Prime mover - Introduction
Authored by: Ben J. Albert
Brought to you by www.dieselduck.net, comments to [email protected]
This article is about the prime mover that drives the universe, as we are about to see, and we will also see how it influences the very fundamentals of science.
Those who are familiar with the poem "The Rime Of The Ancient Mariner" will recall that after the members of the crew died, their sailing ship steered back to port at great speed although there was no wind at all. This led one dead sailor to ask: "But why drives on that ship so fast", to which another dead sailor replied: "The air is cut away before, and closes from behind". That clever ghost identified his ship's prime mover - but what is our prime mover?
Every reasonably intelligent person at some time or other, must have wondered about the mysterious invisible force that drives the universe. Where is our prime mover that makes us breathe, that makes the trees grow? If it is true that a tiny electron(s) can cause a chemical reaction, what then is the prime mover of the electron that enables it to pull, push, or vibrate. How and where does it get the power from to influence it's surroundings?
The Beginning. Every new atom is a new beginning, a new creation; there has never been a "Big Bang". If so, all the heavenly bodies would have reached the same state of development, and would have been of the same age. The hotchpotch planets of our own solar system are quite obviously billions of years apart in age, our sun is a new star, Jupiter has cooled down and is much older, and our moon even more so.
As telescopes improve more and more galaxies become visible and they apparently are drifting apart as indicated by the "Doppler effect". But, we are told, galaxies also turn round their own axes at a great speed. If both observations are correct one half the side of a galaxy should be blue if seen from the side because that side should approach faster than moving away
Matter. Space is filled with energy. At times matter will crystallize out of energy and will form visible clouds in outer space. Matter is energy, it will (like quarts) give off energy / electricity if squeezed. Adjacent matter will absorb this electricity, which will generate more oscillations that will result in more pressure on surrounding matter, and a perpetual electromagnetic interaction will result. Electromagnetic interaction (EMI) inside matter is the Prime Mover of the universe
The electromagnetic field produced by the interaction will cause gravity (see MPs and gravity) that will pull in more and more matter till all available matter has been attracted. All this will eventually result in an extremely hot center but nothing will actually be consumed. Out of the furnace will emerge small clusters (electrons) of various shapes and sizes, they will form bigger clusters called protons of various shapes and sizes. That will be worked outwards to the surface by movement of the smaller matter, where they will cool down and eventually form a crust. The protons and electrons vibrate because of the perpetual EMI of their matter. One can assume that the heavier elements are created more towards the center from where their migration takes longer allowing them more time to grow bigger units. Iron, being a relatively light element will originate halfway down, and could therefore not occupy the center of our planet. Hydrogen will originate near the surface
Proton/neutron pairs are the building blocks of all heavier elements. A neutron forms an inseparable integral part of a proton in the center of the star, possibly as an overheated outer layer. When it surfaces where the pressure and temperature is lower the kernel will expand, and the proton will emerge. The neutron does not vibrate.
Electrons. Electrons are said to have a negative charge. Negative equals "less than zero" - so less of what do they have? Since electrons apparently repulse each other, perhaps they do have a negative pulse? No, they are neutral. Since electrons also vibrate in the same environment as protons, their pulses must also be positive, but because of their size they are easily overwhelmed by a stronger virtual magnetism (see magnetism). It is also possible that "one" electron is actually a cloud of electrons that represent the value of one, and that not all are of the same size
Protons. Protons are said to be positive, which means they have a charge of "more than zero", but positive normally implies a surplus electrons -? So One would expect equals to push each other away, but they do not, and one would expect the electrons to crash into the protons, but they do not - which means that protons are in fact neutral, and the vibrations produced by their EMI cause pulses (see MPs) that register as positive.
