Introduction to the Theory of Despace

Scientific Paper
Title	Introduction to the Theory of Despace
Read in full	Link to paper
Author(s)	Reelin Show
Keywords	wave-particle duality, stellar aberration, electric field, magnetic field, light speed
Published	2010
Journal	Proceedings of the NPA
Volume	7
No. of pages	11
Pages	550-560

Read the full paper here

Abstract

"For the bubbles in the water, there is no water". This is the basic concept of the Theory of Despace. The Theory of Despace states that the universe is filled up with "space", and matter is the place in the universe without space. Based upon this postulation, the Theory of Despace created a new model of the basic particles to explain the forces in distance such as Gravitation, electric field and magnetic field. Based upon the model of the electric field in this theory, the Theory of Despace created a new model of photon which composed of two of the particles - one halfton and one anti-halfton - to explain the wave-particle duality of light. Meanwhile, since the photon is composed of two particles which move in a course of a waveform. For the light speed with respect to the space, it's considered as a wave to be limited to the light speed in that medium. For the drag effect of the space to the photon, it's considered as a particle to become very small. The Theory of Despace also states that the planetary motion is caused by the space vortex. All the planet systems are free vortices. The speed of the space flow at the outer ring of the vortex is slower than which at the inner ring. When light beam comes from far away and reaches Earth, the vortex speed will vary from 0 to about the revolution speed of Earth around the sun. The light speed with respect to the space will remain constant as light is a wave in the space as its medium, and the direction of the light beam with respect to its source will also remain the same because the drag effect of the space to the photon will become almost zero since the photon is a particle and the speed difference of the space flow is extremely small when the photon moves in the space. This solved the paradox between the phenomenon of stellar aberration and the MMX. The Theory of Despace should be the most comprehensible and reasonable one to explain the basic phenomena of our world.

Overview

Reelin Show's paper, presented at the 2010 Long Beach meeting of the Natural Philosophy Alliance, proposes an inversion of the ordinary picture of matter and void. Space, in this scheme, is the only substance — an aether that fills the universe — and matter is not a thing added to space but a hole in it, a region from which space is absent. The name for such a hole is "despace". The motivating argument is one of parsimony: if space were empty and matter came in dozens of kinds, the world's foundations would be complicated, whereas "a simple thing would not be constructed from complex components". The paper's stated ambition is a single-substance ontology from which gravitation, electricity, magnetism, the photon and the speed of light all follow.

The mechanism is flow. Space is imagined as draining continuously out of the present into the past while the future pours fresh space in, which makes every despace hole vibrate periodically and swirl, giving it spin. Matter therefore acts as a sink: space flows in and vanishes, and anything drifting in that flow is dragged inward. Gravitation is this drag. Charge is the phase of the periodic distension and shrinkage of the surrounding space. Magnetism is a directional residue of that vibration produced by orbital motion. The departure from the mainstream is total in ontology but conservative in ambition: the paper does not challenge Newtonian orbital mechanics or the constancy of the measured speed of light, but seeks to explain both as consequences of a flowing medium, and in particular to dissolve what it calls the century-old paradox between stellar aberration and the Michelson–Morley experiment.

The argument

Space, despace and the basic particles

Two entities are introduced, though the author insists "there is actually only one thing in the world": space, which fills the world and "one may call it as Ether"; and despace, a hole in the space containing no space, which is matter. The proton is a genuine despace hole through which space flows and disappears into the past. The electron is not a hole but a pure time-space vibration in which the pushed space rebounds rather than draining away. The neutrino is proposed as a despace hole with no vibration and no flow through it. A neutron is a proton and an electron bound together in close mutual revolution, their external vibrations nearly cancelling. The crucial structural claim is that the time-space vibrations of proton and electron have equal amplitude and frequency but a phase difference of exactly 180°, so that they can counterbalance.

