Ring Theory - A short outline
* Pre-quark pairs combine to form zero mass black holes
* Zero mass black holes are merged pre-quark pairs
* Singlets are the only pre-quarks
* Singlets form strings strings form loops
* Loops become rings
* Rings are leptons and quarks
* Time began when loops formed
* Singlets are the most dense black holes possible
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start with a zero mass black hole (ZMBH). A ZMBH is a positive mass black hole (radius Planck length, 1/6 Planck mass and charge) wholly or partially merged with a negative mass black hole. My definition of negative mass is not the normally accepted one (since the term 'mass' is not necessary and could be any property which acts in the same way that mass does) but consists of a type of mass which interacts with itself in precisely the same way as positive mass does (a negative mass attracts another negative mass). However the interaction of positive and negative mass is best defined as 'separation ruled' in that each positive mass tries always to maintain the same separation from a negative mass, and vice-versa.
A ZMBH, also called a PSP (pre-singlet pair), will thus appear to be a zero mass black hole to any observer greater than twice the Planck distance from the geometric centre of the PSP. When fully merged there is literally 'nothing there'. That does not mean that they do not vibrate around the geometric centre or travel from place to place. I envisage PSPs as being the stuff out of which space is made up. They are the building blocks of the background over which particles move. Interestingly, I calculate that any disturbance in PSP-space travels instantaneously because they are incompressible and yet can overlap without limitation.
When a PSP is torn apart, in that the two holes are no longer partly merged, the result is a positive and negative 'singlet', each of which is the other's anti-particle in terms of mass and charge (charge has the same strength as mass). The two singlets chase each other to maintain separation. Positive singlets attract positive singlets because of their similar masses whilst repulsing by the same amount because of their similar charges, and end up have no effect, other than physical collision, on each other. The same is the case for negative singlets on negative singlets, so the only thing that such a pair can do to interact is to chase each other and to is chase after another such pair, with singlet type alternating. In such a way a chain is built up.
It is only a short step from there into chains latching onto their own tails and becoming loops. In a volume containing many chains and loops constantly crossing, breaking and reforming, the end results will be the most stable loops - they will contains six singlets - which I call rings.
There are only eight possible different combinations of six singlets in a ring, corresponding initially to zero mass and charge. However, I hypothesise that the formation of rings, which proves an extra degree of freedom because of the possible two directions of singlet spin aligned with the direction of travel (screw-like) whilst moving around the ring leads to observable charges of 0, 0, +1/3, -1/3 , +2/3, -2/3, +1 and -1. The size of the charges showing outside the ring may be geometrically based, but the mass shown outside the ring is related to the rotational energy of the ring and the net motional energy of the singlets.
I also have shown why I believe energy is, like force, a vector. It will then follow that the kinetic energy of a body in orbit will sum to zero after one complete orbit. The potential energy is balanced instead by what I term motional energy, which is outward from the centre of rotation. Thus a ring, which is not a 'planetary' type of system, has no total potential energy, has zero average kinetic energy over one rotation of the ring, and has left to show only motional energy of the singlets around the ring. These provide the ring with energy E = h w = M v2, where h is Planck's constant, M is the Planck mass (six singlets each of 1/6 Planck mass with signs material only for the observable mass of the ring, which is the net motional energy) and v the velocity of singlets around the ring in terms of the speed of light.
What is termed 'mass' is then only the net or observable motional energy of the singlets within a ring. This is why singlets do not have to have 'mass' in the accepted sense, because the property they do have balances internally within a ring, leaving only a much smaller effect - which we call mass. If the rings expand and contract from their 'normal' size to take account of all the energies of movement they possess, then the extra translational kinetic energy of the whole ring will show up as extra mass via a reduction in ring size as the singlets travel faster around the ring. Thus a moving mass will be larger than a stationary mass.
Kinetic energy exists only along the direction of travel of a particle at the moment of measurement. The inertia of a body is the force it was originally given to set it in motion, and will be measured as its energy of motion. Force and energy are the same thing, separated only by distance from the point of rotation. These points have to very carefully defined.
