Gravitation shows that photons have mass

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

Physicists have shown that celestial bodies cause photons to curve. This is referred to as gravitational lensing. According to the universal law of gravitation this is only possible if the photon has mass while in flight. The equation that supports this conclusion was worked out by Newton:



G is a constant that converts the raw data to a force in Newtons. Notice that the photon must have mass to make this work. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Photons are particles with mass

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
In addition to the torsion balance experiments, there are a number of other experiments that clearly illustrate that photons in flight are particles that have momentum. I will briefly summarize some of them here.

• The photoelectric effect. Photons striking a metal plate or wire cause the electrons in the wire to move, which sets up an electric current. It seems obvious that this is only possible if the photons pass some of their momentum to the electrons in the wire. In 1905, Albert Einstein concluded this was only possible if the photons were composed of particles.
• Compton Effect. This effect occurs when photons collide with electrons. Compton believed the results of his study could best be explained if the photons “experienced billiard-ball-like collisions with the free electrons in the scattering block.” This means the photons must be particles with mass.
• Casimir Effect. If metal mirrors are placed close together in a vacuum, only those photons in resonance remain between the two plates. Because there are fewer photons between the plates, it allows those on the outside to dominate as they collide with the plates. The plates are pushed together. The only way photons can push the plates together is if they are particles with mass.
• Photons have spin angular momentum. This was proven by R. Beth in 1936. The only way this is possible is if the photon is a particle with mass that is spinning on its axis.
• Diffraction experiments. Photons are deflected when they pass by an object. Elastic string theory explains this as follows: Elastic strings are ejected from photons at a 90 degree angle to the flight path of the photon. As explained in my book, when elastic strings strike a thin wall, it causes the photon to swing around this pivot point, which changes the photon’s direction slightly.


The flight direction of a radio wave photon is affected more by a wall than a visible light photon because the momentum of the visible light photon is some 100,000,000,000 greater. The visible light photon will tend to continue on in a straight line more than the radio wave photon. This by the way completely explains all slit experiments. Notice to make this work, the elastic strings must have physical properties and the photons must have momentum and therefore mass. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Photons have momentum and therefore mass

As mentioned, the momentum of a moving train or a tiny photon particle whizzing along at the speed of light are both calculated the same way: momentum = mass x velocity. One might conclude this: If photons have momentum, they must have mass just like a moving train has mass.

The theoretical momentum of photons with different energies and frequencies can be calculated, and these calculated values can be compared to values determined by experimentation. As explained in previous blogs:

The momentum of photons with different oscillation frequencies has been measured with the use of a torsion balance experiment. In this experiment, photons with a known frequency are directed against mirrors suspended by a tiny wire thread.

Bombarding the mirrors with photons causes the mirrors to move away from the photon beam. This causes the wire to twist as the mirrors rotate in a circle. The amount the wire is twisted is used to calculate the momentum of the photons directed against the mirrors. It was found that the momentum of the photons calculated using the twist on the wire in the torsion balance experiment was exactly the same as the momentum calculated using their theoretical mass and velocity.

Not only can you calculate the mass of a moving photon, but you can prove experimentally that the calculated mass is correct using a torsion balance experiment.

The only logical conclusion is that photons have mass at the time they strike the mirror. How else is it possible for photons to apply a force against the mirrors? I have no idea how scientists who believe in the special theory of relativity can explain this experiment and many other experiments that demonstrate unequivocally that photons have momentum, as well as other characteristics that show a photon in flight has mass.

This is such an important topic that I will continue with it in the next blog or two. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Light from our Sun comes from preexisting mass

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
The light we receive here on Earth from our Sun is created when hydrogen is converted to helium by fusion. In this process some of the mass of the hydrogen ion becomes positrons and electrons. These two particles with the same mass immediately combine and become two gamma photons with the same mass and energy. Free gamma photons are created in other reactions as well. Gamma photons eventually find their way to Earth in the form of visible light photons and other photons of different mass and energy.

The point I am attempting to make is that the light we receive from our Sun comes from preexisting mass. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Max Planck’s constant

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

I have already introduced the idea that the oscillation frequency of a gamma ray photon is much greater than a small radio wave photon. Oscillation frequency is directly related to the energy of the photon. What we are really saying is that the rate a photon goes through its string cycles is directly related to the photon’s mass and energy.

In 1900, Max Planck compared oscillation frequency and the energy of light, and from this he was able to show that the energy of a photon can be calculated using its frequency: E = hf, which applies to all photons. The letter h in this equation is Planck’s constant and f is the frequency of oscillation. Planck’s constant has a value of 6.626 x 10^-34 joule seconds. Thus, the energy in joules for a radio wave with a frequency of 1 x 10^4 is 6.626 x 10^-30 joules. The energy of a photon of visible light with a frequency of 1 x 10^15 is 6.626 x 10^-19 joules.

Planck came to this conclusion: The total energy of a given source of light is equal to nfh, where n is the number of photons emitted, f is the frequency of the photons, and h is Planck’s constant. This was an important contribution by Planck because it clearly stated that light was composed of discrete particles whose frequency and number dictated the total energy of the light emitted.

We still have Einstein and the special theory of relativity to be concerned with but we’ll get there eventually. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Photons have momentum

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

Merry Christmas

If photons are particles, it seems only natural that they have mass, and since they move with great velocity through space, it is only natural that they have momentum because momentum = mass x velocity. This equation can be used to calculate the momentum of a moving train or a photon whizzing along at the speed of light.

In the 1870s, James Clerk Maxwell, a Scottish physicist, carried out some famous experiments that resulted in his ability to calculate the velocity of light, and it enabled him to derive some fundamental equations that characterize the energy and momentum of light. He gave us this equation: momentum = E/c
Where E is the energy of light and c is its velocity. Obviously Maxwell thought that photons were discrete particles with mass.

Notice, that Maxwell’s equation for momentum can be rearranged to give us the more famous equation: E = mass c2. Just substitute momentum with mass x velocity.

In other words, Einstein did not derive this equation. However, he was forced to reinvent its meaning in 1905 because it did not fit his special theory of relativity. According to his theory, nothing with mass can travel at the speed of light. For this reason, he proposed that a photon in flight has no mass. In addition he theorized that mass can be converted to energy. This is a subject we will spend a great deal of time on in future blogs so don’t worry too much about it now.

The exact relationship between oscillation frequency and the energy of a photon was determined by Max Planck, which is the subject of the next blog. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

All Photons create the same number of elastic strings

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

Thus far we have seen that photons are particles and the energy of the particle determines whether we call it a radio wave, microwave, visible light, ultraviolet light, x-ray or gamma ray. In fact there is a continuous array of photons of different energy from radio waves to gamma rays. A gamma ray photon can be as energetic and massive as an electron, while at the other end, the lowest energy radio waves may be smaller by as much as 10,000,000,000,000,000.

Photons with low energy take longer to go through one oscillation cycle than photons with high energy; however, low energy photons and high energy photons are all similar. They all create the same electric fields, magnetic fields, and gravitational fields, and for this reason have oscillation cycles. In addition, the magnitude of the fields at their apex is the same for all photons regardless of their energy levels. It just takes longer for a low energy photon to create and retract the same number of elastic strings. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Photon’s electric and magnetic fields

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

Elastic strings make up the electric fields and magnetic fields surrounding a photon. According to elastic string theory, the negative electric field is composed of e-electons and the positive electric field is composed of p-electons. The magnetic fields are composed of n-magnons and s-magnons.

During the first half of the oscillation cycle, the photon is creating p-electons and s-magnons, and in the second half of the oscillation cycle, it is creating e-electons and n-magnons. This is shown in the next diagram:


Notice these fields are not being cancelled out by their complementary counterpart; i.e., p-electons are not being cancelled by e-electons on the same photon. The same applies to the magnons created. Notice too how the fields are directed at a 90 degree angles from the flight path of the photon, and at 90 degree angles from each other.

By convention, one oscillation period goes from the apex of one p-electon field to the apex of the next p-electon field, but one oscillation cycle is composed of two distinct string cycles. Shortly after the apex of the first p-electon field, there is a brief period of time when the photon is not making any elastic strings (X1), and immediately following the creation of the e-electon field, there is another period when it is quiescent (X2).

It is convenient to think of a string cycle beginning at a point when the photon is not making any strings. Shortly thereafter, it begins ejecting strings until there are a maximum number, and then the strings retract back to their source. In one string cycle p-electons and s-magnons are created then retracted, and in the next string cycle, e-electons and n-magnons are created then retracted. These two events make up one oscillation period.

It is possible that at the time the photon is creating p-electons it may be creating n-magnons rather than s-magnons, etc. If someone knows the proper sequence, I would appreciate hearing from you.

