My Big GUTOE "Tapered Harmony"

My Big GUTOE 

(© 2020, by K. P. Collins)

(06-30-2020)

 

Introduction

The purpose of this WebLog is to provide a brief discussion of "Tapered Harmony", which is a Grand Unified Theory Of Everything that I've developed, and verified, using the published experimental results. It's a pretty long story - a labor of Love that began as a "hobby" more than 60 'years ago' while I was still a Young Child becoming enthralled with the events of the "space age" which was just then entering the 'race' that would culminate with Neil Armstrong stepping onto the surface of Earth's moon.

I was the third son of a career Army Enlisted Man and a Saintly Mother. Our Family circumstances were humble, and, because, as the third son, I was 'invisible', mine were happily spent exploring "the woods" at Fort Lewis ('now' Joint Base Lewis-McCord) in the State of Washington. By the 'time' my Dad retired (as a Master Sergeant after 28 'years' spent in the Service) I'd discovered Science, and would ride the bike (that Dad had given to me when he got his last reenlistment bonus) to Radio Shack™, and use my morning paper route earnings to purchase how-to, and technical, manuals and stuff, always including bell wire. I loved bell wire because of all of the fascinating things you could "hook up" using it. Electromagnets, motors, generators, and after signing up for a subscription to "The American Basic Science Club Inc." to receive mail-order kits each 'month' (paying one month at a time, for the eight 'months' offered), radios, amplifiers, proximity detectors, analog computers, weather stations, and all manner of other exciting things. Test tubes and vacuum tubes, capacitors, inductors, resistors, switches, cloud chambers, microscopes, telescopes, electroscopes, all to be constructed out of simple stuff that arrived in the kits each 'month', along with "instruction" manuals that delight me still when I return to them once 'a decade' or so. "Happiness" is a new "science kit". My own "laboratory equipment", to use in my own "Science Curriculum". My dreams come True. (I lament that there are no analogous, simple but well thought out and implemented, imagination, elbow grease, and ingenuity required, "science kits" available to Children anymore. Nowadays, as a consequence of all the 'profit-seeking hype' that's become commonplace, if a thing doesn't 'do a fancy dance' when a button is pressed it's 'deemed to be uninteresting' even if, with a bit of thought and start-up effort, the thing turns out to be not only interesting, but good fun.)

The Vietnam War began while I was in High School where I was in the "Scientific", college Preparatory curriculum - because I Loved Science, not because there was any hope of my being able to attend college. As the third son, there was just no 'money' left for such. Each 'year', I'd start working on my "Science Project" when the 'school year' began in September - just as soon as I learned a bit about the science courses I'd be taking that 'year' - to have it ready for the "Science Fair" the following February.

Instead of college, I got my draft notice, and enlisted into the Navy on a "delayed entry" basis, during which "delay", I started dating a young woman who was on her summer break from college and working at the Wall Street Journal™ Office and Printing Plant in Chicopee, Massachusetts, where I'd been employed as a subscription clerk for a 'year'. Already enlisted and, nevertheless, wanting to "have something to offer her", I competed successfully for an appointment to The Naval Academy out of the enlisted ranks. Annapolis is synonymous with "excellence". I discovered my "Being" there. But she wasn't interested, my heart 'broke', and I resigned my Appointment. Still 'hurts' (just like the Commandant Of Midshipmen said it would when he called me in to discuss my reasons for resigning my Appointment, which I did not explain. I couldn't because too much was, 'then', coming to an end.)

Things turned 'dismal' for me'. I'd gone from being a leader amongst leaders to a guy with zero prospects. So I turned back to my hobby for solace, and in the combination of my "no-prospects" 'state' and the tragic events of the 1960s, my Childhood hobby gradually transformed into a devoted pursuit. The Kennedy and King assassinations, The Cold War, nuclear weapons proliferation, the War in Vietnam. And all of the correlated social unrest.

I'd seen "Excellence" with my own eyes while at Annapolis, and probably because a "sense" of such remained within me, a Belief that "there had to be a better way for people to resolve their 'differences' than by killing one another" rose up within my Being. Little did I, 'then', know through what trials this Belief would require me to go.

Looking back, it's 'funny' how things unfolded. I'd developed the foundational ideas for the Physics that I'll discuss in this WebLog while 'groping' my way through the Science books to which I had access as a Young Child. For whatever reason, the existing model of "the atom", with "electrons orbiting a neucleus" never made sense to me because it seemed, to me, that folks were just 'jumping onto' Isaac Newton's "Solar System" 'band wagon' to build 'wee little solar systems' and to impose such 'structure' upon 'the atom'. The view that I'd developed was "just the stuff of my hobby", though, and I was aware that "I probably just didn't know enough" to be questioning concepts that had gained acceptance in science. Still, the 'wee little solar system' model of 'the atom' only became more nonsensical to me the more I studied it. There was something about "electrons jumping from atom to atom" when "electricity flowed through a wire" that just didn't 'cut the mustard', and I'm a 'cut the mustard' kind of person. Later, when I became increasingly serious about "doing Physics", and wanted to discuss the ideas I was working on, I discovered that no one would listen.

I 'sensed' that there was something fundamentally wrong in this because I'd studied the work of Galileo, Newton, and others who had made significant contributions to Science, and knew that all of them had brought forward previously nonexistent concepts that turned out to be better than previously existing concepts. So it didn't make sense to me that no one would want to hear about the "non-standard" view that seemed to make better sense to me. Wanting to understand why no one would listen, I set out to explore 'all' that was inherent in this always-occurring, seemingly "automatic" reaction. The result was a nine 'year' sojourn 'apart from' Beloved Physics during which I developed, and verified, a unified theory of nervous system function, cognition, affect, and behavior that I named "Neuroscientific Duality Theory". The "duality" referred to in the theory's name is that all nervous systems 'strive', 'blindly' and automatically, to achieve a single 'goal', and everything else that occurs 'within' them occurs as an integrated by-product of the degree to which that single goal is in fact achieved.

The purpose of this work in Neuroscience was to explain how & why the phenomenon of "Prejudice" - including the above stuff that I'd experienced - arises in biological dynamics, which was accomplished along with much more because, as I worked (with a burgeoning sense of Obligation 'during the nine years') to explain nervous system function, I became increasingly aware of the way that, since nervous systems evolved in Physical Reality, an awesome 'understanding' of Physical Reality permeated nervous system dynamics. Immersed in Physical Reality, the biology of nervous systems evolved to flat-out "know" Physical Reality. You can look into the Neurobiology, as it was laid bare in the pre-1980 experimental results of Neuroscience, and literally see this with your own eyes.

Basically, I looked in the Brain, and saw the Universe.

Given that we are living in another 'period' of upheaval as I write this (the 'novel' Corona Virus Pandemic, with its attendant populations-wide 'stressfulness', the George Floyd Killing, and its attendant Protests and street violence, Etc.), I probably should be writing about the Neuroscience Theory instead of the Physics Theory. But I've worked in other ways to communicate the Neuroscience Theory. Which work has been rampantly Plagiarized, even as it has been repeatedly 'denied' publication over the course of 'decades', which is another set of things that 'broke my heart'.

Which leads me to say, here, that it's not so-called "race" that determines whether a person will behave in inconsiderately thoughtless 'ways'.

There is inconsiderate thoughtlessness all over the place 'within' human 'interactive' dynamics, and everyone does inconsiderately thoughtless stuff to 'others' more routinely than anyone cares enough to admit.

That's "The Problem", not 'race'.

The illusion of 'there being a particular motivation' 'appears' when any 'distinguishing quality' intervenes in the midst of all the thoughtlessly inconsiderate stuff that folks routinely do to one another.

Everyone tends, strongly, to 'attribute' all of the thoughtlessly inconsiderate stuff to 'the intervening quality', which is never "The Problem".

The Problem is absence-of-understanding that derives, and is 'sustained', in the 'way' that folks come to be 'familiar' with different stuff, solely because of the way that what becomes 'familiar' to a person derives in what the person actually experiences.

When there is "separation" between what any two people experience, the people will tend to, 'blindly' and automatically, 'clash', behaviorally, when they initially encounter one another.

Such has nothing to do with 'race', occupation, social status, etc., and everything to do with Ignorance that has not only been allowed to prevail 'within' every human 'heart', but which is routinely coerced, intergenerationally, to actively 'sustain' the Ignorance that Ravages everyone.

It's "nonsensical', but is exactly what has routinely transpired during the course of what has been 'human' history.

And, when one does something that resolves "The Problem", 'everyone' transforms by 'donning the same old the 'cloak' of thoughtless inconsiderateness', 'takes' what one has done and abuses it in 'seeking-profits' in one form or another, all the while 'pretending to care about' the commonplace sorrows that are generated in their own choices, through which the understanding is withheld from everyone else.

Forgive me, please, for 'seeing red' with respect to all such stuff. After a life spent in devoted pursuit of understanding with respect to all that's inherent in it, I Know, with Certainty, that it Ravages, Destroys, and Kills Unnecessarily.

The 'taking' and 'withholding' of work done on behalf of fellow Human Beings who Suffer Greatly, to 'seek-profits', is a reprehensible manifestation of Ignorance that mercilessly Kills and Ravages across all of Humanity.

This "taking and withholding" of the work I did on behalf of the Children has, for 'decades', been routinely confessed to in 'stock market' dynamics, as was the case on the 'day' after I posted the first ('then' unfinished) version of my earlier GUTOE WebLog, when the "Dow Jones Industrial" 'stock' index fell 1700-1800 'points'. It fell again when I posted a 'major' update to my earlier WebLog. And, for the several ensuing days, even though there were continuingly 'negative economic reports', the 'market' 'advanced' by 500-700 'points' every 'day', which occurred as folks've been realizing the Veracity of the work discussed in my earlier WebLog. "More free money! Let's get ours!"

It's been the same for 'decades', with each such occurrence being 'covered up' in False 'attributions' to 'this or that factor' being 'reported in the news'.

Try to understand how I experience all of this stuff. To me, everything in it constitutes acts of Mass Murder that are being perpetrated by 'fine, upstanding citizens', all over the place, as 'everyone' literally tramples upon the Future of the Children by 'taking' work I've done on behalf of the Children, and abusing 'it' to 'seek-profits'.

To Witness such ubiquitously-occurring thoughtlessly inconsiderate stuff - which is why I briefly discussed, above, the fact that 'race' is not the problem - always 'breaks my heart'.

So what I'm doing in this WebLog is sojourning back to my 'hobby', which is what I tend to do whenever I've realized that my 'heart has broken'.

"When there's nothing else that can be done, Do Science."

"That's what I always say."

Tapered Harmony

I'll begin by discussing "macroscopic atoms" and how & why they occur throughout  Physical Reality. This might, at first, seem to be a "whimsical" choice, but it will soon become apparent that such macroscopic atoms scale continuously relative to the "microscopic atoms" that are routinely spoken of in science, and that this is extremely useful with respect to understanding Physical Reality.

To gain a first insight into macroscopic atoms, consider the hydrodynamics shown in the following photo.

In this photo, taken shortly after a heavy rainfall, the water level is about 18-24 inches above the height of the dam (in Chicopee Falls, Massachusetts; The upper-most “light band” is ‘light’ (visible-spectrum ‘electromagnetic radiation’; 'em') being refracted (not ‘reflected’) in a way that's coupled exactly to the geometry of the water-above-the-dam macroscopic-atom, from that macro-atom and then back to the camera lens. The middle “light band” is refracted through the macroscopic atom, with optical (‘electromagnetic’) geometry that is 'also' coupled exactly to the geometry of the macroscopic atom; after being similarly refracted, the lower "light band" at the top of the dam is passing beneath panels that were added at the top of the dam to increase the "head" of the small, but usefully-productive, hydroelectric plant associated with the dam. (Note the greater ‘dispersal’ of the refracted ‘light’ in this lower “band”, all of which (as is explained further below) is 'also' coupled exactly to the geometry of the macroscopic atom.) Historical note: the gap, which permits water to flow under the panels, was required by City Planners to assure that "Chicopee Falls" would remain "Chicopee Falls" even when the level of the Chicopee River was lower than the tops of the panels.)

