It has been assumed for some years that there are “Four Forces of Nature,” as follows: Electromagnetic Force, Gravitational Force, the Strong Nuclear Force and the Weak Nuclear Force.
There is a major problem with all of these “Forces.” None of them fit the Law of Forces: ” For each and every force there is an equal and opposite force.”
A shift of viewpoint may give an explanation for all of this. The Law of Forces could be rephrased to fit a substance, in which case it would read, “Every change in pressure within a substance has a compensatory adjustment within that substance. ” If it can be assumed that there be a “Universal Substance,” then all true forces are simply pressure adjustments.
What in reality are the “Four Forces of Nature” considered in this manner? Electromagnetism and Gravitation are observational Phenomena, what are known as “Fictional Forces,” akin to the Centrifugal Force which children on farms used to demonstrate by whirling a milk bucket in a circle. in terms of some “Universal Substance,” Electromagnetism would be a description of the results of the interactions of two stable vortex entities, of counter-rotating spins and different sizes
within the substance.* Gravitation, an apparent “Force of Attraction.” would actually be a result of differential pressures in the part of the “Substance” between two “Entities” which are part of the substance, and the rest of the substance, including that part between the two entities.
The two “Nuclear Forces” fall into a different category. Both of them would be constructs developed to justify a conclusion. The Strong Nuclear Force is needed to justify the assumption that neutrons exist, as such within atomic nuclei, despite the fact that under any other known conditions they are unstable with respect to electrons and protons. The “Weak Nuclear Force” has a similar origin from the assumption that electrons and protons can rejoin to neutrons to a an appreciable extent
within conditions to be found in the nuclei of atoms.
The concept of a “Universal Substance ” is very old. It was once conceived of as a liquid or gas called an “Aether.” This idea of an “Aether” was supposedly destroyed in the early 1900’s by the Michelson-Morley Experiment which determined the probable constancy of the Speed of Light in the “Vacuum of Outer Space.” By another viewpoint, however, that Constancy of the Speed of Light could just as well have been taken as proof of the existence of a “Substance.” The “Substance” simply has different characteristics than had been assumed. While a solid, liquid or a gas, individually, would not be a valid characterisation of the “Substance,” something at its “Triple Point” where small disturbances will allow it to react as if it were any one of the three fits very well. Particularly when it is considered that the substance will revert to the “Triple Point State” as soon as possible….
In this view, the “Speed of Light” is the “Maximum Velocity of Information Transfer in the Substance at Rest,” or nearly at rest with the disturbance of that information transfer being such that the Substance appears as a “Temporary Solid” during that time of information transfer.
One explanation of this is that the Substance appears to be made up of rotating entities which have a “standard,” or average, tangential velocity of “c,” the speed of light. (This would be a an angular velocity of “2Pi c ” for any readers who are into angular measurement and angular velocities.) Just as belts connecting rotating wheels will transmit information at the “tangential velocity” of the rotating wheels, any set of objects spinning at the same angular velocity are capable of transmitting information at that velocity as a “Carrier Wave.”
An analysis made by combining two constants of nature, Planck’s Constant, “h,” and the Speed of Light, “c,” indicates that the “Universal Substance” may be made up of a “family set” of oscillators having the above rotational characteristic and a constant torque (push/pull on one another) of “h/c.” *
It may be noted that even Space-Time Theory which appears to not accept the idea of a “Universal Substance,” actually, in its very name, not only suggests a Universal Substance, but, also, partially defines it. Mathematical Space is never empty, it is by implication always filled with dots. Time is a measure of sequence which is always referenced to some known cycle. therefore, it can be said that “Space-Time” implies that it operates to describe actions within a substance of tiny units undergoing cyclic motions….
To this writer, the concept of a “Universal Substance” is far more satisfactory than any of the various constructs which have arisen on the basis of the “Four Forces of Nature.”
__
*See the following referenced web site for “pages” which pertain. http://groups.google.com/group/oscillatorsubstance-theory
