Letter to science

1) From Democritus to Steve Hawkings

2) The big bang big crunch paradox

3) God the universe and us

4) Space Curvature yes! But why?

5) GTM Mathematics



Some time ago Stephen Hawking’s book A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME was given to me. Since I like to think, this book generated for me very interesting lines of thought some presented here. In his writing Steve Hawking gives credit to fellow scientists where it is due as he presents his work. Mind you this book does not include mathematics necessary to come to the conclusions. Baring that in mind and having the feeling not to come to terms with the content, why then try to think related science, as an inventor, at all. In addition how can a scientist educated in the system think any other way or be expected to listen to my proposal of which the basics where discarded by science 80 years ago. Well, if my effort turns out only a lone evolutionary structure of thought, by the mind, on a subject! I would still have to be thankful to all those scientists that provided a base of thought for me, from which to exercise and entertain my mind, trying to find the key to the universe. For a person with this intuition it is rather surprising that mastering gravity seems not considered a major challenge in that book. Everything being so over shadowed by a search for GUT, that started off with special relativity, based on passed advance of science, to general relativity which need to be tended to, by quantum mechanics. The combine of that calls for an elevation onto the string theory platform to progress to the ultimate theory, GUT. In fact, science seems rather content with the speed of light limit. One gets the feeling that for science an ultimate theory will solve everything. In the mean time on other scientific fronts, the most bizarre spacecraft propellant systems are envisaged. For which billions of dollars are necessary and that is not getting near the speed of light, so there is little hope for the arrival of a true volume and beyond solar system migratory space age for mankind. Yet, by the disputable function of a machine, because it is relaying on directional stability which is given by the contact of wheels to a smooth level surface, it is shown, that one can convert rotational momentum into linear momentum in a mechanical fashion. A system like this transferred, in theory, into the nuclear arena creates a picture (a vision) to an atomic mechanical function of gravity (see GM 2001). It provides a look at an alternative propulsion idea! This system in its principle could take you past the speed of light. The very small force of the machine wouldn’t accelerate extreme. A 200gr weight at approx.3 rev per sec. produces about a 40gr impulse trust (IT) per rotation = 120gr per second. (In space it is a per IT distance per second, accelerating adding force.) Yet contemplating centripetal force manipulation, to create a linear force by an indifferent principle, does not seem to be known by science. It is not incorporated in the progression of cosmic and nuclear science. Ironically this technology is in use since ancient times for a slingshot and these days in sport. Would Gravitational Time Mechanics (GTM) knowledge have made any difference in the outcome to this book? Like to the idea of the string theory! The string theory seems to `incorporate an imaginary string that has no diameter, yet has to have a braking strain of 1.0 x1039 tons, to string every thing (that is the cosmos) together this is logical inconceivable for the ordinary mind. To comprehend that, if you are a mathematician, one must master the appropriate mathematics, which have been invented, for that purpose, by the top men of the establishment! For the lay science person the only way to picture it, is as the flight pass of a crow, (which has no material dimension but has dimension within the mind) imagined perhaps through the center of a black hole from where it my draw its power. A dwelling for super gravitational energy (black mass perhaps producing a laser like concentration of gravity) and that energy thought as a string or many strings like a spider web (as in the book?) provides that tension (power), to keep every thing in place. In addition, this seems to become a, some what explanation of gravity, appropriate with time and multi infinitive space time curvatures. All this then, at the book’s publication in 1988 must be considered, to that date, an end product of the finest minds since Dimocritus on this subject. The books content is accompanied by the cautious hopes of Stephen

