When it comes to nature and reality I have always been fascinated and awed by it all. Since I was as young as three, you could say I was sort of a mini scientist and philosopher. Once, while lying in bed when I was not much past six years old, I struggled in my childlike awe of the fact that I was here and alive and most unbelievable to me, that I was aware. I have as long as I can remember been caught staring at the starry sky, losing myself in what seemed at the time were innumerable worlds beyond imagining.

My curiosity has been full and happily, unhampered. Below is an attempt to share some ideas I have come across in my life and specifically, to share thoughts that were on my mind around the time I made this photograph. While none of these ideas are my own or complete original generations, as is the case for nearly all scientists and philosophers it seems, they are a reproduction of experiencing and questioning it all.

Time may show that these concepts are, at least in part, mistaken. Also, these are ideas that I am currently studying and comparing to other others in what is generally known to be science and philosophy. I don't intend to say that any of this is strictly fact. Think of it more as an exploration, a conceptual/philosophical investigation which does not belong to anyone, but everyone at once. Please don't come away from this with the assumption that any of it is "proven" or recognized.

Everywhere, all is constantly flux - all is constantly changing. So, I come back from time to time to improve what I had written before based on new perspectives. Such is the endeavor of all knowledge and science and I hope to never strive for a tone of finality in any of my own endeavors.



Most of the below quotes were borrowed from Geoff Haselhurst's site [link] as he has amassed quite an impressive collection of them!

My dear children: I rejoice to see you before me today, happy youth of a sunny and fortunate land. Bear in mind that the wonderful things that you learn in your schools are the work of many generations, produced by enthusiastic effort and infinite labor in every country of the world. All this is put into your hands as your inheritance in order that you may receive it, honor it, and add to it, and one day faithfully hand it on to your children. Thus do we mortals achieve immortality in the permanent things which we create in common. If you always keep that in mind you will find meaning in life and work and acquire the right attitude towards other nations and ages. - Albert Einstein talking to a group of school children, 1934

---

'In Indian philosophy, the main terms used by Hindus and Buddhists have dynamic connotations. The word Brahman is derived from the Sanskrit root brih - to grow- and thus suggests a reality which is dynamic and alive. The Upanishads refer to Brahman as 'this unformed, immortal, moving', thus associating it with motion even though it transcends all forms.' The Rig Veda uses another term to express the dynamic character of the universe, the term Rita. This word comes from the root ri- to move. In its phenomenal aspect, the cosmic One is thus intrinsically dynamic, and the apprehension of its dynamic nature is basic to all schools of Eastern mysticism. They all emphasize that the universe has to be grasped dynamically, as it moves, vibrates and dances. ... The Eastern mystics see the universe as an inseparable web, whose interconnections are dynamic and not static. The cosmic web is alive; it moves and grows and changes continually.' -Fritjof Capra, The Tao of Physics, 1972


I am very interested in a less reviewed, studied and credited approach to modern physics and cosmology. It begins by underlining the difference between its own basic philosophical and metaphysical assumptions about reality and the ones of mainstream science. Namely, the differences between reductionist and holistic approaches to describing reality - and how both points of view actually fit.

It is called the Wave Structure of Matter, or WSM. Some also call it "Space Resonance." In my opinion, for whatever it is worth, the theory is logical and simplistic but more importantly, consistent with observation. The underlying assumptions make it highly intuitive when using it to deduce modern physics. Simply put, it describes the known universe as the emergence of space itself vibrating in two ways - spherical particle vibrations and complex field vibrations. It then, from this foundation, goes on to unite all of physics and cosmology in such a way that I am highly convinced that it is, in the least, on to something. Is it a complete Theory of Everything? Geoff Haselhurst has this to say on that matter:

"Is this a complete theory of everything (TOE)? What is the Nature of God?

No. I do not believe that is possible. This is a description of physical reality, i.e. wave energy interactions in space, how this explains matter. But science says nothing about how our minds can convert sense data based on wave patterns into feelings of love and hate, good and bad, pleasure and pain, tastes and colors, all the higher sensual, emotional and moral representations of our minds. We know these things exist because we all personally experience them. To me this is the religious spiritual side of human existence, where God is the total properties of space (God is not separate from the world, God and nature are one - thus we have moved from Newton and God's particles to God's space or Godspace).

Albert Einstein expresses this enlightened view of God well, he writes;

'I believe in Spinoza's God that reveals itself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings.'

We find this connected harmony of a dynamic unity of reality (God, Brahman, Tao, Spirit, Energy, Light, Vibration) is central to all major world religions, thus their common, and very important moral foundation of 'Do unto others as to thyself'. This is true - the other is part of the self! To me this is all we need to know to live kindly with one another, with all life on Earth.

...The complexity that evolves from this simple dynamic wave system is extraordinary, as is required to explain how such amazing life can exist in the universe. Most importantly, we can see why evolution (change) and ecology (interconnection) are true as they are properties of physical reality. Over billions of years this evolution and ecology of matter waves in the universe has evolved levels of complexity far beyond the comprehension of our feeble minds."

-Geoff Haselhurst

To put it as simply as possible, (and based on my limited understanding - I am not a physicist and am still a while from being able to understand the mathematics of advanced physics) it states that space, which we might normally consider the empty geometrical area in which objects can exist, is the only actual existing "substance." Space has properties. Among these properties is that space is a non-linear wave propagation medium. Space is also tensile. What this means is that while it has some elasticity (to allow waves to propagate "in" and "out" of it), space is quite rigid or "hard." So how, you might ask, do we move through the air when we walk, or the Earth move through space? Since human beings and the Earth are manifestations of space itself and its scalar spherical standing waves, human beings and the Earth pass through it as sound waves might pass through a block of steel.

According to WSM, space resonates in three dimensions uniformly, spherically, which gives rise to two dimensional plane waves of space flowing through all of space in all directions. This can represent the "quantum foam" described by physicists at the Planck scale (10⁻³³cm). What you have is potential electrons everywhere. For me this is another key insight. The potentiality of electrons everywhere and the momentary existence of virtual particles in current mainstream science in my eyes agrees with this hypothesis perfectly.

So, the waves are incredibly small, far smaller than the atomic scale, with a frequency of 10²⁰Hz! That means that at each "location" a wave center vibrates at 2000000000000000000000 (20 Quintillion) oscillations per second.

"From here we can show the Wave Structure of Matter (WSM) in Space is correct by deducing the Laws of Nature that have been empirically observed and quantified over the past several centuries. This changes the foundations of science from inductive (uncertain) to deductive (certain).

The mathematical physics is derived from wave equations in an elastic medium (space). The formula for the speed of waves in an elastic solid (space) is c2 = force / mass density, where force is proportional to wave amplitude, and the mass density of space is proportional to wave amplitude squared.

Importantly, this shows that the wave speed is non-linear (quadratic formula of square root of the amplitude) in relation to the amplitude of the wave. For those who find mathematics a bit of a struggle, well you just need to know two things.

i) Charge is due to wave amplitude interactions - where the higher the wave amplitude the faster the wave velocity (water waves and pendulums are like this too).

ii) Gravity is due to the mass density of space - the higher the mass density the slower the velocity of the waves."

-Geoff Haselhurst

[link]


When there is proper wave coherence (the waves are "in-sync" when they pass through each other [very simplified]) centered on a spherical "wave center," you end up with resonant spherical standing wave structures with varying degrees of complexity.

It goes on to say that what we have interpreted for decades and longer as the elementary "particles" (quarks and leptons) are not in fact zero-dimensional point particles glued together with fields and force carriers, but manifestations of the spherical standing wave patterns of the medium of space itself, where the wave (energy) density is higher.

The way that these waves interact and behave gives rise to discrete effects, which is both why we detect them and why we have light. Matter waves are spherical and three-dimensional just like light; this can be hard to visualize. Also, it can be hard to wrap your mind around the concept that the "out-waves" that form part of the standing wave actually come from the "in-waves" after they have passed through the wave center.

This is the source of the "4th dimension" of "time" that Einstein's equations described, which supports that he was indeed correct by seeing that space and time were deeply connected. Really, time is a manifestation of the motion of space, as is all else. Since any arbitrary wave center "particle" is surrounded by 10⁸⁰ other wave centers in its local "Hubble Sphere" within infinite space, the "in-waves" of any particular standing wave center come from the "out waves" of all of the surrounding wave centers within the Hubble Sphere. This process extends into infinity.

It is incorrect to visualize the waves "starting" from any particular relative center, as the resonance is constant and the infinite universe is eternal. This is a tough subject for most, as our human mind seems to tend toward reductionism (pieces) to comprehend as well as beginnings and endings.

The apparent reason that we do not have infinite energy density among other things is that waves extending from any particular wave center are not spatially infinite. There are decreasing wave interactions with distance from the relative perspective of an observer as a result. This is both why we can only peer so far into the universe from any given location, and why scientists observe increased redshift with distance in the masses of the universe. This, considered with the non-linearity of space and the way that "motion" is described here also alludes to why we experience relativistic effects in the universe. It is important to note that the speed of waves in space, while not constant, is always measured to be the same as c, the speed of light. The inertial frame of reference explained in relativity still holds here.


Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended. In this way the concept empty space loses its meaning. ... Since the theory of general relativity implies the representation of physical reality by a continuous field, the concept of particles or material points cannot play a fundamental part, nor can the concept of motion. The particle can only appear as a limited region in space in which the field strength or the energy density are particularly high. - Albert Einstein

Albert Einstein had an incredible intuition as many people know. He is one of the most misunderstood and argued about characters in history. While he was a mathematical wizard, which partly enabled him to prove to us the truth of Relativity, his incredible intuition is what led him to his brilliant revelations that rocked 20^th century physics.

Einstien grew up in a science based in reductionism. By breaking reality down into "little pieces" it became more manageable and easy to understand. As mentioned above, we more readily understand a reality that can be broken down into its constituents and how they interact in a mechanical way. Einstien's intuition told him otherwise, and his holistic approach led to his continuum of "Space-Time." His ability to mentally pierce into the geometry of space and understand such a thing was uncanny. Einstein, Schrodinger and De Broglie all produced work which when considered together seems to imply many of the concepts that space resonance describes. Einstein united matter with energy into one continuous field and embarked on the journey of uniting that electromagnetic field with the geometry of space-time. Schrodinger uncovered the concept of matter waves, with the particle and forces as manifestations of the shapes and variations in the structure of space. De Broglie demonstrated the phase wave that accompanies a particle and its associated wave counterpart. Einstein already knew matter-energy was spherical and spatially extended. They only had to make the intuitive leap toward a spherical matter wave propagating in both four dimensional vectors to deduce the De Broglie wave (combination between four waves - two particles in relative motion), to confirm Schrodinger's intuitions and to unify all of relativity - electrodynamics and gravity - into one continuum...Spherical wave interactions of space.

Mathematical Physicist Milo Wolff made this unification on a whim and barely realized it at the time. Since (Spring 2011), Geoff Haselhurst has deduced the four possible spin states of matter - two each for the electron and the positron - using complex 4-dimensional quaternion math equations, solving for the Dirac equation. In his own words,

"(There are) exactly four possible phase arrangements where all the transverse vector waves cancel and you are left with tiny little scalar spherical standing waves - the two spin states of the positron and electron perfectly deduced, and this maths structure of intersecting plane waves then deduces the rest of modern physics."

One great way to understand four dimensional movement is to understand that while the first three dimensions are simple directional vectors, horizontal, vertical, and depth, four dimensional movement is a combination of all three, which can be thought of as "inward" and "outward" (as opposed to forward/back, up/down). This mostly holds true in respect to four dimensional movement in three dimensional space. A four dimensional object passing through the third dimension would grow outward, and then pass by shrinking inward into apparent nothingness. Space, according to SR, is an infinite equal-directional three dimensional substance that resonates in four dimensions spherically.

The reason I am so convinced is that when you begin to mentally and intuitively glimpse what the theory says, you see that not only does it perfectly encompass Einstiens' Relativity concepts, but also deduces all of modern physics, most notably quantum theory. Quantum theory on its own does not directly contradict Relativity. Only when trying to unify them into a grand theory do they break down.

What you end up with is a universe in which all things are interconnected with each other by nature of their shared wave motions. All things arise from a fluctuation between two energy states (which is also a mathematical wave). It finds much inspiration in Schrodinger's matter waves and his abhorrence of Born's probability interpretation of his work.

