Re: Speed of Light?

Warren York ( infonet@home.com )
Wed, 18 Aug 1999 19:00:39 -0500

Gpiano99@aol.com wrote:
>
> Hi Warren,
> Yes you may use my piece of the puzzle in your write up. I wrote 4
> tunnels in my equation, that was just to turn it to algebraic form so I could
> more easily do math with it. I did mean the four entrances and exits or
> those holes that you had in your diagram from the two wormholes. It was a
> little late when I started sending you the formula and that and my excitement
> I made quite a few silly spelling errors and other just plain careless
> things. Thank you for baring with me and my excitement.
> I have found the relationship of the spin of an electron with its photon
> as well. Photon has 1 spin. The electron has a spin of ½. Now remember
> there is always a neutrino that orbits respectively that has no mass. This
> neutrino that follows the electron has been a mystery. The neutrino also has
> a spin of ½ so I think it might take up the other half the spin of the
> photons. Neutrino also has no charge. This respective neutrino could provide
> the extra spin lost when 918 paired photons make up the electron, a
> respective neutrino is form which produces the other half of the spin.
> Remember, an object at rest stays at rest until something acts on it and an
> all forces seek and equilibrium. The neutrino is formed by the two wormholes
> of the electron. How it is formed is by the 459 photons shooting out. The
> photons coming out of the wormhole would be making a larger gateway. Like
> how you said, "...,the electron (considered matter) would be making an actual
> quantum TIME jump." The neutrino is the TIME opening or destination wormhole
> of where the electron will time jump to. So where ever the neutrino is, is
> where the electron will soon be. That accounts for the missing ½ spin from
> photon to electron.
=========================================================================
Warren writes:
Interesting concept and one I have not considered. You are getting into
the makeup of the actual Space/Time fabric. I don't want to spread our
thought too thin by jumping around. I have been able to explain the
missing 1/2 spin as you call it by using the basic theory. I am not
discarding your neutrino concept but I don't want to pick things out
of the air as man has been doing with QM so far and try to make them
fit.If it is a true Unified Field Theory, and I truly believe it to be,
the theory should supply all our answers to our questions about QM. It
might turn out to be what I found is the same thing you are talking
about
with a neutrino. I just don't know enough about the neutrino just yet to
see if and where it might apply. I do know some about the neutron of
which
I will get into later. Let me first show you what I found from the
theory
with a little back engineering. I will first in a separate message send
you the graph of just what intrinsic spin is. Once you see what it is, I
feel you will be able to answer the question. We will be using the YGEM
as our guide. You might want to strap yourself in for this one. I have
been told one can not display or graph intrinsic spin. You used the YGEM
to calculate intrinsic mass of a photon. When you are dealing with only
energy it will be intrinsic because the state of TIME is different.
When you are dealing with matter it will be considered mass and not
intrinsic. The intrinsic is the antimatter that everybody is theorizing
about. It's like "Hole Theory" is the QM view where "Electron Flow
Theory"
is the physical or matter world view. Both are correct.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy wrote:
> In my idea of continuum travel or travel through space and time you need
> another opening at the same time. This would direct it to the nearest
> "escape bubble" in time. With out an exit the opening in time would either
> collapse or travel to the nearest black hole.
========================================================================
Warren writes:
I see what you mean. I will send you a graphic on the dynamics (makeup)
of the photon. I don't want to get off track by just looking at only the
photon but at some point I will cover just that. The theory will have
to agree with QM and that will give us our design. I have a good idea of
its dynamics and you will notice the openings in the bubble (photon).
This is important for when ever we talk about the openings (using 4D
Math
are Pi) you are dealing with spin. Notice I just said the photon in
construction is a bubble of Space/Time with a tunnel down through the
center? I only use the input opening as a marker but in reality the
complete tube because of TIME (not physical TIME) is directly connected
to intrinsic spin. In the case of the photon we only have one worm hole
(tube or tunnel) That would be a spin of 1. In the electron we have two
worm holes. Put a marker at the input side and follow the graph I will
send to see how you get 720 degrees for spin 1/2 which is an electrons.
See, the theory still holds up. One could not just make this up but
you will have to see the intrinsic spin graphics first to fully
understand. What you will see is the YGEM in different phases and the
local math to validate it. Keep your eye on Pi. Let me know if you get
excited about this one. That will tell me if you see what I see.