Hawking, to have a clearer theoretical understanding, in the very near future. And generally by science, that the string theory could be well on the way by the end of the century, it is now 2002 (when I wrote the base of this). As I mentioned before, by GTM terms, gravity, the permanent and the electromagnetic force, the weak and the strong force (see GTM 2001), every thing would have the same mechanical base, it is a unified mechanical by frequency controlled interaction, a total mechanical entity. However, for me the thought after mathematical final GUT- string equations is beyond my scope. In fact in my position, I feel silly to write somewhat to my self, an analyzing paper and I hope I don’t make a fool of my self. One must realize so, that I attempt this by the background knowledge of GTM, which is looking at the whole from an other angle, trying to simplify in order to understand and thereby solving a problem. This is driven by the assumption that science up to date has come to all their conclusions by still depending at its roots on Newtonian mechanics. Substantiated by the fact that no matter what (as used by Einstein) it is based on "for every force there is an equal and opposite force" (or reaction). One got to realize velocity of mass from rest or its temporally acceleration, is conventional created by an explosive ejection or mechanical displacement of mass, not as by Gravitational Mechanics (GM), by the (centripetal force) internal mechanics of mass. Consequently, by this barrier of the mind, nothing can surpass the speed of light. Hence all mathematics and experiments have been invented and conducted by minds deeply conventional educated, that is programmed and bound to this system. I am aware of course that so far by any stellar or nuclear observations and by nature nothing has been found or proved to surpass the speed of light. But one must understand or consider that none of the great Greek philosophers in their time seen a hunk of metal (man made) rush across the sky or roll on wheels along a road, up to or beyond thirty times faster than a galloping horse. Man took the metal and made it that way and man can understand the function of gravity and use it his way. Coming back to Sir Isaac Newton, he suggested increase of velocity to infinity! Were did this greatest of thinkers based that on, gravitational acceleration? I think conventional science is like a collection of the finest musical instruments in the hands of master musicians. Now and than a man comes along like Beethoven and sums it all up in a beautiful symphony. However, was that the final symphony? Doesn't a violin concerto by Paganini entice one just as much? Are these the only musicians that can play these instruments? Didn't Wagner expand symphonic 'ungeheurlich' and didn't Prokofieff painted a winter's day like no other composer. So I have a question! In all calculated given time values in Stephen Hawkings book, the age of the universe, the life span of a star, there seems to be no interacting relative time factor involved. By GTM, there is a gravity relative time factor. What I’m trying to say is, if one calculated the live span of a star many times the size and gravitational power as that of the earth taken, as Base 1 (B1)! But one calculated the stars nuclear fusion process by B1 standards (by GM a stellar body at twice the gravitational power would be B2) and one did not allow for the relative GTM factor, the calculations can be out by scientific unexpected time proportions. An astronaut entering a black hole my not fare as bad as expected. Calculations by GTM could show this. This also means that the red shift of stars may vary in brightness according to their individual time rates of fusion. (This is in opposition to the book, large stars to small stars). The larger the mass of a star the stronger the gravity, the slower the time cycle, the slower the fusion, the higher the frequency (by GTM), the dimmer the light emission. This could also be a second reason why a black hole does not emit light. The nuclear process is so slow that light is super dim, because it is diluted by Inner Space -Time (IST) and may thus, not be bend back by gravity. Considering all this, I understood an analogue states some thing like the opposite in the book for a heat-pressure reason! Backed up by an analyzed center of a hydrogen bomb explosion to be of presumed similar condition compared to cosmic fusion events. It is hard to imaging this event to be comparable to an electron size crunch of the entire universe, calling for completely different gravitational ratings (which is common knowledge since Isaac Newton) for the final

