TOE Theory of Everything Archive TOE Dark Matter Dark Energy Black Holes Creation

Expansion is Gravity EIG – Noel Hodson  SW2000 Telework Studies



The Theory of Everything Archive

Noel Hodson SW2000 Telework Studies

Notes and speculations 1988-2004


Go to MAIN PAGE  Short text of TOE Theory of Everything EIG





Expansion is Gravity – the EIG model in a few words: 2

What is matter? Hydrogen baryons at 10 million degrees. 2

Harvard’s ghost-particles, negative gravity and dark energy. 3

Limitless numbers of macro and micro universes?. 4

Summary to date – Oct 2003 – Is this the end of EIG?. 5

Introduction, pre-EIG.. 6

Models of Reality – before EIG.. 7

MAP, COBE and Some Astronomical EIG Numbers. 8

Six foot man expands infinitely – says MAP and COBE. 9

Dark Matter and Energy – Reverse Gravity. 10

QED – Feynman and the eightfold path. 10

Diagram relating to text below see: 10

Ed Fredkin at MIT and Cellular Automata. 12

Planck’s Quanta and Constant pertinent to EIG: 13

Newton’s Bucket & Ernst Mach’s theory of inertia: 13

Wave Particle Duality & EIG: 14

The Elements – EIG light-play. 17

Atomic Shells and EIG.. 17

Newton’s Law of Gravity and Milgrom’s MOND theory. 18

Radio and TV signals – permanent patterns in Space - inertia. 19

The really scary implications of inertia and waves. 19

Clouds of mesons, pions, photons, other virtual particles & EIG. 23

Casimir Effect and a Vacuum starship. 23

Space Chimneys – are better than Casimir space drives. 23

Casimir and EIG – gravity within dense matter. 24

String Theory, symmetry and super-symmetry & EIG. 24

Appendices. 26

Definitions. 26

Letters to science magazines. 26

Bibliography. 30




Expansion is Gravity – the EIG model in a few words:


My ideas are, as far as I am able to judge, consistent with accepted science or at least with current scientific speculation.  I cannot demonstrate or prove these ideas, but perhaps others can suggest experiments that would test the theory.


As the universe expands the omni-present electro-magnetic spectrum or light, the stuff of the universe, attenuates at 2.304E-18% per second, and creates a total (supra) or partial (super) vacuum. Light rushes in to the vacuum – at the speed of light – and in some zones or spheres the light waves collide or merge at angles and at wave frequencies that reinforce the “speed” and cause colliding waves to spin, maelstrom, hurricane or tornado like; at 90 Billion Kilometres Per Second (KPS). This immense speed, C2, creates a surface, and a fractal of primary matter (perhaps a Quark) is created from energy; following Einstein’s formula Energy=Matter X Light-Speed Squared (E=MC2 ).


The Hubble universe constantly expands (the zone or sphere does not necessarily contract after expansion) and inrushing energy feeds the spinning fractal. As in a tornado, I speculate that, the spin draws in surrounding energy leaving a depleted zone around the vortex-sphere. This third vacuum, a surface-vacuum, attracts other fractals, while the constantly expanding spinning surface repels them. The dynamic thus created between repulsive and attractive forces is the dynamic tension that underlies all matter. At this pre-particle level no thing exists that can interfere with the expanding and spinning vortex. Stability and permanence and inertia are created by Hubble expansion.





The Overview

How EIG might operate







What is matter? Hydrogen baryons at 10 million degrees.


An article by Brian D. Fields, astrophysicist at the University of Illinois, in New Scientist 14 Feb 04, reminds me that science understands that all matter was created in the first 1 second after the Big Bang. His team estimates that the baryons – the free particles of neutrons and protons forged at 10 million degrees Kelvin – became Hydrogen 76% and Helium-4 24%, as the universe cooled. This is a timely reminder that counters my idea set out later in this paper that different wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum may have formed the basic fractals or quarks of matter in different “colours” and that the fractals gave rise to different elements. All elements arise from Hydrogen. However – Brian Field’s article advances on thoughts on how the baryons were made or on the forces that cause particles to crystallise or precipitate from the hot soup of the Big Bang. Not having access to a cyclotron I can only assume that if a baryon is exploded (at 10 million degrees K) it yields “pure” energy (particle-less energy) that we know at the electro-magnetic field or light.  The question of how this process reverses to turn light into particles of matter is at the heart of EIG. Fields addresses the existence of dark energy and dark matter without theorising as to what they are. EIG imagines they are in fact vacuums as the field attenuates due to Hubble Expansion.


NB – To correct and re-write texts below on “coloured light waves colliding”. What is an electron. Does the atomic nucleus grow? Yes. ( ?  Different particles and perhaps elements result from primary fractals or quarks being formed through the mutually reinforcing collisions of different wavelengths. Wavelengths that do not match cannot combine with each other to form matter. This characteristic of the electromagnetic spectrum to keep separate and to maintain the integrity of specific signals, is evident in the transmissions and identities of millions of radio, TV and telephone transmissions that occupy the same space. When compatible wavelengths do combine, they create matter with a particular vibration (colour) that in turn may be the foundations of a specific element. ?)



Harvard’s ghost-particles, negative gravity and dark energy.


Friday 4th Feb 2004.   Stephen Battersby, in New Scientist 7th Feb 04, reports the work of Nima Arkani-Hamed and his colleagues Hsin-Chia Cheng, Markus Luty and Shinji Mukohyama of Harvard University on ghost particles and the changes the team have made to Einstein’s relativity gravity calculations. The changes do not sabotage every aspect of relativity and yet predict a new gravitational field with two main areas – gravity as we know it – and a new gravity fluid that fills the universe. The fluid fills the universe, is made of massless ghost particles and each particle is stretched across the whole universe. This fluid is calculated to have “tension” as it stretches across the universe, which is the opposite of “pressure” (pressure has gravity) and is therefore proposed as the force that expands the universe – or the long sought negative gravity.  


Does this fit with EIG?  A fluid (presumably Dark Energy?) that stretches across the universe sounds like a definition of a field force. It is also similar to the concept of long “strings”. The universe is filled with a field of electro-magnetic energy (light) that can be detected at any point we care to test. Why posit a new “fluid”.  If the universe is not infinite, if it has boundaries, and if the boundaries are expanding at my calculated 2.304E-18% per second (which is an ever accelerating global expansion) then the field/fluid will attenuate, as the Harvard team calculates. What might be drawing out this attenuation is the total, unimaginable supra-vacuum of non-space time outside our universe. Whether or not the stuff of the universe (light or fluid) is being replenished (say, from one or more open singularities) does not concern this speculation. As the field attenuates and as it does so unevenly (clumps of matter, galaxies, matter-less lakes etc) it will feel the internal pull of super-vacuums, at every point, on every scale, at all times. These super-vacuums tug on the field which returns to fill them….   And so back to EIG, which still remains a viable concept for expert consideration.    

Limitless numbers of macro and micro universes?


Tuesday 4th Nov 2003.


Leonard Susskind, professor of physics at Stanford University writes today 4th Nov 2003 in New Scientist which credits him with being one of the originators, if not the inventor, of String Theory. Will there one day be a convergence of EIG and String-Theory? Susskind’s article, (of which I can understand only snatches of what is written and I completely fail to understand any of the mathematics to which he refers or the need for imagining more than 4 dimensions – leaving me at a disadvantage), addresses quantum vacuums in which virtual particles are constantly created and annihilated, and bubbles arise in the inflating vacuum. He writes of bubbles forming within bubbles, some of which nucleate and start to grow.


EIG would respond that for a bubble to form there must be a surface, and EIG justifies surfaces as the membrane formed between an expanding zone, within which the electro-magnetic spectrum (light) briefly attenuates, thus creating a partial vacuum, thus attracting light to fill the vacuum, and the spinning that occurs when light collides in such a manner as to reinforce the rate of propagation of light to the degree that a vortex forms – one of the fractals of matter (perhaps a quark) in the universe. Around the vortex, which compacts energy, remains a depleted surface zone that feeds the compaction. This surface vacuum attracts, while the spin repels – and thus stable inertia of matter, and perhaps the cosmological constant, is created.


A major divergence from String Theory occurs in my EIG ideas, where Prof Susskind (and other physicists) seems to assume that the vacuums he cites are the cause of the expansion of the universe; that they somehow counteract gravity and must counteract gravity to prevent the collapse of the universe.


