by Kalman Klim Brattman
Give me the simplest form of matter and motion,
and I will construct, out of them, the world of Nature.
"Give me matter, and I will construct a world out of it."
Immanuel Kant, Kant's Cosmology
("Universal Natural History and Theory Of Heavens")
0. Motivation:
Outlining TRUTON and the Rationale for its Existence

It is the purpose and scope of this work to establish a rational foundation for understanding Nature from one single principle, law, cause, or "logic" of operation. The method employed here, never used before in the form presented herein, is modeled from Mathematics where we start with certain primary propositions, called axioms, and then using rational thinking --and only rational deductive thinking-- an entire theory is build up.

Unlike for Mathematics (where those axioms can be any proposition that cannot be derived from anything else and cannot lead to rational contradictory results), in TRUTON --The Rational Unified Theory Of Nature, those primary propositions, in addition, must have physical roots and connotations that cannot "offend" our given common sense.

Our modeled mathematical method of discovering things in Nature, should not be confused with the long standing method of using Mathematics as a tool in deriving results. We will not use Mathematics per se, but instead we will use the method or the model of Mathematics of how it obtains its results and nothing else.

TRUTON in a way is, par excellence, a direct outgrow from Classical Physics and its followers initiated methodically by Sir Isaac Newton.

On July 5, 1686, Sir Isaac Newton published his seminal and revolutionary work entitled Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy) or in short Principia. The object of Principia was to establish in a rational fashion a "mechanical" Universe where all motions studied to be able to be derived from coherent mathematical-mechanical principles. It was Newton who first coined the term Rational Mechanics to distinguish it from the study of Empiric Mechanics.

Newton, following into the steps of Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo Galilei, and many others preceding them, saw clearly the close and profound interrelationship that existed between Mathematics (in his case, the Euclidean geometry) and Mechanics and how one draws from another their own existence. In his Preface to the First Edition of Principia, Newton noted (Principia, vol. I, Univ. of California Press, 1966, pp. xvii-xviii):

"The ancients considered mechanics in a twofold respect; as rational, which proceeds accurately by demonstration, and practical. To practical mechanics all the manual arts belong, from which mechanics took its name. ... To describe right lines and circles are problems, but not geometrical problems. The solutions to these problems is required from mechanics, and by geometry the use of them, when so solved, is shown; and it is the glory of geometry that from those few principles, brought from without, it is able to produce so many things. Therefore geometry is founded in mechanical practice, and is nothing but that part of universal mechanics which accurately proposes and demonstrates the art of measuring. But since the manual arts are chiefly employed in the moving bodies, it happens that geometry is commonly referred to their magnitude, and mechanics to their motion. In this sense rational mechanics will be the science of motions resulting from any force whatsoever, and of the forces required to produce any motions, accurately proposed and demonstrated.
.... I consider philosophy rather than arts and write not concerning manual but natural powers, and consider chiefly those things which relate to gravity, levity, elastic force, the resistance of fluids, and the like forces, whether attractive or impulsive; and therefore I offer this work as the mechanical principles of philosophy, for the whole burden of philosophy seems to consist in this --from the phenomena of motions to investigate the forces of nature, and then from these forces to demonstrate the other phenomena; and to this end the general propositions in the first and second Books are directed. In the third Book I give an example of this in the explanation of the System of the World; for by the propositions mathematically demonstrated in the former Books, in the third I derive from celestial phenomena the forces of gravity which bodies tend to the sun and the several planets. Then from these forces, by other propositions which are also mathematical, I deduce the motions of planets, the comets, the moon, and the sea." [Underline and underscore supplied.]

Then, recognizing the limitation of his work, Newton noted his disappointment in his Preface to Principia (ibidem) with a glimpse at what future theoretical work may be needed to unlock the ultimate secrets of Nature (underscore supplied):

"I wish we could derive the rest of the phenomena of Nature by the same kind of reasoning from mechanical principles, for I am induced by many reasons to suspect that they may all depend upon certain forces by which the particles of bodies, by some cause hitherto unknown, are either mutually impelled towards one another, and cohere in regular figures, or are repelled and recede from one another. These forces being unknown, philosophers have hitherto attempted the search of Nature in vain; but I hope the principles here laid down will afford some light either to this or some truer method of philosophy."

