enigmas answered


G-theory ©





  • How did the stars begin and continue to 'shine'?  

Answer: We now understand that it is by graviton transitional energy and the gravity GTD (flux) is even through an evenly dense body. This agrees with Gauss. It is net sum zero.

  • What causes drag in space?  

Answer: This is caused by gravitons via the phenomenology of GTD.

  • What causes the red shift in outer galaxies?  

Answer: This is because the universe is expanding (accelerating outwards):

  • Why do the outer galaxies appear to be accelerating outward?  

Answer: because they are being pushed out by GTD.

  • Why isn't the night sky a sheet of low background light punctuated by stars?  

Answer: This is because light loses some amplitude in the creation of gravity.

  • What causes gravity and black holes and what causes the laws of motion?  

Answer: Gravity we now understand and black hole phenomenology is also understood: The laws of motion are caused by G mass P mass and N mass, by GTD, PIR, and AIR respectively in conditional combinations.

  • What causes the anomalous behavior of binary pulsars and why most galaxies have the shapes they do including the enigmatic spiral form?  

Answer: By force frame dragging and mutually distorted gravitational fields. Refer to the text.

  • What causes the astrophysics mass discrepancy?  

Refer to the thesis.

  • How are planetary spins and orbits maintained?  

Answer: By force frame dragging, and the deformed solar gravitational field. Refer to the text for a more expansive phenomenology.

  • Why if their was no counter active force, Lense-Thirring frame dragging and solar wind and other frictional forces would not allow the retention of orbits and spins?  What is the counter active force?    Tidal friction occurs within a frame which is not inertial and the supposed drag is net sum zero so the net drag proportionality on the earth is the same for the planets.

Refer also to the thesis.

  • Why don't large planets exist in the inner solar system?  

Refer to the thesis

  • Why does the moon appear to be moving away?  

Answer: Gravity may be changing. Refer to the thesis

  • What is the heliosheath really running into?  

Answer: GD.

  • Why is there drag in space?     Answer: GD




  • Newton'   s missing inertial frame of reference found:  

By GTDv phenomenology.

  • The real reason that atomic objects can't travel at 'c' or beyond:  


  • How some particles can and do travel faster than 'c':  
  • Refer to proofs, reasons and calculations in the text.
  • How it is possible that the speed of light might not be a local reference frame constant; rather just a universal reference frame 'constant'.

            Ditto, and please explain how we just so happen to be able to observe everything out there in an undistorted, non light delayed fashion.

  • Amazing mathematical proofs for the relationship between the speeds of light and gravity and that gravity propagates at much greater speed than light in the local gravitational reference frame.
  • Why an object in gravitational free fall only appears to feel no inertial force and why the force can't be measured in a small object.  

Answer: 'Einstein's lift' is a flawed mind experiment. Einstein's equivalence principle (EEP) is specious in its application. However it must be noted that all of the equivalence principles stand as stated except for SEP and EEP near the surface of objects and more significantly hot bodies.

  • Why there is no need for the postulation of dark matter by strings etc:  

Answer: Because G-theory proposes an actual and substantive particle of matter which has detectable qualities.

  • What dark matter (and energy) really is:  

Refer to text.

  • The missing mass of the universe found:  


  • Plasmas both cold and hot:  


  • An exhaustive analysis of the singularly particle behavior of light including lasers, reflection, diffraction, polarization, absorption, opacity and translucency, light nodal observations and interferometry including Einstein's slit, diffraction gratings, birefringence, fringe shift, spatial displacement, luminescence retention, Cherenkov radiation and the photo-electric effect, emission mechanics etc.
  • The probability that gravity may not be constant:
  • The possibility of anti-gravity:
  • A particle theory of gravity and its speed:
  • The universe is a multiplex scalar. Refer to text.
  • The probability that the speed of light is not a constant:


Answer: By arguments from logic, ratification of experimental data and the presentation of possible experiments to prove or disprove such a postulation. It is measured as a constant on earth in a vacuum even though the earth is moving through space. So there is assumed to be no light speed anisotropy. That will be shown to be a false assumption.

