Funnel Theory

Have you ever noticed that our scientists.....are the worse story tellers in the world. Utterly incapable of a good story. At least a story that ONE person might be able to follow. I listen to their stories all the time......and I can never follow one all the way thru. How bout you?

Well, that's gona stop, because I can tell a good story. And all can follow it.

First let's look at a science story. This story.....explains the periodic table. The story starts with the H1 atom. And all other atoms are built using this first atom. They say his atom has one proton for a nucleus and one electron in orbit. Next is helium, which has 2 protons and 2 neutrons for a nucleus and 2 electrons in orbit. This story grows...and to explain the whole table...many entities are used for all the elements. It's a catalog of entities. And forces.

I have a much more interesting story. I call it funnel theory and its about the H1 atom.

It begins like this. The H1 atom is NOT an atom. It's an atomic dipole. And there is nothing in orbit.

I use a funnel, because it gives relative physical shape and form to the object. So one may picture it. Have you ever thought about what function a funnel provides? A funnel connects a small hole to a large hole.

Most think that because the proton has 1800 times the "mass" of an electron.....that the proton is larger, physically, than the electron. Some even say that the proton is a component particle composed of 3 smaller particles. And most think the electron is much smaller. But in this story it's just the opposite that is true. Inertia and mass........are NOT an amount. Mass is the density and the velocity of a set amount. All charge comes with and keeps the same amount of STUFF. What is stuff? Stuff is the material of charge. Stuff is the only physical substance there is. This whole universe is made from this one stuff. And being that this stuff is the only stuff there is.....we will never be able to determine what this stuff is....or how or where it came from........ because we have no other stuff to compare it to.

The best way to think of this stuff, is to think of a moving, constant length line. A constant a constant amount. Now imagine a constant E field emanating from that line. Think of it as a constant number of electric field lines.

Now.....twist that line. That line now becomes shorter. But it still has the same number of field lines. So the density of that field has increased, but the amount of E field has not. Twist it some more....even more density. Being that the density increased and the velocity of that line remained constant.....the inertia and "mass" increased. Because the density increased.

Now.....if we close that c moving line into a rotation, we get a rotating ring-type spinning structure. But what is making it rotate? Self-repulsiveness. All charge and all fields from a charge are self-repulsive. It's the electric force that is repulsive. This repulsive electric the prime driver for all the energy in this universe.

That repulsive force is trying to super-nova that charge. All the little slices and pieces of that trying to fly out into and dissolve into empty space. By the way, there are rules in this story. Time and length are omnipresent. It's the same time, with a constant length.....everywhere...all the time.

Along with that E field there is a M field. This M field is perpendicular to the E field. So as the ring expands out.....the M field turns that outward trajectory....side ways. So as the circle turns. And it all turns the same way, because of the common out direction.

When the repulsive force causes the outward V to c........the M field is equal to the E field. This means that the has....two c accelerations. One is out....and one is sideways. It's a c "squared" acceleration. Sound familiar? c out and c to the side.......results in a rotation. A self-powered stable and balanced rotation. Is that too hard to understand? This story gets much better.

As the charge slices begin to turn on their way is NOT an arc turn. It's a rolling turn. A spinning turn. After the stable rotation is established, the resulting structure of this ring is not an arc, as in a circle circumference. The circumference is a small diameter helix. Inside the charge, inside the circumference(ring) is a repulsive E field. And the M dipole. Just the fields, no matter. The inside of a charge is empty of matter. Remember this.

Think of a barber pole with a red stripe. Now bend the pole into a circle and connect the ends of the stripe. Remove pole and leave stripe. That's what a particle looks like. The stripe spins at c.....NOT the pole. The helix of the ring spins at c......not the whole ring. Remember this also.

The raw expanding charge come in two equal flavors. One is left handed and the other is right handed. This handedness makes a huge difference on the personality of the charge. It causes eating disorders. This causes constipation in one and diarrhea in the other.

