READ THIS FIRST ---> one inch equation: TL = mc^2

Quantum Thread Theory
by James Cranwell

Everything in the Universe is made from one type of thread.
All workings of the Universe are result from said thread.


Nothing is Solid. Space is not Empty. Everything is Connected

 TL = mc^2
|- - inch - - |       It’s one inch

There is a high tension lattice-type thread (or string) particle network in space (not the string theory type). Everything is connected by the thread particle network and it moves along with largest mass in proximity (gravity centered, like space-time).
A good 2-D model would be something like a spiders web made from individual yet connected thread particles (individual thread lengths are approximately one Ångström).
Now imagine an infinite 3-D spiders web. If a vibration was set off in it, it would travel forever and the speed the vibrations travel (through the net) is the speed of light (that's actually what light is, a vibration traveling through a thread particle network)
The speed vibrations travel through the particle network is the speed of light "c"
The particle network threads have a certain amount of tension, length and mass. That makes 'c' the speed it is. If the tension, length or mass changed so would 'c'

Here is a regular thread (or string) tension formula...

Tension = velocity squared x mass / Length

If we plug c in and rearrange we get the one-inch formula... TL = mc^2

Incorporates thread (or string) tension and length, mass, speed of light, time.
Equation itself explains their correlation and gives understanding of the way energy, forces and everything else truly works. Mechanical reason for c in E=mc^2
Both sides of the equation are in joules or energy... equivalent to "E".
It means the Tension of the threads in space times their length is equal to their energy.
This is why the speed of light is involved in Einstein's mass energy equivalence equation...

E = mc^2

...and actually why light travels at the speed of light...
I always wondered why... now I know.
It had to be something mechanical... tension and thread lengths!

So, you can arrive at Einstein's famous formula from completely different directions.
You can think energy is contained in mass and released.

E = mc^2

Or you can think there is a particle network of threads and mass is inert, the energy is only potential... released (actually pulled) by tension on the threads.

TL = mc^2

They are equivalent. Which is correct? You do not know.

Tesla was correct...
"There is no energy in matter other than that received from the environment." - Nikola Tesla

Mnemonic memory device...
E for Einstein: E = mc^2
TL for Tesla: TL = mc^2

You can extrapolate anything and everything from it.


If you have a tennis net (2-D lattice-type thread particle network analogy) it has an overall tension on it. The net threads are being pulled from the extremities (if it were an infinite net the tension pull would be coming from infinity).
If you use a pair of scissors and snip one thread in the middle of the net... vibrations (energy) will travel through the net (remember the tennis net has tension on it).
Every individual section (particle) of the net has tension and can release energy into the net. But you cannot add the individual particle energies together and create a massive sum -- because all of the supposed different energies are all one and the same -- coming from the net as a whole.
If a guitar string has a tension of 9 . So does every point on the string.


But you cannot add them together. That would be pure stupidity. The same type of thing has unknowingly happened with the vacuum catastrophe. Space is loaded with energy but it is all from the same source and it is all the same energy. If this is not realized -- there would be an enormous mistake -- 10^120 -- in calculations.


If a few threads of the net were balled-up (pulled together in a clump) then suddenly unballed (decayed). It would send vibrations through the net.
The balled up piece of the net would be considered mass and when it unballs it reverts back to normal net (thread particle network) and releases energy (vibrations) into the net. The vibrations are the energy. You cannot have vibrations travelling in nothing -- thinking that would be pure stupidity.


The graphic is a representation of a 2-D gravitational field (particle network). It would be made of only the XY axis particles attached together (like a tennis net but made from individual particles).
The particles are connected -- that creates the network. The network has tension on it so vibrations can easily travel through it on the threads. Any masses ●● in the network will have a higher tension between them and pull together -- that's gravity.
The speed vibrations travel through the particle network is the speed of light "c"


Is energy equal to length? How about speed? Is speed equal to mass? No, of course not.
So everyone needs to stop saying mass and energy are equal -- they are not equal.