Photon's oscillation cycle

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
All photons go through what physicists refer to as an oscillation cycle. The cycle is created by the appearance and disappearance of the photon’s electric and magnetic fields. One oscillation cycle goes from the peak of the positive electric field to the peak of the next positive electric field. Just how far a photon travels while it goes through one oscillation cycle is calculated as follows:


In this equation, the velocity of light is divided by the time it takes to make one oscillation period. The seconds cancel out, and we are left with a value in meters for our answer, which is the distance traveled by a photon while it goes through one oscillation cycle. This is the only meaning that you can ascribe to this equation. It gives a false impression to think the answer is the length of the electromagnetic wave, even though by convention physicists refer to “meters traveled by a photon” as wavelength. The equation does not calculate the wavelength of anything; it merely calculates how far a photon travels as it goes through one cycle.

The equation above is normally shown as follows:

Keep in mind that all photons travel at the same velocity (c), which is referred to as the speed or velocity of light. However, a low energy radio wave photon oscillates very slowly compared to a visible light photon, which means a radio wave photon travels a much greater distance in order to go through one oscillation cycle. By convention, we say a radio wave has a “long wavelength”, when in reality it simply means the radio wave photon takes longer to go through one oscillation than a photon of visible light.

Photons are particles

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
The evidence that photons are particles is overwhelming; it is important to keep this in mind if we are to understand the experiments and observations involving photons. For this reason, I will not refer to photons as electromagnetic waves because this detracts from the idea that they are particles that just happen to have wave properties. As we shall see shortly, the wave properties of photons are due to their elastic strings.

The energy level of a photon determines whether it is a radio wave particle, visible light particle, x-ray particle or gamma ray particle, etc. Energy is a measure of the capacity of a particle to do work. It requires mass in motion. For example, falling water can be used to make a water wheel spin, which in turn can be used to grind our corn. It requires mass in motion. In the case of a photon, its energy level can be calculated as follows:

E = mass x c x c


E stands for energy in joules, and the mass of a particle is in kilograms. All photons have the same velocity, c , which is approximately 300,000,000 meters per second. This equation clearly shows that photons with high energy, such as x-ray particles, must have a greater mass than photons with low energy, such as radio wave particles, because they both travel through space with the same velocity. This just makes common sense.

I will come back to this subject in detail at a later time. I present it here to emphasize that the only difference between a radio wave particle, microwave particle, visible light particle, x-ray particle, and gamma ray particle is their energy levels, which tells us that the primary difference between different photons is their masses because they all travel at the same velocity.

The elusive photon

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
I will now switch the subject to photons, those particles that make up radio waves, microwaves, visible light, ultraviolet light, x-rays, gamma rays, etc. Photons are referred to collectively as electromagnetic radiation because all photons create electric fields and magnetic fields. The evidence shows they also create a gravitational force of attraction much like electrons and quarks. Superficially, at least, photons are much like electrons because they are both particles and they both create the same force fields.

I will first explain the differences between the various photons, and then I will delve into their physical properties, and their origins. It is an interesting subject that leads to a greater understanding of elastic strings, elastic string cycles, the properties of light, and a host of observations that are central to Einstein’s special theory of relativity. It will be fun.

We will take just one small dose of this subject with each blog. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Our solar system in review

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

I have in this section shown how elastic string theory can be used to explain common observations in our solar system. Gravitons have their effect because of three important features:
• They have physical properties; i.e., they have mass.
• They remain bound to the particles that create them.
• Finally, there is a vast concentration of gravitons emanating from central bodies, such as our Sun.

These features lead to the following conclusions:
• Gravitons couple the spin of a planet to its orbital motion about the Sun. Earth spins in the same direction it orbits as it collides and spins against the Sun’s gravitons in its path. Venus has the slowest spin rate of all the planets because Venus spins in the opposite direction that it rotates. Venus is slowly being forced to spin in the opposite direction.
• Gravitons physically connect satellites to central bodies. Because Earth spins on its axis, it drags the Moon forward much like a gyrating human body drags a hula hoop. This physically transfers Earth’s momentum to the Moon in the same manner that the human body transfers its energy to the hula hoop. The Moon is moving away from us as it gains momentum and Earth’s days grow correspondingly longer. Triton rotates around Neptune in the opposite direction that Neptune spins. Triton is being forced to migrate inward towards Neptune at a noticeable rate.
• A dense matrix of gravitons causes repulsion forces between Sun and planet. Repulsion is dependent upon graviton concentration and the angles taken by an orbiting planet. Repulsion decreases faster than gravitational attraction as the distance between two bodies increase because both of these factors decrease with distance.
• Because the ratio of repulsion force versus force of attraction decreases with distance from Sun, it completely explains Mercury’s precession thought due to relativity.
• The interaction of repulsion forces and the force of gravitation coupled with the planet’s equatorial bulge causes Earth and other planets to tilt on their axes.
• Because the ratio of repulsion force to the force of attraction decreases faster with distance from the Sun, it causes tilt to increase with distance, and it explains Earth’s annual (actually semiannual) polar wobble on axis.
Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Annual polar wobble of Earth on its axis

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

Because planet tilt increases with distance from the Sun, I came to realize that Earth must wobble on its axis. It should tilt more at aphelion than perihelion. A few minutes after coming to this conclusion, I was able to confirm this expectation with use of the Internet.

When Earth rounds aphelion, the force of attraction versus the force of repulsion is greatest, and tilt will increase. Thus when Earth leaves aphelion it will lean over just a little more than when it arrived. The opposite is true for perihelion. Now the force of repulsion is slightly larger with respect to the force of gravitation, which means Earth will be slightly more erect when it leaves perihelion than when it arrived.

This simple explanation has eluded scientists because it makes no sense unless you believe that gravitons have mass and create repulsion forces Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Planets with little or no tilt

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

There are three planets that show little or no tilt: Mercury, Jupiter, and Venus.

Mercury’s equatorial diameter is the same as its polar diameter, and it does not tilt on its axis. The forces of repulsion and attraction are identical at the top and bottom of the planet.

Venus tilts only 2.64 degrees on its axis. Like Mercury its equatorial diameter and polar diameter are the same. This suggests to me that Venus has some unique physical feature that I am unaware of that might explain why Venus has a slight tilt on its axis.

Jupiter might be thought of as a true anomaly when it comes to tilt. Jupiter has a larger equatorial diameter than polar diameter but it only tilts 3.13 degrees on its axis. I can’t say why Jupiter is tilted less than Earth; however, the solution might be in the great difference in their masses, which has helped to stabilize Jupiter in its present position. Jupiter has 322 times greater mass than Earth does, and it has 2 ½ times more mass than all of the other planets combined.

Because Jupiter is nearly vertical, it remains almost perfectly balanced top and bottom with respect to the forces of repulsion and attraction. Perhaps if it were jostled out of its present position, it would eventually assume a degree of tilt greater than 23 degrees. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Tilting planets

Tilting planets
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

For those planets with a tilt of 23 degrees or more, we find the following relationships:

• Planet tilt is dependent upon an equatorial bulge that gives the planet a unique orientation in space.
• Planet tilt is dependent upon the dynamic relationship between the forces of attraction and repulsion acting on the planet. The force of attraction favors tilt and the force of repulsion favors no tilt.
• Planet tilt increases with distance from the Sun because repulsion forces decrease faster than the force of attraction as we move away from the Sun.

I will examine those planets with little or no tilt in my next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Repulsion forces favor no tilt

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

In the previous blog, I explained that the force of attraction favors tilt. Repulsion forces have the opposite effect.



There would be less repulsion force pushing Earth away from the Sun if its equatorial bulge was directed towards the Sun. Repulsion forces are attempting to move Earth’s axis to a vertical position with no tilt. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Equatorial bulge and tilt

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

Earth’s gravitons retracting back to source are trying their best to make Earth into a perfectly round sphere; however, the tug between Earth and Sun caused the planet to bulge along its equator directly towards the Sun. Since Earth’s equatorial bulge is no longer directed at the Sun, it seems likely that the bulge came first, then tilt. This idea fits my model for tilt.

The equatorial bulge gives the planet a unique configuration that allows the Sun’s gravitons to interact with the planet in a very special way. In the following diagram for aphelion, Earth is moving away from the viewer and the planet is spinning counterclockwise on its axis.



There is a gradient along the axis. At the upper side, the force of attraction favors tilt, while gravitons pulling on the bottom of the planet are attempting to reverse tilt; however, overall the force of attraction favors tilt.

The force of attraction favors tilt at aphelion and perihelion, which the reader can verify by making a drawing for Earth’s position at perihelion.

