Journal of Theoretics

The Laws of Space and Observation

Author:  Siepmann, JP


Abstract: The Laws of Space and Observation unify the concepts of time, distance, matter, energy, gravity, and Space.  The previously overlooked yet unifying factor is the concept that "Space" really exists as an entity unto itself.  The Relative Space Density and Relative Space Warp equations as herein presented allows us to mathematically calculate an object’s gravity, mass, size, Space density, and more from a distant viewing site.
Keywords: space, cosmology, universe, gravity, time, distance, special relativity, general relativity, theory, Theoretics,  matter, energy, law, Observational Physics

Note:  RSD in this article should be equal to the observed distance (dobs) divided by the objective distance (dobj).  Also dobs= RSDmde x RSDvel x dobj where mde stands for “mass deviation effect”. Also in Figure 10 orbit B should have an ASW=0.1 and an orbital radius of 9.38km while point A should have an ASW=0.01 with an orbital radius of 93.8km.



Sometimes the greatest advances in our understanding of this universe seem to be so intuitive and simple once revealed. This perfect simplicity of our universe was never more evident than now with the unification of time, distance, matter, energy, gravity, and Space that will be presented here. The key lies in understanding that "Space" really exists as an entity unto itself. I will capitalize Space so we can differentiate this discrete entity from a term that is generic for emptiness in the same manner as we capitalize Earth so as to differentiate the name of a planet from the generic term for ground/soil.

Just because we can not directly perceive something, does not mean that it does not exist. For example, if a fish were suspended out of the water by a hook, it would naturally think (if fish could intelligently think) that this absence of water was a vast emptiness. On the other hand, a more intelligent and yet uncaught fish may see that sometimes the surface of the water is turbulent with waves and it may perceive indirectly that there is some unknown force (air/wind) that exists outside its known sphere. The unknown that we will try to perceive through this paper is the unknown of Space.

Laws of Space

  1. The universe consists of two basic physical components: matter/energy and Space.
  2. Space can never be created or destroyed.    
  3. Space has a cohesive and elastic nature which resists displacement by matter/energy and separation from itself.
  4. When Space is displaced, it becomes warped and thereby exerts a force in the direction of its displacement. 
  5. The force of displaced Space is proportional to the amount of matter/energy displacing it.  
  6. The density of Space is relative.

The above are necessary for this concept of Space to exist as well as the presented theories and equations to be correct. If the theories and equations were proven correct through subsequent experiments, then these Laws of Space would be the best explanation for their findings.

In this concept of the universe, "matter" is nothing but confined "energy" in a transiently stable state, which is why matter and energy are considered one entity. Matter is quantified as mass and can also have an associated relative energy which therefore increase its relative mass. "Time" as we shall see is nonrelative but currently an arbitrary attempt to measure the universe's life cycle and not a primary entity of it. "Distance" like time is but a device of measurement and not a primary entity of the universe. "Gravity" is but a misnomer for the force exerted by Space when it is displaced, as we shall later see. This leaves only "matter/energy" and "Space" to be our two basic components of the universe.

Space and matter/energy can be conceptualized as being the oil and water of the universe as they both can exist in close contact but can never mix. Unlike matter/energy, Space is inert and unchangeable, but yet must have a self-cohesion and elasticity with itself that resists displacement. If Space is displaced, it will become warped, thereby exerting a pressure like force towards the matter/energy that is displacing it. This force is what we have called "gravity." These characteristics of Space are necessary for gravity to exist (indirect evidence of Space; remember the fish that saw the waves) as stated in the second, third, and fourth Laws of Space.

Gravity as we have thought of it does not exist but since it would be virtually impossible to change our psyche enough to call it the "displaced Space force," I will continue to use the term "gravity" in my discussion. The one concept that is necessary to change though is that of gravity being a pulling force. Rather it is more correct to think of it as a pressure like force being exerted in the direction of the matter/energy that is displacing it, similar to the force that the atmosphere exerts on a balloon.