Everyone has the wrong idea of what energy, forces and fields are.
Energy is a particle (anything of substance) vibration or movement.
You cannot have energy without substance, energy is mass (or substance) vibrating.
Energy cannot be out on its own. (a supposed mass-less particle is a particle nonetheless, but there are no mass-less particles, so that's irrelevant)

Same thing goes for forces.
A force is a group of particles arranged in a network pulling each other... and all of the particles absolutely have to be physically connected.

A force (a group of connected particles) can only push very short distances and in rare circumstances like same pole magnets.

But the point is... a force has to have particles involved.
A force cannot be out on its own.

Most of mainstream physics is a misconception.

There is no such thing as pure energy.
Again... Energy is a vibration on a particle (or particle movement).

Can energy be converted into mass?
Ummm... no, energy already has mass involved, it is a particle vibration or movement. There is no pure energy and you are not going to convert energy into mass.

Think of a guitar string. If you pluck it... that is the energy. If you remove the guitar string from the scenario... can you still have the energy? No, of course not.

Can you convert the guitar string vibration into mass? No... that is ridiculous.

Look at what everything really is...


........mass = [M] = kilograms
......length = [L] = meters
........time = [T] = seconds
...frequency = [T^-1] = seconds^-1
.......speed = [L]/[T] ...... = m/s
acceleration = [L]/[T^2] .... = m/s^2
....momentum = [M][L]/[T] ... = kg_m/s
.......force = [M][L]/[T^2] . = kg_m/s^2 = [M][L^2]/[T^2] = kg_m^2/s^2
.......power = [M][L^2]/[T^3] = kg_m^2/s^3

Tension is a Force. Gravity is a Force. A Newton is a Unit of Force.
Velocity is the same as speed = [L]/[T]

Notice mass [M] is not equal to energy [M] [L^2] / [T^2] ...the vibration is missing

Here is what Einstein's (actually Émilie du Châtelet's) famous equation really looks like...

[M] [L^2] / [T^2] = [M] [L^2] / [T^2]

Energy already is a mass times speed^2.

If you could just lop-off parts of an equation and claim whatever is left is equal... i.e. "energy equals mass" then you could also say that "power equals mass" and so does momentum and force. It is really stupid to think like that.
Speed is NOT equal to length. Speed is equal to length divided by time.
Energy is NOT equal to mass. Energy is equal to mass times speed squared.

READ THIS CAREFULLY: Energy is just a word for vibrating mass (or substance). It's like "RED" -- you can have a beautiful redheaded girlfriend, a red ball or a red firetruck -- but you cannot have just "red."
Could there be a blob of "red" floating around in outer space? NO! it would have to be made from something.
RED is a word to describe a property of something else.
ENERGY is a word to describe a property of something else.
The term "Pure Energy" came from Spock on Star Trek. That is SciFi.


NOTE: The " T " in the equation... TL = mc^2 ...below is tension and that's a force.
NOTE: The [T]'s inside brackets below are [time]

Tension times Length is equal to Energy.
 TL = mc^2

tension [M][L]/[T^2] * length [L] = mass [M] * speed c^2 [L^2]/[T^2]


[3] Flux Particle Theory & Why the Speed of Light is "C"
  Authors: Seamus McCelt
  Category: Quantum Gravity and String Theory

Add a Comment

Font Size A A A A A A A
The 3rd 'A' makes a nice size for print
Font Family t v g a s m r

The particle itself would be just the grey threads in the picture (no color and a lot thinner of course).
It would fit perfectly inside of a dodecahedron.
Actual thread length is about one Ångström and it is fine enough where 10 threads (20 radii) could curl-up into the size of a neutron.

quantum thread theory quantum boom theory the one inch equation quantum gravity thunderbolt & lightning cosmic thread dipole repeller einstein did not say that einsteins light clock electrons are fixed position emergence gravitational constant gravitational waves gravitons & spacetime get ruled out gravity killed the dinosaurs instantaneous freeze everything can be correct with math orbital intersection theory quantum thread math Rainbows separate light and dark NO EXPANSION - NO DARK ENERGY - NO SINGULARITIES the ghost in the machine The Shape of Water time time is emergent You are 3-D but really 1-D but really 3-D black holes mighty jets why the speed of light is c

Note: As always - if you steal my original ideas - I will come to your house.

The McCelt Tartan