A letter appeared at my work this week. It was passed around and it landed on my desk and I wondered if Tytower might have sent it.
In any case I thought he should read it and review it. I'd love to hear what he thinks of it.
It was a hand written letter and photocopied. I decided to type it out/ digitise it so that I could share it with other people who I think might like it.
The punctuation is all over the place and he has a special talent for semicolons, brackets and inverted commas. I have tried not to change structure.

Anyhow here it is.... Well, this is the first half, thirteen pages of twenty four.
I'll type out the rest later on.

================================================== ==============

This search for dark matter may well end in error. When you look down into a galatic disk, you are looking down into accelerating inflow of "ether", into the mass that is galaxy.
this means where mass is greatest there will firstly be illusions of "not possible" power. Also the center "light output" is enhanced more DELAYED; more stacked up higher in wavelength; and seemingly further away and "shrunken inwards to center" and also the center appears "spinning faster" (in image seen) than if should be; or really is.
You only need to compare "red" and "blue" images of the same galaxy to see that they are "different positions of the same"; and see areas of greatest mass; (the center of Galaxy) are all earlier in time than the outer. You can see this because the greater is mass areas have faster accelerating inflow which blue shifts the waves of light leaving the center; - whilst also stacking them up closer to give us faster delayed and enhanced power image.
Compare the galaxy at different wavelength based upon "BLue shifted" and "less blue shifted" (or Redder frequencies) and you will "usually" (or at least sometimes) find that center of galaxy will be offset. This is simply because either the galaxy has moved or our viewing position has moved relative to when "Bluer (and delayed) images", left at said earlier view (long ago).
This obviously means a galatic image is a multi faceted image of many times. ie The center image left in time before outer images left.

