It was at this point in my thinking process, though it was touched on prior in this paper, that I made a mental breakthrough in my accumulation of theories and the reason I decided to write and formulate this paper, otherwise I would never have due to personal doubt in my older theories. Now I truly believe this realization of a true core theory, which had been staring me in the face for years, is hugely significant and needs to be shared. This breakthrough was more of a personal breakthrough in my underlining thinking and understanding of the physics of space-time. The breakthrough was the point of realization that my definition of space-time string would define fundamental forces by applying string interaction in relation to space-time vibration and wave theory with total destructive interference interaction resulting in complete repulsive force interactions between objects of “matter”, especially in regards to spheres. It also became apparent to me that spheres, in fact all matter, naturally act as an amplifier of space-time vibration. This vibration of space-time manifests itself as actual light, which I believe to be a spectrum of visible space-time vibration along with invisible light (space-time distortion waves), was the cause of the gravity effect between celestial bodies and matter. The thought continued and which led me to realize that the spin of an object in space-time is caused by this amplification of space-time vibration through a sphere’s body pressing against the nominal space-time surrounding the sphere and also that an object’s spin contributed to attraction and repulsion with other objects by causing a shearing effect (stretching) of space-time depending if these objects were spinning or not. By combining spins of two or more equivalent objects along with quantum vibration of space-time being emitted by these objects at their surface would essentially form a balanced bond of attractive and repulsive forces akin to a molecular bond. The breakthrough thoughts didn’t stop there, it was explosive and it happened to me when attending New Years Day church mass. This validates that I day dream quite a bit during church sermons which is something I’m not too proud of. By gaining this moment of true clarity, I began to understand the true nature of forces and how to apply my version of string theory to actual space-time because now I truly believe I understand space-time as a tangible “substance”. It also became apparent to me the similarities between the classical notion of Aether and this new realized notion of space-time substance containing density. Though the classical Aether and my version are similar, they are also different. In my version of the space-time Aether, light vibration will bend light (refract) as it passes between two different densities of space-time. If the density transition is gradual, so will it appear to be bending light as it gradually traverses through the incremental spacetime densities which is something we have misclassified at the effect of gravity on light. Essentially, I realized with an extraordinary level of clarity that dimension, which I have theorized it to be d1 in very rudimentary mathematics, was space-time and that it was infinitely homogenous (spacetime is not porous at any scale), self defining infinitely, that it has all the properties of bucket of water thus can be manipulated by moving, vibrating and spinning objects in it. The most important realization was that spacetime is always perceived by the observer at a constant density accept when two densities of space-time interact (magnetic fields), such as when an object is in acceleration. This also lead me to realize that space-time takes “time” to be distorted and effect an object’s internal structure (the Universal Law of Space-Time Permeation). This all lead me to understand several days later that if the observer always perceives space-time density as constant and if the observer is in acceleration, the observer’s actual size would “shrink” in order for this to be true; as a result the observer’s body would distort/bend space-time making it denser in front and less dense behind. This thought explosion continued for weeks and I felt completely overwhelmed but couldn’t stop thinking about it. What I was realizing and eventually roughly formulated was that as an object accelerates and approaches velocity of light (c) that the object would “shrink” to a quantum size and experience the passage of time 3x108 faster relatively, essentially c times faster, as perceived from stationary observer. Also I realized that the speed of light wasn’t an actual speed limit at all but also an acceleration limit. Thus the greater the acceleration, thus the greater the force, possibly with a max acceleration of 3x108 m/s2 the same physical shrinking will happen almost instantaneously if the acceleration were to be applied uniformly over the entire accelerating object. This train of thought continued on, and eventually lead me to a concept I developed and noted in my University Calculus book back in 1995, the concept of space-time distortion and that all objects distort space-time when in motion, but now it lead me to incorporate space-time vibration, with moments of acceleration and deceleration, to achieve distortion which essentially changes the density of space-time, thus my original concept of distortion would now also incorporate the notion of space-time density. Numerous detailed applications came to mind with profound implications. Distortion can occur by various means and each form of distortion application can lead to various effects including the perceived bending of light and space-time jump travel faster than relative speed of light. I also realized that no object of matter could ever reach the speed of light relative to the object itself (be measurable as we perceive velocity), but could profoundly pass the speed of light relative to a stationary observer. This stationary observer would essentially be looking at a celestial object transforming into a quantum particle. The size shrinking lead me to pursue the value of scale difference (S) between the quantum and celestial realms and which then lead me right back, again through this mental explosion, to my original theory that quantum and celestial realms are relative realities. Then it hit me when formulating some of the equations involving mass, that our notion of the cause and effect of gravity was equal to cause and effect of the forces of attraction and repulsion relative to “charge” of quantum particles. Essentially, weight (mass-gravity) was relatively equal to charge ( q) and the new formulated relativity mass equation supported this notion with very basic mathematics. The celestial and quantum realities were relative equals.
