it is presently and
dominantly considered, in the macrocosmic
realm of the very large, exemplary, planetary-
generated forces.
Gravity is thought not to occur - significantly
- in the microcosmic realm of the very small.
Whereas, gravity, like Gold, is actually where
you find it, and how much of it you find; in
large and *small, tenuous and *compact
electromagnetic densities (*refer, nuclear
binding forces). Moving in one of two possible -
direction(s). Toward and/or away (impelling or
repelling) from its material (4-D
particle/charge) source.
Question: ‘Is matter expanding at the same
rate of acceleration as light?’
Answer: ‘Yes, but, in a value of square (2).
Consequently, the rate of acceleration is the
same, but the expansion speeds vary with

122 - Contents
microcosmic (very small) and macrocosmic
(very large) space-time, in a value of square.
Consider the (incorrect) distinction between
electromagnetism & gravity as the status quo,
i.e., the prevailing idea that microcosmic
‘nuclear binding forces’, ‘are not, and cannot
be’ related to gravitational forces. This
‘disqualification’ of any unification of
microcosmic electromagnetism with gravity is
based on the false, prevailing and uncontested
premise alleged in the ‘difference’ between
large gravitational forces which cause planets
to orbit, and the smaller forces which bind
‘particles’ together within the atomic nucleus -
sometimes called ‘nuclear resinal forces’.
In this sense, contemporary physical science
still dwells in the archaic conceptual world of
*Ptolemic-*Aristotelean dualization of ‘earthly
& heavenly motions’ - *when it was thought
that the unidentified forces of the far flung
universe and heavens were apart from -
unrelated to - the unidentified forces acting on
earth; until the time of Newton, who proved
that large forces in the universe were the same
forces acting on and near earth. That the fall of
an apple was governed by the same forces that

123 - Contents
caused the moon to orbit the earth, and the
earth’s orbit around the sun...
It is said that the electromagnetic force
reciprocating between an electron and a proton
is 1041 times the gravitational force; the
gravitational force between these two
‘particles’ alleged to be ‘too weak’ to be
measured’ at this microcosmic level.
The nuclear force which is distinquished from
gravity ‘because’ it is 1041 times stronger, is
(microcosmic - 'earlier Moment A') gravity
(unrecognized and unacknowledged by
physicists): this is due to the (4-D continuum)
fact that the value(s) of time is covariant with
the moment(s) of space it (time/motion)
occurs in...

Allow this pie plate chart design diagram <

to represent the Moments A, B, and C, 4-D
expansion of any given physical or spatial
system, where the left-most intersection of the
two lines represents earlier Moment A (the
convergence of the 4-D space-time continuum
emerging from out of the infinite microcosms)
the right-most opening representing later
Moment C, advancing into the infinite
macrocosms, with the middle of this pie plate

124 - Contents
chart representing Moment B - the 'eternal
now' - of the considered 4-D continuum. (The
actual shape of which would account for
acceleration, in a profile structure such as
Riemannian geometry's representation of a
'gravity sink' <Refer 'rubber sheet analogy';
featuring Riemannian geometric shapes>).
The value of a linear, square or cubic mile of
space on (earlier) Moment A earth, is not the
same value as that same mile measured on
(later) Moment B earth, or on (latest) Moment
C earth.
When a motorist on Moment A earth drives
his automobile at the speed he measures as 60
miles per hour, he is not traveling 60 of
Moment B miles per Moment B hour...
Moreover, the velocity of 18 & 1/2 Moment A
miles per second, traveled by Moment A earth
around Moment A sun, is not the same velocity
as compared with the 18 1/2 miles per second
traveled by Moment B earth around Moment B
sun...
Neither is the 365 1/4 days of Moment A year
the same interval in time - in this case
determined by the completion of an orbit
around the sun - as the 365 1/4 days of

125 - Contents
Moment B or Moment C (providing that these
moments could be and were compared with
each other).
The velocity of light - C - in this continuum,
correspondingly varies from one moment to
the next, while remaining constant, relative to
the space-time moment from which it
originates and with which it is associated. This
principle of relative velocity is what allows for
an 'optical', or 'event horizon', for example.
When the ‘mini person’ inhabitant of Moment
A earth may look ‘up’ along the positive
(future) side of the 4th dimension of time, and
see themselves at (later) Moment(s) B or C,
they would see their own image as an
incredibly huge, slow moving giant; if this slow
moving giant of Moment A mini-person’s future
could look ‘down’ along the past side of their
continuously accelerating 4-D projection, they
would then observe themselves as a tiny, very
fast moving ‘mini-person’.
There is no way for Moment A mini-person
(thinking in 3-D conceptual physics) to know
that their 3 dimensions of space, and
consequently their time will be relatively larger

126 - Contents
(spatially) and slower (chronologically) at
(future) Moments B and C.
Conversely, there is no way for that same
giant, slow moving person in (later) Moments
B and C to know that the spatial dimensions
and time of their entire (Moment A) universe
was correspondingly more contracted in space,
having proportionately smaller durations of
time, at Moment A.
The false assumption is that the value of
space is the same with the passage of time;
that, if Moment A earth was compared to
Moment B and C earth, it (the earth) would
have the same uniform size and density in
space, when compared with itself at different
moments in time.
Newton contemplated a 4-D continuum but
did not anticipate that the values of space and
time would vary with different spaces and
times of that continuum.
The ‘here and now’ dimensions of ‘space and
time’ appear - and are 3-dimensionally
conceptualized - to be uniform and
unchanging. The law of conservation of mass-
energy is not infringed upon, since this
expanding continuum is always the same

127 - Contents
amount of energy distributed over an ever
increasing space; maintaining uniform relative
density.
The acceleration of the apparently static
(‘non-expanding’) 3 dimensions of space along
the 4th dimension of time (the 4-D space-time
continuum) reveals a contracted micro-space
accompanied by a correspondingly and
inevitably contracted micro-time. and a dilated
macrospace accompanied by an equally and
correspondingly dilated (‘slowed down’) macro-
time.
This is the reason that Einstein called ‘Space
and Time’: Space-Time.
This is the cause of what Einstein calls ‘Non-
absolute time’, and 'non-absolute space'.
It is also the cause of what Einstein calls
‘time dilation’. The value of time is determined
by the value of space it occurs in. Larger
moments of 4-D space result in relatively
slower time, when compared with the value of
time in smaller moments of 4-D space.

128 - Contents
The Twin Paradox Re-visited:
A popular example of relativistic non-absolute
time (time dilation phenomenon) is known as
the 'twin paradox'. One of two twin brothers

129 - Contents
remains on coordinate system earth, while the
other twin departs the earth in a spacecraft
vehicle, approaches the velocity of light;
remains in deep space sustaining high velocity
for what his senses and instruments measure
as 30 days; then returns to earth to learn that
his earthbound twin brother and everyone else
on earth (who was his age upon his departure)
is considerably more aged than himself.
There is no conceptual explanation for this,
however, the mathematics of relativity indicate
that time dilation is a true effect of greatly
increased velocities. The twin paradox
becomes conceptually comprehensible with the
application of the issued , expanding mass-
field concept:
When an object - a space-craft and its
contents accelerates faster than the coordinate
system from which it originates and with which
it is normally associated, the earth, the mass-
field constructed spacecraft and its contents
are distributed over a greater area, in
accordance with the inverse square law (a
system of relatively uniform space and time; in
this case, as applicable to light). Consequently
it becomes an independent coordinate system,
having relatively larger values of space and

130 - Contents
proportionately slower experiences of time
than its original coordinate system, earth.
In a spacecraft nearing the velocity of light
the individual hairs on the heads of it's
astronauts may (for example) be dilated
(enlarged) to the diameter of a large radar dish
(relative to the dimensions of space recognized
on coordinate system earth). Yet, the
astronauts detect no change of spatial values
relative to themselves or their ship and its
contents, including all of its time measuring
instruments, because everything on board is
proportionately dilated in 4-D space-time
(much larger than that on coordinate system,
earth). For example: It takes these mass field
dilated astronauts several of earth's relatively
micro-spatial hours - and one of their relatively
macro-spatial seconds - to sneeze. Upon
returning to coordinate system earth, they
must slow their speed, and in so doing they
proportionately decrease their former - field
expanded - size.
Upon disembarking the now 'normal sized'
spacecraft, they learn that years have passed
on earth, while they and their instruments
have experienced, recorded, and can account
for only a month of time in space.

131 - Contents
Up to the time of this writing, there are not
even any failed efforts to conceptually account
for 'time dilation' and the 'twin paradox' that
popularly accompanies it.
The (stubbornly unrecognized and denied)
ever enlarging value of space is a ‘non absolute
space’, which causes ‘non-absolute time’. The
fundamental import of this discussion is that
THE VALUE OF GIVEN UNITS OF TIME
(seconds, hours, days, weeks, months, years)
IS ENTIRELY DETERMINED BY THE 3-D VALUE
(size) OF THE SPATIAL MOMENT (coordinate
system) IT (time / motion ) OCCURS IN.
.......................................................

The Unified Field Theory

132 - Contents
Special effects by Austin P. Torney Drawing by Robert Crumb

Einstein authored three major works on

Relativity. Two are very well renowned,
academically, as well as socio-politically.
Einstein's two renowned theories are of course,
the Special Theory of 1906 - which is all about
light - ElectroMagnetism - and uniform motion
(the C, of E=MC 2). And, the General Theory of
1916, which is all about Matter, Gravity and
non-uniform motion (acceleration).
In 1919, Einstein authored a third work which
is not so well known; primarily because it was

133 - Contents
only temporarily accepted by the scientific
community; then abandoned eight years later.
Alloted time does not permit me to elaborate
the details of Einstein's third and least known
work, but I am sure you will find its title very
familiar. It is the Unified Field Theory. The
conceptual objective of which was to find
electromagnetism and gravity one and the
same force.
It would take at least thirty minutes to
cursorily begin to do it justice here; in the
allotted time we cannot afford to go into that
detail.
On the other hand, in a matter of one minute
or less we may recapitulate the fact that the
primary objective of Einstein's presently
abandoned Unified Field Theory was to unify
the Special & General Theories into one
singular statement, The Unified Field.
Specifically the unification of what are
otherwise academically considered to be
separate and unrelated forces; forces, which
the Unified Field proves as actually having the
same causal identity - ElectroMagnetism &
Gravity. Repeat: The Unified Field is
abandoned; its cardinal objective was to find
ElectroMagnetism and Gravity as two

134 - Contents
apparently unrelated forces which actually
have the same causal identity.
Presently summarizing that gravity is the
space-time 4th Dimension because Physical
Matter is found to be an expanding
ElectroMagnetic Field, and conversely.
“Relativity theory furnishes a new way of
looking at gravity and describing it, but it still
remains a mysterious, little-understood
phenomenon. No one knows what connection it
has, if any, with electromagnetism. Einstein
and others have tried to develop a unified field
theory that will unite gravity and
electromagnetism in one set of mathematical
equations. The results have been
disappointing. Perhaps some young reader of
these words, will someday see how to
formulate such a theory." - p. 108, Relativity
for the Million, Martin Gardner.
Summarizing that the cause of gravitational
action-at-a-distance is the 5th & 6th
Dimensions, which are also (each and both),
categorically, an expanding electromagnetic
field. Fact #7.
We have, among other things in the past 65
minutes, overseen the reinstatement and

135 - Contents
confirmation of Einstein's presently abandoned
Unified Field Theory. Matter as well as
electromagnetism is found to be constantly
expanding. Past is measured prologue...
"There is no sense in regarding matter and
field as two qualities quite different from each
other. We cannot imagine (or find) a definite
surface separating distinctly field and matter.
The division of matter and field is, after the
recognition of the equivalence of mass and
energy, something artificial and not clearly
defined. Could we not reject the concept of
matter and build a pure field physics? What
impresses our senses as matter is really a
great concentration of energy into a
comparatively small place. We could regard
matter as the region in space where the field is
extremely strong. In this way a new
philosophical background could be created. Its
final aim would be the explanation of all events
in nature by structure laws valid always and
everywhere. A thrown stone is, from this point
of view, a changing field, where the states of
greatest field intensity travel through space
with the velocity of the stone. There would be
no place, in our new physics, for both field and
matter, field being the only reality. This new

136 - Contents
view is suggested by the great achievements
of field physics, by our success in expressing
the laws of electricity, magnetism, and
gravitation in the form of structure laws, and
finally, by the equivalence of mass and energy
(E=MC2). Our ultimate problem would be to
modify our field laws in such a way that they
would not break down for regions in which the
energy is enormously concentrated."
- Albert Einstein & Leopold Infeld, THE
EVOLUTION OF PHYSICS, pp. 242-3
"The electromagnetic field is, for the modern
physicist, as real as the chair on which he sits."
- Page 151, Ibid
Suppose we pursue, find and reflect this 'new
physics' (not furniture?), referenced above by
Einstein... What happens when we take his
'new philosophical background' as it is applied
to a thrown stone (for example), and observe
"the greatest state of field intensity travel
through space with the velocity of the stone':
beneath that thrown stone's apparently curved
trajectory? What shall this pursuit and the
proper - 'new view' - reflection of Einstein's
proposed 'new physics' be called? Why not call
it, 'the new gravity'? And how shall it be
recognized and perceived? Why not exactly as

137 - Contents
we find it; in accordance with the best
information; opening with that (deliberately
and inadvertently) provided by the most highly
respected authorities on the subject?
"The comparative smallness of what we know
today as gravitational effects is not a
conclusive reason for ignoring the General
Principle of Relativity in theoretical
investigations of a fundamental character. In
other words, I do not believe it is justifiable to
ask: 'What would physics look like without
gravitation (the General Principle)?'
- Einstein, IDEAS & OPINIONS, pp. 352-3

Chapter Six
THE COSMOLOGICAL CONSTANT
& GEODESICS
This is Dave. / Dave's not here!; etc.
- Cheech & Chong. CATCH 22, continued:
Moreover, the attending or reading audience
not sleeping, is witness to the unprecedented
identification and hence the qualified
recognition and discovery of the 5th dimension
of electricity, and, the 6th dimension of
magnetism:

138 - Contents
 The heart-foundation of Einstein's Unified
Field Theory is a (previously unknown
repelling) force which Einstein discovered
within and extracted from his General Theory
of Relativity. That is the same theory that
revealed and introduced us to the 4th
Dimension.
Einstein called this previously unknown force
'the Cosmological Constant'. When he spoke of
it in his Unified Field equations he designated it
with the Greek sign 'Lambda', which resembles
an inverted capital 'V', like this: /\ .The non-
mathematical definition of Einstein's 'Lambda'
or 'Cosmological Constant':
'A previously unrecognized Universal Repelling
Force, originating in all Matter and projecting
across space at the velocity of light'.
Einstein's cosmological constant force does
not eliminate or ignore the concept of
gravitational attraction (the concept of a
pulling force), but rather joins it. The repelling
force and the impelling force are found co-
existentially, side by side. The impelling force
of gravity binds the universe together. The
cosmologically constant repelling force of
Lambda is Einstein's answer to Newton's
candidly asked, previously unanswered

139 - Contents
question of why a universe full of impelling
bodies doesn't collapse on itself. Fact#8

Lambda. /\ The Cosmological Constant.

A repelling force acting across space out of
material bodies; proportionate in strength and
intensity to the mass value of its material
source (particle/charge).
At a personal meeting with Hubble and
others, Einstein was persuaded by the
prevailing purveyors of what came to be
universally considered - and mirthfully called -
the big bang theory; to consider the
*Cosmological Constant a mistake on his part;
*said to be a repelling force acting exactly like
and with gravity; except in the opposite
direction; the strength of which increases
instead of decreasing with distance, preventing
the collapse of a universe of impelling
(mutually attracting) bodies.
At the unexpected discovery that the spatial
universe is expanding (Silpher's discovery,
1912-27; Hubble's law, 1931), Einstein's
Cosmological Constant Force was dismissed as
superfluous. It was 'resolved' - the (spatial)
universe did not collapse on itself because it
was expanding.

140 - Contents
 Einstein was thereafter persuaded to call it
'the biggest blunder of my life'; as indeed this
record takes accented note of agreement.
It's Still the Same Old Story, continued:
The record can only very respectfully agree
with Dr. Einstein's theory; as usual; while all
others have grown weary. Abandoning the
Cosmological Constant to the Friedman-
Lemaitre-Hubble-Robertson (no relation to this
author) -Walker model of an expanding - Big
Bang originated-universe was indeed the
biggest blunder of Einstein's life.
We will return to that redoubtably pensive
consideration in a moment, but now this (I
thought I told you never to play that song
again, Sam.?):
While a follow-through of reinstatement
awaits anyone who pursues documentation of
what happens when one objectively over-rules
the subjective dismissal of the abundantly
proven, objective concept of expanding
matter: On the *chronically myopic premise
that it is 'self-apparently' not happening.
Einstein's abandonment of his own
Cosmological Constant - Unified Field - Theory
is much controversied. On the other hand, they

141 - Contents
aren't talking much about how Einstein was
back to and working on his abandoned Unified
Field; to the time of his death, in May, of '55.
“It is well known to students of high school
algebra that it is permissable to divide both
sides of an equation by any quantity, provided
that this quantity is not zero. However, in the
course of his proof Einstein had divided both
sides of one of his intermediate equations by a
complicated expression, which in certain
circumstances, could become zero (‘at the
slightest provocation’)...
“In the case, however, when this expression
becomes equal to zero, Einstein’s proof does
not hold, and (mathematician) Friedmann
realized that this opened a whole new world of
time-dependent universes; expanding,
collapsing, and pulsating ones.
“Thus Einstein’s original gravity equation was
correct, and changing it was a mistake. Much
later, when I was discussing cosmological
problems with Einstein, he remarked that the
introduction of the cosmological term was the
biggest blunder he ever made in his life. But
the ‘blunder’, rejected by Einstein, and the
cosmological constant denoted by the Greek

142 - Contents
letter /\, rears its ugly head again and again
and again.”
- George Gamow, GRAVITY, p. 270
The so called ‘ugly head’ of the Outlawed
Truth:
“The cosmological constant has now a secure
position... Not only does it unify the
gravitational and electromagnetic fields, but it
renders the theory of gravitation and its
relation to space-time measurement so much
more illuminating and indeed self evident, that
return to the earlier view is unthinkable. I
would as soon think of reverting to Newtonian
Theory as of dropping the cosmological
constant.”
- Sir Arthur Eddington, THE EXPANDING
UNIVERSE, p. 24
“I can see no reason to doubt that the
observed recession of the spiral nebulae is due
to cosmic repulsion, and it is the effect
predicted (in 1919) by Relativity Theory which
we were hoping to find. Many other
explanations have been proposed - some of
them rather fantastic (* ‘tired light’, ‘the big
bang’, ’dark matter’, ‘super-strings’) - and
there has been a great deal of discussion which

143 - Contents
seems to me rather pointless. In this, as in
other developments of scientific exploration,
we must recognize the limitations of our
present knowledge and be prepared to
consider revolutionary changes.”
- Sir Arthur Eddington, pp. 89 - 90, A
TREASURY OF SCIENCE (Harlow Shapley
publishers)
Long ago, this author noted that Einstein's
designation for the repelling force inherent to
universal gravitation is Lambda (Also, by
apparent coincidence, the Aztec calendar's key
symbol: /\ <repeated 9 times in a circle
around the Aztec calendar>; translating to: "4-
motion")…
Shaped, not unlike a kind of transversely
considered axe; also the shape of a pizza-pie-
charted slice. So designated; so named.
Godfathered by Albert - 'the Axe' - Einstein. An
affectionate if levititious term for the Maestro
of gravity.