Seen in a schematic cross section, the water level's relationship to the structure of the dam is as above (drawn to emphasize the height differential, not to scale.)

Such water-height differentials always embody macroscopic atoms, which is the topic through which I'll introduce the primary subject of my WebLog, which is a GUTOE - a Grand Unified Theory Of Everything that exists in Physical Reality. The theory's name is "Tapered Harmony", the derivation of which name I'll explain following a preliminary discussion of some basic stuff.

In the photo below, the "streamlines" developed in the water as it flows with respect to the barrels, and, more subtly, the catenary of the barrel-line, are also macroscopic atoms.

The questions that need to be answered, at this point, are:

Q1. How and why does the water 'pile up' at a height that's greater than the height of the dam?, 

Q2. How and why do the 'small' water-height differences that comprise the 'streamlines' occur? and 

Q3. How and why is it that the barrel-line catenary is a perfect segment of a parabola?

In other words, 

Q4. How and why do macroscopic atoms exist in Physical Reality?,

Q5. How and why do they gain existence?,

Q6. How and why are their existences 'sustained'?

Q7. When they cease to exist, how and why do their existences 'end'?

The Johnson's Baby Shampoo™ Experiment

To provide more information that will be useful with respect to answering these questions, the several screen shots, below, were taken from videos ‘filmed’ while I was conducting my “Johnson’s Baby Shampoo™ (© Johnson & Johnson) Experiment”. I did this experiment 'long ago' because, while consolidating the remnants of a nearly-empty shampoo bottle into a ‘then’ recently-opened bottle, I noticed, and became fascinated with, correlated fluid dynamics ‘in’ which little, limited-‘duration’ streams of shampoo “squirted” from dynamically instantiated little 'mounds' of shampoo. It turns out that the trajectories of these 'streams', and the geometries of the 'mounds' from which they 'squirt', are formed in exactly the same way in which the "water above the height of the dam", barrel-line parabola, and 'streamlines' macroscopic atoms are formed as in the photos above.

(I've extracted small segments from the videos from which the screen shots were grabbed. These videos are contained in an accompanying WebLog, along with additional discussion, but I encourage you to do the experiment on your own. The experiment requires a bit of observational patience, but it’s easy to set up and do. And what you’ll see with your own eyes will be worth the effort.)

After my initial “consolidating of supplies” observations, wanting to study the fluid dynamics thoroughly, I drilled three holes through the bottom of a 35mm photographic film container, suspended it in a glass, and poured shampoo into it. I made the holes a bit too large, which, in addition to reducing the number of secondary streams that occur, also results in an unnecessary over abundance of bubbles forming in the receiving pool of shampoo. These "bubbles" are "encapsulations" that occur when a depression forms at the surface of the receiving pool and is propelled to depth in the pool, enclosing a quantity of 'air' before the 'air' can escape being "encapsulated" (which coupling of flow-rates has generalized importance, so remember it). So when you do your experiment, begin with a single hole that you think is “too small” - perhaps by punching a hole through the container you use as a "reservoir" using a needle - and which you can 'subsequently' enlarge if you don’t get the necessary continuous streams of shampoo. As long as they remain continuous, the thinner your streams, the more “squirting” you’ll see. (Historical note: I obtained the glass I used in my experimental trials during my Naval Academy  "Youngster ("sophomore" academic 'year') Seamanship Training) Cruise" during the summer of 1969) while experiencing an enjoyable ‘evening’ spent at a pub with the members of a German Football Team that had ‘kicked our butts’ earlier in the ‘day’. (Most of the Youngster members of the Academy's Soccer Team had opted to go on the Pacific Training Cruise, and the 'team' we gathered was mostly a bunch of willing, but unskilled, "sand-lot pickups". The German Team members lavished well-deserved praise upon our Goal Tender who was a talented member of the Academy Team, and who valiantly endured the way the rest of us did little but run around with spirited ineffectiveness.) The glass was a precious souvenir of the joy we shared that evening, including in drinking schnapps out of a big glass ‘boot’. A ‘while back’, I was careless in washing the glass, and it’s thin, high-quality manufacture, which provided good-viewing during my experiment, shattered. ‘broke my heart’. I miss that glass, and all of the memories ‘attached to it’.)

 

My experimental apparatus:

Put the next two images in their own “flipping-directory” and flip between them. You’ll see an important 3D UEF-’flow’ differential. 

The continuation of the fluid dynamics at-depth, which is traced by tiny bubbles, is what’s important, here. 

Do the same with the next two images. (Create a separate directory for them so you can “flip” in just one direction, which facilitates your viewing because you can just keep "clicking" while you focus your attention on the images, and not on switching between "buttons" to "click".) 

You can see a 3D “ephemerance” differential (explained later), also traced by bubbles, that is continuously coupled to the primary stream, occurring at depth relative to it. 

I recently (during ‘the night’ of 05/27-28/2020) learned on Twitter©, with respect to a video tweeted by @ChemistryReacts, that the "secondary stream squirting" I’d ‘discovered’ “was first described by the British engineer Alan Kaye in 1963" (© Wikipedia, bit.ley/2ZSZ5lg). The photograph (© Wikipedia) (below) one that the folks at Wikipedia included in their article (I like the little “face” that appears, in the fluid-‘mound’, to the left of the primary stream (if what I 'presently' 'presume' to be "fair use" of the photo is a ‘violation’, someone having "Authority" to do so, please tell me)):

The "secondary" streams squirt out of a 'mound' when the 'point' at which the "primary" stream impinges upon the 'mound' shifts away from the 'peak' of a 'mound'' The spreading of the "base" of a 'mound' occurs as the fluid in the 'mound' flows to merge with the fluid in the receiving pool. As is explained below, all of which occurs in a single continuous fluid dynamic even though there is an illusion that the secondary streams 'are discontinuous'. (In the video tweeted by @ChemistryReacts, I recently viewed an exactly analogous fluid dynamic that I'd not previously observed. In it the secondary stream flowed out of a depression that had formed in the surface of the receiving pool, again in a completely continuous fluid dynamic.)

As is shown clearly in the  photograph (above), when a “secondary stream” is instantiated it routinely emanates from a small fluid-‘mound’ that is continuously augmented-and-depleted in a ‘local’ fluid dynamic that occurs relative to the surface of the pool of the same fluid that receives the “primary stream”. Such fluid mounds augment continuously as they are continuously fed by the primary stream and deplete continuously as they merge into the receiving fluid pool and, still continuously but with increased rapidity, with respect to the instantiation and ‘sustaining’ of a secondary stream. When they are instantiated, because of the mound-depletion dynamics, the secondary streams are only briefly 'sustained', and there is an illusion that the secondary streams 'bounce off of' the graded surfaces of the fluid mounds. But the coupling ‘between’ augmentation and depletion of a fluid mound is always continuous. These continuities, which can most often be observed with the unaided eye (and which are rendered visible in the refraction dynamics that occur during the "bowl" experimental trial (below)), constitute most of how & why the commonly-occurring fluid dynamics disclose immensely. Because they are continuous, there is always an infinite quantity of information ‘contained within’ them, even when they occur relative to a single drop of water (which, in dynamics that are further explained below, they can, and do). 

Infinities have traditionally been ‘presumed’ to be 'intractable', and torturous ‘routes’ through ‘maths normalizations’ have come to be routinely contrived to ‘supposedly eliminate them’ – as if Physical Reality ‘can be altered by doing maths’.

Truth is that there exists no actual rationale for such maths excursions because all infinities that occur in Physical Reality can be analyzed in a practically-useful, exact, way that derives in the fluid dynamics that are always present in the occurrences of all macroscopic atoms, including in the relative augmentation 'and' depletion of the fluid mounds that are instantiated in the “Kaye Effect”.

The ‘presumption’ that the “Kaye Effect” occurs only in fluids having relatively-high “viscosity” is False. The same ‘local’ flow rate fluid dynamics occur, Be-Cause, a single dynamic that occurs 'local to' all fluids, as is explained further below. They are, for instance, what physically underpins the “skipping” of a stone that is thrown at a sufficiently oblique angle relative to the surface of a body of (“non-viscous”) water. So-called “viscosities” can, in fact, be measured exactly with respect to ‘the’ angle at which the same “stone”, thrown with the same ‘force’, at the same initial angle with respect to the surface of any fluid, “skips” relative to the not-otherwise-perturbed surface of the fluid.

Fluid dynamics that are exactly analogous to, if more ‘busy’ than, the fluid dynamics inherent in the Kaye Effect can be seen in the substantial ‘splashing’ of water 'upward' at the base of the Chicopee Falls Dam in the first photo at the top of my discussion. All "splashing' of all fluids, even in cases of 'magma' 'splashing upon' the slopes of an active volcano, same-old, same-old.

Other examples of the same ‘local’ fluid dynamics are captured in the (always beautiful) photographs of “fluid crowns” that form when a “drop” of liquid ‘falls’ upon the surface of a receiving pool of the same fluid. As is explained further below, the way that the extremes of the “crown-spikes” always form into perfect spheres discloses an important "encapsulating" ('containment') dynamic, as does the same formation of perfect spheres that occurs in the cases of droplets that ‘fall’ from a leaky faucet and in the breaking up of low-volume streams of water from a faucet that is cracked open only a bit into successive droplets. If you study such droplets, you’ll see them always ‘moving’ from asymmetrically-elongated 3D geometries to spherical (3D-symmetrical) geometries.

As is explained below, it’s the action of the a single dynamic that ‘encapsulates’ the droplets and imparts spherical-symmetry to ‘them’. Be-Cause, the microscopic 'atoms' ('molecules') comprising such droplets of fluid all share the single dynamic continuously, including an important, 'also' continuous, radially-inward, nonlinearly-graded variation that is explained still further below.

Infinities

It doesn’t matter how many ‘molecules’ comprise a droplet. The solution to the so-called “many-body problem”, inherent, is always simple. In its always-‘moving toward’ a single 'goal', the fluid dynamics always ‘do all the maths’ literally ‘at the local speed of light’. And when one wants to “follow the Maths”, the only ‘complexity’ is that one must carry-through a single always nonlinearly-graded variation, which the fluid dynamics do “as a matter of course” (“automatically”, or however else one wishes to connote, “Maths happens”).

Infinite infinities occur at all scales throughout Physical Reality, and everything in them is literally calculated continuously, at 'light speed'.

All such fluid dynamics are continuous with the fluid dynamics inherent in the “Kaye Effect”. That is, they are all in the same, however-one-wants-to-regularly-address-it, infinity.

In order to establish a practically-useful, exact, analytical method with respect to all infinities that exist in Physical Reality, it’s necessary to derive a single function that operates in exactly the same way at all scales with respect to everything that exists in Physical Reality.

This seems, at first, to be impossible, because, for instance, how can one say anything about what occurs at scales of Physical Reality with respect to which one 'has no access'?

To practically, usefully, and exactly, eliminate this illusion of ‘impossibility’ one need only verify the Physical Existence of an all-permeating (“Universal”) Continuity.

Doing this is a bit arduous because, before it is accomplished, everything that must be integrated in the verification of Universal Continuity is left disordered in “tradition”, not in the least by the ‘presumption’ of ‘discrete particles’ that has come to be coerced by adherents of so-called “quantum mechanics”, which is virtually everyone who works in ‘modern’ physics, and with respect to which there’s a lot to lament because adherents of ‘tradition’ routinely band-together to ‘erase’ any and all discussion that they ‘feel’ diverges from their Beliefs – as if Physical Reality ‘can be altered by belief’. Belief is important - it, along with Hope and Love - enables ‘moving toward’ Truth with respect to “the unknown” – but it’s necessary to ‘move toward’ Truth in one’s Belief, not 'the other way around'. The usefulness of Belief becomes readily apparent when one's Belief enables one to 'move toward' Truth, more. To the degree of such, although Physical Reality remains what it always has been, one Sees Physical Reality anew, which is quantifiable in one's ability to do more than one could formerly do. In such, Physical Reality has not changed. One's abilities have changed. Be-Cause, Belief. It doesn't work 'the other way around'. Belief doesn't change Physical Reality. It 'just' changes everything else.