The degree of Space warpage is determined by and proportional to the amount of matter/energy within a certain radius. This is the fifth Law of Space.

Distinct from the warpage of Space is the density of Space. As with anything else, Space can have a variable density to the observer but it will always be the same density to the object itself. The sixth Law of Space can be somewhat confusing but it is an important concept which will be discussed later in this paper.

Why do I call these "laws" rather than "theories?" Theories are nothing but provable explanations of results of natural laws. These natural laws are our attempt to define the underlying nature of the universe. They can not be explained, only defined. The way that we try to define them though is through theories and experimentation. If we should later find that our definition of a law is flawed or imprecise, it is not because the universe has changed but rather that our understanding of the law has been improved through our study of its actions or measurable characteristics. With these basic Laws of Space, we can now go on to the "Laws of Observation" which are intimately related to the Laws of Space and from which we will be able to develop methods that will allow us to accurately observe and comprehend the universe.

Laws of Observation

  1. All objects are at rest relative to themselves.  
  2. Time and "true mass" are the only constants between the observer and the object being observed. 
  3. The only "real" or "true" measurements of an object are those which are done in the same existence state as the object itself.
  4. Distance will decrease as relative velocity or relative Space density increases.

All perception has an observer and an object. The definition that we will use for "observer" is that which is in a single existence state and is trying to perceive an object other than itself either directly or indirectly. The definition that we will use for "object" is that which is being observed in a single existence state. The observer and the object are each being defined as each having their own single existence state for the purpose of simplicity but also because there can be only one true reality for any object. For instance, if I were near a black hole (bh), I would be composed of many "objects" since there would be many different existence states for the different parts of my body due to the black hole's tidal forces.

Once we have defined the object in this way, the first Law of Observation becomes obvious. In order to understand the third law, imagine yourself flying at half the speed of light; do you actually get smaller or do you just seem to be getting smaller to the observer? The simple and correct answer is that you do not change in size relative to yourself because you, as the object, are seeing the true and correct reality. On the other hand, the observer's view is usually a distortion of reality. This is especially true if you think of one object having many different forms to many different observer's simultaneously. This is similar to the concepts presented in Einstein's Special Relativity (SR).

The second Law of Observation states that time is nonrelative. Let us consider that if time within the universe started with the universe’s origin and will end with its collapse, then all of time must be the same in-between this beginning and end throughout the universe and therefore nonrelative. Time therefore can not be relative.

Man in his attempt to understand the universe has artificially attempted to define intervals of time. From the sundial's use of the solar day and the hourglass's use of gravity and friction, to modern man's attempt to use atomic tendencies. Each attempt getting more precise but still lacking in a basis as a measurement of time. Ernst Mach summed it up quite well when he said, "time is an abstraction." So far, the best that we have done is to try to define an abstraction, not true time.

In Observational physics unlike SR, time can not be sped up or slowed down with changes in velocity or gravity. But how do we then explain the experiments that have been done since Einstein’s time which seem to demonstrate time dilation? For instance, there have been experiments using particles with known lifespans such as muons, that when traveling at great speeds seem to exist longer than they should. Let us take a situation where these muons are being created about 60km above the Earth's surface with an Earthly observer, from the various perspectives of Newton’s Classical physics, Einstein’s Special Relativity physics, and Siepmann's Observational physics as shown in Table 1.

Table 1

Classic Special Relativity Observational
Distance observer sees 60 km 60 km 60 km
Distance muon sees 60 km 1.5 km* 1.5 km***
Time observer sees 4.5m s 200m s** 4.5m s
Time muon sees 4.5m s 4.5m s 4.5m s
Distance that the muon can travel in 200m s (obs) 13.5 km 60 km 60 km
Hit Earth's surface? No Yes Yes
For a surface observer the muon is created at 60 km above the Earth. The muon has a half-life of 1.5m s, and travels at 0.9997c for 3 half-lives (4.5m s).

