Well, let’s draw an inference: the only basic presumption we assumed was that T.A.O. had to exist for logical reasons and that it exhibits the simplest structure possible. It cannot be defined more precisely. It does not have any further characteristics either. No matter what we call it, for the underlying T.A.O. it will be only just an arbitrary word. Maybe this reminds us of the first verse of the Gospel of John: In the beginning was the word…

    We realised that the word, in our case the word T.A.O., had to be  compulsorily existent - it is deductively inevitable. We could choose any other word for it: God, Spirit, or Force... Typically every story of the Creation on this earth begins with a word of this kind. We equated T.A.O. with space because space becomes space only through the existence of T.A.O. Its structure is a granularity representing just a little bit more than the Nothingness - but this structure is already able to transmit energetic information in form of impulses which have a slight similarity to waves. In the broadest sense these sequences of impulses can be called light.

    Light of that kind of very hard gamma radiation (i.e. with a very high impulse frequency) had to exist prior to  any form of matter. Surely there was also any other possible kind of impulse form, and it would seem to suggest itself to give each of these energy quanta a particle name of their own - if the physicists had not already done so (without exactly knowing what they were talking about).

   The coincidence  of spatial and temporal conditions produced building blocks of matter which, on their own, represent only energy without possessing any material substance or mass. They are energetic events and we called the first of these events which we discovered proton. About 99 percent of the universe consists of protons of this kind. When we speak about this proton as an element of this world,  we call it hydrogen. It is the simplest element we know.

     If there was only one single proton inside of T.A.O., this proton would be virtually as big as T.A.O. - i.e. in principle as infinite as the cosmos itself. Because all the vibrations of one field of impulses are running into infinity so to speak. A first and only proton would basically be the centre of T.A.O. around which the impulses would propagate radially. If there ever was such a first proton it would have defined that place in the middle of infinity where the universe developed. Moreover it lent a new spherical geometry to the space.

    It does not matter if many protons came into existence spontaneously and at the same time or if they formed gradually at great temporal intervals. The question is why did T.A.O. not just simply remain at rest like a giant crystal - as big empty incomprehensible Nothingness? Obviously it is the same with the rest as with the Nothingness. It is not conceivable without its opposite and does never exist by itself. For that reason, there could have never been a T.A.O. at rest. What should the rest relate to as long as nothing happened in T.A.O.? And is it possible that “nothing” ever happened? That is a simple but significant consideration because it forces us to acknowledge that there could never have been a real beginning of the cosmos! To ask why there isn’t a Nothingness instead of the universe would make just as little sense as racking one’s brains over why T.A.O. - if its existence is unavoidable at all - just didn’t remain at rest!
    We also have to be aware of the fact that all concepts, even Nothingness or rest, could only come about with the events in T.A.O.! Sometime or other, today’s image of the cosmos developed from that. Because up to the moment when impulses met in such a way that protons could come into being there was nothing else but a chaos of disordered impulses.
    So to speak, two protons would divide up T.A.O.. Since they are distributing shoves in all directions, they are immediately in each others way. Because of the oscillations the granules of T.A.O. will without doubt require more space, a larger area than before - as we already demonstrated in figure 1. The more protons came into existence, the more space they took up. Vibrating and oscillating they fought for the space, displaced each other and drew the first boundaries. In this way, energy centres were created in T.A.O. as spherical fields which obstructed one another or penetrated each other as far as their energies (shoves) allowed. Only now did the protons obtain the atomic appearance which we imagine them to have. The mutual influencing and displacement made T.A.O. literally crystallise out into an enormous amount of protons which squeezed each other down to a structure of tiniest spheres so to speak … not dissimilar to their underlying substructure, T.A.O.!

   Now let’s try to depict such a proton field (figure 11). The circle, however, is an imaginary boundary, though, which is never determined by one field alone but also by the adjoining fields. When we draw the spiral path which results form the movement of two impulses into all directions (see figure 10) into this circle we will promptly obtain the picture which the physicists De Broglie and Schrödinger once created of the atom.


    The sketched in harmonious oscillation represents nothing else but an electron wave. The electron, often described as a building block of matter, is actually not a building block and not a flying particle. It is a wave in exactly the sense in which we understand the word wave. It is created by the two impulses running one after the other; the result is a wave-like oscillation circling the field spatially and which can adopt other forms as well. It differs from light above all in that its path is always curved and in its energy content since it was originally the result of two impulses. Therefore differences in spin and mass action are to be expected as well. If we called this energy whizzing around and around a particle, it would not be quite correct - but still the world predominantly believes that the electron is an object. But it is just as little an object as the proton itself.

