The universe is an extremely dense and viscous infinite four dimensional compressible fluid similar to, yet different from, that hypothesized more than 300 years old, attributed to Rene Descartes and subsequently supported and by researched by renown physicist, J. C. Maxwell, and others for many years. The fluid is the fundamental material of which all is composed. Electrons are tornado-like vortices composed of that fluid. Protons and Neutrons are hurricane-like vortices. While the tornadoes and hurricanes that we see in air are much larger, the fundamental particles (electronic, protons, and neutrons) are femto-scopic because of the extreme density of the universal fluid. Also while tornadoes and hurricanes in air have varying sizes, fundamental particles are all of the same size within each type because the universal fluid has no internal structure -- no temperature, no entropy.
This view of the universe has not been supported by the mainstream physics community today because physics dogma, starting about 100 years ago, says that Einstein’s theory of relativity contradicts it. However, in fact, Einstein’s fundamental assumption was and is, “the speed of light is independent of the velocity of the emitter”, and despite all the dogma that says that his theories contradict a liquid universe, the fundamental assumption that underlies all of his work is actually a property of all fluids. In air and water, the speed of sound is independent of the velocity of the emitter. Einstein did not contradict a liquid universe; in 1905 he simply published a means to bypass a problem that others were having with their liquid universe. Specifically, his assumption restated the structure of the universe in terms of one of its functional properties which enabled mathematical progress while others were mired by attempts to identify the physical property providing that function.
The fundamental problem that Maxwell and others had with the liquid universe in the late 19th century and early 20th century was that they could not figure out how matter could move through the liquid without being stopped by it. Maxwell unified electricity and magnetism into one theory. He created our understanding of light and the equations that launched the modern age. His theory suggested to him that Descartes had been right, that we live surrounded by and amid a universal liquid, and that launched a wide range of experiments to find and measure that liquid. All the experiments of the day were consistent with a highly viscous liquid of the type claimed here. However, in the experience of the day such a liquid would stop any particle in motion, which was inconsistent with Newton’s Laws.
The answer to their dilemma has two parts. First, particles are made of the liquid. Second, the liquid has no internal properties. If the liquid had internal properties such as temperature, then the kinetic energy of the particles could convert to temperature of the liquid. Without such properties, particles in motion, comprised as liquid vortices, will remain in motion. A tornado in motion tends to stay in motion. A hurricane in motion tends to stay in motion. Particles as vortices in an ideal highly viscous fluid lacking internal properties resolves all difficulties of previous attempts to understand the universe as a liquid. The large body of experiments performed a century ago already supports the existence of that liquid.
With the supposed fundamental contradiction between Einstein and Maxwell resolved, we can unite the two views. I have done so with mathematical rigor for various aspects in varying degrees of detail. It works, that is, Einstein's mathematics applies to Maxwell's liquid. Relativity is the principle that points in space are indistinguishable from one another by local measurement. Applying this to the liquid universe in four dimensions determines vortex and photon kinematics that reproduce Einstein’s special relativity, as observables. Forces change the shape and motion of the vortices. This changes their observed mass and also changes the density of the liquid in their vicinity. The change in density of the liquid changes the speed of light and the rate of time together in such a way as to be unobservable by any local measure, and yet detectable by non-local measurement. The details are all perfectly consistent with measurements and with Einstein’s theory of special relativity. The liquid universe implements the principle of relativity.
The calculations even explain why we only observe three dimensions. The tornado- and hurricane-like vortices that are particles have extreme length perpendicular to our observable 3D universe. Light is emitted as waves of photons perpendicular to the vortices. Further, their kinematics is such that, once emitted, their motion stays perpendicular to the vortices, following curved paths on surfaces that deform to stay locally perpendicular to all of the vortices. Thus, the photons group into mutually non-interacting sub-sets, each sub-set occupying a curved 3D surface in the 4D liquid universe. As a result, photons in one sub-set on one surface can generally not interact with photons in other sub-sets on other surfaces. These surfaces are adjacent and parallel to each other and occupy all of the 4D liquid space. In a coordinate system in which our observable 3D space can be assigned W=0 as our present, observable universes at other values of W have spatial structure that correlates with our past and our future. However, they are not our past and our future; they evolve themselves and may deviate from our past and future. They are real. Our past and future do not exist anywhere in space. Our past is gone. Our future has not yet occurred.
