How what was to be the July Blog became the August Blog

Welcome to our 90,000 ^th visitor to well beyond our 95,000 ^th visitor, and to everyone else.  There was recently a set of specials on (generic) black holes on the Science channel, including a few new programs first aired in 2013.  I still cringe when I hear their "experts" bemoaning the lack of understanding of their (generic) black holes, and the mysteries, especially on what lies on the inside.  What bothers me the most is: They always interview the same people, authorities who tell you that they do not understand what goes on inside the (generic) black hole.  My suggestion would be: find someone with a reasonable confidence that they DID understand what was going on inside. [this author, perhaps]

I would still maintain that, among ALL the competition, the C-R theory has what is: the most likely to be the correct answers; from the simple understanding, the Occam‘s Razor principle, where the simplest idea is the most likely one to be found correct, and the real-world fit, where what we DO actually find in nature matches the C-R theory‘s expectations far closer than does the big bang theory.

I desire to be more like a knowledgeable tour guide to you, gently guiding our home readers to the most likely places to showcase the significant answers, than the arrogant "know-it-all", who is more interested in personal credit for any new ideas than in your understanding of the situation.  The recent influx of visitors may bode well for the C-R theory, and help to end the long drought of misunderstanding which has prevailed elsewhere.

I would like to cover several ideas, and review the differences which set the C-R theory apart from virtually all of our competition.  My primary goal is to try to help to allow others to gain the same simple and profound understanding that I believe I have achieved.  To show as clearly as possible how to achieve that new understanding by observing those phenomena that are already known, but are not usually connected-in with a good theory.

Also, I would like to cover some very interesting new articles in the (formerly) current Infinite Energy magazine (May-June), Issue #109.  The authors of 3 articles arrive at some of the same conclusions as the C-R theory, but with a more formal, mathematically-based understanding.  Although they have not gone far enough (by the C-R theory‘s understandings), I would welcome their contributions to further your learning.  Additionally, I would welcome them to the stated position of a similar understanding, which already places them at the head of the pack of virtually everyone else (other than C-R theory readers).

I will attempt to lead them from where they currently are, and try to show how the C-R theory fits-in, and show them the overall plan that the C-R theory claims is for the use, feeding, care, and recycling ability of Black-Holes ^C-R , supernovas, quasars, Seyfert galaxies, active galaxies, and up to GRB‘s, or gamma ray bursts.

No other theory has been so bold or specific as to point out what, exactly should be occurring.  The C-R theory has few needs, but must have enormous quantities of excess, stray electrical charges found, in abundance, in order to cause the system-wide changes imposed by the electrical charge imbalances.  These imbalances cause specific motions imposed by magnetic fields, onto gasses, masses, structures and galaxy arms.

One of the key core ideas is that it is the freed electrons, released outside the Black-Hole‘s ^C-R event horizon, (or Schwarzschild radius) will push-back infalling matter, and prevent the Black-Hole ^C-R from overeating too quickly, and prevent huge, runaway energy releases, at least while it is feeding.

BACK IN MY ( galaxy‘s ) ARMS AGAIN:

It is those excess electrons that also thin out the inflow of gas and "debris", or bigger chunks of mass.  The electrical currents generated by those flowing electrons, generate magnetic fields that guide and shape the formation of galaxy arms, and help to hold and to mold the shape of the spiral galaxy‘s arms in such a way that the galaxy stays together, holding it‘s observed shape, in spite of the lack of the imagined amount of "observed" mass, required to hold it together.

It is the interaction of electrical charges, and their associated magnetic fields, which also polarizes the light (and other em-bandwidths) of em-band radiation.  After the Black-Hole ^C-R feeds in this manner for long periods of time, those Black-Holes ^C-R contain huge quantities of protons and neutrons (without most of their attached electrons).  When later permitted to become "time-active" again, they THEN will be capable of destabilizing the Black-Hole ^C-R enough to cause the nova, supernova, up through GRB‘s, where the energy level emitted is "off the charts" as compared with the far-more-modest expectations of the thermonuclear-powered fusion process, which mainstream theory believes accounts for almost all of the standard energy released.

