Reciprocal System #121-Interview D [Thomas Newsome]

Transcript

all right hello everyone welcome to my channel I'm Thomas and this is a channel for educational videos today is video 121 on the reciprocal system of theory the reciprocal system of theory is a theory of everything that was first proposed by Dewey B larsonback in the 20th century he died back in 1990 but his work has been carried forward by others especially Dr Bruce perrett who died back in 2020 and uh doctors kvk nehru Dr Gopi Krishna and others and um the basic idea behind the reciprocal system is that we have a universe of motion the universe is not made out of matter the universe is not made out of energy but it is made out of motion and matter and energy are actually just specific kinds of motion as is as are every other scientific phenomenon that we know of including acceleration and pressure and magnetic flux and capacitance and impulse force and um speed and energy we've said that already there are others but really any combination um of space and time because for Larson um he distinguished his theory because other people have come up with this idea of a universe of motion but he distinguished his theory from everybody else's by defining motion as the relationship between space and time and so all of these different kinds of motions are just relationships between space and time now space and time so a relationship generally implies a fraction a ratio and um time and space are both multi-dimensional now when you have a fraction you have a reciprocal relationship uh like two-thirds and three halves uh there is a if you invert them then you have the reciprocal and that multiplies out to being one and so um what adheres to one uh one time or space Also adheres to the other they both have the same qualities and um space we know to be three or more dimensions therefore time is three or more Dimensions Larson calls that coordinate space and coordinate time and time is always flowing and progressing getting later and later and so therefore space is also flowing and progressing always getting farther and farther apart evidence for this is the Hubble telescopes observation of the recession of the distant galaxies and Larson calls that clock time and clock space so everything all these different scientific qualities are just relationships between space and time so for example speed is space over time energy is time over space so you could also understand that speed and energy are reciprocals of each other matter is actually timed to the third power over space to the third power and we will get into what that what that really means at a certain point here um but uh the other aspect of space and time that is relevant is that they both come in discrete units only they're they don't come continuous they are in chunks and so you have a minimum unit of time and a minimum unit of space one unit and one unit of space in one unit of time is the speed of light so the speed of light is not the maximum speed of the universe as uh Einstein would claim in Larson's Universe the speed of light is the midpoint or the null point or the neutral point of the universe which makes sense because you have if you have a universe of motion then motion is really the common denominator of everything um and you really don't have anything that's not in motion so even when you are kind of when you are perceiving no motion you have this background motion of the speed of light in all directions Larson calls that the progression of the natural reference system so uh this calls him to to really have a conventional reference system which is you know what we recognize to be Stillness and taking the measurements from that point of Stillness and then you have the natural reference system which acknowledges that everything is moving outward at the speed of light in all directions and so that is the datum from which you take your measurements you take your measurements from the speed of light not from zero and so that uh creates a lot of different Dynamics okay now uh we are right now looking at uh going through the transcript of one of his interviews or really one of his few interviews that he did back in 1984 where he was an 85 or 86 year old man uh six years before he died and uh he's being interviewed by this guy named John summer and uh he's going over various uh various things he right now he's talking about the periodic table and how he kind of came up with his idea about a different periodic table and how he uh recognized that there were really three variables going into the into uh the properties of matter uh and you know one of them is represented by the horizontal rows of the periodic table and one of them is represented by the vertical rows but he has this other one as well so uh he's um uh so he's talking about that so we're going to take over right uh at this point so so here's Larson so in that way the solid is a simpler structure in the other direction the value of tackling more complicated substances first is um first is that then you have series relations the series beginning with sodium for instance is quite well defined so I began with the sodium potassium series and I took that as a two component system as the chemists do but before I got done I realized that I had to introduce a third number I got some results with the third number that I couldn't get with the two but the minute you get into three numbers in anything like this your immediate reaction is those must be dimensions that's an obvious conclusion in a three-dimensional universe so that was the thing that led into that question and then from that you deduced the atomic structure Larson yes when you've when you got dimensions then the next step was to identify the numbers that the rotation numbers with the rotations and the speeds of course there were a lot of different angles to work out on