Rope Hypothesis

The Rope Hypothesis proposes a new vision of the Universe. There is a single closed-loop thread that makes up everything in existence. The Single Thread winds around, crisscrosses, twines, and binds. It forms not only the atoms that collectively comprise matter, but also the mediator of light that extends between them. If we were to start our journey at some arbitrary atom, we would follow along the Single Thread all around every bit of matter and arrive at our starting point. It is the Single Thread that underlies the invisible agents that do light, gravity, electricity and magnetism.


Replies to questions and comments will be addressed at Rational Science

The Single Thread



9 thoughts on “Rope Hypothesis

  1. The “rope hypothesis”? A “vision”, as you say? A new hypothesis? What is a vision, a hypothesis? It is an a priori human idea, a theory, a concept! It is an idea about “how things might be”, or “how nature might work”. At best it is “rational” and “plausible”. In that case – what can it yield? At best it yields an explanation “how things may rationally and plausibly be”, or “how nature may rationally and plausibly work”. Never can a hypothesis tell us how things really a r e , or how nature r e a l l y works. So forget about “hypotheses”, and theories, and “visions”! Rather return to free “experimental philosophy”, which in the 17th century was welcomed as follows: “This is the Age wherein Philosophy comes in with a Spring-tide: and the Peripateticks may as well hope to stop the Current of the Tide, or (with Xerxes) to fetter the Ocean, as hinder the overflowing of free Philosophy. Methinks, I see how all the old Rubbish must be thrown away, and the rotten Buildings overthrown, and carried away with so powerful an inundation. These are the days that must lay a new foundation of a more magnificent Philosophy never to be overthrown: that will Empirically and Sensibly canvass the Phenomena of Nature, deducing the Causes of things from such Originals in Nature, as we observe are producible by Art, and the infallible demonstrations of Mechanics: and certainly, this is the way, and no other, to build a true and permanent Philosophy.” (Henry Power FRS, Experimental Philosophy, London 1663).

  2. Good Morning, Bill Gaede.
    Is your book “Why God doesn’t Exist “still available to be purchased, and if so where is to be found? I did Buy the “rational scientist” magazine in leu of ,and am waiting for it to arrive, otherwise I have not been successful in my search for the above mentioned book or to download the rope theory.
    Many Thanks, Paul

  3. Two questions: 1) The eBook states that tension on all ropes makes it that ropes are never loose, the speed of light is based on constant tension. Then in the same ebook magnetism is explained by threads unwinding and loosening to the point that the slack in the ropes swing around the magnet. How can there be slack in the ropes that swing around magnets when constant tension between all items keep the ropes under high tension (speed of light depends on this in the rope model). 2) Could you clarify the rope hypothesis explanation of polarization? The book (WGDE) explains polarization with resonant frequency (which doesn’t make sense to me because multiple frequencies of light all have the same behavior) but the ebook explains polarization with non-parallel ropes (even though all atoms are connected with ropes so non-parallel ropes doesn’t make sense to me either). The traditional model makes even less sense (removing the magnetic portion of an electro-magnetic wave would mean we wouldn’t have light anymore so I’m definitely not a believer in the current model for the architecture of light. BONUS Question: What keeps atoms spinning in a permanent magnet? It seems that spinning would slow down over time and ropes would stop swinging.

  4. are u insane the rope process is a fool thought so why the importance of the singularity of time and the time measurements using the celestial body’s gravity for the relativity time measurement

  5. What predictions can your idea make?
    Can you show that your idea successfully predicts observed phenomenon? And the magnitude of said pheonomen as well?

      1. No, Predictions are an essential part of science.
        A theorem’s predcitave poiwer is a measure of it’s usefullness, and predicdtions are essentisal for testing hypothesis.

        1. Usefulness plays no role in Science, You confuse Technology with Science. Technology is about ‘usefulness’. Science is about explaining. The purpose of Science is not to be useful. The purpose of Science is to understand why our Universe works the way it does.
          And in Science, we don’t test anything, especially hypotheses. Experiments & verification [i.e., testing’] have to do with evidence. It is religion that deals with evidence. The purpose of evidence is to persuade, convince, convert, and recruit.
          You seem to be confusing the Mathemagical Method used by mathemagical ‘physicists’ of monasteries like Cambridge and Harvard with the Scientific Method.

Leave a Reply to Mark Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *