I.
Like everyone usually does, I have a set of keys to my flat. It may occur that I lose them, so I am also in need of spares. People generally give their spare keys to family members or neighbours so as to be able to gain entrance to their own homes in the event that they lose the originals.
My flat is a simple one; I own no old furniture or anything else of particular value, except the things I happen to be fond of. In spite of this - and it was probably the wrong thing to do - I didn’t hand over my spare keys to anyone else, but took them out to the woods instead and buried them. Not too deep, though, in case I have to find them in an emergency. Nevertheless, they might still be found by someone. The question is: what could anyone do with them?
So I buried my spare keys in the forest. In the ground; in earth that has for a long time been composed of elements far different from those we know and assume to be the lifeless matter of the universe, and which are of course different from the matter that originally formed the surface of the planet. The ground in forests today is full of living beings, or the biological remains of things that were once alive, hence it has a complex molecular structure. Put simply, it is full of organic substances. As we know, biological materials are derived from lifeless matter and gain nourishment with the help of light from the Sun (energy). Such complex molecular organisms are capable of storing the energy they have absorbed, and in some cases are also able to release it again in their own “special” way. This is the magical process called combustion. All organic materials can be burned, thus conjuring light and heat.
Even the simplest form of living matter (being) shows fundamental differences in comparison to the one that is lifeless, its physical structure a complex unit of giant molecules. This unit comprises a unique aggregate designed to perform certain tasks, mainly with the purpose of forming an even more complex organisation; as such, it is alien to the nature of the lifeless environment. New matter (living being) is aggressive, taking advantage of every opportunity to ensure its survival, for example adapting to the deficiencies that have a direct effect on it within its environment. Having surmounted these obstacles - unintentionally - it must undergo change in the interest of so-called development. This development has reached the point where the most advanced biological organisms on Earth, humans, have come to recognise both themselves and their environment so confidently that they expect other or similar beings to exist elsewhere. Insofar as we know, however, no other biological growth exists anywhere else in the cosmos. It would seem that we are not compulsory as of yet!
Everything here and in the environment we are able to perceive has remained largely undisturbed since the time humankind gained self-awareness. Nothing special is happening that would affect our everyday lives or threaten our existence. Everything outside our thin layer of living-space is going about its business as if we were not even here. This gives rise to the following thought: If we remove the biological structure from the Earth, taking away the thin green crust, everything underneath is the same “stone and sand” that can be found anywhere else in the universe.
If we ceased to exist, along with our biological-spiritual approach, everything would be operating “blindly”. The “stone and sand” universe has no need for a creator – only the human-biological spirit does. It is we humans who attempt to explain the meaning, after the event. Nevertheless, we do exist, and so can only observe things from our own perspective. Regarded in this sense, the “expansion of the universe” is imperatively a function of human consciousness - the receptivity and performance capacity of the human brain - the same consciousness that is actually both the motivation and result of all research.
Delving deeper into this theory, we should realise (more on this later) that human (self) consciousness and the system of conventions that have developed along with it are a major complicating factor in conducting research. Consider the fact that our consciousness is also capable of questioning itself, and sometimes does, which is something completely alien to the “stone and sand” universe. There are no questions or doubts in the world of “stone and sand” - nor are there any biological answers. Stone and sand simply exist; they have no interest in us and will probably continue to remain in this state for a long time to come. We on the other hand would like to discover and scrutinise that which is “stone and sand”. In the interest of making some progress, perhaps we should try thinking like stone and sand do.
The tools of our research have been developed from the world that is in “close physical proximity” to us. Our instruments almost always desire to indicate and prove a previously expected result. Our research starts out from tangible (!?) reality, and the tiered scientific system constructed by the human spirit is the only acceptable way for our science to operate. This is how it must be. There is a great deal of discipline on Earth in terms of evaluating scientific explanation. One can’t simply fantasize things just because; every theorem must be proven and elaborated if it is to be accepted by the given branch of science. As we move farther away from the Earth, however, this discipline decreases in proportion to the growing distance, hence the more difficult it is to prove something, the greater the amount of nonsense that can be said about it. If we observe this phenomenon through the eyes of those living at the other “end” of the universe - and let’s assume for now that they exist - then we must be just as mysterious to them as they are to us; notably, it is we who live at the end of the world, where space deviates or disappears and matter is consumed, and before long, we do not even exist. It should be mentioned here that consciousness is by all means collective, meaning that it is of a social nature, and this is the only possible way for it to function. Does the universe exist if it is erased from collective consciousness?
We must immediately ask the following question: What really exists? If I close my eyes, the visible world disappears and I am forced to rely on my other senses to recognise, define, acknowledge and explain my environment. But what happens if I close my consciousness? There is still existence. Of course I can only claim this because of the knowledge I acquired before closing my consciousness. If biological existence ceases, then what kind of meaning must the universe fulfil? According to what we know so far: the spirit of “stone and sand” – no more and no less. If someone had told “stone and sand” that they would once develop into biology, something entirely different from themselves, they would hardly have believed it.
