Three is the key

Concerning Navier Stokes...

When you have a lecture on Navier Stokes, they immediately explain that in order to solve for NS, you then have to solve for the x,y,z vector directions, you look at the planes, look at mass and Energy conservations, and momentum. Ultimately what you're looking for is which way is the particle or the fluid moving?

...with reference to a frictional or pressure gradient, just as Relativity as it went down this track and converted ALL mass and Matter to energy and then described it as a pressure gradient in order to describe gravity as the 'supposedly' - 'bent rubber sheet' of curved space-time...Useful as it allowed us to solve problems and solve things, at the same time it was an explanation without and explanation.

It gave us a way to get an answer without really understanding what is going on. This is what happened in "Quantum Cosmology" when Abraham rationalized and unified....

By the time Abraham rationalized, unified and explained Newton and Coulombs similarities, and then how they related to Einsteins field equations, merged the whole lot to give the unified gravitational field, the answer to Navier Stokes was staring him in the face.

Non-linear simultaneous equations, and field tensors are mathematically complicated...

What Tetryonics does is give us a model that covers it all-at-once in one image...

Space, Time, Energy, momentum, mass and Matter.

This gives us all the forces, everything physical and everything immaterial so in that respect, the one simple basic foundational geometry of Tetryonics can therefor explain this work.

Rather than focusing upon the differential equations, focus on the picture. An image is worth more than a 1000 math words...its the key.

Physics is completely missing what is going on here. What is measured as a sin wave of electric fields or magnetic fields, is in fact the result of a 2[pi] equilateral geometry. As they move past the point, any person or detector won't measure the geometries exactly, but rather they will measure the strengths of the E or M field position with respect to one another.

It's the actual motion of the diamond shaped 2[pi] arrangement of photons of energy passing the detectors that resolve to sin waves in this way. You'll notice the 90 degree phase relationship between the E-Field and M-field components.

First, we must wrap our heads around this 2 quanta EM field that is creating these changing values in the sin waves. It's not just wave mechanics, it's actually the measure of the triangles in relationship with one another.

The alternating diamond shape electric fields in the upper left...and the oscillating magnetic dipole fields shown in the upper right.

Traditionally drawn as circles, are really the passing equilateral triangles passing a point. The upper left maps the E-field max, and the upper right shows the M-Field max oscillations.

Tetryonics simply says that -- Scalar energy that makes a force is an Equilateral Triangle... The square root of that triangle represents the linear momentum as indicated by the pink color running up the height of the triangle.
Euler's equations have been known since the 17th century. It combines trig, exponential features, the square root of negative one, basically all the features of mathematics rolled into once equation, and now we have THE understanding that brings all this to life.

We are working to show that the square root of a negative number is not irrational, it's simply the heights of the Negative charged fields of the Triangle...it's a very real value of the negative charge.

e^i[pi] + 1 = 0

Can be rearranged...

e^i[pi] = -1

If this is the case, you have the square root of negative one being expressed, and mathematicians scratch their head at this...Tetryonics simplifies the issue and just says that the Square root is the height of a negatively charged equilateral triangle.

We have this quadrature wave made from the geometric photons and EM wave. The measurement past a point will produce the complex wave form that sinusoidally varies with time, and the 90 degree phase relationship can be easily understood.

We're not saying that the mathematics is wrong, rather that the mechanism/geometry at work has never been identified before. The concept as understood using a 'concentric pattern of radiating ripples' of electromagnetic energy that overlap to give us complex interference patterns and complex interactions of force, is the basis of field mechanics that led to the Navier Stokes solution.

Rather than radiating concentric rings and spherical point particles as the map, we are looking toward the tessellated Planck Quanta back of all the equations.

Tetryonics is a bottom up approach, given the geometry, the math comes out.

Mathematics (top-down) is simply pattern recognition looking down from our perspective down, and our human minds have found it difficult to interpret the math correctly.

There is a misconception to the underlying geometry, and as a species we've missed the equilateral geometry as being of vast important. The Relativity equations as written by Einstein are all the same as Navier Stokes, as in they are all non-linear simultaneous equations.

Relativity was based on Lorentz corrections ( as the velocity increases, wavelengths get shorter ) , but was applied incorrectly. Lorentz corrections only apply to the secondary KEM ( Kinetic ElectroMagnetic Fields) that result from Matter in motion. It's not Matter itself that Lorentz contracts, but rather this secondary KEM fields alone!

The energy stored in the KEM fields, which have a kinetic component and a magnetic moment, and any Material object moving at any velocity will have mv^2 quanta in a secondary KEM field. All the Relativistic corrections, the Lorentz, transforms, Special Relativity and General Relative relates to the contraction and motion and geometry of Equilateral Fields of mass-energy.

Matter itself is NOT Lorentz variable. Matter Topology is not affected by the speed, velocity changes or application of force in any way shape or form. All the extra energy of the force goes into these secondary KEM fields. This applies to Navier Stokes. These KEM fields are fields of mass-energy momenta - Fields of Motion - or Kinetic Fields.

If we are going to model fluid dynamics and the pressures and velocities and how the 'wavefront' moves, we must first understand that any force applied to Matter is made up of Equilateral Planck energy momenta that is stored in these fields...not in the Matter itself. We are introducing a secondary component that has yet to be identified. Separate from the mass-Matter of the particle itself.

We can resolve away the mysteries of 'Wave-Particle duality' this with an analogy. If we think of the KEM wave as the wake of a boat in water. As you push the boat away from the dock, the boat does not contract, but the energy of your push goes into the creation of a wake. As the boat speeds up the wake gets bigger, and as the boat slow down (due to friction) the wake gets smaller. KEM waves work in exactly the same way. The stored energy of motion is in this field.

The Matter Topology of the boat does not change, but the energy of your push off the dock, sets up a secondary wake/wave is generated and the dynamics of the wave change as the boat increases it's speed. At no time does the actual Matter of the boat contract at, near or faster than light.

Whatever force you apply will be stored in the KEM field, in both a kinetic and magnetic moment. It will cause the Material particle or boat to move in the vector direction of it's Linear Momentum....(the square root of the energy supplied by that force). If you know the weight of the boat you can divide the momentum by the weight of the boat to derive how fast the boat is moving...and more importantly which direction!

This is the Gaussian Distribution from the Geometric perspective of Tetryonics.

Our next illustration gives you more information directly applicable to Navier Stokes.

If you look at the color coded Photons, they form a Normal/Gaussian Distribution pattern in Tetryonics, they go from, red, orange, yellow, green, aqua, blue, Indigo, violet, --going back down---, Indigo, blue, aqua, green, yellow, orange, and then red. themselves...(this is the color coding representing a 64 square unit Equilateral Triangle with 8 quantum steps...the second image below, shows a Pink Linear Momentum Vector going up the center and it represents 9 quantum levels of 81 Planck Quanta going up the apex of the tessellated triangle arrangement.)

Every Quantum Physicist on the planet is missing this point!

This is where the statistical probabilities come into quantum physics itself. It all comes from this field and this arrangement of energy momenta within a charged geometry. Whether you measure it as mass (energy per second) or if you measure it as an energy density (Tau-a-b as a stress–energy tensor) using General Relativity -- with it's associated square root vector velocity or linear momenta -- it makes no difference--, or you can even measure it as a function of time by watching the change of Equilateral Geometry (Quantised Angular Momentum) per second.

If you do the quick algebra on (Quantised Angular Momenta/per second) you get (square-meters-per-second/c^2).... Do the algebra on it and you get 'Seconds'...Any changing seconds -- or changing angular momenta per c^2 will give you TIME...because you get delta seconds.

Delta Seconds is TIME. Time itself is quantised. It's a measure of QAM (Quantised Angular Momenta) or energy geometries per spacial region...That's the simplest way to put it.

All these energy distributions of energy quanta, the scalar as well as the quantised Planck Quanta and their various aspects of Kinetic energy, linear momenta, magnetic moments, time... all these features including velocity, can only be done in mathematics at present as 'simultaneous non-linear equations' because they are a scalar function. The linear momentum and the vector remain linear, but the rest of them are SCALAR functions.

Even though we can now quantise them using Tetryonic geometry, they are still treated as scalar. You try to solve for them, ( x, y, z) each direction of motion has to be solved with a non-linear simultaneous equation.
Just like gravitational fields, the mathematician looks at it and either has a stroke or shrugs his shoulders. To try and calculate them is a nightmare, but to visualize them in Tetryonics is simple.

You can see the Electric and Magnetic Components, You can see the kinetic components...the entire field is kinetic. You can make out it's linear momentum by the pink diamonds running down the center forming the central height of the triangle. You can see the vector direction that the particle is moving. You can also see how many Planck Quanta are present.

More excitedly from Navier Stokes side of it...you can now bring in Relativity, because as we have stated that the kinetic field is fully relativistic and it's the part that is Lorentz corrected due to velocity  changes, we have found that as you add more energy by applying more force, you will put more quanta into that field and those planck quanta being squeezed into the same geometric area, obviously their wavelengths are then contract. As the velocity increases the wavelength of each quanta contracts. The particle itself's wavelength DOES NOT contract, or change.

De Broglie, who extended this to the physical contraction of particles, and Einstein doing the same thing, was COMPLETELY inappropriate. It was a mis interpretation as to what Matter was as opposed to what mass-energy is.

That's where Relativity has erred in it's foundation. The Lorentz contractions, which gave birth to Relativity, DO NOT apply to Matter. They only apply to Matter in so far as the energy of the mass in the Tetrahedral Topologies have a specific Compton frequency and De Broglie wavelength. That part is correct, but it's not Lorentz contracted.

Then you can take it to the final step. The image showing Bosons and Photons...(EM waveforms) shows the Lorentz contractions of bosons, showing the associated energy levels of a photo-electron as it's accelerated.
It shows the physical contraction or changing size of the quanta in the KEM field as the electron is accelerated. Again, a squared number for every KEM field as the energy is applied, so this is where we get Bohr's quantum jumps. Which cause all the problems with asking.

'How do we merge quantum theory in with Classical Mechanics and explain this contraction? How do we do all this in the case of Fluid Dynamics?'

All the particles that are in motion, in say a wavefront, a wave crashing on a beach, or a particle moving through a fluid situation, with resistance and things like that...In a macro scale model, we can do it mathematically, but how can we do it visually using a Macro scale model?

Tetryonics shows us the visual geometry at play, but it also shows exactly how the math was applied incorrectly.
The same KEM fields can be re-drawn showing the same fields, the same energy momenta, but this time we are focusing on the linear momenta, the vector direction created by the energy fields. The more quanta you have provided by the energy supplied by the force, the higher the value of the linear momenta and the higher the value of the associated velocity, in proportion to the mass-Matter, of the particle that that field is associated with.

mass is that lovely constant between force and acceleration. The heavier the particle, the slower the  velocity b/c there's more inertia to get moving, so the force will not accelerate it to the same velocity of a lighter particle. mass acts as a fulcrum in the equation.

Any information about any particle in motion can be gleaned from the simple Equilateral geometries of Planck Quanta in a KEM field, as can ALL the information about the charged Matter Topology of any particle.
Using Tetryonics, if we had a computer big enough and coded correctly, we could physically describe each and every atom, all the spare electrons, the energy in the system, the complete makeup for ever type, whether it's a water molecule, or a metal bullet in a water solution, makes no difference, you can model all the physical particles along with their KEM fields for their directions of motion. Now if it's random, obviously it makes it more complex, but we have super computers capable of meteorologica weather mapping...so why can't we do the same with the Quantum domain, once all these points are taken into account?

If you know enough information, you can predict, not only their exact outcome, but also their exact position, energy, and momenta, for any particle within the system that you are modeling.

What we have been lacking today, is the Equilateral Energy Momenta described as such, and to build the Topologies of the Matter while understanding the mechanics.

If you were to build a model of a one second snap shop of a system, you can put all the particles, with their KEM fields into the model and then progress that like a still shot for another second.

That's all the Navier Stokes equations are doing. They are trying to solve for one instant in time, and then a second later, you allow that system to evolve and take another snap shot. Calculate for their position, charge Topology and the KEM field of every particle in the experiment under question, and then a second later you allow that system to evolve and you take another snap shot with the geometry. Then place a series of 60 of these snap shots together and you have a movie.

Then you have gone from a Navier Stokes type situation, where it's just a black box, to a computer that is actually running the simulation. Then you can test it against physical models to validate Tetryonic Theory.

All the problems resolve down to people having Euler's formula and NS equations, but lack the underlying geometry. They still think of it as circular wavefronts creating interference patterns, when it is these Equilateral Geometries at work.  If you shade these as 50% coloring, you can see the super-positioning of these equilateral KEM field overlays. This creates the the force between particles.

In the case of friction, all you have is a substance with it's KEM field that are super positioning with the KEM fields of the other particles in motion, and resisting it's motion, causing the particles to slow down and loose velocity.

Given enough time with these basic geometries that we now have via Tetryonics, we can do what Navier Stokes attempts to do mathematically, but can't do, and that is to solve for a 3D problem.

"Is it solvable?" -- Yes!

"Can any of the fields resolve back down to a singularity point?" -- Yes!

"Does it have the simultaneous equation component?" -- Yes, because there are scalar field geometries.