In ‘moving toward’ the necessary verification of Universal Continuity, it is useful to extend the concept of “atom” to all scales, microscopic to macroscopic (infinitely-small to infinitely-large). To achieve this, it’s necessary to identify and verify physical dynamics that are continuous beginning at a scale smaller than the scale of (traditional) “atoms”. 

To accomplish this, it is necessary to reduce ‘all’ experimental data pertaining to “the atom” to a single set of continuous dynamics.

Once this is accomplished with respect to any single “atom”, because no boundary smaller than Physical Reality as a whole can be assigned, Continuity necessarily extends to all scales of Physical Reality.

In ‘moving toward’ this end, it’s useful to begin by identifying and verifying ‘properties’ of macroscopic dynamics that are analogous to ‘properties’ of microscopic dynamics.

I initially accomplished this by verifying it with respect to all of the experimental data invoked in the theoretical ‘founding’ of ‘quantum mechanics’. I have explained a lot of the voluminous work, inherent, elsewhere, and will do so, again, in person.

I ‘long ago’ verified that the fluid dynamics that occur in the shampoo experiment constitute macroscopic atoms 'in' which all microscopic dynamics contribute continuously in the instantiation of the macroscopic dynamics.

To begin to understand this assertion, it’s useful to study the fluid dynamics of the ‘mounds’ that occur in the "Kaye Effect".

There are similarities between the macroscopically-observable fluid dynamics of the ‘mounds’ and the dynamics that instantiate the so-called “absorbtion and emission line spectra” of so-called “atoms”. In particular, the geometries of the ‘mounds’ are graded in a stereotypical way as the primary stream ‘piles up’ and flows 'downward and outward' in a mound on its way to merging with the pool of receiving fluid. It's interesting, and, it turns out, instructive, that this continuously graded fluid dynamic is similar to the way that frequency-wavelength is graded in the so-called “series” that occur ubiquitously ‘in’ so-called “line spectra”. The gradation of the fluid mounds is analogous to the gradation of "spectral series". In light of this, it’s interesting that the gradation of fluid dynamics through which the ‘mounds’ are ‘sustained’ is easily seen to be a macroscopically continuous fluid dynamic.

So the questions that need to be answered, here, are, 

Q8. To what decreasing dimensions does this easily observed continuity extend?

Q9. If it ceases to exist, at what spatial scale does continuity cease to exist, how fast and increasingly-fast does it do so, and why does it do so, if it does so?

Answering these questions entails establishing and verifying a set of continuous dynamics through which, for instance, the ‘atomic’ line spectra can be instantiated and continuously ‘sustained’, including with respect to every instance that has been repeatedly observed with respect to all correlated experimental results, Faraday, Curie, Becquerel, Roentgen, Rutherford, Millikan, Compton, Chadwick... LHC. With respect to this sub-problem, as discussed above, a study of “macroscopic atoms” has born fruit.

It is easily seen in the case of a "water above the height of a dam" macroscopic atom that the height of the water above the dam can only derive in a dynamic that induces water molecules to ‘pile up’, in some way, both above and below the height of the dam. It is also easily seen that the piled-up water molecules dynamically cohere above the dam. It is also easily seen that, since this dynamically-coherent piling-up of water 'molecules' waxes and wanes in a way that is exactly correlated to the rate of water flow up-river to the dam and toward the dam, it is easily verified that the dynamic that piles water to a level that is higher than the dam can only derive in the flow-rate of the water up-river to the dam, which has the appearance of being macroscopically-continuous.

From here, the problem reduces to tracing the existence of continuity while spatial dimensions are continuously decreased, and the questions that must be answered are,

Q10. Do physical dynamics remain continuous under continuously decreasing spatial dimension, and, 

Q11. if not, at what scale and 

Q12. why not?

Then one just ‘walks through’ “spatial dimension” continuously (reiteratively, over and over again, which is how & why so doing is “arduous”) verifying that all known experimental results do, or do not, sustain continuity.

A1-12. The short answer is that they do.

A1-12a. The long answer entails undoing all of the mistakes that have come to be ‘enduringly’ handed down, over the course of ‘the last 120 years’, inter-generationally, from professor to student.

It’s this long-answer necessity that compounds the “arduousness” to the point at which virtually everyone ‘in physics’ throws up their hands and ‘surrenders’ to ‘tradition’.

[Sidebar: I ‘apologize’ for the unintended ‘affront’ that I understand is inherent in my not doing so, but I did not do so.

Truth Is.

All one can do is ‘move’ with respect to Truth.

To the degree that one 'moves toward' Truth, Truth ‘moves toward’, right-back.

Not, and not.

Always,

Unfailingly.

This isn't ‘whimsy’.

It’s physically in the way nervous systems function, which stands completely verified in Neuroscientific Duality Theory. 

This physical relationship with respect to Truth derives in the way nervous systems literally grow in a way that's coupled to everything that an individual actually experiences.

Truth 'moves toward', right-back, in a way that's physically in the dynamics inherent in the instantiation of this physical growth that embodies that which is experienced and through which an individual's abilities to operate within and upon 'the environment' augment or diminish.

Which is the most significant physical dynamic of which I am aware.

There is a necessity, inherent, that can only be learned and actualized through Choice. It is that, in order to physically move toward Truth, one must range widely during the course of one's experience. Otherwise, 'trapped within' narrowly-actualized experience, one tends to increasingly 'move toward' that which has merely become 'familiar' to one during the course of one's narrowly-delimited 'experience'.

Truth still 'moves toward', right-back, but in a way that heaps-up the 'burdens' inherent in the absence-of-understanding that ranging-narrowly always leaves in its wake.

Which is the most fundamental 'vicious cycle' that occurs in behavior, and which always takes the form of an inwardly spiraling dynamic.

Narrow experience --> narrow growth --> narrow abilities --> still-more-narrow experience.

There is physically real work inherent in ranging widely during the course of one's experience, which is why, despite  the necessity inherent is, nevertheless, routinely 'moved away from' in 'substitutions' of 'fashionable pastimes' for the physically real work that's always inherent in one's acquisition of 'unfamiliar' experience.

Such 'diversions' constitute the most costly stuff of which I'm aware, not only in the lives of individuals, but across Humanity as a whole, because work left undone increasingly diminishes everything that could, otherwise, be actualized.

Cases in-point abound, but I'll use a 'seemingly' extreme example pertaining to when, for instance, a 'dictator' 'attempts to' coerce 'political' dynamics to 'fit with' his 'familiar' experience, such always 'back-fires', Be-Cause, in 'attempting' to 'force-fit' 'political' dynamics to that with which he is 'familiar', the 'dictator' always simultaneously 'attempts' to coerce the nervous system dynamics of a population to 'move away from' the single 'goal' that all nervous systems 'strive', 'blindly' and automatically, to achieve, and with respect to which everything else that occurs 'within' a nervous system occurs as an integrated by-product of the degree to which that single goal is achieved.

So to the degree that a 'dictator attempts to' coerce the dynamics of nervous systems to 'move away from' the single 'goal' that all nervous systems 'blindly' and automatically 'strive' to achieve, all such 'coerced' nervous system dynamics 'blindly' and automatically 'move away from' such 'coercion', which, to the degrees that 'dictators coerce' in Murderous 'ways', most often results in 'moving away from' that tends to be 'disguised', but which, nevertheless, 'resists' the coercion of the 'dictator'.

Such 'disguises' manifest in an infinite variety of ways, but routinely include behavioral dynamics that are manifested 'in a reluctance to perform work' which, to the degree that a 'dictator's 'coercion' impinges 'within' the Lives of others, always results in 'economic decline' through which the 'dictator' is always effectively 'defeated', including through the unfolding of Civil and International Wars.

The 'dictator' always ends up being 'dictated to' by Truth that he 'moved away from'.

I've invoked this particular example because the same dynamics are inherent in all 'economic declines', even when 'dictators' 'attempt to disguise' their 'coercions' in 'the we-know-better' 'wisdom of the elites' with respect to 'the dynamics of', for instance, 'politics' and/or 'high finance'.

Same-old, same-old, the weapons employed being equally Deadly in every case.

To the Detriment of all.

Recurse until you get it.]

The Universal Extreme Fluid

In order to fix the intergenerationally-handed-down Errors, after ‘decades’ spent in dedicated study, the need to introduce an “extreme fluid” had become increasingly apparent to me. So, I did so, tentatively at first, but with increasing certainty as, one after another, every set of data deriving in replicable experiment imploded into the burgeoning Continuity.

An “extreme fluid” (nomenclature that I coined) is like a ‘normal’ fluid except that it includes no “particles” of any kind. It ‘flows’ like a ‘normal’ fluid except that, it is everywhere continuous, so it does not flow without the cooperation of it’s always-present ‘locally’-neighboring extreme fluid, which, at first, seems ‘extraneous’ and ‘fanciful’, but is simple and has extraordinary usefulness, as I explained in the "'fluid' doing maths, solving infinitely-many many-body problems at the speed of light" discussion above.

I’ve named a particular extreme fluid (the only one that can possibly exist in Physical Reality) “the Universal Extreme Fluid” (UEF) because I’ve verified that it permeates Physical Reality at all scales.

Early in my incorporation of the UEF into my studies, I used it, as is alluded to above, with respect to the ‘atomic’ “line spectra” (which are “lines” in name only) by integrating the UEF in a conceptualization of ‘the atom’ in which “an atom” consists of a spherical volume of UEF dynamically ‘contained within’ ‘containing’ UEF, and undergoing periodically alternating radial (concentric) expansion and contraction.

Spherical Standing Wave Harmonics

I refer to this “atom” as a “Spherical Standing Wave compaction<->expansion harmonic” (SSW harmonic, or just SSW). As is the case with respect to the water in the "water above the height of the dam" macroscopic atom, UEF is dynamically and continuously ‘entering’ and ‘exiting’ every SSW (‘atom’), which transient UEF-‘flow’ I refer to as “UEF i/o”.

I verified ‘decades ago’ (using the TOI © (Table Of Isotopes) database) that UEF i/o is what physically underpins the properties of the Elements. I used the isotope data in this regard because doing so enabled small-shift operations of numerous kinds with respect to single Elements (all of which is documented in a computer program that I wrote for the purpose).

Returning to the shampoo experiment to 'pick up' some useful stuff, the results you'll obtain in the experiment become really-spectacular when you alter your apparatus to use a bowl set under a bright ‘light’ while you dispense a fine stream of shampoo from above, which, if the shampoo you use is, like Johnson's Baby Shampoo, mostly, but not completely, transparent, will enable you to see fluid dynamically instantiated, continuously graded, continuously ‘moving’ 3D refraction differentials. You want your primary stream to 'wander' - just a bit, not too much, and not too rapidly - in this part of the experiment (which primary stream wandering practically eliminates the 'squirting' stream dynamics (because the 'mounds' don't build-up to the necessary range of 'geometries', which 'geometries' are fluid-flow-rate determined, which is important, so remember it. As long as the fluid dynamics remain continuous, they remain the same, but if the primary stream 'moves' too rapidly, it's harder to see the dynamics that are disclosed in this "bowl" trial.) 

What you’ll see in the light that will be refracted 'out of' (the dynamics are actually continuous all the way through your eyes and 'within' your nervous system, so there's actually no "going out of") these dynamic 3D differentials will be extremely informative because you'll see stuff that's coupled exactly to stuff that's routinely 'presumed' to be 'invisible'.

This "bowl" experiment can only be observed dynamically. A video and correlated discussion is included in an accompanying WebLog, but this experiment is so easy to do, and so extremely-informative, (and such good fun) that I encourage you to do it yourself. Just pay close attention to everything that will be going on in the fluid dynamics that will unfold 'in' your own bowl which you'll be able to see and observe in the form of the UEF refraction dynamics that will occur with respect to the 'light' you shine into your bowl while you're dispensing a fine stream of fluid (shampoo) into it. (If you use sanitized 'apparatus', you can always recover most of the shampoo after you're done experimenting, so you're not wasting it.)