You didn't realize charge had such properties did you? Particle consume and excrete "energy".

The particle that has the large funnel hole is the electron. It also has diarrhea. As soon as it eats, it excretes. It wants to stay empty. So it's normal to stay empty. The helix of the charge has few turns, thus it has the longest length, thus the largest circumference. If you induce a turn into the electron will try to relax that turn and excrete that energy back out. The electron wants to remain large, and with slow ring rotation.(not helix rotation, helix rotation remains at c, always).

The proton is just the opposite. When you feed this keeps it. It has hundreds of turns and a short circumference....with a high ring RPM, much higher than electron. Again....the helix rotates at constant c. The proton stays very small, fast and dense.

When you charge or add energy to any particle, you induce turns to the helix. When you relax a charge or the charge emits.....the charge relaxes turns.

This is how charge changes size with energy level. And it also changes the density and the spin V of the ring.

Is everyone following this? Along with the time and length rule for this theory, comes another rule. Only mechanical and electrical principles are allowed. There ARE no other physics.

Now-------that same handedness that causes the bipolar personalities......has another property.

If we take a left and right handed particles and set them on a desk, so that they are rotating in the same direction, we will see different M poles at the top of the charge. Handedness causes a reversal of the M pole direction in the center of the charge.

Now we can go to the funnel. The proton rotates on the small lip of the funnel in one direction and the electron rotates on the large lip in the opposite direction. This allows the M field to be shared and common to both particles. We need to orientate this funnel. Hold it up sideways with the small lip pointing west and the large lip pointing east.

Let's pause here. What is the physical difference between a M field and an M dipole? Location.

An M field has circular lines. However, there is always at least one location with every M field, where the M lines come together. The area and region where this convergence occurs, is called the dipole. It's where the M field is straight. It's the center of every particle.

The funnel represents this area and region of the M dipole. The M dipole area of M converged flux. In a normal solenoid coil, the dipole region/volume is like a cylinder. But with an atomic dipole it's like a funnel. One side is dense and one side is rarefied On one side....the M field fountains out and circles externally to the other side to fountain back in. In one funnel the M field might fountain out at the small lip, and on another the M field might fountain in at the small depends on the rotation direction of the charges. They can bind in both ways.

The E field. This is harder to picture. Because of what you have been taught. This E field is NOT spherical. It's more like an hour glass. An expanding platter.

Also the E field does not come out from one and in, to the other. One field does not point out and the other point in. Both fields point out. The electric fields of particles attract each other because of rotation, not polarity. And those fields only attract when the fields rotate in opposite directions. If the rotations are the same......the particles repel. The attraction is driven by the want....of equal field densities in opposite directions. If that equilibrium is reached with distance, the attraction stops. If the charges get closer...a repelling force will re-equalize that density. This is because the 2 interacting fields have different densities. It's like a see-saw. To far away, they attract, to close, they repel. A boundary of equal E density, sets the distance and length of the funnel. So we have a small,fast, some handed rotation on the small lip and a slow, opposite handed rotation on the large lip. The charge rotations can be switched. It still binds.

But, because of the different RPMs....the particles have to move closer, and then farther from each other. This small in and out of this rotation...causes a small oscillation as the particles spin. As they rotate, they also move in and out a little, from each other.

That's what an atomic dipole looks like. Supremely asymmetrical. However...the weight of the particle make this contraption super highly reactive. Why? Because the proton is 1800 times the weight of the electron. So if the particles have to change distance to equalize....which one do you think is going to do the moving? The electron. Not only is it is much larger and has a larger capture or target area....for external fields to buffet around. A dipole is the supreme jiggler.

We are not done yet, for there are two more types of dipoles.

I need a break.
After reviewing my 1st post, I regret not naming it Funnel Story instead. Have you ever done a search for alternate physics theories? Weeeee dogie. Lot's of theories. We compare theories. We compare it with our own. Using that, it doesn't take long to see what worth most of these theories are.