The symmetric rings are the leptons and the asymmetric - which require at least one other asymmetric ring to balance - are the quarks, each with 'spin 1/2' because of the only two possible orientations of a ring versus an observer and the energy needed to make the ring initially. To make particles, simply stack rings. I believe two rings can form bosons, whilst seven rings are necessary to form neutrons and protons. By hitting an electron ring in a neutron stack with an anti-neutrino ring, the result will be a fast moving electron and a proton. A photon is formed from a ring and its anti-ring. A thorough understanding of the screw orientations of the singlets leads to the two loops merging almost into one, each singlet effectively reforming a spinning ZMBH, so that a photon is a ring of half-merged zero mass black holes. So there is no temporary energy fluctuation, or pair creation, from nothing, because observable energy is only contained by rings. If an electron and positron suddenly appear as if from nowhere, then they were already there waiting to be pulled apart.
To pull apart two rings requires a massive gravitational or charge field. The largest fields will be close to the singlets or PSPs. So space is made up on the smallest possible scale of the largest possible fields. Even where there are only PSPs, there will still be close enough approaches to allow any ring pairs to be pulled apart for some time period. It is also important to note that the mathematical formula for the strength of action of the mass and charge of a ring contains on the denominator the square of the distance of an object from the geometric centre of the rings minus the square of the ring radius. This leads to enormous forces at distances approaching the ring radius, as the denominator approaches zero. It also leads to intertwined uncertainty in the position of the ring and the size of the ring, which for any given strength of action cannot be dissociated. This is, I believe, the basis of quantum mechanics.
The close approach of rings is also the basis of the strong nuclear force, which stacks rings together due to the large energies contained within the rings which are only mutually 'visible' when the rings are close enough. At small separations, a ring rotating in the same frame of reference as another ring will be affected by the individual singlets in the other ring, rather than the idealised sum over the whole ring which assumes perfectly symmetric orbits for the singlets. The approaching ring affects the approached and vice versa, ensuring that the strength of interaction will never exceed that between two singlets alone.
The creation of loops also could act as the start of time. Before loops formed, there would have been no regular events, such as one particle passing one orientation more than one time. The formation of loops allowed for periodicity to become a feature. The size of a loop is inversely proportional to its energy, but directly proportional to the periodicity of the loop, and the product is always 1 in Planck units. Relativity depends on being able to measure time, and so will affect the apparent size of rings - which are their energies - but will not affect the singlets because they have no periodicity themselves.
In gravitational or charge fields the actual shape and size of the rings will alter in line with relativistic expectations, and photons will be affected by twice as much as single rings because there are two rings in a photon. You can have flat space-time with the correct size photons, and light speed is possible because each PSP in a photon can be half merged without being affected by any mass or charge gradients - which leaves the ring sizes unchanged at twice a similar frequency singlet ring regardless of the velocity of the two merged rings that make up the photon. The photon can effectively absorb all the (zero) energy needed to accelerate it, or lose the (zero) energy in deceleration, which a single ring or ring system with mass, cannot do.
Through this process an electron and positron, given sufficient kinetic energy, will form a photon of total energy size, which can then split into a +muon and a -muon with lower kinetic energy. The photon acts as the energy sink which translates kinetic energy of the rings into rotational energy within the rings, averages the ring sizes, and, if the size is small enough, produces muons (higher rotational energy electrons) with lower translational speeds.
The underlying driving force behind all action is to form 'zero total energy states'. These are systems such as the orbits of planets around stars, PSPs, photons, balloons, the centres of planets and stars themselves, symmetrically expanding or contracting universes etc. Once in a ZTES a system will require energy to change.
The consideration of two elastic balls colliding, when using vector energies, can show conservation of all properties such as momentum, angular momentum, motional, kinetic and potential energies in exactly the same form and provides insights into why the current equations used provide the same results (the squaring of certain components loses the information on their original signs). This interpretation of energy as a vector does require a centre of universe frame of reference to be the only absolute one, all others being simply relative.
The difference between strings and chains/loops is that the latter do not vibrate. They have separate components whose motions around the loops or rings provide the observable features of the rings. Since it is necessary to have an area around which a charge has rotated in order to have two magnetic poles, only loops/ rings can provide magnetism. Singlets alone cannot since they do not have periodicity of motion except in loops. So there can be no magnetic monopoles. Magnetism is a second order phenomenon, like observable time using rings, whilst only 'mass', charge, time and volume are primary phenomena.
Singlets are the most dense black holes possible. Any system composed of more than one singlet will be less dense. So any cosmological black hole composed of rings will be very much less dense than a singlet. The greatest cosmological densities may lead to the tearing of rings into chains, and the recycling of singlet pairs and PSPs. If singlets cannot be torn apart (same-same interactions are impact only, same-different are chase or merge) then there can be no singularities. If there are no singularities then physics can be applied everywhere and at all times.