Explore the Concept

A few things interact to produce light energy in the spectrum. Diseases give off light.  Fragrances smell. Rocks reflect.  All made up of the same few building blocks. The combination of light and these building blocks is what makes properties like hardness, luster, and complexity to heal. Electromass attempts to rationalize frequencies as they are measured, while addressing what forces are real and what had to be contrived thru history.

Stars have no different components than atoms; they are actually the best tool we have to grasp light.  There are certain processes that make stars light up, and understanding the differences in stars helps us to understand the variations in light energy itself.  Astronomy has beautifully built a set of data for us to develop mathematics for these variations. This is the right method to understanding the cosmos. Let’s line integrate and see.

This book walks the reader through scales, and forms the same classical, conceptual argument for turning points in Nature. It does not include the mathematical derivation comprising the hypothesis (here), but rather focuses on the intricacies of force fields to consider, what measurements we can manage, and how to manage them.

Preview the book.

Contents

Page

A Curious Observer 3
Principles 4
The Basics 5
Hand Rules 8
A ‘New’ Look 10
Beyond the Table 13
Electromass 15
Plasma 21
Cosmology 25
Lifecycle of a Star 30
Emission 37
Mathematics of Time 38
Timeline 40
References 41
Electromass and the Economy 42

The standard astronomical model follows the expanding universe decision paramount with Hubble (1929) and Tolman (1930). That same model follows the mathematics of Einstein (1905) and combines it with the required supermassiveness of black holes to date The Universe. The model also follows the mathematics of Shrodinger et al (Quantum Mechanics), and Feynman et al (Quantum Electrodynamics), which explains the atom’s behavior from an observational standpoint only. This becomes immediately cumbersome when complex protein chains start FOLDING several different ways; beginning your personalized archetype. Everyone is looking for a model that explains the why, because fundamentally these different sets of mathematics do not agree with each other; none are reasonably explained; and all require the introduction of new and unconfirmed fundamentals. Any model that is contradicted by another model is not an accurate tool for Nature—only for a certain scope. Such logic and limited data received demands the option for something new. Since we have certain data received, conclusions can now be drawn for the first time.

“This one consideration sets me apart from total submission to Classical Physics as of the late 19th Century, over 120 years ago. Quantum Mechanics can’t handle this special case. General relativity alters space and time to explain it. If that one consideration is correct, and the observations in astronomy seem to point to it, our entire paradigm of every field of Physics changes overnight.” Wisdom says to make small claims. Electromass makes one claim. Then carries out its test using little more than the privilege and enjoyment of the Pathagorean Theorem–repeated in such a way as to derive the variety of peaks and valleys in the line [which is] integrated as it approaches the receiver. A small claim leading to an intense reverberation.

Dig Deeper:


CoverHomeDiscussionPoliticsThe Math (video)





∙ Fill out the form to comment here below:
(page is closed for comments)

49 Responses to Explore the Concept

  1. Anonymous says:

    essentially… there it is! in a nutshell.
    Occam’s Razor, once again. 7/7/2009

  2. Anonymous says:

    I don’t believe that is correct. While electromagnetic forces are the strongest over small distances, they are dwarfed at kilometer scale and obove by gravity, and by the strong and weak force at atomic scale distances. 11/8/2008

    • Anonymous says:

      At very large scales and very small scales, there is more to discover and the current models will have to be modified, but it does not appear they will need to be discarded.

    • Anonymous says:

      If we don’t make assumptions, all we can really say is “There’s stuff out there.”

  3. Anonymous says:

    This paper is quite interesting. 6/29/2009

  4. Anonymous says:

    I have read your book quickly and it deserves another read. To take someone from the very basics of physics and expose them to EU/ES concept. I applaud your effort! 6/30/2009

  5. Anonymous says:

    Why has it taken this long to arrive at such a logical deduction? It makes so much more sense, really. 7/7/2009

  6. Anonymous says:

    when the age of the universe was less than 10^-43 seconds, general relativity breaksdown, so that any time after that, physics does apply.

    • Anonymous says:

      extending current laws to predict what happened in the big bang or immediately after the big bang, or long after the big bang, may not be a good idea.

  7. Anonymous says:

    how can emission lines reveal an object’s mass? 11/25/2008

    • Anonymous says:

      “How do you distinguish between mass and matter?”

      Well the same way we always have, since Newton and even earlier. Inertial mass is defined as a property of a given quantity of matter at the time is it observed (measured). From wikipedia: “is a measure of an object’s resistance to changing its state of motion when a force is applied.” This would be true assuming an electric universe or a gravity universe. The question is: what is mass really a function of? This is where ideas like electromass come in. I totally dig this idea….

      In EU mass is considered variable for it is dependent on the pervasive (and always fluxing) electromagnetic field.
      7/10/2009

  8. Anonymous says:

    Are you suggesting that we abandon both quantum mechanics and general relativity without having a theory to supplant them? We know that they are very good approximations, so long as you don’t go outside the known domains of validity. 11/21/2008

  9. Anonymous says:

    This one seems to undermine plank’s constant.7/19/2009

    • Anonymous says:

      The standard model of particle physics essentially claims that plancks constant is a constant of convenience that happens to show up in many places. After a quick view of the PDF, I see no proof that Plancks constant does not specifically denote the angular momentum of an electron.7/20/2009

    • Anonymous says:

      “Shaking” of the nucleus is a phenomenon that is detected in nuclear magnetic resonance by that is a different matter entirely.

