The Fundament of the Fundamentality of What is Fundamental by Paul N Butler

My reply to Scott S Gordon's comment to me on his paper's page on Jan. 14 2018

Dear Scott,

I read your papers and first let me say that I believe that we hold one concept in common although it is expressed somewhat differently in our presented theories and that is that one of the two most basic entities in the observable universe is motion. Because you are locked into the natural creation viewpoint, it is understandable that you feel the need to consider the construction of the spatial system as the other most basic structure to explain the total construction of the universe. I, on the other hand, have decided to limit my current level of information transfer to man here to the construction of the next lower level of hierarchical structure of which man currently does not have a workable conceptual understanding, which is the level of matter particle, energy photon, and field particle structuring. I am doing this primarily for two reasons. First, an understanding of the construction of these entities will clear up many of the quantum and relativity nonsense beliefs, such as that things cannot happen unless they are observed, that the various particle interaction results and there probabilities of occurrence are due to some mysterious random quantum energy fluctuations of spatial vacuum, the concept of multiverses, and the idea from relativity that time is an existent dimension, etc. Once these erroneous concepts are eliminated, the math becomes much simpler and a complete understanding of the universe down to the level of the spatial system that is designed to provide the positions that basic motions can be on, can move from one to another on, and can interact with each other on and the basic motions that inhabit that spatial system can then be more easily understood. I, therefore, start with the existent spatial system and basic motions as the two most basic structures presented in my theory. I leave the mechanisms behind the structure of the spatial system that produces what we perceive as space and the outputs of the motions that are contained in that mechanism that we perceive as basic motions for a later information transfer when man has first been able to understand the levels down to that mechanism. The second reason that I do not provide that information at this point is that man in this world would like to think of himself as god with power over everything and, therefore, would not readily accept that there is someone much greater than him who has constructed the universe and everything in it. The problem is that when you go beyond the simple level of the spatial system and its basic motions to what generates and maintains that system and those motions, the complexity expands outward in the same way that it expands in the other direction when you go from the simple motions to the construction of sub-energy particles, energy photons, matter particles, all of the different atoms that can be constructed of them, all of the great multitude of different possible molecules that can be constructed from the atoms, and the innumerable large scale objects that can be made of them, etc. It is like figuring out after a lot of observation and then putting those observations into a coherent understanding of your world, that you are really just the output images on a very large television screen or computer monitor except that instead of just being made of a light output, you are also made of matter particle and sub-energy field outputs and in three dimensions instead of just the two dimensional TV screen. The organizations of these outputs as they appear in your world require a behind the scenes complex mechanism in the same way that the television also requires to display its image and in addition to that a more complex information structure is needed to generate the actual entities that appear on the screen and to update them as a result of their interactions, etc. The problem is that you have no way to observe those behind the scenes mechanisms. If, on the other hand, the one who made the television and the other needed mechanisms would write a book that gives some of the details of their construction and would then display that book on the screen, so you could read it, you might be able to get some understanding of it. That is what has actually happened, but that is for the next level of understanding, which most people would not currently be able to accept, because of their naturalist outlook on life that prevents them from considering or looking into such things.

To get back to your paper, you either have a problem of lack of understanding of how things work or you have not developed the language to properly express them. First you say that the void contains a very large number of points. If that is the case then these points must be existent entities of some nature. You say that they can possess the property of containing motion. This suggests that in order to contain a motion within themselves they must be composed of some substance that can interact with a motion and contain it. You do not address what the points are composed of, which makes an unanswered more basic concept yet to be developed. You say that the motion contained within the point is in the form of a spin. Basic motions continually move from one point to the next. This requires an existent spatial system of at least one dimension for them to travel in. A spinning motion is a cyclical motion that requires at least a two dimensional spatial system to exist in. This is because a spinning motion is the result of continual interactions between two or more motions acting at directional angles to each other. If the spin that you are talking about does not conform to the laws of motion then you should not use that analogy, but instead make a new word and then define it to describe the details of what is actually happening and also the same thing about the point if it does not conform to the current definition of a mathematical point. If all of these points exist in the void, it seems that the void that you are talking about does not conform to the basic understanding of it as being an empty spatial system. You could also consider the void to be completely nothing, but nothing could not contain anything even zero dimensional points that possess properties such as the ability to spin, etc. Without the existence of any dimensions, the only thing that could exist is just one point because if any more points existed they would create a one dimensional world in that a motion could travel the distance that would be created between them from one point to the other. In reference to a primary spinning point, you talk about the surrounding or adjacent points. In a zero dimensional world, there could not be any other points next to or surrounding the point because there would be no possible positions in existence that were next to or surrounding the point without the construction of at least one dimension to provide positions for those points to exist in. One point could not be relatively closer or farther away from another point without forming a distance between them. You say "Relative motion of each surrounding point represents a circular path". A path is a way that can be traveled from one place to another, which is essentially a distance that can be traveled. A circular path requires the existence of at least two dimensions because a circle is a two dimensional object. When you talk about a god entity's energy field, what is that energy field composed of? Is it something that would exist as part of the entity even if it is not spinning or is it either the spinning motion itself or somehow caused by that motion? When you talk about the existence of an infinite energy field across a god entity's diameter are you saying that the field contains an infinite amount of energy? If the entity is a zero dimensional point it would seem that its diameter would be zero also. When you talk about E2 energy you say "is associated with a particle that displaces the surface of the water medium in a circular motion of the water. This constant circular motion of the water is required for the creation of E2 energy contained in particles". What is the water that you are mentioning and since this is at the scale of entities that exist in space-time and not as those existing as space-time it would seem that their motions should conform to the observed laws of motion, so how is the circular motion generated and maintained in them? I am assuming that the circular motion is what you consider to be the source of the matter particle's rest mass. A normal circular motion is a two dimensional entity. It can exist in a three dimensional object, but it does not produce a three dimensionally uniform mass effect. As an example, If you have two spheres of the same size that are rotating at the same speed in the same direction (counterclockwise), such that the axis of one is parallel to the axis of the other and they move toward each other with the center of one heading directly toward the center of the other and then they interact with each other, the interaction side of one will be moving in one direction that is perpendicular to its direction of travel in one direction while the interaction side of the other will be traveling in the opposite direction in a line that is also perpendicular to its direction of travel. This will cause a mass effect that will tend to cause the spheres to repel each other. If, on the other hand, you bring them together, such that the axis line of one is aligned with the axis line of the other and they are both rotating in the same direction, when they come together their rotation does not introduce a mass effect because the rotation does not exist relative to one another. It requires a three dimensional motion to maintain an equal static mass effect in all directions around the matter particle.

You may have a good point, but it is counterproductive to use examples that exhibit behaviors that are opposite to those that you are trying to convey. It would be better to make up new words for the new objects or concepts and then describe their behaviors as meticulously as you can while at the same time keeping the explanations of your concepts as simple as possible. I will stop for now and wait for your reply to clarify to me about these things.

Sincerely,

Paul

Dear Dizhechko,

I noticed that in the comments on your paper's page, people seem to address you as Boris. Is that what you prefer? If so, I will do that next time.

I did have some trouble with translation of your paper, but I think I got some of it figured out. We both agree that current physics over emphasizes abstract math modeling that is often not as connected to observed reality as it should be, which has resulted in the belief in and development of many observationally groundless concepts, such as the idea that things cannot happen unless they are observed, that time is a physical dimension, and the proposed existence of a multiverse, etc., while at the same time completely ignoring the development of things that are clearly observed, such as what the fact that matter particles, energy photons, fields, and simple angular and linear motions can be transformed into each other, tells us about their internal compositions and operations. It is obvious that they all must be composed of the same basic material in order for any one of them to be transformed into any other one of them. This basic material must be used in a different way in each of them to allow each to have its own specific properties that differ in many ways from the observed properties of the others. After analysis I have come to the conclusion that the simple linear motion is the basic material of all of them and have then shown how each can be constructed out of simple motions, such that each of them generates its individual observed properties of action and interaction.

