Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Physics Forum Unified Field Theory?

Everything is in a state of angular momentum or a product of that orbital motion.This is the mathematical link to everything including the electron, proton, neutron, electromagnetic forces, strong and weak atomic forces, gravity, heat, dark matter, black holes etc..

The definition of angular momentum, as stated in every physics book says that whenever mass orbits, there must be a force and a source for that force for the orbit to take place.

All matter is comprised of particles. Electrons are in an orbital state around protons and neutrons. We now know that the proton and neutron are composite particle, and the proton is comprised of 3 quarks in an orbital state. Then the question becomes; since the quarks have mass, what is the source for the force creating their orbit? Each quark has a positive electrical charge and contains one third the mass of the proton, leaving no mass at its center as a source for its orbit. Because like charges repel the quarks themselves cannot be the source of their orbit. Therefore, this violates the definition of angular momentum, or the source of the orbit of the quarks is beyond our perception to detection. Also; since the proton is the source of the orbit of the electron, it is therefore an outputting particle but does not deteriorate or die a natural death. This violates the conservation of energy laws unless there is a source for this energy.


Is the speed of light only a limit to our perception and detection? Does anything exists beyond the speed of light, and if so then does this region have the capabilities of supporting all the quarks in orbit and maintaining the protron longevity? We cannot see or detect anything beyond the speed of light. However If this is an exchange of energy from above the speed of light to below speed of light, that the proton is demonstrating and if we believe in the conservation of energy there must be mass accelerating from the below speed of light to above the speed of light. There must be a balance between the two regions [above and below the speed of light]. For every input there must be an equal and opposite output for either realm to exist. The amount in each region must remain constant to maintain that balance.

The shape of all galaxies and the orbit of our solar system's comprising this spiral galaxy must also be explained. There must be a source for the gravity allowing these orbits to take place. Now that we can see with telescopes into the center of other galaxies and our own. We see nothing at the center. We do see solar systems accelerating towards this region, and then disappearing into this region. If we believe in the conservation of energy we must assume this matter is just leaving are perception and detection. Since it enters the black hole accelerating it must be going beyond the speed of light and beyond our detection. This verifies an exchange of energy from below the speed of light to above the speed of light which has the capabilities of maintaining the balance. If this is true, then if any galaxies's blackhole had not achieved lightspeed we would see the black hole and its output, and mathematically we could predict it would appear as a quasar. Because of its enormous size and volume, the blackholes must be the source of the energy, which is responsible for the Forces holding all quarks in orbit. Therefore the total pull of all quarks in an orbital state around nothing is the source for the gravitational pull of the black holes at the center of every galaxy. This pulling force creates a great cycle of energy exchange making it possible for all matter and forces to exist.

These conclusions have led me to the study of the natural phenomenon of ball lightning. The shape of this plasma phenomenon and the fact that it exists beyond its connection to its source of energy which created it must be explained. During ball lightning existence it outputs heat, light and electricity without decreasing in size or intensity while it searches for a ground or opposite charge which has the capabilities of absorbing it. We see and detect nothing entering the ball lightning in terms of energy during its existence, but there must be a source of energy for the shape of this plasma and its existence demands it. The only limit to our perception and detection appears to be the speed of light. We must assume that the ball plasma is being supported by energy from beyond the speed of light coming from black holes. The subatomic particles in an orbital state comprising the ball lightning must be fulfilling the same mathematical equation that the quarks comprising the proton does. With the exception of the size difference both phenomenon's ( ball lightning and the proton) shape and existence must be supported by this source of energy. This conclusion leads me to believe that the ball plasma is the key to tapping this unlimited source of energy coming from black holes which theoretically has the capabilities of sustaining our society's energy needs without any pollution.

According to my research, ball plasma could be contained and harnessed inside a spherical capacitor with a deep vacuum center. Once isolated ball lightning has demonstrated it could provide electricity with no visible input and without diminishing in size or intensity. I call this device, a ball plasma fuel cell which I believe has the capabilities of rendering all other sources of energy irrelevant and obsolete.

How your theory can be falsified? Can you derive some testable predictions with using of your theory?
If yes, can you demonstrate it in logical way here?

I am proposing the prediction of the capabilities of ball lightning. To test it would require the building of a spherical capacitor with a deep vacuum center and the inputting electrical power. We have had positive results from a similar experiment, that had kept itself recharged after being nearly drained of energy daily for 3 weeks, with no additional power supply near it.

Why are you wasting your and our time with prediction of prediction of possibility.. - why not just to derive some testable prediction from postulates of your theory in logical and reproducible way?

I am proposing this theory as a theorist, it is up to the reader to prove or disprove it.

is your experiment shielded , so that there would be no outside energy capable of entering into the sphere to recharge the capacitor?

such as ions.

please keep in mind that the aether / ions is the energy that the earth uses.

you wouldn't want to throw an imbalance to an already imbalanced earth.

you might even drain your own health away if you don't be very cautious.

My question was, why readers should handle such theory (of "everything") at all - if it cannot demonstrated a single logical prediction in logical way?

BTW The concept of ball lightning as a spherical capacitor isn't very new and original one.

My reason for proposing this theory is to identify the mechanism by which we can logically predict every aspect of this existence. For example: gravity; since it is produced by the orbiting motion; must have a frequency attached to it's existence. The vibrations of the atoms set the frequency of the gravity.

To disprove my theory of angular momentum, one needs only to identify a state of matter which does not somehow involve an orbiting motion.

