Magnetism differs from charge because splitting a magnet gives two more magnets, each with its own north and south pole (Figure 5.13), but dividing a polar charge gives positive and negative parts. And joining two small magnets gives a big one so if big magnets come from small ones, all magnetism comes from the smallest possible magnet, which is the electron.

Electrons explain why metals can be magnets but not plastics. Copper can conduct electricity because its electrons move freely, and it becomes a magnet for the same reason. The electrons in a metal usually point randomly but if they all point the same way, it becomes a magnet (Figure 5.14). In contrast, the electrons in plastics can’t move freely, so plastic can’t conduct electricity or become magnetic. Electrons then explain electricity and magnetism. 

In physics, an electron is essentially a tiny magnet, whose north pole is at right angles to its spin, and whose south pole is the opposite, so could spin cause magnetism?

Quantum theory requires all matter to spin, so it is a basic property of matter, like mass and charge. It is thought to be imaginary because an electron as a point particle can’t spin but, in this model, electrons actually do spin in quantum space.

If spin causes magnetism, north and south poles are directions not parts, so spin always has both just as a plate always has both top and bottom sides. Splitting a magnet then always gives two magnets because separated spins still have two sides. In this analogy, mass and charge, like the weight and color of a plate, can be split, but north and south poles, like the top and bottom of a plate, can’t be split. It follows that a north pole can’t exist without a south pole, and the evidence agrees.

In contrast, particle models allow the possibility of magnetic monopoles, elementary particles with one magnetic pole. Nothing in Maxwell’s equations of magnetism prohibits them, so despite no evidence, they are argued to exist (Rajantie, 2016). But if spin causes magnetic poles, monopoles can’t exist, so they are just another fruitless search, like that for gravitons.

What then does spin do? By the Pauli exclusion principle, opposite-spin electrons can occupy the same point but same-spin electrons can’t. The reason given here is that electrons can spin into different regions of quantum space (4.7.1), so if one spins up and the other down, they don’t overlap, while same-spin electrons compete for the same space. Opposite spin electrons can then occupy the same point but same spin electrons can’t.

If quantum processing spreads, the distribution around a magnet includes its spin. It doesn’t affect gravity much but between magnets, spin has an effect. Between opposite magnets, opposite spins make more space available, so the quantum field deepens, but between same magnets, same-spins compete for the same space, by the Pauli principle, so the quantum field is shallower.

Magnets then bias the quantum field between them as charges do. Between opposite magnets, the deeper field lets processing overlap with less competition, so it is faster. The magnets then restart more often where the field is faster, so they move together, i.e. attract. But between same magnets, same-spins compete for the same space, so it runs slower. The magnets then restart more often away from each other, so they move apart, i.e. repel. It follows that magnets attract or repel by biasing the speed of the quantum field between them as charge does, but for a different reason.

Gravity, charge, and magnetism then move matter in the same way, by biasing the quantum field around it. Gravity biases the field strength around other matter to attract it only. Charges and magnets move each other by biasing the speed of the field between them, to attract or repel. In all cases, matter moves when the field around it makes it tremble more often one way.

If charge and magnetism both involve electrons, why don’t static charges affect magnets? If magnetism is based on spin, and charge is a processing remainder, these properties won’t interact. Spin doesn’t change charge, and charge doesn’t change spin, so they don’t affect each other. 

This model also explains why charge and magnetism act at right angles. Electric fields act to move electrons in one direction as a current, but electrons as one-dimensional matter must align their matter axes to do this. If their spin is magnetism, it then acts at right angles to the current direction because an electron’s spin is always at right angles to its matter axis.

Currents then cause magnetism because aligning an electron’s axis to move it also sets its spin, so electrons going one way spin one way, and going the other way spin the opposite. Equally, when a magnet moves, it acts to align the electron’s axes, so they move as a current.

Magnetism based on spin also suggests why it fades faster than charge. Charge decreases as an inverse square because it spreads on a two-dimensional sphere surface, but spin deepens space, so magnetism also spreads in another dimension. The effect is less between same poles, but it explains why magnetism decreases more as an inverse cube than an inverse square.

In this model, gravity, charge, and magnetism move objects by biasing different aspects of the same quantum field, where gravity biases its strength, and magnetism and charge both bias its speed. Gravity, charge, and magnetism then act at a distance, with no need for particles at all.

Next

Mass and charge seem different, but here they are two sides of the same processing coin:

1. Mass is the net processing that runs, and

2. Charge is the net processing that doesn’t run.

Matter constantly overloads the network of space then restarts at some point in its distribution. The processing that runs before the restart is mass, and the remainder is charge, which can be positive, negative, or neutral. The network passes on all processing, whether done or not, so the distribution of matter reflects both its mass and charge.

