(Origin of Energy, Space and Time)

Please be patient if this web takes some time to install, as there are a lot of photographs and explanatory diagrams.

By Léon-Raoul & Frank HATEM
(Theory registered at the Paris Academy of Science - France - since 1955)


Ten physical experiments to found

The Magnetic Atom

It is unnecessary to set up different laws to explain different phenomena. Magnetic law alone is sufficient to explain the different aspects of energy. This experiment allows us to be sure that the EARTH is a complete magnet, provided with two opposite magnetic poles, as we have proposed, since everything is made up of dualistic mind.

One law alone for all phenomena is what Earth physicists have always been aspiring to achieve.

Because of Newton's law of Gravitation, which describes only attraction (this attraction is in fact a result of several magnetic actions: attraction, repulsion and " degravitation " - we'll explain later what " degravitation " is), physicists state that gravity on the one hand,and the magnetism of the Earth (shown by any compass) on the other hand, are two different fields of energy: magnetism is both attractive and repulsive, while gravity (which causes the weight of things) would be only attractive.

Today, this separation is no longer valid. We will explain later why gravitation only seems attractive although it is both attractive and repulsive. And to show it clearly, we need to build a vertical compass.

Earth's gravitation pulls down any object, which makes us think that the Earth's nucleus is a huge mass of matter attracting everything. But when you use a compass, you see that the swinging needle is drawn by magnetism: the blue end is drawn towards the North (which means it is the South of the needle), and the white one is drawn towards the South.

With a normal compass, the needle is positioned in its center at a point which keeps it horizontal. But you can do a very interesting experiment: if you reverse the polarities of the needle (for instance, by rubbing a bigger magnet on it), you can see that the white end, which becomes the south polarity and thus now shows the North of Earth, plunges downward, while the other end rises. Strange.

However, nothing has changed apart from the polarities. To understand this, you need to know that the white end of the needle is built heavier than the blue one, which is necessary for it to remain horizontal. Compass manufacturers know that. Compasses are always made with the North pole heavier, BECAUSE THE NEEDLE'S NORTH POLE, showing the Earth's South, IS REPULSED BY EARTH'S NORTH POLE; and its extra weight keeps it horizontal. This shows that the orientation of the needle is due to the Earth's poles, and not due to the galactic North or a big mass of iron somewhere underground.

This shows (for those who are really interested in knowledge) that Earth's "gravity" (weight) is able to recognize if a polarity is North or South: the needle's ends are more or less heavy according to their polarities! Even if their masses are just the same. So, "gravity" turns out to be magnetic.

For a better demonstration, we will now build a vertical compass: the needle can swing both in the vertical and the horizontal planes, and it is perfectly balanced on its axis. Horizontally positioned, like any normal compass with its axis vertical, it clearly indicates the North with its blue end (its South).

But vertically, when its axis is horizontal, allowing the needle to swing in a vertical plane (in the East-West direction to avoid magnetic declination), the blue end dives towards Earth's center, while its North end rises to show the sky. Strange. So, apparently, the blue end is much heavier than the white one.

Let's reverse the polarities. Now, the white end is the heavier, and the blue one jumps skyward. Our compass does not show the galactic North, nor the geographic North, but the center of Earth, like an apple falling by gravity.

Now we can be sure that GRAVITATION and MAGNETISM are one and the same thing. Only one field of energy. Earth's nucleus is a complete magnet with two polarities, and not a mass of matter which always attracts anything within reach, as Newton asserted. Earth's nucleus is able to recognize polarities, pulling "opposite" polarities, and repelling the "like" ones (although they are the same). If not, our compass would always remain horizontal in the East-West direction, had gravitation been the same whatever the polarity.

If Earth attracts and repels just as any magnet does, this means Earth is a magnet. Like any mass in the universe.

But because of its enormous mass, compared to any object on it, none of these objects is able to use its own repulsion. Earth always reverses objects' polarities so that attraction is always maintained. But place an apple far form Earth, in outer space, where Earth's magnetism is as weak as an apple's, and you will see the apple become one of Earth's satellites, because it is also a complete magnet, able to attract and to repel.

Now you have good physical reason to believe in our proposition for the origin of atomic particles. Perhaps, since they are bipolar, they are actually born from a violent romance between consciousness's separativity and love. Now we can continue describing the consequences of this.

Maybe you have a magnet somewhere. You know, that instrument which attracts nails or pins or which closes your cupboard doors.

If you have one, hold it between two fingers, and bring it towards your other hand. See what happens.

Is it close enough? So what happens? Nothing? Try again. Is your hand still there? It didn't disappear, reduced to dust? Perhaps you do not understand our experiment.

Maybe you learned at school that matter is composed of positive and negative (and neutral) atomic particles. You also know that magnetic fields deviate particles from their orbits. "Electrons" is the name of "negative" particles, and "protons" the name of "positive" ones.

So, when you bring your magnet toward an object, its magnetic fields, if "positive" on this side, will attract electrons, and repel protons. Isn't that so? You turn it round and it repels electrons and attracts protons.

So, why does your hand remain a hand? How can this be possible since the particles are disturbed by the magnetic field? All atoms close enough to the magnet should be destroyed. Not close enough, you think? So take a very big magnet, a huge magnet, if you like, and put your hand on it: It is still a hand in good health.

Ask a physicist why this is so. He will answer that the equilibrium of the forces within the atom prevents its destruction. This is incorrect. If electrons are negative, they are attracted by the protons. If they do not fall upon the protons, it means that something keeps them in their orbit, WITH A POWER EXACTLY EQUIVALENT TO THE ATTRACTION. If they were not exactly equivalent, they would fall upon the nucleus (protons) or fly away from it.

Mechanically, the power which ejects electrons from the center is their revolving motion in their orbits (centrifugal force). In Quantum terms, only a mathematical artefact named "quantum" accounts for an impossibility to "leap" from one orbit to another, unless a given quantity of energy is added. To give a name or a mathematical equation to an observation does not explain it. Why don't electrons leave their orbit when attracted?

Since particles are not "particles" today, but probabilistic existences, physicists say it is nonsense to imagine a particle falling upon another. It is not nonsense: electrons are supposed to be negatively charged, and protons positively. If so, they attract each other. If they do not, "positive" and "negative" do not mean anything.

A mathematical equilibrium between two opposite forces is not a mechanical one. And in reality, as opposed to in equations, it would be impossible to maintain such an equilibrium. The smallest variation would destroy it. The smallest magnetic influence would move electrons from their previous orbits, and then either the attraction would be a bit stronger and they would fall upon the nucleus, or the attraction would be weaker and they would leave the atom forever. In both cases, your hand would disappear !

