One school of thought of the Greek philosophers required that the concept of motion was an error in the human mind. The reasoning which led to this conclusion is as follows: Let us suppose that a ball is tossed from one person to another. We can assume that the distance covered required a certain interval of time. If only a part of the distance is considered, the time required is reduced. In the limit, a zero time interval requires a zero distance covered. It follows that at any point in time, the object in question was at rest. Since the time point considered is arbitrary, the object was at rest at every point. Then it could not have moved at all.

The Greeks knew nothing about the calculus. The process of integration is such that an infinite summation of zero elements may very well yield a limit other than zero. The difficulty is easy to resolve mathematically, but there is a much deeper physical meaning that must be considered.

In the historical sense, mass was measured on the basis of its inertial effect. The statement by Ernst Mach that mass exists only in the presence of other mass objects must then be modified. We restate the Mach principle: Inertia exists only in the presence of other inertial objects. What Mach did not know was that he was talking about a field effect.

To this point the human race has been confined to the near

vicinity of earth. Then all of the known laws of physics reflect this fact. Space at the surface of the earth has an energy density which is subject to calculation. It follows that the mass density of space can be calculated. We find that the mass density of the gravitational space at the surface of the earth has a value of one-third the average mass density of the solid earth.

It is certain that an object moving in such a medium as that described can be assigned a velocity with respect to the medium. Since the object is an energy configuration, a total energy must apply. We have found the law of conservation of energy to be active. The kinetic energy of motion is increased only at the expense of the internal energy. The total energy is conserved. Then we find that inertia exists only as a consequence of the energy conservation law.

Now we must consider the nature of limiting effects. The question is whether or not the internal energy can be driven beyond the zero energy condition. It appears that in the absence of the external medium, the laws of inertia would not apply. In the statement of the Mach principle, we may question what proximity is required in order to establish the effect of inertia.

Relativity theory takes the view that the only possible absolute is the velocity of light. If this is the case, absolute rest and absolute motion cannot be defined. On the basis of the above analysis, we must question such a conclusion. Since the act of accelerating an object reduces its internal energy, we consider the object to be at rest when its internal energy is at a maximum. We must conclude that there is a fundamental difference between an object at rest and one in motion. This difference did not appear in the analysis given by the Greek philosophers.

The gravitational potential of the earth shows no rotation. In this case the earth rotates with respect to its own non-rotating space. Since the mass center of the earth is also the mass center of its own space, the space of the earth translates with the earth in its orbit around the sun. This fact is demonstrated by the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment. This experiment was designed to measure the motion of the earth with respect to the luminiferous ether which was assumed at rest.

The foibles of the mind of man are beyond understanding. The null result of the experiment clearly indicated the non-existence of the ether as a background of space at rest. Instead, the interpretation was that the ether still existed. Its presence was masked by the contraction of the measuring instruments.

The Michelson-Morley experiment must be considered in conjunction with a much later experiment by Michelson and Gale. This experiment was concerned with sending a beam of light around an area in the form of a rectangle. The light was carried in the interior of a pipe that was maintained in the state of a vacuum. When the direction of the beam was reversed, a distinct and consistent difference was observed.

The results of the two experiments taken together are sufficient to indicate that the space of the earth translates with the earth, while the earth rotates on its own axis within the non-rotating space. It seems pointless to go to the trouble of performing experiments when there exists no background of theory sufficient to provide a proper interpretation of their meaning.

In fact, there are more simple experiments to prove the stated results. If there existed an ether drift, the plane of the swing of a pendulum would not be on the vertical. Also, the plane of a satellite motion would not intersect the mass center of earth. In terms of rotation, the action of the Foucault pendulum is such that it maintains its plane of swing while the earth rotates under it. The same fact applies in the case of the starboard correction for long range guns in the northern hemisphere. In order to hit a target, correction for the rotation of the earth is required. These facts require that the space of the earth must translate with the earth, but takes no part in its rotation.

If a reference frame is to be established, the space of the earth is at rest with respect to its mass center. The point becomes the origin of coordinates for an earth-centered reference system. Since the rotation of the earth can be defined with respect to its own non-rotating space, the laws of centrifugal force are active even in the case that the earth is the only universal object in existence. The same fact must apply to every mass entity that has any continuity of existence. This is sufficient to reveal the fallacy of the statement made by Bishop Berkeley to the effect that rotation cannot be defined in the absence of external objects to establish a reference frame.

