The at Theory.
- From: "Gerald L. O'Barr" <globarr@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:31:21 -0700
The title of this post could be as follows:
The at Theory.
The Ether Theory.
The Theory of Everything.
(The TOE)
The Simplest Possible Theory.
The Full Kinetic Theory of Gases.
The theory based upon BoM 2nd Nephi 2:11,
that 'All Things Are A Compound In One!'
The Word of God: It Is All Matter! (D&C 131:8)
It just does not matter what title we
use! The theory would still work. And we can
understand it, and use it, and enjoy it. And every
good and true title could be made to apply to this
theory, since this theory applies to all things.
Now the word 'at' comes from the symbolic splitting
of the word 'atom' into half. Atoms (in fact, all
things) are based upon ats. Ats form our lowest
level of existence. The word 'at' can also stand for
the 'Aether Theory.'
'a' 't' truly stands for 'all things.'
The word 'at' starts with the first letter of the
alphabet, and thus should be in the first volume of
all encyclopedia books. It consists of only two
letters, just as the theory consists of only two
elements, just as all of reality consists of just two
elements, mass and space.
We cannot even read this post if there is not at
least two elements that are present. There must be
the color black and the color white (or any other two
different colors), just to have a letter, and thus
have the words that are formed out of those letters.
Not even a computer, the simplest of all machines,
can function unless there is at least both a 1 and a
zero. And again, this is the same as it is with
reality itself, a something and a nothing. There
must be at least two things, in order for there to be
one thing, even if that one thing is nothing.
So let us begin.
***************************************
The ether.
The ether is based upon the following assumptions:
1) The ether (and all things in the ether) consists
of mass and space.
2) This mass is distributed in space as individual
particles. Their distribution is fairly random.
3) These particles have a near infinite variance in
their shapes and sizes. But some ranges in sizes
have more number of particles (and/or some ranges
are more stable in size) than others. (Size is being
used in the same way as the word mass can be used.)
4) Generally, relative velocities exist between
these particles. No limit in their maximum velocity
needs to be assumed (unless there are limits to the
minimum sizes, etc.) (In most models of this theory
we use maximum and minimum size limits.)
5) The very concept of velocity introduces to us, by
definition, the concept of time. And if velocity is
seen to be uniform, and it is, then so is time.
6) With motion existing for mass, and mass having
inertia, then there exists all the functions of
kinetic energy and momentum. These functions are
assumed to be simple Newtonian functions.
7) The ether obeys the following conservation laws:
a) Conservation of mass.
b) Conservation of momentum.
c) Conservation of kinetic energy.
d) And if we want some completeness,
we can say that there is a conservation
of numbers of particles.
(We live in a stable universe)
8) A collision between any two ether particles
generally results in a spall.
9) These collisions also follow all the conservation
laws listed in 7).
10) Certain large ether particles, due to their
specific size, end up being very stable in their
size. That is, they might be losing or gaining the
normal amounts of mass in many of the individual
spallings that occur. But the net mass being lost
and/or gained over time remains small compared to
their overall mass at all times.
11) There are (at least) two different sizes of
large particles that end up with a stable size
situation as presented in 10).
Please note: Since these two sizes of particles
are, over time, stable in their sizes, they are able
to be distinguished from the normal ether mix that is
constantly changing their sizes. And thus, a
separation between the normal, smaller ether mix and
these other larger and stable particles can be, and
are made. But they really do form only one system,
in that they are all of the same matter, and they are
all constantly sharing or exchanging the same matter
with each other. You can call them all the ether, or
you can just call the base system to be the ether,
both can be done.
12) Each of these two stable size types of particles
have at least one difference in how they affect the
distribution of sizes in the ether particles around
them.
Now if all these things occur or exist, the
situation automatically results in having an ether in
which these two stable sizes of particles will
experience the appearances of space like forces
between them. And these forces will be equal and
opposite of each other, if the mix in the ether
around these two stable particles is allowed to reach
equilibrium in terms of this one difference in size
distribution that these two particles are creating.
And all the particles in this system are all
undergoing collisions that result in an exchange of
mass due to the basic action of spalls, so that not
only are there a near infinite range of sizes and
shapes, but many of these different sizes and shapes
are constantly changing with almost every interaction
that occurs with them.
And the amount of change is the same for each
particle, since the change in one is the opposite
change in the other, etc. Thus, the changes are of
the same magnitude, but opposite in sign. And thus,
in these basic reactions, a sense of positive mass
and negative mass automatically appears, and they
have to be exactly equal and opposite to each other
when conditions become stable.