An even more interesting question: If the humans of today, as the summit of biological existence, were told that they are only an intermediate stage from which a third category would emerge, how would they react? What can be imagined and what can not? Are the human mind and imagination at all capable of comprehending the universe? How far can we go in this sense? Let’s assume that humanity reaches its summit. Would that be enough to begin something “extraordinary”? If I wrote here that in a likely instance space contracts, expands, or warps in comparison to a straight path, oscillating in various directions, no one would be surprised. These are common concepts today, accepted theories in conjunction with the assumed characteristics of space: true theories! True theories? But how can nothing wag its tail? How can space warp if it is nothing in and of itself?
Having taken a slight detour, we should now return to our explanation of biological consciousness. We evaluate the universe in physical terms. In our consciousness, it operates according to the pure “stone and sand” mentality – or is it simultaneously a qualitative and moral function embedded in the biological judgement of our earthly existence? One might say this is hogwash. A moral universe…!?
According to our present knowledge, the universe is a world of physical reactions and counter-reactions. It is these, or the forces behind them, that we humans strive to recognise and study in our research, which is strongly determined by our biological essence, our way of thinking - moral, aesthetic, emotional etc. Eyesight, hearing, touch, smell, taste and even the sixth sense are all biological approaches. It is human beings and their moral spirit who stand behind even the most modern of technical instruments. We should also add that humanity is also most certainly at odds about judging and tolerating itself, and it is under these conditions that we set out to see the universe clearly. Having come this far, it is obvious that a distinction must be made between the functioning universe and the one that operates in conjunction with our explanations. Is the universe in co-existence with our biological spirit - morals - the “superior” one (meaning it must be judged according to this consciousness), or is it the overwhelming and unpredictable activity of the elements that is more decisive?
In light of the above, it would seem that our morality does not affect the extra-terrestrial world. This is the result when humans only look at things in one direction, from here to there, but what happens if we reverse the formula? If we leave the questionable theories to “settle” in our minds, we may ask whether this morality is truly ours or rather a philosophy derived from the essence and functioning of lifeless matter, built into us over billions of years.
In regards to our biological mode of thinking, what is it built on and for what purpose? Its foundation is matter and it is directed towards that which is tangible. We are in need of stability both in terms of the tools we use and our thoughts. Our world, including the thin layer of our earthly existence, the expanded universe and the boiling lava under our feet, is composed of matter; something we might call space-filling particles. Since the whole of evolution has developed from this environment, we can conclude that neither the human body nor human desire can be separated from matter. More precisely, all of the things mentioned above are a reflexive part of physical matter, including human thought, which searches for substance in everything. Moreover, it searches for substance in a condition that can be comprehended by the human spirit. Is there any type of matter that can only be detected with great difficulty, or not at all?
In our world here on Earth, we have matter and spirit. These ideas and their content do not mix. We can not blend them because we have neither the level of comprehension nor the vocabulary to do so. Is this kind of consciousness sufficient for us to interpret the universe? Could there be another kind of matter (as of yet unidentified) that only becomes recognisable when combined with energy, and which disappears from our biological scale of recognition when it loses this energy? We are talking here about something greater than our theory of what constitutes matter and what does not. Far more important is the existence or non-existence of energy. Energy makes matter visible and palpable; when it disappears, matter becomes “nothing”. According to this theory, there are two kinds of matter in our world: matter that functions in combination with energy and that which transmits energy. The latter is the blood-brother of the former, and has so far remained unrecognisable.
When I was a small child, I thought it was the bending trees that made the wind. Wind is invisible; we can only see the results of its work. Could this also be the case with phenomena we have not yet recognised? Does everything from “over there” - what we call the universe - actually reach us here on Earth? And if it does, does it penetrate our common sense?
Does it reach us? What exactly can we comprehend, and how?
The most important sphere is eyesight i.e. the perception of information constructed by light. This is combined with data recorded by the other senses. It matters not whether we employ computers and other instruments to conduct our research; it is our five senses that do the actual “reading”.
Without eyesight, however, the information we gain from our other senses would be very little, but this “dominance” also carries with it the possibility of deception.
II. Light
Walk into a dark, empty room, light a candle and place it somewhere in the middle of the space. If we then walk back and forth in the room, we can see the light source from any point within the space. If one thousand people enter the room and do not block the candle flame, each person will see a burning candle. This experiment can be complicated ad infinitum; people can be placed in the room at random, and the light of the candle and its image will still be visible everywhere. Important to us is that the presence of the image is constant, which means it remains unbroken at all moments in time.
