The Fundamental Process of Energy
A Qualitative Unification of Energy, Mass, and Gravity
● Abstract ● Links ● Reviews ● Discussion

Conrad Ranzan (Director, DSSU Research)

Discussion: 2012 (rev. 2016-6)

Contents:

1. Abstract (and links)
2. Reviews
3. A Strange Situation
4. Response from a philosophical brother
5. Change of View Regarding Neutrino

"If the ultimate model of physics is to be as simple as possible, then one should expect that all the features of our universe must at some level emerge purely from properties of space." –Stephen Wolfram, A New Kind of Science

1. Abstract (and links)

Abstract: The Universe is built upon a two-faceted Primary-Cause process, which serves as the key to the fundamental process of energy. Positive and negative energy processes are defined and used to resolve the cause-of-mass question, the cause-of-gravitation mystery, the dark matter problem, the vacuum energy confusion, the energy balance misunderstanding, and the source-energy enigma. "The Fundamental Process of Energy" presents a qualitative understanding and conceptual unification of energy, mass, and gravity.

Keywords: Energy; energy process; positive energy; negative energy; radiation; mass; gravitation; vacuum energy; dark energy; dark matter; source energy; cosmology, DSSU* theory.

* DSSU is the acronym for Dynamic Steady State Universe. It is a model based on the premise that all things are processes. As a cosmology theory it holds that aether is dynamic and that aether expands and contracts regionally and equally resulting in a cosmic-scale cellularly-structured universe.

The Fundamental Process of Energy –A Qualitative Unification of Energy, Mass, and Gravity, PART 1 by C. Ranzan, Infinite Energy Magazine Issue #113 Jan/Feb 2014. Part 1 download

The Fundamental Process of Energy –A Qualitative Unification of Energy, Mass, and Gravity, PART 2 by C. Ranzan, Infinite Energy Magazine Issue #114 Mar/Apr 2014. Part 2 download

Complete article: PDF download

2. Reviews

(2012-5-13) Dear Conrad,

I’ve read your paper through and I’m stunned by its concept originality and how well it dovetails into DSSU theory. I will keep my comments for now specific to the first 10 pages up to but not including Section #8, Energy of the Gravitational “Field”. I feel I must comment on the early foundation you’ve laid out within the first seven sections since what follows stems from the material in those sections. [There are a total of fourteen sections.–C.R.] But make no mistake about it, I am thrilled with the entirety of this paper and find it startling that it answers questions I’ve long harbored regarding the vacuum, questions which have been treated by “others” flippantly if not without regard to science at all. Their idea of energetic particles flipping in and out of a vacuum doesn’t cut it with me —never has!

Physicist Robert Oerter almost had it right with his “oscillators everywhere at every point in space” except for understanding “energy”. He understood the “oscillation” part but he failed to understand the “energy” part, the exclusion of energy from the aether space-medium, the exclusion of energy you accomplish so brilliantly. Now, when it comes to vacuum “fluctuators” I want something more but I accept your definition because it is so beautiful and logically presented. A fluctuator-filled super-dense aether-medium absolutely devoid of mass or energy is about as mysterious an entity as one can imagine. I like both the mystery and realism. How does one attack “luminiferous aether” and how does one fathom Einstein’s (Leyden) profound quotation? One can’t, since you so effectively back up Einstein’s prescient saying that the aether indeed appears “not endowed with the quality characteristics of ponderable media” and/or “energy” per se. You make your case with Einstein, Oerter, and Larmor that, indeed, the aether must be regarded as a natural law involving the imponderable “quintessence” ... Case closed! The truly remarkable concept you espouse is to prove that aether “is not a structure made of matter”. I entirely agree.