  • The continuing creation and balancing of gravity by light:


In all the following general conclusions: please refer to the text.    




  • The effect of light plasmas on gravity and light:
  • What really causes supernovas:
  • Quantum physics anomalies explained away:
  • The mass defect explained away:
  • What causes 'quanta' and why quantum integer and sub quantum steps apply to everything except the lowest order sub-fundamental particles:
  • Atomic dna and the true structure of atoms and nuclei:
  • Why there are far more particles in atoms than currently imagined:
  • Why more photons and sub bosons can be added to atoms and not cause a mass increase:
  • Solutions to the problems with E=mc2
  • 'Vis   viva' or 1/2mv2: which is it?
  • Why there can be no unifying theory between any of the relativistic paradigms:
  • What happens to photons traveling in a string or packet when entering a media event horizon (boundary):
  • The real reasons that cesium clocks must be readjusted to enable GPS satellites to function accurately:
  • Why planets create their own heat:
  • What actually causes fusion:
  • Why the sun is cooling down:
  • What are radio waves, really!
  • How electricity and electromagnetism works at the atomic level.
  • Why light and emr don't require a medium for propagation:
  • What 'mass' is:
  • What actually causes the mass defect
  • What prevents electrons from simply crashing into the nucleus because of Coulomb's law of attraction?
  • Why the eV is a charge (force) and not an energy and the real electron energy is eJ
  • The calculated mass of a photon quantum (x-ray and infrared)
  • Why the Gravity Probe B and synchrotron mechanics don't PROVE relativity. They will be shown to actually disallow its plausibility:
  • Problems with the HTXE probe:
  • Why the applied theory of relativity is a substantive 'croc'.





