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

Paul, I believe that where God is, there Satan. Giving people numbers, God allowed in their minds Satan, which leads people to explore the world and commit sins. This is the source of my blasphemy, which can not be avoided.

I believe that to say; "God in Heaven" - is also that "space is matter." First it is written in gospel language, the second in scientific language. I have deliberately mixed these allegations that people were teachable, the principle of identity of space and matter Descartes, which they avoid. Copernicus, arguing that the Earth revolves around the Sun, had to say according to Descartes, what with it spinning all circumsolar space. And the Earth's rotation is not limited by its solid, it rotates together with the space, creates a field of gravity.

I don't think I'll be a winner, but I need my rating, which indicates how effective my theory and how much people are willing to support it. InCE it's up to me, and I can't argue, knowing that no rating I do not get.

Dear Fellow Essayists

This will be my final plea for fair treatment.,

Reliable evidence exists that proves that the surface of the earth was formed millions of years before man and his utterly complex finite informational systems ever appeared on that surface. It logically follows that Nature must have permanently devised the only single physical construct of earth allowable.

All objects, be they solid, liquid, or vaporous have always had a visible surface. This is because the real Universe consists only of one single unified VISIBLE infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated mostly by finite non-surface light.

Only the truth can set you free.

Joe Fisher, Realist

6 days later

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

Paul,

Fascinating essay and hypothesis. I found your comments on language and communication true and became moot as I did struggle a little from the lack of natural paragraph breaks towards the end. But all in all very readable and interesting.

We start from a similar premise of simple motion and spatial structure with speed and relative interactions being key. We head off different ways from there, but both valuable I think. Your 5th dimension motion seems to me analogous to my orthogonal Chiral handed rotations giving Majorana electrons as their own 'antiparticle. I then derive a classical QM, but I hope you may comment however much you may understand QM or not.

Nicely done for yours.

Very best.

Peter

    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

      5 days later

      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

      My comment to Claude Michael Cassano on his paper's page in response to his comment to me on that page on Feb. 6, 2018

      Dear Claude,

      First I will explain the situation about the printing of the letter n instead of a line feed because that should be the easiest part. I have used the same copy of Microsoft word to type out my comments for several years and that was the first time that it had that problem, so it could not be due to the word processor's end of line delimiters, since they have remained the same for a long time with no problems. After I finish typing the comment, I do a spell check and read over it to look for errors that the word processor would not find like the word 'there' being used when the word 'their' was intended, etc. I then save the document. That all worked ok. Next, I go to FQXI and open the page that the comment is to go on and log in. After that I select the comment that I am responding to and select the option to comment to its thread. I then go back to my word processor, highlight all of the comment and select copy. Next I go back to the FQXI page and paste the comment into the comment window on that page. I then read over the comment to be sure that it is still ok and in this case it was still ok with the line spaces in their proper places. After convincing the FQXI page that I am a humon, I select the option to post the document. Then I go back to the page and check it again to be sure that it went in ok and in this case that is where I saw the 'n's' instead of the 'linefeeds'. This tells me that the problem was not at my end, but had to be either in the transmission or reception area. Since I noticed that the comment that I made on your page seems to have been corrected now, I assume that FQXI found and corrected the error, so it was probably a glitch in their software unless you corrected it yourself. In addition to that, when I was looking at other comments today I saw another comment that mentioned having the same problem, so the evidence indicates that the error was FQXI's software problem. I have left out some details, but this is an example of conceptual structuring, which involves looking at the known structure of the entities involved, at their action and interaction outputs, and then analyzing them to determine the compositions of the structures involved and how their structure acts by itself and interacts with other entities to produce the observed output results. Once all of this is understood any error generated in the data can be traced back to its cause.

      Currently, I find conceptual structuring ability sadly lacking in man's scientific community. Where I do see it, I usually find that it is focused on some minor structure deep down in a logical or math tunnel that has already departed so far from reality that those involved usually think that they are making great gains when they are really just propagating the errors deeper and deeper. At the same time, the observational data and even the math models are giving indications that if followed up could lead to the next deeper level of understanding of the true structure of the universe and that information is generally being ignored. Your paper demonstrated that you have analytic skills and that they were not only reproductive of previously developed math structures, but showed that you could possibly possess the ability to develop new math structures, so when I asked about the substance and structure of matter particles, energy photons, and fields, I was testing to see if you also have developed conceptual structuring abilities. I have not yet had the time to read the papers that you provided links to in your response, but their titles indicate that you may not have developed those abilities. This is not unexpected because conceptual structuring training does not appear to be provided in man's current educational systems. What I am looking for are those who either have or at least possess the ability to understand both conceptual and analytic structuring systems and can ideally use the results from each system to develop a deeper overall understanding of the complete structure of the universe.

      Basic physical conceptual structuring contains four primary levels of structuring, all of which must be applied to create a physical device or to completely successfully analyze and understand an already created device. Generally they are applied in the same order, but you start at opposite ends of that order depending on whether you are creating a device or just analyzing an already existing device. When creating a new device, however, it is sometimes necessary to look at aspects that are desired to be exhibited by later levels to be sure that the present structural level will allow or generate those desired output properties in the later structural level, etc. These levels are:

      1. Substance: All physical objects are composed of one or more substances. Each individual substance in the device is usually described according to the hierarchical level in which the device is produced and is expected to function. This means that a device that is made and is expected to be used at the large scale level such as a pen to use to write on paper will be expressed as being composed of substances such as a metal or plastic outer shell containing an inner tube made of plastic that contains a fluid or semifluid that contains pigment, which will leave the marks on the paper. At one end of the tube would be a metal piece with a small metal ball mounted in it, such that it can easily rotate, but not fall out. This metal piece will have a hole in it through which the fluid can flow from the tube to the metal ball, so it can then be spread on the paper. All of these substances can be found in many different forms at the large scale, so many different types of pens can be created. If you were to decide to make a new better type of ink for a pen you might want to work at the next lower level of structure in which case the substances that you would use to make it might be described in the form of the molecules that you use to make it. If you were making a specific molecule, you could describe its substances in terms of the atoms of which it is composed and if you were trying to make a specific atom, you would describe its substances as the subatomic particles of which it is composed and the fields that join them together to form the atom. The question that I asked you is; what substance(s) would be used to make a matter particle?

      2. Internal structuring: In the above section on substance you can see that the substances are joined together structurally in one way or another to form the completed device. At the atomic level, the number of each type of matter particle that you used and the field structure that is used to join them together determines the type of atom produced. My question to you was, at the matter particle level, how is its substance structured or put together to make a specific matter particle.

