The following notes are compiled from Newsgroup postings by Ross Tessien.
On Tuesday, 23 April 1996 Ross Tessien writes:
Currently, I am writing a book on my views of the construction of space and of time. Pete has on his own decided to put up some of my works because he sees a chord in the thoughts that he appreciates, and I appreciate his putting these things up on the net. I will try to add some of my chapters as I get them cleaned up and hope to publish the entire book on the net to help proof out the concepts before I try to take the book to a publisher.
Your comments are welcomed at ... email@example.com
The following is a very rough draft of some of the chapters in my book. This first section is the preface and should give some insight into what I hope to accomplish.
As I intend to publish this work, I must note that this is a copyrighted work, © 1996 by Ross Tessien. Permission is given for private use and copying.
Preface to the Works ...
For 25 years after Copernicus discovered that the math for planetary motion was less complicated if one considered the sun to be at the center of the "Universe", scientists continued to believe that the Earth was still the center but that for some reason the math was easier using a helio centric system. It was not until after Galileo came along and saw moons orbiting Jupiter, and the waxing and waning of the planets as they moved around the sun that the truth could be adopted as reality.
When Brown saw tiny particles of dust in a microscope lens dancing around in a random way, it seemed difficult to believe that he had observed motions of molecules impacting the specks of matter. But 80 years later, that is what Einstein found would be expected when he considered convergent flows of molecules that should now and then conspire to give the tiny "boulder" a push in a uniform direction in the fluid. So with that, we finally decided that we might give way and consider atoms to be real things.
Then along came Quantum Mechanics and reality was thrown out with the bath water. What is not yet clear is whether or not there was a baby in the tub at the time because no one was looking! Physicists erected a giant wall, a barrier between our macroscopic "real" world, and the quantum mechanical world of wave functions. To get from one to the other, you now need a collapse from mystery into observation. Einstein never liked this concept, and I must say, neither do I.
Many people have written about this dilemma in hundreds of books. The vast majority of these try to point out how well the system works, or they point out the debate that raged between the camp advocating QM and others that favored a more deterministic view of nature. One physicist in particular, David Bohm, tried to reformulate the equations used in quantum mechanics to show that it is possible to treat things as though they really did occur, but that there is some underlying nature to space itself that causes electrons and photons to respond in what we observe as a random manner.
This nature of space, was given the name of "Pilot Waves" by de Broglie and this concept was expounded upon by Bohm. With this approach, Bohm showed that one could treat nature in a completely normal way and that the waves along the path communicated to electrons where to go and that these waves had a statistical order to them that resulted in our observing diffraction patterns and the like. The problem is, I have not read any where that Bohm ever gave a reason for those waves to exist. They were assumed to exist and in this, his concepts were not able to take hold.
What difference does it make if you assume that matter is intrinsically statistical, or if space through which matter and photons move, is intrinsically statistical. If you have no reason for one or the other, then they wind up being equivalent from a leap of faith perspective. And physicists were already comfortable with the leap they had made.
I do not want to recap all of what has transpired because many other authors have done a much better job than I ever could on all of that. I could read what they said, and shuffle it around picking out what I consider important, and then write it down again. This is what has happened many times. Though I will say that each attempt gains a little ground on our understanding of what the universe is all about.
I want to do something different. Something that I can do because I do not have a career in physics to worry about my reputation. I want to explore a new way of looking at space and matter and light. I want to give you one possible reason for pilot waves to exist and a reason that matter should interact with these waves. And, I want to put forward a description of interactions with matter that are all a result of a single mechanism, yes, mechanism.
Thus, I will attempt to show what factors are involved in this mechanism and how all forces are the same in the way that they cause motions and action to be exchanged. This in essence will develop into a description of how and why all forces are linked and each "weaker force" is really just an observation of the same mechanism where the amplitude of the action has been reduced. I will attempt to show how gravitation is really just another observation of in essence the electric force.
Now, the above, in the context of treating the actions of nature as "forces", will not be found correct. Gravitation, for example, is far weaker than the electric "force", and the electric force is far weaker than the nuclear "force". What I intend to try to show is how, with increasing separation distance, the single mechanism for transmitting action from particle to particle changes in form and in doing so changes in amplitude.
Briefly, I will treat sub atomic matter as resonant standing waves in an aether. And I will treat "force" as the amplitude of the interaction between two different particles due to the joining of their resonance's. This interaction causes the two particles to move toward or away from each other depending on just a few factors, namely relative distance, relative phase angle, and relative frequency.
The nuclear force, in such a system is an observation of the interaction of two pulsating particles that are so close that they are at the same frequency of oscillation, and they are exactly phase angle matched. This gives you the maximum of action possible in the fluid medium that couples their standing waves.
The electric force is modeled as interactions with a reduction in the accuracy of matching of the particles phase angles. This phase error reduces the effectiveness of the application of action from one standing wave to the other. And finally, gravitation is modeled as a differential force in essence, where the earth acts as a shield, or more accurately, a filter. Not of gravitons or some flux of particles moving through space, though. Rather, gravitating bodies act as a filter to energy that is frequency shifted slightly to the red as it arrives from outer space and from distant galaxies. This interaction sets up a thrust that creates a frequency gradient in the structure of the standing waves that confine the matter in a body like earth, and fits well into Einstein's concept of geodesics as I will try to demonstrate.
In all of these forces, I must point out what I mean by "frequency" here that will be completely foreign to you. I mean the frequency at which sub atomic matter is radially pulsating like a sonoluminescent bubble. This, is not in accord with current views of physics as there is not known to be any such oscillation of an electron. Further, the frequency of this oscillation, I submit, must be of an extremely high value that we do not and can not measure with any of our devices. And "worse" (I suppose many will think I am assumption on assumption over my head and they may be right. But I am writing the book any way so you may as well laugh if it makes no sense), I am going to put forward that in the quantum vacuum, there is a fundamental frequency of resonance that persists.
The reason is because if sub atomic matter is all resonating at the same, singular frequency, then all sub atomic matter is emitting energy out into the quantum vacuum at this frequency. And to close the loop, if such energy exists out in the quantum vacuum, and sub atomic matter consists of resonant standing waves, then these waves will tend to resonate at this available frequency. One leads to the other.
The impetus for all of this work was a simple question. "How do we know that attractive forces are intrinsically attractive?". It at first seems this is an ignorant question. The ignorant answer is, "Because we stand on the Earth and the Earth exerts a gravitational pull on our bodies. And because we have observed that two magnets can exert an attractive pull. And because nuclear matter exerts a binding energy pull that is tremendous. And because a bar of steel exerts a tensile pulling force which resists our pulling the atoms apart and on and on.
Well, in each of these cases it is true that something is at work that is compelling one body to experience a force toward another body. But I restate the question; "How do we know that the action imposed is a tensile pull as opposed to a compressive push?". The painful honest answer to this question is, "We don't.". In fact, the way mathematics lays out the problem, there is exactly no difference between one way of viewing the mechanism and the other. We use a center of mass, a force magnitude, and a force direction vector in determining all action. Whether the force vector attaches as an attractive pull or a compressive push makes no difference to the calculations.
The only way someone like myself could have a chance to add something to the search for a unified theory of physics is if something stupid like a sign change could actually make a physical difference in the way the universe works. If it is indeed possible to resolve and to unify all of the forces of nature into a single mechanism, then something seemingly benign like this that had been overlooked might have lead to a century of confusion. The reason this just might be the case is precisely because such an error in the sign of a force application has no mathematical consequences, and it is therefore ASSUMED to make no difference on the outcomes of predictions.
For example, if we assume for a minute that gravitation is not intrinsically a pull, then it may just be a differential push. The magnitude of the force would be the same, but the nature would be very different. In this case, we might want to wonder how to build a device that emits energy to offset the effect of gravitation. In contrast, we right now believe that gravitation is a one way force and that there is in this view, no possible way to construct such a device. The result is that we don't bother to look for a way to try.
And yet, recent well documented experiments show that a rotating gyroscope seems to have a different mass depending on if it is rotating one way or the other, or if it is stationary. This seems to imply that either the equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass is not a valid concept (which currently is the only conclusion other than the experiment being in error), or, there is a way to deflect gravitational energy. I hold that the latter is the correct opinion and will describe ways to try to do so in the book.
As I see it, this book is my attempt to study the "Complexity" of the universe. By this I mean, I am looking for a reason that the universe and the matter and energy in it would not have been completely chaotic and random, but rather would have developed into a complex and organized, whole that we observe. There are a few key concepts you may wish to review in your own physics texts so that you understand some of the things I will say. Among these are sonoluminescence, phased array radar beam directing methods, resonant systems like a pendulum or a spring mass damper system, and coupled resonant systems.
With regard to resonant systems, of particular interest will be the amplification of a standing wave in response to continued inputs of energy. This need be no more complicated than the pushes you give a child on a swing to increase the amplitude of the motion of the child. But we will explore what happens if more than one person is doing the pushing and with different phase angles and different frequencies of input energy.
As I see it, if I am going to make any positive contribution, I will need to explore and put forward the following information. Why would all of space gained any organization in the first place. Where would the energy have come from to organize the resonance's and to have given rise to a nodal structure to space. And where does the energy continue to come from to maintain the organization.
The why is what this book is all about, the where was the Big Bang originally, and the evaporation of matter, today. This model, as it is turning out, treats the universe as in essence, a giant ocean of aether. We are like fish in the depths looking out. The universe is treated like a very rigid vapor and the expansion of the universe is treated as a constant pressure vaporization of the contained matter. Currently, all of the evaporation is coming from the nuclear and chemical reactions that reduce the mass of the involved particles as they release "energy".
"Energy", then, is treated like either aether in motion, or compressed aether that given the chance to expand it will incite motion. "Mass" is a measure of the density of the aether in a given region of space occupied by a particle times the volume of that occupation. I must say here that a "particle" is more of a wave than a simple grain of sand. If you have read of sonoluminescence, then you have pondered what the bubble is doing.
But I am working on the standing waves that are out and around that bubble in the water. Following the collapse, there is typically a 1 MHz ringing of the bubble in the form of a damped sinusoid. This means that there are concentric spherical shells of fluid motion that reverse direction every 1.5 mm along a radial line. So, while the laser beams measure the direction and velocity of the motion of the surface of the bubble, they miss the beauty and complexity of the shape and structure of the motions around the bubble.
I will make a lot of references to sonoluminescence in the course of this book just to give you something tangible to visualize. But at all times what I am trying to get at is the nature of electrons and protons and photons, and the like. What I am trying to do is to look into the structure of the quantum vacuum and how matter and light interact with it. This structure must exist if sub atomic matter is resonant, and this concept is completely counter to current views of physics as best I can figure out.
And yet from a qualitative point of view, whatever gravitation and mass and inertia are, it is clear that they deal in the realm of the sub atomic. And whatever the curvature of space and geodesics are, it is clear that they interact with the sub atomic world. What is also clear is that sub atomic matter interacts with sub atomic matter. So there is some form of communication between different particles. In essence, this book is an attempt to look into the inner workings of the curvature of space on the scale of the quantum vacuum. From this, it is hoped that some insight into how to relate all of the forces of nature will come forth.
If this has made little or no sense, don't worry, I don't understand it either. But I will try with as many examples as I can to describe in a concise geometric manner what I am talking about. Unfortunately, my mathematical skills are not what they should be for this discussion. But then we must do what we can.
My intention here is to present this information and this way of viewing the universe so that others already working on these things can compare this geometry with their mathematical equations dealing with string theory and the like. Hopefully, I will have stumbled on one or more points that strike a chord with others more knowledgeable than I.
If not, then this should at least be an interesting science fiction novel as it deals with ways to condense space out of the way to exceed the speed of light and many other interesting things like how we might construct a device to generate a gravitational field. It reaches out into gravitational crystals also known as globular clusters. It explores the concept that we are pushed down by the stars harder than we are pushed away by the earth which is not far from Mach's reputed statement that; "When the trolley car jerks, it is the stars that throw you to the ground".
And I will discuss the concept that a Black Hole is a region into which the aether making up space itself is flowing and condensing. And how later, this highly pressurized Black Hole will explode either via the emission of two jets, or in a catastrophic single big explosion. And the latter form will be modeled as the way our universe got started in the first place which winds up requiring that there be other universes out there beyond the limits of ours.
This book is written by a mechanical engineer with a passion for physics and new technologies. It is not by any means an accepted view of the cosmos so don't use what you read here on any tests in school. I do not guarantee the accuracy of anything inside. This is a book of my thoughts and opinions on the nature of the universe and as such it is a work in progress. It is in the early stages of development and it may be found to be completely in error. But despite that, it is an attempt to bring a modicum of reality back into the realm of the sub atomic, and to show a possible way to tie the electric and the nuclear forces to gravitation.