144 - Contents
Special effects by Austin P. Torney

Four photostatatic copies of a quarter for

every counterfeit dollar in change-seeker. At
yore command. A 4-D chicken in every pot. An
improved world, beyond Shake'n Bake. (Old
Mack. He's back?)
A rash, sleep-disturbing look (in black & white)
at Einstein's 4-Dimensional Geodesics.
This discussion is rapidly approaching its
close. Before it closes, I wish to cite another

145 - Contents
accordance of the General Theory; which
states that a thrown baseball or a fired bullet
does not actually describe a curved or
parabolic path to the earth, when projected
horizontally above its surface. Instead, they
actually move in straight lines which only
appear to be curves and parabolas.

The reason for this says Einstein, is that,

'What is 4-Dimensionally straight gives the
illusion of being curved or parabolic when
projected on the 3 recognized Dimensions Of
Space'.
These quasi 3-D parabolas and curves which
are not really parabolas and curves, but
instead are 4-D straight lines, are called
'geodesics'.
Einstein's geodesic account of gravity is that,
'Matter causes the 4-D Space-Time continuum
to curve in the area surrounding it'. This fact is
formally referred to as, 'Einstein's postulate of
the 4-D Space-Time metric'.
If we find this Einsteinian description of
gravitation vague, it is simply because it is
indeed a vague description, yielding small
conceptual compromise when compared with

146 - Contents
the familiar if mysterious 'tug' of Classical
Newtonian gravity.
One may question, what does Relativity mean
when it accounts for gravity by referencing the
4-D Space-Time metric and the curving of the
4-D Space-Time Continuum? And how does
this 4-D Space-Time Continuum cause bodies
to descend, or geodesically appear to descend?
The 'answer' is that physicists do not
understand the identity of Einstein's 4th
Dimension; since space-time is one of the
many effects of the 4th Dimension, it is not
understood or recognized what the geodesic
gravitational curvature of space-time is either.
(The latest popular interpretation of this
enigma is that 'there is no gravity' - only the
'curvature of the 4-D space time continuum';
the explanation for which remains as
mysterious now as it was when it was
perceived as gravity.)
“The General Theory (of Relativity) presented
a completely altered view of gravitation. It is
viewed as a property of space rather than as a
force between bodies. As a result of the
presence of matter, space becomes a curve
and bodies follow the line of least resistance.

147 - Contents
These 4-D lines are called ‘geodesics’.” - Isaac
Asimov, THE INTELLIGENT PERSON’S GUIDE
TO SCIENCE
The false enigma is resolved in recognition
that the entire physical frame of reference is -
4-Dimensionally - enlarging, pinning the fans
to the bleachers, all the cars to the asphalt in
the parking lot, the city accommodating the
ball park, and the omni-directionally expanding
planet the city rests upon: rising up to create
the illusion that the apparently curving
baseball trajectory - which is actually moving
in a straight line ('geodesic') - appears to be
moving in a parabolic arc. When a test object
is projected straight up in the air, it does not
slow down, turn around and return to the
catcher; no indeed. The catcher and the
ground, rise up to overtake and impact the test
object.
“Time… is essentially a moving proposition,
and we must perforce move with it.”
- Paul R. Heyl, SPACE, TIME & EINSTEIN

Here's what false authority says of Einstein's 4-

D geodesic:
"We cannot visualize such a curved space,
because humanity is not four dimensional."

148 - Contents
 - The LIFE Science Library's UNIVERSE, p. 179

Neither will it ever be visualized, until Matter

is recognized to be 4-Dimensionally expanding;
as simply illustrated here and affluently
verified throughout this mere historical -
previously unrecognized - review.

Special effects by Austin P. Torney

“Impact and apparent ‘return’ of projectile, after

being fired at MOMENT ‘A’.
Acceleration of earth generates illusion of ‘curved’
parabola and ‘descending’ projectile.”
4-D MASS-FIELD STRAIGHT-LINE GEODESIC
(Back to Euclidean geometry.) Fact#9.

149 - Contents
 “The General Theory (of Relativity)
presented a completely altered view of
gravitation. It is viewed as a property of space
rather than as a force between bodies. "As a
result of the presence of matter, space
becomes a curve and bodies follow the line of
least resistance." These 4-D lines are called
‘geodesics’.” - Isaac Asimov, THE INTELLIGENT
PERSON’S GUIDE TO SCIENCE

-----------------------
The Father of Experimental Science, Galileo,
proved that Aristotle was wrong when the
latter surmised that heavier objects, fall faster
in descent, than lighter objects, when dropped
from the same height at the same time, above
the earth's surface.
It does seem logical. It just doesn't happen
to be true. Everyone who is anyone in physics
today, falls on hocus pocus, to make this
annoying fact go away. Reduce it to a trivial
matter of no - ho hum – importance; whereas,

150 - Contents
it is a major, unresolved enigma in theoretical
physics. It is often falsely held up, either as a
non-issue, or as a (falsely) resolved issue.
Galileo is said to be the first to make and
note proof of that unexpected - ever since,
bitterly disappointing - fact of reality - being
the universal rate of descent of all objects in
free fall, regardless of their mass values (in the
absence of air resistance). 16 (32) feet per
second squared, for bodies descending on or
near the surface of the earth.

151 - Contents
Special effects by Austin P. Torney

152 - Contents
 Much (low key, back stage) concern has been
given to Galileo's unarguable fact of
descending bodies in a gravitational field; ever
since it was proven. Especially after Newton
made a law of gravity that does indeed dictate:
the heavier object should indeed descend
faster than the lighter - less massive - object...
Because, according to Newton's laws, there
should inevitably be a greater mutual
attraction between, say, a descending
cannonball and the earth, than between a
descending bb shot and the earth.
The (ironic) mystery is frequently and glibly
said to be resolved in the fact of the
coincidence of inertial and gravitational mass
values intersecting at the same qualitatively
accelerating coordinates.
An obligatory description of the unanticipated
and astonishing coincidence is not any
explanation of the still completely unexplained
*coincidence...
By definition - like gravity and for exactly the
same reason - *not understood (and
stonewalled) by the scientific- academic status
quo: representatives of which all too often are
found pretending an understanding of that
which they do not understand. Furthermore,

153 - Contents
falsely representing what they (often
capriciously - with all authoritative gravity)
tragicomically misrepresent.
That is to say, a cannonball, according to
Newton's Law, should (is supposed to) fall
faster than a descending bb shot. The
cannonball does not fall faster than descending
bb shots or grains of sand or a leaping pod of
airborne Blue whales. Everything falls at the
same rate of acceleration, regardless of its
mass value: *in the absence of air resistance...

Chapter Seven
THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE:
INERTIA, GRAVITY & E=MC2

*This last qualification is important; there are

many novice critics who aggressively introduce
'terminal velocity' of descending object in free
fall above the earth's surface as being 120
m.p.h., which is true, the critic sums up the
argument by adding that if the earth is truly
accelerating - expanding ever faster to rise up
and meet apparently descending objects, then
there wouldn't be a terminal velocity, and free
falling objects 'would accelerate', instead of
reaching 'TV' - terminal velocity - a free falling

154 - Contents
parachutist before the chute is deployed, for
example. All of this is to remind any such critic
that terminal velocity limits the free falling
object, due to air resistance: in the absence of
air resistance the descent rate does in fact
accelerate in corroboration with the 'proposed'
(abundantly proved) accelerating expansion of
the earth.
Proclaiming that inertial mass resistance (in
allegedly unmoving space) to gravity (in
descent time) exactly cancels out the gravity:
does not explain why the allegedly unrelated
(space and time) values are equal. Inertial
values always (without explanation)
proportionately canceling out what would be
the difference between inertial and
gravitational mass values...
Einstein's *General Principle is the only
functional solution to this (The descending
objects are not really falling at all.) It
continues: *unemployed.
“It was Einstein’s feeling about the form
which the laws of nature should take that
guided him. It led him to question a certain
coincidence in Newtonian Law which, all too
conveniently in his opinion, made everything
come out right. This was the perfect balance

155 - Contents
between the mass of a body, considered as a
source of gravity in Newton’s Gravitation Law,
and the mass of a body as a measure of inertia
in Newton’s Laws of Motion.
“According to the last, the amount of force
necessary to change the motion of a body
depends on its mass; a heavy object has a
greater inertia than a lighter one and therefore
is harder to move, or to slow down. To this law
there was, apparently, an exception: the case
of falling. Instead of falling more slowly, a
heavy object reaches the same acceleration as
a lighter one. Newton (*allegedly) accounted
for this with his Law of Gravitation, which
states that the attractive force exerted on one
body by another increases with the mass of the
attracted body. Thus, most conveniently, the
force of gravitation always is exactly sufficient
to overcome the inertia of a body so that all
bodies fall at the same speed.
“This perfect balance, this same mass
constant which appeared in two different roles,
looked to Einstein a bit suspicious, a bit forced.
It should not be necessary to bring in a
coincidence of this sort in order to explain the
universe; God did not present such malicious
complexities.

156 - Contents
 “He began to wonder whether the (*popularly
perceived) distinction between inertial and
gravitational forces might not be artificial.
Could motion which was due to what Newton
called ‘gravity’, in fact be distinguished from
motion due to what he called ‘inertia’? It could
not be, Einstein found, after he had made an
analysis of experiments which might be done
in answer to the question, the distinction was
artificial. It had no experimental support and
therefore - according to the rule: ‘If you cannot
relate it to measurement, you do not know it’ -
the distinction had (has) no place in a physical
theory.”
- Barbara Lovett Cline, THE MEN WHO MADE A
NEW PHYSICS, p.p. 184 - 5
“A defect (of Newtonian Classical Mechanics)
also eliminated (resolved) only by the General
Theory of Relativity, lies in the fact that there
is no reason given by the mechanics itself for
the equality of the gravitational and inertial
mass of the material point.” - Albert Einstein,
OUT OF MY LATER YEARS.
Newton was fully aware of the unexplained,
hauntingly unresolved problem: the functional
intersection of inert and heavy mass values.
Describing this coincidence too often passes as

157 - Contents
explanation for this coincidence; which falsely
currencied description is no explanation at all.
According to Aristotelian intuition and
Newton's laws, heavier objects should indeed,
fall faster. They don't.
Instead: Everything in free fall on or near
earth invariably descends at exactly the same
rate (in a vacuum. Sans air resistance).
Repeat: Einstein's General Principle:
is the only recognizable explanation for this.
At the turn of the 19th century, a Russian
scientist, Roland Von Eotvos, pursued finding a
difference in descent rates of heavier and
lighter objects. A difference which is supposed
to be there, and isn't.
Eotvos, was inspired to achieve technological
measurement of differences in descent time for
variously light and heavy falling objects, down
to a billionth of a second (A nanosecond).
He could find no variants in rates of descent (in
time) for variously massed test objects (in
space).
No difference in descent rates - gravitational
time from inertial space; uniformly perceived
as unrelated - of comparatively lighter and

158 - Contents
heavier objects has ever been measured; to
date.
The author (Truly Yours) submits that no
difference will ever be found. Due to the more
than coincidence - but rather the identity - of
the fact that apparently descending objects are
not really falling at all. The ever-expanding
earth, matter of factly rising up to 4
dimensionally overtake and meet - make
contact with - apparently falling
bodies/objects.
(Upon occasions of free falling objects being
overtaken and struck by, then to be inertially
pinned down upon the earth's surface, present
day science does not recognize the consequent
gravitational fulfillment of the scientific
definition for 'work'. May it suffice to clarify for
the moment, that contemporary theoretical
physics does not acknowledge and
consequently does not employ the advantage
of comprehending and accounting for a proper
understanding of 'objects at rest', while
constantly acted upon by gravity: the
unidentified 'force' - F; on the earth's surface.
That is, such objects are perceived and
conceptualized as 'not moving'. Whereas, the
scientific definition for 'work' requires motion ,

159 - Contents
which, in the case of the ever-accelerating 4-D
space-time continuum and the – perpetually -
prevailing dynamics of the General <and
Special> Theory of Relativity, is not recognized
or acknowledged. Meanwhile 'force' is defined
in several categories of motion, none of which
are attributed to 'objects at rest' on the earth's
surface <for example> in a gravitational field;
all of which definitions are fulfilled. Not only in
the inertial resistance to the acceleration of
earth's surface upon the 'object at rest', but
also and importantly, the - perpetual – omni-
directional, accelerating enlargement of the -
whatever - test object, itself...)
The ('Impossible') reason all objects (appear
to) descend at the same rate of acceleration.
Fact #10.
“Objects of such different nuclear constitution
as aluminum and gold fall with accelerations
that agree to better than one part in 10-11,
according to Roll, Krotkov, and Dick (1964),
one of the most important null experiments in
all physics. Individual molecules fall in step,
too, with macroscopic objects (Estermann,
Simpson and Stern - 1935; and so do
individual neutrons (Dabbs, Harvey, Paya and
Horstmann - 1965), individual electrons

160 - Contents
(Wittborn and Fairbank - 1967), and individual
mu mesons (Beall - 1970).”
- GRAVITATION, pp 13 - 16, Misner, Thorne
and Wheeler.

"A defect (*in the Newtonian Classical system

of 3-D mechanics) eliminated only by the
introduction of the General Theory of
Relativity, lies in the fact that there is no
reason given by mechanics (*The Newtonian
system) itself for the equality of the
gravitational and inertial mass of the material
point." - Albert Einstein, OUT OF MY LATER
YEARS, p.71

"*In a neutron (cyclotron) experiment, a

beam of fast neutrons close to that of the
speed of light was shot into a moderator block,
the emerging neutrons were observed to rain
down from the block with about the same
speed as rain droplets fall". - George Gamow,
GRAVITY, p. 145
“The most dramatic of all early tests of the
general theory took place in 1919 during a
total eclipse of the sun. Einstein had reasoned
as follows: if an elevator in interstellar space
were pulled upward with an accelerating
velocity, a light beam traveling from side to
161 - Contents
side inside the elevator would bend down in a
parabolic path. This would be regarded as an
inertial effect, but according to the general
theory, one can make the elevator a fixed
frame of reference and view the curving of the
beam as a gravitational effect. Gravity, then, is
capable of curving light beams.”
- Martin Gardner, RELATIVITY FOR THE
MILLION, p. 110

162 - Contents
 Special effects by Austin P. Torney

“A beam of light projected horizontally over the

earth's surface, 'falls' at the same rate as any

163 - Contents
other test object. Only the hyper-speed of light
sustains an apparently straight line, which is
actually slightly parabolic, in accordance with
slower moving - horizontally projected test
objects, with more easily measured arcs.
- KBR, TOTAL FIELD THEORY
Proving yet once again, gravity is the 4th
dimension.
Reality Check, continued:
As regards any question of, 'Why didn't
Einstein say gravity is the 4th Dimension'? He
did, and categorically. Einstein may have said
and proved that gravity is the 4th Dimension
much more eloquently and elaborately; much
more absolutely than I or anyone else ever
will.
We could reference an abundance of
Einsteinian non-mathematical quotes at this
time, quotes (many of which are included in
this TOTAL FIELD THEORY presentation) - in
other words - finding gravity the 4th
Dimension. Instead, at this time and in the
name of abbreviation, we'll reference what is
literally the best-known mathematical formula
in the world. The direct, non-mathematical

164 - Contents
translation of which irrevocably proves - as it
always has - that gravity is the 4th Dimension.
The formula is E=MC2. The direct non-
mathematical translation of which is: 'Energy
equals Matter times the speed of light,
squared'.
In grade school, I began to hear other
students ask a question which I have since
then learned is also familiar to many others;
that question being: "In the formula 'E=MC2',
why is C (light; field energy) squared (Out of M
< Mass/Matter/ Particle>; which is perceived
as a static, non-expanding, non-field)?"
I may have asked the question myself, but I
knew less of mathematics than I do now. But
others did ask that question, and that is
understandable enough. The teacher's
(ubiquitous) answer, which I have also learned
since then is familiar to many others, was not
so understandable. That (alleged) 'answer'
being: 'It (C squared) actually isn't necessary'.
This answer, it will not surprise some of you
to know, is quite standardized as a response to
the question, 'Why is C squared, in the formula
E=MC2?'

165 - Contents
 All are implored not to take my word for this.
Simply ask the next physicist or mathematician
you happen in to. If you pursue this question,
you're apt to get that answer or its equivalent.
I had no understanding of mathematics
whatsoever, and yet it still left me and many
others wondering:
'If in fact it isn't necessary, then why did
Einstein include it in the formula?'
One may again reasonably ask, 'What is the
speed of light squared from?' Of course the
only answer is, 'The speed of light (C -
celeritas constant) is squared from (out of)
Matter'.
Smoke on The Perrier:
Affixed to that familiar explicit statement
made by Einstein, is the familiar implicit
statement - 'but it isn't necessary'.
Light energy is acknowledged to be, to say
the least, expanding. Specifically, it is very
accurately measured, originally in 1887 by
Michelson & Morley, to do so at 186,282 miles-
per-second.
*Light energy is also acknowledged to be
qualitatively identical to *Matter energy; *their
differences being only their densities - light

166 - Contents
being much more thinly distributed and
tenuous than matter. This is proven in the
statement 'E=M' of the formula 'E=MC2,
originally published by Einstein in 1906. Light
energy or electromagnetism is furthermore
acknowledged to invariably originate within
and expand-out-of *MatterEnergy - *generator
of all spaces and times.
On the other hand, MatterEnergy is not
acknowledged to be expanding.
Quite the contrary. Matter is unanimously
agreed to be static and non-expanding.
Digressing To Reality, Geometric & Algebraic
Law:
In the formula E=MC2 we have the
acknowledged dynamical omni-directional
expansion of electromagnetic or light energy,
squared from presumably static/non-expanding
MatterEnergy.
As long as there are those who demand and
deny proof of the 4-Dimensional MassField,
there will also be those who fail or refuse to
recognize the accumulative achievements of
historical and contemporary Academic Physical
Science - and, the lessons of Algebra 101.
If all the Nobel laureates in the world gather
together to agree that any entity

167 - Contents
acknowledged and agreed to be dynamically
expanding, can be algebraically squared from
any other entity which is agreed to be static
and non-expanding (exactly such a gathering
exists, and has existed since 1906):
what is established in such an assemblage of
authority is that, none among these mortar-
boarded multitudes has possession of the
mathematical ability required to pass the
seventh grade.
Fact # 11.