Gravity is based on the effect of mass. A huge body like the earth creates a massive distribution that weakens with distance, so the quantum field around a local object is stronger towards the earth. It then moves towards the earth because matter restarts more often where the field is stronger. The effect is slight, but even a slight field change will move it over time. If gravity works by biasing the quantum field strength around objects, how then does charge work?

Recall that every point of space passes on all its current processing before it runs any new processing received, so every quantum cycle has two phases:

1. Share: Pass on all current processing to its neighbors, which dilutes it, then, 

2. Execute: Run any processing received, and if it overloads, request a server restart, where:

a. If the request is ignored, it just carries on.

b. If the request is accepted, it restarts the server processing in a physical event.

The remainders of charge barely affect the weak gravity of small objects but they can interact. When opposite charge distributions overlap, the remainders cancel, so the cycle completes faster because the share phase has less processing to pass on. However between same-charge bodies, the remainders add, so the cycle slows down because the share phase has more processing to pass on. Charged bodies then interact to make the space between them run faster or slower.

Charged bodies mutually bias each other’s distributions. Opposite charges speed up the field between them, so they restart more often there, as servers accept requests on a first-come first-served basis. They then move together, i.e. attract. Conversely, same charges slow down the field between them, so they restart less often there. They then move apart, i.e. repel. It follows that charges attract or repel by biasing the speed of the quantum field between them.

Charge then works as gravity does, not by pushing or pulling objects but by changing their context, so they naturally move one way. Matter constantly moves microscopically, so making it quiver more often one way will move it macroscopically. One object’s distribution can then affect another, even at a distance, with no particles needed. Gravity works by changing the strength of the quantum field around objects, while charge works by changing its speed. 

Why then is charge stronger than gravity for the same objects? In competitions where speed counts, like running, a team that is 5% faster than others wins all the races, not just a few more. Speed also counts on the quantum network, so a slight speed increase on one side can have more than a slight effect. Charge is then stronger than gravity because it biases speed not strength.  

Gravity and charge move matter by biasing its distribution differently, namely:

• Strength. Matter tends restart where its distribution is stronger.
• Speed. Matter tends restart where its distribution is faster.

Both effects occur because quantum processing spreads, so both reduce as an inverse square by Gauss’s law, but they alter the quantum field differently. However if gravity and charge effects come from the same quantum field, what about magnetism? Can one quantum field cause three different effects, namely gravity, charge, and magnetism?

Next

Magnetism was once thought to be distinct from electricity, until Maxwell’s equations were found to describe both, and experiments showed that they were connected.

A static charge isn’t magnetic, but if it moves, a magnetic field appears around it. In Figure 5.12, passing a current I through the wire produces a magnetic field B, so wrapping a wire around a nail and passing a current through it makes it a magnet, and the effect stops when the current does! Electricity can then cause magnetism and the reverse is also true, as spinning a magnet with a wire wrapped around it induces a current in the wire.

Electric cars are then possible because in physics, magnetism and electricity are considered to be one field:

“We will see that magnetism and electricity are not independent things – that they should always be taken as one complete electromagnetic field.” (Feynman et al., 1977).

Is magnetism then just charge in another guise (Note 1)? It would seem not because:

1. Static charges and magnets don’t interact.

2. The magnetic field is at right angles to the electric field.

3. Gauss’s law doesn’t apply to magnetism, which reduces more like an inverse cube.

4. Dividing a charged body gives positive and negative charges but dividing a magnet gives two more magnets, both with a north and south pole.

Magnetism behaves quite differently from charge, so how one field creates both is unclear. The quantum waves of light are also described as electrical and magnetic waves vibrating at right angles. They are said to cause each other, in a self-sustaining loop, which isn’t possible.

The equations of physics explain electricity and magnetism separately, but not how they can be one field, just as understanding horses and birds doesn’t explain how a winged horse is possible. Current physics has no credible theory that explains why electro-magnetism has two different effects, that occur in different directions, and weaken differently.  

The standard model claims that charges repel when virtual photons push them apart, but the same photons conveniently pull together charges that attract, and also make magnetism work differently. The scientific requirements of theory falsifiability and productivity are dismissed as philosophical niceties that physicists with equations don’t need, but if only equations matter, fairies with magic photon wands would explain electro-magnetism just as well! 

In this model, science and logic still matter, so the same quantum field that causes gravity must also explain electricity and magnetism, with no miracles allowed.

Next

Note 1. The logic is that a moving electron’s length is foreshortened by special relativity giving more negative electrons than positive protons in a given length of wire, so parallel wires with opposite currents attract, but this could be correlation not causation

If the field of gravity comes from the quantum field, how then do electrical and magnetic fields arise? Can one field produce three different effects?

