[jerrygg38]

So i request friends, by this forum to give mail addresses of important universities or scientists to whom i can place this for consideration/discussion.

Unfortunately we are not allowed to give out these private emails. However, many top scientists read these pages and if they find your theory worthy of investigation they will pass it to the most suitable department and contact you.

   All the emails of all the professors are listed in the college directories. Then you have to send an email explaining your theory in a few words and ask them if they are interested in your work. They get a lot of emails and only respond if they like what you have to say in your email. That is how I get professors who ask for my books.

[jerrygg38]

   Everything is related to the gravitational field and the electromagnetic fields. Mass is concentrated gravitational field. Charge is concentrated electric field. Prior to the big bang we had just the fields. As the universe compressed mass formed at the center sphere upon which we live. This is where the battle between dark energy and dark matter resides.
   At present this is a distance of Ru from an absolute center and also a distance Ru from an outer sphere such that every point in the universe is the center of it own universe
   The physical universe which exists on a quasi spherical surface (Einstein's Relativity page 136) slowly loses mass which expands the universe. The loss of mass into linear dot-waves (Relativity and the Dot-wave theory by Gerald Grushow-jerrygg38) expands the universe to a maximum but not infinity. This changes the balance between dark matter and dark energy. At maximum radius after 544 billion years, the universe will start to compress and then after another 544 billion years it will contract to a small size but not zero. then the fields will again precipitate matter and the cycle continues. Everything of importance occurs on our spherical plane.

[GoC]

Jerrygg38

Much of what you discuss is subjective like the BB. What caused the BB? There is no scientific explanation other than it was voted in by 13 of the most respected men of their day by a vote of 12 to 1. The one did not let magic persuade him into the field of physics without a cause.

Your dot wave theory:
1. How does it affect a photon?
2. What is the physical appearance of a photon?
3. How does the dot wave affect mass?
4. How does the dot wave maintain c in the universe?
5. What is the cause of gravity?
6. What is a charge?

I can go on but unless you can answer those questions by mechanism its like a politician taking sentences out of context. You and others are looking from a top down approach to physics. Blowing up a car than trying to put it back together is your approach while in reality the car was put together before it blew up. That is the reality I know.

[jerrygg38]

To GoC You asked
Your dot wave theory:
1.   How does it affect a photon?
The red photon is composed of 6.241E32 bipolar dot-waves in the linear momentum configuration.
2.   What is the physical appearance of a photon?
When the photon appears as a particle, the positive dot-waves start at a point and rise upward as they chase the negative dot-waves. At the same time  the negative dot wave is falling from a maximum size toward a zero point. Each exists in their own time dimension. The negative dot-wave exists in the minus time dimension whereas the positive dot-wave exists in the plus time dimension. The property of mass occurs when positive and negative dot-waves form a spherical pattern such that the positive dot wave expands from a point while the negative dot-wave contracts.  Dot-waves only travel at the speed of light C.
3.   How does the dot wave affect mass?
Mass is a property of spherical patterns of electromagnetic and gravitational motions. Everything is made of dot-wave. An electron has 3.377E38 dot waves with a mass of 2.698E-69Kg and a charge of 4.745E-58 Coulombs. The proton has an equal number of positive dot-waves and  3.098E41 bipolar dot-waves. You cannot find the individual dot-waves because they have been crushed together by the big bang and star implosions. However the photons readily absorb and radiate dot-waves as they encounter changes in the gravitational field density.
4.   How does the dot wave maintain c in the universe?
The Universe is a light speed C universe. At the dot-wave level everything travels at light speed whether in spherical oscillations or linear motions. We live in a mixed area of space time that combines spherical dot-waves and linear dot-waves plus orbital configurations of dot-waves. Thus our universe is basically ground speed zero. We are on the border of the battle between dark energy and dark matter.
5.   What is the cause of gravity?
The cause of gravity is still debate-able in my mind. If I look at the universe from a constant energy constant charge structure, it is a puzzle. In my book I look at  various effects of gravity. In chapter 13 I discuss General variable space time. For this situation, the charge and mass of the visible universe radiates into the universe of dark matter/dark energy. The stored charge in the time domain discharges and there is dot-wave current flows which cause electrical attractions. Yet for the present book I maintain constant charge. In my Doppler Space Time, I discharged the universe into nothing. However all this really means is that the visible universe erases and the invisible universe remains. Yet I do not go from a big bang at near zero radius to near infinity. I go from minimum radius to maximum radius with a cycle time of 1088 billion years.
6.   What is a charge?
Charge is the plus time dimension or the minus time dimension. These dimensions are in the nanosecond range. The big time dimension on our clocks only exists for a split second. The photons carry information about the past but the past does not exist. Einstein was wrong to believe such things. The past only last a few nanoseconds at most. Of course I believe in a practical Engineering universe and not a mathematical fantasy. Yet Einstein’s work was great. He makes up great mathematical solutions such as the bending of light around stars but he does not understand the engineering details of what happens. I explain this in my book.
  Anyway thanks for the questions and if you are interested in my book it is available for free on my Facebook page. I send free paper copies to those professors who ask for an autographed copy but I have limited resources to do that.

