© January, 28, 2019

Shedding a bit of light on the

**few **absolutely** TRUE**

SCIENCE CONCEPTS

that will **never** change.

Don't skip this paper if you are interested in theoretical physics.

Kurt Gödel, mathematician Steven Wolfram, and many others including myself have been arguing — for many decades of their lives — that the fundamental principle of how this universe functions must be found FIRST, __before__ any math is utilized. You cannot place the cart __before__ the horse!

Big Bang Concept

We *could* start with the concept of the ** "BIG BANG"**, provided of course, that this

If we look at what Dr. Milo Wolff, a NASA scientist — who helped get us to the moon — points out to us in his book *Wave Structure of Matter*, a universe of spherical, standing waves existed eons before our molecular universe, and this ** "BIG BANG"**, that built our present molecular universe, which does in turn, give us our present spacetime.

It gives us this spacetime — **believe it or not** — via Einstein's *Cosmological Constant*, and that is the story within the picture of this universe you will see by reading this short paper.

Although Milo Wolff's frequency universe all throughout, greatly simplifies our comprehension of the fundamental forces, it does exasperate a modern science problem of how small or large our universe is, because Wolff's standing wave universe, *also apparently*, has no limits of size in either direction.

Here's the NEW picture of this universe you must see, if you are interested in precisely how this universe, of ours, functions.

Dr. Milo Wolff's**SCALAR** Concept

Couple the coming Concepts with Dr. Milo Wolff's **scalar**, spinning, standing wave concept of matter, and you have a simple *Theory of Everything* — a far simpler concept than anything in present science — handed to you on a silver platter.

The electron is a **scalar** entity if we look at the electron from a low enough frequency spacetime realm. From a far, far higher frequency spacetime realm the electron might look somewhat like our galaxy.

But given enough time to *precess* around as a gyroscope, our galaxy will also appear to be more spherical — in time — in Dr. Milo Wolff's **scalar**, frequency universe.

Modern science has totally missed the supreme importance of — the precessing cycle of time — needed to produce a **scalar** resonance.

Our galaxy, to us in our spacetime realm, seems frozen in time: we totally miss all its *precessing*.

Yet this *precessing* — to make one full *precessing* cycle, to appear more like a sphere — gives the *resonance* reason for Wolff's **scalar** *resonance*, or what we see as nature's preferred size, in both micro and macro spacetime realms, and this is certainly the reason the iron molecule is the preferred **scalar** molecular *resonance* after fission or fusion energy: what **scalar** *resonances* have in common is that their *in-phase binding* to the surroundings equals their internal *in-phase binding*.

The Earth is a **scalar** *resonance* in which its *in-phase binding* gravitational force is equal to its *in-phase binding* (to the surrounding stars) inertial force.

Many of my readers know exactly how that works and the exact binding frequency. I've been explaining it for decades.

All forces caused by the spinning electron, travel at the speed of light. The gravitational force, however, travels much faster.

NASA shows us gravity acts at least 20 billion times the speed of light (2x10^{10c}) *Van Flandern*

The only particle that could be spinning at least 20 billion times as fast as the electron has to be a quark.

Strong force containment is nearly correct and it is 99.9999% right. It is the .0001% balance of quarks whose spin frequencies are not contained, that give us both gravity and inertia.

Since that balance here on this Earth remains exactly the same continuously, then this quark spin frequency — when binding in-phase to distant quarks spinning on the same exact spin axis — is the reason that Earth's gravitational attractive force exactly equals the Earth's inertial attractive force to the surrounding stars.

Milo Wolff has shown that, at this **scalar** *resonance* frequency — energy in has to equal energy out.

One of Milo's **scalar** entities is the electron — that is a sphere — and only the *in-phase binding between* spins and/or orbitals, of

We'll look at the 1993 *Evidence of Gravity Waves*, but was it gravity waves that were detected?

You'll see it was merely __fluctuations__ of gravity, that were detected.

Both gravity and inertial attractions are at the quark spin frequency, and unfortunately we have nothing yet to detect that high a frequency.

We'll look in depth at this later; now for the *so called* gravity wave.