Thank "God", physicists are wrong. The atom is not what they believe it to be. Its equilibrium is mechanical, not merely mathematical, thanks to the fact that all particles are at the same time "positive" and "negative". In fact, these two words do not mean anything. Particles are at the same time attractive and repulsive, which is normal since we know that the only energy in the universe, which gives off particles, is MAGNETIC energy.

A particle is simultaneously attractive and repulsive with référence to any other particle. One aspect of it is repulsive to the like aspect of the other, and attractive to its opposite aspect. They cannot be soley in a state of repulsion or attraction with another particle. That is the reason why your hand remains a hand. A particle is attracted by another, but also repelled and with the same strength, and thanks to the "synchronized spins" that this generates, when you disturb it, it balances the disturbance by an acceleration or a reduction of speed in its motion (we shall see this concerning "atomic stability").

So, we shall not use the terms "protons" and "electons" but only "nucleus" and "satellites". They are exactly the same particles but in different circumstances.

The energy we detected in the mind is an energy of love (ATTRACTION) limited by a necessity for separation (REPULSION). Attraction and repulsion make up MAGNETIC ENERGY.

So, the energy we detected in the mind can be called magnetic energy. Magnetic energy is the very energy which builds up the universe. We will see that nothing else is necessary.

In today's science, physicists teach that the atom is made up of FOUR different energies, and sometimes five or six: "gravitation", "electro-magnetism", "strong" and "weak" forces.

In fact, these four kinds of energy are the consequence of only one energy: magnetic energy, i.e., MIND. Depending upon the circumstances, this one energy produces such and such a behavior, to which physicists give special names. But the source is the same. We will show this by describing the birth of an atom. Excuse us if this is a little long, but there is much to be said.

Every Point Of The Universe Is The Entire Act Of Rejecting Infinity And Of Internalizing It.. It Is Not A Part Of This;

Thus, Every Point Of The Universe Is Universe's Entire Consciousness And Entire Love,

And Every Atom The Source Of Its Whole Energy.

Every Atom Is "God".

And every being too.

Everything is the aim flying towards itself.


YOU: Now I know that there are particles everywhere in my universe, particles which are determined by my level of love, so particles which all have the same quality of matter, and the same duality since they are a compromise between my love and my egoism. But not the same size. Some are big, some are small; this is not important. Then what?

Léon Raoul HATEM: The main thing is that there is ONLY ONE KIND OF PARTICLES: two-pole ones. And generally they are spherical, since it is the most natural form, where all influences are equivalent. Another shape requires special circumstances.

They are not rods; they are spheres; but they try to fall upon one other. And they do so as long as they can.

Can they always do so? They can as long as the distance between them is not too large.

We know that proto-particles fall upon one other as long as they are able to. They put their poles in maximum attraction and fall. And then they build bigger and bigger proto-particles, including more and more energy, but separated by a greater and greater distance.

At a given moment, it becomes impossible for them to fall upon each other any more. Why? Since the distance is now very great, the difference between attractive and repulsive power becomes almost null (see figure below). This is because the distance between two poles of the same magnet is very small compared to the distance between two magnets. Distance prevents any brutal movement. The two proto-particles attract and repulse each other with almost the same power.

Attractions and repulsions

equivalent in all positions.

When the distance is large.

When the magnets are close to each other (figure 1), attraction can be stronger than repulsion. When they are far from each other (figure 2), they are almost equal (next figure). The further the distance between magnets, the less difference there is between attraction and repulsion.

Thus, at a given moment, the "chaos" becomes stable. It is not "chaos" any longer. All proto-particles have now reached their optimum size, and cannot take in more energy from space. The void is very deep between these large concentrations of energy, more and more concentrated.

Peace? Unity? Almost peace, because it is not yet unity. Not unity at all. They still feel the presence of other proto-particles around them, they still want to unite with them, but they cannot any longer. What do they do?

They do what they can, what they are obliged to do: Despite this, they maximize attraction between one another by turning their attracting poles in each other's direction, slowly because the power is very weak due to the distance, and the "mass" very big: Their inertia, the mental inertia of their mental mass, is very hard to move. But they do move a little. In fact they turn a little bit, because they are not rods, but spheres of magnetism, whose polar axes are almost, but not quite,parallel, and their four poles are not in the same plane.

Why is this so? Because all those whose axes were completely parallel, or more or less perpendicular, or with their poles in the same plane, fell upon one another. There only remain those which cannot fall.

The same thing happened in our sky, which is the same field of proto-particles at another level. All particles which were between these two levels were absorbed by the upper one or by the lower one. But our sky is the lower level of another upper level. And our atoms are the upper sky of a sub-atomic level. And so on. There is no limit. Because there is no reason for points, at the beginning, to have a volume. Every level of size exists. In fact, it means that only one level does exist. But mind separates its origin and its goal. I separate my past, under my feet, and my future, above my head. Earth and Heavens. In fact, there is no "top" and no "bottom". Only mind which always feels itself to be in its own middle. Mind separates the planets and the atoms. But it is just the same. Mind exists on every level.

Why atoms instead of nothing? Because it is impossible for matter to gather together into one single point, as big as a pin-head, as it would be if those who believe in "big bang" were right. It could be so if matter were only attractive; if gravitation were a reality. But gravitation is not a quality of matter itself. It is a result of magnetic motions. It comes from magnetic duality. Since matter is made up of dualistic particles, it cannot be concentrated in one place. Concentration stops at a given moment, and then they cannot do better than spin and revolve around each other. You will understand this soon.

To understand better, take two magnets. It is even easier with magnets whose shapes are elongated, like a rod. Put them on a table. Not too far from each other. You see: They cannot remain steady. They try to fall upon each other, and to do that, they sometimes have to turn their poles towards each other's opposite polarity.

Now they form a single magnet. There are no longer four poles but only two. The behavior of this putting together of magnets becomes the behavior of a single magnet. Two wills became one will, just as the cells forming your body build your own mind.

It was impossible for these two magnets to stand still. They were obliged to move and touch each other. It is a necessity. Of course, you can prevent them from touching, or delay their meeting as long as you want. But if they are alone in space, they are bound to move.

On earth, if the distance between them is too big, they do not move. They do not affect each other. Because of the Earth's power of attraction. But in free space, whatever the distance, they turn and tend to fall towards each other.

Did these magnets consume any energy in order to move? No. They did not consume any magnetic energy, nor any other kind of energy. No gasoline, no electricity. You did not push them. You did not throw them, using your own energy. You did not order them to move. They decided by themselves.