The interpretation of the four dimensions of relativity in terms of a geometry is in error, but the concept of four dimensions in the interpretation of physical creation has a much deeper significance than Einstein himself could realize. With respect to any established reference frame, a mass object can be described in terms of a location in space and a duration of existence. In the three dimensional space of the universe, this requires the existence of three space variables, any one of which can be changed without affecting the other two. Since duration of existence is independent of location, another variable related to time is invoked. Since the units of the fourth variable must describe a length to agree with the nature of the other three, a constant of proportionality in the form of a velocity must be used. In the geometric sense, there is no place to locate this fourth axis in such a way as to be mutually at right angles to the other three. Since this is true, the imaginary symbol is used as a multiplier.

Now we turn to the study of electrical theory. In the study of alternating current, sine and cosine wave forms appear. These are named circular functions. These functions are described in terms of imaginary exponentials and are generated by rotating machinery. Since this fact applies to electrical theory, the presence of the imaginary symbol in general relativity indicates an internal rotation in three dimensions and has nothing to do with a four dimensional geometry.

The four dimensional length element of general relativity can be reduced to a velocity combination. Then by a proper grouping of terms, a right triangle law emerges. The sum of two squared velocities is equal to a third squared velocity. This describes the fact that in any stable particle such as the electron, there is a motion of spin at right angles to a motion of translation of the particle as it moves. If mass is used as a multiplier, an energy conservation law results.

The fact appears that despite its flaws, the work of Einstein has a much deeper significance than that revealed by present interpretation. In many cases, even when the calculation yielded correct results, Einstein himself failed to provide a proper interpretation.

A case in point has to do with Newton's concept of action at a distance. Newton assumed that forces were manifested at a distance instantaneously. Einstein believed that forces were propagated at the velocity of light. The aberration of starlight is well known phenomenon. There exists no such aberration of forces in the establishment of the solar system. No such system could remain stable if a condition of aberration of forces existed. Any force adjustment must be instantaneous if the law of central forces applies. In order to avoid the dilemma, Einstein proposed the idea that the earth followed a straight line path through curved space-time.

The difficulty appeared in the fact that he had used the same concept to describe the action for radiation past the sun. Since the curvature of the path of radiation past the sun is entirely different than that of the earth's orbit around the sun, the same space-time must have two different curvatures. Since this is impossible, the concept of curved space-time as an explanation for anything must be abandoned.

As a matter of fact, the potential force is local at any point in the space of the sun. It does not need to travel to the sun and back to make itself manifest. Since it is local, its action is instantaneous. This action does not apply to the light from distant stars.

Einstein spent the last thirty years of his life in an attempt to develop a unified field theory. The present state of unified field theory is certainly not unified and has nothing to do with fields. The present concept is that in the beginning there was a single superforce which separated into a weak force, a strong force, an electromagnetic force, and a gravitational force. Forces between material objects are carried exclusively by particles.

As one example in the nucleus of an atom, the nucleus is stabilized against the destabilizating effects of proton-proton repulsion by the action of exchange forces. The forces of mutual repulsion are overcome by the action of mesons which shuttle back and forth between nuclear particles. One standard text used the analogy of the pair of card players held together by mutual interest in the game demonstrated by the interchange of cards between them.

As a matter of fact, the meson carries momentum. In the process of being intercepted by a nuclear particle, this momentum

must be reversed as the meson is sent back to the original particle from which it came. In this case a mutual repulsion between nuclear particles must be manifest. How it is possible for a repulsion to act as an attraction is nothing short of a miracle.

There are as many forces as there are potentials to generate them. Since the electron has mass, there exists a gravitational force. There is also an electrical force associated with charge. Since the electron has spin, there exists a spin potential and thus a spin force. There also exists a magnetic dipole force associated with magnetic moments. The spin force is of short range, but it is found to be of the proper magnitude to provide stability in a nucleus. There is no need to invoke such an impossibility as an exchange force to account for nuclear stability.

In the study of viscosity in the flow of an electrical current, it is found that the coefficient of viscosity is equal to the total electron spin per unit volume. In this case we are able to make the general statement that no viscosity exists in space since no spin applies. Objects moving in space are not subject to viscous forces. Except for the fact that the velocity of light is not infinite, space has the characteristics of the perfect medium.

The study of the perfect medium shows that if a force is applied to a cavity in such a medium, the cavity accelerates at a rate in proportion to the applied force. If the accelerating force is then removed, the cavity continues in motion with a constant velocity in a straight line. If the cavity is at rest, it continues to remain at rest until an accelerating force is applied.

It appears that all of the laws of motion apply to the action of the cavity in the perfect medium although the cavity has no mass of its own. We may well wonder whether or not the laws of motion as we know them depend exclusively on the nature of the medium. Mach may be right in his statement that inertia depends on the proximity of other inertial objects.

Since there exists no acceptable proof that the universe is expanding, there can be no proof that the Big Bang occurred. The radiation detected by Penzias and Wilson of Bell Labs in 1965 is assumed to be residual radiation from the Big Bang. There can be no proof that such is the case. If we consider the energy loss from photons deflected by gravitational fields to provide the red shift in the spectrum, the lost energy must be accounted for. Calculation indicates that the radiation detected by Penzias and Wilson lies within the range of wavelengths to be expected from photon deflections.

