The first thing I shall do is describe the model of the atom. Then I shall describe the motion of the energy within the atom, in simple terms so an intelligent 10 year old will be able to understand it. Then I will show how I came to this result, with little or no mathematics except a calculation of prime numbers. Finally I shall try to describe three experiments, if I can remember thm, which will prove the theory if it is posible to extract energy out of the system (atom). Others are invited to design their own experiments if they can.

Something was made in the first page about the fact that I claim to have an IQ of 167. This is not a claim, but was tested by the education department of New Zealand while I was in the third form at Hamilton Boy's High School in 1969.

It would be confusing to many if I now claimed to have written Einstein's essay about relativity, because I cannot prove it, and if I was him in a past life, it only makes me appear a kook to those who do not believe in God, or who believe in God, but not a Christian God. However, at 167 I'm smarter than Einstein anyway, although he may have lied on his test.

Which has more energy, a solar system or a single atom?

According to my calculations, there is more than 5 cubed time energy inide a single atom than we previously calculated, but the problem like the atom we already know, the helium atom, it is locked in.

Now answer this question, how much energy would it take to move the (mass of) the whole solars system, 100 light years, instantly, at the speed of light? If not that much, how much to move it the same distance, but at a slower rate?

We know what a supernova is. Chinese astronomers observed one in the year 1054 coming from the Crab Nebula in the constellation of Taurus. There is some doubt about the year, because the Chinese calendar was about two year out from ours, however it was predicted the day before (confirming the speed of light as calculated from parallax, by what was recorded as a visit from "the Emperor", but just which  emperor is not clear. It was observed again in China exactly 100 years later, meaning the earth (and the solar system) had moved 100 light years away.

SN 1054 is a supernova that was first observed as a new "star" in the sky on July 4, 1054 AD, hence its name, and that lasted for a period of around two years. The event was recorded in multiple Chinese and Japanese documents and in one document from the Arab world. While it has been hypothesized that SN 1054 was also observed by American-Indian tribes and Europeans, it has not been conclusively proven.

The Crab nebula is easily observed by amateur astronomers thanks to its brightness, and was also catalogued early on by professional astronomers, long before its true nature was understood and identified. When the French astronomer Charles Messier watched for the return of Halley's Comet in 1758, he confused the nebula for the comet, as he was unaware of the former's existence. It was because of this error that he created his catalogue of non-cometary nebulous objects, the Messier Catalogue, to avoid such mistakes in the future. The nebula is catalogued as the first Messier object, or M1.

It is also my conjecture that we did not see the return on Halley's Comet in 1986 as some observers believe, but that we missed it because the Hiroshima bomb caused the earth to burn like the sun for a period, but we will see it before the year 2022. The only way to confirm this is to travel (x) (present date -1945- [Hiroshima] + [66?] or 70 light years away, and see if the earth did burn for a period. Halleys comet will first appear close to teh sun, as its tail expands, then about six months later as it travels past the earth back out into space on its closest point.


If you don't know what momentum is I will explain it later, and also velocity, mass and even gravity, which nobody has yet explained. The closest thing is angular momentum, but there ia a little more to it. it is however elegantly simple once you understand it.

So what of the claim that "Protons and Neutrons are Atoms", the title of my book. Of course Protons and Neutrons are not atoms, they are a lot smaller than atoms, bu that is their general shape, like Rutherford said the shape of the atom was planetary, and not "plum pudding" like.

Take the first three or five atoms of the periodic table:

Atomic number

1        Hydrogen

2        Helium

3        Lithium

4        Beryllium

5        Boron

See atomic number and protons. The atomic number (1-5) is the number of protons in the nucleus of these atoms. It is the 'charge' number.

Hydrogen has one proton and no neutrons in the nucleus. It is represented as a point (.) inside a circle. The circle represents teh size of the atom, and also the boundary of its 'electron shell'.

Helium has one proton and one neutron.