      3. Internal actions and reactions: Since man in this world still does not fully understand the internal actions and reactions within matter particles, atoms, and molecules, it would be best to get a beginning understanding of them by looking at large scale devices. If you look at a mechanical watch that is powered by a battery that can allow it to run for several years, you can see that it contains several internal motions in its parts that interact with those parts in such a way as to provide that the hour, minute, and second hands all continue through their cyclical motion cycles in coordination with each other without the application of any external interactions. The basic motion supplied by the battery is supplied by internal motion transfer interactions between the parts to generate all of the cyclical motions that are outputted in the form of the motions of the hands.

      4. External actions and interactions: External actions and interactions are those that can be detected by another device through external actions and interactions that transfer information from one device to the other device. In the example of the watch above, the movement of the hands on the watch can be detected by us through interactions between the watch face and its hands and light photons that bounce off of those surfaces and then enter and interact with structures in our eyes that ultimately through a large number of internal actions and interactions gives us an understanding of those motions of the hands on the watch. Through such external actions and interactions you could also learn other things about the watch, such as the colors, sizes, and shapes of its external parts, etc.

      When you are trying to get a complete understanding of an already existent complex hierarchical device such as the universe, you must start by analyzing its external actions and interactions because that is all that you have access to for the most part. At this stage analytical structuring methods which generally are math based can be very important in developing understandings of cyclical motion flow structures and their interrelationships or the rules of operation of the devices that are detectable within the hierarchical level that you live in and then to work your way down to the basic structures of that level. When you begin to get to the level that you break some substance down to the point that it becomes two or more other substances, you can begin to understand that those substances were joined together or structured in some way that created a new composite structure or substance with its own internal actions and interactions and its own external actions and interactions due to the way that its parts are put together. At this stage, when you begin to go out of the hierarchical level that you live in and try to understand how things work at lower levels that you cannot directly observe, conceptual structuring begins to become important to focus observational and analytical structuring in the right direction to achieve the maximum development rate and to avoid following mathematical paths that lead to dead ends. At the same time the new observational and analytical information thus derived can correct conceptual errors. The observational, analytical, and conceptual disciplines can each act as a cross check on the accuracy of the others and are thus of equal importance in the acquisition and understanding of the information that is provided to us by the universe.

      Using conceptual structuring we find that as we progress downward through the hierarchical structural levels of the universe, some things such as linear and angular motions, energy photons, and field structures are present and act about the same way at all levels. The entities that make up the substances of each level, however, are different in some ways and tend to become fewer the farther down we go. At the large scale level there is an almost infinite number of different substances that can be made. At the molecular level there are still more possible different molecules that could be made than there are matter particles in the universe from which they could be made. At the atomic level, however, there is a great decrease in the number of different atoms that can be made, especially if you only consider the ones that are stable, and at the matter particle level only a very few stable matter particles can be made. This leads us to the likely possibility that matter particles may be made of only one most basic substance. This concept is strengthened by the fact that matter particles, energy photons, and simple linear and angular motions can be converted into each other. This means that they must all be composed of the same basic substance. Since they each behave differently in one or more ways from the others, they must contain different ways that the substance is structured within them. The fact that when matter particles interact with each other, they can produce several different output interaction results, each of which has its own probability of occurrence tells us that they must contain internal motion structures that can be positioned differently in relation to one another in each matter particle at the point of interaction, such that the different interaction outcomes are generated. The different probabilities of occurrence of each outcome suggest that there are physical spatial areas that motions could be in at the point of interaction that yield each outcome that vary in size for each of them, etc.

      Just as in the past it has been a great help to the advancement of science to have conceptual models of how molecules are constructed and later models of how atoms are constructed, we are now at the point that conceptual models of how matter particles are constructed are greatly needed to guide scientific development into what may very well be the lowest level of structure of the universe. Then the analytical and observational structuring disciplines can be used to model the detailed motion flows and their resultant interaction results for a full in depth understanding of the universe as it is currently known by man in this world. At this point what is needed is someone who can develop the math that can model the complex motion structures of matter particles, etc. and their interaction flows. New math structural concepts such as path flow structuring may need to be developed to make it easier to accomplish this.

      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

      4 days later

      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

        Paul,

        Time now short, Thanks for your kind and long responses but no time to reply in detail. Just to confirm I'm rating yours now (rather higher than the mid 4's!)

        Very best

        Peter

        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

        8 days later

        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

        13 days later

        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

        7 days later

        Hi Paul...

        Please note: My post have been truncated by the FQXi system without option to "view entire post"?... but I log all UQS Social Media and Forum commo online.

        REF:UQS Social Media and Forum Log http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSSMF.php

        The inherent conundrums of any language, to include mathematics, do indeed impose constraints/limits on conceptual analysis, and I am impressed that in < 25K characters you convey enough perceptive detail that I can, within the confines of the language conundrums as discussed in your essay, structurally conceptualize the fundamentals you utilize to construct your reality model.

        Although you acknowledge the heroically constrained bottom line of your analysis of 'fundamental', as "sub-energy particles"...i.e. above ground, as in measurable?... but you "extrapolate" "a tree with hidden roots", you leave the mind door open for an Initial State analysis which confirms that the seed of the tree "... produces the most basic structures from which all other structures are constructed."

        However, CAD clarification of "sub-energy particle" geometry, is essential to facilitate CAD/SIM Initial State point source emission model verification of an unbroken kinematic chain from point source to bottom line of your analysis.

        I admit an architectural bias for "form follows function", but an Initial State point source emission 'function', must be name differentiated from 'mechanism' which requires an interaction of 2 or more forms, which at Initial State, have not yet emerged.

        To derive the Initial State function from which the 'most basic forms' emerge, one can logic reduce subsequent emergence to date, as successful resolve of minimum units of Energy (QE) occupancy within minimum units of Space (QI), on each emission pulse... i.e. pulsed Energy distribution in Space.

        If accurately conceptualized, the Initial State function, as pulsed spontaneous, harmonious resolve of QE/QI, will be apparent at emergence of the first structural forms... i.e. Space and Energy emerge simultaneously as Spatial dimensioned structural entities... from which the first Available Intelligence (AI) as Information logicons... i.e. event timestamp, event location, and event flow direction... also inherently emerge.

        Note the use of logicon to eliminate the multi-meaning language conundrum of "dimension".

        Given unified/uniform Spatially minimum units of Energy (QE) defined by unified/uniform minimum units of Space (QI), only 3 Spatial dimensions are necessary, and the 4th. and 5th. "dimensions" are logicons... i.e. keyboard key shifts... rather than Spatial dimensions.