Concerning New Cartesian Physics, first I noticed that you refer to Rene Descartes as she. This may have just been a translation error, but in case it is not, I thought it good to mention that Rene Descartes is a man, so, he, would be more appropriate. Rene is more often used as a woman's name. In fact I have a daughter whose middle name is Rene, but it is apparently also used in some cases as a male name. I have found that all that is needed to explain the construction of the universe is motions and the empty space of a dimensional system for them to be positioned in, to move from one position to the next in, and to interact with other motions in, so I do not believe that space and matter are the same thing as Descartes apparently believed. I believe that fields are composed of simple linear motion particles, that an energy photon is composed of a simple linear motion that travels at the speed of light that is joined to another motion that is structured such that it generates the photon's frequency, wavelength, and dynamic mass effects, and a matter particle is composed of an energy photon that contains an additional motion that causes it to take a curved enclosed three dimensional path. The great angular motion generated by the photon as it travels this path generates the matter particle's rest mass. With the use of the fields composed of the field particles; space can actually be a vacuum. There is no need for such things as vacuum pressure, etc. Not only can the material and its associated structure of the basic particles be easily understood, but the structure of the strong and weak forces, etc. and how they function in matter particles, atoms, and molecules, etc. can also be understood in this way. My papers on this site's contests explain the details. I have seen many currently new theories that propose the use of rotation in one way or another usually to generate vacuum pressure or a mass effect, etc., but a rotation is a two dimensional construct, so it does not create a balanced mass effect in all three dimensions. It requires a three dimensional motion to create a balanced mass effect in all directions around a matter particle. You say that in matter the rotation is more complex than the rotation of the vacuum, so it may be that you already know this and have incorporated a three dimensional motion into your theory. Another problem with concepts that use rotations is that a rotation generally requires a continual interaction between two motion sources. In the absence of an interaction a motion always travels in a straight line in one direction at a speed determined by its internal motion amplitude or content. In order for everything to move in a circle at larger scales you would have a similar problem.

When you say that physical space is the body of God, you are closer to being right than most physicists that I have come into contact with who don't even believe in the existence of God. The only place that we can look to get an understanding about where God is in relation to his creation is his word, which is usually called the Holy Bible. It usually contains both the Old and New Testaments. First, since God created the universe, he had to have some place outside of the creation in which he existed before he made the creation. From the scriptures it looks like God may have completely filled that place. This would require that he would first have to evacuate or remove part of himself from an area in which he would then create the universe. God made the creation by the part of him that is called the Word. The Word later came into the world in the form of a man as God's Son and in John 1:18 it says" No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." When God made man in his image, he took a rib out of Adam and used it to make Eve, who is the glory or image of man. It may be, therefore, that God also took a part of the motion that he is made of, that would be a relatively equal part of him as the amount of a man that a rib would be, out of his bosom and used it to make the creation. The space in which he created the world must be inside of him because in Acts 17:28 it says about God "For in him we live, and move, and have our being;". Even though the creation is made of some of his motion and is located within him, he has separated it from him by the empty space that he made within himself to contain it. This is necessary because he says that he is a consuming fire. His motions are so great that they would quickly burn up the whole creation if it was not separated from him in that way. When he returns at the end of the world he says that the heavens and the earth will be burned up. In the Revelation 20:11 when God returns for the final judgment it says "And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. That is what will happen when he comes back in to the space he has evacuated to reclaim his motion that he took out of himself to make this creation. This means that the creation is in space that he was in, but is not in now and it is made of motions that were parts of him, but are not now because he removed them from him to use to make the creation. This first creation is constructed in eight parts. The lowest four parts make up the earth. The next three parts make up the heaven and the eighth part is a place that God says is high above the highest heaven where Jesus ascended to after his resurrection and is only accessible to God the Father and Jesus Christ, (the Word of God). God tells us that he is composed of three parts. In 1 John: 7, God says, "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." In Romans: 1, 19 - 20, God says, "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:" This means that God has made images of himself in the structure of the creation. Man is made in God's image and a man is also composed of three parts. First is his spirit, which is the image of the Father. It produces his intents or purposes that he needs or desires to fulfill. The second part is his soul, which is the image of the Word. It is able to receive and understand the spirit's intents and can also generate thoughts that the parts of the body can understand. It sends those thoughts to the body, which is the third part of the man and is the image of the Holy Ghost. The body translates those thoughts into the motions needed to fulfill the spirit's intents. In God, the Father is the spirit. He is called the invisible God and ultimately controls all things through the Word. The Word is the mediator between the Father and the Holy Ghost. This is needed because as God says in Isaiah: 55, 8 - 9, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. This is why Jesus (the Word) said "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh to the Father, but by me." In John: 14, 6. We do not have the ability to understand and communicate directly with the Father. The father has, therefore, provided the Word to be the mediator between him and us. The Holy Ghost is his body, which is composed of all of those of man who have received the Father and the Word into themselves to live in them and control them in a way similar to the way that our spirit and soul controls our bodies. The reason that God made this creation is to build a body for himself to live in. He made us with the intent that we become members or parts of his body in which he will live without end in a new and better creation after the end of this creation, which will occur after he has made all of his body's members and, therefore, he will no longer need this creation. The heaven is composed of three parts or heavens. It is made in God's image. The first and lowest heaven directly controls things in the earth and is ruled by beings called the Powers. It is an image of the Holy Ghost. The second heaven is the mediator between the first and third heavens and is ruled by beings called the Principalities. It is the image of the Word. The third heaven is the highest heaven and is ruled by beings who are ministering spirits called angels who minister to or serve God directly. God's throne is in this heaven and there is also a sea of glass in the middle of it called paradise where the spirits of those who are God's body members go when they leave their bodies when their bodies die. It is a temporary holding place where they can be before God's throne until Jesus returns to earth to rule there for a thousand years. He brings those spirits with him when he comes and they are then resurrected to live with Jesus there for that thousand years. The third heaven is an image of the Father. God passes his intents down to the angels who are also spirits that can understand them. The angels pass his intents down to the principalities who translate them into the language of the powers and the powers then carry out his intents in the earth. There are four powers. The earth is a two level structure. First there is a behind the scenes framework structure that is hidden to us that is composed of four parts. There is one part for each of the powers and they are used in the generation of the four spatial dimensions of earth. They control the structure of the spatial dimensions that hold the motions that generate the motions that we perceive to exist in our universe. Each of the four parts is in the form of a giant wheel. Ezekiel was allowed to see them and he said they were so high that they were dreadful. They have eyes (sensors) round about them. Inside of them, they contain what is called a deep that is composed of what is called waters. When motions are entered into the waters they move around the wheels on the surface of the waters. The motions are sensed by the sensors (eyes) and this causes motions to be generated in our universe. The motions in the wheels do not seem to dissipate or spread out like would likely happen to motions in water in our world, so our water is only an image of these waters, which are much better than our water. It appears that they have zero resistance to the motions and no interactions between motions occur within the wheels. Interactions only occur in the output motions that make up our world and the changes are then fed back into the wheels to change the motions there. In the scriptures there are mainly two people who were allowed to see these things. The first was Ezekiel who saw them looking up at them from below on the earth and the second was John who was taken up into heaven and saw them from that perspective. The first three wheels control the first three dimensions that we are familiar with in our everyday lives and the fourth wheel controls the fourth dimension that controls the motion that creates the frequency, wavelength, and dynamic mass effects of energy photons and matter particles. The motion that controls the three dimensional curvature of the photons in matter particles to cause them to travel in a three dimensional enclosed curved path may be located in the fifth part of the creation, which is the first heaven or it may have to do with the waters above the firmament that are mentioned in Genesis: 1. With the establishment of this level of background information we can now go there and gain a better understanding of what God is telling us there. Genesis 1: 1 - 5, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day." Note that God mentions the creation of the heaven and the earth, but then begins talking only about the earth. The earth was made as a spatial system to contain things with forms or shapes, but it was void or empty. The first action that God took was to add motions to the waters by moving upon the face of the waters. Notice that it says that it was God's Spirit that added those motions. They would have generated the simple motions in our universe that I call sub-energy particles of which fields are composed. The field particles are used to create the matter particle's internal and external fields that allow them to be joined together into atoms and allow the atoms to be joined together into molecules and to allow the molecules to be joined together into the large scale objects that make up our observable world, but they are invisible to us just as the Father is and man cannot yet observe and individual sub-energy particle in any way. They are the image of the Father who introduced them into the earth mechanism. It is evident that the Word of God created the light that is an image of him. This would have been by the addition of motions to the fourth dimensional motion of some of the sub-energy (field) particles to give them the wave like properties that transformed them into energy photons. Energy photons contain these two motions joined together into one entity in the image of the joining together of God the Father and the Word into one being as Jesus said "I and my Father are one". It is interesting that when we speak, sound comes out of our mouths in the form of waves, so God was giving scientific information about the properties of light photons long before people knew of the wave effects of light. The Word is called the light of the world in several places in the scriptures. Next it says that God divided the light from the darkness. This would be all three parts of God working together. This would have been the addition of another motion to some of the light photons to cause them to take enclosed three dimensional curved paths that would transform them into matter particles. They would then become dark because the energy photon contained in them would be confined to the matter particle's enclosed path. In matter particles these three motions are all joined together into one entity in the image of the Father, The Word, and the Holy Ghost who are all joined together into one being. It would represent God the Father and the Word living in and through his body members to fulfill his intents in the world, which is the ultimate result of his intent for making this world. Genesis 1: 6 - 8, "And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day." Here God is still making changes to the behind the scenes structure of the earth that we cannot observe. He divides the waters of the earth mechanism into three parts. They are the waters under the firmament, which God uses to make the land and water that make up the planet earth as we know it, the firmament itself, which God uses to hold the stars and the sun and the moon, and the waters above the firmament. God does not tell us what the waters above the firmament are used for. As you can see, our planet and all that we can see as our universe are all parts of the earth. This includes the earth's heaven. So if you ever meet someone from another planet you can still truthfully greet him by saying "Greetings earthling" and they may need to have the gospel preached to them so that they can be saved just like us. The three other heavens are above and control the earth framework mechanism that generates our universe as its output. I hope this helps.