The opposite is true for repulsion forces, which I will analyze in my next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Repulsion & attraction forces

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

In this blog I will be content just to review why the force of repulsion attempting to push a planet away from the Sun decreases faster than the force of attraction as the distance between planet and Sun increases.
• The gravitational force of attraction between planet and Sun decreases with distance because fewer gravitons make connections.
• Repulsion forces against a given planet are dependent upon two factors and both decrease with distance from the Sun:
1. The concentration of the Sun’s gravitons per unit area.
2. The angles negotiated by the planet as it proceeds along its elliptical orbit become less as the distance from the Sun increases.

The net result is that the force of repulsion decreases faster than the force of attraction as the distance between planet and Sun increases.

Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Tilting planets have a strange story

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
Most of the planets in our solar system tilt on their axes, but the degree of tilt is very variable. Do elastic strings cause tilt, and if so, how?

There are five planets in our solar system that have a 20 degree or more tilt on their axes: Earth, Mars, Saturn, Neptune, and Pluto, well maybe Pluto is an asteroid. Three other planets have little or no tilt (Mercury, Venus, and Jupiter), and in the case of Uranus, the manner of tilt is completely unlike any other planet in the solar system. Scientists believe Uranus met with some cataclysmic event that makes its orientation different from the other eight planets. I ran a regression analysis to determine whether degree of tilt was associated with distance from the Sun for the five planets listed in the table below.



R squared in this analysis was 0.991, which means tilt is highly correlated with distance from the Sun. Scientists believe our Moon influences Earth’s tilt, which would explain why predictions are slightly out of whack for Earth and Mars.

The force of attraction in comparison to the forces of repulsion also increases with distance, which I review in my next blog. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Evidence that elastic strings explain precession

Repulsion forces between satellite and central body was used to explain Mercury's precession thought due to relativity. Let’s see how this jibes with the evidence when a regression analysis is used to predict precession for four known satellites, whose precession values are known. The results are shown in the following table.




It was gratifying to find that elastic string theory does a better job of predicting precession than Einstein’s equation and general relativity.


To delve into the details of how this regression analysis was run is beyond the scope of this blog; however, it is completely explained in my book. I will simply point out that the independent variables used were the difference in the concentration of the Sun's gravitons at aphelion versus perihelion, and the difference in angles of displacement between aphelion and perihelion (actually combined into one by multiplying) In addition, I used diameter of the satellite as one independent variable. Thus there were two independent variables.

The value of R squared that is computed in this analysis is an unbiased estimate of the relationship between the observed precession of the satellites and the two independent variables. If R squared is one, it means there is perfect correlation. R squared for this analysis is 0.9999991, which means there is almost perfect correlation.

If and when I get the observed precession for the other planets, and or asteroids, I will include them in this analysis. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Repulsion forces explain planet Mercury’s strange orbit

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

Mercury orbits closer to the Sun than any other planet in our solar system. In addition, its elliptical orbit is very pronounced, which changes the angles the planet must negotiate as it circles the Sun. The displacement angle taken by the planet as it rounds perihelion is 1.5 times greater than at aphelion. In addition, there is a 2.3 fold increase in the Sun’s graviton concentration at perihelion versus aphelion. I believe these two factors are responsible for the 0.00000396 increase in the repulsion force between aphelion and perihelion, as explained in the previous blog.

Because the repulsion force at perihelion forces the planet away from the Sun just a tad more than expected, it takes longer for the planet to reach the point where it is nearest the Sun; at aphelion the opposite occurs. Both of these factors work to constantly change Mercury’s orbit.

Mercury is not the only satellite that experiences an advancing perihelion. At this time, I only have data for three other satellites. Venus advances 8.4 arc seconds per century, Earth 5.0 arc seconds, and Icarus (an asteroid) 9.8 arc seconds. This gives me four satellites that I can examine using regression analysis, as explained in my next blog. The results are beautiful. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Planet Mercury does not obey universal law of gravitation

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

Mercury’s rotation about the Sun constantly changes. The point it is closest to the Sun advances forward in space with every rotation. Most of this change is due to the tug and pull of other solar bodies; however, there are 43 arc seconds per century that can not be explained in this manner. Einstein proposed that the 43 arc seconds discrepancy can be explained by his general theory of relativity. This view is not shared by all scientists in the field as explained in my book.

In 1958, Coleman, a former physics professor at UCLA, calculated that Mercury’s 43 arc seconds discrepancy can be explained if the difference in the force of attraction between Sun and planet at aphelion versus perihelion does not follow the universal law of gravitation. If the force of attraction at perihelion, when the planet it closest to the Sun, is 0.00000396 less than expected, this would completely explain Mercury’s strange orbit thought due to relativity. I propose this is the difference in repulsion forces experienced by the planet at aphelion versus perihelion.

When the planet is closest to the Sun, the repulsion forces push it away more than average, which serves to advance the perihelion point. At aphelion the opposite occurs and Mercury is pulled in towards the Sun more than average. Both serve to advance the perihelion point of Mercury. In future blogs, I will present strong evidence to support this contention. Till then be safe and in good health. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Triton’s fate is doomed

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

In the normal situation, a satellite rotates around a central body in the same direction as the central body spins on its axis. This is similar to the hula hoop spinning around a rotating waist. The human body and hula hoop are both rotating in the same direction because body and hoop are in physical contact. What would happen if the hoop is acted upon by some mysterious force that caused it to rotate in the opposite direction? Obviously, the hula hoop would quickly come to a rest and fall to the ground because the human waist is spinning in the opposite direction. This is the exact situation we find for Triton, a moon of Neptune.

Neptune is spinning in one direction, and Triton is rotating about the planet in the opposite direction. Perhaps Triton was captured by Neptune, or perhaps its reverse, abnormal rotation was caused by some cataclysmic event. We can’t say how this relationship came about, we only know that at the present time Triton is rotating one direction and Neptune is spinning in the opposite direction.

Triton has a very fast rate of rotation, some 25,765 meters per second, while Neptune is spinning in the opposite direction at 2685 meters per second. Neptune is an extremely large planet, and much like the human body, it is attempting to reverse Triton’s direction of rotation. This is causing Triton to spiral into the planet at a noticeable rate as it loses angular momentum. Triton’s fate is doomed. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Elastic strings help explain a run-away Moon

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

There are two methods by which elastic strings might cause satellite migration. First, in a previous blog, I explained how satellites meet with repulsion forces. This means the Moon in orbit about the Earth will meet with some modest repulsion force as it encounters the Earth’s graviton in its path. In this case, the Moon will be encouraged to move away from Earth, and Earth’s gravitons will meet with resistance as they retract against the Moon’s surface. This will cause a net transfer of momentum from Earth to Moon, which will cause it to migrate away from Earth a tad every year. It will also cause Earth’s day to grow longer. There is another force at work which is analogous to the hula hoop spinning around a gyrating human body.

A small girl is able to make the hula hoop spin around her body because her body is spinning faster and it weighs more than the hula hoop. The human wins out, and the hula hoop in contact with the gyrating body spins in the same direction the body rotates. In this system, a portion of the angular momentum of the human body is transferred to the hula hoop because of direct contact between hoop and body. To maintain this relationship, the human must expend energy, and of course, it is impossible for the hula hoop to migrate away from the human body even though its angular momentum increases. Let’s examine the Earth-Moon system

Earth spins on its axis at the rate of 463.8 meters per second, while the Moon is orbiting around Earth in the same direction at the rate of 4.6 meters per second. Not only is Earth more massive than the Moon, it also spins 10 times faster. Earth’s gravitons that bind to the Moon will exert a force dragging the Moon through space as the Earth spins on its axis. The Moon is attempting to reverse this force, but the Moon is less massive and its spin rate is 10 times less. The end result is an increase in the Moon’s velocity and angular momentum, which means it will tend to migrate away from Earth (15 inches per year). At the same time, the gravitons retracting back to Earth are impeded, which decreases Earth’s spin on its axis with an increase in the length of the day by 0.002 seconds per century. Thus we have a physical reason for the transfer of momentum from Earth to Moon, and a physical reason why the Moon is slowly migrating away from Earth.

The drag effect Earth has on the Moon works because Earth’s gravitons at its leading edge closest to the Moon are constantly being tightened as Earth spins on its axis. At the same time, those gravitons on the other side of Earth are constantly being loosened as Earth on this side is spinning towards the Moon.

Kelland—www.vestheory.com

The moon is trying to escape from Earth’s grasp

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

Our Moon is moving away from Earth 38.2 centimeters (15 inches) every year. Scientists refer to this as satellite migration. Astrophysicists offer this solution. They believe that ocean tides here on Earth slow down the rate Earth spins on its axis. And in fact, the length of the day is increasing 0.002 seconds per century. What they propose is this: Earth loses momentum every year as its rate of spin decreases because of ocean tides. This momentum is transferred to the Moon which causes the Moon to move away from us. There is an important problem with this interpretation.

