**The meaning of mass: Einstein vs Higgs.**

*Mass is the attractive, in/forming force of the Universe; and it is merely the last, accelerated, curved motion of the gravitational force. This was explained by Einstein with his principle of equivalence between acceleration and mass/gravitation. Initially, due to the ‘mirage’ of materialism, physicists thought the principle only applied to the external, curving vortex of gravitational forces that sunk into the mass. But the mass as a solid substance was never found and all pictures have seen merely vortices of curved motions.*

*Now we can explain all this and take further, conceptually and mathematically the discoveries of Einstein, thanks to the advances of complexity. In this post we shall deal at the simplest possible level with ** empirical, theoretical and mathematical demonstrations of t**hose concepts, considering some of the new advances on theory of information and astro-physics, we are making departing from Einstein’s insight.*

**Einstein’s mass theory (simplex) **

*In Physics, according to Einstein the information of a particle is its mass. This can be easily proved theoretically, mathematically and empirically.*

*In the previous pictures there is an obvious empirical proof. All pictures of masses and charges appear as vortices with an accelerated inward motion. Let us now deal with the other proofs (and let us remember that truth in epistemology of science is based in 3 pillars – empirical, logical and mathematical proofs.*

*Einstein’s Conceptual proof.*

Now this simple equation is in accordance with Einstein’s Principle of equivalence between acceleration and gravitational force. Both are *the same in General Relativity.* And so why we should stop this ‘comparison’ at a certain point of the accelerating vortex? Since in the Universe we have never seen ‘substance’ but only motions, it is logic to think that what we call a mass is exactly that: the final region of acceleration into a vortex of gravitational forces. Such vortex obviously offers a resistance to motion (inertial mass), which is dependent of the speed/acceleration of such motion.

*Einstein’s Mathematical proof*

*The mathematical proof is simple, given by the 2 main equations of Einstein, which relate the frequency of information (a time parameter), the mass and the energy of physical systems:*

*ExT=K, E=Mc2, hence M=K/T=Kv; where v is the frequency of rotation of the vortex of mass. *

*Thus a mass is a vortex of space-time that carries the information of the Universe in its frequency. *

*This also has empirical proofs: All vortices attract inwards with a force equivalent to the strength of the rotating vortex. So a hurricane attract more when it turns faster. And so a mass, which is a hurricane of space-time attracts more the faster it turns. Moreover vortices of all kind are ‘accelerating’ inwards: Vo x Ro = K, which means that the shorter the radius is, Ro, the faster its speed, Vo, so the closer you come to the vortex, the faster it turns, the more it attracts, the stronger its gravitational force is, and the more mass it has.*

*B*ut what type of accelerated motion? Well it turns out that there are only two accelerated motions, lineal and cyclical accelerations. Further on, accelerated motions can produce forces that ‘work’. And Newton gave us a simple equation to describe ‘all’ the forces of the Universe: F = M (cyclical acceleration) x A (lineal acceleration). This is fascinating because it means that the Universe is made of 2 accelerated motions: F = M x A, where A is lineal acceleration or ‘energy’ and Mass is a vortex with more dimensional form, or cyclical acceleration, whose form and frequency carry the in-form-ation of the Universe.

Of course when we enter into deeper analysis of the mathematical details, a mass vortex is more complex. Einstein described it with a set of equations that go beyond the scope of this introduction. But there is a different version of those equations much simpler – the gravito-magnetic version, recently proved experimentally by a Probe, which are mimetic from the equations of electromagnetism.

And so since charges are obvious accelerated vortices of electromagnetic forces, it is self-evident that if masses produce a self-similar field system, they will be accelerated vortices of gravitational forces.

As Einstein put it ‘the Universe is simple and not malicious’. And so there you have, the 3 simplest, more important equations of Physics, F=m a, E=Mc2, E=hv and then the more complex, equally essential Maxwell and Einstein’s equations come all together to accept mass as an *‘internal’ property that define mass and hence need no further fields and esoteric particles to be explained.*

*Going beyond Einstein… following his path.*

We could go into far more complex mathematical consequences for our understanding of physics and the Universe. The first and obvious one is in information theory – my scientific speciality: since gravitation is the attractive force of the Universe, it forms, it in/forms the Universe and balances the electromagnetic arrow of expansive entropy and so the Universe will not die but will follow eternal cycles of gravitational implosion and electromagnetic explosions.

