The concept of a radiation pattern

that creates human perception and

its implications on reality

Ben Willetts
Bir mingham, UK
This transcript describes a novel idea that puts a radiation pattern at
the basis of human perception. The persistent uncertainties observed
when measuring quantum particles is explained using parameters that
are used regularly by engineers that design electronic devices to
sense the surrounding environment . The complex wave-fronts present
at the near field of man-made sensing devices are used as an analogy
to describe the underlying mechanism t hat limits humans in
perceiving objects with momentous mass such as black holes. A water
tank analogy is used to convey th e idea of such a radiation pattern to
explain differences in behaviour observed for objects that have large
variations in mass. The typically larger quantity of objects with
smaller masses is theorised to be due to the larger illumination area
present for these objects due to a diverging radiation beam.
The implications of such an idea on other currently unexplained
aspects of nature such as free will and the dawn of the universe is
discussed.

1. Introduction

As of yet, the under lying mechanism/s that cause ambi guities to occur when
measuring subatomic obj ects (Sonj a, 2004), such as electrons and photons, is not
well understood. Several other unexplained phenomena occur when observing obj ects
in our reality, such as black holes (Mathur, 2005) and the infinite field intensities
when reducing the distance of point char ge/ mass to zero, suggest that out current
understanding of the universe is either incomplete or completel y wrong.

The uncertainty in posi tion and momentum in subatomic particles (Heisenberg, 1949)
(Robertson, 1929) , such as photons and elect rons, have led to the drastic idea of the
existence of parall el universes (Tegmar k, 2003) becomi ng widel y accepted during
the early 21 s t centur y. Also , the incompatibility of gravitational eff ects obser ved for
relatively large obj ects with the behaviour observed by quantum par ticles , has caused
physicists to develop multi -di mensional models of reality that started with five
di mensions by (Wuensch, 2003) and this number has now increased to eleven with
the advent of M -theor y (Miemiec, 2006) . The nature of black holes has also left the
physics communit y dumbfounded and has led to models that include
multidi mensional space or infor mation -retained transitions in matter states
(Mathur, 2005) (Guo, 2017) .
 2

The continuously mounting of unexplained phenomena obser ved i n reality , as well

the discrepancies that occur between them, suggest that the current fundamental
understanding of reali ty is wrong, and that physics communit y is not including a
fundamental factor of reality. The idea that will be conveyed here , was for med from
the field of electronic sensing which uses electromagnetic/pressure waves to allow a
system to percei ve its surroundings. These devices make use of a source of ener gy
to produce a radiation pattern/beam to illumi nate obj ects to receive returns to allow
perception (Balanis, 2005) (Knott, 2012) . T his paper will incorporate the existence
of a radiation pattern, developed by an unknown source in the human brain , into the
reality we percei ve.

The idea will be described through reverse engineering behavi ours obser ved in the
perceived realit y. This will be used to suggest planes that such a radiation beam
would propagate through to allow perception to happen as it appears to do. The
failure of technologi cal advancement to create synthetic sent ient beings also
suggests that it is not j ust the brains comput ational capability that allows humanity
to be self -aware.

The remainder of the paper is outlined as foll ows:

Section 2 will go through the t ypical paramet ers of a radiation pattern such as beam -
width and reduction in intensity. The section will also suggest t he axes, such as
position and mass, in which such a di ver ging bam would propagate through by noting
the ambi guities that have been measured by quantum particles in the past.

Section 3 will describe a water tank analogy to explain how obj ects with different
scales are consistently seen to have the same distinct behaviour. This analysis also
aid in the understandi ng of the possible for mation of such a perception field source.

Section 4 concludes with the main out comes conveyed in the paper.

2. Radiation Pattern Parameters

Radiation patterns are produced by a region of electromagnetic/pressure energy and

the shape and intensity of such a pattern that dispersing through space is decided by
the design of the antenna producing it (Balanis, 2005) . The li ght produced by a
handheld torch conveys two of the main parameters of a radiation pattern the beam
width and intensity. As Figure 1 shows as the light produced travels through space,
the size of the beam cross section increases whilst the intensity decreases with
distance, this is because of the conser vati on of ener gy and the Huygens -Fresnel
principle which descri bes a beams di ver gence by the sum of the preceding wave -
front (Balanis, 1999) . The light ener gy in Figure 1 is focused within a volume and
hence won’t illuminated obj ects outside of beam, even at short dist ances.
 3

Figure 1: Visual representation of a diverging light beam

The idea of a radiation pattern of perception is theorised to di ver ge in this way but
instead of spatially, t his beam propagates along an axis that corresponds to mass
(S.I. unit being the ki logram). Fi gure 2 shows the visual representation of such a
beam alongside the distinct regions that encompass all obj ects that have been
physically measured t o date. The main eff ect to be taken from Fi gure 2 is the
existence of a stronger intensity and small cross -section of the beam at larger mass es,
such as classi cal obj ects (obj ects with mass values between 10 - 6 -10 6 kg) and the
weaker intensit y and larger beam cross -section when propagating through regions
that contain obj ects with small er mass (such as subatomic particles).

