ARCUS:  The World Formula and its Solutions

Consequently constructed using the results of Albert Einstein and Max Planck leading to the Unified Field Theory

The Preaching
Hello to all freaks, those shatter themselves their heads about what the world holds well together in the innermost!

1.One of the most important questions presently is the so-called start of the universe, although not a few are seriously thinking about it, if there ever has been a start as such a one.

2. Furthermore you ask for: How far does the matter reach?

3. How is the system of the matter composed actually?

Surely into the retinue of these riddles, more and more questions will be told. First of all I want to finish asking, to view this four problems and to discuss them.

1. Einstein, as a Jew and faithful at a creator, looked into his relativity-theories, the Special and the General Relativity Theory, to find an advanced sense of the matter - he looked for that formula, what should explain every state. One calls it unpretentiously "the world formula" and thinks, behind it there ought to be something huge or very mystic. However it is nothing different than some equations, derived from the General Relativity Theory, which describe the system of the matter like a photo. Basic field equations of that theory are the World Formula themselves! Einstein didn't know this, and today scientists searching without knowing this.

A photo is not a film. On it, nothing is moving. From one single thing you had to conclude for the following states. That reason they haven't seen the world formula, although Einstein have had it in a type of pre-state. Formula is hidden behind the solutions of the General Relativity Theory.

With something philosophical understanding you recognize in the terms of these equations forming an oscillation condition, an oscillator being in movement. That condition you can better describe mathematically and then you have one of the world formulae. How could it be explained, now?

We deduce from this, the oscillator was the ultimatum of the matter, practically a body, that had a pulsating attribute. If one would clone the content of the formula, it would be in the company of many oscillators (from theoretically infinite solutions). All bodies had a relative movement to each other and consequently, they had the well-known relative speed. They communicated together, in that they exchanged the quanta of their waves. If enough of these bodies would meet, then they will form an oscillator of a new hierarchical plane, that will close a bell of the community above it.

This assumption necessarily leads to see a content behind each oscillator, that will exist out of sub-oscillators. The matter would be then like a hierarchical system of moved clocks, how Einstein always compared so beautifully, without noticing, how near he actuality was to the reality. The clocks were packed in a hyper-clock. Each clock includes sub-clocks. We will concrete it: The universe as mother-oscillator included particles as oscillators. Each particle is included by sub-particles. All these cosms were founded on the principle of the oscillating black-white hole. This principle still nobody knows actually. Therefore it is a reason of more, to speak about that possibility.

Can you not spin the thought of the order of oscillators until eternity? However it was cute to accept, outside the universe was a world full of universes put together into a still bigger oscillator and confidentially at the inside the sub-particles went this infinity like running above. Then there was an unimaginable gigantic creature outside the universe and there would be mini-persons in the protons on micro-galaxies. In an infinity of the projection it ought to be so. Was God this giant?

However God should have created the universe world. But a component of this world with the well-known attributes could not create the matter. Consequently this giant was not the creator. Or the giant doesn't exist, and the creator is not a form of this matter, more an existing hyper-nature. How wide does the matter actually reach, I show in the answer on the second question.

Doesn't an oscillator show the fact, that there is neither a start nor an end inside? We watch a pendulum-clock and we try to answer the question: Who has given the first push to the clock, when and in which situation of the pendulum at the first time? Do you participate at such a discussion without sense?

Event still was not understood:

If the world works like an oscillator, then nobody could answer the question to the start. It is only possible, free to Einstein, to put relative starts and ends as cover points. For example one could choose the deepest point of the vibration as zero. So its ascension to the reversion point and the ensuing descent to the zero is an evolution phase, that repeats itself - it's half a period. The repetition on the relatively different side leads to the complete period and its repetition.