* length contraction equation: length'=length(1-v2/c2)1/2

** time dilation equation: t' = t(1/(1-v2/c2)1/2)

*** calculation is shown in the next section

With Observational physics like SR, the observer sees the object's size (distance) decrease as relative velocity or gravity increases but unlike SR, time is constant for both the observer and the object (no time dilation). How do we then explain the various experiments to date that seem to show time dilation?

I propose that the reason we had thought time to be relative is that the methods that man has used to measure an interval of "time" utilized modalities that had a greater density than base Space (a threshold that photons exist below while most other matter exists above). Whether we are using a mechanical watch or atomic oscillations, all modalities to date are subject to relative Space density (RSD). Other possibilities that one or more could explain why experimentally "time" seems to slow as relative velocity or gravity increases could be that as RSD increases a relative entropy will decrease proportionally; mistakenly assuming that an extended travel distance of particles/objects meant a slowing of time; or experimental error.

As previously discussed, time is difficult to delineate and by using arbitrary indirect measures of time, such as atomic clocks, radioactive half-lives, etc., what we call time can be altered by the dynamics of the RSD. The only constant for time that can be used is the time it takes light to travel a set distance in the observer's own Space.

We can now move forward into the Relative Space Density and Relative Space Warp equations which will allow us to mathematically calculate an object’s gravity, mass, size, Space density, and more from a distant viewing site.


The Relative Space Density Equations

I will define "Relative Space Density" (RSD) as the density of Space in which an observed object resides relative to the density of the observer’s Space. The RSD is calculated by dividing the density of the observer's Space (Dobs) by the density of the object's Space (Dobj).

Therefore any object will always see its own relative Space density as being the same (RSD=1) no matter where it is in the universe. It will also not notice any difference in gravity whether the object is on the moon or near a black hole. Imagine that you are a photon who comes near a black hole and by the definition of "object," there are no tidal forces acting on you. Even if you went into the black hole itself, the density of Space would be the same to you, the photon. You would not notice any change in Space density until you hit the singularity (the ultimate primordial compression of matter/energy), and then only because you will no longer exist as a photon.

Since Space can neither be created nor destroyed as stated in the second Law of Space, a remarkable example of RSD would be to look at our universe from the outside during its expansion phase. Assuming for simplicity that Space is equally dense throughout the universe (which we will soon see is obviously not the case), an outside observer would see the distance between two points in the universe as being "x," while a person within the universe would see the points as being "y" distance apart. When the universe expands to the where the outside observer sees the two points as being 2x apart, the person within the universe will still see them as being "y" apart as shown in figure 1 below. The reason for this is that the "amount" of Space between the two points has never changed, only the density.

Figure 1

Because the density of Space may be hard to measure, we can convert our definition of RSD to distance since D=m/d3 and for an object at relative rest where mobs= mobj and we are only measuring along one axis then RSD = dobj/dobs.

Let us place a laser at the end of a piece of metal and knowing how long it took the pulse of light to get from one end to the other in the observer's Space (RSD = 1 and c = 2.998E5 km/s), then if this laser were to periodically fire while traveling through Space at a relatively great speed or near a black hole, we would see that it would take the same amount of time to get from one end of the piece of metal to the other. This means that even though the relative distance (length) of the metal and the speed of light have changed relative to our observation, time has stayed the same. Therefore it is distance that varies with relative velocity and gravity, not time.

It is important to note that the speed of light is therefore relative for the observer and the term "c" should be more appropriately referred to as "cobj" which is approximately 2.998E5 km/s as currently measured in a vacuum. From here on, I will refer to the speed of light more appropriately as "cobj" or "cobs."

Relative distance can also be shown in the following thought experiment. Let us assume that we live on planet "J" that orbits a bh. The RSD for us observers on planet J is equal to one for the entire orbit around the black hole and we measure the orbital circumference of planet J to be 2.83E11 km. The radius of the orbit should therefore be 3E5 km. If we were to make a metal rod 3E5km long and extend it out towards the central black hole, it would not even come close. This would normally not make any sense but in Observational physics it makes perfect sense. Here the rod is protruded from planet J into Space that is progressively getting more dense and as the density increases, distance decreases and the metal rod will never come close to the black hole as shown below.