[GoC]

jerrygg38

   The words you use have different meanings to different people. I agree we only live in the present. There is past configurations and future configurations but only present is possible. This brings us to a need to define time. Time to my thinking is the smallest movement of the electron to the next smallest movement. If electrons stopped moving time would stop.

So to me minus time and plus time has no meaning. There is no logical minus time motion.

I ask for a definition of charge as in what causes charge? Electron negative charge and the proton a positive charge. This definition would cause entropy if balanced as being suggested. More likely being a flow rather than a charge.

If a dot wave for a photon has mass it violates relativity.

What is a time dimension? You cannot throw out words without defining a mechanical structure of a time dimension. Otherwise it just becomes background noise.

How does dot wave maintain c in the universe. Changing the words by saying we live in a c universe is not an answer. Just circular reasoning.

What is the mechanical cause of the motion of the electron? One planks length movement to the next that creates time in the first place. That needs to be answered first mechanically before the structure of the universe can be attempted.

I believe everything needed is in relativity mathematics. The complete mechanical structure of the cause of relativity is needed.

[jerrygg38]

GoC:   The words you use have different meanings to different people. I agree we only live in the present. There is past configurations and future configurations but only present is possible. This brings us to a need to define time. Time to my thinking is the smallest movement of the electron to the next smallest movement. If electrons stopped moving time would stop.
Jerrygg: Ok it is surely possible that the electron jumps from one electromagnetic field line to the next. This enables many coexisting universes to exist in our space. The same can be said of the photon which jumps from one gravitational field line to the next.
GoC:So to me minus time and plus time has no meaning. There is no logical minus time motion.
Jerrygg: The alternate is a plus dimension and a minus dimension. What you speak of is the big time dimension whereas my plus and minus times are tiny dimensions. So we have space time effects at the atomic level and other effects at the big time big ruler level.
GoC:I ask for a definition of charge as in what causes charge? Electron negative charge and the proton a positive charge. This definition would cause entropy if balanced as being suggested. More likely being a flow rather than a charge.
Jerrygg: The compression of space causes a split into very small dimensions. The plus time and minus time dimensions charge up. They are separated in the little time dimension (or the positive and negative dimension). This causes us to have plus dot-waves and minus dot-waves. They cannot damage each other because they live in different and separate dimensions. Yet they attract each other.
  Any discharge is like a parallel plate capacitor where the plates move apart. There is no actual current flow between the plus and minus dimensions. However in our world of big ruler big time clock we get actual current flows as in a battery.
GoC: If a dot wave for a photon has mass it violates relativity.
Jerrygg:   Photons are energy configurations which are linear planar with spins. The same stuff when in spherical type configurations have mass. Photons becomes mass and mass becomes photons. It is all geometry How this violates relativity I do not know. Of course to me relativity is a good mathematical analysis of space time problems but not the solution to all things.

GoC: What is a time dimension? You cannot throw out words without defining a mechanical structure of a time dimension. Otherwise it just becomes background noise.
Jerrygg: Hopefully I explained what I meant.

GoC: How does dot wave maintain c in the universe. Changing the words by saying we live in a c universe is not an answer. Just circular reasoning.
Jerrygg: I look at a spectrum of universes light speed C, 2C, 4C, up toward light speed infinity. Our universe operates upon the light speed equations.
Energy = QC^3
Energy = MC^2
Mass = QC
 MV = QVC
MoC = QC^2
  Thus there are primary light speed equations which govern the universe that we live in. I cannot give you a reason why this is so. This is the particular universe we live in. I have studied many other possibilities over the years but this is the most likely solution to our universe.
GoC: What is the mechanical cause of the motion of the electron? One planks length movement to the next that creates time in the first place. That needs to be answered first mechanically before the structure of the universe can be attempted.
Jerrygg: I study the unit equations and I see the possible relationships between the mechanical world and the electrical world. At the same time I look at the constants of the universe and the relationships between the gravitational constant and the permeability constant. This takes years of study in order to look at all the possible solutions. In the end my theory is based upon the primary equations of the universe and the conversion of kilograms to coulomb meters per second. I do not need any fancy math. All I need is charts of conversions and a hand calculator. Am I right? That is for others to say in the future since at 78 years this December my effort in this regard is coming to an end.
GoC:I believe everything needed is in relativity mathematics. The complete mechanical structure of the cause of relativity is needed.
Jerrygg: Relativity appears to work well. Yet it lacks Doppler relativity which shows the details of the structure of the universe. Once you add that in then the universe is fully understood. I like that the neutrino is the Einsteinian mass/energy of an electron as it becomes part of the proton. I also like that the binding energy of the hydrogen atom is the Einsteinian mass/energy increase. Thus relativity theory defines what happens in the neutron and the hydrogen atom and in a lot of other things. Quantum mechanics uses particles and the like to explain things but they are only the equivalent energy levels using Einsteinian calculations.

[GoC]

I did not realize you were a multi-verser. Personally I place that into science fiction. I am a realest and cannot be bothered with magical things. Carry on.

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

Jerrygg:   Photons are energy configurations which are linear planar with spins. The same stuff when in spherical type configurations have mass. Photons becomes mass and mass becomes photons. It is all geometry How this violates relativity I do not know. Of course to me relativity is a good mathematical analysis of space time problems but not the solution to all things.