We would ask: How has the universe looked as the zero-point has been valid, and how does it develop itself upward then and again downward to this zero? Is zero really zero matter or zero area? Or deal it to itself at the zero only about a mathematical description of the movement like at the pendulum. If the pendulum is rushing the deepest but on the most quickly through the clock, it is not missing! If we introduce quiet simply, that the whole matter of the universe is going to the same center of gravity, it's going around there and it's rising again, so we had found the infinite evolutionary series, of that Einstein suspected, the matter ran on a spiral into the future.

Who however has pushed the clock? This question remains unanswered. One could ignore them and remark, the world already would run eternally this kind, it will also run further that way. It is uninteresting, to ask something so. We persons ask with pleasure. Confidentially we also find such thinkers who devise answers. The only answer is: If one clock like the space must be pushed and provided with an energy, so that it is running, then at the outside of the universe something or someone must be there, that also organizes the universe and that provides it with the physical magnitudes and that has pushed it for first time. This Something, that so doesn't work like the universe, that however exists from the same origin-substance like the universe, that would be the Creator. Herein a certain logic lies.

2. This logical consequence only works completely, if you accept no infinite hierarchy of the oscillators or of the cosms. The universe was consequently the body created of the outside world. The sub-particles will be then no direct projection of the particles. They also wouldn't contain sub-sub-particles but the origin-substance, that the Creator had used to the purposes of the building up.

The concept of the substance is a problem. If namely without definition the substance would be the same as the origin-substance and as the matter, then we were at the logic-point of above. Also then God, existing out of matter, could not have created the world, because he will develop himself with it.

However what is the substance actually?

The chemists speak about substances. They start with the chemical elements and put them together creating the chemical compounds. We have consequently a world of the substances, the chemical substances. Remarking historically you always see, that all the material would be real somehow, therefore it would be directly a substance, so like you see it. In this hope the hypothesis was born, the atoms of the elements are no longer able to be split. You would have find now the elementary substance finally. That corresponded to the simple perceptions of the matter.

With the division of the atoms the mischief in opposite to the substance-concept took its course. The concept of the substance until today was virtually destroyed. Therefore scientists even believe in the non-reality of the matter (I remark, that has only justified as long as one doesn't have any different mathematical models; furthermore I come). Particles are waves, and waves are particles. That description of the quantum theory merges into a completely unintelligible mathematical structure, that one attributes to be an unreal model. The most important thing is that there is altogether a model. One discusses about non-realities and works themselves hot at the extension of mathematical miracle factories. How we have now this negative stand in opposite to the reality? To answer, we further investigate the matter to interior.

3. Nuclei particles - nucleons - are forming the atoms. These are protons and neutrons. Above the nuclei the electrons are rotating in the shell. Well we think it's final. There should be the elementary substances! What however do they do? To form out the substance "atom" they all are in a rotating movements. The atoms of a chemical substance or of the chemical compounds never rest. If we would finish the rotations of the electrons, we found the substance no longer, but bare atom nuclei. For the forming of a substance itself law wise moved bodies are finding together. These bodies are called elementary - namely subatomic particles.

The elementarity of this type was finished as one found interactions in the protons, that allowed to conclude on sub-particles, at first they were called partons. Interactions appear between the quanta of the waves. Because until now they see wave-properties and particle-attributes united, they called the interactive quanta "quarks" later, and they found a filled collection of most different interactions. Are these "quarks" elementary now? After all "they" move within the protons. Let us accept, what many people already accept and what they want to prove: The "quark" of the matter again is formed out of moved structures. Maybe is then the end, finally? The only problem is, that we could not pursue this end no longer directly. We are just missing the energy for such an experiment. Certainly an end should be there well.

That fact has its origin in the quanta forming of the matter. In 1900 Max Planck discovered the effect-quantum. The consequence of that existence is, that not each world, if the micro-world or the universe, could be the direct projection. At the inside of particles it doesn't equally look like here, if it was extremely reduced. In a proton the relations are completely different to quantitative and therefore qualitative situations.

