[Jimbo]

There are many theories claiming to be the true TOE and probably all of them have come about by someone who started with the intention of discovering it. FET is different. It all started when I took early retirement at the age of 52 because the Laboratory of the Government Chemist, UK where I worked was going through the process of privatisation. Consequently they wanted to get rid of research projects and concentrate upon money spinning tasks.

For the last 8 years at LGC I worked alone on a project that was loosely described as surface energetics. It started out looking at mineral flotation and ended up with the biocompatibility of medical implants. Because I was primarily an experimentalist I designed and built an apparatus to automatically measure the contact angles of liquids upon solids and how they changed as reagents adsorbed from the solutions onto the solids.

This project was highly successful and my apparatus has been commercially exploited. With it I was able to determine the correct proportions and orientations of carbon, hydrogen and chlorine atoms on a sample of PVC. My apparatus is very simple and inexpensive and my results could only be confirmed at a university using very expensive radiation bombardment techniques.

When I retired I decided to investigate the theory behind my measurements because, according to the experts, the empirical equation derived from my work was not only claimed to be wrong but had been "disproved" 100 years ago. My equation was of the form A = B - C whereas the current equation was A = B + C - D - E - F ....... with different numbers of parameters for each system.

It was true that my equation did not fit most data sets as it stood but this was because no one had allowed for the possibility that molecules reoriented themselves at interfaces. Once this was taken into account then my simple equation fitted exactly to all data ever made in this field.

It then became apparent that every type of atom has a characteristic attractive force. In order to calculate this force I needed to use the inverse square rule to calculate force changes at the atomic level. This proved impossible because, say for example, you could not calculate how much light a source was putting out if you could only measure it from 10m away. You could calculate that at 5m it would be four times as bright, at 2.5m it would be 16 times as bright, at 1.25m it would 64 times as bright and so on. But this would make the brightness infinite at the source and it is irrelevant whether the source is 10m or 1 million light years away.

At this time I did not know that infinities were a problem in many areas and that the only way to get rid of them was to cancel them out by some mathematical trickery. So instead I sought a solution and eventually arrived at a very simple modification. Instead of saying I = K x (I1 x I2)/d^2 I made it I = k x (I1 x I2)/(d + d0) where d0 is some hypothetical distance beyond the source where the intensity really is infinite. For atoms and their attractive force this distance was found to be 1.387x10^-10m This may seem very small but it is crucial when considering large forces at very small distances.

I believe that it may account for the reason that different experiments around the world cannot agree to better than 1% the value of the gravitational constant. These experiments use very large masses separated by very small distances.

Now we come to the real beginning of FET. Having found that "experts" can easily be wrong, I considered that they may also have got the notion of energy wrong. Heat was at one time considered to be a real substance but was "proved" not to be so. But suppose heat, or more correctly energy, was a real substance, what properties would it have?

Because of my previous thoughts about infinities and because the search for the fundamental particles of nature was just creating more and smaller entities, I took the bold step of assuming energy to be a continuous substance.

This was the real breakthrough. Within a short time I had worked out that the spinning of a continuous substance would create a centripetal force that drew in more of that substance and just like a skater spinning faster by folding in arms and legs, the spin rate would increase. So once any motion in a continuous substance was started it would increase in intensity and increase the density within the spinning region.

I called these regions quantum whirlpools and noted that they would be 2-dimensional. Unlike whirlpools in water where the water has to be channeled outwards somewhere and therefore become 3-dimensional, energy would simply be compressed and its density increased. Incidentally, I had made an intuitive guess that the flow of energy into these whirlpools was the source of gravity and I will come back to that later.

If the whirlpools could continue forever then nothing would have been created except for a universe full of black holes. So I reasoned that at some point there would be a limit to the density of energy where the fluid form became a solid. But where was that limit?

My thoughts at this time were also on trying to discover the true nature of photons. I have always preferred to think of them as particles because I can visualise a particle but not a single wave. I noticed that the electromagnetic spectrum had an upper limit of wavelength equal to 3x10^-15m If photons are particles then a particle passing by at light speed would have an equivalent diameter of 3x10^-15m. If instead of moving at light speed it spun on the spot then it would spin at 10^23rps. I took this as a starting point for the spin rate at which fluid energy was solidified.

It was a simple step then to calculate that when the spinning region of solid energy reached a diameter of 10^-15m, i.e. the size of a neutron particle, its surface speed was equal to light speed c. Thus, from the upper limit of the electromagnetic spectrum I had established a link between the speed of light and the size of a nuclear particle.

Next came the problem of what would stop a neutron particle from continuing to grow in size. Being a solid, its spinning action would generate a centrifugal force which would increase as the particle grew in size. So the centrifugal force inside the particle would eventually increase to the point where it became equal to the centripetal force that was compressing fluid energy into solid energy.

The maximum centrifugal force occurs just within the outermost surface and therefore this is where the neutron breaks apart. So the outermost shell breaks away and immediately becomes fluidised again. But the core is still spinning at 10^23rps and therefore the centripetal force forces the fluid energy just released back onto the core. But this overloads the core again and therefore an equilibrium is set up with a smaller core of solid energy (the proton) and a region of fluid energy (the electron) extending from the core to a distance of around 10^-10m, i.e. the size of an atom.

A further simple calculation shows that the amount of electron energy flowing around the core is 10^39 times the flow rate of energy onto a growing neutron. Hence I had shown for the first time ever why the strength of the electromagnetic force is 10^39 times stronger than the gravitational force.

So now we have a theory for the creation of neutrons and how they mature into hydrogen atoms. Note that there are no such entities as separate protons and electrons as the two are really two parts of the same particle.

The hydrogen atom has the correct balance between fluid and solid energy in equilibrium. If extra energy is added then it is retained only if the atom moves otherwise it is immediately thrown off as a photon.

A photon is a packet of energy thrown off of a core of solid energy whose surface speed is c and therefore this is why photons move so fast. The packet of energy does not immediately expand back into fluid energy because, although it is not spinning as such, it is rolling along and therefore effectively spinning and so generates its own centripetal force which keeps the photon intact. The movement of the photon away from the core generates a region between the two that is kept under tension and therefore as a string of solid energy. Hence the photon is tied to its source much like a yoyo on a string. It is the string attachment that starts the photon energy to adopt a rolling action and therefore remain as a viable packet of energy. This explanation also shows how entanglement can occur when two photons are released simultaneously from the same source.

From the strength of the Earth's gravitational field I was able to calculate that the string diameter was around 10^-41m. This string can only come from the photon itself because it cannot come from the source as it is generating a centripetal force that draws energy inwards. So the photon can be considered to be a packet of energy rolling along at light speed generating its own centripetal force and unwinding a string of solid energy. Its centripetal force is directly proportional to the amount of energy it contains so that as it unwinds energy its centripetal force decreases and therefore it expands in size.

Hence a photon that starts out as a gamma ray with 10^8eV of energy has a diameter similar in size to a nuclear particle and as it unwinds energy it grows until eventually it has only around 10^-10eV of energy and has become a radio photon with a diameter of around 3,000m. Its density is then equal to that of the continuum and the two merge together. Hence there is both an upper and lower limit to the photon spectrum.

Next comes the big surprise. The rate at which a photon loses energy is exactly equal to the loss of energy according to the red shift of starlight. Hence the universe is not expanding but is instead in a steady state

I have to end here as I have reached the limit imposed.