By a nice coincidence, NASA has just released new information on high energy electrons they have found accumulated in the earth‘s Van Allen belt.  The best part is, I know of no other theory which needs to find excess quantities of electrons, or expects to find them locally.  Most theories treat these huge quantities of electrons as a pesky nuisance, or as an inconvenience. Here is a link to a story about the discovery.

www.space.com/22112-electron-satellites-van-allen-radiation-belts.html

I covered, in the previous blog, how the Black-Hole ^C-R conveniently uses the unique disparity between the accumulated positive charges, and the lack of any outward signs announcing the presence of that same charge accumulation, which mainstream science holds is there.  One check of the remnant‘s contents should be enough to convince skeptics that a huge charge imbalance exists.  The Black-Hole ^C-R specifically exploits the obvious mass disparity/difference between the lowly but energetic electrons, and the nearly 2000 times more massive protons.

It is not an "accident" that this unique situation is developed, but nature specifically uses matter which was either created (long, long ago, much earlier than 13.8 billion years ago), to set-up the situation to ensure the deliberate "recovery" of expended matter and energy, which would otherwise go almost entirely to waste, once eaten by a generic black hole.

The C-R theory is likely alone in explaining and expecting specific patterns of electrical current-flow, locations of ionizations, and in the continuing nature of the staying-power of the multiple positive ionizations found in supernova remnants, in ways that can only result from C-R theory-like processes.

Mainstream science is not only NOT looking for such items as are often found in existing reports, but they would deny that anything [ electrical ] of the kind is going on.  The C-R theory is the only theory that receives THE CAUSE of creation of cosmic rays as an ongoing byproduct of normal, everyday operations.  That this result appears without needing any awkward conniptions or coincidental sleights-of-hand to achieve this harmony is one of the indications, to me, that I was on the right track, and not just imagining a fairy tale.

As far as I know, no other theory is so confident as to announce that everything eaten by a Black-Hole ^C-R might eventually be released, down to the lightest neutrino and the coldest photon.  Thus: There is never an information dilemma about where everything goes and what nature does with it after it is swallowed.

NOTE: If any statement is made that nothing ever emerges from a Black-Hole ^C-R after entering, that is clearly false.  Nature is also nowhere near patient enough to consider waiting some 10 ¹⁰⁰ years to recover the contents of a generic black hole, slowly waiting for Hawking radiation to free the particles and photons.

A recent finding showed that, in the vicinity of a supernova, rather than a heavy concentration of dust left behind in the aftermath, the immediate vicinity was almost swept clean, with the expected dust found evacuated from the vicinity and deposited a significant distance away.  Only if one understands the C-R theory process, does this concept make sense, and this result sound reasonable. It is the additional release of the incredible quantity of stray positive charges that drives-away the loose dust with such a force and fury that only the presence of excessive electrical charges can impart.

NOTE: It is not just this once, but over and over, that C-R theory-like items are mentioned in existing reports, without any notice or recognition.  It is only after being told [or shown] what to notice, and where to look, that the informed home reader can learn to recognize the cues, hunt for these clues, and find then recognize the patterns regularly occurring.

Pattern Recognition:

What I am hoping to do is to sow the seeds of pattern recognition and understanding to a skeptical general public, and show the tremendous usefulness of the overall process to smooth operation of our universe.  Nature specializes in moving and mixing the contents, and "freshening" matter and energy throughout our home, in ways that "science" has ignored. [also known as: Recycling]  I am trying to make these blogs a kind-of field guide, to help YOU know what to look-for, and where to look, to start a pattern-recognition in the available literature.

It is not the rarity, but the frequency of often finding these patterns hidden in almost every report, that cause one to realize there might be an entire layer of unexpected [and un-looked-for] processes going on, which only the C-R theory can help one understand.