Figure 2: Radiation pattern w ith illuminated regions at diff erent mass scales

Table 1 shows the mass of obj ects that have been measured in our reality.
The values bet ween ‘ever yday’ obj ects (such as people) and subatomi c
particles are substantially different even on a logarithmic scale. The
 4

widening of the patt ern in Fi gure 2 shows a consequent diff eren ce in

illumination for obj ects in the classical obj ects masses and subatomi c particle
masses. A further agr eement is the inability of humans to perceive small
obj ects directly and only can measure them indirectly through indirect
“illumination” which could be thought of as multi -bounce in Fi gur e 2 which
would invol ve the combination of indirect radiation patterns.

Table 1: Mass values f or a variety of objects (Fishbane, 2005) (Arf ken, 1984)

Object Mass (kilograms)

Electron 10 - 3 0
Hydrogen atom 10 - 2 7
Large Sensor y Neuron 10 - 9 (Groves, 1988)
Average human cell 10 - 1 2 (Brazma, 2001)
Droplet of water (diameter=1mm) 10 - 6
Adult Human 10 2
Earth 10 2 5
Sun 10 3 0
Super massi ve black hole 10 3 6 (Ghez, 2005)

If the source of the r adiation pattern in Figure 2 was stationar y i.e. zero
movement/ vibrations, then even at the quant um scale, the same val ue would
be percei ved ever y time the obj ect was per ceived . This would suggest that a
vibration or disturbance of some kind shoul d be included onto the location
of the source of the radiation as shown in Fi gure 3.

Figure 3: Motion dist urbances on f ield source and movement of radiation

pattern

As humans can onl y perceive classical obj ects when the distance between the
perceiver and percei ved obj ect is sufficiently small enough suggests that one
of the axes in Fi gure 2 should be position. This would also agree with the
uncertainty of the position of quantum p articles in Fi gure 2 . The uncertainly
in a particles momentum (which related to phase) will also be assumed to be
another axis that the r adiation pattern of per ception propagates thr ough . The
uncertainty in the mass region where quantum obj ects exist is sh own visuall y
in Fi gure 4.
 5

Figure 4: Quantum uncertainties caused by beam cross -section at this mass scale

As discussed, obj ect s with gar gantuan di fference s in mass will be percei ved
differently when detected with a di ver ging r adiation pattern . Anot her situation that
can be predicted when considering this model is when regions of obj ects occur with
similar mass values. The photon which is cur rently considered massless and has been
measured to travel at t he uni verse’s upper li mit can be used as an important line on
the mass axes in Fi gure 2. The minute (often considered zero) mass of a photon may
be the li mit at which the illumination of under lying reality can be det ected /perceived.
The presence of vir tual particles , said to be caused by the Casmir effect
(Milton, 2001) (Jaffe, 2005) , supports the idea of a radiation pattern as the region
labelled vacuum in Fi gure 2 may be the starting mass values in which obj ects become
unperceivable and at the upper edge of this region would lie phot ons. Disturbances
as well as variations in the position and phase axes of the source of the radiation
pattern may also change the lower limit of det ectability on the mass axis. This would
cause vacuum obj ects to transition into the photon region of mass and hence would
be perceived as photons at certain instances and as vacuum as other s . The appearing
and disappearing of p hotons have been measured (Lambrecht, 2002) (Jaffe, 2005) .
A region with the lar gest mass within the radiation beam in Fi gur e 2 is the “Black
holes & Dar k Matter” region. An initial inspection of this region would conclude
that obj ects within this region s hould easil y be percei ved as they would be relati vel y
close to the source , causing hi gh intensity returns with low ambi guit y in position
and phase, but in perceived realit y this isn’t the case. In electromagnetic sensing
(Balanis, 2005), the r egion ver y cl ose to an antenna is commonly known as the
Near - field (or Reactive) region (Fi gure 5) . The relatively compl ex nature of the
waves within this region don’t allow any simple propagation of electromagnetic
waves due to construct ive and destructi ve int erferen ces and engineers usually avoid
operating in this region due to the lar ge processing powers requir ed to process the
complex returns. This distortion in the near field possibility causes obj ects (such as
black holes) with extr emel y lar ge mass val ues to be h ard to per ceive by humans
(Figure 6).