The aether as an “ultimate source medium” is worthy of deep thinking. You proved this handsomely …

Your startling concept of aether fluctuators (oscillators) as a nonmaterial conducting medium for the photon in all its electromagnetic (EM) gradations that you so beautifully graphed in Figs. 2, 3, & 4 are clear and easily understood. I can visualize the single propagating photon sucking up the essence medium in order to fulfill its energy driven EM gradated existence. The process of existence of the photon in all its guises and forms, the process whereby the photon owes its existence to its unique mode of conduction, is emphatically lucid. Photons are surely energy laden (thanks to the excitation of the essence medium) to exist as electrons, positrons, quarks, mesons, and their anti-particles. The beauty of it all allows us to create and understand the pattern-rich matter we and the entire DSSU cellular universe consciously express and view as “existence”.

I much enjoyed Figure 5 which shows clearly the high-energy collision concept of “photon confinement” producing both left and right, particle and anti-particle, pairing. What a wonderful explanation and so right-on and to which I add to your question: “How might this be accomplished? How might the aether excitation (the photon of Fig. 4), traveling at lightspeed, be confined?” Yes, of course, by the medium through which it translates along with the method by which gravitational bodies large and small bend light, but far more diversely! This all appears to me like some cosmic grand piano in the hands of a chameleon photon that plays into the incredible micro-macro diversity of life and matter on Earth and all that we observe in the DSSU greater cellular universe by virtue of our particle-colliding, microscopic, telescopic, and spectroscopic tools. Your photonic-aether rendition is positively orchestral in its implications! The aether being a source of great consequence rather than a pot spewing energetic popcorn!

Your thesis on the graviton is cogent and logical. It is little wonder a graviton has not been found? Gravitation, as you say, “is not a force and needs no force carrier”. ...

As you say, “photon propagation through the aether is a process of conduction by aether absorption”. This is just an amazing statement about the aether, the space essence, as it absolutely avoids emptiness and I suspect leaves no holes? I find this description fascinating! Yet how can the aether be taken up by photons and then annihilated? It’s not a matter-or-energy question since the aether does not violate conservation laws—but portions of this soup to just “disappear” as if leaving a hole in the aether in spite of powerfully endowed photons devouring massive amounts of aether as they propagate at the speed of light, this makes my head spin? Your equation on page 7 explains it but the idea boggles the mind.
[Comment: Roger, here, has failed to make the connection with the related process of gravitation. –C.R.]

I know, I need to deep-think this more … to really understand this.

Again, your paper is just amazing. I will be giving it careful study in the days to come.

Thanks again, for giving me the early read on this before you put it out there. Where will you publish? The concept, because it deals with the “vacuum” as profoundly viewed as an aether far beyond the Planck scale and as an aether without an iota of materiality, energy, and mass, will surely be controversial but from my viewpoint most welcome. It’s time to let this all fly!

–Roger F. (California) 2012 May 13

Roger F. is a prodigious reader of books on cosmology and astrophysics, and on the shape of reality. His specialty is creating images that capture the deeper nature of the universe and existence (hence, the metaphoric writing style quite evident in his reviews). His most famous work is The Cosmic Tree of Life, a publicly displayed digital painting. His website is: www.ferragallo.com
–C.R.

(2012-5-19) Dear Conrad,

After my 3^rd read, I’ve come to the conclusion that the process-of-energy paper is a master work … I found that the DSSU conclusion wonderfully brought together the whole of the paper with its diverse components.

I remain more stunned by this paper the more I read on because you have indeed developed new concepts that now drive DSSU lightyears forward. DSSU is a beautiful theory that has not wavered from Heraclitean harmony of opposites one iota in the 9 years since inception and having drawn from this as if from a deep and constant well, as you say so eloquently: "a harmony of opposite perpetual processes", and one that "sustains the perpetual dance of existence". What could be more beautiful than this? I have been held captive by this latest paper and must comment on the whole of it before I can possibly go on working.

As a whole, this is your most profound paper and one of the best written. Your organization and prose is befitting of what you always characteristically do when you tackle DSSU theory: you focus like a laser with a tenacity I greatly admire. Your papers are always admirably written, embrace history, meticulously researched, with fine illustrations that have taken me by surprise. You objectively back-up everything you believe in and are keenly aware you stand on the shoulders of great men who struggled in their time to reveal the reality and physics of existence. I'm so fortunate to have you as a friend and for having shared with me so many of your papers before they were published and this one "Fundamental Process of Energy" encapsulates the feeling I had as I read this paper; that I, too, was a participant sharing the excitement of discovery along with you. Thank you and congratulations!