3 Articles in Infinite Energy Magazine, Issue #109

I was pleasantly surprised to find 3 consecutive articles in the (formerly) current [May-June] issue #109 of Infinite Energy magazine concerning theoretical implications of Einstein‘s theories, and why they [the authors] feel that the collapse into a singularity is not justified.  I welcome them to that fellow "group" of understanders who have arrived at that conclusion.

While I may not entirely agree with their methods for how they achieved their conclusions, I do agree with them that the supposed singularity is not possible.  I believe I have gone further, and maybe radically too far ahead of their conclusions, to show where the implications might lead, if there was someone to show them the correct way.

Nevertheless, it has been so long since I have seen any corresponding progression of ideas leading to (but still following behind-of) the C-R theory, in any [almost] mainstream publication, that I view that as a victory, to have "company" at the same approximate stage of progress in one of the "key" core ideas.  That establishes a foundation where the C-R theory must build upon, in order to reach a complete package, realizing where the Black-Hole ^C-R fits-in in this universe.

The first article, starting on page 8, reprinted from a paper presented to the 14 ^th meeting of the Natural Philosophy Alliance in 2007, by Robert J. Heaston, concerns historical references and correspondence revealing how Einstein approached deriving his equations for the theory of relativity.  Among Mr. Heaston‘s conclusions were, that there is no singularity, and the collapse into a singularity is impossible, and that the event horizon of (generic) black holes is more-like a limit than a starting point.  The article stated, at the end, that Mr. Heaston passed-away in 2009, so he cannot be consulted for any further ideas.

There are some conclusions in this article I do not agree with, but I will hold off discussing them for now.  An unstated implication, which the C-R theory would agree with is that gravitational bodies, using curvature, tend to produce motion to a maximum point, and would not continue to influence matter back into lesser curvature again.

After that first article, there were two additional articles authored by Billie Westergard, starting on page 17, based upon the work of Mr Heaston, but taking it to a higher level.  Among his reasonings are that there is a practical limit to the possible amount of gravitational collapse, based upon a different type-of logic than I used with the C-R theory.

Mr. Westergard also rejects the Big Bang, and that the universe starting from a singularity, both of which are also publicly held views from the C-R theory.  It is possible that some of my reasonings may eventually be acceptable to those already nearing some of the C-R theory‘s mid-way points.

I have read a couple earlier articles in Infinite Energy magazine on the proposed nature of the internal workings of the atom, with the POAMS concept (an acronym for Pope-Osborne-Angular-Momentum-Synthesis).  I do not yet understand that concept well enough, to the extent that I would care to publicly comment upon it in this blog.  I will state that the concept is very specific about the workings of the internal nature inside the atom, and uses a large number of matched-pair electron-antielectron‘s, synchronized to be 180° apart, or exactly out of phase with each other, in lieu of a proton, neutron, or their constituent quarks as an alternative.

I will state that the POAMS concept is NOT what I learned in school. [But, the C-R theory was not taught there, in school, either, so I will not hold that against it.]

I do question whether the POAMS concept would agree with the reams of data derived from the LHC [Large Hadron Collider], analyzed by supercomputers, with the most extreme collisions of myriads of protons, ignoring the "least significant", more standard collisions, and focusing intensely on the most exotic, top, one-in-a-billion, highest-energy, most bizarre results.

As such, with some of their conclusions identical to the C-R theory, I still welcome those believers in this new concept to the limited club of those who do not believe the singularity is real, or even possible.  Since Mr. Westergard is several steps closer to the C-R theory‘s positions than most of the scientific world, I would hope to correspond with him about where to look, and what to notice.  It is also possible that the C-R theory‘s view is still far too radical for anyone else to " safely " publicly endorse, so halfway there is far better than supporting the Big Bang.

I will state that both of the articles used a much more formalized, math-based reasoning, [a formula-based logic], than what I used in the C-R theory.  The C-R theory‘s view is also that the formula can be trusted only so far, before the conditions "imposed" by the situation render the formula null and void in the case of the Black-Hole ^C-R .  Mr. Westergard arrived at similar conclusions in a couple areas.  There were hints in the second article that he is close to, if not specifically, recognizing the possibility of a closed universe.