I had so much material in my head that I began writing everything down in multiple notebooks; endless writings, notes and equations. Every possible waking moment into the early morning comprised of sorting through all these thoughts and formulating them as best I could. I also realized the danger of what I believe I discovered, even though it was just ideas, notions and concepts. The applications could be dangerous as well as very beneficial, so I decided to take my time and write this accumulative paper (book) and truly express these thoughts as best and conservatively as I could. I wanted to express my concerns and to intensely warn everyone of the danger some of us might inflict on the Universe with some of this knowledge.
We are our own worst enemy. Why? Everything we touch, ends up damaged or killed including our neighbours. We’ve been like a virus on this planet and most certainly would be one in the Universe. We are fighters even though we might have nothing to fight for so we create reasons which last for generations resulting in destruction and death. We need to achieve a higher level of enlightenment, but currently, many of us, possibly the majority of us, are selfish and greedy. Some of this is a result of fear and a need to survive and no one person can change this mentality, but I’ll try with my idealistic hope. Essentially my moments of clarity ultimately lead me to a very speculative belief but backed up by logical objective thought. We are conscious observers and that consciousness transcends real realities and is possibly the true fundamental building block of everything along with space-time, meaning it is part of space-time, and essentially is everything. We really don’t actually die even when we physically die which is not a new notion but now its supported by some logical reasoning instead of simply on faith, though its still could to have faith. This is harder to explain, but as an object shrinks into the quantum scale and then continues on into the subquantum and so on, it will never reach an end thus infinitely small and it is possible that in between a small empty space are entire infinite Universes travelling at unimaginable relative velocities, even though to themselves traversing what we perceive to be a foot could take thousands or even billions of years relatively to these realities. We at our scale can still interact physically through space-time distortion and apparently including with simple mental thought. What became very clear for the first time to me is that our physical thoughts influence and are derived from quantum, subquantum, sub-sub-quantum interactions in our brains and through our nervous system which essentially are comprised of relative equivalents to celestial objects and yet we move them with our thoughts. What is a thought physically? What makes these quantum planets move just by us thinking? I’ve speculatively theorized it to be the “will” of the observer which literally affects space-time, even if it is at the quantum scale, or especially so. But how? The will of the observer is abstract and cannot be tangibly understood currently, but yet with it matter can be manipulated. I came to the conclusion that our thoughts, a portion of them exists in space-time itself. Thus consciousness, or a portion of it, also exists in space-time itself and when we think and have will, we can manipulate space-time, cause ripples or change its density, in order to manipulate matter as in the form of quantum particles. Quantum particles too, are made up of space and time, thus in theory thought could also manipulate the physical construct of quantum particles and all particles comprising their sub-structure (and so on). Therefore thought, consciousness and “will” transcends our perception of the physical because it is from space-time this existence of consciousness exudes from. Wherever there is space, there is consciousness because in order to perceive space there must a conscious observer. We then exist before and after death because space will always exist. This leads me to ask why should we struggle so hard and make our lives and especially the lives of our neighbours so difficult. Consciousness, as it relates to this paper’s collective theories, is like energy that cannot be created or destroyed but transformed from one energy type to another. This very logical and I believe scientifically logical approach. It validates the concepts of the soul and spirit as it is taught in many world religions and as it applies to these collective theories in relation to real physics. Yes, it boarders along the lines as being speculative, but I will definitely explore this train of thought and attempt to formulate it. What I have concluded preliminarily is that many random and seemingly unnatural celestial events that we are currently observing in the night sky, even though there is a legitimate scientific study of the event, might be intelligent from a thought process of a super-celestial being of which our perceivable Universe is physically a part of. For example, supernovas, as we currently understand them, should probably never occur. According to parts of this collective theory, even though stars constantly expel energy in for the form of space-time vibrations (the cause and effect of gravity), but the fact these events do occur could be the middle process in a thought in order for potential gravitational forces to fluctuate and form celestial movement which could result in the super-celestial entity sending a signal through his nervous system in order to move a limb via a gravitational/charge pulse in our perception of outer-space. I’m not saying our current understanding of supernovas are wrong, but I suggest that we look at these events through the eyes of this collective theory and reevaluate our current assumptions. As I stated before, I had personal doubts in my original theories thus why I never published any of my work, but I have to stress here that I did not publish any of my original work not due to possible ridicule from any community, scientific or not, but out of self satisfaction in the quality of my theories. I needed these theories to validate a sense of content in my reasoning with regards to physics which I believe they have now. I consider myself very logical and a realist and understand there will be people interested in what I’ve written here and others who boldly dismiss me. This is the natural process and I expect nothing less, but it is not logical that ridicule be the only reason to hide this work from the public and from those of you who are open to a new perceptive with