So, I do not have any idea of whether physicists will attribute any or no validity to the concepts in this book. But I am writing down my observations so that they will have the opportunity to decide. With that, lets get started on this journey of discovery of what our universe might really be like if; "There exist in nature, no attractive forces"
The other side of the fence
Wed, 24 Apr 1996
One of the most profound events in my life was seemingly trivial. And yet it later combined with statements of others and eventually led to a methodology for discovery that I use on a daily basis. If you wish to discover new things, then you must, prior to each discovery, set aside your pre conceptions regarding the technology. If I tell you the earth is not flat, you do not need to stretch your mind very far to understand what I mean. But if you lived in a time before this was common knowledge, then your being able to understand this concept would not be so easy.
Just imagine if the leading physicists today told us that the earth, as it turns out, really is flat and our images from space have all been made through a region of space where the light rays completely curve around and it only appears to be round. If you really try to understand that as a fact, then you will understand how difficult it must have been for those in the days of Copernicus and Galileo to accept that despite gravity creating perfectly level lakes everywhere, the earth was round.
Imagine what that must have been like. Engineers of the day in their construction of the monuments must have been routinely using make shift canals of water around a perimeter foundation to level their foundations for important buildings. And now, if the world was round, the water in their "water level" was not flat. Did that mean it was not level and that they should build their buildings leaning inward to get them vertical and parallel? The answer of course is no and yes respectively, but not of a magnitude that they could measure. The concepts in this book, are like that, upside down and I hope, mind bending.
To look beyond the known, one needs, as I said, to set aside ones pre conceptions and look for ways to change ones view of what is around. Sometimes there are obvious things one might try. This is like the step by step progression. But important discoveries are more often made a different way. They are more often made by looking in a completely new and seemingly incorrect direction before anyone else thought to look there. Newton's discoveries and Einstein's discoveries were of this sort. All of us do this but not with such dramatic results. Let me tell you about how I learned to do this and hopefully what I mean will come clear.
When I was around 8 years old, my parents had bought me a "Super Ball" which is a ball made of a rubber that returned most of its kinetic energy to the ball when it bounced and so they bounced higher than any other balls on the toy store shelves. They were brand new and cost more too, and I had waited long to get one.
While playing in my front yard, the ball every now and then would bounce to the side of the driveway into the bushes from where I would retrieve it. In the flowers and shrubs there was some ivy, and at the property line, a fence through which the ball could not go. One time, the ball went into the shrubs seemingly like all the others and I searched for it as usual. However, I didn't find it so I searched again expanding the area. Again failure. (Mind you this is all happening in an area about 10 feet by 20 feet).
I repeated this about ten times at which point I was completely frustrated and fearful I had lost my cherished ball. About that time, my father came out of the house and asked what was wrong. I explained that the ball had bounced no more than a foot high into the bushes right there and would he help me find it as I had searched a dozen times and had not been able to find it yet.
He agreed to help me look, but to my surprise he did not lift a single leaf where the ball had to be. He walked up the driveway and started around the fence. I told him the ball could not be over there because it bounced low and could not get through the fence. One or two minutes later he handed me my ball with the words, "If you cannot find something where you have already looked, look somewhere else."
In my adult life I considered this, unknowingly, in another fashion. I wondered how I could prove something like time travel or faster than the speed of light space craft was impossible. I was trying to lay out the ground work for how I could know what things or projects were solvable and which were not. From this work I learned that it is not possible to prove something is impossible. The best we can do is demonstrate one way after another that we will not succeed at accomplishing a given task. This neither proves nor disproves the viability of any concept. At best, it only establishes a level of difficulty or creativity that would be required if something were to possible.
For this reason, and because my goal in life is to design and to discover new technologies, I decided that it would be best to give up on the concept of saving time by eliminating things that were "impossible". In its place, I decided to assume that all things are possible, literally. Now, if there were such a thing as something that was intrinsically impossible, despite my assumption I would still not find it. If on the other hand, I was considering something most people believe to be impossible but which is completely fine as far as nature is concerned, then I stand a chance of asking the right question to determine how to do it. Now I wouldn't say I would spend very much time on things I think are likely beyond my ability to determine, but I have considered the concept of time travel. I find no validity to the concept either for my body or for a positron in quantum mechanics. I do, however, allow the concept to exist in my mind.
Likewise I have wondered how one might build a transporter like those in Star Trek. On that note, there is a way in principal to do it. You can now move individual atoms with an atomic force microscope. We also have a technology in manufacturing called stereolithography which takes information directly from a computer design data file and constructs a device layer by layer by depositing material until the desired object is finished and then you reach in and remove the new product from the machine.
So, you could remove each atom from a person up on the ship and record exactly where it came from and what type of atom it was. Then, you could down load that information to a computer on the surface of the planet, or across the galaxy. And then finally, another atomic force microscope could work with a bunch of ultra pure baskets of atoms to reconstruct that person or thing, one atom at a time. This is in principal possible today. In practice, of course, it would take much longer than building and launching a rocket to get the same job done. Not to mention the lack of volunteers for being decoded.
So, "Impossible", then, is a word used by those who do not know how, and are afraid that to try and not to succeed would be to fail. I do not consider that failure exists either. All we do on this planet is to gather memories, gain wisdom, and reduce the number of things about which we are ignorant. We are all ignorant about much more than we are not. To me, knowledge of physical things and of spiritual things are equally good. When a physicist tells me that nature is the way it is and it is up to us to accept it as it is beyond our ability to understand, I simply assume that this physicist is looking on the wrong side of the fence, considers finding the ball impossible, and is making up an excuse to explain why he/she has accepted defeat.
I chose to look on the other side of the Unified Field Theory fence, but first, I had to find where the fence was. This took twenty years and a chance review of atomic physics that awoke a long dormant concept that had always bothered me, attractive forces.
The next incident that helped me to shape my approach to problems was when my older brother made the statement that one can view anything at all as either good or bad, beautiful or ugly. I objected to this concept stating that there were things that were intrinsically beautiful to which he retorted, find one. I brought out a picture of Lake Tahoe. This is a jewel of a lake in the California Sierra Mountains. The picture post card showed the lake looking out from a hillside with pine trees and beautiful Spanish moss all framed, I thought, quite nicely. He took the picture and began with the accent of a Russian travel agent;
"Look at these scraggly trees, they are ugly and have no needles to speak of. And look here at this parasite moss hanging from the limbs sucking the life from the tree. What a horrible and pathetic tree this is. In Russia we have beautiful trees, perhaps you would like to import some of them and get rid of these ugly trees. And look at the buildings on the far end of the lake. They dump their sewage into the lake and this lake is all polluted and you even have dead bodies floating down in the depths of this lake. No, no, in Russia this simply would not do".
(At the time they did dump treated sewage into the lake, a practice which was halted long ago. And, there are still bodies that remain preserved in the depths of the lake due to the very cold temperature of the water. Once in a great while after a storm, a body will be found with clothes from the 1920's or whatever the era that the unfortunate individual fell into the water or the boat sank. I love the Tahoe basin and live nearby. It is a wonderful place to visit for summer boating and for winter snow skiing with Squaw Valley my personal favorite ski resort. I hope this keeps the Tahoe tourist bureau off my case for the above comments!)
Well, then my brother changed his voice and went on to describe how beautiful the same Spanish moss was and how clear the waters were and on and on. The point was, that you could make a case for nearly anything you wanted. This is why we have so many lawyers in our country because for some reason we are willing to listen to these contrived tales.
Any way, with this knowledge I got out of a lot of trouble as a child by using reverse psychology before I should have known it existed. I was not a good kid, but I can say that my explanations were creative. My mother always said I should become a lawyer, but I never really liked the profession.
The third thing that I think really cemented the approach I use came when as an engineer, I was at a meeting with the owners of the corporation and another engineer. The task presented was to design a new kind of a connector which would yield better impedance control for high speed computer interconnect. The owner of the corporation began by saying that he wanted to do something like .........this.......... Well, we listened for a while, and then I opened my mouth trying to show how what he had laid out wouldn't work because it ruined the impedance here and there. He cut me off mid statement and said; "I don't care about things or reasons that what I have presented will not work. I want to hear ideas and I want to learn of approaches that will. We are going to design this connector, period."
Well, fifteen minutes later we had laid the ground work for the new connector design. All we needed was to lay out bizarre ideas and to consider the things that might help. I think that was the last time I ever jumped in saying something couldn't work without at the very least biting my tongue first. Still, I find that the inclination is there and I have to continually ward it off. Most physicists reading this to this point having made it past the introduction likely have some holes in their tongues already. I can only say get ready for more.
I believe this is natural for all of us, but it is also the single greatest reason most fail to find new ways of doing things. It is far easier to demonstrate how or why a concept will not work than it is to happen across enough little details to show how it can. But remember from the above comments on Tahoe, that just because you can lay out a case for why something will not work, does not mean that it won't. You can never prove a single thing to be impossible. You likely do not believe this right now but, but I assure you it is absolutely correct. There are many things "WE" can not do, but nothing that we can say that "NATURE" can not do. We can only say what we have observed nature do.
By this I do not mean to imply that it would be fruitful to go look for a lake high in the sierras made of anti water (water made of anti hydrogen and anti oxygen). While there could be some spatial anomaly that creates such a lake for a time, odds are very much against your finding it. Besides, if you did you would explode when you jumped in. I suppose some could turn that glib comment into another mechanism for the extinction of the dinosaurs, the appearance in our universe on earth of an anti lake!
As you read this book, you are going to immediately be inclined to focus on one point or another that is important to you and you think will force my concepts to fail. You will have years of concepts and ammunition with which to succeed at that task. If you read this book with that frame of mind, you will learn nothing, and you may as well consider this a comic strip and have a good laugh. The point is that you indeed will find many ways to "demonstrate" how what you think I said will fail. My concepts do not fit with our current views. But they do fit with our observations once you understand what my comments really mean.
For those of you who are well versed in physics, I would recommend that you consider this a comic strip and to laugh at the "errors" I will make according to accepted theory. In doing so, you will have a reason to continue. I promise you no shortage of upside down interpretations right to the point of considering why your arm doesn't fall off when it hangs by your side. The humor is in how contradictory these concepts are, and how logical and yet incompatible both sides are.
Evidence exists for both views, mathematical calculations exist for both points of view (because the math is the same), and photos and experience exist for both points of view. The humor is in how opposite the phenomena are that are perceived to have taken place. For example, my view requires Black Holes eventually to explode (and I don't mean Hawking vaporization but rather a sudden release of all of the contained energy). I also expect liquids with slow moving atoms or molecules like liquid helium to flow up the vertical side of a container, over the top, and out onto the table.
It is not that observations of these phenomena do not exist, they do, it is rather the ways these observations have been explained that is so different as to make me and hopefully you too, laugh.
Remember, laughter is good for the soul. And who knows, there might be some small thing that really does happen in nature like I say. No matter what, always remember that if you have carefully searched a given region of space for a solution and have not found it, then assuming the solution exists, you can be certain it exists somewhere you have not yet looked. My recommendation is always; "Go Look Somewhere Else."
If a different interpretation exists, that is where you will find it. Following that, you will need to try to tear it down to see if it can stand up to scrutiny.
Attractive Forces Don't Make Sense
Wed, 24 Apr 1996
In my first year of college physics we had a session where we were learning about the application of force to an object due to pressure applied to a surface. The force is equal to the pressure times the area of the surface to which the pressure is applied. In the discussion, my professor brought out the example of a suction cup. He said that there was a vacuum behind the suction cup and asked us what the origin of the force was in the phenomena of a suction cup sticking to the side of a cabinet.
Most of us said, "the vacuum is pulling the suction cup to the surface". Well, he let us hang ourselves. A vacuum does not pull the suction cup to the surface, rather, the 14.7 pounds per square inch of the atmospheric air pressure is pushing on the external surface. What the suction cup does is to keep any air from leaking in behind the cup rather than keeping the vacuum from "leaking" out. This was a very great reversal in our common concept of the phenomena.
For a one square inch suction cup, the force is about 15 pounds and if you took a piece of anything that didn't weigh very much and applied 15 pounds of force with your finger, you could "magically" cause that thing to "stick" to the side of the surface for as long as your patience lasted. That is all our air pressure is doing. It is pushing against the suction cup from the outside and the vacuum is "NOT" pushing the cup away from the surface. Now this seems harmless enough, but let me show you your first glimpse at our pre-disposition to consider things as attractive even when we know better.