And at the end of his work, Newton clearly was disappointed of not being able to discover the deepest interconnections that govern Nature --from the origin of gravity to the origin of other forces, (ibidem, vol. II, pp. 546-547), as he noted:

"Hitherto we have explained the phenomena of the heavens and of our sea by the power of gravity, but we have not assigned the cause of that power. This is certain, that it must proceed from a cause that penetrates to the very centers of the sun and planets, without suffering the least diminution of its force; that operates not according to the quantity of the surfaces of the particles upon which acts (as mechanical causes used to do), but according to the quantity of solid matter which they contain and propagates its virtue on all sides to immense distances, decreasing always as the inverse square of the distance. ...
.But hitherto I have not been able to discover the cause of those properties, of gravity from phenomena, and I frame no hypotheses; (In the original Latin that become famous, Hypotheses non fingo)" [Emphasis supplied.]

Because of that impasse which continuously was present and which was never been able to be overpassed by all generations that followed Newton, it was in the end a path that was abandoned altogether and replaced for the first time with a novel path containing elements of the irrational with countless of speculations over speculations. Indeed, the foundation of Newton's Mechanics (dubbed today as Classical Mechanics) and which reigned supreme until the beginning of the 20th century was challenged first by Albert Einstein twice --through a so-called Relativistic mechanics in a novel fashion incorporating irrational thinking and elements of the absurd:

1) first time, in 1905 with the introduction of his so-called Special Theory of Relativity (where Newton's fundamental concepts of space, time and simultaneity were being challenged and mashed together into an absurd and meaningless 4-dimensional continuum called space-time where to the Euclidean geometrical 3-dimensional space, time was being added as the 4th dimension of the newly created space. If t is the time variable, and x, y, z are the geometrical coordinates of a point, the space [x(t), y(t), z(t)] was transformed into the meaningless 4-dimensional space [x, y, z, t] and that absurdity is being considered today as a revolution in viewing and understanding Nature. [sic!]

2) the second time, 10-11 years later, with the introduction of Einstein's so-called General Theory of Relativity purporting to be the theory of gravity where the space itself was postulated to have a "curvature" and other properties that where outside of the realm of Euclidean geometry. Gravity was now being "explained" through that willy-nilly postulate of a so-called curvature of the space where the Euclidean geometry was replaced willy-nilly with the Riemannian geometry as the true geometry of the physical space of the Universe.

Once the gates towards irrational were opened and various Mathematical models were introduced that had nothing to do with the reality and the physical word they purported to represent, the landscape of Physics has changed in a most dramatic way. New irrational implants were able now to find a fertile ground for development. A non-Newtonian mechanics, called Quantum Mechanics that could be renamed as A Hocus-Pocus Mathematical Theory of Nature, founded on massive speculations, aberrations of logic and lack of common sense were wrapped up into beautiful and elegant Mathematics that has had no rational justification for being associated with the description and the representation of Nature. In fact, Richard Feynman --the 1965 Physics Nobel Laureate was not joking when he noted that:

Since the rational thinking was no longer a prerequisite in explaining Nature in the new "modern" Physics and, since the irrational arguments were gaining tacit acceptance more and more trough Einstein's Relativistic mechanics, a new scientific climate was able to emerge with Physics at its forefront followed by Astronomy and Chemistry.

In the "new" Physics, more than in any other Natural Science, willy-nilly hocus-pocus advanced Mathematics, with no an iota of justification, began to cover a vast amount of physical speculations creating in the end elaborate advanced mathematical theories of entirely speculative nature. Those speculative results, in a way, became seductive because of the beauty of the language of Mathematics that was able to describe them.

The Physics and Astronomy part of TRUTON, of course, can considerably be enhanced and beautified with expressing those results in the beautiful language provided by Mathematics as outlined in here below:

If TRUTON is designed to be the exclusive theory of Nature, then that representation must be independent of our sense perceptions and, in particular, to be able to make sense for born blind people! How human see and perceive their environment, as interesting as it may be, is not part of true theories of Nature.

