In Nuclear Physics, nearly all processes are recognized to be able to occur in opposite directions. For example, a neutron CAN break apart into a proton and an electron, but also a proton and an electron can fuse together to form a neutron.
I am convinced that these two basic and accepted Laws of Physics occurred as the first step in the creation of the Universe.
First Stage of this ProcessSpecifically, beginning with NOTHING, there were two streams of energy which came into existence, which were propagated in EXACTLY opposite directions and necessarily exactly out of phase, and necessarily having exactly identical frequency and wavelength. The two beams of energy are absolutely identical but they are also exactly out of phase with each other. At all instants, if all the energy in those two beams are added together, they always total exactly zero energy, due to Conservation of Energy. One of these two powerful beams of energy headed AWAY from where our Universe would eventually arise, so it CAN never be detected from within our Universe!
As a future consequence of this, if and when these two beams will ever encounter each other again, they will simply Destructively Interfere with each other and DISAPPEAR! (and in that instant, our entire Universe would cease to exist!)
But these are not instantaneous PULSES of energy but PERSISTENT beams of energy. The comment just made, of our Universe 'ceasing to exist' would only occur INCREMENTALLY, possibly over an interval of billions of years, where our Universe might GRADUALLY disappear from existence, a speck at a time!
There is no reason to believe that 'our' energy beam has YET ceased to be persistently being created! In other words, instead of an INSTANTANEOUS Big Bang, we are describing here a PERSISTENT FORMATION, which may still be occurring after 13.8 billion years of previous formation! Has it already stopped? No one knows. Will such persistent formation continue for another billion years or a hundred billion years? No one knows.
IF the persistent formation had only occurred for, say, one billion years, and then stopped being created, then the AVAILABLE ENERGY WITHIN OUR UNIVERSE might now be constant, in other words, a Conservation of Energy. (We must remember that there would necessarily have to be ANOTHER Universe which we could never detect or see, which contains the EXACT SAME AMOUNT of energy in it! Conservation of Energy again.) However, if such a persistent formation is still continuing today, then the Gross amount of Energy in our Universe might be still be increasing, today. (Note that this again would require the exact same amount of new energy be appearing in some other Universe somewhere, but out-of-phase with our energy, so that Conservation of Energy always applies. Also, IF the persistent formation ceased some time back, and we happened to have proceed to a much later time when the two initial energy beams have begun to collide, (and the Universe is therefore gradually disappearing away!) then the Gross amount of energy in our Universe might now be decreasing.
It is not clear if there could be any way to discern between these three possibilities regarding our situation in our entire Universe(s). All three situations are technically the same, with the only difference being just WHEN we are in the process. Energy might be still increasing (1) creation of energy (or technically, Constructive Interference); (2) there might be stability of Gross energy; or (3) Destructive Interference of the energy canceling out of existence [always exactly matching the quantities of out-of-phase energy in some other Universe(s)]. We tend to assume that we exist during (2). In principle, the three main stages might even sort of 'overlap' where 'new energy' might still be appearing in our Universe while at some other location, 'old energy' might be being destructively cancelled out with with out-of-phase energy from outside of OUR Universe! No one knows and it is hard to see how anyone in our Universe can or will ever know!
The two initial beams of energy might be described in an unusual way, for the following portions of this argument, which we might call Energy and Anti-Energy. This is NOT describing anything goofy such as Dark Energy, but simply referring to a different energy beam which just happens to be out-of-phase with our energy.
There is NOTHING peculiar about this process, and Research scientists do experiments every day where this sort of ANNIHILATION is seen to occur. There is a famous experiment called a Double Slit experiment, where monochromatic light is created and sent through two separate slits, and then a screen behind the slits is examined. Very obvious INTERFERENCE PATTERNS are seen, where in some places, the screen is absolutely dark. If EITHER slit is blocked, the entire screen is illuminated, which proves that the dark areas ARE caused by Destructive Interference of the two identical light beams.