And these force fields can be near infinite in
range (have a true 1/r^2 form) if we assume that
mutual collisions by the field ats with themselves
(which rarely occur anyway because they are all so
small in size) do not normally change the
distributions that existed before each collision.
Now to get a force such as gravity, which attracts
all particles, we do have to allow at least one
difference in the distribution characteristics to be
associated with all particles. In QA thinking, all
particles have to create gravitons. (But gravitons,
as separate particles, do not have to really exist.
They can really be slight variances in the
characteristics of other particles. You could say
that gravitons could travel on the backs of other
particles.
But to maintain uniformity with time, we must
eventually allow this common difference to eventually
become changed back to the true normal distribution.
In other words, gravitons must disappear, or be used,
just as fast as they are created, etc.
We can allow this to occur in the deepest of space
(between galaxies), since here there will be many
more collisions where even rare events will
eventually occur in one or more of the collisions
that occur in this area, and eventually there will be
a slow change back to a completely normal
distribution. Thus we are able to maintain both
gravity and constancy in time with no problems.
Anti-gravity is present in deepest space where this
occurs, but this is not in the same space in which we
exist, or as in which gravity exists.
Let us look at a few of the numbered statements
about the ether. Statement 1) is very important.
The statement that there is only mass and space makes
our reality the simplest possible reality. No
reality can exist without having at least two
elements. And if only two exists, these two must be
seen as complete opposites of each other. In this
specific case, the opposite seen is something verses
nothing, the most opposite set of opposites.
Now what is presented is very much like the
kinetic theory of gases, which truly presents to us a
repulsive force, that of pressure. But we know that
our reality has both repulsive and attractive forces.
It is the kinetic theory of gases that involves
spalls that can achieve for us both of these forces.
And we find that they are automatically equal and
opposite forces.
Now there are many differences between the at
theory and our normal kinetic theory of gases. One
main difference is the variances in sizes. Another
is as was said, the use of the second set of
solutions to the collision equations. This is due to
the nature of spalls. And this introduces at least
one more variable to the collision equation. And all
this brings about QA type of reality, where there are
constant changes in mass, and velocity, and momentum,
and kinetic energy, and position. And all these are
seen in all the particles that are present.
And it allows forces, as QA require forces, where
there are exchanges of both plus and minus masses,
etc. All these things are obtain when we simply
allow this concept of spalls to be the working action
in collisions.
Let us repeat a few of these concepts:
None of these facts are difficult or hard to work
with or to understand. Many of the concepts involved
have been previously used in the regular gas laws we
presently used. But there are differences.
For one example, in the collision equations we
find that there are more variables involved when
there is a spall. The mass of the particles after a
collision are usually different. Thus, the collision
equations must allow these variables to be present.
This is not easy. Mathematically, we can end up with
more variables than we have equations, and we can not
allow such a situation to exist. So we must be very
careful in how we compose the problem. But it is
these very addition variables that produces the power
we need to explain forces, to explain QA, to explain
all the things that we experience and see in our
reality.
For another example, we must use the second
solution set. In a normal collision, we pick only
one solution of our quadratic. But with a spall, we
get to pick the other solution. So again, we must
look again at what we are really doing, both in terms
of our gas laws, and in terms of the ether.
But with the help of a computer, we can follow a
large number of interactions, and we are able to see
what occurs when a mix of collisions occur and see
net effects after these large numbers of acts are
accomplished. So today, we have a way to attack this
problem, and to see that it does in very deed
accomplish what we see to occur in our actual
reality. We do have fundamental particles that are
dancing around, constantly changing their positions
and their mass and their momentum and their kinetic
energies. And they can affect the particles around
them as if they had a charge, or a gravity field,
etc.
But most important of all, we can now understand
things about an ether, and how it is there, but
cannot be directly felt or seen. This is the purpose
of this article, to understand better what this ether
is all about. To understand this ether, we must
first understand spalls.
Now let us consider a simple model, in which some
of these points will be easier to understand.
Let the smallest ether particles have three different
sizes or mass, to include 99, 100 and 101 units. In
normal space, let the percentages of each of these be
25% at 99, 50% at 100, and 25% at 101. With these
percentages, we then see that the average mass is
exactly 100 mass units.
Then let one larger stable unit have an average
mass of 400 units, and the other stable mass particle
have an average of 800 mass units. And when this 400
mass unit is being hit by these 99, or 100, or 101
mass units, the following results from these
collsions: All spalls will be exactly 100 mass
units.