It's something I copied from my 2013 Britannica DVD: "gravity wave also called gravitational radiation:

the transmission of variations in the gravitational field as waves. According to general relativity, the curvature of space-time is determined by the distribution of masses, while the motion of masses is determined by the curvature. In consequence, variations of the gravitational field should be transmitted from place to place as waves, just as variations of an electromagnetic field travel as waves. If the masses that are the source of a field change with time, they should radiate energy as waves of curvature of the field."

Evidence for gravity waves was obtained by studying the changing orbital period of a neutron star binary, resulting in the 1993 Nobel Prize in Physics.

This is a spin-up, spin-down binary pair whose **closest sides** are **in-phase!**

There was a greater attractive gravitational force * each time* these in-phase sides got

You have a greater magnetic attractive force the closer electron spins are in-phase with each other too.

See the immense importance of phase, now?

This is **Ampère's Law!**

Ampère's Law Concept

It's not only the law for spinning electrons, but for every spinning entity in both the microcosm and macrocosm of this entire universe of ours.

Einstein missed the **simplicity** of Ampère's Concept entirely. This was exactly what he was looking for to unify the forces between all those spins in both microcosm & macrocosm. Phase was about the only thing possible to unify spin frequencies, but Einstein never saw its relevance.

This is __also__ telling you gravity is not a fundamental force, yet all these in-phase attractive forces between all these spinning items in our universe **are** fundamental forces.

You must look at Ampère's Law that *astoundingly* — unifies electric and magnetic fields, giving us the *simple* __truth__ — that shows us exactly what causes the fundamental forces.

Kurt Gödel proved the truth must come __before__ the math.

Today, modern science is using highly complex math before it even has the slightest bit of truth.

In the 1820s, André M. Ampère took two batteries and connected each to a long wire, with both wires parallel to each other. When the current went the same direction through both wires, the wires attracted. When Ampère reversed one of the batteries and the current went through the wires in opposite directions, then the wires repelled each other.

The unit of electrical current, the Amp, was named after Ampère for this __simple__ discovery — relating the magnetic field **directly** and ** SIMPLY** to the

This *fundamental* __basic__ **simplicity** of Ampère's Law — using **no*** plus or minus charges or north and south poles* — is now totally obscured by the more complicated math and rules of the Faraday-Maxwell field theory, coming half a century after Ampère, that __must__ use **imaginary** * plus and minus charges and north and south poles*.

A __full__ page (page 29) on 1-18-1967 in the **New York Times Sunday Book Review Section** is about my publication, back in 1966. In that I showed: Ampère's Law was the

Now in 2018 I'm showing that **scalar** **relative motion** (phase) applies — *not only to electrons* — but to all these spinning entities in both microcosm and macrocosm.

Ampère's Law essentially **tells** you: entities that are **in-phase** attract, and entities that are **out-of-phase** repel each other.

This is not only the rule — engineers use — in the electrical world, but it's the rule __between__ all these **scalar**, **spinning** entities giving us __all__ the **fundamental forces** in our entire micro-macro universe.

Thus, we've unified the forces to obtain the **fundamental forces**.

Einstein's

Cosmological Constant

Concept

**Both our ****space and our time are produced by** Einstein's Cosmological Constant repulsive force density caused by all these spinning entities being out-of-phase with each other.

Welcome to Dr. Milo Wolff's frequency universe. Milo and I discussed science for decades. We both were into radio early and saw the rapid changes there. In his 80s, he drove me to John Wayne airport so I could return to Colorado. I do miss Milo Wolff. You are reading what he taught me.

The establishment hasn't caught on to the utter **simplicity of this entire universe** that both Ampère and Dr. Milo Wolff have shown us.

Einstein's Cosmological Constant repulsive force density exists in both the microcosm and macrocosm, and even Einstein didn't realize its true value as also being spacetime that we somehow mistakenly divide into the two seemingly different concepts of space and time.

What can be divided is the spacetime interval — into two different spacetime realms — the microcosm and the macrocosm, using Ampère's Law in both.

Einstein's repulsive force space can __also__ be seen in the microcosm by enlarging an innermost molecular electron to the size of a pin head: the electron would then be as far from the nucleus as the fortieth floor in a tall building is from the street below.

Einstein knew this; this is why he tried to unify macrocosm and microcosm forces.

