1966 book showed
the relative motion laws of A. Ampère unified the forces.
Fitz's first book in 1966
Fitz's 1966 book in Word . . . . . . . . . . . Fitz's 1966 book in PDF


you need to know about
Dark Matter Particles


Abstract: Spin motion is far different from rectilinear motion in the dynamic way it affects the spacetime interval, giving us our spacetime realm, that we divided into two things, space and time, upon which we built modern physics.

My entire life has been one entangled with the latest science developments. I never felt as if I was really working. I felt that I was doing exactly what I wanted to do, and on top of that, I was learning all I could about how this universe worked. I was getting paid to do this too!

I remember, when I was a kid, being at my neighbor's house, and finding out her big radio didn't work. This radio was close to ten years old and built in the 1930s. Its tubes had metal grid caps on the tops of the tubes with each of their metal connectors totally un-insulated. This made it easy to read negative grid voltage on every tube providing you had a sensitive enough meter which most, at that time, were not.

I knew my father's Weston meter, with a sensitive 20,000 ohms per volt movement, was perfect for this. So I got it, and put the positive lead to ground on the radio chassis, and was startled to find a fluctuating negative grid reading on a tube that got stronger as I tuned in with the tuning dial. This proved the radio was OK and receiving a radio broadcast! Then I put the negative lead to the grid cap on each tube, and found they all showed the same fluctuating grid voltage, so they were all working! Then I even found a fluctuating voltage on the secondary of the output transformer to the speaker. That's practically the end of the line! But why wasn't there any sound?

Then I saw the answer: the huge loudspeaker had moved so much, that after years of loud vibrations, a short wire from the output transformer to the speaker coil had flexed back and forth, so many times, that it finally broke loose entirely. I soldered it back again, and that woman gave me two dollars when she heard her big radio play again, just like it did when it was new. I knew then that I should use my brain, to make money in this world of science/physics.

This is not the first paper to explain everything about Dark Matter: this SCALAR paper below, may well have been the very FIRST.

LINKS TO SCALAR DATE: April 30, 2019

SCALAR in htm: -

Also, SCALAR in Word: -

And SCALAR in Adobe pdf: -


You should read SCALAR (Click links above)after you read thisto get the broad science aspect involved in all of this. It's taken a great many scientists — plus a great deal of time — to figure out exactly what is really going on in this universe of ours.

The concepts contained herein are not all mine, but as Alfred, Lord Tennyson said, "I am a part of all that I have met." And you will find, in my other various pages, that I have given credit to those ideas from others that I have used.

In this next link, you will learn that the early galaxies had little Dark Matter.

Universe’s Early Galaxies Were Less Influenced by Dark ...

Mar 15, 2017 · New VLT observations suggest that such massive star-forming disc galaxies in the early Universe were less influenced by dark matter (shown in red), as it was less concentrated.


You will see — in the next Galaxy link — that Dark Matter in the Andromeda Galaxy is invisible to light. The reason this is so important is that it tells you Dark Matter is not like inertial mass, or what is being called gravitational mass, that bends light and also reflects light.

Newton told us in 1687 that gravitational attraction acts INSTANTLY.

NASA — before the moon shot — checked and found the speed of gravity — was either Newton's instantly or at least 20 billion times the speed of light (2x1010c). Click link. Van Flandern

So let's look for a Dark Matter WIMP particle that has such a slow attractive speed that it could neither bend nor reflect light. The previous link showed us that early galaxies had little Dark Matter. But NOW you must realize a theoretical physics fact, that spacetime is one thing: when we look through the Hubble telescope into space, then we are also looking back into time.

The next link shows us Dark Matter prevails in the Andromeda Galaxy. It also states that the reason astronomers know this — is that all the stars in the Andromeda Galaxy move at the same rate — whereas in early Galaxies with little Dark Matter, stars on the edges of the Galaxy move slower than inner stars.

Could the inside of an electron look somewhat like our galaxy?

Most would immediately say NO. But it very well could.

