CHAPTER THREE - THE COSMOS IS ELECTRO MAGNETIC. A DIFFERENT WAY OF UNDERSTANDING ANTI PARTICLES....

THIS IS THE MOMENT OF OUR CREATION

­CHAPTER THREE

THE COSMOS IS ELECTRO MAGNETIC

A DIFFERENT WAY OF UNDERSTANDING ANTI PARTICLES, THE VACUUM & WAVE FUNCTIONS. CHARGE AND QUANTUM BEHAVIOUR.

“Science frequently makes choices between alternatives. Once the choice is made, however, scientists tend to unify behind the accepted alternative to the extent of denying and eventually forgetting that there was any real choice made. Subsequent text books gloss over any possible alternatives, depicting science as a straightforward march up the correct path toward the truth. Since it is forgotten and denied that such choices existed, the results of these choices are rarely reviewed. Not only is there no provision or incentive for such a review, there is a positive and powerful peer pressure against any such questioning of the basic premises.” Don Hotson.

THE ROAD NOT TAKEN.

The physical sciences that seek to explain the nature of the Universe are not just at a cross-roads, as professor Dingle wrote over forty years ago, they have taken the wrong road and are marching confidently along it. It leads to the Big Bang, collapsed matter, universal relativity, nuclear powered stars, empty space that cannot support electric currents, or the magnetic fields that only currents induce, while gravity, the weakest of all forces, is expected to shapes the cosmos. Dark unobservable matter has been invented to provide extra gravity, and dark energy, another invention to explain the escalating expansion of the cosmos which will end all scattered out and dwindling away.

This road leads nowhere yet it seems dazzlingly successful with its rapidly advancing technology in light collection, space craft and computer power. It is providing enormous amounts of high quality data about the cosmos, but it doesn’t relate it all into a rational pattern or a wider context. A quite different view of the Universe is needed.

There is another road a different regiment of science is advancing along, but they are outsiders, the unorthodox, the heretics, often unable to get their views published in the principal journals and publishing houses, and unlikely to have access to the facilities of observatories and laboratories. This is the road I am following. The astronomical and physics data is the same as the orthodox army uses but the picture drawn from it is completely different. Science today is travelling down two separate roads and only one of them can lead to the truth. The difference depends on what philosophy and metaphysics you use, even If it is an unconscious one that forms unquestioned assumptions.

Is the Universe finite or infinite; does it have an origin or is it eternal; what does eternal really mean, and are its activities a matter of chance and indeterminacy or is there intelligence and purpose in the way the universe works.?

It is a number of linked assumptions that has taken science down the wrong road following a series of incorrect signposts.

It is widely assumed that space is so empty that it cannot support an electric current and the magnetic fields that currents inevitably induce. Consequently the principal force has to be gravity and electro-magnetism is a minor player and the tenuous matter of space is treated as a gas. But there is an alternative view known as the Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology. It is a revelation, a window into a far more wonderful and creative cosmos which has no beginning, always is and always was, and the tenuous ubiquitous ionised plasma of charged particles and nuclei throughout space has always existed, produced by the galaxies that have always existed. There is a vast amount of plasma throughout every galaxy and even between the galaxies. A cubic metre of it is hard vacuum by our atmospheric standard, but in the volume of a galaxy there is enough to form stars by the millions. Being overwhelmingly ionised it is charged and subject to electro- magnetic forces 39 orders more powerful than gravity.

Out in space these forces can do quite extraordinary things which don’t occur on Earth. Within a galaxy there are always currents moving across interstellar space because there are always stars with powerful positive charge drawing on them like a load on a power source. In these currents, electrons and protons stream along closed paths that end on the poles of stars and provide the electrical power by which they shine. The power source is the vacuum the nature of which will be explained later.

Here are tables of the fundamental particles which will be frequently mentioned in this and other chapters.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/lepton.html

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/baryon.html

Let us take the road not taken by orthodox astronomy and we will find how extraordinarily creative the activities of our cosmos are.

There are three great questions in astronomy: How do stars form? How do stars shine? And how do galaxies originate? The answers are only found down the alternative road - the electromagnetic road. All stars, (and our Sun is a very typical example,) are formed by the action of vast currents of charged particles which form a ubiquitous network throughout our Galaxy and every galaxy.

The reader can easily enter this road from the internet on `Thunderbolts picture of the day` giving the alternative view of the latest astronomical news and a brief beginner`s course in electric universe teaching.

Because the Universe is electro-magnetic in nature and operation, it is a seamless whole without a beginning, and this makes it difficult to find a place to start an explanation for there is no easy way in like a Big Bang or a Fiat Lux.

THE VACUUM IS NOT EMPTY.

It is an established fact that the vacuum is seething with electrons and positrons which emerge and submerge too briefly and too fast to be actualised in the cosmos, but they are there, for when energy is applied to any point of the universal vacuum it can cause particles to actualise. This can occur not only in powerful particle colliders but also in low energy discharge tubes and chemical reactions.

Professor Paul Rowe in his book ‘An Attempt to Restore Classical Physics’, unearths ignored and long forgotten insights into the vacuum of space. Not the space far out among the stars, but the space we exist in here and now, in which our own atoms and molecules are set.

In the second world war, German artillery shells were far more powerful than Allied ones. Analysis of unexploded shells revealed they contained mixtures of aluminium flake and high explosive and this greatly increased the pressure of the explosion.

Rowe writes: “when I detonated shells containing only high explosive, in vacuum, I obtained the amount of gas expected based on the chemical composition of the explosive. On similarly detonating shells containing explosive aluminium mixtures, in vacuum l obtained much more gas than was theoretically possible, based on the known contents of the shell. Increasing the aluminium concentration increased the amount of gas produced. I tested simpler mixtures. Combustion in vacuum, of highly purified aluminium powder and cupric oxide, produced the gas most readily. Again much more than the calculated amount of gas was produced.

The pressure obtained after sparking mixtures of this gas and air convinced me that the original gas was hydrogen. Could the hydrogen have been produced from the vacuum when very hot molten aluminium droplets were dispersed in vacuum? If so, the hydrogen produced during explosions in air would be expected to react with oxygen of the air to increase heat and increase the power of the explosion. Could the sparks observed while grinding some metals in air be caused by similarly produced hydrogen reacting with the oxygen in the air? Is there something in the vacuum which can be converted into hydrogen under the proper conditions?”

Rowe pursued his researches in the university libraries finding experimental findings of a hundred years ago when a lot of work was being done on electric discharges across tenuous gas or vacuum in tubes between positive and negative electrodes.

In these experiments Clarence Skinner in 1905, passing electric charge across pure Helium and nothing else, reported hydrogen gas produced at the negative electrode. It was thousands of times more than the contents of the tube could possibly provide. Anyway Helium is a totally inert gas that can`t produce anything.

Other scientists such as J Thomson and G Winchester in 1914 found large, and for them, inexplicable quantities of hydrogen in vacuum tubes, using helium or neon which were highly purified and chemically inert. Despite all their precautions hydrogen kept appearing. All this work has been forgotten and was ignored or denied at the time because everyone assumed a vacuum was empty, and you can`t get gas from nothing. But the vacuum is not nothing.

Rowe again: “Based on the results and extensive searches in the book stacks of the MIT science library, I believe that the aether of classical physics is a concentrated matrix of protons and unpaired electrons.”

I personally would go further, it has general features that show it is full of charge and potential particles. Being potential they have no mass or motion, and unless stimulated do not exert negative and positive charge. Yet the vacuum can be polarised and magnetised and then exerts forces.

If you place two charged metal plates close together, one positive the other negative, they will polarise materials placed between them, which means that electrons in the material will orient towards the positive plate, and protons towards the negative, and this slight separation of charges in the atoms of the material produces a small but easily measured electric potential across the material, and this also occurs with a vacuum between the plates. It is slight but measurable, and by convention, all materials are rated relative to the vacuum value. It means that there is something in the vacuum that can be polarised just as materials are.

Then consider the magnetic force between magnets, which we take for granted, but is mysterious. As Rowe describes it “The forces encountered when manipulating separated bar magnets is paramagnetic. This suggests that space contains unpaired electrons.”

An electron on its own is a tiny magnet because it is a spinning electric charge. In all but a few elements, the electrons are paired and their magnetic moments are neutralised. But Iron has a peculiar atomic structure with three unpaired electrons able to exert their magnetic force beyond the atom. This enables iron to become a permanent magnet when all its electronic magnets are oriented in one direction. Some metal objects like pins, can be magnetised in the presence of a permanent magnet but lose it when the magnet is withdrawn, they are paramagnetic. The vacuum is like that. Put two magnets close together with north poles facing and they will repel and resist being pushed together. With strong magnets they just bounce apart, yet there seems to be nothing between them except air. Exactly the same occurs in a vacuum. It can only be explained if the vacuum beyond the air is, as Rowe puts it, “a matrix of charged particles”- only exerting charge when stimulated, and magnets do that by polarising the vacuum, opening the charge that invisibly fills it. This means that when two south-pole magnets face each other, the positive charges in the vacuum move away from the magnets and bunch together between them and repel them, while the negative charges in the vacuum are attracted to both magnets but repel each other across the gap - a double repulsion. In the case of a north and a south pole facing each other, the negative charges in the vacuum are attracted to the south-pole, and the positive vacuum charges to the north-pole, and both poles are drawn together by the action of the vacuum charges concentrated on each pole.

There is a temptation here to talk of the poles of a magnet as having negative and positive ends, but this would confuse electricity with magnetism. To put it briefly; electricity is the attraction and repulsion of electric charges which cause charges to flow across space as currents.

Magnetism is the way moving or spinning charges alter and shape the vacuum around them. It is the universal vacuum which originates magnetic forces which move charged bodies.

