I have since changed some of this since I’ve written my other chapters

called “The Varying Speed of Light”

http://www.scribd.com/doc/36555372/The-Varying-Speed-of-Light

and “Magnetic Over-Unity via Centripetal Spin”

http://www.scribd.com/doc/35527270/Magnetic-Over-Unity-via-
Centripetal-Spin

With that in mind...

Part of my problem understanding Dr. Hawking's model on black holes is

my philosophy that nothing ever travels in a straight line.

There is no such thing as a straight line in our 3D reality.

Crazy talk you say?

Please bare with me...

Look at the straightest ruler you have available.

Now take a microscope and look at the edge of that ruler.
Is that ruler truly a straight line? No.
It's made up of smaller things compacted together called atoms and
molecules.
What is the shape of an atom?

1
Can you please point out One straight line that makes up an atom.
Everything is spherical and travels in an arc.

A Cartesian Coordinate system is a fictitious concept that works on paper

but not in 3D space. Not even with a Z axis.

Nothing travels in a straight line.

Everything travels in an arc.
Everything has positive and negative.

The rate of arc can be so great, that from your relative perception, it
Seems as if it's a straight line, but when you truly investigate, you see it's
not really straight.
It's a bunch of arcs compacted together and when you zoom out, you see
the total sum of the parts.

So, lets look at these current models of space:

I DO NOT understand this or believe this. ((after filtering information

2
through the notion that there are no straight lines.))
No 2D in our 3D reality.

It’s a blank graph…. where are the other stars and planets?
If that’s a model of a black hole…. where are the particles?
Or at least the affect of the particles on the graph.
Please tell me what travels in a straight line through space with zero
influence from other gravity like in that graph.

And why doesn’t the graph have a Z axis? It’s 3D space.

Where does that depression in “fabric of space-time” come into play when
you have a Z axis and things traveling from every given direction?

I could always be wrong..... but here's my argument:

I believe there is a force other than gravity which causes objects to spin
and rotate WHILE they gravitate towards or away from something. My
make believe word for this is "vortation."
Gravity is attracting / repelling.
Vortating is spinning.
2 different things.

Why is there no evidence of any rotation in the 4 picture examples of

space?

Look at Phi.... look at nature. Everything spirals. Why don’t the current
models of space have any spin? It doesn’t seem natural even as an
example. Their model’s are fiction. Look at nature:

3
And why does their grid show ANY straight lines if it's representing 3D
space?!?!?
Get rid of the grid altogether, but if you want to use it as an example, then
change the grid to look like the surface of an ever moving ocean.... not a
frozen lake.
On your relative scale, an arc may appear flat, but it's not on the grand
scheme of things.
A still image of a frozen lake isn’t missing much action.
A still image of the ocean will show ripples and variation. No flatness at
any given time you click the camera.

And NO part of the ocean is perfectly flat since the Earth is round and
water flows Around the surface.
And the picture models of the universe are stagnant. A picture is frozen in
time.
The ocean is not frozen in time!
The picture models would need to constantly move and change in order to
be accurate.
And if it did that... then it wouldn't be flat and stagnant.

4
All of the pictures for the current models of space are only a flash in time.
Just like taking a picture of you with a camera. That one picture doesn't
represent your whole life.... only a moment of your life.

All of the current models of space only represent the fabric of space-time
as a frozen lake and when something sits on the frozen lake the ice bends
and creates a depression in the meniscus of the water as if it was liquid.

How can the frozen meniscus of water bend as if it's liquid? It simply can't.

And how can even the liquid meniscus of water be flat if the molecules
making up that water are not flat themselves?
What you are seeing is the total sum of the parts which gives the false
impression of a 2 dimensional interpretation for your 3D observation.
What you are seeing is water frozen in time on your scale, but when you
look in another dimension (microscope) you see the reality.

Nothing is flat, nothing travels in a straight line.

Everything arcs, spirals, vortates. Nothing is stagnant because nothing can
stay at absolute zero. Especially a black hole.

The ocean of space-time is not like a frozen lake.

Your picture models don't account for this because they don't move.
Even the molecules and atoms in the frozen meniscus of a lake are still
moving. You just can't see it.
Because on your scale... it's "frozen."
Is it really frozen on the grand scheme of things? No.
Is a ruler really straight when you look at it under a microscope? No.

Lets take a "perfectly flat" meniscus of liquid water.

When a water bug walks on the surface of the water, what happens?
Lets compare the current model of space, to nature.

5
The current models of space are saying the meniscus of space-time
(Fabric) can't be broken.
Can the surface of water ever be broken?
Of course. The amount of force required to break the meniscus is what we
call surface tension.

If we could see a particle of sand floating around the depression in the

water near the bug's leg.... I doubt that the particle of sand would ever be
caught in an orbit around the water bug's leg.

The current models of space are saying that we are all floating on the
surface of an ocean but there is nothing beneath the meniscus, or fabric?

This is another reason why I have trouble with the term "fabric" of space-
time, or the mattress theory.
Only computer models and holograms can show you the reality of our 3D
space-time.

it seems you'll be stuck in a paradox if you base a 3D computer model

from a 2D perception.
There's always 3 sides to every story. Yours, mine, and the truth. If all this
crazy talk is my side, then the picture examples are of your side:

6
First of all... why is space represented as flat?
What is that person standing on?
And I think that guy standing there must be god because only he could
stand on a non existent flat surface.
If you can't make a hole in water and bend water around like the picture
above... how can you compare the fabric of space-time, to an ocean?

