The fundenental law of relativity- Why it Works.

[c. michael turner]

Time and Space are Verbs! That's right the essence of time and space are actions of the ultimate process! All mass decays into the Gravitational wave. Newton and Einstien never explained "How" everything works this is the missing answer."Framework to the theory of everything!"
Spacetime is not be the true way to understand the relationship between the concepts of matter, energy, time, space and speed. Relativity - is the point of origin mass to energy transfer between bound matter (potential energy) and unbound matter (kenetic energy) the Gravity wave ( space). That is to say that matter evaporates, decays, into the gravitational wave creating the resulting continious actions of space, time and gravitational wave sychronization. Space is the gravitational wave being freed to its lowest form of matter. Time is the cosmological constant -the evaporation rate of matter. There is no real curved spacetime. It is gravitational wave sychronization, gravitational waves aligning through the path of least resistance that brings matter together, that is responsible time and space distortion as the waves elongate just as the dopler effect works in sounds. Instead of the sound wave being shortened or elongated when compared to moving objects the gravity wave is shortened or lengthened, red-blue shift which affects not the action of sound but the actions of time and space. Gravitational wave sychronization of bodies in motion change the relationship of the gravitational waves with respect to each other and the resulting actions of time and space change.Time and space are actions created by each discrete piece of matter as the matter evaporates into the gravitational wave. Space is the unfolding of matter. Time is the resulting action of the rate of evaporation of the gravitational wave. Relativity- Point of origin mass to energy transfer in wave form of bodies in motion Newton- Einstein- How it all works!
Part of a paper-Copyright @ 2003, All Rights reserved.
Here is my example of gravitational sychronization-


THE BOBBER- RIPPLE (wave) EXPERIMENT

The experiment ………….


A 1000 kg. Bobber automatically bobbing once every 10 seconds in water, and a 1 kg. Bobber automatically bobbing once every 10 seconds in the same water 10 meters apart. They both have the same pounds per square meter bobbing force.

The prediction…………….

Both bobbers would come together and touch to form a uniform distribution of the ripples. The ripples represent the gravitation e- wave emitted from each object.

The discussion…………..

Evaporative gravitation predicts that the path of least resistance would be for both bobbers to have equal centers of e-wave distribution. Since both condensation masses attempt to take up the space to synchronize to the path of least resistance, they touch and remain that way. If the masses could, they would pass through each other until the centers of each mass overlap perfectly, as in the big bang and almost in black holes. This represents the path of least resistance of each set of gravitational e- waves.

THE EVIDENCE



1).Absolute Zero- evaporation (decay) stops.

2). Time - cannot come in Quantum units.Deep space and light studies.

3). Black holes- evaporate over time.

4). All galaxies are increasingly accelerating away from the big bang.

5). Mass decaying into the gravitational wave and the motions of masses together distort time due to gravitational wave synchronization. (Relatively speaking). Matter generates space and time, which are actions of the evaporative gravitational wave being generated. Motion between objects create wave pattern interference, gravity is objects comming together to decrease the interference.

I put forth this explaination to anyone interested to stimulate your thoughts and to amuse yourself on how we all missed something this simple. I believe Mr. Albert Einstein and Mr. Issac Newton would feel honored if they were alive to know that they are both correct and working together. It took three seperate times and three seperate understandings to construct "The framework to the theory of everything". Thank you for reading my Theory. Welcome to my original thought.

[subversion]

almost no thought is original, I too have thought of your exact same bobbing experiment. It's kinda neat really, somewhat remarkable, somewhat eerie, that we both should have the same hunch. Maybe it's a sign. But yeah, I just figured if you had two pulsating objects in water the waves they create would cause them to want to move towards eachother, with the lighter object moving more than the heavier one. I thought of this about 6 months ago as a way to describe gravity. The question is though, have you actually done the experiment? I know I haven't yet.

best regards,

-sub

ps. if mass is constantly evaporating does that mean it is constantly losing mass?

[c. michael turner]

three years ago, the year I copyrighted everything. I will be video tapping a segment this summer. If you think there is no such thing as original thought I will be happy to share the entire theory with you by E- mailing me at Gravitation@cfl.rr.com with your e- mail.
p.s.- with out a long explaination- YES!
If a grain of sand was removed from the beach would you notice?
What is energy loss is a two dimensional wave? How and when does a three dimensional measurement detect it? Maybe the Universe would be expanding at an accelerated rate? F= ma where mass is decreasing and the force is unchanged? Maybe the change in actual position of binary neutron stars verses the calculated position equals the energy loss via the gravitational wave?
And you don't believe in original thought........ Read my paper and see an original thought.

[Epslion]

If I got your theory correct, it involves matter decaying into Space (which in your theory is a gravitational wave). This would have to apply to all matter with mass; and I am not sure about the rate you said these particles decay at, but it seems to me if this was the case we would have noticed it by now. If all matter were decaying then the matter with the smallest of mass like electrons and quarks would just evaporate out of existence, and since I am still here with all my electrons and quarks (for the most part at least) I cannot see how this would work. Another problem I see is how would this account for gravities weak (near non-existent) force at the sub-atomic level?