Chapter Eight
THE BIG BANG IS WRONG.
THE SIGHT & SOUND OF THE
‘INCOMPREHENSIBLE’ 4th DIMENSION

Einstein's 'renowned formula' E=MC2 proves

again that Universal Matter is literally,
constantly and dramatically expanding.
Clipping right along on this planet at 32 feet
per second squared. The Causative Source of
the 4-Dimensional Space-Time Continuum: a
dimension of time, and motion (are
synonymous - time being the interval between
two or more events <in space>).

168 - Contents
An interim of levity about 4-D gravity:
The bespectacled scientific
malrepresentatives proclaim with all
professionalism, that their 4-D spectacles are
unfindable; that their sensory optical
prescription is immeasurable. Unrefractionable.
Even unimaginably out of sight. The 4th
dimension: officially proclaimed to be nowhere
in the measurable light, or the sensual realm of
touch, taste, hearing or sight, in or out of
italics and/or parentheses.
Big Brother can't find the 4th dimension
anywhere, 'because humanity is not four
dimensional'.
Mr. Science is out to isolate gravity waves.
Dr. Graviton Livingston is attempting to locate
someone who presumes enough to find
himself, and what he emptily purports to be in
search of. Lost on the North African river of
denial. The Star Optometrist has contracted a
posse with Warner Brothers to polish-off both
lenses on his misplaced spectacles.
Disregarding the descent of free falling
objects, the weight (and inert mass value) of
everything; the orbiting of the planets - and all
other orbits with and without punctuation.

169 - Contents
('The 4th D cannot be seen, felt, or imagined'.
- The 'scientific consensus'...
'If science was a democracy, the world would
still be flat or square with the universe
revolving around it every 24 hours' - Anon)
The inescapable sounds of gravity. Rhythm
songs of the 4-D space-time continuum.
Anything round and rolling, especially metal
coins and platters, glass and/or stone, that's
allowed to slow down, fall over, and settle,
audibly rocking, oscillating, rolling and rotating
downwardly, audibly accelerating ever-faster
toward a quick stop on a hard surface.

THE EVERYDAY SOUND and SIGHT of 4-D

ACCELERATION
(Is The Audio-Visual music & rhythm of
Gravity)
A tabled or floored coin, dinner plate or
serving tray on a roll, slowing down to a coil of
orbitally circling around its own accelerating
drum roll, finally and abruptly settling down to
a quick-stop, in the making of a gravitationally
resounding, perfectly spiral shaped nest.
Physically rolling and sounding out an
accelerating spiral, while roundly resonating
the rhythmically accelerating part. (What?)

170 - Contents
The same harmonious polka may be harkened
in a characteristically accelerating rocking
motion, from any number of utensils, tools or
spherical objects, rocking (to & fro) on solid
hard kitchen sink or floored surfaces - the
commonplace sight and sound of that which is
adamantly pontificated as 'immeasurable',
'invisible', 'non-mathematically inaccessible,
and 'unimaginable' (What?): the song of an
errant hubcap settling down on the asphalt all
by its rolling and rotating self; where (By and
by; sooner or later) everything in present
tense, continuously and collectively arrives
from the past, squared.
The sound, shape - and measurable sight - of
materially manifest gravity, an everyday,
globally ubiquitous occurrence (You dropped
something?): the reputedly 'immeasurable,
unimaginable' 4-D space-time continuum.
Heat flows downhill; ever smaller.
Whereas, events flow uphill; ever larger.
Entropic universal heat death is not as a
conceptual dogma and/or social obsession,
meaningfully derived from the 2nd Law Of
Thermodynamics. Any more than the 4-D
space-time continuum can be excluded as the
explanation for a steady state theory and the

171 - Contents
long withheld improvement over the
incumbent, 4th dimension abolishing big bang
gangers.
Are you seated comfortably?
A WORD ABOUT SIGNS OF THE TIMES. A
Disinformational Time of The Signs:
'Time is a hallucination purveyed by the
inventors of space.'
- A (popularly deluded) bumper sticker
mentality.
Actually: terrestrial time standards are based
on astronomical motions of the planet(s)
around the sun. A planetary year equals its
completion of a 360 degree arc - round trip -
about the sun (Which, itself is bound toward
Vega). A month of 30 days is 1/12th of a year.
A week is 1/4th of that month. A day is 1/7th
of that week. An hour is 1/24th of a day. A
minute is 1/60th of an hour. A second is
1/60th of a minute. Therefore, a second of
time, for example is also 18 1/2 miles of
space: traveled by the earth in its annual orbit
around the sun…
Sums up the bumper-sticker inspired
hallucination. It’s about time.

172 - Contents
Non-Absolute Relativistic 4-D space-time. What
it is:
Time, furthermore, in 4 dimensions, is
shorter and faster in smaller, past
(microcosmic) spaces, and slower (dilated) in
future (macrocosmic) larger spaces; when
compared to present time at any given
moment of an observer in the eternal present:
exactly between small fast space and large
slow space. A square mile is not the same
spatial size, when compared with itself; from
the present: relative to (smaller, more dense)
past or (larger, less dense) future 4-D
expanding space.
Neither therefore, is 60 miles per hour (or
186,282 m.p.s.) always the same speed. Or a
year, month, week, day, hour - or a second,
always the same comparative duration.
Proving that the value of time varies with the
value of space it occurs in.
Refer, relativistic time dilation. Slow time
(Macrocosmic 'weak forces') occurring in
relatively larger spaces; fast time
(Microcosmically 'strong forces') occurring in
relatively smaller and larger (earlier and later)
spaces - the relativity of time values.

173 - Contents
Refer: Einstein's 'non-absolute relative space',
and 'non-absolute relative time'. For which,
until here and now, there are not even any
failed explanations.
Of course, in a 4-D universe, the value of
time and space (4-D space-time) quite
inevitably varies, from coordinate system to
coordinate system. The speed of light for
example, is ever-increasing, while remaining
constant, relative to the coordinate system
from which it originates and in which it is
measured. The value of time being covariant
with the smaller and larger - earlier and later -
4-D space-times it occurs and/or is measured
in. Fact #12.
Now, to close with two brief considerations.
At irregular intervals, the world press and
scientific journals at large will report on
contradictions and disqualifications of Einstein's
theories. Modifications of the works of Newton
and Einstein, for example, do correctly occur.
Whereas, until the foundations of physical
science represented by Newton and Einstein,
for example, are replaced with some more
improved system, the displacement of the
work of the issued giants of science is confined

174 - Contents
to whatever slight adjustment, accompanied by
whatever dissertation.
Then, there are the ambitions of physicists
attempting to discover, isolate or insulate
gravity waves (Refer 'gravitons').
And yet, like the 4th Dimension, the only
appropriate question regarding
phenomenological gravity, is, 'Where is it not?'
Yet still, Contemporary Physics and its mentors
continue to brush aside electromagnetism (in
the micro and macrocosms) in - high and low,
large and small - probes, hunts, expeditions
and searches for gravity waves (Where are
they not? The bespectacled adventurers are
wearing the corrective lenses they're frantically
looking for… Refer, Dirac’s 1960 equation of
‘gravity waves’ with Planck’s constant h – a
generally ignored equation: which finds gravity
as electromagnetism. Refer, ‘unified field’).
"Although relativity theory replaces gravity by
a geometrical warping of space-time, it leaves
many basic questions unanswered. Does this
warping take place instantaneously through
space or does it propagate like a wave motion?
Almost all physicists agree that the warping
moves like a wave and that these waves travel
with the speed of light. There is also good

175 - Contents
reason to believe that gravity waves consist of
tiny indivisible particles of energy called
"gravitons." In 1969, Joseph Weber, at the
University of Maryland, announced that his
equipment, consisting of huge aluminum
cylinders, had detected gravity radiation. It
seemed to be coming from cataclysmic events
at the center of the Milky Way. Since then,
dozens of attempts have been made to confirm
Weber's claim, some by physicists with
detecting equipment more sensitive than
Weber's. The results have been negative. The
present consensus is that Weber
misinterpreted his readings, and that gravity
waves have not yet been observed (*Have not
yet been proven beyond Dirac’s 1960
findings)...
“As for gravitons, no one has any knowledge
of what a graviton is like, although many
physicists are trying to invent theories that will
predict some of its properties. Presumably it
contains a tiny bit of space-time curvature,
otherwise large numbers of gravitons would be
unable to transmit curvature through space. At
the moment the graviton, like the particle
physicists' quark,' remains a hypothetical beast
that physicists hope someday to capture."

176 - Contents
- p. 106, THE RELATIVITY EXPLOSION, by
Martin Gardner
Speaking of ‘hypothetical beasts’:
(Why the opposition is out of 3-D time &
space, continued:
WHY: THE BIG BANG THEORY IS WRONG
The Big Bang Universe has a (speculatively
presumed super split second) beginning and a
speculatively presumed (entropic heat death)
ending.
Unlike the Steady State Theory; which for
many substantial and eloquent reasons does
not proffer a beginning or ending; which
(Steady State Theory) was abandoned,
because the (recently and unexpectedly
discovered) proven expansion of the spatial
universe must result; inevitably in the
dissipation of occurring numbers (density) of
objects occupying given units of space over
extensively progressive periods of time.
A Steady State Theory projects a general
uniform density of space, rather than a
dissipating space projected in a *Big Bang
translation of Universal History.
Consider the more dense - relatively smaller -
past; advancing into the increasingly less

177 - Contents
dense and ever-enlarging future. *Big Bang
dictated Space always becoming more
dissipated, 'thinning out' with ('big rip')
increased passage of time in the spatially
expanding, 'Big Bang'. Which is what is said to
inevitably result when the dissipating universe
of the present and future, is back-tracked into
the conceptualized universal (consequently
ever smaller and more dense) 3-D past...
Eventually intersecting very densely, when
and where, due to tremendous gravitational
pressures and resulting high temperatures: an
explosion (*Big Bang) is said to have occurred.
Proclaimed by the big bang gang to be the
cause of the recently (and quite unexpectedly)
discovered, spatially expanding universe -
*therefore 'inevitably' thinning out with the
passage of time (often said to be enroute a
conceptually accompanying, imminent
forthcoming, 'entropic heat death' - more
recently termed, 'the big rip').

178 - Contents
179 - Contents
 Big Bang Cosmology. Product of a desperately
concocted (1927 emerged, Henry Silpher
discovered, Edwin Hubble refined,
Friedmann/Lemaitre generalized), ad hoc
makeshift history. The big bang theory is ad
hoc, in the sense that it was conjured up in
hurried response to the unexpected discovery
that the entire spatial universe is expanding
(1927- '1931, Silpher-Hubble).
Back tracking the observed expansion
through past time seems to find the observed
expanding universe at a point of convergence -
an intersecting point where all the matter of
the universe was presumably joined in one
singular 'cosmic egg.' What seems inevitably,
to be ('therefore') an ending of space, ergo,
'beginning of space and time.' A 3-D space-
monopolizing universal beginning.
"Our sun at the center of our solar system is
just one star among billions in the Milky Way
galaxy. Around us are billions and billions of
galaxies. Where could this entire universe
come from? Was it always this way or did the
universe have a beginning? The church has
always believed that the universe came from a
moment of creation - a time when the universe
began. Meanwhile, scientists developed two

180 - Contents
theories: the Big Bang and the Steady State
theories. In this century, science has come to
understand how the universe began from a
tiny point, fifteen billion years ago. No matter
how incredible it sounds, it seems that the
church's ideas of a moment of creation were
right from the beginning."
- STEPHEN HAWKING'S UNIVERSE,
Volume I, Program II: The Big Bang
Copyright 1997

Yet, there is, in astrophysical proven and

agreed upon fact: no common center from
which the spatially expanding universe
recedes. Combined with the *1998 observed
dynamic that the expanding universe is
accelerating (*issued as early as 1975-6) - not
a quality of any kind of beginning explosion;
but more a feature of a repelling force
('Cosmological Constant'), acting across space
out of material bodies, becoming more
dynamic with distance. Fact #13.
-------------
The Editors, SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN,
415 Madison Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017
*14 May 1976
"An Accelerating Universe?" "...that most
reasonable observational data.... fit closely all

181 - Contents
models to which the expansion is accelerating.
"The prediction of accelerating expansion is
contrary to expectation... "something must be
terribly wrong."..."The net forces between
(receding) galaxies really are repulsive (Re:
'Hubble's Law - the more distant a given stellar
or galactic light source the faster it's rate of
recession from the point of observation". Re:
Einstein's Cosmological Constant <repelling
force acting parallel to and in the opposite
direction as the popular concept of 'Newtonian
impelling force>, a force different from others
in that its velocity increases - rather than
decreases, with distance.)”
- SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, 'Science and the
Citizen', December 1975, James E. Gunn
and Beatrice M. Tinsley.
-----------------
'I point out this apparent conflict with the
understanding that Gunn and Tinsley
concluded "...the prediction of accelerating
expansion is contrary to expectation... and that
something must be terribly wrong."
Especially so if "...the net forces between
(receding) galaxies... really are repulsive... and
if gravitational values really are "equivalent to
and synchronous with inertial acceleration

182 - Contents
values beyond a billionth of a second and the
technical ability to measure any difference"
(THE NEW GRAVITY <Is The 4th Dimension>,
April 1976, Kent B. Robertson).
'Is it possible we are overlooking a rather
obvious consideration, concerning the real
nature of 'gravity?'
Very Truly Yours,
David F. Sicks, Anchorage, Alaska cc - Mr. Kent
Robertson
( Mr. David F. Sicks received no response.)

183 - Contents
 Special effects by Austin P. Torney

Revisionary BB Politics - 11-11-2007, 05:22

PM (Posted by K. B. Robertson <RascalPuff –
‘RP’>, on ToeQuest)
Recently in this Theory of Everything internet
enclave, the following - exemplary - excerpt
was included – in bold red lettering - in a post
by the unarguably venerable neutralino:

"Note that nowhere in the BB theory does it

state 'the universe exploded into existence',
or in fact anything to do with explosions!!"

184 - Contents
 This conceptual posturing is merely an
example of the fact that the big bang theory
has evolved from it's inception as a 'beginning
explosion', into a Standard Theorist bunker of
denials that any 'original explosion'
commenced what is now popularly referenced
as 'The Expanding Universe'.

Proclamations that there is no original

explosion associated with the big bang theory
have become the status quo. When someone
proclaims or implies otherwise, they are
promptly described as a 'novice', and
'corrected', as exemplified by the above quoted
statement by neutralino.

This controversy leads to the question of

where the big bang theory originated, and,
how it was described.
Here is the google acquired answer to that
question…

http://www.catholiceducation.org/art...ce/sc0022.html

“In the winter of 1998, two separate teams of

astronomers in Berkeley, California, made a
similar, startling discovery. They were both

185 - Contents
observing supernovae — exploding stars visible
over great distances — to see how fast the
universe is expanding. In accordance with
prevailing scientific wisdom, the astronomers
expected to find the rate of expansion to be
decreasing, Instead they found it to be
increasing — a discovery which has since
“shaken astronomy to its core” (Astronomy,
October 1999).

“This discovery would have come as no

surprise to Georges Lemaitre (1894-1966), a
Belgian mathematician and Catholic priest who
developed the theory of the Big Bang. Lemaitre
described the beginning of the universe as a
burst of fireworks, comparing galaxies to the
burning embers spreading out in a growing
sphere from the center of the burst. He
believed this burst of fireworks was the
beginning of time, taking place on “a day
without yesterday.
“After decades of struggle, other scientists
came to accept the Big Bang as fact. But while
most scientists — including the mathematician
Stephen Hawking — predicted that gravity
would eventually slow down the expansion of
the universe and make the universe fall back
toward its center, Lemaitre believed that the

186 - Contents
universe would keep expanding. He argued
that the Big Bang was a unique event, while
other scientists believed that the universe
would shrink to the point of another Big Bang,
and so on. The observations made in Berkeley
supported Lemaitre’s contention that the Big
Bang was in fact “a day without yesterday.”
When Georges Lemaitre was born in Charleroi,
Belgium, most scientists thought that the
universe was infinite in age and constant in its
general appearance. The work of Isaac Newton
and James C. Maxwell suggested an eternal
universe. When Albert Einstein first published
his theory of relativity in 1916, it seemed to
confirm that the universe had gone on forever,
stable and unchanging.”

Neutralino’s response:
Re: Revisionary BB Politics - 11-11-2007,
06:38 PM
“Ok I'm ready to eat a tiny slice of humble pie
now, RP. My response that you've quoted in
red is not correct. I can't remember saying
that last night, and have no idea why I would
do, but I did (I checked).

So here's my stance on the big bang. Many

people say that there was an "explosion" at
187 - Contents
some point in space, or that the universe was
created from a single point in space. This,
clearly, is incorrect (since the universe consists
of the spacetime of the universe).

However, one can say that there was an

explosion that created spacetime and that is
why the universe is expanding in the way we
see today. The important things to notice are
that firstly, this explosion did not take place in
a specific point in spacetime, since this would
imply a centre, which contradicts the
cosmological principle. Secondly, we note that
we cannot run the clock back to time zero and
see an infinitely dense point of matter. Thirdly,
this explosion is not like any explosion that we
would imagine. When we think of explosions,
we think of fragments of something being
thrown further into space. However, this
explosion was an explosion on the universe
itself which created the universe (if that makes
sense.)

Anyway, talking about explosions, whilst

technically not incorrect, gets confusing. I
would much rather take the stance that the big
bang theory states that the universe was once
far more dense than it is today.

188 - Contents
So, I apologise to you, RascalPuff, and to
anyone else who read my incorrect views.

[As an aside, in future it may be better to get a

reference from a non-catholic source if
discussing workings and successes of a catholic
priest!]”

The reversionary transition came about,

because there is no common center from which
the expanding universe, recedes. The dynamic
structure of the expanding universe is such,
that the recession of light sources is moving
directly away from the observer, in direct line
of sight, no matter what location the expansion
is observed. 'The center is everywhere'. This is
not the dynamic signature of an explosion -
especially when it is learned that the expansion
is proceeding ever faster: accelerating.

On the other hand the described dynamics are

the signature of a repelling force acting out of
all material bodies, 'just like gravity', except, in
the opposite direction. Refer, 'the Cosmological
Constant'.

