Why Space is Stationary

Let me explain why I have named my cosmology theory "The Theory Of Stationary Space", as detailed in the compound posting on this blog by that name. If you are unfamiliar with this theory there is an introduction there.

There are two examples here, one involving radiation in space and the other electrical transformers.

1) WHY ARE WE STILL RECEIVING RADIATION FROM THE BIG BANG?

We know that there must be a dimension of space over which matter is active but which we cannot see. As one example, consider the radiation left over from the Big Bang. We can receive and measure this radiation but we cannot pinpoint the direction in space from which it is coming. The radiation seems to be coming at us equally from all directions in space, allowing for the movement of the earth through space.

If the universe was expanding outward in the three dimensions that we see, we should be able to pinpoint the direction from which the universe is expanding, but we can't. That is because the Big Bang took place in the direction in space that we cannot see, but we perceive this unseen dimension as time. That is why we cannot place the location of the Big Bang in space, but know that it was in the past in our time dimension.

Time, as we perceive it, is really a dimension of space. Matter is not the particles in three dimensions that we perceive, but strings in four dimensions of space. Time really only exists within us. Our consciousnesses are moving along the bundles of strings that comprise our bodies and brains at what we perceive as the speed of light. That is why we can find no real reason for why the speed of light is what it is, instead of some other speed.

When an object seems to us to be in motion, it is just that it's bundle of strings is at an angle to ours so that, as our consciousness proceeds, the object seems to be a three-dimensional object in motion. The greater the angle relative to us, the faster it seems to be moving. A 90 degree angle would represent the speed of light, which is the speed at which our consciousnesses are really moving.

But there is another question about the Big Bang. The fact that we cannot pinpoint it's direction but receive the radiation from it equally in all directions shows that there must be another dimension of space that we cannot see, but perceive as time. The other question is why we are still receiving radiation from the Big Bang at all.

Most scientists agree that the Big Bang took place nearly fourteen billion (thousand million) years ago. The Big Bang, the great explosion that began the universe, didn't last long. It was over in a matter of minutes. So the question is why we are still receiving radiation from it nearly fourteen billion years later. This really requires some special explanation.

My cosmology theory neatly explains it, and it shows why the theory is called "The Theory Of Stationary Space". Radiation is not still emanating from the Big Bang. Everything is really still. The universe has already happened at the instant of the Big Bang. It just seems to us to be in motion because our consciousnesses are moving through it, along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains at what we perceive as the speed of light. The only "new motion" in the universe is that brought about by living things.

This means that the radiation that we are receiving from the Big Bang is not really coming from the Big Bang now, it has been there in space ever since the Big Bang, and our consciousnesses are only just moving through it now. The radiation is aligned at right angles to the strings of matter comprising our bodies and brains, so it seems to be coming at us from all directions at what we perceive as the speed of light.

Our violent and energetic universe is actually perfectly still. It is not that nothing is happening, it is that it has already happened when matter was thrown out in an instant from the Big Bang. It just seems so energetic because of how fast our consciousnesses are moving through it, and we do not see that it is our consciousness that is the thing that is moving.

How else is there to explain why we are still bathed in radiation from the Big Bang, which we know only lasted minutes, nearly fourteen billion years after it happened?

That actually brings about the next question. The conventional model of the Big Bang is that both space and matter emanated outward from it at the same time.

But if space itself originated with the Big Bang then why should there be radiation from the Big Bang in that space? It doesn't seem to make sense. It makes it seem as if space was already there and the Big Bang introduced matter into the pre-existing space.

That is exactly the way my theory has it. Space was already there, brought about by charge replication in multiple dimensions. The number one rule of the universe, where everything is made of near infinitesimal electric charges, is that positive and negative electric charges must always balance out. The universe began with a single electric charge, whether positive or negative, but that created an imbalance and it had to induce an opposite charge on each side of it, but that created another imbalance, and so on.

Somehow, maybe by the Will of God, a discrepancy took place and a two-dimensional sheet began to form by the same process that was within, but not contiguous with, the multi-dimensional background space. But the electric charges in the background space influenced those in the two-dimensional sheet, by opposite charge attraction and like charge repulsion, so that charge migration took place in the sheet. Positive charges migrated toward one side and negative charges to the other side.

This created a lower-energy state, which is the second priority of the universe after charge balance, but it also opened the possibility of the positive side of the sheet coming into contact with the negative side, relative to the perspective of the multi-dimensional background space. That is what happened and the resulting matter-antimatter mutual annihilation is what we perceive as the Big Bang as one dimension of this two-dimensional sheet disintegrated and the other dimension, now as one-dimensional strings, was thrown out across the multi-dimensional background and is what we have today as matter.

The way I see it, there have long been theories about what happened after the Big Bang but this is the only one that explains why it actually happened.

Except that we can only see at right angles to the dimension in which the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains are aligned so that we see in the other three dimensions and perceive the one in which the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains, along which our consciousness moves at what we perceive as the speed of light, as time.