See, with each complete spin there is a slight amount of gyroscopic precessing that shifts the entire flat plane of the galaxy a bit. After many thousands of these complete spins and their accumulated gyro precession shifts, a galaxy would indeed have produced, in space, a complete spherical SCALAR entity.

So our reasoning tells us that — with a fast enough spinning electron — this may be why our electron appears as a spherical, spinning, SCALAR entity to us.

This also seems to be indicating to us why we have problems measuring in other spacetime realms (Heisenberg's Uncertainty). Exactly what makes time and space so different in different spacetime realms?

In the microcosm, where Heisenberg's Uncertainty exists, spinning entities are smaller, and spin frequencies are definitely much, much faster than in our realm. Can the time we sense be dependent on spin frequencies?

Well, the space we sense in the microcosm appears to be much, much smaller than that we are measuring in the macrocosm, and Dr. Milo Wolff's concept is that this is a frequency universe all throughout, and all of his SCALAR entities are spinning standing waves. Knowing this forces us to an important theoretical physics conclusion.

This is a frequency universe, where, in the electron's realm, time — from our point of view — must be the very antithesis of galactic time, because the space in one — from our point of view — is the antithesis, or very opposite, of space in the other.

Understanding what the spacetime interval tells us, shows us less space in the microcosm, means microcosm time must be going faster than our time. With more space in the macrocosm, this tells us macrocosm time must be going slower than our time. This isn't fantasy. This is the beginning of brand new thinking in theoretical physics!

Keep this thought — about time — in mind because we continue with it in the blue paragraph below.

Another time question would be, Has enough time past, in this universe, for our galaxy to have acted as one of Milo Wolff's spherical, SCALAR, spinning entities, to produce Dark Matter force? And the answer has to be YES.

Let's edge into the realm of theoretical physics now again, and consider what our time might be linked to.

You must realize, that it takes such a tremendous amount of time to produce a stable, galactic, spherical, SCALER, spinning entity. But this, of course, is in the spacetime realms of galaxies and super-clusters — that both have more space than us — but where their time — if time is linked to spin frequencies — progresses slower than our time, (fewer number of complete spins) especially in super-clusters.

Not only that, there is good and sufficient evidence showing that the speed of the outer edge of any of Wolff's spinning, SCALAR entities is the speed that its particular spin force travels. For instance, since the surface of the electron travels at the speed of light then all electron produced forces will be at the speed of light.

And since the speed of gravity is at least 20 billion times the speed of light (2x1010c) then, even common sense tells you, gravity must be a quark generated force, by those few quarks escaping strong force containment, whose surfaces are rotating at least 20 billion times faster than the surface of the electron.

All theoretical physicists know, or should know, that spacetime is one entity: humans, however, see it as two things, space and time. Both of these two things (space & time) change with speed or mass. It's been proven that time goes slower, than normal, for things that go faster.

There is something else you need to know about: it's the spacetime interval — previously mentioned — and it does NOT change like space and time, with speed or mass.

I'm afraid that with all these constantly spinning SCALAR entities in both microcosm and macrocosm, space and time or rather spacetime (the spacetime interval) isn't something that is simply here. The spacetime interval has to be something that is constantly being produced.

If you read my papers you will see exactly how in this spinning, SCALAR, standing wave universe of Dr. Milo Wolff, relative motion (PHASE) is the very thing that is producing both our space and our time, or rather spacetime (the spacetime interval). And I've been showing the importance of relative motion (PHASE) since 1966.

In this universe of continual motion, there is one TRUTH: motions in-phase attract. Motions out-of-phase repel.

The reason that I published that small book in 1966 was that at Pan American Airlines, the overhaul of RCA RADAR indicators was not without problems, one of which was Pan Am would order them in batches, and each batch would have entirely different color coded wires. Many times after overhaul, the indicator would have the synch mark at the bottom, instead of at the top. Then the indicator would have to be pulled all apart again.

