Tension in the
Isotropic Field

 I
t has been shown previously that the isotropic grid into (and by means of) which the "points" are to be laid out in space, must possess an elasticity in order to embody the identity of the field as a single unit. A wave traveling through that medium must require a finite time to move any finite distance (see LP #12 & use back button to return).

It must therefore embody a "tension" by which the field snaps back to it's rest position. By definition the measure of elasticity of the initial field must be unit tension (i.e. "1").

Further, that initial tension will be stretched because the points inserted into the I-field possess a spherical positional field which distorts the Euclidean I-field (the P-field and the I-field combine to form a distortion). Were this not so, it could not be said that the I and P fields interacted with one another.

Hence, the I-field begins as a stretched rubber band and a gradient potential thus exists by means of which the I-field (empty space) might push matter down ... thereby relieving that initial field tension.

Here is a rough example of what I am talking about.

My brother once crumpled a dollar bill up and unfolded it several thousand times (perhaps much more as I do not have tha patience to test this ;o). The dollar shrank to the proportions shown above. Occasionaly he would try to "pass it" to the accompaniment of some degree of laughter. No one would accept it. But it was legal tender.

Obviously, untold thousands of micro-folds in the dollar produced a perfect miniature of Washington. The bill was quite soft to the touch as well.

Now, imagine the original bill as the initial I-field under zero tension. Then the second shrunken bill is the field micro-folded by the inserted P-fields. Now mentally stretch the small bill back to the size of the original as though it were rubber. This is the initial state of the I-field (the embodiment of unit tension).

What I propose is that the clumping of matter by gravity relaxes this state. A gravitationally bound galaxy is like folding over the dollar once as in a billfold ... while spreading matter out all over the place puts an enormous number of micro-folds in it.

The isotropic field then forms a "ball" around a galaxy or group of galaxies.

The isotropic field is Euclidean where there is no matter and curved around clumps of mass. This curvature is in addition to the curvature of space attributed to the positional fields and is most prominent at the edge of a galaxy or galactic cluster and least prominent in the interstellar space between individual stars for reasons previously given.

Any mass responds to this additional curvature just as it responds to that of the positional field. It is then presently unaccounted for by conventional gravitational theory.

If this conjecture is true then we have a ready made geometric construct to connect with the dimensionless "fine structure constant". Since the I-field is the carrier of photon waves and the FSC is associated with the electromagnetic interaction, I propose that the FSC is none other than the measure of the present elasticity of the isotropic grid.

Defining the initial state as '1', it must now be relaxed to the measure of 1/137. And the geometric meaning of this is that the speed of light has decreased by that amount.

If the elasticity were infinite the speed of light would be infinite which is not logically allowed. If it were inelastic (reorderable) there could be no light and the I-field could not be said to be an indivisible unit. It must therefore possess finite elasticity and a lesser elasticity would result in a lesser light speed just as steel transmits a wave faster than ... hmmmm ... jello?
But note here also that we cannot in principle detect a decrease in light speed because we are "electromagnetic beings", i.e. we would detect something else as changing while defining light speed as "unit velocity".

And the bulk of that decrease would have occurred in the earliest stages of existence since the addition (appearance) of new matter at the Hubble radius as a percentage of the total -per unit time- is much less now than then.

```

```
```
```