I hope you will soon share this fine paper with other media venues when you believe it to be ready —come what may— because you've advanced DSSU theory significantly due to the very broad reach of what you've written. Perhaps it's nearing a propitious time to roll this out to a Scientific American or Discover or (?). I'm sure you will publish a book open to the critique of all interested parties and the general cosmology community at the right time. I understand the need for good timing, historical reference, caution, structure, and peer reviewed papers and the like, but some risk taking, now and then, may be in order. Of course, you will know when the time comes.

What you have to say about the aether helped me understand the “essence” in a most startling way. I followed the insightful thoughts of Oerter and Larmor and it was a lamp in my head that went off reading again with greater comprehension Einstein's quote: he nailed it with the Leyden [University] event in 1920. Remarkable! The aether if thought of as an imponderable granular quintessential ubiquitous space medium some 10 to the minus 48th power takes me beyond disbelief and I'm straining at the bit to visualize this very strange nonmaterial fluctuator medium that is so far, far, below Planck scale. If this was not enough —later in your paper it was revealing to understand it is a medium that vanishes from the universe in the face of mass and energy at all cosmological scales from sub-atomic to the DSSU cosmic-cellular reality! The idea that this essence is devoid of "energy" is astonishing since it provides a very strange vacuum essence medium space-filling presence whereupon photonic mass energies at all EM scales absolutely absorbs the aether medium through which it propagated! This would be like vacuuming a room with the power of electricity and mechanics and instantaneously watching the room disappear from the universe absolutely and forever annihilated from existence! While the vacuum cleaner remains! Yes, an essence immediately transferring its non-materiality to energetic fundamental particles, photons, "confined photons" as mass that simultaneously goes forward merrily to build atoms, people, planets, stars and galactic clusters. But without this Lambda essence, this component of gravitation, the DSSU universe would be just a hallucinatory dream in the (mind) of wavelet fluctuators. How one goes about visualizing this fantastic process is an engaging challenge which you and a few brave souls have discovered. This paper is a very readable account of this. I will try a few visualizations I’ve thought through because the challenge is too great a test to leave this undone. The corollary may be likened to quantum entanglement but even quantum mechanics pales in the face of your presentation! Rachael Armstrong recently said: "Let matter live". I second this because "life", "mind" and "consciousness" are too extraordinary to ignore and I will engage you on these matters later.

I won't labor your wonderful passages about the "photon" which I just loved! I agree with you that the fundamental particles, including the electron, muon, tau, neutrinos, quarks, and the true forces of nature, etc., may all be constructs (topologies, spins, chirality, complex fields) of the mysterious, yet to be described, photon. I loved your visuals and your splendid discussions of this on page 4 and 5. It's a very powerful thought concept and makes scientific sense to me and all I've read and kept up with. Your sections on Energy of Mass, EM, Electric & Gravitation Fields, Nature of Aether, Energy of Lambda, Zone of Cosmic Tension (by the way, a fine illustration) and more —much more— all brilliantly and clearly presented and beautifully written. Again, the best paper ever because you touched on physics you’ve clearly helped to make meaningful for me and I trust the scientific community will one day come to appreciate.

Thanks for providing the DSSU Glossary at the end; very helpful to have concise definitions. Will you produce this paper for peer review anytime soon, since you may still wish to bring the clarity of other equations to bear on what you presented. I for one like the paper as it is. It is powerful and quite comprehensive. You covered a ton of ground and could likely break this paper into several others since it is so potent and full of new ideas. The beauty of this paper is the wide breadth of its physics outreach which in sum represents an organic whole —a tour de force ...

Again, thank you for having sent the advance copy ... I learned a great deal and I come away more convinced than ever the DSSU theory will win the day and I hope soon.