I needed to find a way this would never happen even the first time. Here my simple rule came to the rescue: if the assembler made sure, that at synch, the electron flow through the top of the coil was moving in the same direction as the electron beam in the cathode ray tube, of the scope, then the synch mark would always be attracted and PULLED to the top of the scope, because both had the same relative motion (in-phase) attraction.

It was thenfor the first time in my life — that I realized I was being attracted to this Earth because I was traveling the same direction, in relative motion (in-phase) with the Earth, therefore attracted to this Earth.

But this was before quarks were discovered. Years later I found that I had discovered the correct relative motion or PHASE rule, but I didn't go high enough in frequency. My simple rule was right, but with almost instantaneous attraction, gravity had to be at the quark spin frequency.

The words in blue & red, twelve chapters above, give us a clue about relativistic spacetime, in that it's the spin frequency of a SCALAR entity realm — in relation to the spin frequency of your SCALAR entity realm — that determines its spacetime interval, in relation to your spacetime interval! This took many years for me to see. And this paper may be the first paper to state it.

It may be hard for most readers to believe, but after considerable research, I know now that it's true.

Welcome to the wonderful world of Theoretical Physics.


Dark matter took its time to wrap around early galaxies ...

Mar 15, 2017 · Dark matter took its time to wrap around early galaxies. ... the stars at the edges of these early galaxies move more slowly than those closer in. "This tells us that at early stages of galaxy ...


This next link shows you Dark Matter is real, but they seem to want your e-mail, so skip it if you want to.


Dark Matter is real | Physics Forums

Apr 05, 2019 · On the dark matter hypothesis, this is possible since it just means these galaxies have negligible amounts of dark matter. In other words, the dark matter model has a free parameter that can be used to predict the velocity dispersion of these galaxies as well as the velocity dispersion of all the other galaxies.


Here's a better link that proves the existence of Dark Matter over alternate observations.

And the next link shows you that there are galaxies with almost no Dark Matter.


Galaxy Found With Almost No Dark Matter

Mar 28, 2018 · But finding a galaxy that’s more or less devoid of dark matter certainly suggests a few tantalizing things. First, it really challenges ideas about how galaxies form.


The next link shows you Black Holes are NOT Dark Matter: these are two entirely different things. I can assure you of that!


11 wimpy galaxies may rule out black holes as dark matter ...

Aug 18, 2016 · The stars there are choking with dark matter, at least compared to larger galaxies like the Milky Way or Andromeda, but the little galaxies don't seem to show any obvious signs of harboring a flotilla of old black holes. "These galaxies would be less dense and larger than we see," Brandt told Business Insider.


So, you know from all this that the percentage of Dark Matter various considerably in various galaxies: this is why you will see all kinds of approximations of how much Dark Matter ATTRACTION there is in our universe, and why that varies so considerably: it is at least four (4) times that of gravity and perhaps closer to eight or nine times that of gravity.

Here is a good version of Dark Matter and WHY it's so strong, in one simple, condensed sentence.

Dark Matter is caused by the SPIN MOTION — in three different spin frequency spacetime realms — of stars, galaxies and super-clusters of galaxies.

Quarks, electrons, stars, galaxies and super-clusters are all NASA scientist Dr. Milo Wolff's SCALAR, spinning entities. The SPINS of not only quarks and electrons — but ALL of them — cause forces.

Stars, galaxies and super-clusters spin far slower than the electron, thus their attractive forces will be far slower than the electron's attractive forces, and therefore this Dark Matter (unlike mass) will neither bend nor reflect light.

Einstein warned us about believing in modern physics in 1954. I've given his exact warning words several times in various pages. I saw the problem well before 1954.

Even before high school, I had accumulated a good variety of radio tubes, and while repairing radios I saw that Benjamin Franklin's plus and minus charges and Faraday's north and south poles were for the birds. It wasn't working that way. I needed one rule that would cover both electrons and magnetism. I was lucky in that ALNICO magnets preceded the magnets we have now. They could only be strongly magnetized in one direction. I studied these old magnets, and they showed me the truth.

