Reciprocal System #322-"The Physical Nature of Space" B [Thomas Newsome]

Transcript

hello everyone welcome to my channel uh this channel is for the purposes of educating and we uh generally try to focus on uh theories of everything uh all-encompassing theories that can help you in your life if you uh kind of uh learn them become aware of them um and uh we usually do uh look at theories that are pretty obscure so that you probably don't know about them or don't know enough about them uh things that have been kind of uh blocked out by uh the powers that be um probably for good reason like they might actually help you and they might actually be accurate um and uh today is the 3 22nd day that we've done on the reciprocal system of theory from Mr Dy Bernard lson and um Larson came up with the reciprocal system uh way back in about 1930 he had his first inklings of it and uh doggedly developed the theory over the course of the next 60 years wrote quite a few books and a lot of Articles gave a lot of talks had a few followers even started a uh a journal called reciprocity um and uh eventually died in 1990 leaving behind a small Cadre of folks who were um interested in um propagating his work still um although that hasn't happened to a great extent um as I was telling um somebody yesterday I have been studying the reciprocal System since about 2001 or 2002 and uh in all my years I have never met another person that has ever heard of Dewey B Larson so it's not like it's out there or anything but we're trying to put it out there on this channel um as far as I know I haven't seen any other channels that are uh focusing on the reciprocal system part of that is because it's very difficult um it's not inherently that difficult it's just that you have to unlearn a lot of information and that LaRon even though he was a good writer he wasn't the greatest teacher and so a lot of the information is out there it's it's there for you but you have to kind of dig it out um you have to really um be exposed to a few of his Works um before you can see the consistency um in his method otherwise you kind of just think oh he's just uh he's just pulling this out of his hat who knows where he's getting this from but then you see that he's doing the same thing uh for uh Atomic physics as he's doing for astronomy you know he's using the same procedure and then you see that he's even using that same uh kind of idea set of ideas uh when dealing with uh some metaphysical issue and so you can you can see that there is some inner internal consistency there okay now the basic idea behind the reciprocal system is that we live in a universe that is composed entirely of motion universe is not made out of matter it's not made out of energy but it is made out of motion and for Larson motion was the relationship between between space and time uh that sets up a generalized reciprocal relationship between space and time you can think of motion as more or less a fraction with time or space as the numerator and space or time as the denominator space or time do not exist in and of themselves they just exist together in motion uh an analogy Larson would use is that uh motion is like a box uh if you have a box you automatically have an inside and an outside of the box so it's a they come by threes motion space and time space is the inside of the Box time is the outside of the box or possibly vice versa and um so all forms of kind of scientific phenomena units so to speak are um um different kinds of motion different manifestations of space and time time and space both come in three dimensions that what Larson calls coordinate space and coordinate time they also both come in a a form that is progressing or um flowing in a what Lon calls a scalar manner meaning that it has a magnitude a a oce that has a magnitude but doesn't have any specific Direction Larson calls that clock time and clock space just think of clock time the clock is always getting later and later and later but in no specific Direction you know you're not saying oh the clock is getting later North or you know something to that effect it's just getting later and it the analogy that you would use for a clock space is uh a balloon with dots on it or as lson would say rubber ball or perhaps some raisin bread uh in the oven and when you turn on the heat uh the bread Rises and all of the raisins or the dots and the balloon if you blow up the balloon all of them are moving away from each other but in no specific direction that is a scaler moot at Larson calls clock space um they're all getting farther and farther apart if you sucked in the balloon they would all be moving closer and closer together and then space and time also only come in discrete units meaning there's a minimum unit of space and a minimum unit of time if you don't have a full unit you don't have anything so you have you have to have a full unit of space before you have any space uh and that unit is small microscopic but uh 4.56 * 10- 8 m with time that unit is even smaller 1.52 * 10- 16 seconds and um you have to have that full unit before you have any space or time and if you have exactly one unit of space space in one unit of time then you have the speed of light which Larson refers to as unit speed one over 1 equal 1 and so in Larson's system the speed of light is unit speed the background or the origin or The Ether or the um back the state of rest uh the null point the zero point so in a reciprocal system the 0 point is actually one whereas in the Legacy science system the 0 point is zero that's from a stationary point but l in Larson system you have a universe made out of motion so motion is going to precede everything else and so the state of rest in a universe of motion is motion outward at the speed of light that is the zero Point that's the reference point you make your measurements from that is it greater or less than the speed of light and um that really sets up uh the idea that half of the universe is moving faster than the speed of light Larson calls that the cosmic sector that is the sector that is completely unfamiliar to Legacy scientists uh who believe in Einstein who tells them that the speed of light is the maximum speed of the universe in Larson system the speed of light is the midpoint or the zero point of the universe and then the slower than the speed of light half Larson calls that the material sector that's the half of the universe that the Legacy scientists are comfortable with um now