Whereas I simply assume they are the cause, or one of the causes of gravity, but I fail to ask what causes Hubble expansion. It just is; a given. The increase in the pace of expansion (how this is measured by science I do not know) would be due, in EIG terms, simply to the logical incremental addition of 2.304E-18% per second to any zone being measured. The bigger the zone, the more it increases. “To he who hath shall be given.”


The more I read of String Theory (ST) and try to put it into context, the more I feel that ST is on the wrong tack and EIG is on a better tack. 


But it would help if I re-read everything I have on ST and get to understand what the mathematicians are driving at. I’m sure that Stamford and other scientists can readily understand this simple idea - but I cannot understand their ideas. But I have a sneaking growing suspicion that EIG is more right than ST.   



Summary to date – Oct 2003 – Is this the end of EIG?

With the recent (Oct 03) announcements, of the discovery of the signature signals of Cold Dark Matter (CDM), from Céline Boehm and Dan Cooper of Oxford University, my cherished “Expansion is Gravity” (EIG) theory may have to be abandoned. The zones, perhaps with diameters of Planck Length the smallest scale in particle physics, expanding at what I have calculated to be another minuscule rate of  2.304E-18% per second, were envisaged by me partly to fill in the knowledge gap left by the mysterious CDM, that makes up 80% of the mass of the Universe. These researchers are proposing that CDM is not virtual vacuums or attractive “holes” in space time caused by expansion, as I imagine, but are particles with mass, with a characteristic signal emanating from the centre of the Milky Way, and therefore perhaps from the centre of all galaxies -  “….the ….sharp signal, which has an energy of 511 kiloelectronvolts (keV), is believed to be due to the annihilation of electrons and positrons ­ the antimatter equivalent of electrons. 

“…Says Hooper. "Since it's difficult to imagine how they could be slowed to a standstill, we were forced to consider a surprisingly light dark matter particle."

“By "light", the researchers mean one to 100 megaelectronvolts, which is between 1000 and 10 times lighter than a proton. Such a light particle is surprising because particle accelerators routinely create particles of this mass, so the particle should have revealed itself.”

The New Scientist report by Marcus Chown tell us that if the findings are confirmed then – “If dark matter really is made up of such light particles, every cubic centimetre of space in the vicinity of the Earth must contain a few tens of them. So you should be able to detect them in lab-based experiments.”

As I have little understanding of the issues involved and only the haziest notion of what a particle 1,000 times lighter than a proton might be or fit into particle tables, and as my cyclotron is undergoing routine maintenance for the foreseeable future, I’ll just have to wait to read a host of other scientific opinions and wait to hear the almost inevitable death-knell for my interesting idea EIG. But it is not quite dead yet. So it may be worth adding relevant facts and fiction to the file below.

On second thoughts, even if they do find CDM (see “Summary to date” next para) it still doesn’t explain what gravity is. For that gravitons and gravity waves would have to be found. So EIG still lives – but not in such rude health.


Sunday 12 October 2003:






Creatures of Light


Introduction, pre-EIG


The Universe is made of light, the electro-magnetic spectrum. Light is the basic “stuff” of the Universe and all things in the Universe are a manifestation of light. The serious gaze of the new born child, a creature, as we all are, made of light, constantly reminds us that the greatest mystery of physics is how life, intelligence, sentience and consciousness emerge from the electro-magnetic spectrum.


Paul Davies, writing in New Scientist on the 21 September 2002, sets out “seven wonders” of physics and his current preferred theories:

(1) What makes the Universe Tick? (The Big Bang & Superstrings) 

(2) What’s the Universe made of? (Cold Dark Matter - CDM)

(3) Was Einstein’s antigravity really a mistake? (An assumed repulsive force to balance gravity) 

(4) Why do we live in three dimensions? (Mathematicians assume there are many dimensions)

(5) Is time travel possible? (Probably not)

(6) Are we living in a cosmic colander? (Of black holes)

(7) How come I can ask these questions? (Consciousness.)


I would add to his list:

(8)    What is Inertia?

(9)    How are surfaces and objects formed and sustained?

(10)  What is the organising principle and the power of Life?


And finally,

(11)   Will Professor Stephen Hawking ever find his God?


Everyone would have their own list of universal wonders, each would be different and all would be valid. The wonders of the universe are probably infinite – there are certainly many times more questions than we have answers for. The way we answer such questions depends entirely on the accurate or inaccurate information we have and on the models we use to organise the information.


Models of Reality – before EIG


The most celebrated scientists, it seems, are those who produce the most readily understood models of reality that stand the triple tests of experiment, attacks from colleagues and of time. Such models include Empedocle’s elements; Lucretius’s atoms of light; Alhazen’s Optics; Kepler’s & Galileo’s Solar System; Gassendi’s photons; Newton’s Mechanics and Gravity; Casimir’s Effect; Michelson & Morley’s constant speed of light; Maxwells’ electromagnetic spectrum; Planck’s Black Body Radiation, Constant & Quanta; Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle; Bohr’s collapse of the wave function; Bohr’s, Born’s & Heisenberg’s Copenhagen Interpretation; Einstein’s Relativity and Special Relativity; Bose’s Statistics; Fermi-Dirac’s statistics; Bell’s Theorem; Shrödinger’s impossible Cat; Feynman’s Diagrams & QED; Hubble’s Constant; Fred Hoyle’s Big Bang and Multiple Bangs; Crick’s & Watson’s Double-Helix; Hawking’s Radiation; and many, many, many more models of the whole and of parts of the system..


It is fair to say that at every stage of advancement in understanding, there are hundreds, and these days thousands, of brilliant scientists whose work contributes to the latest discoveries and to the confirmation of theoretical models. But, as on any stage, just a few of the actors get to share the spotlight of fame and success.  Truly, each star turn does indeed “stand on the shoulders of giants” – and these days on the shoulders of teams of giants.


Models of reality are recognised as being just that – models. The more we delve down into the atom and soar up to the vast spaces of the universe, the less are we able to grasp and represent the reality of what we see. Just as an obituary of one-thousand words may appear to be an accurate description of a person and of their life, but be the slightest and palest shadow of the reality of that person; so scientific models are metaphors and similes of the reality they seek to describe. But models and labels are central and essential to our understanding and to our ability to think – and from well tested theories come practical applications. All the best models ultimately enable us to manipulate the stuff of the Earth and the power of the universe; even if we cannot complete the models and do not fully understand them.


From reading hundreds of scientific books and articles over forty-five years, I have come to a hazy understanding of how Life, The Universe and Everything is thought to work. What I have been unable to find, or unable to comprehend if it is out-there, staring me the face, is how the Hubble Factor that underpins the expansion of the Universe and the Big-Bang theory, fits into the current picture. Expansion is wholly accepted as the driving logic for the Big-Bang theory but thereafter it seems to have no part to play.  John Gribbin quotes Einstein as writing in 1951 “All these fifty years of conscious brooding have brought me no nearer to the answer to the question “What are light quanta?” Nowadays every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks he knows it, but he is mistaken”. 


In like mind, here is a model that I have consciously brooded on for nearly forty, not fifty, years that attempts to tie-in Hubble while remaining faithful to accepted facts and theories, and explores new thoughts about light and its quanta and that other great mystery, gravity.



EIG Diagram

MAP, COBE and Some Astronomical EIG Numbers


Stephen Battersby reported in New Scientist on 15th February 2003 that data from the Microwave Anisotropy Probe has been analysed providing an accurate age for the universe. He also takes the trouble to define the factors he cites which is unusual and refreshing. For future reference:


Age of the universe is 13.7 billion years

Shape is Flat

Age when light first appeared is 200 million years

Contents include:

4% ordinary matter

23% dark matter Nature unknown

73% dark energy Nature unknown

Hubble constant (expansion rate) is 71km/sec/megaparsec


Stephen Battersby also tells us that a megaparsec is 3.26 light years.


The MAP data supports the theory of INFLATION that imagines a period of very rapid expansion shortly after the creation/appearance of the universe.


If you work all this out and reduce it to a layman’s terms it accords closely with the factor I had set out (below) based on the reports that the edges of the visible universe recede from us at the speed of light.


The Hubble constant as stated above works out as the universe expanding at a minuscule  percentage every second – of 0.0000000000000002303633783% or in handy mathematical format

It is                            2.304E-18% per second.  

My figure was           2.348E-18% per second. Thus affirming some glimmering of understanding of the factors and the issues.


If expansion is gravity – it must occur everywhere at all times. EIG proposes that the rate of refilling the attenuated energy vacuums that occur in matter, inside planets, for example, is held back momentarily and strengthened by the shells or surfaces around the fractals of matter (perhaps quarks) but such delay aside, let us apply Hubble to a six foot man.