NEAR to Understanding of a Closed Universe:

No other theory that I know-of has recognized the concept of an energy-time difference, derived from gravity, unique to the C-R theory; the conventional understanding is there is no natural stability of a closed universe* [*as is taught by it‘s enemies, or detractors].  In their opinion, our universe needs some precarious balance of a type of mysterious stabilizing force to exist somewhere between outright collapse, and accelerating expansion.

I have covered elsewhere on this web-site just why the C-R theory maintains that our universe is perfectly stable, size-wise, after this universe initially closed-off.  I will briefly mention here, that our universe exists with just the right properties which require such stability by that very nature. [–this IS NOT a coincidence, just what happens AFTER a universe, or a Black-Hole‘s ^C-R inside, closes-off]

My goal is to offer anyone insights into where: considering the observations they‘ve got available publicly, right now, can lead them to supporting the C-R theory, and how to get there.  I am hoping that the C-R theory positions will seem less radical, after discovering the full-system-plan, to those who already reject the "standard thinking".  With a bit more of a forward-thinking progression, I can lead them on a path of mutual co-discovery.  [Then they too can say: Oh, Now I see why nature works that way!!!]

Re-classifying most C-R theory rejecters as pre-understanders instead

Rather than assessing the current situation, in science, as; almost everyone in "the establishment" rejects the C-R theory ideas, I have recently decided to modify that outlook, and re-categorized most of this world‘s scientists into the role of pre-understanders.  Given time and suitable [guided] knowledge, I believe that they will come-around to understand it, eventually.  The obstacle is that, currently, they believe false ideas, but support them with "evidence" that they each tell each-other, supports those ideas.

What I need to do is to point out the flaws and weaknesses of those ideas, and show why: what they have concluded is invalid.  If this can happen, I can then replace their views with improved understanding, that takes into account what they believed, changes it to correct the observations, and shows the proper place of the evidence.

Overcoming the Engineering Concept: Where the "The Equation" Rules the Roost

Note: I would like to argue why the situation created immediately inside the Black-Hole ^C-R , where the incoming mass is trapped in a "faster than light-speed escape velocity*", gets itself into a location where that condition* there overrules or trumps the entropy equation.  This situation prevents the emission of any "speed-of-light energy" or information.

Science does not either accept or realize that nature has gone to great lengths, building up a sufficiently large mass; creating a Black-Hole ^C-R .  Nature then uses this special situation specifically to set-up or exploit the unique situation in this case, to overcome entropy, and thus, to practically recycle matter and energy.  Mainstream scientists are trained, in school, to be beholden to the equation, and cannot (or will not) imagine why a situation could overcome that [ not so ?] fundamental law.

UNDERSTANDING the Reasoning when Conditions Break Down:

Generally, respect for the "book equations" is a good thing, EXCEPT : WHEN the conditions the book used to derive that equation DO NOT APPLY .  HINT: Immediately inside the Black-Hole ^C-R , but before arriving at a non-existent singularity, the equations literally break down.  This is where the C-R theory insists there is a Neutral Zone ^C-R , a unique volume where the escape velocity is above the speed-of-light.

The conditions there simply cannot be re-created anywhere on earth, but are easy to describe.  NO interactions at lightspeed can occur.  Everything is temporarily trapped, with no possibility of communication out.  This allows this one specific volume to gain EVERYTHING eaten by the Black-Hole ^C-R , without influencing the closed-off volume located a bit further inside, all the way down to the center.

By a happy coincidence, everything further inside EVERY Black-Hole ^C-R IS perfectly understandable by standard science, with a few simple tweaks.  HINT: Our universe IS ALSO our lab model of a very large Black-Hole‘s ^C-R inside, and offers a view of every feature needed, except for the Neutral Zone ^C-R .  [The Neutral Zone ^C-R concept was needed to make the whole universe-system work properly, as a package-deal, and can either be accepted, or rejected.  It was imposed upon my understanding as necessary, and I accepted it as such.]

