The **ANSWER** to *how* this __entire__ universe is built — is this one, simple building principle!

Issued: July 10th 2018.

ANSWER in htm: - *http://amperefitz.com/answer.htm*

Also ANSWER in Word: - *http://amperefitz.com/answer.doc*

And ANSWER in Adobe pdf: - *http://amperefitz.com/answer.pdf*

E=mc^{2}

or

Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared

**but**

"You can't square a speed",

said

Scientist Tom Van Flandern.

Scientist Tom Van Flandern is gone now but a paper of his is still here: you can get it by clicking this link *Van Flandern*

"When you square a speed, you get energy," wrote VanFlandern **later**, in an e-mail to me.

While you can't square a speed to get a faster speed — you most certainly can get an **important harmonic frequency** by squaring a frequency — and that's what this paper is all about.

Einstein's c^{2} is practically screaming at you to look for an **important harmonic frequency** here.

Is the down quark spinning at the square of the electron spin frequency?

Is this why half of the electrons are quark harmonically captured molecular electrons, and the other half — far from quarks — are free?

Gravity travels far faster than light. As far as NASA is concerned, gravity travels instantly. Van Flandern shows us the speed of gravitational attraction is *greater than or equal to* 2 x 10^{10c}. This translated for the non mathematical reader means, for a stable universe, gravity travels *at least or more than* 20 billion times the speed of light. (That's using American billion, not the English billion.)

**First**, scientists know ALL electron magnetic type forces, like light and ordinary magnetic force, all travel at c (the speed of light).

Again: gravity travels far faster than light. Gravity travels **instantly** or, as Van Flandern shows us, *at least* 20 billion times the speed of light.

**Second**, free electrons can never attract each other. They always REPEL each other. Only quark **harmonically** captured, orbital electrons can attract other similar electrons (depending on their spin orientation) or they can attract free electrons.

This showed me the supreme importance of the **harmonic** aspect of all of this.

This **harmonic** aspect between the electron and quark is the reason gravity can bend light because light is electron generated and gravity is quark generated.

Many years ago I read this paper written by Tom Van Flandern and saw, that since quarks had a faster spin than electrons, then this faster spinning quark must be causing this faster gravitational attraction. Strong force containment must be a myth and gravitational force must be caused by a certain quark, probably the down quark.

I told Tom about the **harmonic** aspect of it all and told him he proved the speed of gravity was right up there with c^{2}, the speed of light squared.

Tom's answer to me was simply, "You cannot square a speed."

Years later I was discussing this with Nobel Laureate Brian Josephson, who showed me the PROOF (below) of Tom Van Flandern's statement.

**Try** to square the speed of light, taking c that is 3x10^{8} **m**eters **p**er **s**econd and squaring it to **9x10 ^{16}mps**.

This is **wrong**, because what you really got was meters per second __squared__!

What if c^{2} = **9x10 ^{16}mps**?

Then c is also 3x10^{10} centimeters per second, and squaring it gives us 9x10^{20}cm.ps which converted back to mps tells us c^{2} = **9x10 ^{18}mps**.

** Wrong!** This is far faster that the initial c

What you really got was speed squared, and for this you needed to go back four decimal places instead of only two.

This was Brian's PROOF that you cannot square a speed to get a faster speed!

Einstein's c^{2} appears in our math as a square because it is a release of binding energy, and this binding energy is always a resonant quantum structure.

Einstein's c^{2} relates to various quanta of binding energy in fission, fusion and chemical **harmonic** resonant structure bonds, *most probably*, because of quark harmonically captured electron, molecular bonding.

And this quark, that gives us molecular binding, must not only spin but precess at an extremely high harmonic of the electron if both a spin up and spin down electron can encircle it as these electrons do in molecules.

A quark spinning at an extremely high harmonic of the electron's spin frequency would only slightly affect the freedom of a free electron BUT that's all it would take because an electron needs 100% freedom to entirely repel other 100% free electrons, because BOTH must have EXACTLY equal precession to keep repelling each other.