A current will shape the vacuum near it and curl it around it like a sleeve.

A magnet does not contain a current but it does contain spinning electrons which can influence the nearby vacuum to fold around the magnet in a continuous curvature connecting both north and south poles. This curvature is a continuum not a series of separate lines of force, but it can be mapped that way using a compass or iron filings. It is the vacuum being curved. So you can`t say that the poles of a magnet have negative or positive charge; if you touch both ends of one you don’t get a shock. To avoid this, the convention is to say that north poles are south seeking, and south poles are north seeking.

Yet there is electric charge involved because that is what curves the vacuum around moving charges, whether in currents or spinning in magnets, and as Rowe says there must be “a matrix of positive and negative charge” in the vacuum for it to respond.

Here I must anticipate what will be explained at length in a later chapter and mention the theorising of Don Hotson concerning the nature of the vacuum. He describes it as a contiguity of electron positron pairs in unlimited numbers at every point. Their charges and spins are confined to each other making them neutral and dormant and motionless. They are in a potential state not yet actualised. When stimulated by actual charged particles in the cosmos of space and time and motion, these dormant pairs are opened and their charges are orientated towards the moving charges of the cosmos. This motionless orientation is seen by us as a curvature of the vacuum around currents and magnets.

Arguing from the way magnets behave when, say, a south and north pole face each other, then the negative charges dormant in the vacuum will orient to the south pole and the positive to the north pole, but no particles move, it is a static reorientation that alters the vacuum and curves it around the moving charges in the cosmos. When that takes place the vacuum is a curved continuum alternately attracting and repelling moving charged particles in the cosmos and turning their motion into the curvature of the vacuum.

Electricity is moving charges and flowing currents.

Magnetism is shaping of vacuum around those charges.

Electromagnetism by its power moves the cosmos and shapes the vacuum.

(This has nothing to do with Einstein`s idea of gravity curving space around masses which is an erroneous theory.)

The great forces of gravity, inertia, electric charge and magnetism are what the Universe does; the particles, atoms and bodies are only agents manifesting what the Universe is doing, they do not possess these forces as their own, even though they may seem to.

Gravity is universal unity, inertia is universal extensioing, and they apply to everything that has mass. Gravity binds all things, inertia separates all things, and together they are binding and separating and establishing an ordered cosmos of stars in constant orbital motion.

Electric charge is the action of the Universe binding and separating its fundamental particles in order to establish a cosmos of atomic structures out of those fundamental particles. Magnetism is the reaction of the vacuum to the charged particles and bodies in the cosmos where we exist.

At the deepest level of creation, the fundamental actions are electrons of negative charge and positrons of positive charge and there are an infinity of them in the vacuum in potentia. From these alone all the matter of the cosmos is created. These particles fill the vacuum and are the source of the charge in the vacuum responsible for its dielectric polarisation and magnetism. These potential particles in the vacuum not yet actualised in the cosmos, are not material things they are actions of the Universe. What is adequately stimulated can actualise into the cosmos and take part in its creation, forming structures such as protons, neutrons, nuclei, atoms and the material they constitute. All of them are structured from electron positron pairs. As these are actions not material things, all structures in the cosmos are structured actions at all levels of size and complexity. That we obviously experience our world as solid and very material is because our bodily structure of actions reacts with other structures of actions and we experience this as materiality and pain or pleasure. This is not an illusion; it is because we possess the whole of our structure of actions (our body) in one instant, one experience based on our union of senses and intelligence; materiality is a human qualia.

PARTICLES AND ANTIPARTICLES.

Considering electron positron pairs to be the tools and agents of the creation of the cosmos is contrary to much orthodox thought. There are a great many different fundamental particles covering a great range of masses and all have antiparticles just like them but of opposite charge and when they meet they annihilate each other. This also occurs when free electrons meet free positrons out in the cosmos, they disappear in a flash of high energy gamma radiation. It is therefore assumed that antiparticles are the nemesis of particles but fortunately are very rare nowadays. Yet whenever we look into the vacuum we see equal numbers of the antiparticle of the electron, and whenever particles of any kind are produced in the high energy particle colliders their antiparticles are always produced. The Universe produces them prodigiously but to what purpose? It is a knotty problem for the Big Bang theory of origin which maintains that all the matter of the cosmos was produced all at once and had to be in equal quantities of particles and antiparticles. So there had to be an almighty shoot out of particles and antiparticles, as the Universe began, and yet had to finish up with a cosmos of particles that we now live in.

The immense burst of high energy radiation that was produced in the shootout is now reduced to low energy microwave and radio by the expansion of the Universe, or so the theory goes. It is believed that only one in a billion particles survived, perhaps because they had some advantage at the instant of creation, but no one knows what that was. Since then particles have dominated all matter and antiparticles are a hunted minority constantly mopped up by the particles.

I propose a quite different scenario.

Electrons and positrons are the basic building bricks of the cosmos and between them construct protons and neutrons; in a process I will describe later in this chapter. They are not adversaries, but the way the Universe operates. Particles and antiparticles are always of opposite charge, and either attract or repel, and that manifests the binding and separating which the Universe is doing at all levels. This is how the Universe remains many and One, contiguous and extensioned, attracting and repelling. It is full of dualities, and particle antiparticle is one of them. Electron and positron work together as basic actions to build up structures of actions such as protons neutrons nuclei and atoms. They only annihilate when both are flying free in the space of the cosmos and are not in structures. There was never a universal shoot out, there are as many positrons as there are electrons but they are hidden within the protons and neutrons of matter. I will give a full explanation of all this later.

It is my contention that the fundamental actions and agents of creation are the electron positron pairs. Their charge, the most powerful force in the Universe, attracts and repels binds and divides, and draws together in structures, but holds them apart maintaining space and extension. In the vacuum of space, there are potential particles which the actual charged particles of the cosmos can stimulate into actual existence in the cosmos. Until then, while in the vacuum, their charge is hidden and inactive in the exclusive pairing of electrons and positrons (which makes them charge condensed and neutral). Besides this they have no mass, inertia, motions or gravity. These they acquire when actualised into the cosmos. While in the vacuum they can be said to be in Potentiality, in contrast to the Actuality of the cosmos.

The creative nature of the vacuum was first perceived by Paul Dirac, one of the greatest of mathematicians, in an equation developed in 1928 which will be examined later in this chapter.

WAVE FUNCTIONS.

We know that possibilities are real for us but can`t be weighed measured or handled, yet we spin and weave our lives out of them as we choose or reject and decide to act because of them.

There is a mathematical way of seeking to understand the realm of possibility and probability. It is based on careful minute and prolonged study of the actions of radiation, particles and atoms. This provides measured quantities and values of the activities of particles, and these are combined with a mathematical concept called imaginary numbers, from which the array of complex numbers can be formed. These are used to deal with the probabilities of particle physics; this use of complex numbers seems to point into a deeper level of reality although we don’t know how. This provides the complex numbers necessary for the calculations. In practice it enables us to obtain odds for quantum events to actualise. It enables us to visualise the realm of probability as one of waves and frequencies because possibility is ever changing and moving onward in time. But they are not comparable to undulating water waves, nor the compression waves of sound in air, nor even vibrations moving through solids. They are really sui generis, and are called wave functions, (function ` being a mathematical term, and emphasises it is not a wave in our earthly world), but they certainly underlay our world. In the potentia they are all superposed on one another and are non-local and convey actions instantaneously. It can be said that all the wave functions of the Universe are as one, all simultaneously present to each other.

Wave funtions are actions not things and the cosmos they underlay is all actions. They need to be seen as waves and frequencies all superposed and one. That is the true substrate of the Universe as far as we can comprehend it. Like the possibilities that our lives are immersed in, they are real but we cannot perceive them with our senses, we can only infer them with our intellect. But what are these waves? The best guess we can make is that they are possibility being chosen and ordered and reconciled continually under universal rational purpose.

Human physicists on their tiny scale can manipulate quantum processes and gain some insight into them. They are only doing what the Universe is always doing on an infinite and eternal scale everywhere as it establishes the ordered cosmos that the physicists can exist in.

Our best guess has to be based on analogies from our earthly experience.

Consider a concert hall. The musicians play their various instruments together and fill the air of the hall with a very complex integrated, constantly changing harmony of compression waves swirling and intertwining. If we could actually see the air of the hall, it would seem like a great three dimensional abstract painting come alive. All over the hall are many ears with their powers of reception, analysis and amplification; and there the sound waves are actualised into music.

The best guess that physics and maths can offer as to what the Universe really is, is to liken it to waves of probability, called wave functions. As such they are not yet actualised into our world of individual and material structures. They are all superposed and continually changing in potentia, and all as one, in so fundamental a way that they are all instantly present to one another. These are established facts of quantum physics and our familiar world emerges from it. This is another way of thinking of the Potentia beyond the actual world.

SPACE AND VACUUM.

Space is an integral part of the cosmos. Yet there seems to be really empty space between the particles. This is termed the Vacuum. In common parlance vacuum means absolute emptiness, but science does not see it that way. It is to be thought of as the dynamic substrate of the cosmos.

Space is not the vacuum. I have argued that the forming and maintaining of structures in the cosmos, extensions the cosmos and that extensioning is space and it is an Act of the Universe. But where do the particles come from that form the structures that extension the cosmos? They originate from the substrate and that is the vacuum underlying space.

The vacuum is not space. It is at a deeper level of the Universe, and that means it is closer to the tota simul – and to the universal power of creation which supplies particles, then structures them, and extensions and sequences the cosmos. Seeing it this way can explain why, wherever in space we apply high energy and detecting instruments at any point, we will detect limitless numbers of potential electrons and positrons and what they could form if they actualised into our cosmos. Apply enough energy obtained from the cosmos and some of them will actualise. The vacuum is the creative substrate of the cosmos, its fount and origin.