Six foot man expands infinitely – says MAP and COBE


To get down to small enough units required to allow EXCEL to show the calculation, the man’s height, in his six foot high and six foot wide bubble of expanding space, had to be converted into millionths of millimetres – which are pretty small. Using the Hubble factor I extracted from the MAP report, 2.304E-18% per second, our man would expand in a year by just 1.32 millionths of one millimetre – ignoring the cumulative effect. This would be unnoticeable to most of us and in fact is undetectable by normal measuring techniques as all the measures also expand at precisely the same rate. Is this rate enough to make him universally attractive?


Bear in mind the mechanism that would be at work: The trillions of spaces – say Planck lengths (Planck’s Length is 10-35 metres, Hubble expansion is 10-18 metres per second, or nearly twice the decimal scale; about a billion, billion times larger – but to squeeze that amount of expansion into Planck space, we can reduce the time to a billion. Billionth of a second) – occupied by the man’s material body, expand by this trivial amount. The QED or light energy attenuates creating virtual vacuums, attracting energy (light) to flow into the vacuums. These in turn partially evacuate the larger spheres around the space occupied by the man – partially because the surrounding sphere is larger than the inner sphere or spheres.


As sphere two goes into a partial vacuum state the surrounding sphere/s, sphere three, transfers energy inwards, itself attenuating but less than sphere two. This gives rise to the laws of gravity where the pull lessens by the square of the distance.  This rate of in-falling of energy takes a second; the next second it occurs again. The process is inexorable and occurs throughout space. Therefore any one zone, say a sphere of Planck length, is a continuous conduit and pump for energy – from all directions and at the speed of light (or gravity). Would this multi-directional factor account for the MOND theory that proposes that at large distances gravity diminishes more rapidly than the law allows? 


Any reader following this paper will by now have realised that the 23% Dark Matter and 73% Dark Energy – “Nature Unknown” – are explained by EIG as vacuums caused by expansion.  They are holes not matter - QED and QED.


The MAP or more properly WMAP (W for Wilkinson) is a satellite positioned 1.5 million kilometres further away from the Sun than the Earth. It looks outwards into the blackness of space. If it looked at the Earth or the Sun or even into the centre of the Milky Way, it would be blinded by the microwave energy from those bodies. It reads microwave energies between 20 and 90 gigahertz and is sensitive to variations down to 1/25th millionth of 1 degree of temperature. What WMAP is measuring is the echo from the Big Bang that fills the universe with a back-ground microwave energy of 2.7 degrees above absolute zero (2.7 degrees Kelvin). How it does this I haven’t the faintest idea – but we just have to believe the astrophysicists.





The sphere’s or zones that expand, range in size down from the whole universe, with a radius of 12 to 15 billion light years, (at 12 Billion light years being 113,451,059,465,856,000,000,000 kilometres or 1.E+23 kilometres from me or you, at the centre of our known universe to the visible edge.) and zones can have as small a diameter as Planck’s Length of 10-35 metres or (0.000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,001 metres).  Measured at the farthest horizon, using 12 billion light years, the universe is thought to be expanding at the speed of light, hence the invisibility of matter beyond that horizon. The percentage per second of this expansion is 0.000000000000000264248267%  or 2.6E-18 % per second. This minuscule constant rate of expansion attenuates the fabric of the universe and underlies the all pervasive, eternal tug of gravity. The super-vacuums so formed are filled at the speed of light from the immediate surroundings that leaves a gap to be filled, that tugs on the adjacent spheres ad infinitum, in all directions at all times. This is at least part of the force we call gravity.


NB – build in here that Einstein predicted that the universe would be found to be expanding – but he withdrew from this position as it was too absurd, until Hubble demonstrated expansion through his interpretation of observations. Then Einstein embraced his own conclusions again. The key point from this information is that it is the inclusion of gravity in the mathematical models created to wind-back the universe from the present day to the Big-Bang that dictates the need to propose a period of rapid inflation in the first micro-seconds. It would be interesting to know what the models would tell us if they were based on the EIG theory. If expansion is a major cause of or contributor to gravity, then winding back or shrinking the universe would switch off that factor – and remove the need to imagine an Inflationary Period to account for the homogeneity of temperatures (background radiation) across the universe.

Dark Matter and Energy – Reverse Gravity.


Elsewhere in this paper is mentioned Einstein’s theory about dark matter and dark energy that he concluded ought to push rather than pull.  EIG fundamentally requires the pushing force, caused by expansion, that in turn creates the pull force that is gravity. EIG is based on the idea that between these two forces is a dynamic tension that is inertia and that binds fractals together to form particles.  This dark energy conundrum is again raised in a new book Echo of the Big Bang, by Michael Lemonick, Princeton University Press. $24.95 . EIG smugly thinks of course that it has the answer to dark matter and dark energy – its vacuums and partial vacuums throughout space.


QED – Feynman and the eightfold path.

Diagram relating to text below see:





QED is Quantum Electro-Dynamics, largely developed by Richard Feynman and his colleagues and described in his book QED – which contains 3 lectures on the subject. QED examines the behaviour of light such as bending (refraction), bouncing (reflection), scattering, colour (wavelength) etc and creates the mathematics that describe the processes occurring beneath the observed phenomena.  QED is as proven and reliable as any scientific theory can be.  It is beyond reasonable doubt that QED is correct.


Feynman’s lectures devote much explanation to, for example, reflection, telling us that contrary to common-sense, light shining onto and into reflective glass is reflected from all parts of the glass. QED maths follows all the paths taken by the photons and by “summing” all such paths the maths arrive at the most “probable” path (as in probability theory) that concurs with common-sense observations i.e. the light is reflected at an angle of 90 degrees. What becomes clear from QED is that the photons that arrive from the light source are NOT the same photons that emerge from the reflective glass. En-route the photons have changed to electrons, then to other particles that create photons that emerge from the experiment.


There is much more to QED than that, but I want to try to relate the unpredictable QED behaviour of photons (and electrons etc) to EIG. 


Expanding EIG spheres of equal size (say Planck Space/Length size of 10-35 metres) thought of as billiard balls will I think “nest” in 3 dimensions in groups of 9. This is the central “target” sphere, surrounded in the plane by 6 more spheres (actually in 2 dimensions) and if turned sideways to our view, with a sphere on each side – all in contact or contingent relationship with the target sphere. Interpenetration of adjoining spheres is avoided here for simplicity. 


In EIG as the (imaginary) target sphere expands it attenuates its interior material (light) and the electro-magnetic spectrum rushes in to fill the partial vacuum – strengthened by the directional energy of the incoming light source. This is a virtual photon created in a measurable standard quantum in, say, Planck space. 


The universe continues its inexorable (and energetic) expansion. The virtual photon in the imaginary target sphere, formed from both the ambient energy in its vicinity with the incoming energy of the light source, is surrounded by 8 imaginary contingent spheres that all attenuate with expansion, each tempting the particle in the target sphere to fill their partially vacuumed space.


The virtual photon in the imagined target sphere dissolves and moves (at the speed of light) into any of the 8 imaginary contingent spheres.  The movement is not entirely random however. The directional energy from the source of the incoming photon is a factor and also the polarisation of the incoming photon/s is a factor.


The probability of a 90 degrees reflection is maintained by these two factors. But where any particular photon will be absorbed and re-emitted within the matrix of (Planck sized?) fundamental quantum spheres can only be predicted to be one of eight directions – with the possibility of scattering in another 8 directions occurring at every “newly defined” or observed target sphere.  


Coherent materials such as certain crystals may be based on coherently organised fundamental 9nest-spheres and hence the routing of incoming energy is far more predictable. 


The routing along the probability path (90 degrees of reflection) surely must occur as the incoming photons (waves and particles) create electrons in matter that in turn are more restricted as to direction than are photons.  As the electrons emerge from the mirror-glass into “space” they create photons that we observe.


The Planck spheres are described here as “imaginary” as no such sphere’s or bubbles actually exist. It is a convenience for modelling and imagination to conceive that Hubble Space is expanding in spheres and at a rate “per second”. In fact the process must be ubiquitous and smooth excepting that at a fundamental level of scale, which is perhaps the Planck Length 10-35 metres, EIG speculates that the universal expansion “pauses” for a virtual moment as attenuation occurs and “waits” for infinite light to redistribute itself to refill the attenuated space/s. As the spheres are an imagined construct, then there are no nests of 9 such spheres with a target sphere at the centre, and therefore the number of directions that the inflowing light might take “next” is not limited to 8.  Unless the very process of Hubble Expansion acting on the electromagnetic energy spectrum does indeed structure the fabric of the universe to the Planck scale or another regular scale and thus gives rise to the observed quantum states of particles physics. 