        Also note that although one may utilize point (x,y,z) field coordinate information elements to specify an Energy event location, a point location has no Spatial dimensions by which to define Energy as a Spatial Entity... i.e. a point has no Spatial Energy occupancy capacity, and can not facilitate Spatial displacement mechanisms.

        I do agree that Space, as one of the two initial Spatial dimensioned structural entities, "provides structure for motion", but what is Spatially displaced to yield perception of motion?

        One event node configuration state to another?... but by what fundamental mechanism??

        A charge differential?... but by what mechanism??

        Spatial form can not manifest intelligence without pulsed Energy flowing through it.

        The Initial State function, as Energy distribution, implies a mechanism derived from Available Intelligence (AI)... i.e. Energy be quantized as Spatial dimensioned structural entities that can exist independent of motion... i.e. have inert Spatial properties.

        I agree that a fundamental can be a principle/function, or an object/entity, or mechanism, but a clear distinction must be given Initial State definition, and semantically maintained within the hierarchal development, or unresolvable complexities are embedded in the model formulization which will break the kinematic chain from/to the Initial State.

        Motion is neither a function, nor a Spatial dimensioned structural entity, nor a logicon.

        Motion is the perception of a mechanism ... i.e. Spatial displacement... associated with 2 or more Spatial dimensioned structural entities, and their corresponding logicons, and any theorized minimum spatial displacement of 2 perceived events, requires a theoretical minimum Spatial entity, and a mechanism that operates on the occupant of the minimum Spatial entity.

        Perception of a mechanism can facilitate subsequent expansion of logicons... e.g. speed... as derived from the Initial State logicons... i.e. event time, event location, and event flow direction... associated with the mechanism.

        Emergence of composite initial Spatial dimensioned structural entities... i.e. composites of minimum unified/uniform units of Space (QE) and minimum unfired/uniform units of Energy (QE).. is facilitated by perceptual application of emergent Available intelligence (AI) to an expansion of initial distribution mechanisms... e.g. mirror repeat yields recursion... but the Initial State components are "... essential to allow the structure to be built."... and the Initial State Spatial dimensioned structural entities maintain their identity within the composite.

        As a logician I require all perception must be kinematically resolvable to Initial State, and conceptual limitations, as a consequence of 90 deg. mutually perpendicular axis 3D field coordinate analysis... i.e. Cartesian field quantization... do not facilitate this requirement.

        REF:FQXi Mar. 7, 2018 @ 01:27 GMT Discussion with Peter Jackson http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSSMF.php

        Digital simulation/animation of Initial State distribution entities and mechanism, within a CAD environment quantized by valid unified/uniform geometry, reveals breaks in the kinematic chain, which can be, and are being, ignored, as a consequence of theoretical license with sematic conundrums.

        On Source Emission Pulse-1-Close... i.e. first inert state... the UQS point Source Emission CAD/SIM, resolves emergence of minimum unified/uniform units of Spatial dimensioned Energy (QE)... and their associated path derived directional potential/momentum logicons... which occupy 2D unified/uniform minimum spatially differentiatable/defined units (QI)... which have corresponding addressable current position logicons... and the amplitude logicon as a function of QE/QI accumulation, = 1QE/1QI... i.e. the purpose of the spatial structure is to provide unified/uniform quantization occupancy for minimum units of Energy (QE) when not in motion, and to facilitate minimum unit of Energy (QE) displacement by distribution mechanisms.

        Motion, as perception of the UQS point source pulse Spatial displacement mechanism, is initially detected as a QE cross node transport from Point Source to the 24 initial planar QI that converge to the Origin Point Source.

        For a linguistic pulse-by- pulse Emission log, one can REF:FQXi Mar. 7, 2018 @ 01:27 GMT Discussion with Peter Jackson http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSSMF.php, which can be visually supplemented by the highly illustrated UQS on-line papers indexed at UQS Virtual Lab's Home http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

        Herein it will suffice to say that on subsequent Source Emission Pulses, the initial 24 (QI) recursive ADDRESS PAIRS are emptied ... i.e. the "stack pops"... providing a perception of motion from Singularity to SHELL ONE, Available Intelligence (AI) emergence is logged, the Singularity is reset for repetition of the fundamental function of pulsed differentiation of Space by Energy, QE vector flow direction of SHELL ONE entities is established for subsequent distribution by Available Intelligence (AI), and mechanisms for Spin, Scale Invariance, separate interactive Inertia and Radiation distribution channels, unlimited single Energy Event Spatial effect, Gravity as Inertia, unoccupied "dark" Spatial units, etc... are visually identifiable/verifiable.

        With regard to your "extrapolations" of "... hidden roots that supply and support the above ground parts of the tree.", long established acceptance of credentialed license with language conundrums... e.g. Vedic Science asserts that "Man is the image of God" rather than "Man is created in the image of God". ~ B.T Spalding... obfuscate "below ground" analysis.

        However, the UQS Initial State CAD/SIM Emission analysis... currently out to 5 shell encapsulation of the Point Source Origin Singularity... and logged emergent Available Intelligence (AI)... i.e. nothing "artificial" about it... verifies that the above ground hierarchal process you describe, to support mechanism from which your perceptions of roots are logically derived, is also apparent below ground .. i.e.:

        - Pre-Differentiation of Space by Energy Available Intelligence (AI) = I AM differentiation of Space by Energy

        Note: No Pre-differentiation Intelligence Available (AI) for stop differentiation, or subsequent differentiation

        - Upon Differentiation of Space by Energy Available Intelligence (AI) = I AM pulsed, harmonious, spontaneous, resolve of QE/QI

        Thank you Paul for contributing your insights, and for your review of my essay, which I have responded to on my essay page.

        REF: Knowledge Base (KB) Access as Fundamental to Info Processor Intelligence https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3000

        Sue Lingo

        UQS Author/Logician

        www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

          17 days later

          Dear Sue,

          I checked on your paper's page and was able to expand your comment to me on your page and also your comment on my page ok.

          I will start with your comment to me on your page and number my responses to the paragraphs starting with (1.) in response to your paragraph that starts with "It is my contention that CAD/SIM analysis,".

          1. CAD/SIM analysis can be used to allow visualization of many concepts, but must be properly applied. It is necessary to get a very good understanding of how the concept that is to be modeled works in all of its details, so that they can all be included in the simulation to give a model that is as complete and as accurate as possible without adding errors into the simulation that can undermine its usefulness or even mislead those who depend on it. Learning how to implement such a model properly is, therefore, an important skill to learn and it should be a part of university curriculums for which such analysis can be properly used.