Sincerely,

Paul

Dear Boris,

You did not tell me of your preference, so I used Boris this time. Let me know if that is not ok with you. Numbers and quantities are used by God in the creation. For the most part math is man's abstract language used to work with them, so I don't believe that math is of Satan, but like all of the parts of man's abstract language system it can be used either for good to aid in the understanding of God and his creation or for evil to lead people away from understanding of God and his creation. God did not say that all knowledge was bad or evil for man to have. Man was only forbidden to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Once they understood what was good and what was evil, they would know that they were to obey God and to disobey God would result in the penalty of death, which is why God commanded them to not get that knowledge because he knew that their disobedience would result in their deaths. Other knowledge was not forbidden. Math can either model reality, a complete fiction like in video games, or anything in between that is part true and part false. Having a good conceptual understanding based on observation can help to keep the math models based on reality. As an example, if you understand that total motion content is always conserved in interactions, you won't believe a math model that is based on time as a physical dimension in which you could go back into the past or forward into the future because in order for that to work a complete new copy of the universe would have to be made every time some motion in the universe changed to a new position in space in order for there to be an existent past to go back into before that motion moved. This would be a violation of motion (energy) conservation because it would require a new creation of all of the matter particles, energy photons, and field particles in the universe and even a complete copy of the spatial system to make the copy before it was changed by the movement of the motion to its new position. If you went back in time and changed anything, it would either have to start a new alternate progression of copies of the complete universe from that point or changes would have to somehow be propagated through all of the copies that had been made from that point to the point that you went back in time to change all of the subsequent time to incorporate the changes that you made and all of the other changes that might have occurred as a result of the changes that you made. This would require a complex processing system that could not come about in any natural way and since God does not mention such complexities and observations don't support them either, it would not be reasonable to assume that they exist. My purpose is not to sow discord, but rather to sow the truth that if believed would eliminate discord. If space is matter and matter is space then there is an unknown or undefined substance that space/matter is composed of that contains the rotation motions that you mention. Without knowing what this substance is, the theory would still be incomplete lacking the most important basis upon which everything is built up upon. In addition to that a continual rotation must be supported by the interaction of two motions with one of them working at an angle to the other, because in the absence of an interaction, motions always move in a straight line. What those motions are and how they work would also need to be explained for the theory to have any possibility to be true. As I mentioned in my previous comment, there would also be the problem that a simple rotation would not produce a static mass effect in the matter particles that was the same in all directions around the particle, but observational data suggests that it is the same in all directions. How is the structure of energy photons explained in your theory? I find it much simpler for space to just provide empty places where motions can be positioned, can transfer to the next position, and can interact with other motions. Making space an active entity that contains complex cyclical motions in it adds unnecessary complexity. It is much simpler to make fields from simple linear motion entities, to construct energy photons by adding one more linear motion to a field particle, and to make matter particles by adding one more motion to an energy photon.

You are welcome. It can sometimes be necessary to simplify a conceptual description in order to gain its acceptance, but there are a couple of possible downsides to that, which are that you might find someone who understands that it won't work properly in the simplified form and you could look to be lacking in understanding, which would hinder acceptance and if it does get accepted because people could accept the simplified form, you must then change the form to the way that things really work to establish the true workable form, which again could cause you to lose credibility because it can look like you didn't fully understand it in the first place.

I can understand your problem of lack of time to communicate, but with me the rating is not important because I would not expect to win the contest because I am giving out information that is well beyond man's maximum acceptance threshold. I am not entering the contests to win, but just to disseminate information that is important to man's advancement ability. With me, the problem is that once the papers come out, they come out in a large quantity in a short time, which makes it difficult to look at and comment on all of them that I believe might help the contestant in some way to understand how things really work. As I mentioned in my previous comment to you, I believe that space is not God's body.

I will post this on both my page and yours, so I can have a convenient copy of all of my comments to others and all of the other's comments to me in one place.

Sincerely,

Paul

Dear Boris,

I can understand your desire to get the best review that you can on your paper, so that you could likely win a prize in the contest, so I won't ask you to give me a return comment, so that you can devote your time to trying to win the contest, but I feel the need to respond to your comment because you seem to believe that the use of numbers and the exploration of the world leads people to commit sins and that you are committing blasphemy by doing so, which is not the case. First Satan is not everywhere that God is. Satan is a creature created by God and is an angel, so he would have access to the 3 heavens and the earth, but he does not have access to the eighth (highest) place in the creation because only God the Father and the Word can go there he also cannot go outside of the creation where only God can go. Those who have chosen to become members or parts of God's body and have been completely sanctified and have God living and ruling in their lives do not need to fear Satan because God is much greater in power and in all other ways than Satan, since he is the creator and Satan is just one of his creatures. Those who are being sanctified, but have not yet completed the process that makes them completely ready for God to fully live in them by replacing all of the foolishness that is naturally built into man with the knowledge of God, can still be tempted in some cases, but God can also keep them from sinning, which is why when the disciples asked Jesus how they should pray he gave them a prayer the included asking God to "lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil". Those who do not choose to become members of God's body are given over to Satan to rule over them, so they will be led into sinning by him. He works this through many lies and other means, since they are not protected by God. The biggest lie is the one that he used with Eve to get her to sin, which is that you can be as gods. People are convinced that they can rule over their own lives and be completely independent from all others, when in reality they are obeying Satan's desires. This is why even though they say that they are for everyone having free choice in all matters, they actively try to get rid of all evidence of the existence of God from the world, which if successful would actually take away the freedom of choice to choose to become members of God's body, as an example. Of course, God will not allow that to happen because he always keeps a remnant among the people. Satan knows that once God has completed the making of his body members, there will be no more need to have him to rule over those who do not choose God because God will then destroy this creation and all of the evil that is in it including him and will make a new better creation in which evil will not exist. He, therefore, tries to keep God from finishing his work by destroying as many people as he can. He will even try to kill those who serve him because he knows that as long as they are alive they can change their minds and chose to become God's body members. He must keep them from understanding what they are giving up until they die, in order to be sure that they will be lost to God because it is then too late for them to change their minds. There is, therefore, a way for people to avoid having Satan in their minds leading them to explore the world in such a way as to cause them to commit sins. It just requires them to choose to have God in their minds leading them to explore the world in such a way as to cause them to do good instead of evil. Exploring and gaining an understanding of God and his creation is not against God's will. He actually tells us to do so. That is why Jesus said "seek and ye shall find, knock and it shall be opened unto you, ask and ye shall receive." Seek means to actively look or see or observe that which is around you, which is the basis for gaining all understanding of the world and is a necessary part of the scientific method. To knock is to interact with the world and is also a part of the scientific method. After all, most of what is known about matter particles has resulted from knocking them together and observing the results. The asking has two parts. First is that when you begin to search for an understanding of the world you can find others who have already spent much time seeking, knocking, and asking who can give you the benefit of their work, thus avoiding the need for each person to redo everything. You must be careful, though, to be sure that the provided information is correct. The second part is that you can ask God and since he made all of the creation and knows everything about himself, he can show you all he desires for you to know about it and him at the proper time for you to use it according to his purpose. The difference is that God desires for you to know the truth about him and the creation that he made including those things that can tell you things about him, while Satan desires for you to believe things based on lies that will keep you from seeing and understanding the things that will tell you about God and his nature and the things that would show you that he made the creation. To me the choice is easy to make. You either choose the one who made you and loves you enough that he desires for you to become a part of him and to live and work together in a loving relationship with him in a life without end in a new perfect world without end or you choose the one who desires to destroy you so that he can delay God's work as long as he can to keep himself alive as long as he can. The best that you can hope for if you make that second choice is to have a life that will most likely be less than 100 years long in this world and then to have death and destruction.