 I read it all twice, my first thought is, he knows...
 Let me ask you something, to see if I understood your ideas correctly, more specific in relation with the photons...
  Something like photons being a construction of space, most likely a spiral "shape" that is constantly happening wherever the light is present, although when on the absence of dense atomic structure/matter(absence of macro mass), the light(photons) remain possessing a special configuration, that enable the energy to be carried at "C" trough space?
  One rudimentary and simplistic assumption, you do not say it loud: Light is the source of gravity?
 Or better, the way space reacts to the energy(spectrum), creating (photons) on itself eventually forming waves and colliding with macro mass, there on the presence of the macro mass the photons, constantly colliding at "C" against the macro mass, start to re-adapt their structure, in resonance with the atomic structure. Photons traveling at C, photons rearranging their configurations, rebounding one back over the other, mixing configurations, source of dark mass energy/space energy?
 Reading your description, I'm wrong to assume that the constant rearrangement and rebouncing of this photons, from light on space, to mass on dense atomic structure, as being the true source of the interaction that results in gravity? Light photons, interacting with mass photons, the constant for behind "C"? Also photons as being a shape/configuration of space(itself) in the presence of light, the rebouncing between spiral light at C, against "photonic mass?!", the reasons for behind the dilatation, when near massive objects?
 I'm not presuming, only trying to glimpse further on your concept, is occurring to me that state that mass is able to dilatate space-time, could not be more incorrect on your suggestion, when infact, and I'm simple wondering that, (mass) is (photon mass), mass is the dilatation of itself?
 " Mater have never directly produced mass as a source only as a calatizador, when a planet is causing dilatation on space-time, what's really happening is that the refraction of photons against matter is changing the configuration of "light", releasing the energy from the spiral configuration of light, directly infusing it on the surroundings, resembling and aura, this process of reconfiguration of light, the true source of mass( dark energy?!), and mass not causing dilatation of space, "mass" being the dilatation?
 Cause if photon is a shape, a carrier (on space and of it) able to change configuration ( I did not knew that the configuration could affect the behavior), will one end up with something like (Gravity/mass/motion) "everything was the light"?
 I would really appreciate if I'm diverging to far from what your idea of photon/mass, are leading to?


One other question, about parallel universes, I do not tend to believe o that, but from your perspective on one simple example: A solar system, could be interpreted as a universe, although this "universe" is existing (inside?!) a larger universe (galaxy),. The question is could this mechanic layers be interpreted as what they suggest as coexisting parallel universes? And if it is possible, could this correlation of opposite charges, existing on different dimensions, that do not interact, have as possible being result of a correlation between light and electromagnetism?
 Could the jump of the electron, from inside the heliosphere, be different from the outside, but here it is, where is inside the galaxy and where is outside heliosphere? Both are not the same, although both are coexisting, could this sort of parallel coexistence, take place over "hidden dimensions"?

[pasala (OP)]

Mr Alex,

As said by you,
"Something like photons being a construction of space, most likely a spiral "shape" that is constantly happening wherever the light is present, although when on the absence of dense atomic structure/matter(absence of macro mass), the light (photons) remain possessing a special configuration, that enable the energy to be carried at "C" trough space?"

For me, quite long time, this is a mystery only.  How photons construct a space, may be spiral or different one.
In Newton's description of gravity, the gravitational force is caused by matter only. In Einstein's theory and related theories of gravitation, curvature at every point in space time is also caused by whatever matter is present. Here, too, mass is a key property in determining the gravitational influence of matter.

In general relativity it is mass, energy, momentum, pressure and tension that serve as sources of gravity, they are how matter tells space time how to curve.

In fact matter is not having any capacity to decide the shape of the space.  The shape of the space whether it is curvature or horizontal is decided by the shape of the planet and the gravitational force.  Suppose, let us assume that if the shape of the planet is horizontal, than the shape of the space cannot be curved.  When coming to matter, though light particles may present in the space, they cannot decide or construct the space.  For that in the words of Einstein itself, gravity is due to uneven distribution of mass and energy.

They have taken different masses in the shape of earth and rotated them with maximum speed.  They have noted light photons escaping into the open are.  Since earth is having spherical shape, they have found most of the light particles concentrating at the edges and moving out.  They have compared this to to earth.  As earth is moving with maximum speed, they have presumed that lot of mass is escaping into space and it is constructing curvature of space.

But, here we have to keep in mind one important point that we are living on earth, which is in the grip of gravitational field.  Here, whatever test you have done or going to do is influenced by this gravity field.   When the mass is rotated with maximum speed, gravity that is influencing the mass, start creating rupture, and this results in movement of light photons.

Here, basic and key point is that earth is in the grip of gravitational field and it is not rotating but made to rotate.
When earth rotates, total gravitational field moves along with it.  Total mass, small or big is fully in the control of
gravitation field.  Light atoms and dark matter, which escapes gravity moves to space.


Gravity influence on things:
Gravity is having profound influence on the behaviour, movement and knowledge of the things on the earth.  Actually it is the shape of the things that decides, gravity influence.  Luckily, human beings are having different shape, in the form of straight. Our body is far less influenced by gravity and thus we are able to move to different places, acquaint with different things. In my view whatever knowledge we may posses, it is the shape that decides its development and fate.