"Does it have conservation of energy mass and conservation of momentum?"

Yes, from which we can deduce geometrically/visually, the vector component of each particle. Then we just draw the situation, knowing the forces of motion with much greater detail than is possible with vector diagrams or with pure math. It then becomes a simple visual problem. If you want an exact answer you'll have to run the super computer for the length of time required. Allow the particle to interact and there's your solution.
You can prove for a 3D computational fluid dynamic example, an exact outcome for any particle or for the entire system.

You can't prove that using the math, because you can't solve the math. All you can do is manipulate the math and assume there is no vector rotation and that there are only linear motions, so then you can get rid of all your simultaneous scalar parts.

You can do both with Tetryonics. Where there is a vector straight line of linear momentum you know there is an associated Equilateral field of scalar energy surround it.

All these complex parts of the math, like curl, differentiation over time, just vanish and the solution becomes a simply slide show.

Whether the mathematician will accept this geometric approach will depend on how long it takes them to accept the logic behind it.

The complexity of the NS equations that we are so familiar with, simply disappear using the Tetryonic approach. The problem doesn't even exist as many believe that it does.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Tetryonics offers a strict differentiation between mass and Matter, and we offer clarity between the linear and the non-linear, and even P vs NP type problems that we also resolve using geometry alone.

KEM fields are electromagnetic fields that point in a vector direction. They have linear momentum - the square root - all this applies but Instead of 'circular spherical wave fronts,' we now have equilateral geometry as KING.

Neutrinos are not massless...the term massless is a misnomer and must be abandoned moving forward. A better term would be Matter-less in that Matter has mass, and EM fields have mass but no Matter Topology.

Cross referencing the mass of a neutrino as seen in Tetryonics 17.07 we have 8.851486361 x 10^-50 kg

We know that Neutrinos have 3 neutral Tetryons, meaning that there are a total of 12 charged fascia, and each of these 12 faces only contain a single Planck Quanta, no more...

This gives us the ability to derive the "higgs boson" mass related to a neutrino my dividing the total neutrino mass by 12. Simple as that.

(8.851486361 x 10^-50 kg) / (12 fascia in a neutrino) = mass of a single charged fascia within neutrinos = the 'higgs boson' found in neutrino topology.

Obviously there are more quanta in the Matter fascia of other particles, but we're not ready for that lesson that just yet...

The answer being....7.376238634 x 10^-51 kg ...how's that for an exact value?

And this brings us right back to the Planck mass of a single quanta of energy...as it rightly should.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

To summarize the UFE:

n Pi geometries are radiant 2D mass-Energies [Bosons - Photons]  and
T Pi geometries are standing-wave Matter [Tetryons - Fermions].

[EoUo] is the Electric & Magnetic fields  of energy present in any 1 second measure of Energy in any region of Space    and

m.OMEGA.v^2 is either [Leibniz's mass-velocity]  or  [Planck's constant x quanta] both equally valid but equally failing to reveal the hidden equilateral geometry.

Tpi     [      [EoUo]        .        [mAv^2]       ]
Geometry  .  EM properties  .   Energy content

Notably - if the Energy per second has a geometry that is
it is mass not Matter that is being calculated

n Pi geometry [mass]   -  T PI geometry [Matter]

------------------

The third component to the UFE is the Leibniz-Planck Energy formula
[Leibniz formulated  E=mv^2  - Plank formulated E=hv]
these 2 formulations for energy divide Classical and Quantum mechanics.

As all Energy is comprised of v^2 quanta in their equilateral geometries Planck's formula MUST be re-written to be E=hv^2........

With the recognition that Plancks constant [h] is just mass.QAM [quantised angular momentum or equilateral geometry / second] it is shown that the:
EQUILATERAL geometry of Energy is a hidden property in quantum physics
h = kg.[m^2/s] = m.QAM

BOTH equations can now be re-written as equilateral energy  [E=mv^2] thus unifying classical and quantum mechanics for the first time in physics

--------------------

ALL ENERGY HAS A EQUILATERAL GEOMETRY.............
The SQUARE numbers of energy in physics are Equilateral geometries.

ODD pi geometries are Bosons [EM charge carriers]
EVEN pi geometries are Photons [EM force carriers]

The energy quanta of any EM field is a SQUARE number [sum of consecutive Odd number Bosons]

--------------

The second term in the UFE is [EoUo] which represents the electromagnetic field of energy that creates mass [Energy/c^2]........

Maxwell was the first to formally state mathematically that 1/c^2 is the geometry of an electromagnetic wave and Einstein extended this by showing us that mass & Energy are equivalent [E=mc^2].

Eo is the Electric permittivity of the field and is a diamond shape
Uo is the Magnetic permeability of the field and is 2 triangles [a m-dipole]
together they form an ElectroMagnetic field [EoUo] or EM mass-energy.

In Tetryonics, if you see 1/c^2 think mass, if you see 1/c^4 think Matter
again           nPi geometries are 2D mass-Energy         Tpi are Matter

-----------------------

mass-ENERGY is a 2 dimensional EM wave
Matter is a 3 dimensional standing-wave of Energy [that in turn has mass]

ALL ENERGY IS EQUIALTERAL

------------------

2D mass-Energy is a property of 3D Matter [it is the fascia]
3D Matter is not a property of 2D mass.

mass and Matter are two distinct physical properties of energy
the confusion between the two in physics text has contributed to many of the misunderstandings in physics today.

-----------------

Electromagnetic mass [small m] - is a measure of Energy per second in a give n region of space [E/c^2].

It is a planar or 2 dimensional measure of energy [flat euclidean].... think a sheet of paper.

Its geometry is the basis for all ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS

--------

The first term in the UFE is Tpi representing the TETRYON'ic geometry of MATTER.....

ie all Matter is comprised of 4npi standing-wave energy geometries... they posses mass-ENERGY and volume.

If Matter is destroyed (like in Stars) then the Tpi geometry 'collapses ' to become npi (or 2D radiant EM mass-Energies - Photons etc)

All energy geometries (whether they are 2D masses or 3D Matter) contain mass-Energy [the two remaining bracketed terms of the UFE]

----------------

Quantised Angular Momentum (often viewed as a rotational vector by today's physicists and mathematicians) is in fact the result of equilateral energy geometry, and is the source of CHARGE and all the coupling constants in Physics

-------
My question.
"Isn't it possible to calculate the correct numbers so physics can better target the energy range for the Higgs Boson, or do you have another take no this particle altogether?"
ABRAHAM Speaks
The Higgs Boson is just one fascia of any Matter particle, when the collider smashes them together the Matter geometries break apart....

So the mass-Energy of any one fascia is determined by the mass-Energy of the Matter in motion and the KEM field it generates....

'Modern' physics fails to distinguish mass from Matter at the quantum level clouding the problem further.... so any particles in motion that collide will create numerous Higgs bosons dependent on their specific Matter mass and velocities at the point of impacts.

In short the Higgs mass is a reflection of the Energy content of each charged fascia in the colliding Matter

[their KEM fields also have the same geometries as well as mass-ENERGY]

The Higgs boson revealed.. just one of the charged fascia of Tetryonic Matter

The EM energy content of each Matter fascia is what gives Matter its mass
[inductive loops resist changes to their energy levels just like inertial mass]
------------
Planck's quanta [E=hv] reflects the energy of Quantum level Bosons
Leibniz Energy [E=mv^2] measures the square Energy content of a EM field.

equally if Planck's quanta was a SQUARE number it would be the total energy of a field comprised of consecutive ODD quanta bosons....

Planck quanta squared    [hv^2]   =   E   =   mv^2   mass velocity squared

thus unifying Classical physics with Quantum mechanics through geometry

-------------
Tetryonics - the unified theory of Physics on all scales
------
Equilateral geometry is the key to understanding EM mass-ENERGY-Matter
---
The measurement of equilateral [square] energies per unit of Time gives us a physical unit of m^2/s, historically interpreted by physicists as a quantum scale rotational vector about a point in space...........it is not.

Quantised Angular Momentum {QAM} is a measure of the area of equilateral geometry/second .... in turn its equilateral [energy/sec] can be shown to be the quantum source of Electric CHARGE....

If the QAM is viewed as being the 2 directions of EM energy flux within the Energy geometry then we obtain a positive [clockwise] charge or a Negative [anticlockwise] charge - the two charges being opposite sides of the same equilateral energy 'coin'

Please note: at no stage does the charge flux actually exists - it is a artifact of how we can explain CHARGE in electrical engineering terms - ie by viewing the equilateral geometry of energy as a quantum ideal inductive loop of energy that circulates in one direction or the other - remembering inductors are often termed electrical masses as the resist changes to their energy levels like inertial mass does in physics.
-----
For every equilateral quantum of Energy in the Universe there exists two charges [opposite sides of the energy geometry] - each containing an ELECTRIC field [permittivity] and a MAGNETIC DIPOLE [permeability]...

The fabled and long sought Magnetic mono pole is shown to be a geometric impossibility thus confirming Gauss's law and one of Maxwell's eqns.

POSITIVE charges have a NORTH-SOUTH magnetic dipole  and
NEGATIVE charges have a SOUTH-NORTH magnetic dipole.
with the strength of the electric and magnetic fields being equal to each other but orthogonally opposed [90 degrees to each other].

EM CHARGE is the foundation of the geometry of all mass-ENERGY-Matter in the Universe

---

Pi geometry (found through the Math of Physics) is NOT the SPHERICAL relationship between a circle and it radius - it is PI RADIANS - reflecting the geometry of an equilateral energy triangle.................

The foundational geometry of all MATTER is Tetrahedral NOT spherical.....
---
The connection between ZERO POINT FIELDS of EM energy and INDUCTIVE MASS is unavoidable when the equilateral geometry of energy is viewed as an ideal inductive circuit............

With the energy flux 'moving' in one direction or the other,creating a clear Magnetic dipole in either case.

Both resist Energy changes to their current states [Newton 2nd Law]

And both obey Lorentz transformations - view them from the opposite side the EM charge arrangements are reversed......

A ZPF is not a harmonic oscillator it is an ideal quantum inductive loop of EM energy circulating uni-laterallly within an equilateral geometry......
its equilateral geometry form the foundation for all mass-Matter geometries

--------

In summary EM fields are Pi radian equilateral geometries, each containing an Electric field and a Magnetic dipole of equal strengths......

which in turn can be modeled electrically as quantum ideal inductive loops

but they are in fact equilateral geometries of EM energy with opposite charges on either side of their 2D [planar] geometry.

(These opposite charges create neutral EM fields until they form Matter geometries where only one side of the fascia is 'exposed' externally, thus expressing itself as a quantum charge)

--

Elementary charges vs. Quantum Charges.............

Each particle of Matter is made up of n Tetryonic [4nPi] geometries...
Tetryons [4pi] - Quarks & Leptons [12pi] Baryons [36pi] ........

Each ZPF contributes 1 charge/per fascia to the nett geometry and elemental charge of each Matter particle created.....

Tetryonic theory shows the Elemental charge [Q] being comprised of n Positive and n Negative quantum charged geometries [n/n].....

ALL Matter has a nett elemental charge resulting from the quantum geometry that made them....... elemental charges are 12n quantum charges.

Thus Tetryonic theory full explains not only the geometry of the sub-atomic particles but their measured elemental (and sub-elemental) charge

----

ElectroMagnetic quanta can combine to form 2 distinct fields........

Electro-static fields where the M-fields are neutralised and
Magneto-static fields where the E-fields are neutralised.

In both cases the momenta of the fields [their square root e-vectors] are opposed and cancel out any vector velocity [ie static]

The WEAK force in quantum physics is the result of inductive magnetic dipole edges coupling together

--
Permanent magnets are an example of a Magneto-static field where equilateral EM field energy is stored as a neutral E-field and strong M-dipole field........

Please note the M-field of a current in a wire is the result of charged particles in motion and its M-field is the result of the KEM fields of the charges not a static M-field..[although the resultant permeability has the same geometry]
--
In the 18th century Coulomb's work with charges lead to the Law of Attraction, often stated as Opposites ATTRACT, Similar REPEL....

Tetryonics alters the name of this law to the LAW OF INTERACTION in order to distinguish it from the unidirectional attractive force of Gravity in latter work

Mapping the momenta vectors of the equilateral quanta in static EM fields {or the flux of their electrical equivalents] gives a clear understanding of the forces behind the attractions between Magnets and charged objects.....

The motion of any charged particle is due to the force exerted on it by the EM field it resides in and any instant of time....

EM energy always flows from North to South external to the Magnetic dipole & South to North internal to the Magnetic dipole
--
Mapping the momenta force vectors of charged E-fields provides a clear model of the Law of Interactions and the forces that create it.............

All nett charge EM fields are comprised of a DIVERGENT momenta component and an opposite charge CONVERGENT momenta component.

It is these electric field momenta that attract or repel one charged particle toward another - not virtual particles or exchange particles is a often stated.

The charged EM emanating from Matter is a real field of forces, but is  insubstantial to our senses
---
Of note is the fact that due to their differing geometries E-fields diminish as the square of the distance from the source,

but M-dipole fields diminish as the cube of the distance....................    ..

this is know as Biot-Savart Law of EM field strengths
--
and the WEAK force is the result of inductive coupling along the magnetic bases of equilateral [squared] energy quanta geometries
--
Radiant 2D EM fields form 3D standing-wave Matter..................
[bosons & photons]          [Tetryons, Quarks, Leptons, Baryons]

Having interacted via the weak force, coupled EM fields can interact again and form a Tetrahedral standing-wave geometry of energy [Matter].......