But if we pursue the movement of each structures, so we see a definition of the matter, like it was never given before: The matter exists because of relative movements of moved movements, those are moved themselves - an only back and forth. Behind all the matter an origin thing is put, that had been moved. This origin thing one could call the real-substance, that diverse movement first is doing this, what we call a "substance" - the matter until now.

You could see it also this way: In that the real-substance moves itself, the moved pictures originate, those components we are. Though we are no substance. We are movements. We are froth! Who has it moved? One or several, that or those at the outside of the matter (which is a froth-blister) is formed by the real-substance on a different manner as this matter!

If this logic is correct, then there is the Creator or the Creator's world!

Then the matter is installed by the vibrantly moved real-substance in final repetition sections. And then the mind is formed by non-vibrant real-substance moving in infinite and free sections. Then the soul eternally lives like God.

This also means: While we are thinking this process is moving matter. These movements are reflected into the matter. For example one speaks about his thoughts. But if at the inside of each particle and its sub-particles in the end the moved real-substance itself is moving along the movements of thinking additionally, then this real-substance also draws its own picture into the Creator's empire - obviously this is the soul as a non-material phenomenon.

This was the reason of the dispute about the concepts psyche and soul. The psyche is able to be researched, because one could observe the material processes of the nerves. Everything that is not researchable is existing at the outside of matter, in the soul. Psyche is hardware of the person: brain, nerves, electric charges and interactions, chemical substances, like save-substances etc. At the psyche the picture is stored to indoors, like the knowledge to the brain etc.

In the soul the picture is stored to the outside of matter. We have normally no contact with it. Not the soul is sick, but the psyche if there ever is something sick. Not soul-doctors, but psychiatrists! The history has shown, that the translation of the concept "soul" into the Greek and of that drainage as "psyche" has no longer remained, of that one went out. That has gone equally crooked, like the assumption of the elementary substance! Psyche is no longer the same soul, and particle is no longer elementary-substance.

If it was like we told, then these facts will be valid:

The world is born, lives and dies. Then it will be reborn, lives and dies - an unfinished consequence of oscillation periods under the less changed conditions.

If the world would be going this way, why shouldn't do its sub-structures the way like this? Birth, death, rebirth? Nothing on equal but on alike ways.

Does it remember disagreeably or agreeably to the religions? Why should not especially clever and mental bright sighted persons have recognized, that the world is such a one, before you could postulate it mathematically? Did prophets know more of the reality?

There would be a creator-world, equal like it might be looking out.

An "original" big bang was non-real. At the zero point, the matter had run a different but obvious material and real condition for a short time.

Each zero is movable. So anytime in the universe a heaven-body or a different phenomenon of the matter can run through its relative zero and then it will be reborn. For example, if you think on the supernova.

The matter was a closed and a programmed system with programs to freedom-degrees, that will lead to a low effect of accidents.

The big bang at the zero is described today as chaotic start. That won't be correct however, because the relative start already had a system of order. The energies set free from immense magnitudes did not came from an overall-bang, but from an immeasurable multiplicity of matter-conversions, those have run at determined but each other distant places.

So that the quanta-forming of the gravity was explained certainly. Practically the mass of the universe was set free in portions and remained eternally in determined portions, that will never unite itself altogether.

Such a model pulls very much consequences to itself, those are here still not mentioned at all. It shouldn't remain non-discussed. Otherwise we only remain the alternative:

The universe was originated from the chaos of more inexplicable or more speculative pre-states per accident and developed accidentally, with it extended without aim, to cool about aimless in the eternity of the expansion to the rigidity - a unique, accidental and eternal process without sense, standing in the only few isles of an accidental and without aim formed sense. Its description with the quantum theory finally would lead to non-real condition-models. Who pleases actually such a philosophical handicap of the research? Some psychiatrists will say: "Whoever lives following such principles is psychically sick."

Is the whole world crazy today? 06-01-1999 completed: 01-17-2001

All rights reserved: Arcus (Heinz-Joachim Ackermann, since1998)