(Further note: I've not verified that partial fluid transparency is a necessity. Analogous information sets are certainly accessible via other experimental techniques. Using the qualities inherent in Johnson's Baby Shampoo always yields excellent, easily observed data because the always continuously graded fluid dynamic variations that occur in the receiving pool instantiate dynamic index of refraction variations that are what renders stuff that has been 'presumed' to be 'invisible' readily visible to the unaided eye. Other partially transparent, fluids, having various viscosities, will probably also work, and I have, for 'decades', wanted to repeat the experiment using such other fluids as experimental substrates, but have yet to get around to doing so because I'm 'always' pretty busy, and the results from the shampoo trials were sufficient. Since the fluid dynamics rendered visible in them are continuous, their information contents are infinite. One infinity is sufficient, and every 'time' one does another experimental trial, one obtains another infinity. As is explained further below, as the scale of observation approaches the scale of the 'atoms' ('molecules') that comprise the shampoo, there is a nonlinearly increasingly 'localized' index of refraction variation that occurs with respect to the 'atoms' themselves. As is explained below, these 'atom'-'local' dynamics are 'also' continuous, with only accelerations ever varying with respect to them.) (Further note: fluid "viscosity" is a tool that 'slows down' the fluid dynamics, rendering them easy to observe in detail, but viscosity is not a necessity. The same continuous fluid dynamics are, for instance, visible in "droplet" dynamics of water, in the dynamics of the CO₂ bubbles that 'squirt' out of your just-poured glass of cola, and disclosed in the 'dancing'-'light' that's refracted 'out of' the water in a well-maintained swimming pool on a sunny 'day'.) 

The static image, below, is just a placeholder to remind you to do this experimental trial on your own. 

After you do the "bowl" experiment, you'll see the same dynamics occurring with respect to all fluids that have any degree of freedom to move, and you'll, thereafter, never see 'light' that's refracted with respect to any fluid in the same way.

Traditional explanations of the fluid dynamics in the images above involve so-called "forces". You can find this stuff in traditional Physics textbooks. I'll provide a single, completely-integrated, thoroughly verified, nontraditional, explanation beginning at this point in my discussion.

Again, the "bridge" that enables one to cross from "tradition" to Unification (which is a worthy journey) is constructed out of an all-permeating 'substance' that I refer to as the Universal Extreme Fluid (UEF). An "extreme fluid" is (mostly) like a 'normal' "fluid" except that it includes no 'particles' of any kind.

Such all-permeating 'substances' used to be accepted in "Natural Philosophy", but have been 'rejected' in what have become the now-traditional theoretical approaches in science.

When mention of it is first encountered, the UEF seems to be reminiscent of 'the aether', but, beyond the fact that the UEF is all-permeating, it is not 'the aether'.

Being an extreme fluid, the UEF 'moves', and the single dynamic that governs all of its 'movement' is that the UEF always 'moves' in the direction in which it is most free to 'move'.

I coined the term "ephemerance" ("eph"; from "ephemeral" (Miriam-Webster's: "lasting a very short time"©, which definition will do 'for now', but is not quite a sufficient "stem" (which insufficiency is on me, not Miriam-Webster) with respect to the dynamics of "UEF ephemerence" because, although ephemerance variations can be fleeting, they can 'also' be nearly (but never completely) unmovingly-slow.)) The UEF always 'moves' in the direction of ‘local’ maximum-ephemerance (max-eph) - in the direction in which it is ’locally’ most free to 'move'. This is important so remember it.

[Sidebar: I try to use existing terms (i.e., "refraction") when it's possible to do so, but, otherwise, the 'nomenclature' that I use in Tapered Harmony is comprised of "placeholders" that I coined while developing the theory so that I could use such 'handles' while integrating the nontraditional dynamics with respect to which the placeholders correlate in the 'nomenclature'. This 'nomenclature' has been sufficient in the theory's development, but there's nothing "mandatory" about it. It's the dynamics that matter, not the (verbal) symbols used to describe them. I've always 'presumed' that I'd ("Oh Happy Day") get together with colleagues in Physics and that a rigorous nomenclature could, 'then', be agreed upon. This happy 'day' has yet to come.]

Continuous UEF ephemerance dynamics are what are disclosed in the continuously graded, continuously varying refraction dynamics that occur, and which you can see with unaided eye, in the "bowl" experiment.

That is, it's the continuous UEF dynamics that determine the 'light' refraction dynamics that you observe with respect to the fluid dynamics occurring in your "bowl" experiment.

It's "dynamics", not "dynamics^n".

There's no 'separation between' dynamics.

Everything is continuous in the UEF.

Everything in Physical Reality is the One thing.

Relative UEF ephemerance.

The easiest way to begin to understand the UEF, and how any why Physics cannot be accomplished without it, is to consider the existence of macroscopic atoms, which is why I began this discussion with water at heights above the height of the Dam at Chicopee Falls. 

Here are photographs of five more macroscopic atoms:

Each of the macroscopic atoms seen in these photos takes the form of a slowly-moving 'temperature' wave.

Note the alternation of 'concentric' low-to-high temperature regions that is easily seen in the first four of these macroscopic atoms. The UEF-‘flows’ that instantiate such alternating concentricities are directionally dynamic. (You can literally see these dynamics, albeit, in snapshots, in the gradations that occur in the alternating concentricities shown in the photos.) These alternating concentricities are extremely significant because they always disclose (point in the direction of) the 'local' UEF-flow gradient that is always coupled exactly to the universal UEF-flow gradient that physically is What's Described By 2nd Thermo (WDB2T), which all-permeating exact coupling is the most-fundamental dynamic that occurs in Physical Reality, which is important, so remember it. 

This sort of UEF-‘flow’-direction alternation occurs ubiquitously in Physical Reality, Be-Cause, the UEF always 'moves' in the direction of ‘local’ max-eph, and as it so ‘moves’, the direction of ‘local’ max-eph alters in a way that’s always exactly coupled to the ‘movement’ of the UEF because ‘local’ UEF gradients alter as the UEF ‘moves’ (all of which you’ll be able to see macroscopically when you do the “bowl version” of the Johnson’s Baby Shampoo Experiment.) Study the first four photos above until you see how and why 'heat' flows betwixt and between the alternating concentricities. 'heat', which is 'just' 'instantaneous' 'local' relative UEF ephemerance gradient (neither 'caloric', nor so-called "energy") which physically is what is experienced as relative “warmth” when UEF ephemerance differentials impinge 'within' biological dynamics, always 'moves' in the direction in which the 'local' UEF is most free to 'move' - in the direction of ‘local’ max-eph. 

See what happens when that happens?

Because the UEF is continuous, the "alternation" occurs simultaneously at all scales, microscopically-'local', to Physical Reality as a whole, Be-Cause, WDB2T - extremely small and extremely rapid, to extremely large and and extremely slow, all at once. As is explained further below, this ubiquitous scaled-alternation UEF dynamic is, for instance, what underpins the so-called "atomic (and molecular) line spectra", which is important so remember it.

What's occurring in the UEF dynamics that are "snapped" in the first four 'temperature' wave photos above, is that UEF 'moving' out of one region and into another region decreases the 'temperature' of the exited-region leaving it 'cold' relative to its former 'temperature' and ‘warming’ the region into which it has ‘flowed’, which is how and why the alternating concentricities are dynamically instantiated and dynamically 'sustained' as the 'movement' of 'local' UEF approaches (but, Be-Cause, WDB2T, never reaches) 'equilibrium' with 'non-local' UEF. (Such alternating concentricity stuff can also be observed in the “bowl version” of the experiment, but this requires great care and patience to achieve because, if bubbles are generated in the receiving pool, although they 'trace' the fluid dynamics you want to observe in an incomplete way, they mostly interfere with your seeing the dynamic ephemerance differentials that are what you actually want to observe in the refraction dynamics as they are dynamically mapped in the 'light' you shine into the fluid pool in your bowl. Any bubbles that form exert ‘their own’, 'local' UEF ephemerance group-disciplined dynamics relative to the fluid dynamics that you want to observe. In general, because of instantiation of their "encapsulating" 'air-fluid boundaries', any bubbles that form are quasi macroscopic atoms - as are the 'holes' that form in dough set aside to 'rise' before being baked into bread - which is instantiated by how the UEF 'moves' but is not identical to how the UEF 'moves', so bubbles (mostly) interfere with observation of the dynamics that are most significant. Bubbles can be usefully minimized by taking care in developing ("practicing") the technique you use in dispensing the fine stream of shampoo into the pool in your bowl (basically by minimizing the height from which your necessarily-still-finer streams are released. But 'then', unless you have access to actual Laboratory 'scaffolding' apparatus, your hand, or the shampoo dispenser, tends to get in the way of your viewing.)

The always-occurring, dynamically alternating concentricity is often 'hidden' in details, as is the case in the miniature "grungy melting ice mountain" photo above. Observing at a small scale, here, readily discloses the same alternating 'temperature' (UEF-'flow') dynamics as are seen in the "pond" photos. All you have to do is take ‘time’-sequenced photographs and subsequently study them carefully at various magnifications. (When Spring weather permits, I enjoy “walking a route” for some ‘days’ after a substantial snowfall so I can observe the “harmonics” (the alternating concentricities) in the increasingly-‘grungy’ ‘snow mountain’ remnants of the snow banks that plows pile up as the ‘snow mountains’ are gradually dissipated by the UEF-‘flow’ (UEF, not ‘light’, not ‘electromagnetic radiation’, not 'heat') 'out of sun' refracts through them (which UEF 'flow' actually occurs with respect to 'the' primordial universal compaction, with many intervening refractions ("alternating concentricities"), until, in the region of 'space' 'local to' our 'solar system', it (mostly) refracts 'out of' the UEF 'containment' dynamics of the SSW harmonics that comprise Sun. The 'presumption' that 'light' which reaches our 'local' region of 'space' 'had its origins in the objects that we see' is an illusion deriving in absence-of-understanding with respect to 'both' the UEF 'and' WDB2T. The UEF is not 'restricted to straight lines' between us and what we 'see'. It always 'moves' in the direction of max-eph while refracting many 'times', changing direction (including accelerations) with every such refraction.)) Especially in mid-Spring, the UEF ‘sculpts’ spectacular geometries, constructed in alternating concentriicities, into these dissipating miniature snow (ice) mountains.) 

[Sidebar: If you've been wondering about my use of single quotes, it's because all of the physical dynamics I'm discussing are graded with respect to WDB2T, so, for instance, what constitutes "local UEF" depends upon "how one ‘moves’ where one is in the overall UEF gradient that is what WDB2T physically is”. Such considerations are subtle, but exceedingly important, and if you just keep reading, you'll grasp them. In the mean 'time', I use single quotes (which I call "funny quotes") to connote, "there is more to this (or that) than is conveyed by the 'easy' connotations of the words I've used, but an understanding of this "more" requires stuff that has not yet been explained". It's just important to 'move toward' Truth in this way. So I do, funny quotes and all.]

I'm sorry for the 'necessity' to do so, but since I'm aware that folks tend to 'presume', in-error, with respect to this stuff, I'll include a gentle admonition at this 'point' in my discussion: Athough what's above (and below, and further below) goes far beyond 'both' "Special and General Relativities", there is nothing in the above that contradicts their 'basics', which basics of relativity fall right out of the UEF dynamics that I'm explaining, along with exceedingly-more, as you'll see as you continue reading.