Figure 2

                   Image2.gif (2874 bytes)

Another way of looking at the concept of Space density is with an analogy to sponge cake. Imagine that you are a bug trying to eat your way through a sponge cake that is 8" in diameter and it takes you 4 days to eat straight through. Now imagine that an upset pastry chef took an 8" diameter sponge cake and squished it into a 4" diameter sponge cake. It would still take you (the bug) 4 days to eat straight through. To you it would seem the same distance of cake for both but to the pastry chef it seemed half as long and therefore taking you twice as long to eat your way through.

Why would the density of Space increase as gravity increases is obvious, but why would velocity be relevant to the density of Space? Because when an object moves at a high velocity, it is increasing the amount of Space per unit of time that it meets along that axis and therefore to an observer the density of the object’s Space is increased along that axis. Therefore let us separate RSD into its two constituent components, RSDmda (what has previously been referred to as RSD) for the mass displacement effect and RSDvel for the velocity effect which is a modification of the length contraction equation and equal to 1- (vobs2/c2)1/2. Since distance decreases as relative velocity and/or mass displacement increases, we can now formulate the equation below and define the term "RSD" (without a subscript) as the product of RSDmda and RSDvel.

dobj= dobs x RSDmda x RSDvel

dobj= dobs x RSD

If we now look back at table 1 we can see that the muon traveling at 0.9997cobj will see the 60km as really being 1.5 km as shown below.

dobj= dobs x RSDmda x RSDvel

dobj=60km x 1 x (1-0.99972)1/2 =1.5 km

We can also bring in any other forms of measurement that use distance, such as the circumference of a black hole horizon (bhh) or the energy from an atomic bomb. Since mass is a measurement of the amount of matter an object contains, true mass (a mass at relative rest) will always objective. Since energy (E) is basically mass (m) times distance squared divided by time (t) squared, it can be related to the RSD in the following equation by substitution.

Eobj = m dobj2/t2

Eobj= m(dobs x RSD)2/t2

We can also calculate the energy observed when a quantity of matter is converted to energy while traveling at an increased velocity and/or within an increased gravity relative to the observer. I can now modify Einstein's energy/mass equation with RSD to get the following results.

Eobj= mcobj2

Eobj= m(cobs x RSD)2

You can see that these results will be different than Einstein’s for a mass to energy conversion that occurs in a RSD different than the observer's Space. Though Einstein's complete equation would be correct for a mass traveling at an increased relative velocity in the same RSD Space, it would not be correct for a mass that was located in a different RSD Space such as near a bh. I am sure that this equation will be the correct one when appropriately tested, especially when the conversion occurs in relatively high or low gravity environment.

Energy is therefore also relative. If a particle was going 0.9cobj relative to the observer, it would appear to have great energy but if the same particle was at relative rest to observer, the particle would seem to have little if any energy.

True mass or at rest mass, on the other hand is unchangeable but when a relative energy is associated with it, then it will appear to the observer to have an increased mass or "relative mass." Therefore the true mass of an object never changes but the relative mass may change because of relative energy that may be associated with it. This explains why we see the "mass" of particles increase with their increasing relative velocity.


The Relative Space Warp Equations

As Space is warped around an object with mass, photons will also follow this warpage of Space and to the distant observer it will appear as if these photons are being bent around the mass. Sir Arthur Eddington in 1919 was the first to measure the photon deviation that occurs with our own sun and found it to be about 1.75 arcseconds. This photon deviation can be used to tell us the amount of matter/energy that is within the diameter of the radius being measured, which in this case is the radius just outside the sun's corona. We can use this method to measure the Space warpage of any mass by measuring the angle of photon deviation around that object.

I will call this warpage of Space around a mass the "Relative Space Warp" (RSW) and define it as being the Angle of Photon Deviation (APD) as measured in degrees and divided by 360 degrees with a correction for any interference that may be caused by the gravity of the observer's viewing site which I will call the Angle of Gravitational Interference (AGI). Obviously a more complicated version of this equation may be needed if there are more than one gravitational forces interfering with the APD, but the basic concept is the same as shown in figure 3 and expressed in the following equation.