An important aspect of the Energy and Anti-Energy beams is that they necessarily must be absolutely and perfectly identical to each other, but where they are headed outward in exactly opposite directions such that they can never encounter each other, but where imperfections in the two beams are also identical, except for being upside-down and backwards from each other. THIS is required to Conserve Energy, in all three dimensions. A portion of the Energy beam which has a frequency that is 3% lower and is directed in a direction which is one degree to the left, is necessarily therefore matched by a portion of the Anti-Energy beam which has that identical frequency but which is headed outward in a direction which is one degree to the right of the main beam.
This is standard radiation analysis logic.
The Energy beam (that WE care about!) is therefore a very complex collection of Energy beams which are generally headed out to what we might say is to the West. The Anti-Energy beam is therefore a complex beam of outgoing radiation which is generally headed toward the East. This indicates that the two beams will NOT encounter each other, possibly forever but certainly for a VERY long time! We shall now ignore the Anti-Energy beam for a while.
Second Stage of the ProcessPhysics has long known that it is possible to allow an electron and something which is called an anti-electron (or positron) to collide, and when they do, they cease to exist as particles, having mutually annihilated each other (BUT they create a very precise amount of energy in the process). Similar experiments are done every day where protons and anti-protons mutually annihilate, and neutrons and anti-neutrons mutually annihilate. In each case, the particles vanish but a very precise amount of ENERGY now exists, as radiation, or Energy.
Again, many Physics experiments show that a beam of radiation which happens to have a specific amount of energy available, can and does spontaneously CREATE an electron-positron pair, or if more energy is available, a proton-anti-proton pair can form. This has been confirmed experimentally for EVERY nuclear particle. These are mundane experiments for Graduate Physics students!
Considering our Original beam of Energy, it seems likely that countless particle pairs would be created. Again, the two created particles necessarily have EXACTLY the same mass and velocity (kinetic energy) and they must leave in EXACTLY opposite directions. But the point here is that we now have PARTICLES which have come into existence, after this two-step process.
In general, when an environment has BOTH particles and anti-particles in it, such particles tend to collide and again mutually annihilate, converting back to pure energy (in compliance with the standard Laws of Physics and with all experimental evidence).
However, with these mutual creation processes occurring continuously and in immense numbers, there will likely eventually be some Statistical accumulation of particles heading away in one specific direction, and an identical, but upside-down and backwards of each other, accumulation of anti-particles, headed away in the exact opposite direction, PRECISELY.
Within that accumumation of particles, there WILL be mutual annihilations which occur when any remaining anti-particles encounter their opposites.
THIS then would result in a Universe which was essentially filled with particles, and which also has impressive amounts of energy in it.
WE call this our Universe!
Note an interesting required consequence of this reasoning. Because the geometry of the way EVERY particle was created with a precise velocity (direction and speed), was necessarily matched by an anti-particle with exactly the opposite velocity vector (direction and speed) this seems to imply that when something like our Sun came into existence in OUR Universe, the precise identical anti-particles must have also caused an Anti-Sun to come into existence in an Anti-Matter Universe. In order to strictly comply with all the known Laws of Physics, this IS necessary! Continuing that reasoning further, when YOU were born in OUR Universe, there necessarily must have simultaneously been born an Anti-You in that Anti-Matter Universe, and he or she has lived a life which is absolutely identical to the life which you have lived in our Universe (with the exception of being upside-down and backwards, which would never be detectable!) An Anti-You might therefore be left-handed if you are right handed, but in every other way, to the tiniest detail, you ARE identical.
Again, this consequence is REQUIRED in order that EVERY particle and EVERY energy beam in existence maintains compliance with Conservation of Energy and Conservation of Momentum and Conservation of Mass. If even a single atom in a single one of your brain cells ever became DIFFERENT, then the Conservation Laws would no longer precisely apply, which should not be possible. So there ARE two of You!
Since we could not possibly ever enter an Anti-matter Universe without being immediately mutually annihilated with individual anti-particles, we could not possibly ever MEET our Doppelganger, or even be aware of the existence of such an Anti-Universe where we might even ever be able to communicate. So, in practical terms, you ARE alone in being you!