But this microcosm spacetime is different from ours and uses a different spacetime interval.

The establishment understands that we have all this neutron * Binding Energy* in mass. Really it is

Nevertheless, when these numerous quark-electron bindings are severed — via either fission or fusion energy — then these many, severed items fly off, cork screwing through their realm producing vast amounts of out-of-phase forces or space as we see it, ending up with an element or elements closer to iron.

The iron molecule seems to be at some **scalar**, harmonic balance point, where one full *precessing cycle* gives the more __spherical__ **scalar** effect: there also seems to be a preferred **scalar** size/mass harmonic *resonance* — and major harmonic spacetime realm — **a bit more than** every twenty billion (2x10^{10}) spin frequency orders of magnitude apart.

This gives us — presently, *in Dr. Milo Wolff's frequency universe* — a stable enough universe, in which the probability of a **big bang** correction, *somewhere in the system*, __always__ will exist.

The vast out-of-phase forces — when this stability is disrupted — are what give us every atomic explosion, which ceases after creating the new element/elements, thereby removing all those temporary out-of-phase forces.

This is __also__ what caused the Big Bang and __also__ the present, more balanced universe we have now.

The microcosm — we all know — is a fairly well-balanced realm, where the in-phase forces are balanced well enough against the out-of-phase forces for stability .

Now, here's an energy TRANSFER method that does not affect this in-phase to out-of-phase balance, but in that type of energy creation and transfer method, impedance matching is necessary.

In fact, this necessary impedance matching — where each mass binding had to match an equal mass un-binding — gave us the concept that *"energy could neither be created nor destroyed"*, this was, of course, before the atomic energy era that began with Einstein's proof that E=mc^{2}.

An example of this — impedance matching TRANSFER — is the light that comes to your eyes from a star.

Stars have electrons of various impedances ready to emit light and your eyes have red, green and blue receptors to receive the various colored light — providing among other things — their impedance exactly matches the impedance of those light emitting star electrons. Also, both star electron transmitting light and eye receptor electron must be a spin-up spin-down pair — **with their closest sides ****binding in-phase** — and their spin axes parallel or somewhat parallel.

Also, this my friends — with those other things — is the answer to Olbers' Paradox.

Here's how light from a distant star acts somewhat like alternating current but at a much, much, much higher frequency.

If you look at energy transfer this way, then you will see the relationship between binding with the surroundings (stars) and internal binding; the production of a **quantum** of **energy** is gained __after__ an **in-phase** binding **first** with the surroundings (a star) and then that same electron __switches__ a bond FROM the surroundings (star) to an internal **in-phase** bond in your eye: an example is green light from a star, at 5,000 Angstroms in wavelength (color mid-range), where electrons in our eye cones are cycling bonds between electrons on that star, and __us__, at the rate of 600 trillion times a second (600 THz).

Only **ONE** of those cycling infinitesimally short period bonds is a quantum of **green** light.

It takes only about eight or nine of these quanta cycling bonds before you can sense the slightest bit of **green** light.

This is the way it really works, but if you want to believe in photons go right ahead. However, I do believe that much of quantum theory — along with photons — is going down the drain once an all frequency universe is accepted. We know enough about frequency behavior now to replace much of quantum theory with the frequency aspect of what's really going on, as I've just shown you with starlight and **in-phase** binding.

Einstein's

Spacetime Concept

Some features of quantum theory will remain because spacetime is not continuous — like field theory — as Einstein warned us. Spacetime comes in chunks and has holes.

Even though the electron on a distant star giving you light, is separated from the one receiving that light in your eye — there is ** no spacetime** whatsoever between their closest sides binding in-phase.

There is no spacetime — between those sides — because spacetime itself is only created by the closest sides of entities spinning out-of-phase.

Our thinking of a continuous spacetime has to entirely change to pieces of spacetime.

Bohr and Einstein were both original thinkers, nevertheless, neither got to the bottom of what caused these attractive and repulsive forces in this universe.

Now we know!

All attractive forces are caused by things that are in-phase.

All repulsive forces — along with spacetime — are caused by things that are spinning out-of-phase with each other.