Thank you, again, and congratulations,

–Roger F. (California) 2012 May 19

3. A Strange Situation

Here again we have a situation where defending the orthodoxy and status quo are more important than solving scientific problems. New ideas —no matter how compelling— are not welcome. Far too often there is outright opposition. ... A dissident physicist, Bruce Harvey, is reported to have stated (in 2002): “To say that the established scientific world is prejudiced against new ideas is an understatement. It is paranoid about them.”

Now, you would think that a journal; specializing in the subject of entropy and naming itself “Entropy” would be interested in something called “The Fundamental Process of Energy” and described as a remarkably self-consistent theory. But you would be wrong.

The named article was rejected —deemed not suitable for the 2013 special issue of Entropy journal: “Modified Gravity: From Black Holes Entropy to Current Cosmology.” That is strange. Is it to be supposed that the subject of energy was outside its scope!? In a subsequent submission the paper was rejected by a related journal entitled “Energies.” The managing editor, Astor Zhao, concluded “that the topic covered in your paper does not fall into the scope of Energies either” and suggested “submitting it to another more suitable journal.”

Amazing it is to witness what happens to people when they lose touch with reality. Either this editor is unaware that the subject of the manuscript and the subject of the journal (Energies) is the same —all about fundamental aspects of energy— OR the editor is unwilling to give an honest reason for the rejection. … Keep in mind, here, that my submission was not a shot-in-the-dark; rather it was by personal invitation.

The next publication attempt involved what turned out to be another defender of orthodoxy. The International Journal of Modern Physics D (IJMPD), published by World Scientific, promotes itself as covering the topics of “Gravitation, Astrophysics, and Cosmology.” Perfect. So I thought. The submitted Article critically relates to all three topics. A decision came a few days later, sent by some unknown individual:

Dear Dr. Ranzan,
We have considered your manuscript "The Fundamental Process of Energy –A qualitative unification of energy, mass, and gravity" and conclude that it is not suited for International Journal of Modern Physics D.

Thanks for your submission to the journal.
Yours sincerely,
International Journal of Modern Physics D
[UNSIGNED!]

What is most annoying is that the rejection comes after you go through the time-consuming task of formatting and typesetting your article to the particular journal’s in-house standard —all for the copyeditor’s convenience but a complete waste if the article is not accepted.

This is a strange situation. The research article focuses on the truly fundamental aspects of energy. It has been examined several times with no errors found or reported, with no violation of physical laws, yet three major journals (publications claiming relevancy to this branch of physics) have rejected this paper. Some editors do not even sign their names to the rejection notice! What is the scientific establishment afraid of?! ... Strange indeed.

–CR (2015-8

4. Response from a philosophical brother

Subject: Your Article in Infinite Energy

From: [www.neoetherics.com] To: Ranzan@cellularuniverse.org

Let me say at the outset that I view you as a philosophical brother. I strongly agree with your vision of inrushing aether into a massive body as the underlying process behind the phenomenon of gravitation. And your emphasis on flow rate of change as the key factor, not flow velocity, is of great interest to me. I worked on this problem many years ago and (finally) arrived at the same realization. You are certainly on the right track when you point out that any gravitational body swims in an aetheric sea made up of the superimposed aether flows related to all other near (and distant) massive bodies. Each of these flow rates has its own rate of change, quite unrelated to its velocity. And ultimately it is the vector sum of all these rates of change that determines the direction and strength of the local gravity experienced by the body in question.

Would you agree with the following? The limitless aetheric sea is in motion everywhere; nowhere is it entirely still —not even in deep space. At every point it has a velocity vector. At every point it has an acceleration vector (dv/dt) which is not necessarily in the same direction as the velocity vector. AND, most crucially, at every point it has a velocity gradient (dv/dx). The velocity gradient is a physical characteristic of a point in space. And, again, the velocity gradient is not necessarily in the same direction as the velocity vector, nor is it proportional to the scalar value of the velocity vector. The vector sum of all velocity gradients impinging on any given point establishes the gravity at that point.