  10. Anonymous says:

    this electromass psychobabble has no place in astronomy. What is so hard to believe about supermassive black holes? 12/14/2008

    • KickLaBuka says:

      The Periodic Table of the Elements

      • Anonymous says:

        That’s all you have to explain why you think chemistry tells us that supermassiveness is impossible? That’s seriously *it*? That’s like defending a thesis in English lit by saying “Macbeth” and leaving it at that. It’s not a defense. It’s not even a claim. Can you explain what about the periodic table makes superdensity impossible? 7/21/2009

  11. Anonymous says:

    There is NO mechanism involving electrical charges to account for a black hole. There is ONLY one force known that can create a black hole and that is gravity. 11/24/2008

  12. Anonymous says:

    you demonstrated a better grasp of the specifics than I have. I tend to deal in first principles and logic and logical construction (I freely admit my mathematical skills are non-existent and I often get tagged for that, but I do have a decent grasp of the first principles that support the various mathematical details).7/24/2009

  13. Anonymous says:

    Well the future looks bright indeed! I am not sure how anyone can read that and not come away with a much richer, more fulfilling, and far more interesting view of the universe we reside in. It is all right there, in your face, and all you have to do is take a halfway decent look at it and it becomes obvious.. 6/25/2009

    • Anonymous says:

      In reality, there are almost no similarities between an atom and the solar system.

    • Anonymous says:

      Tropical storms and galaxies are not related, and lightning has nothing to do with astronomy.

    • Anonymous says:

      Whatever we discover about the structure of the Sun has no bearing on the relationship between the luminosity of stars.

    • Anonymous says:

      If I deeply truly believe that galaxies are held together by giant strings of invisible bubble gum (very sticky!), is my untestable hypothesis as valid as your equally untestable (and equally ridiculous) electromass theory?

  14. Anonymous says:

    It seems [electromass] takes a massive (avoiding the begging pun of “Quantum” ) jump from conventional “basics” to a personalised version , of theory.6/30/2009

  15. Anonymous says:

    So we have to admit that there are no absolutes. Only differences. And it is the differences that mean things, not the similarities (although they are not completely worthless). (Funny how, as a society, we are made to conform and so minimize differences where as everything else relies on seeing differences and making use of them. 10/7/2009

  16. Thank you pertaining to spreading that wonderful content on your internet site. I noticed it on the internet. I may check back again whenever you publish additional aricles.
    beats from china
    [url=http://www.makingfriendswiththedark.com/wp-share.php?pid=beats-from-china]beats from china[/url]

  17. Fire service officials have evacuated the passengers and crew. It is not clear if there were any fatalities.

  18. Anonymous says:

    It was a fresh new idea and is an easy read for anyone interested in that sort of stuff.

  19. Anonymous says:

    It’s impossible.

  20. Anonymous says:

    Get a job.

  21. Anonymous says:

    or maybe you are truely insane…guess only time will tell

  22. Anonymous says:

    The lack of understanding is on your part. To say that the entire cummunity of international scolars have a lack of understanding and you know better makes you the true fool.

  23. Anonymous says:

    What’s the time it takes to write (the decimal representation of) a number got to do with the nature of the abstract idea of a number.

  24. Anonymous says:

    Justin Sandburg please stop blanketing with electromass.

  25. Anonymous says:

    Dude. No one gives a shit

  26. Anonymous says:

    My kid is gonna take a piss on electro mass while screaming he’s a fucking dick not a Weener

  27. Kicklabuka says:

    shall I show this to your baby in 20 years?

    • Anonymous says:

      Sure, where can he find you? Daddy’s couch or the hospital? lol you will be far from my son. Just had to take a good thread and buzzkill it eh?

  28. Anonymous says:

    And if I hear electro mass one more time I’m gonna ya-mo burn this place to the ground

  29. Anonymous says:

    Anonymous is one of the best, most open minded people I’ve ever had the pleasure of knowing. Anonymous too. And they are both amazing fathers that will ensure a bright future for their kids. What exactly have you done that makes you able to criticize anyone? Snap back to reality rabbit.

  30. Anonymous says:

    I don’t mean to judge, but a lot of times it seems you have a fear of failure. I mean that with sincerity. I think your passion for electromass is clouding your ability to see outside of your own mind… If you want the truth to be told, tell both sides of it. You can’t press for a certain reaction then hold that as the only truth. Self-fulfilling prophesy. You are making yourself believe what you think.

  31. Anonymous says:

    “The entire history of mechanical engineering is learning from failure. The prima donna type of mind is useless in engineering.” – Maurice Olley 1955

  32. Anonymous says:

    “History shows that engineering (using an idea without necessarily understanding it) usually gets the drop on science (the understanding of an idea without necessarily having any idea what to do with it).” –Phillip Whiteman