QR5.5.1. Electro-magnetism

QR5.5.2. Remainders Spread

QR5.5.3. Spin Spreads

QR5.5.4. One Field For All

Next

The equations of general relativity imply that if a large body collapses under its own gravity, nothing can stop it becoming a black hole, a region of space with gravity so strong that even light can’t escape it. Astronomers have deduced that nearly every super-massive galaxy, including our own, has a black hole at its center.

Physics has no force to stop this collapse, so a black hole is assumed to be a point of infinite mass density, called a singularity. The event horizon of a black hole is the region from which even light can’t escape its gravity pull. In current physics then, a black hole is a singularity of infinite mass density that creates an event horizon around it (Figure 5.11).

Yet this conclusion is based on equations that don’t predict as theories do. In most sciences, equations that produce infinities are assumed to be incomplete, as extrapolating an equation beyond its known data range is unwise, so singularities are speculative. 

In contrast, processing models ban infinities because they are incomputable. Matter can’t become infinitely dense if the network of space has a pixel limit. If a point of space has a finite bandwidth, the matter it can handle is limited, so a black hole isn’t a singularity but a region of space that has accepted all the matter it can, and can take no more. Just as a network with a finite transfer rate limits the speed of light, its finite capacity limits the mass density of a black hole, so what stops the collapse of a black hole isn’t a force but the bandwidth of space itself.

Black holes expand as they acquire matter because more space is needed to handle more matter, so a black hole’s radius is proportional to it’s mass. In contrast, if that mass added to a point singularity, it should decrease as an inverse square, as gravity does. 

In this model, a black hole isn’t a singularity but a volume of space at maximum capacity, with no infinities. Instead of radiating light, it absorbs it, so black holes are in effect black stars that absorb energy (Barcelo et al., 2009). The center of our galaxy then isn’t a hole at all, but a super-massive dark star called Sagittarius A* that holds it together by generating dark matter. To us, as matter, it is destructive, but for the galaxy, it is beneficial.

Next

Special relativity gives every mass in the universe its own clock. I have one, you have one, and every planet has one, but they only keep the same time if they have the same speed. General relativity adds that gravity alters time as well, as it slows down near a large mass like the earth. It then takes a lot of computing to make GPS navigation work, because the clocks of satellites tick at a different rates depending on their altitude and speed.

Why then does gravity dilate time? If time ticks by as network cycles complete, slower cycles slow down time, and more processing does that. Gravity as a processing gradient then slows time by increasing the network load. The matter of earth superposes its existence on the network around it to alter time, so a clock on top of the Empire State Building runs faster than one at the bottom. Gravity slows time as Einstein says, but by slowing down the quantum network, not time itself.

Would we live longer on a planet with more gravity? Others might think so, but we would experience the same number of time cycles. A larger planet dilates time relative to earth but the life events of our lifetime wouldn’t change.

Next

Einstein deduced that gravity will bend light by imagining a flashlight shining in a lift that is accelerating upwards (Figure 5.10). As the lift goes up, the light will curve relative to it, so if gravity equates to acceleration, the sun’s gravity should bend the light passing by it, and astronomers observe that it does, but why?

Einstein’s explanation was that light passing the sun bends because, from its perspective, it is going in a straight line, just as light in the lift is. The sun then doesn’t pull the light towards itself, but changes the space around to make it bend.

Gravity as a processing gradient acts the same way, by changing the distribution around light not the light itself. It works like refraction (3.6.2), where light is bent by water because it spreads more slowly in it. It changes direction because if one side of a spreading wave slows down, it skews that way. Light then refracts in water because it is a denser medium, not because a force acts upon it..

Likewise, the gravity gradient of the sun slows down the spread of light towards it, which bends it. A photon of light is a spreading wave, so if space closer to the sun has a denser field, it bends that way. Light has no mass for gravity to attract but processing waves still bend when processing increases, just as light bends when entering water that slows it down.

This model then supports relativity, that gravity bends light by changing the space around it, but the quantum field not space causes it, so the gravity gradient bends light by refraction.    

Next

Electrical and magnetic fields are cancelled by their opposites but gravity has no opposite, so nothing physical can stop it. If gravitons caused gravity, anti-gravitons could block them but no evidence supports this, and if gluons held the nucleus together, an anti-gluon stream could break it apart, but again it doesn’t happen, although anti-gluons are said to exist. 

In this model, no physical barrier can block the spread of gravity because the quantum network passes its processing on before any physical events occur, so gravity is unstoppable because it isn’t based on physical events. Matter then superposes its existence on the space around it in a way that no anti-gravity shield can block. 

Relativity states that objects fall to earth not by being pulled but because their space changes. Free-falling parachutists then feel no force acting on them, as if they are stationary, but what accelerates them towards the earth if nothing pulls them? Einstein attributed this to the earth altering space and time but these are incidental effects in this model. The quantum field of the earth both accelerates them and changes their space and time.  