Even more important is the consequences for our concept of time. As I anticipated decades ago, and recently Mr. Penrose acknowledge in ‘Time Cycles’ each mass or charge acts as a ‘small’ clock of time’, whose frequency becomes a measure of time and stores ‘information’. So time, information and gravitation are deeply interconnected, as Einstein’s Relativity proves. Those connections which always puzzled scientists, and i have explored in depth in my books and papers on complexity can now be explained rationally. In essence a mass is a time vortex, and the frequency of the vortex defines the attractive power and information it carries. So there are infinite different type of clocks in the Universe. Our mechanical clock is just one.

For that reason Einstein said ‘I am the only theorist who seems to think time goes at different speeds’ – depending on each cycle’s frequency and length and speed – the 3 key new variables to study cyclical time. He also said that ‘time bends space’. Mind the reader he didn’t say mass, as both are synonymous.

Now, we can solve some mysteries that CERN pretends to resolve.

– First, why and how energy becomes mass in that equation, E=Mc2. This is simple Energy is lineal acceleration, mass is cyclical acceleration, thus a mere topological change of the form of motion transforms one into the other. The Universe is eternal, made of motions. And so one becomes the other in the c-limit speed of our space-time membrane.

– Then why antiparticles have inverse time coordinates? Self-evident: they are time vortex that turn clockwards.

– Then, why black holes attract so much being so small? Obvious. The event horizon is the c-limit of speed that curves light into mass. So they turn at c-speed, and they are very small. Thus the frequency of its mass-cycle which is proportional to its speed and inverse to its length is the maximal possible in the Universe.

– And so why black holes DO NOT EVAPORATE? Trivial… There are so many proofs that I wrote an entire book about it. Let us resume here a few experimental, theoretical and mathematical proofs:

*Theoretical*. In essence Mr. Hawking as Mr. Higgs never understood Einstein, despite of making a living on denying him. Mr. Hawking believes that there is only a single time in the Universe and black holes can work as time machines. Wrong. There are infinite time cycles and you cannot go back in time, as those cycles are independent of each other and so you can only at best move backwards a time cycle. Second he thinks black holes evaporate information. Wrong. Black holes precisely create mass by bending electromagnetic space into mass as we have explained. They *create, don’t erase information. *

*Mathematical*. What did Hawking gets wrong in his equations? The two principles of Entropy he denies, when he affirms information evaporates. But also when he thinks that an ultra-hot ‘born’ black hole, in an ultra-cold Earth’s environment is going to break the first law of thermodynamics and become a perfect machine, as it becomes even hotter evaporating. Instead the hot item cools down and evaporates the external world – our world. This any high school student knows it. Or else your coffee will evaporate and the cup freeze. Now if you interpret his equation without this conceptual error, the result is obvious: the black hole will be born exceedingly hot and so the smaller it is the faster it will evaporate the surrounding environment.

Indeed, in simplified terminology Hawking says: Mass = Konstant/Temperature.

And when we reject his entropic error enclosed in the way he dynamizes that equation all is clear: The black hole is born at maximal temperature, with minimal mass, but as temperature diminishes, its inverse parameter, mass grows, POINT. This self-evident truth is what I could not deny for theoretical and ethical reasons and got me into this nightmare (1). Why then physicists defend this absurdity? It has to do a lot with non-theoretical reasons (celebrity, mass-media, industrial profits, CERN’s policy, etc.) but also with the way ‘complicated’ arguments have always impressed people, who without fully understanding them accept it. The jargons and complicated mathematical arguments used by Hawking and other quantum theorists do that work. It is like the banker’s speech on toxic assets. That is the name we have now ‘after’ they convinced us of their enormous value. The ‘black hole factory’ is the proper name of the LHC but that won’t be accepted ‘after’ as a matter of fact, it evaporate us.

*Experimental*. We never saw one evaporating. All feed on mass – the faster the smaller the born black hole is. And this is proved by Novas, which grow so fast after the birth of a micro-black hole seed in his interior. And it is proved by recent observations of small black holes which are far more active than big ones. So one it is born it will grow at c-speed swallowing the Earth within seconds.

