I have since changed some of this since I’ve written my other chapters called “The Varying Speed of Light” http://www.scribd.com/doc/36555372/The-Varying-Speed-of-Light and “Magnetic Over-Unity via Centripetal Spin” http://www.scribd.com/doc/35527270/Magnetic-Over-Unity-viaCentripetal-Spin With With that in mind.. .
Part of my problem understanding Dr. Hawking's model on black holes is my philosophy that nothin nothing g ever travels in a straight line. line. There is no such thing as a straight line in our 3D reality. Crazy talk you say? Please bare with me... Look at the straightest ruler you have available. Now take a microscope and look at the edge of that ruler. Is that ruler ruler truly a straight straight line? No. It's made up of smaller things compacted together called atoms and molecules. What is the shape of an atom?
Can you please point out One straight line that makes up an atom. Everything is spherical and travels in an arc. A Cartesian Coordinate system is a fictitious concept that works on paper but not in 3D space. Not even with a Z axis. Nothing Nothing travels in a straight line. Everything travels in an arc. Everything has positive and negative. The rate rat e of arc can be so great, that from from your relative relative perception perc eption,, it Seems as if it's a straight line, but when you truly investigate, you see it's not not really straight. straight. It's a bunch of arcs compacted together and when you zoom out, you see the total sum of the parts. So, lets look at these current models of space:
I DO NOT understand this or believe this. ((after filtering information
through through the notion notion that there are no straight lines.)) No 2D in our 3D reality. It’s a blank graph…. where are a re the other stars and planets? If that’s a model of of a black hole…. where where are the partic pa rticles? les? Or at least the affect of the particles on the graph. Please tell me what travels in a straight line through space with zero influence influence from other gravity like in that graph. And why doesn’t the graph have a Z axis? It’s 3D space. space . Where does that depression in “fabric of space-time” come into play when you have a Z axis and things traveling from every given direction? I could always be wrong..... but here's my argument: I believe there is a force other than gravity which causes objects to spin and rotate WHILE they gravitate towards or away from something. My make believe word for this is "vortation." Gravity is attracting / repelling. Vortating is spinning. 2 different things. things. Why is there no evidence of any rotation in the 4 picture examples of space? Look at Phi.... look at nature. Everything spirals. Why don’t the current models of space have any spin? It It doesn’t seem natural even as an example. Their model’s are fiction. Look at nature:
And why does their grid show ANY straight lines if it's representing 3D space?!?!? Get rid of the grid altogether, but if you want to use it as an example, then change the grid to look like the surface of an ever moving ocean.... not a frozen lake. On your your relative relative scale, an arc may appea a ppearr flat, but it's not not on the grand grand scheme of things. A still image of a frozen lake isn’t missing missing much action. action. A still image of the ocean will show ripples and variation. No flatness at any given time you click the camera. And NO part of the ocean is perfectly flat since the Earth is round and water flows Around the surface. And the picture models of the universe are stagnant. A picture is frozen in time. The ocean is not frozen in time! The picture models would need to constantly move and change in order to be accurate. And if it did that... then it wouldn't be flat and stagnant.
All of the pictures for the current models of space are only a flash in time. Just like taking a picture of you with a camera. That one picture doesn't represent your whole life.... only a moment of your life. All of the current models of space only represent the fabric of space-time as a frozen lake and when something sits on the frozen lake the ice bends and creates a depression in the meniscus of the water as if it was liquid. How can the frozen meniscus of water bend as if it's liquid? It simply can't. And how can even the liquid meniscus of water be flat if the molecules making up that water are not flat themselves? What you are seeing is the total sum of the parts which gives the false impression of a 2 dimensional interpretation for your 3D observation. What you are seeing is water frozen in time on your scale, but when you look in another dimension (microscope) you see the reality. Nothing is flat, nothing travels in a straight line. Everything arcs, spirals, vortates. Nothing is stagnant because nothing can stay at absolute zero. Especially a black hole. The ocean of space-time is not like a frozen lake. Your picture models don't account for this because they don't move. Even the molecules and atoms in the frozen meniscus of a lake are still moving. moving. You just can't see it. Because on your scale... it's "frozen." Is it it really frozen on the the grand scheme sche me of things? things? No. Is a ruler really rea lly straight straight when you you look look at it it under a microscope? No. Lets take a "perfectly flat" meniscus of liquid water. When a water bug walks on the surface of the water, what happens? Lets compare the current model of space, to nature.