I think this is consistent with the concluding paragraphs of your article. To see my thinking that lead to the same conclusion, go to www.neoetherics.com.

Respectfully,
Jerry Shifman (2014-01-24)

Author's Reply:

Dear Jerry Shifman: Thank you for your interest in my work.

The Infinite Energy magazine article focuses on a unified concept of energy. Since your main area of interest is a gravity theory, I would suggest you read the following Paper detailing the DSSU gravity theory based on aether:

The Processes of Gravitation –The Cause and Mechanism of Gravitation, Journal of Modern Physics and Applications, Vol.2014:3 (2014)

I have read your posted essays. Your basic premise of defining mass as an aether sink is absolutely correct. Your analysis of the gravity mechanism, as in your email, is exactly right. Yes I would agree, “The limitless aetheric sea is in motion everywhere; nowhere is it entirely still.” But there is more. I do believe you will be amazed at the orderly patterns that those motions exhibit.

Here is an interesting perspective on the difference between your approach and mine: You attacked the problem from the bottom up, solved the gravity-mechanism mystery, gained the key to the mainspring of the cosmos, but then struggled to extend the success into a broader theory —a theory of the Universe. On the other hand, I approached the problem from the top down, first solved the big problems so to speak, then tested the theory on practically every acknowledged mystery in astronomy, physics, and philosophy. (Since the theory’s inception in 2001, it has never failed.) Gravity was among them, and turned out to involve a three-part extension (or application) of the core DSSU theory.

You are so right about the Hundred Year Detour that you discuss on your website. … I think there is much to be unlearned and unsound theories to be discarded. Meanwhile, the education system has been subverted, during those same hundred years, into an amazingly effective indoctrination system.

All the best in your research.

Warm Regards, Conrad (2014-01-29)

5. Change of View Regarding Neutrino

The conventional view is that the neutrino, like other leptons, is totally immune to the strong force. It has no charge and no mass, so it can't do very much —except propagate at the speed of light. As physicist Leonard Susskind points out (in his book The Cosmic Landscape, p57), “It doesn’t bind itself to other particles to form more complex objects. It hardly does anything. In fact the neutrino is such a loner that it will pass through light-years of lead without ever getting deflected.” In view of this almost complete undetectability, and the fact that the make-up of the neutrino is still considered a mystery, one may be tempted to conclude that neutrinos are elusive to the point of being practically non-existent.

Under DSSU theory, the nature of the neutrino and its status as an independent particle had earlier been non-committal and somewhat ambiguous; and that was how things stood up until the early part of 2015. I am pleased to report that the mystery of the neutrino has now been resolved.

In the article, abstracted and linked above, I had surmised (in Section 3): "The several types of neutrinos in the Standard Model are either photon-like particles or they are non-entities. The ostensible participation of neutrinos in particle interaction may simply represent a localized, momentary, interaction with the aether —and not some entities with independent existence." But with the new change-of-view perception, a clearer picture emerges.

The revised view is that the neutrino is a particle fully consistent with the DSSU particle model —a model based on a single fundamental particle, a model based on all subatomic mass particles being single or multiple confined photons, and all energy particles being fully-free or partially-free photons. It is now understood how the neutrino manages to be magnetically and electrically neutral —while still acting as a carrier of energy. We now have an unambiguous explanation of why the neutrino is never deflected and rarely interacts.

Coming across this gem was truly delightful. ... All I will say at the moment is that the neutrino fits the model beautifully. The amazing details will be presented in a future article.

For the followers of DSSU cosmology, cognizance of the micro- and cosmic- worlds continues to expand.

–CR (2015-8)

“Artists, take heed: … art that portrays the new universe realistically could be the most subversive art in history.”
–Joel R. Primack, The View From the Center of the Universe

2016-6

Top of page Back to DSSU Home Page

C. Ranzan

Email:
DSSUresearch@CellularUniverse.org

Site updated: 23-01-06

The Fundamental Process of Energy A Qualitative Unification of Energy, Mass, and Gravity ● Abstract ● Links ● Reviews ● Discussion