Ed Fredkin at MIT and Cellular Automata.

David L Chandler reporting in New Scientist 21 June 2003 page 32, on cellular automaton cites John Conway’s 1970 game Life where simple rules determine if a square on a flat grid should be black or white – resulting in complex patterns. What struck me about the report on Ed Fredkin taking this system to ever more sophisticated levels, referred to as The Rule, and into 3 dimensional grids, was Fredkin’s idea that a subatomic particle is just a pattern of many bits of information that travel through the grid (representing empty space) together  “sort of like a swarm of gnats.”  A swarm of a few hundred bits being enough to make a photon or electron.


It is just the kind of image I have been struggling with to visualise how a number of EIG fractals might (A) join to form a particle and (B) propagate through space – see Feynman and the Eightfold Path above.  Chandler also says that Fredkin gets frustrated when people try to restrict/fix his experimental grid size to Planck quanta 0f 10-35 metres. Particle physicists say that their current theories function well down to 10-22 metres therefore the underlying quantised structure that Fredkin addresses must be smaller than that.  Fredkin responds “The space of physics isn’t defined by cellular array; it’s defined by the paths that free particles take in the cellular array.” 


“When it comes to quantum mechanics, Fredkin doesn’t get it.” says Pierre Noyes of the SLAC accelerator at Stanford University. 


So who do we believe?


Planck’s Quanta and Constant pertinent to EIG:



Watch this space


Newton’s Bucket & Ernst Mach’s theory of inertia:


Briefly, Newton observed that when a bucket full of water is suspended on a rope and set spinning, the water at first climbs up the sides of the bucket, as expected of centripetal forces, becoming concave at the surface, but then flattens out again and the water does not spin at the speed of the revolving bucket, or at all.  This observed example of inertia (the water stubbornly remaining inert) could not be explained. Austrian 19th century scientist Ernst Mach suggested that all matter in the universe is connected and that the water was staying in its place in relationship to the mass of the universe, rather than following the local spin of the bucket’s sides.  Einstein used Mach’s Principle as the basis for his thinking about curved space, where space bends in the presence of massive bodies (stars and planets etc).


Can the Water Bucket experiment be bent to accommodate EIG, or vice-versa? 


Pre-matter, EIG relies on the stuff of the universe, the electromagnetic energy field, being just that - a field. A field has no parts and logically therefore everything in the field is instantly connected to everything else in the field. Logically, the primary energy field contains the ingredients for all phenomena, including sensation and intelligence. It is a given therefore that all zones of the universe are in contact. When matter condenses “out of” the energy field, it is actually condensing “in” the energy field. Matter is still part of the field, albeit bounded and defined by a surface. EIG assumes that surfaces hold out against internal vacuums (attenuated energy) caused by expansion being refilled by energy, for longer than do spheres in open space.  And thus matter is a stronger attractor than a similar sized zone of “free” energy in the space/time continuum.  However, all matter is condensed from the field and is therefore connected to the whole field, albeit cloaked to some extent.


While able to find agreement that the water is connected to the whole universe – this does not advance any thoughts on why the water should “choose” to stay in its inertial pattern as related to the universe, rather than to get along and spin along with the friendly old bucket. But I know some people who seem to act like the water – ignoring most local forces and remaining largely inert.  The Bucket requires much more thought.


PS – Why do dark colours absorb more heat from the sun than light ones?  Are the light colours “full”? 


Wave Particle Duality & EIG:


The double slit experiment and experiments with polarised light give results that lead to the conclusion that light is both waves and particles. Whether the waves or the particles predominate is thought to depend on how we, the observers, look at the experiment and how we measure the results.  The Expansion is Gravity (EIG) model allows for light propagating through the almost total vacuum of space at 300,000 KPS travelling in waves. The word “propagate” describes a wave function. Bullets “speed” from place to place and bullets of light or photons would also speed from source to target. But we cannot track the path of a single photon through vacuum nor air.


In another form, as an electron in a copper wire for example, the particle seems more predictable and traceable – but even here the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle governs and we cannot know its path, other than as a statistical probability.  But imagine an energy wave moving forwards or propagating from expanding sphere to expanding sphere, at the rate of 300,000KPS, and from time to time as it arrives at a vacuum, or is drawn back on itself to a vacuum, it is focused inwards or meets another wave, they collide and in some cases the collisions are at precisely the same wavelengths that reinforce each other, at which point a fractal forms and becomes a permanent or temporary particle. A photon that we can detect may need numbers of such fractals to combine, to give it its characteristics.


In other words, a light wave, from an energetic source, propagates across space at about 300,000 KPS, never faster, never slower, regardless of the speed of the source or the destination. The rate of propagation is tightly governed. Wherever along the path of light we care to measure, we find that light is “travelling” at the same constant speed. What is in error here is the use of the word “speed”. What we are intercepting and measuring is propagating not speeding and our instruments are converting a frequency into “speed”. What is actually being measured is vibration. It is the ultimate vibration of the universe and of all that emerges, including life. What is implied by the rate of propagation of light is that the zones or spheres that light propagates into are pre-conditioned or pre-set in quanta that control the speed of that propagation to 300,000 KPS. It is fundamental to physics that different colours “travel” at different “speeds” (giving rise to Red Shift for example), as do other wavelengths such as X-Rays. The average electromagnetic wavelength is that of white light which is “allowed” to propagate at the rate at which the universe expands – a pulse of 300,000KPS. 


As the wave propagates from expansion vacuum to expansion vacuum, light will swirl and react to vacuums in far more complex patterns than is seen in water. Rays of light meet in super-vacuum spheres and at times collide to form fractals/quarks that combine to form photons – permanent or virtual. Thus when science examines a ray of light, it finds waves that give rise to particles that in turn might be robust and remain as particles, or may unwind and return to the wave of light.


QED - 13 March 03 – It occurred to me while re-reading QED (Qunatum Electro-Dynamics) by Richard Feynman that the particle nature of light could be accounted for by assuming a standard smallest unit for all zones of expansion – perhaps the Planck Length - and requiring that light flows in to fill the partial vacuum, the super-vacuum, created by expansion, and that a standard amount of light is required to balance the depleted zone with the surrounding ambient pressure of light. The standard amount would be a single photon. Such photons will migrate along a chain of standard zones towards a stronger vacuum, such as one in the midst of matter, where the virtual, momentary surface holds back the incoming field fractionally longer than in open space, with a consequent increase in the super-vacuum within the zone or zones or spheres. In this manner a wave of light would be divided into billions of photons, each of which flows or propagates, at the speed of light, into the next zone. The photon is eternally deconstructed as it leaves a zone and reconstructed in the next zone, which may be in any direction – at the speed of light – and is thus un-track-able, random and exhibits quantum behaviour, being intact for only a micro-second. 


The repeating cycle of partial reflection of light, incident at 900, from a clear glass surface that repeats between 0% reflection going step by step to 16% reflection as layer upon layer are added to the thickness of the glass, averaging 8% partial reflection, implies that on average 92% of the light goes through the glass. Feynman asks “Can it be that the (added) back surface exerts some kind of effect on the ability of the front surface to reflect light?”. In this EIG theory, could the observed reflection, that is unpredictable for any single photon, be due to the actions of the expanding zones or spheres? . Is a sphere at the top sheet glass surface touching 8 other spheres? (a cluster of 9?) If so, which way will the virtual photon, forged in the target sphere, jump next? One of the 8 contingent spheres lies in the direction we expect to see reflected light, as if from a mirror. If the photon moves in that direction and continues on that trajectory (why should it follow a straight line? – Inertia?) we observe the average eight-in-a-hundred result. We must remind ourselves to consider here that the photon/s we are following are visible photons, i.e. they are at particular visible wavelengths; whereas any single expanding (Planck) sphere that creates a super-vacuum in this case within or at the surface of matter, may draw in energy to refill the attenuation from any wavelength of the electro-magnetic spectrum and from any direction. The experimenter is however interested only in the beam or photons of visible light aimed at the target area on the glass sheet. Also bear in mind that Feynman tells us that 100,000,000 (one hundred million) cycles of 0% in steps through to 16% requires glass 50 metres thick. If we can assume the steps are 1% each, then a cycle requires 16 layers of glass. 100M cycles therefore require 1600M layers of glass, divided into 50 metres, makes each sheet of glass (50 x 100 = 5,000 centimetres x 1M = 5,000, 000,000 millionths cms) divide by 1600M (5000/16 = 312.5 millionths of a cm. ) and 312 millionths of a cm is pretty thin.