– So why light has no mass? A tautology: Light does not close a cycle, but it is a wave that deflects the cycle into an open wave. Hence it never has mass. But if we were to calculate its mass in terms of energy the higher the frequency of the web (analogous to the mass frequency) the more mass-energy it has.

– Then there is the scalar, fractal structure derived of the homology of the equations of charges and masses which however exist in two different scales. This is a key discovery for the fractal structure of the Universe and proves one of my fundamental mathematical findings: the unification equation of the G and Q Universal constants of charges and masses as two vortices of two fractal discontinuous scales of space-time, the quantum, smaller world and cosmic upper scale.

And we will return to that at the end of this article, when considering in depth the consequences of upholding and evolving Einstein’s theory of mass, instead of seeking and absurd scalar particle that explains so little…

– Finally, why the Universe accelerates between galaxies? It is accelerating and will end into pure entropy? No. Self-evident. Physicists ignore the meaning of information and mass and they have a continuous theory of space. None of that works anymore. As each time cycle ‘breaks’ space into an inner and outer region. So do the time cycles of the Universe of which the biggest clock is a galaxy that ‘warps space into time-mass’. So the acceleration of space between galaxies is balanced by its warping within them. And both balance each other: gravitation informs light-space into mass vortices, galaxies. And then light-space the substance of which our space is made, once it abandons the galaxy, stretches his frequency (doppler effect as ‘real’) till its ‘generational time cycle’ of around 10 up to 10 years dissolves it back into non-perceivable, lineal, gravitation with no form. But this and so many other fascinating results of a proper theory of time cycles require more knowledge of physics that I expect a non-physicists to have, so we shall end here the simpler version of Einstein’s mass theory.

*So why the Higgs?*

*I*n that regard, what we face at CERN is not only an existential problem but an intellectual problem: quantum physicists work with a single arrow of entropy=energy, ignoring all about the sciences of information and the meaning of masses as information, forms, dimensional form; and are halting the development of true science, using the methods of religions and the military to impose their false ideologies of the Universe – censorship, bullying, money and political power. But they cannot censor, paraphrasing Einstein, ‘the thoughts of God’, the laws of the Universe, and the consequences of creating the most powerful, attractive vortices of mass of the Universe on planet Earth.

*We **don’t **need the Higgs. The Higgs is just a mathematically poorly constructed theory that Nuclear Physicists have sold out to an audience – the establishment of the military-industrial complex… What people should understand is this: even if the Higgs was found it is only a particle related to certain reactions of the ‘temporal, informative force ‘par excellence’ of the Universe – the weak force that trans-forms particles; but it is NOT the particle that gives mass to all other vortices of space-time (aka particles), neither explains as we have done the obvious relationship between mass and size of the particle (Max. Mass = Min. size by virtue of the inward accelerated motion of any vortex) which is the rule that differentiates the different weights of each particle.*

*And why we need Hawking’s evaporation? *

Nobody really believed in Hawking when he published. Then as he became famous and an industry of popular physics, it became tolerated. Only when CERN needed it to prove itself ‘safe’, it became dogma not to discuss his work and simplistic negation of basic laws of physics.

But all this is not only to be blamed on physicists. They are defending their way of life at CERN. It is the people who blindly believe them as experts. Like the bankers who ab=used mankind in this crisis printing money for free because people do not understand how money is printed, physicists are abusing us because people don’t understand their maths. That is why I have made them so simple to you. In the future updates of this post, we shall develop the entire model in the themes concerned with mass and Einstein’s upgrade with more mathematical rigor. But what matters is to depart from sound conceptual analysis, which is where people and Higgs fail. Then once you have a wrong concept, maths can take you to any conclusion, as in both cases.

**Update. July 2010. The incredible shrinking proton, yet another proof of Einstein’s mass theory.**

This week in which the quark cannon has increased once more its record of luminosity in its slow advance towards the threshold of energies that will make possible to blow up the planet, there has been a striking discovery among serious physicists, which once more proves the absurdity of the ‘Toilet Particle’ (Nobel Prize Weinberg’s definition of the Higgs): the finding of the incredible shrinking proton that proves again what we have been telling for years – that Einstein’s theory of mass NOT Higgs quantum theory is the truth about the meaning of mass in the Universe.