I realized, by the time I was in high school, that relative motion (PHASE) was not only the key to the rule I wanted for both electrons and magnetism, but it also proved to be a good rule for both free and molecular captured electrons as well. I now had a true science rule that was even more than four times as good as the — rules of modern physics — that all my scientific friends were using.

Here's my simple rule.

Things spinning together in-phase attract, and things spinning together out-of-phase repel.

Forget what they taught you in school. Now watch what happens — using this simple rule — to all those items in green above.

I saw, using ALNICO magnets, that the strongest magnetic attraction occurred when most electrons had exactly the same relative motion (most mass spinning in-phase together).

In other words, two magnets had the strongest attraction when the largest number of complete electron IN-PHASE pairings occurred. Meaning entire electrons in one magnet were spinning in the same direction, on the same exact spin axis as entire electrons in the other magnet.

Now use my rule to see why free electrons, or stars, or galaxies repel each other.

All same size, SCALAR, spinning entities have identical gyroscopic precession, which is a force 90 degrees ahead of and in the direction of spin rotation.

This means entirely FREE, same size, spinning things, even in the microcosm, must REPEL, because as soon as their spins begin to line up in-phase and begin to attract each other, the resultant 90 degree precession force — moves both of them equally away — from this attractive orientation.

Now my simple rule shows that captured molecular electrons, that have lost their freedom, can and do attract, because by being captured by the down quark spin harmonic, they are no longer free to precess. And precession is needed to repel.

I believe, about 1960 Scientific American had an extensive article about Ampère's long parallel wires, and how Ampère developed his Law. When I read that, I saw Ampère was not only proving my simple relative motion (phase) rule. but he was also showing Faraday was wrong using one field for plus and minus charges and then, a different field for magnetism. Ampère's Law clearly unifies those two fields, making them obsolete.

I was astonished as to how those in our universities could have been so blind to this for almost two centuries.

While Ampère gave us his law in the 1720s, he was never quite the showman as Faraday, who about 1820 gave us the first electric motorized device, a good decade before the first real electric motor. Michael Faraday suspended a copper wire into a pool of mercury in which was a magnet. One side of a battery was connected to the mercury and the other side to the top suspension point of the wire. The lower part of the wire immersed in the mercury, would rotate either clockwise or counter-clockwise — around the magnet — depending which way the battery was hooked up or which pole of the magnet faced up. Needless to say, when England was supreme, scientists listened to Faraday and not Ampère.

There was even more to be learned from my ALNICO magnets. If I now inverted one of those attracting pieces, their poles would strongly repel, but their sides would now attract at about HALF of the polar attraction. WHY?

Nothing in modern science was telling me why. I had to figure that out for myself, and again my PHASE or relative motion rule, not only came to the rescue, but taught me more about what was really going on in our universe than anything in modern science/physics. See, magnetic attractions are made up of two types of in-phase, attractive, resonant bindings.

All bindings are resonant bindings. This includes molecular bonds that are also harmonic bonds, from which can be obtained atomic energy. All that is in my other papers; I want to keep this paper short.

Anyway, there is only ONE quantum of energy strength ever associated with a same spin, same spin axis electron pairing.

But there is another spin-up spin-down electron pairing — with only their Closest Side SECTIONS attractively binding in-phase — by which our eyes see the various colors of light: when the closest sides of two opposite spinning electrons are binding and un-binding in-phase together at the rate of, let's say, 600 trillion cycles a second. Sections must impedance match to bind (have same momentum).

When electrons do this with electrons in your eye, you see green light. One of those cycles is a quantum of green light. It's alternating current actually, but a lot feebler and a lot faster than 60 cycle AC.

For instance, when you look at a star, electrons in your eye are first binding with an electron on the star, then binding back to a nerve in your eye, then back to the star, then back to a nerve in your eye, at 600 trillion times a second to give you the sensation of green light.

That we can see different colors of light proves that this spin-up spin-down, closest side in-phase binding, gives us quanta of various energy strengths.