Cosmology is the realm of the safest human endeavor. Any claim made is not subject to refutation. Thus we can have mass going out of existence or being brought into existence without cause to suit the whim of the investigator.

The statement brings to mind the current interpretation of pair production and annihilation of positrons and electrons. The present philosophy is that the interaction of positron and electron results in the annihilation of both particles. This results in the creation of two photons, each one of which carries the original rest energy of one of the particles.

In the creation of an orbital system, the orbiting object must lose a part of the energy of free fall in order that the orbit may be established. This energy loss appears as radiation. We have seen that the internal energy of an object is reduced by the act of putting it into motion. A retardation of this motion then results in radiation. Calculation shows that one-half the energy of free fall must be emitted as radiation in order to establish the orbital velocity. In the case of the positron-electron pair, an orbital system is formed in which the total original energy of each particle has been emitted.

The Pauli neutrino is a non-existent particle which was invoked to explain ß-decay of the neutron. Although it has no existence in the world of reality, its counterpart exists as the end result of the decay of positronium. If we can visualize a hydrogen atom in which the nuclear proton is replaced by a positron, then we have an atom of positronium. Since the condition is not stable, it decays to a ground state in which the total mass is emitted as radiation. The point to be made is that the rotating pair still exists in this massless state.

Now we can assume that under certain conditions it is possible for this neutrino to absorb the energy originally emitted and again appear in the real world as a positron and an electron. We conclude that the pair could not be formed except for the prior existence of the neutrino.

Since we have mentioned a ß-decay of the neutron, we may speculate concerning its structure. The presently accepted concept requires that the emitted electron was created at the time of emission and had no prior existence in the interior of the neutron. The emission of the electron was accompanied by the emission of Pauli's neutrino which was necessary to invoke as a means of conserving the original spin. Fermi later used the presence of the neutrino to explain the energy distribution in the electrons emitted in the process of decay.

Einstein reduced his analysis of creation to a series of five basic equations. Since there are not five creations, the concept is at fault. Every physical entity which can exist must appear as a solution to a single basic equation. In the solutions to this equation, positrons and electrons appear as the only stable fundamental units. These are toroidal configurations shaped like fat doughnuts with a hole in the center that approaches zero in size. There are only two such configurations possible. A double motion applies to both particles. There is a sink-source flow like that of a smoke ring in which the energy points pass through the center and recirculate around the ring to pass through the center again. The centrifugal force of this motion prevents the collapse of the unit into the axis of the ring.

There is another motion which is required to prevent the collapse of the ring into a central point. This is the motion of spin. We observe that with respect to a given orientation of sink-source flow, two spin orientations are possible. The spin can be right-handed or left-handed with respect to the flow through the vortex.

The photon is a physical entity and must appear as a solution to the basic equation of creation. Energy considerations from quantum theory reveal that the photon is described as a cylindrical unit one wavelength in length and one wavelength in circumference. The spin axis is the axis of translation, and the spin may be right or left with respect to the direction of transfer.

In theory, if the photon could be deformed in such a way as to preserve the length of the central axis, and the front face of the cylinder attached to the rear face, we would end up with the photon chasing its tail around the closed loop. This suggests the idea of the creation of matter from radiation. The toroidal configuration of the electron or positron would result. It appears that the limits of stability are so narrow that all electrons and positrons have identical masses for a condition of rest.

The neutron is not an uncharged mass entity. It is composed of 1860 positrons and electrons alternating in positions around a closed ring. The mass defect applying to the formation of the ring is equivalent to 20 electron masses so that its measured mass is about 1840 electron mass equivalents. The limits of stability are fairly narrow, but there appears the possibility of neutron isotopes.

When the neutron decays to a proton, a triplet consisting of electron-positron-electron is released from the ring. The positron-electron pair collapses with the emission of its radiant energy which is imparted to the excess electron. This entity may receive any part or all of the energy of the decayed pair. The Pauli neutrino does not appear, but its place is taken by the decayed positron-electron pair. The mass of the proton resulting is about 1837 electron mass equivalents.

The answer to one question leads to another. The neutron or proton is much more massive than the electron, but its volume is quite small in relation to that of the electron. Then we are faced with the problem of contraction. The proximity of positrons and electrons in the ring requires mutual contractions of such a nature that the spin of the neutron is equal in magnitude to that of a single electron.

A calculation of the increase in volume to be expected in the process of disrupting the neutron back to its original constituents yields a value of the order of 10¹⁰. This is ten billion times the original volume of the neutron. It appears that a space drive based on such a process may be pertinent to the future of star travel.