    When we imagine how the electron impulses oscillate across the indeed imaginary surface of the field it soon becomes clear that it will come to shoves again. Figure 10 revealed already that the result of two spatially displaced impulses has to make every granule they hit oscillate. We sketched the result in figure 11: a further creation of a spiral path (a). Every vibrating proton is therefore emitting new disturbances into all directions which are the same as light in principle but for their energy being much too low. Still, they are similar spiral shoves, and logically all these spirals streaming away have the same sense of rotation, i.e. the same spin. With that the space around the proton receives a new order. Let’s just call it “polarised“. And the force which flows outwards through the shoves and seems to envelop the proton like a shell, we will call electric field because the electron waves are to blame for its coming into existence after all.

   When two protons meet they are not very nice to each other from the outset because they are simply in each other’s way. A priori there is thus a repulsive effect which - not least of all - contributed to the development of the proton’s boundaries. Now, the vibrations of the electric field are coming across each other as well. If the two protons are of like kind, like spirals will meet, too, as shown in figure 12 ( A)


     This means the occurrence of meeting case d). This case is called resistance or reflection. That means in addition to their mutually existing aversion,  the two protons put up resistance against one another; their aversion is intensified. With that an apparently new force is revealed. If we wanted to make the explanation of this force easy for ourselves as the physicists have done so far we could say the cause of this force was a “charge“ and simply determine the proton was “positively charged“. That would result in the postulate:

    “Positive (i.e. like) charges repel each other.“

    But we know by now that the proton has not been charged with anything so that there shouldn’t be any mention of charge. And apparently the term “positive” has to be just as ridiculous! But we are able to imagine that there could be a proton which is vibrating into the other direction. Then a spiral with a right-hand spin and one with a left-hand spin would meet (figure 12, B!) and then case a) would arise. We named it penetration - which means not more and not less than that the impulses don’t take any notice of each other!

    If we now postulated a force - to anticipate things a little - which had the tendency to squeeze the two protons from the beginning it would have  an easy job in contrast to the case before. And ignorant of the true facts we would of course say: one of these two protons has to be “negatively” charged! That would be in accordance with the mnemonic sentence we learned at school:

    “Unlike charges attract each other.” 

    But with this we would be spinning a yarn (and the physicists have done so up to this day) which is quite unreasonably far off the truth because the second proton was charged with nothing either! Apart from the opposite spatial polarisation it is absolutely equivalent to the first. For that reason, we realise: positive and negative are actually spatial concepts. Just as well or even better we could say left and right instead!
Later we will discover that all atoms polarise the space around them either into “left” or into “right” in a characteristic manner and that almost the whole behaviour of matter is determined and controlled by that circumstance.

    Obviously all protons of our universe oscillate in the same direction. If one appeared that was oscillating in the opposite direction, it would be a negative proton so to speak, i.e. an antiproton. If we shoved such an antiproton into a proton, the two opposing impulses would annihilate each other in the moment of their joint centre point: the two protons would dissipate into wild, disordered shoves. Thus, we discovered in a simple way that antimatter can actually exist and that there is nothing mysterious behind this concept.

   Therefore, it goes without saying why obviously all protons are of like kind nowadays and why antiprotons can be created in a particle accelerator at best. If there ever were different protons, they would have immediately stood against each other in lively annihilation. Today’s protons emerged victorious! Their remaining correspon-dence explains many a puzzle of nature like the violation of parity (that is the theoretically expected symmetry of the elementary particles) or the strange fact that living organisms only use left-handed molecular spirals. We will have to discuss these topics in more detail later.

    At this point, we want to note down the following: we already expressed our assumption that protons - and with them in principle the known universe - arose from a kind of chaos of gamma or X-rays. But where is it written that the universe has been finished already? Could it not be possible just as well that there is still chaos surrounding the universe which began expanding from any place of T.A.O.? In this case, this X and gamma radiation should still be detectable somehow - for example as a radiation which would flow in on us from all around exhibiting a strong Doppler shift. Maybe we would identify it as heat at best. Well, this radiation really exists. It is the cosmic background radiation with wavelengths of 3*10 -3 to 30 meters, and at least it does not prove the one thing: the Big Bang...

   And could it not be possible that the war between protons and antiprotons is still raging in the universe, and that we would therefore have to detect mysteriously big expressions of energy coming from these areas which could only be explained with the mutual annihilation of matter and antimatter? These messages from the farthest areas of the cosmos really exist: gamma-ray bursts or quasi-stellar objects whose energy radiation is disproportionate to its (although rather unknown) size. Generally they are known as quasars. But we will present a different explanation for this mystery of astronomy. Prior to that we will think about why such an ethereal structure as the proton appears to be so solid that we call it matter.


German Version