Example: In my statement above, that what constitutes "local UEF" depends upon "how one ‘moves’ where one is in the overall UEF gradient that is what WDB2T physically is”, "where one is in the overall UEF gradient that is what WDB2T physically is” is not a locus. It is a state of graded UEF-'movement' dynamics occurring ‘local’ to one’s ‘momentary’ existence. Think of “a punch in the gut” instead of “walking through a moving railway car” or “being in an operating elevator”. The “punch in the gut” is a 'local' UEF dynamic that can occur at any scale at any physical locale, but to the degree that it 'contains' one's being, it is always "where one is in the overall UEF gradient that is what WDB2T physically is.” The same is True with respect to inanimate objects, from a hydrogen ‘atom’, to a grain of sand, to planets, to stars, to star-systems, to galaxies, to galactic clusters, to the Universe as a whole. 

For instance, when I was on Twitter the other ‘night’, I stumbled upon a map of the rotational-directions of spiral galaxies ‘throughout’ the Universe (shown below, as shared by @shamir_lior) Large-scale, UEF-dynamics-instantiated, alternating concentricities are apparent in this map. (Note, however, at this point, I don't know the origins of this map - where it was originally published. So, although I 'presume' that is the product of replicable research, I've not, yet, calculated its veracity on my own.) 

In 'normal' Physical Reality, the UEF always 'moves' continuously in 3D, which is what makes it necessary to work at all scales simultaneously because, where there exist agglomerations of 'microscopic atoms', ephemerance is decreased in 'the' direction ("on a line") between an external point and the center of the agglomeration of 'atoms'. This UEF sub-dynamic is observable everywhere ‘microscopic atoms’ exist, and is, for instance, what intervenes between the UEF and the formation of the ‘streamline’ macroscopic atoms that are shown in the “barrel-parabola” photo near the top of my discussion. They also underpin the dynamics of so-called “friction”, so-called “surface tension”, so-called “cavitation”, including with respect to fluid flow in pipes and relative to ships at sea, and of so-called “electricity” in circuits. (‘electricity’ is ‘just’  ‘local’ UEF that has had 'a' dynamically directed (dynamically restricted) ephemerance gradient coerced upon it, which is 100% of how and why so-called ("electric") "induction" is instantiated and 'sustained' (my dear Michael.) So too with respect to everything else in Physical Reality, which cannot be observed if one does not work at all scales simultaneously, but cannot be missed when one does.)

This on-a-line ephemerance decrease (increased restrictedness of UEF 'movement'), with respect to which it necessary to work at all scales simultaneously, derives in the dynamics of UEF ‘containing’ UEF, ‘within’ which the ‘contained’ UEF “entrains” its ‘local’ ‘containing’ UEF. The UEF ephemerance differential, inherent in entrainment, is, for instance, the physical essence of what has been referred to as "gravity".

‘massive objects’ do not “attract” ‘other massive objects’. The illusion of ‘attraction’ derives in the way that the ephemerance of the UEF that is entrained in the ‘containment’ dynamics of the SSW harmonics that comprise ‘massive objects’ is restricted relative to the ephemerance of UEF that is not so entrained. (Which is 'also' how & why there is an illusion that so-called "gravity" 'is a property of matter', when the dynamics, inherent, are 100% due to relative UEF ephemerance that is mapped exactly with respect to the max-eph dynamic which is simultaneously mapped exactly with respect to WDB2T.) So anything that exists ‘on a line between’ UEF-entraining ‘objects’, to the degree of such UEF entrainment, receives commensurately-less UEF-‘containment’ ‘sustenance’ in the direction of ‘the line’. The SSW harmonics that comprise it become asymmetrically-‘sustained’, and have reduced ‘interaction with’ UEF that exists in the direction of ‘the line’. All ‘other’ UEF ephemerance remaining ‘normal’, the net resultant UEF dynamics ‘move’ ‘massive objects’ in the direction of ‘the line between them’, which line can be curvilinear because of intervening UEF-eph variations (not as a result of so-called "space-time" 'curving' (or 'warping')).

It’s the UEF ‘contained within’ 'and' entrained by the SSW harmonics that comprise the ‘massive objects’ that instantiates this “relative motion” in ‘interaction with’ all of the ‘other’ UEF that exists in Physical Reality, not “the massive objects”, nor any so-called "property of matter", nor any so-called "attractive force".

Note, again, how & why the illusion that 'gravity is a property of matter' arises in 'presumption' deriving in what has been absence of understanding with respect to the UEF 'containment' 'and' entrainment dynamics above. 

It’s useful to extend the scale of these UEF entrainment dynamics to that of spiral galaxies, the rotational dynamics of which occur in 100% accord with what's explained above, not because there are so-called “black holes” ‘attracting' everything ‘in’ the galaxy’, but because UEF entrainment is nonlinearly graded from maximums relatively close to, but not at, the centers of, 'and' to nonlinearly-decreasing degrees in radially-outward directions, 'within', spiral galaxies, including with respect to their so-called "halos". Spiral galaxies are macroscopic atoms that literally occur as UEF whirlpools that exhaust UEF centrally, which WDB2T-powered UEF-'movement' dynamic is what empowers all 'other' physical dynamics that occur 'within' spiral galaxies, which includes all Life on Earth. What is referred to as "the event horizon" of a so-called (non physically real) "black hole" is a dynamically instantiated and 'sustained', physically real harmonic radius at which the velocities of the UEF moving radially-inward 'within' the galactic UEF-spiral approach the max-eph threshold and UEF 'moves', increasingly, in any direction other than the spiralling radially inward direction, which leaves only 'up' and 'down' axial directions in which the spiraling, 'movement'-restricted, 'local' UEF can move. This is the physical wellspring of the so-called "jets" that emanate 'local to' the 'centers' of spiral galaxies (which are actually UEF 'flow' dynamics) that has been traditionally 'attributed' to 'the non-physically-real gravitational attraction of black holes' even though all such "jets" move in ways that 'defy' what would, by definition, be 'the inescapable gravity of a black hole' ('evaporation' not withstanding). (Traditional physics is overflowing with such self-contradictions that are repeated so routinely, and with such 'fashionable fanfare', that (except for their superficial 'fanfares') they tend to become 'invisible' to adherents of traditional physics.)

It is the 'exhausting' of UEF inherent in these 'jets' that instantiates and 'sustains' the galactic 'halos' which are 'contained within' UEF 'external to' the 'galaxy', and 'in' which UEF 'containment' dynamics, the galactic 'halos' constitute another macroscopic atom.

The 'arms' of spiral galaxies are physical embodiments of the alternating concentricities discussed above with respect to the 'temperature' wave photos. Separations between such galactic 'arms' are 'sustained' in the same, but much larger scale, continuous UEF-'flow' dynamics that 'sustain' the alternating concentricities of the the pond 'ice'. In both cases, it is UEF i/o occurring with respect to the SSW harmonics that comprise the macroscopic entities that instantiates and 'sustains' 'the gaps between' the alternating UEF dynamics, which, in the case of spiral galaxies, consists of 'rivers' of UEF i/o emanating from SSW harmonics 'contained within' the galactic 'arms', which UEF 'rivers' are galactic scale UEF waves that are 'sustained' by the UEF in exactly the same way that the water above the Chicopee Falls Dam is 'sustained' at heights greater than the height of the dam. Spiral galaxies literally "pinwheel" in the UEF 'flow' of these 'rivers' - in exactly the same way as do the namesake toys that delight every Young Child who waves one about, or holds one, in the UEF 'flow' 'local' to the Child.

All physical dynamics, throughout all of Physical Reality, are connected continuously in the UEF in the One, always exactly the same, graded relative to WDB2T, way.

'electrons'

Moving on, what have been referred to as "atoms" are not comprised of "particles".

Outside of the minds of Physicists, there exist no such things as "electrons", "protons", "neutrons", or etc., "particles".

When accelerator researchers 'see particles and their interactions', what they are always actually observing are the UEF-'flow' dynamics that derive in the altered relatively restricted UEF ephemerance gradient that is coerced within the UEF dynamics that occur 'local to' an accelerator, by whatever 'technical' means, and which is directed 'within' the accelerator apparatus.

Such accelerator-'local' 3D UEF-'flow' dynamics always incorporate continuously alternating concentricities that are exactly, if relatively more-powerful and more-fleeting, than the same continuous UEF-‘flow’ dynamic disclosed in the "temperature wave" photos above.

What is a so-called "hydrogen atom" if not "an electron 'spinning' while orbiting a proton"?

All so-called "atoms" exist as quantities of UEF that, during some creation violence, have become 'contained within' spherical volumes of surrounding ('containing') UEF as the creation violence subsides with nonlinearly negatively accelerating velocity.

When first encountered, such stuff-'containing'-same-stuff dynamics seem too 'strange', but easily observed examples abound.

All of the commonly occurring, and routinely observable (in the spiral galaxy case, with the aid of telescopes) macroscopic atoms discussed above exhibit the very stuff-'containing'-same-stuff dynamics that seems 'strange' when described in words.

The water exists above the dam because water 'holds' it 'there'. (The fundamental level, in which the UEF ‘holds’ the "Hydrogen" and "Oxygen" 'atoms' 'in' ‘water molecules’ where they 'instantaneously' are, is explained below.)

The alternating concentricities in the pond-ice photos exist because the 'heat' (UEF) 'flow' dynamics explained above.

Everything in Physical Reality reduces directly to 'local' relative ephemerance which is coupled exactly to the universal UEF ephemerance that is what WDB2T physically is.

In a 'hydrogen atom', what has been referred to as "an electron" is a quantity of UEF that, during some creation violence, became 'contained within' a spherical volume, as above, Be-Cause, the quantity of UEF is greater than the quantity of UEF that can pass through the surface area of the volume, Be-Cause, the max-eph dynamic slams-shut the only 'door' through which further expansion could, 'otherwise', occur. (Be-Cause, the UEF dynamics that instantiate 'local' max-eph thresholds throughout Physical Reality, there exists no such 'containment'-correlated "otherwise" in Physical Reality.)

Because it is, in fact, 'contained’ (because its ephemerance is commensurately reduced; because it is ‘instantaneously’ less free to move), the 'contained' quantity of UEF tends to 'move' radially-outward with respect to, and out of 'containment' (which is, as explained below, what physically underpins all routinely-observable "emission" dynamics), but as the spherically-'contained' UEF does so 'move', it's 'movement' decreases the ephemerance of the surrounding UEF 'local' to the 'contained' spherical volume of UEF, which results in a 'shelling'-UEF-compaction (a nonlinearly accelerating ephemerance decrease) that begins to 'harden' when ‘contained’-UEF-eph equals ‘containing’-UEF-eph, and ‘hardens’ increasingly as the 'local' max-eph threshold is approached.

This 'shelling' UEF compaction is what a so-called "electron" physically is.

The UEF 'contained within' the 'shelling' dynamic is spread relatively-uniformly ‘upon’ the 'instantaneous' surface area of the 'contained' spherical volume, so when the 'shelling' compaction interacts with other (‘external’) UEF, the interaction always occurs with geometry and dimensions correlated to the geometry of the 'shelling' UEF compaction dynamic, including its cross-section, at its ‘instantaneous’ spherical radius. Which UEF interaction dynamics instantiate an illusion that 'a point-like entity is being observed' when what's actually being observed is the interaction of the 'point'-thin cross-sections of two spherical 'shells', or a 'shelling' UEF dynamic and a 'nucleating' UEF dynamic (see below, shortly).

Every 'electron' cloud chamber, etc., trace that's ever been observed, and all the data acquired in "double-slit", 'electron'-accelerator (etc.) experiments reduces directly and exactly to the UEF dynamics explained above and to nothing else.

'charge'

What the routinely 'observed' curving of 'paths' that occur in cloud chambers and in accelerator 'detectors' is exclusively correlated to are the dis-integration dynamics that ensue when the "whole surface area" ''containment' dynamics, above, are, because of the UEF interaction dynamics that have occurred, rendered no longer sufficiently uniformly distributed upon the surface area of a 'shelling' compaction to 'sustain' 'containment'.

What the 'curving' physically constitutes is the UEF that was formerly 'contained within' the 'shelling' compaction dissipating out of 'containment', with the onset of the dissipation beginning at 'the break' in the 'containment'-necessary "whole spherical surface area" uniformity and progressively 'and' continuously exhausting along the 'surface' of the 'instantaneous' remnant of the former 'containment'-'shell'.