My professor went on to describe how two very flat pieces of metal can exhibit the same effect. In my machine shop these are called gage blocks and they are the reference standards for lengths in any machine shop. You can go ask a machinist to show you this at a shop near to you. Two of these blocks can be stuck together by wiping all of the air out from between the flat surfaces in what is called "ringing" the blocks together. The surfaces of the gages are so flat (a few millionths of an inch) that the slight oil film keeps any air from leaking back in between the blocks. They thus can develop a vacuum. This vacuum is so good that you can actually suspend one block of steel beneath the other.
"Now," he said, "if we did not know about the effect of air pressure pushing up from beneath the suspended block, we would think that we had discovered a new attractive force mechanism that is proportional to the surface area and the flatness of two objects". This comment of his hit me like a ton of bricks. If we might have made the mistake here, what if we really had made the mistake somewhere else? I started to explore ways that gravitation and magnets might really be some sort of a shield instead of an attractive pull. I found ways to describe gravitation, but now I had no way to describe the repulsion of two magnets or two like charges. I gave up.
That was twenty years ago. Let me describe another "attractive" and see what you think. The effect is called the Casimir effect and is commonly used to prove the existence of virtual photons. (In quantum electro dynamics it is necessary that there exist virtual photons and virtual particles. These are particles with all of the same properties as their real counterparts, but they pop in and out of existence. While they are here they exert real forces and effects, but they are virtual because they cannot survive but for an instant or two because they must disappear before the quantum vacuum "notices" the missing energy).
If you put some oil on top of water, it can preclude certain wavelengths of light from existing in the cavity formed by the film of oil. This is what the photo is of on the cover of Feynman's book, "QED". It turns out that the same thing must take place between two parallel mirrors. If you were to place the metal mirrors very close together, only certain wavelengths of light would be able to exist in the cavity. Other wavelengths would be excluded. In fact this is near and dear to the constructors of lasers which use two parallel mirrors where one is partially reflective to set up just such an internal reflection. The mirrors are adjusted so that there is an integral number of the wavelengths they will emit.
Now what is interesting is that QM and QED require the existence of virtual particles and photons. As I said, these are real particles that merely have a short life span. Virtual photons must obey all the same rules of normal photons, and therefore if a real photon cannot exist between the plates, neither can a virtual one. If you place such a cavity (two parallel mirrors) in a dark box with no real photons in it, you will measure an attractive force due to the exclusion of these virtual photons. This effect is real, measured, and comfortable for me as well as for physicists.
Well wait just a minute. Did you notice anything wrong in that last statement? I thought we learned that a vacuum does not "attract" the suction cup but rather the pressure on the outside pushes. There is nothing that precludes all of those excluded photon wavelengths from pummeling the outside of the cavity and pushing the plates together exactly like our suction cup and our gage blocks. So how did this effect ever get labeled an attraction?
The answer is because, mathematically, it doesn't matter whether you consider it an attractive pull, or an external push, the plates are still compelled to move toward one another. Because we do not know what is really causing the force to manifest, it is meaningless to debate the difference. Or at least, so goes the standard argument. (We do not know what causes any force from a mechanistic point of view and indeed it is believed that to search for such a thing is meaningless and absurd.).
Well, again, wait just a minute. Our entire goal here is to do just that. We are trying to determine what is responsible for the way things work in our universe. We are trying to discover how gravitation is related to the other forces. We are trying to find out what is really going on and if we lay out the ground work in a way that does not separate between something that is pushing as opposed to something that is pulling, the math will work, but how could we possibly expect to describe the mechanism.
The answer is, we could not. So we need to be careful about our assumptions. It is possible that just as is the case with the equations, that none of this distinction will ever make a difference. But it is also possible that our inability to link gravitation and the other forces has occurred precisely because we have been sloppy about our descriptions of how forces are applied.
This would interject a sort of confusing retrograde motion to forces just like Ptolemy dealt with and Copernicus straightened out. For example, the gluon force is very strange in the way it acts. It is completely backwards from all other forces. Is this because gluons got their job description backwards, or is it because we have our force directions backwards?
So, if we know the difference on simple things like the Casimir effect, lets get it straight. Let's note the mechanism as seems reasonable here and call this a Casimir compression rather than "attraction". Even if this distinction makes no difference, shouldn't we put things in their proper place? I don't know about you, but it seems absolutely clear to me that there is a force from the impacts of virtual photons arriving from the outside that is pushing the plates together because the photons are striking the outside.
I am going to make a tiny note here to remain in the back of your mind. What has really happened is that those photons, or, those quantum vacuum fluctuations, were filtered by the metal mirrors and were excluded from growing in amplitude inside the cavity. We are going to discuss filtering of energy in the quantum vacuum several times, and we are going to discuss a complex organization of the quantum vacuum as opposed to the current view of chaotic energy transfers in the quantum vacuum.
So, now that you have those couple of examples under your belt, let me explain why I do not think attractive forces exist. I am an engineer. I believe that real things are responsible for real actions. I have no problem with Browns discovery of Brownian Motion where molecules of water impact little microscopic dust particles and jostle them about. Atoms make sense to me. Further, I have no trouble with the random quantum mechanical behavior of atoms and sub atomic particles. I assume again that something real is bashing these particles about (electrons, photons, etc.). But consider gravitation.
Gravitation force is given by the equation F=GmM/R^2. This means that gravitation is proportional to the total mass of one object times the mass of the other. Mass, is proportional to the total number of sub atomic particles times their respective masses. This means that the effect is cognizant somehow of the total number of sub atomic particles in the two objects. No matter how you cut it, "if" the effect is intrinsically attractive, "and" space is an empty vacuum, "then" there are little strings of energy or something reaching from each particle in the first object to each particle in the other object and pulling.
Now I have looked under my chair for all of these little strings or rubber bands, but have never seen them. Apparently, each particle in the tip of my finger must have enough strings to attach to every other subatomic particle in the Earth. Since for each of my particles, there are a very large number of strings, and since I can see the effect on space that my particles cause, it seems to me I should be able to see these strings that are pulling me down to the earth. To make matters worse, I need strings not just for each particle in my body linked to a like number of particles in the Earth, instead I need enough strings attached to my particles to link them to every particle in all of the Milky Way galaxy and in all of the surrounding galaxies like Andromeda as well not to mention the entire universe. This concept seems to have a lot of strings attached!
Then I wondered how they would handle being spun in a circle as the flywheel on my car revolves around. Then I wondered about binary stars rotating around each other. Think of the strings that would be reaching from my finger to a distant rotating pair of stars. Surely these strings would get tied in a knot and snap. At this point I said enough is enough. I don't see them, and if they were that small, then maybe they don't exist.
And yet, our bodies are made of a bunch of atoms that are like separate marbles. And even those atoms are almost entirely empty space with a tiny nucleus, and then way far away tiny electrons out in a valences. Our matter is really more like a gas than it is like a solid object. And all of these atoms can fly around and some of them move right on past each other as I flex the muscles on my fingers to type this paragraph.
So, I wondered, what if instead of strings, all of those trajectories were just that, directions in which some form of substance can flow. And what if the Earth somehow was more of a shield than a ball of rubber bands. What if I am being pushed down, instead of being pulled down? Well, Feynman considered such a case given enough energy to explain gravitation and it seems that he demonstrated that the interference would slow the planets down more than is observed and so he ruled this out as a possibility.
Remember, though, that we have outlawed ALL attractive forces. We will shortly find that this includes the nuclear binding energy as well. When we eliminate that we have just one choice to avoid a large explosion, namely, a highly pressurized aether. This is normally called the Quantum Vacuum today. I will simply call the medium an aether following the old beliefs and terminology. What I hope to demonstrate below is that if we make this assumption, then it follows that matter is confined by this aether in a resonant manner. And it is also demonstrated how there can be organized, complex, resonance's in the aether as opposed to the current belief that the vacuum is just a chaotic random mess. I will also try to show that if this is the case, then matter would be super-conductive through such an aether just as are electrons in a superconductive ceramic.
As I will try to develop, I do not think that we experience a flux of particles, or so called gravitons. Rather, I think we live in an organized quantum vacuum that has a nodal structure to it that is in essence a bunch of fluid standing waves. The shape of these waves is distorted locally due to emissions from resonant sub atomic matter nearby and far away (time delayed for transit). This quantum vacuum structure of standing waves is what gives rise to gravitation, electric, weak, and nuclear forces.
Each and every force will be shown to be a result of the same mechanism, though there are very specific distances at which the intensities and geometry's of the nodes are altered. These are due to the way the wave energy is conducted through the quantum vacuum and the nodes and so we observe differing amplitudes of interaction between particles at different distances. And finally, gravitation and inertia will be presented as our interaction with energy arriving from the universe, rather than any gravitons sent out from the earth.
Rather than describe gravitation as a "shielding" effect as was analyzed by Feynman, I will try to make a distinction in the interaction of the arriving wave energy by calling gravitation a "filtering" mechanism. Where matter acts like a frequency band pass filter of sub atomic resonant wave energy in the organized quantum vacuum. The organization of the nodal structure will be shown to give rise to a spherical distortion to the space around a body. And this will be shown to be the result of the emissions of sub atomic matter here locally.
One of the key things to take care of in any "shielding" theory for gravitation is how you are going to get rid of the energy you shielded. This is because due to Einstein's equation E=mc^2, we know that if we absorb energy that the mass of the earth should increase. But this does not happen, so there must be some emission of energy for any absorption. When you account for this, one would normally jump to the conclusion that one could not wind up with gravity because if you have the same amount of energy absorbed and then emitted by a body, then through us and our space craft will flow the same amount of energy directed toward and away from the earth.
This means that there should be no net thrust on the space craft and therefore, no gravity. However, if matter is like a band pass filter that absorbs energy at interfering frequencies, and then emits energy in a specific frequency, this is a shift in the quality of that energy. And it is, possible, to have a material be more transparent to one form of energy than to another. So as a brief introduction to our future discussions on gravitation, we are absorbing red shifted energy which interferes with our sub atomic resonance's here on earth and then we are emitting energy at our natural resonant frequency.
Thus, energy arriving from distant galaxies in relative motion to our location applies a greater thrust than does energy exiting the earth that is in frequency match with our particles at the quantum vacuum fluctuation level. This allows the energy leaving the earth to pass through us with a great deal of transparency, while we filter energy arriving from distant galaxies as that energy beats with our resonance's.
Beating is when two waves of energy are at slightly different frequencies. The phase angles of the waves move from being aligned to being out of step and this causes an interference. Such an interference in coupled oscillators is known to be absorbed and canceled out by a compromise frequency. This leads to things like two pendulums coupling their frequency if placed on a wall next to each other and adjusted to be close enough in their natural resonant frequencies.
So in words near those of Mach, it is the stars that push us down harder than the Earth pushes us away. The difference in these forces is what we call gravitation. And the amplitude of the component pushing us away is the same as the electric force. When we measure gravitation, we only measure the difference between the incident and the emitted energy of the earth, and we consider this to be the entire mechanism.
This is a difficult introduction to a difficult concept. The concept to most of us is as foreign as believing the Earth was not flat to our ancestors. I am going to present the concept in a number of ways to try to help the ideas come across. Do not expect to understand what I am saying right away. And if you find something you believe is incorrect, play devil's advocate with yourself and try to find a way your belief is incorrect. At this point Nearly everyone is thinking of the statement of sub atomic resonance's and it makes no sense.
You are likely thinking I mean "at a variety of random and chaotic frequencies". I do not. What I mean is that there is a fundamental frequency of resonance of the quantum vacuum, and that sub atomic matter is pulsing in cadence with this incident energy. I precisely mean that the average distance from node to node in the quantum vacuum is what we know as length, and the average period of a pulsation of a standing wave in the quantum vacuum in a region of the universe is what we know as time.
It Curves, therefore it IS
Sun, 28 Apr 1996
Fifteen billion years ago, or thereabouts, there issued out from some location a giant wave function. This event was known as the Big Bang and from it came waves of all sorts spreading out through space and giving rise to time. Everything went on like clockwork with waves inside of waves and each spread across the entire universe. There existed, in all of the expanse covered by that wave function with a radius increasing at the speed of light following an early inflationary phase, nothing. Reality was not a part of all of this giant wave function and noting existed inside of this giant bubble.
Then, one day a few tens of thousands of years ago, a region of space within this wave function began for some strange reason to organize. The previously chaotic interactions of the expanding wave function went awry and gained some level of organization. The entire universe shuddered at the thought of what must soon take place. All of the waves spread out across the entire universe prepared for the event as they all knew it would arrive sooner or later due to this horrible region of space that refused to be random.