2) WHY ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMERS DO NOT WORK WITH DIRECT CURRENT

Have you ever wondered why an electrical transformer will work with alternating current, AC, but not with direct current, DC? It turns out that the answer involves cosmology and also shows why everything is actually stationary, as described in my theory.

The advantage of alternating current, and the reason that it is favored for household and industrial use, is that it's voltage can be transformed, either stepped up or stepped down, to provide the desired ratio of voltage and current. The current, measured in amperes, refers to the actual flow of electrons through a wire. The voltage, measured in volts, is the pressure, referred to as electromotive force or potential difference. The two are both essential components of electricity and the power, measured in watts, is equal to voltage x current.

The units involved in electricity are all related. The unit of electrical resistance is an ohm. One volt will push a current of one ampere (amp) through a resistance of one ohm. The voltage multiplied by the amperage equals the total power, in watts.

This means that we might be able to vary the amperage (current) and the voltage, relative to one another, while keeping the total power (watts) constant. But why would we want to do that if it makes no difference in the total power of an electric circuit?

The reason is that electrical circuits through wires are not 100% efficient. If we transmit electricity over long distances, there are inevitable losses of power. But these losses affect current more than voltage.

That means that, if we could transform the current, exchanging voltage for current or vice-versa, we could supply electricity from a generating station far away, step the voltage up and the current down, and then step the voltage back down prior to household or industrial use. That would offer tremendous advantages in not having to have the electricity generated nearby in order to avoid current loss in the long-distance wires.

An electrical transformer is a simple device. There is a core made of iron, which is magnetic in nature. Two coils of wire are wrapped around the core. One is the input coil and the other is the output coil. How the voltage and current will be exchanged depends on how many turns of wire there are in each coil.

If the output coil has twice as many turns of wire as the input coil, the voltage in the output coil will be doubled but the current in the output coil will be halved. But the total electrical power, voltage x current, will remain the same. We could think of it as operating in the same way as a lever and a fulcrum, exchanging force and distance. A transformer is referred to as either a step-up or a step-down transformer. But this refers to the voltage, not to the current.

So being able to manipulate the current and voltage is a great advantage. But the transformer only works with alternating current, where the current changes direction many times per second, and not with direct current, where the positive and negative terminals remain constant.

Use of alternating current can be awkward because different countries use different frequencies, or cycles per second. At the time of this writing all countries use either 50 or 60 hertz, or cycles per second. There is no such thing as frequency with direct current. But alternating current is universally used because of this tremendous advantage that it can be transformed. Direct current is used mainly for things that run on batteries.

If we run direct current through a coil of wire, it will induce an opposite current in another coil of wire, and it will form an electromagnet if there is an iron core in that coil. But direct current will not work with a transformer in the way that alternating current will.

But why won't a transformer work with direct current? The electrons in a direct current are moving, they have power and can form an electromagnet. The transformer only works if the electrons are changing direction. In a direct current, the positions of the electrons are constantly changing as they move through the circuit, but this isn't enough to make a transformer work. A transformer only works when the electrons are not only moving, but changing direction.

But then the answer becomes clear. It is a matter of cosmology. Let's remember my cosmology theory.

In my cosmology theory, what we perceive as motion is really only the strings or bundles of strings that comprise matter bent at an angle. Our consciousnesses are moving along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains, at what we perceive as the speed of light, but we can only see at right angles to the direction in which our bundles of strings are primarily aligned in four-dimensional space so that we can only see in three of these four dimensions. The other dimension is that we perceive as time so that objects at an angle appear to be moving.

What this means, of course, is that the electrons in an electrical circuit are not really moving. They are bent at an angle to the alignment of our bundle of strings so that they appear to be in motion as our consciousness rushes by. There is energy in these electrons, but the energy is in the angle at which they are aligned. It is not the electrons, but our consciousnesses, that is actually moving. So it seems to us to be energy of motion.

The only change in the electron strings of direct current is when they are first set in motion, after that they are not actually moving. They are displaced from their position at rest, but are not actually in motion. This displacement, which are electron strings bent at an angle, has two components, the number of strings that are bent and the angle at which they are bent.

The only actual change is when the current is first started, after that the electron strings are stationary as long as all factors remain constant. This is why direct current cannot be transformed. To produce current that can be transformed the current must be started over and over again, because that is the only time there is an actual change, and it is really only change that enables an opportunity for transformation. The only practical way to do this is to get a current that flows back and forth, rather than in a continuous direction, in other words alternating current.

The exchange between voltage and current that a transformer facilitates can be explained simply as the number of electron strings and the angle at which they are bent. The number of electron strings represents the current. The angle at which they are bent represents the voltage. The total displacement of the strings represents the power. A transformer enables us to choose whether we want a few strings bent at more of an angle, or more strings bent at less of an angle, as long as the total displacement is the same.

But there is the opportunity to do this only when the current actually begins, because that is the only time that change is really taking place. As explained by my cosmology theory, everything is really static except for the new movement brought about by living things.