In the next blog, I would like to comment on a new concept becoming popular, called a firewall, believed to exist inside the event horizon.  Find info on, and discuss the firewall concept, inside the Schwarzschild radius (event horizon).  Show why the flaws in the argument for a firewall, make the concept slightly useful, but not critical to understanding both why and how this is done.

UNDERSTANDING THIS UNIVERSE AS A PACKAGE-DEAL:

Important claim: ONLY the C-R theory claims to both understand : WHY and HOW the Black-Hole ^C-R exploits the basic properties of matter, to use them creatively to accomplish a mission and a goal.  This is not a random accident, but a pre-planned [designed-in] strategy, evidence for [and perhaps: a demonstration-of] the handiwork of the Creator.  HINT: This level-of precision can not be accomplished as an OOPS moment, accidentally, due to a randomly derived set of basic conditions and circumstances imposed-upon our contents, occurring during or microseconds after the start-of a Big Bang.  The non-coincidental need for extreme precision, and the deliberate ability of the matter to be manipulatable in an extreme condition, suggests that the basic properties of matter did not arise at random, [or at a fixed beginning], but were always consistent.  The basic properties of matter did not change or vary randomly at a whim, at a beginning.  Matter has ALWAYS had the same basic properties as it has right now, and those properties were never "held-hostage" to some random sets of beginning conditions.

The Black-Hole ^C-R is a Vital Part of Nature‘s Tool-Kit; a Necessary Part of the Whole

NOTE: Only if one understands the complete plan, the entire package, the total system-concept, does the overall strategy become apparent, and the true usefulness of the Black-Hole ^C-R become revealed.  There is a complete level of matter-energy interaction occurring (continually) in this universe, that science is completely unaware of.

Please use the C-R theory as something-of a tourist‘s guide map, to show you where to look, what to look for, and what to notice, to make your journey into the "unknown" much more noteworthy, like a guided tour through the full attractions.  When you can be guided to the main points of interest, the "unknown" changes into "the familiar". It should also help you to make sense of, and understand better, this entire known universe.

HINT: If the Universe YOU understand does not make sense to you ,

please try-out a BETTER theory to help you make clear sense of it!!!  I would strongly suggest starting off with the C-R theory FIRST, and then later, check out any of the competition to compare the level of understanding, and the matching of the expectations with the real-world observations.

Match the known phenomena with the C-R theory‘s expectations, and then compare to what the Big Bang scenarios want to see.

The milestone mark of 100,000 visitors is within sight, probably in September.

Do I want to mention how near we are to a very-reasonable milestone of reaching 100,000 home readers by back-to-school time, sometime in September?  I want to thank the ever increasing number of visitors who are giving the C-R theory a fair shot, and a fighting chance.  Even if you reject these ideas, for now, if I can get you to recognize certain patterns, and start to look objectively for C-R theory based items of interest, I do not mind if I may lose the initial skirmish, but win the long term war for your understanding.

My assertion is that there is something of GREAT interest, to be seen, to be understood, to be linked-to, to help the home reader come to a better understanding, and sadly, one can only find that here, for now.  Thank you for your time, and your interest in the C-R theory.

NOTE: We are trying to establish an "Evidence Locker Page", a place where the home-reader can access links to various phenomena we mention from time to time.  We may be able to group the phenomena into regions or sub sections, covering locations like earth, the solar system, the Milky Way galaxy, while also addressing the scale of activity, and magnitude.

I welcome all home-reader‘s suggestions about helpful links you have found which will show-off the C-R theory‘s contention that there is a huge amount of electrical activity occurring all around, which has been generally missed if not downright ignored.  The C-R theory also maintains that this electrical, magnetic, and charge-driven activity HAS A CAUSE, and is not simply imported from somewhere else, or occurring spontaneously.

Jerry Reynard, last modified August 9th, 2013