Tetryonic theory terms these Matter quanta as Tetryons to reflect their geometry....... current physics has no name for them as they have not been identified yet (for several reasons) but they are the basis for Fermionic Matter

Tetryons can form 3 types of Matter - Positive, Neutral & Negative charges
with the neutral charge representing 50% of the population

ALL ENERGY (and CHARGE) SEEKS EQUILIBRIUM   [2nd Law Tetryonics]

--

Four ZPFs can combine to form charged Tetryons
--
Four ZPFs can combine to form neural Tetryons
--
Each equilateral charged geometry fascia of Tetryonic Matter has....

Quantum levels comprised of ODD geometry bosons,
summed together they form a square number energy geometry
whose nett charge is determined by the number of energy quanta within it.

Charge determines particle geometry [Matter family]
Energy content determines the mass of the Particle

--

All Tetryonic Matter is comprised of equilateral charge geometries that form standing-wave energies...........

The energy content of each charge geometry is comprised of numerous quantum EM fields that always total to a square number of quanta.

EM masses are designated a n[Pi] quanta in Tetryonic theory
Matter is designated as T[pi] quanta in Tetryonic theory

so as to distingush 2D radiant mass-Energy from 3D standing-wave Matter
--
Tetryons are the foundation of fermionic Matter in the Standard Model......

They are tetrahedral standing-wave forms of EM energy formed through the WEAK interaction of inductive M-dipoles in EM fields.

There are 3 types of Tetryons: Positive, Neutral and Negative,
which the Neutral Tetryons accounting for 50% of the statistical population.
[Their two differing charge formations result in identical Tetryon'ic Particles]

Neutral Tetryons acts as a dielectric Matter quanta as charged Tetryons interact to form larger sub-atomic and elemental Particles.

There are often referred to as Gluons in the current 'Standard Model' of quantum mechanics....
--
Tetryons are one of the main distinctions between current physics and Tetryonics...... they are Tetrahedral geometries as opposed to the spherical geometries envisaged in the 'Standard Model' of sub-atomic particles.....

The spherical model developed from our envisaging atoms as small versions of planetary systems in early physics and from the associated maths pointing to 4pi geometries as the source of EM and Gravitational fields.........

The 4pi geometry of a Tetryon easily fulfills the same role in math as a sphere and offer much more in providing a accurate and successful 3D model on which to build a new 'Standard Model' of elementary particles.
--

Bosons [charged EM fields], interact inductively [via the WEAK force] to form Tetryons...................

Tetryons then go on to interact via their charged fascia to create larger Tetryoni'ic Matter particles...this fascia interaction is the STRONG force
and results in all sub-atomic particles as well as the elements.

It is stronger that the Weak force as it is the result of parallel fascia coupling of electric and Magnetic fields, as opposed to the inductive edge coupling of a magnetic field............

The balancing of charges in larger sub-atomic particles reveals the source of Quark's 1/3  2/3 partial elementary charges and the neutral charges of Neutrinos as being integer Tetryonic [4n] charges.
--
anti-UP Quarks ........................... are 12pi [tri-Tetryon charge geometries]
created when 2 negative Tetryons combine with a neutral Tetryon [gluon]
to form a NEGATIVE 8 charge [-4, 0, -4]
--
DOWN Quarks ......................... are 12pi [tri-Tetryon charge geometries]
created when 2 neutral Tetryons[gluons] combine with a negative Tetryon
to form a NEGATIVE 4 charge [0, -4, 0]
--
anti-DOWN Quarks ...................... are 12pi [tri-Tetryon charge geometries]
created when 2 neutral Tetryons [gluons] combine with a positive Tetryon
to form a POSITIVE 4 charge [0, +4, 0]
--
UP Quarks .................................. are 12pi [tri-Tetryon charge geometries]
created when 2 positive Tetryons combine with a neutral Tetryon [gluon]
to form a POSITIVE 8 charge [+4, 0, +4]
--
electrons [Negative Leptons] ... are also 12pi [tri-Tetryon charge geometries]
created when 3 negative Tetryons combine with each other,
to form a NEGATIVE 12 charge [-4, -4, -4]

But in the case of Leptons the STRONG force between the charged fascia is REPULSIVE resulting in a distinctly different particle geometry and differing physical properties to that of Quarks
--
positrons [Positive Leptons] ... are also 12pi [tri-Tetryon charge geometries]
created when 3 positive Tetryons combine with each other,
to form a POSITIVE 12 charge [+4, +4, +4]

But in the case of Leptons the STRONG force between the charged fascia is REPULSIVE resulting in a distinctly different particle geometry and differing physical properties to that of Quarks
--
neutrinos [Neutral Leptons] .......... are unique 12pi [tri-Tetryon geometries]
created when 3 neutral Tetryons [gluons] combine with each other,
to form a completely NEUTRAL 12 charge particle  [0, 0, 0]

Again, the STRONG force between the charged fascia is REPULSIVE resulting in a Leptron'ic particle geometry but with differing physical properties to that of charged Leptons.

Important to note: electrons, neutrinos and positrons are all identical in physical size [geometry] differing only in their nett Charges and masses [Energy content per charged fascia]
--
The masses [Energy content] of all Quarks and Leptons follow the 'square' energy levels of quantum mechanics due to the foundational geometry of their equilateral, charged EM fields.
--
Of note is the fact that Charged particles such as electrons [-12] and positrons [+12] have the same geometry as electrostatic fields.....

ie they posses electric fields with neutralised M-dipoles

This point is key in explaining the physics of electrodynamics in terms that historically been explained through Einstein's Special Relativity...

The magnetic moments of charged particles in motion is the result of a secondary KEM field that is created from the engines of motion NOT the relativistic distortion of charged Matter
--
The magnetic moments of particles in motion is the result of the Energy-momenta [equilateral] geometry of the associated KEM field that is produced by ANY inductive geometry moving through external EM fields [vacuum energies].............

KEM [kinetic Electro Magnetic] fields are equilateral geometries
Electro-static fields are diamond shaped EM field geometries
(due to their opposed energy momenta).............

KEM fields arecomprised of 1/2 E-field energy & 1/2 Magnetic moment
--
The strength of the KE & Magnetic moments of particles in motion is directly proportional to the SQUARE of the particle's velocity......

KEM   =   { 1/2 mv^2 [KE] + 1/2 mv^2 [Mag. dipole]  }     =     mv^2

Kinetic Energy & Magnetic moments are the result of a singular KEM field geometry
--
The KEM fields of all particles in motion can be modeled with equilateral KEM field geometries
--
The geometry and physics of Kinetic ElectroMagnetic [KEM] fields
--
Tetryonic geometry reveals Matter [standing-wave energy] to be VELOCITY INVARIANT (as opposed to SR where mass-Matter are poorly defined)

The Lorentz velocity corrections do NOT apply to Matter only to KEM field energies - a major departure point from the foundational assumptions of SR.
--
Einstein's error of Perception in the physics of Electrodynamics.........

Both theories of Relativity fail to define and distinguish between mass & Matter (choosing instead to lump both terms together into the Stress energy tensor and apply Lorentz velocity corrections equally to both).....

Tetryonic geometry clearly defines EM mass as planar ME fields and
Matter as 3D standing wave energy geometries thus distinguishing both physically from each other.....................

geometrically proving Relativity theory to be in error on a foundational basis
--
The definition of, and distinguishing between, mass & Matter in physics
is one of the greatest failings of modern science................

Along with a physical definition of CHARGE geometries, it has lead to over a century of confusion in all the fields of science and its published literature.....

Tetryonic geometry provides a clear foundation for the physics of mass & Matter and their relationship to Energy on all scales of physics

mass is a 2D radiant form of EM energy
Matter is a 3D EM standing wave geometry [possessing volume]

2D mass is a property of 3D Matter - Matter is NOT a property of mass

--
Rest Matter is 3D EM energy with no KEM field
[it is in an inertial frame of rest with respect to the observer].........

Total relativistic energy is comprised of rest Matter + KEM field energy.
total quantum Energies     =       Tpi E       +  1/2 KE + 1/2 Mag

The mass of any particle's Matter is velocity invariant
- only the KEM field's energy changes in response to acceleration
- relativistic length contraction must be re-termed WAVE-length contraction

--
The relativistic Lorentz velocity correction factor [B] applies to KEM fields
NOT to the mass-Energy content of Matter

Relativistic length contraction is really KEM field WAVE-length contraction
(a direct result of the change in KEM energy energies due to velocity)

--

Modern quantum physics described the force holding atoms together as the STRONG FORCE - Tetryonics defines it as EM coupling of charged fascia.

Just as the Law of Interaction created Quarks and Leptons from Tetryons, the quarks themselves go on to interact via the charged fascia (via the Strong force) to create additional families of even larger particles as
energy seeks charge equilibrium           [the 2nd Law of Tetryonics]
--
MESONS are the first family of particles to quickly form from Quark pairings.
(with neutral Pions being the only stable form possible)
--
Unstable Pions quickly decay back into more stable electrons and positrons or combine with additional quarks to form stable 36pi BARYONS
[Protons, Neutrons, anti-Neutrons  and anti-Protons]

--

PROTONS [Positive Baryons] ...
are 36pi [tri-quark charge geometries]

created when UP & DOWN quarks combine with each other,
to form a nett POSITIVE 12 charge [+8, -4, +8]
which is equal but opposite that of the electron [-12 lepton]

NOTE: Protons form from symmetric U-D-U quark combinations
NOT UUD which is impossible due to similar charges repelling each other

--
NEUTRONS [Neutral Baryons] ...
are 36pi [tri-quark charge geometries]

created when DOWN & UP quarks combine with each other,
to form a nett NEUTRAL charge [-4, +8, -4]

NOTE: Neutrons form from symmetric D-U-D quark combinations
NOT DDU which is impossible due to similar charges repelling each other
--
anti-NEUTRONS [Neutral Baryons] ...
are 36pi [tri-quark charge geometries]

created when anti-Down & anti-UP quarks combine with each other,
to form a nett NEUTRAL charge [+4, -8, +4]

NOTE: anti-Neutrons form from symmetric anti [D-U-D] quark combinations
NOT anti[DDU] which is impossible due to similar charges repelling the other

---
anti-PROTONS [Negative Baryons] ...
are 36pi [tri-quark charge geometries]

created when anti-UP & anti-DOWN quarks combine with each other,
to form a nett NEGATIVE charge [-8, +4, -8]

NOTE: anti-Protons form from symmetric anti[U-D-U] quark combinations
NOT anti[UUD] which is impossible due to similar charges repelling
--
BARYONS are SYMMETRIC 36pi charged EM geometries
with nett Tetryonic charges of [-12,0 & +12]

equivalent to the elemental charges of [-1, 0 & +1]
--

Just like Quarks and Leptons, the mass of 3D Baryon'ic Matter is
determined by the 2D planar Energy content of their charged fascia

THE ENERGY LEVELS OF BARYON'IC MATTER DETERMINES THE
ANGULAR MOMENTUM OF ELECTRONS BOUND TO THEM
(Deuterium acts as a quantum synchronous EM energy convertor)

Tetryonic theory applies a spectral colour-code to these energy levels

--
The infamous PARTICLE ZOO is the direct result of different energy levels of
Baryon'ic Matter that is produced in high energy collision experiments.

(resulting in 3 families of Matter particles, with varying charges & masses)

--
Baryon'ic particles
[Proton - Sigma-]

---
Baryon'ic particles
[Charmed - Bottom Sigma]

--
Baryon'ic particles
[Xi - Charmed Xi Prime]

--
Baryon'ic particles
[Charmed Baryons]
--
Baryon'ic particles
[Charmed Omega - Charmed Double Bottom Omega]

Tetryonic geometry - rationalising the particle Zoo for science

--
The charged Tetryonic geometries of Matter
revealing the hidden world of quantum mechanics through geometry

[ZPFs, Tetryons, Quarks, Leptons, Meson & Baryons]

Tetryonics has many layers of detail not obvious to the first time viewer of the theory, and a quick glance through will not be sufficient with this topic. I know that this thread has many reading that are not participating and for the purpose of serving these readers, I'm happy to highlight a few more of the layers that we can unwrap with the purely geometric approach.

The mathematical exploration of quantum mechanics is hopelessly lost with a rigid definable geometry to guide it. It leads to all sorts of outcomes such as multi-dimensions, black holes, no distinction between mass & Matter etc...

A lot of time was taken up correcting small [but important] 'errors' arising from geometry-less maths. [Maths may the language - but geometry is the Canvas surface on which it is written].

Equilateral Geometry is the foundation of Relativistic Math.
In Tetryonic theory, the circles around Planck triangles are the region of space mapped out by light per unit of time [ie in 1 sec light radiates in 2 directions at c to form a circle with a radius of c, a circumference of pi [2c] and an area of pi[c^2].

