Welcome to the Structure of Reality Website
Newton was not entirely wrong while Einstein was not entirely right !
The author of the works on this website is Gary T Forbat
Welcome to a new way of thinking about the physical reality we humans find ourselves in. There can only be one reality, one that is exhaustive of all possibilities and entirely self consistent within its own parameters. What is this theory Structure of Reality about ? It is a theory based on complex logical and conceptual ideas derived from currently available and established evidence. It is a foundation theory outlining the most general and fundamental basis upon which a fully consistent theory of physics can be generated. It also covers the large scale aspects of Astronomy and Astrophysics going beyond the observable universe. Once understood and accepted it will have major implications for future of science and scientific development. It has also implications in metaphysics and philosophy.
As history shows, most new ideas face opposition from those whose careers are built upon the then current status quo. Even Einstein and many others faced strong opposition before their theories were generally given public discussion. But times have changed. Before the internet there would have been no possibility to bring this theory to public awareness without the patronage or support of some high profile academics. But they are the very ones who base their careers on the currently accepted theories. I wish it was not the case, but it is likely that it will take a new generation of thinkers and academics who do not rely on the status quo to finally open formal discussion on this new exciting vision of reality. As it is now, 'word of mouth' and social media are the most powerful ways of increasing the pressure to establish a public forum of critical discussion.
A SHORT INTRODUCTION TO THE 'STRUCTURE OF REALITY' THEORY - For a detailed account of its full history and information about G T Forbat please read the about page. Einstein's theory and his proposed misconception will be discussed briefly at the end of this introduction. Of course, without reading what is written below, it won't make much sense.
PART 1/4 - preliminary
Introduction to the Structure of Reality theory
Ideas about the nature of the world of space and matter humans find themselves in have been around through the entire historical period. Theoretical Physicists and Astrophysicists have spent much time over the last century to make sense of it all, but much still remains shrouded in uncertainties. This new theory attempts to outline in the most general terms the basis upon which the physical reality works and how it can be comprehended by the human mind. To better facilitate it, it would be useful to begin with an open mind and even better would be the Cartesian idea of temporarily suspending belief associated with current ideas in order to more easily open up to new possibilities.
To begin with, think of our own human perceptions of the physical world. At the simplest glance the spatial environment appears to be a three dimensionally structured spatial emptiness with matter and forces inside it. This spatial environment extends away and outward in every direction to a very far but indefinite distance. There are limits to how far our eyes can see, and there are also limits to the range of observational capacity even with the most modern telescopes and other scientific instruments and observation through these cannot find a better answer than to explore merely greater distances with much the same result. Beyond these limits there can only be logical projections based on what is already observed in the accessible region. With this in mind a three dimensional Cartesian geometry can perfectly overlay the observed spatial region and its projection beyond those limits implies an infinitely extended spatial region. But infinity is a difficult concept as it cannot be quantified in the usual way and the human mind is conditioned by its limited observational scope to finite resolutions.
The problem of infinity will be dealt with a little later, but for now to continue with the current line of thought, space apperas to be three dimensionally structured with time added to give it continuous existence. Time is a fourth and necessary dimension making it space-time. But if space is thought of as an emptiness without considering the huge amount of matter matter inside it, there can be no idea of time passage and could only be thought to exist in an enduring continuing present. This is actually the root concept of time never before discussed. But in fact, as we know, the spatial region is not just an emptiness but contains an enormous amount of matter as well as forces which create a dynamic mix of interaction between matter parts. This gives rise to the concept of time passage by measuring the steady rhythms of material interaction. Apart from common attributes like three dimensionality, matter is certainly not a continuous single, shapeless, unreactive, immutable and infinite emptiness like the host dimension of emptiness, but is always and everywhere fragmented, finitely structured and interactive through a range of forces acting upon it. The matter interaction driven by forces creates the causal evolution through time, yet interestingly, forces always emanate from matter and therefore should be considered a function of matter itself. This is where interchangeability could apply, but space as a pure emptiness cannot be part of the mix.