189 - Contents
 The Unabashed Reinstatement of the
Cosmological Constant (Lambda), continued

Before and since the latest writing of this

condensed (originally, 1959) presentation of
Total Field Theory: Gravity is the 4th
Dimension, the 'big bang' "theory" has been
ambitiously renovated - unflinchingly retrieving
the 'abandoned' Cosmological Constant from
the round file - putting it back on the slate
(refer 'LCDM' - Lambda Cold Dark Matter, and
the regularly employed big bang employment
of the term, 'cosmological constant', in those
words...). Moreover, the ex parte big bang
gang has nonchalantly declared that it doesn't
- after all - need a common center from which
it originates. Under these rearrangements, the
covertly bewildered, usurped, big bang
gangologists carry on with 'business as
usual'...
Enter in google: 'Einstein was right after all -
maybe'. Then <collectively> enter in google:
cosmological constant lambda expanding
universe big bang acceleration red shift dark
energy dark matter Friedmann Lemaitre
Robertson Walker, and draw your own
conclusions about what's happened to

190 - Contents
astrophysics and the big bang theory,
especially since 1976 thru ‘98 and continuing.
- K. B. Robertson 4/21/2007
The expansion is proven, dynamically
structured as though the center (alleged origin
of the big bang - said to be the beginning
cause of the observed spatial expansion of the
universe) is everywhere. No matter the
location of any given observation point: the
structural dynamics of the observed expanding
universe are such that always the red-shift
recession of the measurable surrounding
universe (of receding objects) is: in direct line
of sight; moving directly away from points of
observation; wherever they are located.

This is not a 3-dimensional signature.

It is the 4-dimensionally prevailing status

quo; establishing a structural expansion
corroborating a physically and spatially
expanding - steady state – universe, where the
center is everywhere; as it is in fact observed
to be. Proving every point of mass (charge/
disturbance; systems of combined particles)
and its (their) generation of omni-directionally
expanding electromagnetism and gravity: as

191 - Contents
the collective cause and origin of the observed,
red-shift measured expanding universe.

The Big Bang is categorically founded on a 3-

D premise. In what is insisted to be an
‘acknowledged’ 4-D Universe.
Refer, George Orwell's 1984 *DOUBLE-THINK
& *NEWSPEAK (*two mutually conflicting
parallel lines to infinity): endless gridlock.
The Big Bang imposed retroactive progression
to the bygone past's intersection of three
dimensions to a point of origin (the anticipated
end of retroactively expanding space - traced
backwards in time to an inevitable intersection
and consequent point of beginning), does not
apply to a four dimensional space-time
continuum...
The past of which is progressively smaller, to
endless 4-D infinity, when the observed,
spatially expanding (Big Bang originated; 3-
Dimensionally fixated) universe is traced
backwards through past time, from the
present.
Back tracking the observed spatially
expanding universe is popularly said by Big
Bang advocates, to eventually arrive at an

192 - Contents
intersection where space ends: in three
dimensions.
There is no open argument against the
omniscience of the four dimensional space time
continuum here. It is simply and altogether
excluded as a solution (refer option/ aka,
ultimatum).
The Big Bang Theory denies/excludes/ignores
altogether here, what its double-talking
perpetrators say they acknowledge (the 4th
dimension)...
Meanwhile, the Big Bang Theory becomes
dissolute, when it comes in a functionally
applied contact with the (Invisible, What?) four
dimensional space-time continuum.
"Concepts that have proven useful in ordering
things can easily attain an authority over us
such that we forget their worldly origin and
take them as immutably given.
They are then rather rubber-stamped as a
‘sine-qua-non of thinking’ and an ‘a priori
given’, etc.
“Such errors make the road of scientific
progress often impassable for long times.
Therefore, it is not at all idle play when we are
trained to analyze the entrenched concepts,
and point out the circumstances that promoted

193 - Contents
their justification and usefulness and how they
evolved from the experience at hand.
“This breaks their all too powerful authority.
They are removed when they cannot properly
legitimize themselves; they are corrected
when their association with given things was
too sloppy; they are replaced by others when a
new system can be established that, for
various reasons, we prefer."
- Einstein, "Ernst Mach", Physikalishe
Zeitschrift 17 (1916), 102; Collected Papers
vol. 6, Doc. 29
(P.S. Consider the Big Bang adoption of the
formerly orphaned & ostracized Cosmological
Constant & Steady theories, in order to
'maintain' the desperately stricken, anemically
perished 'big bang beginning', ok? Maybe no
one will be watching them, while they deign to
do it in the road... <'What big bang
makeover?'> Oh yes. They've gone through
the line w'out paying for the abducted CC ( /\
Lambda) and Steady State; so far, it - 'the
normal adjustment' - continues to be no big
shakes...)
Whereas, in four dimensions (when space-
time is not excluded from the universe, as the
Big Bang Theory - while alleging to

194 - Contents
acknowledge the 4-D space-time continuum -
excludes the 4th dimension altogether), past
space goes on ever-smaller forever; smallness
proceeding as endlessly as largeness: with the
relativistic center (source of expansion) located
everywhere in the occurrence of matter-field
particles (without a spatial limitation at the
falsely assumed and foreseen intersection of all
matter, culminating in the alleged explosive
<Big Bang> beginning); in the increasingly
distant, ever smaller past to infinity, and
growing ever larger forever in the increasingly
distant future; to infinity.

Special effects by Austin P. Torney

(Refer <the herein reinstated>: steady state

theory.)

195 - Contents
 Chapter Nine
REINSTATEMENT of STEADY STATE &
UNIFIED FIELD THEORIES

"As long as we are considering an individual

electron, we could be mislead into thinking that
its waves are physical realities. Each electron
('disturbed area') in fact demands a 3-
Dimensional Space to itself. This makes it
obvious that these waves are merely a
mathematical phantom; consequently it is
profoundly disconcerting to find that
experiment confirms their existence. The
apparent congruity between calculation and
experiment must be in some sense illusory. It
is extremely difficult to avoid the conclusion
that the experiments and their results have yet
to receive their proper interpretation." - JWN
Sullivan, THE LIMITATIONS OF SCIENCE.

"Obviously matter is not expand ing".

The Steady State Theory was abandoned
because it was unable to explain how the
universe would remain at a generally uniform
density while at the same time becoming ever
larger, spatially.

196 - Contents
 Hoyle-Bondi & Gold, at first (desperately;
because everything else about the Steady
State theory is an eloquently strong account of
the observed, universal status quo) proposed
the *'spontaneous creation of hydrogen' to
maintain the required uniform density of their
Steady State universe. This reparative course
was later abandoned, mainly because it
contradicts the law of Conservation of
MassEnergy.
Whereas, the four dimensional space time
continuum requires no such *adjustment - an
adjustment that does indeed (prohibitively)
contradict the Law of Conservation of Mass
Energy.
Whereas: 'These disturbed areas which are
discovered to demand 3-Dimensions of Space
indicate the position of the electron; yet we
cannot state that the disturbed area is the
electron. Because any such locality has a
tendency to spread, and if the matter of the
universe were a number of disturbed areas, by
now it would have spread indefinitely'.
- J.W.N. Sullivan, The Limitations of Science,
pp. 103 & 104
(Hold that non-expansive - standing field of
static - thought?

197 - Contents
 Exactly what the present day - indefinitely
spreading - universe looks like: without the Big
Bang. (By now it would have spread
indefinitely: squared...)

198 - Contents
----------------------------
The below quote is extracted from
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/hawking/universes/html/univ_steady.html

199 - Contents
 "Proposed in 1948 by Hermann Bondi,
Thomas Gold, and Fred Hoyle, the steady-state
theory was based on an extension of
something called the perfect cosmological
principle. This holds that the universe looks
essentially the same from every spot in it and
at every time. (This applies only to the
universe at large scales; obviously planets,
stars, and galaxies are different from the space
between them.)
“Obviously, for the universe to look the same
at all times, there could have been no
beginning or no end. This struck a
philosophical chord with a number of scientists,
and the steady-state theory gained many
adherents in the 1950s and 1960s. How could
the universe continue to look the same when
observations show it to be expanding, which
would tend to thin out its contents? Supporters
of this cosmology balanced the ever-
decreasing density that results from the
expansion by hypothesizing that matter was
continuously created out of nothing. The
amount required was undetectably small—
about a few atoms for every cubic mile each
year.

200 - Contents
 “The steady-state theory began to wither in
the 1960s. First, astronomers discovered
quasars, the highly luminous cores of very
distant galaxies. Because the vast majority of
quasars lie exceedingly far away, their
existence proves that the perfect cosmological
principle cannot be true—the distant and
therefore ancient universe is not the same as
the younger universe nearby. The death knell
for the theory sounded when radio
astronomers Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson
discovered the cosmic microwave background,
the leftover radiation from the Big Bang. *The
steady-staters had no reasonable way to
explain this radiation, and their theory slowly
faded away as so many of its predecessors
had."
*Whereas, in the 4-D matter-field universe,
background radiation is simply understood as
signals from an earlier, more dense epoch in
the physically and spatially expanding
universe.
The folly of Cal. Tech's Dr. H. P. Robertson
applied 'spotted balloon' analogy…
Where he specifically explains that the
expanding balloon's surface represents the
expansion of space and that the spots

201 - Contents
represent matter in space, but the spots on the
balloon are not to be thought of as painted on
the balloon’s surface, because then the spots
themselves would expand with the surface of
the balloon, so Dr. H.P. Robertson carefully
clarifies that the spots representing matter are
to be thought of as 'raisins glued to the
balloon's surface', so that the raisins do not
expand with the space, since matter is not to
be thought of as expanding…
“If matter were expanding we would have no
way of detecting the expansion, since
everything would be expanding uniformly.”
- Dr. H. P. Robertson, CalTech.
Meanwhile, the Steady State universe
remains steady state because physical (4-D)
matter is expanding along with expanding
space; consequently space does not 'thin out'
of material systems with the ongoing
expansion of space. Ergo, the abandoned
Steady State theory is reinstated; due to the
expansion of corporeal matter itself - excluding
any need for the (unacceptable) 'spontaneous
creation of hydrogen'.
Moreover, the recent observations that the
expanding universe (including matter itself) is
accelerating, corroborates acceleration as

202 - Contents
found in nature. Summarily, the - earlier,
relatively more dense - Steady State theory is
as much an explanation for the controversied
background radiation, formerly thought to be
exclusively explained by the big bang.
Manifest Natural Precedents for Accelerating
Expansion:
Very much on the order of 360 degree arcs of
ripples (or pie-plate charted portions thereof)
emanating from the center disturbance point
on the surface of a pool of water. The newer,
earlier ripples not only expanding, but also
accelerating. Moving ever more swiftly; with
the aging development of distance from center
source of disturbance. Not only is qualified
continuous expansion, colloquially and
precisely found here (on the surface of water),
but also acceleration - a ubiquitous, natural
emergence of an expanding; accelerating
system.
Some observers flatly deny acceleration of
expanding water ripples: they are mistaken...
It is traditionally verified in ripple tank studies
that the further water-waves move from their
geometric origin (center source of
disturbance), the faster they expand, etcetera,
ad dynamic infinitum. The expanding water

203 - Contents
ripples are accelerating - moving ever-faster -
and the structure of the concentric acceleration
is accountable in the law of the inverse square.

The difference between expanding water

ripples and expanding electromagnetism is that
water ripples are expanding (accelerating)
much more slowly than light
(electromagnetism) and water ripples require a
conducting medium, whereas light (apparently)
does not (Refer Michelson & Morley’s
interferometer experiments and Einstein’s
conclusion that there is no ‘aether’

204 - Contents
<conducting medium previously thought to
vehicularize light waves>).
Consider the following quotes from Guy
Murchie’s (excellent reference book) Music Of
The Spheres:
"... the famous Krakatoa (South Pacific island
volcanic eruption generated) swells of 1883
were credited with heights well above one
hundred feet, combined with length that grew
to hundreds of miles and a speed no less than
that of sound in air (approx. 720 miles per
hour)."
- p. 373, Guy Murchie, Music of the Spheres.
"Another curious characteristic of the (ship or
boat) bow wave... is that, taken in the
singular, it becomes concave forward, due to
acceleration." - Guy Murchie, Ibid, p. 374
"... stern waves (on/of water, as from a ship or
boat) accelerate in concave backward form..."
- Ibid, p. 375
"... liquid waves possess acceleration..." - Ibid
p. 376
.............................................

205 - Contents
"The Accelerating Expansion of the Universe
“I’ve read in Scientific American and other
places that the acceleration of the expansion of
the universe is increasing, (possibly due to
dark energy), first postulated by Einstein as
the cosmological constant.
“This is the beginning of the end of all
knowledge about what was and is. As space
empties out, our galaxy-to-be will come to be
surrounded by a total void, past which we can
never see. It will be as in 1908, when
scientists thought our galaxy constituted the
entire universe, for the quickening expansion
will pull galaxies apart faster than light,
causing them to drop out of view. Beyond a
certain event horizon, no matter or radiation
will be able to reach us.
“In five billion years, although our sun will be
a red giant, the Andromeda galaxy will loom
large in the night sky for those who remain in
our solar system, for our Local Group of
galaxies will collapse into a single enormous
SuperCluster of stars, but all the other billions
of galaxies will disappear into an oblivion
beyond the event horizon. We will once again

206 - Contents
live in a supposed island universe. Even the
CMBR will be so faint as to be undetectable.
“Even now, the view of the early universe has
pretty much vanished." - Austin P. Torney
3/7/'08
-------------
"On the other hand, Austin, when the
acceleration of the spatial expansion of the
universe is viewed in conjunction with - and as
a result of - the accelerating material
expansion, then we may have a 'steady state'
universe.
('Return of the Steady State'
www.newscientist.com/article/mg13718622.300-science-return-of-
the-steady-state-universe )

Whaddaya think?" - K. B. Robertson, Ibid

-------------
"Is it fair to say that the accelerated
expansion of the space between me, you and
Austin is responsible for proportionately
retaining our bodies' density, or is it the
accelerated expansion of the space within our
bodies that is responsible for creating its
mass?

207 - Contents
 “I just wanted to be clear on whether or not
the relationship between mass and gravity is
the same for mass and acceleration.
Thanks." - Raven Knight (aka, 'Nobody') Ibid
--------------------
"Good question.
I think they're synonymous, Nobody.
It has to do with the electromagnetic field
surrounding sub atomic charges.
The 'loop' of magnetism - exiting the northerly
core and swinging around to enter the
southerly core constitutes expansion from the
north and contraction to the south, within and
sustaining the same system.
Refer, 'conspansion' (contraction & expansion).
'Tao', 'YinYang'.
It may have to do with Dirac's 'particle' and
'anti-particle' - where the northern
(exit/outward) hemisphere constitutes one,
and the southern (entrance/inward)
hemisphere constitutes the other (particle, and
anti particle).
The result may be what causes the explosion
Dirac predicted; in turn, perhaps being the

208 - Contents
cause (if not the identity) of the 4-D expansion
of the subjected system, en toto."
- K. B. Robertson (aka, 'RascalPuff'), Ibid
----------------------
"Perfectly clear answer, Rascal. Thank you.
I don't know if it's just me, but it seems like
your discovery way back when (50's?) has
influenced many folks. You've given me many
missing pieces of the master puzzle."
- Raven Knight, Ibid
-----------------------

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

In physics, the Dirac equation is a relativisticquantum
mechanical wave equation formulated by Paul Dirac

in 1928 and provides a description of elementaryspin-½

particles, such as electrons, consistent with
both the principles of quantum mechanics and
the theory of special relativity. The equation
demands the existence of antiparticles and
actually predated their experimental discovery,
making the discovery of the positron, the
antiparticle of the electron, one of the greatest
triumphs of modern theoretical physics. ...the
Dirac equation was originally invented to
describe the electron...

209 - Contents
The Cause of 4-D Expansion, QM & Negative
Inertia?
Professor Paul Dirac's proposed anti-particle
(electric charge, referred to as a 'particle') and
its proposed explosion upon contact with a
conventional 'particle' (electric charge), may
be an ongoing event constituting the status
quo of (4-D) reality as we experience it...

Consider a sphere such as a macrocosmic

planet, the sun (any and all of the stars), or a
microcosmic system such as an electron
'particle' (electromagnetic charge). Each
generates a familiar, spider web shaped
electromagnetic field, wherein the magnetic
portion of that field emanates in a 'northerly'
direction from the north pole of the issued
sphere, loops around it in a circular motion
which suddenly is traveling in a southerly
direction upon reaching and passing the
ecliptic middle of the sphere.

210 - Contents
211 - Contents
 The continuing loop completes a full (torus
structured) circle around the planet, sun or
electron that generates, maintains and
sustains it; the magnetic field then entering
the southern pole of it's given system of origin
(planet, star, electron) to resume a northerly
direction through the axial center of and
relative to the polar system at issue. This
described dynamic represents an ongoing cyle
of magnetism generated by and emanating
from, around, and back into the system that
generates, maintains and sustains it. The
sphere itself, en toto, is stabilized by a
magnetic field which is constantly moving in
opposite directions - northerly out of, then
looping around to a southerly course, and back
into and through the core of the issued
spherical entity in a northerly direction, ad
infinitum.

(Download PalTalk for free)

212 - Contents
 Expansion and contraction within and
sustaining the same system - refer
'conspansion'.
The reverse of directions - from north to
south - occurs at the ecliptic (equatorial
bisection) of the issued, spherical electron,
213 - Contents
planet or star Each given system is also
emitting electrical energy in straight lines at
right angles from the ('particle') system that
the circular magnetic field is parallel to.
In accordance with Dirac’s findings in 1960,
these magnetic directional reversals and
electric discharges correspond to the
occurrence of observed - right angle emitted -
quantum emissions. In the four dimensional
(tensor) setting that Einstein has assigned to
all material systems; these two (northern and
southern) hemispheres are oppositely
interacting with each other ('as anti-particles'),
apparently resulting in the Dirac-predicted
explosion, evidently constituting the omni-
directional expansion of 4-D systems. The
omni-directional motion of electromagnetism
may also account for the generation of
negative inertia (the tendency to oppose force
applied to it; in reference to Mach's principle)
in every such individual system.

*Mach's principle submits that in an isolated space (bereft of

any but one entity) an object would have no negative inertia.

214 - Contents
The fields from isolated, individual charges look like this:

physics.bu.edu/~duffy/PY106/Electricfield.html

Whereas, in context of Matter in 4-D expansion, the apparent

defect in Mach's principle is that an isolated positive charge is
confined to it's location - exhibiting negative inertia (a
tendency to remain at rest; resisting outside forces) - by the
recoil of - it's own, inherent – omni-directionally expanding
electrical energy.

The isolated negative charge is confined to its location - also

exhibiting negative inertia (a resistance to outside forces) by
the omni-directional influx of electrical energy. These are the
causes of negative inertia. – * KBR
*The upshot of "Mach's Principle" is approximately this: the inertia of a
body is determined in relation to all other bodies in the universe (in short,
"matter there governs inertia here"). Mach's principle apparently does not
compensate for the consequence of omni-directional expansion of all matter
from it's center.

