The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

[Chris Coles]

Some of you already know that I have been working on a book about the subject of gravity. The book is now available from CreateSpace. http://www.createspace.com/6935058

As it is very controversial; it will, if eventually accepted as a new theory, destroy Big Bang Theory, and effectively re-writes both the physics and cosmology text books. So I will welcome any debate generated here on iTulip.

[Mega]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

................is there a car chase in it?

[Mega]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

I have always thought of the Universe as a cloud................so Chris how do we go about building a warp drive?

[Mega]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

I get a change to read it next week i hope............

[Chris Coles]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

Mega, nice to see you up front with sensible questions; no, sorry, no car chase. As for a Warp Drive, I am not sure, that is another energy source, though I do have many thoughts regarding new sources of energy from my new description of the electromagnetic force field structure of protons.

The primary focus of the book is to work right through to a description of the reasons why everyone got it wrong with the subject of gravity and the effects of balanced forces with mass upon a body of solid mass. You will discover that I describe every aspect, from the structure of the proton and the source of the proton; right through to the gravitational structure of the largest objects in the Universe; what I call Galactic Core Objects. Then I take you through the mechanism that returns these gigantic objects back to become those familiar dust clouds. No big bang, impossible to create a singularity. No particles; a universe that is both entirely electromagnetic and Newtonian.

Part 6 lists the many experiments that I believe will, for example, show that the photon is entirely a wave of kinetic energy. Setting out to show that the speed of light is not constant. Red shift has been misinterpreted and thus we live in a vast immensely ancient steady state universe.

14 years hard work. Look forward to a debate here and elsewhere too.

[Chris Coles]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

Now I have been provided with the complete set of links for all the international sites for sales via Amazon. With one proviso, the only site to stock the book for the roughly the next week is CreateSpace. But with iTulip being an international site, I herein add all the other links for everyone's interest.

The direct URL for your CreateSpace eStore and Amazon detail pages are::

https://www.createspace.com/6935058
http://www.amazon.com/dp/099283743X
http://www.amazon.ca/dp/099283743X
http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/099283743X
http://www.amazon.de/dp/099283743X
http://www.amazon.es/dp/099283743X
http://www.amazon.fr/dp/099283743X
http://www.amazon.it/dp/099283743X

I hope that you find this information useful, and I wish you the best of luck with your title. Thank you for choosing CreateSpace for your publishing needs!

[shiny!]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

The subject matter will be over my head for sure, but I congratulate you on finishing such a large and daunting project and wish you all the best, Chris!

My very own pet theory of gravity is that it consists of very tiny, invisible little bricks that float down and land on things, weighing them down. Like Tetris. When I sleep at night I get covered by a blanket of gravities that make it hard to get up in the morning. Gravities are the reason why an object at rest stays at rest.

I'm joking, of course. Or maybe not...

[Chris Coles]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

The subject matter will be over my head for sure, but I congratulate you on finishing such a large and daunting project and wish you all the best, Chris!

My very own pet theory of gravity is that it consists of very tiny, invisible little bricks that float down and land on things, weighing them down. Like Tetris. When I sleep at night I get covered by a blanket of gravities that make it hard to get up in the morning. Gravities are the reason why an object at rest stays at rest.

I'm joking, of course. Or maybe not...

In fact, the subject matter will not be over your head. What has occurred over the past decades is that to cover up the fact that, what one might describe as 'conventional science', had no idea what gravity is and how it works; they concocted a series of way 'over the head' ideas that sound very grand, deliberately verbally obtuse, and actually worthless concepts, as a cover up.

You will find that the book is written in plain English and that, (apart from a couple of chapters setting out, in the simplest of terms, the mathematics that describe how the gas molecule cannot detach from any solid mass, and thus how what we all describe as gravity, reduces in force, molecule by molecule), due to the attachment force always being predicated towards the greater mass within each atoms external force field; the book sets out the whole theory, in simple terminology, combined with 216 mostly hand drawn illustrations and additional images that are all publicly available.

You will discover that you can see gravity; indeed, have been looking at it all your lives without understanding that as a force, it is both there to see and yet non existent.

That there is no additional force field called gravity. that gravity is simply caused by the positive electromagnetic force field of the proton, (rather than being totally negated by the accompanying electron), in fact, extends beyond the electron to attach, under the rules long ago laid down by James Clerk Maxwell, to the closest adjacent electron. That that simple mechanism is what creates the illusion of the additional force.