  • Special relativity has been refuted as being applicable to reality.    
  • The Lorentzian transformation theory is shown to be a mathematical abstraction which produces a space drag curve that isn't supported by the evidence. At the same time the G-theory curve derived from calculations herein DOES!    
  • By consequence: applied general relativity and geodesics is specious science. Many arguments from logic are included herein as well as enlightenment to the model fitting-errors, as well as the impossibility of a mathematical unifying theory to ever be forthcoming.
  • G-theory presents a substantive solution to the mathematical abstractions of those relativistic theories.    
  • There is a valid reason why there is no possiblity of unification between quantum relativistic theory and astronomical relativistic theory.
  • CTP symmetry is not necessary to prove G-theory. In fact it has already been noticed that in some cases there is no symmetry.
  • Quantum chromodynamics is questionable.
  • Time is an absolute constant, and space doesn't bend.
  • Space is a multiplex dot vector scalar with separation branes and time doesn't bend.
  • The reason for the space matter density proportionality has been found.
  • Newton   was right the first time. Gravity is pushing and not attracting.
  • Differences in matter cause slight differences in gravity.
  • Stellar objects backfill and bend their gravities to a realizable extent.
  • We have discovered a plausible reason for the precession of the planetary orbitals.
  • We have discovered an orbit sustaining phenomenology for planets.
  • G-theory models the Allais affect.
  • We have been able to provide a solution between the three orbital equations which is able to solve for the data obtained from orbital observations.
  • A substantive mechanics for      Newton 's    missing inertial reference frame preventing hyper velocity motion has been found.
  • The Mercury problem has been solved.
  • The Kepler problem has been solved.
  • The propagation of gravity is almost instantaneous and its speed has been calculated.
  •     A more plausible mechanics of a supernova explosion has been presented.
  • A valid reason for the ability of neutrinos to travel right through the earth has been presented.
  • We have found the difference between an alpha particle and a helium nucleus.
  • A black hole is conditionally invisible and time doesn't stop inside one, and they generally won't evaporate.
  • We have discovered a plausible structure mechanics for black holes, neutron stars, magnetars, micro black holes and the likelihood of the existence of a kind of tiny black hole inside every nucleon.
  • We have discovered the likely superluminal flare mechanics of a black hole, as well as the lighthouse gamma ray flares of other astronomical bodies.
  • We have discovered the reason for the background x-ray radiation in space as well as the temperature variations.
  • We have analysed nucleosynthesis and concluded that elements greater than 60Fe are no longer being synthesized but the existence of heavier elemental matter of the periodic table in the universe is probable.
  • Proof that everything has mass including photons and neutrinos.
  • E=mc2  is an erroneous variant of the also incorrect equation E=mv2   . The correct equation for a photon quantum is E=mc+hf. The formula for nucleon and other sub particles is given in the thesis.
  • We have discovered the true equation for total quantum energy.
  • We have discovered why low voltage data circuits exhibit an increasing propagation delay which is a problem unlikely to be overcome.
  • We have also discovered the real universal formula of energy divergence.
  • Some of the 'dark age' equations of motion are speciously based on imperfect experimentation and conclusions. These have been put under the microscope herein and found wanting.
  • We have been able to calculate the energy required to send a 'passel' of ions around the LHC by calculating that required for one nucleon.
  • The singular energy required to keep one lead ion traveling at 1/2c has been calculated from the G-theory energy-velocity curve and formula.
  • The quantity of sub bosons in a quantum has been calculated.
  • Both light and emr are propagated as particles with some variability of fairly stable vibration and linear vectors and both are speed anisotropic.
  • Proof against the notion of wave propagation, and why a medium (aether) is not required for any reason including the observed scintillation from light sources in space.
  • The reason why light has mass as well as instantaneous acceleration of emission has been found.
  • The reason why trillions upon trillions of photons that have mass are able to be legally added to an object without causing an increase in its mass (even when the promise of mass energy equivalence at the large scale failed to materialize as a possible phenomenology) has been found.
  • The real cause of both the mass defect and discrepancy has been found.
  • The real reason for the kink as well as the gentle bend in the binding energy curve has been found.
  • The missing electron mass is not binding energy: It is a T mass and G mass relationship function.
  • Mass energy equivalence theory is specious.
  • Quantum and Astro-physics have been unified.
  • The model fitting proposal of a geometrical form for atomic nuclei has been soundly resolved.
  • The model fitting proposal of the mechanical structure of fermions (which can explain why the electrons behave as they do and don't just crash into the nucleus) has been found,.
  • From this a different mechanics of electromagnetism, radio transmission and reception has been derived.
  • We have uncovered the true nature of the relationship between force energy and work at both the mechanical and electronic level.
  • We have learned how virtual forces such as magnetism are able to carry energy without a previously predicated return path.
  • We have discovered the true return path for energy in space.
  • We have discovered how emf propagation is facilitated without a medium.
  • We have discovered that Hilbert space aperiodic harmonic modal sets caused by interactions between the 'g' and form factors cause electronegativity/positivity and electron orbital jumps.
  • We have discovered how electrons are able to maintain orbitals without crashing into the nucleus.
  • There is a relationship between gravity and specific heat which is not aligned with Sg.
  • Why the idea of 'spin' as rotational motion is not required at the quantum level because the vibration of particles is being continuously energized, and they no longer require some sort of magical conservation of 'spin' energy. (disambiguation included)
  • Why gravity is actually a greater force than the nuclear strong binding force. Have you visited a black hole lately?
  • Both Newton and Einstein have erred and a new N-metric equation for gravity has been derived.
  • General relativity is denied as a possible model.
  • Special relativity is also refuted.
  • Lorentz Poincare invariance is also specious. In variance is required at the quantum level.
  • A proposal of what a Higg's boson actually is and how it is proposed to cause mass and how that mass is elastically propagated to the larger forms of matter.
  • Why the Higg's boson discovery hasn't been a discovery of something new. It may have already been inadvertently theorized as something else completely.
  • The periodic table of elements is ill equipped for new science.
  • G-theory has demonstrated that the Quantum integer Principle is fully related to ohm's law and is thereby proven to be a law.
  • We have discovered how light is able recognize that an object is a prism before it even gets there.
  • We have discovered how light can slow down in a medium without piling up at the surface.
  • We have discovered the true phenomenology of Cherenkov radiation.
  • We have discovered the true synchrotron phenomenology.
  • We have discovered the true light phenomenology surrounding slits and holes.
  • We have discovered what causes the anomalous relationship between the specific heat of metallic solids and gases.
  • We have discovered that there is a proportional sub fermion particle density relationship relevant to particle temperature.
  • We have discovered the true relationship between fission and fusion.
  • We have discovered why fusion began and why it continues to occur in stars, and why positive fusion power generation on earth is impossible.
  • We have discovered why symmetry is able to be voided without violating the laws of thermodynamics.
  • I have held back my postulated matter construct models of everything, right down to the Higg's boson, including variations such as neutrino variants.     Refer to the thesis.