215 - Contents
 Chapter Ten
THE DIVISORY DILEMMA
OF LARGE & SMALL FORCES
A positive charge omni-directionally emits an
outgoing electric force, and, a negative charge
omni-directionally absorbs an incoming electric
force.
Sometimes opposites do attract, and
sometimes they repel. Newton says gravity
may be an impelling - or a repelling - force
('the gravitational alternative'). Einstein says
gravity is - at least sometimes - a repelling
force; adding furthermore that gravity may be
both a repelling and an impelling force (refer,
the 'cosmological constant').
Truly Yours tends to observe that gravity is
usually a 4-D repelling force, on or near major
gravitational masses (GR), and an impelling
(aquatic, terrestrial and atomospheric) tidal
force (for example) at greater distances (SR).
Summarizing that, since Newton introduced
what he fully acknowledged as a mysterious,
occult force of gravitation, usually - but not
stringently - to be thought of as an impelling
force, this record sees no reason why Einstein

216 - Contents
is disallowed from introducing a repelling force
acting parallel to Newton's impelling force...
Summing up a tandem repelling and impelling
force, with each man offering major
contributions to understanding the universe;
neither of which men - or forces - are mutually
exclusive.
The Albert-Isaac Electromagnetic apple

Special effects by Austin P. Torney

The dilemma of microcosmic and

macrocosmic forces:
The superfluously conflicting schools of
thought (Circa 1900 thru 1930 and ever since)
on Max Planck's - Helmholtz inspired, Rubens
confirmed - Quantum Mechanics'...
The 1897 dated observation of black body
radiation led Planck to attempt to observe an

217 - Contents
invariable increase in entropy, which resulted
in null thought and laboratory experiments;
leading to Planck's 1900 revision of
Boltzmann's alternately continuous and
discontinuous statistical interpretation of the
2nd law of thermodynamics (later paralleled by
Heisenberg's Principle of Indeterminacy).
It is only obscurely known or recognized that,
although there are indeed opposing - J.J.
Thompson-electron-launched - arguments on
this subject, Einstein and Planck were in the
same camp, along with Schrödinger, regarding
the much misunderstood 'problem' of
microcosmic 'continuity' of dualistic wave-field
theory, and 'discontinuity' of so called
'particles'.
Leading to an undrained, ever rising swamp
of determinacy and indeterminacy,
entanglement, water ripple and shotgun pellets
rolling sideways and speeding linearly through
vertical and horizontal slits, in the ever
imposing shadow of assumptive continuous
wave eclipsed by the anticipated, non-
prevailing 'ultraviolet catastrophe' and the
newly incumbent black body radiation -
vocabularized in electrical theory and
thermodynamics - introducing the circle of

218 - Contents
broken lines forming a sought-after curve but
still leading to an apparently non discardable
discontinuous 'quantum leap', because energy
in discontinuous portions cannot be infinitely
divided…
Establishing that radiant energy is not
quantitatively infinite - in unequal units, Planck
resolved that the frequency of the considered
discontinuous wave is directly related to its
duration, or more specifically, its length.
This was unexpected because it defined a
seemingly antithetical, self contradicting
equality in discontinuous and continuous
energy packets - 'quantum', which, literally
translated from Latin equals 'what quantity'. It
came to pass that, depending on how these
units are measured and otherwise evaluated,
they alternately manifest as 'waves', and, as
'particles' - continuity, and discontinuity.
From this arose a further quandary of
defining the dynamics of what was projected,
compared to the method or conditions of
projection.
Quantum Mechanics (perhaps better
understood as 'quantum dynamics') was not
altogether contradictory to the - at that time,
much established continuous wave theory -

219 - Contents
which was often confirmed in delicate
laboratory observations as well as more
pedestrian observations such as the often
exemplified fact that a swinging pendulum
loses its momentum in a continuous declination
of kinetic energy. Quantum Mechanics contests
this.
Black body radiation occurs in discontinuous
packages of microcosmically indivisible energy
units of erg seconds, where the individual,
indivisible unit is designated as 'h', for the
numerically expressed value of:
.0000000000000000000000000066, or, 6, 6 x
1027
Establishing that ordinary sizes as perceived
by human observers were not the end measure
of what was occurring in the much smaller
realms of physicality and dynamics.
Max Planck had not excluded the previous
standards of observation and measurement,
whereas, he certainly had established that the
characteristics of the larger physical world
were not aligned with those of the smaller
physical world, and that the Latin statement,
ut infra, ut supra and conversely ('as above, so
below'), was a generalization but not a law.

220 - Contents
Atomic (microcosmic) physics was understood
to be in its early stages and the Planck
dynamics were a portention that many other
unexpected discoveries were due, as the
science of observing and measuring
microcosmic reality progressed - the evolutions
of which were alternately championed and
challenged, by Planck, Rutherford, Einstein,
Bohr, Schrödinger and a lot of others time and
space does not allot for - as it was and is - in
the format of this dissertation...
------------------------
There are two kinds of math. Metric, and,
non-metric. The first is obliged to be
responsive to and directly determined by
measurably real conditions; with or without
mathematical descriptions of them.
Non-metric math is, for example, not obliged
to conform to any existentially (conditionally,
physically, spatially, dynamically,
phenomenologically) manifest state or process
of observed, measurable reality. An exemplary
pair of non-metric mathematical formulas can
be equally correct, while reciprocally and
mutually disproving each other - numbers
only. Who needs reality to do non-metric

221 - Contents
mathematics? Has little or nothing to do with
'science'.
(Meanwhile, Truly Yours has been banned from
several internet 'science forums' for providing
the <what was then the free access> URL
addresses to this work - they call it
'spamming'...)
____________________________________
Einstein's Unified Field. The most evolved
understanding of the large and small force
dominated, macro and microcosmic universe. A
comprehensive unification of large and small
forces with their correspondingly relative
space-time coordinated values, manifest in
electromagnetism and gravity, discovered as
having the same causal identity. Manifestly
being the same entity. The Rosetta Stone of
theoretical physics.
(Yet to be rubber-stamped by the Hollywood
Guild?)

222 - Contents
 Chapter Eleven
QUANTUM MECHANICS RECONSIDERED
FROM 4-D ‘PARTICLE’, to 5 & 6-D ‘FIELD’.
Part I
A proposed Resolution of the Comparative
Disparity between discontinuous Quantum
Mechanics and continuous Field Theory,
follows, after a brief review of the issued,
dissolute problem.
The term ‘Force’ (‘F’), as it relates to and
represents gravity, has never been
comprehensively defined or understood in
physics, until now. This is because ultimately,
contrary to popular dogma proclaiming four
universal forces: there are only two forces in
the Universe - gravity and electromagnetism
(including large and small, weak and strong
forces) - What Fritjov Capra correctly calls
‘Tao’; neither of which has previously been
identified. They are unified herein as results of
the 4, 5 and 6 dimensional space-time
continuum of gravity, electricity and
magnetism - the simultaneous manifestation
and extension of six Euclidean dimensions.
- K.B.R.

223 - Contents
 THE RESOLUTE CONFLUENCE OF
CONTINUITY & DISCONTINUITY
Einstein was not awarded the Nobel Prize for
his Special and General (continuous field)
theories of relativity, but rather for his
contributions to photon-discontinuity
('particle') theory, i.e. 'quantum mechanics'.
This is the refuge of the Particle 'theory' school
of thought, where quantum mechanics is
adopted as the foundation of the 'theory' of so
called Particle Physics and discontinuity;
whereas, relativity is about continuous waves.
The two discussions, Quantum Mechanics/
Photoelectric Effect/Particle Theory, and the
subject of relativity and field theory are
generally considered antithetical/contrary-to
each other - the perceived discontinuous fork
in the formerly continuous road through
theoretical physics.
In 1900, theoretical physics was near to
recognizing and utilizing - pursuing continuous
field theory to its fullest extents (*which the
record humbly submits, is since accomplished
herein); when Max Plank's discovery of the
'constant "h" factor' emerged - a
discontinuous, invariably uniform value that

224 - Contents
the continuous field could be (and is in fact)
reduced to. This discovery deterred/ diverted
any further pursuit of the direction Maxwell's
accumulating camp was proceeding in, with his
continuous field theory...
Theoretical physics branched out, at Planck's
introduced juncture of discontinuity; wherein
and thenceforth, theoretical physics in general
was dichotomized, brachiated; divided into two
camps...
Field Theory is about continuous waves.
Quantum Mechanics is about discontinuous
units (of waves, called 'particles'). The record
repeats, the two subjects are generally
considered mutually exclusive. Continuous
Field Physics apparently contradicted by
Discontinuous 'Particle' physics... (Quanta -
photons - are not so much perceived as
discontinuously surface 'particles', as they are
perceived as discontinuously unsurfaced
waves/fields).
Whereas, the apparently inherent, so called
'contradiction', is a 3-dimensionally
misunderstood illusion: projected on a 4-
dimensional phenomenon; starring, the usual,
3-Dimensionally spellbinding, culpable party

225 - Contents
animals? Standardizing a three dimensional
concept of a spiral, there is nothing unrealistic
about Archimede's spiral (It's just 3-
Dimensionally expanding, in an allegedly
'acknowledged' 4-D universe)...
Whereas, the record submits, continuous
fields inherently beget Discontinuous Particles:
Note (in the foregoing illustrations and
narrative) the accelerating transition of the
four dimensional mass, consisting of four
ninety degree quadrants.

Any more energy generated by that system,

has no more room to occur inside that
spheroidal electromagnetic charge (of 360o 4-
D mass/matter system); the 5th quadrant of
ninety degrees - generated by and a result of

226 - Contents
the four dimensions constituting the material
energy that generates it, moves - is emitted -
at right angles out of 4-D matter, in a fifth
ninety degree unit of electricity, the 5th
dimension. 'Quantum Leaping' out of the four
ninety degree quadrants of physical matter.
For this reason - of a 5th 90o unit, all
quanta/photons have the same 'Quantum'
value (plural - 'quanta'), though they may
occur - always having the same value - in
more extended units of or toward infra red, or
more compact units of or toward ultra violet.
The following information is extracted from The
Dictionary of SCIENCE, by E.B. Uvarov and D.
R. Chapman, Penguin Publishers, copyright
1943 to 1975.
"Quantum - According to the quantum
theory, energy exists in discrete units, only
whole numbers of which can exist: each unit is
called a 'quantum' <plural 'quanta'>. The
quantum of electromagetic radiation is the
photon; in certain contexts, the quantum of
energy associated with nuclear forces may be
taken as the meson.
Quantum Mechanics: The system of
mechanics which, during the present century,

227 - Contents
has replaced Newtonian Mechanics as a
method of measuring physical phenomena
occurring on a very small scale (e.g., the
motion of electrons and nuclei within atoms;
see atom, structure of).
Quantum Theory originated with the
discovery by Max Planck that the heat
radiation from a black body (see black body
radiation) is quantized, i.e., emitted in discrete
quanta of energy, the magnitudes of which are
given by the products of the frequency of the
radiation and a universal constant, now known
as Planck's constant. It was soon realized that
all electromagnetic radiations are quantized
(see photon) and the theory was developed by
Niels Bohr, so that the spectrum of hydrogen
could be accounted for quantitatively (see Bohr
theory). This early version of quantum
mechanics was refined by Sommerfield to take
into account the elliptical orbits of electrons.
More recently quantum mechanics has been
developed in a specialized form, known as
wave mechanics, which is more versatile and
involves fewer arbitrary assumptions than the
original theory."
'Photo-electric effect'. In general, any effect
arising from the result of a transfer of energy

228 - Contents
from light incident on a substance to electrons
in the substance. The term is normally
restricted to one type of the effect, namely the
emission of electrons by substances when
irradiated with light of a certain frequency
greater than a minimum threshold frequency.
Electrons emitted in this way are called photo-
electrons and constitute a photo-electric
current when the system is included in a
suitable circuit."
(*Quanta may sometimes be collectively
measured and/or otherwise improvisationally
considered, in erg seconds <one erg = 10-7
joules> or Angstrom units <One AU=10-10
metre. A measurement of wavelengths of light
& intra-molecular distances.> - KBR)
- The Dictionary of SCIENCE, by E.B. Uvarov
and D.R. Chapman, Penguin Publishers.

And now, this:

May the Reader mark the above issued
definition of 'Quantum Theory', and especially
its closure quote, alluding to the evolved
adaptation of 'wave mechanics':
"More recently quantum mechanics has been
developed in a specialized form, known as
wave mechanics, which is more versatile and

229 - Contents
involves fewer arbitrary assumptions than the
original theory."
The above information with its closing note is
simply a reminder that the popular perception
of quantum mechanics is that it contradicts
'field-wave' considerations, whereas, quantum
mechanics has been addressed more
manageably, in context of 'wave mechanics'.
An Offered Avenue of Comprehension in the
Quantum Mechanical Field of 'Discontinuity'
and the 'Quantum Leap' (continued)...
The 5th dimension (5th ninety degree
extension out of the four part, three hundred
sixty degree quadrants) doesn't ‘mysteriously’
leap out of 4-D matter at all, but rather is an
inevitably extrapolated, continuous - and
accelerated - extension of it (the 4-D mass
from which it originates and by which it - the
5th dimension, is generated), manifest in an
apparently discontinuous unit - "Plank's
constant 'h' factor"; photon - always having
the same value, because it is consistently the
5th ninety degree unit extending out of the 4
physical dimensions that precede and generate
it.

230 - Contents
Special effects by Austin P. Torney

Four 90o quadrants constituting an

electromagnetic charge. The illustrated
‘platform’ of the 4th quadrant is perceived as its
3-D boundary. Photoelectric emissions
extending beyond it are the 5th & 6th
dimensions of electricity and magnetism.

231 - Contents
 Chapter Twelve
QUANTUM MECHANICS RECONSIDERED
Part II
The 5th ninety degree unit (photons;
'Planck's "constant 'h' factor") photons, or
'quanta' - is the smallest unit of energy known
to academia. The described dynamic does not
actually contradict continuous field theory (as
popular perceived and alleged), but rather, is a
result of and generated by the 4-D space-time
continuum.
5th and 6th dimensions of electricity and
magnetism respectively, are accelerating, just
as the source from which they invariably
originate (4-D matter), but the expansion of
electricity and magnetism is exponentially
extended from 4-D matter and therefore
accelerating at a much faster - quantum
leaping - rate. An illusion of 'contradiction' of
continuous field theory, whereas the
apparently 'discontinuous' particle is actually a
4-dimensionally and continuously expanding
charge of electricity which generates 5 and 6
dimensional, 90o segments - photons - at right
angles from it's 4-D boundaries.

232 - Contents
(The record may be 'redundant' in the
presentation of this issue, whereas, the
233 - Contents
variously repeated descriptions wish to
approach the unprecedented solution from
several different perspectives. Thank you.)

This record describes the above explained

dynamics of Planck's 'constant "h" factor'
(known as the 'quantum leap'): as the
'translatory moment' - when the 5th 90o unit
of electricity extends out of the 4-D quadrant
of 90o that generates furthermore, 90o of
electricity, followed by 90o of magnetism; i.e. -
the 5th and 6th dimensions of electricity and
magnetism, respectively. Comprehensively and
continuously emitted in discontinuous units,
called 'quanta' and/or 'photons'; often referred
to as 'photo-electric effect'. The 'translatory
moment' is also when the apparently 'standing
field' of (actually expanding) 4-D matter,
projects the 5th and 6th dimensions of
electromagnetism, abruptly accelerates beyond
the acceleration-rate of 4-D matter (an
apparent 'standing field', emitting the
recognized electromagnetic field; in discrete -
90o units); emitted at light speed (relative to
the apparently 'standing <'static'> field' from
which it originates and by which it -
electromagnetism - is generated).

234 - Contents
 360o divided by 90o equals four, followed by
a 5th 90o 'pie chart' shape, extrapolated at
right angles out of and far exceeding the -
collective - area of the four 90o quadrants
preceding it.
Repeat: note that the 5th 90o component
occurs beyond 360o, and that, by way of
extrapolation - exponential acceleration - the
5th component, although identical in 90o
shape, very abruptly transforms to a size much
larger – and correspondingly more tenuous -
than all four combined 90o quadrants
preceding it.
When the four 'sliced pie quarters' are
gathered together in an equilateral circle, they
simultaneously complete a 360 degree whole.
This represents a so called 'particle', more
appropriately described as a 4 dimensional
'charge' of field energy.
The 5th section of 90o occurs outside of and
at right angles to the described quadrant of
four 90o segments. This record offers the
(above diagrammatic) geometric expression -
of an extrapolating spiral - as an example of 4-
Dimensional acceleration of matter, generating
a fifth 90o segment, representing the 5th
dimension of electricity, contiguously extending

235 - Contents
at right angles out of the 360o, 4-Dimensional
system from which it originates and by which it
is generated; while the *6th 90o segment of 4-
D charge-generated magnetism, exponentially
extends at right angles out of the 5th.

Chapter Thirteen
QUANTUM WAVE & FIELD MECHANICS
Notwithstanding, the herein proffered,
geometric translation of the qualities of matter
and space-time dynamics - provided by way of
the recognition of matter (as an implicit
'standing <'static'> wave' system) and gravity,
as the 4th D, generating the explicitly transient
5th and 6th dimensions of electricity and
magnetism.
The consideration of the exponential inclusion
of logarithmic 90o segments, definable as
physical dimensions, up to and beyond six,
proceeding to infinity (in 90o quadrants), may
allow for recognition of previously unidentified
dimensions...
Wikipedia

236 - Contents
The Golden Spiral
You could, if you wanted to, continue drawing the spiral into
infinity. It never ends. Look at the picture and you will
understand.
The golden spiral also resembles something in nature. A
seashell of course! The Golden ratio is everywhere.
-----------------------
Wikipedia - Magnetic field, moving at right angles to electric field, and
parallel to charge.

The Earth's magnetic field, which is approximately a dipole. However,

the "N" and "S" (north and south) poles are labeled here

237 - Contents
geographically, which is the opposite of the convention for labeling the
poles of a magnetic dipole moment.
------------------------

Combined electric & magnetic fields

manifest as an electromagnetic field.

Special effects by Austin P. Torney

....with *magnetism moving at right angles to

electricity (moving at right angles out of the 4-
D center point mass; fulfilling the definition for
a 5th dimension), 'charge'/'particle' -
magnetism thereby fulfilling the definition for a
*6th dimension...
----------------------------

238 - Contents
 Photoelectric effect, i.e., 'quantum
mechanics'.
Moreover, the 'quantum leap' is a sobriquet
from the popular consideration that a given
unit of microcosmic energy moves from one
(Niels Bohr) 'orbit' (or, alternative 'shell'
theorized station) to another, without ever
occupying the space - interval - between the
transposed orbit. There is no explanation for
this perplexing enigma-apparent ('the quantum
leap').
This record submits that the transposition of
a given orbit, as it is perceived in 4 dimensions
instead of three, offers the alternative
interpretation of the so called 'leap', as
occurring in a spiral shaped path -
unanticipated; uncompensated-for, in the
status quo 3-dimensional failures to
comprehensively accommodate 'quantum
leap', as comprehensively expressed in the
above two illustrations of 4, 5 & 6
dimensionally equivalent geometric structures.
That is, the 4-dimensionally interpreted 'leap'
is not per se, any kind of 3-D perceived vertical
straight line ( ----> ) - up or down, to and
from orbit A to orbit B, constituting the (short
cut perceived) 'leap' (from one orbit or shell to

239 - Contents
another) - at all, but, rather, is a (lateral, long
way around) coil shaped ( @ ) - spiral-spin-up
(360o) transience...

