Chapter 7 - THE ETHER: A CLOSER LOOK
COPYRIGHT © 2017, By Jonathan P. Volkel
Technically, science knows that light has varying speeds, yet they still claim that its speed is constant. Light has often been measured to travel at speeds close to the declared constant speed. Since it is believed that the sub-atomic photons associated with light have no mass, then the only explanation as to why they don’t travel at infinite speed is that it must be the absolute maximum possible speed limit of the universe, and that it was therefore impossible for anything to go faster than that. At least, it is the only explanation allowed because of their theories. In Chapter 12, “The Smallest Picture”, the real reason as to why light has the speed that it does is revealed.
Most photons in outer space do travel at approximately the same speed… on average. At any given instant of time, a single photon is capable of travelling at only one speed in only one direction. It cannot change its speed or direction until it collides with another object. Vibration happens because of the unimaginable quantity of photons, their incredible speed and the different directions they travel in. Every time a photon moves in one direction, it doesn’t get very far before it collides with another photon and changes direction. As such, one individual photon does not vibrate. However, when the entire ether (all of the photons in the universe) is thought of as if it were a single object, it contains an incredible amount of vibration. Since all atoms are immersed within the ether, they vibrate because the constant collisions with all of those photons creates the vibration within the atoms.
It can be very difficult to envision this if it is envisioned as just one little photon moving around in space. Perhaps this will help. Imagine the numbers for the lottery are going to be drawn. A drum is filled with numbered ping pong balls. The handle is cranked, the drum spins, and all the balls begin to bounce off each other frantically. If the handle could be turned fast enough, the balls would become a blur of motion. That image is a closer approximation to the behavior of all the photons within the ether. All the photons are bouncing around at incredible speed, but they can’t travel very far in any one direction. As soon as they try, they bump into another photon that was heading in a different direction. The linear direction of a photon is altered by the collision, and the photon that got bumped now moves in a new direction dictated by the original bumping photon. Its new direction causes it to collide with another photon in its path. This creates a series of collisions that pass on from photon to photon. This is what’s called “propagation”.
It is important to remember that at any given instant of time, one single photon is only capable of moving in one direction at one constant speed. It cannot change that speed or direction on its own. A photon’s speed and direction only changes by colliding with another photon. The resultant change in the photon’s speed and direction is instantaneous. There is no acceleration. The two colliding photons instantly swap their inertia (speed and direction of motion).
Newton’s third law of motion can be summarized as this: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Not only does the energy swapping behavior of photons conform to this law, but it is the very reason as to why the law is what it is.
Inertia is REDEFINED in this paper as being the energy of motion. The movement that is caused by inertia is referred to as momentum. It is the speed of “coasting”. If there are no external forces acting upon the object that possesses the inertia, it will coast with that speed and direction forever. The inertia of an object has been expressed by science in a formula: where p=momentum, m=mass, and v=velocity: p=mv. This relationship is a long-time proven law of motion and is a common effect we all experience every day. The bigger an object is, the harder it is to get it moving to a desired speed. The smaller it is, the easier it is to get it up to that same speed. When an identical force is applied to smaller and smaller objects, the result is greater and greater speeds.
Everything explained here about photons and atoms all relies on and depends upon the energy of motion. As such, there are two things that must be comprehended in order to understand the universe. The first thing is the energy of motion and the meaning of p=mv. That is, given a fixed amount of applied inertia (“p” is constant), then, the more mass (m) that an object has, the less its velocity (v). And so too, the less mass an object has, the greater the velocity that will result from the same momentum (“p”). The second thing to be understood is Newton’s third law of motion: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Possessing a clear understanding of these two concepts allows a proper understanding of how the ether, the atoms, and thus, how the entire universe works. IT’S THAT SIMPLE.
Using numerical values helps in visualizing this. In order to assign a numerical value to a photon, assume that it has a mass of 1 unit. Also assume that an electron, which is much larger than a photon, has a mass of 1,000 units. If momentum of 1,000 units is applied to the electron, then the electron’s velocity will be the result of p=mv (1,000 = 1,000 x v). Therefore, its velocity is 1. If that same momentum is transferred from the electron to a photon its velocity will be (1,000 = 1 x v) Therefore the photon’s velocity will be 1,000.
This relationship is one of the reasons why a specific amount of momentum manifests to us as electricity when it resides within an electron, and then manifests to us as light when it transfers into a photon. Please realize that the numbers used here are just for illustration purposes. All that this example is intended to convey is that a fixed amount of inertia acquires different speeds depending upon the mass it resides in. Those different speeds, in conjunction with various patterns created by groups of objects in motion, manifest to us as different effects, such as: light, electricity, magnetism, gravity, heat and radiation.
“Why is the speed of light faster than the speed of electricity?” There are three conditions where inertia transfers. First, it can transfer within the ether from photon to photon. Second, it can transfer from ether to atoms (or vice versa). Third, it can transfer from atom to atom. Light involves the back-and-forth transfer from ether to atoms. Electricity involves transfer from atom to atom only. Since the masses involved in atom transfers are so much larger, speed decreases. All elements of electricity involve things with a mass greater than that of a photon.
The above application of the momentum formula creates a HUGE problem with science’s present understanding of energy and inertia. At present, science defines inertia as “The tendency of an object to continue in its state of motion”. Thus, an object in motion tends to stay in motion, and an object at rest tends to stay at rest. Although all of that is true, the problem lies in the belief as to WHY things behave in that way. It is believed that this happens because it is the nature of matter to do so. This type of understanding was proposed by Galileo close to 400 years ago, and it was incorporated by Newton into his first law of motion. Ultimately, the ability to maintain motion is thereby attributed to the nature of matter.
However, matter in and of itself is completely inert. It cannot move at all unless it is infused with energy. Once energy occupies the matter, it causes the matter to move through space. The matter (an object) will then move at one speed and in one direction until the energy of motion within it changes. That change only occurs when the object collides with another object. At that point, the energy within the two objects trade places, and both objects instantly attain the other object’s speed and direction. This entire concept is addressed more thoroughly in the Analysis topics “TIME, SPACE, MATTER and ENERGY” and “Sub-Atomic Motion”.
This type of understanding regarding matter and energy creates several conflicts with science’s present day understanding of them. One of those conflicts occurs with the understanding of what an “object” is. Present day theories accept and treat intangible things, such as time, space, energy, mass-less waves, mass-less particles, “north” polarity and “south” polarity as if all of them were objects. It is that type of faulty understanding of nature and the universe that fuels belief in Einstein’s theory, and the belief in magnetic mono-poles, and the belief in Quantum Entanglement.
In truth, none of those previously mentioned intangible things are objects. The only thing that can actually be considered as being an object is something that is made of matter (it has physical, tangible mass). Newton’s second law of motion confirms this. It states: “The acceleration of an OBJECT is directly proportional to the force applied to it and inversely proportional to the OBJECT’S MASS.” Thus, if it doesn’t have mass, it is not an object and cannot be considered as one or treated as one in any way, shape or form. The Analysis topic “TIME, SPACE, MATTER and ENERGY” clarifies this.
Another conflict with modern day scientific beliefs lies in the understanding of what “energy” is. In Chapter 5 “The Electron and Light”, a list of some of the energies that science measures is provided. None of the formulas contain a unique definition for energy. For example, the units of measurement for Force was Newtons. The units of measurement for Work was Joules. The units of measurement for Power was Watts. All of these are expressions of various combinations of mass, space and time. Not only that, but all of them are measurements of acceleration. In them all, time is expressed as seconds squared or even seconds cubed.
Time has its own unique units of measurement: seconds. Space has its own unique units of measurement: meters. Matter has its own unique units of measurement: kilograms. And yet, there is no definition for unique units of measurement for Energy. Energy is always expressed as being some combination of the other three. Even Newton’s second law of motion: F = ma, places Energy on the left side of the equal sign and the other three on the right side (acceleration is an expression of Space divided by Time). This implies that Energy is made of the other three, and the other three are made of Energy. It is this type of thinking regarding the nature of Energy that fuels such theories as The Big Bang Theory. That is, Time, Space and Matter came into existence because of a great release of Energy.
In the previously mentioned formula, p = mv, “p” is momentum. Momentum is not defined by science as being a type of energy. Instead, an object that is coasting is said to possess “kinetic energy”. Kinetic energy is measured in Joules. That is, acceleration of an object (a force measured in Newtons) applied over a certain distance of space. And so, Newtons multiplied by meters equals Joules.
Both Newtons and Joules have the variable for TIME squared. This means that both are measurements of acceleration. As such, there is no existing definition for energy as it relates to the energy of coasting (a constant velocity). As stated earlier, this is because science’s definition for inertia causes them to believe that an object coasts because it is the nature of matter to do so, and not because there is an unchanging amount of the energy of motion within the object which is causing it to move at a steady rate. This is also why there is no unique unit of measurement for energy.
Science needs a complete overhaul on their understanding of Energy. Energy does not belong on the left side of the equal sign all by itself, with Time, Space and Matter being on the right side of the equal sign. They all belong on the same side of the equal sign. Then what goes on the other side of the equal sign?