The Theory of Sense Perception (TSP) as interesting as it may be, lies outside of the realm of Physics as its results need not depend of how the humans or other livings perceive their surroundings in various conditions or circumstances.

For instance, at best, Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, is par excellence, a theory of sense perception (TSP) and thus, it needs to reside outside of the realm of Physics!

In TRUTON all forces and concepts of Nature are real and not fictional and its results should never ever be derived from our perceptions of how we see or perceive certain physical phenomena from different systems of references or systems of coordinate or other particular conditions.
Based on the fundamental principle that in TRUTON all of its results must be independent from any particular coordinate system, the question that arise is what model would be acceptable in here and what Mathematics can be used. Well, Continuum Mechanics (known also as The Rational Mechanics) is the model suited for TRUTON where the Tensor Calculus (and Tensor Analysis, in general) represents its mathematical backbone since a tensor in Mathematics has an existence independent of any particular coordinate system. Physical laws when expressed, as in Continuum Mechanics, by tensor equations are universal in the sense that if they are valid in one coordinate system, then they are valid in any other coordinate system. That beauty of invariance of tensor equations regardless of the coordinate system employed makes that tensor approach universal in a theory of Nature. So yes, the mathematical blueprint and formalization of TRUTON for its Physics and Astronomy components must be the one currently employed in the advanced Continuum Mechanics.

As the irrational method of "explaining" things has gradually entered into the mainstream science, it was not long before cosmologists began entertaining out-of-the-blue speculative concepts as dark matter, dark energy, black holes, and so on, as being "ingredients" of our Universe.

The Universe itself is being speculated as being originated somehow from a point of infinite density and temperature that somehow began expanding and continue to expand. Such a postulated origin of the Universe defy all logic, all common sense, and most importantly all Physics --as Physics (as oppose to Mathematics) does not allow infinite parameters into its arsenal. All physical parameters of Nature are finite indeed.

Troubling questions, that could have triggered an alarm, such as how a point of infinite density and temperature could have been formed in the first place, that is in a blatant defiance to all Physics and its concepts of describing Nature, did not stop the Big-Bang Cosmology to became the dominant cosmology of nowadays. God, if there is one, surely is having a field day in seeing how far off the current physical science has deviated from the rational understanding of the Universe's actual origin, formation and evolution.
.Nature's Ultimate Cylcles (NUCs)

In TRUTON, the willy-nilly lunatic Big-Bang cosmological model is being replaced with the cosmological model based on the grand ultimate everlasting cycles (GUECs) of Nature's spinning megastructures --the spinoverses that are being formed, with our Universe being one of them.
A breaking spinoverse surrounded by absolute vacuum.
.Those spinoverses, whose spin can only increase with time (because their axes of spin --AOS are not fixed and thus can rotate freely in space and, as such, an AOS rotation of an 180 degrees will result in a change in the spin's direction), will ultimately reach a finite critical upper limit of rotation. A spinoverse reaching that spin limit of rotation will break up with its remnant parts flying apart radially.
.Those remnant flying parts in the surrounding vacuum will decompress and transform themselves into stable base level entities, to be identified later, that now continue with their radial gliding linear motions. They now have became the seeds for the creation (through collisions and accretions with other remnant parts of other disintegrative spinoverses) of new spinning megastructures, i.e., of new spinoverses.
.The spinoverse cycles of formation and self-destruction is therefore complete for new cyclical rounds to commence. Such cycles thus will continue in perpetuity.
.Thus, Nature does not have a beginning nor an end of existence --being, as such, a given eternal entity, as oppose to its spinoverses (aka, its universes) that all possess a finite life of existence with a beginning and an end, being thus entities derived all from Nature.

The novelty of the new "modern" Physics is its ability to place, side by side, the irrational with the rational and mash them indistinguishable into a mathematical format to look very "scientific." As long as that "modern" setting peppered with elements of the irrational and limitless speculations are allowed to exist, Natural Sciences are indeed at a very great peril. A beautiful Mathematics should never ever replace or be a camouflage for the missing Physics in deciphering the secrets of Nature. And that is because Mathematics can be associated easily with concepts and assumptions that have nothing in common with Nature and its modus operandi.