Here are some extracts from the thesis.


After doing that--- note this excerpt from the thesis---in which I previously wrote the following---


"BRANE: (membrane) the inter-dimensional event horizon at the cosmo-universal and similarly at the quantum level as the case may be. Objects exhibiting 'atomic mass' are not able to exist with any true invisibility or imperturbability in individual dimensions. They exist in the whole observable universe multi-dimensionally and so then it can be concluded that only qualified 'sub particle' objects existing in different dimensions are able to occupy the same space time without any dilemma, and the brane is the separation point between such either biracial particles or dimensions existing in real space time, - In higher order particles, usually by the agency of a gluon or any neutrino/anti-neutrino combo or even some other bosons for higher order constructs such as pions and muons- but this doesn't apply to sub fundamental biracial particles whose construct is purely mono or bi dimensional.

A brane is a virtual point which can be considered to be the crossing point of dimensions. It must consist of -conceptually being- the stuff of one of the listed dimensions but a brane might be considered to be the anti particle of itself when understood as a confined stationary point. In that regard it would be similar to the theorized Marjorana particle but in G-theory this particle is not any sort of dark matter because it's not really matter; rather it's a qualifiable state. It's just that two separate neutrinos say might seem to have the existence of some matter between them which is holding them apart yet they are all -three- subject to Cosmean laws. I.e. they can't just appear and disappear without any connection or jurisprudent attachment to higher order matter, so they must be constrained to behave (jurisprudently and) relative to the quantum states of the various bound atoms. So in effect branes are also bound states which are fully relatable to the nuclear matrix filling statistics--- presented herein under G-statistics and not BE statistics.

If Marjorana 'particles' are ever to be observed it would be by behaviours under particular circumstances -observable by the existence of partial -ve or +ve quantum loops occurring in very slow motion atomic states in exposed pions or muons -around the edges of such higher order matter- which are brane connected parts of EWF Higg's superstructs.

This all means that a brane may be the stuff (matter/particle) of a dimension existing between other dimensions. In that case the brane may be recognizable as a particle which is subject to annihilation when not required as such. The reasons for a time delay for annihilation will be given in the thesis and it has to do with PEP even at this low level of particle. I guess that would make a brane a fermion.

In any case annihilations (whether slowed or not) can produce other particles which reappear on or off site. 'Energy' can neither be created nor destroyed--- but certain sub particles may become invisible and appear from nowhere and in those cases particles such as the Marjorana particle might be observed but we need to qualify the evidence. Size is not the issue it is dimensional status. If you could completely enter the right dimension (and look around)--- well---.

We can't do that however so what we need to observe is a definable change in annihilation statistics dependant/proportional upon/to the changed states in higher order atomic matter and then you will see your Marjorana bound state/particle -if you wish. Of course we won't ever see one (a singularly existing brane) but we must search for this evidence of such a brane state/s by seeking that proportionate behaviour.

This is where the ideas I have presented elsewhere result in zero-energy or other apparently violating energy results from particle perturbations. That behaviour appears to violate the laws of physics. However it is the eos which brings parity over time no matter what! There is jurisprudence. I.e sometimes nothing annihilates to something and visa versa. Also we might be puzzled up to now by the occurrence of strictly similar annihilations which exhibit variable results. That is actually predicted by this theory" and the evidence is to be found in the annihilation statistics relatable to the exposed higher order states of pions and muons. Such evidence is not to be found in atoms or the lower order particle statistics which abound".