Gravitation as space drag

Because the Earth is a vast collection of protons, it is treated as one giant despace hole into which space vanishes at some rate ΔV. Surrounding space flows in to replenish it, dragging all floating objects with it. The drag is written in the form of the standard fluid-dynamics drag equation, m_pg = C_dρv²A, with ρ identified as the "Density-Of-Space", said to be exactly the density of the particle, and A the particle's cross-section. Through a chain of substitutions involving "effective factors" α₁ and α₂ and an effective volume V = α₂δA, the density and volume cancel against m_p = ρV, leaving

g = C_x Δv

with C_x a simplified drag coefficient. Acceleration is thus independent of the mass of the accelerated body, which is offered as the explanation of why gravitational acceleration does not depend on the mass of the falling object. The paper is explicit that "there will not be any drag effect if the speed of space flow is invariant" — only a changing flow speed produces acceleration.

Electric and magnetic force

Distension of space means increase of distance; shrinkage means decrease. A key asymmetry is asserted: because space carries a Pressure-Of-Space, positive pressure can be arbitrarily large, whereas negative pressure cannot exceed −POS, "the same with a compressor with respect to a vacuum generator in the general atmosphere". Two particles in antiphase therefore cancel the vibration between them while the outer space pushes each toward the other, and since pushing beats pulling the net effect over a cycle is attraction. Two particles in phase double the space between them on the push half-cycle and pull only weakly on the other, giving net repulsion. Charge neutrality is the self-cancellation of the vibrations of equal numbers of protons and electrons. Magnetism follows when an electron's orbital period τ is an even multiple of its vibration period φ (τ = 2nφ), so that the space vibration acquires a persistent direction; the field lines bend outside the material because space gained in one direction must fill space lost in the other, and magnetic poles are therefore not one-way directions but alternating ones.

The photon as halfton pair

A photon "is not 'A Particle'": it is a halfton and an anti-halfton, identical except for a 180° phase difference. Halftons are said to be the same objects as electrons, present in atoms in equal numbers with their antiparticles and contributing nothing to weight or charge. When a halfton pair falls into mutual revolution and reaches a balance between orbital frequency and vibration frequency, the pair's centre of mass is driven repeatedly in one direction in a sine oscillation, once per half revolution. The photon is thus "not a waveform, but a particle(s) moves in a course of a waveform" — successive photons are independent, and each is emitted at an angle less than 45°. This is the paper's account of wave-particle duality.

Aberration, the null experiments, and the space vortex

Three test cases are offered against a naive moving-Earth account of light. A 6 m bar carrying an LED at one end and a paper target at the other, rotated through 180°, should show a displacement ΔL = 2Lv/c = 1.2 mm at 30 km/s; "we did not get such result". GPS signals from 20,200 km take of order a tenth of a second, so a 30 km/s aberration would displace fixes by kilometres, yet no such correction is applied. Laser tracks on a CD or DVD are under 0.5 µm wide, while d = 2Lv/c over a 1 cm path gives about 2 µm, so discs "will not work all day long". The author adds that the Earth's motion cannot in any case be only 30 km/s, since the Sun circles the Galaxy at about 220 km/s and further motions are unaccounted.

The resolution is the gravitational space vortex. Since a circular orbit requires v = √(GM/r), the space itself is taken to circulate at that speed at every radius, so the Earth's velocity relative to local space is zero and the Michelson–Morley null is automatic. Starlight entering the solar system keeps its direction in the universal frame because the accumulated drag is negligible: summing the shell-by-shell speed increments telescopes to Δv = C_xGM/(cR), and with C_x = 1 this is V_E²/c. The apparent tilt is then simply θ = arcsin(v/c), which is stellar aberration. The stationary aether should accordingly be replaced by a "Spiral Ether Model": planets are small vortices carried in the Sun's giant vortex as an object is carried in a water vortex, so no friction slows them.

