I previously had 3 articles on my blog about this, and have now made 2 videos (more to come) on YouTube. The videos might help to make some of the concepts clearer, but the web pages are there as a backup.

It seems appropriate to put this in ATM at this time, as the third part of how to make a universe will be about Harmonics Theory which has already had its day in the ATM Sun. In the first two parts I deal with the history of physics and where I think subtle errors (usually of discoveries being in an inconvenient order) were incorporated into physics and cosmology thinking.

The links to the videos are given and in each case the video links on to my blog where you may study the diagrams in more detail or see the names of people and so do web searches on the facts more easily.

I was going to leave out the idea of WSM (Wave Structure of Matter) until another time, but will be guided by forum organisers as to whether they see it as impossible to separate that idea from what is presented here. I give the link anyway for my own video on that as well as one which is an interview with physicist, Milo Wolff who has demonstrated that a standing wave model of the electron will satisfy all its properties. Nucleons are another matter as the standing wave form is not yet known.

How to make a Universe - Part 1

How to make a Universe - Part 2

These are additional background which I would prefer to do as a separate ATM thread later but will be guided by the forum organizers as to whether they should be included now.

WSM = Wave Structure of Matter

Dr Wolff Philosophy Physics Video: Wave Structure of Matter

Some of the key points that I consider are to be made are:

1. Implicit in Maxwell's equations are solutions for spherical standing waves which would logically be taken to be the solutions for matter.

2. Therefore matter is the same stuff as light, just standing waves, not traveling waves. The frequency of a particle's standing wave is the Compton frequency of that particle. The wavelength is the Compton wavelength. For a nucleons the wavelength is very similar to the standard radii of the particles, about 1.3 fm.

3. The idea of an aether was abandoned because of SR and the fact that the wave nature of matter as advanced by de Broglie was unknown at that time but the M-M (Michelson-Morley) experiment got a null result. If people had understood that matter was standing waves of e/m then the null result for M-M experiment is expected. Actually Lorentz, Michelson, Morley, Einstein, Dirac all believed in an aether.

4. I am not saying that SR or GR are wrong. I am saying that modern interpretation has lost the true meaning of them. The meaning of SR is that even when there is an aether, because of the wave equation and Lorentz transforms we cannot determine the rest frame by any means depending on e/m. LET = Lorentz Ether Theory is an established method of arriving at relativity.

5. This isn't really about aether but the fact that even from a simply e/m point of view, matter fits into the equations. However it is necessary to understand that near the centre of particles the energy concentration (or flux) is much higher than elsewhere and so the speed of light is different. In GR this is dealt with as the distortion of space near a massive object, but I argue that it is equivalent, and much easier for simple minds, to have a variable c than to have space-time distortions.

6. When the natural non-linearity of all physics laws is recognized and particles are seen as standing waves, then it can also be understood that particles are not 100% stable over vast eons of time. Rather, the non-linearity leads to energy leaking to other frequencies (being harmonics of the basic particle frequency).

7. It is this leakage of energy that is responsible for both gravity and red shift. Gravity, because the outgoing wave is weaker than the incoming wave by about 1 part in 10^40 so making gravity that much weaker than the strong force. This is consistent with Le Sage Gravity.

8. The same rate leads to the observed red shift because the leakage of the wave energy results in adding mass to nucleons and leads to a blue shift of all wave lengths over time without any motion. Because we see distant matter as it was long ago we see it red shifted in proportion to its age or distance. This is consistent with Narlikar's variable mass theory.

9. The study of Cymatics (and perhaps oscillons) has much to recommend it to those who would understand particle physics. It shows the possibilities in how particles are non other than standing waves and how the incoming wave of a particle pases through the centre of the particle and becomes the outgoing wave. These two make the standing wave which is the particle. The outgoing wave then becomes the incoming wave of other particles throughout the universe. Through this means all particles are continuing to be recreated every moment. The true interconnectedness of things is understandable as basic physics.

10. Feynman and Wheeler almost arrived at this with their advanced and retarded waves, but didn't make the final step from the waves being something that happened to the electron rather than them actually being the electron. The confusion is that the advanced wave is seen as backwards in time rather than just arriving there.

11. Cymatics videos show clearly things that we cannot work out by intuition. That is why physics based on intuitive reasoning has gone astray. It has missed this wonderful opportunity to understand nature better.

I have mentioned Le Sage gravity and Narlikar's variable mass theory, but do not intend to argue them in this thread, simply to say that these ideas easily explain why those two ideas are correct.

Perhaps the only other area to be addressed is to say that it seems to me that all physical laws must be non-linear and that the consequences of this has not been sufficiently addressed in present theories.

Ray Tomes