          2. It is indeed very important to look at the universe in terms of what substance(s) are used to construct each entity that exists within it and how the substance(s) are put together or structured within the entity to give it the form, internal actions that it contains, and the external interactions that it produces. When one works in architectural design of a structure in the real world, a practical approach is always necessary to generate a workable structure. You could always visualize the use of infinitely strong yet infinitely flexible materials in its construction, but would not find that any such materials actually exist. You have to settle for materials that actually exist and that can actually be put together or structured in the way that will produce the desired result. You might think that diamond actually exists and that a fifty foot diamond I beam would work well for a given application, but you would soon find out that such a thing could not be made from that substance due to various limitations. This should give you an advantage over many that I see today who either try to make substance from nothing or try to apply or structure an existing substance, such as motion in a way that it does not operate, etc. As an example, I often see spin motion being applied to some zero dimensional entity. First, a zero dimensional object cannot spin because although it has a point about which a spin could occur, it does not possess anything outside of that point that could spin about it because if it did it would not be a zero dimensional point entity. This is a very simple understanding because the actual speed of the spin motion of an object (given a specific period of rotation) is determined by 2 times the radius times PI (about 3.14). The radius of a zero dimensional point is zero, so 2 times 0 times PI = 0, giving zero spin motion per rotation. Even if spin is applied to an object that has a size greater than zero, it is not a basic motion. Spin is a cyclical motion structure and cyclical motion structures generally require the periodic reversal of direction of motion in all of the dimensions in which the spin participates. A simple motion structure contains three primary internal information structures that control its motion through space, they are its current position in the spatial system, its direction of travel in that system, and the amount of motion contained within it (its motion amplitude (generally how fast it moves)). It can read and act in accordance to all three of these information structures, but it can only change its current position information as it moves from one position to the next in accordance to its internal direction and motion amplitude information. Its direction and motion amplitude information can only be changed as an output result of an interaction with another motion entity. Since a spin or rotation requires that the motion's direction information be continuously changed, a spin requires a continual motion interaction between two or more motions. To put it a different way a spin is generally a 2 dimensional composite motion structure generally composed of 2 motions.

          3. The important thing is that what you draw or conceive should conform or be in agreement with all real world observational data as much as possible and if possible it should give an explanation as to how the observed data is generated by the concepts that are illustrated in the drawing. You could watch a movie that portrays matter particles to be very little gremlins and you could then draw the gremlin particles that you saw in the movie or you could draw matter particles as little fuzzy orange balls even though you had never seen such a concept before that concept came into your mind, but in both cases what was drawn would not conform to data from observed reality. On the other hand, you might visualize a concept that you had not previously seen in the world that just came into your mind and you could have the ability to see how it works in your mind, but you might not have been given the natural ability to draw it or acquired the skills to program it into a computer to display it to others. In such a case you could draw conclusions as to its validity. You would just have a difficult time convincing others of its validity unless you could find someone else who had such an ability and was also able to understand the concept from your description of it in enough depth to allow it to be drawn or displayed, so that others could then also see it and see that it was valid.

          4. I am used to CAD equaling Computer Aided Design and SIM to likely equal Simulation. If that is the case, it does not seem that such a simulation program would force derivation of minimum units of space and time. It would only define the minimum and maximum size range of space and time that can be displayed on the screen at one time. As an example, you might specify that one dot on a display line would equal 1 centimeter. If the screen contained 2000 dots on each line and 2000 lines, a full screen display could only display 2000 centimeters in either the horizontal or vertical direction. This would mean that any spatial entity that was outside of the range of 1 centimeter to 2000 centimeters could not be properly displayed on the screen in those directions in the simulation. You would only be forced into derivation of minimum units of space if you desired that your simulation include the minimum units of space in its displayable range. Any entity that can interact with another entity must have at least a small interaction cross section to allow an interaction to occur. Even sub-energy particles contain physical size. Any entity that was truly a zero dimensional size point object could not interact with any other entity and would, therefore, not be detectable in any way or have any effect on anything else in the universe. This minimum interaction cross section may or may not be equal to a minimum spatial position size. Space could be discrete with some minimal size for each position or it may be continuous with no minimum size except zero size. Man does not presently have the ability to discern which is the case. In your case, you are attempting to explain the beginning of the universe starting with some type of singularity. If that singularity had a zero size, it could not transmit any entities that do have size into this world, since anything that had size would not fit to travel through the singularity. Since total motion content is conserved in all interactions in the universe, it is a reasonable likelihood that any motion that entered into the universe through the singularity would have to come from some other place that contained that motion in order for the total motion content to be conserved. If the singularity had a size, it would require the existence of enough space to contain it. There would also then be the question of what was on the other side of the singularity that would provide the motion that came through the singularity and what the singularity itself is composed of and how the motion transfer interactions operated, etc. If you believe that space was also created at that time, it would need to be transferred from where the motion was transferred or created by the motion, etc. and that mechanism would also need to be described. Unless you think that the motion transfer is still going on, you would have to explain what turned it off. If the motion came from some other universe, it would be reasonable to assume that all of the motion in our universe could at any time be transferred out to create some other universe through a singularity there, thus destroying all of the built up structures that now exist in our universe including us in the process. If you believe that the singularity somehow actually created all of the motion that is in our universe from nothing, not only would that not be in accordance with energy (motion) conservation, but you would still need to explain why it seems to be turned off now and the mechanism that caused that to happen. There would also need to be some reason why other singularities have not opened up and created more motion in our universe since then. The complexities go on and on from there, which is one reason I chose to not attempt to go all the way back to the beginning. Instead I chose to go to the next lower hierarchical structural level beyond the lowest level currently understood by man here. In the same way that observational information gained by studying the large scale object level helped man to get an understanding of the next lower molecular level and the observational information gained by studying the molecular level helped man get an understanding of the next lower atomic level and the observational information gained by studying the atomic level helped man to get an understanding of the next lower matter particle hierarchical level, I have used the observational information from studying the matter particle hierarchical level to gain an understanding of the next lower basic motion level from which not only matter particles are constructed, but also energy photons and basic field particles (sub-energy particles) are composed. This level of structure is the lowest level of structure of entities that exists in all that we can observe to be our universe. I have not attempted to cover the creation of the spatial system because it appears to have been in existence first and then the motions were added at later times. This cannot be intelligently discussed, however, until man gains an adequate level of understanding of the basic motion level of hierarchical structuring. Yes, at that time much of the quantum gibberish will be discarded and the good parts that remain will then be better understood. A better understanding of time will also be needed. As an example, a physical time dimension does not exist, etc.

          5. I am glad you have gained from it.

          6. You will not need to start from a point source emission to simulate the level of structure that I am covering.

          7. Even including the sub-energy particles

          8. You are welcome.

          Now I will cover the second message that you left on my paper's page starting with the paragraph that starts with, "The inherent conundrums of any language,".