The combination of Time, Space, Matter and Energy results in MOTION in our universe. That is what everything in our universe is: objects with various quantities of Matter, filled with various amounts of Energy, causing them to move through Space over various distances, for various continuing durations of Time. All formulas should be re-written to express our universe in that way.
What should such a formula look like? We need to compare the observed behavior of these four components that make up our universe (Time, Space, Matter and Energy) to each other and to the resultant motion. First, a comparison of all of them to motion is examined. When comparing Energy and Matter to motion, it can be seen that Energy and Matter are inversely related to one another. That is, given a fixed quantity of Matter, as Energy increases, motion also increases. Given a fixed quantity of Energy, as Matter increases, motion decreases. When comparing Space and Time to motion, it can be seen that Space and Time are also inversely related to one another. Given a fixed amount of Time, as Space (distance) increases, motion also increases. Given a fixed amount of Space, as Time increases, motion decreases.
Next, a comparison of all of them to each other is examined. Energy and Space are directly proportional to each other. Given an increase in Energy, the distance traveled through Space in a fixed amount of Time also increases. Energy and Time are inversely proportional to each other. Given an increase in Energy, the Time needed to travel through a fixed distance of Space decreases. Matter and Space are inversely proportional to each other. Given an increase in Matter, the distance traveled through Space in a fixed amount of Time decreases. Matter and Time are directly proportional to each other. Given an increase in Matter, the amount of Time needed to travel through a fixed distance of Space also increases.
By combining all of these observations, the resulting formula would look something like this:
MOTION = (ENERGY/ MATTER) x (SPACE/ TIME)
The problem with the above equation is that there is, as yet, no unique unit of measurement for Energy. Such a definition needs to be established and Energy needs to be recognized and accepted as being separate, discrete and unique from the other three. The reality is, there is no way to convert or transform any one of them into any of the others. Just as we cannot say things like “How many seconds equals one meter?” or “How many meters equals one kilogram?” neither can we say how much Energy equals how many kilogram meters per second. The distinctness, uniqueness and individual natures of all of these components of our universe is described in greater detail in the Analysis topic “TIME, SPACE, MATTER and ENERGY”.
Once a unit of measurement for Energy is finally determined, then a formula to describe the amount of energy in an object that is coasting can be properly determined. Without such a formula, the ether cannot be correctly understood or measured.
As stated earlier, all of the existing formulas for Energy incorporate the concept of acceleration into them. However, no photons can accelerate. They can only possess motion at one speed and in one direction. Ultimately, this means that even the atoms do not accelerate…at least, not in the way science thinks about acceleration.
Science tends to think about acceleration in an analog sort of way, whereas, acceleration actually happens in a digital sort of way. Here’s an analogy to aid in understanding the difference. Imagine an empty bucket. The amount of water in it represents the amount of motion an object possesses. If a hose which discharged a steady stream of water was used to fill that bucket with water, then the amount of water in the bucket would increase at a steady and uninterrupted rate. This represents motion increasing in an object at a constant and steady rate. This represents an analog image of acceleration. It is a velocity that continually increases at a smooth, constant, steady and unbroken rate.
Now imagine filling that bucket again, but this time filling it with water by instantly dumping cups full of water into it, one cup at a time. The quantity of water in the bucket would instantly increase to new levels in small increments with each cup of water added. This represents a digital image of acceleration. It is velocity that increases by instantly jumping to new higher levels of velocity by one instantaneous jump at a time.
Science perceives atomic acceleration as being a type of analog thing, when in fact it is digital. The energy of photons incorporates into an atom, one photon at a time, resulting in increased jumps by the atom to new velocities. However, the photons are so uncountably numerous, and are moving so incredibly fast, that these instantaneous sub-microscopic jumps to greater and greater velocities can only be perceived and measured by us as a smooth and steady continuous acceleration. And so, technically, there is no such thing as a smooth and continuous steady acceleration. There is just the very rapid change in motion resulting in greater and greater velocities.
But why does velocity increase? Are photons draining their energy into the atoms? When one photon collides with another photon, they don’t give inertia; they trade inertia. The third law of motion confirms this. Contact between two objects always results in those two objects trading their motion. However, when a photon’s energy enters an atomic component, under the right conditions, some of that energy can be left behind in the atomic component causing it to move faster. When that happens, the photon that emerges from the atomic component moves slower than the one that entered. The details of how and why this works are explained in the Analysis topic “Sub-Atomic Motion”.
There is also another situation whereby photons can cause an atom to move faster. Remember that photons contain inertia that points in only one direction and which moves at only one speed. In this situation, it’s not a change in speed that causes an object to accelerate. It is a change in direction.
All atoms vibrate. That is, they move back and forth at incredibly high rates of speed. The reason they do this is because they are immersed in the ether and are completely surrounded by photons that are slamming into them at light speed. The atoms get bounced back and forth so much, that, ultimately, they quickly end up right back where they started. Vibration within atoms does not occur because of internal atomic forces. It occurs because external forces are forcing the atom to move back and forth.
This second cause for increased motion in a single direction involves removing many photons from within an atom which contain all different directions of travel, and replacing them with photons that all have similar directions of travel. As a result, “piece by piece”, the substance and makeup of an atom transforms from containing random vibratory motion into more and more linear motion. The more photons within an atom that have the same direction of motion, the faster the atom moves in a straight line in that direction. The conditions which can cause a photon that departs from an atom to be moving in a different direction than the photon that entered the atom is also discussed in the Analysis topic “Sub-Atomic Motion”.
The above explanations can cause many questions to arise. What is an atom made of? How do photons incorporate themselves into an atom? Why do photons seem to have a speed limit? How does movement of atoms even occur? How do atoms cause photons to change either their speed and/or their direction? These questions are all answered in Chapter 12 “The Smallest Picture” and in the Analysis topic “Sub-Atomic Motion”.
A very important observation to be made here is that it is all a closed system! No energy is lost anywhere. It is simply transferred from atoms to ether and back again. Even an expression such as; “some energy is lost as heat” is technically incorrect. The correct way of saying it would be “Some of the energy is relocated in a completely different direction and the relocation is what we call heat.” What heat is and how it is made will be discussed in Chapter 9 "The Proton, Heat and the Atom".
This understanding of how light transfers from electrons into the ether and how the propagation of light is constant through the ether clarifies some errors in an astronomical assumption. Astronomers believe that they can measure distance in space based on the pulsations of a pulsar. They observe two different frequencies of light emitting from the pulsar in bursts. The assumption is that both frequencies are being emitted at the same time and they observe that one of the frequencies arrives here (is seen) before the other, indicating that one of the frequencies was slowed down. Since they believe that the speed of light is constant, they theorized that an obstruction (a cluster of electrons that is frequency sensitive) lies between us and the pulsar. They theorize that a field of electrons which causes interactions with the lower frequency of light impedes its travel. Since the speed of light is constant, then the time delay between the arrivals of the pulses is an indication of total distance traveled.
The flaw with this theory is the assumption that the pulsar is emitting both frequencies simultaneously. Why would it? How could it? Is there any way to prove that it is or isn’t? It can be visually seen that the two frequencies occur at separate times. To invent an imaginary obstruction of electrons to support an imaginary alteration to what can be seen makes no sense. To base a theory on something that requires two unprovable assumptions is irrational.
If both frequencies of light did happen at the same time, then they would be seen at the same time, no matter the obstruction. Under what conditions do electrons slow down or delay only one frequency of light and ignore others? How are those conditions existent in space? This theory was created because of a lack of understanding on what light is and a disbelief in the ether. Electrons would not hinder the progress of light. Even if those interposing electrons were not "free agents", but were part of some atoms floating around in space, and those atoms only responded to one frequency, it would still make no difference. The transferal of inertia is instantaneous and the energy would still experience no delay in travel.
Some scientists have already theorized that light waves are not a continuous wave. They believe that light is delivered in tiny wave packets. Apparently, they have the clues that they need to realize that the ether exists, but have been unable to put the pieces of the puzzle together and see the whole picture.
Chapter 8 -THE NEUTRON AND GRAVITY
COPYRIGHT © 2017, By Jonathan P. Volkel
In this chapter we will begin to get an idea of what gravity really is. Our original understanding was that it emanated from within atoms, somehow travels through the vacuum of space, "grabs" onto other atoms, and pulls on them. Thanks to Einstein, we now have a completely different understanding of gravity. According to him, it is not even a force at all. In fact, gravity has absolutely no effect on matter. Instead, gravity bends space and moving matter which passes through that bent space ends up changing direction in order to follow the resultant curvature.
So then, according to Einstein, where does gravity come from? How is it created? Does it come from within atoms? What is this "non-force" that has the ability to bend space? It must be pretty amazing stuff. It can "bend" the nothingness of space, but somehow has no effect on matter, even though it comes from matter. If not, then where is it coming from? His theory contains all kinds of ideas about what gravity does, but falls very short on explaining what gravity is. And, quite honestly, his theory is just way too hard to swallow. For more details on his theory, read the Analysis topics “Relativity”. There you will see exactly how Einstein’s theory ignores and defies the laws of motion, gravitation and plain old common sense. Also explained is the evidence that proves what the unified force is and how Einstein completely overlooked it.