If you're going to draw a flat line on paper, roll the paper up like a scroll
since that represents the true path of an object in space.
Or put the paper in front of a fan so that it's constantly blowing and
rippling.

If an object traveled in a straight line, that would mean we are stationary

in space. Or it would mean we are moving through space in a straight line.
But nothing can travel parallel forever. At some point those 2 objects will
intersect.
It could take the amount of space available in the universe but they will
eventually intersect.

The rate of inclination is sooo small, that from your relative perception it
SEEMS as if they are traveling parallel. But if you were able to witness it for
eternity... those objects would crash into each other before an eternity.
Even if those two object were the only two existing objects in the universe,

7
they would STILL intersect because they each have a gravitational pull on
one another.
That pull will eventually cause an intersection.

A straight line is a fictional concept that only works on paper and is an

"optical delusion" on our relative scale.

Cartesian Coordinate systems do not work in 3D space because they deal

with straight lines.
They work just fine for our tiny universal frame of reference at this point in
Humanity. But if we wanted to travel really really far, I think we would need
to use a spherical coordinate system or something even more complex.

Since your point of origin never remains stationary, you might actually need
a spherical coordinate system that constantly rotates in an ever-changing
phi spiral.

How are you supposed to draw a constantly moving Cartesian graph on

paper?
You simply cannot.
You need advanced computer systems like we do today or holographic
systems to draw proof of 3D reality in it's true context.

There are no flat lines and no flat space in a spherical coordinate system.
And even a spherical coordinate system doesn't account for spin.

All the models of the universe I see, only account for a Cartesian view on
space.
Where is the rotation?
Where is the arc?
Where does phi come into play?

Gravity doesn't need to be present in the form of a celestial body to affect

an object's path of travel.
Space is not empty so therefore there will always be a force on an object
no matter how deep into space it goes.
Nothing will ever be without some pressure. Even in the vacuum of space.

Straight lines cause resistance since everything naturally flows in an arc.

Of course our current models of space fall apart sooner or later because
eventually, a straight line always meets resistance. This force other than
gravity, makes All straight lines ARC on it's path.

8
It's natural and it's a force other than gravity.
I feel that Gravity and Vortation go hand in hand like Space and Time.
Space-time..... Gravity-spin.

Lets look at Marko Rodin's coil and vortex model.

His coil dramatically reduces electrical resistance and barely any heat is
generated.
He says it's because he wrapped the coil in a natural spiral which flows in
accordance to the universe.

Marko Rodin's coil model is correct!

And a pic of John Searl's device called the SEG (Searl Effect Generator) The
magnets, rollers, stator ring, etc are composed of arcs. No straight lines.

9
I used to think space was flat, then I thought it was a sprial, then I though
it was a sphere.
Now I don't think space is made of anything at all.
There is no fabric. Only forces within the void which act upon corporeal
objects.
All things are on their own path down a vortex.

Newton says, "All objects travel on a straight path until an outside force
acts upon them."
Well, I don't think so.

I sense that All objects Would travel in a straight line through space-time
if it wasn't for gravity-spin.
Since there is always some gravity from background radiation in the
deepest parts of space, there will always be spin to couple that gravity.

I completely agree with Newton when he said, "For every action there is an
equal and opposite reaction."

For the "action" of space the equal and opposite reaction would be time.
For the "action" of gravity, the equal and opposite reaction would be spin.

I don't believe in the flat space model as if space was like a mattress.
There is no floor in space, no grid, and no fabric of space-time. And if
there is... it's probably not flat.

Everything travels in an arc.

Everything has positive and negative.
There must be a particle to balance out another particle.

10
There must be a force to balance out another force.
Those 2 particles can be so far away from each other that you would
never realize they are associated in a binary orbit.
Almost like the biblical tale of Noah.
Everything travels 2 by 2 in an ark.
"Binary Vortation"

Space balances out time like gravity balances out spin.

Everything is moving in space together yet independently.

There are so many objects in space that there is an infinite number of
neutral points in space.
Therefore, there is gravity-spin everywhere.

Perhaps this is where the notion of infinite probability comes into play?
There seems to be an infinite amount of directions you can go from any
one given point in space-time.
Therefore any place you start from is a neutral point to something or
someplace else.

So, phi is natural. A spiral is natural.

If you have enough phi spirals intersecting on a small scale, I think you will
eventually see a straight line on a giant scale.

So if you shined a really powerful laser beam that could reach the distance
of the universe... you would see it arcs around planets and stars like a
sine wave.

At no point is that laser beam perfectly straight.

But again, like a phi spiral, if you zoom in enough on any given part of the
arc, it will appear as a straight line.

The phi spiral is a pretty simple concept. Even though I believe in god, I
think intersecting spirals is a simpler concept than god.
Most people's Occam's Razor is god because its the simplest solution, so
therefore people think it must be the correct one.

But simple to one person, is complex to another. Everything is relative.

--Jason Verbelli

11