because of the reciprocal system postulate um what you have in the material sector is identical uh as far as general you know not in absolute you know specifics but generally uh what you have in the material sector is identical to what you have in the cosmic sector except that they are inverted or reciprocals meaning that if you uh reverse the roles of space and time then you get the picture of the cosmic sector so in the material sector you have coordinate space three dimensions of space and clock time the clock is always getting later and later and later but in the cosmic sector you have coordinate time three dimensions of time and you have clock space um the clock is always getting farther and farther and farther apart and when you think about the clock space it's really that space is you know uh expanding uh at the speed of light in all directions it's um not any particles moving in that dire like so for example in Larson system the photon which we measure from you know the Legacy science standpoint as always moving at the speed of light you know from the Michelson Morley experiment you know the speed of light is constant the photon is always moving at the speed of light that in Larson system that is because the photon is the only particle uh that is actually not moving it's not moving uh compared to what Larson calls the progression of the natural reference system the space itself is moving uh and the photon just moves with it and so it appears as if it's moving outward at the speed of light um now Larsson gets into this here in this article that we're looking at today uh we started this article yesterday and hopefully we'll finish it today but the article uh was written way back in 1966 by lson and is called the phys physical nature of space and so he was talking about um you know how space itself is progressing and that the photon is just along for the ride and um things like that so if you want to get to the start of this paper you want to go back and watch yesterday's video as well as today's but we will start here um I'm just going to read like the last sentence of the last paragraph that we dealt with and then move on to the next stuff many of the most important of the new conclusions reached in the development of the reciprocal system have originated from the discovery that certain phenomena hitherto regarded as involving ordinary vectorial motion are actually manifestations of scalar motion of the progression type so again he's making this distinction between vectorial motion and scalar motion and and noting that the Legacy scientists are aware of scalar motion aware of the properties of scalar motion but they have never recognized its significance they've the they use the example of the expanding balloon from time to time but they don't uh recognize that this is this is in a different Motion in kind than your vectorial motion and it needs to be in kind of a different category and needs to be thought of differently then a vectorial motion you know a vector a vector is an arrow it's always in a specific Direction whereas a a scalar motion is you know no particular direction all of the dots on the balloon are moving away from each other um the farther away they are the faster they're moving away from each other and this was observed by the Hubble telescope that determined that all of the distant galaxies are moving away from each other so you know the the scientists know about scalar motion but they don't understand its difference from vectorial motion and its significance Larson puts that front and center that this scalar motion is actually the most fundamental kind of motion and it's at the very core of his uh Theory okay um a related point of major significance to physical theory that is brought out clearly uh by the balloon analogy is that the datum from which all physical activity extends is not zero but the speed of the expansion it is evident that if we are concerned with the magnitude of the independent motion of a particle on the surface of the balloon it is not the measured speed that is significant the meaningful quantity is the difference plus or minus between the measured speed and the speed of the expansion similarly the significant quantity in the physical universe is the deviation from the speed of the expansion the speed of light not the deviation from zero uh eventually Larson I think uh began to call this displacement uh he uses the term deviation and difference here uh eventually he also uses the term displacement here is one place where the new Theory leads to some modification of previous mathematical relations but it should be understood that the essential difference between the new theoretical system and previous scientific thought is conceptual not mathematical the requests that are frequently made for a mathematical statement of the new Theory are therefore meaningless to illustrate this point let us give some further consideration to the outward movement of the distant galaxies the galactic recession there are two theories of this recession currently in Vogue among astronomers The Big Bang Theory so-called which attributes the existing Galactic velocities to a gigantic explosion that is presumed to have taken place billions of years ago and the steady state Theory socalled which postulates that the galaxies are being pushed apart by new matter that is being created in Intergalactic space to these I have now added a third my new theoretical system says that the galaxies are actually stationary in physical space except for some random motions that are too small to be observed but that they are being carried outward with reference to fixed geometrical coordinates because physical space itself is an expanding system so far as the galactic recession is concerned there is no significant mathematical difference between these explanations and hence there is no mathematical basis per for preferring one of them over another the real test of the relative power of these different hypotheses is the extent to which they are able to throw additional light on unrelated questions and for this purpose it is the interpretation that we put upon the mathematical Expressions our concept of the physical nature of the recession that is significant mathematical reasoning or manipulation of symbols cannot take us beyond the bounds that are set by our Concepts of the physical realities that are represented by the mathematical expressions or symbols and in the case of present-day