As we know, gravity is the force associated with the atom. Einstein said that it was a “field” and not a force. Ignore that. We all know it is a force and every dictionary definition describes it as such. It is also certain that inertia in motion has a direct link to gravity. That is why we create artificial gravity by spinning things. But what is gravity? Gravity isn’t some sort of lines of force that reach out through a vacuum. It is most certainly NOT a field that creates a curvature of bent space. It is actually the motion of objects propagated through the ether at light speeds. We know that the system which the electron is in manifests in the ether as light and magnetism, but what about gravity? Gravity seems to pull on objects and its energy manifests as inertia in motion. What is this energy and where does it come from? Light comes from vibrating electrons. What does gravity (linear motion) come from?
Gravity is a very strange phenomenon. The motion created by gravity seems to defy logic. If gravity was a force, then objects affected by gravity should obey the second law of motion: F = ma. An object should respond to gravity with a velocity that is inversely related to its mass. That is, the greater the mass, the slower the speed. And yet, gravity causes all things to move at the same rate regardless of mass. This is a clear violation of the second law of motion and seems to prove that gravity is not a force. However, objects affected by gravity don’t move with a constant velocity. They accelerate. The first law of motion tells us that an object changes direction and speed only because it is affected by an external force. Since gravity causes changes in direction and speed, it therefore must be a force. Newton’s law of gravitation also defines gravity as a force. Somehow, the laws of motion tell us that gravity must be a force, and yet not be a force at the same time. It is this paradox that fuels the theories. “Bent space” is the best explanation that science could come up with to explain the paradox.
What you will see next is that the energy of gravity is the exact same energy that creates electricity, light and magnetism. The effect that gravity has on atoms is almost identical to the effect that magnetism has on atoms. The only obvious difference is that magnetism only affects some things, but gravity affects everything. Now you will see what that energy actually is, where it comes from, how it works and why it works. Here’s the secret to untangling the paradox. The gravity wave that propagates through space and reaches out to affect objects is indeed a force. The motion that it causes in objects that come into contact with the wave is not a force. Objects that move because of gravity are not moving because of inertia. A different phenomenon is affecting them.
Gravity is not some unique and different kind of force or field that is generated from within an atom. Gravity is simply inertia in motion. It is the result of the organized, focused and directed motion caused by a collection of photons that all move with the same pattern of motion. No one individual component of the atom is capable of generating the effect that we call “gravity”. Gravity is the result of all the atomic components working together to affect the direction of motion of the photons in the ether. For now, only a general overview of how it works can be provided. To understand the full picture, there are a few other topics that need to be understood.
The first thing that needs to be understood before being able to see the full concept of how gravity works is the correct model of the atom. This is explained in Chapter 9 “The Proton, Heat and the Atom”. The current model of the atom, the Bohr model, does not show the correct relationship. The correct model will show the proper relationship between the sizes of the neutron, proton and electron and how those three components actually interact with one another.
The second thing that needs to be understood is the nature of the motion of photons. Science’s current understanding of them is that they are mass-less particles that move at the constant "speed of light". This understanding is incorrect. Chapter 12 “The Smallest Picture” will reveal the true nature of a photon and how it can create "non-inertia" motion. For now, we can get by with the general idea that it is mass-less and moves at the speed of light.
The third thing that needs to be understood is the true nature of MATTER. The substance that the atomic components are made of plays a big part in the creation of the directed motion that we call gravity. This is revealed in the Analysis topic “TIME, SPACE, MATTER and ENERGY”. When MATTER and ENERGY combine, a center seeking effect is formed. This effect, in and of itself, is not gravity, but it plays an important role in the process that creates the motion of gravity. In fact, this "center seeking effect" only exists because atomic components are "floating" within the ether. The ether is the source of gravity's perpetual power.
Finally, in the Analysis topic “Sub-Atomic Motion”, all the pieces are combined to show the step by step creation of gravity. It demonstrates the creation of the force that is a gravity wave and the resultant “non-inertia” motion that occurs in objects affected by that wave. That description satisfies all the laws of motion without the need to “bend space”. For now, a general, non-specific explanation will be provided.
The neutron is the largest of the atomic components. It has much greater mass than the proton and electron. The Bohr model of the atom indicates that the neutron and proton are about equal in size, but that is not correct. Chapter 9 will clarify this. Although all three of the atomic components do contribute to the formation of gravity motion, the neutron is the greatest contributor. It has the most mass of the three components. However, it is not the mass that is responsible for gravity. It is the physical size.
The larger mass of the neutron results in it being physically larger than the other components. This increases the surface area of the neutron. Because of this, it is struck by a greater quantity of photons per second than the other two types of atomic components. This means that it can affect the direction of travel of more photons per second than the other components.
One atomic component by itself cannot create gravity motion. It requires at least two components working together to accomplish this. When arranged properly and moving in the right way, atomic components can cause photons to be channeled and “focused” into a linear stream of motion. The stream of photons strikes another object causing it to move towards the stream, resulting in the motion that we call gravity.
How can it be possible for an object to move towards something that is striking it? Remember that we are using the current understanding that photons are mass-less. To arrive at the answer, combine this understanding with the fact that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
When the photons collide with an object, they “push” against the object. The object “pushes” back. Since the photons behave as if they are mass-less, they offer no resistance to the objects “push”. They pass right through the object and the object moves towards the photons. In doing so, the object moves steadily closer and closer to the atom that is emitting this stream of photons. This is gravity.
Wait one second. This sounds impossible. How can a photon have no mass, and yet simultaneously “push” against something? In order to do that, there must be some sort of physical contact. How can something be able to “push”, and yet at the same time be able to pass right through it like some sort of a ghost? How can it make physical contact, and simultaneously not make physical contact?
This type of confusion is well justified. The type of behavior that was described defies the laws of motion. This does not mean that this explanation for gravity is incorrect. It means that our present understanding of the nature of a photon is incorrect. The true nature of a photon and how it is able to do what it does is revealed in Chapter 12. For now, we can get by with the explanation provided. Just accept that it does work. When you finally see what is really going on, you might be a bit surprised. We can only advance one step at a time.
This type of photon behavior displays its nature of causing a reverse action. When the same photon continues on through the first object and hits a second object, it again performs a reverse action on the second object. As a result, the second object ends up moving in exactly the same direction as the first object. And so, thanks to the photons, two separate objects will both move with identical patterns for no apparent reason. This phenomenon has been observed and it plays a part in science's observations and resultant theory named “Quantum entanglement”. For the full details on that theory, see the Analysis topic "Objects and Quantum Illusions".
There is one question concerning gravity that will be addressed here. Wouldn’t the pulling force of gravity always result in objects racing towards each other and colliding? In some circumstances the answer is yes and in others the answer is no. To know the answer to this, one needs to simply look at our solar system. Why doesn’t the Earth fall into the Sun? Technically, the Earth is always falling into the Sun. Our lateral movement combines with the rate of falling to result in an orbit. In other words, the Earth moves inward and sideways at the same time, causing a circular orbit as the result. So it is with the atom. If an atomic component wasn’t revolving, it gets pulled in. If it was revolving, it establishes an orbit.
Things get a little complicated when you apply this to large systems, like an entire planet. The summation of gravitational forces at the center of a large mass creates an overall inertia that is inward, resulting in greater density and pressure at the core. And what is “pressure”? Pressure is simply inertia that IS opposed (motion is unopposed inertia). Atoms that are all moving towards each other eventually can’t move at all. They all try to keep moving towards each other, but there’s nowhere to go. Incoming inertia builds (amplitude increases) without resulting in inward motion. All of this inertia builds to the point where the atom finds itself “overfull”. The universal rotational inertia limit forces the atoms to shed this extra opposed inertia. They release it into the ether as heat and light. This is why stars are so very hot and bright. They are constantly shedding the overabundance of gravity inertia as heat and light into the ether. Because the inertia at any point cannot exceed the inertia generated by the universal rotational spin for any real length of time, such things as “Black holes” are impossible.
You may be wondering how gravity becomes heat and light. All types of energy are simply objects of various quantities of mass moving at various speeds with certain patterns of motion. Motion is the unified force. When motion transfers from one object to another, changes in mass, speed and pattern result in changes in the manifestation of energy. The universe is spinning at a constant and steady speed, and therefore, so is the ether. That speed is imparted to everything within that ether current. Imagine being on a river and drifting with the current. It forces you to travel at its speed. You can swim against the current, but as soon as you stop, it will speed you up again. You can race along with the current, but as soon as you stop it will slow you down. The ether has this same effect on all the atomic components. It forces changes in the speed and the pattern of motion of atoms.
