Gravionics and a Spiritual Life: How a New Philosophy of Space and Time Unites Science and Spirituality

Contents

Description

Preface

Chapter One

Assumptions

Chapter Two

The Gravionic Model of Physical Systems

Chapter Three

Cosmology

Chapter Four

Gravionics and Physics

Chapter Five

Gravionics and Spirituality

Chapter Six

Logic and Music

Chapter Seven

Gravionics and Philosophy

Chapter Eight

Gravionics and Life in the Cosmos

Chapter Nine

On Evolution

Chapter Ten

Respect for Diversity

Chapter Eleven

Saving Humanity

Chapter Twelve

My Life

Summary of Principles

Infinite Child

About the Author

Thanks to Aty, Molly, Violet, Phoenix, Orchid, Janet, Aspen, Lee, Jim, Lynn, Jeff, Peter, Jan, Hal and all others that have helped me with this book.

Illustrations by:

Jim Frederickson

Photographs:

Rock and Stick, The Black Holes of a Galaxy Cluster, Cover

Jim Frederickson

Earth’s Gravity Map, Hubble Deep Field, 3D Cosmic Map,

Sun Gravions, Magnetic Lines of Force

NASA

Description

Gravionics is the study of the individual connections of gravity that bind all mass together and through which all energy transfers are made in the real world. For years, scientists have thought that gravity was just a big sheet of something that acted on mass. Now we know that gravity is made of individual connections, called gravions, and that these connections arise from the mass. As different physical systems move through an infinite cosmos, they come into contact with each other, making and breaking gravionic connections. Human beings have very complex gravitational interactions and the study of these interactions can help mankind in its quest to better understand science and to obtain a spiritual life.

Spirituality is defined as the actions between sentient beings where all energy transfers are positive and loving. Love is defined as the actions of sentient beings whereby they give more energy than they take and where they make more connections of gravity than they break, recognizing that all real events are first and foremost gravitational events. By learning a simple set of rules, human beings can become spiritual in a way that is measurable by science and good for our planet and the individuals that live here.

Human beings must become more aware of our position in the cosmos. We must rise to a gravionic awareness of our universe. This means that we must develop our communal energies and work together as a species to save ourselves and our delicate planet. We must apply gravionics to all of science and begin teaching its spiritual aspects to children when they first enter their formal schooling. If gravionics were learned by all, humanity could save our precious planet and take our place as citizens of the cosmos.

Preface

This book was written to help human beings become more spiritual. This is accomplished by understanding the workings of the gravitational system and how those energy exchanges relate to spiritual life. The gravionic model of physical systems (GMOPS) is a new model of science that not only solves the current problems in physics and cosmology, but also clearly defines a set of rules, which if followed, will allow all human beings to work together to solve the problems that threaten the survival of our species and live a spiritual life.

The first four chapters are important to make my case that GMOPS is a unified model uniting science and spirituality. The bevy of physical, experimental, and philosophical evidence strongly suggests my model is a better fit of nature than the current hodgepodge of models that represents modern science. All should read these chapters, but anyone who professes science as a profession must read and understand these chapters and their exploration of the assumptions that form the foundation of present day science.

The remaining chapters represent my attempts at using the gravionic model to better understand our world and how to apply the gravionic model to our everyday life. Daily we interact gravitationally with everyone that we meet, yet few people are aware of the energy exchanges that take place during these gravitational events. Everyone should understand that our thoughts, emotions, and consciousness are all gravionic events and that connections of gravity are made and broken by every human interaction. Since energy is exchanged through these connections, we all have a responsibility to make as many new connections as possible, maintain those connections we have previously made, and give energy to others to benefit humanity as a whole.

My goal is to help all human beings better understand the workings of nature and how to use this knowledge to improve their own life and the life of others. When humans work together, there is no problem we can’t solve. When we fight with each other, we just waste our precious energies. Gravionics is not a religion, but a way of better understanding how to be spiritual, even if you don’t believe in God. It is designed not to make us all alike, but rather to help each person be unique and still be productive within the framework of our societies. I hope that eventually gravionics is taught to all first graders and that your life is made better and more productive by reading this book.