[c. michael turner]

You state electrons would decay out of existance. Let me give you a simular example so you see what it sounds like to me. Apples are purple, since I see no purple apples, apples do not exist. You have places your own limits on your understanding and then discarded the notion based on your false limits.
Answer me this- what is the exact mechanism that forms an electron?

Imagine a stream of water in the mountains and the stream opens to a shallow pool and then continues. The parameters of the pool. evaporation, water rushing in, water rushing out, splashing, and yet the pool remains level.
All matter condenses is an example of water rushing in, your electron can be an example of the pool, and the gravitational wave can be an example of the water rushing out.
Also imagine that your understanding of small of energy transfer is almost infinately larger than it truely is. Imagine all the sand on the beaches of the world and I remove one grain, how do you notice?
Quick answers to the rest.-
Matter decaying is space.
Gravitational effects in the sub-sub atomic world- throw a rock straight down into a body of water, where is the deepest well created by the ripple? What effect does the amplitude of that well, next to the rock, have on the surrounding matter vs. the wells futher out. Is there a closeness to some of the interacting molecules at the surface of the interaction that feel no effect?
You have to understand the box before you can see outside it.
What effect would we see if what I postulate is true and things are smaller than we ever thought. Well maybe we could detect a discrepency in binary Nuetron star spin mass, actual vs. calculated and if we could show the discrepency is solved if we take into account the energy loss into the gravitational wave that would maybe be indirect evidence.
How about this- My theory says two extremes
1).if I throw a tennis ball up in the air and force = Mass times acceleration
since the force stops the gravitational wave synchronization of the respected masses align to decreass the acceleration with no net change in mass. I agree with the observation 100 percent.
2). Let's take the Universe as a whole. If since the end of the transitional inflational period or the big bang mass has been decaying into the gravitational wave and producing space as the mass decreases then if we assume force = Mass times acceleration and the force is continuously constant since my concept does not change the force in the same way as the old concept, the force wouldn't slow down mass it would synchronize the waves, space would be getting flatter as mass gets smaller. The remaining mass should be accelerating as space is flattening so constant force= decreasing mass times increasing acceleration. look up these concepts of binary neutron stars and gravitational wave energy loss on google and The hubble telescope and the accelerating universe, and get back to me.

If I got your theory correct, it involves matter decaying into Space (which in your theory is a gravitational wave). This would have to apply to all matter with mass; and I am not sure about the rate you said these particles decay at, but it seems to me if this was the case we would have noticed it by now. If all matter were decaying then the matter with the smallest of mass like electrons and quarks would just evaporate out of existence, and since I am still here with all my electrons and quarks (for the most part at least) I cannot see how this would work. Another problem I see is how would this account for gravities weak (near non-existent) force at the sub-atomic level?

[XarGoth]

..Time is the cosmological constant -the evaporation rate of matter...

Do you realize that this means as you accelarate the evaporation rate increases.

I would like to ask you then, why does the mass increase with our Velocity?

How do you explain mr=mo/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) and how did you implement this evoparation into this equation?

[c. michael turner]

Do you realize that this means as you accelarate the evaporation rate increases.

I would like to ask you then, why does the mass increase with our Velocity?

How do you explain mr=mo/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) and how did you implement this evoparation into this equation?

The evaporation rate is like a catch 22, it only increases as energy is added to the system, much like radioactive decay. It decreases as energy is taken away from the system.
Now for part two but let me attack it from a different angle, the fine structure constant. Should the fine structure constant be constant over time? How much time? The answer is that it won't change. See a delima? See the only way out?
If you are with me so far then here is your answer. Think of a stream with a pool. The stream above the pool is the material that is still condensing from the big bang, background radiation. The pool is matter, three dimensional mass, and the stream below the pool is the gravitational wave, matter decaying to the path of least resistance, thus the refered to equation above does not change the way you have thought in order to disprove this concept. I do appreciate you getting to the point, it has been a while since that has happened. The mass decreases overall in the closed system but doesn't change in the open system.

[XarGoth]

Well i am doing my best to understand the theory, here is a question that comes to mind;


First of all, if gravitation is decaying mass(evaporating gravitation) then can we calculate this mass?

I mean there should be a !decaying-mass per second! constant if this theory is true, Ever thought about finding it with some equations?


Well, i know you are saying it is relative..But i still think the relativity can still be explained by maths like Einstein did. So you still should find a constant for Rest or a given Velocity..

[c. michael turner]

Well i am doing my best to understand the theory, here is a question that comes to mind;


First of all, if gravitation is decaying mass(evaporating gravitation) then can we calculate this mass?

I mean there should be a !decaying-mass per second! constant if this theory is true, Ever thought about finding it with some equations?


Well, i know you are saying it is relative..But i still think the relativity can still be explained by maths like Einstein did. So you still should find a constant for Rest or a given Velocity..

Remember that I am claiming that a three dimensional mass is decaying into a one dimensional wave. How do you calculate something so small?
Observation over time? yes and there have been two studies that come to mind. 1). binary neutron star observations and energy lossed do to the possibility of gravitational waves emitted.
2). also, the possibility of change over eons of the fine structure constant.
My claim is that mass transfer is so small of a three dimensional loss and so large of a one dimensional loss that it is virtually indetectable three dimensionally. Like a pond in a stream. Water goes in, water goes out put the pond remains the same until the stream dries up.