You'll find lots of units like c^2, c^3 and c^4 within the maths of physics - only Tetryonic theory reveals what these terms really are [spatial coordinate systems based on the speed of light]

These c^2 [Euclidean], c^3 [Cartesian] and c^4 spherical coordinate systems based on the speed of light are used to geometrically differentiate planar ENERGIES from 2d mass and from 3D Matter in physics, clearing up much of the confusion of the existing mathematics.

ENERGY quanta are a Planck triangle without a circular spatial coordinate surrounding it.

2d MASS is Energy per light second [E/c^2], a triangle with a circle.

3D MATTER is shown as a tetrahedral form of Energy per light second squared [E/c^4].

Just one of the major scientific breakthroughs revealed via Tetryonics is that all Baryon topologies have identical quantum mass-energies [but differing nett elementary charges] thus correcting almost a century of atomic and chemical theory and providing the means to unify Bohr shell/orbitals with Schrodinger quantum numbers to produce the first accurate model of all 120 periodic elements. Tetryonics shows the exquisite detail of the charged Matter topology of all 120 elements showing their energy levels [shells], and position of all electrons [and their spin]  - showing how classical Bohr information and Schrodinger numbers 'line' up.

Tetryonic Chemistry offers a new periodic table overthrowing Dmitri Mendeleev's version. Quantum Chemistry offers a detailed schematic for the elements with all their quantum information shown and related to the quantum Matter topologies of the elements, quantum energies, and shells. For the first time ever, this new periodic table actually reflects quantum reality.

We are ushering in an Alchemical Renaissance and although there's really no way to know how or when that will manifest in the world around us in the years to come, the information we are are bringing to light absolutely flies in the face of conventional wisdom and a peer review process is simply a cat and mouse game between the good ol' boys who have their own theoretic models to uphold and defend.

Who among you would be so willing to admit that your life's work could turn to dust overnight and who among you would be open minded to a new theoretical approach to knowledge should the information show up on your desk tomorrow morning?

I venture to say not many. A few thousand emails to mainstream academia sends them straight into the cognitive dissonance that Skullsoup mentioned above. I've spent 30 months looking at this day in and day out, asking others to take a closer look and seeking to find an 'authoritative' figure in the field to comment. Crickets in return, and no substantial evidence has been brought to my attention in this time that would have me turn away from the Tetryonics explanation of things.

Mostly crickets in return, save a handful of faithful servants of the truth.

Those keen to study Tetryonics are those that have fallen prey to the system of education and erroneous models, but with only a small handful of independent researchers, I am confident that we can accelerate past the rest at light speed.

We can show where the text books are currently wrong, we can correct the underlying errors, assumptions, and mis-interpretations of the current quantum theories in the space, all while reducing the complexity of mathematics down to the simplicity of geometry.

It that doesn't sound like progress, then let's be honest with ourselves, and suggest that perhaps you are not even looking or seeking for the truth to begin with. I've been at this study of physics for about 30 years, and have piled up a large debt attempting to jump through the hoops of university academia, and I've found a free eduction in Tetryonics, that from any angle is an improvement on the current formulations and explanations of physics.

I'm not here to spoil your fun thinking about multiple dimensions, time travel, worm holes, and entangled particles across vast galactic distances, or ruin the mystery, but there is a certain component of this Theory that does in fact remove the mysterious, and helps those with ears to hear, to plant their wisdom in a foundational understanding that is self referential, consistent and harmoniously unifies the science of our past, providing fertile ground to stand and move our civilization towards uncharted waters.

The two benefits of our technology will be the controlled release of mass-energy from Matter, and the safe long term storage of energy as mass in inductive topologies.

We have made great strides in advancing our understanding of the electrical sciences over the past century since these words were written, we have delved deep into the very structure of Matter itself only to find that at the core of our understanding lie roadblocks that stymie our progress in the quest for sustainable sources of energy that mirror the simplistic process found in nature. At the heart of our current problems in understanding the physics of Nature is our ability to define and differential between mass & Matter, even Energy itself on a geometric basis.

Until we are able to do so our attempts to mathematical model the process at work on all scales of physics will remain hopelessly abstract and filled with assumptive errors of math born from a top-down approach attempting to understand the physics of immaterial fields and material particles.

A new bottom-up approach has been devised wherein the charged geometry of Planck energy momenta itself resolves the current mathematical impasses into elegant geometric solutions reflective of the true quantum nature and mechanics of energy on all scales of physics.

With these charged 2d planar geometries and 3D topologies we can at last ‘see’ the immaterial quantum world of mass-energies and model in exquisite detail all the field interactions that take place unseen to us and that give rise to nuclear Forces and fields of physical interaction.

The quantised angular momenta [QAM] of Planck’s constant is revealed to be nothing more than a reflection of the planar equilateral geometry inherent to energy momenta at the quantum level, a property that gives rise to new definitions of 2d mass-energy geometries and 3D Matter Topologies; allowing for visual and tactile manipulation of Energy and particles to be conducted for the first time in history.

We can model the formation of particles of Matter from fields of energy momenta and see how charged topologies interact with each other via interactive fields of Force, in turn leading us to new insights into the true nature of physics and a rapidly advancing understanding of the true mechanics of the Universe hinted to us by Tesla and dreamt of by so many ever since.

With an advanced understanding of quantum fields and particle dynamics comes new insights into the charged topology of elements themselves and finally a completely new picture of the forces and processes at work in Stars.

The ‘fusion’ of elements in stars is shown to be no longer the process by which stars liberate energy at their cores. Just as Mendeleev’s periodic table of elements can now be replaced by a far more accurate table modeled on the quantum charge topology of each and every element with its associated quantum numbers and electron configurations, the process by which stars convert Matter into radiant mass-energies can be finally revealed through Tetryonic theory leading us to grasp the physical mechanics at work in the stars and put this knowledge to work for us here on Earth.

QAM = Quantised Angular Momenta [m^2/s]
QAM, which is often mistakenly described as spin, flux, curl in physics and electrical engineering, when it is in fact the equilateral geometry of energy itself, ie Planck's constant [h] = kg.m^2/s  = mass.QAM = mass.OMEGA

It is the hitherto 'hidden' foundation geometry that creates everything in our Universe - mass-ENERGY-Matter and the Forces of motion and interaction on all scales.

My hope, as an independent researcher, is to bring together facets of a changing world so that we may pass through the doorways of discovery with the least amount of turbulence.

Growing pains can be awful, but once we are through that phase, a breath of fresh air and opportunity for real and lasting understanding can take hold across the planet.

A Paradigm is a set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality for the community that shares them. Not everyone shares them where mainstream physics is concerned.

I would agree that a paradigm shift of unlikely proportions is upon us, and I whole heartedly disagree that "the ground moves slowly."

What I'm finding is that there are a group of people moving and advancing our understanding at such a rapid pace, it's unprecedented how quickly things are happening now.

Most of us don’t even know the transition has been made, or that the corner has been turned. I believe that it has.

It is up to us as individuals in all our fields of endeavor to break free of the chains of education, and to use our intelligence to create a better understanding of our Universe.

Geometry rules our Universe not math.

While mathematics is the language of science it remains a language that lacks a well defined physical model on which to test it and further its many and varied solutions to quantum mechanics. it is this lack of any rigid, enforceable geometry [grammar] that has allowed the flourishing of numerous statistical and probabilistic solutions to the physical problems in turn impending our scientific advancement of quantum processes.

Tetryonics offers the world a gift, but so many 'experts' in the field won't even spend 3 minutes with the material before passing judgement, and we all wonder why process is so painstakingly slow.  It's heartbreaking in all actuality. Do we want answers, or not?

Humanity has shifted, and all I'm doing is trying to share knowledge. Tetryonics has nothing to sell, only wisdom to share. The lips of wisdom are now closed, except to the ears of Understanding.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

As a researcher of the theory, I've not found one person anywhere that is up to the challenge of debunking it, or capable of showing me where the ideas themselves need revision. I'm patiently awaiting someone's attempt to debunk the information with information of their own.

That's was the purpose of the thread after all, and was hoping to enjoy the exercise. I've provided enough definitive statements and ample material from the theory itself, providing anyone a chance to spot the foundational flaw, should one actually exist.

My goal is to stick with the source materials as best I can, but keep in mind I am not the originator...

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-So with that in mind-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

A Contract Between You and Me: The Philosopher’s Agreement

I assume that you are a thinking person. If you are a thinking person, you are a philosopher, and I ask you to join me in what I call the “Philosopher’s Agreement” as you read on.

The Philosopher’s Agreement is a traditional agreement philosophers have observed to place the focus on ideas and not their originators. The term ad hominem refers to an attack made on a philosopher instead of the ideas of the philosopher, and ad hominem attacks of course violate the Philosopher’s Agreement.

The Philosopher’s Agreement goes much further than merely prohibiting ad hominem attacks — it supports the philosopher’s search for ever greater understanding. According to this agreement, you have two options when you detect a flaw in my presentation:

1. If you cannot see how to correct the flaw, it is your privilege to describe the flaw and your obligation to share any thoughts you have about how to correct the flaw.

2. If you can see how to correct the flaw, it is your obligation to describe both the flaw and your solution for correcting the flaw.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

One of the major elements in our current situation is the fact that, as science is now set up, evaluation of new ideas is left almost entirely to the individual scientists.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Concerning Heisenburg's Uncertanty principle, a little background is necessary. The math is actually somewhat irrelevant because there is always more information about the system under measurement by simply viewing the images themselves. The images convey something that the equations themselves fail to communicate. The math is there for those that need it, but it would take page upon page of equations to relate what a single page of T-theory presents.

Here's the 5th book in the series to date. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0xb7kQORMdDeUNmU3BuNVRqeHc

Start with that, or start with Quantum Mechanics...The foundations are important, otherwise you won't grasp Electrodynamics, Gravity, Chemistry, or Cosmology.

Quantum Mechanics: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0xb7kQORMdDcE1ZemgxV2oxNlk/

T-theory provides a bottom-up geometric approach to QFT where all fields and particles can be accurately modeled.

It eliminates infinities, Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle and provides a deterministic model of all Energy forms in any chosen temporal time-frame [c^n].

This then allows for the very accurate modelling of the quantization of scalar fields and macro-scale mechanics.

In short, Tetryonics is a geo-mechanical model of energy interactions from the quantum scale up to the Cosmological. In turn eliminating such problems through its rigid geometric models and deterministic mechanics.

At the heart of Tetryonics is the foundational postulate that all 2d Planck quanta of mass-energy momenta are equilateral quanta and that 3D Matter is tetrahedral in nature [not spherical as has been historically assumed].

The data fits, but the geometric explanation of the physics and mechanics underpinning is changed - and then goes on to explain so many other current 'paradoxes' in the fields of physics.

ie the source and role of charge, differentiation of mass and Matter, the incorrect postulates underpinning SR & GR and how to explain and unify Newtons G, Coulomb's k, SR & GR with quantum theory to produce a fully relativistic quantum theory of universal gravitation.... and an accurate quantum topology of all 120 periodic elements.

Modern science is stuck in a serious case of Confirmation bias.

Since the 1900 with the emergence of relativity theory [and its erroneous postulates about the Lorentz contractions of charged mass-Matter in motion], modern science and the math used to describe it has continued to accept ever-increasingly wilder speculations about the true nature of the observations of physical processes on many energy scales.

In short what the mathematics formulates to be true and what Humanity are interpreted as the causative agents of these processes and formulations is growing further from the underlying geometric truth of the matter day by day.

Field singularities, Quantum Uncertainty, Virtual particles, and Black holes are but some of the most glaring mistakes of modern science' current penchant or belief that maths is the 'language' of physics. Perhaps it may serve as a framework language to describe the underlying physical geometries at work - but it is Planck geometries themselves that serve as its 'grammar' and which reveal the true visual splendor of Nature at work on all energy scales...

"GOD does not play dice with our Universe"

Our Universe is an electrically engineered EM environment comprised of countless [yet finite] equilateral Planck quanta of energy momenta.

Not a universe filled with spherical entities that can't make up their mind what and where they are, indeterminately blinking in and out of existence depending on if you happen to be looking for them or not.

The statistical probability distributions that mathematicians lovingly attribute to indeterminacy and uncertainty in physics is nothing more than the gaussian distribution of bosons and photons in EM fields that make up all mass-ENERGY-Matter and fields of Force in our Universe.

Distributions and Uncertainty

A Bell Curve (Normal Distribution) is a mathematical reflection of the integral Planck mass-energy momenta quanta distributions found an all equilateral charge geometries.

Probabilities are the square of the amplitude.

All probabilities are re-normalized and sum to Unity.

"No physical theory of local hidden variables can reproduce all of the predictions of quantum mechanics." John Stewart Bell
WRONG!

"The more precisely the position is determined, the less precisely the momentum is known in this instant, and vice versa." - Werner Heisenberg
WRONG!

Chance is closely related to the ideas of uncertainty and indeterminacy.

Uncertainty today is best known from Werner Heisenberg's principle in quantum mechanics.

It states that the exact position and momentum of an atomic particle can only be known within certain limits.