I would ask that you not judge my writing abilities too harshly as you read this book. I consider myself a philosopher and not a writer, yet if I never write anything on paper then all my thoughts will eventually be lost. Please try to make it through the rough parts and search for the jewels that lie within.

your friend,

μmike

Chapter One

Assumptions

1. Assumptions

I am enough of an artist to draw freely upon my imagination. Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world. Albert Einstein

Imagination without knowledge is useless. μmike

Assumptions play a key role in understanding space and time, as well as all science and logic. All of human thought, including mathematics, can be viewed as models of nature, always at least once removed from the actual reality. As we make these models, both within our individual minds and as the body of science, we have certain assumptions that guide us in the use of these models. After many years of accepting and using these models, mankind sometime loses sight of the assumptions that form their foundation. I believe that all past models of nature and science are based on assumptions that may prove false on closer examination. This probably means the logic that follows those assumptions is also not valid.

As a personal example, in the early 1980’s I had a computer company and I installed many custom systems. I had studied logic and assumptions in school and become very logical in my thoughts. Most people associate logic with Spock from Star Trek, but he was never as logical as me. This was probably because the people that wrote his lines had never systematically studied logic as I had, in both philosophy and electronics. One can make mistakes in logic when it is studied as philosophy; but when one deals with electronics, nature never forgives a logical mistake.

After installing a computer in a lawyer’s office, I left the system working perfectly. The next morning I received a call from the very irritated owner telling me that I had sold him a bad computer. I immediately went to his business location and as I walked in the door to his office, he was standing beside the computer flipping the on-off switch back and forth. He was very angry and said See, this computer doesn’t work.

Having been trained in logic, my first concern was always to check that the computer was getting the proper power. As I looked over the situation, I noticed that the computer was unplugged from the wall outlet. I immediately walked over, plugged in the computer, and then turned on the power switch. The computer came up quickly and was working properly. His cleaning woman had unplugged the computer during the night as she was cleaning his office, and that was the reason for the failure.

There were two bad assumptions that occurred in this scenario. The first was the assumption that I would sell a bad computer to anyone. The second bad assumption was that the computer was plugged in. After many years of solving these types of problems, I became aware of how important assumptions are in the solving of logical problems.

In the new model of space and time that I have proposed, I’ve looked at the assumptions that mankind has used to make his models of science and discarded those that seem to be flawed. Of course the logic that follows is based on a new set of assumptions. Hopefully I will remain aware of them.

As we examine the assumptions that have been used in science for the last few hundred years, we see that some of these assumptions might be wrong. It seems that assumptions are handed out in college and then never revisited by student or teacher. I would propose that the following assumptions are incorrect:

1. Space is square and can be accurately represented by Euclidean math.

2. The speed of gravity is infinite in distance and affect. Or the speed of gravity is the same as the speed of light.

3. Gravity is only attractive and not repulsive.

4. If a particle has a beginning, then all particles have the same beginning.

5. Our number system can accurately and completely represent nature.

6. Our models of science are the reality.

7. Our experiences of nature are complete and represent all there is to experience and measure.

The assumption that space is square (Euclidean) needs to be examined. As mankind rose to awareness on our small one gravity (1 G) planet, it looked like all of nature could be described using points and straight lines. Nothing seemed more intuitive, because we perceive that we see straight lines everywhere. We build most of our structures with straight boards or metal parts and we make right angles the heart of our construction. Can you even imagine building a house without straight lines or right angles?

As an example, the right triangle can be represented by notes of the music scale. What further proof would one need to see how closely Euclidean relationships match nature? Surely the straight lines in this triangle are a part of nature since many of us recognize the distinct notes of the music scale, which seem an integral part of the very cosmos itself. So do straight lines really exist?

A pendulum has been used as an example of a straight line in nature. If we hang a weight from a string and put it in motion, it appears we have a straight line from the point of attachment to the weight. We can make calculations based upon this straight line and even make predictions about the real world based on the interval of the swing of the pendulum.

But as we examine the system more carefully, one can actually see that the string bends slightly when the weight reaches each of its turning points, so even from this macroscopic viewpoint, the line is not straight. Even more careful examination, such as under a low power microscope reveals that the string itself is made of fibers, which stick out in every direction and what we once thought of as a straight line, is now made of numerous straight lines from the individual fibers of the string.