The essence of our observation is that light spreads outward in a spherical manner. This means that if it encounters no obstacle, it will fill every point within the given space. In terms of our everyday perception, however, this is not true at all. On physical diagrams, works of fine art and in photographs, light falls in a straight line, casts shadows etc. The reason for this is that a single person can only see one candle (image of light), but not the same image as perceived through another person’s eyes. Therefore, a straight path between the light source and the organ perceiving it is a decisive factor in depictions of light.
Our experiment took place in an earthly environment, but experiments conducted by astronauts also prove that everything in space works the same way as it does here on Earth: light spreads in spherical form throughout the entire universe.
In keeping with our present knowledge and assumptions, light is made up of electro-magnetic waves and particles travelling at a speed of nearly 300,000 km/sec, which means that both of these components must somehow spread outward at this speed - flash - in a harmonious fashion. Our experiment has shown that light spreads outward from its source in a sphere, expanding in all directions. If we stop to consider that space is filled with millions upon billions of shining stars and celestial bodies, then we can hardly find a point anywhere in the universe where those speeding particles are not present. Take a look at the following diagram!
Figure 1
The diagram shows a thick cloud of particles near the surface of a light source (e.g. a sun-like celestial body), expanding outwards to fill the space in every direction. Let’s assume that the distance between the source of light and our point of observation is 3 light-years. Light travels from the source on a straight path. At such a great distance, some dead spaces would have to develop here at the point of detection, but there are no such spaces! The light source is clearly visible and perceptible at all points within the given space. Now assume that the source of light radiates in a sphere of 3,000,000 (3 million) kilometres. In approximately 3 years, this will be a 28.4 billion-kilometre sphere of light. How was our sun able to fill such an immense space if these particles never rested for a moment and raced into the void along a straight path at a speed of 300,000 km/sec? How do these particles reach the “dead space”? Do they sometimes move sideways, ever so slightly, and if so, how and why?
The situation is made even more complicated by the fact that our sun is not alone within this 3 billion-year globe of light. It shares the space with innumerable other shining celestial bodies of varying size, all of which want to fill every point in their own space, sending one or two of their own particles to places where there are already millions and millions of other such particles!
As we can see, the complexity is caused by the presence of these particles. So far, no one has been able to collect them and study them. They constitute an unknown substance, which does not appear on any physical depiction of light, either. In spite of this, since they represent one of its two structural components, they are always mentioned when light is described. Taking this into consideration, these two components - electro-magnetic waves and particles - must form some kind of logical unit together, and there must be some sort of necessity behind this unity.
From the cellar to the attic, and from the highest mountains to the deepest oceans, our everyday life is filled with all types of natural electro-magnetic waves in addition to those generated by us. These do not have a direct influence on our daily existence because our physical senses are unable to perceive them. We can see light because its wave-length is within the limit of our vision, almost as if it were designed just for us. Exactly the opposite is true, of course: It is we who were designed to see the light.
Let’s talk some more about particles!
What role do they play in their assumed symbiosis with electro-magnetic waves? Do both components travel together from “birth to death”? What do they do with each other during that time? Are we speaking about electro-magnetism or about co-existence – are particles charged by electro-magnetism? Can they discharge and recharge again, alternatively? Do light particles collide with each other, and if so, does this collision release some kind of energy?
These are but a few of the many unanswered or partly answered questions in connection with how light works. Light is one of the most contradictory phenomena of nature (mainly because of the particles) – its “production” and ordinary, everyday use are amazingly simple and self-evident. In contrast, its physical operation, the role it fulfils in the universe and all of its related effects are extremely difficult to understand.
It is night-time, and my room is quite dark. I feel around, search for the matchbox, and strike a match. Light appears, and soon the flame dies.
I have just created electro-magnetic waves and particles. The electro-magnetism of the waves can be measured since this is a familiar concept, but what about the particles? I wonder what they are like. How big are the particles released from a match? Are they as large as the ones that come from the sun, for example? Are the particles radiating from a flashlight, a campfire, a neon tube and other sources of light identical in size, or do they have different characteristics? When I lit the match, I gazed into the flame. Does this mean that the particles slammed into my eyes at a speed of nearly 300,000 km/sec? Fine! But what happened to them afterwards? Did they become part of my body, or maybe they quietly departed by way of metabolic transfer?
As we know, light spreads in a spherical shape; hence individual beams from the match-flame ran through the window-pane, out to the street, and so on. Some of them made their way toward my dark-green painting, where they were swallowed. My dark-green painting does not have metabolic processes. Or does it?
Imagine that there is room for particles within matter, and since it is heavily bombarded by them, the particles probably arrange themselves nicely among the other atoms and interconnected molecules within the paint on the canvas, in metal, in wood etc. But they must surely accumulate after a certain time, mustn’t they? Of course, if they can penetrate matter, they can also leave it. Having stepped into the shadow, however, they have also lost their partner, the electro-magnetic waves. If they remain inside, then they probably accumulate. On the other hand, this accumulation can not go on forever. After all, we are talking about billions of years, and particles are not symbolic. They are genuine materials, albeit with an unknown composition, figure and mass.