Astrophysicists offer us no physical explanation for the transfer of momentum; just that it is transferred, which keeps the sum total of angular momentum constant. Think of a person playing with a hula hoop. The energy of the gyrating individual is transferred to the hoop which causes it to spin. The transfer of energy in this situation is obvious. The individual must be in direct contact with the hoop; otherwise the hoop will stop spinning.

If there is no physical contact between Earth and Moon, why should the movement of our tides influence migration?

Second, some astrophysicists have proposed that the slow spin rate of Venus and Mercury might be due to the tidal interaction between these planets and the Sun. However, tides cannot be responsible for this observation because Venus and Mercury have no oceans, which means tides would have to occur in solid bodies. Or paraphrasing Shakespeare “something must be wrong in Denmark”. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Repulsion forces between satellite and central body.

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

The elliptical orbits of the satellites in our solar system cause the satellites to collide at an angle with the Sun’s gravitons. This exerts a slight outward pressure forcing the satellite away from the central body. There are two main factors that influence the repulsion force: The concentration of the Sun’s gravitons that the satellite must negotiate its way through, and the sharpness of the angle taken by the satellite as it rounds the Sun. The greater the angle of displacement, the greater the repulsion force. It is somewhat analogous to a boat crossing a river. If the boat heads directly across stream, the force of the water on the side of the boat may well cause you to capsize; whereas, if you take a less direct route, the crossing is easier.

Because all planets have an elliptical orbit, there is one point where the planet is closest to the Sun (perihelion) and another point where it is at maximum distance from the Sun (aphelion). At perihelion, the concentration of the Sun’s gravitons is greatest and the angles taken by the planet in orbit are the most acute. At this point, there will be maximum repulsion. At aphelion, the concentration of the Sun’s gravitons is least and the angle of displacement is least, which means the force of repulsion will be least.

This repulsion force is very small compared to the force of attraction between satellite and central body; however, it helps to explain several observations in our solar system: satellite migration, Mercury’s strange orbit, planet tilt on axis, and Earth’s polar wobble on axis. I will discuss each one in separate blogs.

Why do planets rotate in the same plane?

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

When we were kids and not plugged into a TV, we frequently had to invent something to do. On occasion I tied a string to a tin can filled with dirt. I then caused the can to rotate around my head by rotating my hand. The rotating can came to rest in a plane dictated by my rotating hand. Obviously, I had too much time on my hands, or perhaps this activity relieved me of hoeing the garden for a few minutes. Now I see that the rotating tin can is analogous to the rotation of the planets in our solar system.

The planets in our solar system tend to rotate in a similar plane like tops on a table. This occurs because the planets are physically connected to the Sun with graviton strings, just like the tin can was physically connected to my hand by a string. As the Sun spins on its axis, it drags the planets through space, which causes them to move into the same alignment like tops spinning on a table. The Sun is a huge massive body, and it spins faster than the planets rotate. This allows the spinning Sun to dictate the plane of rotation for all the planets in the solar system. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Venus spins slowly as predicted by elastic strings

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
Astrophysicists believe that some cataclysmic event caused Venus to be flipped on its axis because, unlike the other planets, it spins in the opposite direction that it rotates around the Sun.

Venus spins slower than any other planet in our solar system, just 1.81 meters per second. Its slow spin rate is as predicted by elastic string theory because it spins opposite to its rotation about the Sun. The planet is trying to roll inward towards the Sun as it spins on its axis; all of the other planets spin and roll in the opposite direction. The forces at work are attempting to reverse the spin direction of Venus. This is a slow process that will require millions if not billions of years for the planet to completely reverse spin direction and come to a new equilibrium. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Predicting spin rate of satellites

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

Spinning bodies plowing through a dense field of gravitons suggests that gravity, satellite diameter, and satellite momentum can be used to predict spin rate. The question posed is this: Can these three independent variables predict the spin rates for the satellites in our solar system? This was analyzed using regression analysis for our Sun and all the moons and planets in our solar system. There were 26 heavenly bodies used in this analysis.

Now for the results: A regression analysis computes an r value, which is a measurement of goodness of fit for the satellites along a regression line. The closer the r value is to 1.0 the better the fit. In this study r was 0.99, which is pretty close to 1.0. This suggests that 99 percent of the spin rate for of all the spinning bodies in our solar system can be accounted for by their momentum, diameter, and the gravitational force between satellite and central body. For example, the Sun spins on its axis at 1946 meters/second and the predicted rate was also 1946 meters per second. Mars spin rate is 240.8 m/s and its predicted rate was 243 m/s. Saturn’s actual spin rate is 10279 m/s and the predicted value was 10061 m/s.

A little discussion might help. The theory is that the spin of a satellite moving through a dense fabric of elastic strings is influenced in much the same way as a billiard ball striking the side of a pool table. When the ball strikes the cushion, it will promote a spin inward towards the side of the table. In the case of Earth, striking the gravitons emanating from the Sun, it will tend to cause the planet to spin inward toward the Sun. Thus, it will induce the planet to spin in the same direction it orbits the Sun.

Now for the conclusion: The study is as predicted: Satellite spin is controlled by the density of the elastic strings and gravity, diameter of the satellite because this affects its interaction with the graviton matrix, and satellite momentum because a large fast body such as our Sun will be less affected by the graviton matrix it must plow through as it circles the center of the Milky Way Galaxy.

Why is this important? It provides striking evidence that elastic strings have a physical presence in space, which means gravitons must have mass. How else can you explain the results of this experiment? It also is of interest because it explains one of the conundrums of science—what controls the spin rate of satellites.

This study is supported by the following: I have shown that spinning table tennis balls in flight continue to curve even in a complete vacuum, which suggests they are spinning against a graviton matrix in their path. It means gravitons have a physical presence in space; they have mass. This concept is supported by my experiments that show spinning table tennis balls curve more in a magnetic field because, like gravitons, the elastic strings that make up the magnetic field have mass. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

The connection between spin and rotation

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

The spin of a planet, or any satellite, is tied to its rotation around a central body.

The concentration of gravitons emanating from our Sun far outnumbers the gravitons from our Milky Way Galaxy because of the close proximity of the Sun to the planets in our solar system. However, gravitons from all sources are vast: they form an interlaced graviton matrix that heavenly bodies must plow through as they orbit their respective central bodies. Let’s examine the Earth-Sun system.

As Earth rotates around the Sun in its elliptical orbit it is constantly striking the Sun’s gravitons at an angle. Because of the angles taken by Earth as it collides with the graviton barrier, it is causing Earth to spin on its axis in the same direction as its orbit. This means the leading edge of Earth is spinning inward towards the Sun. Spin is created much like a billiard ball that begins spinning after it strikes the cushion along the pool table. Here we find that the leading edge of the billiard ball is spinning inward towards the edge of the table.

The Earth, like most rotating bodies, is spinning in the same direction that it rotates around the Sun. This is exactly what you would expect if the leading edge of the planet is rubbing against the gravitons emanating from the Sun.

This helps explain why the strength of the gravitational field, diameter of the planet, and the satellite’s momentum are important factors that influence the spin of a satellite. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Factors that influence spin rate of satellites

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

Because gravitons influence the spin of satellites in our solar system, it means the diameter of the satellite will influence spin rate because the larger the diameter the greater the surface of the satellite that comes in contact with the graviton matrix. In this case, it is having a positive effect on satellite spin.

However, like gravity, the diameter of the satellite can also have a negative impact on spin rate. The larger the diameter, the greater the leverage that Earth can apply to our Moon to control spin rate. It is much like the use of a long pole to maintain balance by someone walking along a tight wire. Earth’s gravity is pulling down on both sides of the moon, which tends to reduce spin rate.

Momentum also plays a part in the spin rate of a satellite. Momentum is a measurement of mass x velocity. We all know it takes a country mile to stop a train because of its great momentum. In the same manner, our massive Sun moving at great velocity will be affected less by the graviton matrix it plows through as it rotates around the center of the Milky Way Galaxy. Its huge momentum will tend to push aside the matrix, which means its spin will be influenced less by its rotation velocity. Thus, a large momentum is a negative factor influencing spin rate.

The extent that gravity, satellite diameter, and satellite momentum influence spin rate can be measured. This is discussed in my next blog. This is all based on the idea that gravitons form a dense, physical matrix in space that spinning bodies plow through as they orbit some central body. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Factors that influence spin rate of satellites

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

The diameter of the satellite will influence spin rate because the larger the diameter the greater the surface of the satellite that comes in contact with the graviton matrix. In this case, it is having a positive effect on satellite spin.

However, like gravity, the diameter of the satellite can also have a negative impact on spin rate. The larger the diameter, the greater the leverage that Earth can apply to our Moon to control spin rate. It is much like the use of a long pole to maintain balance by someone walking along a tight wire. Earth’s gravity is pulling down on both sides of the moon, which tends to reduce spin rate.