The flood of speculations that continued unabated in the "new" Physics has proliferated into all Natural Sciences. From the many examples that could be given, we could mention for instance the ludicrous speculation responsible for the mass extinction of the dinosaur some 65 million years ago as a result of some catastrophic cosmic event generated by the collision of our planet with some real or imaginary meteor. (As we shall see, the mass extinction of the dinosaur with ease can be explained through rational arguments --not as an accident, but as a necessity-- derived from Evolutionary Biology.)

The new "modern" field of speculations over speculations has created indeed an extremely fertile terrain for writing "scientific" speculative papers and books --all masked under the elegant costumes of advanced mathematics that it was employed with not one iota of justification for its use.

Everybody appeared to be happy of the newly found bottomless speculative reservoir: the universities and other research institutions were delighted of the new found wealth of papers and books that their members were able to produce as that wealth was able to justify to the society (which has been footing the bill) of the necessity of continuing with the ever increasing funding.




Similar to a "Mafia" Club creating a protective shield from visibility to the rest of the society, the Science Masquerade Club (SMC) of today's "modern" theoretical physicists has a protective shield of its own, most difficult to penetrate, vested in an advanced gibberish mathematics that is being employed to cover the Club's nonsensical theories of Nature that are being promulgated to the masses of the society at large.

Arguably, today's Science Masquerade Club can be viewed as some sort of a cartel that for Particle Physics could very well be called the TAU TAU Quantum Cartel (taken from the bogus tau particle of Quantum Machanics).

The most common and visible protective shield, that is being used by the SMC towards the novice visitors entering that masquerade Club, is the posting at its "entrance" --for intimidation purposes-- typically in the form of a blackboard, some advanced gibberish mathematics that no outsider could possibly grasp, as illustrated herein, such as that of the popular peddler for the "new" particle Physics (NPP), Brian Greene of Columbia University, USA (posted below) or that of the much cited Lisa Randall of Harvard University, USA (posted in here). With that intimidating gibberish posting, the set-up is complete being indeed foolproof !

BTW, All members of SMC, with no exception, appear to have one basic commonality: they all appear indeed to be severely brainwashed. And, that is done via a "reeducation" program of controlling the Mind's inferences by injecting in it an amalgam of speculative, illusionary, circular and irrational reasoning mushed together with aberrations of logic and distorted unrelated analogies reaching the level of the absurd!

(That nonsensical mushed amalgam, as noted, is being infused with some gibberish incomprehensible advanced mathematics to appear to the novice as being highly scientific in nature. The end result of all this is the incorporation of high-level gibberish, nonsensical, incoherent talk that appears to be a trademark, most notable, for the elite members of SMC.)

Arguably, that brainwashing is being propagated through a Particle Physics (PP) Cult which is no different, in essance, than that of a religious Cult. And that is because at their substratum, they both have one common denominator: their Irrationality. The brainwashed members of a PP Cult and the ones of a religious Cult appear indeed to look and act quite the same (pictures below)...

Brian Greene's sample of a typical set-up "shield" placed in front of the visiting novice newcomers...
The mandatory
Ricci tensor (renamed in Physics as the Einstein tensor) is well embedded in there...

As in the case of "Mafia's soldiers," the work of those nowadays scientists appears to be legitimate through the cultivation of illusions which have not an iota of rationality in them and which, are being trumpeted to represent the course of the new, modern abstract physical science. As such, that new speculative course (that is being camouflaged with an impenetrable mantle provided by advanced gibberish Mathematics) is being pedalled to the society at large as serving to the advancement and/or the interests of Natural Sciences and thus, as serving to the society at large.
The reality however is sadly different: advanced speculative, irrational work, wrapped in fancy advanced arbitrary Mathematics, is perhaps great for "academic" amusement and entertainment, but it has no place whatsoever into the body or development of Natural Sciences. The plague of that massive irrational speculative work that now has engulfed the entire "modern" Physics needs to be eradicated in its totality if Natural Sciences can truly be further advanced. It is time that we begin cleaning our house and dispose of that accumulated academic garbage. We make no mistake on the urgency of that cleaning !