Consider the following experiment!
If light travels towards me from one source, and another light source (reflector) shines light across its path in front of me, no matter how weak the source of light opposite me is, it will not be washed out by the strong light coming from the side.
Figure 2
Look at another example from nature!
If we walk onto a pitch-dark, empty meadow on a starlit night, we can clearly see the points of light above us. Even though everything is otherwise covered in darkness, there is still vast amount of light present here – the sun shining on the other side of the Earth, under our feet, is flooding the space outside of the Earth’s shadow with light just as it will tomorrow at lunchtime. These rays are present all around the space visible to us, and yet we perceive no light. Based on this, we may conclude that if particles of light exist at all, they must be transparent.
What exactly do we see?
The prevailing source of light, even if it is merely a shining speck of dust: What we actually see is the ray of light that travels on a straight trajectory to our eyes within the sphere emanating from the shining dot. We do not see the rays that move past our eyes, however slight the angle. Our eyes are indifferent to what produces light and what merely reflects it; only our consciousness makes a distinction between the two.
Taking the above into consideration:
- We have either one or several sources of light, none of which are blocked by anything, and the surrounding environment is composed of many materials that absorb light.
- We have either one or several sources of light that are blocked from our sight by something, and we see only the secondary - tertiary reflected light.
- Variations of the above.
How do we see?
Here is an example of the second version. When a thin layer of cloud covers the sun (which is the only source of light), we should not be able to see our environment, and yet we can still see everything very well. The explanation for this is the fact that sunlight is refracted as it moves through specks of cloud, making each individual point of refraction a new source of light. Each of these in turn radiate their own sphere of light; the expanding light hits the objects in our environment, where even the smallest spot, depending on its reflective capacity, once again becomes a new sphere of light, and so on, until the light reaches the darkest corners of our room. These all comprise many billion “radiating” points of light that send electro-magnetic waves straight into our eyes to form a composite image in our consciousness. What role do particles play in this situation and how do they behave within this “chaos”? What commands them and what checks to see that the order is carried out? How can they be reflected from a given point without being damaged (then continuing on their path at the previous speed) and without colliding with the ones that come directly behind them? Do they simply run over each other without causing harm to one another?
* Our next example leads us to an even more daring revelation.
During a solar eclipse, the Sun is covered by the Moon in the usual way. It is surrounded by darkness so deep that the bright pinpoints of the stars are clearly visible nearby. The previously mentioned celestial body called the Sun has to emit an enormous amount of light particles for those to completely fill space (at all moments in time) several billion light years away. This means that the number and density of particles close to the surface of the Sun must be immense. What can we deduct from this?
- Since we are able to see the stars near the darkened sun, we may conclude that (light) particles are transparent.
- Since nothing can just simply move through something else, we may also conclude that (light) particles allow (light) particles to pass through them – in fact, they conduct them! *
(2008)
The electro-magnetic waves are alien to the particles; one is an impulse without a “body” while the other must be some form of matter. Even so, the two of them must exert some kind of influence on one another in order to keep moving together through thick and thin! There is no such thing as half-, quarter-, or scant light. Light as we know it is always a complete unit.
The following diagram depicts a single ray of light emanating from its main source, isolated from the radiating sphere, as it reaches a tiny, yet visible point in our environment and is reflected. The reflection itself forms another sphere of light.
Figure 3
According to the particle theory, a certain number of particles from the single ray of light reach the point of refraction, where they multiply with staggering intensity (not to mention those that are absorbed!), and continue multiplying billions of times over until something else absorbs them, etc.
Where does this proliferation come from?
It is worth taking a look at the circumstances and behaviour of light passing through transparent materials (gas, water, glass). Air is composed of oxygen and nitrogen atoms as well as a small number of other atomic compounds, a mixture of all of the above. For our purposes, the main characteristic of air is the fact that it is transparent, “malleable”, and possesses space-filling properties. Consequently, air is a fine conductor of light (?), or allows light to pass through it (?), even though it is made up of several different kinds of atoms and molecules. At this point, there is no need for me to describe the structure of an atom since everyone is familiar with the “composite image”, but I will do so anyway. I use the term “composite image” because so far, no one has actually seen the original.
Figure 4
The nucleus of an atom is filled with positively charged protons and uncharged neutrons, its three possible shells being the orbital territory of 1, 2 or more negatively charged electrons. (All pictorial depictions serve to inhibit fantasy, although they are important tools for building consciousness and knowledge.) No one has ever seen an atom. The diagram above is a fantasy image; the arrangement of components may be different, the individual elements may have irregular contours, and in terms of proportion, the distance between various parts may be smaller or larger. What we are interested in is the role of uncharged neutrons in this arrangement, and whether it is compulsory for them to remain inside the sphere. Taking another glance, we can also observe that the elements composing the atom do not fill the inner space bordered by the outer shell of electrons. Consequently, matter composed of atoms is not consistently dense; we merely see it and feel it as such – perceiving iron, stone, glass…etc.