Momentum also plays a part in the spin rate of a satellite. Momentum is a measurement of mass x velocity. We all know it takes a country mile to stop a train because of its great momentum. In the same manner, our massive Sun moving at great velocity will be affected less by the graviton matrix it plows through as it rotates around the center of the Milky Way Galaxy. Its huge momentum will tend to push aside the matrix, which means its spin will be influenced less by its rotation velocity. Thus, a large momentum is a negative factor influencing spin rate.

The extent that gravity, satellite diameter, and satellite momentum influence spin rate can be measured. This is discussed in my next blog. This is all based on the idea that gravitons form a dense, physical matrix in space that spinning bodies plow through as they orbit some central body. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Spinning moons, planets and Sun

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
Dancing was still a big part of life when I was a child. Everyone in our small town would gather frequently to dance in a large hall that also served as a basketball court and an area to put on plays. Old folks, young folks, and those in between would dance with each other while those who couldn’t dance would sit and talk and watch the activities—there was no TV. Parent’s taught sons and daughters and older siblings taught younger siblings how to fox trot and waltz. Even our school teachers had a hand when it was raining and impossible to have recess outside. The fox trot and later swing was learned by almost everyone. Spinning across the dance floor with your partner was healthy for mind and body but is now a lost art form except for “Dancing With The Stars”.

Spinning is a curious attribute of all things both large and small, be it electrons, photons, or heavenly bodies, they all spin on their axes. The spin rates of the satellites in our solar system are strongly influenced by gravitational fields, the diameter of the satellite, and its momentum.

Just how the gravitational field affects the spin rate of the Earth and other satellites is complex. A dense field of gravitons serves as a positive factor to induce spin because satellites continually rub against this barrier at an angle, which causes the satellites to spin on its axes as discussed previously. On the other hand, gravity has a hand in holding our Moon in synchrony with Earth’s spin rate such that the same side of the Moon is always facing Earth. This is true for almost all moons in our solar system. This means that the force of gravity is also a negative factor reducing spin rate. In tomorrows blog I will discuss briefly how the diameter of the satellite influences spin rate. Perhaps you can already guess the outcome. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Beer drinking has its benefits

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
Steve Rozelle, a close friend of mine that I played basketball with on the high school team (I was the last sub), surveyed and drank beer with left the university where he was on the basketball team to move to the city where I was attending college. He came there to meet up with my cousin Tanya that he later married. He often had little to do so he taught me chess in the afternoons and we played pool at night while his future wife worked; my grade point average that year reflected my activities. He would pour a pitcher of beer over my head and I would reciprocate. I gave up science to become a thespian for one year and he did the same. Steve did however rise to his potential. He was an engineer and became second in command in the construction of a nuclear reactor in the eastern USA: His quick mind and dominating personality far exceeded the average individual.

Where were we? We’ll get back to the parameters that influence the spin rate of satellites in the next blog. No more drinking beer and reminiscing, Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Spin rate of solar bodies

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

Astrophysicists believe our solar system was formed from a swirling mass of hydrogen, silicon, and other particles that coalesced to form the Sun, planets, and moons found in our solar system.

The energy of the swirling particles was conserved as orbiting, spinning bodies in our solar system. Scientists believe at one time the spin rate of the Sun was 1000 times greater than what it is today. The spin rate for the individual planets varies greatly from Mercury with a spin rate of just 3 meters per second to Jupiter that spins at 13,070 meters per second. Planet Earth spins just once in 24 hours, which means its surface speed is 248 meters per second. All of the moons trapped in orbit about their respective planets spin very slowly. What dictates the spin rate of these bodies? What causes the great differences in their spin rate? Why has the spin rate of the Sun slowed down? Elastic strings do have a story to tell. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Our solar system bears witness

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
In 1610 an Italian named Galileo began using a spyglass that was invented a couple of years early by a German spectacle maker living in the Netherlands by the name of Hans Lippershey. The spyglass he invented magnified objects because it used a two lens system.

Using a spyglass he built, Galileo quickly discovered that the planet Jupiter had moons that rotated around it. He had confirmed what Copernicus had concluded some 60 years earlier—that smaller solar bodies rotate around larger central bodies, which meant that Earth rotated around the Sun. Of course, we all know this got Galileo into hot water with the all powerful Catholic Church, and he was nearly executed because the Bible says the opposite. Science and religion have come a long way in the past 400 years, but unfortunately, strong remnants of this thinking exist today.

Using a spyglass that came to me as a gift from my wife, I had the pleasure one starry night in Rockville to see the moons of Jupiter and watch over a period of several nights as they appeared first on the left side then the right side of the planet. I realized I was viewing with my own eyes exactly what Galileo had witnessed 400 years earlier. I suddenly felt connected to this ancient scientist.

Not only do all heavenly bodies rotate around other heavenly bodies they also spin on their axes. Earth rotates around the Sun once per year, and it spins on its axis once every 24 hours, which means as I sit here at the computer, I am actually traveling eastward at approximately 1000 miles per hour because Earth is spinning on its axis in that direction.

The curious thing is this: All heavenly bodies have their own unique spin rate. What causes the planets, the moons and our Sun to spin at different rates, and some at rates far different than expected? What can elastic string theory tell us about the spin rate of the stellar bodies in our solar system? Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Graviton waves trapped

A large flood in the Virgin River was a time of great excitement for the kids in Rockville. We would gather on the Green Bridge that crossed the river and watch logs and whole trees being swept downstream. The river became so muddy that fish lined up along the river’s banks and stuck their mouths and gills out of water to breath. I always marveled at this adaptation. Those that didn’t run for cover were likely swept down stream to Lake Mead and the Colorado River. The Virgin River carries more mud for its size than any other river in the USA.

Waves of water and the waves that travel along an elastic string may have the same general appearance, but the similarity ends there. Water waves are composed of many parts, and for this reason, it is impossible to grasp these waves as they rush downstream. In contrast, the waves that travel along a virtual elastic string are part of the string, and they have interconnected physical properties.

Consider an electron going through its string cycle with its magnons, electons, and gravitons retracting against the electron’s surface. Because of the retraction process, the electron becomes extremely dense, perhaps more dense than any other material on Earth. Now imagine a graviton trapped between this dense electron and its retracting strings. This graviton can not retract back to its source. The resistance created allows the graviton to exert a force of attraction.

This state does not last long because the graviton is released as the electron completes its string cycle. The retracting graviton quickly loses its ability to transmit waves, perhaps because it becomes more diffuse throughout its length. And without waves, there will be no further resistance to retraction.

This model explains why there are multiple points of attachment between a graviton and the body it penetrates. It explains why the distance through a body and the density of the body predetermines the resistance created when a graviton retracts. It explains why the length of the graviton outside the body it penetrates has no effect on the force of attraction created. Thus, the attraction force of a single graviton from Earth is the same whether the graviton penetrates a body close at hand or whether this same body is light years away.

Snapping portals cause waves

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
Waves in the Virgin River at flood stage and the shape of waves in the ocean resemble the waves that travel along a common string. There is a broad front to the wave which slopes to the rear to meet the normal level of the ocean.

Try attaching a string to a fixed object and tap it with your finger. You will be amazed at the velocity of the small wave that travels away from your finger. Physicists credit the elastic property of a common string for the waves that travel along its surface when disturbed. Physicists have shown that the smaller the string the faster the wave velocity, and of course virtual elastic strings are extremely small and they have perfect elasticity. This accounts for the fact these waves travel at immense velocity. The equations provided by physicists support this idea.

During the string cycle, there are billions of virtual particles ejected through portals. The strings created remain connected to the goo inside the electron, and the string created is extremely small compared to the virtual particle that created the string. This allows many strings to accumulate inside a portal during the string cycle without affecting the portal size. If there are 100 strings that accumulate inside each portal during one string cycle, it means the portal opened and closed 100 times during this period of time.

The opening and closing of portals causes a physical disturbance that travels along the string in the form of a tiny wave. Because the string has perfect elasticity and extremely small size, the wave will travel at immense velocity along the string without loss in energy. The velocity of the traveling wave will have nearly the same velocity as the particle as it is ejected into space.
Kelland—www.vestheory.com

No two gravitons are identical

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
The Virgin River has two major tributaries. One fork flows through Zion National Park from the mountains north of Zion. At flood stage it tends to be a muddy white color. The other fork joins this stream a few miles south of Zion and a few miles north of Rockville. It flows from mountains south of Zion. At flood stage the river in this fork tends to be a muddy red color. During some floods, the water that rages through Rockville is muddy red on the south side of the river and muddy white on the north side of the river. As the flood continues the portion of red to white changes as the storm shifts its position. Let’s see how this might relate to gravitons.

