THE FABRIC OF SPACE AND TIME

By Larry Wright (ECTV)
05/09/01

http://www.earthchangesTV.com


Space is not empty but is in fact a fabric or medium that propagates magnetic fields and electromagnetic waves. Space is not matter in the sense that it is not composed of particles. Tendencies are to describe space in terms of plasma. This, because plasma too will propagate electromagnetic fields and carry electric charges. This view though closer to the truth than the concept of empty space is still not completely accurate. A plasma is made up of particles. Space exists between particles. When you look at a solid object it is really not solid at all. There is more space contained in solid matter than matter itself. Each tiny particle is separated from all other particles by space. Similar to the separation between the stars and planets.

When looking at the universe as a whole, there is more space than actual matter. Some 80 percent of matter and the universe is composed of so called empty space. Matter cannot exist without space for it would have no medium for existence. If not matter then what? This is an area that touches on the metaphysical as well as the physical. We must be prepared to accept the concept of a non particle material similar in many respects to the fluid qualities of water. A material like water that forms vortexes with cyclonic properties that cause matter to condense and whirl about. A material that permeates the entire universe and propagates electromagnetic waves and vibrations. Atomic and sub atomic particles, light and radiation are the results of electromagnetic waves.

Matter is a four dimensional wave form. Height, width, depth and time. Matter has no real existence apart from it's wave form. Like the ripples on a pond of water, when the disturbance ceases the ripples vanish back to water. In fact the ripples have no identity or existence apart from the water itself. Similarly, matter has no existence apart from space itself. When the disturbance ceases matter vanishes back to empty space. The ancients called this mysterious substance Ether. This concept was largely abandoned in the 20th century. Now science is beginning to come full circle. Recent discoveries in physics and astronomy are now beginning to return to this ancient concept of Ether. It is now called or will be called by a different name but the concept is the same. It is the only thing that makes sense and explains the many discrepancies that modern science has uncovered. For instance, the fact that science cannot explain 80% of the missing mass of the universe. The so called dark matter that is thought to fill space but so far cannot be found. Isn't it interesting that this 80% of missing matter amounts to the same percentage of empty space between matter? What this means is that space is really another state of matter. A non particle state with fluid characteristics. At rest it is empty space. When in motion as waves it becomes the visible universe. This theory has been submitted to the American Physical Society in Long Beach, California. I am including a link to this website and I encourage anyone who reads this article to go to this website and read up on this theory. See www.space-time-mass.com for more details.

This article was copied from http://www.earthchangesTV.com .

EXCERPTS OF "SPACE-TIME-MASS UNIFIED THEORY"

WEBSITE See www.space-time-mass.com
"GIFTT (Ghassemi Institute For Technology Transfer) presented a theory to the American Physical Society in Long Beach, California in April 2000, San Francisco in 1989, in Washington DC in 1990, and in Columbus, Ohio in 1998.

This theory proposes a solution for the missing mass of the universe. It states that the very fabric of space-time is another state of matter, hence it has equivalent mass. Therefore the massive fabric of space-time fills the entire emptyness of the universe. This hypothesis, which we call space-time-mass unified theory, explains a universe in which everything (i.e., matter, energy, space, time) is all made of each other and are all from one nature. Another proof of this theory is the existence of nuclear force. In reality, mysterious "gluons" that are presumed to glue the nucleus together do not exist. The universal pressure of space-time is responsible for this observed nuclear force. ·Similar to the air theory of Aristotle, we have assumed that space-time (the vacuum of space) has no mass and no pressure. So, the mass of the universe is missing! And mysterious gluons hold the nucleus together. What holds the particles at nucleus together is the external pressure of space-time.

Other challenges are facing today's scientists. The space-time-mass unified theory explains these challenges by assigning equivalent mass to the liquid fabric of space-time which fills the entire universe. The space-time has mass and pressure, and mathematically it can be modeled to have the properties of a liquid. If we propose a model for the universe that is like a giant star, the relationship between nuclear force "P" and the mass and radius of the universe can be calculated. See explanations and proofs for detailed answers to the challenges discussed below." The space-time-mass unified theory is proven by and explains the following: Missing Mass of the Universe: The theory is that the fabric of space-time is another state of matter with equivalent mass providing a gigantic amount of mass and gravitation.

This explains the present working of the universe. Missing Mass and Shape of Galaxies: There is no dark matter surrounding the galaxies. The massive fabric of space-time provides a satisfactory explanation for the shape of the galaxies and the motion of the stars they contain. Simply, all the galaxies are floating in the massive fluid of space-time. Just look at the side-by-side photographs below of a spiral galaxy (below left) and a hurricane (below right). The Hurricane has it's shape because it is floating in massive fluid of atmosphere. The Nuclear Force: There are no mysterious gluons responsible for the nuclear force. Our observations relating to the expansion of the universe demonstrate that we can assume that each point in the universe is at the center of the universe and that everything is expanding away from that point. This can be illustrated by a model of the universe that is like a gigantic star made of space-time liquid. For comparison, let's take two suction cups and push them together. The cups attract each other due to external air pressure, since there is no air inbetween them. Now, let's take two protons (or neutrons) which attract each other with a nuclear force Pn.