In regards to the above, it seems that light must pass among, below, above or possibly through many billions of nuclei, molecules, alien specks of dust, droplets of condensation, and who knows what else, at incredible speed so as to enable electro-magnetic waves and particles to emerge intact within our field of vision, without distorting the image of the original light source. Atoms as a unit contain both positive and negative charges, and are therefore not neutral from the aspect of magnetism. The condensation and other tiny particles in between are also charged, and it is through this wilderness that the electro-magnetic waves we call light must struggle to pass. Moreover, it would also seem that light, together with its particles, has continued along this path with apparent ease and great precision for many billions of years.
The descriptions above are more or less valid in the case of transparent liquid and other similarly translucent materials as well, not ignoring the fact that the latter have a rigid, hard and “dense” structure.
Our next experiment involves a glass vessel. Five of its walls are transparent, while the sixth consists of a device designed to pump the air out of the jar, thus creating a vacuum. Having done everything possible to ensure that the least possible amount of air remains in the jar, we wait for our instruments to measure the result. After a considerable length of time, we can see that nothing has changed; nothing has gone in and nothing has come out - the jar is perfectly sealed. All of this takes place in a dark room. Then we turn on the lamp we have placed beside the jar. Light enters the jar, leaves it and appears on the wall opposite to us. If we place our eyes at the appropriate angle and can see the spot of light, we know that the reflected light has also passed through the walls of the jar, once there and back.
Figure 5
The jar is made up of molecules. Air is also made up of molecules, and atomic matter. We have succeeded in pumping the air out of the jar, and nothing has changed inside it during the course of our experiment. We can confidently declare that the electro-magnetic waves and the particles have penetrated the rigid material of the jar and collided with our eyes at a speed of 300,000 km/sec.
If certain matter is capable of passing through molecules and atoms, and I am thinking about particles now, then we can assume that it or other forms of matter are also capable of passing through our air pump, which is also composed of matter. Therefore, it is likely that we did not pump everything out of the jar because our atomically structured matter and tools are incapable of doing so.
In summarisation: Light of an electro-magnetic nature travels in close conjunction with certain particles at a speed of 300,000 km/sec, and expands in a spherical form everywhere in the universe. We are able to depict the nature and behaviour of light, but the composition of its particles never appears on physical diagrams; we know nothing about their substance, location, behaviour and influence. It is assumed that these two integrated elements travel for billions of years at a relatively constant speed. What propels, pushes, or pulls light in such a way that it is able to maintain this speed? What kind of energy or heretofore unknown agent provides this continuity, and how can it exert such an equal influence on both components?
According to present day explanations, the universe is constantly expanding. Is this expansion slower, identical to, or faster than the speed of light? If it expands at the same rate as light, this would seem to indicate a balanced state. On the other hand, the concept of a time-lag or that of over-acceleration raises many assumptions and interesting explanations that shatter the imagination.
Various calculations have taken place over the course of time. The speed of light is somewhat slower in air, water, and glass, but when travelling through a vacuum, in its own tricky way, it nearly reaches its maximum of 300,000 km/sec. This is apparently the top speed that can be achieved in the universe. Naturally, light-speed decreases slightly in the case of glass, water and air because something inhibits its progress. In a vacuum, light travels at 300,000 km/sec. I find that to be too little. Why not 400,000 km/sec, or 1,000,000 km/sec, or more? Because even in a vacuum waves of light are blocked and regulated by something.
III. SPACE
A couple of years ago, I was handed an advertising brochure in which a company offered drivers the opportunity to pump some king of rare gas into their tires instead of air (I don’t remember what kind). According to the advertisement, gas molecules are larger than air molecules, and so the chances of the gas leaking through the pores of the rubber are lower, meaning that tire pressure can be maintained for a longer period of time. Obviously, if someone tried to fill their tires with molecules smaller than those of air, they would not succeed at all. The tires would remain flat.
The previous chapter concerning light described an experiment in which air was pumped out of a glass jar…but let’s take it a step further! We wanted to take everything out of that glass jar. Every material used in the course of the experiment was made up of atoms, including the glass walls of the jar, the air-pump, gaskets, and the measuring devices, and it makes no difference whether these were transparent or not. Our instruments reliably indicated that we had pumped everything out of the jar.
Question: In the current view of science, do any materials exist that are smaller than atoms?
The answer is yes: particles - those particles which, according to science, form a close bond with light and race along at a speed of 300,000 km/sec. But not always! If light hits something, or is absorbed, it decelerates, slowing down to something like 0 km/sec. In this event, it is logical to assume that the other component of light also slows to 0 km/sec.