RSW = APD/360 - (sin(AGI) x APD/360)

Figure 3

                            Image5.gif (3566 bytes)

The RSW tells us the amount of mass within a certain radius. For instance, if two equal masses are measured at the same distance out from their center but even though they are very different in size, their RSWs will be the same as shown in figure 4 below. Though this can be used for certain purposes, for the purpose of this paper, we will be using the RSW that would be measured at an object’s edge.

Figure 4

Since the RSW of an object is proportional to that object's gravity (g), we can say the following for any two masses y and z.


We can now substitute the sun for object y and solve for gz as follows.

RSWz /RSWsun= gz /gsun

gz = gsun /RSWsun x RSWz

It is now possible to see that the number represented by gsun/RSWsun is a constant, which would be the same for any celestial body. I am using the sun because it is the only celestial body for which I have the appropriate information. I will call this number the "Space Constant" (SC) which for now will have an approximate value of 2.0E8 m/s2 as calculated here.

SC = gsun/RSWsun

SC = 274 m/s2/((1.75 arcseconds/360degrees) x (1degree/3600arcseconds))

SC = 274 m/s2 / 1.35E-6

SC = 2.0E8 m/s2

As more information about other celestial masses becomes available, the numerical value for the SC will become more accurate. We can now substitute us the Space Constant Equation below to determine the actual gravity of any celestial body.

gx = SC x RSWx

We can further prove the validity of these equations by finding out the actual APD for such bodies as the Earth and moon which would have a calculated APD of 0.064 and 0.010 arcseconds respectively.

gEarth= SC x RSWEarth

RSWEarth= gEarth/SC

APDEarth/360degrees = 9.80 m/s2/ 2.0E8 m/s2

APDEarth= 4.9E-8 x 360degrees x (3600arcseconds/1degree)

APDEarth= 0.064 arcseconds

___ ___ ___ ___

APDmoon/360degrees = 1.62 m/s2 / 2.0E8 m/s2

APDmoon= 8.1E-9 x 360degrees x (3600arcseconds/1degree)

APDmoon= 0.010 arcseconds

Using the Space Constant Equation we can also calculate the gravitational acceleration at any bhh as shown below.

gbhh = 2.0E8 m/s2 x 360/360 = 2.0E8 m/s2

We can also figure out the observed radius of a bh by using a 1 solar mass bh and comparing it to the sun, which is also1 solar mass. Because we know that the RSW is proportional to mass (m) and inversely proportional to radius (r), we can therefore solve for the observed radius of a 1 solar mass bh.


1.35E-6/1=(1/6.95E8m) /(1/rbh)

rbh=1.35E-6 x 6.95E8m

rbh= 938 m

The radius of 938 meters would give us a circumference of 5.89 km, which is quite different, than the 18.55 km obtained from Classic Relativity.1 The observed density of a one solar mass bh is therefore 7.67E20 kg/m3 using Observational physics.2 This is over 100,000,000,000,000,000 times more dense than the Earth.

For any two black holes they will each have the same RSW (1.0) and gravity (2.0E8 m/s2), therefore the distinguishing characteristics will be the mass and radius (subsequently volume and density also). Since mass is proportional to RSW and radius is inversely proportional to RSW, we can use the one solar mass bh (B) to calculate the radius of other black holes such as a ten solar mass bh (A) as shown below.




Therefore the radius of any bh is 938m times the bh’s mass in solar mass units. We can also use this information in reverse. For instance, if we can measure the observed diameter (and therefore radius which is one half of the diameter) of a bh, we can calculate its mass as shown here.

mbh(in solar masses) = rbh/938m

And since gbh is the same for all black holes at the horizon, then the observed speed of light will always be the same at the horizon. The time it takes to travel the circumference of the horizon though will increase two-fold for every 1 solar mass unit increase because circ=2p r.