A Grave LIGO conCERN
big-time science con artists of the "new" Physics...

How more absurd or repugnant this picture from CERN could be?
Bottles of champagne and hard liquor are part of CERN's Control Room decor!
Fabricated milestones are celebrated there with bottles of champagne that are labeled accordingly.
Handy perhaps, for celebrating fabricated staged discoveries or for being able to see what one want to see...
But not to worry, the society at large is footing the bill for all that massive orchestrated charade and charlatanry!
Nothing, but absolutely nothing, has advanced our understanding of the atomic and subatomic worlds from the CERN, FERMILAB or LIGO experiments.

The experimental part of the "new" Physics that currently exists

[be it for instance, at CERN (say, with the much publicized discovery of the fictional elusive particle purporting to be responsible for the origin of mass [sic!] of subatomic particles (whatever that nonsensical endeavor is presumed to be) i.e., of the discovery of the so-called speculative Higgs boson), or at FERMILAB, or at the LIGO Labs (with the purported discovery of the Cosmic Gravitational Wave which is a monumental orchestrated hoax), or at any other multi-million/billion dollar project of the "new" experimental Physics/Astronomy]

is made up of mostly fabricated "discoveries" providing, at best, pseudoscience results (which never ever needs to be confused with the real science) and, at worst, fraudulent results gained from plain deceit.
The bogus experimental data received from the "new" experimental Physics is no accident and, that is because the theory behind that data, which is always preconceived, is flawed at its very foundation. Indeed, the foundation of Quantum Mechanics, the foundation of Einstein's theory of gravity, of space and time, of Relativity, the speculative foundation of the Big-Bang cosmological theory or of the speculative existence of Black Holes --all are flawed foundations out of which we can get only flawed preconceived results. All those willy-nilly foundations and representations do no exist in Nature, but only exist in our deformed imagination of Nature.

From particle accelerations or colliders, we never ever could gain anything that could advance our understanding of the nano-world of Nature. And that, as we shall see in the next section, is because of Heisenberg's Observational Indeterminacy Principle (OIP) dubbed today, incorrectly, as Heisenberg's principle of the "observer uncertainty effect."

[Originally, Heisenberg used the word "ungenauigkeit" ("indeterminacy") to describe his observational-impasse recognition that in the English-language version, incorrectly, was translated as "uncertainty" and which, later, was transformed into a new and different form and type of "observer uncertainty effect" known today as Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle (HUP).]


Life is good at FermiLab...
From the speculative cosmological Big-Bang phenomenon or the purported imaginary Black Holes that do not exist in Nature, but exist only in our own imagination, we can make elaborate and costly experiments (such as the ones from CERN, FERMILAB, or LIGO Labs) and claim, in the end, to be a confirmation of whatever the sought result we want to get. However, to dupe the society which is footing the bill of billions and billions of dollars in the name of "science" for those speculative mega-projects that lack an iota of rationality in them, is indeed criminal and repugnant to the core of our entire civilization --and that, cannot go on, and on, unabated.

There are a number of ways to be successful in brainwashing.
A glimpse into the manipulative method of brainwashing is outlined below.

PS> Very often that false reality is amplified by the media
which is sucked in by the science bait -announcements.

Brainwashed by a religious Cult.

at CERN by a PP Cult.
In the search of the eternal and elusive "truth":
No one from either Cult, under the mantra of "reaching the truth,” has any idea what they are actually acclaiming or praising.

That global academic masquerade of the stated
Science Masquerade Club (SMC), that has been in existence for quite some time, cannot go on and on indefinitely. There should be a time when that wide spread academic charade, upon exposure, will have to come to an end.