When an atom gets flooded with gravity inertia, like within the center of a star, all the components get overfull of this type of inertia and end up going faster than the ether current. That current tries to force the components to slow back down. In order to do so, those components must shed inertia back into the ether. Electrons blend the gravity energy to be closer to their own frequency and shed it as light inertia. The protons do the same kind of thing and shed the surplus inertia as heat. Because of the large mass of the star, the high input of gravity continues to pour in endlessly, saturating the core with high amplitude gravity inertia. Frequencies will travel from a high amplitude location to a low amplitude location. This inward high amplitude frequency of gravity is forced into the atoms at the core. The frequencies of light and heat are in low supply and low amplitude at the core, and so those frequencies can escape the atom without opposition. And so the electrons and protons continue to blend the low frequency gravity inertia and shed the excess energy as higher frequencies endlessly.
This concept of the ether current forcing things to match its own speed is manifested to us in many commonplace ways. It is the concept of "blending" or "equalizing" energy. If you pour a pot of hot water (high amplitude energy) into a pot of cold water (low amplitude energy), it blends to become warm water. If you pop the top of a carbonated beverage, the higher pressure air within rushes out to equalize (blend) pressures with the atmosphere. If an atom has too much inertia, its excess energy is drawn away into the nearby ether current in order to equalize the energy. If an atom has too little inertia, it absorbs energy from the surrounding ether in order to equalize with it. Thus, flooding an atom with one kind of inertia causes it to shed all its other types of inertia in order to equalize its energy with the surrounding ether current.
In order for everything within the ether to be fully equalized, all matter would have to be evenly distributed throughout the entire universe. It isn't. Once matter exists as large clusters of masses, such as in planets, stars and galaxies, lots of inertial activity happens there and lots of imbalances constantly occur in localized “pockets” of the universal ether current. This causes inertia to continuously flow in and out of the atoms and the ether within those areas as the universe tries to enforce a blending of energy.
Gravity is emitted in all directions. It also travels outward via the ether (from within the object). With each atom it interacts with, more inertial energy is added to the surrounding photons and the amplitude of the frequency increases. The further out gravity travels from the center of a large mass, the further apart the atoms are from one another and the less frequently the gravity acquires new energy. Once free of the object, the process of focusing photons into a directed stream ceases, and the amplitude of the gravity diminishes as the propagation of photons blends the linear motion into random vibrations. The gravitational ether current is strongest close to the object and weaker the farther away it gets.
The neutron does more than just contribute to the production of gravity. It is also responsible for creating other types of effects as well. The electron moves at very high speeds. This causes it to create changes in the motion of the photons in the ether at a high frequency rate. This results in the creation of high frequency waves which cause the sub-atomic photons of the ether to propagate that wave as light. If that same high frequency motion travels directly from atom to atom instead of travelling through the ether, it manifests as electricity.
If you are still unsure that electrical energy is the same as light energy, just go outside during the next thunderstorm and take a good look at a lightning bolt. We know that lightning is high powered electrical energy. We can also see that it is high powered, blinding light. Air is composed of molecules that are gases. The gaps between those molecules are filled with photons. As that one energy from the lightning bolt travels through the air, it must transfer into photons in order to bridge the gap and reach the next air molecule. As that one energy from the lightning bolt transfers from air molecule to photons to air molecules (etc.), that one energy alternately manifests as electricity, light, electricity (etc.). It all happens so fast, that we perceive it all as being simultaneous.
The neutrons are much larger than the electrons. Not only does this mean that they have greater physical size, but they also have much greater mass. The same energy that causes the electron to move also causes the neutron to move. Since the neutron has more mass than the electron, it responds to this same quantity of energy by moving slower. This is the result of applying the law of motion for momentum; P=mv. “P” = momentum (force), “m” is the mass of the object in motion, and “v” is the velocity of that object. If “P” is constant, then as mass increases, velocity decreases.
Because the neutron has greater mass, it moves at slower speeds. This causes changes in the pattern of motion of the photons in the ether at a much slower rate. That is, at a lower frequency rate. This results in those slower patterns of motion propagating through the photons as low frequency waves. This means that in an atom, the electron is responsible for transmitting the high frequency waves that exist in the upper half of the electromagnetic bandwidth. The neutron is responsible for transmitting the waves that exist in the lower half of the electromagnetic bandwidth.
Photons speeds are proportional to neutron speeds according to the mass of each of them. The slow neutron speeds noticeably affect the rate at which the pattern of photon motion changes. The neutron moves slowly and therefore its pattern of motion changes slowly. This causes the pattern of motion of photons that come into contact with it to change slowly too, manifesting as low frequency waves in the ether. Thus, waves created in the ether by electrons and neutrons both propagate through the ether at equivalent speeds. The only difference is the frequency.
There is a tendency to envision vibration, spinning and other types of an object’s motion as a smoothly flowing constant and continuing change in position. From our perspective it is, but at the subatomic level it is not. It is an endless series of microscopic instantaneous jumps from one speed and direction to another. There is no acceleration. Each incoming photon causes an instantaneous jump to a new speed. To us, it seems as if the object slowed down or sped up gradually. Such proportionate instantaneous changes in speed and direction would pulverize our bones into dust, but we are so huge compared to a single atomic component and have so much more mass, that the instantaneous jumps results in microscopic changes that we perceive as smooth acceleration or deceleration. These changes are very noticeable to a microscopic neutron and all of the atomic components.
Whatever neutrons, protons and electrons are made of, it must be very tough and dense in order to survive the rigors of this. If they were made of tiny particles, then wouldn’t they all eventually flake off? Would little pieces eventually break away? Photons are constantly crashing into them at light speed. How do the atomic components survive this onslaught? These are questions that are extremely relevant to this analysis. It is a topic that can’t be ignored. If no such material, force or energy (or lack thereof) could account for this, then the system doesn’t work. If such relatively huge energies would shake things apart in the world that we can observe, then they could also do that on the atomic level. If this question can’t be answered, we can’t just invent some imaginary new energy or theoretical super glue to explain this. If this can’t be explained, then this is just another unsubstantiated theory. It HAS TO be explained. We MUST look deeper.
Whatever the real answer is, it absolutely MUST conform to every known LAW of science that we know to be a fact. Chapter 12 “The Smallest Picture” explains exactly what holds the atomic components together and what keeps them from shaking apart. The analysis topic “TIME, SPACE, MATTER and ENERGY” expands upon the information revealed in chapter 12 and reveals the ultimate hidden truth about MATTER. Realize that explanations such as “It’s the weak or strong atomic force” are completely insufficient. Unless it can be demonstrated what those forces are, where they come from, and exactly how they work, such explanations are just useless theories. Rest assured that far better explanations will be provided. For now, just accept that they do hold together just fine, and we’ll proceed from there.
The neutron processes most of the frequencies that the electron doesn’t process. The neutron is the counterpart to the electron. This reveals an interesting characteristic of the atom. It is the engine which creates the motion that propagates as waves through the ether. While the electron interacts with high frequency vibrations in the upper electromagnetic range, the neutron interacts with lower frequency vibrations. The frequencies that affect the neutron aren’t (usually) involved with the electron.
Why do high frequencies only originate from electrons and low frequencies from neutrons? The answer lies in the inverse relationship between mass and speed. Given a constant applied force, greater mass responds with slower speed. Slower speed leads to lower frequency. The same force applied to a smaller mass yields higher speed. Higher speed means higher frequency. That is, the components speed dictates the rate at which it changes its pattern of motion.
When combining gravity, speed and rotational movement with a sub-atomic component, a specific orbit results. Small electrons have small mass and therefore have high speed. This causes them to orbit further out. Their high speed makes them compatible with high frequencies. Large neutrons have large mass. They have the same inertial forces applied to them as the electrons do. That same inertia applied to large mass results in slower speeds. Slower speeds result in smaller orbits and compatibility with lower frequencies.
The behavior of an atom can be compared to the behavior of a solar system. That would mean that in order for the electrons and protons to stay in orbit around a central neutron, the mass of the neutron would have to be comparatively very great. The difference in size between protons and the neutron might be the same ratio as to that of the Earth to the planet Neptune. (WAIT. Protons “orbit” around a neutron? That goes directly against the Bohr model of the atom! Patience! You will soon see how it works.)
Photons do not orbit around anything. All they do is travel in a straight line. Perhaps think of them as rows and columns of dominoes all standing side by side and filling an area. If you sweep your finger across the front row, they will fall in sequence with the same pattern that your finger moved with. That pattern is the wave. An electron moving very fast through the ether creates a high frequency wave. A neutron moving slowly through the ether creates a low frequency wave.
Let’s clarify what the nature of the bandwidth is that a neutron can process. There has to be one frequency band in particular that neither neutrons nor electrons “like”. As a matter of fact, it makes perfect sense that such a cushion would exist between the two frequency ranges. If not, then the in-between frequency might add its inertia to the electron in one moment, and then at some other point in time to the neutron. This would imbalance the whole system. There has to be enough of a gap between the function of the two systems so that, even if it oscillated and increased or decreased its frequencies a bit, it would still not overlap the other’s jurisdiction.
This frequency band would have to be somewhere near the lower end of the electron’s bandwidth and somewhere just above the neutrons upper band capabilities. This band of frequencies does exist, and it falls into the range that we call heat (The IR band. Refer to the chart in the “Electron and Magnetism” chapter). This means that electrons and neutrons can both hold heat in their systems, but only some of it. In the case of the neutron, its uppermost capability probably extends up into the microwave bandwidth. Heat generated inside of the neutron that is outside its range is sent elsewhere. Electrons hold the higher frequency heat while neutrons hold the lower frequency heat. Can you guess what holds all types of heat? The answer will be provided when the proton is discussed (chapter 9).