The product of the position error and the momentum error is a multiple of Planck's constant of action. This irreducible randomness in physical processes established the existence of chance and indeterminism in physics.

http://screencast.com/t/Ysn69E08

What this shows is the Equilateral Tessellation of individual Planck Quanta forming larger EM field geometries. The normal distribution falls along the bottom and only when you understand the work of Max Planck and that of bosons ( or the charge carriers ), and couple that with the work of Einstein (the study of the energy content of photons), that you can see the bigger picture and unification we speak of.
Electron-Positron Uncertainty

Using Tetryonic charged geometries form mass-ENERGY-MAtter, an electron's position and velocity CAN be modeled simultaneously, but any attempt to measure or interact with it, will affect its component energy-momenta

Atomic orbitals are typically describes as "hydrogen-like", (meaning one electron) wave functions over any spatial region of measurement, categorized by n, l, and m quantum numbers, which corresponds to the electron's energy, angular momentum, and a vector momentum component, respectively.

Lepton's are physically spin 1 fermion particles that can easily me misconstrued as having entirely different spin numbers without the correct physical geometries to base the observed measurements on.

Tetryonics gets to the root of the issue and states that Quantum Mechanics is a statistical [mathematical] representation of equilateral charged geometries and EM energy interactions.

Determining the motion of electrons bound to atomic nuclei is akin to measuring the motion of variable speed electric fan blades mounted at various heights within a rotating carousel.

The energies of photo-electrons are determined by the Baryons they bind to and incident photons.
The unique 12 facet topology of Leptons results in the same geometry being presented ever 120 degree rotation of the particle. Meaning that nn identical fascia is presented every 120 degree rotation. Their spin number is a measurement of their magnetic moment.

Every charged radial arm of a Lepton's geometry is identical to every other( including Electric and Magnetic dipole orientations). The unique 12 faceted geometry of leptons results in an identical EM geometry being observed for every 120 degree rotation of the particle. Making accurate measurement and mathematical modeling of its rotational dynamics and mechanics incorrect without the correct physical geometries.

Leading to the interpretation that the Lepton disappears and re-appears when being 'observed' or measured.
Tetryonics resolves these issues with an accurate 3D model of Leptons and Quantum Levels thus providing a solid foundation for explaining Electro-Dynamics.

Wave-Particle Duality

First proposed by Christian Huygens in the 1600's it wasn't until the 1800's that Thomas Young Proved this wave-particle duality with the classic double-slit experiment.

In 1668, the Dutch physicist, Huygens, believed that light was made up of waves vibration up and down perpendicular to the direction the light travels, and therefore formulated a way of visualizing wave propagation.
This became know as the 'Huygen's Principle' and was the successful theory of light wave motion in three dimensions.

Sir Isaac Newton, held the theory based on his spectral observations that light was make up of tiny particles or 'corpuscles of colour'.

English physicist Thomas Young argued that Newton's theory of particle light was incorrect, and instead argues that light was a transverse wave.

In 1803, Thomas Young studied the interference of light waves by shinning light through a screen with two slits equally separated, and the light emerging from the slit, spread out and produced wave-like interference patterns.
In 1900 Max Planck proposed the existence of a light quantum, [n.hv], a finite packet of energy which depends on the frequency and spectral energy of the radiation.

In 1905 Einstein suggested that light is composed of tiny particles called photons, and that each photon has energy related to it's frequency [hf].

Mathematically relating the number of Planck quanta [n.hv] with Photon frequencies [hf] and the frequent interchange of one term for the other in physics is the source of considerable quantum confusion.
2.hv=hf

The quantum idea was soon seized upon to explain the photoelectric effect, and became a part of the Bohr theory of discrete atomic spectra, quickly becoming part of the foundation of modern quantum theory. In turn this lead to the quantum weirdness of wave-particle duality, Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle and Schrodinger's quantum wave equations and wavefunctions.

"Closer examination of the geometries highlights a long-standing error is the mathematical formulation of QM energy formulae, namely the mistaken interchanging of planks quanta [v] for Einstein’s frequency[f] in relation to energy. It, in fact, takes 2 charged Bosons [hv] to create a neutral Photon [hf] mathematically equating the two [as historically has been the case] is the same as saying 2=1."K.C.A.

The paragraph above likens the situation to that of quantum physicists NOT knowing the difference between a simply premise...that of odd vs even numbers. This is something that will rewrite the textbooks, and is just one stunning example of the resonant structures inherent within the Tetryonic material.

"Let no-one ignorant of Geometry enter." -- Plato

“Enlightenment is a destructive process. It has nothing to do with becoming better or being happier. Enlightenment is the crumbling away of untruth. It's seeing through the facade of pretense. It's the complete eradication of everything we imagined to be true.”― Adyashanti

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

THE most important step in seeking an enlightened understanding of how to unify science is to recognise that the quantised angular momenta of Planck's constant [h = mass.OMEGA] is in fact a measure of an equilateral EM geometry at the quantum level..... not a spin, or flux, or curl as assumed currently.

[something that NO modern scientific theory has done to date]

From this foundational postulate a unified geometric theory of Everything can arise, in turn correcting the erroneous assumptions of current theory.

The postulate of equilateral quantised angular momenta [OMEGA = m^2/s] has far reaching implications for modern theory in that as shown in my work it allows for the modelling of quantum, classical and cosmological systems alike using the geometry of energy itself as the building block.

Ie it affords for the first time a bottom up approach to modelling physical system at any energy scale which then provides us with an accurate, non-deterministic model of the physics of all particles and their fields of interaction.

Truly some aspects of current theory remain, like interactions with the same said particles with electrons or photons affecting their energy states but it clearly shows that indeterminacy and the probabilistic nature of wave~particle mechanics have been taken too far.

These are simply differing aspects of material particles and their [equilateral ] fields of mass-energy momenta and all the inherently 'spooky' properties of quantum theory are easily accounted for and explained with simple Tetryonic field geometries and Matter topologies.

In turn many of the current assumptions that you mention and rely on for you current understanding of the mechanics of Nature  [ie indeterminacy, uncertainty &  quantum fuzziness etc] simply vanish from models of particle and fields and their physics at any scale.

As to what practical applications and advances may be afforded from a better model of quantum processes apart from the unification of physics, chemistry, biology and cosmology [itself a long held lofty goal of science], my work is peppered with examples of possible improvements for all that I am currently working on at present.... clean, limitless energy, FTL communications, even better and more accurate SW models of particles and fields and a early school educational 'toolkit' that will educate the young as the errors of 'squared' energy levels and 'square root' linear momentum and provide them with a inherently better model of all particles and fields of mass-energy momenta from which they can learn and better understand our universe on all scales.

[all of which are explained and noted in much better detail my published eBooks]

I would suggest that this is the goal of all scientific theories since The Greeks , Leonardo and Descarte first put forth their ideas and Tetryonics is simply the next step on our Human journey of discovery. Much more awaits us I am sure.

I am sure history will judge if Tetryonics is superior to current theory - it certainly resolves many of its current impasses, paradoxes and segregation problems through the use of a single triangle of energy, and given that it offers a way forward unlike any other offered by current physical theories at present.


 

Response to an analysis of Tetryonic Chemistry by Robert J Brotherus [July 2015]

In reply to a paper outlining Mr Robert Brotherus’ examination and mis-understanding of

Tetryonic theory and in particular how it applies to the modern understanding of Chemistry

as it currently taught.....

Point by point I’ll firstly address the particular points of concern raised wrt modern chemical theory

and physics in general:

Tetryonics paper on quantum chemistry is very scarce on making any predictions about

atomic properties or comparing such predictions to experimental results.

Tetryonic theory provides many predictions regarding the physical 2d planar geometries of

bosons [radiant mass-energies] and the 3D material Topologies of Fermions [Matter and

their associated physical properties]. Inclusive in these are many predictions and repeated

statements and illustrations of specific particle shapes and the values of mass-energy

momenta attributed to each... as well as how these values stem from the equilateral

tessellation of Planck energy momenta and why they differ from the established values of

modern scientific theory....

In many cases there are similarities to be found with existing observations but where

Tetryonic theory differs from modern theory it is not by choice but rather dictated by the

equilateral mass-energies within charged Matter topologies themselves and all too often led

to much effort in order to reconcile the differences, leading to further insights and extensions

of the theory over time.... Where differences exist it is deliberate not by error.

Tetryonics is a BOTTOM-UP physical theory that unifies many currently disparate theories of

science into a coherent unified model of the same – but not without its own set of mental

challenges to those who are first becoming acquainted with it. As such it must be recognised

that Tetryonic theory should not be studied without a sound understanding of the foundation

upon with it is built.... Many have approached analysis of my work in such a way only to find

that their analysis was limited by modern science’s lack of precise detail of the foundations

of the physics that they attempt to explain [to wit modern theory is a top-down explanation of

the science build up over many generations with an equal number of varying interpretations

and assumptions]

Tetryonics plays down importance of “mathematics” and instead emphasizes “geometry”.

Arguably I place a lot of emphasis on geometry over that of mathematics in Tetryonic theory,

but only so as it offers insights into physical theory that maths alone has not been able to

provide since its wholesale incorporation into the science in the 1600’s. This is not to

downplay the importance and productiveness that maths has provided us a scientific tool,

but rather to ‘illustrate’ and draw attention to the advances that a purely geometric model has

to offer us in advancing our understanding of the same.... To wit, Tetryonic geometries are

based on the postulate that all physical theory is founded on equilateral Planck quanta of

energy momenta and as such these physical entities afford no room for speculative ideas or

mathematical manipulations beyond what is physically possible to be constructed.

To help elucidate my work and thoughts on the differentiation of 2d planar mass-energy

geometries from 3D Material topologies I recorded a detailed YouTube video titled

“Tetryonics 101” where I show HOW to use the existing Tetryonic templates [of Planck

mass-energy momenta] to construct all the fields [boson & photons] of the Standard model

along with the 3D Mater topologies of all the known fermions [and them some]... I do hope

you’ll take the time to review this detailed instruction on the creation of quantum fields and

Matter and try to replicate them same yourself – it is THE most informative thing students of

Tetryonics and science in general can do when trying to increase their understanding of the

hitherto unseen constituents that make up quantum theory and our macro-scale Universe

and the laws of Nature we observe....

Tetryonics paper on physical chemistry is scarce on such numerical predictions and where it

does make such predictions they are often in contradiction to observed experimental facts.

In addition to the maths found within Tetryonic illustrations there are also many

spreadsheets developed from those very same equations over time to provide the numerical

detail found in the illustrations – particular wrt periodic elements and theory rest atomic

masses and kinetic elements etc. – It is by no means exhaustive on every topic imaginable

but they do address the information provided on particles & elements etc. along with their

kinetic and relativistic energies of motion.

Tetryonic Problem: Missing hydrogen element

Hydrogen is not missing from Tetryonic theory – in fact it is extensively detailed and

modelled in Tetryonics [1] – Quantum Mechanics eBook [again highlight the need not to

jump into one’s preferred field of expertise and study but rather learn Tetryonic theory as you

would any modern physical theory in order of presentation]

Hydrogen is designated as element 00 in Tetryonic theory as it is NOT the building block of

periodic elements as is currently understood but rather a sub-unit of Deuterium the real

building block of all elements.... This is not an arbitrary decision but one forced on anybody

who attempts to build physical models of all elements in order to match and explain many of

the current established aspects of chemical and quantum theory wrt the quantum

electrodynamics of elements themselves wrt molar mass, the Aufbau principle, Schrodinger

and Bohr numbers for each element and how Deuterium nuclei [or any other] may bind

together in order to form all the elements of the periodic table and their respective spectral

emissions lines.

Attempting to build heavy elements utilising Z number Hydrogen nuclei as a foundation with

the excess molar masses being accounted for by way of ‘extra or excess’ Neutrons [as is the

established model of modern chemistry] runs into a number of problems immediately –

namely:

The lack of residual strong Force binding points on nuclei to facilitate the binding of Neutrons

to the nuclei in order to form the elements [particularly elements 60+]

The incorrectness of ‘reserve beta decay’ to explain and model Neutron particle formation

and the mechanics of electron binding to periodic elements in accordance with Schrodinger’s

wave equation and Bohr’s atomic model of the same in order to produce observed spectral

line emissions of each element in the PT.

There is no uncertainty or indeterminacy in Tetryonic theory as there is in modern theory to

explain away such inconsistencies between various aspects of physical theory – each

attribute MUST be modelled and explained from first principles & invariably leads to new

insights into quantum chemical theory that are at odds with established lines of thought.

To wit I stand by the claims and statements made in my eBooks :

Each elemental nuclei is made from Deuterium" (p. 12)

“120 elements in 8 quantum levels and hydrogen as a free radical.” (p. 26)

“Deuterium (not hydrogen) is the building block of all elements." (p. 21)

“Hydrogen is NOT a periodic element” (p. 83)

As it is the ONLY way to model and explain how all the periodic elements are created from

equilateral Planck energy momenta that is in accord with the known observables... they are

not in agreement with some aspects of established theory BUT they do closely mirror the

observables and once KEM fields of thermal heat, kinetic motion etc. are taken into account

provide a very accurate quantum model of chemical processes at the quantum scale.

Tetryonics does not throw all these facts out of the window just because hydrogen does not

fit neatly into my [or other] pre-conceived set of boxes and triangles and hexagons, they are

calculated from the Material models and immaterial fields associated with each element that

MUST grow from first principles... not from assumptions elaborated upon over time.

