I would be more than willing to abandon the EEP if it can’t burst a big crunch or form what would be an undistinguished hydrogen atom from the energy density of space or cause gravity by perpetuating an energy differential surrounding the proton.

The bottom up approach has been used to predict how the EEP does these things.

Without the EEP, the ISU dissolves into an idea that requires broader speculation. That is where responsible speculation ends, the bottom up process has nowhere to start, BBT is still without a cause, and I go on to my next interest.

There is a complexity to what I am saying that means that you won’t be able to understand it unless you have read the part of the word salad that explains the reason for the project, the basic rationale, and the specifics of the bottom up investigation. Those specifics start from the introduction of the EEP, the concept of the greater universe, the balance between energy and matter, the energy to matter to energy process, the concept of critical capacity, the arena, the energy density of space, expansion and separation, matter formation, the cause of gravity, and the generation of the homogeneous and isotropic hydrogen environment that exists after matter formation but before the first stars. That is where the bottom up process has taken me. I am at the point of trying to describe the simple hydrogen atom in terms of the EEP and how it does what the hydrogen atom does as to specific quantification of one atom at rest; size, energy, internal relationships, and workings. If I can do that with responsible bottom up speculation then the bottom up process has a recognizable link to the Mainstream.

When you discount it without acknowledging that you have read it you have no more credibility that you give me for doing the whole thing with thought. If you have read it you should be able to say where you think I have exceeded the rules of the bottom up approach, i.e. responsible speculation.

I can even list what I consider responsible speculation sequentially. Anyone can respond by telling me where they have to jump off of the Bottom Up bandwagon.

• It is responsible to speculate about a cause of the initial expansion.
• One possible cause would be a big crunch that existed before the initial expansion.
• We don’t have any physics to say why such a crunch would burst to cause the initial expansion so if the precondition was a big crunch there has to be some missing physics.
• The big crunch is said to be one of the three possible outcomes of BBT and is said to result in complete entropy so the missing physics must defeat this path to entropy.
• It is responsible to conclude that the missing physics might be carried by an as yet undiscovered particle.
• It is responsible to portray that particle as a unifying particle.

That is the first section of the bottom up process that leads to the concept of the elementary energy particle, the EEP.

For all I know all of the community will have jumped off the wagon by that point. So without listing the next section of “responsible” speculation, where do you get off the wagon? If it is #1 just say so and that should be the end of it for you.

If you stay on board for the whole section you are where I was when I began to describe what the unifying particle would have to be like to pull off its amazing feats.

If anyone is on board to this point just say so and I will list the next section which will probably shake you off the wagon.