It seems that the cycle starts at 4%; so with (visible) light striking at an angle of 900 the cycle is as follows:


            Glass              reflected light

1)     312M/cm        4%

2)     624M/cm        5%

3)     936M/cm        6%

4)     1268 M/cm     7%

5)     1580 M/cm     8%

6)     1892M/cm      9%

7)     2204M/cm      10%

8)     2516M/cm      11%

9)     2828M/cm      12%

10) 3140M/cm      13%

11) 3452M/cm      14%

12) 3764M/cm      15%

13) 4076M/cm      16%

14) 4388M/cm        0%

15) 4700M/cm        1%

16) 5012M/cm        2%

17) 5324M/cm        3%


18)5636M/cm        4%

   etc. etc.


It is likely in the EIG theory that expanding spheres in space behave differently to expanding spheres in matter or on the surface of matter and that the deeper embedded in matter a sphere is the longer its surface will hold out against inflowing energy, will therefore create a more powerful super-vacuum, which when it pops, attracts light more powerfully than an equivalent zone in “empty” space. So the depth of glass effect on incident light could be due to this embedded quality of EIG zones.  Mathematically, how many spheres are in a cluster where the central sphere is in contact with exactly the same size of contingent spheres around it? 


The zones might be interpenetrating as we are not here talking of matter fractals (quarks) until we get below the surface of the glass – when we are of course dealing with matter fractals whose surfaces repel each another while the local or surface vacuums attract.  But what is observed in reflection has to emerge from the surface – so more thought needs to go into the glass/space interface.










The Elements – EIG light-play.


The fractals or Quarks formed by collisions of light in supra or super vacuums may form only between precisely matching wavelengths. They may be specific wavelengths that make specific quarks, that make specific protons and neutrons that make specific atoms that make specific elements that in turn can be detected by their absorbing/emitting specific light colours/spectra. If so, there are as many types of these fundamental fractals as there are wavelengths in the electromagnetic spectrum, as there are elements in the periodic tables.


Are elements infinitely divisible – calculus like – or are they truly limited to the list we have in the periodic tables. Are, for example, isotopes of an element, subtle differences in the wavelengths of the light (EMS) that collides to make the underlying fractals for that particular element.


The wavelength signatures of the elements as detected in light from stars, interstellar gases and elsewhere would be explicable in terms of the fractals that combine to make the atomic particles in elements being “spun” or  “wound” from specific wavelengths from the electro-magnetic spectrum.  As light from, say, a star, strikes an interstellar gas, the light adds energy to the atoms in the gas, atoms made from spinning spheres of for example blue-light, and the element emits that colour; it can emit no other wavelength.  Similarly an excited Laser or Maser emits the colour or wavelength of the ruby or other element in the barrel of the machine.


Atomic Shells and EIG


The electron shells around atomic nuclei are in effect event-horizons; not in this case signalling the existence of the singularity of a black hole, but created by the energy hungry fractals, spinning in the protons and neutrons at the nucleus and drawing in energy as they do so, while simultaneously expanding, attenuating, creating short-lived super-vacuums, that attract more energy to fill the partial voids. Thus the shells are created at boundaries between the forces of expansion of a zone, the in-pressing of energy being wound into the fractals and the in-rushing of additional energy to fill super-vacuums. Switch-off Hubble expansion and the process winds down and halts. Gravity lets go its grip and the universe starts to unpick itself. 


But the constant Hubble expansion, barely perceptible though it is, ensures that the atomic shells survive as they continually expand – and, as Einstein established, at whose surfaces the forces of accelerating expansion are indistinguishable from the effect of gravity.  The acceleration comes from a simple adding of a constant percentage to an ever larger zone. The radius of such a zone grows longer by a larger fraction each second by a process of accretion.


Newton’s Law of Gravity and Milgrom’s MOND theory.


A single atom, thus formed, or a single primary fractal or quark, would in theory have or “emit” ever fainter shells that would fill the universe, as Professor Milgrom’s MOND theory, which proposes a slight variation to the Law of Gravity, predicts. At the centre is the particle, it spins and draws in energy, it expands and draws in energy, the spinning surface repels other matter. Energy falls in towards the centre, moving in at the speed of light. The larger sphere, larger and thus containing more energy, immediately beyond is then partially depleted of energy and that sphere draws in “free” energy. The inner sphere is created and stable and is protected by the outer sphere – ad infinitum until all the energy of the universe is structured into one great spherical pattern – ever fainter shell within shell within shell in accordance with the law of gravity that the force diminishes with the square of the distance – logical as each shell is a sphere surrounding the smaller inner sphere. But, this perfect sequence does not happen. The adding of sphere’s to a particle stops when it comes into contingent relationship with another particle. And the universe is full of particles either permanent or temporary.


The electron shells are waves of light. As in all circumstances, in all regions of the universe, the zones the waves occupy are expanding. Super-vacuums result, energy rushes in and particles form, then disappear and form again. The wave/particle duality is preserved, in fact is created by, Hubble expansion. Try to track an electron and it is likely to vanish. Wait patiently by an atomic shell and one or more will appear. The number of possible scintilla is dictated by the energy in that shell, that is governed by the number of protons and neutrons in the nucleus, that are made from the primary fractals or quarks, that are spun from energy at specific wavelengths.


Some elements are so constructed as to be incapable of being a lone atom. Hydrogen atoms, for example, always travel in pairs. A hydrogen molecule is effectively two interpenetrating outer shells sharing energy, surrounding two nuclei of one neutron each. At the outer shells surfaces, chemistry takes over and ensures that atoms combine with other elements to form molecules and so on until life itself emerges from the broth. No particle can be alone for long.


A new EIG fractal, spun from light, has its attractive outer surface-vacuum and its inner repelling surface. The surface-vacuum attracts energy, which attempts to enter the zone at the speed of light that in turn pulls on adjacent energy etc, etc until another fractal arrives. If the second fractal is suitably aligned it will join the first, and the surface-vacuum increases. The Hubble expansion continues and creates super-vacuums aligned in all directions. If the second fractal is misaligned to the first, they will repel each other and move away at high speed until they encounter matter – where the process is repeated.


Radio and TV signals – permanent patterns in Space - inertia


Radio signals persist in intelligible form for decades – in principle for ever, if we have sufficiently sensitive receivers. How can this be? It implies that once patterned the electro-magnetic spectrum holds that pattern across vast distances and across eons of time – How? It implies that radio wave patterns are not interfered with as they cross air and space by uncountable numbers of other patterned waves – How? It is not due to immense power of transmission as this applies to the faintest signals from the early Voyager etc space craft now at the edge of the solar system and beaming out decipherable data with the millionth power of an ordinary torch battery – How? How does the EM spectrum record and carry and preserve all the messages, all the TV programmes, all the radio, all the satellite phone messages ???  Discuss. 


I am increasingly of the view that the basic stuff of the universe, the electromagnetic spectrum or the Aether, that Einstein worked without, was conditioned at a very early stage and may still be subject to conditioning, that cannot be undone except perhaps by energies as powerful as those that set the conditions in the first place.  This alleged conditioning creates the characteristics and capabilities for (1) Inertia and (2) legible and sustained radio signals – in the apparent chaos of signals that manifest in every part of the universe.  String theorists and other mathematicians predicting multiple dimensions in this universe,  need look no further than the incredible multiplicity of radio signals crossing the same spaces, and yet being distinguishable one from another, unique and untouched by their millions of mutual “collisions”. For such a legible signal, must we in fact account for the whole system – the sender, the receiver, the observer and the power source?


The really scary implications of inertia and waves.


Just as radio transmitters, driven by immense or minute electrical power, ranging from fading, feeble satellite batteries to supernova and colliding galaxies, emit waves and patterns that persist in space for eons of time and across infinities of space, so too does the human brain, indeed any nervous system of any animal, also transmit detectable radio waves into this most mysterious recording medium, that we call Space.  The implications of such brain waves being permanently recorded are staggering for all conscious beings.