In fact the Aufbau table is shown in Tetryonic theory to be a table that has been ‘right

justified’ to match the nomenclature of mathematics rather than the geometric topology of

reality [which is centred about the principle quantum numbers and shells of Schrodinger and

Bohr respectively]... it is only our skewed perspective of maths that prevents most from

seeing the real symmetry present in atomic nuclei as detailed in the quantum numbers of

Schrodinger’s wave equation for the same ... ie there are no g,h,I,j, shells as supposed and

all the quantum numbers of Schrodinger’s wave equations match the symmetric topology of

elements as geometric portrayed in Tetryonics [and are in agreeance with Bohr’s shells and

orbitals as well, thus unifying all 3 theories]

The material topologies of Tetryonic theory then also lead to the necessity to correct

‘weighted’ values for all known particles and elements [and then some] in light of the

quantum mechanics of the same – ie their identical 3D charge topologies and the mechanics

of the quantum rotating synchronous convertors [Deuterium nuclei] that they form in

deference to the accepted theory of mini-solar systems and Neutrons that are heavier than

their identical charged counterparts [Protons and anti-Protons]

Point in case being Tetryonic Problem: Incorrect Proton and Neutron masses

As detailed in illustration 49.04 & 49.05 respectively in my eBook... Tetryonics demands an

exact mass for Planck quanta and the molar masses [at absolute zero] for each and every

particle in our Universe for modelling and any additional energy momenta [by way of

thermal, spectral, kinetic or observational energies etc.] are accounted for in the KEM fields

of each respective element or particle.

There is NO room for a ‘weighted’ atomic mass as utilised in modern chemistry which

conveniently ignores the mass and motional energies of the electrons in the elements or

which ignores the KEM field energies noted above for ‘most’ situations and calculations –

Tetryonic theory MUST account for all of these energies even if it does so at the risk of

disagreeing with modern theory at times...

The Proton and Neutron MUST have identical atomic masses as they are identical – both

are 36Baryon Matter topologies differing only in the net charges of +12 [24-12] vs 0 [18-

18] they possess as a result of their constituent quarks [UDU vs DUD] as extensively

detailed in my QM eBook... Neutrons are NOT created through the process of ‘reverse’

beta-decay as is supposed presently supposed in modern theory and accordingly do NOT

have a slightly higher mass than Protons which in turn affects the molar mass calculations

for all periodic elements and isotopes as outlined in my Chemistry eBook as well at length.

Ie Carbon 13, 14 and upwards are not the result of ‘extra’ Neutrons being bound to the

Carbon nuclei – such a nuclei if possible would be stable and not decay as observed – but

rather they are simply the result of the inherent ‘squared’ equilateral mass-energies of each

Baryon in the nuclei being increased from n1 to n2 to n3 .... Resulting in a net mass

increase that ‘appears’ to be the result of a number of ‘extra’ Neutrons in the nuclei [again

this is detailed in my Chemistry eBook and spreadsheets of the calculations be easily

created from the formulae found in chapter 53 on my Chemistry eBook....

This ‘significant discrepancy’ with Tetryonics prediction of Proton and Neutron masses from

observed ones alone will be enough to prove Tetryonic theory a worthy successor to modern

quantum chemistry theory – unless you can explain all of the above using ‘excess’ Neutrons.

I am neither ignorant of the basic masses of basic particles nor do I think that Tetryonic

theory and observed facts of nature disagree, but rather the established theoretical ‘facts’ of

modern chemical theory must be in error

I agree that in reality Matter has 3D structure (including volume) hence the terminology of

Matter topologies throughout my work. To portray my planar illustration of elements and

particles in my PDF eBooks as not reflecting their true material topologies is grossly

inaccurate and reflects that fact that YOU have NOT read all my work including Tetryonics

101, the Google sketch warehouse of 3D CAD models of each and every particle [kindly

developed by Rene Cormier over many months of effort] and extensive list of all elements

and their charged 3D topologies and electronic wave function properties and numbers which

are freely available to all – only planar 2 d mass-energy geometries [bosons and photons]

are portrayed as being like thin 2D sheets in Tetryonic theory, something I am sure you will

become more familiar with as your understanding of T-theory advances,[and your distain for

its predictions and values not in accord with modern theory wains over time].

Regarding the ‘separation ‘ of electrons from the atomic nucleus – this is an antiquated

model of quantum electrodynamics that is fashioned on planets and their satellites [ie the

mini-solar system Bohr model] and which has been extended to a fuzzy electron orbital

model to incorporate the Schrodinger quantum model and the ‘inherent’ quantum

uncertainly/indeterminacy of statistical probabilities intrinsic to quantum theory as the

theories developed over time.... Tetryonics makes it quite clear in T[1] – QM that the atomic

nucleus is in fact a quantum synchronous convertor [ala Tesla/Westinghouse] that can store

and release mass-energies in a controlled and predictable manner [ala isotopic decay and

spectral line emissions] and that quantum mechanics is NOT quantum inherently uncertain

nor in determinant as it is often portrayed – in fact quantum theory as explained by Tetryonic

theory is very much deterministic in every way – it was only our top-down view of the

mechanics that led modern science to this erroneous conclusion, which I have attempted to

correct through Tetryonic theory.

The electron does not orbit the atomic nucleus of any element but rather is bound via its

magnetic dipole moment to the positively charged nucleus and spins akin to the rotating

rotor of quantum convertor partially within the 3D Matter topology of Deuterium nuclei....

Again these models have all been built and operate according to established electrodynamic

theory and their operation is well understood in the macro sense [but obviously the

acceptance of such a model strains the thoughts of most who have grown up a mental

picture of fuzzy electrons orbiting a spherical nuclei]

Again the electronic structure of each and every one of the 120 possible periodic elements is

well detailed wrt Bohr shells & orbitals and unified wrt their respective Schrodinger numbers

for the same in my Chemistry eBook for all to view.... Unlike modern texts which normally

stop at element 20 and claim that it is just too difficult to show the quantum models of larger

elements with their evermore complex electron configurations and Schrodinger numbers

The s.p.d & f orbitals of electrons ‘around’ any elementary nuclei is the result of the atomic

nuclei rotating about is centre of mass/gravity [classical angular momentum] and the

electrons tracing out easily determined and well defined concentric orbits about the same

centre [as illustrated] .... A close examination of the Schrodinger numbers [or in fact Bohr

orbits] of heavier/larger Z number atomic nuclei reveals the there are no g,h I orbits etc as

often postulated but in fact there is a reversal of electron orbital distance as the element

number and principal energy levels increases..... Resulting in the periodic symmetry

depicted in Tetryonic theory of an atomic nucleus resembling a child’s spinning top, which

could be mistaken for a spherical topology from our macro view of the quantum scale.

With each element’s Z number reflecting the number of Deuterium atoms in each nuclei, not

the number of Hydrogen atoms with an ever increasing number of Neutrons to account for

observed molar masses

The electrons associated with each atomic element’s structure in fact have an important and

direct bearing on the spectral emissions of each particular element. Even though their mass-
energies of their electronic topologies are only 0.000533’ % of the mass-energies of each

Baryon in any atomic nuclei this mass-Matter differential along with the energy momenta of

the electron’s KEM field is key to facilitating the absorption and release of spectral line

emissions particular to each and every element known... again, it is not simple good enough

to conveniently ignore electrons ad hoc in scientific theory to suit a particular point or theory

just because they are or ‘insignificant’ mass compared to the whole nucleus. Any successful

model of science and physics in general must be able to account for ALL the known aspects

of modern observations not just a select few that suit their purposes in order to unify physics

on all energy scales. Ie a new model of the quantum structure, topology and mechanics of

atomic nuclei must account for charge, atomic and chemical interactions, spectral line series

and all known elements and compound creation in the ONE physical model.

Clarifying question about Tetryonics nuclear vs. atomic size wrt the Zenon atom

I humbly submit that illustrations 51.49

And 53.49 respectively along with the 3D CAD illustrations of the same

Should be sufficient to explain and illustrate all properties of the Zenon atom [or any other

you chose] including their rest mass-Matter energies [at absolute zero], their charged Matter

topology in accord with Bohr shells/orbitals and Schrodinger numbers and the kinetic mass-
energies of their bound electrons.

Clarifying question 2 about Tetryonics nuclear vs. atomic size

According to Tetryonics the proton and neutron in Deuterium nuclei touch one another at the

point son their respective charge topologies where the e-field components of their

constituent quarks are located - this is indicated on all Tetryonic element illustrations via red

[for positive] focus points and black [for negative] focus points.

But since Tetryonics does not include any separate strong nuclear force but just

electromagnetics, all particles of Tetryonic nucleus would fly apart in a nanosecond.

Again, this misunderstanding and erroneous statement about Tetryonic theory seems to

stem from you having failed to read Tetryonics [1] – Quantum Mechanics, viewed my

Tetryonics 101 instruction video or even attempted to build and understand how atomic

nuclei are formed and come together to form larger elements and compounds alike prior to

commenting ....

In my first eBook I have gone to great lengths to show that the STRONG force does indeed

exist and in fact plays a crucial role in bringing tetryons [the tetrahedral quantum of Matter

topologies themselves] together to form leptons, quarks, mesons & Baryons – it is the

parallel opposite charge interaction present between the planar charge faces of each tetryon

within each and every Baryon [not to be mistaken for the residual strong force]

Obviously this co-planar opposite charge interaction holds all atomic nuclei together and

your claim of Tetryonic particles flying away in a nanosecond just doesn’t hold water...

In fact just place two sheets of glass together with a thin film of water between them and see

how easy it is to pull those sheets apart by applying a force orthogonal to the co-planar

sheets of glass and you’ll soon understand the STRONG force much better that you do

presently.

This charge interaction between the e-fields of quarks in Baryons serves to not only bring

positive charge Protons together with neutral Neutrons [something modern theory cannot

explain] but also serve to orientate each baryon to the other so as to facilitate electron

bonding and the creation of ever larger atomic elements and compounds [the residual strong

or EM force as it is often termed or the London force]

Yes I have an ‘obsession’ with all atomic nuclei have equal numbers of Protons, electron

AND Neutrons in accord with their Z number, just as you have an obsession with them being

Hydrogen atoms with excess Neutrons ‘bound’ to them – but for the reasons highlighted

above, and many others – as for the quantum structure of Protium (regular hydrogen),

Deuterium and Tritium being ‘missing’ - again my T[1] - QM eBook holds the answers

With additional space being made to highlight the Tetryonic genesis of Tritium & Helium 3

All isotopes are simply Z number nuclei with the energy levels of their Baryons raised to the

next quantum energy level [n1-n8] in accord with the 3D material symmetry of the atomic

nuclei themselves and the Bohr shells/Schrodinger principal quantum numbers, which can

occur either through natural energy absorption or the artificial increase of their mass-energy

content in the lab....

Obviously with all Deuterium nuclei being quantum synchronous convectors as the energy

levels of their Baryons are increased [or decreased] the electrons bound to them respond in

kind [hence synchronous] via spectral line emissions [or absorption] ....all covered in

Tetryonics [2] – Quantum Electrodynamics.

There is NO explanation in modern chemical or quantum theory that accounts for the Proton-
Neutron ‘curve’ of atomic isotopes nor for the islands of stability that exist for various

elements, however Tetryonic theory accounts for all of this firstly by ‘straightening’ out the

curved Z line of Protons and Neutrons underpinning atomic elements [by showing that all

atomic nuclei are comprised of D nuclei not H atoms with excess neutrons] and then

showing that the observed isotopic masses of each are the result of increased principal

energy levels of their constituent baryons with the D nuclei comprising each element.... It is

no error or ‘false notion’ as you put it, rather it is the current explanation of these facts by

modern theory that is in error

You have chosen Lithium to make your point I chose Carbon, Nitrogen and Oxygen to make

mine, but the explanation for Lithium remains the same..... an increase in the mass-energies

of the baryons making up the element concerned... btw I have done spreadsheets for each

and all the elements as a matter of course during the development of my theory.

Element 3 – Lithium [ground state atomic topology and electronic configuration]

Regarding your comment of “but in reality only electrons are on these shells and the

structure of the nucleus is completely separate from these shells”, - that is only the current

opinion/consensus explanation of quantum chemistry at this stage and is obviously at odds

with Tetryonic theory built from the ground up from equilateral Planck energies not the top-
down through supposition..... I am confident that over time this consensus will change.

1. Explaining the extra (neutron) weight as higher energy-levels of the Deuterium nuclei

seems ad hoc explanation with no supporting evidence – simply nonsense.....

2. No calculation is presented to derive a prediction for the excess mass (or energy)

from the Tetryonics model – have you even read my work in detail – calculations and

mass-energies are provided everywhere throughout it.

3. The excess mass of, say, Lithium 7 (one excess neutron compared to 3x deuterium)

– again a number based on your erroneous viewpoint – not y given explanation and

illustrations of the same.

4. This is inconsistent with the fact that there are multiple isotopes of each element.-

how so?

The energy level of Baryons of each and every illustrated element in Tetryonic can

be increased resulting in isotopes of that element – with NO extra Neutrons present,

again you seem to have failed to read and/or comprehend what was presented

before you in the Tetryonics chemistry eBook.