moment of the mass contraction leading to a big bang ignition. So I wonder, if science calculated the live span of the stars by their mathematical means considering a gravity-related time factor, contemplating even (conventional), a variation between the core and the surface, there could be a difference. The age of the universe, the big bang, the first second of expansion! This moment and every second after that would have to be calculated and the values summed up. As by every second during the initial expansion process, the gravitational relative time factor would change according to the continuously easing of the center (and total) pressure. Causing hence a continuously alteration of gravity, hence a continuously change in time values, adding thus to the conventional age calculations of the universe. In fact the time difference in the first second of the universe in the big bang progress compared to 1 second on earth B1, could be so immense, as to cause a rethink to established time values and theories (see mathematical explanation). This is best understood if one imagined oneself within that mass. With respect to science, I find cause worth to mention all this, because I remember a publicly famous Australian Professor of science Julius Miller in one of his TV shows with the classical water tank emptying, while parallel at the same time at a lesser capacity refilling sequence. Where he said," do you know, that while the tank is full (because of the extra pressure) it empties faster than when it is near empty! Nobody ever thought of that, so all previous calculations are incorrect". The day when my teacher hit us with this mathematical twister, I was 15 years of age and years later when my eldest son come home with it, I had the feeling that the Professors solution was some how, at some time, in the back of the mind. And I think many other thinkers felt the same but no one brought it up, Professor Julius Miller did.


The GTM point on which this writing is based in stellar and nuclear mechanics is! GRAVITY IS A RESULTANT OF THE QUANTITATIVE IST CONTRACTION RELATED MECHANICS OF MASS. TIME (bound state electron velocity) IS A RELATIVE REACTING PROPERTY OF THE TWO. That means that in a situation where there is zero mass there is also zero gravity and zero time. Time; as we know it, is a continuos phase of the chemical mechanics of matter a progressive change to decay and renewal. We see it passing in seconds, hours, days and years. The hour hand makes a twelve-hour circle the spiritual hand a cosmic circle, a Zeitalter. So for a big bang to initiate, contrary to the presumption that the universe is being reduced at that critical moment to zero mass, leads into a paradox. Which science amplifies, that the existence and therefor the surge for an ultimate particle is still on, so at the moment the electron or the quark etc. are considered elementary in size. If this final particle is found and confirmed, for those who believe in zero mass for the prime singularity, they have to ask the questions. Can mass, as a total of the universe, where its building blocks can not be divided, be hidden into zero mass, is black mass zero mass? Does a black hole has to collapse ultimately into zero mass? What, if the mass has a sufficient spin and the centripetal force thus holds the balance (See mathematical explanation)! One can argue that this elementary particle can be annihilated by its anti particle and changed into energy; zero mass. But that would be by GTM, the nuclear science equal to a stellar science black hole affair, may be a mini parallel of a black hole (U-2)! A black hole that is conventional a gravitational power colossus, evidence of mass (generating gravitational energy), even so it is expected to whither away, (by GTM change from Universe 1 (U1) to (U-1), (U-2), etc.). Science also talks of the incredible energy of some particles; this has a calculable equal, by GTM, in a contraction situation. We are told anything that has energy has mass, now we are told super energy has no mass. Gravity by a sufficient singularity as quantity of mass, is a supreme energy, gravitational speaking. Because of this relation, there can only be without mass (zero mass), zero time! This is acknowledged in the book. Therefor a true beginning in

time of the universe can only be claimed by a primeval collection of its mass as a singularity of zero