All of the universe was dark that day. Just a huge jumble of waves. In fact, even the concept of huge does not apply because there was no time, no distance, no reality. On that day, it happened. That horrible organization of waves imagined themselves into a creature, holding a stone and slamming it against another stone to create a sharp edge. That horrible grouping of waves had "learned" that a sharper edge on the stone would cut the hide of the quarry it had just killed.
With that sentient thought, a chip flew from the stone and all of the universe came ablaze with stars, a sun, a moon, a solar system and a planet earth. In that thoughtful moment, all of the waves throughout the universe collapsed into being a universe. That ancient cave man wielded power greater than the balance of efforts of all of mankind combined. That ancient cave man created the entire universe when he gained the ability to think.
Or so quantum mechanical physicists would have us believe. Personally, I don't think that the universe really cares if we watch or not, it is perfectly happy to carry out its chores in an organized manner. It is only our arrogance that leads us to believe that we are somehow important. This was never the case in the past, so how did we come to this in such educated modern times?
If we leave the cave man and come forward in time, we find a myriad of technical developments along the way. But one development in the past hundred years had more of an impact than any other since Newton. That was Einstein's understanding that energy and mass are the same thing related by the equation E=mc^2 that even non physicists have come to know and cherish as a symbol of modern understanding. And yet for physicists, this equation leads to somewhat of a paradox.
In between the symbol for energy, and the symbol for mass, in the same equation, there is an "equals" sign. This would have been fine if what was meant was that a mass moving with a given velocity had kinetic energy, but that is not what is meant by this equation. This equation does not tell us that if you multiply an amount of mass by the square of the velocity at which it moves you can find out how much work that mass in motion can perform. No, this equation tells you how much work you will be able to perform when you eliminate from our universe a measure of mass.
That equation tells us that energy and mass are really the same thing at some intrinsic level we do not yet understand. The confusion may have originated from a curious experiment that led to the discovery of this equation. That experiment was carried out by Michelson and Morley and was a pivotal refutation of aether theories. It was stated that because they did not find a variance in the velocity of light propagation, that light could not be little packets drifting through space. And of course, I think they were correct about their findings of the way that light does not behave.
This, however, is a far cry from ruling out aether as a material medium filling our universe. It merely gives us some ways in which aether and light do not interact assuming that both light and aether exist. We do have some concept that the universe is large and that it occupies space. We believe this because we can personally move from one location to another and we have sent things out on journeys through our solar system and we can look at photographs we make of star birthing regions in nebulae and we can see photos of distant galaxies and on and on.
But what of the basics? What happened when a deuterium nucleus combined with another to form helium? We know that if we take that helium nucleus and cool it down to the starting temperature of the deuterium before we accelerated them (i.e. we compare two D nuclei and one He4 nuclei at the same temperature), that we find that the helium does not weigh as much as the deuterium from which it was made. So, some of the mass is missing.
No we attribute the quality of "somethingness" to matter. Meaning, we believe that matter consists of something and it is therefore allowed to have the quality of mass. Where then did the eliminated mass go? Today it is believed that mass is not conserved, and that energy does not posses any physical geometric properties. Space is empty and through it moves energy. Energy does not have any physical make up, it just IS. But does this make sense?
What if we try to look at this entire problem from a different angle for a minute. Lets just assume for the sake of argument that whatever makes up mass is conserved. What would this mean? First of all, it would say that space and energy and matter were all intrinsically made up of the same stuff. So, lets call this stuff aether and see whether or not aether can reasonably be believed to exist.
If Space consists of aether, then due to the expansion of the universe, we should expect that the pressure of this aether vapor should be decreasing unless something else is going on to replace it. On the other side of the coin, if we consider that the universe has within it a large amount of mass that is undergoing nuclear reactions in stars, this process is releasing a large amount of aether into space. So in a static universe, we should expect that the pressure would be going up.
Well, if we look at these two process, one of the expansion of space and the aether in it, and the other of the vaporization of mass to create aether, then this begins to look like a simple constant pressure expansion process. The universe expands some differential amount, and an equivalent amount of aether is vaporized from the matter in the stars to replenish it. Well, we know that matter indeed does get depleted when a nuclear reaction takes place, but what of space being created? Can we possibly learn anything about the expansion and creation of something we cannot see?
Honestly, I am not certain, but it seems to me that we should. If the reaction of nuclei is responsible for the creation of space itself, while this is a bizarre concept to those of you who think of space as an empty void dotted with real matter, it is not so bizarre for those few of us who believe that space is itself a material substance through which we are moving in some superconductive manner. Well, yes you may be right, I may be one of few lunatics who believe that there is some structure to space that would allow it to behave in a superconductive manner!
But lets consider a couple of possible observations of such a process. first of all, we must note that the pressure throughout the universe would be nearly constant. Though far from galaxies in empty voids one would expect the pressure of aether to be reduced due to the expansion of the universe. And if nuclear reactions are what can replenish this vapor, then the emissions of newly born space (aether) will come from galaxies and move outward. Because there is a star density gradient in most galaxies, there will also be an aether expansion velocity gradient where the greatest expansion velocity is near the center and the lowest is far away.
This velocity profile will follow a curve that is a function of the radius from the center line that I have not yet figured out. But in a qualitative sense as a first cut, there is a reduction in the number of stars per unit volume of space as you move out along a radial line. This is especially the case because if aether can be emitted in any direction, the expansion of the aether would necessarily be spherical, regardless of the shape of the galaxy or globular cluster of stars. Further, once you reach the boundary of nuclear reactions, you have no more emissions into space and the expansion then decreases in velocity according to 1/R^2 like any normal expansive flow.
Within the region of the galaxy, there will be a decrease in the outward flow that is probably something more like a 1/R relationship like gravitational inside of a body. In any case, it seems like the flow out into space (flow of newly created space) can only take place in just one way. This new space must still resonate in cadence with the standing waves that already fill space and for that reason, if new aether is emitted, then there must arise as well, new nodes in the structure of the aether.
In other words, just because some star sent some aether out to replenish the pressure drop the expanding universe caused, does not mean that all of a sudden nodes are going to get larger. If the density and pressure of the aether did not change, then the natural resonant frequency for standing waves in the aether did not change either. And therefore, the spacing of the nodes (space) will remain constant and the period of a standing waves oscillations (time), will also remain constant.
Consider the implication of this from the point of view of matter in a rotating galaxy of stars. All of the stars are emitting space which must expand out into the universe. This new space must conform to the natural frequency and the natural order and sizes of existing nodes. This means that the number of nodes must increase and one can imagine this like a slowly moving checkerboard. If we view this from a different frame of reference, that of the stars rotating about the center of the galaxy, then this increasing number of nodes filling space looks a bit like a record rotating in reverse with the grooves moving toward the outer diameter of the disc.
Those grooves are the "geodesics" of the space around a galaxy, and they cause the natural motion of stars and matter to move outward in direction. This means that the gravitational effect forcing stars in toward the center of a galaxy is reduced in a very unique manner. Stars near the center, where the creation of space is the maximum, will experience a thrust outward that is also maximum. And stars that are far out from the center will experience a thrust outward that is small by comparison.
Considering gravitation, stars near the center should experience a "pull" that is very large and so should have a large orbital velocity to offset this "pull". While stars that are near the outside will experience a lesser gravitational force, and so will orbit more slowly.
If we combine the concepts in the previous two paragraphs something strange happens. The stars near the center of a galaxy must slow down their velocity predicted by gravitation alone so that they do not fly away from the center. While stars far from the center are not as much affected and so they orbit as we would normally expect. Put another way, the geodesics near the center of the galaxy have been warped away from the center by the release of aether, and toward the center by the gravitational effect. While this same thing occurs at larger radii, the ratio is changing and could lead to a linear gradient where stars near the center are sort of like parachutists floating down into the center.
Because the mass of the galaxy is largely tied to the number of stars, and the quantity of emissions is also tied to the number of stars, both the emissions I am talking about and the gravitation with which we are familiar are both in lock step with one another no matter what the shape or mass distribution of the galaxy is. And in the particularly interesting case of a globular cluster, These two effects seem to be very well balanced in such a way that there has formed a gravitational "crystalline" structure of stars.
The reason this is so interesting is because in a galaxy, it predicts that the orbital velocity of the bodies will not be faster like is the case in our solar system where Mercury moves with a very high velocity and Pluto moves with a very slow velocity. Galaxies, in contrast, should find a roughly equal velocity that is independent of the radius. Matter and light transiting past or through such a region of space would still be warped inward by the net shape of the geodesics, but the curvature observed in a galaxy of planets would be different than the curvature in a galaxy of stars.
I think that this would require us to revise our estimate of the mass of the sun due to the difference between the way gravitation applies to a body that is, and the way gravitation applies to a body that is not, emitting aether from nuclear reactions. Aside from the error in the mass of the sun, I cannot think of any other observation that would change. Further, the change to the mass would be just a constant that would take into account the emissions thrust. But I suppose that other bodies, like a neutron star where no further aether emissions are taking place would fall into the category of regular non nuclear matter as far as its gravitational interaction with space.
In conclusion, I would like to point out that we know for a fact that space can curve. We can treat space like it is a system of geodesics where these can be warped by the presence of matter. This does not mean that space is not indeed a system of geodesic nodes in the form of standing waves in some material medium through which we move in a superconductive manner. Light has been observed to change its path in a curve as it moves past our sun and as it moves past galaxies. An excellent example of this is Einstein's Cross where a distant quasar was split into four points of light by a closer galaxy that acted as a gravitational lens.
So, it seems to me that if space over here can behave differently than space over there, that there must be something tangible in both regions of space. i.e., there must be real geodesics within the structure of space itself and not just in the equations we use to describe what space will do to a beam of light.
To the point regarding space, "It curves, therefore IT IS". And if space really is made up of something that has to it some sort of organization that interacts with sub atomic matter, then despite their wavelike nature, matter really exists too. And if this is so, then the universe did not need for some insignificant organization of wave functions to strike a rock in order to collapse into existence.
So in my opinion, the universe really is 15 billion or so years old, and it is only our minds that have collapsed in understanding by falling into a 90 year slump in creativity to search for the reality behind the physics. I suppose there are those who would prefer to view this in a different way. They might imagine that shortly after the turn of the century, Schroedinger with his cat righted the wrong performed millennia ago by that cave man when he showed that we really aren't here after all.
Personally, I think Schroedinger elegantly demonstrated that the cave man did nothing but learn to use a stone tool on that day long ago. The universe was a fifteen billion year old expert at quantum mechanics by the time that cave man say the light of day.
Fri, 08 Mar 1996
Entropy is an interesting concept in physics. It is a measure of the reversibility of a process. All real macroscopic processes involve some amount of inefficiency. Energy is conserved as far as the balance of mass plus energy before a process equaling the sum after, but the amount of mass and the amount of energy individually may change. In other words, if you fuse two nuclei of Deuterium creating helium (I don't want to address real reaction products or their probabilities here), there will be a reduction in the overall mass of the nuclei and an emission of energy in the form of accelerated particles, better known as heat and/or gamma ray photons and other electromagnetic energy. This heat results in a measured higher temperature of the involved particles which is, if you go back to the definition of temperature, just another way of macroscopically measuring the fact that the involved particles are moving faster.
Enough of the basics. What is sometimes forgotten is that not only nuclear, but as well, exothermic chemical reactions result in a reduction of mass of the involved atomic and molecular species. This makes sense, if we get energy out, energy and mass are equated, so we must have used up some mass to get the energy. Where did it go? In our current system of physics where we believe in the magic of fields that exist in an empty vacuum, there is no answer and so entropy is a mystery. If, on the other hand, space is full of a highly pressurized aether full of vibrational energy, and particles are condensed from this aether, then the above finally becomes intuitive. By vaporizing a portion of the mass of our matter we increase the ambient **static** pressure of the vibrating aether vapor. If you think about it, this is required in our current Universal epoch because our universe is expanding and therefore reducing the ambient pressure of the aether surrounding us and confining our matter. Matter is vaporizing bit by bit to fill this reduction and to maintain the stability of the fabric of space and time itself. So, Entropy is the one way vaporization of condensed aether (matter) into vaporized aether (energy, note; the vaporization of the mass comes out of the particle like a jet and therefore accelerates the particles and what we call energy is a measure of this kinetic energy, or temperature. Why this is so is discussed in other posts and elsewhere). With this definition, there is a continuous and intuitive understanding of the process of releasing energy and of what entropy IS.