240 - Contents
...which may be alternately and approximately
perceived within the structure of the 'YinYang'
or 'Tao' symbol, from center to outside
parameters, from a lower orbit to a higher one,
and conversely (*spiral spin-down, this
perspective also includes the ambivalent
dynamics of 'chemical valence').

Yin Yang ('Tao')

The symbol of apparent opposites with its

connotations of antipodal contention is actually
an icon of mutually supportive, complementary
reciprocity, since about the 3rd century BC;
accompanied by a philosophy proffering that its
complete gestalt is beyond human
comprehension (which it may well be, for all of
its elegant - prescient implying - simplicity.)
(Refer Fritjov Capra's TAO OF PHYSICS, allows
for *the illusion of apparent contradiction:
actually mutually supportive; that being the
central meaning of 'Tao'. In this case, the
'inexplicable enigma' of quantum mechanics
and its perceived 'contradiction' of continuous
field theory.)

241 - Contents
 In the Bohr modeled atom of planet-like,
nucleus-sun orbiting electrons, the orbits are
not circular or elliptical, but rather - as with
any other orbiting entity's 4-D path: spiral
shaped.
The 4-D space-time continuum is presently
said to be 'acknowledged' in academic and
experimental physics; yet, the effects of that
continuum, continue to go unrecognized,
denied, discarded and unaccounted for. The
round - O and elliptical - 0 - 3-D structure -
wherever it orbitally occurs - is not anticipated
or perceived as spiral shaped - @ , as it is in
fact, in the prevailing, four dimensional
setting.
There is no precedent for this offered (4-D
spiral 'translatory moment') explanation,
regarding the cited 'incomprehensibility' of
Quantum Mechanical Dynamics; including a
solution applicable to the 'quantum leap'.
Subsequent to this conceptual departure in
what had formerly been the generally agreed
dominant paradigm of field physics, Eddington
quipped, "We'll call matter 'particles' on
Mondays, we'll call it 'waves' on Tuesdays, and
we'll call it 'waveicles' the rest of the week." -
Paraphrased.

242 - Contents
 Eddington's slap-stick ambivalence about the
apparent dilemma, directly implies the
ambiguous enigma as illusory.
This record submits that continuous field
physics does not contradict discontinuous
'particle' physics, or conversely.
They symbiotically (and, until further notice,
invariably) accompany one another, the latter
being generated by the former. As gravity is
generally a push (at short distances - GR) and
a pull-push (at long distances - SR), so
particles and fields are likewise non-
contradictory and mutually reciprocal, co-
existing together.
Until further notice, electricity and magnetism
invariably accompany one another and are
apparently two different vectors expressing the
same obvious transience at right angles out of
a 'particle' - electromagnetic charge,
misunderstood as being a non-expanding, 3-D
'standing' ('static') field.

243 - Contents
 Special effects by Austin P. Torney

Chapter Fourteen
AUXILIARY INFORMATION
Epilogue Part I
When all else fails: read the instructions.
Good morning class. Today were going to wake
up to sleep-inducing lectures on theoretical
physics; from now on, from dawning spin-in to
dusking spin-out. Opposition here may
optionally augur-in and/or crash and burn
spectacularly at the front of the class. Once
you're in, you're augured in for the revolving
binary duration. Condemned to keep adding up
to the 3 Body Problem: where 2 wrongs don't
make a right. But, 3 or more do. (Carrying phi
out to its consummately last decimal point?)
244 - Contents
 Please restrain any residual *applause?
(*All background noise, including hissing,
booing and flatulence, will only be
opportunistically interpreted as further proof of
the Big Bang theory, and Big Brother's <'Gotta
revolution!'> 'solution.' Refer the 13 billion
year microwave background radiation
hangover from the Big Bangologist's confetti
and party throwing 'Beginning'. <Never mind
the Steady State Theory's superior explanation
for anything and everything that the Big Bang
Gang is unconscionably plundering from
Lambda /\ to 'explain'>...)
__________________
Some of you may be familiar with the book
title: ZEN AND THE ART OF MOTORCYCLE
MAINTENANCE, by Robert Pirsig. There are two
statements in that book which are
appropriately applicable to the self inflicted
demise of Contemporary Physics
(representatives) and the prevailing
gravitational and 4-Dimensional dilemma. On
page 100, Pirsig writes:
'The real purpose of scientific method is to
make sure Nature hasn't misled you into

245 - Contents
thinking that you know something you don't
actually know'.
Again, on page 5, Pirsig writes, 'The truth
knocks on the door and you say, 'go away, I'm
looking for the truth', so it goes away'.
Pirsig's precautionary allows that you must
also make sure Nature hasn't misled you in to
thinking that you don't know something that
you do actually know.
The attempt to isolate and discover gravity
waves is comparable to standing or sitting in
Einstein's General Relativity-demonstrating
elevators and 'attempting to isolate and/or
discover gravity waves'.

This misunderstanding is directly contingent

to the refusal to recognize the 4th Dimension:

246 - Contents
as universal gravity on or near four
dimensional matter; extended across space
from four dimensional matter (acting at a
distance), via the 5th and 6th dimensions of
electricity and magnetism, respectively.
In attempting to isolate - and find an insulation
from - gravity, we have succeeded in isolating
- and finding an insulation from - the 4th
Dimension. Isolating it from reality - and
ourselves from an unprecedented
understanding of the Gravitational ('How can I
relate to it in my own?') Experience.
We keep asking the wrong questions. I have
been repeatedly asked by sincere people -
"What can we do with the statement 'GRAVITY
IS THE 4th DIMENSION'?" Having a mind of its
own, this operator must censor what Molly
Keyboard MacColley has to say in response to
those who ask 'What can we do with the 4th
Dimension?'.
May it suffice to say for the moment, the
question might be asked of Lief Erikson for a
run-down on North American Civilization, or
the Wright Bros. for a quick briefing on Air
Force One - or a Boeing 747 crossed with a
bumblebee or humming bird. One must know
that the unrecognized continent - or

247 - Contents
aerodynamic principle - is there; must
recognize it, before anything can be ‘done’ with
it.
THE DOMINANT ACADEMIC PARADIGM
Reminiscently comparable to the drunk who
was crawling around the base of a street lamp
one moonless night. A policeman happened by
and watched him for a few minutes; finally
asked him what he was doing. The drunk
replied, 'I'm looking for my wine bottle, I lost a
full bottle of wine'. The policeman queried, 'Are
you quite sure you lost it around here - I don't
see a sign of any wine bottle'. The drunk
replied, 'Oh no officer, I didn't lose it here - I
know that for sure. I heard it fall out of my
pocket about forty or fifty feet from here'. The
policeman exclaimed, 'Well then man, you'll
never find it here!' The drunk looked up and
said 'Yes, I know officer, but there's no street
lamp over there'." (At least, there didn't use to
be.)
- Kent B. Robertson, @ San Francisco City
College GREENPEACE Gravity Premiere Benefit,
October, '76
***********

248 - Contents
THE (amazing) LIMITATIONS OF SCIENCE
(continued):
"There exists a profound similarity between
Newton's Law 0f Universal Gravity, Coulomb's
Law Of the Interaction Of Electric Charges, and
Sir Humphrey Gilbert's Law for the interaction
of magnetic poles. And, if one can shield
electric and magnetic forces, why can it not
also be done with gravitational forces?" -
George Gamow GRAVITY pp. 143-4
--------
"Einstein again broadened his theory to
include the phenomena of electricity and
magnetism. This does not mean that he has
given an electromagnetic explanation of
gravitation. Many attempts of this kind have
been made, and all have failed in the same
respect to recognize that there is no screen for
(insulation from) gravitation. What Einstein has
done is something deeper and broader than
that. He has succeeded in finding a formula
which may assume two special forms according
as a constant which it contains is, or is not,
zero. (May expand, or contract <be 4-D:
growing ever larger at right angles to itself, or,
growing ever smaller at right angles to itself>
at the slightest provocation.)...

249 - Contents
 "In the latter case the formula gives us
Maxwell's equations for an electromagnetic
(repelling) field; in the former, Einstein's
equations for a (an impelling) gravitational
field." - SPACE, TIME & EINSTEIN, Paul R. Heyl
Today's representative physicists are on
Einstein's Relativistic elevator, attempting to
"screen", insulate from or "isolate" gravity
waves.

It sounds like a joke of some kind...

The Book-Cooking Journalistic Questions:
"If gravity is caused by the acceleration of the
earth's surface, why does a ball roll downhill?"
- * THE LA. FREE PRESS, 2/'71 (*A HALF VAST
LOOK AT GRAVITY < IS THE 4TH DIMENSION>

250 - Contents
- *A 'Book Review', under the smug
pseudonym of 'Art Wand.')
Had the record been confronted 40 years ago,
with such a formidable enigma, he would have
abandoned Einstein's abandoned Unified Field
in the same masterfully perplexing stroke? Mr.
Wand's proposed interrogative (‘…why does a
ball roll downhill?’) does establish he’s
functionally illiterate or didn't read the book he
'reviewed'... A lot of that rolling around; with a
growing number of ersatz, 'Final Theory of
Everything’ - authors. (Some of whom have
literally torched less condensed hard copies of
this book in a trashcan, en conversant with
Truly Yours... <P.S. I laughed out loud and
reminded the book burner that it's intractable
to expel the universe from itself.> The internet
is peppered with anonymously originated, cast
aspersions against – and censorship of - this
author… Refer:
http://www.toequest.com/forum/toe-theory-
articles/2517-einstein-s-so-called-biggest-
blunder-right-after-all.html )
"Maxwell's (*expanding) field equations break
down, at the (*alleged non-expanding) surface
of the particle." – Ibid

251 - Contents
 *Maxwell's equations do not 'break down' at
any 'surface' (There is no 'surface'), whereas,
the recognized transient light energy 'shifts
gears' (exhibits a 'translatory moment') as it
moves out of, not as it moves in to a given
source from which it originates and by which it
is generated - converting upon extending from
an apparently 'standing'/'static charge' of very
dense 4-D mass energy, to dramatically
accelerated, very tenuous 5 & 6-D energy -
described by Maxwell's equations - moving at
light speed. This transition ('shifting of gears'),
is the ephemeral interim between the
microcosmically very small, dense, surfaceless,
apparently 'static' 'charge' (so called
'particle/'mass energy'), and its extension -
quantum leap to - macrocosmic, very large,
tenuous, ostensibly transitory electromagnetic
field energy.
A 'vector' = direction and magnitude. In this
case, the direction - from the center of the
'material charge' from which standing field and
transitory energy co-variantly expands,
remains omni-directional, while the rate at
which the magnitude of a given expanding
system, increases, at the transpositionally
apparent 'surface', distinguishing the standing

252 - Contents
(4-D) field inside the originating system, from
the measurably transitory (6-D) field outside
of the ('particle'/'charge') system.
Reprise:
"If the universe was made up of (unstable)
disturbed areas, by now it would have spread
indefinitely." - Ibid.

Special effects by Austin P. Torney

"Humanity is not 4 dimensional."

253 - Contents
- LIFE Science Library's Universe, p. 179
(*The LIFE Science Library's editors and
keepers have pronounced the
<'acknowledged'> universal 4-D neutrons,
protons and electrons as being 3-Dimensional:
when they occur in the form of human beings.
- KBR
Few in authority on other issues, are found
with any, regarding the 4th dimension.
A time of the signs.
..................................
(‘When you’re lost in the rain in Juarez
And it’s Easter time too
And your gravity fails
And negativity don’t pull you through
Don’t put on any airs
When you’re down on Rue Morgue Avenue
They got some hungry women there
And they really make a mess outta you.’
- Bob Dylan, Just Like Tom Thumb’s Blues.)
_________________________
"The only new thing in this old world, is the
history you didn't know about." - Harry
Truman
"If it's original, it'll be copied." - H. L. Mencken

254 - Contents
"An error doesn't have to become a mistake,
unless you refuse to correct it." - J..F.K.
('Lee Harvery Oswald acted alone'. - The
Warren Report.)
>>>>>>>>>> ......... <<<<<<<<
NON MATHEMATICAL SOLUTIONS TO
FORMERLY INVETERATE, RECIDIVIST
PROBLEMS IN PHYSICS. (Continued)
- Kent Benjamin Robertson
Copyright © 2002, 1999, ‘85, ‘70.

255 - Contents
 Chapter Fifteen
Epilogue Part II
Absolute Zero. Zero degrees Kelvin, remains
as controversial as it is elusive. Whereas, the
Big Bang 'Theory' is comparable to a soda
bottle rocket launched from a tilted box of
proactive popcorn in an ad hoc museum of
unnatural history.
The second law of thermodynamics has been
politically corrected to 'prove' the alleged –
post incidental big bang - 'entropic heat death'
of the universe. No such occurrence unfolds in
a 4-D space time continuum; steady state
prevails. Theoretical physics, since the turn of
the last century, has become a political
carnival.
If this can occur in the purest field of physical
science, it can occur in any academic
discipline, or social morality or law. Enter mind
control, doublethink, newspeak and double-
government, as Orwellian dominated,
normalized policy.
This author has been invectively described as
having ‘satanistically turned gravity upside
down’; whereas, under the authority of Newton

256 - Contents
and Einstein, this author has documented
gravity right side up.
...................
Infinite Smallness - in 4 dimensions - is just
as endless as infinite largeness, continued:
*‘Zeno’s paradox.’ (*’If you keep cutting the
distance in half, between point A and point B,
you never get from point A to point B’.)
Not really a paradox at all. Zeno may have
been entirely aware of its flaw and introduced
it as a riddle, the timely solution to which he
may have been aware.
In any event: In reality, a person or thing
can move from point A to point B.
Whereas, in a purely geometric, 3-D
consideration, the advance of point A, enroute
point B (halving the distance between the two
points), never arrives at it’s destination,
because the geometric 3-D consideration -
conspicuously - leaves out the 4th coordinate
of time (Sound familiar?).
O degrees Kelvin - Absolute Zero - is (so far)
unachieved in the laboratory.
Word is, that laboratory experiments in
cryogenics have come ‘very close’ to Absolute
Zero (the cessation of all motion - molecular
and atomic - in a given material system).

257 - Contents
On the other hand, ‘very close’ to Absolute
Zero, is indeed a relative term. A tenth,
thousandth, hundred thousandth, or billionth of
a degree (Kelvin or Fahrenheit) sounds
impressively ‘very close’ to achievement of
Absolute Zero: until the consideration of the
relativity of infinite smallness in 4-Dimensional
space-time is taken seriously into the allegory
and deceptively apparent ‘very close’
approaches to Absolute Zero.
(Speculative note: If and when any physical
object is successfully subjected to Absolute
Zero, that object may appear to implode and
disappear; due to the cessation of all
molecular and atomic motions, causing it to be
the only 3 dimensional entity, surrounded by a
4 dimensionally expanding universe, creating
the illusion that it swiftly shrinks, when it is
actually the only thing that isn’t expanding.
Black hole singularities for example, may be
three dimensional entities in a four
dimensional universe - becoming as infinitely
small and dense in three dimensions, as the 4-
D universe becomes relatively larger and more
tenuous around it.)
Yesterday’s 4-dimensionally considered mile
is much smaller, when compared with today’s

258 - Contents
4-dimensionally considered mile. The day
before yesterday’s mile is even smaller than
yesterday’s or today’s mile.
Yet, in context of the moment of time the
measurement is made, in these A, B, C
marked, ever enlarging-moment considered
coordinate systems, they are all the same
value, relative to the 4-D frame of time and
space they are measured in.
In the 4-D space-time continuum, yesterday’s
60 miles per hour, is not today’s. Today’s mile
is larger, and today’s miles per hour is faster,
when compared with yesterday’s. The same is
true of the speed of sound or light. These
remain constant, yet are always increasing
with the size of the coordinates system they
are measured in. The value of time varies, with
the comparative and ever changing - physically
expanding - value of the coordinate system it
is measured in. Time is motion. Motion occurs
in - requires - space.
This applies to all standards of space and
time measurement. This same consideration is
applicable to coming ‘very close’ to Absolute
Zero. The reason Absolute Zero probably never
will be achieved.

259 - Contents
 Yesterday’s 72 degrees Fahrenheit, is not
today’s; today’s is not tomorrow's. All three
temperature measurements, occurring in
moment’s A, B and C, are the same, relative to
the coordinate system they are measured in,
and different, only when compared to
themselves: in different moments of space-
time.
The values of time, space (including
measured heat, which is motion in space;
motion is exactly synonymous with time, and
conversely) are constantly changing - yet
remain relatively constant - in the 4-D space-
time continuum. Just as the velocity of light is
constant, yet always increasing, along with the
acceleration of the mass field (4-D matter)
from which light invariably originates and by
which it (light, electromagnetism) is
generated...
The 4-D space-time continuum of the past, is
‘very small and dense’, when compared to the
present. The present dimensional size of space
and material objects at large in the present, is
comparatively very small and dense, when
compared with the future-projected physical
dimensions of the universe or any four
dimensionally expanding portion of it...

260 - Contents
 For the same reason that *'Zeno’s (alleged)
paradox' suffers from leaving out the 4th
coordinate of time. As does the ‘big bang
theory’ - preempting the steady state theory
on the premise that matter is 3-dimensionally
static and that the universe is dissipating. (*'If
you keep cutting the distance between A and
B, in half, you never get from A to B.' This is
true in space without time. But there is no
space without time, and there is no time,
without space. Refer 'space-time'. Time is
motion, and motion requires space to move in.
Zeno's Paradox excludes the factor of time.
Therefore it is not a paradox at all. It's a
misunderstanding... Caused by the exclusion of
the element of time, and the 4-D space-time
continuum.
The same misunderstanding is preventing the
realization that the alleged ‘microcosmic (very
small) nuclear binding forces’, are simply and
inevitably a miniaturized manifestation of
macrocosmic (very large) gravitational forces.
Gravity is said to occur for the most part, only
in the realm of the very large. Whereas,
nuclear binding forces are simply 'very small'
(very dense; electromagnetic) gravitational
forces. How wrong a 3-dimensionally fixated

261 - Contents
scientist (who says he 'acknowledges'
Einstein’s 4-D space-time continuum) can be,
and for what schizoid, transparently
unscientific reasons.
"The whole evolution of our ideas about the
processes of nature, with which we have been
concerned so far, might be regarded as an
organic development of Newton’s ideas. But
while the process of perfecting the field theory
was still in full swing, the facts of heat,
radiation, the spectra, radioactivity, etc.,
revealed a limit to the serviceableness of the
whole intellectual system which today still
seems to us absolutely insuperable, in spite of
immense success at certain points. Many
physicists maintain - and there are weighty
arguments in their favor - that in the face of
these facts not merely the differential law but
the law of causation itself - hitherto the
fundamental postulate of all natural science,
has collapsed. Even the possibility of a spatial-
temporal construction, which can be
unambiguously coordinated with physical
events, is denied."
- Albert Einstein, ESSAYS IN SCIENCE, 1934
______________

262 - Contents
 Chapter Sixteen
AFTERWARD Part I
***************
Transcendental number - the square root of
minus one - pi.
Pi. 3.1416 followed by an infinite number of
zeros. Refer: the interminable chore of
carrying pi out to its last decimal point... And
the transcendental growth of the number
eleven when multiplied: 1x 11=11. 2x11=22.
3x11=33. 4x11=44; etceteras.
Buddhists have adopted it as an expression of
expansion.
..............