Of course, the Higgs is *yet to be found, *after months of collisions and CERN has already set up a date, 11/9, to make strangelets – sorry, to collide lead – hence abandoning the reason why we wasted 10 billion $ and risked our lives – the finding of the Higgs Hoax.

The discovery explained easier by Dennis Overbye in the NY Times, one of the few focused journalists on the scientific press, which brings us news that matter, is by far the most important fact of science to come out this year. Since the dicrease of the radius of the proton in a normal Hydrogen atom with a light electron Vs. a heavy atom with a heavy muon instead of the electron, turns out to shrink 4% – an amazing amount for the precise calculations of quantum physics, which quantum theory cannot explain.

Simply, the long-standing value used for a proton’s radius is 0.8768 femtometers, (a femtometer equals one quadrillionth of a meter). But the study team found it to be 0.84184 femtometers. How’d they make their measurement? First, think of the standard picture of electrons orbiting around a proton:

According to quantum mechanics, an electron can orbit only at certain specific distances, called energy levels, from its proton. The electron can jump up to a higher energy level if a particle of light hits it, or drop down to a lower one if it lets some light go. Physicists measure the energy of the absorbed or released light to determine how far one energy level is from another, and use calculations based on quantum electrodynamics to transform that energy difference into a number for the size of the proton [Wired.com].

That was how physicists derived their previous estimate, using simple hydrogen atoms. But this team relied on muons instead of electrons. Muons are 200 times heavier than electrons; they orbit closer to protons and are more sensitive to the proton’s size. However, they don’t last long and there aren’t many of them, so the team had to be quick:

The team knew that firing a laser at the atom before the muon decays should excite the muon, causing it to move to a higher energy level—a higher orbit around the proton. The muon should then release the extra energy as x-rays and move to a lower energy level. The distance between these energy levels is determined by the size of the proton, which in turn dictates the frequency of the emitted x-rays [National Geographic].

Thus, they should have seen the specific frequency related to the accepted size of a proton. Just one problem: The scientists didn’t see that frequency. Instead, their x-ray readings corresponded to the 4-percent-smaller size.

Now the task at hand is to check whether this study is somehow flawed, or is in fact a finding that will shake up physics.

In an editorial accompanying the report in the journal *Nature*, physicist Jeff Flowers of the National Physical Laboratory in Teddington, England, said there were three possibilities: Either the experimenters have made a mistake, the calculations used in determining the size of the proton are wrong or, potentially most exciting and disturbing, the standard model has some kind of problem (Discovery magazine).

Indeed, providing the findings are certain, the only explanation comes from our work in Fractal Relativity and its concept of mass, as a vortex of space-time which shrinks in radius when it grows in mass, *which can be measured as a direct function of frequency as it was done in the experiment*. In fact, the variability of the radius of any vortex of mass, from atoms to black holes, is one of the proofs we advance already a decade ago in our book on fractal space-time published in Spain. The reasons are obvious:

A mass, which is not given by the esoteric Higgs particle, but is an intrinsic property of a vortex of space-time, attracts like a hurricane does, the faster it turns – *the higher its frequency*. And so the attraction is greater inside the hurricane of space-time, where the speed of the vortex increases. Unlike the Higgs hoax this intuitive explanation of mass, based in the Principle of Equivalence between mass and acceleration, in which General Relativity is based, explains easily why the proton shrinks: the massive muon creates a fractal space-time vortex of higher mass, whose radius diminishes and whose frequency increases.

**Update. May 12: Going beyond Einstein (II): ****Cyclical ****Times: ****frequency, the information of the Universe. **

Long ago, following on the steps of the master (not denying him as Hawking et al do) i took to its ultimate consequences the Principle of Equivalence of Einstein, developing a Theory of multiple spaces and times.

The first task was to complete the work of Einstein with the new tools of fractal, non-euclidean geometry and simultaneous logic I had developed to advance our ‘languages of space’ (geometry/topology) and time (logic, causality), a step further to be able to study with more rigor cyclical, discontinuous space-time.