The capability to record and retain a pattern in any medium, be it light, radio or in solid rock, is a feature of the power of inertia. It is inertia that keeps the Moon cycling the Earth, the Earth moving round the Sun, the Sun and solar system travelling within an arm of the Milky Way and the Milky Way travelling in a predictable relationship with other galaxies. Equally, it is inertia that maintains the shape of a table, or a person, and it is inertia that confines atoms to their position or course of travel and maintains their spin and elemental identities. This most subtle and little understood of all universal phenomena is also the power, or diverse powers, that maintains a radio wave. But in what medium is a radio wave – an electromagnetic or light wave – created, transmitted and maintained.


Make a broadcast on BBC Radio of, for example, a recording of Churchill’s famous lines from 1942, after the Battle of Britain had been won, “Never in the history of human conflict has so much been owed by so many to so few”. The broadcast adds its electronic pattern to the millions of simultaneous patterns on the “airwaves” from other radio and TV stations, from mobile phones, from computer screen emissions, from events on the Sun and in the galaxy, from millions of engines’ spark plugs and of course from millions of human brains. And yet, among this uncountable host of patterns, hundreds of miles from the emission, a simple wire whisker, touching on a common crystal is able to isolate the pattern of Churchill’s voice and, powered by a small battery, channel it to a speaker. 


Race out into space, faster than the speed of light, and position yourself with suitable receptors a mere sixty light-years away from London, and you will be able to hear the original live broadcast – still discernible – among the billions of radio patterns propagating, from every point around you, at 300,000 kilometres per second, passing through your location in the infinity of space. What medium is it that maintains the message with such extraordinary integrity?


What is inertia?


Everything we experience, be it solid, liquid, gaseous or in waveform, is formed from light into objects or phenomena that acquire and retain identity.  

Their identities are predictable. We can subject them to external forces and reliably predict what will occur. Their lives or, on the atomic scale their half-lives, can be forecast with accuracy. Yet they are all made from light, that most ephemeral and ubiquitous substance. Is light a substance? If light had no substance how then could it confer substantiality. Prise an element apart, such as uranium, and it explodes into light, almost completely converting to that purest form of energy. But uranium’s near cousins, gold, silver and lead refuse to be dismantled by chain reaction. They are also made of light but light held in such strong patterns that we cannot overcome the inertia of these heavy metals with mere explosions. It requires atom-smashers, vastly expensive cyclotrons with huge electrical energies, firing particle bullets at near the speed of light to displace even one electron or neutron from a lump of lead. Inertia protects us from chain-reactions in all but the unstable elements – frustrating our unceasing efforts to destroy our planet – or at least all our neighbours on the planet.  The radio-wave patterns of a lump of lead, or the vibrations of the atoms and molecules of lead, are just as much patterns in the electromagnetic spectrum as are radio waves. There is no essential difference between them – and they are all manifestations in the field of light.


Einstein put a damper on such speculations that still raged merrily among scientists in Victorian times and right up to Albert’s demonstration that, to understand quantum physics, we do not need the “Aether” – as in “ethereal”. But to understand the medium that carries radio waves, we do need the aether or something like it. For convenience we shall resurrect the term and refer to the mysterious stuff of the universe, as the aether – always recognising that it is constituted of light.  But to be the remarkable building material and recording medium that it is, the aether must be light that has been conditioned in some way.


Into this pre-conditioned aether all of mankind pours its conscious and unconscious transmissions. It has been sufficiently demonstrated that we broadcast our moods, our condition and our vibrations to others. We are able to hunt together, cooperating by subtle signals. We can feel the atmosphere in a room through the same kind of signals. We can measure and photograph electrical activities in the brain, powered by the electrical circuits of our bodies – sufficient to light a 40 watt light bulb. These brain waves are constantly being broadcast. It is arguable as to whether our conscious or unconscious thoughts are broadcast in a form that is most legible. It seems that our strongest instincts, to survive for example, are unconscious and operate in spite of our conscious efforts.  For example, could a person commit suicide, however strongly motivated, simply by holding his or her breath? The brain does its job of keeping our autonomic responses and nervous system working without any conscious effort from us.  These nervous system signals are broadcast from our heads into the aether. Menstruating women living together align their cycles – unconsciously.  Crowds experience mass joy, fear and panic – that is almost irresistible to any one individual. Our brain broadcasts are palpable – and can now be recorded by man-made receivers.


All transmissions, all broadcasts are somehow structuring the aether. This structure or condition remains in the aether and can be detected, isolated and replayed. Radio broadcasts, however banal or profound, go out into space to infinity. So do mobile phone text messages, and so do the messages we broadcast from our brains. Every object in the universe is, at its most fundamental level, a pattern of light, imposed on the aether, held in that pattern by inertia. Every broadcast that propagates across the universe has some impact on the patterns underlying the objects, the manifestations, in the universe. We, we humans, play our part in conditioning the aether, the stuff of the universe, with the broadcasts from our brains.  This is a truly scary thought.


We broadcast our brain waves and in doing so, just as all broadcasts do, we alter the basic structure or conditioning of the essential stuff, the very essence, of the universe. We collectively make our own environment. Such conditioning is not merely local. It goes out from us and propagates to the furthest reaches of the universe. And, if the universe is curved, our messages, our trillions of minute hammer strikes on the chisels that form and reform the universe, ultimately return to us. If the universe is flat, we are nevertheless conditioning the aether at an essential level, where we live.


It is comforting in some ways to imagine that mankind is collectively responsible for whatever conditioning effects our brain waves might have. But just how subtle is the aether. Is it capable of recording, of accepting the shaping that comes from a broadcast of the impulses of a single human brain?  In a world where every human being, all six billion of us, can be envisaged as one day having our own unique mobile phone, operating on a unique wavelength, with the tiniest traces of battery power and yet still be uniquely identified as our vital messages pass through satellites, space, air, water, wires, exchanges and aerials – how difficult is it to imagine that our far more personalised brain waves remain legible. If we concentrate – does this concentrate and increase the power of a brain-wave transmission. Panic focuses our energy and seems to transmit fear very strongly.  (NB Power of prayer, mediation, sympathetic magic).


Quite soon, in terms of scientific development, we will be able to scan for brain waves, for human brain waves, and be able to identify and in due course to locate a person by their unique signature. Travel twenty light years out from the Earth and, with suitable receivers, you will be able to pick up the thoughts broadcast twenty years earlier by an individual. This astonishingly robust and coherent pattern in the aether will be streaming across space, at the speed of light, unchanged. What is the aether made of to enable such structure to survive in this turbulent Universe. Why don’t all the massive radio signals from galaxies colliding with other galaxies for example, smash into the tiny pattern of a brain wave – or a mobile phone signal – or an episode of The Archers – and erase it forever from the aether? The massive swamping radio waves occur everywhere, all the time, but they do not eradicate the subtle recordings.


Perhaps, when the aether is so conditioned, so full of patterns that it can take no more – the end of the world will indeed be nigh. But before that fateful day, what are my brain waves doing to the medium. How am I restructuring the universe?


This conditioning of the aether, this meticulous recording of the merest signal wave, does not occur only in Space. There are familiar parallels scientists have studied – of sound waves in air and in water. Immense whales navigating the oceans sing to one another and their songs can be heard half-way round the globe. How are these communication vibrations maintained in water? The waves the whales transmit are broadcast, similar to a radio wave in the aether. The whale does not spout or blow out water in modulated waves that propagate as water waves. Such waves could never survive intact; they could not carry a coherent message.


When a choir sings its chorus rings out and, even from far away, with focused microphones, we can hear the whole effect or we can discern individual voices and groups of voices. What we hear are not air waves being blown into our ears by the singers; we detect the intricate and durable structuring or conditioning of the air in extraordinary complexity as sound waves propagate in ever widening circles from the source. How are these patterns maintained?


Let a fire engine race past, bells and sirens blaring and swamping all other vibrations – but immediately it has passed the choral music will ring through, as pure and as delicate and as accurate as before. And, with exceptional recording equipment and clever filtering, the singing can be isolated from the great passing noise – sharing the same air space, its identity assured through the mysterious power of inertia.


Clouds of mesons, pions, photons, other virtual particles & EIG.


The “clouds” of particles that are thought to be constantly created and destroyed around and presumably within the spaces in each atom compare to the local vacuum at the surface of each EIG fractal particle. Local vacuums are created when matter forms from energy that collides and, tornado like, locks energy into a sustainable shape (inertia) and, due to Hubble expansion, continues to expand, thus requiring more energy from the immediate surroundings, and thus depleting the immediate shell of energy. This dynamic system is akin to the dance of virtual particles required by quantum theory.


Casimir Effect and a Vacuum starship.