General Theory ...
Date: 20 Jun 1996 16:17:10 GMT
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Ross Tessien)
Organization: Impulse Engineering, Inc.
Subject: TOE - Current Overview
The following is a very brief overview of the TOE I am working on. I do not intend to get into the details of why in this post so as to keep it short. This is intended to give you a brief intro to the things I am researching so that those with common ideas might discuss some of them.
Also, I have a lot of things that this model predicts we should see, like black holes exploding and emitting giant jets of matter. Of course we do indeed see these in the cosmos, but they are attributed to the small amount of matter that failed to fall into a singularity. I have no singularity in my black holes. Well, here goes.
1) My model treats all of the universe as being filled with a highly pressurized aether from which matter is condensed and in which a buzzing nodal structure exists that we call space. This aether can compress into what I will call a "liquid" for familiarity to the process of change of state.
2) A black hole is an aether sink that is formed when there is a convergent flow of aether that forces the pressure to climb to high, and the aether condenses. Such a flow will then have no more resistance until it reaches the liquid core inside the black hole and inside of the event horizon. The event horizon occurs because the flow velocity of the aether reached, and exceeded, c. So the aether, the nodal structure of space, and all waves are being translated into the interior of the event horizon at a velocity of greater than c inside of the horizon. The acceleration is a 1/R^2 acceleration until the aether begins condensing.
3) Because a black hole forms like this, it is highly pressurized, and if the convergent flow is reduced for any reason (reduction in the pressure of the aether in that region of the universe), then it will more easily breach confinement and exude all of its contents. This occurs in the form of jets, as we see in the cosmos all the time. And it can occur all at once in extreme cases. The latter is the source of the energy for the big bang. A single breach of a super massive black hole. We are inside of that expanding and evaporating material, but the evaporation has eliminated all of the liquid except for the tiny droplets that got trapped in the acoustic nodes during the expansion.
4) During the expansion of that core, the shock front from the big bang would have run into any galaxies remaining around it out to great distances and obliterated them. Those collisions would have perturbed the shock front and sent acoustic wave energy into the interior of the expanding big bang ball during the inflationary period. Thus, the variances in the CBR.
5) The liquid aether would then have been expanding and evaporating with a bunch of acoustic energy moving back and forth across the interior of the ball and reflecting off the surface due to the change in impedance of the medium inside vs outside the front. This would have no choice but to form acoustic nodes in some regions. And liquid aether near those nodes would be forced into those nodes. Such liquid aether would be trying to explode and evaporate as the static pressure inside continued to drop. But being in the node, it would only be allowed to resonate.
6) Those resonances would send out wave energy in phase and frequency time with the arriving ones. Thus, the resonances of the particles formed, tend to re-enforce the resonances of the acoustic nodes. The acoustic nodes would later become what we know as space, and the period for a 360 degree resonance would become what we know as time.
7) There are two phase timings that should be stable. 0 degrees and 180 degrees. Resonant expansions at 0 degrees would expand into the compression of the nodes at 180 degrees. Thus, the entire structure becomes phase and frequency locked together. This forms the dual structure for space, and particles in the 0 degree timing become known as "positively" charged and particles that are trapped in the 180 degree timing of oscillations become known as "negatively" charged.
8) The entire nodal structure of space on average is rectilinear, sort of like a three dimensional version of white and black cubes for a chess board. But the structure can be more compact with a degree of rotation, ie, more energy can fit into the volume plotted for the universe at any particular period and in any particular region. So, it you take that rectilinear structure and sort of twist it about two orthogonal axis', then you will get an intertwined helical structure of nodes. That structure is the normal, free space structure of "space".
9) Particles, ie matter, are spherically convergent standing waves within that structure. The fabric of space is distorted into a spherically convergent structure by wave refractions between the emitted waves departing the particle, and the randomly moving free space wave energy moving through the structure of space. They mutually refract, aligning the free space waves into a spherical convergence, and aligning the emitted waves into the free space helical curvature, on average. Thus, particles standing waves are "pumped", and that is why they do not separate and spread out as Lorentz told Schroedinger they would.
10) Forces can be transmitted from particle standing wave to standing wave in a phase and frequency coherent manner, nuclear strong force. Or by transmitting them through the nodal structure of space, frequency coherent but the phase coherency is chopped which reduces the amplitude, ie electric force. Or the same energy transmitted through space over long distances will additionally be frequency shifted and add another degree of interference from one distant particle to another once the wave finally gets there ie gravitation. (thus all forces are due to the act of particles nearby one another shielding each other from energy arriving from afar that is phase and or frequency de coherent with the local oscillations.
11) All forces are wave mechanically communicated, and all thrusts are due to the kinetic exchange of aether momentum. Thus, there are intrinsically, no "attractive" forces. Attractions occur due to the incidence of energy that interferes with two particles from the outside and thus exerts a thrust forcing them toward one another. This is like wave motions forcing a log toward shore in the absence of wind on the ocean. It is the interference in the frequency and or phase angles of the arriving energy that is attenuated that results in the net thrust.
Well, enough for now, got to go to work.
Connectivity mechanisms ... Date: 19 Oct 1996 22:45:15 GMT
From: email@example.com (Ross Tessien)
Organization: Impulse Engineering, Inc.
Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics.new-theories, sci.astro, sci.physics.particle
Subject: Matter, Strings, Aether and the Sun
I have for the past year and a half, been working on the concepts of pulsating spheres as forming the fundamental basis of sub atomic particles. This model has some interesting attributes not the least of which is the fact that spheres which resonate at 0 and 180 degrees will "attract" one another while those with like phase angles will repulse. This was all shown way back before the turn of the century, I later found out.
(Note: A spherical standing wave is a geometry similar to what you would get if you used a bobbing ball on the surface of water, i.e. a fishing bobber, and you forced that ball to bob up and down repeatedly with a specific frequency following a sinusoidal positional relationship. That would send a series of waves radially out from the center with a specific wavelength. If you take that planar geometry, and then revolve it around an axis in the plane of the water surface and passing through the center, you will get a spherical standing wave structure with pressure fronts instead of the elevation wave fronts in the water analogy.
Also, in this model of space-time and matter, the aether is what is resonating and forms both space-time manifold and the matter itself as well as being the carrier of light and all forces as these waves, extending out into space around the particle.) But the interesting thing I have recently figured out is that if you look at the wave structures of two adjacent spherical standing waves, you will find that they have constructive (if the waves are phase equivalent (0 degrees relative phase angle to the space nodal structure)) and destructive (if phase opposed (180 degrees)) interference's along the line of sight through the centers of the adjacent particles. That interference turns out to re-enforce or to break down the standing wave patterns of the respective particles and to lead to thrusts which yield the properties of attraction and repulsion.
In other words, if the position of one wave relative to the other, accounting for the transit time of the waves, is phase equivalent or phase opposed then you will get constructive or destructive interference of the two standing waves. The same concepts can be used for multiple particle interactions by applying the geometry's between the particles.
The reason the above is interesting is because if you consider just the line of connection where maximum interaction occurs, that is just like a vibrating spring. And if you consider the interaction of the waves at a 45 degree angle or at about all other spatial angles from the line of contact, there is very little net constructive or destructive interference. So, as far as each spherical standing wave is concerned, the only thing affecting the energy arriving at its center is the line joining the two particles. And that looks just like a string, or a spring depending on if you want to study transverse, or compressional modes of vibration, respectively. But the equations I think are all the same from a theoretical point of view of combining strings or springs.
So, with such a model of matter what you wind up with is a situation where the particles interact in a manner amazingly like what is currently being evaluated in string theories. But you have a much better intuitive feel for what is going on, and what questions to ask.
Lets explore this concept a bit more deeply and look into some effects that might manifest with such a model in the situation where two particles scatter, i.e. collide and recoil, by using like phase angle resonance's which lead to constructive interference's.
If I take the analogy of the bobber in the water, I can turn the situation around a bit and bring in the notion of space and of time. To do this, I must pretend for a while that the wave energy is not created by some mechanism pulling up and down on the bobber, but rather, suppose that the wave energy is arriving from the outside and is converging on a location in the middle of an infinite pond of water.
The convergence of the wave energy will lead to a build up in the amplitude of the waves, or, a hydraulic jump. And at the center of the convergence you will see a jumping spike of water. You can perform this for yourself easily by using a large pot of water, or a water bottle at work, and tap the side of the container. That will send in an acoustic transverse wave on the water surface. If you repeatedly tap the sides of the container, you can initiate a resonance with the diameter of the container, and the propagation time of the wave front. You should easily be able to get a stable bouncing spike of water in the 2D reference frame.
3D is really a similar thing, except as I said, the wave fronts are compression waves instead of these transverse waves. Actually, you could initiate compression wave fronts in water too, but for a 1 foot diameter container the first resonance is at about 4,500 Hz, so your finger tapping just won't do as the sound speed is about 1,500 m/s. Sonoluminescence is an example of a 3D resonance.
So, the convergence of the water in our example leads to an elevation rise as you approach the center of the circular standing wave. This is a bunch of water piled up by the reflection of the incident wave energy, and it is simply a hydraulic jump in a unique configuration where the KE is being converted into gravitational PE.
If you consider a single standing wave with a mound of water piled up, and then you send in some wave energy from a given direction which interferes with that standing wave, then the confinement of that water will be weakened and some of the water will leak or flow, down and out of the mound through that destructive interference.
If that were a particle of matter in aether, that emission of aether would lead to an acceleration of that particle because the emission only has one velocity, c. And the emission only has one direction in which to go, the line joining the two particles. And both particles would interfere with each other, thus both particles would be accelerated away from one another via emissions.
In the case of DD fusion, if the reaction products were n and He3, then they would accelerate away from one another while spewing out a stream of aether at each other. So, where does that aether go and what does it become? Simple, "SPACE".
E = mc^2 because the energy is derived from the emission of aether at the velocity of light, from the standing waves which are nothing more than acoustic standing waves in the aether. i.e., there is no real separation between space, matter, time, energy, force, charge, spin, etc. All of these properties are just measures of the manner in which the aether has been forced to move in a given region. That is why matter is coupled to space and to time.
The above equation can be written in a form that includes momentum in the sum as follows;
E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2
But the above discussion implies that there is another momentum component, and that mass is conserved. So, this equation can be re-written as follows;
E^2 = (m1c^2)^2 + (p1c)^2 + (m2c^2)^2 + (p2c)^2
m1 is the mass of the particle(s)
p1 is the momentum of the particle(s)
m2 is the mass of the aether
p2 is the momentum of the aether
So, if we find that the momentum of the matter has increased, and the mass has decreased, then the energy is increased. In the classical version of the story, mass is not conserved as can be seen in the first equation including momentum. But in this version of the story, momentum, energy, **and** mass are all conserved. But one must count the momentum and mass exchanged with the universe in the form of aether.
In other words, you must account for the conservation of aether in the system where the matter "particles" are nothing more than resonance's in the aether that forced a piling up of the aether into a small region of the universe.
If we were to adopt this model, then we would not be amazed by things like stars having a tremendously hot solar corona that has hydrogen at 6 million degrees and oxygen at 100 million degrees K. The reason is because we would expect to be able to look and find some affect on the matter near the surface of the sun as the aether makes its way out from the fluidized bed of particles making up the sun, and is finally allowed to expand out into the lower pressure rest of the universe.
That expansion, we would expect, would induce an acceleration on the nodal structure of space-time within that aether. And for that reason, we should expect to find that acceleration being imposed on the matter caught in that expansion. And if there is an inertial acceleration imposed on matter caught in that acceleration, we would expect to find that the matter would be accelerated to velocities that were the same, independent of mass.
Now this is a strange expectation, because it is currently believed that only magnetic fields and electric fields could cause these sorts of high temperatures, or in essence, velocities as T is defined as the KE of the particles. Funny thing is, 100/6 ~= 16, the mass ratio of oxygen to hydrogen. So, the temperature that was determined was due to the ions having the identical velocity dispersions in the spectragraphic readings. But the charge to mass ratio is 1/1 and 8/16 = 1/2 (maximum if fully ionized, which is not the case so the actual value is less than 0.5).
Thus, we find that the charge to mass ratio is at best, 1 : 0.5. Which if we do not invoke any strange geometry's or resonance's to get the precise match in final velocity dispersions, we should have expected half the acceleration for the oxygen. But if I am doing this right off the top of my head, that would lead to a final velocity ratio of 1 to 0.25 for H to O velocities. And when we square that to convert to temperature, we get a temperature ratio of 1 to 1/64.