The ability to convert motion into low frequency vibrating waves is not so strange if you think about it. In fact, we already do that on a regular basis. Not only do we possess the ability to construct such a device, but it also exists within our bodies. The device we construct requires the pairing together of a microphone and a speaker. The microphone transfers the inertia of motion into the inertia of electricity. The speaker reverses the process. It converts the inertia of electrical current into the inertia of motion. This is a system of information transmission that mimics the behavior of photons. The main difference is that, even though photons are continuously transmitting all motion information as waves, the microphone/speaker pairing only sends electrical signals when sound occurs.
Not only have we already figured out how to build something that exactly copies what the ether does, but our own bodies figured it out long ago. Our voice box is like the speaker (changing bio-electrical energy into motion). The motion of sound created by the moving voice box is transmitted by propagation through the air. When the propagation through air reaches our ears, our eardrums vibrate. Our eardrums are like the microphone, changing motion into bio-electrical energy. This vibration then gets converted into neurological electricity and travels to our brains. We interpret this process as sound. It makes perfect sense. After all, If we can do it, then so can a neutron and an electron. In fact, the ONLY reason we are able to do it is BECAUSE that’s exactly how the atom does it.
The basic concepts of motion again will be addressed again, just to keep it fresh in your mind. How does the transfer of low level directional frequencies create inertia in motion? The answer lies in Newton’s third law of motion. “For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction”. Whatever the neutron’s speed and direction (amplitude and frequency) may be at any given time, the photon pushes back with the exact opposite force. The straight line “combined wave” shown below is what would happen if atoms pushed against atoms with an equal and opposite force. The forces would cancel out motion. However, neutrons and photons don’t oppose each other’s motion. They don’t cancel out. Both experience unopposed inertia and so both move. It would look something like this:
Whatever the frequency in one realm (atomic or ether), the other is doing exactly the opposite. It is exactly the same behavior seen in the electron. The vibration phase of the electron is opposite the light wave phase. In the neutron, we are dealing with low frequencies. Instead of a random vibrating push, they exert a focused directional push directly at each other. To understand what happens next, imagine you and a friend pushing equally against one another. If you suddenly step aside, he moves in the direction he was pushing. What happens in this case is that the neutron pushes against the ether at its contact point with the photon and the photon pushes back against the neutron. It’s like trying to push against something that isn’t there. You end up moving. Thus, the neutron moves towards the photon, and the photon moves through the neutron. How this works is explained in chapter 12.
If you followed the logic of all this, then a big question might pop into your head right about now. Since gravity deals with moving things in space, and it dissipates quickly in the ether, then what about magnetism? It moves things and dissipates even faster than gravity does. Isn’t moving things associated with low level directional frequencies? Magnetism is a part of the electron cycle and electrons only deal with high frequencies. How is this possible?
The makeup and design of the elements which are magnetic dictates this. An imbalance is created in the electron by speed changes in either the orbital or rotational speeds. The resultant interactions with the atom create an up and down oscillating bounce. This creates oscillation in the electron. Oscillation is a very linear low frequency. It is because this frequency is so incompatible with the electron that it is shed so quickly. The electron encounters resistance to sending this energy inward, because no one else wants it. The energy must be completely discharged from the system. And so, it goes out into the ether. These low level frequencies exert a pulling effect when they encounter another electron that already has a similar oscillation by transferring the oscillation into it. The overall effect is similar to what gravity does. All of this will be clarified in Chapter 13 “Oscillation”.
The difference between gravity waves and magnetic waves is in their frequency. This is why some elements are magnetic and some are not. If an atom is stable and not oscillating to start with, then incoming magnetic frequency waves will mostly miss an object that is not also oscillating. The portion of the magnetic wave that does hit the object that is not oscillating represents only a small portion of the power of the full wave. As a result, it has little effect on that object. If the receiving atom was already oscillating to start with, then the incoming magnetic frequency adds to the amplitude, causing greater linear movement which manifests as “magnetism”.
Chapter 9 -THE PROTON, HEAT AND THE ATOM
COPYRIGHT © 2017, By Jonathan P. Volkel
This is the place where all these topics will start to come together. This is where we can finally start to build an atom and see what it really looks like. What you will see will be quite different from what you’ve been taught.
At this point you may realize that there is one more piece of the puzzle that has not yet been covered. What about the proton? What role does it play in all of this? Everything that has previously been explained breaks down the functions of the universe into two separate systems: the low frequency system and the high frequency system. Are these two systems completely separated from one another? Is there any way for energy to travel directly back and forth between these two systems? Just as the electron is the bridge between high frequencies and the ether, and as the neutron is the bridge between low frequencies and the ether, the proton is the bridge to the ether that covers the bandwidths between the upper and lower. It is also the bridge that makes the matter-to-matter connection between the upper and lower frequencies. It has a bandwidth which overlaps both while also having an in-between range all to itself.
Earlier it was stated that some of the energy emitted by an electron is lost as heat. Later, that concept was explained further in that it wasn’t actually lost, just redirected somewhere. This is the job of the proton. Heat is vibration. We feel heat because vibration within that bandwidth had transferred to us. Heat must be the one frequency that doesn’t reside comfortably within the speeds customary to the electron or the neutron. It makes sense that there should be a gap between their energy processing capabilities. The huge size of the neutron compared to the tiny size of the electron creates a problem. To transfer energy from one to another would require huge transformations between frequency and amplitude in one quick jump. Some in-between mass is needed in order to more gradually step down (or up) the power.
Take another look at the bandwidths of frequencies from the frequency chart. At the junction between the IR range and the lower frequencies, we see the microwave range. We use microwaves as a quick and convenient way to create heat and cook food. Look at the junction between the upper edge of the IR range and light. What color do you see? Whenever we make a fire to create heat, we also see the glow of low frequency red light. The proton vibrates at speeds within the microwave and IR bands. Its bandwidth overlaps into both the upper and lower halves of the bandwidth of its neighbors. As such, it can interact with both halves.
Before we can begin to see how the atom really functions, there is one very major point that must be understood. Science NEVER originally believed that energy could exist outside of matter and travel through a vacuum on its own. We always thought that energy had to travel by only one method. It had to propagate through something made of matter. Energy ONLY moves because it is "handed off" from one piece of matter to the next, sort of like a baton moving around the track in a relay race. This is not an opinion. It is a FACT supported by every observation of the movement of energy that we can experimentally verify. It was Einstein who said that energy could exist outside of matter, and move on its own, AND HE WAS WRONG.
Keeping that in mind, then realize that science has already found all the clues needed to correct the inaccuracies of the Bohr model of the atom. All we need to do is put the pieces together correctly to see the true picture. Whatever the outcome, it MUST conform to all the known laws of physics that work EVERY time and under ALL conditions. If it doesn’t then it’s just a crazy theory. If the solution to this puzzle requires creating some mystery force that operates in an as yet unknown and unprovable way (such as the weak and strong atomic forces); then the solution is no good.
Think about it like this. The existing atomic model places all the protons in the nucleus with the neutrons. Also, all the protons are believed to be positively charged. We know that things with the same charge repel one another. Then why don't all the protons fly away from one another and out of the nucleus? The correct answer is "You're right. They would repel and fly away from one another. Therefore, that model must be completely wrong".
Instead of accepting the obvious, scientists invented imaginary forces that do not exist in the real world at any detectable level in order to force the Bohr model of the atom to appear to work. They chose to believe in unbelievable and imaginary forces rather than admit they might be wrong. It's time to see the truth which embodies provable scientific principles and to forget the fairy tales. So far, you have been standing at the edge of the ocean of “the transfer of inertia through the ether” only up to your knees. It is time for you to brace yourself and dive all the way in.
Here are the clues that aid in building a correct model of the atom. We know that electricity, magnetism and light are all associated with the electron. How do magnetism and light travel? It is the energy of the motion of matter which gets translated into a linear wave that can travel through the ether. How does electricity travel? Electricity is inertia in motion that travels from atom to atom through atoms. The ether has nothing to do with electrical movement and so, for the moment, we will focus only on the realm of energy transfer from atom to atom.
If you wanted to transfer energy directly from yourself to some other object, (from atom to atom or, from one solid thing composed of atoms to another) how would you do it? All the scientific laws of inertia and motion tell us how. We already know the answer. You would need to go to the other object and touch it. You would need to make physical contact! After all, isn't that the entire point of this whole analysis? Wasn’t it already established from the very beginning that energy cannot travel through the vacuum of space on its own? Energy cannot exist outside of matter. The ONLY way that energy moves is by being "handed off" from one piece of matter to next. In order for energy to move, IT MUST PROPAGATE! Just as it is in the large macro world that we can see, so it is in the atomic micro world. The Bohr model of the atom cannot and will not work. The electrons in it aren’t touching anything!