In fact, they do not consume energy because they only recover their natural state of being: more unity. Life does not consume energy to evolve. It only consumes some by resisting its natural state of being, in order NOT TO evolve. This is why we get old and get tired: we resist ourselves. And this is why saints, who do not resist "God", can live without eating.

So, motion is possible in the universe without consuming any energy. Only love (Nothingness's necessity applied to consciousness) is necessary, between poles in a state of attraction. Then they move. There is a creation of energy. Of work. Of motion. A kinetic energy is born which performs work (magnets are heavy to move), and which is not balanced by a consumption. Interesting.

YOU: I think I understand: If your particles are real MAGNETS, with two polarities, the universe can start without any outer intervention or consumption of energy. It is its own source of movement. So, I AM MY OWN SOURCE OF LOVE.

Spontaneous genesis of motions (kinetic energy) if everything is magnetic

L. R. H.: Exactly. Now look at this little machine (figure 2): Two magnets are affixed on a vertical axis as shown in the figure above. The first one is moved by an engine, the second one is free. They are affixed so that they can alternately exhibit their two polarities to one another. The turning speed of the first magnet (A) is rather slow (about three spins per second) , and can be controlled at will. The second magnet (B) on the other vertical axis, extremely free, is affixed to a rigid arm able to come and go more or less close to magnet A. Magnet B's mass is increased by a wheel giving it more inertia.

Same apparatus seen from above (drawing)

and in reality (photo)

This little machine will help us to discover the subtlety of the mechanism of the Universe, for the universe is very simple, but harbors a great deal of extraordinarily subtle details, each one a monument of intelligence. Many of them are revealed by such a simple machine, in which the behavior of turning magnets (planets and atoms' particles are turning magnets) can be shown. And most of all, this apparatus gives all the necessary proofs of my theory's accuracy. If stars and planets are really whole magnets with two poles, they cannot behave differently.Of course, the conditions of distance and of the atmosphere etc. are different, but the main phenomena concerning turning magnets are still the same.

If we find the reason why these magnets start spinning and turning forever around their axes, from absolute steadiness, with some of the reasons for also revolving around each other, and if we understand why they are able to withstand any external intervention without braking their motion and without breaking their balance, then we will have explained the mechanical principle of the universe.

More than that, it will show us a principle of self-acceleration and automatic speed-limitation, leading to an equilibrium between masses, distances, and speeds, giving perpetual self-maintainance, with, moreover, the capacity for evolution and transformation.

I suggest six parts for my demonstration:

I - Origin of gravitation;

II - Birth of the first motions of atomic particles, starting from absolute steadiness (original stable state), and self-acceleration to achieve enormous speeds (more or less 50 000 km per second);

III - Self-acceleration of motions

IV - The phenomenon of DEGRAVITATION, unknown by Earth physicists, but absolutely necessary for the universe to exist;

V - Origin of orbital (revolving) motion;

VI - General harmony and regularity of all motions, maintained by their own means, and providing matter with stability whether you move it, hit it or heat it.


Magnet A spins around its vertical axis thanks to an engine working at an even and rather slow speed. The second one (B) is not motorized, but can also spin around a vertical axis affixed to an articulated arm allowing its back and forth motion relative to magnet A; but B cannot touch A. No engine causes B to turn or move.

Two different situations allow us to understand the effects of "gravitation".

1°) Magnet A is spinning thanks to the engine. If the second one doesn't turn, or turns at another speed, they sometimes attract each other, sometimes repulse one another, and magnet B comes and goes alternately: ATTRACTION AND REPULSION are equal between them.

2°) After a while, the two magnets turn at the same speed, and synchronize their motions: at each half turn, there's always attraction between A and B's poles. Then, there's PERMANENT ATTRACTION BETWEEN THE TWO MAGNETS: they always remain as close to each other as they can. B never withdraws from A, REPULSION IS INVISIBLE, although there is still a repulsive force, since they are magnets. When magnets are turning, they need to be synchronized in order to attract each other. If not, they cannot; they remain mutually indifferent.

figure 5 : synchronized rotations yield permanent attraction.

That is what NEWTON's "gravitation" explains: planets and stars are complete magnets, but we think they are only attractive, for we cannot see repulsive effects: their nuclei spin in synchronized fashion, so that they are always in attraction. That's what explains harmony and steadiness in galaxies, and most of all, the fact that planets spin and remain spinning. As strange as it may seem, scientists don't know why planets spin around. They think this serves no purpose, when in fact it provides the source of gravitation. They can't explain why planets turn on their axes in about 24 hours, 12, 6 or 48 hours, which allows synchronism and attraction (the genesis of these motions is explainable only if planets are complete magnets). The nucleus of the sun spins on its axis in 24 HOURS just as does the Earth's. But since it is very big (1,300,000 times bigger than Earth), its surface cannot turn at such a speed.

To confirm this, we shall call upon another experiment, and then come back to our apparatus.

the SUN

the nucleus spins in 24 hours.

(About 1/10th of the whole mass). But the rotation at the equator requires 25 days (27 days at latitude 45°).

Between the nucleus and the surface, the magma is liquefied by swirling at slower speed

than the nucleus, and rubbing, producing

heat and light.

The sun's magma turns in 25 days at the equator, 27 days at latitude 45 °, and 30 or 35 days at the poles. This is the absolute proof that the nucleus spins faster than the rest of the mass. This difference in speeds produces heat increase, until stabilization is reached.

Since the nucleus is obliged to turn in synchronization with all the nuclei of the galaxy ( which gives it its cohesion), a rubbing together of the different layers of the sun occurs, which increases the heat, and makes the matter fluid and the sun bright. That's why big stars shine, whereas planets, which are smaller, do not. The heat of the sun is never caused by nuclear explosions: They are the consequence of heat and not the cause. This clears up the fact that the Sun and the other stars live long, and generally remain at almost the same temperature all their lives, sometimes increasing, sometimes decreasing, but not always decreasing, or increasing up to the point of explosion, which would soon happen if physical theories were accurate.

Of course, the nucleus of the Sun spins in 24 hours (or an entire multiple or submultiple). If it did not, IT COULD NOT ATTRACT THE EARTH. Only synchronized spins produce gravitation between stars and planets. Our apparatus shows that clearly.

Prof. Maurice ALLAIS, French Nobel Prize winner, is a great creator of experiments. He created a pendulum which he called "pendule paraconique anisotrope", i.e., a pendulum which, without any restraint, can swing in any orientation, and manifests different physical properties, particularly in its swing direction. This reveals a blatant anomaly in classical conceptions of pendula swings, founded on Newtonian gravitation.