Elastic gas composed of pin-point particles doesn't involve an orbiting motion. Anyway, I don't see the way, how to assign vibrations of the atoms to frequency of the gravity.

The nutational rate of all atoms is responsible for the frequency of gravity. I have never heard of elastic gas composed of pin-point particles, but I am skeptical that it is not derived from atomic functions which consist of orbiting particles.

We're talking about subatomic particles, not just about atomzz...

No, I am talking about a natural phenomenon (ball lightning). This is my explanation how and why ball lightning exists, and proposing what it's possible capabilities are. If you have a better theory of what ball lightning is, please share it.

The "spherical capacitor" hypothesis is quite old concept and no special testable predictions follows from it.

Do you propose theory of everything - or just a ball lightning theory? Which testable predictions follows from it?

Thank you for posting that 78 page article. I enjoyed reading what other dedicated people are doing in the investigation of ball lightning. Their apparatuses are very interesting and show good possibilities. However, I was unable to determine the longevity of their experiments. In other words, after the power is turned off. How long does the plasma remain and continue to output energy? In my experiments, I was able to achieve energy output for weeks after a complete disconnection from any source of energy. I also have some misgivings over their explanation of exactly what is happening inside of the phenomenon of ball lightning and their explanation of where this energy output would be coming from. The authors of that article felt comfortable in stating that the ball lightning is capable of making energy. or that you could get something 'from nowhere'. I think this represents fuzzy math. Conservation of energy laws are not just a suggestion. They don't just appear to, work sometimes. They must be always in action or not at all in my opinion.

The spherical capacitor, that I have built and tested (with positive results) and I am proposing as a harness for ball lightning; is comprised of two stainless hemispheres with a combined diameter of approximately 1'. Attached to, and divided by a dialectic plastic 2'x2'x.25"at the center of the dialectic plastic is a 3" hallow glass ball, positioned to protrude into both hemispheres equally and is vacuumed out to approx. 99% empty. There is air pressure in the space between the glass center and the stainless steel hemispheres. This design is the product of decades of work and thousands of experiments trying to contain this extreme electricity. Ball lightning does not respect even the best of dialectic materials. It took me at least 20 years before the first sign of longevity was documented in my experiments. My laboratory lacks only adequate power supply with tunable radiofrequency controls capable of electrifying the spherical capacitor that I've constructed.

As to your question: " is this a theory about everything?" The answer is yes. This is my best attempt at communicating what I have discovered as a common denominator for all states of matter. It's the motion that is the common denomitor.

And I believe, that coupled with the source of energy beyond the speed of light, that these are the missing numbers in all predictions, without having to resort to using quantum physics as a way of explaining what we coudn't understand.

Every experiment that I do, and every thought that I write is to answer the big problem our civilization faces. The problem we all face is the carbon footprint that we are exhausting into the atmosphere. This is technological suicide to continue as it is. I understood this in the early 1970s, as a young man. . I knew then that this was global suicide. This is what I've dedicated my life to solving. This is what I wake up in the morning thinking about. This is what I go to bed thinking about.

Hi
Theodore Toth__

I thought I would respond to your posting of angular momentum for several reasons. Mainly to remind you of something that should always be uppermost in the mind of the curious about physical theory__ nothing is never as it appears to be. There is good reason for this and I will partially answer why by asking a question. Have you ever thought the current template for physical theory may be totally wrong? I am not talking about that part which has been able to detect, measure, and quantify, as far as it goes, the fragmentation of energy into its various "parts". That has been a marvelous path of accomplishment. I'm referring to a level that exists below that level. In tearing down energy into what now seems to be its infinite parts certain speculation has arisen such as black holes, worms, multiuniverses, and all kinds of exotic speculation. Most of this has been the byproduct of the big bang theory. What if the big bang is wrong? The big bang arose from Einsteins general theory of gravity, and his theory of gravity was heavily influenced by the Michaelson/Morley experiment of "1884" to detect an aether that might suffice to be a carrier for light. What if all of the speculation emanating out of these is all wrong? Which they are! Well, if they are wrong than every assumption being made today by necessity will be wrong.

How am I so sure of the above? Well, this is not the forum to discuss that. However, perhaps down the line parts of that certainty will reveal itself. But I will give you a brief example of where I'm coming from. The inquiry only now is beginning to try to understand space and the speculation there is some form of energy it is comprised of. The speculation arising from early indication is also wrong so that speaks for itself. What is indicated is that it is the carrier for light which Michaelson/Morley failed to detect. Had Einstein known of its nature and existence it would dramatically change his field equations that led to the big bang. So now many of the things you rely on to form your thinking is really a deadend. Hold tight though, there is hope one day science will gain the right perspective to accomplish their goal of understanding. Remember, everything you see in reality and everything in energy theory are effects of something else. The something else is the end-game.

The vibration of particles at restmass does not involve an orbiting motion. The cause of the vibration is not known, although I believe there is a "cause" underpinning it.

I believe it was Mach who first proposed orbiting as the cause for gravity. That was a long time ago. Even though gravity "waves", or the existence of, is being explored there is no evidence for them. No frequency has ever been attached to gravity, and probably won't be. Gravity is not a force, it has no known cause, yet, and it is just an effect of the interaction of energy (include space in that equation too). Like energy and the motion of energy there is no known mechanism and that speaks to your question about a mechanism. It is highly likely whatever causes the motion of energy produces the effects of gravity including all other motion such as angular momentum. Right now it is (un)comfortably thought the big bang put everything in motion, I suggest there is very good reason to believe otherwise. Your mechanism.
.