I've already explained why this is so in many previous internet papers, such as in the following link. *amperefitz.com/darkmtr.htm*

So Einstein's c^{2} is *indeed* a riddle wrapped inside an enigma that we are still trying to solve, because *'you can't quantize without fixing the gauge'*. Your math only gives accurate measurements in your spacetime realm or 'your gauge'. Atomic energy (mc^{2}) is being generated within both the quark and electron spacetime realms, neither of which is your spacetime realm.

In the quark spacetime realm, after the Big Bang, iron became the best balanced element. __Fission__ and __fusion__ work on **opposite sides** of the BALANCE SCALE. Fission *builds up* the smaller elements into pieces closer to iron and fusion *breaks up* the larger elements into pieces closer to iron.

Both fission and fusion atomic energy are now slowly re-balancing the quark molecular realm better toward the element iron.

Without this present slight unbalance, neither life nor this array of elements would be able to exist.

The establishment misses all this because they would rather believe in old myths than the **balance** evidence that you can get by clicking those two, previous links.

Given enough time, with fission and fusion energy, this universe will be converted entirely to iron, or elements close enough to it, where no more atomic energy scalar balancing is possible.

Dr. Milo Wolff, one of those NASA scientists that helped get us to the moon, taught me that this is a scalar frequency universe all throughout.

If we are tuned to a frequency close to or at Planck's Constant, then we will only be able to see frequencies higher than us (microcosm) as frequencies.

We will see lower frequencies than us (macrocosm) as something else.

Einstein searched for laws that would unify both micro and macro worlds. However, he failed.

BUT

If you read my writings, you will see, that the one thing I've been absolutely certain of — since my first book in 1966 — is that the phase laws, given to us by Andre M. Ampere in the 1820s, are universal laws, good both in the micro and macro worlds, while our present science rules are merely subset rules, that can **not** be interchanged between the microcosm and macrocosm.

Once you know something like this, that the mob doesn't, then that allows you to solve more science problems than the mob can.

And this I did for decades.

The following in blue is from my book *"Universities Asleep at the Switch"* that I published well over a decade ago.

Kurt Gödel proved that if we were confined in a subset realm — like here on earth — without being able to see out far enough then we might believe that our science laws were universal truths when this would be far from the truth. This is exactly what has happened.

Berkeley, then Mach then Maxwell all told us surroundings were involved (Mach's principle). Since this did not mix well with present science and made the math too difficult, it was simply given lip service and largely bypassed and ignored by the universities. The university presses printed, "Inertia is implicit with the geodesic equation of motion." Now, thanks to my good friend Dr. Milo Wolff, we have actual proof inertia is ** not** implicit with the geodesic equation of motion; it's same frequency surroundings that are involved. We have computers, coming on line in the future, that will do these calculations and will give even more proof of this than Milo gave.

Dirac predicted that one day we would be able to see an approximation of how it all worked and how true this becomes. The basic building blocks of this universe are simple standing waves whose spins and orbits produce vector forces, but this fact is totally obscured by all our subset, local science laws and the tons of garbage printed by the university presses.

They do print some diamonds as well but the problem is the same as in a diamond mine where you have to go through many tons of mud to get only one diamond.

The diamond that this book is showing you is that it is surroundings, surroundings, surroundings and spins, spins, spins. It's surroundings and either spin or orbital binding. These spins are spins that bind, giving us not only binding energy but gravity, inertia, light and all the invisible forces as well.

In fact, that's what this book will be explaining.

And that, essentially, is what you should be looking at to get the big picture of how our entire universe works.

Even though we see energy as a vector force, we entirely miss the fact that, taking the surroundings into consideration, energy is really an attempt at better overall scalar balancing.

I'm afraid the present science establishment entirely misses this and the supreme importance of Ampere's Laws.

Mathematician Stephen Wolfram hit the nail on the head telling us, "Math can only explain simple things, but a simple model can explain a complicated universe."

I believe we won't even have scratched the surface of science until the establishment realizes the supreme importance of frequencies and phase.