For this simple reason, we can assume that non-speeding particles do exist and that the matter they are composed of is identical to that of the speeding ones. Imagine that our empty glass jar also contains such motionless particles. These have always been there: in the glass of the jar, in the wall, in the composite matter of the air-pump, in a glass of water, in the human observer, from top-to bottom; in his/her blood and flesh, in every space – on the street, in buildings, in metals, in vegetation, in the ground, in the sun, and last, but not least, in “empty” space. We need only take a short step further in our imagination to realise that our universe expands to the extent that this matter fills the space.
Light is a strange thing, difficult to define. In reality, it can only be perceived and explained along with its particles.
There are two possible variations:
- Light travels together with particles, and to his day we believe that this co-existence is light itself.
- Light both originates and travels in space-filling material, and in this condition is inseparable from particles.
In the second variation, the familiar composite is one of travelling waves and spatial particles that roll over one another, and are therefore nearly motionless. It is precisely the difference in speed that makes their symbiosis so mysterious and difficult to understand.
Experiments with particle acceleration devices have yielded some interesting results. In this case, it was not possible to reveal the particles, but some matter, or traces of matter were left behind. One would have expected signs to be revealed on the side of light since the experiments were designed with this in mind, but quite unexpectedly, traces of some unknown matter appeared in the spatial context instead.
Humans think in still images. It is this link that has made pictorial depiction possible, or forced it. The first pictorial depictions probably came about as the realisation of some inner compulsion and with no pre-conception, the point being that this trait has remained valid up to the present day: People continue to think in still images. How does this work? If someone or something runs in front of us, our consciousness perceives the running motion together with all of the related details as a global image, in a fixed state. If we wish to examine the person or object in motion more closely, we try to construct stationary images in our thoughts until the picture comes to a halt. Only then can we observe the image, decipher the details or question the connections. When we examine light, we do so with our vision - using our eyes. Observation and experimentation with light can only take place in the presence of visible light. This can also be done with the help of instruments, but even so, the essence depends on the person handling the measuring devices, and his/her ability to see.
Spatial matter (particles) is transparent and consists of an unknown composite (substance); we know as much about this as we do about light particles. In addition, these particles are presumably malleable and elastic (expansible) and their size is identical to that of “light particles”. One of their main characteristics is that they fill space i.e. compose it. Briefly and succinctly: they are everywhere and in everything.
Light is present everywhere in the universe, even if only in the pinpoint of the smallest star. As we know, even this tiny pinpoint of light fills the entire space. In other words, it can be seen from all points within the space. Taking the above into consideration, it immediately becomes obvious that space is made up of two components: spatial matter and light.
What we are interested in is the following: Where there is light, there is spatial matter; the two are inseparable. Light travels through spatial matter at tremendous speed. It makes no difference where it happens to be at a given moment; spatial matter is also present there, and everywhere. If we succeeded in observing light for one incomprehensibly short moment, any single moment (!), we would see that it is in the process of forming a close connection with a particle. This is the moment of depiction: the unification of electro-magnetic light waves and spatial particles! Even if they are under constraint, they simply can not avoid each other, reveal themselves or exist without one another.
We could argue here about the ability of nearly motionless spatial matter to conduct light at great speed. Accordingly, light travelling through air at only slightly less than the usual speed may also fall within this critical category, taking into account the fact that it does so together with “light particles” - both within and in opposition to an environment composed of every kind of atom. It is also worth mentioning strong, diffused light, where a cavalcade of multiple “light particles” run up against and through each other “unharmed” and without decelerating. The list of examples is endless.
Light, electro-magnetic waves, and electro-magnetic constructions - meaning atomic structures - in addition to all matter and phenomena known and unknown in the widest universe are built on and into spatial matter, from which they originate either directly or indirectly, and “behave” - function - in accordance with this relationship.
Either on their own or together, star-like celestial bodies, planets etc. and their smallest units - atoms - function perfectly and precisely in their relationship with one another. But what is it that controls and nurtures this arrangement, and how?
The following is intended to demonstrate just how deaf, blind and indifferent the universe is:
The scene is an imaginary cellar, the main features of which are that it is pitch dark down to the last molecule, 100% sound-proof, odourless, tasteless and “impalpable”. All of the previously listed traits are biological constructions. Wherever biological abilities can not be made to function, everything remains in the dark, outside the sphere of perception, both in reality and symbolically. This is approximately how we can imagine the universe to be, and during the time of our biological existence, it has apparently had to function under these conditions peacefully and with tremendous precision, having no eyes to see with, no ears to hear with, or any other senses. Rigid celestial bodies and other matter taking part in this arrangement can not see each other’s light or their own; they neither see, nor hear, and they do not feel. In this sense, everything is truly deaf, dumb and blind, but in reality nothing functions this way for no reason. There must be something, such as a sensitive membrane-cerebrum, that defines and preserves this functioning. Composed of particles, this electronically and mechanically pulsating membrane is the spatial matter that fills the entire universe; it conducts electro-magnetic waves (and light), sometimes recharging when necessary, sometimes passing its energy on to matter consisting of electrons, neutrons and protons. It conveys and transmits messages, sees, hears, feels and thinks in keeping with the nature of lifeless matter.