theories of Galactic recession these boundaries are narrow indeed but when we turn to the New Concept of the recession that is supplied by the reciprocal system we find that this opens up um an influence no I'm sorry this opens up an immense new field for investigation one very important point which immediately becomes obvious is that on the basis of this concept both the recession and the inverse of this phenomena may occur coincidentally this is not possible in a universe that behaves in accordance with current cosmological theories we obviously cannot have the explosion postulated by The Big Bang Theory and the reverse process an implosion as it is sometimes called going on simultaneously before the idea of concurrent Inward and outward motions could be conceived at all it was necessary to have a totally new concept of the nature of the recession such as that which has been provided by the reciprocal system if as that system contends objects with little or no independent motion such as the distant galaxies are being carried outward by the progression of space itself then it is clearly possible for objects which do have substantial independent motions to move in the direction opposite to the progression of space and thus move steadily inward toward each other such objects will then appear to be exerting forces of an attraction upon each other but because they are actually independent scalar motions rather than forces they will have some extraordinary character istics quite unlike those of the forces of our everyday experience in particular they will act instantaneously without an intervening medium and in such a manner that they cannot be screened off or modified in any way all of these are of course the observed characteristics of gravitation and it is apparent that the behavior of aggregate of matter in the observed physical Universe agrees exactly with the theoretical behavior of objects that have independent motions in the direction opposite to that of the space progression so he's really saying gravitation is really the opposite force of progression you have to have the progression first but then you can have uh an independent gravitation um of the the bodies that are being carried outward and that gravitation can actually actually cancel out that progression um you know he was using the term here explosion and implosion the explosion is the nature of the progression like the big bang uh so-called and then the implosion is the gravitation um you know that is analogous to to sucking in the balloon you know sucking in the balloon and space is is basically moving backward um but it's not really like that because it's the space doesn't move that way it's those are independent motions of um of those dots on the balloon or the the distant galaxies um so I I I'm not exactly sure but I don't believe that analogy really holds um another way to think about it is that the gravity uh the um you know explosion and implosion but also that um you have gravity and the progression is actually anti-gravity so the progression is really the a force of anti-gravity while you know the opposite of gravity uh that's also not completely correct either because that kind of presumes that gravity precedes the progression which is not true so uh you could really think of gravity more as being anti- progression okay um we thus find that by a purely conceptual change a modification of our ideas as to the fundamental nature of space without any alteration of previously established mathematical relationships we are able to extend our explanation of the galactic recession to apply to gravitation as well thus bringing these two important physical phenomena within the scope of the same general theory so it is throughout the Universe each advance of this kind that we make with the aid of the new concept of the nature of space opens the door to further advances in related fields identification of gravitation and the galactic recession as two manifestations of the same basic phenomenon leads immediately to complete and consistent answers for many of the most serious problems that now confront the astronomers explanations of the origin of of the galaxies the ability of the globular clusters the immense uh I'm sorry the stability of the globular clusters the immense distances between um the stars and so on then further development along the same lines enables clarification of relations in areas that the farther a field such as um areas that are farther a field oh it says areas that lie farther a field such as the expansion of solids and liquids for instance thus a whole theoretical Universe gradually emerges as we build item by item on the new conceptual Foundation okay that is the end of that article and uh again that was called the physical nature of space now the next one that we're going to read when we start up tomorrow um is the counterpart and you sometimes wonder why you would need the counterpart if space and time are reciprocals of each other you would think that whatever you have to say about space You could also say the same thing about time and that's true um except for the fact that we live in one part of this universe and so we see time and space differently because of our Vantage Point um we live in the material sector we make our observations in the material sector um and so uh you know we see we see space up close but we see time far away if we lived in the cosmic sector then we would see time up close and space far away so uh and like as Dr Bruce pet one of uh larsson's followers would would have said um we only see space we do not see time you know so the difference between time and space is not in it of themselves it's that we have a different vantage point when viewing the two of them because of our the way we are situated in this universe and so the next article that we're going to look at is called the nature of time so he has to have a different article to explain the nature of time as he does for the nature or calls a physical nature of space because these two things manifest to us differently even though they're fundamentally um the same except that they are reciprocals of one another so uh so the next article that we're looking at is called the nature of time and I think that this article's a little bit longer than the one that we did today and yesterday so it might take three or four days to get through but uh look forward to that tomorrow and uh thanks for tuning in today have a great day