that because even though the structure may not be too complicated in certain ways it is complicated in that there are alternate ways of fitting into the reference system we still have more work to do to clarify this point in the theory question you mean the coupling to the reference system Larson that that's part of it yes questions so you had these three dimensions and you were working also with the photon you realize that simple harmonic motion could be permanent then somehow you brought these two ideas together and concluded that the photon was actually one of the building blocks of the atom Larson let's put it this way the idea of the photon as simple harmonic motion was really the same thing that Galileo had in respect to translational motion according to the previous ideas based on Aristotle's work it was necessary to have something to cause continual emotion and the problem was to identify what it was that caused the proton to continue uh sorry the photon to continue actually I've read that completely wrong let's go back uh Aristotle's work Accord the previous ideas based on Aristotle work was uh it was necessary to have something to cause continual motion and the problem was to identify what it was that caused the motion to continue I think that Aristotle himself used angels to push the planets around well Galileo discovered the fact that you don't have to have anything to explain that that is motion because it's motion is continuous now I was merely extending the same thing to this simple harmonic motion because once started is nothing but emotion that continuously changes Direction excuse me and consequently it requires no more explanation than translation now once you have a vibrational motion you have an object in space for the purpose of explaining radiation all I had to do was to let this object move in a direction perpendicular to the vibration there were other questions in connection with radiation of course that I still hadn't clarified but up to this point that was all I needed you can't rotate until you have something that is going to rotate so that to me we were talking about this yesterday but that to me gives evidence that Larson didn't really understand um the Primacy of rotation um you can have translation without something to translate and you can I don't know maybe I'm maybe I'm not understanding what he's saying correctly there you can't rotate until you have something that is going to rotate so that's really how he's saying that the atom is being formed first you have to have something and then you rotate it in two different dimensions and possibly a third and that is what creates the matter but you can't rotate uh until you have something to rotate and um Larson's uh you know followers uh his uh revisers disagreed with that and they really even said that the photon itself is the result of a by rotation of a counter rotation and that the simple harmonic motion is merely the residue of the interference of those two rotational motions and that the rotational motion is just as primary as this translational motion and so it doesn't require anything that you need you don't need any Angel to push it around to make it happen the way that Aristotle was saying about planetary motion and even though planetary motion it you know in both of their schemes is rotational he doesn't seem to be applying it here so this is an interesting point and it's a point that has been a sticking point in the reciprocal system uh for many many years since Larson died and since Bruce Perrette and kvk nehru started uh you know to kind of look toward the by rotation as the source of the photon so you know the photon is your simple harmonic motion your sine wave and that is for Larson that's a combination of a translational motion and a vibrational motion so you've got when you combine both of them you get a sine wave but you also get a sine wave when you have two counter rotating motions and you interfere them a sine wave comes out of that too so those are two different ways to look at the photon and they create very very different results okay back to the questioner so basically you took the simplest object you could see could conceive of Larson I'm developing from the standpoint of Simply a relationship between space and time and that's the first thing I was able to derive from that so that's all I needed when I got something that would work that is the most likely thing anyway so that was the thing um then that I decided to rotate so for his Adam he's got he's got the the vibration yeah he's got the simple harmonic motion and then he rotates that in a perpendicular Direction and rotates that in a perpendicular Direction and that is what creates matter so you really got three components there and you know that makes sense because matter is in Larson's uh you know in Larson's uh denominations of time and space matter is time to the third power over space to the third power well we know that space to the third power is just volume x y z coordinates you know it it's this this far in this direction this far in this direction and this far in this direction so that's that's volume so you have three dimensions of time in a volume that's mad that's matter and so the First Dimension is the photon the second dimension is the rotation and the third dimension is the other rotation um so um and that also uh kind of sheds some light on actually what time is you know when you think of space you think of it as as in a direction uh not a vector but just a a an expanse you know from here to here how much space is that or from here to here how much space is that but with time you're not so much dealing with a translational motion you're dealing with rotation you know uh uh just like a clock a clock is you know measured by how much rotation you have how much angle you have and you know the days of the week or whatever