What makes the vacuum so different from space is that all of it in its infinity is present at every point we care to examine in space. It exhibits features of the infinite tota simul.

The cosmos draws from the vacuum, and the vacuum provides. Both are infinite and eternal without beginning.

Using the insights of Dirac and Hotson, it can be argued that the energetic motions and forces of the actual cosmos stimulate and raise what is potential and dormant in the vacuum into actual structures, forces and motions in the cosmos of space and time. The vacuum can be considered to be the ‘potentiality` of the cosmos. What is potential in the vacuum becomes actual in the cosmos, what is dormant becomes active, what is neutral becomes charged, what is still becomes spinning and moving and what is massless gains mass.

It is strange that in exploring the vacuum we are coming closer to the heart of the Universe. We see creation working from the vacuum and its potentiality, because we are in the midst of the creation of the cosmos, and for us it is an ongoing event; but for the Universe it is an everlasting Act of perfect creating that cannot fail.

We exist in a cosmos of an infinite multitude of separate things, and between them an infinite source of further things coming forth from the vacuum. Is not this reminiscent of the totality of all numbers? An infinite expanse of whole numbers, an infinity of relationships between them, and in between there are irrational numbers at every point, each of them still in creation still not completed. From our gnat`s view point we can never find the limits of them as they are emerging even as we calculate. We are trying to find a limit to the infinite. As far as we know, every irrational number is as limitless as the totality of all whole numbers. Numbers are a wonderful mirror reflecting the Universe.

It is because we are at the midpoint of its infinite event that we have to distinguish between the actual cosmos already created and the potentiality of a cosmos in the vacuum not yet created as far as we are concerned. Because it is not yet created we must see it as emptiness, but because creation is occurring we see it as dynamic. What we infer from what we observe is that beyond the space between things, is the vacuum from which particles emerge exhibiting charge, spin and energy. We cannot see into the vacuum but we can surmise that it is an infinity of potential particles without mass, motion and energy. The cosmos interacts with it and draws from it an inflow of particles, and stimulates electric and magnetic fields in the vacuum to influence the movement of charged bodies in the space of the cosmos.

Cosmos and potentiality are not separate realms they are set within one another and interact everywhere constantly. This is bound to be so because it is one Universe and one event of creation without end.

The best theoretical picture we have of the potentiality of the vacuum is that it is a contiguity of electron positron pairs, charge condensed spin one bosons, not in extension, not actualised. (It can be likened to the cosmos with time space and motion removed). Where cosmos and potentiality interact is where we see the emergence of actual particles with charge mass and spin. We also observe electric and magnetic fields when electron positron pairs in the vacuum are slightly loosened and can exert charge in their contiguity and can transfer charge across cosmic space and influence the motions of charged bodies moving in space. What is happening in the contiguity of the potentiality can then be seen in the extended cosmos. This observable aspect of the potentiality can be termed the electric and magnetic fields operating in the Vacuum.

But why should the vacuum be packed with electron positron pairs with negative and positive charge condensed and spin neutralised? Again I remind the reader that we are talking about actions not material things. It is the way the Universe Acts.

At a deeper level beyond the vacuum the unity of the Universe intensifies towards the tota simul. Particles are in a contiguity when in the potential state because they are actions, they are wavefunctions all superposed and instant to each other and not in our space and time. That at least is how we perceive the Universe as a whole to be acting to remain many and one, one and many, uniting and separating. This is the Act beyond the contiguity of electron positron pairs and that Act is what we can surmise to be creation.

So from our standpoint within the cosmos, we can perceive and surmise a series of ‘depths. In the forefront is a dynamic space in extension full of stars and atoms; then beyond that a contiguous vacuum of electron positron pairs; and at the deepest level we can discern, there is the realm of wave functions which is the creativity, the rationality and the purpose of the Universe tota simul. Not separate realms, of course, but one within the other equally eternal and infinite and essential to each other.

The Universe is a generative infinity, growing endlessly into further possibility as we must see it. It is also central to this universalist scheme of thought that this ‘now’ that you are experiencing is the moment of creation of the cosmos for you; it is all happening now, and yet it is all reconciled because it is all coherent.

Eternity is not duration, has no origin and no end. It is all present all at once. We cannot experience that, because we enter the cosmos at one finite locality and lifetime, where we experience space and time and a succession of events.

There is a great gulf fixed between our finiteness and the Infinite, and yet we are the children of the Universe and have a real part to play in creation.

To understand creation, let us consider the potentiality. It is the endless waves of possibility (wave functions) which we can imagine turning and rolling and changing as our own time passes. The fundamental actions that create the structures are, as far as we know, the electrons and positron that emerge from the vacuum. They are constantly emerging and submerging in the vacuum between structures. One might call it the loom from which structures are woven.

In the vacuum from where potential electron positron pairs emerge, there is no mass, no inertia, no gravity, and charge is neutralised. But as electrons and positrons emerge into the central plasmoids of galaxies, they can combine into protons, neutrons as well as many unstable larger particles that always break down to protons and electrons.

Almost all the positrons end up in the compound particles, which means that matter and antimatter do exist in equal proportions in the cosmos and in the vacuum. They do not annihilate; they co -operate to create.

But out in the cosmos, any free positron not in a structure soon meets an electron. What happens then is widely misunderstood. They do not destroy each other and disappear in a flash. Instead they briefly revolve around each other due to their electrical attraction, forming a pseudo atom known as positronium which lasts for about two millionths of a second, and then both particles radiate away the energies they acquired in the cosmos, and fall back into the vacuum, from whence they originally came, and from our point of view they disappear.

Creation is not in the past, it is incessant now. All things are being created now. Their creation is not done just once and after that they are self-sustaining permanent entities with their creation behind them. Now is always the moment of all creation. It is why the Universe is a unity now, and why its logic and rationality and natural laws are operating all the time, everywhere now.

To summarise:

As all structures are being created incessantly now, the extension that ensues is occurring now, and so the cosmos is always extensioning.

It is not the Big Bang for it is not expansion of space outwards and no entity is moved because of it, nor does it cause redshifting of light. It can be glimpsed, as Roemer found, when he timed the eclipses of the moons of Jupiter relative to the movement of the Earth. What he glimpsed was not the speed of light but the extensioning of the cosmos. It is not a speed, for the cosmos is not moving anywhere, it is just establishing its extension. `C’ is a constant of extension and `h’ is a constant of structuring as will be explained later.

Light has no speed, it is instantaneous, gravity, charge and magnetism also act instantly but that is because they are universal and not localised individual actions. Light is different for it is a specific limited interaction between two separate electrons, and it is possible to time it, for it has a beginning and an ending, whereas gravity and charge never begin or cease.

THE NOW OF STANDPOINTS.

The activity of creation never stops. It gives every standpoint a continuing and ever changing eventum. This is its relevance to the universal activity and the sphere of that relevance is the particular cosmos of that standpoint. The universal cosmos is filled with standpoints each with their own cosmos. The Universe cannot be seen as a whole by us for each of us has a finite standpoint and a finite cosmos but the Universe is the infinity of all cosmoses each one relevant to one standpoint with its own Now, as its own eventum acts on it. Each standpoint is separate and as distances between them widens the difference in their own nows increases.

As we look out from Earth, every other now out there is assumed to be in our past, for we assume it takes an interval of our present time for a signal sent from a distant emitter to reach us. Referring to our own clocks, we can arrange an exchange of signals so that we know when it was sent and the distance it crossed. This is only possible to arrange in our Solar System but it must apply universally.

Why is the time difference always behind our own time? The rest of the cosmos seems to be in our past, and the widely held assumption is that light travels at 300,000 km per second, so all its news is yesterday`s news and the light we are receiving from distant galaxies left them when the dinosaurs roamed our land. But light does not travel, it is instantaneous, and what we receive from anywhere is all in our present now. Emitters, however distant those atoms may be, are instantaneous with reception in the molecules of our retinas and instruments. Our eventum is always in our present now and is from our own cosmos and so is relevant to us at that instant. What is instantaneous is what is relevant to us in the contiguity, but we see it extensioned and impose our system of measured distances and light time upon it.

If I was on a planet at Alpha Centauri my eventum there would be what that sphere of my own cosmos would send me, and my now would be four years different from your now on Earth, if we were trying to keep in touch.

How can the Universe be all one and yet be separated into standpoints and nows? It is because all standpoints are being constructed now from fundamental actions, but as they do so they create space and extension the cosmos.

Only structures have to travel across distances and take time to do so, but their eventa are instantaneous for them.

Every standpoint exists in its own time which is the flow of events from the cosmos specifically to that standpoint and its now.

The Universe is not in time, it has no eventum to bring further event to it. It is perfect and all reconciled, it does not evolve; it just is. It is mistaken to conclude that the evolution we see in the flow of events around us can apply to the Universe as a whole. What finite standpoints perceive is not evolution of the Universe, but its logic as it creates the stars and other structures that we see from our gnats eye viewpoint.

THE EQUATION OF DIRAC.

AND THE THEORY OF HOTSON.

If you want to travel down the alternative road you have to explore the internet, where there are no restrictions on publishing your ideas. Of course, there are many cranks out there and you have to use judgement to sift the wheat from the chaff, but there are original and innovative ideas to be found there if you keep looking. One of these is the web page of Don Hotson, an American, who examines the brilliant equation of Paul Dirac 1928 which showed the true nature of the electron and positron, and the substructure of the cosmos.