Usually to say God in heaven does not refer to the earth's heaven where the sun, moon and other stars, etc. are located, but refers instead to the heaven that is the other part of the creation, which is divided into 3 heavens. The earth is contained in the lower 4 dimensions of the creation. The first heaven also has an additional fifth dimension and is controlled by the powers. The second heaven has an additional sixth dimension and is controlled by the principalities. The third heaven has an additional seventh dimension and is ruled by the angels. God's throne is located in the middle of the third heaven. When someone with understanding says God in heaven, he would usually be referring to the third heaven where God's throne is. We are not given much information as to the construction of the heavens, so we don't even know if it contains any matter as we know it. When God had created the earth he said that it was without form and void. This means that it contained space that was meant to hold or contain things with shapes or forms, but it was empty space at that time and did not contain any of those things within it. The things would, of course, be things made of matter, but matter had not yet been created in it. This tells us that the space and the matter are two different things. The space was created first and later the matter was created in it out of motions that were added to the earth later. Gravity has to do with the sub-energy field particles that the Spirit of God added to the earth when he moved upon the face of the waters and the fifth vector motion that changes energy photons into matter particles, etc., but I can't go into the details of that at this time.

I hope that this can help you to avoid the blasphemy and to gain the relationship with God that will deliver you from evil. As I said, you don't have to answer this comment as I know you are busy trying to get good reviews to win the contest.

Sincerely,

Paul

My comment to Claude Michael Cassano on his paper's page on Feb. 5, 2018

Dear Claude,

Does your math model tell us the basic substance of which matter particles, energy photons, and fields are composed or constructed? If so what is it? Does it tell us how this basic substance is structured in each of them to give them their individual observable properties? If so what are those structures?

It would seem to me that if time is a dimension and one could go back into the past or forward into the future, then, whenever any motion in the universe moved to a new position it would be necessary for that motion to somehow generate a complete new copy of the entire universe in order to always preserve the place to go back to before that motion position change occurred. Given the great size, large number of existent entities, and the great structural complexity of the universe that we can observe, it would seem to me that such an elaborate almost infinite structure would not be in accordance with such concepts as energy conservation and Occam's razor that nature always chooses the simplest most efficient way of doing things, etc. Of course, in order to be able to go into the future, all of those copies of the universe would need to have existed from the beginning of the creation to allow someone to go into any point in the future from any point in the past. It would seem to me that this would mean that all of the choices that you will make in the future must already have been made by you at the beginning of the universe in order for the copies of the universe that included the changes that were generated by those choices to be able to be copied into those future universe copies in which you made those choices so that you could go into the future to places beyond the places where you made those choices and see the proper results of your having made those decisions. In addition to all of this unnecessary complexity, if you could go into the past and change things, all of those changes and all of the additional changes that might directly or indirectly result from those changes as they moved forward in time from that point, would have to in some way be propagated through all of those copies. That type of thing does not look like a natural structure, but like some computer program that would contain all of the additional logic programming to perform such a task. It would seem to me that a universe that contained motions that continually moved from one position to the next in the absence of interactions with other motions would be much more in line with Occam's razor, etc. In such a system, when motions moved from their present positions to new positions these new positions would be their present. The positions that they were in before moving into these current positions would be part of their past, but would no longer exist because those motions would no longer be in those positions. Positions into which all of the motions would move after they moved out of their current positions would be their future positions, but that future condition of all the motions would not yet exist because the motions would not have moved into them yet. This would mean that only the present ever really exists, and there would only need to be one of each motion that is in existence, which fits well into observed reality. Can you use your math model to not only model existing most accepted theories, but to also determine if they are actually true to reality, by going behind the structure of those theories to determine if all of their complex structure is needed and if their resultant outputs are the best way to model reality?

Sincerely,

Paul

Dear Claude,

For some unknown reason, every extra line space that was in the above comment to you was replaced by the letter n. Can your math theory explain what caused that to happen? When you see the letter n just sitting there by itself just understand that an extra line should be between the text before the n and the text after the n. Isn't man's modern technology wonderful? I don't know if it will happen to this message also or not. I guess we will see.

Sincerely,

Paul

Dear Peter,

Thank you for the positive comment on the essay and hypothesis and the comments on language and communication. I do have a tendency to transfer the information without always including all of man's language structures in the written form because they are not included in the form in which it is provided to me. I try to add the commas and paragraph extra lines, etc., but I tend to miss some especially if I get in a hurry or near the end of a long project, etc. From what I have seen in other papers, it seems to be a common problem of many. Sometimes I see things that appear somewhat odd in papers, but if it does not interfere with the transfer and understanding of the intended concepts of the paper, I try to just ignore them. As an example, in the first paragraph of your paper you say "We suggest 'yes' but we want most fundamental." The use of the word "we" would suggest that you worked with one or more others to generate your paper, but you are the only one mentioned as the author of the paper. Of course this does not have a direct bearing on the paper's content except as a slight distraction from the subject, which is not important.

As you mention frequency is not fundamental because it is a resultant output property measurement of cyclical motions, which are also not fundamental because they are the result of the interactions between two or more basic linear or cyclical motions. In the same way, wavelength is the resultant output of the joining interaction of a cyclical motion with a linear motion at an angle to the direction of the cyclical motion's back and forth motion. This can, of course, be more complex if the cyclical motion contains more than one linear motion component within it. Time is one of the most misunderstood concepts in science today because it is generally considered to be an existent physical dimension, but it is actually only an output property of the interaction between a motion and the spatial distance through which it travels. Things become much simpler when you understand that a given motion can contain more or less motion than another motion, such that if two motions travel from points on a line in the same direction that is ninety degrees from the direction of that line and both travel to another line that is parallel to the first line, one of the motions can reach the line and the other motion has not yet traveled that far because it contains a smaller amount of motion. I call this amount of motion that is contained within a given motion its motion amplitude because it represents the magnitude of the motion content within that motion. Any convenient motion amplitude can be selected as the standard motion amplitude. This frees one from the extra complexity of adding a rate function. This changes D=RT to D=MT where M is the motion amplitude of the motion. This shows that T=D/M. From this you can see that time is only an interaction relationship between a motion and the distance that it travels. You could, of course, select a standard motion amplitude that would be that rate that would cause it to travel one mile of distance that would compare to the distance / motion amplitude spectrum that would currently be called one hour. Twice that motion amplitude level would then be equivalent to 2 miles per hour, etc. An hour is actually only a measurement of a standard motion traveling through a standard distance. Whether it is considered to be the time that a point on the earth takes to travel 1/24 of the way around the circumference of the earth or the time it takes for an atom to travel through the distance of many complete cycles of vibration, etc. it is just the measurement of a motion's motion amplitude as it travels through a specific distance. Since T = D / M, There is a whole spectrum of motion amplitudes and their associated distances that equal the same time. Any distance greater than zero would have an associated motion amplitude that would cause it to take one hour to travel that distance. If you want to tie a standard distance to a standard motion amplitude to produce a specific time output, you can just select the desired standard distance and then select the motion amplitude level that will yield one standard unit of time. We are used to using specific standard motion spectrums to generate our standard times, but a standard time could be any D / M spectrum combination that together all equal one unit of time. The only reason that the concept of time is even needed is because motions can contain different amounts of motion. If all motions contained the same amount of or amplitude of motion, the need to consider time would not exist. If someone asked you how long it took you to get to someplace, you could just say it took 12 miles and they would know how long that was because anything that traveled 12 miles would take the same amount of time. In that case D =T and since they would be equal, it would not be necessary to consider time at all. The concept that time is some sort of existent dimensional entity in itself, especially one that you can travel back and forth in, is one of man's current scientific errors.