The abstract definitive of and about physical reality is based

on numbers.
If you wish to learn the circumference of a circle, you use pi.

If you want to know the area within a circular

circumference, you use pi r squared.
There appears to be a four dimensional trout
swimming in this acknowledged eloquent
encryption. Cruising dorsal fins at the surface
of our Tequila Sunrise?: the circle pi r squared
is applied to, is evidently four dimensionally
expanding; the reason it takes forever (and an

263 - Contents
appendage of endless tomorrows?) to carry pi
out to its last decimal point.
The Golden Rectangle and the exponential
extrapolation of four 90o quadrants completing
a 360 degree whole is invoked, if not
alternately identified, here. It is said that
Euclid was the first to find - in about the year
300 BC - what, by many other since adopted
descriptions, was originally described as the
golden rectangle. Its direct relationship to the
already issued subject of exponential
extrapolation in this book is said to have
deeply disturbed no small number of post
Pythagorean Geometricians and
Mathematicians, due, to the 'incommensurate'
value. That is, most numerical and
mathematical considerations lead to a
conclusive outcome; a result, an ending
closure; a logical consequence of a reasoning
process...

An enigmatically intriguing fact of pi r

squared is, that that there is no resolution in
the formula. It's renowned for taking
whomever toils to carry it out to its last
decimal point is subjectively synonymous with
futile dissolution, and, among other more

264 - Contents
objective if mysterious considerations, infinity
itself.
_________

INDUCTION, DEDUCTION, PRODUCTION,

continued reprise:
The Pythagorean philosophers place great
stress on the first four positive numbers. In the
numbers one through four, you have 1 as a
point. 2 as a line. 3 as a plane.
In consideration of a triangle in three
dimensions - a pyramid: 4 sides then rest upon
a 5th coordinate (number), the base of the
four sided pyramid; wherein the colloquially
recognized pyramid forms a tetrahedron.
A square, plus B square equals C square.

A treatise on Nature, authored by Aristotle,

entitled: ‘physics’; soon to be known as
*metaphysics (*Nature beyond the knowledge
of people), now specifically defined as
‘physics.’ Newton was not called a physicist, for
example, he was called a philosopher, his
PRINCIPIA is a philosophical dissertation.
Academic physics would emerge from the more
general roots of philosophy - a mode of
inquiry. Refer the atomistic theory of
Democritus. Atoms (matter reduced to its
265 - Contents
smallest form, while remaining an element,
rather than a - sub-atomic - electron, neutron
and/or proton constituting an elemental atom)
and the void (space - the interval between two
or more points).
Ontology, is the study of that which exists -
reality at large. Often depending on the
limitations of observation. Ontology is more
than what is immediately apparent to the
human senses.
Epistemology, is the subdivision of ontology,
in the sense of how he search for reality is
conducted – the method of ontological study.
_________________

266 - Contents
A Review Series of Timelessly Cogent quotes,
follows:
"...Descarte was not so far from the truth
when he believed he must exclude the
existence of an empty space. The notion
indeed appears absurd as long as physical
reality is seen exclusively in ponderable bodies.
It requires the idea of the field as the
representative of reality, in combination with
the General Principle of Relativity, to show the
true kernel of Descarte's idea, 'there exists no
space empty of field'."
- Einstein, p.p.375 - 6, IDEAS & OPINIONS

"Regarding the tenability of gravitation as an

impelling force, paralleled by the Cosmological
Constant as a repelling force, a natural and
complementary occurrence of this apparently
incongruous ambiguity exists and prevails in
the fact that omni-directional electric field lines
around a positive charge are directed away
from the center of the charge; whereas, the
field lines around a negative charge move
inward, toward the center of the charge." - K.B.
Robertson, p. 221, GRAVITY IS THE 4th DIMENSION,
Copyright 1979.

267 - Contents
"I do find gravity an attractive force at times."
- K.B.Robertson. Ibid.

"Matter and space are seen to be inseparable

and interdependent parts of a single whole."
- Fritjov Capra, THE TAO OF PHYSICS, p. 208
"According to the physicist-philosopher Ernst
Mach... material objects not only determine
the structure of the surrounding space, but are
in turn influenced by their environment in an
essential way."
- Fritjov Capra, Ibid, p. 209

"In one of the most reckless and sweeping

generalizations in the history of thought,
Newton filled the entire space of the Universe
with interacting forces of attraction, issuing
from all particles of matter and acting upon all
particles of matter across the boundless
abysses of darkness."
- Arthur Koestler, THE SLEEPWALKERS
"... when a light ray is spreading from a
point, the energy is not distributed
continuously over ever increasing spaces, but
consists of a finite number of energy quanta,
that are localized in points in space, move

268 - Contents
without dividing and can be absorbed or
generated as a whole". - Albert Einstein
"The above and below quoted statements have
been called the most revolutionary sentences
ever written by physicists in the 20th Century.
It signals the end of perceived continuity and
endorses the beginning of duality. The wave is
no longer exclusively continuous. The particle
is no longer exclusively discontinuous. The two
seem to join and share each other’s qualities
together as one." - Wikipedia

Special effects by Austin P. Torney

"The views of space and time which I wish to

lay before you have sprung from the soil of
experimental physics and therein lays their
strength. They are radical. Henceforth, space
by itself and time by itself, are doomed to fade

269 - Contents
away into mere shadows, and only a kind of
union of the two will preserve an independent
reality." - Hermann Minkowski, 80th Assembly of German
Natural Scientists & Physicists, 1908.

End of condensed (internet) presentation of Total Field

Theory: The Non-mathematical Reinstatement of
Einstein's Presently Abandoned Cosmological Constant
and Unified Field.

Thank you for reading this missive.

(Afterward Notes to follow)

(Special thanks to Robert & all

moderators, administrators and staff
of the science forum <T.O.E.>:
Theory of Everything)
- K. B. Robertson 4/21/07 1741 hrs EDT
"There once was a lady named Bright, who traveled much faster than
light. She departed one day, in a relative way, and returned on the
previous night". - Eric Buller 1923

270 - Contents
 Chapter Seventeen
AFTERWARD Part II

TOTAL FIELD THEORY - No Space Empty Of

Field.
The Reinstatement of Einstein's Presently
Abandoned Unified Field (Steady State)
Theory.
by K. B. Robertson

******

As this anthological narrative attests. there is

nothing new about Newton's gravity or
Einstein's 4th dimension of space-time, except,
empirical proof that they are one and the
same. Their causal identity is the physically
accelerating expansion of the universe at large.
In this work at hand, Einstein's formerly
abandoned Unified Field is reinstated (with the
Steady State Theory); without mathematics.
New information keeps coming in that finds the
'Big Bang' universe not only to be expanding,
but to be picking up speed. A 'Big Bang'
originated universe isn't supposed to be doing
that. Whereas, that's exactly what a physically
accelerating 'Steady State' universe does.
This work is all about the reasons why. Like
the Unified Field theory, the 'Steady State'
271 - Contents
theory is abandoned. The reasons for their
reinstatement are accumulating...
____________________
Newton asserted ‘Hypothesis non fingo’. - ‘I
make no hypothesis’. Yet, his entire,
unarguably revolutionary Classical Mechanics
was based on the hypothetical 'particle' that
science has yet to assuredly accommodate.
The ‘particle concept’ that dominates physics
and the vast majority of colloquial human
thought: has never been proven beyond
hypothetical, quasi-scientific retainers. ‘The
(rarely) indicted ‘particle’ isn’t found ‘wrong’
here, but rather: resiliently incomplete; so as
to aggressively exclude the incumbent role of
the continuous field in the corporeal balance of
material considerations. - K. B. Robertson
"In the laboratory of Michael Faraday (1791 -
1867), who made many important
contributions to the knowledge of electricity
and magnetism, there is an interesting entry in
1849. It reads:
'Gravity. Surely this force must be capable of
an experimental relation to electricity,
magnetism, and other forces, so as to build it
up with them in reciprocal action and
equivalent effect. Consider for a moment how

272 - Contents
to go about touching this matter by facts and
trial.'
"But the numerous experiments this famous
British physicist undertook to discover such a
relation were fruitless, and he concluded this
section of his diary with these words: 'Here
end my trials for the present. The results are
negative. They do not shake my strong feeling
of the existence of a relation between gravity
and electricity, though they give no proof that
such a relation exists.' " - George Gamow,
GRAVITY

"It is very odd that the theory of gravity,

originated by Newton and completed by
Einstein, should stand now in majestic
isolation, a Taj Mahal of Science, having little
of anything to do with the rapid developments
in other branches of physics. Einstein's concept
of the gravitational field grew from his Special
Theory of Relativity, and the Special Theory
was based on the Theory of the
Electromagnetic Field formulated in the last
century by the British physicist, James Clerk
Maxwell (1831-79). But in spite of many
attempts, Einstein and those who have
followed him have failed any (gravitational)
contact with Maxwell's electrodynamics...

273 - Contents
 "Einstein's theory of gravitation was more or
less contemporary with quantum theory, but in
the forty-five years since they appeared, the
two theories have had quite different rates of
development. Proposed by Max Planck and
carried forward by the work of Niels Bohr,
Louis de Broglie, Erwin Schrodinger, Werner
Heisenberg, and others, quantum theory has
made colossal progress and evolved into a
broad discipline that explains in detail the inner
structures of atoms and their nuclei."
- Gamow, GRAVITY

"On the other hand, Einstein's theory of gravity

remains to this day essentially as it was when
he formulated it half a century ago. While
hundreds, even thousands, of scientists study
the various branches of quantum theory and
apply it in many, many fields of experimental
research, only a few persist in devoting their
time and passion to further development in the
study of gravitation."
- George Gamow, GRAVITY, p. 136.

"Magnetism, gravity, and action at-a-distance

have not lost an iota of their baffling mystery
since Gilbert (before Newton, 1642 - 1726)"
- Arthur Koestler, THE SLEEPWALKERS.
274 - Contents
"Since the General Theory of Relativity implies
the manifestation of physical reality as a
continuous field, the concept of discontinuous
particle cannot play a fundamental part, the
‘particle’ can only appear as a limited region of
space in which the field strength and/or
density of energy is particularly high." -
Einstein, IDEAS & OPINIONS, p. 348

"The combination of the concept of continuous

field with that of mass-points discontinuous
from space appears inconsistent. A consistent
(total) field theory requires continuity of all
elements of the theory, not only in time but
also in space, and in all points in space. Hence
the material particle has no place as a
fundamental concept in a field theory."
- Einstein, IDEAS & OPINIONS, p. 345

"It is very probable that there is a hidden

relation between gravity on the one hand and
the electromagnetic field and material particles
on the other, but nobody is prepared today to
say what kind of relation it is. And there is no
way of foretelling how soon any further
important progress will be made in this

275 - Contents
 direction." - Excerpted from the Preface to
GRAVITY, by George Gamow.
"According to General Relativity, the concept
of space detached from any physical content
does not exist. The physical reality of space is
represented by a field." - Einstein, IDEAS &
OPINIONS, p. 348
___________________

The ('red shift') ‘expanding universe’ took the

‘scientific community’ by surprise in 1927 -
1929.
. An - ad hoc - explanation was hurriedly put
together by Lemaitre, Hubble, Gamow, and
others - if the expansion of space in the
universe was back tracked, it was reasoned, it
would eventually converge at a point of
intersection (since estimated to have been
some 13 billion years ago), where all the
matter in the universe must have been
compacted, causing intense pressures and heat
which resulted in and caused the ‘big bang’
explosion, resulting in the spatially expanding
universe, as it is spectroscopically (‘red shift’)
observed today.
There are more recent variations on this
theme, but the described dynamics are the

276 - Contents
origin of the ‘Big Bang’ perspective. When
previously unknown phenomena emerges out
of astronomy or experimental physics that is
contrary to big bang theory, its proponents
reply that there is no other cosmology on the
slate beside the big bang; then go about the
business of plundering required explanatory
ingredients from the very sources they
eschew.
The cosmological constant, lambda /\ , is not
functionally abandoned, nor is the steady state
theory or Einstein's Unified Field (finding
gravity and electromagnetism as two
apparently unrelated phenomena which
actually have the same causal identity). These
reparative elements have simply been
transferred from their pastures of retirement
and reemployed where needed by, of and for
the big bang gang.
No big shakes.
('The big bang theory is all we've got.' The big
bang is now artfully laced with elements of the
cosmological constant and the steady state
theories, the unremarkable presence of which
is spearheaded by operative conditioning,
double talk, neurolinguistic programming and
psychomolecular restructuring <refer
'brainwashing'>...)

277 - Contents
 Chapter Eighteen
AFTERWARD Part III

Problem: There is no common - big bang -

center from which the observed expanding
universe expands. The expansion is
astrophysically established as dynamically
expanding in direct line of sight, away from a
given observer, from any location. This is not
the signature of an explosion from a common
center.
It is the signature of a repelling force acting
across space out of all material bodies,
paralleling all the characteristics of
conventional gravity, while acting in the
opposite direction. Namely, what Einstein
called ‘the cosmological constant’ - a force
unlike any other known, because it increases -
instead of decreases - with distance.
Einstein’s Unified Field theory of 1919
predicted an expanding universe - a prediction
that Wilem de Sitter foresaw (in Einstein’s
equations) as early as 1917. A decade before
the expanding universe was spectroscopically
discovered between 1912 and 1922, by, Dr.
Vesto M. Silpher, and translated in 1927 by
Friedmann & Lemaitre, and 1929 by Edwin

278 - Contents
 Hubble as proof of a spatially expanding
universe, observing (by way of spectroscopic
‘red shift’); that the speed of a receding galaxy
increases with distance (‘Hubble’s "red shift").

Einstein - under much influence by Wilem de

Sitter – had (inadvertently) predicted an
expanding universe, and that it is the result of
a repelling force acting out of all material
bodies, just like gravity, except, in the
opposite direction. This is the force that
Einstein proposed prevented the universe (full
of mutually impelling bodies) from collapsing -
a problem that Newton himself called attention
to, for which there was no previous
explanation.
When the spatially expanding universe was
discovered, it was resolved that this explained
why the universe didn’t collapse on itself, and
for this reason, under much ensuing
controversy, Einstein was persuaded to
abandon his previously submitted Cosmological
Constant repelling force.
Recent data is accumulating, finding that the
spatial universe is not only expanding, but that
it is also picking up - increasing in - rate of
speed of expansion. Again, this is not the

279 - Contents
 signature of a big bang originated universe,
whereas, it is the signature of the abandoned
Cosmological Constant: a force which increases
with distance...
It is well known that Einstein abandoned his
Cosmological Constant repelling force
(designated with the Greek sign ‘Lambda’ - an
inverted V, like this /\ - calling it his ‘biggest
blunder’ ), due to the discovery of the spatially
expanding universe. It is not so well known
that Einstein went back to working on his
formerly abandoned unified field - cosmological
constant - theory, at Princeton, before he died
in 1955...

Besides the ‘red shift’ established expanding

universe, there is one other evidentiary
phenomenon in particular, which is said to
support (if not ‘prove’) the big bang ‘theory’,
and that is the issue of cosmic microwave
background radiation predicted in 1949 by
George Gamow and (inadvertently) confirmed
(via satellite) in 1963, by Arno Penzias and
Robert Wilson. Whereas, what is proven by the
observed background radiation is that the
universe as we know it was more dense and
hotter in earlier moments that in the present.

280 - Contents
The 'Big Bang' interpretation does not have a
monopoly on this translation. Any model of an
expanding universe yields the same
observation (That the universe was more
dense and hotter in the past than in the
present. This work - the reinstatement of
Einstein's presently abandoned Unified
<Steady State> Field theory - represents such
an alternative explanation).
When Science is Popularly Displaced by Falsity
---------------------------------------------------

The much applauded and controversial 'Big

Bang Theory' is not a theory. It is an
hypothesis.
The much applauded and controversial 'Super
String Theory' is not a theory. It is an
hypothesis.
(Please refer, Webster's dictionary, or, any
dictionary of scientific terms.)
These importantly expansive
misunderstandings negatively influence and
handicap the entire world of contemplation at
the foundations of objective thinking. These
endlessly repeated misnomers sustain
themselves. Calling hypotheses 'theories' is
unscientific and misleading, digressive and
harmful. Is there no room for a cordial fireside
chat about such - very important,
281 - Contents
fundamental, symptomatic -
'misunderstandings' (Resting comfortably in
the center of 'Standard Theory'; expanding
tolerance thresholds on the foundations of
academia)? Are they not plaintively germane
to the influence of scientists on public
acceptance, controversy and tolerance
thresholds - perspective, science, art, fiction
and culture?
___________________
"Big Bang', 'SuperStrings' & the 'out dated'
Cosmological Constant.

The ‘ugly head’ of The 'outdated' Truth:

“The cosmological constant has now a secure
position... Not only does it unify the
gravitational and electromagnetic fields, but it
renders the theory of gravitation and its
relation to space-time measurement so much
more illuminating and indeed self evident, that
return to the earlier view is unthinkable. I
would as soon think of reverting to Newtonian
Theory as of dropping the cosmological
constant.”
- Sir Arthur Eddington, THE EXPANDING
UNIVERSE, p. 24

282 - Contents
 “I can see no reason to doubt that the
observed recession of the spiral nebulae is due
to cosmic repulsion, and it is the effect
predicted (in 1919) by Relativity Theory which
we were hoping to find. Many other
explanations have been proposed - some of
them rather fantastic (* ‘tired light’, ‘the big
bang’, ‘dark matter’, ‘super strings’) - and
there has been a great deal of discussion which
seems to me rather pointless. In this, as in
other developments of scientific exploration,
we must recognize the limitations of our
present knowledge and be prepared to
consider revolutionary changes.”
- Sir Arthur Eddington, pp. 89 - 90, A
TREASURY OF SCIENCE (Harlow Shapley
publishers)
______________________________________

283 - Contents
From Jacobowski, to Rascal Puff 4/8/07
It seems you are putting words into
Eddington's mouth without alerting us:

Eddington died in 1944, so he could not

possibly have made a statement about
superstrings.
_______________________

Dear Jacobowski:
The words you say I seem to be putting into
Eddington's mouth without alerting you, are in
parentheses and also marked with an asterisk
(*).
Eddington speaks of 'some rather fantastic'
explanations, but does not present any
examples of his time, so I - ostensibly and
markedly - presented some examples of our
time. I believe this simple and obvious
qualification is clear to any unbiased reader.
___________________________
There are other potent disagreements with the
so called Big Bang theory:
"Astronomers have now generally accepted
the fact of this expansion, and Einstein's 'field
equations' of his General Theory of Relativity
can be construed to fit an expanding universe."