My model for the electron string cycle has the graviton being ejected into space from a point near the center of the two spheres that make up the electron. This means the virtual particle that is to become a graviton may be composed of s-goo and n-goo to varying degrees. When the virtual particle is ejected into space, the graviton string that develops is composed of both materials. I also believe that the composition of this material is not uniform along the length of the string, much like the Virgin River at flood stage. This means every graviton is different from every other graviton. Because all gravitons have the same mass, but varying composition they do not bond and cause a force of repulsion, nor do they bond and cause a force of attraction. Kelland—www.vestheory.com
Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Specificity of elastic strings

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
At one point in time I did not believe the poem offered below that I had written many years ago had any great relevancy to existing conditions. Obviously, this is not the case at the present time. Just substitute race bigotry or fanatical religion or the desire to breed for “crown”.

Somewhere on earth a mother weeps
As her child lies dying.
And somewhere on earth lovers love
Even as they're bleeding.

Is it the fate of Man
To make war for the crown?
Is it written in his genes,
Is he self destruction bound?

Has Evolution played him an evil trick
By giving the animal a super intellect?
An explosive mixture of mind and behavior
That propels him onward to his own extinction?

Will a drive more ancient than Man
Cause him forever to war upon the land?
Or can the animal gain master of his will,
That is the cruel riddle only the future can tell!

The end…..


The specificity of an elastic string is determined by two attributes: the size of the string and its composition. The composition of the string is determined by the fact it is either s-goo or n-goo, and the size of the string determines whether it is a magnon or electon.

Gravitons neither bond and cause a force of attraction nor do they bond and cause a force of repulsion. How is this possible? I will address this important question in my next blog.

Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Self inducing forces

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

The forces of nature are self inducing; in terms of the electron’s string cycle it means the creation of strings and retraction of strings is self inducing. I believe there are three factors at work. First, the strings have perfect elasticity. This means when a virtual particle is ejected into space it stores potential energy in the string in the same manner that a rubber band stores potential energy when it is stretched. This means no additional outside source of energy is needed for this string to retract back to source.

Second, the energy of the retracting strings is not lost. It becomes stored as potential energy in the form of condensed goo that has perfect elasticity. The goo becomes an extremely dense material as the strings bond and exert pressure on the surface of the electron. At some point in time, the internal potential energy reaches a critical state and the dense goo begins ejecting new virtual particles.

Third, a spinning electron has spin angular momentum. Scientists theorize that spin angular momentum drives the self inducing magnetic forces. My model for the electron’s string cycle has the graviton winding up on the electron in the same manner that a fishing line winds up on a reel, which of course utilizes the spin angular momentum of the electron. It causes the electron to be divided into two spheres. Of course it should be appreciated that all strings eventually retract back inside the electron to help form the primordial goo for another round of strings. A spinning electron would aid in the distribution of strings about the surface of the electron, which in turn would aid the self induction process. Finally, spin angular momentum might aid in the formation of the virtual particle inside the electron in some unknown manner. I will come back to this point when I discuss radio wave particles in a future blog. Kelland--vestheory.com

Ejection of virtual particles through portals

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
When the electron reaches its most condensed stage, the internal pressure reaches a critical state, which causes it to eject virtual particles into space. The virtual particles are ejected through portals, and the size of the portal helps to determine the size of the virtual particle. I envision there are billions of portals for e-electons and every portal creates one string with each round. In the same manner, there are separate distinct portals for p-electons, n-magnons, s-magnons, and gravitons.

At the completion of a round, the strings that blanket the electron once more apply pressure to the surface of the electron as they continue to retract back through their portals. This eventually forces another round of strings to be ejected into space. This means that during any one string cycle every portal fires numerous times; perhaps in the neighborhood of 100 times each.

A point in time is reached when retracting strings are no longer applying pressure on the outside of the electron, and the number of strings emitted by an electron has reached maximum. At this point, the newly created elastic strings have bonded to each other and begin a new string cycle. This works because the electron and the strings have perfect elasticity. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Electron reaches most condensed state

11/1/11
The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
At its most condensed state, the electron is completely covered by retracting electons and magnons bound to their complimentary strings. The strings are literally attempting to pull the strings they are bonded to back through their own portals. This applies great inward pressure to the outside of the electron. At the same time, the retracting gravitons are squeezing the center of the electron into two spheres. It is envisioned that electons and magnons contribute equally to the inward pressure exerted on the electron. During this process, the strings that have retracted inside the electron change their structure to create the primordial s-goo and n-goo needed for a new round of strings. Finally a critical stage is reached and the electron begins ejecting virtual particles.

The metamorphosis of the strings to primordial goo reminds me of the metamorphosis of limestone to marble and marble to magma as the pressure on the rock increases due to silt deposited above over the centuries by rivers that feed the oceans. In this case we are dealing with a rock cycle. Finally, the magma is thrust up from below to create new rock whose composition depends on the composition of the magma, which is determined by its location on Earth. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Graviton divides electron into two spheres

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
The virtual graviton particle is ejected some 10 to 20 million meters in space as discussed in a previous blog. The evidence presented suggests this string exists for a second or so, which allows it to travel this great distance and return at nearly the same velocity as a magnon.

My model suggests the virtual particle that is to become a graviton is ejected from an area between the two spheres of the electron. The electron is spinning rapidly, and I envision that the graviton becomes wrapped between the two spheres of the electron in the same manner as a fishing line on a reel. As the graviton retracts, it creates great pressure on the center of the electron, which effectively divides the electron into two spheres.

Because the graviton exists through many string cycles, the electron continually exists as two spheres. This preserves the n-goo in one sphere and s-goo in the other sphere. I will come back to the composition of the graviton in a future blog, but first I will continue to define the electron string cycle. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Electron string cycle cont’d

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
We saw in the previous blog that the electron’s n-magnons bond to the electron’s s-magnons, and then retract against the surface of the electron. As they retract, they create great internal pressure inside the electron’s two spheres. The strings that make up the electric fields contribute in a similar way.

The electron makes e-electons that give the electron its negative charge and allows it to bond to the p-electons emanating from the proton. Recently, scientists have also shown there are virtual particles surrounding the electron that are composed of both negative and positive particles bonded together. I believe the electron is making an excess number of e-electons that bond to the p-electons that also arise from the electron.

It may well be that the electron makes 2 units of e-electons and one unit of p-electons, and that one sphere of the electron creates e-electons and the other sphere p-electons, just as one sphere makes n-magnons and the other sphere makes s-magnons. It follows that one unit of e-electons becomes bound to the one unit of p-electons leaving one unit of free e-electons or one unit of charge. This unit bonds with the p-electons emanating from the proton (actually from the quarks inside the proton).

When the electron’s e-electons emanating from one sphere come in contact with an equal number of p-electons emanating from the other sphere, they bond and retract. There must be billions of these strings that bond and cover the electron like an orange peal as they retract back inside the electron. This causes great internal pressure inside the two spheres of the electron. Gravitons also have a key role to play as discussed in the next blog. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Electron’s elastic string cycle

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

There was no electricity to our farm house when I was a small child, and there was no bathroom for several years. To take a bath, Mother heated some water on our wood stove, and we took turns bathing in a number 2 (?) metal tub. Today we are absolutely dependent upon electricity, and thankfully so because I don’t even own a number 2 tub. At the heart of electricity lies the electron.

The electron is a busy little particle. It creates electric fields, magnetic fields, and gravitational fields. These fields are self inducing. The creation and retraction of the elastic strings that make up these fields continually cause new fields to form as old fields disappear. It is a cyclical process that mirrors the oscillation period of an electron. I refer to it as the electron’s string cycle.

The electron makes n-magnons that arise from the north pole of the electron and it makes an equal number of s-magnons that arise from the south pole of the electron. When they meet in space they bond and retract against the surface of the electron. They form a fabric of strings that surround the electron, and when they retract they exert great inward pressure on the electron. This also happens for the electric fields as discussed in my next blog. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Elastic strings meet and bond

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
The space about us contains a vast number of gravitons and other strings that form a dense matrix in space. We can not personally sense them because of their perfect elasticity, their almost insignificant mass, and the great distance they are shot into space. However, in a previous blog, I did explain my own experiments that show us that a spinning Ping-Pong ball is deflected by a magnetic field and continues to curve even in a vacuum. Thus, strings have a physical presence in space, they have mass. This conclusion is supported by various phenomena in our solar system, which I will go into at a later time.