You are right that we both start out with motions, but I see them as the existent entities that occupy an otherwise empty spatial structure while you look at them as somehow existing as motions that are contained within some kind of undefined fluid. It is very hard for man to get away from the concept that motions must always be expressed as something else that is in motion rather than the understanding that all of those other things that you see in motion are actually composed of motions themselves. In interactions, the number of matter particles and/or energy photons is not always conserved, so they cannot be the most basic structures. Only the total motion content is always conserved. It is possible that the total number of motions is also conserved, but since man here cannot presently observe individual sub-energy field particles, that concept cannot be observationally tested at this time. I say that because when an energy photon is absorbed by an electron in an atom, it may only transfer its fourth dimensional wave motion to the electron and then leave the interaction as a linear motion sub-energy particle, etc. The point is that the total amount of motion in the universe always remains the same, but those things that are constructed out of that motion like energy photons and matter particles can be constructed and destructed by interactions. A particle can exist as a linear motion that does not contain any rotational or spin motion associated with it. Such particles are evident in field structures that operate in a linear action with no angular motion. In your hypothesis what is that fluid composed of and how do its individual parts act and interact to produce the interactions with motions that you propose that somehow produces vortices that are in the shape of spheres? This fluid level and the motion that was introduced into them would, of course, be a more fundamental level of structure than the matter particles that would be produced by them and would, therefore, need to also be understood to obtain a complete fundamental understanding of the universe. Since the Higgs Boson contains a very large amount of motion, it should be able to produce many other particles and/or energy photons as decay products. That should not be a surprise to anyone.

It looks like you identify curl as rotation. If that is the case, you are right that the curvature of the rotation decreases as you travel away from the pole on the surface of the sphere toward the equator, but it does not reduce to zero at the equator because if you look at a rotating sphere from above the north or south pole, you can see all the way to the equator and observe that it is still rotating. If it was not rotating anything at the equator would fly off away from the sphere in whatever linear direction that its linear motion was going when it reached the equator. You are right that the linear motion is greatest at the equator and does reduce to zero at the zero dimensional point of the pole, since that point cannot rotate. In most cases vortices in a fluid do not take the shape of a sphere. You would have to explain how that shape is formed.

Although the rotation curvature does decrease to a minimum at the equator and then increases again as you travel toward the other pole, it does not change direction of rotation. You can see this by fastening a flag on a long pole to the far pole that you are not above so that the flag pole is at ninety degrees to the axis of rotation and the flag pole is long enough that you can see the flag sticking out beyond the equator of the sphere. You will see that the flag is rotating in the same direction as the half of the sphere that you can see is rotating. The appearance of rotation in the opposite direction only occurs when you view the sphere from above the opposite pole. This is not due to a change in the direction of rotation of the sphere. It is due to a change of direction of the observer in relation to the sphere.

If you view the rotation of the sphere from above the equator with the north pole of rotation up and the south pole down, you can move all around the sphere staying above the equator and it will always continue to rotate in the same direction either toward the left or the right according to its original motion direction. Its direction of rotation will only appear to change to the opposite direction if you rotate yourself so that the south pole is up and the north pole is down. Again, it is not the direction of the rotation of the sphere that has changed, but the direction of the observer that has changed. In both of the above changes due to observer orientation, the observer could be another spinning sphere and an interaction between the two spheres could generate different outcomes depending on the spheres' relative orientations.

When you say "6. Fermion pairs DO 'pop up' from a sub-quantum condensate (motion induces pressure changes)." Is the sub-quantum condensate the same thing as the fluid that you mention earlier or is it something else? If it is something else, it would also need to be defined as to its basic substance and how that substance is structured. Its fundamentality in comparison to the fluid, etc. would also need to be established and if one generated the other in some way that generation mechanism would need to be determined and explained. If motion induces pressure changes and the pressure changes cause fermion pairs to be created, how come we don't see new fermions popping up everywhere, since motions are moving around all over the place? In (7.) When you mention "sub-ether" is that something new or is that just another name for the fluid, the sub-quantum condensate, or something else that you have already mentioned? If it is new how does it fit in with the other structures? In (9.) when you say "Majorana fermion; north hemisphere = electron, S = positron, (equator is up, or down at 180 degrees)", it looks like you are saying that a positron is just an electron that is rotated 180 degrees. If that is actually what you are saying it would seem that in a gas where particles can move freely and interact with each other, an interaction could easily cause a matter particle to be rotated on its axis, which would cause it to become an antiparticle compared to those that had not been rotated. When the rotated particle interacted with a non-rotated particle they would both be destroyed and turned into EM radiation. Over time as more and more particles became rotated by interactions, the gas would become completely changed into EM radiation. Since most of the matter in the universe is composed of gas, such large scale conversion in stars would create so much EM radiation that the stars would all explode, etc.

This comment is getting large, so I will end it now.

Sincerely,

Paul

Peter Jackson's comment to me on his paper's page on Feb.11, 2018.

Paul,

Wow to that to! Much agreement, but I'll just focus on your questions.

1. The 'We' isn't quite the 'Royal' we. I've worked with other specialists on various aspects of the discrete field model (DFM) first described here in 2011 removing some of the nonsense interpretations surrounding SR (postulates are fine) to resolve the 'ecliptic plane/stellar aberration' issue and many more. Classic QM was a severe test, which it's nicely passed, now with computer code support from Declan Traill.

2. Yes, it's all about motions within motions. Twin vorteces without a 'surface' (i.e. water) can be seen at wingtips etc. and often produce toroidal dynamics, as a galaxy and its active nucleus AGN ('Black Hole' in ancient theory!) However all galaxy discs rotate within an oblate spheroid. Earths EM field on the other hand it toroidal! Obtaining QM output from complex toroidal spin proved tricky but wasn't needed!

3. how come we don't see new fermions popping up everywhere, since motions are moving around all over the place? Look hard, because WE DO! It's fine structure surface electrons, also 'surface charge' increasing with motion, the Unruh Effect, the Coma of ALL bodies moving in space and Earths Bow Shock. Just look at the heat as they reach max plasma density 10^22/mm at the shuttle nose on re-entry! We've known of 'pair production' for 100+years. Also see earlier essays. And of "Fermion pairs DO 'pop up' from a sub-quantum condensate (motion induces pressure changes)." Is the sub-quantum condensate the same thing as the fluid that you mention earlier..? Yes. And it's by the Higgs process.

4. In a field all local fermions will have the same axis, so N near S, yet in their case like poles don't 'attract' but keep a quite even 'lattice type' distribution! There's something we don't know, and with know known 'bottom' to scale below 'matter' maybe your '5th dimension' direction has validity. But yes, stars DO of course explode, then the torus re-forms! Google the HST Crab Nebula core shots.

But someone/something must have 'moved' in the first place many cycles ago!

I hope that's the main ones but comment or ask on.. Great to find someone who connects and asks.

Very best

Peter

My comment to Peter Jackson on his paper's page on Feb. 16, 2018.

Dear Peter,

1. I guess then that you really aren't the Pope or the king of the world as I thought you were. That is such a disappointment. I was thinking that you might have the power to open up diplomatic relations with my world. That was a Si-Fi moment. At least as far as you know. It looks like you are very concerned about making your work compatible with relativity and quantum mechanics. When I looked into them I found that both contained some major errors that have propagated many nonsense beliefs. Probably the greatest error in relativity is the concept that time is a physical dimension that you can travel back and forth in. In quantum mechanics, when it was discovered through observations that matter particles expressed the property of angular motion, instead of gaining the understanding that they were not point particles, but were actually extended particles that contain internal motions that can present themselves as angular to the direction of travel of the particle in interactions, they just invented the idea that they possessed some not well defined property of spin, which most have now come to believe that they really meant spin in the normal sense. Since they still want to believe matter particles to be point objects, this has led many to believe that a point object can spin when that is not the case in reality because a point object contains a point about which to spin, but it does not contain any extension to spin about that point. In any real world spin, the angular motion decreases to zero at the center point of the spin. Because of all of this, I decided to look at the observational information and see where that would lead me.

2. I found that not only the observational information, but also current theories indicated that matter particles, energy photons, angular motions and even simple linear motions could all be changed into each other. This meant that each one of these entities had to contain all of the basic substance of which the others are composed in order to be able to be transformed into them. When I looked at the observed properties of each of them I found that the simplest structure is the simple linear motion. I decided to see if all of the others could be constructed out of one or more simple linear motions, such that they would exhibit all of their individual observed properties and I found that it is possible to do so. When I analyzed the matter particle that would be produced in that way, I found that it would not be a point particle and it would exhibit angular motions in interactions with other matter particles. The internal motions of the matter particles also explained why interactions between matter particles could generate several possible different outcome results and why they would each have a particular probability of occurrence. This cleared up a lot of the quantum mechanics nonsense, such as the idea that things don't happen until they are observed and the need for space vacuum pressure to explain the different outcomes, etc. I also found that simple linear motion particles could make up the structures of fields and explain why it sometimes appears that matter particles and energy photons just seem to appear from nowhere, etc. The fields composed of them also could explain the mechanisms of how the electrons and the matter particles in the nucleus of the atom are joined together and contained within the atom and how atoms are joined together into molecules, etc.