We also know that all our electrical research indicates that an electron is negative and a proton is positive. This tells us that there is a direct work connection between the two. Logic and the laws of the universe of matter regarding energy transfer via motion then demands that the only possible explanation is that the electron must make physical contact with the proton! It is not only obvious; it is impossible to be otherwise. If that is true, then how does the proton transmit energy? By the same reasoning, it must make physical contact with another atomic component, which must then make contact with another electron, and so on.
Hold on. There is something very big to consider here. Everything is spinning. The atom absolutely must be spinning exactly as our solar system does, because all of the inertial laws of the universe demands that it does so. Every inertial input into an atom contains rotational data. The biggest contributor of that data is perhaps, the universe itself. Everything within it must be more or less aligned with that rotational inertia. The atomic components are not only spinning in orbital motions, but they rotate and vibrate as well. How could two rotating balls stay in contact during bursts of inertial change? Wouldn’t their surfaces slip against one another? That would depend on the forces involved.
Here in the world of atomic interactions, there are always more than just two forces at work within any individual object. That is because the things that we consider to be individual objects are not really individual objects at all. They are actually made of many individual objects (atoms) working together to create the larger assembled grouped object. As a result, multiple forces are always affecting the behavior of things in the world that we see, and contribute to the motion that we perceive as slippage.
In the sub-atomic world, it is possible to have two and only two discrete and individual uniform objects in contact that only affect one another. Their motion manifests as just one force moving in one direction. Because of this, sub-atomic behavior can be a bit different than what we are accustomed to seeing. The details of how grouped behavior is different than an individual object’s behavior are discussed in the Analysis topic “Sub-Atomic Motion”. For now, we will just go with the concept that there is no slippage.
How would an atom work if all the components were in physical contact with one another? The best way to envision it is with gears. Imagine you have two gears lying flat on the table; a medium sized one and a small one. The small one is in contact with the other so that their “teeth” mesh. Turn the medium gear a little. What happens? The little gear turns in the opposite direction, but with more rotations. Turn the little one. What happens? The medium one moves in the opposite direction, but only a little bit. We already have all the science laid out on how gears work. We already know all about rotational relationships between different size gears, power distribution, transfer of work energy, and so on. All the physical laws of science that we have already learned can and must also apply to the atom.
There is no such thing as the weak or strong atomic force. The protons don’t repel one another and fly off into space because they are not and never were all bunched up in the nucleus with the neutrons. Instead, they are orbiting, held in place by the same forces that hold the planets in place. The parts that make up this engine are held firmly together with their “gears” snugly enmeshed by the inward motion of gravity and inertia. The purpose of all the engines that we call atoms is to take rotational inertia from the universe and distribute it to all the other atomic engines out there as waves of energy via the ether. Their fuel is inertia in motion.
(Now you understand why the cover page of this website has the picture of spinning gears.)
Now start to expand your thinking as you mentally build an atomic engine. Let’s see how it works. Imagine one more gear that is very large. Place it beneath the medium sized gear. Turn the big gear and see what happens. This is how the Hydrogen atom functions. Add a second medium gear so that it touches both the other medium gear and the big gear giving three way contact. Turn any of the gears and watch what happens. Oops. We have a problem. The whole system locked up and won’t spin. What went wrong? When we turn the medium gear, the one next to it moves in the opposite direction. Since they are working against one another upon the same big gear, any forces that are added will always cancel out and the gears won’t move. We need to make an adjustment. We need to change the way the second medium gear fits in so that it doesn’t affect the big gear.
If we tilt the second medium gear away so that it is only touching the other medium gear and then move any gear, it works again. We could also place the second medium gear so that it is touching only the big gear and not the other medium gear. Now add another small gear on top of the second medium gear while making sure it doesn’t touch any other gears. That’s simple. Spin any gear and watch the motion of all the gears. Now add one more big gear. It has to be added so that it meshes with the other big gear but does not simultaneously come into contact with any other gear. That’s not hard to do. There are a lot of places where one could put the second big gear and satisfy all the parameters. Adding the second big gear also allows us the option to re-position the second medium gear if we wanted to. We could move it so that it touches the second large gear instead of the first large gear. Turn any gear and watch the motion. It works. Congratulations. You have just built a working model of a Helium atom.
That’s all there is to it. We already know how it works. We just never realized we were employing the exact same forces in our everyday lives that the universe also uses. Is it any surprise that we build engines that use gears inside of devices we call “transmissions” to transform power? It is natural. We transform the up-and-down motion of pistons and transform it into spinning motion. We channel some of that spin in one direction to create electricity in an alternator. We use gears to transform some of that spin into linear motion in the drive-train. And we use spin to power a pump to circulate fluid in a cooling system to redistribute heat so that the system doesn’t burn out. It is the way the universe works. We had no other choice but to build engines in that way. Every motor and engine we build does what it does by spinning. In an atom, it gets a bit more complicated than in a simple car engine. We use gasoline to generate an engine’s spin. The atom uses the inertia from the spinning universe as its fuel.
The previous gear analogy of the atom only serves to provide a rudimentary visualization of the way things work. The actual workings of the atom’s behavior are somewhat different than the workings of the gears for three reasons. First of all, atomic components are not sitting on a flat surface and they are not flat discs. They are spheres that are “floating” within the ether ocean and can therefore be assembled in three dimensions.
Secondly, if the small and medium sized gears were uniformly spinning around the larger gear, then, even though they are all moving at different orbital speeds, they would all complete one orbit around the large gear in the same amount of time. Doing so would cause all of the gears to create the exact same frequency wave. The only difference in their waves would be the amplitude. The atom is actually capable of creating multiple different frequencies simultaneously, which means that the different atomic components complete their individual orbits in different durations of time.
Thirdly, none of the atomic components are locked into a fixed position like the gears in the analogy would be. The atomic components can easily trade position and motion. The instantaneous exchange of motion is explained in greater detail in the Analysis topic “Sub-Atomic Motion”.
Regrettably, we may never know exactly what an atom looks like or see exactly how it is configured. The atomic components are moving too fast to see or accurately measure. Any attempt to look into an atom to see what is going on only results in blurred images and fuzzy readings. Attempts to slow down the atoms in order to get a better look at them may prove to be futile. The ether surrounds everything and the high speed motion of photons continuously recharges the atoms. The photons cannot be blocked out or stopped. The nature of the unified force allows the atom to take whatever frequencies of motion that it receives from the ether and transform it into whatever motion the atom needs in order to recharge itself and remain stable.
The atom actually functions in ways similar to how our solar system functions. The Moon orbits around the Earth. So too does the electron orbit around the proton. The main differences between these two systems are the high speeds of the atomic orbital motion and the fact that the electron is in physical contact with the proton.
The Earth orbits around the Sun. So too does the proton orbit around the neutron. The atomic orbit is much faster than the planetary orbit, and the proton-electron pair is in physical contact with the neutron.
This type of motion would mean that, as the electron orbits around the proton, then sometimes the proton is in contact with the neutron, and sometimes the electron comes between the proton and the neutron. If the electron was able to come into contact with the neutron, it would mean that either both components would momentarily stop spinning, or that one of their rotational spin directions would have to instantly reverse. Instantly reversing spin directions is not only possible, but is normal when it comes to sub-atomic motion. Reversing rotational spin direction has no effect on the amplitude of a wave. An analogy would be to compare it to a baseball player batting right handed or left handed. Even though the bat is spinning in opposite directions, the ball still flies away from the bat the same way.
The ability of the atom and its atomic components to instantly reverse spin directions is normal for sub-atomic motion and is a behavior that we harness and rely upon every day. Alternating electric current works solely because the atoms can instantly reverse spin direction. Alternating electrical current in the USA reverses direction 60 times per second. Each time it reverses, the magnetic fields and the atoms in the electrical wires instantly reverse their spin directions. For details on how electrical current direction indicates the atomic spin direction, see the Analysis topic “Magnetism Theories”.
This type of atomic behavior, wherein each component has its own unique orbital path around a single other atomic component, means that the electrons will orbit the protons in less time than the protons will orbit the neutrons, and the protons orbit the neutrons in less time than neutrons will orbit other neutrons. As a result, a single atom can simultaneously create multiple waves of different frequencies within the ether at the same time.
Actually, when the electron comes between the proton and neutron, it is unable to make physical contact with the neutron. Just as large objects, such as planets, have ether whirlpools around them, so too do the tiny atomic components. Since the electron and neutron are spinning in opposite directions at their potential point of contact, so too are their ether currents. The currents push away from one another, preventing the two components from making contact. As the electron orbits away, the proton returns. Its whirlpool matches the direction of motion of the neutrons whirlpool, and the two components are able to make physical contact. To see how ether currents can attract or repel one another, see the Analysis topic “Magnetic Fields”.
One Hydrogen atom consists of one neutron, one proton and one electron. They are three different components of three different sizes. Each component therefore rotates and orbits at different speeds. Adding more neutrons to create larger atoms would result in those neutrons orbiting around one another. Here is an example of four different atoms and their possible configurations. The sizes of the components are not to scale and are just for illustration purposes.