mass, that would be spiritual. In addition as zero mass has no gravity, there can hence be no pressure, hence any heat. Heat, as light is quantum of photons and it has frequency, therefor by GM mass. Hence light bends reacting to gravitational frequency (frequency of a star), therefor it has GM at a lower dimension (U-2). Collectively (strictly by GTM), without mass, there is no ignition cause for the big bang, Hence their can never be a true beginning of the universe, a beginning of time. It has to start with a hovering of time (ultra slow time). For a big bang we are thus forced to allow initial mass (Stephen Hawkings revision?) and this all together, as I can see, seems a paradox, because you cant have one without the opposite of the other. It could be said that my postulations are the result of ignorance, which is partly true! But then, this can be a benefit because this ignorance is not influenced by the burden of knowledge that becomes a blockade, by the code, to evolutionary constructive imagination. The only way a philosophic abstract scientist can make his work of forbidden indifference to the main stream known, in these times, is by claiming he is working with E T’s together and that they told him so. It is well known that mass as a significant singularity according to its size and density causes a variable of gravitational power. Hence it is not outer space that controls time but gravity generated by mass either by its volume or by a forced up on IST mass condition. Thus IST acts as a storehouse for energy it the reverse of the human concept in Outer Space Time (OST) that when there is a surplus we build a bigger storehouse. At the nuclear level, by GTM, energy is stored by the contraction of IST (see mathematical explanation). And this should have no effect on OST. That space, big bang or big crunch will always be there. It is the farm, the creation space, a domain of God. Also in spade of all, one must admit to scientific proven time variation through distance variable but it is still gravity (by distant mass) related. One could take distance, as space and therefor space-time or space curvature as a major influence to a variable of time! By GM, space (outer space) has as little influence on a substantial life span differential for an astronaut as has that gravity in space; to provide a gravitational steady foothold to the floor of a spaceship for the astronaut, compared to gravity on the surface of the earth. Maybe it can be found that the slower gravitational frequency (vibration) to which the astronauts could be subjected to, out in space, from smaller planets than the earth, if their body’s adapt to it, should make them operate at a faster rate of time (age faster) than on earth. GTM show there is a limit an energy barrier, which does not permit that (see GTM chart). That seems to be the golden limit forming a general time boundary of the universe, approx. to the earth life base B1. There is no considerable attraction out in space, as we know to cause a significant gravitational effect on a small object, by an equal small object. (The exception of the combined particles of a large mass of gas clouds contracting into a planet considered) Only sizeable bodies have influence on smaller objects or compliment each other appreciative through distance in space gravitational; see also gravitational mechanics, GM 2001. The contraction of inner neutral, relative to B1 space is the key for a true substantial proportional variable of time. In relation with that statement one must conceive inner space in the form of the inner volume, of all the mass of a stellar body. And by the inner space that body and so all its mass, either by being contracted natural or artificial, thus causing the effect of substantial variations of gravity as according to GTM. To be extreme lets take the big crunch contracted volume before the big bang to be electron size. Time, at this compact state of the whole universe, would pass so slow, that it would exceed the calculated existence of the universe up to date and make the big bang theory questionable. By GTM for the above, one second Inner-Space-Time (IST) has approx. a duration, of 1.0 x 1093 seconds OST a time dilation from earth, -B1 time- or correctly, by the GTM chart, time is slowed down where 1/1.1.0 x 1093 second IST = 1 second OST. One must realize that OST does not exist any more in this contracted configuration. Therefor a big crunch size black hole would rather be a cosmic time freezer. And please note that any duration of time of the universe hovering in this

stage is a time span that has to be added to the age estimations of the universe. Because as long as there is mass there is a flow of time! Next, the chemical reaction, nuclear interaction of the big bang in progress, from an electron size, would be time indifferent and slower compared to earth B1

gravitational time conditions, until the whole mass from within of the universe equalized (expanded)