Abraham Lincoln
As such, and in response to
SMC, at our "trutonian" door, we have placed this posting paraphrased from the one coined some two centuries ago by Abraham Lincoln, the 16th President of the United States:

"You can fool some of the people some of the time,
you can even fool some of the people all the time,
but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

AEnd of conCERN

From Particle Physics, the bottom-end frontier of Physics --the mother of all Natural Sciences, there is absolutely no evidence that our understanding of Nature has been enhanced at all, neither with the advent of a) Quantum Mechanics nor with that of b) Einstein's Relativity theories. Indeed,


a) Basic, fundamental questions expected to be elucidated in Quantum Mechanics are to this day completely ignored and left literally in the dark... For instance, upon the discovery of the Electron and the Proton, to this very day, there is no understanding as to WHY the Electron and the Proton have electric charges in the first place, nor is there an understanding as to WHY those respective charges are exactly equal in magnitude.
.Also, there is no existing explanation as to WHY the negative charge is being associated to the Electron --as a negative quantity usually represents a deficit of some sort, nor is there a rationality as to WHY to the Proton it was associated a positive charge --as a positive quantity is usually associated to a surplus of some sort.

(The irony, as we shall see, is that the Proton represents in fact an energy "hole" --and thus, an energy deficit, while the Electron represents an energy "peak" --and thus, an energy surplus and, as such, their charges need to be reversed [sic!]).

With the recognition that the Proton is an energy "hole," the explanation of gravity becomes now superfluous!

WHAT an electric charge actually is, besides being a "property" of matter?, or HOW and WHERE those particles store and carry their respective electric charges? --are examples of some basic fundamental questions that today are not even being asked, much less entertained, in that truly repugnant Quantum Mechanics. No Mathematics indeed can fill up or mask that void of knowledge! The naked ignorance is there, in plain sight, as no mathematical shield is able to be found in Quantum Mechanics to cover that profound gap of knowledge, from the many, that currently exist.



b) Contrary to the current existing prevailing view, there is nothing, but absolutely nothing out there, at the macro level, that could dethrone the Newtonian Mechanics and replace it with, say, Einstein's General Theory of Relativity (GTR), or with anything else. Indeed, for instance, the two major observational tests attributed to support Einstein's GTR were

   1) one, with respect to explaining the peculiar perihelion precession of Mercury's orbit, and
   2) the other, with respect to predicting the deflection of light by the Sun.

which, both of them, can be explained with ease from the principle of Classical (Newtonian) Physics and nothing else.

1. The fundamental error that exists in Einstein's GTR, when dealing with the perihelion precession of Mercury's orbit, is that there, the Sun is being considered to be a homogeneous spherical mass which in reality it is not. Today, we know that the Sun's mass and distribution is far from being homogeneous, being in fact of an enormous complex structure --that of a hot non-homogeneous plasma interwoven with magnetic fields. To this, if we add a recent observational finding and recognition that the Sun is not quite spherical, as its poles are flattened, then we begin to appreciate that the anomalies of Mercury's orbit are a direct reflection of that physical complex reality and nothing else. All that was first recognized in April 1982, at the University of Arizona, USA, by Professor Henry A. Hill in collaboration with Dr. Philip A. Goode and the graduate student Randall J. Bos and, reported by Hill of those results before the Royal Astronomical Society of Dublin.

2. The deflection of light by the Sun (or by any other massive mass) is indeed a straightforward consequence of Newton's corpuscular theory of light coupled with his (and not of Einstein) theory of gravity and, nothing else. Again, in the Sun's case, its complex structural mass needs to be taken into account in the calculation of the trajectory of light's corpuscular deflection that must exist in conformity with the modified Newton's formula of gravity.

Yes, as you perhaps may have guessed, it is the aim of TRUTON not only to eliminate and pulverize those two irrational implants --Quantum Mechanics and Relativity, but also to restore and continue the long standing rational path of Physics formalized by Isaac Newton and its followers --a path that may be called the Trutonian path.

What was wrong, one may ask, with Newton's method of discovering "things" in Nature and, why with his approach which was so adequate in so many respects, we could not "descend" and "see" the cause of existence of various phenomena that govern Nature such as gravity or "see" the cause of all other interactions that govern Nature's particle world?