Hotson argues in his web page - “Dirac`s equation and the sea of negative energy”, that there is an energetic dynamic aether that Einstein removed, that Dirac`s equation demonstrates to exist, and that Heisenberg and others destroyed when they dismantled this equation. Ever since then physicists have been content to use the truncated form of Dirac`s equation which has landed them in many profound problems.

Schrodinger`s wave function equation for the atom is said to contain most of physics and all of chemistry, and Dirac expected that since all matter and energy evolve as waves, his development of that equation would be a unitary theory of everything.

Dirac`s complete equation describes a quantum spinor field (i.e where everything is spinning) that has, as solutions, four different kinds of electron. These are: electrons of negative and positive charge with ‘positive energy`; and electrons of negative and positive charge but of ‘negative energy`. Hotson maintains that this way of thinking about electrons can provide simple natural models of the electro-magnetic field, the strong nuclear force, the wave function, and use direct contact physical models, not purely mathematical ones.

What Dirac called negative energy I call the potential actions which underlay the cosmos as its substrate, and these are the potential electron positron pairs in the vacuum. In this potentiality there is no mass, no motions, no gravity or inertia, and charge is strictly confined. Negative energy is a good descripton.

To quote Hotson: “the treatment of Dirac`s equation is a lesson in the way modern science works (or rather doesn`t). I think that if one had to point to a single place where science went profoundly and permanently off the track, it would be 1934 and the emasculation of Dirac`s equation. This crisis at the heart of science caused a chronic hardening of the paradigm, and science thereby lost the ability to self-correct”.

“Dirac`s wave equation is a relativistic generalisation of the Schrodinger wave equation. In1934 this brilliantly successful equation was shorn of half of its solutions by a questionable bit of mathematical sleight of hand. Because it was ‘politically correct`, this bit of juggling became the accepted interpretation.”

“Since Dirac`s equation generalises the Schrodinger wave equation, Dirac expected that the solutions would describe everything that waves. Since all matter and energy evolve as waves, Dirac thought his equation would be a unitary theory of everything. However, the discovery of several new particles, and peer criticism, resulting in the truncation of the equation, frustrated this expectation.”

However, “the full equation predicts that the entire physical Universe can be made from four kinds of electron.” All matter and all forces are necessary combinations of the four kinds of electron.” (In 1928 the positron had not been observed and named.) “Dirac believed there was a negative energy ‘sea` and that positive energy particles of our cosmos floated on top.

Heisenberg rejected the existence of a negative (potential) energy substrate. Nonetheless it seemed to be necessary both to theory and the experimental evidence observed in the vacuum. Every charged particle in our cosmos can stimulate unlimited numbers of electron and positron pairs partly emerging from the `negative energy sea, (the vacuum), by the charge on that particle. This makes every interaction an infinite body problem; this is because the cosmos acts as a ‘load` upon the vacuum and both are infinite.

An electron in the cosmos polarises the vacuum and is consequently surrounded by the oppositely charged ends of electron positron pairs still in the vacuum but able to exert a tiny force. This is an experimentally verified fact. “But if the negative energy sea is not believed to exist, then the electron positron pairs cannot come from there, so the mathematical operator in Dirac`s equation that calls for unlimited numbers of them has to become a creation operator of actual e.p pairs here in the cosmos. It had to be creation if they appeared from nowhere. Similarly, when they disappear the mathematical operator must be an annihilation operator. This is the alternative to a changing of state from negative to positive energy if you reject Dirac`s full equation. What should be potential becoming actual has to be seen as actual in the cosmos coming out of nowhere. Creation from nothing and disappearance into nothing is a massive violation of conservation of matter and energy.”

But this was argued away by Heisenberg using his Uncertainty principle. This limits what we can know and measure about any quantum state, particularly energy and time. If we can observe for an extremely brief interval, (so the argument goes), the energy available would be effectively unlimited, and particles in the vacuum could come into being in unlimited numbers for a very brief time , using energy ‘borrowed’ in unlimited amounts from this Uncertainty relation of energy and time. And when they annihilate they ‘pay back’ the loan.

I venture to ask; in what form does the Uncertainty relation loan pure energy? There is something unreal and unphysical about the Uncertainty principle. It seems to need an observer for every particle transaction, but what observer? If they come from nothing and return to nothing, they must be virtual particles, though Dirac`s equation does not imply this. If they are not real or even potential then we can give them whatever properties they need. This must follow if Dirac`s negative energy sea does not exist and everything happens out here in the cosmos.

In any case Heisenberg`s argument does not work, because there are unlimited numbers of virtual e.p pairs around every actual charged particle at all times, so it doesn’t matter how briefly each individual virtual e.p pair exists for, the loan never ends, so it is a permanent loan of infinite energy.

In cloud chambers, we can see e.p pairs suddenly created from radiation which is equal in energy to the particles rest masses. However they don’t endure in the cloud chamber because they don’t form a structure and must fall back into the potential.

Electrons and positrons also have spin angular momentum, which is about 16 times more energy than the radiation that created them. This spin energy is real energy and it is the angular momentum needed by the electron to set up a stable standing wave around the proton, but they don’t produce atoms in the cloud chamber because there is no proton to accept them. This angular momentum is directly responsible for the extension and stability of all matter. It places electrons in energy levels around nuclei in atoms. Ultimately it supplies the energy radiated when an electron alters from one orbital to another. If the vacuum potentiality is not recognised, then there is nowhere for this energy to come from. Orthodox theory calls particle angular momentum an ‘intrinsic attribute’, which really means we don`t know what it is. It is ridiculous to suppose that powerful entities such as electrons and positrons can be created out of nothing.

According to Dirac`s equation they are raised in their state from potential to actual, (or as I would phrase it, raised from potentiating in the vacuum, to existing in the cosmos), and if they annihilate they just return to the vacuum after radiating into the cosmos all positive energy and then become dormant.

Dirac`s equation states that spins and charges are lowered in state into the vacuum; they are not created ex nihilo nor annihilated. Denying the potential state led Heisenberg to introduce the virtual electron, virtual positron, virtual photon, and the Uncertainty principle lending out unlimited energy from no identifiable source. It engulfed physics in infinities because electron positron pairs in the vacuum were assumed to be in the cosmos rather than massless in their potential state. Moreover, surrounded by this infinity of charges negative and positive, and assumed to be in the cosmos where the electron is, meant that the electron`s own charge had to be infinite also, or its charge would be totally cancelled out and could not be measured. Instead of trying to correct this serious problem by re-examining assumptions and theory and calculations, the dilemma was resolved by a mathematical trick.

The infinities of charge and mass afflicting the electron were removed by subtracting opposite infinities, and then the measured values of the charge and mass of the electron were inserted, and following Heisenberg`s lead, physicists could invent unobservable entities with the required properties. Concerning the electron`s magnetic moment (due to it being a spinning charge), if we use Dirac`s equation and its potential energy, then what were actual energies become potential energies and the magnetic moment comes to agreement with the measured value to ten decimal places, which is the same as the orthodox one calculated by Heisenberg, and always quoted with great pride. But the calculations for the other particles, using Heisenberg do not give the right answers. For example: the magnetic moment of the proton using Dirac is ten thousand times more accurate than Heisenberg and doesn’t need fudging, but this is never mentioned.

Hotson argues that there is a minimum time ‘t` which must elapse before the wave function changes appreciably, said to be 6.26 x 10-24second. So the wave function can only alter in increments. This does not mean that time is quantised, but that action is in units of Planck`s constant h. Unless time was a continuum, how could we perceive that action was quantised? It is in structures that action is quantised.

I am greatly indebted to Don Hotson for this whole argument and the insights it gave me into other matters.

BINDING AND SEPARATING.

In the cosmos two kinds of forces operate; those that bind matter together, and those that divide and individualise. So there is gravity, charge attraction and nuclear binding force on the one hand; and there is charge repulsion, and inertia and particle decay on the other.

To clarify the terms:

Positive and negative refer to charge.

Actual and potential refer to energy.

Matter and antimatter refer to particles.

Binding and dividing refer to forces.

Actuality and potentiality refer to creation.

Choosing / rejecting refer to possibility.

Existing and potentiating refer to the mode of being.

Energy is available in unlimited amounts, the cosmos acts as a load drawing on the vacuum. Only actual structures have mass because they are being actualised into the cosmos. In the potentiality there is no mass, gravity or inertia and all is contiguous.

Concerning mass deficit or binding energy: The measured mass of an alpha particle, for instance, is less than the sum of its two protons and two neutrons when these are flying free and separate in space. This difference is the mass deficit or binding energy, it is not known why this is so. I argue that the alpha, which is the helium nucleus, forms in the special conditions of a galactic plasmoid, without needing energy of motion. It does not form by four nucleons falling together in the space of the cosmos and somehow losing mass, when you would expect them to bring extra energy in with them.

Concerning electron spin:

DiraC`S equation describes a spinor field where there is rotation of the wave function. But a turning through 3600 does not bring it back to its original state but to its opposite state. Its wave function ‘psi’ becomes ‘opposite psi`, then as it turns further and reaches 7200 reverts to ‘psi` again.

Electron and positron associate, under the guidance of the wave functions, into protons, neutrons, and other compound particles. This occurs in the centres of galaxies in structures called plasmoids.

The Dirac equation states that the electron always actualises at c (meaning that it enters into extensioning at c and then any velocity acquired in the cosmos is additional to that.) In the potentiality of the vacuum there are no speeds, all is instantaneous, but as it actualises into the cosmos it is caught up in extensioning at c, and acquires its rest mass, and then in addition acquires speed and direction of motion as binding and dividing forces act on it.

The potentiality of the vacuum and the actuality of the cosmos are not separate realms but create together.