Gravity occurs because the density of the liquid is reduced near each particle (each vortex) relative to that of the neighboring liquid. This reduces the speed of light in that region. The variation in the speed of light causes light and all particles to bend per the standard laws of refraction. It is the particular spatial dependence of the speed of light near mass, combined with four dimensional particle motions, that make refraction generate particle motion that we recognize as gravity. The reduced density of the liquid also locally changes the rate of time, and it does so precisely such that the measured speed of light remains constant. That is, for gravity and in general, the clocks and rulers vary in space such that we cannot distinguish one point in space from another by any local measurement. The spatially varying clocks and rulers in the liquid universe transform the standard local scalar gravity potential (1/r) into a better behaved though more complex looking form (exp[-γm/r]). As a consequence, in the liquid universe gravity is a smooth continuously differentiable property of space at all radii including at the center of the vortices even for very strong gravitational fields – there are no singularities. Also, as a consequence, the equations for the liquid universe give correct predictions for gravity including for such exotics tests of gravity as the advance of the perihelion of Mercury, which has been used to test Einstein’s general theory of relativity. The speed of light near the Earth is about 1 part in 10 billion less than away from the Earth. The speed of light near the sun is about 1 part in 1 million less than away from the solar system.
Electro-magnetic forces are primarily the forces created by the rotational velocity of the vortices. The spatially varying clocks and rulers in the liquid universe transform the electric potential removing all singularities, as they do with gravity. As a result, the electric energy of all charged particles is finite, without need for ad hoc adjustments required in other theories. When vortices are relatively far apart, the perturbative effects of multiple vortices add linearly. Maxwell’s equations for electro-magnetic forces apply when vortices are sufficiently far apart such that linear superposition applies.
Strong and weak forces occur where the vortices are too close together for linear approximation. They are the non-linear components of the interactions among the vortices. Strong and weak forces express changes to the structure of vortices, combining and splitting them.
The well known equivalence of matter and energy, E=mc2, is true in the strictest sense in the liquid universe. That is, strictly speaking, there is no particle mass separate from the liquid. Rather, the energy of the particles is exactly the sum of the kinetic and potential energy of the liquid as structured into the vortex comprising the particle. Einstein’s famous equation actually defines mass as m = E/c2. That is, his equation says that for any vortex, the the amount of gravity generated by that vortex (which defines its mass) is determined by the energy of the vortex (per unit length) divided by the square of the speed of light.
Galaxies are themselves particles – particles so large that we live inside them. They are not held together by the gravity of the smaller particles within them. Each galaxy is a fundamental vortex of its own in the liquid. As with femto-scopic particles, the galaxy scale vortex creates gravity and by similar mechanism. As a super-huge vortex, it creates smaller vortices quite literally as spin-offs. Those smaller vortices are trapped in the galaxy and their presence enables us to observe the galaxy. This is confirmed in data because the total quantity of fundamental particles (electrons, protons, neutrons, neutrinos, photons, etc.) that we observe in our galaxy is insufficient to generate the gravitational force holding the galaxy together.
It is not clear whether solar systems are a bottom-up aggregate of fundamental particles, as Newton claimed or whether they are a vortex solution of their own that generates and traps fundamental particles as Descartes claimed. While the equations of gravity for the solar system are consistent with Newton’s Laws, observationally, the main difference between Newton’s hypothesis and Descartes hypothesis is only whether the mass of the sun as computed from its gravitational strength is equal to, or greater than, the sum of the masses of all the fundamental particles in the sun. Today, lacking any means or effort to actually count the sun’s fundamental particles or to otherwise differentiate the two views, any preference for Newton’s hypothesis over Descartes hypothesis for solar scale objects is opinion. Certain apparently gravitational anomalies have been seen in our solar system, beyond those expected from General Relativity, which might distinguish the two hypotheses, but analysis of these anomalies has not been performed.