What this 'curving' that has been, in tradition, 'attributed to' so-called "charge" ('because, after all', the curving routinely occurs relative to an externally-applied "magnetic field") physically is is 'just' the dissipating, formerly-'contained', UEF 'jet'-propelling the 'local' UEF-'movement' dynamics as the formerly-'contained' UEF 'moves' in the direction of 'local' max-eph, which UEF-'motion' 'whips' the 'path of' the dissipating UEF into always-inwardly-'spiralling' UEF-'flow' dynamics - somewhat like the dynamics that occur when the newly-exposed 'ends' of a broken firecracker are ignited - "jet-propulsion" via exhaust-dissipation.

Such 'curving' remains routinely detectable only while the UEF 'contained within" the dissipating UEF 'shelling'-'containment' remnant continues to approach the max-eph threshold. When there's no longer a sufficient quantity of UEF left 'in' the 'containment' dynamic, the dynamics 'wink-out of' routine detectability (but, as is explained below, do not become "completely invisible").

'protons'

Continuing with the net UEF 'containmment' dynamics, as the microscopic-scale max-eph-instantiated 'door-to-radially-outward-movement closes', the 'atom'-proximal 'external' ('containing') UEF 'moves' in the direction of max-eph, which, with respect to the 'local' max-eph dynamic, Be-Cause, the 'shelling' UEF compaction, leaves only the radially-inward direction in which the 'shelling'-compacted 'internal' and 'external' UEF can possibly 'move'.

Which instantiates a radially-inward UEF 'flow' – a ‘nucleating’ dynamic – in which the same quantity of UEF 'ends up' compacted into a 'point' at the center of the now-'point'-sized spherical volume.

Which instantiates the fleeting illusion of a 'heavy particle (a proton) that exists at the center of the hydrogen atom', as has been 'presumed' ever since Rutherford so 'presumed' because he had experienced the illusion of his 'cannon shell' but neither knowledge of the UEF nor its dynamics.

'electron mass'

The illusion that ‘an electron has low mass' and ‘a proton has mass ~1836 x electron mass' occurs because, in the ‘electron case' the correlated quantity of UEF is spread out in a spherical shell, while in the ‘proton case' the same quantity of UEF is compacted into a 'point'. With respect to any one SSW harmonic, in both 'cases', 100% of physically possible interaction dynamics are routinely comprised of compacted-into-a-point UEF or compacted-into-spherical-shell UEF.

UEF Quantity Metering

The same quantity of 'contained' UEF undergoes concentrically alternating, nonlinearly accelerating, expansion and compaction periodically - harmonically - generating the so-called "emission" 'and' "absorbtion" "line spectra" as it does so, Be-Cause, the same max-eph UEF dynamic "regulates" UEF i/o with respect to the ongoing ’containment’ dynamics. The dynamics of UEF i/o constitute how & why the same quantity of UEF, but not the same UEF, is ‘contained’ (which is why I use funny quotes around references to ‘containment’). ‘containment’ is a dynamic, not an ‘unchanging state’, which is a UEF-'flow' asymmetry that is an absolute requirement of Universal WDB2T, and which discloses that there exists no “static” entity, of any kind, in Physical Reality. Hence, the non-existence of so-called "particles".

'radioactive decay'

For instance, with respect to Physical Reality as a whole, so-called "radioactive decay" is always coupled exactly to WDB2T, occurring when UEF ephemerance 'local' to an 'atom' becomes greater than the (relatively more restricted) ephemerance that is necessary to 'sustain' UEF 'containment within' its harmonics. When such 'atomic' disintegrations occur, the formerly-'contained' 'and' entrained UEF is 'released' from 'containment' 'and' entrainment, which UEF 'release' decreases the 'local' UEF ephemerance ('bolstering' the 'local' UEF; restricting its freedom to move), which is how & why what is physically a continuous UEF 'movement' dynamic with respect to the Universe as a whole yields an illusion of 'random decay events'. (And how & why 'decay' dynamics are unfolding at a relatively-slow rate during the universal epoch in which you and I have existence even though all such 'decay' dynamics, taken together, constitute an explosive universal UEF dynamic that is unfolding at a nonlinearly-accelerating rate.)

'stabilities'

These relative UEF ephemerance dynamics 'also' determine 100% of the dynamics of the nonlinearly increasing isotope (element) 'stabilities' that occur following all 'instances' of creation violence. (Which is how & why, for instance, there is relatively much 'radioactivity' ('containment' instability) immediately 'after' the creation violence inherent in a 'nuclear' detonation. In accelerator experiments, 'stars', novas, supernovas, etc., including the galactic max-eph dynamics explained above, same-old, same-old, but with nonlinearly-greater 'power'.

There is 'also' an exactly analogous UEF ephemerance dynamic that occurs at-depth 'within' all relatively-large agglomerations of SSW harmonics, including "Earth" because UEF 'containment' dynamics become nonlinearly less 'sustained' at-depth 'within' all such relatively-large agglomerations of SSW harmonics, which dynamic 'also' reduces directly to the 'local' max-eph dynamic. Which is how & why 'radioactivities' always increase, 'and' 'atomic stabilities' always decrease, nonlinearly relative to 'depth within' such 'bodies'.)

Creation violence always instantiates a nonlinearly mapped distribution of 'containment' stabilities. The relatively unstable 'containments' entrain their 'local' UEF relatively weakly (relative to 'stable containment' dynamics), which 'sustains' the 'containments' only while UEF 'moving' in exact accord with the 'local' max-eph dynamic sufficiently 'sustains' entrainment dynamics, which 'sustaining' of 'containment' entrainment subsides nonlinearly in exactly the same 'radioactive decay' dynamics explained above. So-called "half lives" correlate exactly to the nonlinearly-'unfolding' UEF dynamics that are always inherent.

'neutrons'

What's been referred to as "a neutron" occurs in exactly the same way as in the 'electron'<->'proton' case except that, in the case of a 'neutron' quantity of UEF, the quantity is dynamically ‘split’, with each split-quantity of UEF simultaneously undergoing concentrically alternating (“doubly alternating”) expansion and compaction. That is, when one split-quantity is ‘shelling’, the other split-quantity is always ‘nucleating’.

(Although it’s ‘inelegant’, a term such as “split-quantity” (rather than a ‘static-fractional’ quantity) is necessary because, between ‘shelling’ and ‘nucleating’ extremes, the UEF-eph curve is that of a downward-open, vertical-axis-of-symmetry parabola (for the same max-eph reason as the "barrel-line" parabola at the top of my discussion) with greatest ‘containment’-ephemerance at the ‘vertex’ of the parabola, which ‘vertex’ is exactly, but in nonlinear measure, halfway between ‘shelling’ and ‘nucleating’ extremes), and the distribution of the UEF ‘contained within’ each ‘split’ varies in a dynamically graded way that is exactly coupled to the 'local' max-eph dynamic. This is how & why ‘probes’ pass right through SSW harmonics (‘atoms’) when they encounter ‘in between compaction extremes’ UEF-eph. All of which is ‘also’ True in the case of the “singularly alternating” ‘electron’<->’proton’ UEF ‘containment’ dynamics explained above. (With respect to any ‘and’ all UEF-‘containment’ dynamics, because of continuously occurring UEF i/o, ‘static-fractional’ quantities of UEF are nonsensical.)

'charge'

The doubly alternating simultaneity, above, is how & why a so-called "neutron" is said to 'have no charge', which, when taken together with the 'electron'<->'proton' (singular) concentric alternation of UEF expansion and compaction, discloses what so-called "charge" physically is - a UEF-'movement propensity' that is what relative UEF ephemerance physically is and which occurs solely with respect to the 'local' max-eph dynamic. Spherical UEF compaction yields the illusion of 'positive charge' and spherical UEF expansion yields the illusion of 'negative charge', with what's actually occurring in either case reducing to the general max-eph dynamic which determines UEF 'movement propensity' (relative UEF ephemerance) per unit volume of UEF throughout Physical Reality.

In the doubly alternating ('neutron') case, the 'movement' of one split-quantity is always 'counterbalanced' by the 'movement' of the other split-quantity, so there's no 'distinguishing' UEF 'movement' propensity (relative UEF ephemerance remains 'balanced'), which results in  there being no illusion of 'charge'.

UEF Quantity Metering

With respect to the 'electron', 'proton', 'neutron' UEF expansion<->compaction dynamics explained above, which are referred to as "sub-harmonics" in Tapered Harmony, the metering of 'contained' UEF quantities occurs solely, Be-Cause, a quantity of UEF must conform to the max-eph dynamic in a way that is distributed over the whole surface area of the spherical 'containment' volume, with uniformity ‘also’ coupled exactly to the max-eph dynamic, if 'containment' of the UEF-quantity is to be instantiated and 'sustained', which is what so-called “electron capture/emission”, “proton capture/emission”, and “neutron capture/emission” physically are and how & why ‘they’ physically occur. (Which is ‘also’ how & why there is the illusion that “things come in threes”.)

UEF i/o

To the degree that this single whole-spherical-surface-area max-eph ‘containment’ uniformity requirement is under- or over- shot, the ‘discrepant’ quantity of UEF dissipates continuously away from being ‘contained’ which is just more UEF i/o. Therefore, only 'maximum' 'nucleation' and  whole-surface-area, max-eph-sufficient quantities are routinely ‘detectable’ (“observable”), which is how & why there is a 'microscopic'-scale illusion that ‘the UEF does not exist’. Sub-max-eph-threshold UEF just dissipates. It’s not “invisible”, however, because such dissipating UEF is always dynamically entrained with respect to the 'containment' dynamics from which it dissipated, which is how and why so-called "ionizations", including in so-called "electrolytics", are routinely, but not always, 'reversible'.

Such dissipating UEF can, and routinely does, ‘combine’ to exceed the 'local' max-eph threshold. “Pop”, ‘containment’ happens. Not out of ‘nothing’, but out of ‘dissipating’, sub-max-eph-threshold UEF ‘moving' in combination so that creation violence is fleetingly instantiated relative to the 'local' max-eph threshold. The resultant ‘containment’ will be ‘sustained’ for as long as the UEF gradient ‘local’ to it is sufficient to ‘sustain’ it ‘in’ spherical-standing-wave expansion<->compaction harmonic motion, which is what is routinely observed in accelerator 'detectors' with respect to the detritus of so-called "particle collisions". I refer to such fleeting 'containments' as "encapsulation" dynamics, the UEF dynamics of which are exactly analogous to, if more powerful than, how & why "bubbles' become "encapsulated" at-depth in all trials of the shampoo experiment.

[Sidebar: There exists no so-called "wave-particle duality". There exists only UEF 'movement'  dynamics that always exhibit only wave-like 3D alternating concentricities that derive in the way that UEF 'movement' dynamics always alter 'local' UEF-eph relative to their 'local' max-eph threshold, which dynamics are exactly determined in the universal max-eph dynamic that is what WDB2T physically is.

No so-called "collisions" ever occur in physical reality. The illusion of 'collisions' is instantiated when the UEF 'sustaining' dynamics of two or more 'objects' mutually refract. See "Compton UEF Refraction" below.]

All macroscopic atoms, including those shown in the photos above, are instantiated, 'sustained', and cohere in the sub-threshold UEF dissipations of many SSW harmonics, which (again) is what so-called "heat" physically is.

'charge'

Which, taken together, is 100% of how and why the so-called "negative charge" of a so-called "electron" and the so-called "positive charge" of a so-called "proton" 'are' physically instantiated in a stereotypically occurring way that yields stereotypically observable ('always similar' relative to max-eph) values (that is, the results of the Millikan oil-drop experiment), and how & why ‘positive charge’ and ‘negative charge’ are always ‘equal but opposite’.

'electromagnetic radiation'

All of which, taken together, fully discloses what the so-called "electric" and "magnetic" 'components of' so-called "electromagnetic radiation" physically 'are'. Speaking of 'them' in the plural is nonsensical. 'they are' a single UEF ephemerance dynamic that alternates between waxing ('electric') and exactly-coupled waning ('magnetic') maxima that 'hover' about 'their' 'local' max-eph threshold, which is how and why the 'broken containment shelling dynamics' explained above curve with respect to the UEF gradients that are what applied 'electric' 'and' 'magnetic' "fields" physically 'are' (what it physically is)). And is 'also' how & why frequency-wavelength changes dynamically as 'em' travels through 'local' ephemerance gradients. Which requires that everything with respect to so-called "cosmological redshift" be redone because it's relative UEF ephemerance that determines frequency-wavelength, not spatial distance, and not the so-called "speed of light".

'attraction and repulsion'

All of the dynamics of so-called “attraction” and so-called “repulsion”, including with respect to so-called “gravity”, fall right out of the correlated UEF ‘movement’ propensities (with respect to ‘gravity’, again, deriving in ‘UEF entrainment dynamics ‘local’ to a UEF being shared 'within' a conglomeration of SSW harmonics.)

Z and 'mass'

How and why there is an illusion that "elements" 'increase in mass' as Z increases 'within' the Periodic Table derives solely in the max-eph UEF dynamic, Be-Cause, as quantities of 'contained' UEF increase via the "UEF quantity metering" dynamics explained above, the 'power' of the 'nucleation'-'shelling' UEF compaction dynamics of SSW harmonics increases commensurately. 

'mass, inertia, energy, work'

This single SSW 'nucleation'-‘shelling’-power UEF dynamic is what so-called "mass" 'and' so-called "inertia" physically 'are', and is how & why there is an illusion that 'mass and energy' (neither of which has physically real existence) 'are equivalent'. The illusion 'that they are equivalent' derives in the single max-eph dynamic which is the sole determinant of what have been erroneously referred to as "mass" and "energy", which is 'also' how & why there is an illusion that one illusion 'transforms into' the other illusion.

There exists no such 'transformation'. What has physically real existence are the UEF dynamics explained above, and nothing else.

It is necessary to perform “work” to ‘impart motion to a material object’, not because the ‘object has mass’, or because 'it possesses inertia', but, Be-Cause, before the ‘object’ can be ‘moved’, the ephemerance of all of the UEF that is entrained in the UEF ‘containment’ dynamics of all of the SSW harmonics that ‘instantaneously comprise the ‘object’ must be decreased – must become restricted relative to all other ‘local’ UEF.

To the degree that an ‘object’s ‘inertia’ is ‘overcome’, it is solely, Be-Cause, this alteration of relative UEF ephemerance.

This UEF dynamic, and only this UEF dynamic, is what “work” physically is, and how & why “work” is experienced as “being arduous”. 

SSW Phasing

Another basic, but important, max-eph UEF dynamic occurs in a way that is 'also' exactly coupled to the number of whole spherical surface area 'containment' sufficient quantities of UEF that are incorporated 'within' SSW harmonics as Z increases. It is that, the compaction<->expansion phase of of every such incorporated UEF quantity is determined with respect to the compaction<->expansion phases of every 'other' previously incorporated quantity of UEF - which is 'another' thing that is exactly coupled to the max-eph dynamic.

That is, the phasing of each UEF compaction and expansion dynamic is determined in a way that 'fits into' the phasing of all 'other' 'contained' SSW sub-harmonics, which, basically, means that, 'within' a 'stable' Element. there is only one max-'nucleation' dynamic occurring at any 'instant'. This "phase-fitting" is important because it's what determines 'atomic stabilities', again in a way that is determined solely in the max-eph dynamic. When an SSW harmonic is 'unstable', it is because of the decreasing 'containment' (increasingly-restricted) ephemerance that's imposed upon the net SSW harmonics as additional quantities of UEF are incorporated into 'atoms' (as Z increases), which onset of sub-harmonics 'containment' imposed decreasing ephemerance begins to happen in a harmonic at Technetium, Z = 43, and begins to happen increasingly at Tin, Z = 50, because incorporations of  additional quantities of UEF begin to interfere with the sub-harmonics of already incorporated (Z < 50) quantities of UEF - because additional 'nucleation events' begin to 'overlap' increasingly. Which increases UEF i/o ('radioactivity') 'and' decreases SSW stability, as an SSW's harmonics undergo nonlinear accelerations in which the 'local' max-eph threshold is approached increasingly.

In general, the sub-harmonics of an SSW harmonic 'fit' relative to a so-called "nucleus" so that there is one dynamic at max-nucleation, one 'moving toward' 'nucleation' and 'moving away from' 'shelling', and one 'moving away from' 'nucleation' and 'moving toward' 'shelling', with the 'fitting' becoming 'tighter' as Z increases, which is 'another' dynamic that imparts an illusion that 'things come in threes' (even in the case of singly alternating Hydrogen (Z = 1)) and which instantiates the illusion of all so-called "exclusion" dynamics.

(Other basic and important SSW harmonic dynamics are explained further below.)

'time'

A practical example: The non-existence of so-called “time”.

It has been traditional in science to invoke ‘time’ as an 'ordering principle' with respect to ‘events’ or dynamics that are to be ‘calculated’. But no such thing as “time” has existence in Physical Reality, and the invocation of ‘time’ in ‘calculations’ not only needlessly encumbers ‘calculations’, it renders them False – non-physically-real.

To grasp this, consider a ‘spring-powered’ “clock”. “Clocks do not measure "time". When one “winds a clock”, the ‘work’ (the 'pushing' of UEF) one performs in so doing decreases the ephemerance of the UEF entrained in the ‘containment’ dynamics of the SSW harmonics that comprise ‘the spring’.

In so doing, as is explained above, a net ‘mass-equivalent' ephemerance decrease is imparted, collectively, to the SSW harmonics ‘instantaneously’ comprising ‘the spring’.

What a “clock” measures is the metered, more or less mechanically governed, increase in ephemerance ‘within’ the SSW harmonics comprising the ‘spring’ as the UEF entrained in the ‘containment’ dynamics of the SSW harmonics comprising the ‘spring’ ‘moves toward’ max-eph.

No so-called “time” ever exists in the mix.

'battery powered clocks, 'power line powered clocks’, ‘atomic clocks’, same-old, same-old.

Which is why I use funny quotes around ‘references to’ non-physically-real ‘time’.

There is always only the UEF at its ‘local’ relative ephemerance gradient, which restricts the validity of all “calculations” with respect to Physical Reality to no less than, and no more than, three dimensions. The three dimensions map UEF-eph at 'spatial locus', and that is all that’s necessary to calculate with respect to anything that exists in Physical Reality.

I’m not saying, “Throw out 'lower and higher-dimension' Maths.”

Just understand that, everything less than, and greater than, three dimensions is non-physically-real.

Infinite-compaction never occurs 'within' SSW harmonics because UEF is expelled from the harmonics during compaction-phase “emission” dynamics and injected into the harmonics during expansion-phase “absorbtion” dynamics as ‘contained’ and ‘containing’ UEF, respectively, approach relative to the 'local' max-eph threshold at nonlinearly accelerating velocity.

“Absorbtion” and “emission” are continuous with all ‘other’ UEF i/o dynamics, with only ‘the’ UEF ‘movement’-directionality ever changing – like “breathing-in is continuous with breathing-out ('all the way down in' 'internal' "respiration" (graded UEF 'flow') dynamics) – like throwing a ball 'up' is continuous with the ball’s coming 'down', in every case, Be-Cause, the max-eph dynamic and nothing else.

The rate of UEF ‘movement’ in between ‘nucleation’-compaction and ‘shelling’-compaction extremes is exactly coupled to the ‘instantaneous’ degree of UEF-compaction, which is exactly coupled to ‘local’ UEF-eph. The UEF dynamics of SSW harmonics undergo nonlinear negative acceleration entering compaction and nonlinear positive acceleration exiting compaction.

Relatively ‘soft’ compaction dynamics (emissions and absorptions) occur at nonlinearly spaced spherical radii between 'nucleation' and 'shelling' extremes, but 'contained' UEF is, otherwise, in a sub-interaction-threshold 'state', in which 'detection' is 'impossible' unless multiple SSW harmonics that ‘instantaneously exist in approximately the same expansion or compaction phase interact, with the “approximately” being exactly coupled to the net result of such ‘interaction’ dynamics (coupled to whether or not the sub-dynamics sum to yield an ‘instantaneous’ ‘contained’ or ‘containing’ ephemerance that approaches the max-eph threshold).

Which is what accelerator folks routinely observe, while 'presuming particles' that, verifiably, have no physically-real existence.

The ‘spectral lines’ (which are actually “spectral ‘shelling’-compaction dynamics” coerced through slits and a prism) occur as the nonlinear accelerations, above, result in the volume-‘containment’ ratio (also above) approaching the max-eph threshold. As this threshold is approached, UEF ‘moves’ in any direction other than the direction in which max-eph is being approached, which UEF-‘movement’ is what the so-called “spectral lines” physically are. “Spectral series” literally map these nonlinear accelerations. Nobody saw this before the work I’m discussing here, because nobody understood the nonlinear accelerations inherent in SSW harmonics, and if these nonlinear accelerations are not comprehended, an illusion that the ‘spectral lines are randomly distributed’ occurs – “Never mind” that the ‘spectral lines’ occur so stereotypically that they are used to identify ‘chemical compositions’, which could not be accomplished if there actually was anything “randomly-occurring” correlated to the generation of ‘the spectral lines’.

You can observe macroscopic analogues of the above ‘spectral line’ generation in the shampoo experiment. The secondary streams are, in every way, exact macroscopic analogues of “emission spectrum” ‘events’. This exactness results from the fact that, at a fundamental 'level', both fluid dynamics are 100% continuous UEF ‘movement’ dynamics.

[Sidebar re. my using “compaction” instead of “compression”. The UEF does not “compress”. It “compacts”, like what you get when you take your empty plastic water ‘bottle’ and twist-crunch it. Plus and minus scraps of UEF evidenced in ‘heating’ and in the altering ('stressing') of the 3D geometries of 'chemical bonds', post twist-crunch, the whole water ‘bottle’ is still there. It just occupies a smaller volume. The UEF compacts and decompacts in an analogous way. “Compression” implies a substantive change that would 'also' imply “mushiness”. There are mushy agglomerations of SSWs having relatively high ephemerance 'containment’ dynamics. These agglomerations can undergo compression. UEF is not “mushy”, and it does not undergo compression, so I don’t use the term, “compression”.]

'uncertainty and randomness'

The illusions of so-called “uncertainty” and of so-called “random events” derive solely in what has been the absence-of-understanding with respect to the nonlinear accelerations explained above. If the nonlinear accelerations are not comprehended, everything 'looks random and uncertain' even though everything is deterministic.

At ‘normal temperatures', because their max-compaction dynamics are so fleeting, the nonlinear accelerations tend to ‘mismatch’ phase dynamics amongst ‘locally’-neighboring SSW harmonics. So, because the nonlinear accelerations were not comprehended, experimenters and theorists ‘presumed’ that any ‘event’ ‘detected’ occurred ‘randomly’, when, in actuality, ‘it’ was just a coincidence with respect to always multiple nonlinear accelerations. (This everywhere-continuous extreme fleetingness is 'also' what underpins the 'locally' graded decrease to ~zero of the high-frequency end of the blackbody power spectrum. The blackbody power spectrum, which is continuous, correlates exactly to the nonlinear accelerations and quantities that are inherent in dynamics of UEF i/o, which dynamics are is what 'shifts' the maximum 'power' of the spectrum toward it's high frequency 'end' as TempK increases.)

[Note well, “coincidence” does not, in any way, imply “uncertainty”. Because the dynamics being explained are continuous, they are, and can only be, 100% deterministic.

Note well, further, “determinism” does not imply “absence of Free Will”, but it does underpin how & why the ability to "Choose", that's innate 'within' 'normal' nervous systems, matters.

Sorry about my ‘abruptness’, here, but I have to “head confabulation off at the pass”.]