Thus, according to Newtonian gravitation, the swinging mass of a pendulum should endlessly maintain the orientation starts off with: it is obliged to pass regularly at the vertical of its position. But this is simply not so: This pendulum shows very important changes in its swing direction, and in a very regular way, as if the vertical direction were changed. No physical law is able to explain such changes.

Modifications occur after regular periods of 24 hours and 24 hours 50 minutes, and are greatly accented during the eclipses of the Moon and Sun.

Prof. Maurice Allais thinks that these variations are due to gravitational phenomena in accordance with the couples: Earth-Sun and/or Earth-Moon.

In fact, the vertical of a position changes regularly. Its direction is not aimed towards the center of the planet, but towards an "iso-dynamic" center, which is the balance-point between the planet's two poles..

We know that the nucleus of the Earth, Moon and Sun are bound to be perfectly synchronized, which involves permanent attraction among them. Between the Sun and Earth, for instance, every 12 hours, two poles start attracting each other while the two others start "degravitating" (see further on about "degravitation"), i.e., they stop drawing each other backwards magnetically.

We also know that, for other reasons, when two poles approach each other, they lose much of their influence upon the objects around them, and recover this power when they move away from each other.

Thus you can understand that, every 12 hours (12 h 25 for the Moon because of its relative position) a pendulum which followed one orientation, passing by one vertical, is subjected to this loss of magnetic power when the inversion occurs: one pole of Earth coming into attraction with the opposite pole of the Sun decreases in magnetic influence while the opposite pole increases. Twelve hours later, it recovers its influence and the opposite pole of earth weakens. Hence the isodynamic point of vertical attraction moves as the point of equilibrium between the two poles changes, changing the vertical and hence the orientation of the pendulum swing.

Eclipses accentuate the phenomenon when the Moon's motion and the Sun's motion are added together, proving that this variation actually comes from the Sun.

We already know that the Moon is totally synchronized with Earth (everybody can notice its "libration" motion every 12 hours), but thanks to Prof. Allais's pendulum, we now have a quite solid proof that the Sun is also synchronized.

Every star of our galaxy, every planet, follows the same rhythm of spin (or an entire multiple, or submultiple of 24 hours: 12, 48 etc.), and it's thanks to this that it remains a galaxy. This rhythm would build up progressively, unavoidably, if they were all real magnets. They are: it's impossible to explain the origin of gravitation if it is not magnetic, but it's easy to explain two-pole magnetism. And astronomers are observing more and more examples of repulsion in planetary motion. If planets are magnets, our apparatus shows that THEY CANNOT remain in attraction unless their spins are not synchronized.

It also shows that an acceleration of motion is possible without any input of energy, thanks to " degravitation ".


L. R. H.: We will soon understand that there's no external wave which causes particles to move, but that particles produce that motion by themselves, motion which immediately generates the "associated wave" which can be observed.(many physicists think that the wave comes from the outer universe and makes the particle move; it is the opposite: the particle produces a wave because of the regular alternance of rotating polarities: North field, south field, north field, south field, and so on, in all directions. This is felt as a wave.

We call upon two magnetic rods to materialize two concentrations of magnetic energy, but it's just the same with cubes, balls or anything. Our next figure shows two rods, with two poles for each of them: North and South. Imagine they are free, without any external influence, in any relative positions, and at any distance from each other. What will they do?

Figure 7

Spontaneously, as soon as they are in sight of each other and whatever the distance, they will simultaneously start moving to line up their four polarities, minimizing the distance between the two poles in attraction between which the distance was previously the smaller (this is an experiment anyone can do). There are eight reasons for this:

1 - Magnetic fields extend themselves to the infinite, without any limitation of distance, and are partly absorbed by any contrary magnetic field (because of the necessity of Nothingness's unity);

2 - Magnetic fields extend themselves in all directions simultaneously, divided into two different polarities absolutely equivalent in power, since the effect of apparent matter only occurs where consciousness balances love. We name these two polarities North and South.

3 - Opposite polarities attract each other by absorption of the magnetic fields.

4 - Like polarities repel each other, their fields refusing each other.

5 - Every mass or magnet has a CENTER OF GRAVITY separating the mass into two equal parts. The magnet can turn around that center to orient its poles.

6 - Two magnets always have a preferential position towards each other:

- Either attraction is the stronger, if two poles in attraction are closer than the other poles;

- or repulsion is the stronger, if two like poles are closer than the other poles. Balance is impossible between two magnets, even when attractive and repulsive forces are equal. They always pull their poles apart in repulsion, and draw them closer in attraction.

7 - Magnets always try to put their four poles on the same plane, whatever their shapes and volumes.

8 - Magnets in repulsion never remain in repulsion. They always manage to put their poles automatically in attraction, turning in required directions, helped by both attraction and repulsion.

So, without any external intervention, without any decision, any magnets free in space, wherever they are, spontaneously start moving, seeking nearest positions for mutual absorption, whenever possible. Then, if all masses of the universe are magnets, they don't need any push or "big bang" to get energy to move. They immediately create a little kinetic (motive) energy, without consuming energy. THEY CANNOT REMAIN STEADY.

This is "God"'s first impulse.

What we have just said about rods is also true for magnetic spheres. For spherical magnets, the relative positions at the beginning are fairly important. The orientation of each magnet's polar axis has consequences for further motions. For very simple reasons, the concentrations of magnetism which populate the space are spherical, or tend to become more and more so.

Fortunately for us. Because spheres, in fact, do meet the criteria required to form any atomic or planetary system. You can see in the previous figures that the circles drawn by the poles around the rotation axes, can be very different and take place at any latitude: This depends on the orientation of magnetic polar axes. The figure below shows the most frequent case of magnetic relationship between two spheres when they begin turning. The poles face each other on two lines joining the two spheres (A's S and B's N, B's S and A's N) and, when they spin on two planes. (S for South, N for North).

Figure 8

The positions of the two magnets, before any motion begins, are very important. Motions' extents rely upon them when the magnets try to put their four poles on the same plane, and they cannot do this if the four poles are in the same plane (generally, they are not). When trying to do so, they will have to rotate to show their poles in attraction to one another, and minimize the distances between the two poles in attraction (A's N and B's S) which were closer. Hence the two others (A's S and B's N) get further from each other, turning symmetrically in the second plane.