Assessment

What is attractive here is the economy of the starting move. A single substance with a single defect type, and forces arising from asymmetric pressure in a vibrating medium, is a recognisably classical programme — closer to Descartes' vortices and to nineteenth-century aether mechanics than to anything modern — and the paper is honest about being an introduction rather than a finished theory. The mass-independence of gravitational acceleration falling out of the cancellation of ρ and V against m_p is the one genuinely neat step: if drag is proportional to volume and mass is density times volume, the density drops out, and that is a real structural insight rather than an assertion.

The arithmetic in the aberration section is CORRECT as far as it goes. With v/c = 10⁻⁴, 2Lv/c over 6 m is indeed 1.2 mm, and over a 1 cm optical path it is indeed about 2 µm, four times a CD track width; 20,200 km of light travel is 0.067 s, near enough the quoted 0.1 s, and 30 km/s over that interval is about 2 km, so "kilometres" is right. The telescoping sum Σ[1/(Rn) − 1/(R(n+1))] = 1/R is done correctly, and GM/(cR) does equal V_E²/c ≈ 3 m/s, which is indeed negligible beside V_E = 29.8 km/s, so the conclusion that starlight is not entrained follows from the author's own premises. Note, though, that "C_x = 1" is a bare number in a relation, g = C_xΔv, whose two sides do not have the same dimensions; C_x must carry units of inverse time, and setting it to unity is a choice of unit system, not a physical result.

The three "questions on aberration" are the weakest part, because all three are already answered by standard theory without any new mechanism. Aberration is a relative-velocity effect between source and observer; in the bar experiment the LED and the target are rigidly comoving, so a null is predicted by classical aether theory and by relativity alike, and the same is true of the laser and the disc in a CD player. For GPS the 30 km/s orbital velocity is shared by satellite and receiver and cancels identically; what does not cancel is the satellite's ~3.9 km/s motion and the Earth's rotation, and those are precisely the Sagnac and relativistic corrections that GPS does apply. Presenting the expected nulls as anomalies is the reverse of a refutation.

The vortex resolution has a naming problem and a physics problem. A free vortex in the fluid dynamics the paper cites has v ∝ 1/r; Keplerian circulation has v ∝ r^−1/2. The abstract's "All the planet systems are free vortices" is therefore not the flow the derivation actually uses. More seriously, the circulation law is imported wholesale from Newtonian gravity rather than derived from despace: nothing in the sink-and-flow picture fixes the tangential speed, and nothing in it produces an inverse-square law either — the paper never converts a vanishing rate ΔV into GM/r², and never relates C_x to G. The vortex speed is thus a fitted quantity doing exactly the work the mechanism is supposed to do. It is also tuned to Earth's orbit alone: co-moving space explains the Michelson–Morley null for a laboratory at 1 AU on a circular orbit, but the Earth's 0.46 km/s equatorial rotation is not co-moving with it, and interferometers flown at aircraft speeds, or the Michelson-Gale ring experiment, would then have to be reinterpreted case by case.

Elsewhere the internal logic strains. The drag law starts quadratic in v and ends linear in Δv, the transition resting on undefined "effective factors". Space vanishes permanently into every proton, with the future supplying an unlimited replacement flow, and no conservation statement is offered; nor is it explained why the electron, which is not a hole, nevertheless has mass and gravitates. The halfton is asserted to be "the same thing" as the electron while carrying no mass, charge or weight, which contradicts the paper's own rule that phase is what makes charge. The 45° emission angle, the identification of the halfton separation with the wavelength, and the τ = 2nφ condition for magnetism are stated without derivation and without a testable number attached. Finally, section 9.4 gives the emitted photon the velocity component of its source, c′ = c + v_s, relaxing back to c only over long distances — a Ritz-type emission theory ingredient that conflicts with de Sitter's spectroscopic binary argument and with the observed arrival-time coherence of gamma-ray burst light across cosmological baselines. No quantity in the paper is compared against a measurement to better than order of magnitude, so nothing here is yet at the stage where it could be tested.

See also

• Reelin Show
• Aether
• Michelson–Morley experiment
• Photon
• Proton
• Electron
• Speed of Light
• Emission Theory
• Category:Vortex Theory