They can also bind together — only using their closest sides — magnetically for much longer periods. And as I learned from my ALNICO magnets, ALL of these various strength spin-up to spin-down bonds, available TOGETHER in my magnets, gave about HALF the strength of ALL the same spin, same spin axis bonds.

My webpage statistics show me there is much world interest now about this relative motion/PHASE concept that allowed me to remain ahead of my competition. Some read every page available to them. I wish more scientists would comprehend it. But then again, thinking of the new weaponry that might come of it, perhaps it's better they continue on the same old muddy road they are on now.

I received two copyright notices yesterday from the U. S. government: one stating, "Your application and payment for the work Changes coming to Physics were received by the U.S.Copyright Office on 5/8/2019." And the second notice said my 201 page Adobe pdf file size :1271397 KB was successfully uploaded for service request 1-(and ten more numbers) Date/Time :5/8/2019 5:14:43 PM.

I've been copywriting my books and things since 1966, but this is the first time I have ever done it online.

Time will tell if NASA scientist Milo Wolff, who helped get us to the moon, was right in that this is a frequency universe all throughout, but we fail to see it that way and instead see these SCALAR, spinning entities all throughout such as quarks, electrons, stars, galaxies, and super-clusters of galaxies.

Our time-span is not long enough to see galaxies and super-clusters as spherical, SCALAR entities. Galaxies look flat to us, but nevertheless they will precess — like a gyroscope — given enough time, to end up perfectly spherical and SCALAR, clearly showing us this fact: our spacetime and theirs is entirely different.

Einstein, pro field theory and Bohr, pro quantum theory argued their entire lives about which was right, but neither saw the important fact that spin frequencies, precession and SCALAR entities were in both microcosm and macrocosm. Neither Bohr nor Einstein saw that, with all these spin frequencies, PHASE would be the only logical answer to a Theory that got to the bottom of Everything. If you read SCALAR, you will see how close Einstein actually came to solving the greatest science/physics puzzle of all time.

You will also see — as you read SCALAR — WHY we will never be able to detect even one complete Dark Matter particle (WIMP). It's all there and while I'm alive it's entirely FREE!

However, my copyrights now last 70 years after my death. I'm over 86 now! And I'm sure my heirs won't give everything away free — for 70 years — like I'm able to do and am doing now. DPF Jr.



THIS PAGE in html: -

Also, THIS PAGE in Word: -

And THIS PAGE in Adobe pdf: -

To read more about what is really going on in our universe click the following links.



Also, SPIN PRECESSION in Word: -

And SPIN PRECESSION in Adobe pdf: -

SIMPLE in htm: -

Also, SIMPLE in Word: -

And SIMPLE in Adobe pdf: -

An Important Matter seen by Crichton in htm: - crichton.htm

Also, Crichton in Word: - crichton.doc

And also, Crichton in Adobe pdf: - crichton.pdf

Field Theory DATE: October 29, 2018..

Field Theory in html: -

Also, Field Theory in Word: -

And Field Theory in Adobe pdf: -

Field Theory was taken from the larger 3 Beliefs Paper.

3 Beliefs in htm: -

Also, 3 Beliefs in Word: -

And 3 Beliefs in Adobe pdf: -

Phase Symmetry. phase symmetry 12-02-2013

Also, in Adobe.pdf - phase symmetry.pdf

also, in Word.doc - phase.symmetry.doc

Ampere's Law of Relative Motion . DPFJr

a unification . . QED . . Ampere.htm

Order a copy of "Universities Asleep at the Switch" NOW.

Read "Universities Asleep at the Switch" FREE in html.

Read "Universities Asleep at the Switch" FREE in ADOBE (slower to load).

Over 4 Decades of Fitzpatrick's Books, Papers & Thoughts:

And here's this page duplicated in Adobe.pdf:

Anyone may copy and paste this complete presentation to their web page providing they paste it in its entirety.

Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr.
May 9, 2019

If any of your work seems to correlate to my findings then please write to me at:

Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Apt. 314

Belmont Village

4310 Bee Cave Road

West Lake Hills, TX 78746

Send me your e-mail.