You will observe that as soon as a sphere starts spinning, it becomes a GYROSCOPE, prohibiting a change in the orientation of its rotation axis. This means that the rotation axis of both spheres together makes an angle which can neither increase nor decrease. This is very important: when something happens to disturb the atom, the only possible change will be in the speeds of rotary motions and in distances, not in orientation. This will give the atom its solidness. If this angle could be changed, it would be unable to resist disturbances.

Well, you understand now how the first motion of an atom starts: as soon as you have spherical concentrations of magnetism (there are reasons for that, which we explained before), far from each other, they try, as does any magnet, to line up their four poles (if they are in the same plane), in order to fall upon each other. But when the poles are on two different and parallel planes - and it's often so with spheres - they are bound to start turning to maximize attraction and try to fall. So, there's a beginning of motion WITHOUT ANY OUTER INTERVENTION. Only attraction and repulsion intervene (repulsion accentuates the motion symmetrically with attraction).

If they are quite close to each other, they not only will fall upon each other, but spin several times while falling, or only balance if one of the two is too big. They will never achieve perpetual motion. But if the distance is great between the two spheres, for instance, like stars and planets, and the poles are not on the same line nor on the same plane, it becomes impossible for them to fall upon each other: They automatically start a parallel, rotating motion, and will never stop: They are obliged to accelerate and build up a perpetual planetary or atomic system!


Today, since science believes in Newton's "only attractive" gravitation, without repulsion between masses, what we are going to describe of course looks impossible. Physicists generally think that if all planetary motions were stopped, all spheres would fall upon one another, because only a supposed "initial" motion maintains distances in spite of attraction. This is not true: attraction generates motions, and repulsion maintains distances.

Since masses are magnets (attractive and repulsive) their behavior is quite different from that supposed by physicists. Certain observations demonstrate that they are magnets. And that's enough to explain a universe creating itself without need of any explosion to provide it with motive power. Until now, we have seen only the first push. This is a lot, but not sufficient. We also need more and more speed for our magnets to reach the high velocity they exhibit. They can't help reaching it.

To understand this acceleration, we need to look again at our little machine with turning magnets, one of which is moved by a little engine. Since our readers cannot look at it, I shall describe what happens.

1 - When the first magnet is steady, in any position, the other one, which is free to turn, spontaneously rotates on its axis so as to put itself in maximum attraction. This is normal.

2 - If magnet A is steady, and you make B turn on its axis, the latter no longer tries to be in maximum attraction: It does not react to magnet A because of equality between alternating attraction and repulsion. The rigid arm to which it is affixed allows us to place it as far as we want from magnet A. Wherever you place it more or less close to A, it remains where it is, or comes and goes, rotating from time to time. Physicists generally think that attractive power is only a matter of mass and distance; we show that it is not only so: It is also a matter of relative motion between masses.

3 - Now we cause our two magnets to turn together, but at different speeds. You can see the same phenomenon. There is neither permanent attraction nor repulsion between them. They almost ignore each other, as though they were not magnets. Sometimes closer, sometimes further, the distance where you place them remains roughly the same. They have no will at all to fall upon each other, but when they don't move, they actually do, since they are magnets.

4 - Now we make A turn (with the engine) at a regular and somewhat slow speed. But not B. Then B starts balancing on its axis, showing alternately its South and North poles to A. The arm is now fixed in order to maintain an unchanging distance between the two magnets). It is absolutely impossible for B not to follow A's movement, balancing itself instead of turning (this is the explanation of the Moon's swing motion around its axis ("libration") instead of rotation.

Some other planets do the same with the Sun. A great mystery for today's astronomers and physicists, which wouldn't be so if they admitted that all planets are whole magnets and not only attractive matter.

5 - Now, we are going to observe the most important relative motion between two magnets: HARMONY. I mean: "symmetrical synchronized parallel spins". This allows the birth and existence of the universe, because it makes up eternal and stable atomic systems.

We launch our magnet A using its engine, but controlling its rotary speed: First, very slowly, to allow magnet B to start turning by itself, then a little faster: then MAGNET B ACCELERATES. Then at full speed, and magnet B follows (it was maintained at a short distance from A).

Yes, you actually read "accelerates". You may be surprised because, if you learned physics in school, you learned that any acceleration is abslolutely impossible without consumption of energy. Magnets do not consume energy to move together. Now, magnet B consumes no energy at all. Only A is moved by an engine... and B follows, only moved by magnetic links. And it's not a product of our imagination. If you have such an apparatus in front of your eyes, you cannot contest it. Magnet B started its motion by itself, accelerated, and is now still turning, at a very high speed, just like magnet A.

YOU: Yes, A and B seem to be driven by the same power, although only A is motorized. But physicists already know about magnetic gears.

L. R. H.: It is impossible to really explain magnetic gears with today's Physics. Even more incredible: magnet B has more power than A, the one which is moved by the engine.

YOU: What do you mean by "more power"? The two magnets turns at the same speed!

L. R. H.: A is moved by an engine. So it produces no energy at all: No effort is required on its behalf to defeat mechanical frictions. But B turns exactly at the same speed as A! And as long as A turns , B also turns, and at the same speed. In fact, it means that B has more power than A, more power in order to overcome braking factors, adding it to its rotary power. And see what happens now: I am pressing on the wheel of magnet B to increase friction, and brake its speed down. And what do you notice?

YOU: B continues at the same speed.

L. R. H.: Yes. It means that when I try to oppose its motion (not too much of course), it ACCELERATEs again to make up for the loss of speed that my pressure should cause. Isn't that extraordinary?

YOU: Physicists must be amazed by this, aren't they?

L. R. H.: Until now, most of them refused to see it. Well, we can let our two magnets spin in synchronism (A's N facing B's S when B's N is far from A's S, and vice versa). B will never stop by itself as long as A turns.

YOU: Could you place another magnet on A's other side, which would also turn?

L. R. H.: This is the same machine with THIRTY-TWO magnets turning at the same speed in a circle. And only one is moved by a tiny engine like this one. You could even build one, if you want, with millions of magnets, tons of magnets, turning at a high speed without incurring any consumption of energy, apart from for this tiny engine, which consumes no more energy when all the magnets turn than when only one turns. And I can show you that machine whenever you want. It shows that if the spheres in the sky are magnets, the universe doesn't need energy to work. It creates it's own motive energy.

YOU: If there's an engine somewhere.

L. R. H.: No. This machine needs an engine because it is built on Earth, to overcome mechanical braking. But I'm going to explain to you how it starts in the sky by itself, when there is no friction, and no planetary gravity.

YOU: You are sure that there's a build-up of momentum?