Figure 5: Near-Field and Far -Field regions w ithin electromagnetic radiation

 6

Figure 6: Near-f ield region that exists w here the mass of extremely large objects
in the perceived universe reside such as bl ack holes

The further consequence of the theorised radiation pattern of human perception is

the percei ved quantit y and speed of obj ects due to the di ver ging pattern and
movements in the location of the sou rce ( Figure 3) . An increase in the beam cross -
section area (in the position and phase planes (Fi gure 4)) due to a r eduction in mass
being obser ved would also mean an increase in the number of obj ects possible. This
is sensical considering the number of measured atoms within a droplet of water and
the number subatomic obj ects with an atom and so on and so on. A disturbance or
change in position of the field source would cause a lar ger shift in position , the
lower in mass a perceived obj ect. Going back to the photon resi ding in the mass
value in which detectability of obj ects cease, a shift in the position (and hence speed)
over percei ved ti me should be lar gest percei vable velocity, as it currently is .

Due to the di ver ging beam cross -section having a lar ger si ze wit hin the vacuum
region, relati ve to all of other perceivable r egions, the vacuum can be put forward
as the region which has the lar gest coverage i n the position -phase plane. Th is agrees
with the widel y accept ed atomic model developed by Ernest Ruther ford (Rutherford,
1923) in the earl y 20 t h century which concluded that “solid” structures are composed
almost entirely (>99.99%) of empt y space ( Kalmus, 1999).

Disregarding the effect of the Near -field effects, the following relationships are
expected to be when considering the si mple i dea of a radiation pattern of perception :

1/Mass α Number of objects α Velocity α 1/perceivabili ty α position uncertainty

In the idea discussed, the interactions betwee n obj ects in a gi ven mass region (such
as electrons in the quantum region) is assumed to be deter ministic as with the forces
predicted by the classical version of Gauss ’s Law (Gauss, 1877) as depicted in
Figure 7. It is assumed in this theorised model that both the radiation pattern and
radiation source variations in position cause the nature of these obj ects to appear
stochastic to the perceiver . This idea resembles the pilot wave idea proposed by
De Broglie in (De Broglie, 1927) . The potential coupling be t ween r egions ( shown in
Figure 7) due to the presence and/or absence of the radiation patt ern is left up for
discussion.
 7

Figure 7: Deterministic interactions in each mas region and potential coupling

betw een regions

3. Water Tank Analogy

The idea of the radiation pattern of human perception was devel oped by mak ing
analogies with a water tank and the submer ged layers developed by sedi ments with
different mass densities as shown in Fi gure 8 . Due to all sober human beings seeming
to perceive the same material reality, the source of the theoretical radiation pattern
must all exist at approxi mately the same poi nt on the mass di mension for this idea
to wor k. The water tank analogy in Fi gure 8 also helps to visualise this by
considering bubbles of air rising to the j ust below the surface.

The idea of free-will crops up in various fiel d within the physical and social sciences
and for this to exist in the idea discussed here , interactions must occur between the
source of the radiation pattern and the perceived obj ects as portrayed in Fi gure 9 .
Currently, the presence of a feedback between each percei ver and the percei ved
obj ects remains unclear and so is left up for discussion.

Figure 8: Water tank w ith submerged layers of different mass densities

 8

.
Figure 9: Bubbles i n w ater tank used t o visualise the sources of radiaiton
patterns along the same mass.

If the theorised radiat ion pattern of human perception is indeed used to create the
reality we percei ve , then the obvious creation of our perceived uni verse s hould then
be when the radiation pattern was first for med. This would suggest that obj ects that
we percei ve already exist ed but not in the f or m we percei ve them. The Bi g Bang is
currently a popular idea for the dawn of the uni verse which was theorised by
Lemaıtre (Lemaıtre, 1931) and validated by measurements made by Hubble (Hubble,
1929). Although various measurements of the surrounding uni verse support the Bi g
Bang theor y, the idea runs into problems when going so far back i nto the evolution
of the uni verse that al l of the uni verse condenses to an extremel y small volume and
this is where the theory currently breaks down. This problem wi th the Bi g Bang
theory proposes a cur rent lack of understanding of the uni verse and hopefull y the
ideas discussed here can help to surpass some o f these difficulties.