In other words, the hydrogen should have been hotter, and then random collisions between the H ions and the O ions lead to the subsequent heating of the O ions to the value of equilibrium with the H. But in no circumstances should we have wound up with the oxygen being hotter than the H unless we bring in as I said, some sort of resonant mechanism. That of course raises two pointed questions. presumably any resonant heating of the O in preference to H would need to have had the energy come from other hot O ions oscillating at the natural resonant frequency of the O ions. But that is like the chicken and the egg story and you could not invoke that. So, you will have to just say that something did it and leave the something blank.
The second pointed question is, even if you leave the reason for the heating blank, why did the heating wind up shutting off precisely where the ratio of temperatures matched the mass ratio? In other words, why did the H ions get accelerated to precisely the same velocities as the O ions?
If I drop an oxygen balloon and a hydrogen balloon on the moon (no atmosphere), they will both accelerate in the gravitational field the same. And if I place both of them on a scale, they will weight an amount that is also dependent on their masses. So, both inertial and gravitational accelerations lead to this sort of expectation. But magnetic and electric accelerations do not.
So it all comes down to one simple error in our formulation of physics, in my opinion. This error is in believing that mass, and space are different things. That massiveness is something special and separate from energy or light or forces or the space-time manifold. This error has led to a century of confusion in applying the equation E = mc^2, and in all sorts of phenomena where the wave forms of matter interfere with one another to create a variety of effects like tunneling and the onset of chaos, and gravitation and on and on.
Gravitation is about the most simple force to understand in this context as a simple thrust imposed by wave pressure striking the standing waves. When you get the idea of working with these standing waves, you come to learn that their interactions lead to line interference's which resemble strings (imagine that!), and that Doppler shifts in the frequencies lead to interference's from one particle to another. This leads one to consider all forces as exactly the same phenomena, interference's. But the relative velocities, distances, and relation to the ambient wave energies lead to different effectiveness' of these interference's.
Gravity for example is a simple result of the arrival of Planck scale wave energies from deep space, which our matter here filters, and re-emits at our local resonant frequencies. i.e., Hubble flow shifts the apparent frequency of the resonance's as they arrive here, and thus that energy interferes with and is filtered by, our matter. The earth does the same. And so we are pushed down harder by energy arriving from space than we are from energy departing the earth. It is that simple, and two guitar strings do it, BEC's do it, JJ's do it, and all sorts of other effects like the coupling of pendulums do it too. Resonant things, resonate. And if in the presence of wave energy, they resonate in cadence with that energy.
So, we see that treating matter as spherical standing waves, if one considers the interference's between two such structures, leads to a breakdown in the ability of the standing wave to confine the build up of aether density in that standing wave, and so some of that aether is emitted out into space. And, we see that when we open our eyes, we find that the sun demonstrates this phenomena quite plainly and clearly in the corona temperatures. And if we look further, we find that the coronal mass ejection's and all sorts of other effects are found to manifest in the sun as it interacts with the rest of the universe. And galaxies and the dark matter problem come into this thicket of evidence that confounds physicists too.
It is all there, all you need to do is open your eyes and look with an open mind and you will see it.
Differential Gravitation ...
My work began with the nuclear force. I considered sub atomic matter as resonant particles. It was not until after about two months of study that I first saw gravitation and then GR warping of space beginning to come out of the investigation. That was quite a shock to me back then, but it is now absolutely comfortable. What I did and why it should be considered as more than fancy hand waving is not easy for anyone I have talked to to understand. For that reason I am going to begin with a less complex subject than the structure of the aether and sub atomic matter, namely, gravitation. Before I do, though, there is a small amount of background about how a particle exists in the aether that you must know.
In classical physics and quantum theory, a particle is described by a wave function. This is a mathematical equation that describes how say, an electron is going to behave on its way to a screen after passing through a two slit apparatus. This equation is a function of the electron and of the apparatus, and it is not considered fruitful to try to talk about what the electron looks like as it is an intrinsically statistical wave without real substance. This is why one could never determine both position and momentum at the same time, there is no real thing there to measure.
Fortunately, I did not understand all of this when I began though I am not sure that such a non sensical belief founded on faith would have swayed me from continuing. I considered at the outset that matter is real stuff, and that it is made of real stuff too. This means that an electron really is either here or there, and not a spread out wave that will later collapse. If you think about the view of QM, it really is absurd. You would never convince someone off of the street that what physicists are peddling is so. All I can say about that is that if intuition is a measure, then QM is not correct in other than an exquisite statistical synopsis of a more detailed real event that we do not yet have access to.
In many aether theories, including those of Maxwell, particles are considered as resonant. You can consider this to be anything you wish for starters, but then you will need to justify your choice of geometry and interaction. Many people simply state that this is so without linking the effects of the resonances to one force after another. There is a sort of nebulous, this force does this but then there is something else that takes care of that other force. kind of an approach. With the construction I wound up with, there is just one force in the entire universe, namely, the nuclear force.
One can break down this force into common regimes for the sake of simplifying calculations and in so doing come up with new forces like the electric and gravitation which are amplitude reduced interactions. This is like using Bernoulli's equation in fluid dynamics rather than trying to analyze the trajectories of each and every particle in the fluid flow. The amplitude of the action, or force, is reduced because with increasing distance, there is a reduction in the coherency of the phase angle and/or frequency. The latter arises due to energy arriving from bodies at greater distances and with relative velocities and different gravitational origins of the sub atomic resonances. To simplify this last statement, red shifted extra galactic energy is out of frequency match with energy resonances here on earth.
Technically, as will be shown, the greater the gravitational field, the greater the blue shifting of energy. This means that sub atomic matter on stars actually have resonances that are of higher frequency than the corresponding resonances here on earth. As it turns out, gravitation is caused by resonances that are different from those here locally and this follows at each body in space.
In this chapter, then, we will deal with how and why gravitation arises and will touch on the curvature of space around a body. As an introduction, let me begin with a justification of assuming that particles are resonant. As will be seen in later chapters, it is not this one assumption that warrants our changing our views, but rather the sum of the available information and interconnections that fit what we have observed for centuries.
It is the way that resonant particles are part wave and part solid in this model, and the way an electrons motion naturally gives rise to a new wave shape that can be either a neutrino or a photon depending on the violence of the motion. It is in how the emissions add together like phased array radars we understand giving rise to gravitation from natural and understandable filtering mechanisms. It is the sum of this dissertation that carries the weight that cries out for a re evaluation of our belief in QM, attractive forces, and an empty vacuum of space.
Before I begin with gravitation, I am going to give a first introduction into the concept of resonant particles. Later, I am going to go into these particles in more detail, and later still, I will go into the warpage of space and time in greater detail as well. I have said to many an inquirer over the Internet, if you wish to understand what I am talking about, then you must come to terms with what is meant by resonant nodal structure. An excellent review of these concepts would be to consider the nodal structures of a hologram, and as well, the action of waves lapping on a piece of driftwood and forcing it to shore in the absence of wind (ie, the waves originate from wind far out at sea and the driftwood is in a region where the waves are the only active force pushing the log to shore.)
Justification of Choosing Resonant Particles
In this section I am going to talk about resonating particles a bit to help you become familiar with what I am trying to talk about. The more fundamental question, however, is why choose resonating particles at all? Why not just select quiet simple pea like particles that sit quietly waiting for some force to act on them? The reason is because such a description leaves out any discovery of what a force IS. Such a description is exactly what we already have and it does not lead to an intuitive understanding of how and why things work in our universe. It is the basis for the quantum mechanical nature of matter being a mystery as one must attributed bizarre properties to matter and one must believe that matter truly is an equation with no reality of its own.
To me, this seems absurd. Why should particles not be real things just because we are unable to measure them. Such has always been the case at the limit of our determinable reality, and yet as our technology improves we always come to learn that there is more to what we previously understood and indeed, galaxies of stars exist and indeed atoms exist. So why, then, do we forever continue to believe that our current knowledge is firm and worse, fixed? Why do we even bother to attempt to affirm that matter doesn't have a reality simply because we can not today get at measuring it all at once?
Well, I cannot hold to such beliefs and so I set out to determine what particles really look like and why they look that way. To do so, one of the most simple concepts is to attribute to particles a simple pea like structure that is static. Unfortunately for me, without an attractive nuclear force for which no one has ever presented a mechanism, such an object cannot exist. You might have an aether that was like pea soup, but no peas as discrete stable things. If you chose a sphere or any other shape to define a particle, it would simply be a region of space indiscernible from all others.
If you read the section on construction of an aether, then you were exposed to why I first came to consider particles resonant. It was the observation of the organization of the aether into helical corridors of flowing helical quanta that led me to this concept. I noticed that if the quanta ran into each other, then there would rapidly ensue a pile up of quanta where their kinetic energy was transformed into potential energy. This meant pressure greater than the surroundings, and this led to the realization that such a collision would inevitable explode outward to get rid of the excess pressure.
It is what I noticed next that was critical to this construction of space and indeed led to the understanding of the nodal structure or geometry of space that is commonly referred to a Relativistic curvature of spacetime. As the quanta exploded outward, they too ran into other quanta and each deflected the other. When you run the directions and the energies, you find that they deflect each other in opposite directions. This forced one particle to conform to the external shape of the conduction paths, and forced the other to converge back on the origin of the original collision. In other words, a first collision set in motion subsequent collisions due to the exchange of momentum between quanta in the aether.
This is what resonance is all about. What was really interesting is that I did not look for a resonant particle at all. I was simply trying to figure out in what different ways the aether quanta could behave. When I blocked their flow, particles resulted. And moreover if you recall the construction of the aether as a dual fluid comprising right and left handed quanta and lattice corridors, then you will recall that you do not get just one particle in such collisions, but rather two. Each confined by the opposite helical structures.
So, it is inevitable that if you do not have attractive forces to hold things together, then you will have resonant particles so long as you have an aether that is dense enough to give rise to the complexification and not so dense as to lock up an not allow relative motion (assuming such a condition could even exist, the core of a Black Hole would be where to look). Some of the original aethers I considered were not dense enough to support the organization. They simply remained random as to how quanta traveled through space and I could not get anything interesting to happen with such a construction.
So, we find that fairly early on I came to the conclusion that matter must be somehow resonant. In order to proceed quickly to concepts that might torture and test such a conclusion, I made the assumption that this was the case and set out to discover what kinds and shapes of resonances one might expect to find. A spherical collapse is of course a simple one to consider, but many other geometries are possible just as there are several forms for a double bubble. The former has kept me busy while the latter has kept mathematicians AND me busy.
Electrons seem to fit the concept of spherically resonant particles for a number of reasons discussed in other chapters. Thus far, I have not determined the shape of complex particles like protons and neutrons. However, from a distance, they will appear, as do electrons, as a local region with energy pulsing in and out of it. In the case of these heavier particles, the amplitude of the pulsations will be greater. In other words, from a distance, regardless of what the true geometry of a given particle is, all matter will appear as spherically resonant objects forcing quanta to flow in and out cyclically.
The intensity of the pulsations I expect to be proportional to the mass of the particle. This means, then, that protons and neutrons are really convergences of what we might call positive AND negative quanta into a common convergence. This does not mean that they mix, but rather that one confines the other in a consistent way. I will address the geometries possible for protons and neutrons later, but you might imagine one geometry to be that of a grouping of double bubbles or that of a double concentric bubble. This is a tremendous simplification as the geometry, whatever it turns out to be, is dynamic and changing throughout the cycle of convergence.
The frequency of resonance is much higher than those we normally consider in electro magnetics. This is because EM frequencies are those of translating particles (ie electrons moving from one valence to another) which take a certain time to move from here to there. The time of travel creates a wave that stretches out from the event at the speed of light. Thus, the longer the time for the event to occur, the longer the wavelength and the lower the frequency. Along this flight path, however, the particle itself will have pulsed a very large number of times. So, in creating a photon of a given wavelength, there are a great number of wave cycles for the pulsation of the electron itself. It will later be shown that these pulsations give the photon definition as a soliton which can remain coherent and indeed pumped, as it propagates through space.
If you consider a spherical particle for simplicity, we can imagine it pulsating radially in the ocean of quanta and this pulsation gives rise to waves that leave the surface of the particle and travel out into space at the speed of light. These are not photons in the classical sense (Like the assumed photons that cause attraction and repulsion. These photons are an assumption and a simplification of the wavelike phenomena actually responsible for the attractive and repulsive mechanisms. And these are not intrinsically attractive at all). These are the waves that give rise to the nodal structure of the aether and to the curvature of space. (A side note is that the rate of pulsation of the sub atomic matter IS what we call TIME. This is addressed in latter chapters.)