to earth mass lava density B1. If that was on common scientific grounds gravitational-mechanical practical, even than, because the greater the mass, the stronger is the gravitational power. As a result, time should pass slower by conventional thinking also. In that respect my reasoning can be used here to make a reasonable point in thought. Since science can estimate the approximate mass of the universe, hence we can calculate the radius of that mass as an expanding sphere, to that B1 point. Hence we can calculate the progressing variable of density for every B1 second, to that length of that radius, throughout this big bang expansion progress. Hence the relative total inner space-time is related to that constantly changing condition of that mass proportional to that continuously easing pressure (see attached mathematical explanation). This process to the creation of the primordial elementary B1 soup sphere (earth lava-state), the start of mass separation and the creation (the development) of galaxies has to be summed up to that point, to get a true estimation of the age of the universe. What has to be done is to compute from that point on, the universe known expansion rate to the size of the universe today. Then ad this time span to the suggested two initial time spans, the hovering and the progressing to the B1 soup stage and the result should be inconceivable, from the conventional universe age estimations, by which the universe is approx. ten thousand million years (3.14496 x 1017 seconds) old. Since some scientists support the idea that the universe initiated by a violent explosion! That of course would suggest that science did not incorporate a reason as found by GTM for a controlled, slow initial start of the big bang. And my thoughts therefor could be useful to those scientists that believe there has to be (for big crunch technical reasons) a delicate initial expansion of the universe, such as Stephen Hawking. This can be calculated by the (GTM) relative time variable (see mathematical explanation). This is also very logical because we are dealing with a too massive volume of mass here. We are not talking about an exploding grenade having all the room to expand. Here, the whole universe before the big bang is compressed by the big crunch to the size of an electron or a pea or < etc. if you like, which can not by the common law of physics, expand three dimensional faster than the speed of light. That also hints it should not start of as gas but as lava B1 soup and this even at C, in a sense, because of the volume, is much like a controlled expansion. All considered there can be no beginning of time (a re-creation), only a suspension, ultra slow time because there has to be an initial mass for the big bang to ignite, this can be mechanical better understood by GTM where there is a mass contraction to infinity. If there should be any disinterest as to why there should be relative, to the gravitational condition of mass, a slow controlled initial (as by GTM) progression of the big bang! One could say, that the way relativity was presented by Einstein, is a part of an overall scientific progress and thinking in every aspect, whether you apply it exact or some what different, so one shouldn’t blame any one for these thoughts and suggestions. And even if all this, that I suggested, has been said or has been considered before and has been ignorantly, unconsciously plagiarized by me, there is always a chance of the existence of a Professor Julius Miller who picks up the loose ends and ties them together.


"….for than we would know the mind of God."

I don’t know why Steve Hawking makes the above request as quest for man, since he provided so many answers. For if he used them to try to answer this issue himself, he would get very close to

what he is surging for. I think being a scientist at this period of time the knowledge is such, that it deprives one of the freedom, of that of a philosopher, even to the point of listening to one. This is an ultimate barrier to primary or alternative advance of thought! In spite of the overwhelming success in electronics and computer technology and other branches of science, for it closes the doors to the benefit of basic imagination, therefor, basic change in some established fields. Stephen Hawking has no hesitation to write that the big bang, in his early work, could have started with the whole universe contracted to zero mass, which science need to establish of course to have a singularity of zero time, for a big bang to start from zero time. How else could you have a true beginning of time and thus the beginning of the universe. I pointed out earlier by GM that can not be so, because without mass there can be no gravity acting. Try the Cavendish experiment with one ball of led on one side and non-on the other. By GTM mass reduces successively into lower dimension, from (U1), into (U-1); into (U-2), > etc. So mass should never come to zero but it could be infinitely reducing from one dimension into the next lower one, see (GM 2001). In Stephen Hawkins book, even a beginning of God, limits of God the purpose of His creations, to get to know His mind and probably a doubtful end of all things, he writes have been questioned or have been an issue for many thinkers including Stephan Hawking himself. When we take a good look around us by nature every thing grows and therefor expands. By human logic even God seems to expand in spirit by those who join Him reborn as a living spirit. Thus giving man a reason why he is, and why he has to complete his cycle on earth. Thus why planets like the earth have to be, for life like us to evolve, to be able to start and complete that cycle. Thus why a star has to be to support a solar system for a planet like ours to evolve. Thus why a galaxy has to be to create and support solar systems for that purpose. Hence why the OST, has to be to provide space for the galaxies of a universe. Hence why God was and is and has created the universe for a purpose. If we think about many singularities or the vast number of galaxies and solar systems and wonder about the waste full complexity for a reason as stated above. Then look at nature where some species produce millions of eggs for only a few to survive. Einstein said! "Anything that has mass has energy and anything that has energy has mass", By GTM, anything that has mass has frequency hence dimension and anything that has three dimensions has according to mass condition, relative, calculable variable time. And HE who is a Living Spirit has no material dimension and is therefor infinitive in time, in both time arrow directions the past and the future. Hence, no one alive in the flesh can ever assign a beginning nor an end to HIM. If you dare to do so, the word infinity would loose its meaning either material or spiritual. It seems for a reason that man can only realistically, conceive infinity in to the future direction (Stephen Hawkings mentioned directional arrows of time) but can not conceive it into the opposite direction, except in particle science. It is not meant for man, it is against the logical nature of all things. Most of us have a beginning and an end. Only in a new life, infinity from there on, if we are chosen, except for, " Blest is he who come into being be for he come into being." After all this, one must be thankful to Stephen Hawking for his book and to my eldest son who gave it to me. What a treasure trough as bases of thought! Because when I read many month ago about the Israeli Professor Elihu Ripps who discovered the book within the book in the Torah! I was stunt! That did not comply with my GTM, where by time can only be locally retarded but in a special condition. As an inventor I ask the immediate question how is that possible, how does God accomplish to lay out future events so accurately? Was I totally wrong? After many nights of thought, I concluded that this was impossible for me to comprehend - ever. However, since we are his children it would not hurt to keep asking. And when I just hours ago, while writing this, made my point of the dual directional infinity of Him, I realized that Steve Hawkings mentioning of our material world, being paralleled by an equal mirror image antimatter world, that by this there is an answer. If these two worlds where normally synchronized progressing in time, the antimatter world, (hence the spiritual world) could be