What they have really detected in this article -which must have been a large enough particle to have be imaged by a STM, which typically sees nucleon size objects- is two Higg's brane separated neutral particles larger than neutral pions (which is a Higg's superstruct Higg's Suzy particle or just a Suzy particle. It is actually two Higg's bound -ve and +ve pions)* and this is all in support of G-theory theory per se. -Maybe they've studied this theory!?- Such particles will decay to pions and then to muons over temperature dependant time, with a statistically even chance -in an unaffected state- of becoming similarly neutral and not -ve or +ve pions etc. This means they will mostly (66% chance) decay to neutral which in turn means they will generally appear to be their own antiparticle.

*Editorial comment in brackets. 'Suzy' is a play on SUSY.


So what we find being observed in this article is a superposition of multiplex VM states of a stable number of branes and not just the affects of seeing only one Marjorana junction which would be typically extremely small. However this cannot be declared as quantum mechanics superposition in any way shape or form. That sort of observance is just glorified statistics of chance to be found in any particle or 'wave' system, as is the new 'pilot wave' supposition. The standard math of permutations and combinations has -in those theories- just been superseded by a size limiting -Hilbert space- equation. This sort of misconception will continue to occur because most algebraic math is telling a story of how to break an occurrence into parts and arrange it in a story form to be able to make it apply to an infinite number of actors who can get the same results and this can be done in new and often devious ways. After all patterns are patterns which generally repeat.

Is there any difference in saying 2+3=5 or 10/2=5. The answer may be the same but the approach was different and the algebra will be different. So just watch out if it's only the result you need to get regardless of the method. The story could be crap but you still might  be able to derive an equation from it to get the result you need to support your story.

Note: I'm not trying to show off with these excerpts but any theory needs to develop 'creds' fast! By the way--- I'll say it again--- The chances are that the friggin' cat is dead!






"Note: When it comes to acceleration (photon emission) there is a phenomenon which isn't being thought of here and that is this.

If acceleration is caused by collision or significant perturbation between elastic objects then the component of motion can be transferred with a proportional amplification of the acceleration rate to another particle with less mass. There are other features of elastic transfer available by classical physics to get that photon out of that atom!

Consider a cricket bat striking a ball. The noted acceleration rate can be incredibly great for a short duration. We fire bullets from guns in just centimetres and these are large objects compared to photons.

If there is something in the atom which can act like the cricket bat and something else that can get some elastic 'wind up' -mechanical energy storage even- then we can have that photon being batted, shot and slung out of there with observably instantaneous acelleration.

You see the energy can be small and the force large and of short duration. You don't need wave function mathematics to do that job. HOWEVER A NICE PHYSICAL WAVE 'FUNCTION' IN THE RIGHT PLACES CAN CREATE A NODE OF ENERGY WHICH COULD ACHIEVE THAT PHOTON EMISSION JOB VIA CLASSICAL PHYSICS ALONE.

In this regard it is likely that there is something fundamentally wrong with our understanding of acceleration in the real world. When contemplating instantaneous acceleration--- F=ma doesn't quite cut it. Even dvdt is incapable of reflecting impossibly instantaneous force nuances. Please refer to impetus definition herein."


It turns out that I have a similar theory involving instantaneously* acting nodal snaps relative to QIP, and the resulting emission of photons. However my photon is not a wave or a dualistic particle or a particle riding a pilot wave, and this excerpt is related to electron spin states.

*Please be aware that true instantaneity is impossible in the real world.


" NB Also it should be noted here that the Schrodinger equation may well describe the theoretical statistical node relationships but in G-theory such wave function is only an external-to-electron h-bar driver of the physical electron quantum states so derived. Refer to CH 23.

So the Schrodinger equation -being erroneously proposed for a harmonic oscillator- relies on the specified spatial distances involved. -but because of losses- that equation is similarly just mathematical and not truly representative of the apparently chaotic real world which is really being superimposed upon by the herein proposed VM statistics. How else can such wide divergence of reality from the mathematics be explained? You can keep scratching your heads or throwing relativity at the problem if you like. It's up to you. However please bear in mind what I suggested about 'explaining one magic with another' as being a definition of insanity.