Einstein’s field equation describes the gravity of the earth as curving the space-time around it, to make matter naturally move towards it (Figure 5.9). That gravity is a field gradient around the earth predicts the same, but attributes both the object’s movement and space-time changes to the quantum field.

Gravity then accelerates matter because as it moves closer to the earth, the quantum field around it increases, as Gauss’s law predicts.

Next

Newton discovered gravity but found it inconceivable that inanimate matter caused it:

“It is inconceivable, that inanimate brute matter should, without the mediation of something else, which is not material, operate upon, and affect other matter without mutual contact;…” (Wilczek, 2008) p77.

If matter is only moves by physical contact, how does the earth pull the moon without touching it, or the moon cause tides on earth? Newton had no answer, nor does science today, as that matter alters space and time is just as inconceivable as that it acts at a distance. Matter moves in space and time, so how can it change what defines it? The standard model solution was that unverifiable virtual photons cause electro-magnetism, but this trick didn’t work for gravity, so the idea that matter changes space and time only deepened the mystery.

Yet we know that fields spread everywhere because Wi-Fi works, so why can’t the earth have a gravity field around it that keeps the moon in orbit? Clearly the earth has effects far beyond its boundaries as even in a plane high above the earth, gravity keeps passengers in their seats and the earth’s magnetic field affects compasses. The problem is the belief that these fields act by creating particles, but gravity doesn’t work that way.

However, if matter is a process that repeatedly overloads a network that passes it on every cycle, the earth has a quantum field around it that reaches far beyond its surface. This field is currently called imaginary, but quantum theory calls it a field of potential existence, so quantum realism accepts that matter spreads its existence around itself.

How then does this field spread? According to Gauss, any flux spreading over a sphere surface diminishes as the inverse square of its radius (Figure 5.8) (Note1), so a spreading processing flux will reduce as an inverse square of distance. The earth then spreads processing around itself that decreases in a predictable gradient.

As established, matter moves when the field around it is stronger one way, and the processing gradient around the earth has this effect. The earth doesn’t directly touch a satellite orbiting it, but its quantum field does, to bias the field around it to make it move. It makes the field around the satellite stronger nearer the earth, so its matter trembles more often that way. The earth then moves matter not by particles that push but by changing the quantum field around it.

Classical objects only move when touched but by quantum theory, the quantum field of the earth touches all the matter around it. Gravity is then when the processing gradient around the earth biases the tremble of other matter towards itself. It is not just any field but the original field behind all others so in this model, the quantum field explains all the forces of physics, including gravity.

Next

Note 1. The flux transferred across a sphere surface reduces as the inverse square of its radius 1/r². Newton’s law of gravity F = g.m₁.m₂/r² with m₁ and m₂ masses and g constant is an inverse square flux law, as is Coulomb’s law F = k.q₁.q₂/r² with charges q₁ and q₂ and k constant. Both laws come from Gauss’s flux law.

When a plane accelerates, the back of the seat pushes passengers to keep up with the plane, but parachutists in free-fall accelerate without feeling a force at all. A parachutist jumping from a plane feels no force when gravity accelerates them to the earth, so:

“It’s not the fall that kills you; it’s the sudden stop at the end.” Douglas Adams

But how can matter go faster when nothing is pushing it? Einstein’s insight was that a free-fall acceleration equates to being at rest, so gravity isn’t a force at all but the earth curving space and time around it, which he said was “the happiest thought of my life!” First he noted that the effect of gravity equates to an acceleration so in a rocket accelerating at 1g, people feel a force pulling on them just like gravity on earth. For example, they can sit down and have a cup of tea just as they do on earth. Gravity is indistinguishable from acceleration, except that no particles make it happen.

Einstein then showed that gravity occurs when the earth warps the time and space around it. This replaced Newton’s inexplicable force-at-a-distance by a gravity that equally inexplicably distorts space and time. For Newton, space was a fixed stage where objects acted in common time but for Einstein, gravity changes the space and time of that stage. A particle moving in a straight line then curves under gravity as if influenced by a force, but actually it is space that curves.

Gravity then is caused by changes in space and time, so the standard model claim that gravitons cause gravity denies general relativity, just as its claim that particles move on fixed paths denies quantum theory. Why then does current physics believe what contradicts its two best theories?

Relativity also explains Galileo’s earlier finding that but for friction, all masses fall at the same speed.  A heavy object has more inertia so it should be harder to move, but for some reason the gravity on it is equally greater, so the effects cancel. A ton of lead hits the ground at the same time as a feather because according to relativity, gravity varies with mass just as inertia does. It was a brilliant solution, but it left the standard model with a force that none of its particles could explain.

Next