Monday and then Tuesday the difference between that is a rotation of the Earth um and so time is really a rotational thing whereas Space is really a um a translational thing in this sector of the universe now if you were moving faster than the speed of light in what is called The Cosmic sector of the universe then I believe it would be it would be inverted and time would be this straight one and space would be rotating so okay now now the so this this is what you can get into with the reciprocal system you once you understand the rules then you can start to uh you know do the induction and the deduction that uh Larson used for to create his system if this then that if this then that well if this is what happens then this is necessarily going to happen and you can you can uh learn to understand Larson's uh process of deduction uh I did about 15 videos on that earlier um that is his uh coming from his talk that he gave um I don't remember the date uh that he was he's giving that talk uh but it was um it's called the outline of the deductive development of the reciprocal system if you look back about three months three or four months back um in my videos you can watch those 15 videos that I did on uh going over his deductive development of the reciprocal system and then you can see how he developed it and then you can learn to develop your own system and you know see how it agrees with his system okay okay back to Larson I'm developing from the standpoint of Simply the relationship between space and time that's the first thing I was able to derive from that so that's all I needed when I got something that would work that would uh is most likely thing anyway so that was a thing I decided to rotate then the next problem was to see how that fitted with the figures that I had the results of observation and measurement and of course that took a long time but the thing that kept me at it was that there was a con that was continuous progress you could see the thing developing in a natural and easy enough manner so that it was clear that you were on the right track when I say easy manner I don't mean that I saw it easily it's something I should have seen I've had that experience so many times I would come to something as a result of a long and difficult period of work and then recognize that it was something that if I had been smart enough I should have seen it immediately question you mentioned once that at the beginning you went into a a lot of blind alleys but I imagine that after you got these results you were making pretty steady progress well the blind alleys were primarily in the inductive phase of the work you see there were really two phases to this operation there was an inductive phase in which I was doing as you always have to do in inductive reasoning you start from the observed and measured facts and worked back up toward the general principles that govern those that was what I did until I arrived at this concept of the universe of motion and described it in the postulates that was back around 1950 . so the work up to 1950 the inductive phase of it was the hard work since then it has been the deductive phase I have simply gone from these postulates and worked down toward the consequences in the original development starting in about 1950 and into the deductive part of it I was working mainly with these general principles but since I had gone up along a certain route when I started down I had this information pretty well in hand in these particular Fields such as inter-atomic distances and the liquid state those were the things I used to get up to the general principles the postulates coming back down again in the deductive phase was easier because I had already covered them in the other direction I never had so much trouble with the black with blind alleys after I started on the downhill proposition in the deductive phase you don't get into blind alleys so much the problem there is usually a case of not seeing where to go next after reaching a certain point but if you see it all you usually see the right direction that was not true in the inductive phase it's something like the difference between the two kinds of calculus in the differential calculus you always get an answer you follow the rules and you go directly from the problem to the answer well that's not true in intro integral calculus you don't know whether the answer is there or not that's the same kind of thing in inductive and deductive research in the deductive research if your theory is right it's just a matter of finding the right Avenue of approach and seeing it up setting it out but in the inductive phase you don't know whether you've got an answer at the end of the road or not and you have nothing to tell you if you're on the right Road or not unless you get into trouble now when you do get into trouble you're not sure whether it is because you're not smart enough or because you're on the wrong road for instance I spent I would say at least a couple of years on a trigonometric solution to the question of the elements but because I was figuring that maybe it has something to do with the position of the elements in the solid state I even got some interesting results from that but finally I was forced to conclude that it didn't work so I discarded that throughout two years of work and started back again on a different basis okay now to me that quote there that that answer to that question is pretty much gold and that is really uh deserves to be gone over and over again because uh he's explaining you know the inductive phase is uphill the deductive phase is downhill in the same way integral calculus is uphill and differential calculus is downhill and that's how you get to solve problems okay uh we will um resume at another time tomorrow uh in this uh interview and um you have a great day thanks for tuning in hope to see you soon