For more on this subject and to understand how the Sch. eq. is only a basic fundamental quantum equation upon which a more robust theory can be built classically. Please visit this link."


Or study this thesis exerpt---


----gamma particles can be conditionally emitted from electrons in higher energy states where the eos is actually non functional but it requires electron speeds at almost 'c' to cause any significant emission enabling inertia gained from their infinitesimal P-mass to be realized; so when it finally occurs, the emission of the gamma particles will only be at the speed of the electron and not 'c'. This novel, fledgling proposal will also be examined in greater and tantalizing detail.

The magazine of your relativity gun should be well and truly empty by now as should be the 'cross draw' pistols of energy mass equivalence; both of which nuclear physicists sometimes attempt to utilize ad hoc whenever it suits them, even if such usage necessitates the ignoring of an obvious element of reverse logic.

That's not a fair sledge really, because science is always a journey and sometimes the inexplicable and downright contrary have to be ignored to enable advancement in any area for better understanding even if that does lead to theory rejection in the end. At least some of the physicists admit the quandaries and the general idea is OK if it is useful but we must be wary of dogmatism in the face of such model challenging dilemmas, or science may advance no further in crucial directions.

I strongly assert that the electron has been wrongly determined to have some significant and inertially active N-mass because of the misunderstanding of the forces involved*. This problem should have been cleared up if you accept the proton-electron phenomenology as stated above. I will be expanding on this subject further now and in much greater detail later.

*This is where/why Newton 's second law and Schrodinger's equation show deviation. Refer to P-mass.


Having said that I still wouldn't like to take a long hypervelocity electron shower! They do have some inertial mass but much of their mass would be P-mass. That is why they are very much affected by QED perturbations; significantly h-bar but no apparent Newtonian or gravitational inertia.






For a more in depth analysis of the following overview--- please refer to chapter 23.

I suspect that electrons are positioned around the nucleus by the following process. Protons exhibit a pulsation of various and variable QED fields from zero to a positive magnitude determined by nucleonic parameters. The frequency of pulsation is possibly too high to be measured but it stands to reason that it could be at the highest x-ray frequency known or even higher because of the fine constant energy loss function. This is not referring to the Lamor frequency which is the combined resonance of the whole atom. The nuclear internal resonance is likely to be much higher but relatable of course. The nucleon resonance in collusion with the Lamor resonance is likely to be responsible for form-factor modes.

The g factor magnetic field also expands and collapses at other frequencies and orientations determined by energy state and nuclear space filling parameters. These two forces create nodal patterns, in that; rapid changes of frequency of one or the other causes electron orbital nodes to snap to and fro. N.B: Phenomenologically comparative rapid nodal 'snaps' can be instrumentally observed when experimenting with sound wave interference also. These quantasized nodal shifts are expected to be indicative of nucleon quantum level shifts and may actually be causative of PEP. Wow! If that's the case then quantum steps could simply be controlled by variable 'g' and form factor interference, rather than having to envisage some sort of internal atomic computer. Such nodal interference phenomenology is the more likely scenario*. The problem here is that one of the frequencies is probably a light 'f' while the other is an emr 'f'. Note: In G-theory those two are not externally compatible.

*Also please google 'bouncing droplet pilot wave and quantum resolutions'.


The electrons are always positioned in an elastic coulombic avoidance relationship with each other and will always be found (elastically) near the region of the junction of magnetic lines of force and electric field nodes.

A necessary digression: This will give them a particular spectrum line which of course can be affected by the Stark and Zeeman, and Paschen-Back effects because the G-theory electron is both an electrically charged particle -in the summative double negative and single positive manner which will soon be described and depicted diagrammatically- as well as having an elastic and cross charge oriented magnetic dipole moment. Otherwise it stands that traditionally accepted electron behaviour and other related phenomenology could only occur if 'truly' unworldly physics is involved. I.e. magic!* G-theory is offering real physical phenomenology. Note: The spectra affects are suspected to be caused by retro-charge and retro-magnetic effects transmitted to the proton/s by the electron proton interrelationship, which in turn would rewrite the signature vibration of any photon that the proton emits while in any given state. Multiple spectral lines are caused by multiple atoms being affected in slightly different ways according to their real world parameters within the field.