Electrons and positrons while in the vacuum are paired together, their charges and spins are confined to each other and do not influence any other particle, they are said to be charge condensed. In this state they are neutral and spin as one, this means they are spin one bosons. But when actualised into the cosmos they become separate particles with their own spins and opposite charge. They are then fermions and as electrons and positrons they spin oppositely. They make a pair with half spin each and are called fermions. Each has its own standpoint, and in the atom cannot occupy the same energy level or orbital energy as another fermion. Being separate and separated their charges are uncoupled and can act across the cosmos. But when back in the vacuum they are paired so closely they are bosons with spin one and their charges are confined to each other. In a manner of speaking, it is as if they only ‘see’ each other there.

If there is no charge, mass or momentum in the vacuum, then electrons and positrons must acquire these properties as they actualise into our physical world. In the vacuum they are not material things but are fundamental actions, described as waves of probability all superposed and instantaneously present to each other, and turning and changing under the powers of creation. Stimulated by the structures in the cosmos, the electron positron pairs actualise into the plasmoids of the galaxies. There they form the structures of protons, neutrons, other compound particles and helium nuclei, and being the internal constituents of them they ever afterwards maintain these structures, for creation is not in the past but always now.

Structures composed of electrons and positrons formed in the plasmoids of galaxies where there is no momentum to disperse them. Electrons are in the nuclei of all atoms because they never entered them from outside in our cosmos, but took their place with positrons in the creative stillness of a plasmoid, and then emerged fully formed into the eventfulness of the cosmos.

In the plasmoid, and ever afterwards within the atomic structures, this work of creation continues and can be likened to an endless dance, or a kaleidoscopic pattern of waves, and in our cosmos they still maintain their dancing waves within the structures. There, where creation still continually operates the e.p pairs spin and weave. But outside of and between the structures, in the open space of the cosmos, electrons and positrons do have uncoupled charge and mass and momentum, and if they meet tend to form positronium briefly, radiate away their rest mass energy and fall back into the potentiality of the vacuum where wave functions swirl and roll and merge.

Our space is extensioning because of the continuous creating or structures, and our experienced time is the universal event of creation particularising into the actions and the events that are structuring our cosmos now. Our space is produced by continuous extensioning and therefore it is a continuum; and there is no minimum Planck distance. We measure this continuum by our arbitrarily chosen units of length and volume. What we call time is the flow of events we experience, and that flow has no gaps; there is no minimum Planck time. There is instead a minimum quantum of action h which structures creation.

THE NATURE OF CHARGE

Electrons and positrons are actions not solid things; it is what they do that gives them whatever we measure them to have. What we can measure is their magnetic moment for they act like tiny magnets, which implies that they are spinning charges. According to the Helicon theory they are spinning rings of charge enclosing a tiny internal space. This allows a calculation of their size to be made using the value of their magnetic moment, and this gives us a size of a quadrillionth of a metre. This means they are not point particles and therefore their charge does not reach infinite value.. (This alternative view can be found on the internet under ‘Helicon theory` or `Common sense science` or the web pages of David Bergman, or Charles Lucas, or Glen Collins.) I explain it in more detail in chapter four and five.

Charge is an action, not a substance that is stored within particles. Indeed it does not belong to them at all, but is what the universe does through them as its agents. This is why charge is incessant and inexhaustible and indestructible, for it has a universal not a localised source.

There are two schools of thought in physics: Quantum electrodynamics, (QED) insists that everything behaves as point particles, while Quantum field theory (QFT) insists everything is waves.

Wave functions are continually creating within the structures, and structures are moving and interacting out here in the cosmos. Wave functions are contiguous; while structures are individual; they both create together. We experience both but concentrate our senses and attention on the cosmos. We can glimpse the wave functions only in carefully prepared laboratory situations using sensitive instruments.

Imagination and thinking, and the turning over of possibilities in the mind is what humans do and that is the activity of creation within us of which we are conscious.

Consider a sculptor fashioning a bronze statue. Where does it start? Not in the heat and noise of the foundry but in the mind of the sculptor where the possibilities are conjured up, and images considered and decisions made and altered. Creation originates there, and only when it is resolved does it enter the physical world as clay models and instructions to the foundry and so on.

We, situated within the Universal event, perceive creation working all around us and experience it within us. It is rational for it is creating a coherent consistent order, and it has a purpose, a terminus, which is the reconciliation all complete, tota simul.

HOTSON`S THEORY OF CHARGE.

The electro-magnetic field is e.p pairs in the vacuum but partially uncoupled and conveying electric charge and producing magnetic fields. The form that this potential energy boson sea must take can be seen as we approach the absolute zero temperature. As we remove all heat we find that there is still immense particle energy at the zero point.

To quote Hotson: “let us say you are approaching a wall. As you approach you detect a large amount of energy, and at the wall you find it is glowing white hot. You ask, what is behind the wall? and are told “oh there`s nothing behind the wall, the Universe ends there` “.

In fact it is where the potentiality begins. In the potentiality there is the endless turning of the wave functions and it must be these that weave together the fundamental agents - the electron positron pairs-(e.p for short), into the structures of the cosmos. They are not distinct realms for the wave functions are everywhere and creation is ceaseless.

Concerning the Bose Einstein Condensate or `BEC which appears close to zero; various changes occur in the physical characteristics of materials near zero temperature. In metal conductors of electricity, some of the electrons in the matrix of the metal atoms change their phase and become `Cooper pairs` which are, in effect, bosons, as their wave functions merge and they are in the same state. At even closer to absolute zero, a true BEC may form which acts as a single unit rather than a collection of many atoms, and then superconductivity and super fluidity occur. They act as one and are approaching the state of the potentiality of wave functions.

Hotson thinks that the potential energy sea of Dirac must exist as a BEC and underlies and permeates our physical world, and this explains instantaneous electro -magnetism and quantum non locality.

Super conductive and superfluid materials are extended structures in our physical world but exhibit unity and are BECs. They are governed by one wave function and every part of them is in the same state. This provides a nonlocal reality underlying the cosmos which can explain these phenomena. It is the source of unlimited e.p pairs and therefore of the e.m field. It is proven that every actual charged particle in the cosmos must be surrounded by unlimited numbers of the oppositely charged ends of e.p pairs which are in the vacuum and cannot confer mass on the charged particle they surround. They cannot neutralise its charge. If they were actualised in the cosmos they could confer infinite mass and charge and cause chaos. The e.p pairs have to surface to affect the physical world.

Actual ions in the cosmos polarise e.p pairs in the vacuum into endless chains of linked e.p pairs. This takes no energy, since in the vacuum there is already a potential e.p pair at every point. There is no fixed amount of e.p pairs, for the potentiality produces them endlessly. They form a sphere of polarised ep pairs radial to each charged particle in the cosmos, which is drawing these ep pairs partially apart, slightly uncovering their charge, and allowing them to attract neighbouring e.p pairs in the vacuum and form endless chains either attracting or repelling.

The cosmos acts upon the vacuum at various levels of intensity pulling the pairs apart. (It could be said to be the lowest level of extension and particularisation at the vey edge of the interface of cosmos and potentiality).

The patterns of chains of charge + - + - + - … in the vacuum form instantaneously so that actual charged particles in the cosmos attract or repel each other instantly along these chains regardless of distance (but of course subject to the inverse square law of diminution). It is the actual charged particles of the cosmos that act upon the potentiality of the vacuum stirring it into activity.

The extensioning of the cosmos is the activity of all its particles fitting their spin-energy into the orbitals of the atoms and standing apart. Another cause of extensioning is the polarisation of the vacuum by the charged particles of the cosmos pulling the bosons of the potentiality apart so that charge and magnetism can act across this separation.

Dirac`s equation does not state what the pattern of the unlimited e.p pairs should be in the potentiality, but iron filings spontaneously orientate around charges and currents and give us a picture . When e.p pairs are polarised and uncoupled, the charge exerted by the strcture in the cosmos becomes a charge across the vacuum radiating out in every direction and diminishing inversely by the square of the distance. The charge radiates outward instantaneously, for in the vacuum there is no separation, for the e.p pairs are wave functions not things.

Hotsons illustration.

The strength of the charged vacuum can be measured by the number of e.p chains per unit area, just as Faraday would have counted lines of force per unit area, as illustrated by iron filings.

Maxwell accepted this and wrote in 1873, “The nature of this stress is, as Faraday pointed out, a tension along the lines of force combined with equal pressure in all directions at right angles to these lines. From the hypothesis that electric action is not direct action between bodies at a distance but is exerted by means of the medium between bodies, we have deduced that this medium must be in a state of stress.”

In other words, they attract along the lines of force, but repel between the lines of force so that the lines do not coalesce. This follows the universal principle of uniting and remaining separate. Maxwell did not care for action at a distance any more than Newton did.

Hotson then enlarges on Maxwell`s model, “the tension along the lines of force is supplied by the attraction between aligned opposite charges in the e.p chains. But the pressure in all directions at right angles to the e.p chains is supplied by the repulsion between the charges in different chains lined up roughly parallel to each other.” (only roughly parallel because the lines of force from the charged particle spread out radially and so cannot be exactly parallel), this also explains the repulsion between like charges as the chains curl away from each other. (see diagram).

Electron positron pairs in the potentiality when opened out are on the interface between cosmos and potentiality and then magnetism and electric charge operate in the vacuum between the particles and structures of the cosmos. In itself the vacuum is a contiguity extensioning but we, existing in a cosmos of separate bodies, see it as space.

The magnetic force can be derived from the electric force, because charged particles moving across a magnetic field will be forced to follow curved paths because the e.p lines these particles are crossing are not parallel and therefore they are alternately attracted and repelled and this curves their motion.

A full account can be found on Hotson`s remarkable website titled “Dirac`s equation and the negative energy sea”

SPIN ENERGY.

There is an apparent violation of the conservation of energy during pair production of electrons and positrons when high energy light photons act on the vacuum. The spin energy of the created particles is not accounted for by the photon energy. It must come directly from the potentiality of the vacuum which is the power supply for all matter in the cosmos. The energy supplied by the light photon is derived from the activities of the cosmos, but the spin energy necessary to construct nuclear and atomic structures derives from their potential state in the vacuum, just as their charge does. This spin energy supplies the placing and orbitals of the electrons around the positive nucleus of the atom.

Maxwell introduced the field concept to avoid action at a distance, but only as a computational device, never doubting that there was a physical medium for the actions of electro-magnetism. But after Einstein abandoned the aether, the field became a device that magically wafted charges across the void and allowed us to forget that we had abandoned physics when we abandoned direct cause and effect. No one knows what fields really are but nowadays they can be invented to explain what we don’t understand. (The Higgs field is a good example.)

THE EMPTINESS OF THE ATOM.

The problem of the emptiness of the atom follows from an assumption widely held that it is composed of various small physical objects separated by space like a solar system. The picture of electrons orbiting a central nucleus like planets orbiting the Sun was never more than a rough model, now long out of date. For instance it was thought the innermost electron was much closer than Mercury is to the Sun, but this is way way off. Suppose we were to magnify the atom to the dimensions of the solar system, where would the innermost electron be? Nowhere near Mercury, not even near Pluto, but more than 490 times further from the Sun than we are. (There is a lot of extension in the atom, where extensioning largely originates.)

The planetary model of Bohr has been known to be unrealistic for 90 years but it still lingers on, because it is easy to visualise. It was superseded by the Schrodinger model of standing waves fitting within the atom in a particular whole number pattern for each element; but waves of what? How could they confer the solidity of our world? Are we all standing on waves, and is that any better than standing on emptiness? This question confronts us with the very nature of the cosmos. A particle is said to be a wave smeared out over the volume of the atom, but it still has to act as a particular particle in a world of particular actions. So electrons are said to function in orbitals to distinguish them from planetary orbits.

After Schrodinger’s wave theory, came Max Born with his interpretation of them as waves of probability. The square of the wave function ‘psi’ is a probability for its location if we look for it, and means that it localises to a few probable positions. This still left the problem of how it acted across the emptiness of the atom, like a gnat in a cathedral. In any case there is no physical evidence that electrons in atoms are localised at all.

Except at the outermost edges of atoms where the valence electrons interact with other atoms to form compounds, atoms as a whole are neutral. Their nuclei are not perturbed in any way by any shifting influences of moving electrons. So what are atoms? Atoms are not a collection of separate particles; they are coherent wholes constantly in creation. Out here in the cosmos, we perceive the physical individual particles and the structures they form, but beneath them all and within them all, is a realm that is not particularised, not separated and is fundamentally one. It is not a realm of things but of waves of probability, and that means wave functions- emerging into actuality in the cosmos. They are waves of probability as we must see it, but they are a progression of universal logic at the deeper level. It is a realm of continuous creation now and always now. What gives us the sensation and experience of the world`s solidity is the interaction of the cosmos with the molecules of our bodies.

Consider the case of a lone electron approaching a lone proton out in space. They are propelled together, their electrical attraction increasing by the square as the distance halves, yet when the electron reaches the appropriate Bohr radius it instantly turns at right angles without any observable force being applied, and begins to orbit the proton, thereupon establishing a hydrogen atom, or so it seems if we only think of things in a trackless void. But a proton is internally composed of a dynamic system of electrons and positrons endlessly weaving the proton between them. They are wave functions superposed and acting as one, which extends out beyond the proton and provides a place for other electrons to find orbitals and so constitute an atom. It is not a cosmos of chance collisions in a void. Underlying space is the potentiality which creates and maintains all structures. What applies to protons applies to all stable nuclei composed of several protons and neutrons. Around every nucleus is an energy system ready to accommodate electrons. In this way the cosmos creates the atoms and molecules and their chemistry and all that they can construct up to organisms and all life. Everything is made of e.p pairs and this explains why an electron appears when a neutron converts to a proton, and when a proton converts to a neutron a positron is presumed to be expelled. Yet orthodox theory states that they cannot have existed in the nucleus because of their momentum accumulated in the cosmos. Quite true, but they never needed to enter the nucleus from outside. Electrons and positrons were assembled in a plasmoid into protons and neutrons which were woven together from e.p pairs.

PLASMAS.

When protons and nuclei become separated from their attendant electrons, they are ionised and can then interact through their attractive and repelling charge forces. They behave as if in an interconnected whole and produce well organised effects. They become a Plasma - a web of interaction showing how the Universe operates as many in one.

We observe that plasma constantly regenerates itself and encloses all impurities in a double layer. No one has ever explained how it can self- organise and act coherently; it seems life like and the term plasma is taken from medicine. A double layer is generated by two volumes of plasma that remain at different electrical potentials. The assembling of a double layer converts motions in the plasma into energy of the electrical field in the double layer.

Space is not homogeneous but a mosaic of different volumes of plasmas with different speeds, densities, chemical composition and levels of ionisation that remain separated by their double layers. Space is where cosmos and potentiality meet and creation is clearly at work in organising plasma into the inter-interstellar currents that form and power stars. This universal interaction of charge and magnetism causes the particles of plasma to act as if they are all contiguous. This has been developed into the idea of fields of force emanating from all particles and all overlapping, but it is always the Universe acting through them. This is what makes plasma in space seem so creative and lifelike.

RELATIVISTIC EFFECTS.

All e.p pairs are established in the cosmos at extension c, giving them their rest mass at c as they enter the galactic plasmoids from the vacuum. As the nuclear and atomic structures form in the plasmoids they cause extensioning at c; - this is creation at work actualising into our cosmos. But in the potentiality where there is no separation and all is contiguous, it can only be instantaneous. Light in our cosmos is really instantaneous in the underlying contiguity, and whatever is relevant to our standpoint in the contiguity is received instantly by us as our eventum.

The structuring of the cosmos converts instantaneous into extensioning at c and particles actualise into the cosmos at c, giving them their rest mass at c, they are then immediately caught up in the interplay of forces in the cosmos. Under the accelerating forces of the cosmos they acquire individual velocity with direction and speed relative to other bodies. As their individual velocity increases, their inertial mass increases beyond their rest mass. This mass increase reduces the power of cosmic forces to accelerate them to anywhere near light speed. Only the lightest most fundamental particles such as electrons and positrons and protons, can reach a velocity near c in our space.

The creation of structures extensions the cosmos and gives them a standpoint in it, and a place relative to everything else. But as a structure increases its individual velocity in our space, it is placing its standpoint along a direction of travel in addition to the standpoint it received as it was established in the cosmos and placed relative to everything else. At high individual velocity near c, not only does its inertial mass increase, but its distance along its line of motion decreases. The cosmography for that object shrinks along that line of motion, for it and for it alone. The cosmos is not affected in the slightest by what any object in it does. Relativistic effects only affect the object. Distance reduction is important for electrons and protons, for as they can approach closely to individual c because their mass is so minute, their particular cosmography shrinks for them along their direction of travel. That enables them to cross vast distances flowing along the inter-stellar currents in extremely short times, so that the cosmos operates as one and is not separated out by its apparent vast spaces. Those vast spaces are real to us but not to fast moving particles.

The rest mass of objects is due to their continuous unending establishment into the cosmos. It is the continuousness of their creation that maintains them in their standpoints and their mass, and their tendency to remain at rest or in uniform motion unless acted upon.

A clear example of relativistic effects is the number of muons that shower down through our atmosphere at .997c. At that speed they can easily reach the surface even though their decay half-life is only 2 millionths of a second. The orthodox view is that time slows down within the muon, so that their disintegration is delayed and their half-life increased.

I argue that it is distance to the surface along the line of velocity that decreases to one ninth. Their internal nature is not affected for their creation is not affected. Muons show how the lightest particles can move through a cosmos shrunken for them, (and these muons in our atmosphere are quite slow compared to cosmic particles moving through the galaxy).

To summarise: in the vacuum e.p pairs are as one, their charge being concentrated to one another, and they are bosons spinning as one. When actualised they become fermions with half spin each, and that is how we usually see them in our cosmos. I argue that the spin one of a photon of light is the sum of the separate spin halves of the electrons in the separate emitting and receiving atoms however distant. The emitting and receiving electrons and their spins are momentarily one for they are in phase. There is no photon linking them.

An electric field is the result of the alignment of part polarised e.p pairs in the vacuum, which attract each other along their lines of charge and are repelling between their lines as they fan out from the charged particle in the cosmos polarising them. A charged particle moving through this field is alternately attracted and repelled and will inevitably follow a curved path. The curvature depends on the strength of the field and the speed and mass of the particle.

In the case of neutral bodies in the cosmos, gravity and inertia curve their paths by attracting and opposing.

THE TWO SLIT SITUATION.

When a beam of light of one frequency is passed through a barrier with two very narrow slits and then lands on a screen, it forms a pattern of alternate light and dark bands.

Here we are providing a situation where we can glimpse creation at work as it follows the logic of the ultimate reconciliation. An alternate way of describing it, from a human point of view, is that we glimpse the choosing of possibilities by Nature as it is occurring. In this two slit situation the interplay of wave functions is not yet over as the final screen is being reached, and the electrons in the atoms there are being stimulated and are showing the pattern of the wave function`s activity at that instant.

Another kind of two slit situation is where atoms are passing through the slits and show an interference pattern even when only one atom at a time is sent through. So it isn’t due to jostling, it is showing an underlying wave function pattern placing atoms on the screen. They are being placed by wave functions, not by trajectories in space of actualised atoms.