Re Dark Matter "influencing Galaxeys" Not So !
For a start we are seeing the center of mass power boosted; delayed; and perceived in fast motion,
The center is not rotating "that fast". It is an illusion created by delayed and stacked up waves of light. Very much so it is "like" a movie flim started off "late" and so screened in "fast motion" (due to late arrival). It can never catch up of course, because distance that it has to travel is "increased" in exactly the same way as an aeroplane flys distance relative to a head wind; rather than to the ground distance, used independent of any wind.
So there is no Dark Matter at all. What you see is explained by simple physics. Seriously; the Ironstone Age fails the test and Albert Michelson, is who you should follow.
Then there is the observed fact that "edge-on galatic" speed readings (shifts) tend not to support that center spins as fast as it appears to spin; (as we come to expect from looking towards our Sun).
That's so bleeding obvious that surely you all know why? All it is is that the closer to galactic central MASS; the faster the cosmic energy inflow.
The faster the cosmic energy inflow the more angled "up" and away from central mass the orbiting stars must traverse (exactly like an aeroplane "has to angle into" a side wind, to maintain a straight course). This means if there is a 1/2C downflow to center of galatic mass the speed measurable sideways across is "2 forward and 1 up = 2/3c"
G-force is the acceleration of the cosmic energy pool into any mass object.
G-force cannot be felt or perceived until or unless "something solid" (like the surface of the Earth); is preventing us from accelerating with the 32ft per sec per sec constantly accelerating, 7 milepersec inflow of cosmic energy into duh erf. {?}
This also fully explains all that the Cussmollogists get all up-themselves trying to explain by "inventions; or ass-assertions;" of "Dark Energy " and "Dark Matter". These are equally as bad as the "Hubble Constant" in that they are based upon "Ass-assumptions", rather than physics.
When you see a Galatic Image; you see "Multiple time different departures, as one images". due to the cosmic inflow; (of the aether); accelerating many many times faster into mass center of the image we are perceiving. We are presented with "a multiple-time" image (for every of the multiple images created, leaving against (and within) inflow).
"waves exiting against inflow, means "blue shifted by the inflow"; so compare different frequencies. "Flow sped" into the object; (that is the light source); will "delay-stack" departure and there is faster inflow of cosmos into the center where the mass is greatest).
Ask: Perhaps "the Pulsars "are simply stars" high enough in mass category" (before the star goes to a dark area).
Mercury "precesses" because the image arrives delayed and sped-ip via the acclerating inflow into the mass of the sun. Its orbit will vary; "in speed and seen time" depending on if the view is "out to the side of the sun" or "in front of, PS (I don't even think Einstein intended how we interpreted).
Gravitation into a star; makes delayed image of that star "sped up extensively" Its planets (are seen) "sped-up" to orbit in "days" or months? It's an effect to be seen when seen "looking at the star's Equator". It is all "Physical Physics" explanation, for waves created; against an inflow; are stacked up closer. "Stacked up" remains forever constant. The do not "un-stack" as they accelerate always against a falling away inflow speed; but they maintain the same distance apart. This means the frequency they present constantly rises the further out we observe from, within the sphere of gravitational influence.
Eventually; (of course); they depart the sphere (delayed) to traverse space; (at C); in a condensed and sped-up image, rather than the reality.
If you can check; you will find that not only does Mercury precess faster from Jupiters moons, but so does Venus Earth and Mars; all seen as if to orbit in "shorter time spans" (from vicinity of Jupiter)
With Mercury; (from the earth); we will see it at "constantly changing angles of view"; relative to a straight in line "line-up" between Earth and Sun. This then means that perceived speed constantly changes; (as the wave view changes, to arrive different speed angles). What we "see"; "measured"; and do duh maffs abouts would not be the same as seen if we looked down upon our galactic disc; (opposed to line up to Equator view).
Light is (in effect) "Flat sheet arrivals". Where two "sheets" intersect; as (for example) happens in the "light through two slits", we perceive "partiggles".
"SPAZE TYME"; is not needed to explain anything. Cossmollogists "sleep on" rubbah sheets and assume a "force" where (somehow); "everything is sumhowls" like a roll-about on a rubbuh sheet" and then "wunduh-why spent cosmos has not yet collapsed to a "central lump"; (it muzzed books there invisible and Dark) I "look"; I simply reason what I see according to "Phizzicks". I can't see evidence of any force so; why assume that "mass" is "pulling on anything".
So what causes "mass" to seemingly "be as if accelerated"; or (rephrased) "to accelerate towards mass".
Dare to think outside of "Text Books"; go back to Albert Michelson; don't let yourself become all "stuck in duhduhduh "Ironstone Age".
Michelson proved there is "an ether" lets call ether the "cosmic Energy Pool" (if may please the ASTRALS).
We "breath in". Why not, all "MASS" also "breathes in" if so, it's an accelerating inflow into mass. Ask yourself? What if mass requires the cosmic Energy to "flow into it". That creates acceleration.
As the Cosmic Energy Pool "flows into all mass" then "all other mass"; along with the Cosmic Energy Pool (from which all mass is created); accelerates constantly (at 4 times).
Waves exist as "part of the very inflow" departing light; like sounds is but "shuntings within", "against" the "mass-induced in flow"; (Blue shifting; Delayed; and Stacking up). Speed of the inflow falls with increase of distance 'out-away from center of mass"; so it is as if waves are "accelerating" away". (It's relative?)
Leaving against inflow "stacks , waves up" and has them exit sphere of gravitational influence at quite a sped up image. Thus; (delayed), waves "accelerate-away" (at "four times" faster for each doubling of distance).
The accelerating constantly; inflow into all mass will have "solid parts" that; (whilst not independent of but do move within) can "go their way" if moving with in the Cosmic Pool.
This simply means, if "moving mass" traverses "fast enough" (sideways to the cosmic energy inflow); it may well almost seem "little affected" by the Energy Pool inflow. But tradjectory is affected by the time that it is subjected to the "acceleration"; less to the "inflow", more to the acceleration.
Simply to put a "number" upon the relationship of inflow to acceleration, simply be reminded the we know that Earth's acceleration is at 32ft per sec per sec per sec. Inflow is just as well known as being seven miles per second; and proof of this (bleedin obvious fact); is that to get a projectile out of the Earth's sphere of Gravitational influence, it has to be; (Jules Vern Gun fired off as "7 miles per second".
"Exiting 7 miles per second" is within and against a "7 miles per second inflow", that has accelerated from "O"; (at outer edge of Earth's sphere of gravitational influence) up to 7 miles per second arrival speed, at earth's surface. When "leaving 7mps"; a "projectile" is at 14 miles per second; but ; (it has to of course); loses 7 miles per second to "acceleration"; (de-acceleration of course); before it reaches the outer edge of earth's sphere of gravitational influence. Simply put; the 7mps (the cosmic energy accelerating inflow deceleration outward is inclusive of 7 miles per second drop off of projectile speed.
For the Cussmologists; (wiff Astrophizzicyst brains) Dear Team,
This week 9th july 2019? there wuzz ah bit on how the Cussmollogists are working out duh Red Shift too gratuh unduh standink (Talk about blind leading the blind!)
As far as common sense dictates; Red shift is the movement of the bright lines to lower frequency due to the sharing out of energy (in wave fronts); as the "4 times greater in spherical area" saps (or shares out); the initial energy. No energy is "lost". It's shared about around a gratuh spherical surface "bubble". red shifting is because wiffins only (duh duh duh) "Same 'size' of light collector" area (of a collection device?)" Wave-energy is "spred-out" four times stretched at double duh distance. (Less so if light is lasered). We followed the wrong ALBERT!
The answers were all known before "second" ALBERT", before our play out the Parable of "Emperors New Cloths". True Red Shift based on ever doubling of distance away "away from the light source" What an Eurekad full-on Asstral does instead is "to, Emperor's New Clothes", and assert that light "is always unchanging in any whey".
Trubbles wiff dat is dat instead of "four times less, (sideways share); energy observed at double duh distance we get (instead) the idiocy that each further away light year gives to us "less and less" and less and less red shift as distance increases (leading to the Ass-assertion of a "Big Bang" (acceleratik?)