Space, according to this, is the foundation, the medium, for this fluctuation. When you drop a stone on a calm pond with a mirror surface, you generate a circular wave motion across the surface. When you can get over the mental hurdle of imagining this happening in three dimensions, spherically, you must then go a step further to imagine the reverse happening simultaneously. When you have a combination between an inward and outward spherical wave structure of space and the wave motions are in coherence, you end up with a tiny little standing wave structure which gets "locked" in that state. This is the fundamental particle that we have known and loved (and hated) for so long.

Don't expect to understand right away, or to be able to visualize how unified spherical wave motions can manifest our visible universe in one day. It can take a while for your brain to adjust to the new information, since this is a way of looking at reality that is much different than we are used to. We have gone from hard materialism, of zero-dimensional point particles held together in "empty" space by fields and force carriers, to a medium, a base "substance" that generates all matter, light, time, motion, charge and force through its powerful ability to oscillate through two opposite energy states as a 4 dimensional motion. It is especially hard to understand how something seemingly as insubstantial as "immaterial" waves can give rise to "material" objects until you understand that space is actually the "material" and the wave fluctuations are just the mechanism through which this "material" molds itself into an infinite variety of forms.

---

Finally, please bear in mind that I am one limited human being with a limited understanding of the universe as is the nature of my temporal form. Through time, I will find the errors in these writings or have them pointed out to me and will come back to correct them where necessary.

'All things come out of the One and the One out of all things. ... I see nothing but Becoming. Be not deceived! It is the fault of your limited outlook and not the fault of the essence of things if you believe that you see firm land anywhere in the ocean of Becoming and Passing. You need names for things, just as if they had a rigid permanence, but the very river in which you bathe a second time is no longer the same one which you entered before.' -Heraclitus, 500 B.C.

'Metaphysics is universal and is exclusively concerned with primary substance. And here we will have the science to study that which is, both in its essence and in the properties which, just as a thing that is, it has. ... That among entities there must be some cause which moves and combines things. ... There must then be a principle of such a kind that its substance is activity.' -Aristotle, Metaphysics, 340BC

'Reality cannot be found except in One single source, because of the interconnection of all things with one another. ... I do not conceive of any reality at all as without genuine unity. ... I maintain also that substances, whether material or immaterial, cannot be conceived in their bare essence without any activity, activity being of the essence of substance in general. ... It follows from what we have just said, that the natural changes of monads come from an internal principle, and that change is continual in each one. ... Now this connection of all created things with each, and of each with all the rest, means that each simple substance has relations which express all the others, each created monad represents the whole universe.' - Gottfried Leibniz, Philosophical Writings, 1670

'Natural science (physics) contains in itself synthetical judgments a priori, as principles. … Space then is a necessary representation a priori, which serves for the foundation of all external intuitions.' - Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, 1781

'We may agree, perhaps, to understand by Metaphysics an attempt to know reality as against mere appearance, or the study of first principles or ultimate truths, or again the effort to comprehend the universe, not simply piecemeal or by fragments, but somehow as a whole.' - Francis Herbert Bradley, Appearance and Reality, 1893

'The judgment, for instance, that there is a three-dimensional (spatial) world is, Brentano believed, so widely confirmed as to be infinitely more likely than any of its alternatives.' - One Hundred Twentieth-Century Philosophers, Brown et al, 1998

'I cannot conceive curved lines of force without the conditions of a physical existence in that intermediate space.' - Michael Faraday, 1830


'In speaking of the Energy of the field, however, I wish to be understood literally. All energy is the same as mechanical energy, whether it exists in the form of motion or in that of elasticity, or in any other form. The energy in electromagnetic phenomena is mechanical energy.' - James Clerk Maxwell, 1890

'Greek philosophy seems to begin with a preposterous fancy, with the proposition that water is the origin and mother-womb of all things. Is it really necessary to stop there and become serious? Yes, and for three reasons: firstly, because the preposition does enunciate something about the origin of things; secondly, because it does so without figure and fable; thirdly and lastly, because it contained, although only in the chrysalis state, the idea :everything is one. ..That which drove him (Thales) to this generalization was a metaphysical dogma, which had its origin in a mystic intuition and which together with the ever renewed endeavors to express it better, we find in all philosophies- the proposition: everything is one!' - Friedrich Nietzsche, The Greeks

