https://milesmathis.com/science.pdf
I was just going to put up a link to my science site, to remind you that if you run out of things to read
here on my art/history site, there are about 800 other papers on my science site, going back 25 years,
and not all of them are full of difficult math. There is a link at the top of my homepage, of course, but
most people never visit that—they just bookmark my updates page. So some don't even know I have a
second site. I do this now because I have posted a lot of papers this year so far over there, and most of
them are short and don't require much knowledge of science. They are just me dunking on the
mainstream, so the same thing you find on this site but with a science flavor. Mainstream physics is
currently imploding after years of being strafed by me, and even mainstream scientists on Youtube and
other places are starting to admit that, see Sabine Hossenfelder as just one example. She doesn't
promote me, of course, that isn't allowed, but she is admitting physics, astronomy, and science
academia are in a freefall, and may not survive in their current forms. So these are very interesting
times, and I didn't want you to miss out on the fun.
But then I thought, why just leave a raw link when I can flesh it out a bit, perhaps helping you to
understand what is really going on. Most of you know me as the guy who is blowing the cover of
every Intelligence project in history, but some in the know think my science is even more important
and revolutionary, and they are probably right. So if you haven't spent any time over there or don't
have any science chops, I will give you a thumbnail sketch of why they think that.
My science site has been quietly superviral for many years now. By “quietly” I mean almost no one
knows it, because I am not promoted by anyone but me. The mainstream has not only refused to cover
any of my big discoveries, they have refused to report on my astonishing success online—which is just
as incredible a story. The only ones who know it are people at Google, the Air Force, NASA, and
places like that, and they aren't happy about it. They have been trying to put a lid on it since the
beginning, and it got very serious about six years ago, when Google began completing delisting me.
Not just downlisting me, but refusing to list me at all. Other search engines like Bing and Yahoo then
followed. We knew this was true since at first we could compare Google to Bing, and when Bing
began delisting me we could compare to Yandex, which was still listing based on numbers, as they
should. Now Yandex has started delisting me, so I guess you will have to get your information in the
future from toilet stalls.
On my art/history site, you have seen evidence of that as well, since I have posted recent screenshots
proving my papers are going to #1 immediately at Yandex, and sometimes even at Google and Bing.
That happened with my paper on the fake Trump assassination attempt, for example. And there are a
few of my old papers on both sites Google has failed to censor. I have so many papers up some of
them miss the net, I guess.
At that last link you can see that I was ranking above Wikipedia, the Dictionary, and all university sites
on many topics, which was unheard of. I saved some of the screenshots as proof. It had never been
achieved by anyone, but especially not by a one-man self-published site with no institutional
connections. This was of major concern to the mainstream, because up to then their response had been
to ignore me and claim I was a crank with no penetration. But the Google results disproved that with
huge exclamation points. And my numbers could not have been due to ignorant “Flat Earth” readers,
as they claimed, since my most-read papers were on subjects only professional physicists or
astronomers or mathematicians could comprehend. Youtube dopes would not be clicking on papers
with titles like “The Drude-Sommerfeld Model”, “The Perihelion of Mercury”, or “The Fractional
Quantum Hall Effect”. No, this indicated that mainstream scientists from the universities and labs were
secretly mobbing my papers, reading them at home under the covers with a flashlight and then denying
it at work.
The catastrophe for the mainstream went into overdrive in 2020, when I made a big prediction about
Solar Cycle 25, which was just starting at that time. The mainstream also tries to dismiss me by
claiming I don't make any predictions and don't reference mainstream experiments, which was always a
lie—but the lie got much bigger in 2020. I have never done anything else except go through
mainstream papers and theories with a fine-tooth comb, correcting them, rewriting them, and showing
my readers exactly what it must mean. Same thing I do on my history site. But in 2020 I was able to
do what no one had ever done: predict a Solar Cycle by first explaining the mechanism and then
showing how that mechanism physically created the data. That paper is pretty dense and you may not
be able to follow it. Lots of graphs. But the long and short of it was that I showed the cycle was
caused by an electromagnetic feedback loop between the Galactic Core, the Sun and the four big
planets. So all I had to do is track the big planets, looking at alignments. When the planets were most
in line to the Sun/Core, we would have a maximum. I then simply predicted sharp spikes in the
sunspot data on planetary alignments. There have been six of those so far in this cycle, and they all hit
right on schedule, which was like shooting the mainstream in the heart six times. After the first one
hit, mainstream scientists at NOAA and NASA and places like that were so panicked they called Air
Force for help, which took over sunspot counting for the first time ever. It was soon clear why Air
Force was there: they began faking all the data, sitting on sunspots numbers to make it look like I
wasn't right. Sunspots can be very small or very large, so their favorite trick was to mis-weigh the big
ones, counting them as about half as large as they should have been. I have proved that in a series of
papers. Even with that trick, they still failed to keep numbers down enough, and Cycle 25 was MUCH
larger than they predicted. But pretty much exactly what I predicted. Even better, their trick of
suppressing big spots didn't get rid of the spikes on planetary alignments, I guess because Air Force
didn't get the memo to hit those days extra hard. They only got the general memo to suppress by about
75% across the board, but didn't realize there were specific spikes to suppress. So those spikes
remained in the data, proving I was right.