Let us now remember that we had an Anti-Energy beam, which clearly would have EXACTLY the identical consequences regarding creating two OTHER Universes, which we might refer to as Anti-Energy Universes. The Conservation Laws still apply (everywhere) and so this means that there must be FOUR Universes which exist, which are necessarily absolutely identical to the tiniest detail. The single exception is the fact that the geometry of these processes necessarily creates mirror Universes, where some might be considered upside-down and backwards. However, note that we residents of the United States might describe the people of Australia as constantly being upside-down, while there is NO actual sensation of that for the Australian people. So as the Anti-Energy, Anti-Matter, Anti-Me is typing these words on his Anti-Computer, he might consider ME to be upside-down and backwards! There are apparently EXACTLY FOUR OF ME, each in totally separate Universes. This is NECESSARY to ensure that the Conservation of Energy and Conservation of Mass laws of science are absolutely true and reliable! In fact, the four of ME are each typing away on absolutely identical computer keyboards, which is also necessary to always maintain the two main Conservation Laws! Of course, each of us four MEs claims to be the 'matter-energy' version, and we each refer to the others as being 'anti-mes' in the other three Universes that none of us could possibly ever confirm or detect in any way. Each of us thinks that the others are 'left-handed' or 'upside-down', but since we cannot ever actually know that the others exist, we are each free to believe such things, and even in the UNIQUENESS of me!
This concept was first created in 1960 as part of a High School Science Fair project. This presentation was first placed on the Internet in 1998.
The origin of the Universe has been speculated about for centuries. A new approach suggests that it might be that there are either TWO or FOUR identical Universes! This is based on two very well known facts in Nuclear Physics: (1) Energy, in the form of a photon, can transform into Matter and Anti-Matter, in the forms of an electron and positron; that is, the electron and positron simply APPEAR where nothing had existed a moment earlier except energy; a photon can similarly transform into a Proton Anti-Proton pair; and (2) 'Nothing' can transform into two packets of energy which are exactly opposite or out-of-phase; this is easier to follow in the opposite direction, where a sound wave or light wave can "destructively interfere" with an identical wave to entirely cease to exist. These processes can be both done in a laboratory in both directions, either FORMING the two products or in ANNIHILATING the two sources. This premise has geometric constraints, where the two products necessarily have to leave in exactly opposite directions with exactly identical velocities. This is due to the Conservation of Mass, Conservation of Energy and Conservation of Momentum Laws. This would seem to have implications that resulting Universes would have to have great similarities.
In a laboratory environment, we might say that 'nothing' might transform into a photon and anti-photon (two packets of energy) which then each could transform into an proton anti-proton pair. Such experiments are regularly done in Nuclear Physics. The result of this sequence of experiments is that you started with 'nothing' and ended up with FOUR solid objects! In the lab experiments, two of those resultant particles, the two anti-protons (the anti-Matter particles), quickly annihilate when they encounter any Matter particles (protons) and therefore immediately transform back into energy. The premise presented here is that if the four different types of particles were each sent in SELECTIVELY different directions where they would there only encounter particles of their own types, that the anti-Matter anti-protons would not encounter natural protons and would then be quite stable for long periods of time. Ditto, all other anti-matter particles would be stable because there were no natural Matter particles in that Universe to encounter and mutually annihilate with. As long as the four resultant types of particles did not interact with any of the other three types, there could very logically be four very stable Universes!
One new implication of this premise is that this would NOT necessarily have to have occurred in a single explosive moment of a Big Bang. Indeed, it might easily be an ONGOING PROCESS where the total mass and total energy of our Universe might therefore be changing at this moment.
Another new implication is that this premise does not need Physicists to entirely discard all the known laws of science, as they find it necessary to do regarding the Big Bang theory. It seems very troublesome to insist that the Conservation Laws exist everywhere, universally, but then claim that they do not apply at all related to Big Bang issues. It does not seem acceptable that you get to change your set of Laws just on a whim!