Scientists have shown that magnetic fields and electric fields created by photons emanate from these particles at a 90 degree angle to the particle’s line of flight. It is reasonable that the photon’s strings are at least partially swept to the rear of the particle as it flies through a matrix of gravitons. In the same manner, the electron’s n-magnons and s-magnons are to some extent swept to the rear where they meet and bond as the electron rotates around the proton. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Something about nothing

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
One summer when we were in grade school, my cousin and I herded a few cows on top of Dad’s mountain for our uncle. I had no shoes and the trip up and down that mountain was torture because I also sprained my ankle on the trail home. Our uncle gave us 25 cents and told us to split it. I don’t know who got the odd penny. Obviously, I must have been disappointed in our day’s earnings or I would not have remembered it. However, to be fair to our uncle, 25 cents at that time is probably equivalent to a few dollars today. I remember walking 2 miles to earn 10 cents for milking someone’s cow, and when I was in the 5th or 6th grade, they let grade school out early that spring so the kids could harvest strawberries for a local farmer. I remember picking about 14 crates of strawberries over a two day period, which netted me $7.00. When I was a little older, my cousin and I would hitchhike 20 miles to pick fruit, and then thumb home. I was fortunate in life because I never felt poor nor did I ever feel the need to accumulate money except to ease the pathway through life.

Almost everything I’ve done in life has been out of curiosity, which finally led me to elastic strings. If you are reading this blog, you must also be curious about the nature of things. Perhaps you are pondering over the following questions:

If all gravitons are presumably identical why don’t they bond and form a force of repulsion? How do electrons, photons, and quarks hold onto the gravitons when they retract? What causes the traveling wave that proceeds along all strings at great velocity? How do elastic string cycles work? The answer to the last question is key to understanding the first three questions. I will first tackle the electron’s elastic string cycle. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Gravity depends on distance through object

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
The bucket that struck my head held tightly to Earth’s gravitons, and Earth grasped the buckets gravitons. The resistance created enabled the bucket to pull on Earth and Earth to pull on the bucket. The force of attraction between bucket and Earth was shared equally by these two bodies.

The resistance created when a graviton retracts is key to understanding the force a graviton can exert when it pulls on some object. Resistance is due to two factors: the density of the object and distance through an object. This explains why a graviton from Earth retracting through the Sun creates 27.1 times more force than a graviton from the Sun retracting through Earth. The density of the Earth is greater than the density of the Sun; however, the average distance through the Sun is much greater than the average distance through Earth, which makes up for Earth’s greater density.

The force of attraction between Earth and Sun is shared equally between these two bodies. The number of gravitons from the Sun that penetrate Earth is much greater than the number of Earth’s gravitons that penetrate the Sun. However, each graviton from Earth creates 27.1 times the retraction force. Thus:

The number of Earth’s gravitons striking the Sun times the Sun’s density times the distance through the Sun is exactly equal to the number of the Sun’s gravitons striking Earth, times the density of Earth, times the distance through Earth. That’s a mouth full, isn’t it? Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Resistance to graviton retraction

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
I clearly remember helping my older brother add soil to the top of our outhouse to ward off the rain. He took the high position on top of the outhouse and I filled the bucket with dirt that he would pull up with a rope. He managed to drop the bucket on top of my head, which left a gash in my noggin and blood running down my face. This was in the 1930’s, and at that time, I had never seen the inside of a bathroom. And there wasn’t much in the way of toilet paper either. We probably used the pages from an old copy of a Sears and Roebuck catalogue.

The bucket had to hold onto Earth’s gravitons in some manner, otherwise there would be no way for Earth to pull on the bucket. The question is: How did the bucket grab hold of the gravitons emanating from Earth? There are four parts to this puzzle.

1. The graviton string has tiny waves that begin at the source of the string and proceed along its length at great velocity. It can be shown mathematically that these waves likely travel along the string at almost the same velocity as the virtual graviton particle. By the time the virtual graviton particle reaches 10 to 20 million light years in space, the first wave arrives with it. I will in a future blog go into these waves in detail, for the moment please bear with me.

2. The graviton wave has physical properties, it is composed of mass. When it passes near an electron, photon, or quark it is trapped by the particle’s strings as it is going through its string cycle. This allows the graviton to exert a pulling force when it begins retraction because the string’s waves become stuck in the particle’s strings.

3. The string is quickly released when the electron, photon, or quark completes its string cycle.

4. The graviton can no longer transmit traveling waves after it begins retracting because its properties change throughout its length. This means there is no way for electrons, photons, and quarks to grab hold of the string because there are no physical nodules to hold onto.

Consider the attraction between Earth and Sun. When a graviton from the Sun passes through Earth, any portion of this string beyond Earth has no influence on the force of attraction between these two bodies because this portion of the string quickly loses its ability to transmit waves as it retracts, and without waves there is no resistance. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Gravitation versus density of body

Uncle Virgil died a happy man
At least as happy as death can be.
The monster buck got his revenge, and
The paint brush blooms for all to see.

Bodies are one where flowers grow
Earth has recaptured its children there.
And the echo of the old man and buck
Still lingers softly in the canyon air.

….the end

The force a graviton is able to muster depends directly on the density of the body it penetrates. Because iron is denser than wood, Earth’s gravitons exert a greater force of attraction on an iron ball than it does on a wooden ball of the same size.

Resistance depends on the number of electrons and quarks the graviton meets and the denser the body the greater number of these small particles. It also means there are many points of attachment when a graviton penetrates a body. When the graviton is temporarily prevented from retracting back to its source, it provides the resistance necessary for it to pull on the body when it retracts. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Gravitons do not bond to other gravitons

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.


The bones were white by summer:
Antlers and Virg's ribs were one;
Their naked, ghostly skulls
Lay smiling in the noon day sun.

The Savage rifle was rusty now;
Its stock was buried in the sand.
A stink bug lay in the barrel;
A fruit fly made ready to land.

In the case of the electric force, there are two kinds of strings. E-electons emanating from the electron become bound to p-electons emanating from the proton and when they retract it causes an electric force of attraction between electron and proton. The same is true for the magnetic force. When e-electons meet they neutralize each other; thus, all atoms are electrically neutral if they have not lost an electron. This is not true for the force of gravitation.

Gravitons do not bond to other gravitons and cause a force of attraction, nor do they bond and form a force of repulsion. And they do not neutralize one another.

The force of gravitation between Earth and Sun follows the universal law of gravitation worked out by Newton, and in the same manner, the force of gravitation between Earth and Moon follows the universal law of gravitation. This means gravitons from Earth are not being neutralized by the Sun’s gravitons. They do not bond and neutralize each other as is the case for the electric force.

Gravitons become bound to the bodies they penetrate by friction, not because they bind to other strings. I will discuss the manner of this friction in a future blog.
Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Gravitons persist longer than other strings

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
Uncle Virgil continues....

This is a tale of my Uncle Virg,
An aged and gnarly man,
Who fought a monster muley buck
In a red canyon formed of sand.

Muley Buck charged like a demon
Nostrils flared and eyes flashen fire
Smoke seemed to billow round him
The ol' man was caught by surprise.

The thirty-ought-six came up in a flash
A knobby finger pressed cold steel
The buck charged on with lowered head
There was an explosion then all was still.

To be continued….

My model for the creation and retraction of strings shows that gravitons are created at the same time as other strings, but the model allows them to exist for a much longer time in space. I first worked through the model for the creation of strings, then later realized that the model required that gravitons persist through many string cycles. If gravitons exist for one second, it would allow them to make a round trip of 10 to 20 million light years traveling at the same velocity as magnons: 10 raised to the 23rd power or 100000000000000000000000 meters per second.

The conclusion that gravitons may exist for a longer period than other strings is supported by two other observations. First it has been shown that atomic clocks traveling west in commercial airliners run faster than clocks traveling east. The variable here is Earth spinning on its axis. I believe gravitons are bent in space as earth spins on its axis, which means they have to exist perhaps a second or so in order for this to occur. All strings have waves that emanate from the electron and other particles that create them. Because gravitons are bent as Earth rotates on its axis, it causes graviton waves to travel at least partly to the west. A vast number of waves traveling west would penetrate the clock flying west and cause it to run faster. The waves would have the opposite effect on clocks flying east since the clocks would be penetrated by waves coming against them.

The nature of graviton waves, how they are generated, and how they influence the speed of an atomic clock will have to wait for future blogs. There is a rational explanation.

Other experiments have shown that clocks here on Earth that communicate with atomic clocks aboard satellites must be continually adjusted. This adjustment depends on whether the clock is east or west of the satellite. Graviton waves can also explain this effect. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

The inconceivable becomes rational

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.

Uncle Virgil tracked the wise ol' buck
Along towering sandstone cliffs,
Amid oak and manzanita brush,
Up and down the mountain reefs.

Finally in a narrow canyon,
Walls thousands of feet on side,
Muley decided to make his stand
Uncle Virgil was going to die.

To be continued…..