But I have done things much larger than that, starting with diagramming the atomic nucleus. There
were a few attempts to do that back in the 1940s, but but they soon gave up. Their data was very
limited, and more importantly they were terrible at visualization. Physicists in the 20th century were
generally very limited math geeks, especially the ones in theory, and they were the least artistic
scientists in history. This is because of the influence of Bohr and Heisenberg, mainly, who taught
physicists to avoid diagrams and illustrations. They hated them. And they hated them because they
couldn't read them. Their brains didn't work like that and they honestly couldn't fathom diagrams.
Mach admitted he was confused by the real world and feared walking into distant mountains. No
really, I am not making that up. And Bohr wasn't much better. These guys were just short of legally
blind.
So when I came along in about 2000, the standing nuclear diagram was just a bag of marbles. If you
consulted nuclear theory, you were told all the protons and neutrons inhabited the same spot. Yes, they
dodged into the quantum blur thing there as well, just like with their orbiting electrons. Everything was
a probability and you shouldn't even try to visual anything. It couldn't be done, they told us. Nature
didn't make sense and you were a fool to expect it to.
But I never bought it. Everyone with any sense always knew that couldn't be right. And I had a leg up
in the problem beyond being an artist, because I knew going in that the nucleus was channeling the
charge field through it. No one else before me knew that, so they couldn't build the nucleus as a charge
engine. So once again I had a mechanical hook no one else had. I knew why the nucleus was built like
it was even before I built it, you see. I knew the architecture had to channel charge.
And what is this charge I am always talking about? It is the old +/- on the proton and electron, that the
mainstream already knew about, so I didn't make it up. I just made it a real field of real photons. The
mainstream had known about charge since the time of Ben Franklin, but no one had ever thought to
make it a real field of real particles. It was just treated as a propensity or something. As with
diagramming the nucleus, they had given up trying to explain charge long long ago. In the 1990s it was
defined as a message between particles. No, seriously. A message. Through Facebook, I guess.
Historically, it was Maxwell's old D-field, and as such was just more math. It was a ghostly field that
lay under the EM field, but since Maxwell never figured out exactly what it was, and since his students
were way dumber than he was, they just buried it. Basically no one talked it about for 150 years until I
dug it up and re-animated it, showing it was the primary real field in the universe, the greater part in a
unified field theory, and 95% of all current energy.
In most of the problems I solve, it is overlooked as ambient heat. It is real photons peaking in the
infrared, so it is mostly out-of-sight and invisible. It remains even in a vacuum, since a vacuum is an
ion vacuum. You can't create a charge vacuum, since whatever you make your walls out of will still be
emitting charge. Plus, everything is porous to charge. And on the Earth, everything is in the Earth's
heavy charge field. Physicists always forget that, which is why they can't ever explain anything, from
entanglement to the double-slit experiment to dark matter. All their theories are missing 95% of the
total field.
So you can think of charge as a powerful photon gas that drives and animates all things. Like the
Force, if you will, but completely real, made up of real particles with real masses, real radii and real
spins. It determines the architecture of everything, starting with the nucleus. The nucleus is built for
one thing and one thing only: to channel charge. At each atomic number, you will find a specific
architecture that channels charge the most efficiently at that size. The nucleus has to be built this way
because if it is built wrong, the charge field will quickly tear it apart, from inside and out. Any
imbalance will be fatal. It is like building a house in a high wind or powerful wind tunnel, but in this
case you let the wind move both around the house and through it.
You start by building the rooms of the house. In the atomic nucleus, these rooms are mostly the same:
Helium nuclei. That is just two protons and two neutrons in a bulletproof configuration, allowing
charge to move right through the structure—in at the poles and out the equator. You then build up all
nuclei from those rooms, taking great care to place adjacent rooms in the right configuration, to allow
charge to channel through while pushing the rooms together at the same time. Yes, if you fit the rooms
together in the right way, the charge acts like a glue, keeping the house super-tight. It isn't an actual
glue, it just presses things together, again like a very strong wind.
What else have I done that no one had before? Well, I solved the mystery of superposition. The
mainstream has known that a particle may have two states at the same time, one state “superimposed”
on the other. Meaning, one right on top of the other somehow. But how? That they couldn't say.