If we magnify further, we continue to see that the fibers are made of smaller substances called molecules and that each molecule is connected to others, but no where is there a straight line. Molecules are round or spherical structures and attach to each other through bonds that might be straight. Yet even these bonds flex and if we examine the system close enough, we see no true straight lines at this scale.

Even further magnification shows that the molecules are made of atoms and the atoms are made of neutrons, protons, and electrons, all of which do not make straight lines. Each of the bonds that hold these systems together also flex and bend as different forces are applied to them so finding a straight line here is impossible also.

Apparently each of these objects is made of even smaller parts, called quarks and these all have bonds that are not straight either. The closer we examine nature, the more we see that straight lines do not exist.

Newton certainly held the viewpoint that straight lines exist. But Newton was limited by the viewpoints and mathematics of his time. Euclidean math and space was accepted as the norm during this time and there was no awareness of the problems of assuming that straight lines exist.

It wasn’t until Einstein’s work that humanity realized that not all space was square. Einstein showed that gravitational fields somehow bend this square space. The larger the gravitational field, the more the space next to it is bent. And the more we observe nature, the more situations we discover where space is not square. Our global positioning satellites, with their precision receivers, must use Einstein’s relativistic math (to show the bending of space), since the correct position of the satellite cannot be determined accurately by assuming straight space and using Euclidean math. We must take into account the curvature of space to accurately determine the correct position of any satellite of our Earth.

Many more examples can be given, but in the end we must wonder if the assumption of square space is accurate. If square space exists outside of each mass, one must ask the question Where did this square space came from? There has been no measurement or experiment that suggests this square space exists, only that we see the bending of this space the closer we get to any mass. The assumption of square space seems to reside totally within the imagination of mankind and the current models he has adopted to explain the world around him.

At one point in our history, most humans assumed that the world was flat and that they would fall off the edge if they traveled too far from home. At other points in history, mankind assumed that the entire cosmos revolved around the Earth, since that seemed to explain everything. Others have assumed that the Earth was created from nothing 6,000 years ago while others assumed it was created from nothing 13,700,000,000 years ago. Just because most humans assume something doesn’t make it true and the history of science has been the overturning of bad assumptions as the evidence shows nature to be other than first assumed.

The next bad assumption is that space forms itself instantaneously, without using any time. When mankind wants to solve a problem in science, we never take into account the speed of the formation of the coordinate system itself. Whether in our minds or on paper, we assume that the coordinate system exists before our problem even starts. The assumption is then also that nature requires no time to form its own coordinate system, so we never include a speed of formation in our equations describing nature. If nature does require time to make its own coordinate system, then our assumptions are wrong and any models based on these assumptions must, logically, be prone to flaws.

The only thing that connects all mass in any universe is the connections of gravity that form the bonds between these masses. If the gravitational system represents nature’s coordinate system, as I have proposed, then I would suggest that it must form itself faster than the fastest object that might move through the system, or contradictions would occur. The movement of all radiation occurs at the speed of light and that is the fastest thing we know. So I would suggest that the gravitational system must form itself faster than the speed of light, but how fast would that be?

Newton thought that gravity acted instantaneously on all objects that exist. He said that the force of attraction became less as objects moved further apart, but he thought that this force acted instantaneously (without time) upon every mass in the cosmos. He could see no limit on the attraction of gravity and therefore its affect on all masses.

Einstein disagreed and said that nothing could travel faster than the speed of light. He assumed that gravity was much like radiation and that it traveled in waves that moved at the same speed as light. He never considered the possibility that gravity was nature’s coordinate system and that it must in fact form faster than the light which moves through it. He also never considered the possibility that radiation must move through the connections of gravity.

Since human beings are not used to thinking about a coordinate system that must form itself in real time, there has been much confusion in science about the speed of gravity. Most people associated with science take Einstein’s view and assume that the speed of gravity is the same as the speed of light. But cosmologists assume the speed of gravity is infinite, since that is the only way that everything that exists could have a relationship with every other thing that exists.

If the speed of gravity does have a limitation in how fast it can transmit coordinate information, then the further we travel away from any particular mass, the longer