It is also easy to see that as the RSW approaches one, the RSD approaches zero. The converse is also true, as any object in the same Space as the observer would have a RSD=1 and a RSW=0. It becomes a little more complex if an object is in a RSD>1 as the RSW would be negative which means that the APD would be away from the mass being measured (figure 5). Additionally, the equation relating the RSW with RSD would be different. For a RSD <=1 or a RSW=>0 then a RSD=1-RSW and for a RSD >1 or a RSW <0 then RSD=1/(1+RSW) as shown in figure 6.

Figure 5

Image7.gif (2066 bytes)

Figure 6

Since RSD and RSW are relative, we now need some absolute reference system for Space density. This system would need to be from the perspective of an imaginary observer outside of our universe. Such a system would be composed of non-negative values between zero and one. Relative velocity would not play any role. In such a system, an ASD (Absolute Space Density) of "1" would be exactly the same density as any other Space in the universe that also had an ASD of "1." This would be especially helpful in trying to map the universe and its celestial bodies as well as in defining "base Space" which is the least dense Space in the universe and would have an ASD=1.

The ASD could be calculated by using the RSW of the observer and the object for whose ASD is being calculated. The observer's RSW could be measured from a distant location just like any other object but an easier way would be to use the Space Constant Equation in the following form.

RSWobs= gobs/SC

Then by adding the two RSW's together we can get the ASW and subsequently the ASD as shown below.

ASWobj= RSWobs+RSWobj

and therefore


I have been using the term bhh with is past and current meaning of the outer circumference of a bh where the photons travel 360 degrees and can not escape. Since photons can not escape from within the horizon, everything from the horizon and inward will appear black to an observer just outside. I say "just outside," because a distant observer would not be able to see a bh because of its gravitational lensing as shown in figure 7. The main technique for finding a bh is to look for visible objects, which are influenced by a nonvisible "force of gravity." Another way would be to find objects that become distorted as they pass behind a segment of Space (the invisible bh) as shown in figure 8.

Figure 7

Figure 8


A bh can also have many horizons depending upon the definition we are using. For instance, we assume that the most interior horizon is that of photons, but there may be smaller particles that we can not see that could have smaller horizons. Likewise, a photon will have a smaller horizon than a proton and a proton will have a smaller horizon than an atom.

A simple explaination for these phenomena would be to say that the maximal velocity of an object determines its horizon, but what determines an object's maximal velocity?  The answer lies in our newfound concept of Space. Let us think of an object at a certain orbit around a bh where a distant observer would see an object as being in RSD="Z" Space. Now if the observer wanted to send a ship into the same orbit it would need to be going a certain velocity. The observer could send the ship off into his own Space and have it achieve a velocity that would give it the same observed RSD as the object’s bh orbit. Once the ship has achieved a RSD=Z in the observer’s Space then it could go to the bh and achieve the same orbit as the object without any change in velocity.

Therefore it must be the density of Space (its resistance) that is the determining factor for an object's maximal ASD, maximal velocity, and minimal bh orbit. The greater an object's mass the larger the minimal bh orbit and the less its maximal velocity and ASD will be as shown in figure 9. Also if an object has a mass less than the Space resistance threshold then it can go though Space unimpeded at a velocity of cobj. This threshold must obviously be greater than the true mass of a photon.

Figure 9

Though we have calculated the observed radius of a bh as being 938m per solar mass, what is the actual or object radius of a bh? The actual radius of a bh turns out to be infinite because as the RSD (or ASD) approaches zero the dobj approaches infinity. Though this is hard to comprehend we must understand that with each increment closer to a bh, Space becomes more dense and distance becomes logarithmically contracted to the point that even an infinite length will appear negligible to the distant observer. In fact, the closer you get to a bh, the longer the circumference becomes. An example of this concept using a one solar mass bh is shown in figure 10 below.

Figure 10

Since we can not see the light within a bhh, we can still distantly look at the speed of light just outside at an ASW=0.99 (ASD=0.01) which would give us an observed speed of light that is 100 times less than cobj as shown below.