What is causing conventional science to dismiss the theory, is it's simplicity. Drafts of this book have, for some years now, been regularly deposited at The Royal Society in London. Again, some years ago, a friend, a member of the British Institute of Physics, actually rang up The Royal Society to ask them if he could come in to discuss all my work with them; their answer was; "No, we only do that by invitation and we are not going to invite you". They have never come back to me. I have even attended some of their open to the public discussions, even asked questions related to their subject being discussed; no one has ever walked up to talk to me. However, over the years, many tiny incidents have led me to believe that they know full well I am in the pipeline.

Your own theory of tiny bricks is in fact a very good synonym, instead of bricks, just imagine that, as you lay in bed, every gas molecule in the room is attached to your bedclothes and to each other; and that those attachments progress on out of the atmosphere to connect, eventually, with every other object you can see in the night sky.

The Universe is a Cloud of such attachments. Everything is interconnected by that simple mechanism.

All I did was set out to describe how, over a lifetime of thought and observation; I have come to work out my theories and thus to set them out in a book. The Foreword is by Donald L. Birx who is now President of Plymouth State University.

Enjoy!

[touhy]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

Congratulations Chris! Who would not want to publish their very own "Theory of Everything"?.

I do not have the knowledge base to refute or exclaim the thesis of your work, but I suspect the explanation of everything will, indeed, be simpler than we imagine. Your efforts are to be commended.

Ok, now as a useful thought experiment; describe an experiment that could verify or disprove your theory.

(I'm commenting here mostly to glom-on to any potential glory you might achieve as the next Sir Issac Newton....it will be my brush with fame I can show my friends)

[Chris Coles]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

Congratulations Chris! Who would not want to publish their very own "Theory of Everything"?.

I do not have the knowledge base to refute or exclaim the thesis of your work, but I suspect the explanation of everything will, indeed, be simpler than we imagine. Your efforts are to be commended.

Ok, now as a useful thought experiment; describe an experiment that could verify or disprove your theory.

(I'm commenting here mostly to glom-on to any potential glory you might achieve as the next Sir Issac Newton....it will be my brush with fame I can show my friends)

Thank you touhy, (a very unfamiliar name I must say ),

Let me see if I can satisfy your request; I am going to give you an example that is already in the book.

A classic and well accepted theory today, states that a photon is both a wave and a particle. The central argument is that there are effects caused by what is described as the two slit experiment, where photons of light are fired towards a screen, which has, between the photon source and the screen, either a single slit, or two slits cut in a partition through which the photons may pass on their journey to the screen.

When only the single slit is open, the photons arrive on the screen in a totally random manner; but if the second slit is opened, then the photons arriving at the screen show that there is a wave pattern created by that passage of photons through the double slit.

Note: Please bear with me as I have to give you what is a very shortened description of the underlying theory, as, in the book, I will have worked my way through several hundred pages of debate and more than one hundred illustrations before I get to Part 6 Questions Needing Answers; so if you wish to later get to the underlying debate, I can only suggest that those of you interested in my work; purchase a copy of the book. Well, I had to get that in; I am sure you will all agree.

The underlying concept of a major part of my theory is that no gas molecule can detach from either a solid mass surface, or from any other gas molecule.

Yet, as things stand with the presently accepted theories, a gas molecule is seen as a separate object that can move linearly without contact with any other to satisfy the likes of Ideal Gas Law, where pressure and temperature are deemed to be caused by the speed of impact of each gas molecule upon the container surface. That is then taken further to underpin the rules for the nucleosynthesis, where, again, all the rules relate to the energy of impact between molecules.

Those rules form the bedrock of modern physics; they are entirely wrong and I am going to describe why.

Imagine in your minds eye an image of the nucleus of a gas molecule; it will sit, (not as now assumed, within a circular outer surface with no external attachments - free to move linearly - to conform with the existing rules for Ideal Gas Law); but instead, as each and every proton within that nucleus has a strongly positive electromagnetic force field; that positive force field extends beyond the orbit of that proton's electron, (just like the gravity of Earth extends beyond our Moon), to attach to another proton's electron, (forming a part of the structure of the closest adjacent gas molecule nucleus), which is thus external to that first nucleus. Now, instead of the gas molecule being a separate object, it now sits within an external field formed from those attachments and that external field is all pervading, it fills the space between each and every molecule. Again, those force field attachments are deeply unstable, so they must also conform to the rules long ago laid down by James Clerk Maxwell, wherein a positive field seeks the shortest distance to a negative potential; or extends to infinity.

As each gas molecule nucleus rotates within that external field, I call that an external energy field; then each proton must constantly change it's location relative to the other adjacent molecules protons. Thus the attachments are constantly seeking the shortest distance; and as that changes, the attachments detach from one whose distance between has changed to seek the next closest proton 's electron, where they re-attach. Those continuous detachments and reattachments are the source of your photons. The whiplash of the changes, at the speed of light, create ripples of energy that travel along throughout the atmosphere giving us the means to, for example, define the temperature of the atmosphere.