Suppose, let us presume that we are having the elephant shape, horizontal, which is more influenced by gravity.  What ever knowledge elephants may have, they cannot move, more freely as we are doing.  To face this gravity effect, elephants are having four legs, where as human beings are blessed with hands, which facilitate to do so many things.

Yours
Psreddy

[GoC]

pasala,

   Yes the shape of mass controls the dilation of space by the inverse square of the distance. Mass causes a expansion of space energy to a less dense state. Half of the stars in the sky are binary and the other half have planets. Some are outliers but basically suns are created in pairs. Some pairs are unbalanced to the point where one sun destroys the other creating planets. The planets are molten and gravity causes them to form sphere shapes. Throw water n the air and the drops will be sphere shaped. The earth bulges at the equator and is flattened at the poles. Atomic clocks all tick at the same rate at sea level. So the space energy is the same at sea level. The spin is compensated with increased distance at the equator to counteract centrifugal effects counteracting gravitational effects.

Energy of space that allows light to be propagated is affected by dilation expansion.  The light is a energy wave created on spin energy c of space itself. Both GR and SR dilation of that same energy cause light to expand outward. Gravity is that dilation and the aura around mass is that threshold of abrupt change in energy density contracting. This we observe in galaxies as lensing. The expanded energy acts like a convex lens to view galaxies behind expanded. Light is expanded to curve around spherical objects and dilated in space occupied by mass. The density is a gradient from the center of mass out by the inverse square of the distance.

Mass and energy are two separate systems working together to create relativity.

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

Hello,

I do not question your attestments about gravity, and I agree with your explanation. I admit I do not quit understand everything but seems logical to follow the group.

 Although, what Jerrygg suggested about photon and possible configuration diverging from light to mass, and the opposite too, sort of make sense....

 I'm just trying to visualize, that if someone would be able to prove that not for logic.
  Not attesting, only considering, if photons are to have different configurations, and if photons most likely are construction of space, seems quite possible, if real, for photons being mass...
  Follow this, may be subjection: Space creates photons on itself on the presence of energy (light)
 Now you have a universe that has no matter and only light, there would be no significant mass, or in a better sense there wouldn't be presented, at thta point, references as stars and planets...
  Let's advance to where matter already does exist, for I do not know why it exists, or how it was formed..
  Now you have the exactly same universe, with the addition of a "not massive" object made of matter, lets suppose, following the concept even if incorrect, that the atoms that form the planet alone have no mass, only electromagnetic bounds, strong bounds, given to them by the particles...
 Probably the spinning of those very particles, given to them by C itself since the very beginning of their existence...
 What I have in mind is one could say that a brick for example, does not posses weight nor mass, only atomic structure, and that by "existing space within its atoms" it, the brick, seemed to have mass, when infarct there was only photonic mass, lets say, flowing trough the brick...
  Something like the atomic structure of the brick, its atoms, resonating with the empty space that is existing "now" within this atoms, given to them a special shape, and the configuration of those atoms, diverging from the ones on the environment, defining what that specific configuration of atoms is...
  I do not know how to put in words to explain once, and that is from my limited English.
 The question is, if there is only one source of mass? That mass being photonic mass, from space, and comprehending all that is, mass of any given object, mass of anything, dark matter...
  What I mean is, what if we are observing dark matter or theorizing it from the wrong point of view? If could be possible that space is there happening fine at C with the photons arranged for light, and than matter comes in, and "gives" a center, a point of reference to this photons, lockingg them within the atomic structure, by giving them configurations that diverges from C... I mean, a ray of light with photons moving at C, lets say that there was a structure (a wall) that could not stop the motion) but instead, something that is able to capture and hold it on place, still being at C, and this the source of the rotation of the other particles including the electron?

 I do understood what you explained about part of the mass licking trough space as the planet moves...
 But what if is the opposite? Matter being a combination of particles and atoms, and each one of those components, receiving "potential mass" from the photonic space surrounding them? So why do not say, that if was possible that space is giving "mass" to matter, by existing within the gathered atomic structure, why not, "photonic mass"...
 The question should be, couldn't be that dark matter, if they are correct only miss interpreted, is "mass of space" happening "freely" on space, due N factors, one of them as being the presence of numerous particles and atoms, like on a gas cloud or maybe even due the presence of too much "light" crossed between stars on a specific sector of space?
  IF possible, that all mass is given and provident from space by being constantly producing this second configuration for photons, couldn't be also the case that too much light, eventually and gradually starting to form particles, consequently atoms.. What I have in mind, is possible that all that dark matter, is "similar" to the first stages that are necessary to form particles, atoms and eventually matter?

 Thin about it, they are considering that is missing matter, because there would be missing mass right, so they come up with dark matter to compensate and it sort of match, they can only feel the gravitational effects it has...
 Well it occurred me, clean up an area of space, and now set the planet earth on the center, at distance one is observing the dilatation in function of its mass. Now disband the planet separating each particle from the other and distribute all those particles trough the entirely area, now...
 For a distant observer, particles wouldn't have quality of light enough to be visualized, although, the effect on gravity can be observed, correct? For the earth that was there, on the future, is already there, past, the only difference is that its mass is still disparced trough the whole region...