In QM, a particle has what is called its wave function as was laid out in the original theories of Schrodinger. He realized that if one had a bunch of waves of different amplitudes, frequencies, and phase angles, that one can end up with a resultant wave in a region of space that is large. As I understand, he tried to apply this large amplitude wave form to particles, where a particle WAS this large resonance in the aether, or the medium of space. Lorentz pointed out to Schrodinger that such a wave packet would be expected to spread out in space and disperse, and this is certainly not what one expects an electron to do. (Well, except in the current version of QM).
I had tried a lot of ideas, but what kept bothering me was the fact that nuclear matter can emit energy after undergoing a reaction such as fusion. If the mass could be reduced, I reasoned, then there must somewhere be a pocket of mass to be discharged. I had been working with simple waves that were analogous to what I later learned Schrodinger had worked on. It seemed to me, with the resonance I was working with, that there had to be some form of condensation going on. This meant some sort of solid core was contained inside the particle, trapped so to speak.
In this case, Schrodinger's particle can indeed remain coherent. Consider a particle that is resonant in a fluid aether that can undergo a phase change like a drop of fog can be condensed from water vapor. If the particle is an under damped oscillator (a reasonable assumption), then if there are small vibrations filling space, they will be amplified by the particle itself just like the amplitude of a child on a swing is amplified by the constant pushes in phase and at the correct frequency of the child's resonance on the swing.
It seemed to me that a particle would be more like a drop of fog which is condensed water vapor. If the quanta involved in the wave form Schrodinger was working with undergo a phase change from vapor to liquid creating a core, then there is a reservoir from which to emit quanta during short lapses in incoming wave energy. There is also a core to define a position for the electron despite the resonant wavelike surroundings. Actually, I was not really trying to define a true position of the electron and didn't care if it had one. I was not aware of the debate over the uncertainty of position and momentum. All I sought was to find the geometry that would fit our observations of sub atomic matter from an energy balance standpoint and from the concept of there being no attractive forces in nature I was working on.
If all of space is full of resonances, all one needs to keep such a particle in motion is to get it started, and then to have the background noise of an amplitude that is greater than the energy lost to damping of the resonance of the particle. Given super fluid properties of liquid helium, it would seem reasonable that the aether responsible for the existence of liquid helium should be even more super. If this is truly the case, then these resonances would travel a very long way across space without being appreciably damped. And this we shall see gives rise to gravitation.
Put another way, if an object has a natural resonant frequency, then it will resonate naturally if energy of that frequency is available. For under damped systems, there is an amplification factor, and if one makes a reasonable assumption that the damping factor in aether is quite low, then a very small amplitude of background resonant energy will be able to sustain the particle.
The core has, as it turns out, another important function. It serves as an energy block which shuts down the velocity of the incident quanta coming in during the compression phase of the particles resonance. Thus, the wave energy will always depart along a radial line rather than just running through at whatever angle.
This has a very important effect on the space surrounding the particle. Namely, the refraction of energy into alignment with the particle. Energy leaving the particle will tend to refract energy out in space toward a radial line of incidence. In other words, a particle, via refraction, actively harvests energy from the surrounding space and forces it to converge on the center of the particle. This same effect occurs in galaxies, and is also how electrons catch photons as they fly through nearby space.
The above concepts are dealt with in more detail in other sections, but with that understanding that particles are resonant in nature, we can now work on gravitation. The particles in the earth are essentially tiny emitters of energy and the sum of their emissions spreads out into space and distorts the normally orthogonal nodal structure into a spherically deformed shape. To come to grips with this deformation (which I believe was exactly what Einstein was looking at in his mind as he described gravitation as a geometric deformation of space), it is useful to review the concept of phased array radar and how the wave fronts add.
In the diagram, you will see that we have a number of emitters of energy. Depending on the timing of emission, we can direct this beam normal to the plane of emitters or at an angle. If the emitters were on a two dimensional surface, then we could emit energy along lines that can pierce a three dimensional space in front of the antenna array. With the phased array system at Beale Air Force Base, two planar arrays of antennae are assembled on two surfaces which have an angle between them of 240 degrees. This particular antennae can track aircraft inside of a 1,200 mile radius with an included angle of around 120 degrees reaching from around San Diego up to almost the Russian border.
So, what would happen if we wrapped the little emitters around a spherical surface, and then sent out pulses of energy that are phase and frequency synchronized as a first cut? The next figure shows the development of a circular wave front shape as a sphere is a bit difficult to illustrate in a book. All of the waves stretch out into space and take on a spherical appearance after one is a ways away from the emitters (a few atomic diameters should work fine).
Now, suppose we consider a particle out in space. It must resonate in tune with the power weighted average of the incident energy surrounding and confining it. There is a regular arrival of wave energy coming from the earth. Further, from the vantage point of the particle out in space unaware that this is a phased array signal that originated from a large number of particles, it appears that the energy is arriving from along a radial line. If we consider the frequency of the wave at this location coming from earth to be f, and the phase angle is taken to be zero as our reference, then lets look at all of the energy arriving at this location with which the particle might want to synchronize.
We already considered energy leaving the earth, so what else is out here? Well, there is energy arriving from the sun at its frequency and the amplitude has been diminished due to the distance, but it is still a substantial component in our surrounding space. There is the signal from the moon with its frequency and amplitude. Note that the sun has a lot more emitters, so the original signal amplitude was much greater than either the earth or the moon, but the amplitude has decreased across space as the spherical shell of energy spreads out. We also see the other stars and planets within our view which each have their amplitudes and frequencies as they arrive. Then, we have a lot of energy that fills the balance of space arriving from distant galaxies which are red shifted from all of the normal frequencies nearby (though remember that a star with its much greater compression of matter has a blue shifted frequency as compared to the frequency of earth and this ought to hold out to quite large red shifts of galaxies.).
Overall, as we look out into space, there is a random jumble of frequencies and phase angles, and there is this one, nice clear signal coming from the nearby earth. So, matter will have a frequency that balances all of the incident power and due to proximity, this will be close to the frequency emitted by earth. Thus, matter will tend to filter out and attenuate all other frequencies of energy arriving at all other phase angles.
In the attenuation process, a small wave of energy arriving from the distant universe at the wrong time will reflect off of the particle, and it will also give a push to the particle. They each recoil away from the collision. An important note here is that we do not have instruments to measure such a small wave form. We are, however, able to observe particles and the way they randomly jump around as they are bashed about. So, we observe a sort of Brownian Motion at a very much smaller scale.
Because we have adopted the concept of an empty vacuum filling space, we claim that the particle itself is intrinsically jumpy or Quantum Mechanical. I am fully comfortable with the random motions of particles, but simply feel they are indeed being bashed about. That we cannot yet measure these sub atomic wave fronts is a problem for technologists to sort out, and I consider myself one of them and am working on the problem.
Notice, however, that the particles will have a preferential direction in which to be bumped, namely radially downward toward the signal originating from the earth. There are fewer bumps from energy arriving from earth than there are from energy arriving from space. So, bump by bump, a particle is accelerated toward the center of the earth. If you wish to be more precise, you can bring the moon into the picture and later other bodies. Energy arriving from the moon will tend to synchronize some of the matter in the object with its emissions. Other particles will tend to precess in such a way that they are resonating at a frequency that is very close to that of the earth, but shifted somewhat toward that of the moon (and the sun and the planets and stars, etc.).
These are the overtones of the wave energy out in space, and the energy is not really random from local sources as they are all affecting each other. This brings the emissions from earth into a loose phase and frequency lock with the other planets, the moon, and the sun. I cringe when I tell people that gravitation is simply a push toward earth from space that is greater than the push toward space by the earth. Not because this is not accurate, but rather most immediately conjure up an image of particles of aether, or quanta, flowing through space like bullets. This simply is not so if I am correct. We are dealing with standing waves and the best way to imagine these is to note that a surfer on the ocean does not flow in to shore with every wave that passes beneath him. The wave moves through the water, but the water remains essentially stationary (it circles around as the wave passes through, but you can observe the motions of a kelp bed to see that there is no net flow of water toward shore except if you take the tidal actions but this is not what we are dealing with here).
Well, how about a first look at General Relativity as Einstein probably saw it. If we look at the diverging spherical waves on their way out into space, we notice that their amplitude is decreasing as they mix with the energy out in space. Now, imagine a wave trying to traverse a path near the earth such that it would normally miss the earth. As it enters the region of space with the waves leaving the earth, the translating wave of energy is refracted somewhat just like it was in our particle above. This forces the wave to curve toward the center of the earth slightly. As this wave moves in closer, the amplitude of the waves leaving earth are stronger and so the refraction is greater and the wave curves more. This curving of the trajectory continues right on past the earth and out the other side. A wave coming from the opposite direction would experience the same deformation to its trajectory so the process is symmetrical.
What about energy that would have barely missed the earth if it went straight? It will be curved in and strike the earth. And, energy that is close to radial will still strike the earth, but it will be at an angle that is closer to radial than if the refraction had not occurred. So, we see that a gravitating body in space, just like a sub atomic particle, harvests energy from the surrounding space. And how does this energy show up? In two forms, gravitation and gravitational heating of the body as it attenuates the redirected as well as the otherwise incident energy.
Is there any evidence that gravitational heating is a real mechanism? Well, I believe there is. Two mechanisms that come to mind are the solar neutrino deficit and the solar coronal temperature excess neither of which are satisfactorily explained via currently accepted physics principles. Alfven waves are a proposed heating mechanism for the corona, but the amount of energy and the time frame in which it can be created do not match the observed temperature. The corona is simply too hot. Regarding the nuclear furnace, it is possible that the sun's nuclear engine already died out and the heat is still rising to the surface, but this is too much of a stretch to be taken seriously.
If there were a small amount of heating due to another currently unknown source, and if that source came from space and meshed with the sun in the region of the corona, then it would explain both. And, if the mechanism I am talking about is that mechanism, then it will apply itself foremost near the surface as arriving waves of energy begin to interfere with the un's matter. This energy continues to be absorbed throughout the volume f the body as you must remember that these waves are smaller than neutrinos and the sun is quite transparent to energy of these frequencies.
What kind of an object in space might be expected to converge an even greater amount of energy in a tight region of space? A galaxy of course. Imagine the shape of the waves of emitted energy surrounding a galaxy like the Milky Way. They will spread out in a way that creates the greatest amplitude along the plane of the galaxy and will be of lesser amplitude from above and below the galaxy. Now if you run the lines right on in to an intersection, you will find a region of space that is he focal point of both harvested energy, and as well, emitted energy as much of the emitted energy of individual stars will converge at the focal enter of the galaxy.
OK, so what, we have some energy converging on a region of space. Well, if the energy density is exceptionally large, then we would expect to find that unusual things take place in galactic centers aside from whatever else might be in the center of a galaxy and indeed we do find strange things happening at the center of the Milky Way. We observe spectra of electron positron annihilation events which begs the question, Where did the positrons come from?.
The attenuation of normally incident energy is Newton's gravitation. And the addition of the refracted energy is Einstein's gravitational curvature of space outlined in General Relativity. This refracted energy is like an increase in the density of space itself in the region of the gravitating body. A photon, which is an organized wave, is curved due to the same refraction mechanism as it passes close to a body and we observe this with the gravitational lensing of starlight.
The Arrow of Time In an Aether Universe
by Ross Tessien
As always, the following opinions will not serve you well on any tests you may have to take in the near future. Read at your own risk. This essay deals with the Arrow of Time. The abbreviated version of what follows is that if you treat the universe as an ocean of aether, and "matter" as standing waves in that ocean, then you find that you cannot escape the notion that the ocean and the matter are made up from the very same, single, fluid. Namely, aether.
But if this is so, then massiveness becomes a measure of the amount of aether tied up in an individual standing wave. As such, any reactions that wind up reducing the mass of particles, must by extrapolation, emit aether. And so we find that the notion of matter standing waves departs from the notions of particles in an important way. Exothermic reactions of standing waves must emit "space". Observations outlined in my posts on Aether Tectonics describe this issue, and the observations of the SOHO spectrometers and other observations are outlined in that article.