The basic problem with spins or rotations is that they are two dimensional structures. They can be extended into three dimensions, but if you look at any point on a rotating sphere, you can see that it just revolves around the center point in a two dimensional plain. This means that it will not produce the same mass effect in all three dimensions. As an example, If you have two rotating spheres that both rotate in the same direction at the same angular speed and you place them, so that they are aligned side by side with their north rotational poles up and you then give one of them a small amount of motion toward the other one, when they come into contact, their angular motions in the opposite directions will cause them to repel each other. On the other hand, if you move one of them above the other one, such that its south pole is above the north pole of the other one and you then apply a small amount of motion to cause them to come together again, you will see that their angular motions will not cause them to repel each other because they are both moving in the same direction at the same speed in relation to each other, so that there is no relative angular motion difference between them. It requires a three dimensional motion pattern to generate a three dimensionally stable equal static mass effect in all three dimensions, which is what matter particles generally do, observationally.

3. The particle pair productions, etc. that you mentioned, create electrons, etc. as the result of energy photons receiving enough motion during an interaction, so that they contain an adequate motion content to be able to produce the matter particle or particle pair that is created and then come into contact with an adequate angular motion such as the sub-energy field of an atom near its nucleus to allow that extra motion to be transferred from its fourth dimensional wave motion to the fifth dimension, which causes it to travel in a curved path that encloses back upon itself to generate its three dimensional cyclical enclosed path that changes it from an energy photon into a matter particle. Of course, it is also possible for a sub-energy particle to receive enough motion in an interaction to cause it to travel faster than the speed of light, such that the extra motion that would have caused it to travel faster than the speed of light is transferred to the fourth dimension to generate its frequency, wavelength, and dynamic mass effects, which changes it into an energy photon and if it receives enough motion it can also become a matter particle as described above. The matter particles don't just pop up from nothing it is just a matter of motion transfers that change one type of already existing particle or motion into another one.

This is often accomplished by the transfer of kinetic motion from one entity to another one. Since man cannot yet detect single sub-energy particles, it can appear to him to be coming from nowhere, though. High densities of sub-energy particles that are directionally aligned can be detected as magnetic fields, etc., but man has generally not yet progressed to the point of understanding that yet. You are right that motion induces pressure changes. When a matter particle travels through a dense sub-energy field with enough kinetic energy it can generate enough pressure on the field to cause the probability of an interaction between it and a sub-energy particle in the field to be high enough, so that an interaction occurs. Since the matter particle contains the greater amount of motion, some of its kinetic motion is transferred to the sub-energy particle which changes it into either an energy photon or a matter particle depending on the amount of motion transferred and whether an adequate angular motion content is encountered, etc. In man's current particle accelerators, electrons are created by this type of interaction between the strong magnetic field used to compress and guide the matter particle beam and the matter particles in that beam, which is generally undesirable.

4. In a field it would be possible for all of the particles to be aligned, such that their north poles were all in one direction, let's say up, and south poles at 180 degrees from that in the opposite direction, down, to make a two dimensional plane, but when you placed the next vertical level above it, the south poles of the particles in the new upper level would be above the north poles in the level below it, which, as described above, would not cause them to repel one another. Such a field would only work even in one layer with solids and to a lesser degree with liquids. In a gas the kinetic motion of the entities is great enough to overcome or be greater than the strength of the field that binds them, which is why they can move around freely in the gas. As you increase the kinetic motion level in the gas, you first exceed the level of the field structure that binds the molecules to each other, which causes the molecules to be able to move freely. Next you increase it to the point that it exceeds the strength of the field that joins the atoms into molecules and the molecules are broken apart leaving a free flowing gas of atoms. If you continue to increase the kinetic motion level of the gas you reach the point that you exceed the binding strength of the electrons to the atoms, which results in their separation from the atoms. Man usually calls this a plasma state and it creates the maximum free flowing motion structure that is usually found in nature. It would be possible to increase the kinetic motion level to the point that the nucleus of the atoms would also break up, but this does not usually occur in nature because in those places where the kinetic motion level might reach that level, such as in a star, there is also the great pressure due to the pull of gravity in the star that counteracts such dispersion and actually instead causes matter particles to be joined together into atoms. Of course, man's particle accelerators can create enough kinetic motion in matter particles to break up the nucleus of atoms and even the quark bindings in composite matter particles, etc.

In our universe, the bottom of the scale is the simple linear motion sub-energy particle. Next above that is the energy photon, which is composed of a sub-energy particle and an additional motion that generates its wave properties. Next above that is the matter particle that contains an energy photon and an additional motion that generates its three dimensional enclosed path and its static mass effects. One complication that man is not yet generally aware of is that the matter particles that we know to exist can only interact with other matter particles and energy photons within a specific frequency range. This is because an interaction requires an adequate interaction cross section. This means that matter particles and energy photons with high enough frequencies have such small cross sections compared to the matter particles and energy photons that we experience that they cannot interact with those in our level of structure. The same thing applies to those that are of such low frequency that our matter particles and energy photons have such a small interaction cross section in comparison to them that interactions can't take place. This means that our detectable universe is just a frequency subset of a much larger frequency continuum composed of many levels. As a matter particle's motion is increased toward the speed of light a greater portion of that motion is transferred to its fourth and fifth dimensional motions. The extra fifth dimensional motion causes the curvature of the matter particle's enclosed path to increase, which causes it and thus the matter particle to become smaller while the increased fourth dimensional motion increases the frequency of the energy photon contained within the matter particle, such that the proper angular motion component is preserved to maintain the matter particle's stability. When it is traveling very near the speed of light, this makes it possible for it to interact with higher frequency energy photons and matter particles of the next smaller structural level, which can allow it to gain enough more motion from them through interactions to allow it to transfer into that level from ours. A similar transfer method can work at the other end of the frequency spectrum of our particles to enter the next larger level.

My point about the stars was that if matter/antimatter particle pairs can just popup from the sub-quantum condensate, from motion induced pressure changes, and they then come together and annihilate each other and are converted into EM radiation (energy photon(s)), then in a gas that contained a great amount of motion, such as in a star, one would expect a very large number of energy photons to be created in a very short time by that method in addition to those that are created by the fusion process. This great amount of energy would greatly overcome the pull of gravity and the star would explode. This would apply not to just a few stars, but to all stars. Most of the stars that explode do so because they have used up most of their fusible atoms and can no longer generate enough energy to counteract the pull of gravity. They then collapse due to gravity. This causes a type of expansion that depends on the star's mass, etc., which could be an explosion of one type or another.

5. In the Scriptures It says that God introduced motion into the universe when his Spirit moved upon the face of the waters that are a part of the background structure of the earth that we cannot detect. This would have created the field (sub-energy) particles that are an image of him. Next the part of him called the Word said "let there be light" and there was light. This would have created the energy photons by adding more motion to some of the sub-energy particles. The light (energy photons) is an image of the Word. Finally God (this would include all three parts of him including his body) separated the light from the darkness. This would have added an extra motion to some of the energy photons to create the matter particles, which would have made them become dark because the photon within each of them became trapped within the matter particle in its enclosed path and, therefore, it would no longer be free to travel and interact with other entities and transfer the information about one entity to another one as light photons normally do. The matter particles are an image of his body. After that he used these created entities to construct the rest of the universe. There is much more detail presented in the Scriptures, but this comment is getting very large so I will end it now.

Sincerely,

Paul

My comment to Karen Crowther on her paper's page on Feb 18, 2018

Dear Karen,

I read your paper and found it very interesting in many ways. If taken strictly as presented the nine conditions could possibly identify a most fundamental theory depending on how they are interpreted. As an example, since the universe is constructed as a structural substance hierarchy, although it is possible to generate a complete theory that covers all of the structuring of all of those structural levels, it could be somewhat difficult to work with. It might be easier to still compartmentalize the total theory into parts that specifically deal with each hierarchical level or the interactions between two levels, etc. as needed to minimize the amount of work that would be required to implement it at specific levels. At the same time the overall theory could describe the overall material structural generations, their actions, and their interactions throughout the total complex structure of the universe. Also since some structures, such as energy photons and field structures remain essentially the same throughout all of the hierarchical levels of structure, these entities and their structures and functioning could be considered background fixed structures, but they are existent parts of the universe that would necessarily be a part of any truly fundamental theory.

