## Unified Field Theory or UE – Finding a different scientific approach

### November 27, 2008

Unified Field Theory or UE – Finding a different scientific approach

~James Dunn

The most current work for being able to predict and explain Everything:

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=196498

We keep trying to break things down into smaller components so that we can understand the Universe around us as bits and pieces. Like nuclear constructs, currently scientists make larger supercolliders to observe more subatomic particles. This is valid, but we introduce innate inaccuracies because of our mathematic system we use.

From a unified outlook, these subatomic particles are just conditions created to observe certain “properties” of the same energy that we currently have no relatively tangible means of sensing. From a scientific viewpoint this is fine.

Personally, I believe the Universe is composed of an energy that is common amongst most things we can observe and detect; there does not seem to be a conflict, there appears to be a gap. However, what we observe are not unique energies, we simply use instrumentation to get observable results compatible with our senses. Reasonable, but we miss most of the interactions actually taking place. We currently do not have significant control over our own sensory limitations. And the instrumentation that we have developed thus far, for the most part, expresses values compatible with our senses, not that of universal influence.

For instance, light cascades all around us. But we only see light that vectors towards our eyes or interacts directly and specifically with our nervous system. A laser beam of high intensity traveling from right to left in front of our eyes is completely unobservable unless it strikes something in the air to reflect it directly into our eyes. So we only see what impacts us directly. We use most of our brains to represent images graphically. We can not presently conceive of all the interactions that take place in even a very tiny volume of space. We only recognize and understand very specific conditions.

Scientists are likely to find that there is an extremely broad number of conditions which can effect an observable response at the “subatomic level”. While in actuality they are simply influencing a broad category of properties of a common unified energy. Imagine two light beams converging in a dusty room. The property seems to be this bright spot in the room and we might call it SP1; but in actuality it represents a combination of two different sets of properties that converge and are observable in a specific environment; the environment itself being part of the properties involved.

Gravity and Light may be strongly related. Both intensities decrease by the square of the distance from the source, both have no known limit to how far they can travel or have influence. Perhaps the influenced properties of light can similarly influence gravity under certain conditions. Similar to confining a laser beam. If gravity can be collimated, we can create gravitational distortions; but first, what is gravity in UE components?

We explore things by accepting that our minds have significant limitations and at times we step beyond our limitations by using computers and other instrumentation. But our minds presently can not conceive the contents of any finite volume of space beyond some very simple metrics. We have a very long way to go before we will be able to represent such vast information into something we can understand and manipulate with a completely known consequence.

There are no voids in space, something exists everywhere to the extents of all observable galaxies (currently 47 billion light years). At the very minimum there is light and gravity influences in every cubic inch in space.

Is there a better method of researching, understanding, and manipulating the complex interactions of energy? Assuming a unified energy.

I think so. Whenever scientists explore mathematic models of interactions they will attempt to simplify the mathematics to more quickly arrive at a useful relationship. Acting as engineers instead of as scientists. Forcing themselves to find a relationship for publication. They use numbers to quantify a finding, but give little credance to quality.

Scientists and Engineers often use a mathematic series to throw out all but the dominant influences of an equation. The remainder is considered “noise”. I believe the noise contains a great deal of information related to UE.

Consider an equation, such as for wavelength in electromagnetic propagation. Rather than simplify the expression, keep ALL of it’s terms in symbolic format. Do the same for ALL other known equations relating nuclear physics, astrophysics, cosmology, …., but as much as practical keep the symbology unique for a given property.

If it is found that a symbol used deviates at times by even a small amount, then there is an influence that is unaccounted for. This indicates a symbol must be broken up into sub-symbols with each sub-symbol representing relative weight and qualities of the circumstance. A UE symbol is a collection of properties that are observable, then mark that symbol as representing a significant coincidence of properties in our dimensional space.

Do not simplify the equations, expand them to their limits in the form of symbology.

We see the outliers from a manipulation, like Pluto was observed to follow an orbit, but sometimes it deviated. A hypothesis was that another massive body was in its vacinity and therefore that would account for the deviation. This same type of logic can be applied to symbolic math. If something doesn’t fit, put in a dummy variable that has the properties and characteristics that you need to make the symbolic equations work. When deviations are noted, further provide symbolic characteristics to account for the deviations. When everything is working in the symbolic simulation, look for real world counterparts. The idea being, in symbolic math, we do not throw out small variations to make equations work.

Think about it, PI * diameter is equal to the circumference of a circle. But 3.14 * diameter is an approximation. Through empirical study it is found that 3.141592654 is much more accurate. Further developments yielded values of PI out to thousands of places. But, PI will ALWAYS be an approximation when using a numerical system. The value of PI has non-repeating numbers that go virtually on forever. But symbolically, the notation PI is absolutely accurate.

There is a big difference between science and engineering. In science, they need to work with absolute accuracy as much as practical to build knowledge. In engineering, they need to be practical as much as possible to keep costs down and build devices.

As nuclear lepton, spin, and other properties are discovered relating various properties, then include those relationships throughout the entire symbolic set of nuclear/astro physics symbolic representations. When calculations yield inconclusive results, then suspect other influences and build a symbol with the properties that would be needed to represent the observed results.

The desire here is to find conincident relationships that are either hidden or not yet observed because of previous oversimplification.

If a system is known and small influences are made as a collective effort, a major impact can be realized for some desired hidden or observable value. Like a rogue wave out on the ocean, small resonant swells can become coincident and form a wave 100 feet high on a calm and clear day.

Noise isn’t something to throw away, it is useful information.