The phenomena described by Quantum Mechanics are generated by the liquid universe in three separate related aspects of fine-scale vortex structure and behavior. One aspect is the Heisenberg uncertainty principle that correlates uncertainty of particle position and momentum. In the liquid universe, this uncertainty is created by the vortex shape along its length. The axis of the vortex is not straight. Rather it coils. The coil has a radius and a periodicity (along the unseen dimension, W). The product of the two determines the well known physics constant hbar, the Dirac constant. In terms of observables, the radius of the coil corresponds to uncertainty in position of the particle. The periodicity of the coil correlates with the uncertainty in the momentum of the particle. Another aspect of quantum mechanics is the probabilistic nature of outcomes – Schroedinger’s cat. This aspect occurs because the vortices have velocity perpendicular to the observable three-dimensional universes. Thus, whatever piece we observe of a vortex at a given time, it is a different piece that we observe the next instant. Because of this transverse motion, precise predictions of particle behavior require 4D knowledge of the universe. However, our knowledge of the full universe is limited to one 3D slice. This lack of knowledge makes our predictions of particle motion probabilistic. The extra dimension provides a long sought “Hidden Variable”. A third aspect of quantum mechanics results from the physical integrity of the vortex. Specifically, in response to a force applied in one location on the vortex, the whole vortex, rather than break, adapts along its length. This creates a tendency for the vortex to respond to the average of the forces applied along segments of its length, rather than to the specific force applied to the 3D particle that we observe. This averaging enables our calculations to be correct on average, even lacking 4D information. This also implies existence of motion that propagates along the vortex thus providing potential coupling among seemingly disconnected points in space.
Mesons and baryons seen to date, other than electrons, protons, and neutrons are unstable vortex structures. Mesons are “excited” tornado-like vortices. Baryons are “excited” hurricane-like vortices. They are higher energy vortex solutions to the fundamental liquid equations. They decay by emission to the corresponding stable low-energy vortex solution. The process of a neutron decaying into a proton and an electron really is like that of a large hurricane spawning a tornado, except that whereas in air the whole process is physically large enough for us to see in detail, in the universal liquid the vortices are femto-scopic.
Anti-particles are typically our observation of vortices passing through our observed universe “upside down”. Such anti-particles typically result from the creation of particle, anti-particle pairs. Each such observed pair is an observation of a vortex that passes through our 3D universe bends around and comes back through our 3D universe at another location, thus with rotation and other properties inverted. This second observation of the vortex, the “upside-down” observation, is the anti-particle. It has inverse electric charge and inverse parity to the particle. Both of the vortices are moving transverse to the 3D universe; if time were to reverse so that the motion of the vortices through the 3D universe reversed, then our identification of which is the particle and which is the anti-particle, would reverse. This is the physical mechanism underlying the well accepted concept of CPT invariance (charge, parity, and time invariance). Some mechanisms may create particles that have only inverse charge or inverse parity. The liquid universe generally supports all variations of a vortex solution that are the same via a symmetry operation (mirror, rotation, etc). The predominant symmetry for particles at any place in the universe may depend on the symmetry properties of that location and of the particle generation mechanism – for example their spinoff as small perturbations from the galaxy containing them.
The detailed mathematics of the liquid universe is well represented using Lagrange mathematics. Lagrange hypothesized that physical systems behave in a manner that results in minimum action of the system, i.e., minimal sloshing of energy between kinetic and potential energy components. Lagrange mathematics is well accepted though not mathematically amenable to all physics theories. The liquid universe and the Lagrange mathematics are very mutually compatible. The Lagrange representation for the kinetic energy term for the universal liquid is as for any liquid. For the potential energy, the particular formulation used to date is the harmonic potential energy of an ideal liquid. That is, the potential energy at each point in space is proportional to the square of the gradient of the density of the liquid at that location. The liquid universe also obeys continuity. That is, the only way for liquid to get from one place to another is to travel there. Liquid cannot disappear from one place and reappear in another. The continuity requirement is included in the Lagrange mathematics as a holonomic constraint, as usual. Also, energy is conserved in the Lagrangian. In fact the only difference between the Lagrangian for the liquid universe and for an idealized classical fluid is that the Lagrangian for the Liquid Universe spans four spatial dimensions.