Nuclei. If one places elements from the lightest to the heaviest in one line, one would expect a gradual change but that is not the case. Elements are unique because even when the atomic weight, density, diameter, and electron configuration etc. of an element is practically identical to the one next door (like gold and mercury, or aluminum and silicon) they still could be vastly different. This seems to suggest that the real difference between elements lies much deeper than we can observe and that the Periodic Table is of little value. Since all elements are constructed from the same matter, the difference between elements must therefore reside in the construction of the protons / neurons and nuclei that were shaped by pressure and temperature at the time of construction. The shape of visible crystals should give some indication of what lies deeper
Magnetic Pulses. A catalyst is proof that some force, powerful enough to create chemical reactions, surrounds an atom. Mikhail Tsvets famous chromatography experiment furnished convincing proof that atoms extend their influence far into the surrounding space, and that they have different affinities with other atoms / molecules. Every atom / molecule is therefore a catalyst, or a potential one. It is the arrow that kills the bird, not the bow.
Motion (Brownian) was first observed by Scottish botanist Brown some 150 years ago when he noticed that MWs cause floating pollen under the microscope to vibrate. Nuclei are surrounded by passive energy also known as "dark matter" and the vibrations cause chain reactions of "onion shells" of compressed energy/magnetic pulses (MPs) where the compressed front of the 3 D wave is positive and the trough negative. They radiate outwards from the nucleus leaving the nucleus void of energy, a "white hole".
The greater the mass of an atom the more energy levels it can support, e.g.. hydrogen has such a low weak frequency that it can only keep one energy level suspended round the nucleus, whilst gold can support six levels because its frequency is higher and stronger. Electrons keep their distance by riding on positive energy fronts of energy levels called shells where the pull of gravity and the push of the MPs balance each other out. Shells and their electrons clouds are therefore the result (symptom) of nuclei activity. The sun's energy levels and gravity keep the planets in place and the earth keeps the moon in place
Bonding. Atoms will only voluntarily bond if their frequencies are compatible A light bonding (covalent ?) will occur if the outer shells of two atoms fuse into an "envelope" and become one molecule. A firmer bond (ionic ?) is obtained when the first two or more shell fuse into one.
By implication, an atom / molecule bonding with another will change the overall frequency and therefore the chemical properties of the new compound. The new frequency in turn may change the relationships of surrounding molecules by firming, loosening, dislodging, or creating new ones such as when sodium, a metal, and a greenish-yellow poisonous gas chlorine, form the new healthy envelope called salt
Magnetism. Magnetism is concentrated energy. In a permanent bar magnet, all the shells of atoms are forced in one direction, rather like the stretched tails of millions of tadpoles all swimming one way, and their MPs are sending out vibrations only in one direction. The "lines of force" that become visible in the iron filings experiment are the MPs projected by the focus that protrudes from one side of the bar and in a virtual movement meet the other side where there are no vibrations. This virtual movement is why a magnet will pull and push another magnet - but will always pull soft iron. An electron that crosses the path of virtual magnetism will be deflected and will appear to be negative.
Electricity. If a copper wire cuts through a magnetic field, it actually cuts through the compacted energy of the "tadpole tails" and their surrounding auras, and in doing so, pick up small parcels of compacted energy. It is only a chain reaction of energy moving down the wire and not electrons. The reason why current moves in a specific direction through a wire must be because the lines of force (above) simultaneously also revolve because the electrons still revolve the way they originally did.
Light Pulses. The parcels moving down the wire may end their journey when they meet up with something like the filament in an electric bulb where the intense heat will cause them to vibrate violently sending out white chain reactions of electromagnetic pulses in the form of ever increasing "onion shells" at the speed of light. (Place an onion roots side down and cut it horizontally through near the center. Imagine the dead center is a light source. Now imagine that the light source vibrates causing a chain reaction that moves outwards at the speed of light) It is these perfectly all round 3D pulses that are confusing and taken as waves by some or as photons by others, because the profile is strong-weak-strong-weak, not up-down-up-down. All electromagnetic transmissions, radio for example, work on the same principle.