In the middle of the Twentieth Century, radio astronomy discovered that there is a very faint Background Radiation which seems to come from all directions in the Universe. This is a very faint and weak radiation, generally described as three-degrees-K radiation, which is a reference to the apparent temperature of the source of that radiation. The presence of the 3°K radiation is the ONLY bit of evidence which has seemed to be available regarding the early stages of our Universe. It has been interpreted as indicating that some event of immense heat and power occurred around 13 billion years ago, and the heat from that event has been dissipating ever since, and is now at a remaining temperature of 3°K, just slightly above Absolute zero.
This reasoning, based on that single bit of evidence of 3°K radiation from all directions, has resulted in the fact that most scientists now believe that the Universe, as we know it, began with a Big Bang. The idea is that, if we could somehow "run the movie of time backwards", we would see that the Universe was physically smaller, and hotter, in the very distant past. If this assumption is true, then at some specific moment even before that, all of the material of the Universe must have existed at a single point in space.
Public Services Home Page
Physicists have speculated about the details about how this could actually happen. They suggest that there were momentary stages where only energy could have existed, then, as this incredibly hot environment cooled down a little, actual material (protons, electrons, neutrons) came into existence, then the outward momentum of all the original contents continued to carry everything outward to eventually be distributed throughout the Universe as we now see everything.
Keep in mind that this sort of subject only involves very little actual fact and a LOT of speculation on the part of the scientists! No one does or even can ever know the details of what would have actually happened in those first fractions of a second.
To a great extent, it IS essentially entirely a speculation.
All of the currently supported theories about the very beginning of the Universe require completely ignoring a number of the basic principles of Physics. The field of Physics was built on ideas like the Conservation of Energy and the Conservation of Momentum. It seems really troublesome to just dismiss such concepts, and instead claim that the circumstances were so unusual that different rules applied, but that no one can every know just what those rules were! The premise described here does not seem to have these problems. It seems to comply with both Conservation of Energy and Conservation of Momentum, at all moments. In that, I believe it has potential value.
To suggest how incomplete the current logic necessarily is in these matters, I will now suggest an additional feature that does not seem to be included in such speculations, even though it must certainly have been true, if a Big Bang event occurred.
A similar logical situation exists for us on Earth. Say you decided to go on a long trip, and you decided to go EXACTLY west. No matter what you encounter, oceans, mountains or whatever, you continue to go exactly west. Well, after traveling about 25,000 miles, exactly west, (in a direction that you believe to be an exactly straight line) you will likely come upon very familiar territory, where you started from! You would arrive home from the east! If you hadn't known that the Earth was a giant ball, which you had gone around, you would certainly be really confused at how you could have arrived back home after going absolutely and perfectly straight west continuously.
More than that, if your home town had significantly modernized during your long journey, you might not even recognize it and keep going. After going around the earth fifty times, you might conclude that "the Earth is certainly larger than 50 x 25,000 or 1,250,000 miles!" Of course, you would have been wrong!
Obviously, we can see that you hadn't been precisely going perfectly west after all! All along, without knowing it, you had been very slightly going downward as well. In a mile of walking exactly west (on a perfectly round, perfectly smooth earth), it turns out that you actually also curved downward around 16 inches without knowing it.
This is essentially the same kind of effect on that light beam that seems to be going absolutely straight through the Universe. The actual curvature of its path would not even be noticeable to us at all, but even if we could sense it, the curvature would be so small as to be virtually unnoticeable.
OK. The preparation is now in place! Now imagine that REALLY early Universe, where everything that exists could still fit in an imaginary "box" a mile on a side. Inside that Universe, gravitation would be incredibly strong, because all the mass that will ever exist is all so close together in there. All that stuff we just considered about a (straight) light beam must be true in that Universe. So, if a light beam was aimed in any direction, it would ACTUALLY be continuously bent back by that gravitational effect to permanently loop back and forth through that Universe (until it eventually ran into some object and got absorbed). Since everything is much closer together, gravitation effects are especially strong, so the curvature would be very severe. So, how long would the light beam seem to be, from the thing that created it? If that beam never ran into anything, the light beam would appear to travel forever IN A STRAIGHT LINE! Even though the entire Universe could fit inside an imaginary box a mile on a side!