L. R. H.: Look. I break the synchronism: Now, magnet B turns slower than magnet A. Then, as we saw before, they stopped attracting each other, and magnet B moved a little bit away from magnet A. But if I reduce B's speed only a little and oblige it to stay close to magnet A', look what happens! It increases its speed in order to be synchronized again with A. Now you cannot say that there's no auto-acceleration. And everyone who wants to perform the same experiment will observe the same incredible effects. Only incredible for physicists, because for the universe, it's normal and always has been. Thanks to this phenomenon, the universe still exists today as it did yesterday in spite of all the influences atoms receive. For physicists, B shouldn't turn, because, apparently, there's absolute equality between all the magnetic efforts. In appearance only, because in fact, this is not so. And as long as A turns, B will also turn provided nothing inhibits their synchronism. If I stop the engine, magnet A stops and B slows down until it stops, because of mechanical friction. This shows that when it turns, it is able to overcome this friction. Where does this energy come from?

YOU: In any case, this experiment is done with one magnet moved by an engine. It is not so in the universe, and God cannot launch every particle of every atom, and every planet to cause it to be synchronized with others. So?

L. R. H.: This figure shows our two magnets. Alternately, two poles become closer and the two others pull away, at each half turn. There's attraction between the two poles which pull away. Then there's always an average attraction between the two magnets, without any variation of power. Apparantly. And magnet B should remain steady. Pulled ahead on one side, held back on the other with the same power, and moreover slowed down by mechanical friction, how can it turn? Something unknown causes a production of energy, an acceleration able to impede the mechanical braking. You will notice that, in the universe, this brake doesn't exist because there's no metallic frame, no air around it, etc. There, the phenomenon of acceleration must be even more efficient.

The reason for this acceleration lies in a very small phenomenon, a law that Newton didn't notice, and that is absolutely necessary for his Gravitation Law to be complete. Today, this law has a name: "DEGRAVITATION". Degravitation is the main part of this theory of atoms. It shows that gravitation is not only a matter of distances and masses, as Newton said, but also a matter of motion.

Produced by the simultaneous pulling away of two poles in a state of attraction, (of two different magnets, of course), degravitation enables an atom's birth, and its evolution, just as any planetary system's birth.

Most of our webs are free, although many people think the information they contain is worth Nobel Prices, and really can make a difference.
If you want us to continue, and can help us, please donate, by a kind click on button below.
Thank you very much indeed.


Newton's system, which until now has presided over official astrophysical mechanics (but there would be no reason for it to be different from that of atoms', if the means of investigation were the same) relies upon an initial speed (alledgedly coming from the "big bang"), balancing the attraction of a star's gravity. And then, the planet instead of continuing its route on a straight line, revolves around the star. The whole universe, for Newton and his successors, relies upon an initial launch. And will therefore die when motive energy is consumed. Our system relies upon a perpetual acceleration, but an acceleration limited by mechanical laws which also exist in Newton's system, but which he never took into consideration. It means that if the universe were living in accordance with Newton's system, the braking resistances would have killed any motion by now. With degravitation, things are quite different. I'll try to explain it as simply as possible because it represents the basis of all life in the universe.

YOU: Degravitation? Doesn't this word mean something like levitation? Or is it the elimination of gravity on something in motion, balancing the Earth's attraction, as with a satellite?

L. R. H.: No. Degravitation is the natural phenomenon of eliminating magnetic braking when two poles in a state of attraction pull away, for some external reason. Attraction remains, but becomes inoperative (unable to brake the motions) because of relative motions in the couple of magnets. The Sun and the Earth, or the nucleus of an atom and one of its satellites (an "electron") are couples of magnets.


An object B pushed away from magnet A reduces its speed until it comes back. Attraction is reduced at the same rate.

Attraction is an interpenetration of the magnetic fields of two objects. It's "becoming one with two". It's reciprocal: if an apple falls to Earth, it means that the apple also attracts the earth, even if its attraction is too weak to be visible.

Repulsion is a refusal of magnetic fields. They reject each other: This is a will to remain oneself, alone.

Attraction acts according to the reverse of the square-distance: twice as much distance between two magnets, with four times less attraction. The picture shows those values between a magnet A which doesn't move, and a magnet B becoming more distant. In the left-hand column, you can see the distances, doubled each time, from line C to line D. In the right-hand column, you can see the values of attraction.

An object B which is pushed away from A would be, whatever its speed, slowed down immediately because of the attraction, without any limit in distance. It is the same for something you throw vertically into the air. The Earth moves, of course, but remains quite steady, relative to the object. And the object will one day fall (unless, after a while, it's more attracted by another planet, or by the Moon for instance). This means that speed isn't sufficient to free an object if there's no external attraction. Sooner or later, it comes back.

However, there's a way of completely freeing the object from the magnet attracting it. And it's not repulsion (repulsion, we said, always manages to place magnets in attraction, making them turn); and it's not suppressing the attraction; it's suppressing the EFFECTS of attraction, by withdrawing simultaneously the other magnet (the one which slows down the first one): then we eliminate the effect of attraction and braking.

This is exactly what happens with our little machine. At each half turn, the two poles which were getting closer start getting SIMULTANEOUSLY further away. Attraction increases between the approaching poles, but between the distancing ones, attraction doesn't brake: it's inoperative. Strange? Not really. Once we have demonstrated it, you will understand quite well. Anyway, you understand that if there were any braking between the poles drawing apart, magnet B couldn't turn. It turns because there's never any braking balancing the attraction increases between the approaching poles. Once you understand this, you will know how the universe can appear and live.

left hand side: magnetic braking 

right-hand side: suppression of magnetic braking (degravitation)


These two drawings show that the same body, attracted with the same force in the beginning on the line of contact C, and given the same ascenting speed in both cases, crosses areas that are regularly reduced by half in the second case, in comparison to the first.

Once the distance from B to B' has been covered, the difference in attraction gives, e.g., from 1/64th to 1/256th fo limits G and G'.

This figure shows that when the two poles move away from each other, the decrease in attraction is always the same as the decrease in figure 5, but always one line in advance, although the pole has not been obliged to cover the distance necessary in figure 5: The decreasing rate is sufficient to free magnet B' without any will to come back.

YOU: Will you tell us why attraction becomes inoperative between your mutually separating poles?

L. R. H.: Sure. Look at the figure, comparing a magnet (B) leaving a steady one (A), which accords with Newton's Law, and two magnets moving away together from each other, where Newton's Law is insufficient:

We know that the first one isn't free. Sooner or later, it will come back. The second one will never come back because, when its speed decreases, the distance between the two magnets increases by as much, exactly compensating the loss of speed. If you divide your speed by 2, but at the same time multiply the distance by two, it's exactly as if your speed didn't decrease. And that is true at every moment,at every point during their route. So magnetic braking is inoperative. Exactly as if there were no attraction between the separating poles.

