I sent a video lecture to about 60 institutions of higher learning in 1994, from which I drew exactly one confirmation that the video had been received and viewed. I owe that one response largely to the fact that I sent it separately, and I included a personal letter to the recipient pointing out some erroneous information in an essay he had published. Once he verified the information, I suspect he viewed the lecture as a courtesy, and was pleased with its content. That gentleman was a chemist.
I began my serious investigations into cosmology and cosmogony in 1978. It seemed intuitively obvious to me that the universe was a white hole (the end result of black hole collapse in a parent universe). I was not the first to make this observation I later learned, though it was never indicated who was responsible... Lee Smolin, perhaps... I'm guessing. At the time, this idea did not have many followers, and frankly, it still doesn't. So I kept working on the idea alone. I felt that the nearly infinite compression of the material of a star to produce a daughter universe would place some stringent requirements on the structure of matter and energy. The cosmogony had things to say about cosmology, and the cosmology had things to say about elementary particles and forces. I reasoned that a study of the geometry of matter and energy was required to test the theory, and I reluctantly delved into particle physics.
In 1979 I began work on an intersecting-string model for the nucleus using magnetic field lines as a structural element of the theory. Progress was slow, and I was on very uncertain ground, working mostly on instincts. In 1981 I published a report titled "Cosmogony From Black Hole Collapse" which showed a daughter universe inflating like a balloon beneath the singularity in the embedding diagram for the Einstein-Rosen bridge. It was a crude paper, my research reports back then tended to be split between fabulously insightful ideas, and incredibly horrendous blunders, heheh. I make no apology, I've always been an amateur, couldn't afford the education to be a pro. Between 1981 and 1983 I had a breakthrough on the string theory, recognizing that there were two string types and finding my first nuclear solutions. In 1983 I registered copyrights and published structural string models for the proton, neutron, and electron. The models are the same as the ones published on this web site, except today, I have about 30 solved nuclear shells, and a much better understanding of the strings. Curiously, string theory, which I had never heard of before 1982, suddenly exploded in 1984. Everybody was interested. But it wasn't my models they were looking at, it was John Schwarz and Michael Green's. They were pro's messing with strings long before I, though I think those sinusoidal models of the proton and neutron I sent out (yes, Queen Mary College was on my mailing list by then) probably had some inspirational impact, as string theory was pretty much dead in 1983. If I inadvertantly did somehow inspire them to develop vibrating string theory with those sinusoidal solutions, then I owe the world of physics a hearty round of malicious laughter. Allow me to be the first to admit, I do not understand the rational of any other string theory beyond my own. I simply cannot fathom where the minds of physicists wander to these days. (Apparently they were seeking answers to more esoteric physics problems, beyond my comprehension, and the nuclear structure problem was evidently not their principal goal... well, either that, or they were hopelessly lost. In either case, fortunate for me.) So, I had a good laugh, and I ignored it. In the meantime, I kept working on colliding string theory, black hole cosmogony, and the laws of nuclear geometry. I knew now that I would have some time to develop my work, since I was certain that vibrating string theory was a wild goose chase. They were writing equations, and I was drawing circles on balloons, ping pong balls, and eventually I made a VERY exciting discovery... the hot melt glue gun!