5. See above for Hydrogen family [please]

All the ‘observed’ masses you have provided in that table are firstly just that, weighted

[averaged] measurements of particles with kinetic energies [heat, spectral, motion etc.] not

the absolute rest masses I have provided and clearly stated as such...... you must account

for observational and inherent kinetic energies for your stated values to even begin reflecting

the quantum values of particles at absolute zero.

Again, ‘isotopes’ is NOT what you think and proclaim – there are no extra Neutrons in the

nuclei – only Baryonic energy above that of the res/ground state of such an element at

absolute zero – unless you can account for those KEM field energies [as should be done]

Tetryonic Problem: Helium as Alkaline Earth metal

- And Hydrogen is element 1 which no-one can agree on which position it truly belongs in

on the current periodic table.

Tetryonics problem: 120 possible maximum elements

- That is what is dictated by the charge topology of particles and elements themselves,

perhaps you’d care to share what your spherical [or other] model for element 93 is, and

how all the ‘extra’ Neutrons bind to each other to create that particular model?

Tetryonics shows quite clearly the reasons for there being only 120 possible periodic

elements and it agrees with the math and equations of both Bohr and Schrodinger’s models

despite the differing quantum topologies.

Perhaps, you can produce element 121 and prove me wrong on this.

Additional random quotes - the uncertainty principle erroneously dictates that

position and momentum cannot be simultaneously determined

- There’s nothing random about this comment/quote - Tetryonic theory is founded on the

SINGLE postulate that Planck mass-energy momenta has an quantum equilateral

geometry [ie quantised angular momenta (m^2/s] is equilateral/triangular not circular as

it is the macro sense of angular momentum] - from that flows the fact that the

probabilistic nature of quantum theory and the maths used to describe it are in fact not

‘fuzzy’ or indeterminate as supposed presently but in fact an emergent property of the

tessellation of mass-energy momenta at the quantum level.

The inherent indeterminacy of quantum theory is a crutch used my mathematicians and

scientists alike to explain many of the puzzling aspects of quantum theory like the inherent

statically probabilities of quantum fields themselves or the wave-particle duality of photons or

particles in motion..... Again it is them and modern theory that have simply failed to grasp

the geometric reality of energy momenta that underpins these phenomena and how they

build to form the familiar laws of Nature at our scale of observation.

Tetryonic theory is all about correcting these erroneous assumptions and established

viewpoints – but any change of perspective is not without birth pangs of angst and

misunderstanding from those who first encounter it [like Newton, Planck and Einstein with

their theories of Gravity, Quantum mechanics & Relativity theories before it]

That it is the transverse bosons Max Planck described using E=n.hv when resolving the

ultraviolet catastrophe and spectral line emissions

And which subsequent theorists incorrectly applied directly to Einstein’s formulation of E= hf

to describe neutral PHOTONS of energy momenta [dual charge bosons – quantum

transformers]

And then erroneously attributed to an inherent uncertainly in quantum field dynamics etc.

that does NOT and never existed in Nature itself or in Tetryonics....

I do look forward to further elaborating Tetryonic theory in detail with you – but also strongly

suggest that you become more familiar with my Tetryonics [1] – Quantum Mechanics and &

Tetryonics [2] - Quantum Electrodynamics eBooks beforehand as a lot of your suspicions of,

and reaction to Tetryonic theory seem to stem from a lack of understanding of the basics of

the theory....

And as I mentioned in previous communications, I remain open to an online discussion so

we may discuss these points in far more detail than possible herein.

There is also lots more additional information and explanation of Tetryonic theory to be

found on YouTube and Otto’s Science of Life web- blog & the detailed 3D CAD models

developed by Rene Cormier in the Google sketchup warehouse.

ht.....

Point by point I’ll firstly address the particular points of concern raised wrt modern chemical theory

and physics in general:

Tetryonics paper on quantum chemistry is very scarce on making any predictions about

atomic properties or comparing such predictions to experimental results.

Tetryonic theory provides many predictions regarding the physical 2d planar geometries of

bosons [radiant mass-energies] and the 3D material Topologies of Fermions [Matter and

their associated physical properties]. Inclusive in these are many predictions and repeated

statements and illustrations of specific particle shapes and the values of mass-energy

momenta attributed to each... as well as how these values stem from the equilateral

tessellation of Planck energy momenta and why they differ from the established values of

modern scientific theory....

In many cases there are similarities to be found with existing observations but where

Tetryonic theory differs from modern theory it is not by choice but rather dictated by the

equilateral mass-energies within charged Matter topologies themselves and all too often led

to much effort in order to reconcile the differences, leading to further insights and extensions

of the theory over time.... Where differences exist it is deliberate not by error.

Tetryonics is a BOTTOM-UP physical theory that unifies many currently disparate theories of

science into a coherent unified model of the same – but not without its own set of mental

challenges to those who are first becoming acquainted with it. As such it must be recognised

that Tetryonic theory should not be studied without a sound understanding of the foundation

upon with it is built.... Many have approached analysis of my work in such a way only to find

that their analysis was limited by modern science’s lack of precise detail of the foundations

of the physics that they attempt to explain [to wit modern theory is a top-down explanation of

the science build up over many generations with an equal number of varying interpretations

and assumptions]

Tetryonics plays down importance of “mathematics” and instead emphasizes “geometry”.

Arguably I place a lot of emphasis on geometry over that of mathematics in Tetryonic theory,

but only so as it offers insights into physical theory that maths alone has not been able to

provide since its wholesale incorporation into the science in the 1600’s. This is not to

downplay the importance and productiveness that maths has provided us a scientific tool,

but rather to ‘illustrate’ and draw attention to the advances that a purely geometric model has

to offer us in advancing our understanding of the same.... To wit, Tetryonic geometries are

based on the postulate that all physical theory is founded on equilateral Planck quanta of

energy momenta and as such these physical entities afford no room for speculative ideas or

mathematical manipulations beyond what is physically possible to be constructed.

To help elucidate my work and thoughts on the differentiation of 2d planar mass-energy

geometries from 3D Material topologies I recorded a detailed YouTube video titled

“Tetryonics 101” where I show HOW to use the existing Tetryonic templates [of Planck

mass-energy momenta] to construct all the fields [boson & photons] of the Standard model

along with the 3D Mater topologies of all the known fermions [and them some]... I do hope

you’ll take the time to review this detailed instruction on the creation of quantum fields and

Matter and try to replicate them same yourself – it is THE most informative thing students of

Tetryonics and science in general can do when trying to increase their understanding of the

hitherto unseen constituents that make up quantum theory and our macro-scale Universe

and the laws of Nature we observe....

Tetryonics paper on physical chemistry is scarce on such numerical predictions and where it

does make such predictions they are often in contradiction to observed experimental facts.

In addition to the maths found within Tetryonic illustrations there are also many

spreadsheets developed from those very same equations over time to provide the numerical

detail found in the illustrations – particular wrt periodic elements and theory rest atomic

masses and kinetic elements etc. – It is by no means exhaustive on every topic imaginable

but they do address the information provided on particles & elements etc. along with their

kinetic and relativistic energies of motion.

Tetryonic Problem: Missing hydrogen element

Hydrogen is not missing from Tetryonic theory – in fact it is extensively detailed and

modelled in Tetryonics [1] – Quantum Mechanics eBook [again highlight the need not to

jump into one’s preferred field of expertise and study but rather learn Tetryonic theory as you

would any modern physical theory in order of presentation]

Hydrogen is designated as element 00 in Tetryonic theory as it is NOT the building block of

periodic elements as is currently understood but rather a sub-unit of Deuterium the real

building block of all elements.... This is not an arbitrary decision but one forced on anybody

who attempts to build physical models of all elements in order to match and explain many of

the current established aspects of chemical and quantum theory wrt the quantum

electrodynamics of elements themselves wrt molar mass, the Aufbau principle, Schrodinger

and Bohr numbers for each element and how Deuterium nuclei [or any other] may bind

together in order to form all the elements of the periodic table and their respective spectral

emissions lines.

Attempting to build heavy elements utilising Z number Hydrogen nuclei as a foundation with

the excess molar masses being accounted for by way of ‘extra or excess’ Neutrons [as is the

established model of modern chemistry] runs into a number of problems immediately –

namely:

The lack of residual strong Force binding points on nuclei to facilitate the binding of Neutrons

to the nuclei in order to form the elements [particularly elements 60+]

The incorrectness of ‘reserve beta decay’ to explain and model Neutron particle formation

and the mechanics of electron binding to periodic elements in accordance with Schrodinger’s

wave equation and Bohr’s atomic model of the same in order to produce observed spectral

line emissions of each element in the PT.

There is no uncertainty or indeterminacy in Tetryonic theory as there is in modern theory to

explain away such inconsistencies between various aspects of physical theory – each

attribute MUST be modelled and explained from first principles & invariably leads to new

insights into quantum chemical theory that are at odds with established lines of thought.

To wit I stand by the claims and statements made in my eBooks :

Each elemental nuclei is made from Deuterium" (p. 12)

“120 elements in 8 quantum levels and hydrogen as a free radical.” (p. 26)

“Deuterium (not hydrogen) is the building block of all elements." (p. 21)

“Hydrogen is NOT a periodic element” (p. 83)

As it is the ONLY way to model and explain how all the periodic elements are created from

equilateral Planck energy momenta that is in accord with the known observables... they are

not in agreement with some aspects of established theory BUT they do closely mirror the

observables and once KEM fields of thermal heat, kinetic motion etc. are taken into account

provide a very accurate quantum model of chemical processes at the quantum scale.

Tetryonics does not throw all these facts out of the window just because hydrogen does not

fit neatly into my [or other] pre-conceived set of boxes and triangles and hexagons, they are

calculated from the Material models and immaterial fields associated with each element that

MUST grow from first principles... not from assumptions elaborated upon over time.

In fact the Aufbau table is shown in Tetryonic theory to be a table that has been ‘right

justified’ to match the nomenclature of mathematics rather than the geometric topology of

reality [which is centred about the principle quantum numbers and shells of Schrodinger and

Bohr respectively]... it is only our skewed perspective of maths that prevents most from

seeing the real symmetry present in atomic nuclei as detailed in the quantum numbers of

Schrodinger’s wave equation for the same ... ie there are no g,h,I,j, shells as supposed and

all the quantum numbers of Schrodinger’s wave equations match the symmetric topology of

elements as geometric portrayed in Tetryonics [and are in agreeance with Bohr’s shells and

orbitals as well, thus unifying all 3 theories]

The material topologies of Tetryonic theory then also lead to the necessity to correct

‘weighted’ values for all known particles and elements [and then some] in light of the

quantum mechanics of the same – ie their identical 3D charge topologies and the mechanics

of the quantum rotating synchronous convertors [Deuterium nuclei] that they form in

deference to the accepted theory of mini-solar systems and Neutrons that are heavier than

their identical charged counterparts [Protons and anti-Protons]

Point in case being Tetryonic Problem: Incorrect Proton and Neutron masses

As detailed in illustration 49.04 & 49.05 respectively in my eBook... Tetryonics demands an

exact mass for Planck quanta and the molar masses [at absolute zero] for each and every

particle in our Universe for modelling and any additional energy momenta [by way of

thermal, spectral, kinetic or observational energies etc.] are accounted for in the KEM fields

of each respective element or particle.

There is NO room for a ‘weighted’ atomic mass as utilised in modern chemistry which

conveniently ignores the mass and motional energies of the electrons in the elements or

which ignores the KEM field energies noted above for ‘most’ situations and calculations –

Tetryonic theory MUST account for all of these energies even if it does so at the risk of

disagreeing with modern theory at times...

The Proton and Neutron MUST have identical atomic masses as they are identical – both

are 36Baryon Matter topologies differing only in the net charges of +12 [24-12] vs 0 [18-

18] they possess as a result of their constituent quarks [UDU vs DUD] as extensively

detailed in my QM eBook... Neutrons are NOT created through the process of ‘reverse’

beta-decay as is supposed presently supposed in modern theory and accordingly do NOT

have a slightly higher mass than Protons which in turn affects the molar mass calculations

for all periodic elements and isotopes as outlined in my Chemistry eBook as well at length.

Ie Carbon 13, 14 and upwards are not the result of ‘extra’ Neutrons being bound to the

Carbon nuclei – such a nuclei if possible would be stable and not decay as observed – but

rather they are simply the result of the inherent ‘squared’ equilateral mass-energies of each

Baryon in the nuclei being increased from n1 to n2 to n3 .... Resulting in a net mass

increase that ‘appears’ to be the result of a number of ‘extra’ Neutrons in the nuclei [again

this is detailed in my Chemistry eBook and spreadsheets of the calculations be easily

created from the formulae found in chapter 53 on my Chemistry eBook....

This ‘significant discrepancy’ with Tetryonics prediction of Proton and Neutron masses from

observed ones alone will be enough to prove Tetryonic theory a worthy successor to modern

quantum chemistry theory – unless you can explain all of the above using ‘excess’ Neutrons.