Again, this is just like the trip on the Earth's surface. What is the longest trip you could ever make on Earth? Well, it could be infinitely long. Even though the Earth could fit in a really big box, you would be able to travel exactly west forever on its surface. The reality would be that you would wind up going around and around the Earth, but the path could be infinitely long.
Here is my logic about that concept. It is also speculation, but it seems at least as valid as the speculations of others in the field.
Our known Universe seems to be virtually entirely MATTER, with only the tiniest occasional amounts of ANTI-MATTER in it. But, the two are essentially identical. In principle, if enough anti-matter had accumulated somewhere in the Universe, it could have gravitationally collapsed and formed a star, just like all other stars (and the Sun) began. Such an anti-matter star would appear exactly like any other star we could ever see, and there would be no way that we could ever know that it was anti-matter rather than matter, by its light or its motion.
But, if such an anti-matter star actually existed, within our Universe, it could not exist very long in our matter Universe. The "empty" Universe is actually filled with all kinds of loose atoms and simple molecules, and meteoroids and asteroids and comets and probably planets. There are therefore a LOT of loose things just wandering around space, and most of these things must certainly be MATTER. When such an object would get pulled into an anti-matter star by its gravity, the matter of the object would combine with some of the anti-matter of the star to instantly annihilate each other, both instantly disappearing and creating a LOT of new energy. It seems certain that an anti-matter star or planet would soon be entirely annihilated in this way in our matter Universe.
That implies that virtually everything in our Universe is MATTER. So, what about considering an initial raw energy source that spontaneously divided itself into a LOT of MATTER, which went in one direction, and an EXACT SAME amount of ANTI-MATTER, which went in exactly the opposite direction? On a nuclear scale, physicists regularly see such energy (photons) spontaneously divide into electron-positron pairs (electrons and anti-electrons) exactly in this way. I am just proposing that it had occurred (somehow) on a grand scale.
This concept could then explain why all the material of the Universe seemed to appear at the same moment at the same place, if a Big Bang type of event actually occurred. Actually, it could also represent an ongoing process, where new material continues to enter our Universe! It just seems to me to present a more logical explanation of how it might have happened.
There is a really interesting consequence of this premise! Precisely the same number of protons and electrons and anti-protons and anti-electrons would have to have been formed. The physical law of conservation of momentum would insist that each such pair of object must necessarily move off in precisely opposite directions. From standard symmetry arguments of Physics, I don't see how it could be avoided that our MATTER Universe and the proposed ANTI-MATTER Universe must be precise "inverted mirror images" of each other! They would even have PRECISELY the same initial conditions in each of them. Therefore, all of the later gravitational interactions would have to have proceeded identically in each of them. That would imply that both of these mirror image Universes must progress absolutely identically. The materials that gravitationally came together five billion years ago to form the Sun must have been matched in the anti-Universe in the forming of the anti-Sun! And then, the anti-Earth, and anti-oceans, and anti-dinosaurs, and anti-people, and anti-computers, and anti-YOU! It seems to me that the initial symmetry of the beginning of the two Universes must necessarily have set the conditions for absolutely identical progression in both of them. This is essentially implying that the anti-ME is now typing these letters on the keyboard of his anti-computer on the anti-Earth in that anti-Universe!
More than that, I have no way of even establishing that I am the original! HE certainly thinks of himself as the original and so he considers ME as the anti-HIM!
Fortunately, the two hypothetical Universes could never meet each other, or even be in any contact with each other, because any such contact would necessarily involve mutual annihilation of the message or the person or the Universe! If they should ever meet, every particle in our Universe would exactly meet its anti-particle, and the existence of the entire Universe(s) would end. Still conserving Energy and Momentum. So, there's absolutely no way to ever confirm or deny my speculation about the anti-ME!
I find that part interesting to think about, but essentially irrelevant. More important to me is that a matter/anti-matter pair of Universes allows a logical description to be possible as to where everything originally came from!
OK! This accounts for TWO mirror-image Universes. But the beginning of this said there might be four. What gives?