Roland Centre of Wisconsin writes to New Scientist recommending his article on his work with Robert Forward on quantum vacuum starships.  My research takes me to anything that mentions vacuums.  The premise being based on the Casimir Effect or force. This is that when two uncharged plates (not necessarily metal) are brought very close together the narrow gap between them excludes long wavelength particles and quantum fluctuations, creating an attractive force ( a partial vacuum? ) that pulls the plates towards each other.  However, ten years ago I wrote to the Director of CERN, then an Oxford man, to suggest a better idea than Casimir’s force, namely Space Chimney’s, also based on vacuum drive.


Space Chimneys – are better than Casimir space drives.


This idea for a trans-space drive is to build a saucer shaped space craft that has an outer rim that spins rapidly. No! this is not a spoof, saucer shaped really does work the best. From the rim hundreds of laser beams point upwards and can be angled to point coherently in the desired direction of travel. Under the craft within the spinning rim solid lasers point downwards/backwards. The spinning laser beams form a circle within which is a chimney. The beams are charged to attract all particles and energy from within the chimney to the beams, or the sides of the chimney.  Thus the centre of the chimney becomes a partial vacuum and, like a fire chimney on Earth, the higher pressure below and the low pressure above, lifts the vehicle. This is easy to visualise in Earth’s atmosphere, as simply creating a powerful vacuum in the air above a saucer would lift it – and the creation of the chimney vacuum is well within current physics.  In “empty” space it is more difficult to visualise but would nevertheless be a real effect.  The chimney power would reach out as far as the charged laser beams remained coherent. Ultimately, the vehicle would come close to the speed of light. Steering is achieved by pointing the chimney in the desired direction as the craft must follow the flow of matter “up” the chimney. Think of it as building a very, very long lift shaft.  What happens at the “end” of the chimney is anyone’s guess. Work on such lasers, designed to nudge nuclei into place, is currently underway in a team managed by Misha Ivanov of the National Research Council Canada, Ottawa.  They are polarising lasers to create rotating electromagnetic fields that trap and direct nuclei. How much easier it must be  to push a photon or electron around.


Does EIG have anything to offer this idea?  To be addressed later.


Casimir and EIG – gravity within dense matter.


The Casimir effect can be illustrated by two completely flat machined plates – say of a relatively inert material such as pot electrical insulator material – brought together to within the wavelength of at least part of the electromagnetic spectrum. The plates are drawn to each other, or more accurately they are both drawn to the partial vacuum between them caused by the exclusion of some energies. Imagine the plates being held apart by inert washers inserted in the gap. The vacuum force will continue to pull and the washers will deny the pull, holding the plates in stasis – apart. From the EIG perspective this is very interesting as for EIG it is necessary to explain why dense matter, say within a planet, exerts a stronger attraction (gravity) than do spheres of expanding space. If all are expanding at the same Hubble rate it would seem logical that the temporary vacuums would be consistent. However, if the Casimir Effect operates between particles or even molecules of matter that is dense (in close proximity) then just as with the experimental Casimir plates, some energy wavelengths will (always) be excluded and the relative vacuum between or within such particles will not be refilled by the whole electromagnetic spectrum of wavelengths in the way that occurs in open space, or as quickly. It can be imagined that the Casimir Effect creates a “permanent” stronger vacuum within dense matter – say in the heart of a star. Such “permanent” differentials between the ambient energy fields (the stuff of the universe) and matter will be stronger attractors and could be part of an explanation for Hubble expansion acting more strongly within dense matter. It might even be scientifically testable in a laboratory.


It is interesting that the Casimir Effect exists at all as in the popularised explanations there is no mention of sealing the edges of the gap between the two plates so as to preserve any partial vacuum. Presumably the Casimir experiment takes place in an air-vacuum chamber? It must simply be that longer wavelengths cannot exist between the plates and that the lack of these makes the density of the energy field between the plates less than the ambient density of the surrounding (complete) field. If so, this is exactly the type of phenomena that EIG needs for it credibility.


String Theory, symmetry and super-symmetry & EIG.


String theory is a mathematical proposal and search for a TOE or Theory of Everything that would integrate the laws and formulas of the four forces, the weak and the strong nuclear forces, the electromagnetic force and gravity, together with quantum theory and relativity.


Strings are improbable mathematical constructs being one dimensional, having only length and no thickness, and looping back on themselves to make the smallest particles in the universe – smaller than the Planck Length – and therefore forever undetectable by any known probe. To explore small objects requires even smaller things (particles or wavelengths) that can probe into the nooks and crannies of the object under scrutiny and return to our monitoring equipment with information. Paradoxically, strings may also be some of the largest things in the universe, being thought by some theorists to stretch across the whole universe, still as one dimensional lines or strings. Strings vibrate, like violin strings, in an infinity of possible vibrations.


The parallels with EIG include the concept that the enclosed fractal zones (quarks or whatever) are the smallest particles of matter and are indestructible, because they are untouchable. Also, as I postulate above, the EIG fractals might only form when matching wavelengths (colours) from the electro-magnetic spectrum (light) collide at angles that reinforce the spin and multiply the spin to C2 thus forming a surface. These matching and mutually reinforcing wavelengths might, EIG postulates, match and create the macro world of elements as identified in the periodic tables. However, as we learn from allocating ever narrower bandwidths for communication technologies, wavelengths may be almost infinitely divisible – limited finally by the Planck Length.  Just as String Theory relies on slicing ever thinner sections to eventually arrive at an infinity of one dimensional objects, so EIG fractals may be infinite slices of the electromagnetic spectrum, forming an infinite variety of elements, most of which are grouped into the familiar elemental forms. Thus calculus-like slicing is a theme common to both theories.


The creation of gravity in EIG by Hubble expansion that brings Supra and Super vacuums, might also be a parallel for the multi-dimensional aspects of  String Theory.  It is impossible to depict multi-dimensional space and or time in models or drawings – mathematicians portray such extra dimensions in formulas that very few people can follow. Those who can follow the logic belong to a peer group and accepted view that non-mathematicians can only gaze at in wonder.  String theory requires up to 10 and some think 11 dimensions, in place of the familiar 3, plus time, that are relied on by most other theories. Due to being both enfolded and below the Planck scale (one-millionth-billionth-billionth of a metre) these extra string dimensions are undetectable and, some think, incredible. EIG may be thought to utilise at least one extra dimension, as energy pours or explodes into space-time at the beginning of the universe, from an equally inconceivable  place of “non-universe” and according to EIG, attenuates then turns back on itself, creating space/time ripples that are the first conditioning of the universal energy AND, perhaps tearing the fabric to create Supra-vacuums that give glimpses beyond this universe to another place or non-place that by definition is “in” another dimension.








Supra-Vacuum – a glimpse from the space-time continuum to the No-thing that existed “before” the universe. These supra-vacuums would occur in the first few moments of expansion from a Big-Bang singularity and would cause the expanding energy to arc back on itself to fill the vacuums; causing many collisions between rays of energy (light) and creating the majority of matter fractals.


Super-Vacuums – are vacuums caused by Hubble expansion of the universe when the electromagnetic spectrum, the “stuff” of the universe, expands momentarily and Light rushes in, at the speed of light, to fill the vacuum.


Surface-Vacuum  - the zone around a fractal of matter that is depleted as the energy is utilised and drawn into the spinning fractal . Surface Vacuums create an attraction between fractals while the spinning surfaces repel each another, thus creating a dynamic tension.


Letters to science magazines


GRAVITY MATTERS – my letter to Scientific American 17th August 2002.