          1. I am glad that you were able to structurally conceptualize the fundamentals given in my paper. That should make it much easier for you to generate a simulation of them if you choose to do so.

          2. I have looked at a great number of attempts to explain the beginning of the universe as a natural chance occurrence, etc., but they all ultimately lead to infinitely recursive structures or the creation of something from nothing, etc. that do not agree with data produced by observation of reality. When this is combined with the complex hierarchical structure of the universe and especially of living creatures within it, it is evident that it was designed by an intelligence that is much greater than man's and could not have come about from natural chance occurrences. I would, therefore, say that although there are many levels of structure that I have not yet attempted to fully explain, the ultimate seed of the creation is the intelligent creator who constructed it. There was a time when I was much younger that I tended to believe the natural creation theory, but developments in scientific understanding over many years have convinced me that it is impossible. It is sort of like if you traveled to a distant dessert planet and found it to be completely covered in sand except that sitting on the sand was a car. Would you say to yourself "That must have taken millions of years to have formed naturally.", or would you more likely say "Some intelligent being that is capable of making a car must have been here before me."? When you look at the universe and see its complex hierarchical structure that clearly shows all of the signs of being an intelligently designed device with assemblies, subassemblies, and sub-subassemblies, etc. with so many possibilities of construction parts out of which only the few right parts are used in its construction so that it works properly in situations where if any of the large number of possible wrong parts are used it would not work, etc., it just gets to the point where the natural creation theory looks more and more like nonsense. There is not just some singularity seed from which the universe came into existence. There is a structure that sits behind our universe that is much larger and more complex than our universe that generates our universe as its output. The mechanism that directly generates our universe is just a small part of that structure. It is contained in the first 4 of 8 dimensions). The fifth dimensional world (the first heaven) is controlled by beings called the Powers. Since their world contains an extra dimension, they can view everything in our four dimensional world and control it in the same way that if a two dimensional world existed in our three dimensional world as a vertical and horizontal plane on a wall in your house, you would be able to look at everything going on in that world, but those in that world would not be able to see you because they could not see into the third dimension. You could only be observed by them in any way if you or some part of you were to enter into their two dimensional plane. You could introduce motions into their world to create storms, etc. in such a way that they would not be able to detect that you caused them. The powers have the ability to control things in our world in a more detailed way because things in our world are controlled by a mechanism in the lower 4 dimensions and they control that mechanism. This means that they could control the programming and data within that mechanism that generates our universe as its output. We would have no way to trace anything back directly into that mechanism, and especially not to the ones who control it. It would be like the simulation of a man on the computer screen tracing back into the computer through changes to its programming back to the person who made the changes. The next higher 6 dimensional world (the second heaven) is controlled by beings called the Principalities. They can view everything in the lower levels, etc. Above that is the 7 dimensional world (the third heaven) controlled by the angels. Again, they have the same abilities over all of the lower levels. God's throne is located there and he tells the angels what to do and they either do it or pass it down to the appropriate level to perform it. Above that level is the 8 dimensional world, which is reserved for only God the Father and the Word. That is a short description of the whole creation, but God is mostly outside of the creation and he is the true seed or source of all things that were created. Many people believe that God created the world, but I find it strange that very few ask the question, Why or for what purpose did he do all of the work to create it or to put it another way, What does he get out of it? That is where it gets really interesting.

          3. The geometry of a sub-energy particle is that they are very small linear motions, but not zero point or zero dimensional and in the absence of an interaction they move in some three dimensional direction at the speed of light or possibly less. In a CAD SIM there is not initial point source emission. A large number of sub-energy particles were introduced into our universe all at once in various places. To follow one, you could just pick a spatial location for its introduction origination and have it travel from that point. You could give it any direction of travel and any motion amplitude or speed not greater than the speed of light that you desire.

          4. I can see your problem in this respect. You have two main ways to go. You can consider the singularity to be zero in size or zero point or zero dimensional using various terms that all basically have the same meaning. In this case nothing that has any size other that zero could pass from some other place through it to generate the space, energy, and matter that exist in our world. Since any zero size entities that would pass through it would contain no size, they could not generate space that contained size or any objects, such as energy photons or matter particles that contain any size. This pretty much leaves you with the concept that the zero point or size entity somehow creates space with size and also all other objects that exist within that space essentially from nothing. In all observed interactions in this world, the total amount of motion is always conserved. Sub-energy particles can receive motion from another entity in an interaction that causes them to become energy photons or even matter particles, energy photons can receive motion during an interaction and become matter particles. Some of the received motion can also be converted into the kinetic motion of the matter particle. They can also give up their fourth dimensional wave motion to another entity during an interaction and become a sub-energy particle. Matter particles can receive motion during an interaction that can add to their kinetic motion. If they receive enough motion they can break apart and produce many output entities, some of which can be temporary unstable entities and some can be stable final output results, etc. Matter particles can also give up energy and turn into energy photons or even sub-energy particles. They can even be converted into kinetic motion energy in another entity. They are all composed of motions and those motions can be transferred between them during interactions between them, but the total motion content always remains the same. The idea that some zero size point could create all of the space and motion that exists in our universe from nothing is completely opposite to the way that all of our observable universe works and is, therefore, nonsense science. Moreover, if a zero point exists, it would be likely that an innumerable number of them could exist. Since all indications are that there would have been only one beginning point, there would have to be some mechanism that triggered the creation action of one while not allowing others to do so. This would mean that there would either need to be some other existent entity that triggered it or there would need to be some mechanism built into the zero point itself that triggered it that would need to be explained as to how it works and why it only worked in that particular zero point that generated our universe and not in any others, etc. This is only a beginning sample of all of the complexities that result from this concept. The other possibility is that the point is not actually a zero size point, but has a small size that is large enough to allow motion to be transported through it from some other place and this motion transfer created the universe. The biggest problem with that concept is that the place that supplied the motion to build our universe would have had to be already in existence before our universe in order to allow the transfer of motion from it into our universe. The question then is, how did that place get there? This leads to an infinite recursive process of universe production from universes that already exist, which again is nonsense science. If the point has some size greater than zero, there would also have to be enough space in existence for it to be positioned in before the expansion that would somehow create the rest of space and all of the entities that exist in it were produced. Again there is no reason that a great number of such points would not be in existence, thus creating a large amount of space and also transferring large amounts of motion into our universe from many points instead of just one. It is for these reasons and many others that I gave up on the natural universe formation concept.