That's the reason why there's no balance between attraction increase and braking. Attraction increase is always alone. Hence there is a speed-increase.

YOU: It seems so simple that we wonder why physicists never saw this!

L. R. H.: They couldn't because they never observed magnets to explain the universe. And now they don't want to hear about it. It's too simple. They spend too much money on discovering very few things. They generally refuse to imagine that they could answer the greatest questions in the world with only five dollars worth of magnets.

YOU: In fact, the magnet is twice as far away in case two than in case one, when speed is divided by two. In case one (figure 5), the decrease in speed produces the same decrease in distance, and for that reason, it will stop sooner or later; in case two (figure 6), it produces no variation at all in distance. Therefore it's as if there were no attraction to brake the speed. This is fantastic!

L. R. H.: This is normal. It can't be anything else. If you study it in terms of distances, as if you stopped the two magnets at a given moment, surely you would think that Newton's precept is also OK in this case. But the problem is different: It is a matter of motion, not of position.

Each time a pole covers twice such a distance from another steady pole, attraction is divided by 4. But if at the same time, the other magnet also moves in the other direction, the decrease rate is not 1/4 but 1/6. That supplementary decrease is enough to balance the decrease of speed, also divided by 4, and then to let the magnet turn at an even speed all the time, always the same. Don't forget that this is mainly true in the case of turning magnets, having some inertia, synchronized, and not if you pull one and push the other. It's a spontaneous phenomenon in the case of self-generated rotation, in which kinetic energy is the only acting force.

You will also notice that in our example, or with our machine, the magnets are of the same size, volume, and weight. Of course, in planetary systems, and probably also in atoms, there's no reason for spheres to be equal in size. This doesn't alter the law. We can formulate it this way:


Then the attraction pulling on each one decreases to the square of twice the distance thus created between them, instead of the square of the simple distance when one of them is steady. IT IS ONLY A MATTER OF RELATIVE, RECIPROCAL MOTION, AND NOT OF DISTANCE (this is why mathematical analyses discount Degravitation: they only compare the distances and the attraction at a given moment).

Now it is easy for you to understand why magnet B turns, in our experiment, even though only magnet A is powered by an engine. You know why there are attractive and repulsive spheres in the sky, why they are obliged to start turning and why they speed up. But what about revolving motions ? The Earth spins around its own axis, but it also revolves around the Sun. Why?


Figure 12 : orbital drive # I

It is not capable of reproducing natural circumstances; nonetheless, the wheel cannot help but move around while the different couples of magnets spin in harmony. All of them make the wheel turn, as if they were satellized on their orbits. The figure below shows how a nucleus drives its satellite's orbital motion.

Figure 13 : Orbital drive # 2

In real conditions, planets and particles do not revolve around each other. In fact, they revolve around the GRAVITY CENTER of the system. In the system "Earth-Sun", and in the whole solar system, the gravity center is inside the Sun, near its surface. So, we believe that every planet revolves around the Sun, whereas they revolve around the center of gravity of the entire system. This is so because planets are much smaller than the Sun, and this is the same in any system where the central star is very large compared to the stars around it.

This revolving motion enables the work provided by the system to be balanced. By revolving very far at high speeds (revolution speeds depend on the spinning speeds and distances), little stars produce the same energy power as a very big star which turns only slightly around a point very close to it, or a point inside its mass. Revolution ensures the equitable distribution of the work produced, and parity of energy power production, between the component parts of the system. This explains why, when two stars are the same size, we can see them revolving around each other.

YOU: So, revolving motions increase when spins increase. If there is no limit to acceleration, as at each turn there is a bit more power, sooner or later it will burst!

L. R. H.: No. They cannot accelerate beyond a certain limit. Since they are free, something else happens.


Revolving motion works like an old-fashioned sling: while turning, speed increases, and the centrifugal force increases too. Since the gyroscopic phenomenon prevents any dislocation of the system (obliging motions to change only in speeds and distances in the same plane, thanks to the synchronism of spins), when speed increases, the satellites tend to withdraw to further orbits. There, the attractive and repulsive powers are even smaller. Hence, spin motion decreases.

When systems' speeds are so high that the centrifugal force is stronger than the resultant attraction, it tends to decelerate the entire system, increasing the distances.

Then, if the distances are greater, and the speeds lower, the centrifugal force decreases (everything remains synchronized and consistent). It may decrease until this centrifugal force becomes weaker than the resulting attraction in the synchronized system. Then the satellites tend to fall down again upon the nuclei, diminishing the distances, increasing the attractive and repulsive powers, thus increasing the spin speeds, and so on. The centrifugal force recovers power, and again tends to pull the satellites away in greater and further orbits.

Little by little, (and yet almost instantaneously to our eyes), our atom becomes perfectly balanced, finding the appropriate orbits permitting its satellites to turn at maximum speeds, where any jump in centrifugal force compounds any increase in spinning speeds. This provides the atom (or the planetary system) with a solid equilibrium of eternal harmony.Eternal harmony thanks to, on the one hand, synchronized rotations which oblige spin speeds to increase or decrease while distances change or when something outside the atom intervenes, and on the other hand, to the gyroscopic effect, which obliges these disturbances to be evacuated solely by modifications in the speed of spin, and not by twisting the angle formed by rotation axes, which would tear the atom and make particles fall upon each other.

Furthermore, if you add outer energy to an atom, by striking it or heating it, or by compression etc., this increase in magnetic energy (every action is magnetic energy) tends to increase the speeds, thus dilating the atom. But the atom resists this dilatation in order to maintain synchronism (synchronism cannot be broken and is the atom's "resisting factor", in addition to gyroscopic effect). As soon as the intervention stops, the speeds decrease and the atom recovers its previous form (see figure 14).

It is the same if you subtract energy by, for example, cooling the atom (see figure 15). The reverse occurs, of course, compensating the contraction by an acceleration, since when distances are shorter, energy increases, increasing speeds, and making the atom recover its previously larger volume.

This is especially important because this gives matter a real mechanical stability, whereas in the Quantum atom nothing causes any stability. In the latter, particles are placed " miraculously " on very precise orbits (although they are not particles...) so as to be in balance. The smallest variation would destroy this balance and subsequently the atom itself, with no hope of it returning to its previous form.

figure 14 : Satellite pulled away from the nucleus, driven to come back to its previous orbit, in order to maintain synchronized rotation (only way to maintain maximum attraction).