I am neither ignorant of the basic masses of basic particles nor do I think that Tetryonic

theory and observed facts of nature disagree, but rather the established theoretical ‘facts’ of

modern chemical theory must be in error

I agree that in reality Matter has 3D structure (including volume) hence the terminology of

Matter topologies throughout my work. To portray my planar illustration of elements and

particles in my PDF eBooks as not reflecting their true material topologies is grossly

inaccurate and reflects that fact that YOU have NOT read all my work including Tetryonics

101, the Google sketch warehouse of 3D CAD models of each and every particle [kindly

developed by Rene Cormier over many months of effort] and extensive list of all elements

and their charged 3D topologies and electronic wave function properties and numbers which

are freely available to all – only planar 2 d mass-energy geometries [bosons and photons]

are portrayed as being like thin 2D sheets in Tetryonic theory, something I am sure you will

become more familiar with as your understanding of T-theory advances,[and your distain for

its predictions and values not in accord with modern theory wains over time].

Regarding the ‘separation ‘ of electrons from the atomic nucleus – this is an antiquated

model of quantum electrodynamics that is fashioned on planets and their satellites [ie the

mini-solar system Bohr model] and which has been extended to a fuzzy electron orbital

model to incorporate the Schrodinger quantum model and the ‘inherent’ quantum

uncertainly/indeterminacy of statistical probabilities intrinsic to quantum theory as the

theories developed over time.... Tetryonics makes it quite clear in T[1] – QM that the atomic

nucleus is in fact a quantum synchronous convertor [ala Tesla/Westinghouse] that can store

and release mass-energies in a controlled and predictable manner [ala isotopic decay and

spectral line emissions] and that quantum mechanics is NOT quantum inherently uncertain

nor in determinant as it is often portrayed – in fact quantum theory as explained by Tetryonic

theory is very much deterministic in every way – it was only our top-down view of the

mechanics that led modern science to this erroneous conclusion, which I have attempted to

correct through Tetryonic theory.

The electron does not orbit the atomic nucleus of any element but rather is bound via its

magnetic dipole moment to the positively charged nucleus and spins akin to the rotating

rotor of quantum convertor partially within the 3D Matter topology of Deuterium nuclei....

Again these models have all been built and operate according to established electrodynamic

theory and their operation is well understood in the macro sense [but obviously the

acceptance of such a model strains the thoughts of most who have grown up a mental

picture of fuzzy electrons orbiting a spherical nuclei]

Again the electronic structure of each and every one of the 120 possible periodic elements is

well detailed wrt Bohr shells & orbitals and unified wrt their respective Schrodinger numbers

for the same in my Chemistry eBook for all to view.... Unlike modern texts which normally

stop at element 20 and claim that it is just too difficult to show the quantum models of larger

elements with their evermore complex electron configurations and Schrodinger numbers

The s.p.d & f orbitals of electrons ‘around’ any elementary nuclei is the result of the atomic

nuclei rotating about is centre of mass/gravity [classical angular momentum] and the

electrons tracing out easily determined and well defined concentric orbits about the same

centre [as illustrated] .... A close examination of the Schrodinger numbers [or in fact Bohr

orbits] of heavier/larger Z number atomic nuclei reveals the there are no g,h I orbits etc as

often postulated but in fact there is a reversal of electron orbital distance as the element

number and principal energy levels increases..... Resulting in the periodic symmetry

depicted in Tetryonic theory of an atomic nucleus resembling a child’s spinning top, which

could be mistaken for a spherical topology from our macro view of the quantum scale.

With each element’s Z number reflecting the number of Deuterium atoms in each nuclei, not

the number of Hydrogen atoms with an ever increasing number of Neutrons to account for

observed molar masses

The electrons associated with each atomic element’s structure in fact have an important and

direct bearing on the spectral emissions of each particular element. Even though their mass-
energies of their electronic topologies are only 0.000533’ % of the mass-energies of each

Baryon in any atomic nuclei this mass-Matter differential along with the energy momenta of

the electron’s KEM field is key to facilitating the absorption and release of spectral line

emissions particular to each and every element known... again, it is not simple good enough

to conveniently ignore electrons ad hoc in scientific theory to suit a particular point or theory

just because they are or ‘insignificant’ mass compared to the whole nucleus. Any successful

model of science and physics in general must be able to account for ALL the known aspects

of modern observations not just a select few that suit their purposes in order to unify physics

on all energy scales. Ie a new model of the quantum structure, topology and mechanics of

atomic nuclei must account for charge, atomic and chemical interactions, spectral line series

and all known elements and compound creation in the ONE physical model.

Clarifying question about Tetryonics nuclear vs. atomic size wrt the Zenon atom

I humbly submit that illustrations 51.49

And 53.49 respectively along with the 3D CAD illustrations of the same

Should be sufficient to explain and illustrate all properties of the Zenon atom [or any other

you chose] including their rest mass-Matter energies [at absolute zero], their charged Matter

topology in accord with Bohr shells/orbitals and Schrodinger numbers and the kinetic mass-
energies of their bound electrons.

Clarifying question 2 about Tetryonics nuclear vs. atomic size

According to Tetryonics the proton and neutron in Deuterium nuclei touch one another at the

point son their respective charge topologies where the e-field components of their

constituent quarks are located - this is indicated on all Tetryonic element illustrations via red

[for positive] focus points and black [for negative] focus points.

But since Tetryonics does not include any separate strong nuclear force but just

electromagnetics, all particles of Tetryonic nucleus would fly apart in a nanosecond.

Again, this misunderstanding and erroneous statement about Tetryonic theory seems to

stem from you having failed to read Tetryonics [1] – Quantum Mechanics, viewed my

Tetryonics 101 instruction video or even attempted to build and understand how atomic

nuclei are formed and come together to form larger elements and compounds alike prior to

commenting ....

In my first eBook I have gone to great lengths to show that the STRONG force does indeed

exist and in fact plays a crucial role in bringing tetryons [the tetrahedral quantum of Matter

topologies themselves] together to form leptons, quarks, mesons & Baryons – it is the

parallel opposite charge interaction present between the planar charge faces of each tetryon

within each and every Baryon [not to be mistaken for the residual strong force]

Obviously this co-planar opposite charge interaction holds all atomic nuclei together and

your claim of Tetryonic particles flying away in a nanosecond just doesn’t hold water...

In fact just place two sheets of glass together with a thin film of water between them and see

how easy it is to pull those sheets apart by applying a force orthogonal to the co-planar

sheets of glass and you’ll soon understand the STRONG force much better that you do

presently.

This charge interaction between the e-fields of quarks in Baryons serves to not only bring

positive charge Protons together with neutral Neutrons [something modern theory cannot

explain] but also serve to orientate each baryon to the other so as to facilitate electron

bonding and the creation of ever larger atomic elements and compounds [the residual strong

or EM force as it is often termed or the London force]

Yes I have an ‘obsession’ with all atomic nuclei have equal numbers of Protons, electron

AND Neutrons in accord with their Z number, just as you have an obsession with them being

Hydrogen atoms with excess Neutrons ‘bound’ to them – but for the reasons highlighted

above, and many others – as for the quantum structure of Protium (regular hydrogen),

Deuterium and Tritium being ‘missing’ - again my T[1] - QM eBook holds the answers

With additional space being made to highlight the Tetryonic genesis of Tritium & Helium 3

All isotopes are simply Z number nuclei with the energy levels of their Baryons raised to the

next quantum energy level [n1-n8] in accord with the 3D material symmetry of the atomic

nuclei themselves and the Bohr shells/Schrodinger principal quantum numbers, which can

occur either through natural energy absorption or the artificial increase of their mass-energy

content in the lab....

Obviously with all Deuterium nuclei being quantum synchronous convectors as the energy

levels of their Baryons are increased [or decreased] the electrons bound to them respond in

kind [hence synchronous] via spectral line emissions [or absorption] ....all covered in

Tetryonics [2] – Quantum Electrodynamics.

There is NO explanation in modern chemical or quantum theory that accounts for the Proton-
Neutron ‘curve’ of atomic isotopes nor for the islands of stability that exist for various

elements, however Tetryonic theory accounts for all of this firstly by ‘straightening’ out the

curved Z line of Protons and Neutrons underpinning atomic elements [by showing that all

atomic nuclei are comprised of D nuclei not H atoms with excess neutrons] and then

showing that the observed isotopic masses of each are the result of increased principal

energy levels of their constituent baryons with the D nuclei comprising each element.... It is

no error or ‘false notion’ as you put it, rather it is the current explanation of these facts by

modern theory that is in error

You have chosen Lithium to make your point I chose Carbon, Nitrogen and Oxygen to make

mine, but the explanation for Lithium remains the same..... an increase in the mass-energies

of the baryons making up the element concerned... btw I have done spreadsheets for each

and all the elements as a matter of course during the development of my theory.

Element 3 – Lithium [ground state atomic topology and electronic configuration]

Regarding your comment of “but in reality only electrons are on these shells and the

structure of the nucleus is completely separate from these shells”, - that is only the current

opinion/consensus explanation of quantum chemistry at this stage and is obviously at odds

with Tetryonic theory built from the ground up from equilateral Planck energies not the top-
down through supposition..... I am confident that over time this consensus will change.

1. Explaining the extra (neutron) weight as higher energy-levels of the Deuterium nuclei

seems ad hoc explanation with no supporting evidence – simply nonsense.....

2. No calculation is presented to derive a prediction for the excess mass (or energy)

from the Tetryonics model – have you even read my work in detail – calculations and

mass-energies are provided everywhere throughout it.

3. The excess mass of, say, Lithium 7 (one excess neutron compared to 3x deuterium)

– again a number based on your erroneous viewpoint – not y given explanation and

illustrations of the same.

4. This is inconsistent with the fact that there are multiple isotopes of each element.-

how so?

The energy level of Baryons of each and every illustrated element in Tetryonic can

be increased resulting in isotopes of that element – with NO extra Neutrons present,

again you seem to have failed to read and/or comprehend what was presented

before you in the Tetryonics chemistry eBook.

5. See above for Hydrogen family [please]

All the ‘observed’ masses you have provided in that table are firstly just that, weighted

[averaged] measurements of particles with kinetic energies [heat, spectral, motion etc.] not

the absolute rest masses I have provided and clearly stated as such...... you must account

for observational and inherent kinetic energies for your stated values to even begin reflecting

the quantum values of particles at absolute zero.

Again, ‘isotopes’ is NOT what you think and proclaim – there are no extra Neutrons in the

nuclei – only Baryonic energy above that of the res/ground state of such an element at

absolute zero – unless you can account for those KEM field energies [as should be done]

Tetryonic Problem: Helium as Alkaline Earth metal

- And Hydrogen is element 1 which no-one can agree on which position it truly belongs in

on the current periodic table.

Tetryonics problem: 120 possible maximum elements

- That is what is dictated by the charge topology of particles and elements themselves,

perhaps you’d care to share what your spherical [or other] model for element 93 is, and

how all the ‘extra’ Neutrons bind to each other to create that particular model?

Tetryonics shows quite clearly the reasons for there being only 120 possible periodic

elements and it agrees with the math and equations of both Bohr and Schrodinger’s models

despite the differing quantum topologies.

Perhaps, you can produce element 121 and prove me wrong on this.

Additional random quotes - the uncertainty principle erroneously dictates that

position and momentum cannot be simultaneously determined

- There’s nothing random about this comment/quote - Tetryonic theory is founded on the

SINGLE postulate that Planck mass-energy momenta has an quantum equilateral

geometry [ie quantised angular momenta (m^2/s] is equilateral/triangular not circular as

it is the macro sense of angular momentum] - from that flows the fact that the

probabilistic nature of quantum theory and the maths used to describe it are in fact not

‘fuzzy’ or indeterminate as supposed presently but in fact an emergent property of the

tessellation of mass-energy momenta at the quantum level.

The inherent indeterminacy of quantum theory is a crutch used my mathematicians and

scientists alike to explain many of the puzzling aspects of quantum theory like the inherent

statically probabilities of quantum fields themselves or the wave-particle duality of photons or

particles in motion..... Again it is them and modern theory that have simply failed to grasp

the geometric reality of energy momenta that underpins these phenomena and how they

build to form the familiar laws of Nature at our scale of observation.

Tetryonic theory is all about correcting these erroneous assumptions and established

viewpoints – but any change of perspective is not without birth pangs of angst and

misunderstanding from those who first encounter it [like Newton, Planck and Einstein with

their theories of Gravity, Quantum mechanics & Relativity theories before it]

That it is the transverse bosons Max Planck described using E=n.hv when resolving the

ultraviolet catastrophe and spectral line emissions

And which subsequent theorists incorrectly applied directly to Einstein’s formulation of E= hf

to describe neutral PHOTONS of energy momenta [dual charge bosons – quantum

transformers]

And then erroneously attributed to an inherent uncertainly in quantum field dynamics etc.

that does NOT and never existed in Nature itself or in Tetryonics....

I do look forward to further elaborating Tetryonic theory in detail with you – but also strongly

suggest that you become more familiar with my Tetryonics [1] – Quantum Mechanics and &

Tetryonics [2] - Quantum Electrodynamics eBooks beforehand as a lot of your suspicions of,

and reaction to Tetryonic theory seem to stem from a lack of understanding of the basics of

the theory....

And as I mentioned in previous communications, I remain open to an online discussion so

we may discuss these points in far more detail than possible herein.

There is also lots more additional information and explanation of Tetryonic theory to be

found on YouTube and Otto’s Science of Life web- blog & the detailed 3D CAD models

developed by Rene Cormier in the Google sketchup warehouse.