The Nuclear Atom?
The True Theory of the Physical Universe—
From Microcosmos to Macrocosmos

Scientific Australian, June 1968
David Halprin

Four books by Dewey B. Larson just come to hand.

(1) The Structure of the Physical Universe (1959).
(2) Case Against the Nuclear Atom

(3) Beyond Newton (1964).

(4) New Light on Space and Time (1965).

Review copy from North Pacific Publishers, P.O. Box 13255, Portland, Oregon 97213 U.S.A.

“Since the beginning of the 20" century, we seem to have accepted, quite blindly
sometimes, all experimental observations, whether they fitted into the general framework of
Bohr & Rutherford, or not. Whenever they do not, present practice is to try and save the
theory, by adding further extensions and qualifications. What Larson does, and with
alarming simplicity, is to show that most of the ‘physical and chemical’ evidence, to which
text book writers refer, is equally consistent with many other hypotheses, beside the theory
of the nuclear atom, and is therefore no proof to any hypothesis. Where do we go from
here?”

Not only has Larson accomplished the difficult, but to many people, schooled in current theories, he
has done the impossible. Never before has there been a purely theoretical method to evaluate
interatomic distance, density, cohesion of liquids and solids, etc. Now it has been done without
recourse to any experiment. This alone is sufficient reason to give the theory further critical evaluation,
despite any apparent incredibilities. Then a whole host of achievements are revealed as one pursues the
developments. Gravity is explained, neither as a propagating force, not an instantaneous action at a
distance. Galactic recessions are made clearly understandable. A Euclidean concept of space is found to
be in agreement with the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment, without ad hoc assumptions. The
temperature-dependent properties of the fluid states of matter, (liquid vapour and gas) are linear with
respect to both temperature and pressure. In the first book (1959) a prediction was made to the
existence, somewhere in the universe, of events, millions of times more energetic than the most violent
explosions, then known to science, and since then, these have been observed. Electricity, (current and
static) are simply explained, and there is clarification of the true relation of electric charge to electric
current. Also there is a list of all sub-atomic particles, even those not yet discovered, all derived from
theory alone. This is part of the larger chart including all elements, with an associated 3-number
identification, from which, by purely mathematical methods, all physical properties are calculated.

Bohr’s work was a marriage of Rutherford’s theory of the nuclear atom, with Planck’s theory of the
quantum. The decree that makes the divorce final, is the abandonment of the last vestiges of
Rutherford’s theory. All that is left, is what came originally from Planck. We must go on from here, and
the new atomic theory, that replaces the nuclear atom, must embody the quantum concept in some
manner. To all of us, steeped in the unquestioning adoration of the contemporary scientific method, The
Case Against the Nuclear Atom, is a rude and outspoken book, which sometimes hurts. The frightening

2 The Nuclear Atom?

thing about it is that it rings true.

A summation of the four books would be: The author, having been aware of the shortcomings of the
logic used by physicists, when formulating their conclusions from the observed results of experiments
in fields as diverse as subatomic and astronomical ones, has listed in great detail what the whole subject
of logical deduction is about, and what one cannot assume as a proof, just because the current theory
agrees with observation. He points out internal contradictions in theories of some noteworthy people,
including Einstein, who therefore becomes a little less deified. As a result, he decided to question the
whole basis of space-time definitions and assumptions, resulting in two fundamental postulates.

1. The physical universe is composed entirely of one component, space-time, existing in three
dimensions, in discrete units, and in two reciprocal forms, space and time.

2. The physical universe conforms to the relations of ordinary commutative mathematics, its
magnitudes are absolute, and its geometry is Euclidean.

He makes extrapolations within strict bounds of logic, with constant checking, for the benefit of the
reader, and eventually, throughout the books, in great detail, he constructs a theoretical universe, and
summarizes most of it in the fourth book. This theoretical universe is based on his reciprocal system, as
defined in the postulates. There are no ad hoc assumptions anywhere. The mathematics involves the
theory of probability and simple algebraic methods. No need for tensors, spinors, quaternions, etc. This
complete theoretical universe has its counterpart in the observed universe, where anything that we may
question about the observed universe, can be explained in terms of this theoretical universe. His only
points of difference with current theories, is where the so-called proof or conclusion is at variance with
his theoretical extrapolation, and where there is in fact no actual proof yet—this being merely the
pitting of one theory against another. The important point is that to date there is no currently accepted
theory, which has been genuinely proved correct, which causes Larson’s theory to crumble. This, of
course, can be taken as a challenge to all “unbelievers” to find such a fault were it to exist.