According to the space-time-mass unified theory, this force Pn is really the resulting external pressure of the universal space-time on these particles. The pressure exists because the space between the protons has vanished. The Force Needed for the Expansion of the Universe: There are no anti-gravity forces (Newsweek. March 9-1998) responsible for the expansion of the universe. The matter at the present time is melting and transforming into space-time: hence the very volume of space-time which is the volume of the universe is constantly increasing. Proton Decay: The proton or other elementary particle decay has puzzled the scientific community for years. The proton vanishes and can not be detected as energy or other particles. The explanation is simple: the proton melts and transforms into space-time. The experiments should be designed to detect space-time and not energy. Such experiments are challenging but rewarding.

The Shape of Galactic Clouds: On· the famous picture of the pillars of creation in Eagle Nebula (M16) taken by the Hubble Telescope with the footnote from Simon Goodwin, Hubble's Universe. 1. The shape of the Eagle Nebula is formed by gases and dust which are mushrooming and growing inside the massive space-time fluid. Therefore, it looks exactly like a cloud. 2. The light at the crest of the galactic clouds comes from stars behind the clouds, hence the observed brilliant diffraction. 3. The pointed edges of the ragged-shape galactic cloud is created by the reverse push from the massive space-time in which the cloud is growing. There are no solar-wind type pressures responsible for this ragged shape.

Aren't you going to throw yourself into to any of these threads, P2K?

"Like the ripples on a pond of water, when the disturbance ceases the ripples vanish back to water. In fact the ripples have no identity or existence apart from the water itself."
And the cause of the ripples? Are they not the identity of the ripples? No free will allowed!

'For instance, the fact that science cannot explain 80% of the missing mass of the universe."
When did it thoroughly explain, beyond labelling, the other 20%?
Quintessence is the key! The essence of a thing that makes a thing what it is.
Do we have to become all knowing Gods to know anything? Probably.

"What this means is that space is really another state of matter."
YES, I agree, space is the most transcendent, weakest, but continuous form of energy. Energy is everything and everything is energy. If there is no such thing as a perfect vaccuum, there is no such thing as empty space, other than in concept. (so maybe thought can go outside of the square of experience until it finally hits the wall of true reality!)

The rest suggests that space and time can exist without energy? If space is a form of energy, maybe this is the perfection, the eventual and endless conclusion of the Universe. (Word of the month is 'maybe')

"There are no anti-gravity forces (Newsweek. March 9-1998) responsible for the expansion of the universe. The matter at the present time is melting and transforming into space-time: hence the very volume of space-time which is the volume of the universe is constantly increasing."

We're doomed to be space foam?

I won't pretend I read this very carefully so perhaps I missed something but it seems like a simple exercise can cast quite a bit of doubt on this (ignoring some of the bigger problems that would seem to crop up).

It's true that matter is indeed mostly empty space. But if we're going to say that that empty space has mass like any bit of matter then what we're saying is that most of the mass of any body actually comes not from the massive particles making it up but rather the space in between those particles. You might be able to write off such a statement if you assume the mass contribution from the empty space is negligible compared to the matter component except the statement " Isn't it interesting that this 80% of missing matter amounts to the same percentage of empty space between matter?" would seem to contradict that. Saying 4/5 of the mass in the universe comes from the 4/5 occupied by space and and 1/5 comes from the 1/5 occurpied by matter certainly seems to put the two masses on equal footing (and understand that I'm just indulging the alleged numerical coincidence for the sake of argument).

Anyway, the point. We can imagine some block of material with mass M and some volume V. This mass M, however, is assumed to have two components. One-fifth of it is attributable to the matter component of the block; this component won't change as long as we don't add or subtract any matter from the block (which we're not going to do). We'll call this base mass m so we have 1/5 M = m. The other 4/5 of M is contributed by the empty space between the matter in the block--that is, it's associated with the volume V. It's getting confusing but we'll call this mass associated with the volume m. Thus for the original block 4/5 M = m is associated with the original volume V.

Now let's squeeze the block to 1/16 V. The mass contribution from the matter component is unchanged--it's still m. But since we've cut the volume (and the empty space contribution) to 1/16 its former value its new contribution m' = 1/20 M. So the total mass of the block after compressing it should be M' = 1/5 M + 1/20 M = 1/4 M. It should be only a quarter as massive.

A very naive calculation but it gets the point across. On the surface at least, if we're going to treat empty space like any piece of mass this idea ought to predict a volume dependency for the mass of an object which we just don't see.

I think this article is trying to play off the idea that the vacuum has an energy density that many believe is the culprit behind dark energy, the agent that's accelerating the expansion of the universe. The idea in the article seems a bit shakier than that though.