 I do not believe that, but I'm considering, what if the black holes are not the end of the chain of events? it's natural to us, our scale, to believe that our scale is absolute, that we have purpose, maybe even the last purpose... But with a universe this big, couldn't be the case that only "we" consider the black holes, (center of galaxies) as being the end of the line?
 There is so much thing we do not know, that I usually allow myself to wonder, if we are not looking at galaxies from the wrong perspective. If galaxies as we call and see, isn't but a coincidence, that we are live, seems to be perfect, but maybe we woke up in half of the way, maybe universe is not done yet, perhaps black hole, if on the right conditions can give birth to a star... Sounds weird but the truth is, "Galaxy" could very possible be as any other star formation we observe "a simple gathering of particles to form something else"...
 All this, can be happening in large scale, at the afterwards of a ordinary massive super nova expansion of a fraction of what we would consider to be minutes, and after billions of years for us, we wouldn't be able to know...

 it's just a lot of doubts, but what had never occurred me, is what Jerrygg mentioned, a possibilities, of the configuration of photon, diverging straight flat linear wave light, to spherical spiral sipping particle when "trapped" by atoms and particles (matter), photons(space) given it shape, composition, frequency and also mass...
 Is possible photons be linear wave light on space, and at the instant (constantly) they (space) interact with atomic structure they absorbed the spinning of this second configuration of photons (spherical like particles(Space spinning at C)presented on matter? And if so,could normal space (linear) when in interaction with this second configuration (indeed not from matter, but provided by ts existence on space). The rebouncing of both configurations "happening in free space" resulting in local gravity?
 Gravity existing because of the mass, mass existing because the existence of atoms, this mass promoting the gathering of those atoms towards a center, and eventually after the formation, all the mass be still present but most of it outside the object, like space resonating and responding to the planet like if it was a single atom? Producing its mass on the exterior(space), and this mass "constantly" happening around the planet as it moves trough space? Dark mass?

 If possible, once one have stars and matter that is spinning faster, is quite possible that they are moving so fast that the mass that should be happening more at the surroundings is being left behind as they move, this being the impression of dark matter and its effects? The relative mass of a moving object on space (minus) C(speed of light)?
 Can something, any object, left behind its mass as it moves around another?
 Or is dark matter, the proportional photonic mass of super massive objects, as in black holes?

 Or more precisely, is the mass truly on the atoms that form matter? Or any given amount of atoms is constantly subjected to a "proportional mass" due their existence in space-time?
Is possible add this two configurations light/mass for the photons, without violate "only the base" relativity?

[GoC]

    Macro mass and micro mass are different things because the mass of the atom always remain the same. Micro mass has to be a organized system for macro mass to reliably follow relativity. There would not be a change in micro mass if there was no macro mass. Macro mass disturbs micro mass to create ripples (waves) for the spectral identity. Dilation of that micro mass (dark mass energy) energy to move the electrons of mass. We need to follow all of relativity in the mechanics of the universe.

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

    Macro mass and micro mass are different things because the mass of the atom always remain the same. Micro mass has to be a organized system for macro mass to reliably follow relativity. There would not be a change in micro mass if there was no macro mass. Macro mass disturbs micro mass to create ripples (waves) for the spectral identity. Dilation of that micro mass (dark mass energy) energy to move the electrons of mass. We need to follow all of relativity in the mechanics of the universe.

 Following the possibilitie of the mass of an atom be provinient from space(photonic mass/potential mass), of two atoms would not interfere with the number of atoms presented, being that number 1 or 1 towusand of them, macro mass would be the result of the sum of individual potential mass of each atoms that is forming matter?
 I'm not suggesting this photonic configuration within atomic structure as being static, more like each space within the atoms being the whole universe, flowing trough the objects, constantly producing "where they exist" two different types of mass provident from the same source, space... 1 Kg of iron, should have the same mass in wherever given location, at least inside heliosphere, although, the weight of this mass can be increased by the dilatation of space where it exists, but, wouldn't be weight and mass two different things?
 What I'm asking is, the electrons keep one atoms to touch the other, there is always empty space among normal matter, other than that one have fusion, fusion may be forcing the atoms to combine and in the process strait much more energy from the photons(space within the atoms)..
 Isn't, even if not correct, imagine a system where the mass of any giving atom is given by it from space, making use of the construction we call as photons... One system where each atoms is built to be equal the other atom of the same kind, with particles and charges making sure that they nerver fuse one with the other, isn't that an organized system?

 You have a spherical rock, it does have space within its atoms, than you add a spherica layer, a cover of dust, and another of gases, another of liquid, it's irrelevant for matter, micro mass would still remain organized as long there is space within the atoms that formed the rock(potential mass), but should be truth that if one keeps increasing the number of layers, there would eventually start to occur a delay in C, there would take considerable time for space to flow from the exterior to the center of this layers(the rock in the example).
 Isn't possible that this gap on C, from outside in a planet for example, stared to reduce the micro mass, and consequently start to fuse the atoms one with the other by gradually, from inside out the planet, removing the space within the atomic structure on the inner layers of a planet, resulting in a conversion of atomic structure into energy...
 Al tough that energy would not be able to transfer itself very easily or escape the center, not from pressure or compression, but because its medium was the space within the atoms of the other layers, so I imagine that a planet is able to conserve heat energy because due the density of its layers, it cannot transfer the energy from the interior to the exterior, for there is a gap within it (a lack of space), without that all that energy should not be able to convert into mass, for mass would have being from interaction with space?