Iffy youse dares consider (or to read) don't forget that there is the quite different issue of "Dust Clouds" (and that Blue spectrum will always Red-shift faster than red light).
ALSO; as distance becomes vast it will almost be impossible to even pick up any Red shifting change; if you are relating it to a light year of travel; (when wave surface is Billions of light years spherically). Perhaps the "microwave background" is simply light that you "really can't measure any shifting of" - (due to vast spherical distance).
(PS. Astro-Cussmollogists, "breath deeply"; (avoid having a strole)
Also I have told you that every Galaxy is seen in multiple-image of "different times". Time cannon ever change; but the central image may take "light years longer" to get to us; than from less gravitational inflow, outer parts of the same galaxy. Era's will be offset; (and it will show oddities; when you compare different "wavelength images" of same Galaxy). The Blue frequencies will "Show" the galaxy center offset"; back in time, compared to (less delayed); view of the stars orbiting the "Outer of Galaxy")
*(PPS If any Cussmologist "has expired; I deeply apologise)
If you ever prove me right there is no "Patent" (to bother about). You do the work and perhaps a (no-bull) prize awaits you?
Anyway, have a fun read. - Mariot

Thank God for ALBERT; (and his mate Morely) - the Michelson Morely experiments he proved that Waes of Light; across an accelerating inflow; gave us the Speed of light through the ether. "PS" mind you the speed of light is SLOWER across closer to stars surface.
Yes! "just as air sets the speed of sound, so does aether set he speed of the waves of light" that traverses within; (and by); its medium.
Of course when a "medium of transmission" (the ether); is accelerating; we observe different speed of light at different heights across. (It is far less complicated than you might think.)
ALBERT proved that the ether flowed downwards into the mass of du herf. that is why "the speed of C" is the same (except for the fringe effects Michelson's apparatus picked up); in all North-South-East-West; (same height); directions; (but not up-down) Light is waves; (exactly like sound is waves); (and the energy pool of space is like a duck pond). Waves accelerating downwards, move apart; (as they accelerate); to arrive unchanged frequency.
Gravity is not a force at all. All it is, is the acceleration; (YES, never ending acceleration) of the cosmic energy pool into the center of MASS. Its this inflow that bends the path of waves passing by mass, and the closer the waves to the mass the more. Sideways; (around erf); waves nearest to mass. "record at a "slower speed" forward" (and so we time the image (as-if) slightly slowed.) Like "sound" passing over a funnelled air flow; the closer the waves pass, the more it is as-if we see the waves "from above"; to read straight line path across.
But what wood whees see, across 1/2 C inflow?
Because light is a two-and-fro shunting wavefront, that; (in imaginative description); resembles one at a time "bubbles" from the surface of the object being observed and so taking the spherical shape of our 1/2C inflow Planet;- then. What we will see is "these bubbles" moving away at 1/2 C rather than at C.
We see 1/2 C; so simply, because we are within the inflow ourselves; (we ; in this case ; (pretend to be); in a fixed orbit point); as-if we are hovering like a helecopter can hover.
This means that if we can pretend we are holding a fixed position, that any other (similary holding position); object that sends us a light wave or radar signal "across the 1/2 C down flow" has to be sending a signal across a 1/2C downflow so that it's as-if signal (across a 1/2C downflow), "Traverses" at an angle and "falling" 1/2 what it traverses forward. (Gravity does not slow time, nor speed of C). It's like the view of the spherical wave that arrives across the inflow is at 1/2C downwards In effect; we view "looking down" at 22.5 degree angle (?)from "above the object" even though we and the observed "across the inflow object" are; (both of us); maintaining some height relative to being across the downwards 1/2 C inflow.
Waves; (at C); move across at "1" but a "1/2" so the angled path, (in a downflow in a medium); means they need further path "sideways" distance; (or appear to be slowed!). Relative to our view point; simple waves; (whilst maintaining "C" always) are delayed by traversing(like an aeroplane) at a 22.5 degree angled "upwards path across".
"Poetically", we "might assume a planet with a 1/2 C downwards inflow" This has to be "Poetic Licence" for obviously its near impossible; not because in any way we would feel the 1/2C (just it's "G" acceleration; (and how any carried particles, might fusion-impact heat up the atmosphere). But assuming "1/2C"; rather than the 7 miles per second that it is here on our Earth; then light traversing upwards at "C" would take double the time to travel up to an orbiting space station, than it would take if "speed of C" "was independent of" the energy pool through which light waves traverse; - (*and it is most certainly is not so).
Because light traverses via the structure of the energy pool; in more-or-less exactly the same way as sound waves traverse through air; then against a /2C downflow; (headwind); the effective speed upwards is also 1/2C; and so it will take (exactly); double the predicted time; (of Einsteins' Theorum); to arrive at the space station orbiting the planet. (Simple Arithmetic).
Because light traverses through and via the energy pool; that is flowing downwards at 1/2C; the waves of light; behaving exactly as do sound waves through air; will arrive at planet surface in 2/3 of the "time expected" should you foolishly believe in "duh feary of Rockativity"
Yes "believe me when I tell you "(or I will go on to offer proof that cannot be denied; the speed of C is OK to use; but only if its speed (of C); relative to speed of transmission, on "speed of traversing through" the cosmic energy. Radar bounces; (on more massive planet with a 1/2C inflow) will take "2 times up and 2/3 times down" or 1 1/3 times.
Yes; the Radar bounce (up to Space station); 1/3 longer.
PS. and also; the speed across a 1/2C downflow, will be "2/3C" across (and in no way is spaze warped to allow this).