It is an incredible fact, almost too much for the mind to comprehend, but scientists believe that the planet Earth beneath our feet is essentially empty space. When my astrophysics friend told me this I was astonished even though I knew that scientists favored the big bang theory for the creation of our universe. The only way this can work is if all the mass of the universe can be reduced to a small dense ball. This means that our Milky Way Galaxy, and all the other galaxies that make up our universe, would fit inside a thimble if all the empty space were removed. It means the whole universe and all its billions upon billions of tons of iron, quartz, hydrogen, and living creatures is almost nothing but empty space, and it means the elastic strings that connect electrons to protons and atoms to atoms must also be essentially empty space, since they too have mass.

If the elastic strings that bind our atoms together and create our world consist mostly of empty space, then it is not a great stretch of imagination to believe that gravitons could span some 10 to 20 million light years and remain intact; they would just be stretched over a little more empty space. And since they have perfect cohesion, they would remain coherent; and since they have perfect elasticity, they would retract back to their source with great velocity.

Thus, the inconceivable becomes more rational. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Elastic strings extend a limited distance in space

The Forces of Nature by Kelland Terry, Ph.D.
The ditty for Unk continues…

Uncle Virgil was eighty one
But his muscles were firm as stone,
Tossed hard rocks most of his life
Seeking treasures from the earth below.

The old man wanted to kill the buck
Before he was laid in the ground.
But Muley was faster by far, and
He thundered off with a giant bound.

To be continued….

Astrophysicists conclude that a cluster of galaxies under their own internal gravity spans some 10 to 20 million light years, but not beyond that point. This means gravitons extend a great distance into space, but the distance is limited just as you would expect for a string that has mass.

One light year is the distance light can travel in one year at 300,000,000 meters per second, which means light travels 9,400,000,000,000,000 meters per year. Those galaxies that lie outside 10 to 20 million light years are not affected by our gravitational force field. Thus the Andromeda Galaxy some 2.5 million light years away is part of our local cluster of galaxies bound together by a common force of gravity; however, the Virgo Galaxy some 60 million light years away is not bound to us by gravitational force. This is not surprising if gravitation is caused by elastic strings that have mass and can only extend into space a finite distance. I ask you this: If gravitation is explained by a four dimensional world, where space and time are warped, as proposed by Einstein, how do you explain a finite length for gravitational fields? However, in the same sense of mystery, how is it possible for a particle too small to be imagined stretch 10 to 20 million light years? Perhaps you will be surprised when I discuss this in my next blog. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Ejection of virtual string particles

I wrote this little ditty for my Unk. Hopefully you will enjoy it.

This is a tale of my Uncle Virg,
An aged and gnarly man,
Who fought a monster muley buck
In a red canyon formed of sand.

They first met at Elephant Gap
In the fall of the ought ought year.
Big Muley stood between tall pines
A strong old buck, a most wily deer.

He shook his antlers at the sky,
His hooves they pawed the ground;
He glared at Virgil in defiance
His mortal enemy he had found.

To be continued….

When I first thought of elastic strings, the question became, what natural observations and experiments in physics can be explained if the forces of nature are due to elastic strings? I did not set out to prove or disprove any other existing theory, but simply follow elastic strings wherever they led me.

All elastic strings begin as extremely small particles that are ejected into space with great velocity from electrons, photons, and quarks. When they are generated into space, they leave a tiny portion of their mass behind that becomes an elastic string bound to its source. Just how far they are ejected into space depends upon the type of string. In the previous blog, I discussed magnons and in the next blog I will discuss gravitons, the strings responsible for the gravitational force. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Photons are vastly larger than virtual particles

One of my uncles was an inveterate deer poacher. Perhaps when he was a kid at the turn of the century there was no law governing when the King’s herd could be harvested for meat, and for this reason poaching had less meaning to him than those of another generation. One year in Zion National Park the rangers had there eye on a very large mule eared dear that weighed some 300 lbs. It was something of a pet. My uncle shot the deer in the park and was caught. Fortunately for my uncle, he was well loved by everyone, and as the story goes, they told him that the very least he could have done was to shoot their pet deer outside the park, and after telling him not to do it again, they let him go. If my uncle had been a virtual particle that traveled billions of times faster than light, poaching would have been a snap.

All strings begin as virtual particles that are ejected into space by electrons, photons, and quarks. Electrons not only eject elastic strings into space, they also eject photons, the particles of light that travel at 300 million meters per second. The virtual particle ejected from an electron that is to become an elastic string is vastly smaller than a photon, which allows the electron to eject virtual string particles billions of meters per second faster than it does photons. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Virtual particles have great velocity

My companion who raced down from the Eagle Crags with me did not know then that he would become one of the great scientists of his generation; however, I am not surprised. He was superior to most of us because of his intellect, his photographic memory, and his work ethic. His seminal book based on his original careful research has been cited by more than 5000 other scientific publications, and it formed the basis for 13 other Ph.D.s that followed in his footsteps. He is now a retired Professor Emeritus from a major university. He too remembers fondly our flying leap below the Eagle Crags. It is unfortunate that we did not have virtual properties that would have taken us back under the Eagle Crags for a second race to the valley below.

The virtual property of elastic strings means they must be ejected into space and retracted with great velocity. What tangible proof is there that strings travel at such vast, almost inconceivable velocity. Well, first we know that particles of light (photons) travel at the amazing speed of 300000000 meters per second. It only takes a few minutes for light to travel from our sun to earth. This extremely fast almost inconceivable speed must have seemed incredulous when scientists first began measuring the velocity of light more than a hundred years ago. Scientists still question how this is possible.

Secondly, it is an established fact based on numerous experiments that when a photon is split and one of the photons is sent off even kilometers away that modification of one photon instantly modifies the other photon, much, much faster than the speed of light. This was once referred to as quantum weirdness, but now is known as entanglement. I believe the two photons are entangled by elastic strings, which allows almost instant modification of one photon by another. I believe entanglement is direct physical evidence that something travels much faster than the speed of light and this something is elastic strings.

Physicists who believe in special relativity downplay entanglement experiments. They contend that entanglement is a form of communication. What does this mean? The physicists that offer this solution to entanglement offer no physical explanation for this concept, nor do they attempt to explain how it causes entanglement. It doesn’t fit the special theory of relativity that nothing is faster than the speed of light and for this reason most physicists ignore these experiments, just as they ignore many other experiments that don’t fit theory. I cannot find a single experiment that does not fit VES theory.

Elastic strings are ejected with great velocity

To the south of Rockville tower the Eagle Crags, spires of Navaho sandstone that hover as sentinels over the gate to Zion National Park. The west slope beneath the stark monoliths is covered with a deep layer of coral sand, a remnant of the Navaho sandstone that once covered much of southern Utah. When we were kids, my cousin and I climbed to a point just beneath the Eagle Crags where we began our rapid descent down the steep slope of coral sand to the valley below. It is perhaps as close to flying as you will ever get without donning a parachute or taking up a pair of skis. We didn’t leap tall buildings like Superman, but we did leap over tall bushes with a single bound. On that day the gravitational force of attraction almost took a holiday.

We may have felt like we were flying, but our speed would more resemble a dead bug compared to the velocity that strings are ejected into space.

The electron in orbit about a proton goes through one oscillation cycle in about 0.0000000000000001 seconds. This is also the period of time it takes to eject and retract the strings responsible for the magnetic field. Now consider that the magnetic field around Earth extends some 20 million meters into space, and the string must travel that distance and return in this brief period of time. To accomplish this feat it must travel some 100000000000000000000000 meters per second, that’s 10 raised to the 23 rd power.

Is there any evidence for this conjecture? The answer is yes, and I will discuss this issue in my next blog. Kelland—www.vestheory.com

Electron's oscillation cycle is created by its string cycle

And now for the end of the civet cat story. It was Christmas Eve and our little family was enjoying some hot apple cider when suddenly we found the troop of civet cats had joined our party. For a moment or two they seemed completely tame as they darted between our legs without raising a stink. Perhaps they would have stayed around if we had taken off our shoes and socks, but as it was, they suddenly scampered into the bathroom that Dad built. There they disappeared completely. It was a little spooky until we decided that they had left the bathroom through the bathtub’s overflow drain hole that Dad had never connected to a pipe, even though given their size it seemed impossible. We plugged the hole up and that was the end of this little story. They could no longer come and go as virtual particles.

Because virtual elastic strings are constantly being created and retracted, it means the electron must have a string cycle. There must be a period when strings are being ejected into space and a point in time when they have retracted back to their source. Thus the magnetic field and electric field must vary as the electron goes through its string cycle. This is exactly what scientists have shown. The string cycle for an electron is identical to its oscillation cycle. I believe in most cases, the variation in the magnetic field is used to establish the oscillation period.

VES theory shows us that the electron’s oscillation cycle is dictated by the length of time it takes to make and retract its elastic strings. Thus the oscillation cycle and elastic string cycle are identical for an electron. Kelland—www.vestheory.com