Protons and Bigger Black Wholes: Which Way Do They Spin?

In Harameins UFT, both protons and black holes spin. Which way, clockwise or counter-clockwise?

There is some controversy about the direction of proton spin in mainstream physics, it seems. (The intricacies of Quantum Chromodynamics are well above my pay-grade, I’m afraid.)

I’m wondering if the inversion that occurs at the event horizon of black holes*1 reverses itself at alternate scales, e.g, PSU’s spin counter-clockwise, protons spin clockwise, black holes spin counter-clockwise, cosmos spins clockwise, or some such.

In physics, equilibrium is the name of the game. The question “how do you get something from nothing” comes up in the question of Creation. Inversion may be a key technique for getting infinity out of zero. It may be a rule that as long as the books balance at the end of each cycle, you can do anything you want with reality.

So I’m thinking that inversions of spin at successive scales may be how equilibrated infinity can emerge from zero and sustain itself, I guess.

A related question: Where does electric charge come from in Haramein’s model?

Any clues anyone?

*1 Quote from David Darling on The Kerr Black Hole (which spins but has no charge):

inside a Kerr black hole

At each event horizon the roles of space and time are reversed; so, in the case of a Kerr black hole space and time swap places twice.

Which pole are we looking at? But that question implies the Universe has a North and a South, and I have no idea if that would be the case. I know, that does not help at all.

The behavior of particles between the Schwarzschild radius and the Kerr event horizon (the ergosphere) is very strange, they can change direction. Depending on stuff I never tried to comprehend. Inside the event horizon space becomes time like, which is hard to intuit.
By the way the next step is a Kerr-Newman black hole which is charged, but it is generally thought the change on a black hole would be too small too be significant - though I suspect that is a guess.

As far as I know Nassim has not published on charge. And more generally I don’t think anybody can tell us what charge is, only how it behaves. DayWitt thinks it is a property of the vacuum particle (like the PSU but Planck radius, and with charge as well as mass) . And uses that to define constants such as gravitation, G = q_P^2 / m_P^2 ( this gives the the right number in cgs units).
http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/html/10.11648.j.ajmp.s.2016050101.14.html

1 Like

@Bob
I understand that to determine spin, place your POV at either pole. If the equator is spinning right that’s clockwise, and if leftward, counter-clockwise. Everything that spins has a north and a south if I’m not mistaken. Isn’t chirality (handedness) is built in to the cosmos? (On the other hand (pun intended) how do you tell the difference between north and south…?)

“Time-like”, yes that’s the word. I think that at each event horizon there is an inversion, creating an alternation between time-like and space-like – spin, oscillation? Movement along the time axis to movement along the space axis?

Really looking forward to what Nassim has to say about charge. It’s an electric universe IMO. Plasma is where it’s at. Hm, this might be it.

Thanks for the clue about the Daywitt model of charge. My intuition is that all physical phenomena are to be derived somehow from the spin (or other motion?) of the Planck oscillator - of h-bar. Thinking maybe charge is an epiphenomenon of the Coriolis effect (or some such) generated at the spinning surface of the proton. Somehow the dynamics of the oscillating double torus explains it, I think.

Does the Planck oscillator itself oscillate between time-like and space-like states, the way a photon alternates between electric and magnetic waves?

Have you (anyone) spent time mulling over the the Module 4 plasma ball model? I think we can map mind and cosmos both onto that model. The inside ball’s surface needs to spin at lightspeed relative to the outer.