This article lays out the notion of the arrow of time. This arises because all matter that remains today, is the liquid aether left over from the big bang, and which has not yet vaporized into "space". Thus, because of the expansive momentum of the universe, the aether is being depleted in pressure, and exothermic reactions are replenishing that pressure. So, the conclusion of this article puts forward that all exothermic reactions are aether emissive reactions. And that the reason those reactions take place at all, is precisely because the pressure in the matter standing waves is greater than the ambient pressure of the ocean of aether we call a universe. Ross Tessien
The complete version follows:
In physics today, there is a problem in the interpretation of what time is all about. This arises because of the reversibility of processes and stems to the second law of thermodynamics. All processes, (i.e. of two chambers of gas at different pressures equilibrating at a mean pressure once allowed to mix), tend toward maximum randomization in a statistical manner. Boltzmann, Maxwell, and Thomson, along with all of the leaders of the day worked on this problem as they were formulating the laws of thermodynamics.
This time asymmetry arises in the consideration of entropy and available work, but it has far reaching consequences for all processes that are deemed symmetrical. The reason is, despite our notion that the various processes of radioactive decay, fusion, combustion of gasoline in a car, and simple mixing of fluids or materials being reversible, in practice, they do not tend to reverse. The tend in a singular direction and we call this direction the *Future*.
The reason that this is so, is because there is no net change to the universe based on the actions of these discrete particles. If there were some manner in which the universe were altered, due to some reaction, and the universe only wanted to be altered in this one direction for some physical reason, then there would be an obvious reason for time to progress into the future, and not into the past. But it appears that particle physics cannot, and likely could not ever offer up a solution to this conundrum.
The reason is plain if you happen to believe that particles are actually standing waves in a physical, material aether. Today, however, physicists believe that matter is made up of a bunch of pea like particles. These particles are self contained and come with a variety of properties including mass and a variety of fields for every occasion. and these particles, independent and self contained, move through the space-time of our universe, which is nothingness, but which somehow influences the motions of those particles despite its nothingness. We use names like geodesics
Now in the aether model, using standing waves (which is just one of many forms of aether model, but it is the one I believe to be correct), we have a very very different concept of what a *particle* is. In this model, what we know as matter is none other than the very same aether, but it is resonating in a special way. This *special* way, is just a convergent standing wave not unlike the resonance's of sonoluminescent bubbles following collapse as they *ring* at about 1 MHz. And it is precisely like the recent articles you may have read about *Oscillons* in Sci Am and elsewhere. Those Oscillons are just a one dimensional version of the same standing waves I am speaking of which are far better represented by the sonoluminescent bubbles as an analogy.
The point is this. If matter is just a resonance in a material aether, there must be some form of non linearity that is induced at extreme pressures such that those resonance's can remain coherent. (Calculations which determine muon and tau masses as ratios of electron mass seem to bear this supposition out. The condensation pressure is at about E111 eV/m^3 based on some crude calculations).
What this means, is that there is in all reactions a conservation of aether. So, fusion reactions release aether that was densified in the standing wave resonance's due to the mutual shielding from wave energy arriving from outside, i.e. from the balance of the universe. But where does it go? Well, it becomes, *space*. In other words, space is massive, and, it is flowing out of stars and into black holes. Yes, I do mean *flowing* out of stars.
And there is a sharp expansion at the chromospheric to coronal transition region of our sun. Across that boundary we find that the temperature of the ions in the corona rise by a thousand fold to the millions of degrees. This is counter to what one would expect, which would be that the ions would be radiating to space and cooling down just like our atmosphere. The accelerations are being found to be inertial in recent SOHO observations that show that the velocity dispersions are the same, independent of charge to mass ratios.
But I digress, back to *time*. So, what is it about our universe that leads to the asymmetry of time? Well, we need to answer that by looking way back in time to the big bang and we must ask ourselves, what was that? As I said, the aether flows into black holes. The way that can occur is if the kinetic energy of any convergent flow of aether exceeds the condensation pressure potential energy at some radius, then inside of that radius, when the pressure begins to build up, rather than reversing the inward momentum of the aether, the KE will induce the phase transition upon the aether involved. That will give rise to the birth, and growth, of a core inside of the Schwartschild radius. that core will be composed of condensed aether. Note, I have conservation of aether while the current concepts have in its place, a singularity. And also, I have gravitation as being imposed by wave motions thrusting standing waves in the directions of bodies which act like shields, not as a *pull*.
In any case, you know the adage *What goes up, must come down.* Well, what goes in must come out, too. And so we wind up with a requirement that sooner or later, all black holes must breach their confinement due to the fact that (well, my opinion that) they are not holding themselves together by any magical *attractive gravitational force*. Instead, they are highly compressed, and confined by the kinetic energy of the convergence of aether into that region. The energy density of such a convergence climbs by the radius ratio raised to the fourth power. So, if you measure the KE of a spherically convergent wave of energy out at some radius R_o, and then you measure that same wave front some time later at a smaller radius R, you will find that the energy of the wave front is now, E = E_o (R_o/R)^4
So, if that value of E exceeds the condensation pressure of the aether, then you will get a collapse of that region of space-time, and the space-time nodal manifold will flow into that hole. The radius at which that occurs is the Schwartschild radius, R_s. So, we get,
E_condensation = (E_o) (R_o/R_s)^4 = E111 eV/m^3
Now here is where the arrow of time finally shows itself. You see, the big bang was nothing more or less than a huge black hole core that breached its confinement! The previous universe that had been flowing into the hole finally slowed down it's momentum, and the core expanded out to the Schwartschild radius. Once that occurred, you had what physicists today like to call a naked singularity. Only it wasn't a point of zero dimension. Instead it was a physically large core of intensely pressurized aether in its condensed state. We know all about this from liquid water and vapor water so it shouldn't be too bizarre to grasp.
Now what happens to liquid water if you expose it to outer space? Well, it boils. And in that process, it breaks into smaller and smaller droplets. i.e., it becomes atomized. Finally, all of the droplets are able to evaporate as the ball expands out to a large enough volume and there is no more liquid water remaining, just the vapor. So, the same thing is going to happen to our liquid aether, highly compressed to far in excess of the ambient pressure of the surrounding universes aether.
At first, the vaporization will be inflationary, just as with the water ball. The aether will boil. Then it will break into smaller and smaller droplets as the liquid becomes mostly vapor. But some droplets will remain and they will be the final droplets of liquid aether to vaporize. They will still be in existence because they will have been trapped in the acoustic nodes formed by the boiling process. And so they will all be vibrating in unison with one another. And yes, you guessed it, they will be, **standing waves** trapped in the acoustic nodes, and in their convergent cores will harbor the remaining liquid droplets of the liquid aether core that breached confinement ~15 billion years ago.
So, we have in our universe today, a bunch of droplets that are trapped in the acoustic nodes of the aether. These droplets exist at the Planck scale at about E-35 meters. And surrounding them are tremendous standing waves. There are E20 shells to a single standing wave out to the scale of the nucleus of an atom. And another 15 orders of magnitude to get up to what we know as a meter.
When exothermic processes transpire, they do so by releasing aether out to space. Exothermy is a process by which aether escapes and helps to increase the pressure of the quantum vacuum, or the ocean of aether we call a universe.
The arrow of time, then, is simply a measure of the direction in which aether is released, or vaporized. That direction is the future. The direction in which aether is accumulated into individual, or groups, of standing waves, is the past.
Therefore, all processes that increase entropy, release aether to space. And that is all there is to know about the Arrow of Time in our universe. The Arrow of Time, is a direct result of the direction in which aether is released in order to help out bolster the pressure of the ocean of aether we call a universe.
On the Planck scale, Time itself is a measure of the period of the vibratory energy of the nodal structure of space. The resonance of that vaporization process, or in other words, the fundamental acoustic frequency of the resonance of those not yet vaporized droplets of aether.
Now if you want to know about the arrow of time in other universes that are a part of the Gigaverse to which we belong, then there are other regions which are compressing due to expanding shock waves from other big bangs. In such a region, one would expect to obtain exothermic reactions from **mass gaining** reactions.
So, if you ever hear that the amount of energy released in laboratories is smaller than it was in previous years, beware. That could signal the advancing of an aether pressure front. You see, such a big bang expansion of aether ought to be super-luminal for a period of time until the shock drops down to light speed. this is the same thing that occurs in the explosion of an atom bomb. The shock is super sonic and the energy reduces by a factor of about 1/R^3, until the velocity drops down to about the sound speed. At that time, the shock transitions to a sound speed pressure front, and then the drop in pressure of the front falls to the familiar 1/R^2 relationship.
The same ought to occur with the aether. So we ought to expect inflationary motions at super luminal velocities at first, and then sound speed (or light speed if you prefer), expansion of the pressure information following that.
In aether standing wave models, spacetime is composed of waves traveling in all directions, propagating through the aether ocean of the universe. They combine locally and form a nodal structure due to constructive and destructive interferences of the acoustic pressure fronts. The fundamental frequency of the quantum vacuum being the Planck scale resonances at about E45 Hz. So, the fundamental unit of time is about E-45 seconds.
The fundamental unit of space, is again at the same Planck scale, or, E-35 meters. So the time unit is just the time for a light speed signal to propagate across the Planck scale length. These two notions lead to a very interesting result.
If matter is composed of standing waves, coupled to that acoustic nodal manifold, then there is a direct reason for the concepts of positive and negative. They arise from phase opposition in the pulsating connection to the spacetime manifold. But regarding your discussions of time, the following becomes apparent.
That the unit of time is a measure of how many wave crests have passed by your location. Count the wave crests, multiply by the constant, and that is how much time has passed in your frame of reference.
Now, notice what happens if we want to freeze time, and then move through "space". As we translate, we experience the same pressure variances as we move through the standing wave manifold of spacetime, except this time the waves are frozen in position. So we measure "distance" by translating through the manifold and counting wave crests as we go, and then multiplying by E-35 meters.
But notice what happened. It didn't matter whether we were moving through time, or space, we still did the same thing to find our distance of translation. We counted wave crests of the nodal structure of spacetime.
Now the numbers of wave crests that come through a given position are precisely linked to the speed of light. This is because they are the result of the same acoustic pressure fluctuations that give rise to and propagate the disturbance to the spacetime manifold we know as "light".
So yes, as you move into different regions of the universe, ie up into a satellite, time marches at a different pace. The reason is simple. Light propagates through that lower density region at a greater velocity. (by density I mean aether density, not matter density. Though matter is nothing but a convergence and density amplification of aether anyway so you can think of it any way you prefer.
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Ross Tessien).
Posted to alt.sci.physics.new-theories
November 20, 1996.
How to Create a Time Machine
The notion that we might be able to build a time machine is an interesting one. But, I am wondering how it could ever be accomplished in the universe where energy is such an important notion.
Here, we have a universe where there is a conservation of energy, and an equivalency of mass and energy. Thus, as our stars burn, they are depleting mass, and releasing energy. To go back in time, it seems to me, one would need to put the universe back into the same condition it had prior to the event that one wishes to go back to.
You see, in all of the sci fi movies and the like, one gains the impression that all that is required to go back in time is to break the speed of light, or some other notion. But what about the energy of the local universe at that earlier time? Our sun, in 10,000 BC had a different amount of matter in it than it does today, and the universe had a different amount of energy tied up as mass, and freed as photonic energy.
We also have a notion of the reversibility of our processes in the core of our physical theories. But why? We know that energy gravitates from GR, and so a hot rock should "weigh" more than a cold rock, despite both having the same number of atoms. Yet, we do not have instruments to measure this change because the amount of energy released from nuclear processes, ie mass to energy conversion, is so huge. So, the energy of the rock does not increase its mass to an extent that we can measure the difference (correct me if we can do this now but I had been told that we could not as the numbers are in the mud of current balances and thermal distortions mess up the resolution).
So I ask a question. Why do we use the notion of reversibility as being so firm as it is proposed? It seems to me that if the reversibility is not equal, that we then have an arrow for time. We in fact know, that the universe seems to be in a process of converting mass to energy all over the place. And it seems also to be in the business of forcing clumps of matter together, which of course result again in the conversion of mass to energy.
These processes are asymmetrical in the direction the universe tends to go and result in our second law of thermodynamics. It is interesting that one can apply that second law equally to gravitational perpetual motion machines as one can to chemical or any other form of perpetual motion machine. Doesn't this clearly show that these processes are **not** exactly reversible?
And so if these processes are not reversible, then it seems to me that if one wanted to head "back in time", that to consider the location one wants to get to is a small part of the problem. It seems to me that one would need to set all of the dynamical motions and the energy condition of the local universe at the least, back to how it was.
If you take this notion, then shouldn't heading back in time require infinite energy (or at least, as much energy as was released in the universe from the time frame of the traveler, back to the time he/she wishes to head back to)
So why is it that we think that one might be able to go through time as a disjointed property of the universe, independent of putting the energy condition back to where it was at that time in the past?
November 26, 1996.