          5. What determines the minimum unit of energy (QE) and the minimum unit of space (QI)? Where does the energy pulse come from? Since there are apparently many energy pulses, there must be an energy source that contains the energy to be used to produce the pulses. What is that source and what is the mechanism that extracts the energy from that source and transforms it into the pulses and then emits them? What form does this energy take in each of these units of space and how is it contained in that spatial unit, so it does not go elsewhere?

          6. The energy apparently comes from the energy pulses, but where does the space come from? Since the point would not contain the concept of dimension or direction within it, how could it emit an energy pulse that would travel out from it in all directions in a three dimensional space? Why would it not just emit the pulses into one dimension? Why would it emit in two directions in each dimension to create bidirectional dimensions rather than just one direction to create unidirectional dimensions? These things ignore the easiest simplest path and go on a more complex path. This is contrary to most things in nature that tend to take the simplest shortest path. On the other hand, if a more complex path is somehow naturally generated, why stop at three dimensions instead of one hundred dimensions or at bidirectional dimensions instead of quad-directional dimensions, etc.? Since none of these things would be in existence until they were generated in some way by the singularity, the singularity or some other existent entity outside of it would have to contain the mechanism that would generate these things in this way rather than some other way, so what is that mechanism composed of and how does it work?

          7. Noted.

          8. Why would three dimensions be needed and no more or less? The fourth and fifth dimensions are actually physical spatial dimensions and are needed to control the generation of energy photons and matter particles and to sustainably support their operations and interaction outcomes, etc. through the motion flow cycles through these and the other three dimensions.

          9. It would seem that the initial point would have to first contain or occupy the energy within it until it is emitted as an energy pulse and as it emitted the pulse it would be facilitating the spatial displacement or motion of the pulse energy from it into the new spatial positions around it.

          10. The motion itself is displaced.

          11. Motions are very simple machines. Each motion possesses three information entities that control its operation in the absence of an interaction with (an)other motion(s). First is its current location in space. Second is its direction of travel in space and finally is its motion amplitude or what man would call its speed. A motion's only operation is to continually change its position in space from its current location to the next location in the direction of its travel according to the amount of motion contained within it or its motion amplitude.

          12. I am not sure what you are talking about here, but generally there are two types of charge effects, which are cyclical and static. An example of a cyclical effect is the variable effect that an energy photon can have on an object during an interaction with it that depends on the position, direction, and the motion amplitude of its fourth dimensional motion's back and forth cyclical motion in the fourth dimension. An example of a static effect would be the alignment of the sub-energy fields of a large number of matter particles/atoms/molecules in the same direction in a substance such as an iron bar. The combined aligned sub-energy flow produces a larger scale sub-energy flow through the bar from one input side to the opposite output side and then in the opposite direction outside of the bar back from the output side to the input side of the bar. If the two input or the two output ends of the bars are located so that they are facing one another and the field is strong enough, one bar can be supported above the other by the sub-energy field flow interactions of their sub-energy fields. Note that a static effect is seen, but it is due to the continual motion flow cycle of the sub-energy particles in the fields and their interactions.

          13. It appears that you may hold the belief that the singularity contains all of the energy necessary to generate all of the entities that are contained in the universe, which is the current predominate belief of man in this world. If such a condition existed, the first problem is how a point singularity could contain all of that energy within it. In your theory you say "a point has no Spatial Energy occupancy capacity". This would imply that energy could not be stored within a point entity. If it could somehow be stored within the point object, how is that accomplished? Most believe that the energy storage became unstable in some way, which resulted in an explosion that started the universe. In your theory, you specify that the energy is released a little at a time in the form of pulses. This would indicate a controlled energy release by some mechanism. What is that mechanism and how does it work? In the real world energy can take many forms, such as the mass energy of matter particles, the wave energy of energy photons, the linear energy of fields, and the kinetic energy that produces the motion of matter particles through space, etc., What form is the energy in when it is stored in the singularity before it is released and in what form is it in the energy pulses as it is released? If the energy pulses flow through the spatial form, as you say, this flowing seems to be the same thing as motion through it.

          14. You then say "The Initial State function, as Energy distribution, implies a mechanism derived from Available Intelligence (AI)... i.e. Energy be quantized as Spatial dimensioned structural entities that can exist independent of motion... i.e. have inert Spatial properties." This seems to imply that these spatial dimensional structural entities would not contain (AI) available intelligence since they could not have energy flowing or moving through them if they exist independent of motion. If the energy stored in the spatial units is inert, what form is it in?

          15. The whole concept of universe creation from a singularity is fraught with unresolvable complexities. Kinematic chain would mean the chain of motion from or to the initial state to or from some other state. Motion would need to be present in order for the initial energy pulse to leave the initial point and travel to the first position that would become the first spatial position. In reality the energy pulse would be the motion, since motion is all that really exists in this universe except for the spatial positions for it to be positioned in, to move in, and to interact with other motions in, but you seem to think that the energy pulse would be composed of something that could be not in motion. If this were the case then the motion would need to move this inert energy into the first spatial position outside of the initial point so that they could be joined together into the first spatially minimum unit of energy. If the unit of space (QI) is also emitted by the initial point it would also need to be moved into its position outside of the initial point by motion. One question in that case would be whether the (QE) and QI) are joined together somehow in the initial point and then emitted as a unit, in which case the mechanism of their joining together and how they are sent out of the point, etc. would be important to understand, or whether they are emitted separately in which case it would be important to determine which is emitted first and how they are joined together after they are emitted. The structural nature of this inert energy that does not move would also be important.

          16. Motion is the only thing that exists in the spatial structure. It is the only thing that can act internally or interact externally. If anything else existed that did not contain motion within it, there would be no way for it to act internally or interact with anything external to it unless motion was added to it or unless the entity that interacted with it contained motion within it. On the other hand cyclical motion structures can cycle through an enclosed path that can sit in one place giving it the appearance of an inert object when viewed at larger size scales in a similar way as the way that atoms and molecules can be joined together into large scale objects that appear to be solid inert objects even though we now know that they contain many cyclical motions within them at smaller scales. Interactions between two such motion particles will, of course, yield angular motion components as output results of those interactions as is observed in matter particle interactions. The angular motion as it travels through its curved enclosed path also generates a static mass effect as observed in matter particles. There is no need to invent other external particles to give them mass, etc. There is no need to have any inert particles in existence if the spatial system was created first and then the field (sub-energy) particles, the energy photons, and the matter particles were added later. This all agrees with observable reality. It looks to me like you need the inert energy to keep the minimal spatial units in existence when those positions do not hold other entities, such as matter particles, etc. This is only required because you use the inert energy entities to produce the spatial minimum units in the first place and this is only necessary because you are trying to generate both the spatial system and the entities that exist in it at the same time from an initial point source. This is one of the reasons to believe in vacuum pressure in space. The other main reason is to explain how energy photons and matter particles seem to appear or disappear from nowhere in interactions. Of course, that problem comes from not understanding the existence of sub-energy field particles from which they can be produced by the addition of motion gained during an interaction or how the energy photons and matter particles can be converted into sub-energy particles by giving up motion to other entities during interactions. All interactions are just motion transfers between entities. Once these kinds of things are understood, space can just be empty places where entities can be positioned in and the entities can all be composed of motions. The spatial positions can then be stable even when they are empty. The whole structure becomes much simpler to understand although it can still be somewhat difficult to model because of all of the interacting motions that exist within entities and between them during interactions between them.

