No I have not heard of Stan Byers before.

I went and scanned some of the information on the web site, and as I indicated in a earlier post, “all theories that contain universal truths will converge at some conceptual domain“

It seem to me that Stan Byers is trying to explain the structure of mass in its fundamental level, that understanding then would lead to the understanding of the forces and fields that are associated with gravity, magnetism, electricity, and light.

In this respect Stan Byers has a quest that is similar to mine, BUT his basic premise is different from what I have come up with.

Quotation from Mr. Byers web: http://home.netcom.com/~sbyers11/

The parentheses highlighting the word (substance) in this above quote has been added by this present author. The aether or medium of yesteryear was generally thought of or referred to as consisting of a material substance. The first medium (aether ?) of this current paper, "Radiant Pressure Model of Remote Force", consists of non-material, non-electromagnetic prime force radiation (frequency spectrum, Pf). The electrostatic force is one demonstration of unbalanced flow within the prime radiation and shadowing system. The electrostatic force radiation, Pe (read P sub e) is a sub-spectrum within the total Prime force spectrum, Pf.

In the eighteen hundreds, the scientists figured that there must be some type of a supporting structure for the transmission of energies and forces such as light and gravity.
The “aether” was the idea that was used to explain these various phenomenon.
Then along came the “quantum theory,” that seemed to do away with the need for a medium that would carry the waves that caused the observed effects.
This theory postulates that the observed effects are caused by “wave/particles,” where these wave/particles can do the function of both the waves and particles.

But how do you explain gravity, magnetism, or electrostatic fields with this “quantum theory,” in other words how do these wave/particles cause the observed attracting or repelling forces.

Mr. Byers uses words such as: "Radiant Pressure Model of Remote Force", to try and explain how these fields operate.

Perhaps I can give you the gist of the theory that I am proposing by over simplifying the process that has taken many years to complete.

When I was young and went to school, I learned about space, mass and energy.
I learned that everything we see and many things we can not see are made up of mass.

At that time my concept of mass was that it was solid in other words if you took any piece of material and broke into infinitely small pieces, the fragments would still be solid.
Then I learned that the small pieces were actually made up of molecules and molecules were made up of atoms, and atoms were not solid at all, there was lot of space inside the atoms.

I also learned about energy, I studied the concept of energy, and no matter what type of energy I studied, the bottom line was that the word energy was always associated with motion of some type or another.
Science fiction presented various concepts for the word energy, but real science only presented evidence that energy is associated with some type of movement.

Then I read about Einstein’s formula of E=MC^2, it took a long time to understand the meaning of the formula.
The formula basically states that mass and energy are intrinsically combined.
Energy is motion of some type and the C represents speed, the two necessary ingredients were there, but it left a question of; why was the speed multiplied by itself to get to the right answer.
There also was the question of mass.

How does the mass move in a “particle” such as a proton or electron, and what does the speed of light have to do with it.
In other words how is energy and mass combined in wave/particles.

Those questions remained in my head for a long time and I did not resolve them until I reintroduced myself to theology.

When I was very young, I remember listening to someone reading the bible, the subject was Genesis, the message was that God had created the heaven and earth, and the earth was without form and void, also there was the word firmament in there and in those days I did not comprehend the full meaning of the words, but still they stuck in my memory, perhaps because I did not comprehend them thoroughly.

After studying Einstein’s formula and coming to an impasse on some questions, I picked up the Bible and read Genesis with the Einstein’s theory clearly in mind.

This time the words in the Bible had a totally different meaning, simply by modernising the concept words, the Bible explained everything that Einstein explained and even went further by giving answers to the questions that Einstein’s formula did not.

For further info go to:
http://space-religion.com/More_of_the_theory.php

Let me know if this information helps you to understand the formula that I am presenting.

Thank you.