In the illustration for Hydrogen, three images are shown. They depict the three components of the Hydrogen atom during different stages of their orbital motion. The curved black arrows indicate the rotational spin direction of each atomic component. The red arrows indicate the orbital path of the electron. The blue arrows indicate the orbital path of the proton. The green arrows indicate the orbital path of the neutron. The red “x” indicates the location of the center of mass for the whole system. In the third image for Hydrogen, the electron orbits into a position between the proton and the neutron. The opposing ether whirlpools that exist between them prevent the electron from actually touching the neutron.
Even though not readily apparent in the Hydrogen example, the neutron is also orbiting. It is orbiting around the center of the entire system’s mass. Because that center is located within the neutron, its orbit manifests as a wobble in its spinning motion. If the Hydrogen acquires an additional electron-proton pair on the opposite side of the existing pair, then the center of mass would relocate to the exact center of the neutron and the wobble would vanish. This stabilization effect is why some atoms can exist as isotopes.
Helium is shown during two stages of its orbital motion. At some point, both electron-proton pairs can come into contact with one another as shown in the right image for Helium. Their spin and surrounding whirlpools match directions at the point where the two electrons meet. They can touch and thereby allow the continued exchange of motion throughout the atom. When the electrons of two different atoms come into contact in this way, it allows inertia, such as electricity, to move from one atom to a different atom. Lithium is #3 on the Periodic Table of Elements. It consists of the same components that exist in three Hydrogen atoms. In the configuration shown, each electron-proton pair would alternately come between two touching neutrons.
The example for Carbon shows all of the components stretched out in a straight line. However, those components may actually try to move as close to one another as possible. The end result might be more like the arrangement you would get of egg yolks if you cracked open many eggs into a bowl. Opposing ether whirlpools around components would prevent three way contacts. Ultimately, whatever the actual configuration is, the components cannot connect with some sort of triangular arrangement. Three adjoining neutrons cannot simultaneously make contact with one another. Their spin directions would continually oppose one another preventing any spinning motion from happening.
In atoms that had more than one neutron, the neutrons would need to orbit around one another. In order to understand how all of these components would function, one would simply need to look at how celestial objects orbit around one another. The forces that work on a large planetary and celestial scale are the exact same forces at work within the atom. The only difference is that atomic objects are touching one another. The concept of a “barycenter” would come into play. That is, the total mass of the entire system would need to be determined, and a central point of that mass becomes the center which the system orbits around. In the case of the example for the Lithium atom, the center of mass would be just above the center of the middle neutron. That center of mass would keep changing its location as the proton-electron pair orbited around that central neutron. This would cause the Lithium atom to have a slight wobble in its orbital motion.
Lithium has several different isotopes. Existing theories explain this as the gain or loss of electrons. Present atomic theory proposes that neutrons and protons have approximately the same mass. This model is quite different than that. Thus, an isotope of Lithium might actually gain or lose both an electron and a proton.
It would make sense that Lithium could gain or lose both an electron and a proton. An infusion of energy into a Lithium atom would cause it to spin and orbit faster. The wobble would grow worse and worse. If it shed a proton and an electron from the center neutron, or gained a proton and electron on the opposite side of the center neutron, then the center of mass would relocate to the exact center of the middle neutron. The wobble would vanish and the Lithium atom’s spin would stabilize.
With this model of the atom, each of the atomic components completes one orbit in a different amount of time than the other components. Due to its low mass, the electron is travelling the fastest. In addition to that, it is orbiting around the proton, which has a circumference much less than that of a neutron. As a result, the electron can complete many orbits in less time than any of the other larger components can complete a single orbit. Recall the definition of a wave from the beginning of Chapter 1: A wave is patterned vibration which creates a disturbance that travels through a medium. And so, the electron’s orbital motion is a high frequency pattern of motion which creates a disturbance that travels through the medium of the photons of the ether. We perceive and identify that high frequency patterned disturbance as “light”.
The proton has more mass than an electron, so it travels slower than the electron. Even so, its mass is still much less than that of a neutron. And so, it travels much faster than a neutron can. It orbits around the large neutrons. Even though it takes more time to complete one orbit than an electron does, it still completes one orbit faster than a neutron can complete one orbit. And so, the proton creates a pattern of motion within the ether that creates waves of lower frequency than the electron. It creates waves that have a frequency range that falls within the IR band. The largest and slowest moving atomic component, the neutron, moves and orbits slower than all the others. The neutron requires more time than any of the other components to complete one orbit. It causes the production of the lowest frequency waves within the ether.
Of course, even the shapes of the components are approximations, provided as shown only to help in visualizing the workings of the atom. As you will see in Chapter 12, their shapes may be much more flexible than anyone thought. Scientists say that they broke a proton and it fell into several pieces that they called “quarks”. As you will eventually see, it is not possible to break any of these components. Photons continually collide with them at light speeds and they survive those collisions without damage. The sizes shown above are NOT to scale. The correct scale might be more in relation to the sizes of the planet Neptune, the Earth and the Moon.
Modern chemistry has all kinds of theories on how an atom looks. They believe that the electrons orbit around the nucleus in different layers. The quantity of electrons in each layer varies. The theories about the configuration and arrangement of atomic components came about because of experimental data accumulated for over a century, providing huge amounts of data on how the elements behave. That elemental behavior is then compared to the Bohr model of the atom, and the theories arise to try and explain the observed behavior. The theories and the model keep changing year after year because the data doesn’t quite fit the model. If scientists were to use the correct model of the atom, the data would fit easily.
Because of opposing spin directions, a neutron can’t touch other neutrons in such a way as to create a simultaneous three way contact. This eliminates triangular configurations. However, they could possibly be arranged in a “+”, or cross configuration. An example of this would be the child’s toy “jacks”.
The above configuration could represent a five neutron configuration, with one in the center and four surrounding neutrons. Neutrons could also stack above and below the center, and the entire arrangement could extend further outwards from there. The number of possible configurations becomes immense, and it will take a great deal of comparing data to the model to determine exactly which configurations work.
The interesting thing about this is that one wouldn’t need a theoretical physicist to understand this atomic concept. The mechanical engineers who design automobile transmissions would be the experts to talk to in order to better understand the workings of an atom. They would be restricted to using only three different gear sizes in their designs and analysis.
Wouldn’t a greater number of different sized gears (components) be more efficient? Each different size would be better matched to its speed. Each successive layer out from the center would require one step down in gear size. This would be a very efficient gearing system. The appearance of imbalances in the system would be greatly reduced. It would indeed be more efficient, but it would also be useless to us. If that were the case, effects like magnetism would virtually disappear. The system works so well for us, and life as we know it exists as it does because there are only three different sizes.
This system works consistently everywhere. For example, one piece of Gold behaves exactly the same as any other piece of Gold. The ONLY way that this is possible is if every electron in the universe is exactly the same size as every other electron. All protons must be exactly the same size as each other, and so too with all neutrons. If not, elements would not be so distinct from one another.
The rush of inertia from one electron to the next electron in the atom is the surge of energy that we call ELECTRICITY. When two or more different atoms connect to one another, they connect at the point where their outermost components come into contact. That outermost component is usually the electron. Two different atoms position themselves close enough to one another so that their electrons come into contact with one another while they orbit. When one atom is connected to another atom through their electrons, the process of equalizing inertia travels from atom to atom through the electrons. Each successive atom then transfers its heightened electron inertia to the next atom through the electron-to-electron connection in order to balance the atom- to- atom speeds. It is a chain reaction of transference of inertia that tries to balance the whole system of interconnected gears. The electron energy must pass through the protons in order to reach the next electron and eventually the next atom. It is this pathway of travel that scientists labeled “positive” and “negative”. Each time the extra inertia moves through this pathway, all the atomic components experience a boost in energy. The atom takes the one unified force, the ENERGY OF MOTION, and transforms it into different speeds, frequencies and patterns of motion to create all the manifestations of energy that we perceive.
Electricity increases the speed, and therefore the total motion within every atomic component. Electricity releases magnetism. This happens because the sudden speed increase causes the entire line of atomic components to gain an oscillating bounce. Electricity also releases heat. This is caused by increased motion in electrons, protons and neutrons. With lots of electricity, an audible hum/ buzzing can be discerned. This is caused by increased speed in the neutrons. The closer the travelling inertia gets to the central neutron, the lower the frequency that is emitted. The amplitude (intensity) of these emissions is also lower near the center of the atom, because the energy dissipates while it travels. The lower frequency emissions of the neutrons are low enough that we can actually hear it as a buzzing hum, but only if a lot of power is flowing. Even lower frequency emissions can actually be felt as physical vibrations. All of these effects are detectable to us because the ether is absorbing and relocating some of the surplus energy in order to try and balance all motion throughout the universe.
We already know how electricity works. The behavior of electricity is familiar to us. Thanks to people like Ohm, Watt and Volta (just to name a few); we have already established the laws by which electricity works. All the observed effects conform to the laws; ALWAYS. We just didn’t really understand why it worked or why those effects happened. We just knew that it did work. Now we can know why.