          17. Why are you leaving out the movement of the energy and/or the space from the initial point into its position external to the initial point to create the minimum unit of space entity (QE/QI)? The motion is the mechanism that would come first and generate this position creation and transfer of energy to it? The two entities that would be displaced in relation to each other would be the initial point and the first minimum unit of space that would somehow emerge or move from the point and become separated from it and be positioned into its own separate position.

          18. Yes the speed of the travel of the energy and/or space from the initial point to its resultant position could be determined from the motion change from the initial point to its final position and so could the event time, event location, and event motion direction.

          19. Some problems in this area that would need to be addressed would be:

          a. What determines the number of dimensions that the energy pulse travels in away from the initial point? If the initial point was all that existed prior to the release of the first energy pulse, the whole concept of dimensions with all of their basic structural properties and interaction joining structures, etc. would have to be developed somehow by the energy pulse. This whole structure and how it would come about would need to be explained.

          b. What determines the number of directions contained within each dimension, I.E. unidirectional, bidirectional, etc.?

          c. Is the pulse a continuous analog wave that travels out in all direction combinations from the initial point, thus filling all possible spatial positions regardless of distance from the initial point or is it a digital wave composed of discrete energy packets that become more and more separated from each other as they expand out over greater distances from the initial point, thus allowing empty areas between spatial points that become larger in size the farther they are from the initial point? If it is analog the pulse amplitude would have to continually increase in each succeeding pulse in order to be able to carry the greater number of spatial positions that would need to be carried by the pulse front to allow it to fill the larger area that the pulse front would cover as space expanded. This would mean an increase in the amount of motion, the number of spatial units and the number of inert energy units contained in each pulse compared to the previous pulse that occurred before it. This increase would be exponential due to the increase in the volume of space over all dimensions in the spatial structure. Such a controlled increase would not likely occur naturally.

          d. What determines how much energy is released in each pulse and what equally distributes it into all of the spatial entities that are created?

          e. What is the mechanism that generates the spatial unit from the energy pulse or is there emission of space as well as energy in some way from the initial point?

          f. How are the spatial units joined together long term, so that they don't just separate and drift apart to create little islands of disconnected space?

          g. If the energy that is stored within each spatial point is inert (contains no motion), it seems that it would not be able to do anything at least without the addition of motion from outside of the spatial position. Is that the case?

          h. It would seem that the energy pulse would have to contain these inert energy entities, but would also have to contain motion to move them out of the initial point and into their place in the overall spatial structure. If that is the case is that motion depleted as it deposits the spatial units or does it continue to move at full speed? If it continues to move at full speed, it would seem that after it reached the end of the currently available space, it would bounce back to the initial point and interfere with the motion contained within the next energy pulse, likely causing it to not be able to properly deliver all of its new spatial positions properly. There are so many complexities of the generation of such a complex structure from a single point most of which are probably not even considered by most of those who propose such a process. I have only mentioned a few, but it should be enough to give an idea of the magnitude of the structural information that would need to be considered to really show how it could possibly work.

          20. You are definitely right that the whole structure would have to be able to be kinematically (through the flow of motion) resolvable or traceable back to or from the initial point because motion is all that there is when all things are considered.

          21. You are certainly right that current theories don't follow all of the motion structures all the way from the source to the selected end point and back, but to be fair, man in this world does not currently possess the ability to do so, both because of lack of knowledge of all of the structural details and also because of the lack of computing ability and power to fully simulate or model them.

          22. Why 2D and not 1D or 3D, etc.? How do the distribution mechanisms work to displace the QE from a QI? Where do the QE go when they are displaced and what happens to the QI that they were in before they move out of them?

          23. Why only 24 points around the initial point? Are these 24 QI positions spread only in a two dimensional plane around the initial point or are these 24 points spread over three dimensions?

          24. I looked at the emission log, but found it to be filled with terms that I am sure have great meaning to those intimately involved in your theory, but I found it to contain too little more common context to allow me to get a good in depth understanding of how it all works. I suggest finding someone who is both familiar with the theory and the math and software that goes with it and can also convert it into more commonly understood definitive terms of description that can be understood by those who are not intimately involved in your CAD SIM software programming and the UQS theory's various terms, etc. From what I could determine it appears that the energy pulses are in a square wave digital pattern of off all the way followed by on all the way rather than some form that has an output that varies in amplitude during the wave cycle. I didn't see anything that would tell me if the off and on times are of equal duration. As I mentioned earlier, my first question would be, what mechanism within the singularity generates the on/off switching? The next question would be; what is the nature (properties) of the energy that flows or moves out of the singularity and into the spatial units (or possibly generates the spatial units in some way and then moves into them)? Do the spatial units come out of the singularity or are they made in some way by the energy from the pulse? It appears that the energy pulse spreads out from the singularity in a spherical 3D pattern in your theory. The implication would be that the spatial units are somehow created and expand with the energy sphere. If the spatial units fill all of the space between each other and the expanding surface of the sphere they could not be spherical themselves, however. How do you understand their geometric form to be? In your theory does any motion move a whole number of units (I.E. no fractional units) so as to make all motion digital instead of analog? It still appears that the energy pulse amplitude would have to continually increase to generate the continually increasing number of spatial points that would need to be filled in each succeeding outer shell of the expanding spatial sphere or the expansion would drastically slow down as the sphere expanded with each new outer shell of spatial units requiring exponentially more spatial units to fill than the previous one if the number of spatial units emitted by the singularity remained the same with all pulses because all of the pulses contained the same amount of energy. What size do you consider that the minimum spatial units would be and how much energy would be contained within each inert energy unit within each spatial unit?

          25. It would seem to me that the first appearance of motion if it could be viewed from outside of the developing structure would be the movement of the energy pulse out of the singularity into the first spatial positions that would be formed in some way. I am guessing that the second energy pulse causes the emptying of the first 24 positions into the next row of then created spatial positions and would also then refill the first row of positions. Since the second row would be larger than the first, if the first row entities popped into the second new row they would only generate the 24 spatial positions that they popped into. How would the other positions needed to fill that row be produced? How is the mechanism for spin created and structured to produce the complex spin motion? What are the unoccupied dark spatial units?