Einstein again had showed the way using the 5th postulate of non-euclidean geometry; but I realized if the fifth postulate was changed that required to change also the 4th initial ones as now ‘points’ had width to enclose infinite parallels. This mathematical r=evolution allowed me to define a new unit of non-euclidean mathematics, the fractal point, and its formalism applied to different sciences allowed me, finally, after 50 years of scientific research, to complete the task set about by the first congress of systems sciences at the death of Einstein, at Macy’s, where the biggest minds of mankind joined together to explore and define the goals of the new sciences of cybernetics, information and systems sciences.

All that knowledge poured in my scholar books goes beyond the scope of this web. It essentially represents the completion of the long seek dream of unifying quantum, relativity and evolutionary principles to into a unified theory, *not only of mathematical principles (achieved through the use of the basic topological forms of the Universe, the sphere, the torus and the zero point, which all systems including humans possess) but also its logic functions. *

It also meant to correct once and for all the fundamental error physics as a science: the spatialization of time and its reduction to a single dimension of space, when Time has 3 dimensions, past, present and future, and it is *space, what is a mere dharma of present time, perceived in simultaneity.*

Indeed, during centuries physicists have spatialized time, because they didn’t quite understand. Einstein once was asked, ‘what is really time’ and he responded, ‘what a clock measures’. Later in his life though he acquired deeper insights important for the future of time theory, some of which have been explained above. And yet his work was simplified by Minkowski despite his protest ‘telegraphic wires don’t travel to the past’ and further misunderstood for a century to come, as *physicists despite their mathematical dexterity often seem to be dyslexic in conceptual, logic thought, the language of time, and both are required to properly understand the Universe. *So we need to complete the astounding wealth of knowledge physicists have gathered on geometrical space with a deeper analysis of the laws and dimensions of logical time.

*Since what Physicists call time is merely the study of its relationship with parameters of space – its spatial properties, related to space and speed (v=s/t), which Einstein evolved within those limits. His biggest finding in that sense was the study of present-time, the simultaneous time-measures of his special relativity. *

However there is an entire new brave world of physics that does the opposite: studying space just as a present dimension of time and considering then the laws of all the time cycles between past and future.

This ‘physics of times’, which I developed in depth in my youth creates another mirror image of the laws of physics, seen from the perspective of cyclical time and motion, according to which space is the ‘submissive’ element – a mere present, simultaneous slice in the complex tapestry of infinite time cycles from infinite beings performing the ‘motions’ and ‘actions’ of the Universe.

This only Leibniz among the pioneers understood with his concepts of relational time and space.

In the posts of this section on the future of science and physics – if we survive the foolishness of CERN – we will introduce a few themes of the new physics of multiple time cycles in more depth following the path of Einstein’s principle and his description of mass and gravitation as cyclical motions. We shall deal in this section with several key themes for its enormous philosophical importance to understand reality:

– The first consequence of the homology between vortices of mass and charge and time-clocks in two scales of the universe (the quantum and cosmological scale) is the acceptance that time is cyclical. This opens a new world for time theory. So we shall study the future of Time Theory, considering the main laws derived of cyclical time, computed mathematically as the frequency of a given cycle. And the consequences of a Universe made of time motions not of fixed, spatial substances – namely its eternity. Since if masses and vortices are mere cyclical motion, such universe made of ‘time motions’ will never stop…

– The future of Space Theory explaining the fractal structure of the Universe, which is not only invariant to motions as Einstein discovered, but invariant at scales and invariant in topologies and so it is Absolutely Relative, in sizes, forms and motions.

We shall consider only of this extensive theme, a key element of scalar relativity: the mathematical deduction of the Fractal Unification equation of charges and masses and its consequences for our understanding of time and space. Since it was one long quest of Mr. Einstein which would certainly deeply enjoy such discovery for its simplicity, elegance and logic power to reshape the way we see the Universe.

– The future of Entropy and the deeper meaning of the laws of Thermodynamics in a discontinuous fractal Universe – namely the creation of a second arrow of complexity and scalar information.

– To cap it all with the expansion of those laws i found in physics, when i harmonized the laws of quantum and relativity, according to their fractal scales, to all the systems of the Universe. The result was an amazing structure of simple laws that harmonized mathematics, logic, physics, biology and sociology, as we are all parts of a whole, the organic Universe, and so we all obey the same laws of ‘exi=st-ence’ as entities of energy and information (exi), words which are synonimous of space and time (st), and apply therefore to all sci-ences which study those ‘complementary’ entities of energy and information in the different scales of size and form of the Universe.

Because the unification equation of masses and charges was the last task which Einstein tried to complete, i will pay my debt to him, ending this post on his work on Mass and gravitation that Mr. Higgs and Mr. Hawking and their sponsors, CERN, deny with the solution to that still standing question of physics.

**Fractal unification of charges and masses.**

*One of the most fascinating proofs of the fractal structure of the Universe in infinite self-similar scales of lineal forces of ‘spatial energy’ and cyclical particles of ‘informative time’ are the recently found ‘d-orbitals’ of the galaxy: two bubbles of electromagnetic energy that show the self-similarity of the quantum, **electro-magnetic **and cosmological, gravitational membranes of space-time. They are the 2 main fractal scales of space-time of the Universe. In this post on the future of physics (1) we introduce the mathematical equation that unifies the constants of both forces, G and Q, complementary to the Gravito-magnetic equations recently proved by Probe A, which express Einstein’s field equations in a format self-similar to that of electromagnetic forces. Of the hundreds of pages on that basic duality of space-time, we have chosen this equation to honor Mr. Einstein, who seeked for it in his last decade, but not knowing the concept yet not discovered of fractals, could not even ‘imagine’ how to proceed with such analysis. When asked at CERN on those themes, Mr. Hawking merely replied: ‘i dont understand’. And yet since ‘**the Universe is simple but not malicious’, anyone with high school knowledge of physics will be able to grasp it.*

Physical Reality is made of dual energetic/informative states (complementarity principle particle-wave): Cyclic vortices/ particles develop lineal actions-waves in 2 scales, the microscopic quantum world of Electromagnetism and the macroscopic, gravitational world. Once the duality of scales and forms is understood, we unify the constants of dimensional proportionality of both types of vortices and forces, studying transversal waves of ‘lineal speed’ in both scales of the fractal universe: the c-speed of small electromagnetic waves, and we contend, the superluminal ‘action at distance’ of gravitational waves.

Let us consider the first element of that duality, unifying* *masses and charges of gravitation and electromagnetism as vortices of 2 different scales of space-times. Masses and charges are vortices of 2 space-time scales made of 2 relative energetic and informative motions, where gravitation is faster/more extended but carries less information than the slower/less extended world of light and electroweak particles.

The main variation of those vortices of accelerated forces is the one we observe between electronic charges and quark masses, which are the cyclical vortices of those 2 scales of reality, the scale of cosmological vortices of mass and the scale of electroweak vortices of charges.

And so we have to unify those 2 types of cyclical geometries on one side and their lineal, light and gravitational forces, on the other side, as they switch acting either as sinks of space-time (cyclical, non-lineal vortices of increasing acceleration) or as lineal, gravitational or electromagnetic waves in both scales.

Yet since electromagnetism and gravitation are self-similar accelerated vortices of 2 different fractal branes of space-time, the microscopic and cosmologic branes, it follows we should be able to treat them with the same equations of gravitation, either Einstein’s more detailed vortices, defined by the Principle of Equivalence between mass and acceleration or with the classic analysis of Newton, as accelerated vortices with the same geometrical form, whose relative proportion of energy/speed/ distance and information/curvature will be given by 2 different Universal G-Constants.

Thus, we should be able to describe both, the standard Earth-Sun gravitational vortex and Hydrogen, electron-Proton quantum vortex with the same equations, defining them according to the mass of the particles, the rotational speed and 2 different Universal constants, U.C.(i/e):

U(g), the Universal Constant of gravitation that defines a larger/ faster/less curved Gravitational membrane of masses and…

U(q) the Universal constant of charge (Coulomb) that defines a smaller, slower, more curved membrane of quantum light. Since electromagnetism has more information and less energy distance.

Further on, we will be able to prove empirically our hypothesis of 2 self-similar spatial membranes made of light and gravitational quanta, whose only difference is the i/e relative density of information/energy of its cyclical vortices, if the values of the two Universal constants, in those 2 systems (the earth-sun system and the proton-electron system), correspond to their relative empirical value, when we treat them both as mass vortices (being the gravitational constant 10^{39} times weaker than the charge constant).

Let us then go on with the treatment of charges and masses as Newtonian vortices of space-time. In newton’s equations a mass can be considered a cyclic, accelerated vortex of gravitational space-time defined in classic Newton Mechanics by a centripetal, gravitational acceleration: *ω ^{2}r*.

The same treatment can be done with Poison equations or Relativity equations, which are a static, present, simultaneous picture of Newton’s space-time vortex of acceleration, where G expresses the informative curvature of the space.

Thus if gravitational acceleration is *ω ^{2}r*, then

*F=mg=mω*, and we arrive at

^{2}r= GmM/r^{2}*G=ω*. Where

^{2}r^{3}/M*r*is in meters and

*ω*is angular acceleration in radians per second.

If we substitute for the Earth-Sun system’s rounded values, (the Earth’s angular velocity, *ω* is 2 x 10^{-7} radians per second; its orbital radius is 149 x 10^{9} meters and M, the Sun’s mass is 2 x 10^{30} kg.), we obtain, a value for G that measures the Sun’s Space-time contraction (in static space) or formal acceleration of the vortex, equal to 6.6 x 10^{-11} kg^{-1} m^{3 }rad. sec.^{-2}, in accordance with experimental evidence. Roughly the same value of G, till now calculated empirically, is obtained for all planetary orbits.

This shows that the entire solar system is a series of self-similar gravitational vortices of space-time caused by planetary masses.

Then if we apply the model for G to the hydrogen, proton-electron atom the orbital parameters are: *electron’s angular speed=4.13×10 ^{16} rad.sec.^{-1}; Bohr radius=5.3×10^{-11} meters and*

*Proton mass=1.6 x 10*. And so substituting those values in

^{-27 }kg*U(q) = ω*1.5 x 10

^{2}r^{3}/M, where U(q) is the Universal constant, quantized for the electromagnetic scale as ‘q’, we obtain a value of ±^{29}

*kg*

^{-1}m^{3 }rad. sec.^{-2}*.*

Thus, if we treat charges as vortices of a denser space-time membrane, we obtain theoretically a U.C. (i/e) of around 1.5 x 10^{39} times the value of the gravitational *G, U(g)*, self-similar to the empirical value.

Yet a theoretical calculus of those values cannot be exact ‘by chance’, unless our thesis is right. Thus, the previous calculus is a clear proof that both, charges and masses, are unified as values of the same type of space-time vortices in the 2 different scales of space-time of the Universe. And they are geometrically unified from the p.o.v. of geometrical relativity not from quantum theory, as Einstein wanted it^{2}. Thus, the Unification equation in terms of Newtonian mechanics is simple:

*Unification Equation: *

*UC _{G,C} = ω^{2}r^{3}/M*

*UC*=

_{G,C}x M*ω*

^{2}r^{3}M= ω^{2}r^{3}/UC_{G,C}Where we obtain for 2 UC(i/e) values, G and Q, 2 different space/time scales and vortices acceleration (mass and charges).

2 obvious, simple proofs of that dual, scalar structure:

– Planck’s minimal value for Mass is far bigger (10^{-7} g.) than the minimal value for an electromagnetic action (h), which seems to mean that the mass scale is far bigger than the quantum world.

– The entire standard model works without gravitational forces. Thus we have to postulate that particles are not ‘mass-particles’ but electromagnetic systems, which become elements of mass only when they aggregate in huge numbers, as it happens with electromagnetic photons, which become electrons of the upper scale in huge nebulae.

But we see masses as static forms. This is due to the Galilean paradox: a space-time vortex-mass becomes then statically a space-time distortion, a deformation of space-time which increases as we decrease size. Since the *deformation of space-time is the same for any cycle. Hence, when we trace a smaller cycle the deformation increases.* And so it does the mass and the U(w), now a static constant of deformation. This is the interpretation most often assumed of G in Einstein’s Relativity. In a simpler, classic approximation based in fluid dynamics, M/r^{3 }becomes the density of space/time and its inverse, R^{3}/m, the displacement of space-time provoked by a given mass. It is then evident by Archimedes Principle that a bigger mass density will provoke a bigger displacement and distortion of space-time an inversely a bigger acceleration towards the central vortex. And since the density of a proton is much higher than the density of a planet, the Universal Constant for an atom is much higher and so it is its angular speed. Does the electromagnetic constant, or static curvature of an atomic system, is much stronger. So it is the density of a proton mass.