Here is my first conjecture: That all protons and all neutrons are exactly the same; at least for the first five to ten atoms of the periodic table. After that (from 10 to 100) they may possibly get more complicated, I simply don't know.

Here is my second proposition: That protons and neutrons both (each) are composed of a group of similar sub atomic bodies. I say that these bodies are most likely to be a group of three or five, and that they in turn mirror the shape of the proton and neutron.

That is to say, (and I intend to add illustrations here to clarify things) in the simplist, and most abundant atom, Hydrogen, which has just one proton, inside teh proton there is another (proton, or Hydrogen atom) which is a group of three (or five) particles with exactly the same structure.

In this way, there is more energy in the nucleus, than in the outside (electric charge) of the atom, but that it is bound up by layers of balanced charges, and increasingly compressed, (and more rapidly moving) mass. We quickly arrive an the formula that Energy is equal to Mass to the speed of light cubed. We can come back to that later, but particles faster than the photon (speed of light), propogated perpendicularly to the (collision) (of opposed particles) in the nucleus of the proton, create a new particle.

So here is how the model looks: It can be represented graphically by:

O=O=O=O=O//, that is, a proton inside a proton inside a proton inside a proton inside a proton.

Remember there are three of them, that is three (we will call them protons for now, but the are only proton (or Hydrogen atom) like in shape, and each is smaller and smaller as you go inside. In fact, however, in terms of the space outside the atom, they are very close to each other indeed.

At some point, lets say at the fifth level down, or in, there is a possibility that energy breaks or spills out. This can be represented by a branch coming out of teh fifth( or whatever level it happens to be) and levels continue down (lets say to 21 levels, or possibly to infinity).

So now I must describe all three, or five shapes in the proton, and the same number in the neutron, and how the energy is channelled down, or up and what motion it takes in its orbit in each shell.

Then I have to describe and name the particles, what relationship they have to a mass, or an electron, or a photon. Describe the shape and nature of a photon, and say where any other sub atomic and sub photonic (hotonic) particles can be found. Describe gravity.

All this I have already 9or mostly) done, but have not yet fully put it on paper in an orderly manner, however the structure is correct.

How do I know?

If I believe in Roswell aliens, if a space craft (top order benevolent predator) has come from another solar system or galaxy, it must have travelled faster than the speed of light. 1.

The shape  of these energy levels may have already been revealed to us in (some) crop circles) and all we have to do is recognise the shape to confirm it. Seeing a recognisable shape, and saying it was either put there by intelligent life, or possibly unthinking pranksters is not conclusive argument at all. Not all (hardly any) crop circles are made by extraterrestrial intelligence, but there is there any evidence to give it credibility. Even if we saw a scientific formula we recognised, spelled out in a cornfield, we couldn't conclude that aliens did it, especially if we don't believe it is possible, but on the other hand, if there is faster than light travel in another galaxy, what message would they leave, if any, if they decided to visit us, and why wouldn't they? Again, if there is only one type of alien, a galactic policeman, preventing wholesale visitation by numerous alien types, do we have anything to fear from them, and are they the Roswell type, which the US government would knows is true, but not necessarily understand, or do we prefer to believe in a hoax?

Again, there is no reason to suspect that science is not the same everywhere, that every civilisation will sooner or later devise an atomic weapon, and indeed science will not stop, but given a million or so more years of discovery, we too will unlock more of its secrets. We may not all have the same religion, or any religion, because Christ would be meaningless on another planet where there is no recorded history of Him or information about Him, but science will not be a stranger, when light is the same everywhere, and so are the atoms and gravity itself. We will assume that atoms are the same for now, and that there are 100 in the periodic table of elements everywhere, but perhaps there could be more, possibly 2,500? Why not, we can look at that later also.

Do we already know enough to take the leap and state Mass = Charge?

Probably not quite, but we a little explanation we can proceed.



Make a free website with Yola