accelerated ahead of the material world but it could also be reversed in time into an opposite (arrow) direction of time, the past. Now if God started the big bang, therefor time for species like us, when the universe should contract, that time would end one day! But God can in the antimatter, parallel world (the spiritual world) survey it in two directions, past and future! Hence the past and the future can be connected that means it is a cosmic circle a form of infinity. A circle of life, (a Zeitalter for every universe) like any thing else in life on earth, only in cosmic time dimensions This can not be done within our material world, because we are bared by the boundary of the progressing mechanics of matter (thermodynamics). No wonder every hair is counted on our head. He can count them any time! In any period of our lives. It is like a time less living spiritual dairy. You could put Julius Caesar after all these years right now in front of a spiritual court and every sin that he committed is plainly visible as his life is rolled up, before the Judge, like a movie. Goodness yea, what are we going to do now! Now if some of you thinkers out there want to go one step further and say can’t we still make past and future events happen in material appearance? We know that science works seriously on the disassembly of mass at the atomic level in one location to reassemble it in an other-. To achieve this you would have to seek a technology, able to control the spiritual parallel to our world. At a chosen point convert that anti matter world into a present parallel reality or contract the event to the quark level and with anti quarks transfer it into the spiritual level. By writing the next lines, I actually give my GM theory the coupe de grace in relation to Gods hand in the universe. As it is known God is a spirit; hence therefor without mass and therefor infinitive timeless in both time arrow directions the past and the future. Therefor since it is considered by science for a prime singularity to ignite with zero mass, if that looks for us possible to conceive, that is therefor a spiritual situation. Hence it is at this point that God is in complete control of the start. The light is in control of the light, a power, the energy of the Spirit, hence such, a beginning of the universe. Hence a human species follow up sequence described as above. Now if God starts this universe only once but out of spirit, just as he appeared to us in the flesh and every restart from than on begins with mass, than I get away with my theory. Oh, who so ever dismisses all these possibilities, remember it is science that is providing the clues! If we look at the earthly live forms, we see that an egg has all the gene information, after fertilization, of its species. The same system provides the complete gene blue print of life in all its exact diversities of all the creatures. Plants have a blue print. One-celled life forms have blue prints! The finest biological scientists are proving now that they can intervene and alter the course of the blueprint. So can nuclear science alter the course of a species by transforming the landscape of our planet, into that of Venus. Do you really doubt that God, at the control to the beginning of the universe, has not got a blueprint as a whole or can not alter his blueprint during progress? Lets consider if we are so violent as to blow each other up with mega hydrogen bombs and if we succeed to destroy the surface of the earth and our selves! Is that not in a sense an alteration to a blue print, a provision in which a foul branch is cut off? Is it not obvious, if we are not worthy, we are literally programmed to remove our selves. Do you really think then, no one has provided the initial blueprint of life, the initial seed of live on earth for which man is still looking for? Knowing from that moment that life may unfold programmed created, or (evolve, mutate) as according to Darwin’s evolutionary theory, the course of the progression to be changed any time by planetary or cosmic events. And parallel the mental intellectual evolution by the highest species of a suitable planet, as we are witnesses of, to our selves, at this very moment. Steve Hawking cosmic parallel mentioned in his book leads to an answer to the riddle of the Torah and the Torah points the way to a spiritual singularity. If this Power has that technology, what about the parallel universe, as a spiritual events recording device? Why not, as mentioned before, does science take Professor Arthur Wheeler’s advice and listen to the wise men of the past, compare it to what science tells us. Than you have two sources of knowledge, the spiritual and the physical to draw