That is how it may seem through the filter of our natural intuitive thinking, but theories have evolved that attempt to contradict this view. One of the mainstream ideas at present is the so called 'big bang' theory. There are several reasons why this idea was taken on board. One of the pillars of 'big bang' theory is the observed exponential red-shifting of light with distance which is taken for a 'Doppler' effect, assuming objects to be accelerating away from each other after a so called explosion from a very condensed point. But then, what if this redshift was found to be caused by factors other than Doppler acceleration? Then how much of big bang's credibility would be lost? For instance, when light passes close to a major gravitational object a redshift is now known to occur. These major lensing effects can be measured, but then, light passes close to strong gravitational objects relatively few times. As light travels very long distances there is no region completely devoid of gravitation with gravitation coming from every which direction however slight from close or distant neighbouring objects. Stars and their solar systems, galaxies and their clusters all exude gravitation and as light travels through on its very long journey across space to get to us is affected by huge numbers of gravitational nudging, however small, coming from every which direction. This would cause light to turn and weave through a myriad of minor lensing effects with very minute unmeasurable redshifting. But over long distances these small redshift effects can accumulate until it becomes measurable. If the lensing redshift effects are based on percentile changes the result could be easily mistaken for a 'Doppler' acceleration effect.
Another difficult idea with the 'big bang' theory is the creation of space between objects where there was no space before thereby causing the distancing away. Space created from nothingness? Really? What can be created from a multiplication of zero? What could non spatiality be like? A huge number of difficult questions arise. This can also lead to a source of thinking that space is just a mental idea in a single or some type of communal mind. But in scientific terms the 'big bang' projects a spatial expansion from a single point which is not even taken as a central region from which the outward expansion proceeds. Then there is an observation supposedly in support of this expansion by the very bright so called 'primordial'galaxies that seem to show up at the very edge of the observational limits. This is seen as the evidence of the expanding universe in its very early state many billions of light years ago. On the other hand, would it not be reasonable that there be instances of galactic collisions thorughout this vast infinite universe which would create an enormous firestorm with so many stars and their planets colliding causing a chain reaction of other collisions? This would generate much more energy than the energy of other nearby unaffected galaxies that would be faded out by the great distances. At any one time these occurrences would be likely to be relatively few and very far distances apart. Then again, galaxies could also explode from within if the central orbital balance was disturbed and collisions occured from the centre outward creating huge explosions and a chain reaction reaching to the outer regions. These would also be visible from greater distances than other nearby galaxies and could be misconstrued as big bang 'primordials'.
PART 2/4 - micro physics
The host spatial environment is already well enough defined above. The next question would be to find out about the nature of the matter and forces inside it. Firstly, how is matter structured? The many variations of the atomic structure and its chemistry of interaction creates the world of matter that we are part of and perceive. Yet the atomic structure is not a single solid object. It is formed by a composite of much smaller parts in rapid interaction creating a very much larger structure involving space enclosure. At the centre the nucleus of the atom is itself also known to be composite and some of its composing parts also. Bosons and fermions may be the next micro scale level with the Higgs Boson thought by some to be some sort of base particle. But can it be? Presently our technology can only go so far, but the question arises as to where this reduction to a group of smaller highly interactive parts lead? Can there be a finite solution to matter deconstruction like the Higgs Boson or some even smaller particle further downscale? Alternatively could it keep reducing to smaller and smaller interactive parts to infinity perhaps? It is difficult to explain a finite ending with a base particle, since there has to be a credible reason, and that reason too needs a reason, leading to a 'vicious regress' of infinte explanations. On the other hand, an infinite reductive process explains itself at every step by the very same reason and offers no paradoxes. It may be like a fractal coastline zooming in to more and more details with each magnification ad infinitum? The search goes on for more micro particles and modern colliders are set to discover other components. Once separated from its main interactive structure some parts may 'unwind' into a lower scale level seemingly disappearing into the void of space. But nothing can actually disappear into nothingness. Those particles no longer interact to form a larger group and on these extreme micro levels the component parts are too small to detect, at least for the present. Other components may detach and re-integrate into neighbouring structures without unwinding to a lower scale level of particles. A never ending deconstruction into smaller and smaller interactive groups is not such a bad option with each particle having infinite roots. The emptiness of the host spatial environment cannot deny such a process as it has the same quality of continuous emptiness at any level of minisculity however small to infinity.
This word 'infinity' brings on a resistance to our normal ways of thinking. It is a mysterious amount too difficult to entirely comprehend. As already mentioned, a simple finite solution of an ultimate particle downscale, some super foundation particle raises more questions than it answers. It is bound to succumb to a 'vicious' regress requiring new and unique explanations at each step. Other attempts to cap it within finite parameters claim abstract values such as warping and space curvature. Can a perfect emptiness curve? Then there are theories involving 'strings' and a host of other things and there is competition between these brain twisting abstract mathematical theories, but none have so far yielded any comprehensive solutions. They utilise extra dimensions and these unfathomable brain twisters can sound very exciting and have already proved powerful in inspiring the human imagination into fantasy. Modern art and culture has been greatly influenced by them. But so have from many other mystical and fantastical ideas or ghostly tales. As the facts stand at present none of these theories have yet succeed in solving the physics problem in its entirety. Not even Quantum or Relativity theories which seem to rule their respective fields of competence, yet unable to reconcile into a single seamless theoretical solution.