This reformulation of electromagnetism simplifies and clarifies the meaning of physics. Yet to grasp the relationships between the quantum world and the cosmos we have to transform, using the new coulomb constant, C=1.5×10^{29}, electromagnetic parameters to the jargon of gravity, departing from its fundamental relationship:

*F=**UC _{C} Mm/r^{2} = e^{2}/4pe*

_{o}*r*

^{2}Then we can translate the main constants of electromagnetism (the Rydberg constant, the α constant, which denotes the strength of the electromagnetic field, etc.) to the gravitational jargon and again the results obtained are close to the theoretical value.

So it is evident that we are observing the same geometric force at different scales, *explained with 2 different historic jargons*. Further on, as we ‘transform’ the concepts of electromagnetic vortices to gravitational, geometric symbols, the main discoveries of Relativity apply to electromagnetic vortices.

Perhaps the most interesting simplified value under the new U(q) charge constant is the Proton radius that appears with the same formula than a black hole, Schwarzschild horizon. This means that a quark particle (a hadron, a proton, etc.) is basically a black hole of the quantum, gravitational scale and vice versa: a cosmological black hole might be a deconfined state of billions of ultra-dense quarks. In such fractal Universe, each small particle could from the perspective of a small observer a macrocosmic form. And each atom could be a galaxy. Such fractal Universe validates the Theory of Great Numbers, which are the parameters of self-repetition of the Universe, which might be from a lower perspective a mere atom or black hole of a hyper-Universe.

Yet self-similarity is not equality, an atom is self-similar to a galaxy but NOT likely a galaxy – reason why for example quantum cosmology is false. Quantum cosmologists consider ‘identical’ the scales of the cosmos and the quantum world, so they use quantum equations for all. This is a hyperbolic error. We have equations for each scale and what we can show, as we did here, is the self-similarities of scales.

All in all, it is evident that what we call a black hole or pulsar is made of quark quanta; it is a fractal of quarks. Thus we can apply to its vortices the laws of Newtonian fluids or the more complex equations of a Non-Euclidean vortices of space-time, as we do with any other ‘medium’ called a ‘phase space’ in physics. They can be considered akin to a hurricane, which is a ‘medium’ of air molecules, or to a tornado, which is a medium of water molecules. All those mediums have limits of speed, which are the same for their lineal forces and cyclical vortices:

Light space-time has a c-speed limit, which is also the limit of speed of a rotational electron vortex and a 0 K limit.

Dark energy and quark matter belonging to the gravitational membrane seems to have a c<10 c lineal and rotational speeds.

Because each space-time membrane has vortices of information and energetic, lineal forces, we need equations of self-similarity, relating informative vortices of charges and masses on one side and gravitational and electromagnetic waves on the other. This is done with gravito-magnetism, which relates cosmic gravitational, lineal waves and electro-magnetic fields. So, the gravito-magnetic formalism just needs to be properly fit within the wider concept of 2 self-similar fractal space-times, to define in self-similar terms, light waves and dark-energy waves of gravitation; as the elementary, actions-units of the 2 fractal scales.

But the previous equation is only the beginning of a true r=evolution in our understanding of both scales, its forces, laws, mathematical equations and relationships that we shall advance further in future installments on this web and kindle books published on the subject.

** **

* *

__________

(1) This key equation to advance physics was presented at the Madison Congress of Systems Sciences in the paper ‘the arrow of Einstein’, which at the time of my first suit to cern was being considered for publication at Physical Review. Then the paper was rejected with no further comment and the conference given at Madison Congress erased from Google scholar and ISSS servers, with no response or reposition so far despite unending complains 0-:. I have now published it in the books on ‘Fractal Universes’ and ‘The black hole factory and the meaning of mass’ available at Kindle under my name. You see the beauty of the laws of the Universe and truthful information at large is that you cannot erase it. It stubbornly keeps surfacing, despite human efforts against it, because truth ‘is’, we only ‘exist’. So we will publish it in the future a synoptic model of ‘Physics of Times’, as needless to say those who opposed CERN have been ‘erased’ from the scholar world of scientific magazines.