Well, the premise as presented still required the pre-existence of a lot of energy, that somehow spontaneously split apart into the matter and anti-matter. Could that original energy that is necessary also be explained?
Another characteristic of nuclear physics is that it is possible for two (identical) photons to meet each other and just disappear! Essentially, this like two identical waves in water or in a vibrating guitar string or anywhere else, which are exactly out-of-phase with each other. If two such identical waves are traveling in exactly the same direction and they are exactly out-of-phase (by 180°) then they completely "cancel" each other and disappear.
One of the central understandings of nuclear physics is that any event that occurs could occur as seen is real time or it could also occur as if time was running backwards. This seems to imply that, if two photons can completely annihilate each other, leaving nothing, then a beginning "nothing" must also be able to split into two photons. Again, things like the various conservation laws of physics would insist that the two photons thus created are (1) absolutely identical, but of opposite phase; and (2) traveling away from the point of creation in precisely opposite directions.
Therefore, my speculation on the beginning of everything adds one more step prior to the division of initial energy into matter and anti-matter Universes. The new step is an earlier division of NOTHING into mirror-image, identical energy streams traveling in precisely opposite directions from the original point of origin.
This actually provides, not only the energy stream necessary to later create our matter Universe and my hypothetical anti-matter Universe, but a SECOND identical (mirror image) energy stream going in the opposite direction. It seems to me that, due to the standard symmetry arguments, whatever cause OUR original energy stream to divide itself into matter and anti-matter, would also have occurred under the identical conditions of the OTHER original energy stream. That seems to imply to me that TWO MORE identical Universes must have come about. And, since the symmetry arguments must still be precisely true for both of these division stages, the four resultant Universes must necessarily have progressed precisely identically. Wow! That means there are probably FOUR MEs typing away! (The ME here, the energy-anti-matter me, the anti-energy-matter me, and the anti-energy-anti-matter me!) The four of us would all experience the exact same sensations, in precisely the same ways. Even though I (this me!) refer to anti-matter and anti-matter Universes, the me that is in any of the other Universes also thinks of himself as being in the matter Universe, so they would refer to me as being in an anti- Universe!
As I keep repeating, ANYONE's opinion on such things is sheer speculation, because there is so little actual evidence that exists about these matters. But I have always liked the elegance of this approach because it begins with absolutely NOTHING, and accounts for all the mass and energy that we know exists in our Universe, where other theories, like most Big Bang theories all just see all that mass and energy just popping up without explanation. Their theories always say that the laws of physics just didn't apply at that time, to allow their speculation to be possible. I have always been uncomfortable with subjectively claiming that the laws of physics either apply or don't apply based on things some scientist might want to have happen. At least, my theory here does NOT require weird or different laws of physics to have ever existed. That single reason is why I see potential value in this theory!
I considered THIS concept to be far more important than the Astronomy Project of the previous year. I won the Science Fair at the High School, and at an area Fair. I then attended the Chicagoland Science Fair, where I hoped to also have success. Unfortunately, the three Judges to whom I had to try to explain these things were two elderly housewives (who both smiled a lot but clearly had NO idea what I was talking about!) and a Garbage Truck Driver. THEY felt I deserved Second Place, so I did not get a chance to again compete in the Illinois State Science Fair