Mordehai Milgrom’s excellent article Does Dark Matter Really Exist (SA V287No2 Aug02), together with the panel by Anthony Aguirre, clearly informs me, an amateur, for the first time, of the factors that stimulate CDM theories and Professor Milgrom’s 20 year old alternative theory MOND that arises from the observation that a space shuttle falls to Earth at one hundred billion times the acceleration that Earth and its Solar System fall towards the centre of the Milky Way. I can only speculate, as I have not the training to calculate, that the Hubble constant for the expansion of the universe (extrapolated from observed Red Shift, not light-speed, thus mitigating the wholly circular arguments that universal expansion might otherwise be reliant on) is, while mentioned in the article, not given as prominent a place in these theories as it may deserve. Hubble expansion measured at the visible horizon of the universe, a horizon that recedes from us at the speed of light, is approximately 2.64E-18  or in laymen’s terms 0.00000000000000264% per second.  This endless, minuscule expansion of every sphere, large or small, represents a constant acceleration of the surface or horizon of that sphere. Einstein postulated that constant acceleration is indistinguishable from gravity. It is therefore worth spending some thought on the idea that gravity may be partially driven by Hubble expansion. Professor Milgrom cites as an exciting possibility, “The vacuum. The vacuum is what is left when one annihilates all matter (or equivalently energy) that can be annihilated …….. the interaction of the vacuum with particles might contribute to the inertia of objects ….. the vacuum also enters cosmology as an explanation for cold dark matter.” I believe that the vacuum of any sphere in the universe is momentarily increased by Hubble, as the stuff inside that sphere (radiation, plasma or particles) attenuates, before being refilled from the omni-present background radiation. I have further speculated that sphere’s of matter – say at the centre of large planets or stars – or in any element, have formed surfaces that hold back the incoming radiation for fractionally longer, and thus have a stronger, attractive vacuum for a microcosm of time. It is these ubiquitous Hubble vacuums, varying with the density of matter, I believe, that are the reality behind CDM as they pull on each another.


Opinion Letters, New Scientist Magazine


…………  and an earlier letter to New Scientist. …………..

8 April 2000. By Fax and Email.


The three articles on black-holes in New Scientist  1st April 2000; by Marcus Chown, on atom sized black holes and by Nigel Henbest and by Stephen Battersby on quasars, radio jets and galactic sized black holes tacitly assume that black-holes are collapsed very large objects, compressed by gravity – a force that, as Newton’s apple demonstrated, is self-evident but, as the continuing search for gravitons and CDM illustrate, is not yet understood. The observed and theoretical characteristics of black-holes, particularly the emission of immensely energetic radio jets, might better fit with Hubbles’s expanding universe than with the concept of matter crushing itself into the total annihilation of a singularity and quitting the universe.


Einstein demonstrated in his constantly accelerating windowless elevator thought experiment that gravity and constant acceleration are indistinguishable from each other. If Hubble expansion is to be incorporated into universal theories then every zone (e.g. sphere), at every scale, sub-atomic through galactic to universal, must logically be expanding at a constant (or variable) rate of acceleration. Einstein tells us that we would not know whether our experience of weight was due to gravity or expansion – if we were to stand on the surface of a sphere in Hubble’s ever expanding universe. We must ask ourselves just what is expanding in Hubble’s universe – just what is the fabric of the universe that stretches and grows infinitely; and what local effect does such expansion have on attenuating energy and matter.


The existence of galactic and atomic black holes implies that black holes may exist at any scale in any part of the universe. If, as Fred Hoyle postulated many years ago (before recanting), the universe is being constantly created at all points and if, as Einstein demonstrated, we cannot distinguish between expansion (acceleration) and gravity and if Hubble’s interpretation of red-shift being evidence for universal expansion is correct, the ubiquitous black holes could be caused by expansion – and they could be spawning not destroying matter.


Thought of as vacuums created by the attenuation of the stuff of the universe as it expands, black holes would exhibit exactly the same behaviour and characteristics as collapsed gravitational objects. The power of expansion would attenuate the universal fabric and nature, abhorring a vacuum would rush to fill the void – with energy and matter. As the void of a black hole was filled, bearing in mind that the zone is constantly expanding, a pulse would occur of expansion, void, fill, expansion. The in-rushing or in-falling energy and matter would collide, become plasma due to the impact and recoil. It may be postulated that the collisions of energy in these zones created and still create primary particles.


Thus paradoxically, zones of Hubble expansion would attract matter and energy as the zones push out their boundaries. This expansive, attractive force would in all ways be indistinguishable from gravity. CDM would be explained by the existence of innumerable, invisible black holes. Black holes, rather than being The Great Annihilators of Nigel Henbest’s article, would in fact be the fundamental unifying force and the creators of the universe.


Noel Hodson

14 Brookside OXFORD OX3 7PJ




Expansion is Gravity (EIG)

18th April 2003


The continued searches for Gravity Waves (First results on gravity waves; New Scientist 19th April 2003) and for the missing Cold Dark Matter and Dark Energy - being 96% of the mass of the universe, still leaves room for other hypothesis such as, Expansion Is Gravity (EIG). A "hypothesis" as your reader Brian Myers correctly points out, is not advanced as a "theory". 


The Hubble universal expansion constant calculates as a minuscule 3.0336E-18% per second. Applied to a six foot person, he or she, ignoring the compound effect, grows by an undetectable 1.328 millionths of a millimeter per year.  If Earth's 16ft per second gravity  field were to be due to the expanding globe it would represent a rate of growth of 9.1448E-07% per second; still very small but an immense 11 decimal places difference from the universal percentage; but perhaps dense matter develops different expansion properties than do zones in open space. As the search is for a tiny, ubiquitous field force that cannot be shielded and that acts in every direction, on every scale, simultaneously, Hubble expansion could be the culprit.


Yours truly



Noel Hodson


PS - if NS editors (or readers) would like to check the fairly simple arithmetic, I'd be happy to forward my EXCEL calcs.  The sums above are however correct. The EIG hypothesis is expanded on my web site -http://www.noelhodson,com


Noel Hodson

Tel 00 44 (0) 1865 760994

Business Projects Manager

Telework Consultant












31 May 03

New Scientist Letters


Dump Quarks


From Tom Lockyer

Los Altos, California, USA


Your article on protons shows quite clearly that the standard model, after 40 years, still has not revealed the structure of these subatomic articles (3 May, P34). When is science going to give up on quarks as a lost cause? In retrospect, the quark model never has had any results to recommend it. The quark has failed miserably to answer the simplest questions about the proton, such as its mass, charge or magnetic moment. Worse, the theory has had to postulate unprecedented fractional charges, and envision proton quarks as three thingies in a bag. Following the discovery of a third “strange” quark, someone noticed that the bagged three quarks violated the Pauli exclusion principle. Theorists got around this by postulating quark colour forces called red, blue and green that combine instantaneously to form a colourless combination. The fact that the quark model consistently failed has resulted in the postulation of many crazy “patches” to shore up the theory. For example to hold the quarks together, gluons were postulated and given the unprecedented ability to be stronger at large distances and “asymptomatically” free at short distances. And to explain our failure to detect quarks, it was postulated that if you break the gluon “strings”, quarks form on the free ends.

The sad fact is that particle physicists are stuck with a very bad model, and seem content to maintain the status quo, just to feed their wives and kiddies.


This letter, I assume written by an expert, Tom Lockyer, points up the great difficulties of creating a model that works and passes the peer pressure test. And it leaves hope that new ideas might be explored as not all the answers are known yet.

  “Quark” is the name currently given to the “fractals” of matter from which all matter is thought to be made. In the EIG concept these fractals are formed by colliding fields of light (electromagnetic spectrum) that spin to form basic particles. The colliding light waves or beams reinforce the rate of spin and wind-in or pack-in energy to the point where it becomes dense. These spinning fractals have surfaces formed by the immense spin rate of the energy and a depleted outer zone, a local vacuum, created by the inner pull, due to Hubble expansion, and the inward spin of energy – the syndrome of the ballet dancer drawing in her arms and spinning all the faster - similar to vortices that can be studied in the macro environment.  The rotating surface repels other fractals while the local vacuum holds them together.  This dynamic tension between push and pull is, I imagine, the fundamental glue of the universe, constantly reapplied as long as Hubble expansion continues.


 NB –address photonics p14 Alchemy of Light, NS 24May03

         Also think about the Casimir Effect.










Moore, Patrick

Stars and Space

A & C Black Ltd


The Ascent of Man

BBC Publications

Auderbach, Charlotte

The Science of Genetics


Hoyle, Fred; Wickramasingh, Chandra; Watkins, Jordan

Viruses from Space

Cardiff University Press

Feynman, Richard P

What do You Care What Other People Think?


Asimov, Isaac

The Universe


Capra, Fritjof

The Turning Point


Mc’Crone, John

The Ape that Spoke


Gleick, James



Wilson, Edward O

The Diversity of Life


Asimov, Isaac

Asimov’s Guide to Science


Gleick, James

GENIUS, Richard Feynman & modern physics

Little, Brown & Co.

Zukav, Gary

The Dancing Wu-Li Masters


Davies, Paul

The Last Three Minutes

Weidenfeld & Nicholson

Zohar, Danah; Marshall, Ian

Quantum Society


Zohar, Danah

The Quantum Self


Gribbin, John

In Search of the Edge of Time

QPD London

Davies, Paul

The Cosmic Blueprint