If we take a single gas molecule attached to any solid mass surface, then the attachment towards the solid mass is always going to be greater than on the opposite side of the gas molecule, simply because the greater attraction of the many protons within the solid mass, will attract that gas molecule nucleus, slightly off centre within that single gas molecule external energy field. Thus, when we now imagine another gas molecule that sits on the other side of the first gas molecule; it is attracted by the tiny difference in force caused by that original nucleus being slightly closer to the solid mass, and thus slightly further away from the second molecule. Now, if we take an imaginary pair of tweesers and try to detach the second gas molecule from the one attached to the solid mass surface, the only force we can use is that of a third gas molecule, and that too has its nucleus slightly closer to the one below. Thus the outer surface of each gas molecule has a slightly lower force field strength of attachment at its outer surface, than the other side of the molecule. Ergo, that is the reason why what is called gravity; reduces as the distance from any mass increases; but I digress.

Now, imagine we sit inside what will be a little box forming a chamber with a photon source at one end and a screen at the other. What we will see will be each gas molecule within that chamber, attached to each other and to all surfaces, and forming what I describe as gas molecule attachment force columns, the base of each such column is thus attached to the bottom surface as the greatest mass, the entire planet, being beneath the bottom of the chamber. These columns of attachments extend upwards to similarly attach to the upper surface. That will form what is a veritable forest of columns of attached force fields, each of which are also constantly rippling between themselves, caused by the temperature of the atmosphere within the chamber creating constant changes in the location of the protons, in turn causing constant ripples of energy that will define the temperature of the atmosphere within the chamber.

Again, each gas molecule is attached sideways to each other. They thus form a forest wall of force field attachments in columns throughout the chamber.

Now, when we fire a single photon towards the screen, it will, inevitably, have to negotiate its way through all those columns of force field attachments. So for a start, that is why, with either no slit or a single slit, placed between the photon source and the screen, the photons will arrive at the screen in a totally random manner. However, if we now add the second slit, some photons will randomly pass through one slit with others randomly passing through the second to pass through the forest of attachment force columns, but this time the twin slits causing a sideways movement in the columns. What occurs is the same effect as with a tuning fork. You "ping" one side and it resonates to the other side; you set the entire chamber into a resonance that forms a wave within the chamber; that in turn, causes the photons to now follow that resonance and form an image of a wave pattern on the screen.

All photons are simply caused by those rapidly changing ripples of dynamic energy traveling along the constantly changing attachments between all the protons forming the atmosphere within the chamber; when they can, due to the photons passing through two slits, they cause resonance by passing through a twin slit partition that acts like the twin arms of a tuning fork placed between the photon source and the screen. When they do that they form a wave pattern on the screen.

So now I will add a second aspect to the original experiment, add some additional sound waves from a tiny digital load speaker, the sort we all have in a mobile phone, for example, then, when we change the frequency of the sound waves within the chamber; we will surely observe a difference in the wave pattern produced on the end screen.

All those attachments are electromagnetic; their interactions entirely conform to what may be described Newtonian. oh! And for the life of me, I cannot imagine why no one thought to increase or reduce the pressure within the chamber; that will also, surely; change the results of the experiment?

To achieve that description I have also, within the full book, provided a completely new electromagnetic force field structure for the proton; one that now fully conforms to the rules for electromagnetism as laid down by James Clerk Maxwell.

One final point; this description I am sure you will all agree, has been placed before you in plain English. No fancy words, no gobble-d-gook, no difficult to understand mathematics. Just plain English.

I have finished the book with a challenge to every young person on the planet to follow my lead and create a new industrial age of gravity. To achieve that, they need to know about the book; so all of you; get out there, buy the book and read it and then and start to beat the drum; we need the young to get started ASAP.

By the way, how many existing industries will be impacted by this new industrial age? What effect will it have on today's market values? food for thought?

[bungee]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

All those attachments are electromagnetic; their interactions entirely conform to what may be described Newtonian. oh! And for the life of me, I cannot imagine why no one thought to increase or reduce the pressure within the chamber; that will also, surely; change the results of the experiment?

Maybe a silly question but if current scientific understanding or your model suggests that changing the pressure of the chamber will change the results of the experiment why don't you give it a try and publish the results in a scientific journal?

The setup sounds fairly simple and if going to the top of a mountain did not provide sufficent pressure differences there are decompression chambers and other ways of doing the experiment at different pressures.

Are these some doable killer experiments that will prove or disprove your theory?