284 - Contents
- Isaac Asimov, THE INTELLIGENT PERSON'S
GUIDE TO SCIENCE, p. 49

"NEW CLUES ABOUT THE NATURE OF

DARK MATTER: Einstein May Have Been
Right After All:
... Energy: Einstein May Have Been Right
After All View this image. The good news from
NASA's Hubble Space Telescope is that
Einstein was right — maybe. ...
hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/20
04/12/text/ - 17k - Cached - Similar pages -
Note this
HubbleSite - NewsCenter - New Clues About the Nature of Dark ...

285 - Contents
 Chapter Nineteen
Afterward Part IV
From Buck Dharwin to *RascalPuff
4/9/07
"Problem: The expansion is astrophysically
established as dynamically expanding in direct
line of sight, away from a given observer, from
any location. This is not the signature of an
explosion from a common center."

That's not a problem for the Big Bang theory.

It doesn't claim that there was anything like a
conventional "explosion" (*It used to). Neither
does it require there to have been a common
center (*It used to). In BB cosmology, all
points in space suffice equally for the center
(That's one of the renovations that have been
applied to the Big Bang since its inception -
absorbing the dynamics of the <abandoned>
cosmological constant).
It's also inaccurate to claim that it's not a
theory. It predicted the cosmic background
radiation, and this was in fact found,
supporting the theory.
From *RascalPuff to Buck Dharwin 4/9/07

286 - Contents
The two mainstays of Big Bang are Hubble’s
'red shift' expanding universe, and 'cosmic
background radiation'.
Recent observations find the so called big bang
universe to be increasing in its rate of
expansion. This is the signature of a repelling
force acting across space, 'just like
conventional gravity', except, in the opposite
direction (preventing the universe from
collapsing on its self).
The big bang theory has evolved from having a
common center, and being a 'cause for the
expansion', to elaborately sidestepping the
formerly central - since, compliantly
metamorphosed - issue of a common center,
and apparently ignoring the accumulating
observations that the spatially expanding
universe is picking up speed.
Background radiation was predicted by
George Gamow in 1949 and (accidentally)
proved in 1963, Gamow proclaimed that such
radiation would contribute to a big bang
theory.
What background radiation indicates is a
relatively more dense universe at earlier times,
explicable in more ways than the proposed big
bang. Specifically, the observed, controversied

287 - Contents
background radiation is as much 'proof' of a
physically (as well as spatially) expanding
universe, that was more dense and hotter at
earlier moments than it is at later moments. It
appears that the presently abandoned Steady
State and Cosmological Constant theories are
overdue for reinstatement. Especially since the
big bang school is already employing the
cosmological constant to prop itself up.
From Buck Dharwin to Rascal Puff
I merely pointed out that the theory made a
prediction, which was verified, and so it
qualifies as a theory.
As for geometric "sidestepping", I see this as
the weakest argument in the anti-Banger
arsenal. Perhaps you've got an algorithm that
maps every existing point in space back to the
interior of a singularity, but I'd dearly love to
see how it assigns one of these existing points
in space the role of "center".
This isn't to say that the universe doesn't
have a geometric center. For all I know, it
does. Wouldn't matter either way.

From Rascal Puff to Buck Dharwin

The Big Bang is undone by having no
common center. Presently it is yet again

288 - Contents
undone by the observations that the spatially
expanding universe is increasing its speed.
The background radiation is more likely the
result of an earlier, more dense steady state
universe than any big bang. A steady state (no
beginning, no end) universe sustains itself
without the spontaneous creation of hydrogen:
when the physical universe is expanding, as
well as being the cause of the spatially
expanding universe, by way of the repelling
force of the cosmological constant, originating
out of all matter parallel to Newton's gravity,
while acting in the opposite direction.
I am aware that Newton's gravity has been
functionally abandoned, whereas 'the curvature
of space' and 'geodesics' are explicable by way
of the employment of the expansion of matter
itself, corresponding with and the cause of the
spatially expanding universe. As the status quo
stands, Standard Theory is convinced that
without the big bang, there is no explanation
for the expanding universe.
There is an alternative explanation, and that
is a physically expanding (physically 4-D)
universe, complimenting and causing the
observed spatially expanding universe.
I submit that the 'curvature of space' will be
reinterpreted, to accommodate a physically as

289 - Contents
well as spatially expanding universe. George
Gamow's prediction of background radiation,
along with the interpretation of what that
means - desperate measures to explain
Lemaitre's ad hoc, innovative explanation for
the unexpectedly discovered spatially
expanding (‘red shift’) universe.
The reinstatement of the Cosmological
Constant is literally gaining on the Big Bang,
via the observed increasing rate of expansion
(acceleration).

From PuzzledCow to RascalPuff

4/10/07
“The reinstatement of the Cosmological
Constant is literally gaining on the Big Bang,
via the observed increasing rate of expansion."
Not sure what your point is. The active process
by which the expansion is supposed to
accelerate is already a part of the big bang
theory, be it under the name of "dark energy",
"quintessence" or just "cosmological constant",
or a combination of three different things -
well, the state of the affair is unclear, but
basically the big bang and the cosmological
constant belongs to the same paradigm.

290 - Contents
 From RascalPuff to PuzzledCow
The big bang commenced as a hypothesis
based on 'red shift'. In 1949, Gamow predicted
that background radiation should exist as a
residual hangover from the big bang.
Background radiation was detected in 1963 -
hastily promoting the big bang to a theory
status. Whereas, any expanding universe will
inevitably be more dense in its past, as
compared to the present, the presently
abandoned steady state theory yields the same
conclusion while the accelerating expansion of
physical matter (in four dimensions) reinstates
the steady state theory.
The big bang hypothesis evolved into a
theory by way of a conceptually polarized,
prejudiced interpretation of the cause of the
measured background radiation. Moreover and
since then, the big bang premise has cavalierly
disconnected itself from the requirement of a
center source from which it originates.
Now, furthermore proclaiming that the
recently and unexpectedly discovered
acceleration of the (spatially) expanding
universe is caused by the emphatically
hypothetical impetus of 'dark energy',
'quintessence' or just (pilfers and tailors the)

291 - Contents
'cosmological constant' (culminating in what
you offer as a 'combination of three different
things'); which you proclaim as 'already a part
of the big bang theory'. Whereas, reiterating
your own words, "...well, the state of the
affair is unclear, but basically the big bang
and the cosmological constant (steady
state theory) belongs (sic) to the same
paradigm."
The cosmological constant accompanies the
steady state theory, and the steady state
theory - including the accelerating expansion
of (4-D) matter itself - is the rigidly ignored
alternative to the big bang, which has
embraced and displaced many of the
characteristics of lambda and the steady state
theory, while simultaneously rejecting them...
Is it your point to say that, if the expanding
universe is accelerating, the (repeatedly razed
and reconstructed) big bang has it accounted
for; by way of hypothesis and/or your
unexplained reactivation of the cosmological
constant or steady state theory?

4/11/07
PuzzledCow wrote:

292 - Contents
 First, I'm NOT a proponent of the big poof
theory. However, that theory is permanently
evolving, much like Ptolemy's earth-centric
theory was evolving into variants by adding
epicycles and deferents.
One of these epicycles is the cosmological
constant, an old hat that Einstein had
postulated in his original theory in order to
keep the universe both finite and static, later
was discarded by Einstein, and was put in the
circuit again by 2000 or so when cosmologists
deduced an acceleration of expansion from
observation of the redshifts - the redshifts are
no more seen as the result of a Doppler effect
but as the expansion of space itself, whatever
that means.
My previous comments are from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy
(the warning at the head of this page confirms
that the whole story is unclear).
The above dialogue occurred in the 'About Physics' forum
of the internet. 10-11/4/07
**************
The Smith Chart
Although originally intended for and applied to early radio
technology, it's still used by radio technologists, and seems
to have a distinguished place in the structural and
conceptual considerations at hand - there appears (including

293 - Contents
the issue of radiation) to be a lot of answers-questions here
(in more ways than several dozen?).
Its parallel to Maxwell’s field and Riemann’s geometry is
self-evident.

Wikipedia

End of Afterward

294 - Contents
 Chapter Twenty
Art, Prose & Poetry
of the 4-D Space-Time Continuum
The Non-mathematical Reinstatement
of Einstein's Presently Abandoned Unified Field

Space-time Gravity Is The 4th Dimension:

Special effects & design by Austin P. Torney

295 - Contents
For more cost free rhythm and reason, please consider a
season that resonantly sings beyond theories of strings.
From Euclid's straight line shine to Isaac's golden apple
and its geodesic grapple.
A catchy little tune that most anyone can croon, by the
curved silvery light of Albert's expeditionary moon.
Dr. Einstein's waking inspiration may yet sweep the
sleeping nation at the slightest provocation.
An unrecognized solution that could start a peaceful
revolution. Big Bang Gangology’s further confirmation of
their favorite libation - more denial and debate with the
orphaned Steady State.
Behold Albert's resurrected smart bomb with enduring
aplomb. Benevolent bomb leaves all the buildings and
people intact; takes 4-D space-time to get them back on
track .
Asked the teacher what gravity was, an' all he said is
what gravity does. Said I wanna know why, not how
things fall. Teacher said nobody knows that one at all.
Asked the people on the 6 O'Clock news; they said on
that we have no views. Same thing happened in a
physics lesson - a picture of Newton gave a puzzled
expression.
Still wanted to know what gravity is, so I went outside
and continued the quiz. Asked a mathematician and he
took all day saying gravity is numbers. So I lit one up
and, went into suspension, tintanambulating beyond the
3rd dimension. The answer appeared as a gentle kiss, so
I wrote another poem and it goes like this...

296 - Contents
 Poetry for all times and places, poetry for all rhymes
and spaces. Where are the dimensions and where are
they not, boundless dimensions of color and thought;
infinite dimensions of cold and of hot. But countless
dimensions of space there are not.
Dimensions of music, of wine and of thee, of these there
are many, but of space only three.
A 3-D you anna 3-D me, munching 3-D apples from a 3-
D tree. 3-D up an' 3-D down, 3-D apples to the 3-D
ground. A 3-D fall anna 3-D 'thump'. 3-D sugar inna 3-D
lump.
3-D east an' 3-D west, Sir Isaac Newton did his 3-D
best. 3-D universe, 3-D math - 3-D projectiles onna 3-D
path. 3-D smooth and 3-D rough; 4-D Einstein singin'
"Three ain't enough."
4-D amplifier and 4-D gear, singin' 4-D lyrics into 3-D
ears. 4-D guitar an' 4-D strings. Albert's 4-D song about
4-D things.
3-D professors onna 3-D jag, stuffin 4-D physics in a 3-D
bag.
If yer lookin' for a message in here, it's of 4-D
headaches from a 3-D beer. 3-D professors tellin' 3-D
lies, gettin' 3-D money for the Nobel Prize.
3-D scientists onna 3-D pension, refusing to recognize,
space-time gravity is the 4th dimension.
(Variations on this thought provoking vignette appear else-
where on the net. Copyright 1979, by K. B. Robertson. All
rights reserved. With acknowledgement for authorship, may be
reproduced and distributed for educational, recreational and
non commercial purposes.)

297 - Contents
Special effects by Austin P. Torney Art by Richard J. Benish

298 - Contents
 4-D accelerating expansion to macrocosmic infinity.

Copyright 1968 by Masao Komura Special Effects Copyright 2007 by Austin P. Torney
An ensemble of systems. A Hierarchy of multi-moment 4-D space-time surfaces. - K.B.R

4-D Salted Butter 'n Popcorn Cartoon Genesis

Crackerjack. Morton salt & Land O' Lakes butter. Squared.

-------------------------------------------------------

299 - Contents
 4-D Space-Time Continuum, continued:

It’s everywhere and especially represented in some places

in particular.... there is a print-painting of a terrier looking
dog with a sailor boy on a box of Crackerjack, holding an
inevitably smaller box of Crackerjack, upon which is printed
another image of what appears to be the same dog beside
another - looks like the same - sailor, only smaller; holding
yet another box of Crackerjack; with what would seem has a
printed painting of another dog beside another sailor holding
a yet smaller box of Crackerjack and so on...

It seems to go on forever, if the pictures could somehow

be made ever smaller and still exist, as the visibly
descending and/or ascending sequence of images certainly
suggests... Geometrically squared rectangular boxes of
hierarchically parallel and orthogonal Crackerjack containers
and icons, out of infinite smallness proceeding to infinite
largeness. Si. Nut city. (It took a while to learn the
difference?)

Called me ‘Seahorse’ on the day we met. Gave me an

English translated copy of Einstein's, 'Ideas & Opinions'.
Mara Benevida Neapolis started it, in Naples, Italy, April of
'59 (While Caryn H. Robertson has always underestimated
her part in contributing to the evolution and publication of
this work, since 1960).

Seahorse spots the ‘displaced’ box of Crackerjack and

begins to see in its familiar artwork graphics what he will
eventually recognize as an important representation of
Einstein’s Unified Field without mathematics. Multi-moment
space-time. An ensemble of constantly enlarging and
diminishing systems...
Ready or not teleported to a place no different than and

300 - Contents
identical to all the places and times he’s ever known, a day
like any other day, only Crackerjack boxes are now showing
up in Italy with New World Icons of an ever enlarging - and
ever diminishing - blue & white terrier dog with a blue and
white sailor boy holding a red striped box of Crackerjack
with the image of a Sailor with a Terrier dog, would never
again be the same with or without punctuation... Pensive
studies widened, more light was let in: wisdom and
knowledge proving once again, like gold, to be where you
find it.

Who said the ever-smaller sequenced pictures - smaller or

larger, past, present & future - had to ‘end’, ever?
If the atoms of the universe of the past got ever smaller and
the atoms of the universe of the present got ever larger and
the painter or printer passed his job on from one generation
to the next, where was the ‘end’ of the illustrated hierarchy
of images - the multi-moment space-time ensemble of
differently sized pictures of the same dog and sailor boy
holding a box of Crackerjack with a picture of himself and
his dog on it?

Same thing happens on a cylindrical container of MORTON

salt, the byword of which is ‘When it rains, it pours."
Meaning that humidity or dampness in the air does not
prevent the salt from being smoothly dispensed from the
container, or whatever shaker it may be contained by. The
pictorial logo on this dark blue colored, cylindrically shaped
package is a little girl in a yellow skirt, walking in the rain,
holding an open umbrella over her head with her right hand;
with a container of MORTON salt, pouring out of the metal
spout cradled in and under her left hand and arm; upon
which is the same pictorial; and so on; squared - same as
the CRACKERJACK.

Since then we’ve noticed elsewhere, "Land O Lakes" butter

301 - Contents
and dairy products 'Where goodness begins'. It's an icon of a
beautiful young Native American woman perched on a lake
back grounded - presumably Minnesota - mound of grass,
offering a sample of the product - in this case, a pound of
butter upon which she is the labeled icon; squared. It
doesn't look like the Land O Lakes anecdote of 'Where
goodness begins' has any explanation of where it ends...
Yes. The same thematically endless hierarchy as the multi-
moment 4-D MORTON salt icon - 'When it rains (water) it
(Morton salt, still) pours', and, the CrackerJack Sailor -
squared.

Sort’a like getting a big box of something under the

Christmas tree or for your birthday and when you go to open
it, it turns into a hierarchy of empty boxes growing ever
smaller or larger depending on whether you're wrapping or
unwrapping the smallest or largest box... Depending on
whether you're giving or receiving the container(s)...

There were too many coincidences, Einstein was caught up

in a similar imbroglio, only it was in Bern, Switzerland, just
northwest of where all this cartoon compounded dilemma
was unfolding and back in the early 20th century.

302 - Contents
Graphic & special effects by Austin P. Torney

303 - Contents
A Brief History of Rhyme (The dreaded thread)
Poetic science alliance.
Einstein's presently abandoned Unified Field reinstated w'out
mathematics.

The joining of Field with Quantum Mechanics.

The exclusion of politics from science.

A scientific paradigm shift in alliance.

Scientific panics at quantum mechanics

Democritus foresaw the invisible atom, but since then his
discovery is found with substratrum. From antiquity, and
ubiquity the continuous wave was the rave, the magnetic
transparent field, all proved to be electrostatically real.

Faraday found the cathode ray. Thompson uncovered

electrons one day. Rutherford discovered protons a different
way. Temporally understood Maxwell's waves beneath the
celestial hood. The wave emitting electron could not be
subdivided - at first it was whispered, then openly confided.
Yet along came smaller mysterious articles, of Max Planck’s
curiously indivisible particles:

Transforming a known world of electrostatics into a schizoid

tangle of quantum mechanics. Conceptual doors were
opened for the entrance of protons, but no comprehensive
vacancy for the residential photons. Other atomic tenants
varied in weight height and disguise, but the photon is
always the same value and size. A deteriorating atom might
change its balance or valence, while the unchanging photon
showed no such talents. Vigils are kept to find it changing its
station, while its stubborn identity confirms in black body
radiation.

304 - Contents
At dollar conventions where no change is invited, twenty
nickels sit down to an audience excited. The quantum takes
for granted inclusion, while greenbacks resent the currency
of intrusion. To and from spherical shells the electron darts,
while the unchanged quantum arrives before it departs.

If you’re looking for a message in here, it’s of Max Planck’s

quanta and Niels Bohr’s spheres. Invincible in principle,
Newton’s Mechanics are sure as shooting, while quantum
mechanics are robbing and looting. Evolutionary
experiments are eclectic, but the final conclusions are
photoelectric. As though these convulusions are not enough,
reality panned out some other stuff. The only certain
universal permanancy, is Einstein’s constant light-speed and
Heisenberg’s indeterminacy.

Einstein’s fort was special & general relativity, while his

Nobel Prize was for photo-electricity. Uncle Albert having
firstly proven to be right - ahead of Brownian motion and
the speed of light. This century old issue of size is how
Einstein won the Nobel Prize - how the peace loving master-
blaster stayed alive in 1905.

Anaxgoras of pre biblical days took big and little to greater

heights and stays, he said "There’s always something larger
than large, and always something smaller than small."
Perhaps the smallest large statement of all. May this
admonition of illusion be this brief sonnet’s conclusion.

The 20th century path has been rough - to the point of

surrendering enough of this stuff.

- K. B. Robertson, Copyright 1979 & 2007 All rights

reserved. May be used for non commercial educational and

305 - Contents
recreational purposes with the stipulation that proper
accreditation is extended to the author.

Though this ballad may be spiritual or mental, any

semblance to education is purely coincidental.

Readers are invited to this paragon of camp, may the poetic

winner be rewarded with writer's cramp?
Whoever may think that here is no thought, please feel free
to carry over and give yer best shot.

Special effects by Austin P. Torney

306 - Contents
Special effects by Austin P. Torney

307 - Contents
Special effects by Austin P. Torney

308 - Contents
Special effects by Austin P. Torney

309 - Contents