ASD= cobs/cobj

0.01=cobs/2.998E8 m/s

cobs= 0.01 x 2.998E8 m/s

cobs= 2.998E6 m/s

Why have we not noticed a difference between an object's observed and actual size before? When we are talking about black holes the numbers are remarkable, but when we are talking most celestial bodies the difference is negligible. Even with our own sun the difference between its observed and actual size is negligible by today's standards of measurement. For instance, if we were to calculate the actual radius for our sun using the observed radius of 6.95E8 m and its RSD of 0.9999987 (RSD=1-RSW=1-1.35E-6=0.9999987), we will find the difference being negligible to five significant digits.


0.9999987=6.9599E8 m/robj

robj=6.9599E8 m

Even if we could determine the sun’s observed radius down to the meter and assumed that the sun’s radius was 695990000m, the difference would still only be 905 m, with the actual radius being 695990905m.

This paper has now laid out the basis for a new understanding of everything from quantum to celestial mechanics. The photon is no longer a mystery but rather a tool for exploring and mapping Space. The concept of Space has been the missing link in unifying our understanding of the universe. Now previously unimaginable possibilities exist from discovering the universe’s lifecycle to faster than light travel, and much more. The only limitation to man’s future discovery will be his imagination.



1. Space exists as a physical entity with unique properties and characteristics.

2. Space has a theoretically measurable minimum density called "base Space."

3. The universe consists of only two components, matter/energy and Space.

4. Distance is relative, while time and true mass are not.

5. What we have called "gravity" is actually the force or pressure of Space resisting its displacement by matter/energy.

6. Siepmann's Observational Physics offers a unified view of the universe that supplants Einstein's previous theories of General and Special Relativity.

7. The Laws of Space postulate the characteristics of Space. They are the basis of the Laws of Observation and the subsequent Relative Space Density and Warp Equations.

8. For the Laws of Space and Observation, the Relative Space Density and Warp Equations have been created to allow a distant observer to calculate an object's actual size, mass, gravity, and more.

9. An object's gravity, velocity, mass, radius, density, RSW, RSD, ASW, and ASD are all mathematically related via Observational physics.

10. In Observational physics, what an object experiences is the only true reality while what the observer in a different existence state, sees only a distortion of that true reality.

11. The only way an observer can determine what is happening to an object elsewhere is to know the existence state of the object being observed.

12. The density of Space is increased when it is being displaced by matter/energy and/or a relative increase in velocity.

13. Distance decreases relatively as the density of Space increases.

14. The gravity of any black hole at its horizon will be 2.0E8 m/s2. The observed radius of a black hole is 938 m times its mass in solar mass units. For any black hole, a distant observer can determine its observed radius by finding its mass.

15. The closer an observer gets to a black hole the larger it becomes, to the point that the diameter of a black hole becomes virtually infinite.

16. The density of Space can be defined using an absolute value system. The universe can also be accurately mapped using the same system.

17. All objects will have a maximum velocity, a maximum ASD, and a minimal black hole orbit that is determined by their degree of Space resistance. Space resistance is mainly determined by an object's mass.

18. The observed speed of light (cobs) is relative while the objective speed of light (cobj) is constant.

19. Though the speed of light is relative, in RSD=1 Space it will always be equal to cobj which is approximately 3.00E8 m/s.

20. The only true measure of time will be a light clock which utilizes cobj over a preset distance as defined in RSD=1 Space.


Calculations Addendum

  1. C= 4p SG/c2 = S x 18550 m = S x 18.55 km

    C=circumference of a bh   

    S= # solar masses 

    c=2.998E5 km/s 

    G=1.327E11 km3/s for 1 solar mass

  2. Black Hole Density = 1 solar mass/(p rbh3) = 1.99E+30kg/(p x 938m^3) = 7.67E20 kg/m3


78th edition of the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics

Journal Home Page

© Journal of Theoretics, Inc. 1999