## Graviton

### November 27, 2008

**Graviton
**~James Dunn

I have an Electrical Engineering background, but I know comparitively nothing of Astrophysics. So the following will read as science fiction.

Do Black Holes move with any observable relation to one another? (compensated for photon travel times, influences of gravity, and refraction in stellar dust)

In the electromagnetic world, propogation and resonance must always be considered. Black Holes represent Graviton, mass, and periodic properties.

**Dark Matter:**

As the atoms of matter are torn apart while entering a Black Hole, a large portion of subatomic particles are released. Neutrino can travel through 2 light years of Lead (Pb) without interacting, I would tend to suspect that many subatomic particles leave the confines of Black Holes unobstructed until they can react with matter/energy properties outside the region of the Black Hole, the place where the atoms are torn apart. Might this be a source of Dark Matter? Large amounts of subatomic energy bundles that have yet to coalesce back into matter. As the concentrations of subatomic energy bundles interact with graviton flux densities they return to the confines of an atomic nuclei. Matter preferrentially forming along the graviton flux gradients at perhaps certain positions of graviton resonance.

**Black Holes devoid of matter:**

Graviton exihibit some properties similar to electromagnetics, like resonance. Periodic particles beating against one another will display resonant properties like visible spectrum interference patterns. Graviton at a subatomic level are suspected by the scientific community to display resonant properties.

So, perhaps black holes are devoid of a significant amount of matter, if any. Perhaps Black Holes are three dimensional graviton resonant nodes within our Universe. Gravity, without mass.

The amplitude of the resonant regions would be the result of the influence of gravitons everywhere. Perhaps the subatomic particles that are generated while atoms disassociate help to confine graviton. The large graviton concentrations periodically spaced in three dimensions act as a type of anchor for all mass as we sense it. In a Unified Energy space, the graviton would represent the convergence of Unified Energy (UE) properties which are collectively defined as a Graviton. A photon is similarly a collection of UE properties which allows it to act as both a wave and projectile.

**An expanding, or rather oscillating, Universe:**

The Universe is presently considered to be expanding slightly faster than what would allow the Universe to collapse onto itself. But it is doing so at a rate very close to the critical value between collapse and expansion.

If the Graviton nodes are anchors and the graviton flux throughout the Universe imparts fractional forces over large expanses non-linearly. Then the mass of the Universe may oscillate over long periods of time amongst propogating graviton nodes. Like a blob of mercury on a plate with a vertical vibration component. Given time, the strands of graviton will flex in density and begin pulling matter back towards the centers of graviton densities.

29Apr07 – See “Distribution of Dark Matter”

**The Spin of Black Holes:**

Graviton nodes exist in many different volumes. Spin might be characterized by the masses in orbit around the graviton node, rather than the graviton node itself. Or perhaps a graviton node has a multi-dimensional spin as part of its graviton properties.

**Our Universe much different than it appears:**

Given that our observable Universe is highly manipulated by matter and energy throughout the travel of photons, I have no idea as to what the Universe actually looks like; nor the spacings or propogation of black holes, both large and small. A photon traveling from a galaxy with a black hole as its center would continuously be pulled along the axis between the black hole and the observer. So a lens effect occurs causing photons to cross the central axis at some point during its propogation. The larger the Black Hole, the stronger the lense effect, and the further the apparent distance to the galaxy. The galaxy is actually much closer than it appears.

**Alternative form of propulsion:**

In the electromagnetic spectrum, light propogates naturally and omnidirectionally in-general. Through certain manipulations light can lase monochromatically along a single vector. If graviton would allow for a similar manipulation, then an alternate form of propulsion becomes feasible. A graviton node might be influenced into propogating along a vector by disturbing the flux of sub-atomic particles surrounding the Black Hole. A graviton node devoid of mass would not necessarily have any inertia as part of its properties.

A Chicago based research team has been investigating a new form of nuclear energy dubbed “Total Anihilation” since before 2000. They are attempting to create a complex waveform to disturb the nuclear bonds of atoms. If successful, they will be able to produce large concentrations of subatomic particles. If the subatomic particles can be isolated, they can be used to provide a multitude of new processes based upon sub-atomic particle manipulations. In UE, this would mean we would have the opportunity to observe and manipulate many converging properties not before possible. I would suggest this physical research be done off of the Earth because the energy release is trillions of times more powerful than a fission or a fussion.

Related to the above, if a small graviton node could be created to propagate along or perpendicular to a graviton flux density, then a space craft might be propelled in this fashion. Further, if a small Black Hole (Graviton Node) were to have a non-uniform density of graviton related subatomic particles influencing the intense graviton flux, perhaps the black hole could be made to propogate and pull surrounding matter along with its graviton density. Intergalactic travel of worlds becoming feasible in a mental exercise sort of way. Where our Sun trails the Black Hole and carries our Solar System with it to a new location in the Universe. Expand this further, and our Milky Way Galaxy could be propelled similarly.

Moving as a body of matter with similar references would have the effect of not having a sensation of being in motion. However, there exists a great deal of matter along a proposed path of travel. Matter moving near the speed of light would vaporize in the presence of free floating hydrogen atoms in space. Potentially, varying the properties of graviton densities could create paths for matter to flow around us as we traveled along a course. To the incident matter, we would appear almost non-existent; a brief distortion in our perceptions lasting no more than a nanosecond. We would pass through stars without incident. All displaced matter seamlessly returning to its position before displacement.

Possible? Yes. Within the next 10 years? Who knows. One never knows when and where inspiration merges with the practical. But based upon recent past history, not likely. We have the technologies available to produce space-based solar collection systems to provide clean energy for the planet; but we don’t use our resources conscienciously.