The Larson Research Center

Yesterday, I showed how the most famous equation in theoretical physics, E = mc2, fits like a glove into the LRC’s development of its RST-based theory of fundamental physics. In a universe of nothing but motion, mass, energy, charge, magnetic moment, quantum spin, etc, the nature of which are unexplainable in the LST framework, must be identified as scalar motions. They are either scalar motions, combinations of scalar motions, or relations between these.

Since we now see that the most famous equation of theoretical physics can be explained in terms of n-dimensional scalar motion, it’s natural to ask if the other famous equation of physics, perhaps the second most famous equation, can also be explained in terms of scalar motion. This is the equation

E = hv,

where E is energy, h is Planck’s constant and v is the frequency of light. This equation is central to the LST community’s theory of quantum physics, because it defines the quantum of energy that all material things are built upon. It is the fundamental equation of the universe of matter.

Of course, it must also be the fundamental energy equation of the RST community’s work as well, but here it has to be understood in terms of n-dimensional scalar motion; that is, in terms of fundamental units of space and time, not in terms of the LST’s concept of “action” and 2π rotation, as in the LST-based theory.

It was Larson who insisted that the LST dimensions of h, the dimensions of action, were unphysical. In Chapter 12 of Nothing But Motion, he argued:

In all of the space-time expressions of physical quantities [derived in this work], the dimensions of the denominator of the fraction are either equal to or greater than the dimensions of the numerator. This is another result of the discrete unit postulate, which prevents any interactions from being carried beyond the unit level. Addition of speed displacement to motion in space reduces the speeds; the atomic rotation can take place only in the negative scalar direction, and so on. The same principle applies to the dimensions of physical quantities, and the dimensions of the numerator of the space-time expression of any real physical quantity cannot be greater than those of the denominator. Purely mathematical relations that violate this principle can, of course, be constructed, but according to the theoretical findings they have no real physical significance. 

…

The most notable of the quantities excluded by this dimensional principle is “action.” This is the product of energy, t/s, and time t, and in space-time terms it is t²/s. Thus it is not admissible as a real physical quantity. In view of the prominent place which it occupies in some physical areas, this conclusion that it has no actual physical significance may come as quite a surprise, but the explanation can be seen if we examine the most familiar of the conventional applications of action: its use in the expression of Planck’s constant. The equation connecting the energy of radiation with the frequency is

 E = hv

where h is Planck’s constant. In order to be dimensionally consistent with the other quantities in the equation this constant must be expressed in terms of action.

It is clear, however, from the explanation of the nature of the photon of radiation that was developed in Chapter 4, that the so-called “frequency” is actually a speed. It can be expressed as a frequency only because the space that is involved is always a unit magnitude. In reality, the space dimension belongs with the frequency, not with the Planck constant. When it is thus transferred, the remaining dimensions of the constant are t²/s², which are the dimensions of momentum, and are the reversing dimensions that are required to convert speed s/t to energy t/s. In space-time terms, the equation for the energy of radiation is

 t/s = t²/s² x s/t

Of course, Larson speaks in terms of his concept of “scalar rotation,” a speed concept that we have replaced with the concept of 3D oscillation, but the relation of 1D, 2D and 3D scalar motion in the equation remains the same. If we write Larson’s version of the energy equation in terms of the ratio of the 1D diameters, 2D surfaces and 3D volumes of the fundamental S|T unit, the SUDR|TUDR combination, we get:

Td/Sd =  Ta/Sa * Sd/Td,

where, again, T and S designate the TUDR and SUDR and d, a and v are their diameter, area and volume dimensions. With π factored out, this gives us four times the radius squared for the 2D area, and twice the radius for the 1D diameter (see here),

2(r”)/2(r) = 4(r”2)/4(r2) * 2(r)/2(r”),

2(1.732)/2(.577) = 4(1.7322/(4(.5772) * 2(.577)/2(1.732),

3 = 9 * .333…

3 = 3

If we think of 1D oscillation as the cube root of 3D oscillation, then we can re-write the last term of the equation as

(Sv/Tv)1/3 = (.257/481/2)1/3 = .333…

even though 1D oscillation isn’t defined independently in our work, as it is in Larson’s. The reason why only one dimension of the oscillation is effective in the equation, instead of two or three dimensions, still remains to be explained. However, I suspect that it has to do with the direction of propagation of the light, which can only be detected in one dimension at a time.

At any rate, these are exciting times.