regards to physics as a whole. We as a people can only elevate ourselves collectively thus through communication and collaboration which must be initiated by an idea. What if we are not alone in the Universe and we are one of an infinite number of life forms coexisting with us in the Universe? It’s possible to the more advanced of these entities, that they would see us as extremely dangerous if we possessed they’re knowledge and technology, thus it would be in the Universe’s best interest that Humans be policed. Why? We are violent, destructive, selfish and greedy. Some of us would use any means to achieve their desires even though those desires mean nothing in the end. We are killers, stealers, most of us are liars. There is the need to survive and we use many of these horrible methods to survive which speaks to greater problem with our society as a whole because society generates the need for some of us to do this. Personally, doing anything considered unethical in order to survive is much less if at all “evil” than those of us who commit unethical behavior for reasons other than survival. I am referring to physical survival not political, economic or reputation. By doing wrong against a neighbour and feeling satisfaction is evil, but if doing wrong results in true deep remorse that is not evil even though it was wrong. The Catholic Church, even with its shady history, many Christian churches and most good religions all teach us, “don’t do unto others what you wouldn’t want done to you.” It can be misinterpreted as an eye-for-an-eye, but then what would that achieve; an endless loop of unethical behavior based on the premise of revenge. How we should read this is that even if others wrong us, we should not accept it, we should defend ourselves ethically and not feel that we can do the same thing in return and feel absolved from remorse because we would still be doing wrong. We should rise above those who commit offenses against us but we also must be humble and not feel that we are better than others because we feel more ethical. That self-righteous feeling negates good ethical behavior and can be more destructive than good. Now what is considered ethical is subjective so I would say ethical behavior should fall in line with not treating others as you wish not to be treated. Of course, some of us might like being treated badly in which case don’t also treat others as they don’t want to be treated as it pertains to majority of the populous. It’s very apparent my religious background bleeds through in my writing, not because I blindly follow the church doctrine, but because I truly believe in many of the teachings of my religion and that of many other religions now more than ever, because we need to achieve global harmony. It is essential to our own Universal survival as the Human race.
What is the reason we exist? What is our purpose? Based on the somewhat logical and speculative preliminary thought, and following the notion that consciousness doesn’t “die” and is possibly space-time itself, or part of it, implying that space-time is alive thus logically a living entity. Ultimately, how does this all relate to the meaning of life? What are we all working for? If on some abstract level the form of conscious life that we all are truly has no death, then why do we have bodies that live and then die? Why would conscious space-time entities take on frail “physical” bodies and life and consciously decide to live difficult lives as the majority of us do? I can only speculate on why we exist, but personally I believe the purpose to life, all life, is to grow in our perception, knowledge, awareness, enlightenment and spiritually in order to understand our existence, before, during and after death.
Collectively, the purpose to life is to grow our consciousness and to expand our perception of reality, because as we become aware of reality and understand it, our perception of reality expands to encompass our new awareness and this process is infinite, thus enlightenment is also infinite. If this is true, try to imagine what will be revealed, perceivable and understood at an infinite level of awareness and understanding. Will all the answers to existence ever be answered at an extreme level of consciousness? I’d like to say yes, but something inside me also hopes that everything will never be answered and that mystery will always remain because then there will also be a pursuit in life, the pursuit to answer.
Life comprises of so many pursuits, such as the pursuit of creating things, even the creation of ideas. One of my favourites is the pursuit of the arts or the pursuit of enjoying the arts. Thus the pursuit of something is the common mystery in life? I don’t know why, but the fact we pursue these things makes us feel good, aids in our growth and is a good indication that it is a positive path though I personally stress that these pursuits should be for the self and the common good, not just for selfish purposes because to be just selfish is to limit your reality. Depending the scenario, being selfish can also impose limitations on the reality of your neighbours who are also part of this existence as we all are. How? There are many ways such as taking advantage of the good will of others or imposing restrictive political systems will limit the perception of reality in others. To hurt someone and make them feel worthless limits their perception on reality because being hurt makes the individual see things “negatively” even if they are not and this makes these individuals more susceptible to irrational forms of hurt. Being truly hurt makes them sensitively irrational even if some put on a strong logical exterior. “Negative” as it relates to our “psyche” means narrow minded or of limited perception. This can be, for example, not being able to trust anyone because your father wronged you or wasn’t there. There are a multitude of ways to hurt someone. Many of them are subjective so being aware of the sensitivity in others will help avoid perpetuating their initial legitimate hurt which in time will slowly mend by us assisting them increase their understanding of their situation, help lower their level of sensitivity, increase their level of perception and increase their self-worth. It’s not an easy task, but if the strongest of us were to take on the task of assisting just one other person increase their level of understanding, knowledge, self-worth and help stabilize their emotional sensitivity due to hurt they experienced, the world would be a much better place. A monumental pursuit and very noble one would be to rid the world of hurt.