Conclusions and assumptions in connection with particles serve to support this theory, according to which:
Certain experiments successfully revealed that particles of light must have a connection with one another. In the course of testing, it was possible to indicate that one particle was aware of something that another particle next to it was. This means that particles found in close proximity to one another within a space were well-informed about the tasks they had to perform as a group. Based on this, we can assume that this information also reaches more distant particles, which means that particles are, on the whole, well-informed. So states the experiment dealing with “light particles”.
What sort of transmission is necessary for the universe to function? Has atomic matter in the universe always been able to function without energy replacement, and will it continue to do so forever?
* Representative scientific broadcast on Austrian television, c. 2008:
Leading scientists have completed an experiment which shows that energy forms – can be obtained – from nothing (in other words, “from empty space” – my comment). *
(2008)
The first chapter contained a diagram showing the model of an atom. All atoms constantly flutter and vibrate. We know that energy is necessary for motion. Without energy, there is no movement. Imagine matter that is located in the dark, 10 metres below the surface of the Earth. One atom does not convey information to another. On the other hand, something must transmit energy between atoms and molecules. Something also has to transfer the energy of the universe to the farthest point and to the deepest atom within matter. This transmission is performed by spatial matter, the particles of which are the repository of this task.
What does this look like?
Particles simply plough through the superstructure of the atom, the electron shell, without interfering with its function. Naturally, the theory would be invalid if this were true. In reality, the opposite is true: Matter is built into space.
But let’s not run so far ahead. Take a look at one more experiment with light:
Certain assumptions led to the conclusion that “particles of light” must somehow play a role in the transmission of electro-magnetic gravity. This theory has two interpretations. The first correlates with the previous declaration while the second states that every reaction must have a counter-reaction, and visa versa. If we regard gravity as a reaction, then this bundle of energy must also have a counter-reaction somewhere. Gravity is an emission of energy. How has atomic matter continued to emit this energy for billions of years without taking on new energy?
Gravitational pull begins at the centre of the Earth, other celestial bodies and all other electro-magnetic structures composed of atoms and/or molecules (including a pebble held in someone’s hand or an even smaller bit of matter) and increases closer to the surface, where it has a magnetic influence on all electro-magnetic matter composed of atoms and/or molecules. “Particles of light” are unable to perform this task for two reasons:
- Because they can not penetrate matter that is not translucent.
- Because they do not exist.
The transmission of gravitational force is conducted by spatial matter - spatial particles - and this brings us to the second important role it plays. The first has already been mentioned: Spatial matter acts as an agent to preserve the energy supply of the universe (transmitting from outside of matter inwards). The second: Spatial matter provides the environment for the development of gravity (transmitting from within matter towards the surface). It should be mentioned here that gravity is the most important force in terms of maintaining balance in the universe.
Further exploring the construction of atoms and their relationship to spatial matter, it can be strongly assumed that the elements comprising atoms - protons, neutrons, and also electrons - have traits similar to those of spatial matter, without recharging. And why would it be otherwise? What would have been the motivation for constructing the universe out of three, four or five particles with different characteristics when only one is enough? The differences are already made significant by their link with energy.
As a consequence, particles everywhere in the universe are:
Pliable and tenuous – The hardness of atomic matter depends on the strength of the electro-magnetic space, or structure.
Gaseous and weightless – The weight of matter depends on the mutual effects of electro-magnetism i.e. gravity.
Colourless and transparent – The colour of matter is produced by light-waves of varying lengths refracted on the electron shells of atoms (the rest is absorbed).
In our age, we have discovered the binary system. As far as I know, this means sign or no sign. In fact, if we look deep into the universe, somehow it also seems to function according to this system; meaning energy or non-energy as opposed to matter or no matter. This duplicity is dominant throughout. Like the concept of “to be or not to be” – the essence of the choice is not matter, but energy. The context is a given: it was, is and will be. Energy is the basis of existence. If energy is present, there is existence. If there is no energy, there is no existence.
In summary:
The universe has two components. One is particles of spatial matter: colourless, odourless, transparent, pliable, tenuous, gaseous, and weightless. These make up protons, neutrons and electrons. The other is energy, which builds atoms from a certain amount of neutral spatial matter. Naturally, this requires special conditions. In our case, the development of matter probably took place 10, 15, or who knows how many billions of years ago with something called the big bang. What that actually was so far remains a mystery.