5. Conclusions

A radical idea that puts a radiation pattern at the centre of human perception is
discussed in detail with the aid of visual diagrams as well as theory used by the
electromagnetic sensi ng community. The axes in which this theorised radiation
pattern would propagate through , to for m reality, is proposed by reverse engineering
observations that have been made by the scientific communit y such as uncertainties
measured by subatomi c particles. Numerous obser vations such as the existence of
virtual particles appe aring and disappearing out of existence, the vast empt y space
within Rutherford’s at omic -model and also t he nature of black hol es have all been
explained by using the expected behaviour of a radiation beam dispersing down a
descending mass axis. A water tank analogy has been used to aid in t he understanding
of the radiation pattern of perception with t he use of visual diagrams.
 9

References
Arfken, G., 1984. Uni versit y physics. Orlando: Academic Press. Table 1.5.

Balanis, C.A., 1999. Advanced engineering electromagnetics. John Wiley & Sons.

Balanis, C.A., 2005. Antenna Theor y, Hoboken. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc, 8, pp.21 -31.

Brazma, A., Par kinson, H., Schlitt, T. and Shoj atalab, M., 2001. A quick introduction
to elements of biology -cells, molecules, genes, functional genomics, microarrays.
European ioinfor matics Institute, on -li ne tutorial di www. ebi. ac.
uk/ microarray/biology in tro. ht ml.

De Broglie, L., 1927. La mécanique ondulatoire et la structure atomique de la matière

et du rayonnement. J. Phys. Radium, 8(5), pp.225 -241.

Fishbane, P., Gasiorowicz, S. and Thornton, S., 2005. Physics. New Jersey: Pearson
Prentice Hall.

Gauss, C.F., 1877. T heoria Attractionis Corporum Sphaeroidicorum Ellipticorum

Homogeneorum. In Werke (pp. 3 -22) . Springer, Berlin, Heidelber g.

Ghez, A.M., Sali m, S., Hornstein, S.D., Tanner, A., Lu, J.R., Mor ris, M., Becklin,
E.E. and Duchêne, G., 2005. Stell ar orbits ar ound the galactic center black hole. The
Astrophysical Journal, 620(2), p.744.

Giovannetti, V., Lloyd, S. and Maccone, L., 2004. Quantum -enhanced measurements:
beating the standard quantum li mit. Science, 306(5700), pp.1330 -1336.

Groves, P.M. and Rebec, G.V., 1988. Introduction to biological psychology.

McGraw-Hill Humanit ies, Social Sciences & World Languages.

Guo, B., Hampton, S. and Mathur , S.D., 2017. Can we observe fuzzballs or
firewalls?. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.01617.

Heisenber g, W (1949) The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory, New Yor k:
Dover.
Hubble, E., 1929. A relation between distance and radial velocity among extra -
galactic nebulae. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 15(3), pp.168 -
173.

Jaffe, R.L., 2005. Casi mir effect and the quantum vacuum. Physical Review D, 72(2),
p.021301.

Kalmus, P.I., 1999. Empt y matter and the f ull physical vacuum. Physics education,
34(4), p.205.

Knott, E.F., 2012. Radar cross section measurements. Springer Science & Business
Media.

Lambrecht, A., 2002. The Casi mir effect: a f orce from nothing. Physics world, 15(9),
p.29.

Lemaıtre, E., 1931. T he evolution of the universe: discussion. Nature, 128(3234) ,

pp.699-701.
 10

Mathur, S.D., 2005. T he fuzzball proposal f or black holes: An elementar y review.

Fortschritte der Physi k: Progress of Physics, 53(7‐8), pp.793 -827.

Miemiec, A. and Schnakenbur g, I., 2006. Basics of M‐theor y. Fortschritte der

Physi k: Progress of Physics, 54(1), pp.5 -72.

Milton, K.A., 2001. The Casi mir effe ct: physical manifestations of zero -point
energy. World Scientif ic.

Robertson, H.P., 1929. The uncertainty principle. Physical Review, 34(1), p.163.

Rutherford, E., 1923. The electrical structure of matter. Journal of the Societ y of
Chemical Industry, 42 (37), pp.874 -882.

Sonj a Franke -Arnold et al, 2004. New J. Phys. 6 103.Table 1 -2.

Tegmar k, M., 2003. Parallel universes. Scientific American, 288(5) , pp.40 -51.

Wuensch, D., 2003. The fifth dimension: Theodor Kaluza's ground‐breaking idea.
Annalen der Physi k, 12(9), pp.519 -542.