The most interesting part of your paper to me is your description of the hierarchical tower of theories at different size scales of the universe. You do not mention that there are different hierarchical structural levels of the universe in which basic substance(s) of one level is used in that level to construct what is then the basic substances of the next larger level, etc. At the lowest structural level that man has currently gained an understanding, matter particles are the level's basic substances and are structured together with field structures to form all of the atoms. At the atomic level, the substances of the atoms are structured together with field structures to form the molecules and at the molecular level the substances of the molecules are structured together to form the substances of the large scale objects that we generally work with at our hierarchical level, etc. As you progress up the hierarchical chain, the number of different structures that are produced within each level increases. The lower the level is, therefore, the simpler or more fundamental it is than those levels above it. Any truly fundamental theory would, therefore, need to be able to explain the complete construction of all of the structures at all of the levels in the total structure and the complete progression of substance production from the first level through the last level. One reason that currently accepted theories such as QFT and GR, etc. can't be truly fundamental is that they do not address the substance or the structuring of that substance that produces the the basic entities of matter particles, energy photons, and fields, which make up the currently known lowest hierarchical level of the universe. This is very odd, since there is now (and has been for some time) adequate information in both observational information and also within the mathematical constructions of current theories to allow these things to be extrapolated and understood. It appears that this area has been purposely avoided. I can see reasons why that may be the case, but it is holding back man's progression because hidden within the internal structure of matter particles is the key that can free man from the limited scale problems that you mention. When these things are understood by man, some of the parts of both QFT and GR that man currently considers to be important will be seen to be in error. This will simplify the remaining parts and allow a complete workable theory to be developed. The real question is how long will man hold back this development for what amounts to petty reasons?

Sincerely,

Paul

Karen Crowther's comment to me on her paper's page on Feb. 19, 2018.

Dear Paul,

Thanks for your comments. There is a lot in what you have said, and I can't fully respond to all of it, so I'll just make a few comments.

On the idea of potentially "compartmentalising" the theory into sections that deal with particular phenomena at different scales, in order to simplify its practical implementation. This is complicated, firstly, if we have a unified theory, where all interactions are described in the same way at the fundamental level. Secondly, even in non-unified theories, effective field theory has revealed that identifying the interactions in the fundamental theory that are going to make a difference at lower energy scales is often a non-trivial task, without using techniques like the renormalisation group flow. Additionally, symmetry breaking, for instance, can also profoundly alter the less-fundamental description of a system, compared to the fundamental one, in a way that may not obvious from looking only at the fundamental theory.

On the idea of a fundamental theory needing to explain how all the less-fundamental entities arise, or how to "construct the structures present at all other levels". This is a deep question that is of great interest to me, and I regret that I was not able to properly address the issues of emergence and reduction in my essay. I hope you will continue to research it, because it is certainly an area worthy of further study.

I am a bit confused, however, by your claims here,

This is very odd, since there is now (and has been for some time) adequate information in both observational information and also within the mathematical constructions of current theories to allow these things to be extrapolated and understood. It appears that this area has been purposely avoided.

Maybe you would like to elaborate more, especially about these "petty reasons" you cite, please? But, from my understanding, yes, of course much is known about GR and our QFTs, but there is also much that is not known, and still areas of active research. In some areas we are still trying to develop the right techniques, and in others, we may not have adequate computing power. Take, for instance, the low-energy limit of QCD, which is extremely difficult to solve.

Best,

Karen

My comment to Karen Crowther on her paper's page on Feb. 20, 2018.

Dear Karen,

In order to give you an idea of what can be extrapolated from current observational data and theories, I guess it would be best to start at the lowest most fundamental level of physical substance structuring and build up from there. If you look at E=MC^2 where E=energy, M=mass, and C=the speed of light, most who have much familiarity with it would understand that matter particles can be changed into energy photons and vice versa and, of course, it goes much deeper. Energy is not only expressed in the form of energy photons, but is expressed in the form of simple kinetic angular and linear motions, etc. Observational data shows that all of these forms of energy can be converted into each other. If each of them can be converted into any of the others, then each one must contain within it all of the basic substance that is contained within all of the others. This would indicate that one of them would likely be the most basic or fundamental form of this substance.

It is obvious that the simplest of these structures is the simple linear motion. It only possesses three internal information structures, which are its current position in space, its current direction of travel in space, and the amount of motion that it contains, which I call its motion amplitude. As an example, if two motions leave points on a line simultaneously and travel straight at ninety degrees to that line to another line that is parallel to the first line and one of them possesses twice the amount of motion amplitude that is contained in the other one, it will reach the other line when the other motion reaches the halfway point. You can, of course, choose a specific motion amplitude as a standard motion as man has done by breaking down the cyclical motion of the earth's rotation on its axis, etc. to make it easier to compare different motions with each other, but I start this way to make it clear that motion amplitude is the property possessed by a motion without getting into the concept of time which is really just a relationship between motions as they travel through distances. I could cover more on that later.

If a basic linear motion is the most fundamental substance from which all other entities are composed, all other entities should be able to be constructed using just linear motions. Fields generally operate in a linear manner without expressing angular motions at angles from their direction of travel. They can, therefore, be constructed of individual simple linear motion particles.

Energy photons contain a linear motion that travels at the speed of light, but they also contain an angular motion that travels at ninety degrees to its direction of travel in a cyclical back and forth pattern. One way this can be constructed using only linear motion is to consider that the speed of light is a threshold level, such that if you try to add motion to a field particle to get it to travel faster than the speed of light, the excess motion over the speed of light is instead transferred into a small fourth dimension. This dimension connects to the other lower three dimensions at ninety degrees in the same way that they connect to each other with each position in the fourth dimension connected to all points of the other dimensions. The fourth dimension is very small and contains only three positions within it. The center position is connected to our dimensional structure and the two end positions are located outside of our dimensional structure. When a motion enters this dimension it travels back and forth between the ends of the dimension. It bounces off of the ends and, thus travels in a cyclical back and forth pattern. The greater the amount of motion that it contains, the faster it can travel one complete back and forth cycle, which increases its frequency. Since it is still travelling at the speed of light in its linear direction of travel, it will not travel as far in that direction during the faster fourth dimensional motion cycle, which will decrease its wavelength. The greater amount of motion that is contained in its cyclical back and forth motion will allow it to transfer more motion during an interaction with another entity, which gives it a greater dynamic mass effect. If that motion is at an end of the fourth dimension when an interaction occurs, it cannot transfer any of its motion to the interaction because it is located outside of our dimensional system. As it travels from an end, it begins to enter our dimensional system and the farther it is into our system when an interaction happens; the greater is the amount of its motion that can be transferred during that interaction. Its greatest dynamic mass effect occurs when it is completely within our system. As it continues to travel past that point, it begins to move out of our system again on the other side, so its mass effect decreases to zero again at the opposite side of the fourth dimension at which point it bounces off of the end and begins to travel back the other way. The same thing happens again during this half of its cyclical motion flow except interaction effects are in the opposite direction. This is a model of an energy photon composed of only two linear motions.

A matter particle can exist in a stationary form relative to other matter particles. When it is stationary or not moving in relation to other matter particles, it still possesses a mass effect called its static or rest mass. It can also move up to close to the speed of light. In an interaction, its motion increases its mass effect. During an interaction, it can demonstrate an angular motion effect with several different interaction outcomes each of which occurs at its own specific probability of occurrence. This is a dead giveaway that it contains an internal motion structure. In order to contain internal motions, it cannot be a point particle, since there is nowhere within a point particle for a motion to move. The idea that matter particles can be point objects and can spin is nonsense. A point object contains a point about which a spin could occur, but has no extension to spin about that point. In any real world spinning object, such as the earth, the greatest motion amplitude occurs at the point that is farthest from the central axis, such as the equator on the earth. As you move toward one of the axis poles, your motion amplitude (speed) decreases and it reaches zero at the center of the axis of rotation. This idea of point particle spin is one of the greatest errors in man's current theory. Once you realize that matter particles are extended objects that contain internal motions, the next step is to try to understand how they can be constructed using only simple linear motions.