The simple phase model that explains our complicated universe is right there in front of our noses, but few see it.

Ampere's simple phase model not only shows us exactly how our universe works but it showed me that, while Einstein thought his biggest blunder was the insertion of the factor denoted by the Greek capital letter lambda into his General Relativity formula, his biggest blunder was in removing lambda from General Relativity.

If this paper is still around half a century from now, the people reading it then will see I was right about this.

The removal of lambda, by Einstein himself, strengthened a Phlogiston type myth, that has set us back in science far more than any myth yet.

I've enjoyed this world of science and I've really enjoyed being the sole resident on a completely fenced 600 acre ranch between Dripping Springs and Blanco here in Texas, but even in this area the highway traffic is getting worse, so I handed my son the keys to my car with only 5,000 miles on it and I will enjoy my 85th birthday, in a few weeks, in one of the better retirement places here, near Austin, Texas.

If I kept my car and had an accident and it wasn't my fault, these kids on the jury would say, "You know that old geezer **had** to cause it!"

Still have my pilot's license that I got in 1950 when I was 17. I loved flying; they were my wings: the instant that I emerged out of a cloud the ground was never level but tilted! WHY?

I saw it was centrifugal force playing tricks on my senses, so I learned about using gyro instruments and took many hours of necessary Link training.

Flew many airplanes, some my own. Never wrecked one but almost killed myself several times. Guess all that flying is over now too.

I knew early that I had to find out EXACTLY how gyroscopes worked. Later in life I worked with the very latest in electronics and gyros, for several decades.

This led me to far more knowledge about our universe, and to finally be able to write this paper to all of you who want to know a bit more about this universe than the present establishment can possibly tell you.

November 25, 2017

Here's one on June 12th 2018 telling about a Britannica mistake, but half way through is a most interesting dissertation on how our eyes see** COLORS.**

Britannica in html:*http://rbduncan.com/britannica.html*

Britannica in Word:*http://rbduncan.com/britannica.doc*

Britannica in Adobe pdf:*http://rbduncan.com/britannica.pdf*

*See: **Phase symmetry makes quantum theory more complete. 12-02-2013*

Also read (2005 addendum2017): *http://www.rbduncan.com/quarkspin.htm*

And: *http://www.amperefitz.com/why.we.have.gravity.htm*

And read **this page**: *http://www.amperefitz.com/abstract.htm*

Here's the link **- **to** this abstract page**** - **in Adobe pdf: *http://www.amperefitz.com/abstract.pdf* (Click or copy any of these links.)

For **4 Decades** of my writings: click *http://www.amperefitz.com/4.decades.htm*

*45 Years of Putting this Jigsaw Puzzle together - of unifying Gravity with all the other forces*

45 Years of Putting this Jigsaw Puzzle together - of unifying Gravity with all the other forces" __also__ in Adobe.pdf - *45years.pdf*

*It's all nothing but RELATIVE MOTION !!!.htm*

"Ampere showed us, it's all nothing but RELATIVE MOTION !!! *(phase)*" (science) e-book by Fitzpatrick __also__ in Adobe.pdf - *Amp.pdf*

Also you can buy my latest book at Amazon or read it FREE using links below:

*http://www.amperefitz.com/unvasleep.pdf* (This is the book in Adobe)

or

*http://www.amperefitz.com/unvasleep.htm* (This book link opens faster if you have dial up.)

There was a ** full** page in the New York Times devoted exclusively about

"Fitzpatrick's First Book" __also__ in Adobe.pdf - *pge1.pdf*

Click above links to read that first book of mine free.

I've found out and published a lot more since then: Over 4 Decades of Fitzpatrick's Books, Papers & Thoughts in Microsoft "**Word**":

*http://www.amperefitz.com/4.decades.doc*

And here's this page duplicated in Adobe.pdf: *http://www.amperefitz.com/4.decades.pdf*

Fitzpatrick's website is at *http://www.amperefitz.com*

Another older website carrying Fitzpatrick's works FREE is: *http://www.rbduncan.com*