755 N.E. Royal Court
Portland, Oregon 97232
Aug. 17, 1985
Frank H. Meyer
1103 15th Ave. S.E.
Minneapolis, MN 55414
with the decisions reached at the Board meeting in Portland I am submitting
my suggestions as to the contents of the special edition of Reciprocity
in which the article Gravitation and the Galaxies is to be published.
should have an editorial introduction pointing out that recent changes
in the astronomers interpretation of the recession of the distant
galaxies now permit us to show this recession to be a scalar motion.
This confirms the validity of one of the basic premises of the Reciprocal
System of theory, and puts us in a position where we can demonstrate that
a fundamental change in the accepted structure of physical theory is definitely
necessary. Here, then, is the kind of a direct and positive argument that
we need in order to present our case effectively. Once we show that some
significant change has to be made, the door is open for a consideration
of our findings, which indiate the nature of the necessary changes.
in our discussion, that the article be followed by comments by different
individuals, pointing out areas in which the verification of the existence
of scalar motion makes a contribution to scientific knowledge. For the
purposes of this issue of Reciprocity, the comments should be limited
in length, so that they have the status of supplements to the article
that is featured in this issue. I anyone wishes to elaborate his thoughts
into a ful-length article, you can no doubt find room for it in some future
issue. The contributors should be encouraged to select their own topics,
however, I am submitting the following suggestions for the benefit of
anyone who may want to make use of them:
- The general acceptance
of a definition of motion that excludes scalar motion explains why previous
atempts to construct a theory of a universe of motion have failed. Without
the phenomena that we have now identified as scalar motions, the scope
of the motion concept is too limited.
- Recognition of scalar motion
adds two more dimensions of motion to the one that can be represented
in the reference system (the only one recognized by present-day science).
This simplifies a number of physical problems.
- Einsteins assumption,
in his general theory of relativity, that mass distorts space, thus
accounting for the shape of the gravitational force field, is now seen
to be wrong. The radial force field is a direct result of the scalar
- The finding that the electric
charge is a motion gives us an explanation of a phenomenon that is without
any explanation in conventional science. We are told that the charge
has to be accepted as a given feature of the universe, not capable of
- The expansion of
the universe that the astronomers talk about is essentially the
same thing as the progression of the natural reference system that our
theory requires. However, the astronomers assume that space is
expanding, whereas we see an outward movmenet of the individual masses.
The demonstration that gravitation is also a scalar motion shows that
our version is correct, as the same general principle must apply in
both cass, and a contraction explanation of gravitation
would not be feasible.
- The existence of scalar
motion emphasizes the limitations of spatial reference systems. Instead
of being a framework in which all motion can be represented, as seen
in present-day theory, these spatial reference systems can only represent
one-dimensional motion at speeds less than one unit.
- All objects with mass are
in motion from the scalar standpoint, even if they are stationary in
the reference system. The gravitational force is the force aspect of
this scalar motion.
- I mentioned the action-at-a-distance
problem in the article, but it could stand some further comment, since
it has been a bone of contention in physics for centuries.
As the foregoing items indicate, verification of the existence of scalar
motion is the key to a greatly improved understanding of physical relations.
The objective of our current promotional activity is to bring this point
to the attention of the scientific community as forcibly as possible.
Dewey B. Larson