The current models of space are saying the meniscus of space-time (Fabric) can't be broken. Can the surface surface of water ever be broken? Of course. The amount of force required to break the meniscus is what we call surface tension. If we could see a particle of sand floating around the depression in the water near the bug's leg.... I doubt that the particle of sand would ever be caught in an orbit around the water bug's leg. The current models of space are saying that we are all floating on the surface of an ocean but there is nothing beneath the meniscus, or fabric? This is another reason why I have trouble with the term "fabric" of spacetime, or the mattress theory. Only computer models and holograms can show you the reality of our 3D space-time. it seems you'll you'll be stuck in in a paradox par adox if you you base a 3D computer model from fro m a 2D 2 D perception perc eption.. There's always 3 sides to every story. Yours, mine, and the truth. If all this crazy talk is my side, then the picture examples are of your side:
First First of all... all... why is space represented repre sented as flat? What is that person standing on? And I think that guy standing there must be god because only he could stand on a non existent flat surface. If you can't make a hole in water and bend water around like the picture above... how can you you compare the fabric of space-time, to an ocean? If you're going to draw a flat line on paper, roll the paper up like a scroll since since that represents repres ents the true path of an object in space. spa ce. Or put the paper in front of a fan so that it's constantly blowing and rippling. If an object traveled in a straight line, that would mean we are stationary in space. Or it would mean we are moving through space in a straight line. But nothing can travel parallel forever. At some point those 2 objects will intersect. It could take the amount of space available in the universe but they will eventually intersect. The rate of inclinat inclination ion is sooo sooo small, that from your relative perception pe rception it SEEMS as if they are traveling parallel. But if you were able to witness it for eternity... those objects would crash into each other before an eternity. Even if those those two object obj ect were wer e the only two two existing existing objects in the universe,
they would STILL intersect because they each have a gravitational pull on one another. That pull will will eventually cause an a n intersection. A straight line is a fictional concept that only works on paper and is an "optical delusion" delusion" on our relative scale. sc ale. Cartesian Coordi Coordinate nate systems do not work in 3D space spac e because they deal with straight lines. They work just fine for our tiny universal frame of reference at this point in Humanity. But if we wanted to travel really really far, I think we would need to use a spherical coordinate system or something even more complex. Since Since your point point of origin origin never remains rema ins stationary, you might actually actually need nee d a spherical coordinate system that constantly rotates in an ever-changing phi spiral. How are you supposed to draw a constantly moving Cartesian graph on paper? You simply cannot. You need advanced computer systems like we do today or holographic systems to draw proof of 3D reality in it's true context. There are no flat lines and no flat space in a spherical coordinate system. And even a spherical coordinate system doesn't account for spin. All the models of the universe I see, only account for a Cartesian view on space. Where is the rotation? Where is the arc? Where does phi come into play? Gravity doesn't need to be present in the form of a celestial body to affect an object's p ath of travel. Space is not empty so therefore there will always be a force on an object no matter how deep into space it goes. Nothing will ever be without some pressure. Even in the vacuum of space. Straight Straight lines lines cause cau se resistance r esistance since everything e verything naturally naturally flows flows in an arc. Of course our current models of space fall apart sooner or later because eventually, a straight line always meets resistance. This force other than gravity, makes All straight lines ARC on it's path.
It's natural and it's a force other than gravity. I feel that Gravity and Vortation go hand in hand like Space and Time. Space-time..... Space-time..... Gravity-spin. Gravity-spin. Lets look at Marko Rodin's coil and vortex model. His coil dramatically reduces electrical resistance and barely any heat is generated. He says it's because he wrapped the coil in a natural spiral which flows in accordance to the universe. Marko Rodin's coil model is correct!
And a pic of John John Searl's device called the SEG SE G (Searl Effect Generator) The T he magnets, rollers, stator ring, etc are composed of arcs. No straight lines.
I used to think space was flat, then I thought it was a sprial, then I though it was a sphere. Now I don't think space is made of anything at all. There is no fabric. Only forces within the void which act upon corporeal objects. All thing things s are ar e on their own path down a vortex. Newton says, "All objects travel on a straight path until an outside force acts upon them." Well, I don't think think so. I sense that All objects Would travel trav el in a straight line line through through space-time spa ce-time if it wasn't for gravity-spi gra vity-spin. n. Since there is always some gravity from background radiation in the deepest dee pest parts of space, space , there will will always be spin to couple couple that gravity. gravity. I completely agree with Newton when he said, "For every action there is an equal and a nd opposi o pposite te reactio r eaction." n." For the "action" of space the equal and opposite reaction would be time. For the "action" of gravity, the equal and opposite reaction would be spin. I don't believe in in the flat flat space model as if space spac e was like a mattress. There is no floor in space, no grid, and no fabric of space-time. And if there is... it's probably not flat. Everything travels in an arc. Everything has positive and negative. There must be a particle to balance out another particle.
There must be a force to balance out another force. Those 2 particles can be so far away from each other that you would never realize they are associated associated in a binary orbit. Almost Almost like the biblical tale of Noah. Everything travels 2 by 2 in an ark. "Binary Vortation" Vortation" Space balances out time like gravity balances out spin. Everything is moving in space together yet independently. There are so many objects in space that there is an infinite number of neutral points in space. Therefore, there is gravity-spin everywhere. Perhaps Per haps this is where the th e notion notion of infi infini nite te proba p roba bility bility comes into play? There seems to be an infinite amount of directions you can go from any one given point in in space-time. spa ce-time. Therefore any place you start from is a neutral point to something or someplace someplace else. So, phi is natural. A spiral is natural. If you have enough phi spirals intersecting intersecting on a small sma ll scale, I think you will will eventually see a straight line on a giant scale. So if you shined a really powerful laser beam that could reach the distance of the universe... you would see it arcs around planets and stars like a sine wave. At no point is that laser beam perfectly straight. But again, like a phi spiral, if you zoom in enough on any given part of the arc, it will will appear ap pear as a straight line. line. The phi spiral is a pretty simple concept. Even though I believe in god, I think intersecting spirals is a simpler concept than god. Most people's Occam's Razor is god because its the simplest solution, so therefore people think it must be the correct one. But simple to one person, is complex to another. Everything is relative. --Jason Verbelli