'attraction, repulsion, and chemical bonding'

All so-called “chemical bonding” derives solely in the “UEF sharing” that occurs amongst ‘locally’-neighboring SSW harmonics. UEF sharing occurs to the degree that the expansion<->compaction harmonics of one SSW ‘align' constructively’ with respect to, or ‘fit into’, the expansion<->compaction harmonics of another SSW. Which ‘fitting’ is measured in the degree to which the net resultant ephemerance increases.

The illusions of ‘attraction and repulsion’ that have been traditionally ‘presumed’ to be ‘due to’ so-called “valence electron charge” correlations with respect to all instances of so-called “chemical bonding” are actually the physical UEF-ephemerance dynamic above and nothing else.

In the illusion of ‘attraction’, what’s always physically occurring is that ephemerance increases ‘within the UEF-sharing dynamics ‘local’ to the SSW harmonics that are ‘presumed’ to ‘bond’.

In the illusion of ‘repulsion’, what’s always actually occurring is that ephemerance decreases with respect to the UEF-sharing dynamics ‘local’ to the SSW harmonics that are ‘presumed’ to be ‘repulsed’.

In either case, it's 100% UEF 'moving toward' max-eph.

In neither case does anything constituting so-called “charge” exist.

UEF Sharing and 'local speed of light'

UEF-sharing dynamics tend to 'pile-up' - which is, for instance, how and why the water exists at a height above the Chicopee Falls Dam - because the 'local speed of light' is dynamically exactly coupled to SSWs/vol. The more SSW harmonics 'in' a spherical volume, the lower the 'speed of light' is with respect to the UEF sharing dynamics of the SSWs. Always.

“Local speed of light?”

Yeah, ‘local c’.

Despite it’s being called ~“one of the most strongly verified constants in all of science”, ‘the speed of light’ is perfectly-variable.

When Michelson and Morley 'presumed not to detect' variations in 'the speed of light', they ‘did not’ because they were unaware of the way the UEF ‘moves’ relative to ‘other’ UEF. They 'presumed', as did their contemporaries, that the 'aether' was a 'static background substance' with respect to which relative 'foreground motion could be detected'. 

Contrary to this 'then' commonly-held 'presumption', the UEF always ‘moves’ in the direction in which it is most free to ‘move’ - in the direction of maximum-ephemerance (max-eph). As an exactly determined result of this, as the velocity of an accelerated ‘mass’ approaches the max-eph threshold, UEF correlated to the acceleration ‘moves’ increasingly in any direction other than in the direction of max-eph. 

The max-eph dynamic manifests everywhere in Physical Reality, always doing so with respect to the UEF-'containment' dynamics of every SSW harmonic ('atom') in the UEF ephemerance gradient 'local' to an SSW harmonic. This 'local' dynamic is what makes it easy to observe and to verify the physically-real existence of the UEF, Be-Cause, it's 100% of what physically underpins the dynamics that have been referred to as "inertia" and "mass".

Continuing with the reification of perfectly-variable 'speed of light', which is a physical UEF 'movement'-directionality dynamic, this 'local' UEF dynamic, which occurs at all scales throughout Physical Reality, ‘instantiates’ the illusion that ‘the speed of light is constant’, when what’s nearly, but not quite (Be-Cause, WDB2T), “constant” is overall UEF 'movement' relative to all of the 'local' max-eph threshold dynamics that occur throughout Physical Reality, which is an enormous calculation that the UEF is continuously performing at 'the speed of light'. Which is 'another' in which 'stability' is 'sustained' throughout Physical Reality.

It’s important to understand this because all physical phenomena ‘experience’, and interact with, the max-eph threshold in a way that’s exactly coupled to 'both' the UEF ‘containment’ dynamics of the SSW harmonics involved in the ‘interaction’ 'and' universal WDB2T, which is (again) how & why ‘objects’ are experienced as ‘having mass and possessing inertia’ in proportion to their 'atomic' compositions, which are actually their SSW harmonic compositions, which reduces directly to the max-eph dynamic everywhere in Physical Reality.

'the bending of light'

Another case in point is the so-called “bending of light”, 'presumed' in tradition to be 'due to 'gravitational attraction exerted by a massive body', as the 'light' passes relatively close to a ‘massive object’, which ‘bending’ actually has absolutely nothing to do with non-physically-real 'gravitational attraction'.

The ‘bending’ occurs because the so-called "electromagnetic radiation" ('em'; ‘light’) which actually exists as alternating UEF compaction <-> expansion dynamics that 'travel' in the UEF, and which refract continuously in the nonlinearly-varying UEF dynamics correlated to the net UEF ‘containment’ 'and' entrainment dynamics of the SSW harmonics comprising the ‘massive object’. UEF entrainment always manifests as ‘locally’-reduced ephemerance that is exactly coupled to the UEF ‘containment” and UEF i/o dynamics of the SSWs involved, which dynamics vary nonlinearly with ‘distance’. There is an illusion that this variation 'occurs with inverse-square correlation with respect to spatial distance', but the nonlinearity only tends to average to be approximately, but (because of WDB2T) never exactly 'inverse-square'. In cases of creation violence in which UEF 'containments' become instantiated and 'sustained within' SSW harmonics, the correlated nonlinearities fleetingly become beyond-all-routinely-occurring-dynamics extreme, Be-Cause, during creation violence, 'local' max-eph fleetingly increases in proportion to the violence. When the 'local' max-eph threshold changes, 'local c' changes, Be-Cause, 'the speed of light' is exactly coupled to relative UEF ephemerance.

So-called "constant speed of light" and so-called “gravitational attraction” are the same, single illusion deriving in absence-of-understanding with respect to the UEF.

Compton UEF Refraction

The UEF refraction dynamics above (and further above) are continuous all the way into the max-‘nucleations’ and the max-'shellings' of all SSW harmonics, which is how and why the angles at which observables are ‘detected’ in so-called “particle scattering” are actually determined in the nonlinear UEF-compaction dynamics that are determined in the nonlinear accelerations that occur in the SSW harmonics which are determined solely with respect to the single max-eph dynamic.

When an SSW is fleetingly in the proximity of maximum 'nucleation' the index of refraction of the UEF that is compacted 'into' the 'nucleation' has increased nonlinearly toward the physical extreme that is the max-eph threshold, and 'em' that enters 'it' is refracted in a way that 'inverts' the direction of the 'em' in a way that's coupled exactly to the 'instantaneous' degree of 'nucleation'. It's not so called "inelastic" (or "elastic") "particle collisions". It's always 100% UEF refraction dynamics that occur continuously, even in cases occurring with extreme nonlinearity during 'nucleating' and 'shelling' compactions, and which always reduce directly to the max-eph dynamic. (Everything, here, stands completely verified in a computer program I wrote 'decades ago' and shared online 'more than 13 years ago'.)

Which is also what the “cannon shell” that Rutherford 'presumed' to ‘see’ (and others still 'presume' to have 'seen') physically was.

So-called “Compton scattering” is actually “Compton UEF refraction”.

Here's another phenomenon that I discovered and named the ‘photomagnetic effect’. It’s the flip-side of the ‘photoelectric effect' 'coin'. (Funny quotes because there exist no ‘photons’, ‘electricity’ or ‘magnetism’ in either dynamic. They are 'both' comprised solely of UEF ‘moving’ relative to the max-eph threshold.)

Wanting to see the so-called “magnetic lines of force” in 3D, I suspended a 'strong permanent magnet' in vegetable oil and sprinkled powdered iron on the surface of the oil.

A partial 3D rendering of ‘magnetic lines of force’ resulted, which (my dear Michael), are not “lines” but nonlinearly graded UEF-sharing 'and' entrainment dynamics that always occur in 3D. The SSW harmonics comprising the 'powdered iron' are literally carried in the 'local' UEF as the 'local' UEF 'moves' in the direction of maximum 'local' ephemerance, ‘collecting’ ‘local to’ 'local' max-eph, but the ‘magnetic field’ exists as a physically real, 3D, relative UEF ephemerance distribution that is everywhere continuously nonlinearly graded exactly with respect to max-eph. (The 3D rendering seen in the photo remains "partial" because, when sprinkled upon the surface of the vegetable oil, the powdered iron travels 'downward' through the fluid (through the UEF-sharing dynamics of the UEF 'local to' the SSW harmonics that comprise the vegetable oil), but due to the UEF-sharing dynamics that instantiate the illusion of 'magnetic attraction' ('never-mind that there are two opposite magnetic poles which both attract the same stuff'), the 'powdered iron' doesn't travel beyond its 'local' interaction with the UEF-sharing dynamics that instantiate the illusion of 'magnetism', which practical 'limitation' can be ameliorated by using a 'powered iron' shaker fixed to an articulated 'arm' that has a spherical range of motion relative to the 'magnet', the results of which I'd love to see.) 

'then', when I shined low-power 'em' (‘light’) from a so-called "LED" on the max-eph-distributed 'tendrils' this happened: 

The 'action' (after Fermat and Feynman) of the 'either' UEF i/o or 'em' ('or both') with respect to the UEF ‘local’ to the ‘system’ altered the ‘local’ max-eph distribution (including its gradient, as is readily observable in the photograph) which resulted in the max-eph 'tendrils' being carried, by the 'local' UEF, into an altered form of their prior geometry.

My jaw hung down :-]

It's the same-stuff that's explained above, rendered flat-out visible.

That is, the one-way UEF gradient that is what WDB2T physically is with respect to Physical Reality (the Universe) as a whole, being ‘locally’ directed via an instantiation of a 'locally'-directed relatively-decreased UEF ephemerance which is what, how & why 'em' physically is.

The result gave me Joy.

That Physical Reality is Deterministic does not restrict experience of "Freedom". It just makes it easy to know how & why to “shine your light”, how much 'work' is inherent in doing so and why, and what the 'work' physically is, and how & why to do it.

I'm going to 'break-off', here, adding only that everything I've explained in this discussion constitutes only a basic explanation of the contents of "Tapered Harmony", which is so named because the UEF 'containment' dynamics explained above take a form of Spherical Standing Waves (SSWs) comprised of concentrically-alternating expansion and compaction UEF ‘containment’ dynamics that occur harmonically, and which are coupled exactly to the one-way 'flow' of UEF, from compaction to expansion that is universal WDB2T (the "tapering").

Tapered Harmony is the product of more than 50 'years' of dedicated work. Before that, its antecedents were my hobby. I've searched far and wide relentlessly, and am aware of no experimental result and/or observation, at any scale, that is not already reduced exactly to the few simple things that are explained above. (Challenges to the assertion, inherent, are welcome, but I require that I be informed with respect to challenge-correlated, up-to-date, published (“paper”) references in the routinely-accessible Science literature that I can access independently. So I can See “what’s there”, if anything, before speaking.)

In addition to Physics 'and' Chemistry, the stuff Unified in Tapered Harmony 'also' has spectacular significance in Biology and, in particular, Neuroscience. For instance, because all behavior is determined in nervous system function, and because nervous system function stands reified in Tapered Harmony (in Neuroscientific Duality Theory) the UEF dynamics that stand completely reified in Tapered Harmony completely map the only possible path through which Humanity can be lifted up out of the 'present' deadly iteration of what have been the long-occurring, Sorrowful, dynamics of behavioral Prejudice that have routinely recurred to Ravage all of Humanity over the course of human history.

It’s ‘hard’ to write in a way that enables folks to comprehend that they do not comprehend what needs to be comprehended, and I'm 'tired' ‘now’.

When I recover, it’s my ‘plan’ to continue with further examples and discussion with respect to the UEF dynamics that occur at all scales in Physical Reality. 

I’ve got an ever-increasing number of such examples ('long ago' numbering in the millions) because it had come to be, and remains the case, that, no matter where I look, I see the stuff that I've briefly explained above.

In the 'mean-time', please forgive any typos and/or cumbersome ‘language’ that I've left in my discussion. I haven't, yet, been able to 'polish it to an elegant shine'.

If you’ve read this, Thank You.

If you've read this for Comprehension, "Oh Happy Day!"

TGLk

k. p. collins