All light is white, colors are white light compressed to a greater or lesser degree. Since the front of a fast expanding pulse will be more compressed than its rear, the front would show up as a shorter blue wave and the rear of the shell as red. Light will lose speed as it travels along and the original white will turn to red. That is why galaxies appear to be moving away
It is not possible for the light of stars to bend near the sun because there are no rays. The space around the sun is filled with a dense "atmosphere" of ejected substances and electromagnetic disturbances, as the light of a star pass on all sides of the sun, it may be altered by this dense mass in the sense that the all around passing light will bend inwards or all outwards.
Gravity. Mention was made of the nuclei of atoms vibrating sending out "onion shells" of electromagnetic pulses, leaving the center of the atom void of energy. This "cavity" is gravity, it pulls things in. The gravitational pull will be the strongest in the center but the pull will extend far beyond the atom�s outer shell. The same logic explains why we are kept on the ground, why the sun attracts the earth, and why the center of our galaxy keeps the sun in its place. Einstein�s "curvature of space time" which he "borrowed" from Riemann, was a prank.
Life. If for example molecules A+B form a simple cell C1, their new envelope (C1) may let another A and B in separately, but as soon as that happens the new A + B may form another C1, the two may then combine to create a larger cell C2, alternatively the two may repel each other and produce other C1�s. If the new A+B assumed a mutation C3, and C3 settled inside the envelope C2 - a complex cell, C4, was created. Cell division is the basic principle of life.
Conclusion. Light is the maximum speed at which energy can vibrate, in an unstable element a higher vibration might result in a nuclear explosion, and if a stable element vibrate beyond its maximum it may explode, causing a chain reaction, and destroying the planet.
Columbus was under the impression that he had discovered India when he first set foot on America. His assumption was wrong, but that did not change the physical properties of America in any way. This paper will not change the world either. It is just that many "facts" were based on the wrong assumptions.
� Ben J. Alberts
84 Afrikaner Rd
Simon�s Town 7975
Republic of South AfricaMinor editing by: Martin Leduc
October 2000
Editorial comment -
Below is my response to an E Mail I received in regards to the above.
- Martin
When I first came across that article written by Mr Alberts I thought it was
pretty good. Mainly because it made me think of 'things' outside my field
which is important to us all. Physics is not my first concern with the site.
A marine engineer is a jack of all trade, who is self confident and
knowledgeable enough to recognize and perhaps tackle any problem that may
occur on a ship very far away from safe haven. What I am trying to get at is
this: I am, and most of my colleagues are, "hands on people" and theoretical
arguments are really not our game.
Although I did not agree with some of Mr.Albert's thoughts, it was a short
concise article which tackles a huge subject which I believe to be
interesting, but still is shrouded in many unknowns. I think a person might
argue the points of any articles written by 'experts', but that is the
beauty of being human - we have reasoning and can be influenced by logical
arguments.
Please feel free submit your thoughts, they will not fall on deaf ears and I
for one would be most interested in them. If you wish, just point me to an
article which would replace Mr Alberts'. I always challenge anyone to rebuff
any of my material on the site, but please do not just 'throw out' negative
thoughts. We all win when we freely exchange ideas and concepts.
Martin
martin's marine engineering page
www.dieselduck.net
Ps. I do not know Mr Alberts, nor did he leave any quick means of getting a
hold of him.
----- Original Message -----
From: "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 4:01 AM
Subject: congratulations on the site
> I really enjoyed reading most of the articles on
> your site, even though I'm not in the business
> myself, I only have a 30-foot sailboat! My one
> complaint is your article on "basics of energy",
> which really prompts one to wonder whether the other
> saner-sounding articles are really just as dumb.
> The only sensible sentence in this particular article
> is the last, only the author does not seen to realise
> it applies to his writings. A point-by-point rebuttal
> of the stuff in that article would take forever, and fall
> on deaf ears anyway, so I won't bother.
>
> cheers,
> louis