||The first illustration shows the conventional depiction of the Einstein-Rosen Bridge forming between two universes. On my drawing, each line represents a sheet of space-time, a universe, and they are depicted warping towards each other to form the bridge. Well, theres an obvious problem here. If the two sheets of space-time warp to meet each other, it implies the transmission of some sort of signal between the two universes to get them to warp towards each other and join. What is that signal? It has to escape from the universe, whatever it is, and there does not seem to be any real justification to suppose that such a signal exists. Assuming magical interactions is convenient, nobody can prove there isn't such an interaction, but equally, nobody can prove there is. I don't buy it. Too convenient, too many assumptions.||
||Somebody started thinking in the second depiction, maybe they didn't like the idea of magical forces operating between unconnected universes to connect them up either, so they proposed the possibility that the space-time sheet of our universe was folded over on itself, and that the Einstein-Rosen bridge actually connects to another location in our own universe. Well that seems to be an improvement, but the depiction of the sheets bending to meet is still there, and we would therefore still be inclined to think that some signal must pass between these two regions of our universe to get the bridge to form in this manner. Unfortunately, the two regions of space-time which connect are very distant in space-time, and in order to pass such a signal, it would have to travel the long way through space-time. If we impose a speed of light restriction on this mysterious signal, then it could never arrive in time to cause both regions to warp towards each other. Another problem the math guys have (or should have) with this model is that there is supposedly a rotation of dimensions at the singularity, where the time-like dimension is swapped with a spatial dimension. If that's true (and I have no compelling reason to doubt it, in fact I support it), then this model cannot be correct. Also, there are apparently a lot of black holes out there, but there is no evidence that any white holes are emerging in the universe. This depiction doesn't do it for me either.||
||The third depiction takes into account the rotation of dimensions at the singularity, and maps out a causal process for producing a daughter universe from the collapsar. The rotation of dimensions gives the singularity a new space to expand into, and an explosion of the dimensions of this new space-time occurs to fill the manifold represented by the newly formed null space below the event horizon in the parent universe. (I believe the physicists working with "inflationary" models call it a "false vacuum." Please do not therefore confuse this theory with that one, both theories were developed at approximately the same time from different foundations. Inflationary cosmologists do not concede a collapsar in their version, but seem to use identical embedding diagrams. Mine are black holes, theirs are, um, false vacuums?) Anyway, the interesting feature of the false vacuum theory I could understand is that there is no speed of light restriction for the first wavefront of energy out of the primordial singularity. This was an excellent observation by the "false vacuum" theorists, and something that I had missed at the time, but I'm happy to acknowledge it. The speed of light is restricted by its travel through the transparent medium of space, and the transparent medium of space is actually composed of depleted quanta... but I'll get to that later. In this depiction, the daughter universe inflates like a balloon from the singularity. (I have a modified version of this cosmogony developed shortly after this video was produced. Singularities do not form in Colliding String Theory, a more exotic object is created in the collapsar process. See String Basics for a brief synopsis of the new and improved version.)|
||A depiction of the space-time map showing the expansion of the physical dimensions of space
plotted against the dimension of time. The dividing line
between "Past Space-time" and "Future Space-time" is the phenomenon of the present (now) propagating
from past to future. Since the time-like dimension is plotted as a spatial dimension, it is possible
to define absolute time on the map as a measurement of distance made in the temporal dimension from
the primordial singularity to the event. The map has a distinct advantage in seperating the dimension
of time from the phenomenon of time, something physicists seem to have an incredible inability to
conceptualize properly. Since the universe is considered by me as a white hole, with a parent
universe on the "other side" of the primordial singularity, certain assumtions can be made
concerning what is happening to the collapsar in the parent universe. It is collecting energy.
Starlight, particles, dust and gas. It is radiating gravitons.
We have seen the relics of dead stars of a less dense variety, pulsars, neutron stars, novae,
and when they change their radial velocity they usually do so quite suddenly. I have theorized
that the black hole in the parent universe collects this material onto the singularity until a threshold
is reached, at which point the energy is dumped into the daughter universe as an impulse wave. This
impulse wave enters the daughter universe through the primordial singularity, which lies at the
beginning of space and time for the daughter universe. To incorporate the energy, the manifold of
the daughter universe is modified by the impulse wave of new energy to include it. This impulse
wave will have an energy amplitude and be a thin dividing line in the time-like dimension. The
energy of action of any particle in the universe will be limited by this globally applied wavefront,
This suggests the phenomenon of the present modifies future space-time, but the modification is limited
by the available energy of the impulse wave. I have coined the term "delta wave" to refer to the
phenomenon of the present (now). Modern string theorists would probably refer to it as a
"Planck Membrane." Each such delta wave provides a new history for the universe as it sweeps from
past to future. It also implies that time dilation is an apparent effect, the rates of physical
interactions slow, but the phenomenon of the present (now) is global, and the rates of clocks have
no bearing on the phenomenon of the present. As with starquakes on neutron stars, or flares on novae,
what happens once can happen over and over again. Each time energy is dumped through the singularity,
the cosmos unfolds again, with a bit more energy to play with in writing a new history, but otherwise,
pretty much the same. If the universe records these histories in space-time, this provides for multiple
QM histories for real world objects. It sets a limit on the "many worlds" paradigm of quantum mechanics.
Only one history is actualized for any one object, but the object can select from all its recorded histories,
or, if there is sufficient energy of action, record a different history. (The discussion of the Planck
constant and multiple delta waves is given much later in the lecture video, hence the out of place frame.
You'll find the rest on page 7.)
The concept of absolute time is also re-introduced as a measure of distance between the primordial singularity and the location on the map of the specific event.