In considering reality as a whole, there is an inevitable direction toward infinity. Surely it cannot be limited because a limit itself creates a higher entity than itself. The solution of an infinity of downscale steps into smaller and smaller and yet even smaller groups of more and more interactive parts should no longer be impossible to accept. As with the infinity of spatial extension and of the infinite continuance of time, it is not actually counter intuitive to envision it. Our minds have been conditioned in our limited experience and observations to finite outcomes thereby it requires an expansion to our thinking. There are different values to consider, as infinite outcomes can never be proved by direct observation or be quantified in the usual manner. But the idea of infinity is not difficult to imagine by a mental concept of continuance.
As for matter, each particle in this never-ending chain of deconstruction holds its roots in an infinity of further deconstructiob. Rather than a single base particle which raises an infinity of questions, every particle in the infinite deconstuction can be defined by a simple formula that each one is a construct of a group of smaller highly interactive parts and this is not only a solution but a very strong foundation for matter. But it is just the beginning of our enquiry. The deepest secrets of matter are yet to be revealed.
PART 3/4 - macro physics
An infinite deconstruction to smaller and smaller interactive parts means there is no ultimate finite foundation for matter, but then, every structure type deconstructed into has its roots in an infinity of further deconstructions. Matter is certainly not without foundations, and very strong foundationsin an infinity of deconstructions. But with the idea of an infinite deconstruction into smaller and smaller interactive elements, a very important question arises. The deconstruction downscale is one way of looking at it, but taken from the other direction, from the small scale upward, the process of structure building eventually reaches the atomic form, but does it then terminate with our discerned world of matter? It does not make sense. After an infinity of steps why terminate at this point? Or perhaps it doesn't? Is it possible that the process continues into the large scales of astronomy as well? In fact on large scales there is a system of of larger structures formed from smaller ones. Stars and their planets form galaxies and galaxies group together in clusters etc.. This may indicate a possible continuance through to even larger scales. There may be a problem thoughh, since how can the large scale structures be seen as part of the same system? How can the micro world of extremely rapid dynamics with space enclosure be compared to the larger scale objects of astronomy where interaction is relatively much slower than on the atomic scale.
Yet there may be a way to compare them, however there are crucial time factors to reconsider. These time factors have never yet been subject of discussion. The infinity of spatial extension gives room for the existence of any larger size structure whatsoever to infinity. Adding time continuing into the infinite future, the huge structures of the macro world of astronomy can, with a simple modification of the time concept, be seen to function as rapidly as the parts of the atomic structure. It is not actually changing the definition of time but broadening its range of understanding. A simple thought experiment may clarify the issue. As the mind thinks way upscale in the structuring process where huge formations exist, the interaction at this level would look very slow by our way of seeing it, almost at a standstill. For us to perceive our world of matter a moment of discernment can be defined as a fraction of a second. The moments are tagged together to form a continuous stream. While we define a moment as a fraction of a second, on the large scale this could never be significant enough. When a moment is redefined to considerably longer intervals, like millions or trillions of years or more, and they are tagged together rapidly as we do our moments, these huge mega-structures of astronomy could be seen with a rapid dynamics comparable to our world of atoms. Any objects existing in this mega world built from these huge interacting formations could be seen by a perceiving being in this world who os also built from them in much the same way we see our world. Of course it would look different but it is all one physics appearing differently at different scale levels.
With the redefined moments to rapid sequences of very long intervals of time, perceiving creatures in a mega world would perceive their materiality to be evolving not entirely differently from the way we see ours. Their perception mechanisms and other instruments they may utilise would be built from and function based on the dynamics of their mega based 'micro matter' that creates their world.
With further matter construction to infinity of large scales many other even larger scale matter style environments may exist, and perhaps an infinity of them. In the downscale reduction it is the reverse argument to the upscale, with tiny structures evolving very rapidly and any perceiving creatures that may exist in these downscale materialities would be created by their micro matter base and their world would be evolving extremely rapidly, and these creatures would perceive their environment not unlike we perceive ours. From our point of view the evolution of events in such a world would be far too rapid and on very miniscule scales to be discerned by us, perhaps ever.
PART 4 - the dynamics
The infinite transformations of the matter process produces infinite layers of different structure types, each type spread throughout the entire universe, the same universe but at different scales and different dynamics. The atomic layer for instance is spread throughout the universe. On a larger scale solar systems are a layer spread throughout the universe, and so are their galaxies spread throughout the universe. The same applies at each level downscale with an infinity of layers upscale and downscale. This strongly suggests that our matter base has an underlying layer of micro infrastructure. A separate work is in the making to describe this invisible micro matter infrastructure through which all larger matter must pass.