First, consider that there is a fifth dimension and a threshold fourth dimensional motion level that must be reached to allow motion to travel from the fourth dimension into the fifth dimension, such that an energy photon must contain a great enough fourth dimensional motion to at least make the lowest mass matter particle to allow a motion transfer to the fifth dimension. Once this condition is met, the energy photon must also come into contact with an angular motion, such as when it travels through the field of an atom near its nucleus. Some of its fourth dimensional motion is then transferred from the fourth dimension into the fifth dimension. The fifth dimension is structured, such that the motion that it contains is then transferred into the lower three dimensions in a cyclical way, such that it begins to transfer motion into dimension one increasing linearly from the zero level to a maximum level and then back to a zero level in a linear pattern. As the motion level reaches the maximum level in dimension one, it begins to enter into dimension two in the same way. The motion level in dimension one reaches the zero level at the same time that the motion level in dimension two reaches the maximum level. At this point motion begins to enter dimension three in the same way. As the motion level in dimension two reaches the zero level, the motion level in dimension three reaches the maximum level. At this point motion starts to enter into dimension one again. This is only an example and does not represent the complete motion flow cycle because it is for man to figure that out in detail. When the motion enters into the lower three dimensions from the fifth dimension, it would cause the energy photon to travel faster than the speed of light, but the excess motion over the level of the speed of light is transferred into the fourth dimension. Only the angular component of the motion remains in the lower three dimensions, which causes the photon to travel in a curved path that encloses back upon itself to create a three dimensional cyclical enclosed path structure in which it continues to travel. If the photon's wavelength fits properly into the enclosed path, the angular motion component is present to allow the motion to travel from the fourth dimension back into the fifth dimension and the inter-dimensional motion flow cycle is complete and the matter particle is stable. If it doesn't fit properly, the matter particle is not stable and the motion cannot travel back into the fifth dimension. The motion drains out of the fifth dimension and the curvature that it generated disappears causing the matter particle to become a photon again. The great angular motion in the matter particle generates its static or rest mass effect. You can see that when two matter particles interact, various outcome results can occur depending on the positioning and direction of travel, etc. of the photons within the matter particles at the point of interaction.

Matter particles also generate their own field structures. The motion flow of the photon in the matter particle around its enclosed three dimensional path entrains field particles (I call them sub-energy particles because they hold the position in the hierarchical structure of the universe that is just below that of the energy photon.) to travel through the matter particle in a dense packed stream. This creates an input and output for the sub-energy flow on opposite sides of the enclosed path. These travel around on the surface of the particle's path along with the motion of the photon as it travels along that path. This is the internal field structure of the matter particle and it keeps the internal photon motions from interacting between the matter particles within an atomic nucleus. The internal and, therefore, also the external flow of this field is modulated by the frequency/wavelength fourth dimensional motion of the photon within the matter particle to vary the flow from a zero level linearly to a maximum flow rate and then back down to the zero level in a cyclical pattern that produces a series of concentric sub-energy field spheres around the matter particle that vary from a flow rate (particle density) of zero to a maximum flow rate and then back down to the zero rate in a linear manner. The sub-energy flow within each sphere is in all directions around the sphere from the particle's sub-energy internal field output to its input creating a flow that operates at ninety degrees to the direction towards the particle in any direction. The inner most high density sphere contains the matter particles of an atom within it. The outer spheres bind the electrons to the atom. As an electron approaches an atom, it is attracted to its external sub-energy field. As it travels through the sub-energy spheres, it is also attracted in the opposite direction to the spheres that it has already traveled through. When it reaches a point that the attraction of the spheres is equal in both directions for its mass, etc., it will come to rest in the low density area between two high density field spheres. Its motion around the nucleus will be controlled by the motion of the adjacent high density sub-energy spheres in a three dimensional motion pattern. This gives a basic conceptual model view of how matter particles are structured out of basic linear motions and how they function, etc. This completes the description of the lowest hierarchical levels of existent entity construction of the universe starting with its most fundamental basic material substance, which is motion and progressing through to the level of atoms. I hope this gives you adequate information to get a good basic conceptual understanding of how it all works. I have, of course, left out many details and this comment has still grown large as the range of man's comments generally goes, so I will end this comment and leave the other issues for a possible later comment.

Sincerely,

Paul

Dear Peter,

Thanks for the good rating. I got up to 5.3 for about a day. It then went down to 4.4 which is .1 less than it was before you gave me the good rating. The same thing happened last year. Like I have noticed in comments by others, there was no comment associated with the point downgrade. Since I am giving out information that is well beyond the current ability of man in this world to accept, believe, or understand fully, and it would require a lot of work on man's part to confirm that the information I am giving is true and in the process many currently believed concepts would be proven to be in error, I do not expect to win any of the contests, so any who would try to work against me by giving me a low score are wasting their time because I will not win anyway and it is not my goal to win the contests, but just to help people here to advance adequately as is required by the proper time. I notice that whoever is giving out the low points must like you because you are now near the top of the heap. It is very unreasonable for anyone to waste a low score on me since even a 5.3 score would not get me anywhere in the contest anyway. It would seem like it could have been better used on someone higher up near the top. There could, however, be some other agenda at work, such as to try to minimize the number of people who see my work by making it appear to be of little value, to the scientific community because of the low score. It should make you wonder why anyone would go to such extremes to discredit the information that I am giving. It must make someone afraid for it to get out and possibly be believed. My job is just to get it out. I let the others play their games. It provides good structural social monitoring for those who look at such things and trace them back to their sources to provide future control information, etc. If I were to hazard a guess it would be that there are those in the secret scientific community who would like to receive the information, but would like to prevent it from acceptance by the public scientific community. It might be looked at as a form of damage control while at the same time getting what they want. All of these things are continually observed and evaluated by the one who gives me the information to give out and appropriate actions will be taken at the proper times. Luckily I don't have to worry about all of that since I am only the messenger. I would wish you good luck, but it seems like you may not need it. Again, thanks for your attempt to help me.

Sincerely,

Paul

To All,

In some of my comments I mentioned that if a point is located one inch from the earth's north or south rotational pole central axis point of rotation, it would only travel about a little over 3 inches in one rotation (about 3.14 inches). That is not correct, of course, since that would be the radius times Pi. The right answer would be C = 2 Pi r or the diameter times Pi or 2 X Pi = about 6.28 inches. Since no one corrected me on it, I figured that it would be good for me to correct it for posterity. It is interesting how people can get so far down the quantum mechanics / relativity rabbit hole that they forget the basics. Of course, the idea that spin can be a basic motion, that a point object could spin, or that a point object could even exhibit the property of angular motion are other examples of lack of understanding of the basics.

Sincerely,

Paul

My comment on Sue Lingo's paper's page on Mar. 21, 2018.

Dear Sue,

I read your paper and found that your approach can be useful. Although, in a way, FQXI tries to frame the contest subject around existing currently accepted theory, such as quantum mechanics and relativity, etc., papers that are accepted for the contest generally allow for a relatively wide range of variation. My papers in the contests on this site, which go into the layer of physical structure that exists below the level of quantum mechanics and explains the basic substance and the internal structuring of that substance in fields, energy photons, and matter particles and how quantum effects emerge from their internal actions (motions) and external interactions, is a good example of that range. The biggest problem that I have found is that if a paper is not in accordance with the mainstream acceptable concepts it tends to get very little visibility. With 200 contestants in the contest, only those who are considered important figures in the scientific community or have an extended following for some reason tend to get much attention. As an example, my paper only got 5 community ratings and 2 public ratings. Of course, I don't play the games that many do to get attention, since I am not interested in winning the contest. I am just getting the information out there for anyone who is interested in understanding a deeper level of the physical structure of the universe to see. It would be good if contestants would get a record of the number of community and public hits on their papers (the number of accesses of the papers). This would give a better gauge of how much coverage a paper gets. My point is that it is good to have a large number of new concepts expressed in the contest papers, but if no one reads the new concepts, but only those that follow the currently believed line that is expected, the new concepts will not be properly evaluated and that leads to delayed or completely lost scientific development opportunities.

We live in a universe that is composed of motions that continually move or flow from one point to the next in space in the absence of interactions and also flow through their interactions with other motions. The total amount of motion is continually conserved throughout all of these actions and interactions and the total number of motions may also be conserved, but I don't generally go into that, since man in this world cannot presently sense individual field particle motions. In a matter particle there are 5 individual motions that are continuing to flow and act and interact within the particle. These can be mapped, so that every possible combination of their conditions can be generated. When 2 matter particles interact, it is possible to generate a map of all of the possible different outcomes that can result from the interaction. From the ranges of cyclical flow distances that generate any given output result or outcome, it is possible to generate the probability of the occurrence of each possible outcome result. In this way the causes that generate the possible interaction outcomes and each outcome's probability of occurrence can be deterministically understood. Although there is a path flow structuring method that can be used to map these things, man in this world has not yet developed that concept. Your 3D CAD/CAM method could potentially be used to simulate these things with adequate resolution to allow man to visualize such things. When this is done a whole new level of structural understanding will be opened unto man in this world and much current quantum gibberish can then be discarded, while at the same time the reasons to keep the parts that are kept will be understood. My papers on this site's contests give some of the basic concepts from which more detailed structural information can be derived.

Sincerely,

Paul