Well, it is perhaps important to answer to that here, and right now, that the primary propositions or axioms which Newton has chosen in building up his Theory Of Nature (TON) were limited in two (2) major areas:

 i) one, that they were placed much too "high up" in the evolutionary ladder of Nature and thus, from there no one could "descend" below the base platform of his axioms and primary propositions; and
) the other, that they were primarily channeled concerning the state of motion through his famous three (3) Laws (or Axioms) of Motion (enunciated in his seminal Principia) leaving aside the state of matter --the other indispensable primary ingredient of Nature as, first perhaps, recognized by Immanuel Kant in his Cosmolgy ("Universal Natural History and Theory Of Heavens").

I. Kant
Now, as noted (in point i), since from a given set of axioms, one can go only upwards in a meaningful way, the "level" of those axioms were clearly far above the atomic and subatomic world and hence, from that starting point it was impossible to tackle the world "below."

In addition, as noted (in point ii), because the state of primal matter was left and set aside by Newton, that made it quite impossible, with Newton's TON, to tackle the material world "below" that is ultimately responsible for all material interactions that govern Nature.

That last recognition of the foundational role of the primal matter is truly monumental for TRUTON. Indeed, here, in TRUTON, we shall begin our journey from the absolute "bottom-line" level of matter from where there will be no "below" or "underneath" to consider. Then, from that absolute "bottom" line of Nature, we shall, exactly as in Mathematics, build up the entire theory of Nature, our TRUTON. Clearly, by building TRUTON from the "bottom" up, we shall expect that some (if not all) of Newton's axioms or laws of motion to be incorporated and integrated into the foundation of TRUTON.

It is also important to note that while Newton clearly had indicated in Principia's Preface (see the underlined text above) the reason why he chose the Euclidean geometry as the mathematics capable of describing the forces and phenomena of Nature, Einstein and their followers and those embracing the Quantum mechanics, never ever were able to provide a justification for their hocus-pocus mathematics employed except to say that with such departure "it works!" [sic!] meaning that we can write a lot of hocus-pocus papers containing a lot of beautiful mathematics.

Finally, let us note one more time that throughout the entire history of Physics and for that matter of the rest of Natural Sciences, the direction of theoretical work was done, if you will, "inwards":
we started with the result (provided by observations or experiments) and went "inwards" attempting to find an explanation for the result obtained.

In Mathematics, as we have noted, the method of obtaining its results has been exactly opposite being, if you will, in the "outwards" direction:

you start with certain primary propositions called axioms beyond which there are no more meaningful inquiries to be made and then, you work your way "up" deriving results which are build up from the previous results and so on.

It is this "outwards" direction from the ground up that we shall attempt to initiate as the new direction of studying Nature called the trutonian or the trutonic method.

To travel with us in our trutonian/trutonic ascendent journey, you need not have any special mathematical training because the principles of TRUTON can be understood from reasoning derived from physical considerations alone. The backbone of TRUTON is causality. In TRUTON, causality is its centerpiece. Describing Nature without its physical casuality is not acceptable in TRUTON. For example, in TRUTON taking and employing gravity without knowing its cause and origin of existence is not an acceptable form of presentation. In other words, the descriptive approach without causality in presenting Nature is not the approach that TRUTON will embrace. Because of that causality "skeleton" of TRUTON that is physical and not mathematical in nature, special mathematical training or skills are nor required in here.

In TRUTON, causality and origin of phenomena will always be of a physical nature, and never ever, be of a mathematical one as in the hocus-pocus Quantum Mechanics !

Finally, the Mathematics that can be applied to TRUTON's "skeleton" can give rise indeed to a beautiful theoretical "body" whose elegance and beauty only Mathematics can provide. And, as already noted, the most suitable Mathematics for TRUTON appears to be the Tensor Analysis whose physical derivative is, as noted, the advanced Continuum Mechanics (known also as the Rational Mechanics).

But before one can dress TRUTON with elegant garments provided by Mathematics, we need first to know what we are dressing up and, making sure that this is the body that we want to dress!



Kalman Klim Brattman