So let's call this a story. We will stay comfortable and relaxed, because it's a story, not a theory. Although at one time it was our zenith theory. But I was not taught or read of it until I was in my 60s. And it is not my's a hearsay story. I am just repeating it. Because the story satisfies me.

Before we go to the other dipoles, a few rules for the story. A particle is an electrical device. A device is a dumb, contraption, that does the same thing all the time. It's a lossless device. And the way this device responds, depends on the way it it stimulated. It's always the same response for the same stimulus. It's dumb. This eliminates all probability, all randomness, and all chaos. It also eliminates the need for information and the transfer make this universe. Life is a different matter. Life is the only singularity we have detected. The universe is common.

Let's get back to the sideways funnel. Let's say the there is a N M pole at the west end of the proton and a S M pole at the east end of the electron. When it comes close to another like dipole. We know what happens. They join in series and form a magnetic circle. A common M dipole thru the center of every particle. Look at my icon. That's 2 electrons and 2 protons forming a nucleus. A nucleus has an enclosed M dipole, the dipole has an open M dipole. Science calls my icon a H molecule. But it's not, it's an atom. It has a nucleus.

Now look at my icon. Where do you think the weak part of this structure is.? It's at the electron for several reasons. The electron M pole is rarefied. Less dense. The electron RPM is slow. And the E field is rarefied too. If another atom comes by and wants an electron, it can pluck the electron out of the nucleus very easily. Because there isn't much flux density to hold it. When that happens, the nucleus explodes....from the repulsion of the two side by side protons left there.

The H atom is very fragile. So, let's make it stronger. To do that we need to make a neutron. And to do that we need to go to the sun. The sun is a liquid soup of dipoles. Very dense. Many collisions and accelerations. Hold up the funnel again. When this bombardment pounds the electron closer to the proton, The particle E fields repel. But the bombardment does not end. In order to force that electron has to shrink....and roll down that funnel. This equalizes that density between the particles. In certain steps down that funnel, the field repulsion quits, because of the density change with that size charge, equalized the fields. But the bombardment continues, pushing closer. As the electron steps down and gets closer, it gets to a point where the electron is just a little bigger than the proton.

At this point...the electron slips over the proton, and becomes locked and co-planar with it. It does not oscillate, it wobbles. That wobble can decay. When it does, the neutron falls apart. The proton is inside and the electron is just outside of it. One spins inside the opposite directions. This cancels the E fields like no other. But leaves a common and strong M pole.

Now in my icon, take the two big circles(electrons) out and replace with a circles that are just a hair larger than the small proton circles. These are neutrons. Now put my two large circles back in, around the neutrons. We now have a helium atom. And if you can pluck an electron out, the nucleus will remain intact. A neutron is necessary for any atom large than H. The purpose of a star is to produce neutrons. The purpose of the neutron is nucleus security and a landing pad for electrons.

A neutron is a folded dipole. A dampened locked dipole. more. Deuterium is a dipole. It has a neutron inside the electron. And ready to bond to make helium.

Nuclei can get up two 10 protons. If you put more than 10 neutrons with it....decay will happen.

O is two nuclei with 4 protons(and one neutron for each proton too) each. They are like stacked plates, but result in cubic volume. Carbon is neat, it can have a 6 proton nucleus or a four with a 2(helium) nested in the center.

Large atoms have multiple plates. You bust a large one, you get other atoms and nuclei out.