"Closer-in, Light across an energy inflow, (of duh erf; gets pulled downwards more than further out light"; meaning increased "over the top view" of its waves. This is "hub-hub" simple. This so simply means the lower down passing across light (read over top) then take longer to traverse the same distance (sideways across). The reason is simply; with waves traversing across flow downwards, we end up seeing waves as if from above it is simply that in order to measure a (curved) line across sideways we are, (or have to) measure light that is "traversing within" "downwards flowing energy"; more so , the closer to the erf's surface as we perceive or measure it.
Take the images of two "clock-faces", the one higher (seen across an accelerating G force inflow); has its waves of light arriving less moved on downwards than the image from the lower down clock, (which is in accelerated inflow sped); and so it will take LONGER for us to read the"over the top image of lower down clock to traverse the same distance; (straight line); across to the observers standpoint (PS it will require the observer to "bob down" to read image of lower clock and "bob up" to read image of upper clock.)
Reading images across or within energy "downflow" (accelerating 7 mile per second inflow; (into duh erf); makes "TIME readings slower" and yet nothing about time can change; (for its all simplistic physics); (and there nefer wuz 4th demention). PS it's entirely different if you look down "from way up above" for then lower clock is running faster (yet shows earlier Tyme).

Light waves, traversing; in a curving sideways; across Erf.

Rule Wun: Waves are "pulled down" at 7mps (accelerating).
PS(and so we actually do see the clock from "slightly above view")
Rule Too: Duh closer to duh surface duh more bent.
PPS(and thus we see duh clock face "as if from further above viewpoint)"
Rule Free: Duh moores bendink down; duh slower across (and so duh lower clock runs slower?
No it duzz knot; but it reads slower).
("No it does not"; keep that in mind)
If duh masuring wuzz instead dunns to sticks "stuck vertically" (so that they point to center of Erf)
then the angled apart; (at top of stick) nature will somewhat corect the time taken; so that both the uppuh clock and duh lower clock keep thuh "same tyme" Bleedin obviously the light is slower across; (still); for duh lower clock; butt duh distance traversed is shirtuh simple put; Mass does not "warp space"
Rule Fife: Don't accept duh dicktakes of any fearis of Relativvitty, on face value; else "you will end up taking up arms" then going about with the intent to "kill off" any of the "non-believers" who have not entered the forf demention of unduhduhduhduhduh standing eureka needed to be wun of duh "Wize Men" in the "reel tyme" playout of Emporers clothes.

PS. as for clocks; the faster inflow must slow atomic decay?