Figure 15 : Atom submitted to an action pushing the satellite toward the nucleus.

Supposing that one day you asked your physics teacher what would happen in the following situation in which : the two poles of two magnets are in exact equilibrium. They niether fall upon one another, nor move away from each other. They are in attraction but completely steady (see figure below).

The question could be: " what does magnet A do if I pull magnet B away a little bit? " They will most likely answer: magnet B follows and moves towards magnet A to maintain equilibrium.

Now at home, take one of your magnets. Affix it to a vertical board as in the figure above, so that you can pull it away a little if necessary..

Now affix a thread on a nail driven into the top of the plank, at the end of which you attach a piece of iron. The system must allow you to maintain the piece of iron in very precise equilibrium, trying to touch the magnet. Of course, it must not touch it.

Now you ask your teacher again: "what will happen if I pull the magnet a little bit away, so that it gets further from the piece of iron (or magnet B)? If he answers again "magnet B follows", do it. Withdraw magnet A just a bit. What happens?

What happens is that THE WHOLE EDIFICE OF MODERN THEORETICAL PHYSICS COMES CRASHING DOWN. For this system is exactly the same as an atomic system, where an electron remains in equilibrium in its orbit although it is attracted by the proton (proton is positive, electron is negative, so they are in attraction). If the electron (the piece of iron) does not fall upon the proton (the magnet), this means that something (the thread) pulls it outward, in the other direction, to create a very precise equilibrium (same as yours on the board). In an atom, the revolving motion is this force.

If you move one of the magnets, you break the equilibrium, since, as you withdraw a magnet, you diminish the attraction between the two magnets (or particles). So the force which maintained the piece of iron (electron) at some distance is UNAVOIDABLY stronger than the attraction. Thus the electrons fly away from the proton, and will never come back. Matter is destroyed, the universe no longer exists. One change in one atom will break every equilibrium in all atoms because of the precision of balances, disturbed by the smallest outer influence.

Thank... "God", again, that matter is not ruled by this kind of unipolar particle. For every day, we move, strike, shock, and tear matter, which nonetheless remains solid. It remains matter.

Of course, physicists never talk about energetic balances in atoms, only about mathematical balances. In quantum Physics, the problem is evacuated since atoms have only a mathematical reality. Particles do not exist. They are only matrices of probabilities. If this is so, we wonder how a matrix of probability could have a positive or negative electric charge... And if they have, how opposite charges manage not to merge when they can.

In any case, even if particles do not exist, we nevertheless disturb atoms all the time. What happens when a "matrix of probabilities" (which has physical properties!) is pulled away from its nucleus? It becomes another matrix of probabilities. In fact, perhaps, "electrons" and "protons" do not attract each other...

The problem cannot be solved in this way. Matter's stability ALTHOUGH IT IS ALWAYS EVOLVING, can be explained only if Physics changes everything since the beginning. Maybe in 100 years time...

But for you, tomorrow is today.




1 - OFFICIAL ATOM (Quantum Mechanics):

Particles are not particles. However, they are in attraction, due to their electric charges (the source of which is unexplained). Some are positive, some are negative, and for myterious reasons, they build "atoms". In order to maintain equilibrium, they are bound to have the same size, the same power, and the same number (what a coincidence!).

Electrons have no reason to spin. However they apparently do. Nuclei are not supposed to spin. They contain "neutrons" in order to increase their masse without increasing their electric charges.

Electrons do not revolve around nuclei. They stand here or there when they are observed. However, they can quit an orbit and occupy another orbit, if a sufficient package of energy (quantum) is provided (the source of which is unexplained).

The "quantum" is the only stability factor in such an atom. Any disturbance exceeding a quantum of energy would destroy the atom forever. This prevents such an atom from being able to constitute matter, and deprives it of all the suppleness and adaptability it effectively needs in order to evolve in accordance with circumstances.

"Particles" are associated with a "wave", which is explained by nothing. On the contrary, every magnetic particle (Hatem's atom) is obliged to emit alternately a "North" and "South" field which is felt as a wave, and is responsible for our ability to perceive it.

Physics is obliged to invent " anti-matter " to maintain the coherence of their theories, in order to ensure the balance of the whole mass of the universe.

With the magnetic atom, there is no need to invent anything hypothetical to make theories consistent. " Matter " contains its own counterpart, since it constitutes,within itself, the opposition of two principles. " Anti-matter " is within " matter " itself.


All particles are bipolar magnets, and their origin is explained. They attract AND repel each other. Their number, size and power are unlimited. There is no need of "miraculous coincidences" for the atom to work and the universe to be. The distance between them is considerable, for obvious reasons. This distance is useless in the Quantum atom, but indispensable in ours: short distances cause particles fall upon one another and prevent Degravitation from working. Large distances cause atoms to manifest harmonious reactions, which are factors of stability.

Our atom behaves exactly like stars and planets, but they cannot be observed without interception. So their motion cannot be observed and physicists think that they are not in motion.

They are bound to meet in order to make up atoms, but they cannot fall upon each other and are obliged to spin and revolve (all this is clearly explained and inevitable): their motion starts from steadiness, accelerates thanks to degravitation, and is stabilized thanks to orbital revolving.

Generally speaking, particles spin in synchronized motion, which causes gravitation (permanent attraction, although repulsion also exists between them) and their orbital revolution. The orbital motion is also due to synchronized rotations.

The orbital motion tends to dilate the atom, while "gravitation" tends to concentrate it, which provides it with its stability. The atom's motion accelerates or decreases in accordance with external influences, without significant modifications: any concentration is balanced by an acceleration which dilates the atom, and any dilatation is balanced by deceleration which concentrates it. So it solidly resists external influences, while retaining the capacity to evolve when necessary. Polar synchronized rotations, in association with the gyroscopic effect of rotations, are the two most important stabilization factors.


Click here for lectures by Frank HATEM.


for the Third
Origin of Mind,
Origin of Energy,
Origin of Matter.
to order.

Links to other Pages

for the Third
Origin of Mind,
Origin of Energy,
Origin of Matter.
to order.

Links to other Pages

for the Third
Origin of Mind,
Origin of Energy,
Origin of Matter.
to order.

for the Third
Origin of Mind,
Origin of Energy,
Origin of Matter.
to order.

Most of our webs are free, although many people think the information they contain is worth Nobel Prices, and really can make a difference.
If you want us to continue, and can help us, please donate, by a kind click on button below.
Thank you very much indeed.

Click us, we love it...

It will be a pleasure to talk with you about knowledge.