[Chris Coles]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

Maybe a silly question but if current scientific understanding or your model suggests that changing the pressure of the chamber will change the results of the experiment why don't you give it a try and publish the results in a scientific journal?

The setup sounds fairly simple and if going to the top of a mountain did not provide sufficent pressure differences there are decompression chambers and other ways of doing the experiment at different pressures.

Are these some doable killer experiments that will prove or disprove your theory?

That is a very fair question; what seems to be very simple is not; but for a variety of reasons. Right now I have no option but to concentrate upon marketing the book; all my spare funds are directed towards that single aiming point. Once upon a time, I managed some substantial industrial research projects for major international customers. That experience taught me that trying to move forward without the funds in place to do so .... in a proper manner; is asking for financial disaster. I could write a new book on the subject; indeed, had in 2009, written a book on the subject; The Road Ahead from a Grass Roots Perspective. All my instincts scream at me to, for now; stick to the marketing of the book.

Yes, I have a long term aiming point to create a fully independent Gravity and Energy Research Institute. But that requires in the region of £100 Million, up front, just to get it rolling. Having spent a good part of my working life grossly undercapitalised; I have no intention of going down that road again. Period!

Yes, I have a plan, yes I am implementing it. The book will need to be made available for at least three years before anyone will want to even review it. Again and again, I have been shunned by academia. The Royal Society in London have regularly received drafts of my work; they simply shun me. Yes, I do have a very small group of friends, academics, that have risked their own careers to help me and yes, I do very much appreciate that help. But trying to push my theories into the face of academia will not help me; certainly not in the short term.

This is a long game play. What I need are credible book reviews. There is no way to force that issue out into the open; they will come, naturally, in their own good time. Right now there is only one aiming point; it is marketing, marketing; marketing, and then again, when all else fails; marketing!

[Chris Coles]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

Having mulled over your question and my initial response; I want to add some additional thoughts.

Writing this book over the last 14 years has taught me that conventional science has not one jot of interest in my work and for a very simple reason; if I am correct, without intent to do so, I make them look utter fools. Many of the mistakes they made are very simple indeed. Today, as I see it, this is not about my proving anything because that will be a wasted exercise; they do not want to admit that I might have something useful to say.

Instead of seeking glory for myself, all I care about are the young people of the planet. They are the best people to take this forward, very probably after I am long gone. My aiming point is to see as many as possible of the youth of the planet get some idea of my thinking, and that by doing my best to get the message out; they will have the chance to mull it over for themselves. They are the best people to take a new age of gravity forward.

A very large part of the overall problem is the now deeply corrupt British Civil Service. They have become a classic secretive mafia style organisation; intent upon stuffing the treasure of the nation into their back pockets, and gaining access to awards they can persuade others to bestow upon them; Lordships for failure is big business here. Someone has to take up the challenge to shut that organisation down and re-build it from the bottom up with a completely new ethos. As things stand today; that is never going to happen, and as such I live in a leaderless nation, desperately, intellectually, impoverished.

A feudal nation breeds a mindset that demands no one ever rocks the boat, The Royal Society is an excellent example; pompous idiocy!

No, I am never going to be credited with anything; they have already made that crystal clear. Thus my only intent is to see others prosper; and as many as possible, preferably the young and talented and all over the planet; rather than any single group or for that matter; nation.

For those reasons, all I care about is to do my best, with the funds I can muster from my own resources, to market the book for the future success of the young; they are the future of the planet. It is their challenge, and thus also, their reward.

[Techdread]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

Chris with respect your book is a theory, if it is correct you will be credited even if posthumously I don't think I needed to tell you that.

It is up to you to show that your theory is a better account of how gravity works not for the royal society or any other organization to do the research because of your book though having said that someone may pick the mantle.

I have heard of a theory and experiment that seems to tally with your double split explanation but can't find it I think the article was written in The Economist magazine.

[DSpencer]

Re: The Universe is a Cloud of Surplus proton Energy

Maybe a silly question but if current scientific understanding or your model suggests that changing the pressure of the chamber will change the results of the experiment why don't you give it a try and publish the results in a scientific journal?

The setup sounds fairly simple and if going to the top of a mountain did not provide sufficent pressure differences there are decompression chambers and other ways of doing the experiment at different pressures.

Are these some doable killer experiments that will prove or disprove your theory?

Probably because it's already been done and the results disprove his theory. Double slit experiments with electrons have been done in vacuum chambers. It's not really necessary to do with photons as they can travel through air mostly undisturbed. The fact that you can see clearly is all you need to understand why his theory is nonsensical. If photons were being scattered by columns of force field attachments in a "totally random manner" it would be pretty hard to see anything.