First there was spatial matter, and then multiple influences of energy turned this into atoms, which then bonded to form the atomic matter we know today, hence matter was built into spatial matter. The role of spatial matter in the functioning of atoms is indirect, which means that spatial matter is present inside atoms without interfering with or influencing their operation. Spatial matter is charged by energy, but does not remain in this condition; it merely stores the energy in its own unique manner. Of course, this is not the way things actually are. We just imagine them to be this way. In reality, energy in space is in a state of constant flight and equalisation.
Spatial matter simultaneously carries both a negative and positive charge - energy that is denominated within atoms, where it effectively becomes positive or negative.
Let’s take brief look at one component of atoms: neutrons! These are material particles, present within the shell of an atom in a positive-negative environment, and yet they do not become “magnetised”. It follows then that neutrons might be regarded as the batteries of atoms, storing energy in order to keep atoms operating; this means energy with no advance signal, and with neither a positive nor a negative charge.
The “free movement” of spatial matter within the shell of an atom raises the possibility that neutrons are not existing components within the construction of the atom, and it is rather spatial particles undergoing a “reaction” that can be regarded as one of the materials in the nuclear superstructure i.e. as neutrons.
We could easily say that the role of spatial matter is limited only to taking on, transmitting, and distributing energy, devoid of any “content”. And yet it is precisely the necessities described above that can be interpreted as content because it matters greatly how much there is of what, where it comes from and where it is headed. A group of components based on a simple scheme thus comprises an extremely complex information system.
The human nervous system also operates with electro-magnetic signals that run through various nerve tracts with the help of simple impulses. The difference is that human beings have a central nervous system, which processes incoming signals and turns them into data…and so on. According to our current experience, however, the universe largely functions with a system in which “the big things affect the little things”. This is the apparent state of affairs, but it tempts us to make false analyses. Nothing in the world or the universe takes place just “as the cookie crumbles”. The movement of matter, energy, and events, suggests some kind of purpose, an effort to “find a solution”. It can be assumed that motion and activity throughout the entire system is based on the “memory” of the universe, and functions in accordance with this, constantly striving to do or undo something.
What stimulates and motivates the biological being?
Self-preservation and reproduction:
The survival of these two basic needs is due to sensations and stimuli that come from within. All such instinctive commands can be traced back to the most primitive of living beings, and to those who were once less developed. If we travel back in time, we will all of a sudden find ourselves in the world of lifeless matter; nowhere a single-celled organism or even a protein molecule to be found. Well, in our minds there is a tremendous difference between these two conditions, whereas both lifeless and living matter are made up of “dry” atoms. The functioning of these atoms strictly depends on the system of the universe; it means only the unique bond between atoms and biological existence. (Everyone knows that humans are eventually reduced to nothing more than a handful of lifeless ash – even my parents.) Individually, atoms that compose biological matter function the same way as those that compose lifeless matter. In the case of biological existence, two kinds of structure are built on one another. The basic elements (atoms) function in a way characteristic of lifeless matter in the interest of their own survival, and their “system of communication” is based on spatial matter. A living being made up of complex biological molecules developed from individual atoms is built onto this ‘dry” physical world and carries the basic system within it. If we begin to examine the operating technique of human spirit and existence, the deeper we go, the more we move towards that which is simple, and soon we find ourselves in the most primitive world of existence. This territory and philosophy are the world of lifeless matter; both the meaning and the interpretability of the universe: a union of pure energy, “dry” atoms and hardly recognisable particles.
But let’s not stop here!
Presumably, there was a time when our spatial matter was also in a more primitive condition, after which it developed to become the spatial matter we know today. It may well be that this took place over an interval of time much longer than both the presumed past and future of our world.
This process has never had a beginning or an end; the definition and concept of time can not be linked to the physical environment. They are merely a biological-moral interpretation.
Returning to the present, we can see that in the world of both the lifeless and the living, the emphasis is on function, survival, and development. The lifeless world has its own way of gaining nutrition, its own conditions for aggregation and its own opportunities for development. Atomic matter takes on energy from spatial matter based on mutual attraction; it releases energy from itself, and “develops” - in some direction - as a consequence of this functioning.
Space is constantly filled with energy, and there are only minimal differences between distances comprising billions of light years. It is precisely this continuity that makes it possible to maintain balance in the universe, and this is why our Earthly existence was able to develop. A radical decrease or possible increase in spatial energy (but from where?) would automatically have an impact on the structure and strength of the gravitational space of atomic matter. Such a change would alter the relationship and distance between planets (atomic matter).
If we take into consideration the ability of spatial matter to expand and assume that in 15 billion years the diameter of spatial particles will double in size, by then the diameter of the universe will have reached 30 billion light years. Why couldn’t atoms change to the same extent?
There are two locks on my door. One of them is a common cylinder lock under the door handle, while the other is a simple security lock. Well, I have buried the keys to each of these locks in two different forests…in order to make the task more difficult.
Vienna/Gußwerk, December 2004 Balint
Translation: Michael Kando