          26. Both statements affirm the existence of God and that man is an image of God. The statement that man is created in the image of God would usually be interpreted by most to indicate the source of man as being made by God, which just adds this extra information. In his Word, God gives more information about man than the Vedic Science that was not given by God, but comes from information provided to man by and about others who come from other planets of the earth's heaven where the stars are located. Most of these are from the same quadrant of the Milky Way galaxy that we are a part of. They are more scientifically advanced than man here is, but they are still, mostly bound to this galaxy because they still do not possess fifth vector technology. There are those in the earth's heaven who do have that technology and they can travel at will about anywhere in earth's heaven (such as between galaxies) that they desire. This can be done even without ships although it is always safer to use structured fields. Even they are, however, still limited to the earth universe structure. They cannot leave it and enter into the mechanism that sits behind and generates our universe in its lower four dimensions or go into the fifth, sixth, or seventh dimensional heavens or into the eighth dimensional place in God's creation that is reserved for only God the Father and his Word. Neither can they exit the creation altogether as God can. When those from other planets first came to this planet, they found it useful to them to convince the people here that they were gods, but just like those who came to America from Europe had rifles, canons, and armor, etc. that made them appear to be more than men to the local people, those who came from other planets were just forms of men with more toys to play with than the local people had. Many men are still at this time being deceived by them. God created this world to use it to build a body for himself to live in. Since we are made in his image it is usually easiest to start by looking at our structure. We are composed of three parts. First is our spirit, which is the image of God the Father who is a Spirit. It produces our intents of what we desire to do. Next is our soul, which is made in the image of God's Word. The soul can receive the intents of the spirit and translate them into thoughts that our bodies can understand. It then sends those thoughts to our body. Our body is the third part of us and it receives the thoughts from our soul and does the work that fulfills the spirit's intents. The needs of our bodies are also communicated to our spirit through our soul and the spirit then generates intents to take care of those needs. The way that we live and work in our body is similar to the way that God desires to live in and work through us as his body members or parts. Once he has created all of his body members in this world, he will no longer need this world since his body members are made to live in him without end, so he will not need to make new members to replace old ones. He will, therefore, then take back into himself all of the motion that he took out of himself to create this whole creation, which will effectively burn up this creation. After a final judgment of all who have ever lived, he will make a new bigger and better creation that is not subject to entropy, etc. and he will live in that creation in and through his body members without end. God does not desire to force us to be his body members, so he has made a way for those who do not want him to rule over them to believe a lie and live out their lives in this world believing that they are in control of their lives and then to die and after the judgment to be destroyed. The lie is that we can be as gods. Of course, not only can't we ever hope to be able to do anywhere near what God can do, we can't actually be in control of our lives. Those who do not chose to have God in control over them are put under the control of another being that God made for that purpose. He is called by many different names, but a couple of them are Satan and the Devil. As far as I have seen, most of those from other planets do not know much about God. If they have a spirit to generate their intents and a soul to translate those intents into thoughts to their body and a body to receive and carry out the spirit's intents, they are just a form of man and could come to God though His Word Jesus Christ and be saved as members of God's body also. It would appear that there is a big opening to spread the gospel to new worlds. Those who desire to believe the lie that they can be as God would rather accept the statement that "Man is the image of God" than the other form that is given because it does not mention that they were created in his image, so they can believe that they somehow attained to that level by themselves. Of course, if they examine the statement closer they find that first they are accepting that God exists and secondly that they are only an image of him. In reality an image is never as good as the real thing. Ask your friends if they would rather have you with them or a picture of you with them. If they all say the picture, you either need to get new friends or seriously examine yourself as to why that would be. My guess is that most would prefer you to the picture because they know that you can do things that the picture could never do.

          27. Yes, but the below ground part is actually more complex than the above ground part, as I showed in the little bit of it that I covered above. That is why I usually don't cover it with many people, since most of it is not observable by most men and even though the scriptures tell us that a couple of people have been given a look at that structure and what they saw has been recorded in the scriptures, it is hard to find many who would believe it, since most current scientists, especially those that control the dialog, mostly do not believe in God or if they do believe that he exists, they do not accept him in the only way that he allows us to come to him through his Son Jesus Christ and, therefore, they tend to work against him rather than for him, even when they sometimes actually think that they are working for him. Nevertheless, God will save those whom he has chosen and if even one of them reads these things and if it in any way is used by God to draw him to God and he is saved, all of the work to do this will be well spent. I also hope that the scientific information that God has given to me to give to others also is received by those for whom it is given and used to make life in this world better for all as much as possible. I do understand that even mentioning God will likely cause many to automatically reject the scientific information that is provided, but it may just be God's way of transferring the information only to those who will use it properly.

          28. Do you believe that spatial positions actually exist before the energy pulse arrives and it differentiates and makes the positions observable or usable by the deposit of a small amount of inert energy into each spatial position or that the spatial positions are actually created by the energy pulse, etc.? If you believe that they are actually created by the pulse, how does that creation mechanism work?

          29. Do you believe that the pulses are still occurring or that it went on for some period and then stopped due to lack of energy remaining in the singularity to continue to generate the pulses, etc.?

          30. The word resolve implies that something is already there, but not discernible or observable until the pulse acts upon it. Is that the case?

          31. You are welcome. I try to help in any way that God gives me to be able to do. I will put this comment on both your paper's page and mine for easy access by both of us and any who read either paper.

          Sincerely,

          Paul

          4 days later

          Hi Paul...

          Appreciate your thoughtful response, and will at first opportunity reciprocate in kind.

          However, if FQXi does not graciously maintain contestant essay pages after May 1st., I will need an e-contact.

          In the interim, if one keeps in mind that UQS is not a belief/theory... i.e. UQS is a math model that resolves a visual geometry solution, and associated digital code, for pulsed distribution of minimum units of Energy (QE) equal in all directions from a single point source... one can find answers n the UQS Project on-line archived papers, to many of the question you pose.

          For example: "23. Why only 24 points around the initial point? Are these 24 QI positions spread only in a two dimensional plane around the initial point or are these 24 points spread over three dimensions?"... is contextually addressed and 3D CAD illustrated at:

          Comparative Singularity Geometry http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQST-TVNH.php

          Thanks again Paul, for sharing your insights and providing opportunity for exchange.

          Sue Lingo

          UQS Author/Logician

          WWW.uqsmatrixmechanix.com