[protheory]

I think this is the most sensical thing I've written for a while on this subject, it just explains briefly how and why I originally wrote what came to be known as Pro theory...

This is a rough idea of how it all started for me...

What originally led me to the idea of the three potentials was that I imagined atoms, just balls of energy in my mind, glowing and somehow creating everything.

I thought this was gospel physics for a long time and as I kept searching and pushing the boundaries of my own thoughts, I realised that if everything was made of atoms that by the same token everything must behave the same as a single atom repeating itself over and over to create the universe and my own life somehow.

I looked into atomic structure and thought that if I were to take the words away (I was still a reductionist at this point) I would be left with an example atom containing negative, positive and neutral energy somehow.

At this point I'd not really realised what I was onto with this idea, I just thought "that's interesting to me as a thinker" rather than my thoughts now which are more like "I've written a TOE and it works like this..."

So basically I imagined that somehow the bricks making the wall I was beside at that point in time were somehow composed of these three energies, I didn't know how it worked or formed, but I knew that everything was made of atoms and that atoms contained three potential energies so logically every atomic creation (literally everything, nothing etc) should follow this same pattern somehow.

I continued my mental search and realised that perhaps symmetry was the answer for the bricks, I imagined a single brick with two opposite sides and a middle, then I imagined that each corner had three points in a triangular pattern, I used the bricks example to try and apply this pattern somehow to other things.

I looked at the window in a room I was in and noticed that it was perfectly in balance, symmetrical, with two opposite sides and a middle, I continued this process for months and months while writing down all my thoughts about everything being based on atoms.

It wasn't until maybe a year later that I started to take this as literally as I do now, I mean by saying plus this plus that, and when I realised how literally this idea showed a pattern within everything I could think of I changed my previous thought 'everything is atoms' to 'everything is atoms plus the opposite plus neutral ad infinitum' which showed a definite shift in my thoughts.

Eventually I gained in intellectual confidence and started to read physics theories to see if and how I might be able to explore them through my new pattern.

My journey towards what became Pro theory was long and arduous but I think it's important to note that I only decided to call it a TOE when I realised its completeness.

I'm still not sure whether this will be adequate for you to see this idea as I see it but I hope it will go some way towards how I came to think about all problems in the way that I do

[protheory]

I know this is about atomic structure but I think that everything is the same and I think about and see numbers in a very similar way to the boundless black box example here.

It's a good way to visualise my RH answer and my philosophy of numbers.

Just try to imagine that the spheres represent the three potentials within all numbers and you'll be on the right track


Boundless
Imagine a boundless black box containing a glowing sphere.

Pure
Inside the box there are no forces, values, or measurements in existence except the sphere which itself exists only in example.

Singular
The singular sphere may move in any relative direction and for any relative distance.

Potentially
Wherever the sphere eventually resides, it will always be potentially able to perform the exact opposite to each change in position because it is the only presence within the box.

Conditions
If another sphere is added under the same condition as before, the two spheres will always be opposite to each other, despite distance or position, as they have no relative boundaries to prevent this.

Results
Whichever way the two spheres move the opposite is still be possible in theory.

Third
If a third sphere were added to the example a neutral point could be achieved.

Defined
This point is defined as the position between the two original spheres.

Fourth
If a fourth sphere were to be added to the box, it could only repeat any of the three previously defined actions or positions.

Quality
The fourth sphere may be regarded as being opposite or neutral in relation to the others, but it adds no unique quality to the example.

Option
The fourth sphere has the option of attracting another sphere, repulsing another sphere, or neutralising itself in relation to another sphere at any given moment but its potential behaviours are simply a repeat of the original three.

Regardless
We could choose to add an infinite number of spheres to the same example, but regardless of the relative "amount" of spheres, they all possess the same three theoretical potentials.

Atoms
1. Electrons are negative.
2. Protons are positive.
3. Neutrons are neutral.

Sub-atomic
Sub-atomic level is a fractional version of the same principle.

Charges
All sub-atomic particles may carry three possible charges at any relative point in time, regardless of what words may be used to describe them.

Difference
The amount of a certain charge may vary, relatively creating what we define as "difference" but this does not change the fact that quarks possess the same three potentials as atoms and literally everything else.

I wrote this explanation in my answer to Yang-Mills Theory but the example is a good one I believe and it transcends any thread and example boundaries.

This is how I imagine everything, particularly numbers

There's this too, it's something I wrote quite a while ago now but I make a point of keeping all my writings for future reference in case it might help me to explain myself later...

According to the best scientific minds in the world, everything is debatably made of what are known as 'atoms'.

Atoms are glowing balls of energy.

Inside each and every atom there are these three potential energies, three types of force if you like.

The 'words' don't really matter, its the idea that is more important.

The names of these three are as follows.

1. Electrons (negative).

2. Protons (positive).

3. Neutrons (neutral).

Simple isn't it.

If we choose to explore inside the individual forces we find so called sub-atomic particles.

These particles are known as "quarks" which is pronounced to rhyme with cork.

Now, believe it or not, these sub-atomic particles are even smaller than the three particles that you just imagined, i.e. electrons, protons and neutrons.

The interesting thing is that though they are even smaller than what we thought were the smallest things possible in the universe, luckily they still exhibit the same three distinct potentials, negetive, positive, and neutral.

Each 'quark' still has a fraction or percentage of either negative, positive, or neutral energy.

Energy, no matter how small, always has three simultaneous potentials.

Still with me?

Good.

The thing is that most physicists deny the fact that there are always three simultaneous answers to "everything" and furthermore, they deny that this idea can be a complete theory of everything.

I invite you to make up your own mind.