 I'm not assuming that relativity is wrong, there is no basis for that, I'm considering N possibilities for the high probabilities that relativity is "misinterpreted"...
 More precisely, and I can't proof or be sure neither, the photonic experiment of Einstein was miss interpreted ed, the wave/particle should be correct indeed, but something is suggesting that Light/mass should  also be of the same...
 For this above, I'm also considering what I already doing for a while, that "temperatures" are properties excursively of "space" within and outside matter, every temperature that is, ( and I do acknowledge that temperature is a feeling), I'm just picking the world temperature, to cover all sorts of (irradiation and transfer), being it radiation, heat, any sort of "transfer of energy" I'm comprehending on "temperature"...  As I human I agree that could is the absence of heat, but also I cannot even closely agree with that...
 If you have a sphere of "spinning" energy, pure energy, and you do not have much "Space" around of it, to transfer that very energy as heat properly, that very energy will remain conserved on the interior, gradually expanding itself as the sphere grows, or as the sphere receives more "proportional mass" as the field(heliosphere) that is containing the sphere is changing the "proportional mass"...
 Although I'm not sure if mass is from space neither, only that if it is, and electromagnetism(magnetosphere) can infarct control space within the field, is acceptable that the earth may be expanding when compared with the early earth, for the sun may be considerably smaller now than it was on the past. Assuming that is not the universe that is expanding but instead a smaller heliosphere, not only for our sun but for all stars we are observing... As the sphere reduces, the planets are submitted to an "bigger proportional mass", as this happens more energy is stored in the interior, expanding the planet...

 I'm wondering that the planet stays together and spherical from within, for energy is less dense than matter, or has lower mass at the very center... Earth would than be, a external layer of rock and molten rock around a center( a gap) of pure energy that is trapped there, unable to transfer for it was formed there, unable to transfer the energy for there is motion and basically no "space" within the atoms of the outer layers surrounding it...
 Drill a hole to the very center of earth, shoot a laser, strong volcanic activity, or even a wrong burn of elements at the center that may result in a strong shock wave that crack up to the surface... In resume not different from any sun, crack open a direct path from the exterior to the interior and depending on the conditions you'll have a collapse of the planet (waiting for reformation) or you'll have a nova, for all that trapped energy will find the meanings to immediately be transferred...

It's much of speculation, but it suggests an inner core that explains everything else, right bellow our feet.
 I tend to believe that wherever is "truly" happening there would solve or confirm any other possible question about the universe...

 For having no proof I'm still on your side with relativity, but we do have to pay attention, for all the work over relativity has "light and a photonic universe as its basis" with has proven to be most likely correct, although it's not completely closed to misinterpretations, that when corrected, would lead to the same relativity we do accept...
 If I decide that a car is a motorcycle, and keep that tough for one hundred years, to eventually discover that it wasn't a car, none of that changes everything I observed and experimented within at that period, the only significant change is that "I" not relativity that was incorrect, our understanding of it...
  For not having proof other than thoughts, I stick with your opinion and knowledge with relativity, although, I'll natural always question the reasons behind relativity, for the creator also did not knew neither...

[pasala (OP)]

Mr GOC
As said by you,
"Mass and energy are two separate systems working together to create relativity".

In GRT Mass and energy relevance is expressed as:
"The equivalence between mass and energy, as expressed by the formula E = mc2, is the most famous consequence of special relativity. In relativity, mass and energy are two different ways of describing one physical quantity. If a physical system has energy, it also has the corresponding mass, and vice versa. In particular, all properties of a body that are associated with energy, such as its temperature or the binding energy of systems such as nuclei or molecules, contribute to that body's mass, and hence act as sources of gravity".

This equivalence principle is impossible, except in gravitational field only.  Unless, otherwise outside energy supports and boosts energy it never equates mass.  It is true that mass and energy are two different physical quantities and enjoys unique qualities.  Mass is less dynamic and mostly static.  Where as energy is more dynamic. Each and every mass carry's certain amount of energy and it varies product to product.  This energy, stored inside mass gives dynamism and it start attracting electromagnetic waves in the open area.  However it is far limited and it mainly depends on the external source of energy. 

Here, on the earth where there is huge concentration of fundamental energy, whatever experiments we are doing is influenced by the gravity field.  Suppose we are sending light on a metal, here light itself is being influenced by the gravity.  In the absence of gravity, there is no scope for light at all.  Small amount of electrons  released by you has no capacity to create a light ray.  Small amount of energy released by us, creates pressure on the existing rays and a light ray is formed.  Further reflection against metal is being done by the gravity waves only.  For this gravity waves, metal is an important object only.  When light is forcussed, metal is excited and absorbs upto certain amount of energy and there after electrons start taking a different shift and already existing rays in the opposite direction are high lighted.

If we keep this in mind in our research, in my view quantum theory will take a different approach.

Yours
Psreddy   

[pasala (OP)]

Mr Alex,
Thank you, for the elaborate explanation. 

Well, i think your feelings are affected. 

Actually, whatever you have said is within the frame work of general relative only. 

Here, every thing presented by me is simply mine ideas only and they have no relevance to your
explanation to jerrygg.