Conservation of Angular Momentum A Violation of the Conservation of Angular Momentum(Sept 2006)
Galaxy Spiral Arms Stability and Dynamics A purely Newtonian gravitational explanation (Nov 1997, Aug 1998)
Twins Paradox. The Twins Paradox of Relativity is Certainly and Obviously Wrong (research 1997-2004, published Aug 2004)
Perturbation Theory. Gravitational Theory and Resonance (Aug 2001, Dec 2001)
Origin of the Earth. Planetary Gravitational Resonances (Dec 2001)
Rotation of the Sun (Jan 2000)
Origin of the Universe. Cosmogony - Cosmology (more logical than the Big Bang) (devised 1960, internet 1998)
Time Passes Faster Here on Earth than on the Moon! (but only a fraction of a second per year!) (Jan 2009)
Globular Clusters. All Globulars Must Regularly Pass Through the cluttered Galaxy Plane, which would be very disruptive to their pristine form. (Nov 1997, Aug 1998)
Existence of Photons. A Hubble Experiment to Confirm the Existence of Individual Photons (experimental proof of quanta) (Feb 2000)
The Origin of the Moon (June 2000)
Rotation of Jupiter, Saturn, and the Earth (Jupiter has a lot of gaseous turbulence which should have slowed down its rapid rotation over billions of years) (March 1998)
Cepheid Variables Velocity Graph Analysis (Feb 2003)
Compton Effect. A Possible New Compton Effect (Mar 2003)
Olbers Paradox Regarding Neutrinos (Oct 2004)
Kepler and Newton. Calculations (2006)
Pulsars. Pulsars May Be Quite Different than we have Assumed (June 2008)
How the Sun Works in Creating Light and Heat (Aug 2006)
Fusion. Lives of Stars and You (Aug 2004)
Equation of Time. Sundial to Clock-Time Correction Factor (Jan 2009)
General Relativity. Confirming General Relativity with a simple experiment. (Jan 2009)
General Relativity. Does Time Dilation Result? (Jan 2009)
Geysers on Io. Source of Driving Energy (June 1998)
Mass Extinctions. A New Explanation For Apparent Periodicity of Mass Extinctions (May 1998, August 2001)
Precession. Gyroscope Precession and Precession of the Earth's Equinoxes (Apr 1998)
Tides. Mathematical Explanation of Tides (Jan 2002)
Source of Energy Using the Moon (1990, Dec. 2009)
Earth's Magnetic Field. Complex nature of the magnetic field and its source (March 1996)
Perfect Energy Source From the Earth's Spinning (1990, Nov. 2002)
Nuclear or Atomic Physics related Subjects:
Nuclear Structure. Statistical Analysis of Same-Atomic-Weight Isotopes (research 1996-2003, published Nov 2003)
Quantum Defect The Quantum Defect is a Physical Quantity and not a Fudge Factor(July 2007)
Atomic Ionization Data Surprising Patterns in the NIST Data Regarding Atomic Ionization (June 2007)
Nuclear Physics Logical Inconsistencies in Nuclear Physics (August 2007)
Neutrinos. Where Did All the Neutrinos Come From? (August 2004)
Neutrinos. Neutrinos from Everywhere? (Oct 2004)
Quantum Nuclear Physics. A Possible Alternative (Aug 2001, Dec 2001, Jan 2004)
Quantum Physics. A Potential Improvement (2006)
Quantum Physics is Compatible with the Standard Model
Quantum Physics is Compatible with the Standard Model (2002, Sept 2006, Oct 2010)
Quantum Dynamics (March 2008)
Ionization Potential. Surprising patterns among different elements (March 2003)
Nuclear Structure. The Mass Defect Chart (calculation, formula) (research 1996-2003, published Nov 2003)
Assorted other Physics Subjects:
Precession. Gyroscope Precession and Precession of the Earth's Equinoxes (Apr 1998)
Earth's Magnetic Field. Complex nature of the magnetic field and its source (March 1996)
Perfect Energy Source From the Earth's Spinning (1990, Nov. 2002)
Earth Energy Flow Rates due to Precessional Effects (63,000 MegaWatts) (Sept 2006)
Gravitational Constant. An Important Gravitation Experiment (Feb 2004)
Tornadoes. The Physics of Tornadoes, including How they Form. Solar Energy, an Immense Source of Energy, Far Greater than all Fossil Fuels (Feb 2000, Feb 2006, May 2009)
Carbon-14. Radiometric Age Dating, Carbon-14, C-14 (Dec 1998)
Mass Extinctions. An Old Explanation For Apparent Periodicity of Mass Extinctions (Aug 2003)
Hurricanes A Credible Approach to Hurricane Reduction (Feb 2001)
Equation of Time. Sundial to Clock-Time Correction Factor (Jan 2009)
C Johnson, Theoretical Physicist, Physics Degree from Univ of Chicago