Putting up the slits shows us creation is ongoing as the wave functions directing those atoms reach the screen. Then the atoms in transit interact with the atoms of the screen showing the wave function pattern of the atoms in transit. But confronting the wave with one slit is not a choosing, for it localises the atom before it reaches the screen and so it does indeed have a trajectory in space. However, as one single atom after another goes through the two slits, the logic of the reconciliation progresses, or if you like, each choosing of possibility is different, and so they actualise in different places. Clearly some wave process is involved in the propagation of a single atom facing two slits, and a choosing is occurring because each atom lands on a different point of the screen. Placing a detector between one of the slits and the screen detects single atoms there at the detector and nowhere else, while single atoms passing through the unguarded slit reach the screen directly following their own trajectory in space and there is no interference pattern produced. It doesn’t matter how far back the detector is, or how fast it operates, for there is no time or space in the potentiality, which is where the atom`s wave functions are and where the final actualising of the atoms occurs. The potentiality only extends as far as the detector.

In the two slit experiment, we can play about choosing where the potentiality shall end and our space begins, and the result will show in the pattern of actualisations on the screen. Particles and atoms in this experiment are being placed by wave functions and not by trajectories of actualised entities.

In the two slit situation without detectors, the atom is emitted as an atom, is then in the potentiality where wave functions control it and then it actualises as an atom landing on the screen. (This is the opposite of Bohm`s theory where each particle has its own guiding wave. I argue it is the Universe that chooses and guides because the substrate of the whole cosmos is wave functions at its deepest level, and they guide all particles, which is why the material cosmos is ruled by natural laws.)

Creation is actualising the cosmos from the potentiality now. We can accurately observe what goes on in the cosmos; we can only surmise what goes on in the potentiality from where our cosmos emerges. Wave functions are the best idea we have.

All that has been discussed in this section only applies to the material cosmos not to life and organisms which have some degree of freedom to choose possibilities to actualise.

THE CONSTANT OF ACTION h.

The constant of action ‘h` applies to structures which use energy in discrete amounts for distinct acts. The energy of the smallest amount of light of a given frequency (a single quantum) is that frequency multiplied by h. It is produced by the action of one single electron in an atom changing its orbital. The frequency defines how much energy is involved, so a quantum of violet light with twice the frequency of red light will have twice as much energy. The energy of h is measured to be 6.63 x 10-34 of the energy needed to move one kilogram one meter in one second. It doesn’t seem much, but it isn’t zero and that is the important thing. The merest quiver of a gnat`s eyelash would be earth shaking in comparison to h.

It particularises energy and therefore it particularises creation which we measure in terms of energy out here in the cosmos. It makes it possible for atoms to be constructed. Because of this, h is usually combined with pi (as h divided by 2pi) which allows the electron to fit into an orbital in an atom in one single act.

The originator of the idea for this ultimate quantum of energy was Max Planck in 1901. He had to abandon a widely held assumption then prevailing that the energy radiated by heated bodies was a continuous range from low to infinitely high energy. It was assumed there was nothing to prevent atoms from vibrating and radiating at any frequency and any energy. At that time no one knew anything about the structure of atoms.

However hot bodies did not radiate at all frequencies but had limits, and Planck realised it was because not only matter was atomised but energy was too, with an ultimate unit of energy which he termed ‘h’. The energy that atoms can radiate depends on their frequency of vibration and that depends on how much energy they have. They could only have a limited range of vibration and so a limited range of frequencies, simply because energy was atomised and not continuous. It is because energy has to operate in structures such as atoms that it is quantised into wavelengths and frequencies specific to each kind of atom.

This was a radical departure from Maxwell`s electro-magnetic theory in which energy was continuous. Instead, as we now know, the energy of the atoms can only take certain values which are simple multiples of the frequencies of the electrons moving in the atoms.

Quanta are particularised, but waves are continuous. The old wave theory of light predicted that the higher the frequency radiated by a heated body the greater the energy and this would be limitless at ultra violet frequencies. Planck`s constant `h` proved this view was wrong, for in reality a decreasing number of atoms would be able to emit at the higher frequencies.

Three years later Einstein proved the quantisation of energy in the photoelectric effect.

If we shine light on an electrically charged metal plate we expel electrons from its surface. This is the best evidence of the quantum nature of light for it is particularised as it affects matter. Its effect depends on the frequency of the light and not on its intensity. It depends on the energy each photon has to knock out an electron; it does not depend on the number of photons. Intense light of low frequency knocks out no electrons at all, whereas dim light of high frequency will do so every time. Even single photons of high frequency will expel electrons with each photon. Waves cannot behave in this particularised way.

What we observe is a cut off frequency below which no electrons are expelled regardless of how bright the light is when it is too low a frequency. The old wave theory also predicted that electrons would need a finite time to absorb enough energy to break away from the surface, but in fact the action is instant. Each photon delivers all its energy in a single action. This is further evidence that it is atom to atom interaction in the contiguity of wave functions which we must see as separated things. In the underlying reality there are no travelling impacting photons, it is directly interacting atoms and their electrons.

In complete contrast to light, sound waves move in the medium of an atmosphere of molecules, causing waves of compression and rarefaction. Sound is totally different from light for it acts in a material medium not in a contiguity of wave functions that is underlying all matter.

Bohr proposed that if all matter emits radiation in quanta, and absorbs it in quanta, as in the photo electric effect, then may be the atoms cannot accommodate energies in between these discrete quanta. Therefore the electron energies within atoms are themselves quantised. The electrons are not free to follow any orbit, as would be possible according to Newton`s laws, but only certain prescribed orbits, and could only transfer up or down in the atom in precisely defined energy quanta. However, electrons flying free are not quantised in this limiting way for they are not fitted into structures. Instead, they emit continuum radiation when spiralling in magnetic fields out in the cosmos. It is when in atomic structures that they are quantised, so perhaps it is not the electron that is quantised but the structure it is in that quantises its emissions of light.

It is not that space is divided into energy levels in the atom; it is that creation is a complex structuring activity.

Bohr was able to explain, by the jumps between orbits, how different elements give off light in precise sets of frequencies, which are their unique and defining spectral lines.

Pauli later showed that each atomic energy level could only accommodate a fixed number of electrons, and they can only transfer to another orbit if there is a place for them.

Then Schrodinger showed that electrons should not be thought of as tiny specks each circling the nucleus, but as waves stretching all the way round the nucleus as single integer units. They are orbitals rather than orbits.

At the quantum level we encounter a very fundamental unpredictability not due to our ignorance of initial conditions. We cannot predict with certainty what will happen next in the quantum world because, as far as we are concerned, creation is still occurring.

We can only calculate probabilities for different outcomes. So, for instance, we can only calculate half-lives for unstable nuclei using vast numbers of them. The Universe is both reconciled and for us still in process of being reconciled, for we are in the midst of it. This is why it is only partially predictable.

WAVE S OF PROBABILITY

Einstein believed we had to go beyond quantum mechanics to find the answers, for what we are lacking is a deeper under-standing of Nature; - he was right.

If an electron is over here now and we apply an electric field to it, we ought to be able to say where it will be in five seconds time; but it is not so for It is mostly in potentiality in process of creation. So it is not moving in a continuous trajectory through our space and time.

Schrodinger proposed a new equation that describes, not the way an electron moves, but the way a wave evolves, using what we know about how waves in our world behave. Solving this equation provides us with a mathematical quantity ‘psi`, which symbolises probability. For an electron it does not give a precise location at a given moment but only the likelihood of it being somewhere if we look for it there. (This is in sharp contrast to the fully localised trajectory that an actual body like a bullet has.) A wave function is not a physical wave and indeed no one knows what it really is. Most physicists just use it as a powerful mathematical tool. The wave function psi in itself is not a probability until it is squared, (is this because potentiality and cosmos are interactng?). The universal reconciliation is what gives forward direction to the evolving wave function.

A wave function spreads out from the point where the electron was last detected and, using the wave function, enables us to assign probabilities as to where it might appear next. If the electron is detected in a certain place then its wave function is instantly altered and it will be zero probability everywhere except that location. If we don’t detect it again, its wave function will spread again.

Most physicists believe that all the time we are not watching the electron its wave function is all we have to describe it. It is not a simple classical particle with a definite location at each moment. It is not existing in our cosmos of space and time but is potentiatinhg in the potentiality. We can only describe that state by using the analogy of waves in our cosmos.

The term ‘wave function` implies something that waves, with undulating peaks and troughs and constantly spreading out. It must somehow be wavy like that for we see interference patterns in the two slit experiment. However, a wave function does not simply oscillate like a water wave; it is far more complex and unworldly; and analogies and similes always have limits.

At each point in space the wave function is defined by two numbers, real and imaginary. Combining all the relevant real numbers together produces one wave, and combining all the relevant imaginary numbers produces the other wave, and the full wave function is a product of the two. The real numbers refer to the cosmos; the imaginary numbers refer to the potentiality. As both are continuously interacting, combining them gives the full picture as far as we can define it. The Schrodinger equation goes rolling on endlessly as long as the action of the cosmos on the potentiality is not actualising it.

Wave functions are all superposed upon one another and it is very hard to relate the strange properties of an abstract mathematical quantity – the wave function – with the world we live in. Nonetheless it helps us to calculate and predict what a particle or atom will do in a statistical sense. There are no logical steps of reasoning we can follow that can explain why any particle should end up where it does.

Superposition is not unique to quantum mechanics; you can see it in any body of water where waves meet in different directions and pass through each other unchanged. Schrodinger`s equation has the same mathematical property because it is waves. An electron might be in a state described by a wave function that is the sum of two or more wave functions each describing an electron in a different place. (Place meaning wherever it will appear if we look for it there in our cosmos; there are no places in the potentiality.) It is in this super-posed state because it is in the process of creation and while it is, it seems to us to be in no place in particular but several places in possibility. We only ever find it in one place when we look, and it will have only one particular energy.