All the parameters that are currently considered fundamental in physics must derive from the Lagrangian. The Lagrangian described above has only two parameters that can be adjusted to the data -- density of the fluid and the strength of the potential energy. The overall Liquid Universe approach does have some other flexibilities available supporting adaptation of the vision to some subtle observations of the universe. For example, a non-harmonic component of the potential can be added to the potential energy. Also, more dimensions of infinite extent can be added such that three dimensions will still be observed.
Understanding the universe’s origins requires understanding the context and causes of the flow of the liquid. We do not have that context. In a limited case, if the universe really has only four dimensions and if Einstein’s principle of relativity applies at all scales, then the Lagrangian has one solution superficially similar to the Big Bang. In such case, the universe is an expanding 4D sphere and our observable 3D universe is an expanding hollow spherical shell. When examined in detail the solution is not a Big Bang. Rather, the liquid universe shows that such interpretation of universe’s origins as a Big Bang results from failure to scale clocks and rulers. For example, when the universe was 10 billion years younger and correspondingly much smaller, the liquid was much denser. Hence the vortices and the corresponding particles were much smaller, the speed of light was much higher, and clocks ran much faster. A proper accounting of all of these effects shows that an observer in that early universe would observe a universe very similar to that which we observe today. For example, today we measure the universe’s age at between 10 and 15 billion years. Due to scaling of clocks and rulers in accord with the changing density of the liquid, all observers at all times would come up with that same estimate, even when the universe was one year old by our clocks,.
If the universe has more than four dimensions, then the flow of the liquid universe in our little piece of it really depends on the structure of the surrounding universe. We can easily expand the mathematics to analyze the liquid in more than four dimensions. However, we must also note that our liquid universe could itself reside in a different larger context (for example, in a non-liquid universe) and its flow could result from boundary conditions at the interface. A key general principle for extrapolating from our observations to determine the context of our local 4D universe is that the universe is top-down, not bottom up. That is, the liquid flows because of the gross properties of the larger universe. Then, small perturbations in that flow give rise to galaxies, galactic clusters, etc. Those give rise to the fundamental particles. The shape of our observable 3D universe is curved to be locally perpendicular to all of the vortices of all of the particles. A convex or concave shape of our 3D universe in its direction of motion determines whether it is expanding or contracting. A second key general principle for understanding the context for our universe is that we cannot use our current clocks and rulers to interpret the universe’s appearance in the past or the future. Rather, we must first use the liquid density to determine the scaling of time and distance to the past and future. Only then can we interpret the physics of that past or future era.
But for a small twist of fate, the liquid universe might already have become recognized a century ago. Einstein invented special relativity before he invented “wave-particle duality”. This caused Maxwell’s liquid to become rejected before wave particle duality was invented. Had Einstein introduced wave-particle duality first, then people might have realized that if light comprises perturbations of Maxwell’s liquid then so might particles, which could have led directly to a hypothesis of particles as vortices in Maxwell's fluid, which could have led to this theory that much earlier.
When I first presented the basics of this in the early 1980’s at my alma mater, university faculty provided three memorable responses: “People won’t listen until they are ready to listen”, “Have you read ‘Flatland’”, and “Today’s heresy is tomorrow’s orthodoxy”. “Flatland” is a short book about the difficulties experienced by a three dimensional being trying to show a two dimensional being that the universe is really three dimensional. The other two comments are self-explanatory. Even years before that, a professor described to me the process of building physics theory as a series of patches that continue until the whole collapses under their weight, only then to be replaced by a better foundation. Since the mainstream physics community rejected a liquid universe a century ago, physics has been adding patches at an accelerating rate – mass renormalization, quarks, Higgs particle, dark matter, dark energy, collapsed dimensions, and more – all unnecessary in the liquid universe.
Today’s theories are awarded the status of “orthodoxy”, perhaps by groupthink and certainly at odds with their progenitors’ wishes. Einstein himself is widely attributed with rejecting the theories he helped build and trying to start over. Dirac, who combined special relativity and quantum mechanics, and discovered the anti-particle also chided, in a speech I attended long ago and which in part energized this work, in spite of the community’s mathematical accomplishments including his own, that “We do not understand even the electron.”
Key mathematical rigor for the Liquid Universe is published at xxx.lanl.gov, somewhat out of context to avoid suppression by enforcers of the current orthodoxy. This paper provides context for that rigor.