And when this 800 mass unit is being hit by these
99, or 100, or 101 mass units, the following results
from these collsions: No spalls will be 100 mass
units. The spalls from a 99 will remain a 99, the
spalls from a 101 will remain at 101, and any spalls
from a 100 will alternate between 99 and 101.
The results of all this is clear. One of these
units will cause the dispersion of sizes in the ether
to be reduced. The other will cause the dispersions
to be increased. And each of the 400 and 800 mass
particles can remain within a very narrow range of
mass as they do this. They will both be stable
particles in the stated ether given.
Such a simple change in the dispersions of the
ether will caused these two particles (the 400 and
the 800) to either be attracted or repelled by the
other. And if the ether was as stated, with an
equal number of 99 and 101's, and if the changes by
each 400 and 800 is as stated, which makes the sum of
the particles the same as the original mix, then the
forces will be equal and opposite.
Let us be sure exactly what is being said here.
Let us say that we have one 400 and one 800 particle
in a field that consists of 100 99-mass units, 200
100-mass units, and 100 101-mass units. This is a
total of 400 field particles.
What would we have if half of these field
particles (50 99-mass units, 100 100-mass units, and
50 101-mass units, a total of 200 particles), had
interacted with a 400 mass unit, and half of these
field particles (50 99-mass units, 100 100-mass
units, and 50 101-mass units, a total of 200
particles), had interacted with a 800 mass unit.
If we add up all the spalls, we would have from the
400 mass body a total of 200 particles of exactly 100
mass units. And from the 800 mass body, we would
have 100 bodies that were 99 mass units and 100
bodies that were 101 mass units.
And what does all this show? First of all, each
body ended up with spalls that averaged exactly 100
mass units, which was the average of the bodies that
hit it. Therefore, neither the 400 or the 800 body
could have seen any overall change in its size. And
the total space around it could also not have seen
any real change in their average sizes. But there
were changes, there were changes in the dispersions
that existed in the space near each body.
And so the average number of particles of each
size in all of space remained the same. But
immediately around each of these particles, there was
a direct change in the distribution. And this change
would exist in a 1/r^2 pattern around each particle
until there appeared another interaction which could
affect this dispersion.
All of these conditions might sound to be very
special, but in fact, they will be very natural and
cannot be prevented from occurring. With time, all
of space will show an average distribution that will
be a function of the total effects of all the bodies
that are preset. The space immediately around each
of these different bodies will have to differ from
the average that is due to all the bodies. And these
differences will have a sense of equal oppositeness
if their numbers are reasonable equal, etc.
What was special in all this was my personal
efforts to choose percentages and changes that would
be equal to what would occur in time. By doing this,
I was able to instantly achieve equal and opposite
forces without waiting for a long time to occur for
these balances to occur naturally. Now of course I
might not have really been perfect in what I have
done. But any slight mistake that I have made would
eventually be self corrected, if a computer program
were made to take into account all the actual results
that might be expected, and run the program until
full equilibrium were achieved.
Also note: The act of these 400 particles to
reduce the dispersions, and the 800 mass to increase
the dispersion, can be reversed. Whether you use one
or the other is not always critical, as long as you
are consistent in any one problem, until you begin to
worry about high speed motions or the forming of
compounds out of these 400 and 800 mass units.
Here are tables that relate the spall that results
from any two particles that are colliding. These
table tell you the mass that is added to the incoming
mass (the 99, 100 or 101) which of course would then
have to be subtracted from the mass being hit. The
spall produced would then be the 99, 100 and the 101,
plus the value in the table, and the large body would
end up being 399, 400, or 401 (or the 799, 800, or
the 801), minus the value in the table.
101 100 99
399 -1 0 0
400 -1 0 +1
401 0 0 +1
101 100 99
799 0 -1 0
800 0 -1/+1 0
801 0 +1 0
I have used such tables in some of my computer
runs to determine the action the computer should make
each time a collision is observed to take place. In
actual reality, it is not important that every hit
results in unit changes, or even in any exact values.
What really counts is that at least the averages are
in one direction or the other. And we find that this
approach is very forgiving, and very easy to achieve
final results that are very much like what QA forces
us to observe.
Thanks for reading.
Gerald L. O'Barr <globarr...@xxxxxxxxx>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The at Theory.
- From: Martin Hogbin
- Re: The at Theory.
- Prev by Date: Re: A New Solution to the Twins Paradox, and Others
- Next by Date: Re: relativity hates empirical observations
- Previous by thread: Gravitational Time Dilation and **NOT** Dark Energy
- Next by thread: Re: The at Theory.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