**This is the correct building block model of how this universe is built.**

Mathematician Stephen Wolfram proved — in his *A New Kind of Science* — that all the math in the world isn't going to show how this universe works until you have the __correct__ building block __model__.

And how true that has been!

Scientists use the word spacetime for a reason: space changes with a change in speed or mass, and so does time. We know when we look through the Hubble telescope through space, then we are also looking back through time. Space changes and time changes but the **spacetime interval** never changes: look it up!

Most enlightened scientists realize that spacetime is a single entity, therefore we use that word. Einstein, more than anyone else, gave us this realization of spacetime.

Our ancestors, however, didn't know about Einstein or spacetime and have given us two *different* building blocks of SPACE and TIME for our present science.

**This is an exceptionally simple universe** — once you understand what is really going on.

But we don't see it for the same reason that we see SPACE and TIME as two *different *things — when they are only ONE thing — as Einstein proved, the **spacetime interval**.

Why we discern both space and time is an enigma, but it has to do with the fact that as we look out into space, we forget about all these spin frequencies (time creators) producing it.

This may, in fact, be the very beginning of solving that enigma.

*** Below Important ***

It's a universe of Dr. Milo Wolff's **scalar**, spinning, *standing wave* entities all throughout microcosm and macrocosm, whose spins **all obey **Ampère's simple phase law: **scalar** entities (solids) are created __between__ attractive force, **in-phase** concentric binding of spin frequencies — or harmonics thereof.

And then we have the opposite of SCALAR.

Spacetime (Einstein's Cosmological Constant type repulsive force or space) which is produced __between__ **out-of-phase** spin frequencies.

*** Above Important ***

Einstein has to be given credit for being the first to see that all this space also had a repulsive force density to it. However, he missed the spacetime aspect of it all.

In fact, I did myself until recently. People will see that by reading some of my earlier papers.

You must now think in terms of spacetime and rid your mind of our modern science principles of space and time being two distinct fundamental entities.

Spacetime is being produced via **out-of-phase** frequencies and Wolff's SCALAR entities are being produced via all the attractive force, **in-phase** frequencies.

Milo Wolff has shown us that **this is a frequency universe all throughout!**

And in this frequency universe there is a propensity for the in-phase forces to equal the out-of-phase forces, but they never can balance out because of such things as the added attractiveness of harmonic binding: the down quark spinning at an exact higher harmonic than those harmonically captured molecular electrons.

Frequency plays a much bigger role now than in modern science, which we unfortunately must put a bit out of our minds now to understand what fundamentally is really at the bottom of things in this universe.

When you state **momentum** then you __must__ **give the frequency of that momentum**.

Deductive reasoning tells us that different spin frequencies are thus producing different spacetime intervals!

Therefore, this is indeed a frequency universe all throughout wherein the
spacetime interval *—* *although invariant in one
spacetime realm — *varies from realm to realm.

Einstein was so close to solving the puzzle. He gave us spacetime. He gave us his Cosmological Constant that he knew were in both microcosm and macrocosm, but he missed the next two steps: recognizing what Wheeler and Fehnman did, and then seeing that this was due to a multitude of out-of-phase waves.

Since the spacetime interval does indeed vary from realm to realm, Wheeler and Feynman were correct to warn us about our measuring in other *—* *spin/orbit — *spacetime realms and Niels Bohr was correct arguing with Einstein that Heisenberg's uncertainty exists outside the microcosm as well.

Wheeler and Feynman did warn us about this measurement uncertainty when they
told us we could never measure accurately outside of our own *spin/orbit *spacetime realm but
somehow our university *—* *military industrial complex —
*experts were asleep at the switch on this one or maybe
this was simply another of those things they wished to conceal from us, hoping
to catch Snowden *E. Snowden-Wikipedia* before he revealed it to us.

Future computers will someday give us a perfect match showing us how the standing wave world of** Schrödinger's Equation **

Here is a *quote *from the*
Britannica 1997 CD* telling about Einstein's tensor math which **"***led him to an essentially unique
tensor equation for the law of gravitation, in which gravitation emerged not
as a force but as a manifestation of the curvature of spacetime.*

As you see in the above ** Britannica** quote, force is a manifestation of
space. Also there is

Saul Perlmutter has shown, as in **GR**, that if repulsive force is __more__ * spacetime* than

This bi-polar aspect also exists in ** all** the fundamental forces

The people who have read *http://www.rbduncan.com/* and *http://www.Ampèrefitz.com* know that you cannot even begin to understand this universe until you
know exactly what spacetime is. It is ONE thing, not the two things of space and time that we presently THINK it is.

Our minds seem to be equating the main
scalar frequency of the
electron as a clock that mainly determines what we call time. We sense the spin frequency mainly determining
force and space. (*We see the spin of the electron causing the magnetic
force*.) Also, by reading, what you see in
the above links, you will see what force the spin of the quark causes to even
distant quarks. Also read:

By reading what is in the above links you will also know what we see is an
**average** time and an

*Each electron repels its nearest neighbor by a certain amount of force, the
same as each star repels its nearest neighbor by a certain amount of
force. *

View these electrons as Niels Bohr did, as spinning spheres, even though we
know they are a complicated **Schrödinger** type resonance.

Think of two energy exchanging electrons, with opposite spins, as two
*gears meshing*. But
these two * entire* electrons are

In other words, even though those two electrons are not themselves in the
same space or the same time, **an ultra tiny
sliver ***(a quantum)* **of their closest sides
are**.

From the Britannica 2009 DVD **"Minkowski**, Herman: His idea of
combining the three dimensions of physical space with that of time into a
four-dimensional "Minkowski space"-**spacetime**-laid the mathematical
foundations for Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity.**"**

Sigma chemical bonding is a proven fact. It must always be seen as a
**spacetime**
** binding force** between a

You might say these ** minute
portions** see themselves in the same space and time
through a wormhole. But the reason they can do this is that space is not this
vast empty space we visualize. It's built up of trillions of quantum chunks and
if none of them get directly in the way, then these two

One additional thing is * very* important and this is that

Now, here's what Niels Bohr taught us:

From the Britannica 2009 DVD **"**Spectral lines are produced by
transitions of electrons within atoms or ions. As the electrons move closer to
or farther from the nucleus of an atom (or of an ion), energy in the form of
light (or other radiation) is emitted or absorbed.**"**

For instance:

If a **quantum **of
**violet** light is
given up by a star to your eye then on that star, in a certain time period, an
electron that was originally far from its nucleus, dropped to one of the closest
orbitals of its nucleus. While in that __same__ time period (*standard model
explanation*) an electron in your eye
emitted a **quantum**
of **violet** light to
your senses.

If a **quantum** of
**red** light is given
up by a star to your eye then on that star, in that __same__ time period, an
electron dropped about ** half** the distance

From the Britannica 2009 DVD **"quantum:** the magnitude of all the **quanta** emitted or absorbed is the same in both energy and momentum. These particle-like packets of light are called **photons**, a term also applicable to **quanta** of other forms of electromagnetic energy such as X rays and gamma rays.**"**

**Photons** are classed as **boson** **quantum** exchange particles. Remember, in these **quantum** exchanges, the __same__ magnitude of energy emitted is also
absorbed.

From the Britannica 2009 DVD **"quantum mechanics:** The probability
of a transition between one atomic stationary state and some other state can be
calculated with the aid of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation. For example,
an atom may change spontaneously from one state to another state with less
energy, emitting the difference in energy as a **photon** with a frequency
given by the Bohr relation.**"**

Let's look at how a **photon** supposedly works in the *standard model*:

If batter **blue**
hits the ball twice as much as batter **red** *in the same time period* then batter
**blue** will expend
twice the energy as batter **red**.

It's the same with light: as **violet** light being almost twice the frequency of
**red** light has
almost twice the energy in each **quantum** of light.

But the time period with all of these **quantum** exchanges seems to be associated with
Planck's constant (** h**). So if the batter hits the ball twice as much, this gives twice the
energy. Since there are almost twice the swings back and forth with

However, all of this is well known to **quantum** theory physicists.

Now we come to something not as well known to all:

You must realize that the sigma type close bondings — *of your electrons here* —
also occur with distant electrons as far off as the Hubble
limit; not only that but these far distant bondings are at the __same__
__strength__ as close bondings. They must be the same strength because the
quantum of light emitted from the star was the same strength as your eye
received; this is an agreed upon, quantum theory fact.

Where this ** in
phase spin
attraction** happens the

Since this *standard
model* photon has no mass then it has to be considered
nothing more than a simple binding shift or binding exchange between that star
and your eye. A simple binding shift would better account for the recoil effect
noted in Feynman diagrams. And a binding shift causing other binding shifts, or
emanating from other binding shifts, would better account for the various bubble
chamber tracks.

The *in phase*
type **spin** attraction of two Cooper pair *electrons* has a
Fermi-Dirac quantum entanglement element similar to the *photon *type Bose-Einstein condensate
element to it because space has disappeared (condensed) between the
** in phase portions** of the two

We have, as part of the standard model, **Q**uantum
**E**lectro**D**ynamics:

**QED** uses what is called the ** square of the amplitude**. These are

When you have plenty of time, you can better understand this
** square of the
amplitude** quantum of energy transfer, if you listen
to the

Minkowski almost had it. He told us that both the star's electron and your eye electron had to be on the ** same light cone** before you could
receive light from a star. It's really that a

If you copy this page with its * links* to your computer then you will have some other pages
(

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

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

Have a good day & visit my site at good**reads**:

*http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/276352*

**Click ANY of these **links** to get what you want**

****

Read my **latest** book FREE: (these two
* links*
below)

http://www.amperefitz.com/ua_20071020_ck_ds_jm_ds.pdf (This is the book in Adobe)

or

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

While all the links on this page are OK and presently working, unfortunately
only about two thirds (*2/3*) of the links I gave,
years ago, as proof (click & see: http://www.amperefitz.com/presskit.html) for
statements in this latest book, published in the year **MMVl**, are now still working **BUT** your search engine will probably take you to
a similar area where you should be able to read similar proof
material.

****

& super popular now:

*QED — Feynman's
Strange Theory of Light and Matter* "Feynman's
Strange Theory of Light and Matter"

*http://amperefitz.com/einsteins.cos.c.htm**
*Einstein's Cosmological Constant.

*http://www.amperefitz.com/two.magnets.htm**
*Two magnets will show you more than thousands of books.

http://amperefitz.com/exexshorttoe.html Extra short Theory of Everything.

*http://www.amperefitz.com/45years.htm**
*45 Years of Putting this Jigsaw Puzzle together — of unifying Gravity with
all the other forces.

**The NEXT 12 FREE publications in
Adobe pdf **

QUICK version of Ampere's Laws.

*http://amperefitz.com/qamp.pdf** *

Two magnets will show you more than thousands of books.

*http://amperefitz.com/two—magnets.pdf**
*

Sigma bond strengths in the microcosm

*http://www.amperefitz.com/bond.strengths.pdf** *

"An important Quark message no one is heeding!"

*http://amperefitz.com/quarkmspin.pdf**
*

45 Years of Putting this Jigsaw Puzzle together — of unifying Gravity with all the other forces."

*http://www.amperefitz.com/45years.pdf**
*

"Ampere's Long Wire Law is a fact!"

*http://amperefitz.com/question.pdf**
*

"Affenstall Science Christmas Message"

*http://amperefitz.com/affenstall.pdf**
*

"Dan Fitzpatrick comments on Theoretical Physicist Mendel Sachs' Beliefs."

*http://amperefitz.com/answers.to.mendel.pdf** *

"Why we have general relativity or why mass increases with speed."

*http://amperefitz.com/why.general.relativity.pdf** *

"Fitz answers some Scalar Wave questions."

*http://amperefitz.com/26nov2006.pdf**
*

"And Hubble warned us this was NOT an expanding universe."

*http://amperefitz.com/lj2004.pdf** *

"Ampere really gave us this Relative Motion Law in 1825 for things he knew were moving in the wire (electrons)."

*http://amperefitz.com/relMlaw.pdf**
*

**For the LATEST **Click: *http://www.amperefitz.com*

*or **http://www.rbduncan.com** which was really the very first web page showing us what was actually going on in our universe.*

*And of course - click this following link: **http://www.rbduncan.com/toprule1.htm*

AND 4 Decades of Fitz's papers:

*4 Decades of writings of Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr. *

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

*Daniel P. Fitzpatrick Jr. *January 28, 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.