from. Conclusively if science wants to find the theory of all theories it would have to be one of the three options of Steve Hawking quote" just an infinite sequence of theories that describe the universe more and more accurately" unquote. It can’t be a theory beginning in the middle or add a few periods spaced together it has to be like genetic genes blueprints which He is showing us right now. And the theory must unfold like the book within the Torah using a computer, because He knew we would have such a computer at some point in time. It can not start with E = mc2 its got to be, zero t + spirit = E > mc2. m < E = soup-stage = galaxies, sun, earth + (live x time) = universe = creation. This would be a base trunk of which all other theories and formulae branch off. The GTM chart works somewhat like that for its limited purpose.



To visualize a progression of the universe from the spiritual realm (zero mass), to the galaxy creating soup stage, which is not the way it would happen according to GTM. Thinking therefor as an exercise, conventional with a touch of GTM. Favoring rather a, from solid (super condensed), slow controlled expansion of the universe material, into a primeval soup stage, a lava like B1 stage, like below the crust of the earth. To the forming of an enormous sphere containing all the mass of the universe (in the B1 soup stage), spinning center longitude and slower latitude as well. If in such a progression, the longitude spin reached a tangent velocity (thus defeating gravity) whereby mass is

flung out in a stream, as rather dense soup as soon as the surface viscosity of the mass allows distribution! Than it is cut of, as the flowing mass is used up periodically and through the latitude spin a change of the tangential angle is created, which also provides the center and the twist of the cartwheel. It would see the divided sections into a winding spin pivoting at center stream of mass, in it self, a birth of a galaxy. To substantiate a thought like this, one got to realize the big crunch is a, to center, radial three dimension contraction. There should be a catalyst for the big bang other than an explosion caused by super compression or combustion of pure energy! A sufficient mass spin will by tangential angular velocity, force a mass expansion and separation and create thus room for a periodic succession of the same. This could happen to any size black hole! The two dimensional spin of the soup sphere would insure that the evolving galaxies would be distributed equally three-dimensional surrounding the original sphere. As well provide a reason for the delicate nature by which the universe has to expand according to the book. Further a black hole need not to collapse to zero mass if its mass has sufficient spin. As to a stable longitude spin! When the sphere reduces its volume the radius shortens hence the tangent velocity should slow down. This could be of set by a proportional increase, by the from center, expanding mass to a point. Also an action whereby a longitude tangential drag caused by the releasing mass accelerates the angular velocity much like a water hose on a downward motion unwinding from a reel. Previously released mass would provide the gravity. The later released galaxies my have a different shape. So overall, the universe is assured a fairly even distribution of mass per galaxy. Science could work out the velocity of that spin for the last galaxy and the last galaxy would have a different shape again (earth like), a clue for science to work out center universe. The evolving galaxies, if the arms were out of balance, its mass could divide into two, giving cause to different shapes. Expanding on this thought train, there are two questions!