I'm not addressing this quote towards any one person in particular, it's just a copy of an old introduction to Pro theory that I wrote a while ago, my idea with quoting as much as I can is that perhaps somewhere along the line it will all come clear

PRO.

[protheory]

If we base our visualisation and understanding of everything on atomic structure we notice things like personal space.

You know when a person moves too close to your face or body and it feels uncomfortable? This is your body's electron shell repulsing the peripheral electrons of the other person.

Both of you are based on or formed by atomic structure and so you both possess an electron shell.

Conversely, if a loved one or family member comes into your personal space (electron shell) the feeling is positive isn't it, this is because they have the correct electron combination to get right into your nucleus.

You know when you get a feeling about a person, like you're not too sure of them, you can sense danger? This is electrons (literal negative energy) that your own shell is reacting to and repulsing as like charges repel, in this example you might want to move away from the situation.

I think that a lot of change in life is electrons filtering the right combination of energy to get into your nucleus, the nucleus of a person is neutral and positive but negativity usually comes first as it is peripheral.

You know when you feel negative and/or repulsive about something, a change in your life, the end of a relationship, any negative event, this is electrons.

Electrons are the way I visualise pure negativity, the changes I mentioned above often seem extremely negative at first but mellow with time, the mellowing occurs when you as a person are able to accept the change more positively.

If all things and people are atomic in nature, with electron shells and a nucleus, then this explains why when we first approach a new situation (atomic structure) we at first encounter its shell, if we have compatible electrons (we achieve a positive understanding) then we bond but if we don't have the correct understanding (rudeness in conversation perhaps) we repel each other.

When I see shock waves on water in concentric circles I see this pattern, it's the same as when I look at earthquakes with an epicentre and the shock radiating outwards, everything has a centre just like an atom does, the circular formation also reminds me of the atomic connection.

I notice that most cars have four wheels but the minimum needed for perfect balance is three, I notice that the triangle is one of the strongest and most studied shapes in the history of mankind.

I notice that electricity always carries three potentials, my car can go forwards, backwards, or stay still, the enormous tree in my garden has branches above ground, and a mirror image of this below ground, you cannot have one without the other, I see that every pivot point (joint) on my limbs has two sides (finger joints for example) and a neutral middle point without which my fingers and limbs could not bend.

Everything possesses a perfect symmetry pattern of three.

[protheory]

Pro theory is intended to be a compliment to all existing religions.

Open to interpretation

Pro theory leaves the universe open to your own particular interpretation.

By avoiding definite definitions my theory can also avoid offending anybody.

What we need

We need to work towards a model of the universe that does not offend any particular religion or other way of life.

We need a model that everybody agrees about.

Life

If we are ever truly going to agree on a common way of life that we can all follow we need to locate the positive in every situation and try to avoid the negative.

Distillation

What I mean by distillation is that if we pull all the positive positive energy from our best ideas we should be able to work out a new framework for life.

It might even be so objective (unemotional) that we can all agree on it.

Learn to look

We need to learn how to look objectively at knowledge without emotion.


Avoid the negative

If we have one rule for life that will not offend any religion or way of life it must surely be to avoid negativity and to embrace positive.

Remember

I am not suggesting that we should aim to get rid of all negativity because this is practically impossible due to the loop of change, it includes three potentials at all times.

I am suggesting that we should aim to avoid the extremes of negativity and possibly to embrace the extremes of positivity.

Negativity?

What I mean by negativity is negative behaviours, negative thoughts, negative actions and negative energy.

It is as simple as it sounds.

Complications

No complications, just try to learn about what you can do to reduce negativity in your life and increase positivity.

Why is simple good?

Simplicity means that everybody can understand the message.

Actions

Remember that all negative thoughts and behavioural actions should be studied and changed to a more positive energy.

Able to change

Energy just means something that is able to change.

General ideas

The general idea is always pure and simple.

The message

1. Embrace positive energy.

2. Avoid negative energy.

3. Be aware of neutrality.

PRO

[protheory]

This is how I see Pro theory, pictures speak much louder than I could ever do.

[protheory]

When I talked about each leaf having a centre line and forming like atoms this is another example of what I see



Notice the symmetry of the leaves, and the way the flower has a perfect centre with petals forming the electron shell of the formation, in this case a plant.

[protheory]

This is an old photo of me in Amsterdam, I remember feeling that this position would make a good picture, I just had a feeling about it at the time.

This shows me doing a hand sign for 'unite' as in 'unite as one all people' that a friend told me about, I didn't realise at the time but the triangulated finger positions symbolise perfectly the symmetry of the TOE as I see it

[mkirkpatrick]

Hello and welcome Protheory to the forum,I have been away soaking up the sun in Turkey for two weeks,you have been very busy posting I see,I may well have a rival?
I have very briefly looked at your theory,seems quite logical in a illogical sort of way!
I agree that within the relative physical universe all is a sequence of three,some say that
if your inner senses are finely tuned,you can actually "hear" the sequence completing itself like-click-click-click!


While I agree that this is so in the relative universe;the sequence of three,I feel that this
does not apply to the absolute universe,which is I feel to be a sequence of one.


kind regards michael.

[lodestar]

Hey PRO,

What'sup man. That's a cool picture of you in Amsterdam. I want to go there really bad.

Hey do you think this symbol reminds you of your theory too?

[protheory]

Hey Lodestar, I like the picture, I think it does remind me of my theory yes, definitely.

It shows the two idealised opposites and the centre of the formation too, just like the atomic visualisation I've been posting about in this thread.

Thanks for sharing it with me, I appreciate it and it helps me to show what I'm talking about too, like with the pics I posted above.

PRO