Again, they just dealt with it mathematically, but didn't try to explain it physically, because they
couldn't. They often resorted to just calling the states red/blue or something, since they couldn't
distinguish them with real mechanics. This ended up infecting everything, including most famously
quark theory, where they promoted this mechanical ignorance as a sexy novelty, calling quarks
top/bottom, charmed, or strange. People then got Nobel prizes for that mess and it was cemented into
place permanently. Like everything else, you weren't allowed to question it.
Their superposition math usually worked, since they had fit it to experiments over many years, but in
some experiments it stopped working. Things started happening that didn't make any sense. Detectors
were detecting things they shouldn't have. To explain these “weird” findings, they used even more
slippery math, summing over all possible states to again find probabilities. To go with that slippery
math, they added equally slippery interpretations, by which a particle was going through two slits at the
same time, or maybe even taking all possible paths, with all possible spins. The real result was then
“decohering” out of the vacuum by some magic, the magic usually requiring you to look at it. Before
you looked at it, it was just a blur, but with an observer it entered the universe and took one form
instead of all the others.
No really. That was really the state of physics in the 20th century, and still is. Murray Gell-Mann,
probably the third most famous physicist since 1920, after Hawking and Feynman, thought even Mars
was a probability, and said so in his 1994 book The Quark and the Jaguar. It didn't really exist until
someone looked at it in a telescope. You may think these guys were just taking a piss, and maybe they
were, but if so they have never admitted it. That is still mainstream physics.
So how did I solve it? Very simply, as usual, starting with drawing a picture, which allowed me to see
that the two superimposed states weren't just math, they were real spins. But they weren't two similar
spins, just pasted on top of one another; they were spins in different planes and of different sizes. The
inner spin was an axial spin, like a basketball player spinning a basketball. But the outer spin was endover-end, like a car crashing in a spectacular Hollywood scene. This was done to get the second spin
outside the influence of the inner spin. The outer spin has a radius twice that of the inner, so they don't
interfere with one another. This puts the outer spin in another plane, and that plane is at a right angle to
the first spin.
This explains the weird experiments, because it explains why some detectors were detecting the inner
spin while others were detecting the outer spin. The detector is in one plane or another, but not both, so
you have to track which spin it will be detecting. Sometimes it won't detect anything, when you think
it would, and that is because it is in the wrong plane.
You can see how that is a bit tricky, and why they would have missed it for a century without the right
illustration. It becomes pretty obvious with a good illustration, but as I have said, these guys weren't
artists. They weren't visual at all. They were the nerds who thought a lime green polyester shirt went
with orange slacks, so how are they going to see stacked spins?
What next? How about unification. This was the big project of Einstein and for a long time it was the
biggest unsolved problem of physics. Still would be if I hadn't solved it, but they gave up on it a long
time ago. Einstein made no real progress on it, and those that came after just mucked it more and
more, until they finally decided to pretend it didn't matter. By 1990 they had given up on unification
and began replacing it with containment. That is what gauge theories are: they no longer even claim to
unify, they just claim to put gravity and EM in the same big operators and call it a day. They put
gravity and EM in the same room and claim they have achieved a marriage. Though they can't say how
copulation would ever occur. These new gauge solutions don't allow them to answer any real
mechanical questions, since they contain no mechanics. It just gives them another opportunity to dump
an endless ugly math on you, like String Theory.
How did I solve that one? Well, I turned the problem inside out, showing that they didn't even need to
unify gravity and EM (electromagnetism) since they were already unified without anyone knowing it.
You see, they weren't really trying to unify gravity and EM, they were trying to unify Newton's gravity
equations with Maxwell's EM equations. Seems like the same thing, but it isn't because as it turns out,
Newton's gravity equations were already unified. Same for Maxwell's equations. Newton had fit his
equation to an experimental result, and that result was due to a compound field, that field being unified.
But because Newton predated the EM field, he had no way of knowing that. Later in the 19th century,
when EM arose, no one realized that EM had been hiding in Newton's equations all along, hidden by
the constant G. So I started out years ago unwinding G, showing what it really was. Until I came
along, G was just an unassigned constant. No one had any idea what it was. It made the equation
work, that is all. It filled a hole in the equation. But I realized that constant had to be representing
something. More than that, I recognized it must be representing a second field in the equation. A
whole other thing the mainstream had missed for centuries. With some more work, I was able to match
it in size to the EM field. I showed it fit the known size of the EM field, based on known values like
the Ampere, the Joule, the Coulomb, and so on.
So instead of unifying Newton's equations and Maxwell's equations, which were already unified, what
was necessary was pulling apart the old equations and showing what they really stood for. Once all the
variable and constants were re-assigned to real parameters, we could put them back together, achieving
re-unification that way. We then didn't have just one unified field equation, we had many. Not only
were Newton's and Maxwell's equations unified, Gauss' equations were unified as well, and so was the
Lagrangian.