If one considers my proposed soup stage postulation! Than it takes, by the GTM relativity effect

approx. 1 x 1093 seconds, over 13645485 steps as bundles of seconds receding to 1x1 second B1 time. This is calculated as time steps (see mathematical explanation), to expand from a big crunch (an electron size reduced universe) to the soup stage. As explained above, the primordial soup-sphere spinning then two-dimensional throwing out streams of mass, three-dimensional, creating galaxies. The same should spin horizontal aligned to the center of the original sphere out going three-dimensional into space from center creation. Because the first dimensional the longitude spin initiates the stream of mass, the latitude spin gives that mass the galactic twist and its arm shape. A variable in the emitted density of the mass could determine variety of shape. If a point in the universe could be found to which this center alignment spin of all galaxies fits, that also could be the center of the universe. That would give a point from which to gouge the size of the universe more accurately. Now as the soup streams are catapulted out into space by angular velocity, not one galaxy should be radiating away from the center or from each other. But all should recede in an angular vortex motion outward, (a crab shell spiral shape). If there had been only one galaxy created it would have followed a straight pass from the tangent of the soup sphere provided that it used all the primordial soup. But where would its galactic spin come from? Since there are many galaxies it took time to send them all on their way. Therefor from the ignition of the big bang, the distribution of mass, to the remaining soup sphere, this mass caused and maintained by gravity an outward spiraling effect to the path of the galaxies into the depth of space. And now after the total creation of all galaxies they among them selves through their inter gravitational attraction sustain the spiraling outward effect. So by its primary motion, every thing is actually curving outward three dimensional from us. This velocity should be equal to the mass separating angular tangential velocity necessary, to separate from the soup sphere. That could be checked against the distance and out ward movement between the galaxies. Also, we can calculate by that galactic spin, the tangential initial soup sphere spin. Hence, we could determine the original radius of the soup sphere, hence counter check the mass of the universe. So, if this outward spiraling concept can be proved that means that there was a soup stage beginning, if not the big bang began gaseous and would have radiated outward three-dimensional at the near the speed of light. But why than, does the universe not expand constant, at or near the speed of light?


What are the mechanics? This may be, best explained by the outward vortex spiraling effect, caused by a tangential mass emission curved by gravity! Hence the galaxies as a whole have a primary angular outward velocity and therefor the from center universe radial outward secondary motion is caused by the centripetal force. (To cement this, the book states a side ward velocity of the galaxies). Hence a continuously increasing outward distance (radius) between the galaxies from a center. Now as this distance increases between galaxies so does the gravitational hold (bond) decreases between them, therefor by the expansion of the spiral we measure a radial outward acceleration. In a gaseous big bang radial expansion without dual spin of the soup sphere, acceleration would not occur. Hence Einstein is right space is curved, because every thing is receding from us in curves three-dimensional. It seems that is why, the general relativity proved slightly more accurate planetary motion results over Newton. Concluding my writing of this letter, it is rather philosophic, hopefully

perhaps, a somewhat evolutionary progression of thought, my be it has some value at that. The function of the machine is the only concrete foundation of the innovative thoughts but as mentioned before I feel somewhat supported by Einstein’s appreciation of imagination in relation to knowledge.



This is a line of thought whereby through GM the big crunch can be modified, that is not to contract the universe to near zero but to an, as currant functional, but condensed origin and than to expand again. This paper is to be published if interest is shown in the postulations above.



This is a line of thought portrayed as a struggle between the mind and the inventor! An attempt to find a mainstream (Einstein fashion but involving gravity) solution to confirm that on a planet of similar make up, to the earth, but double the surface gravity, there is a time dilation ratio of 1:8. Time on that planet is eight times slower. This was don in addition and for the confirmation to a simpler solution as has been used for the GTM chart. On the way an idea emerged that will enable man to measure the acceleration, the speed and therefor his position in space, traveling at and above many times the speed of light. To be published if interest is shown in the above.


Related Articles

letter to science 4/2004

Mathmatical Explinations

GTM 2004 Update