*The Schrodinger equation is true in essence but not in practice -which is why we see relativity being brought to the rescue of the Hydrogen fine constant dilemma- but we will find that rescue to not be necessary with G-theory.


This high frequency force interaction causes the electrons (which consist of a magnetic dipole and a '-ve1' net charge as a dualistic imbalanced charge particle)* to move at very high velocities within the constraints of the fields and interactions with other electrons so described. Uncertainty principle declares that an electron can be at any legally approbative position relative to the intersection point at any time but (on average), equidistantly averaged between other electrons.

*To behave as it does an electron can be conceived as an elastic particle consisting of one north and one south magnetic 'particle' at right angles to a set (or multiples of a pseudo-baryon set) of three charge 'particles' in a (-2/3 -2/3 +1/3) arrangement giving it a net electrostatic negative-1 charge and also (and very importantly for G-theory) AN IMBALANCED CHARGE DIPOLE WITH A SUMMATIVE NET -1 CHARGE BUT STILL WITH A SLIGHT SINGLE SIDED POSITIVE CHARGE RELATIVE TO SPATIAL ORIENTATION STATISTICS -and this can produce the strength difference noticed between hydrogen bonds and covalent bonds in larger atoms-.

THIS MAGNETIC DIPOLE IS ABLE TO BE so affected and SHIFTED ALONG THE LENGTH OF THE CHARGE DIPOLE  ELECTRON PART IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE ZEEMAN EFFECT. Note: Charge particles (with color/flavor changeability) do not follow coulombs law within the fundamental particle they exist in; otherwise a proton would fly apart by quark repulsion! This is a novel theory based on a coming conclusion concerning quark lattice phenomenology, but how else can you explain the ability of an electron to notionally change its energy level without a comparative color change QCD retroaction? Where's the energy law in that?







According to G-theory, electrons MUST consist of a lot of particles, especially if an electron positron collision is able to cause the formation of two gamma particles. Note: I also suspect that a nucleon consists of a conditionally vast quantity of particles WHICH MOSTLY EXIST WITHIN THE QUARK LATTICE, AND THOSE OUTSIDE OF THE 'POLYSTATIC GRAVITOS-DIMENSION n QUANTITY' in the femtospace UNILATERALLY DETERMINE THE TEMPERATURE OF THE NUCLEON. That temperature is conditionally determinable by the rate of boson emissions relative to temperature differential between the atom and the measuring instrument. It becomes clear that any temperature measuring instrument is able to affect the measurement---






The theory of relativity offered herein is different than the one you will be familiar with; but before you blow a fuse and leave in a huff, why don't you first solve the following paradoxical problems and answer the FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION and perhaps even toy with the other questions proffered? Then if you can be honest with yourself you might be able to see your way clear to delve further into a proper evaluation of the herein proposed scientific-model-replacement--- G-theory--- or MVM for multiplex vacuum modification theor y.

G-theory doesn't derive from some sort of superior intelligence possessed by G-man! It's just that if you simply stop seeing gravity as a pulling force acting between lumpy bodies and objects like a string acting from their centre's; and otherwise begin to evaluate it as the quantum field in the vacuum that it truly is, then the new theory being proffered becomes the obvious solution, and once the historical errors -which first led to the 'commonly held theories of relativity'- are resolved then 'all' the answers just come tumbling out, and by consequence those former faux-science relativistic theories become automatically redundant.

I have been accused of 'not getting' relativistic gamma by this website in this discussion

I used to believe the whole deal. It wasn't until I analysed the whole paradigm that I realized that if you begin with the wrong assumptions in the first place you will end up with the wrong results.

Instead of providing a refutation of the following analysis the 'Professor' only carried out an ad hominem attack on yours truly. In actual fact the Professor begins all of his 'education with the forgone assumption that STR is a fact and that he's God's gift to mankind in being able to explain how something so simple works. I harbour some doubts as to whether he has the mind power to tackle a thesis of this calibre. Of course he can prove me wrong I guess.