The end.
Another reason I like this model is that it has a explanation for anti-matter. If the proton and electron have the same structure, one is left, one is right.....and if one normally likes empty and the other likes full....I can see circumstances where at times, perhaps in a thunderstorm, the entities could become inverted. This would charge the electron down, to the size and RPM of the proton. And if you then could collide it, it too would give dense fragments, and you would see quirks from an electron. The electron would have the same "mass" as the proton. And by the same token, the proton could be discharged/relaxed up to the size of an electron with a slow RPM. A simple explanation for anti-matter. And this would also show that the proton is NOT a composite particle....but a single one. The electron has about 18 amp turns. The proton has about 30,000 amp turns. And normally the proton is about 200-600 times SMALLER then the electron. That's very dense and wound up very tight. When you bust takes a duration for that density to dissolve. And we think those dense fragments are particles. The electron is rarefied and dissolves much quicker and we see no composite particles with it.

Accelerating protons backwards should give us positrons. A discharged or relaxed proton. Not only would this verify anti-matter is regular matter, just temperately inverted.......but show the the electron and proton have the same structure. AND that there is no deep mystery about other is not missing.

So now we have a PHYSICAL explanation for matter and anti-matter.
Mass and/or inertia. Are they the same? What's the difference?

They are different but we think they are the same. They are very similar. As both resist acceleration. Mass is a measure of the AMOUNT of matter. Each particle has a reference mass value. And we can count the numbers of each particle. From those figures will get a mass amount. This mass amount will resist acceleration. The more mass, the stronger the resistance.

If we add motion to the mass, we can add more resistance to acceleration, without adding particles, or the addition of more mass. The motion added could be a spin, or a linear acceleration/velocity, or an angular acceleration.

Inertia is the combination of the amount, and the motion(or state of motion) of matter.

Particles are different. Much different than a collection of particles. Both the electron and the proton have the SAME amount of mass. This amount remains constant. This would be the "mass" resistance to acceleration. But most of the acceleration resistance of a particle comes from the motion of the particle. We can adjust and set the resistance to certain levels with acceleration. We can induce acceleration into the particle and increase it's motion. That increases it's resistance to more acceleration. Without adding mass. This is the illusion of a mass gain with velocity. It's not a mass gain, it's an inertia gain. A motion gain.

And not only that, the increase in motion, shrinks and contracts that particle motion. This decreases the interaction or target area. The external accelerating force has to be increased, to provide the same rate of acceleration. It takes more energy for each inertia change. Not just because of the added target inertia, but the decrease in area of the acceleration. The mathematical ratio can go from zero to infinity. Thus an un-surmountable amount of energy to reach a V of c. That's the narrative for c speeds. For mass and matter. In my opinion this mass gain can be nullified, using intermittent acceleration. If we stop the acceleration right before the inertia change....the charge will keep it's linear V, relax back to starting target size......then hit it again til right before the inertia change. Rinse and repeat. Particle acceleration without a "mass" gain.

Comparing linear velocity to angular velocity. We have all been taught to do this using pi. But we need to re-think this. For several reasons. First of all, the compared rotation has to remain flat and in plane. This does not happen in nature's rotations. Nature's rotations spend half their time above that flat plane and the other half below. They wobble. This invalidates pi. The C/D ratio is always larger than 3.14. It's variable and adjustable with the amplitude and the number of wobbles. And please remember this. Linear velocity requires zero acceleration. Angular velocity requires TWO angular accelerations. Remember that when you are comparing.

This applies to planetary, moon and charge rotations. Be very wary of math analysis. And math proofs. Especially math disproofs. Math concepts can not be applied to physics. But physics concepts can be applied to math. It's a one way relationship. We're using the wrong way.
The quantum mystery. What the heck is a quantum anyway? The quantum is a mystery about energy. It appears that we when look at energy very closely, the energy comes in little blocks. Chunks. Down at the fundamental is SIZED not SIPPED. Not streamed, but shot.

Why is that? Not only why........but HOW is that? Why and how is it so?

This can be explained by the hay-baler principle. No matter how fast the hay-baler is traveling, the bale it emits, is always the same size. ONLY the space between bales changes. Let's release a few quantums and see what they do.

But it's easier to understand with wagon wheel spokes. It's hard to imagine a wheel hub, with an infinite number of spokes, so we'll use 8 spokes. A wagon wheel with 8 spokes, now throw away the rim.....a hub and 8 spokes. There is a red button on the hub. When I push that button, it releases all the spokes at the same time.

Let's spin that hub. And hit that button. The spokes fly out. NOW.......let's move that hub while spinning it. Then hit that button..........did moving that hub.......change the length of those spokes? It did not. No matter how fast you moved that hub.....the spoke length remained the same. The velocity of that hub, had no effect on the length of that spoke emitted. And if that hub is always at the same rotational speed when released, the spokes will have constant velocity.

Let's again look at that hub. It starts out naked with no spokes. When you turn that hub, spokes will start to grow from it. When the hub turns 180 degrees, the spokes are 1/2 wavelength long. At the time that button is pushed....and the spokes are released, the hub stops still for that spokes took all the motion and energy from it.

The hub starts turn again in the opposite direction and growing new spokes. At 180 degrees(half turn) the spokes are released again. When the hub spins in one direction the spokes are red. When the hub spins in the other direction the spokes are green.

There is a rubber man standing at a distance with his arms stretched out. The hub and the man are standing still.

When the red spoke passes by the man, the spoke will twist that man to the right. For the time that the spoke passes. After that spoke passes, that rubber man un-twists and returns to normal. This happens because there is a dead time and a dead space, between the emitted spokes. The man can reset. Then the man gets hit with a green spoke. This spoke twist the man to the other direction. For the length(duration) of that spoke. The spoke passes and the man resets. It take TWO durations(mark and space) for the man interaction. But only an instant for the hub interaction.

IF the hub and the man are's a 50% duty cycle. IT IS NOT A CONTINUOUS WAVE.

Before we go any must realize a confusion......about comparing a frequency to a duty cycle.

Today with digital electronics.......we have math conversions between these two dynamics. These conversions will screw you if you are not careful. This is because of the way "frequency" is define with duty cycle. A true wave has equal parts of alternation. There are symmetrical. The positive has the same duration as the negative. AND THEY MAKE THE SAME ASSUMPTION OF A DUTY CYCLE. But the emission from a moving emitter, or a moving detector, the dead space duration and the spoke duration are NOT equal.

If the hub is moving away from the man.......the only thing the man will an increase in the space duration between the spokes. Spokes remain constant length.....the space does not. If the hub is coming to the man.....the space duration decreases, not the spoke. So with hub movement, only the spaces change. The dead spaces. Because of a change in distance. But distance does not change spoke length, only space length.

What happens when only the man is moving? When the man is moving, BOTH the space and the spokes changes length and duration. If the hub is still, the 50% duty cycles is changed symmetrically with man motion.

IF the hub is moving, it will place a non 50% duty cycle ratio on spoke/space. AND IF the man is moving will change both duration of spoke and space equally, but KEEP that emitter ratio.

Our modern science has bent over backwards, trying to justify our measurements with a continuous waveform narrative. And keeping us stupid for one hundred years.

We have phase changes and frequency changes and group velocities and phase velocities........and have even varied time and space to explain this dynamic.

When properly used, we can separate the emitter and detector timings(combined duty cycle effects).....and determine the RV of emitter and our RV to it.

And no change in time or length is necessary. As a matter of fact, it proves spacetime is not possible.

It's quite ironic. The true narrative of emission disproves spacetime.
Last edited:
After explaining inertia and anti-matter......there is another mystery from modern science. And that mystery is.....why does the universe appear to be expanding.......but only at the farthest reaches.....but not here locally?

And the reason for it is......because when an emitter space width modulates the light signal.

And when the detector moves, it period modulates the light signal. Both of these modulations occur when watching starlight.

And both of the modulations occur more.......with distant light.

Space is not is being modulated. Modulated with motion and distance. The length and duration of the space between pulses. The "off" time.

EM propagation is not a is a discrete, intermittent pulse. It strobes. It blinks. It does NOT have a has a duty cycle. With no relative velocity, the duty cycle is 50%. With emitter motion......the light signal is NOT pulse width modulated........It IS space width modulated. This space width modulation is more pronounced with distance. The length of the emitted pulse always remains constant, because the pulse is emitted as a chunk, not a stream, which takes a duration.

Thus the change in duty cycle is more pronounced with distance.

The frequency we from the ringing and reaction of the mass......not the propagation.

The appearance of the expanding universe, comes from this natural modulation of light.

Space width modulation. Our modern science has not one clue to this.

Light has duty cycle, not frequency. The offset in duty cycle will tell you the velocity of that emitter. And the offset in period will tell you the relative velocity of the detector.

Time and length are omnipresent. That's the true dogma. No probabilities, no randomness and no chaos is permitted. These are the restrictions and rules for the study of physicality.

Modern science is man's greatest fiction.
Space Width Modulation.

Imagine a spoked wheel. Remove rim. Place a release button in center of hub. When pushed, the button releases all the spokes.

#1. No matter the spin speed, the released spokes keep the same length.
#2. The emitted spoke was emitted as a chunk, and required no streaming duration. An instant release.
#3. No matter the speed of the hub thru space, the emitted spokes remain the same length.

Now imagine a current conductor. When voltage is applied, current will rise until the current bucking voltage equals the driving voltage. Then current steadies. During this time an electric and magnetic field grows out from the conductor....out into space. At about 1 ft. per 1 nano second.

It will take 1/2 period duration to grow a field with a 1/2 wavelength radius from that conductor. Out into space. It takes 1/2 period to grow a 1/2 length of EM field. Into space.

Now imagine that field being emitted like a spoke. A chunk of length.

Now imagine a spoke catcher. A spoke catcher is like a balanced vertical see-saw. When a spoke flies by, it tilts the see-saw in a direction, for 1/2 period duration.

#4. Then the see-saw takes another 1/2 period duration to reset that tilt. During this time, the emitter is growing another field, that takes 1/2 period. This is when we measure an electrical frequency......and think it's a wave. A full wave period. But light is a pulse, a strobe, not a wave. Only the catcher waves. Because the catcher rings. It vibrates.

#5. Rinse and repeat. If the is no relative velocity between the hub and catcher......the duty cycle of this dynamic is 50%. (radio is only in use haft the time) This is party why propagation seems to be both wave and particle. Because it's actually a duty cycle.

Now think about this

#6. The only thing that can change with hub the SPACE duration between pulses.

Star light is SPACE WIDTH MODULATED. And the longer the distance.....the more it is modulated. Giving the appearance of an expanding a distance. And that offset in duty cycle can tell you the relative V of that emitter.

#7. The motion of the catcher(detector), modulates the whole period(mark and space)...keeping that emitter offset. This period offset can tell you the relative V of the detector.

#8. Both of these modulations occur with all starlight. All moving emitters.

#9. This explains the deep red shifts at long distances. And deep shifts only occur at long distances.
Matter, mass and energy.

Matter is the material, the stuff of the cosmos. And IF there are no breaking collisions, and IF there is no anti-matter reactions......then the amount of matter is and remains constant.

Mass and energy is and are properties of matter. Mass and energy are descriptions and properties of the matter. It's the amount of motion of the matter.

Mass is the inertia of matter. It's variable with motion. Inertia is the energy of matter, not the amount.

Matter is the amount and is constant, mass is the amount of motion the matter has. And the mass of matter can be changed. By adding or taking away motion.

And the only way to add to add M flux. Only the M field can be transferred. The amount of E field can not be changed. We can add and subtract M flux, but we can not add E flux. E flux can not be changed.........BUT the density of that constant E flux can be changed. When we add M flux, the E flux is compressed into a higher density.

And the mass and the inertia increase.

Energy is motion.......mass/inertia is the confinement of motion. Matter is the amount of material.....and is constant.