Being aware of “negative” things and living “negatively” are not the same. One is good and the other is not. You must not hinder the growth of others, but be supportive even if you don’t understand your neighbour. You should understand that they, just like you, are in pursuit of something in order the feel satisfaction, content and to grow. The problem is that most of us tend to always associate satisfaction with material things and pursue the accumulation of material objects in order to fill a void that can never be filled by such means. Let’s be realistic, to have wealth is beneficial on our journey through life, but wealth is subjective so yes it can be money or something else of value. To some of us, and to me, having the love, loyalty and especially the understanding of others in the form of true friendships is a great wealth. In essence, the pursuit itself is the purpose to existence because in everything there is a pursuit.
Personally I believe the pursuit of music is a wonderful pursuit because of a question that has lingered in my mind since early childhood. What makes music so enjoyable? Why does it change how you feel? I love music, almost all forms such as rock, pop, jazz, classical, country and especially dance music. Music with a good rhythmic beat which usually compels me to move which further leads me to sing and dance to it; a secret love of mine. Currently I believe there is more mystery in music than there is in physics, even though both are probably intertwined. It doesn’t require you to know the mysteries of the Universe to create music which is itself another mystery.
What is love? It is a very noble and significant pursuit in enjoying our neighbour’s company, to learn from them and them to learn from us. To understand how they think is a wonderful pursuit which leads to the pursuit of altruistic friendship (selfless relationship) which to me is what true love is or is embodied as. To truly love is perhaps the greatest and most challenging pursuit to life. Ultimately we should love everyone because that would give us, collectively, the greatest awareness and help us ascend in our perception of reality which in turn we can then assist our neighbours to achieve this same awareness. To love just one person, or to love just your family is selfish. True love doesn’t distinguish between your mother or child and the neighbour up the street or a colleague at work. Why don’t mothers and fathers love other children as much as they love their own? Why can’t we love someone else’s parents as much as we love our own? Why do we have higher expectations of our own parents than of someone else’s parents as it relates solely to you? Yes, some of it is derived from our society, our up bring and our environment, but I don’t believe absolutely in that. I believe that certain perceived forms of love are not under our complete control and that they are preordained prior to birth. This out of control aspect of our psyche is derived from our genetic programming as cold as that may sound. Thus altruistic, selfless friendships which is a truer form of love usually collides with our genetic drives making the pursuit of selfless relationships an extremely difficult task, but if we understand the mechanisms hindering the pursuit of something that could bring about global change and peace, then we have just expanded our perception of reality allowing us to muster up the will and find the means to do so. I love the saying, “If you truly love someone, let them go.” It is a very powerful statement and many of us know how that feels. It conveys the true essence of what I’m trying to explain here. This not only applies to lovers but friends, parents, siblings and children. From a different angle, why don’t we just help others? Obviously within reason and means because we still have to contend with our current society and how it still works. Honestly why not just help? Help them to achieve growth. It is noble and there is a common good to helping others. Our basic genetic drives are very, very powerful so we must learn to surpass them and find that will to actually feel and show love for others. Again it’s not easy, but difficulty should not be the means to cease this noble pursuit. If anything, difficulty should be a reason why we pursue it.