So far the discussion has been about size differences, but there is the question of dynamics. There is an important dynamic process that drives the entire system. It is cyclicality, but not in the sense of orbital cyclicality only. For instance, a back and forth pulsation can be considered cyclical as can many other configurations. In galaxies with billons of stars there are some that disintegrate and others are created from their debris so there are roughly the same number maintained. On micro scales electrons cycle very rapidly about (not necessarily around) the nucleus. The cyclical movement is rapid enough to set up a larger particle with a relative solidity and impenetrability. Electrons themselves are subject of investigation as to their internal structure. The main atomic nuclear parts, the protons are also known to be composite, created by even smaller rapidly interacting parts. They in turn are also bound to be composite with cyclical paths considerably shorter at each step downscale. While the paths shorten the speeds at which these shorter paths are traversed are not significantly reduced thereby creating higher cyclical frequencies at each step of reduction downscale. With upscale structuring into the world of astronomy the cyclical paths are considerably longer at each level upscale but the speed at which they can be traversed has a maximum value, so lower cyclical frequencies are inevitable with each upscale transformation. With an infinity of structure layers representing unique and different types of formations both upscale and downscale, there can be no limit to variation. Every step upscale or down reveals different configuration types that are spread throughout the universe.
It should be noted that not all structure types continue to build upscale through group interaction, but in fact as our apparent large volumes of empty space suggests only a relatively few percentage gets through to partake in upscale structuring. These terminal layers are transparent and invisible to the eye but have been detected by the universal background radiation it exudes and an explanation of dark matter.
PART 5 - conclusion
In summary, the interaction of structures both upscale and down is facilitated by various types of forces. But in fact forces emanate from matter itself and should therefore be considered functions of matter. The dynamics of the structuring system is cyclicality. Downscale cyclical frequencies increase, upscale cyclical frequencies decrease. Toward the micro, at present we are looking at several levels deep. Beyond that the minute structure types involved are too small and frequencies too rapid to presently discern as matter having substance, appearing only as energy with no matter base supporting it. But a zero mass solution can only be relative. There is a mass, there is always mass however small it may be. On larger scales at our level of matter discernment we can observe energy stored and transferred from matter to matter. On micro scales energy that may appear without an obvious matter host would have its matter base at micro levels below our present discernment capabilities. In ultimate terms of the overall reality, our perceived world of substance happens to be positioned somewhere along an infinite chain of structuring ranging from the infinitely small through to the infinitely large. The Structure of Reality theory is unique as it presents a totally self-contained universe, a complete, comprehensive and exhaustive model of reality which can be easily understood, with nothing required to be brought in from outside its own parameters. It explains what reality is and how it works. It is the foundation concept from which a detailed physics can be generated. It is also the ultimate human understanding of how we fit in and what we are to the overall reality at large.
Above I have presented a viable solution to the understanding of reality. Historically, in the absence of a solution the problem of reality has been ignored and put aside, so long as there exist theories that work well enough on their respective field of competence as do Quantum and Relativity theories. Two separate theories working side by side without a unified view. Surely this indicates that something must be missing. It remains a mystery how Relativity can explain the behaviour of larger scale phenomena but cannot operate well enough on the quantum level, and how Quantum physics fails to explain the large scale world where Relativity is so useful. The search for a bridging idea to bring the two theories together has not yielded success for more than a century, but not for a lack of trying. With the Structure of Reality theory here is an explanation of the whole. It is fully comprehensive and self-contained with nothing imported from the outside itsown parameters to validate it. I believe this is the turning point of thought about reality. How long it will take for it to be fully recognised I cannot guess. I can only keep refining and perfecting its expression for present and future generations and bring this new vision to the relatively few who are able to recognise its value today.
Einstein was wrong in not separating the host environment of spatial room from matter. He thought it to be a single interchangeable aspect of physical reality. Had he realised that the structuring process of matter as described above existed he would probably have derived a different and better version of his theory. The infinity of micro matter layers is clearly evidenced by the universal background radiation and the calculations revealing the existence dark matter.
Please keep in mind that the above is merely an introduction to the full Theory dealing with only the core ideas. To keep it short and easy to understand many detailed aspects cannot be fully discussed here.
Thank you for your visit
Gary T Forbat
Should you have any comments, suggestions or questions about the Theory please do not hesitate to contact me by email at firstname.lastname@example.org