Yours
Psreddy

[GoC]

Mr. pasala,

  I do not believe mass has any energy. Energy is of space. c is of space and move electrons. This is the only way electrons and photons can be confounded to measure the same speed of light in every frame. We can not believe mass can move at c if relativity is correct. A photon can have no mass from the atom.

You cannot get a photon moving faster then the electron that produced it if fundamental energy is from mass.

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

Mr Alex,
Thank you, for the elaborate explanation. 

Well, i think your feelings are affected. 

Actually, whatever you have said is within the frame work of general relative only. 

Here, every thing presented by me is simply mine ideas only and they have no relevance to your
explanation to jerrygg.

Yours
Psreddy

 Perhaps you're correct, yes you're correct, I have a big limitation for my perception, there is no way I can produce math for those toughs, although if I share the thoughts with other people that actually can figure out the math, maybe one of those can come up with something.
 No necessity to happen immediately, no need to quote as reference, can happen years from the moment they read or maybe the next half hour, at the other hand may not happen at all, could mean nothing...
 I do not know how to bridge toughs with formulas, I do understand what they mean, I just do not know how to focused on those letters for more than a few minutes. Al tough if one describable the equations as what they mean, the way most of the other members do, I can easily visualize it "happening" within my thoughts, and even when I'm able to visualize a different possibility, I lack the attention necessary to built the math, so the only option left is to share...
 I got a lot of general knowledge, never had the necessity to advance much further on a specific mater, although as days pass by one and another piece of technical information I "borrow" from each post, specialty in new theories topic, goes adding and increasing those glimpses, as much more, the better..
 My apparently necessity with alternative incoherent "magic" comes from the fact that to try to glimpse the logical visualization within my thoughts, I need to know as many possible information about what defnetly cannot be out here and a short explanation of why.
 I need as much incorrect information as possible, to get closer of what "could happen", otherwise I do not know that see, nor even how to compose it...

This is the main reason behind my apparently attestments and false claims, I can guarantee that I'm correcting and revising them as fast as I'm typing the words...
  For those, like you who actually understand the math behind those equations, the best way to do it is to ask on a proper manner, for you have the understanding, the tools for it...
 I'm a simple Worker, I do study a lot but using my free time and my own methodology, in fact I never come to finish the last half year on high school, not until I reached 25 years old, not using as a excuse but as for explanation of why my claims are not reality, are in fact question, it's the way I trained my mind to operate, constant meditation... I sort of feel envy when other people come up with complex formulas, for I do understand most of it, although I can never hope to built or correct any, reason why you'll not find a single commentary of my under any topic that involves complex equations...

 Just a few mounts here, thanks for the kindness of all of you, into answer and correct my misinterpretations, I can each day more easily understand what is not correct on the frame...
 As the gin-clear concept of The Box, the Box experiment itself within its meaning, the energy base of jerrybb, this member seems to have a great piratical knowledge of energy and particles he's an EE after all, he also does a lot of question which is very helpful, for each member question is one thing else on the frame, and also one thing less(impossible to be) to worry about, the commitment of GOC with relativity along with the concept of fundamental energy, his commitment is so great and he seems to only have problems with mainstream, so it's very helpful tho have someone "stood" within relativity, that is basically our only stick at the moment. Most of users with great knowledge tend to be impatient with ignorance, and even those who actually answer, seems to be able to do it only once at best, for specific reasons, as much as one, as myself, keeps coming up with different possibilities formed within my toughs, he dispose to correct it, and more explain why not...
You seems to work in the same way, although you're seems to sound too much open to new ideas, I did read your post more than once, as I do every day with all the others... Do not get me wrong, you add information as anyone else, but you do not fight back the claims I usually do, witch is much appreciated, although, for someone with my "actual" knowledge of universe, provide me the right answers I not as effective as correct my own mistakes...

  For an example, today I set a new solar panel at my roof, i sit there for almost an our, luckily I live on a German colony here in South Brazil so we have a lot of opportunities to do anything without concern with society, with is very helpful... So, I sit there for about an hour, observing the panel, changing the format of the ray of light was hitting it, "even considering what a ray is? Is correct to refer to it as "a" ray of light? and if so is correct to assume that light here is formed by many rays of light, or by a single ray of light? What's light? Electrons being released from one side of the cell to the other? Photons hitting the electrons? New electrons forming from nowhere? What about that nonsense of photonic mass and carrier, what if the "shape" photon does release the energy into the matter that for the cell and a electron is ejected for the energy contained on the carrier was transferred and assumed the place of the electron? What is an electron "in fact"? What of the surroundings of the cell if a carrier of light spinning at C transferred its energy, would the missing energy on the "shape" of the photon to disband back into the "aether"? Whould than the abrupt stop of the spinning C, cause dilatation of the space"ripples" where the carrier was disbanded? Perhaps heat(irradiation) is related to that? Isn't heat energy of space that different from an atom, or exactly for not have an atom available nor energy enough to join, could be heat energy of space without a point of reference? heat!? I know what it is, to the point sounds logical to refute this idea and search other possibilities! Could be heat the natural "temperature/state" of space when it is not at C? Nearby particles and atomic structure, due to their mass? Mass?
 In resume i mentally visualize the ray of light hitting the panel, even projecting myself to watch myself watching the panel in order to visualize how the ray, rays, or "light" have reached my eyes...