When we measure single atoms passing one at a time through two slits, they build up over time into a super posed pattern of all of them together. How can they act as single atoms and yet produce a communal superposed pattern? It is because it is not a series of separate events but an ongoing integrated activity and shows creation pointing towards reconciliation; it is not random, it is rational.

All wave functions in the potentiality are superposed but are separating out at the interface of potentiality and cosmos into separate events in our cosmos.

The wave functions in the potentiality are not separate entities but a superposed plenum always there. That is the pattern of superposition that builds up as the creation of the cosmos continues and we can watch it doing this on a screen. It looks like two real waves interfering, but we are not dealing with real waves washing up against the screen, but a set of probabilities for the arrival of a single atom at a given point. Before the atom hits the screen, the mathematics of the wave function is all we have to describe reality.

In brief, it is atoms in the cosmos, but it is probabilities in the potentiality and there are wave functions and the maths for understanding them using earthly analogies.

(This is a very good reason for thinking that what is going on is a universal computation, and why maths is the best method we have of getting a handle on it) In using wave functions, there are no waves moving through our space, it all happens in the potentiality where there is no space or atoms moving through space. It is where the universal logic is running.

This is the mysterious reality beneath and within our seemingly solid world. We live in the reality of the cosmos, and the potentiality is a deeper level of it and not a separate world.

All the many text books I have read have one common complaint; no one can explain how single atoms can go through both slits and produce an interference pattern over a period of time. Our experience drawn from our material world cannot be used for an explanation, so they advise the reader not to bother with one but just use the maths and be grateful for it.

Richard Feynman, a leading physicist of the 20th century, famously said in one of his lectures;

“I think it is safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics. Do not keep saying to yourself, if you can possibly avoid it `but how can it be like that?!, because you will go down the drain into a blind alley from which nobody has yet escaped. Nobody knows how it can be like that.”

Speaking as a voice from the drain may I attempt an explanation?

Between source and screen there are the wave functions; not the atom going through the slit, not the wave going through both slits, but the waves of creation in the potentiality all superposed and not In our space.

If the atom is going through one slit only, then it is going to land on one atom in the screen as it leaves the source. In the contiguity both atoms are together and in phase.

It there are two slits, then a choice has to be made in the potentiality between source and screen there and then. From our point of view it is being made as the wave functions reach the screen and have to place the atom at some receiving atom on the screen. We see the choosing being made at the screen. We see the activity of the waves indirectly in the pattern of scintillations on the screen. There we glimpse the event of creation in progress. If the atoms are going through one at a time, we have to wait to see the wave pattern. If many go through together then we see the pattern immediately.

An interferometer manifests the super position of a quantum particle in the most vivid way. On entering the instrument, each atom is faced with a choice of different paths along the opposite arms of the instrument. But until we look, the wave functions of the atoms will be superposed and, from our point of view, travelling along both arms at once. If we assume it is all in our space, then it is baffling, but not if it is in the potentiality and not in our space. When we recombine the two paths, using converging reflectors, we will see interference of a form that proves the atom had to have gone both ways at once, (its wave function did, but not in our space).

NON LOCALITY.

And a great debate.

Concerning non locality: there is no doubt that instant communication between distant objects is a general feature of the quantum world and involves the nature of the wave function itself. From our point of view, two objects are separated, but in reality their wave functions are as one. This may seem to mean that the wave functions are spread out, but they are not, they are superposed as one. Underlying the appearances of our world there is a profound unity. Distant particles remain in touch, and whenever two particles interact they can become correlated so that their fates will be entwined, no matter how far apart they are, until one of them interacts with something else.

In an experimental situation, an unstable atom emits two electrons in opposite directions, and we don`t know how they will be spinning. Distant detectors intercept them and measure their spin orientations. It is always found that they will be spinning oppositely even if they are so far apart that light could not have connected them.

Einstein argued that the reason the particles or photons will be found to have correlated properties is not surprising. They had remained correlated because they had been emitted from the same source. No faster than light signals need be invoked if their properties had been set from the start. They had properties, not yet measured by us, which are termed hidden variables, and do not involve non locality because they were always there. ( But were they? Or are they still to be actualised in creation?)

Einstein and Bohr argued this to and fro for years.

John Bell in 1964 in a tight logical argument that only needed ordinary arithmetic showed that if Einstein was right there could only be a less than perfect correlation between the distant particles when you took a lot of different measurements as you kept repeating the experiment. This is because, if they had no mutual contact at all and they could not communicate faster than c, then a measurement on either of them would be unknown to the other. Therefore even with the shared properties they started with there would be a limit to the agreement between the results of the measurements. All sorts of events could have affected one or the other on their long journeys and altered the results.

If, on the other hand, quantum mechanics with its single wave function describing the entangled state of the pair was the reality, then there would be a maximum correlation, greater than that possible for two separate particles on separate journeys and out of touch. This difference is Bell`s inequality.

In 1982 Alain Aspect proved, in an intricate experiment, that it is the entangled particles that are better correlated and deep reality is non local.

Most physicists would go further; and argue that not only can we not infer from the final measurement what actual properties the particles had before measurement, but they did not even have definite values for these properties for they were in a super-position of all possible properties open to them. There had to be an interaction or measurement to precipitate them to an actual state instantaneously.

It has to be remembered that all this refers to the fundamental particles and not to the things of our familiar world of large scale complex structures. Quantum physics refers to the work of creation at the deepest level.

We must digress here and distinguish between chaos and quantum indeterminism. Chaos is only found in the behaviour of actual molecules and bodies in our time and space. It involves instabilities so sensitive that prediction of what will happen next is in practice impossible. With chaos there is no regularity, no predictable sequence of events. Weather is a good example. Chaos is in the cosmos, and usually in loosely gathered together aggregations such as atmospheres and oceans. In contrast the potentiality is not chaotic, for it is the Universe creating order.

Schrodinger`s equation, which is used extensively in physics, is perfectly deterministic. Given the wave function at any given moment, we can compute it exactly for any future time. What we are doing is computing waves, based on what we know about physical waves. What we cannot compute is the work of creation as the waves actualise out of the potentiality into our cosmos. We can only quote odds. The notion of probability only comes in when we stop computing waves and start making predictions about what our measurements might be. For this problem we have to have a set of extra rules which provide a way to translate the endless turning of the wave equation into answers about possible position and energy of a particle as it actualises.

The probability of finding a particle in a certain actualised state is obtained by adding the squares of the two numbers, real and imaginary, that define the value of the wave function for that state.

CONCERNING SCHRODINGER`S CAT.

And another great debate

A radioactive atom triggers a Geiger counter that triggers a device that breaks a vial of poison and kills the cat, all enclosed in a box. The radioactive atom contains a neutron which will at some moment convert to a proton and eject an electron which will trigger the Geiger counter, a quite unpredictable event. We are then asked to consider whether the rest of this dismal contraption is in a similar indeterminate state as the radioactive atom, including the poor cat, and can`t be resolved until someone opens the box and looks inside. I follow the common sense view and argue that the only quantum event is the radioactive atom when it fissions out a particle. Everything else is actual and not in two states at once.

Barrels of ink and no end of man hours have been spent on this ridiculous problem. Schrodinger proposed his cat conundrum to show the wrong reasoning in quantum physics. But Bohr and Heisenberg took the opposite view and insisted that we cannot talk about the cat as even having an unresolved reality until we open the box and look at the cat. To think like this, assumes that the indeterminate nature of the radioactive atom spreads into the whole box and includes the cat. If this is so we cannot decide where the quantum level ends and our actual world begins. This is the case if we assume that everything has to happen in our cosmos, including all quantum behaviour. But if you distinguish between potentiality where the wave functions operate, and the cosmos where people and cats exist then the problem disappears.

Particles, atoms and molecules can potentiate in several states at once but not organisms, solid matter and human artefacts. They persist for they are structures already created and being maintained by continual creation.

The physicist Khalifi makes this clear: “A radioactive uranium atom in the rocks will at some time emit an alpha particle that can leave a visible track of crystal defects in the rock. It doesn’t matter whether we look at the rock today, or in a hundred years or never, the track will still be there. What if the rock is on Mars and is never discovered by a conscious observer? Does it sit in a state of limbo, both having and not having a track etched into it?”

Everywhere in this infinite Universe, and always in this eternal Universe, cosmos and potentiality are interacting incessantly actualising this world, and it wouldn`t make any difference if we all went extinct.

Those (I mention no names) who have said or implied that unless we are observing the Universe it must always be in an indeterminate state, like Schrodinger`s cat, are guilty of a hubris that deserves a personal thunderbolt from Zeus. The Universe is not inert, supine or mindless, and can manage its affairs excellently well.

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER THREE.

THE COSMOS IS ELECTRO MAGNETIC

THE ROAD NOT TAKEN (table of particles) 125

THE VACUUM IS NOT EMPTY 130

PARTICLES AND ANTI PARTICLES 135

WAVE FUNCTIONS 136

SPACE AND VACUUM 138

THE NOW OF STANDPOINTS 143

THE EQUATION OF PAUL DIRAC 144

BINDING AND SEPARATING 149

THE NATURE OF CHARGE, HOTSON`S THEORY (diagrams) 153

SPIN ENERGY 156

THE EMPTINESS OF THE ATOM 157

PLASMAS 159

RELATIVISTIC EFFECTS 159

THE TWO SLIT SITUATION 161

THE CONSTANT OF ACTON. h 163

WAVES OF PROBABILITY 166

NON LOCALITY 169

CONCERING SCHRODINGER`S CAT 172