I almost forgot to tell you something very important about the photon.
The specific propagation of the photon is what makes every thing
happen. It moves in two axis at one time. That is why it shows such
strange qualities as duality and so forth. A virtual particle with
wave like properties and having intrinsic mass of zero as you have
pointed out. The intrinsic state being the anti state as I stated
earlier would become a -1 mass (zero intrinsic mass of 0 = -1 mass)
if viewed from the physical world.(-1 meaning having negative TIME)
Now like Spin, this is not an additive process as you were trying.
This is why you can also not use an additive process in dealing with
the train experiment and the speed of light. QM does not work logical.
The reason is the state of TIME is different than what the foundation
of the math is built on. In the physical world TIME is an apple. In
the QM world TIME is an orange. Both good to eat but not the same
thing. Having a direct link to giving birth to TIME as we know it is
the other part. Again, I am starting to get off topic and into the
fabric of Space/Time. There are laws and rules there also. If you want
a better idea of its propagation (motion or action) think of a donut.
Now make that donut fluid for remember it is not a solid (matter). The
donut now becomes a smoke ring. The smoke ring now is rotating on its X
axis (the energy axis or SPACE axis) while it is also turning in on
itself
along its Y axis (the TIME axis). Now it propagates in the X axis and Y
axis. The electron propagates Space/Time on its X axis only. This is why
the photons blend to make the surface area on the YGEM before being
sucked back into the counter worm hole (tunnel).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy wrote:
> This GUT theory is starting to creep me out with all that it is
> unlocking. It explains gravity because gravity is the suction of these
> wormholes.
======================================================================
Warren writes:
And guess what? That suction is the flow of TIME. (hyperspace TIME not
True TIME) Hyperspace TIME: Dealing with Space/TIME fabric. Now you
have a connection between, Energy (light), TIME, Gravity and Matter
(the electron). Cool!! All from the YGEM or theory. Looking more like
a Unified Field Theory to me every moment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy wrote:
Electromagnetism force is explained quite simply enough through
> this GUT. Gravity is mass at rest or photon pairs that have slowed and have
> grouped in four (I think that's how you explained six quark formation; an
> atom). What is very exciting with this theory is it works perfectly with
> E=MC(C) which is, of course, proved to be true or we wouldn't have figured
> and tapped the power of the nuclear force.
> When it come to experimenting to show this theory really does work may
> take some careful thought using what this GUT gives us. Some how we need an
> experiment that shows where the photons shoot out of the electron. I still
> think a vacuum experiment that totally block all electromagnetism besides an
> electron would work. Is there a vacuum chamber that can do this?
========================================================================
Warren writes:
I inquired for some assistance from a professor at Berkeley on this
today and another here in S.C. last week. I know they are busy people
but how can one expect another to get excited when they haven't even
been exposed to the theory? I'm still another crack pot until somebody
like you decides to investigate first hand. You may still drop out if
things don't add up and I understand that. I feel they will add up
however and I haven't even begun to cover every thing yet. TOE

I can tell you are starting to get excited but wait till I get into
the good stuff.

I post our messages for reason of record. I hope that is ok with you.
========================================================================
Jeremy wrote:
>
> My algebraic formula is changed a bit for better recognizing what each symbol
> means.
> MC(C)=E=4=918= photon mass
> M= mass of electron
> C= speed of spin
========================================================================
Warren writes:
I like to think of " C " as the Arrow or Vector of Light. Light being
the constant with speed understood.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy wrote:
> E= energy of an electron from mass and spin
> 4= to the four shifts of force
=======================================================================
Warren writes:
Using my 4D Math each 4 in your list is Pi. I'll have to show you this
math later but you can take the area of a sphere formulae for example:
A=4 Pi r^2 and see how the geometry fits the math and fits the theory.
The shape of something having 4 Pi in it will always be round be it real
or virtual. It is Universal. The math also works for higher math such as
Pauli Matrices used in finding spin 1/2. Math will always be in
agreement
with the geometry since math of any kind is only an image. Most use it
as
a quantity and loose sight of what it is telling you be it static or
dynamic. This is why I developed the 4D math to extract this data. It
seems to work but I do not have the time to check it out to see where
the 4D math may break down at some point. I just use it where I need
it at this point. Hay, I'm only one person. What can I say?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy wrote:
> 918= the 918 paired photons NOTE: individual photons can't be used since they
> posses a different attribute. Do not make the mistake of multiplying 918
> times 2.
=====================================================================
Warren writes:
If you go in the other direction with the theory in the arrow of the
macro you will see how 918 X 2 ties into the theory. Remember there are
both micro and macro worlds besides the QM world that needs to be
addressed. I already gave an example in the "order of matter".
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy wrote:
> photon mass = just as it says, photon mass
===================================================================
Warren writes:
Very important. It is " Intrinsic Mass ". We are still dealing with
two worlds and must make that distinction.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy wrote:
>
> Numeric
> (.0005)([(.5)(.5)])= 0.000125/ 4 = .0000312 / 918 = 0
>
> Verbal formula:
> rest mass of electron multiplied by spin of electron squared equals energy
> of mass of electron and spin divided by the points of shift of force equals
> electron energy without the four shifts of force divided by the 918 paired
> photons equals the rest mass of a photon
>
> Jeremy Lynn Mumme
> PS
> Thank You for your consideration toward my own work. I'm glad to share my
> little piece of the puzzle. Especially when it is something of this
> magnitude.
> Please send me your thoughts about what I think I might have discovered with
> the neutrino.
======================================================================
Warren writes:
I will send the graphics on spin in relation to the missing 1/2 spin and
the neutrino under separate cover. Please point out where I am not clear
or perhaps mistaken in my reasoning.

Also, you might want to consider a joint paper with me on this since
you have already been credited with the Intrinsic Mass of a Photon.
I have no problem with sharing. This is fun for me. If it makes it,
fine,
if not then it has been an adventure. Let me know if you agree using
the word intrinsic. I just feel a deeper meaning needs to be given to
Mass of Zero. Otherwise someone will think zero is nothing there
instead of a Kinetic force that will develop into an actual mass when
there is any delta in position or direction. Also part of the duality
phenomena. Warren