Genetics is a funny thing, especially to a software developer like me. Why? It implies that we are all programmed like machines, which is kind of ironic from my perspective. It also alludes to the question of who did the initial programming. Do we have control over genetics other than through selective breeding and genetic manipulation? I like to believe that we do due to some very logical reasoning. We over time can actually change our genetic makeup through abstract means as well as direct. How can we do this? We can do it through our will to change. Our will to change our most basic drives, be it to control our selfishness or control a compulsion to steal will overtime change us physically. The key here is it must be willed and not cavalierly but seriously. Change can only occur if there is a will. Of course this all sounds like speculation from an archaic philosopher, but I urge a serious course of study on this topic. There was a study sometime ago, when exactly eludes me, but a group of people were asked to envision themselves playing basketball well and a second group was asked to practice basketball to improve their skill. Both groups performed remarkably well even though only one group physically practiced. This is an example of mind willing physical change. You can argue that the group thinking about playing basketball well had no physical change and I’ll argue that eye-to-hand coordination was the physical aspect that changed along with their entire physical coordination. No, they didn’t grow an extra arm, but for the short time they willed their thoughts to order their bodies to do better, it actually did result in small but real physical change. To continue my theoretical speculation, people that have children at an older age tend to have children that are genetically disposed to greater intelligence. Why? Because these older parents had more time to will change into their bodies, via their physical psyche, which affected their genetic programming and eventually was passed into their new born child. This defies Darwin’s evolution in regards to natural selection of random mutations, because in this version, random mutations aren’t random at all but willed into existence by the living biological entity.
Due to this mystery of genetic programming, which all life is subject to, we have an overwhelming sense to reproduce and protect our own bloodline. What we must understand is that it is a form of programming. We are definitely not, or should not be, the sum of this programming. No amount of genetic programming will ever order control over consciousness. If anything, consciousness will order and control genetic programming. So it’s important to understand that what we sometimes think is love is at times a very genetic response to stimuli which is pre-ordained and programmed into our bodies. An example, and perhaps the most socially acceptable, is the difference between lust and love where one concludes in forms of sex and the other concludes in the mystery of a mutually altruistic friendship. So boldly, when referring to love, I’m not talking about sex, though it can play a part of it. I believe that sex is a genetic drive in order to reproduce, and it is a very powerful impulse that many of us find very hard to control. Sex blends two or more people together involving and giving great pleasure, but it can be very negative as well as very positive and not for classical religious moralistic reasons but because of the Universal Law of Equilibrium, a scientific law which I strongly believe in. When you become aware of something, your consciousness, the actual portion of space-time you exist in becomes aware of that something, but in the union of two bodies or more, the space-time that your consciousness exists in will be blended, be invaded somewhat or totally with the space-time consciousness of the person you’re having sex with. Your literal physical space is invaded by someone else’s. The best scientific analogy is to refer to the classic notion of energy and how the Law of Equilibrium orders energy distribution. If one of the two individuals in physical union, not necessarily having sex but also in close proximity, has a limited or “negative” perception on reality the other individual’s conscious awareness will lower while the negative person’s conscious awareness will increase forming an equilibrium between the two. Now this might not be a bad thing if it is to help the “negative” person, but perhaps before forming such a union, one should ask and find out why this person has a lack of understanding (awareness) or is “negative”. What is the source of his or her “negativity” and will it continue affecting this individual and in turn continue affecting you by having or being in union with this individual which can ultimately hurt you? And this effect of equilibrium between conscious entities can be multiplied many times over by carelessly being in union with people more “negative” than you and not being aware of the impact to your psyche (consciousness and subconscious) much less your physical health. If you are aware of the impact and the consequences then it is possible your awareness might aid you in handling the negative impact but this might not protect you from being hurt on a level you cannot understand or yet be aware of. For example, some professionals become pessimistic, individuals, a negative quality after dealing with countless “negative” even though these professionals are trained to handle it
psychologically. Then again, to grow together in friendship and love in order to help others achieve growth is very noble pursuit, but you must be aware that this is what you’re doing and also be aware of the down-side as well of the up-side to such a pursuit. None of this is easy, but I’ll state it loud that it is essential to our collective well being. We all need to make sacrifices in order for all of us to grow. Catholic Priests in general and many religious leaders, even psychologists and therapists, study and meditate for many years in order to discipline their minds against the difficult tasks they’ll undertake throughout their chosen professions and many do fail but a great many also succeed. Everyone has a slight or significant perception difference on almost everything, thus to include their perception in your reality will expand your reality and then in turn you can share your perception with your neighbours and help them to grow. I use the word perception loosely here. I’m not only referring to perception but also to understanding, knowledge and enlightenment. A different perception doesn’t make the perceiver wrong or right, but just being aware of it and exploring our neighbour’s thoughts and emotions has a lot of significance, because they too are a conscious entity coexisting with you in this reality. In conclusion, to understand your neighbour also aids in understanding your own existence.
I believe in God more now than ever before, even though because of my logical mind I’ve had my doubts over the years. I often think how lonely it must be for an entity infinitely aware and understanding everything to have no equal. To have no one for him to truly share his thoughts with in a manner that only a god-like entity could truly understand. This is assuming he is truly alone, but something in me believes there is one