'I cannot but regard the ether, which can be the seat of an electromagnetic field with its energy and its vibrations, as endowed with a certain degree of substantiality, however different it may be from all ordinary matter.' - Hendrik Lorentz, Theory of the Electron, 1900

'According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time. But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of matter, as consisting of parts ('particles') which may be tracked through time.' - Albert Einstein, 1928, Leiden Lecture

'Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended (as fields). In this way the concept 'empty space' loses its meaning. ... The field thus becomes an irreducible element of physical description, irreducible in the same sense as the concept of matter (particles) in the theory of Newton. ... The physical reality of space is represented by a field whose components are continuous functions of four independent variables - the co-ordinates of space and time. Since the theory of general relativity implies the representation of physical reality by a continuous field, the concept of particles or material points cannot play a fundamental part, nor can the concept of motion. The particle can only appear as a limited region in space in which the field strength or the energy density are particularly high.' - Albert Einstein, Relativity, 1950

'When forced to summarize the general theory of relativity in one sentence: Time and space and gravitation have no separate existence from matter.' - Albert Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, 1954


'What we observe as material bodies and forces are nothing but shapes and variations in the structure of space. Particles are just schaumkommen (appearances). ... The world is given to me only once, not one existing and one perceived. Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experience in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist. ... Let me say at the outset, that in this discourse, I am opposing not a few special statements of quantum mechanics held today (1950s), I am opposing as it were the whole of it, I am opposing its basic views that have been shaped 25 years ago, when Max Born put forward his probability interpretation, which was accepted by almost everybody. ... I don't like it, and I'm sorry I ever had anything to do with it.' - Erwin Schrödinger, Life and Thought, 1989

The fundamental element of the cosmos is Space. Space is the all-embracing principle of higher unity. Nothing can exist without Space. ... According to ancient Indian tradition the Universe reveals itself in two fundamental properties: as Motion and as that in which motion takes place, namely Space. This Space is called Akasa .. derived from the root kas, 'to radiate, to shine', and has therefore the meaning of ether which is conceived as the medium of movement. The principle of movement, however, is Prana, the breath of life, the all-powerful, all-pervading rhythm of the universe, (Lama Anagarika Govinda, 1969)


'The notion that all these fragments is separately existent is evidently an illusion, and this illusion cannot do other than lead to endless conflict and confusion. Indeed, the attempt to live according to the notion that the fragments are really separate is, in essence, what has led to the growing series of extremely urgent crises that is confronting us today. Thus, as is now well known, this way of life has brought about pollution, destruction of the balance of nature, over-population, world-wide economic and political disorder and the creation of an overall environment that is neither physically nor mentally healthy for most of the people who live in it. Individually there has developed a widespread feeling of helplessness and despair, in the face of what seems to be an overwhelming mass of disparate social forces, going beyond the control and even the comprehension of the human beings who are caught up in it.' - David Bohm, Wholeness and the Implicate Order, 1980

'Someday we'll understand the whole thing as one single marvelous vision that will seem so overwhelmingly simple and beautiful that we may say to each other; 'Oh, how could be have been so stupid for so long? How could it have been otherwise!' - John Archibald Wheeler




-----


Great Youtube video with diagrams and animations to help visualize:
[link]

Dr. Wolff:
[link]

Geoff Haselhurst's Website:
[link]
(If you are interested in anything related to metaphysics or philosophy, this website is a must read)

Anyway (LOL)...that is mostly what gave me the inspiration for this image and its name.






Workflow:

Shot on a Canon 5D Mark II and a 24-105 f/4L. Tripod is a Gitzo carbon fiber, with a Gitzo off-center ballhead. f/4 is a BIT dark for this sort of work, but it managed. Ended up with a bit of bad color noise and some banding in the corners of the .raw files, but it was easy enough to work out.

This is 11 vertical images stitched together in Photoshop. They're overlapped by as much as 50%, because I wanted as much image data as possible for the final result. I was happy with my first attempt to stitch it, though I may try again in the future. Each image was shot at 25 sec. f/4 ISO 6400.

Did some small local contrast adjustments for the milky way, and a simple curve for overall contrast. Downsized and sharpened for web. The purple "lines" above the trees aren't banding, just "spires" of faint aurora