For this very reason fell free to comment on every single over explained explanation, I do it so to be able to better express a tough due my lack of mathematical representation. The reason and only expectation behind those explanations, is not to be correct, is both a gamble that someone else will read, and think about it, and harvest knowledge to my own visualization...

 As for your question, i cannot prove nor be sure, but I do frame that the answers, the missing piece, is right bellow our feet, it's not an obsession, everything I glimpse Saturn orbiting the sun, how and why Neptune exchange orbits, why there is gravity, anyway a sum of everything it almost 90% of the time, and its a lot of time, it always point me the center of those objected, and perhaps my subjection or not always tend to point back to the "photonic everything about it", all the rest has even if incorrect has being corrected since than for it can be visualized, I'm not focused on light, we know what it must be, I want to become able to complete an logical orbit around the sun, this without in half of the way earth do not fade, explode, desperate, stop, implode, become a sun, any many other possible outcomes...
 As much one explain why not something, anything, longer earths survive within my toughs...
 For this also considering if the very existence of planets, even if I'm alive because of it, is a good thing at all, is this what this "place" was meant to be, are galaxies a post graveyard of massive objects, or under the right conditions a super massive black hole is able to "become something else", for this also considering that it could also be causality that follows the rules, considering also for this that the physical laws we know could also be causality, left overs, all this happening at the afterwards of a super nova expansion of a older hyper massive sun, that exploded all those planets we now call stars, given the scale what seems to be billions of years to us, due our universal speed of light, could comprehend within hours on an past higher scale, is there past? Past?  What about that big time dimension he was wondering about? Parallel with physical?
See? there is no much left to me once I cannot express this with math, but words.

The logical answer is to spend most of my time here reading on silence, and I have to admit, here in my country we do not have any good source of updated information, not even close to the one, you guys make available here...

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

Mr. pasala,

  I do not believe mass has any energy. Energy is of space. c is of space and move electrons. This is the only way electrons and photons can be confounded to measure the same speed of light in every frame. We can not believe mass can move at c if relativity is correct. A photon can have no mass from the atom.

You cannot get a photon moving faster then the electron that produced it if fundamental energy is from mass.

 Let me ask you, all this you state falls in into the question:
 What if space seems to be empty and massless right because it is at C, what if the atom has not its energy from its own, what if the atom is formed(on space) by the interactions particles, by gathering together sort of, slowing down C...
 The proper question should be, consider for a minute that mass is from space, what are the chances of mass of any given object, dark mass, any mass, being "space when it is not at C" due the presence of atomic structure? Supposing that the electron is infact "borrowing" its energy from C(Photon) on some sort of cooperation, as the electron is constantly borrowing the spinning C, from the photon(space) and on this process, to be releasing space energy(trough the photon), in the same frame as the photon has it's acceleration borrowed by the electron, it goes out from the state of C, and this change on C, only within the presence of atomic structure, as the source of mass as we know?

 What if dark matter, is the effects of all the matter (including gas and particles) gathered on a certain open area, such particles would not posses quality of light to be visualized, could be that the presence of too much distributed particles, occasional to remove space from the state of C just on a specific area? And the difference between dark matter and the mass of any matter, as being only the possibility of being visualized in open space? I mean you can't look inside a piece of rock or any given object made of matter, how to know than that dark matter isn't mass(its effects)visually exposed?

[GoC]

Mass is created in suns from fusion by a process similar to what you expressed as dark mass. Fission is the opposite process to change mass beck to dark mass energy.

[pasala (OP)]

About time dilation:

It is true that Einstein proved in his General relativity that time is not a universal law of physics and it dilates from
place to place, it may be due to gravity or velocity.  He has taken two places, one point A on the top of a hill station and the other, point B low lying area.  He compared ticking of clocks at the both places and found variations. 

Here, time dilation is due to gravity.  On the high hill area where gravity is weak, ticking of clock is faster. Where as on the low lying area, where gravity force is high ticking is slow.  This is due to gravity effect on the clock. 

But, here we have to remember one important point that high hill area is not  free from gravity.  It is also reeling under gravity pressure only.  But when we move to low lying area, gravity pressure/force increases.  Due to this pressure/force, ticking of clock is slowed down. 

Let us presume that we are in a zero state of gravity.  Here, how clock works is an important point.  In zero gravity, everything is in free state.  Suppose if we are using atomic clock.  Here, basic function of atomic explosion is controlled by the gravity.   Electrons released due to atomic explosion, have no control over atomic clock. Here we have to remember one important point that without gravity force/pressure electrons never splits automatically.

In fact very functioning of the atomic clock depends on the gravity.  It is in the grip of gravity.  Existing energy rays in the open area, have already deeply penetrated into the clock.  When the electrons are freed, they joins the existing rays and pushes them in upward direction.  It is due to this force/pressure that clock is working. 

In low lying area, where there is high gravitational field, pressure/force on the clock is increased.  Energy rays in the open area are more potential when compared to the inside the clock.  So, naturally pressure/force towards clock is more when compared to pressure/force of electrons.  Here electrons have to gain more strength, when compared to outside pressure to come out and to move the clock. 

This is the reason why at the centre of earth, gravity is less when compared to poles. 

Einstein used this function simply to compare how time dilates from place to place.  If we understood, "what exactly gravity is", so many things will come out.

Yours
Psreddy