This whole system works because each atomic component (neutron, proton and electron) is in physical contact with the next component. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. When one component slows down or speeds up, the decrease or increase in energy is instantly shared with all the other components. It is this “cause and effect” of constantly attempting to balance speeds that results in atoms constantly either absorbing energy from the ether or releasing energy into the ether that manifests as light, magnetism, heat and gravity.
Chapter 10 -THE ATOM AND MOLECULES
COPYRIGHT © 2017, By Jonathan P. Volkel
How big can the system of atomic “gears” get? The size is limited by the energy available from the spinning universe and the mass of the atomic components. The further the atomic components extend outward from the center of the atom, the greater the outer circumference of the atom. The greater the circumference of the atom is, the faster the orbital speeds attained by the outermost atomic components will be. Think of it like a merry-go-round. The closer you get to the outer edge of that spinning wheel, the harder it is to hold on. The distance from the center of mass and the orbit speed are directly related to one another and are inversely related to the “pull” of gravity. Eventually, the inertia of the outermost atomic components could be such that they won’t be able to stay in contact with the other atomic components. The atom then becomes unstable.
This next concept is very important to understanding molecules. What happens when two atoms link up to become a larger entity known as a molecule? Do both atoms sit in one place and just spin like the gears would do? Does one atom sit still while the other revolves entirely around it? Do both atoms simultaneously revolve around one another?
Each individual atom is made up of three separate size components. And yet, all of those forces within the atom can be combined into a summation of one overall force that manifests at the outermost component (usually the electron). As such, the entire atom can then be viewed as just one individual larger “gear” that is constantly spinning.
Another atom is also viewed as one individual larger “gear”. If both atoms are situated appropriately close enough to one another, then, as the atomic components orbit around their own central neutrons (the center of mass), the outer orbits of the two atoms will intermittently touch, thereby meshing these giant “gears” and becoming an object that we refer to as a “molecule”. The number of “teeth” on each of these giant “gears” depends on how the components are arranged and their configurations. The entire universe functions as a system of intricately connected “gears” of all different sizes. The complexity of the molecule dictates the resultant size of the “gear”. Viewing every complex system as just another larger sized gear provides insight as to how they connect to one another. Three components in simultaneous contact with one another won’t work because opposing spin directions would lock up the whole system.
Obviously, atoms must move around in order to approach one another and connect. Once that happens, they actually continue to move in relation to one another. Their behavior might more likely resemble the behavior of two tornadoes or hurricanes that come into contact with one another. Once their energies intermix, they begin to whirl around one another. The knowledge of weather patterns possessed by meteorologists could be valuable in the analysis of the behavior of atoms and molecules. That’s because things behave as they do in the macroscopic world that we can see because the microscopic world that we cannot see is the source of that behavior.
Each atom that is added to the combination changes the location of the center of mass and the orbital motion of the entire group. For now though, in order to keep things simple, just view them as standing still and keeping a stationary position once linked up. Although not accurate, doing so simplifies understanding. Trying to figure out the exact arrangement of neutrons, protons and electrons within a single atom is complicated enough. It is equally complicated, if not more so, to figure out exactly how individual whole atoms interconnect, adapt and adjust their motion in order to create molecules.
The periodic table shows 118 different elements. That means that 118 different neutrons, protons and electrons all unite and spin as one system of objects. Any more atomic components that might be added on would fly off immediately. In fact, the last few elements on the periodic table are artificially made and can only exist briefly. It is the transfer of low frequency linear inertia to the ether that causes gravity to occur. It is the rotational speed of the universe and the concentration of photons which determines the overall rate that gravity is created. The periodic table of elements is limited by these universal constants.
We do know that some atoms do gain or lose electrons. If so, then where do they go? Imagine two different atoms connected together at the electron. A severe inertia variation comes along and forces the atoms to become imbalanced. When the contact between the two atoms disconnects, it doesn’t have to always separate at the point where the two electrons touch. An electron could break away from its proton. That leaves the one atom lacking an electron, while the other atom has two electrons connected end to end on the one proton. In all likelihood, this would happen if the two atoms were different types of atoms. If so, the one with stronger gravity (more inertia) might steal the other’s electron.
Different elements can be combined with one another to create an alloy. All the basic components in different elements are identical. It’s just their arrangement, quantity of components and motion that is different. Consider this. All identical elements that have the exact same configuration of neutrons, protons and electrons also have the same rotational speeds as one another. This means they are spinning and orbiting at (almost) the same speed and all the electrons have (close to) the same speed. They link up to one another easily to form larger pieces of that one element type.
If one more neutron, proton and electron is added to an atom, a different element is created. Its overall inertia is the same as the other types of atoms, but the rotational and orbital speeds manifested in its outer layer is different than in other types of atoms. The components of one element type rotate and orbit at different speeds than other element types.
In order to artificially connect two different elements, their rotational speeds need to be matched. This is usually accomplished by inputting heat into the mix (inputting inertia). A constant surrounding of steady heat encourages both elements to orbit and spin at the energy level created by the heat. At that point, their speeds match and they can merge. Once merged, the newly formed alloy can be cooled down. As it cools, the vibrating speed of the new combination blends. If the blend is compatible and stable, the new alloy vibrates at a different speed than either individual did, causing it to behave slightly different than each individual element did. Some elements create too much of a vibration difference between them if merged. They are unable to successfully blend their vibrations and become an alloy; the connection becomes unstable and breaks.
Atomic components can connect to one another in three dimensions. On the one hand, there exists a flat plane that is defined by the spinning of the universe. All things will be forced to move along that plane, just as the solar system does. However, our three dimensional world is not flat. Atomic components, atoms and molecules must be able to stack in all directions.
The extent to stacking entirely depends upon the rotational forces at work. Stacking cannot happen until the atom or molecule has enough components extended outward horizontally. Otherwise, stacking vertically would cause it to tip over. The design of spinning tops helps in understanding this principle. They are wider at the middle and narrower at the top. The design of the atom must be similar to this, because the spinning forces require it to be so.
When the stability allows it and a neutron stacks vertically, the entire inertial response of an atom changes. When the actual configuration pattern is known, the reasons as to why certain elements are gasses, liquids, conductive, magnetic, radioactive, stable, etc. will all be able to be determined. Science won’t simply know what an atom is and how it behaves. Motion analysis will allow them to know why it is and why it behaves that way. It is possible that three dimensional atoms would by necessity have an overall roundish shape, but perhaps the shape of an atom is more flattened out and pill shaped due to spinning forces. The spinning forces of the universe will force the shape to comply with the laws of motion.
Atomic components and atoms can be in contact with more than one component or atom at a time. Just so long as three components do not make simultaneous three way contact, motion will be unimpeded. For example, one proton can be simultaneously in contact with two electrons. It will work just so long as the two electrons are not also simultaneously in contact with one another.
“Isotopes” of various elements can exist. That is, an element can have slight variations in its atomic components that allow it to still be the same element, however, it behaves slightly differently than the standard element behaves. One example of this is Hydrogen. It consists of one neutron, proton and electron. The orbits of those three components cause the whole atom to wobble. The addition of a proton and electron on the opposite side relocates the center of mass to the exact center of the atom, removing the wobble and stabilizing the motion of the atom. The result is the creation of an isotope of Hydrogen.
The Bohr model of the atom is very different than the atomic model described herein. The Bohr model requires extremely different explanations for what an isotope is and how and why it can exist. By following the Bohr model, wrong conclusions can be drawn from experimental evidence. Descriptions of Hydrogen mention a type called “Protium” which supposedly consists of only one proton and one electron with no neutron. Is such a thing possible? Science believes that the mass of a proton is almost the same as the mass of a neutron. It is not. It is much less. Perhaps Protium consists of just one neutron and one electron. Science assumes the larger component must be a proton and not a neutron because they believe it is the opposite charges of protons and electrons that work together to hold an electron in orbit. The truth is, the forces that hold atoms together have nothing to do with “charges”. The full explanation for what holds atoms together is provided in the Analysis topics “Sub-Atomic Motion” and “Objects and Quantum Illusions”.
Also consider this. There actually are no inherent charges within electrons, protons or neutrons. The real reason that an electron and proton are considered as “negative” and “positive” is because there is a direct work connection (physical contact) between the two. If an electron and a neutron were directly connected to one another, then wouldn’t the neutron be considered as “positive”? This may have fooled the analysts into thinking that Protium only involved an electron to proton connection.
The more neutrons that an atom possesses, the further out from the center of mass they orbit. The orbital speed of the outermost components increases as the circumference of the atom increases. As a result, those outermost components can attain more energy than can be siphoned off into the ether. That extra energy of motion becomes trapped within the atom. The atom then sends this extra motion to the individual components that make up the atom. And so, the electrons, protons and neutrons each increase their speeds, causing them to orbit around their individual components faster. The frequency emissions of those components correspondingly increase.
Consider a Plutonium atom. It is number 94 on the periodic table. That means it has 94 neutrons, 94 protons and 94 electrons. The neutrons would not all be stretched out in a straight line. There would be stacking of neutrons within the atom. Even so, the outermost components are situated pretty far from the center of mass. The outermost electrons in Plutonium orbit their protons so fast, that their frequency emissions fall into a range that we define as “radiation”. The proton is also orbiting faster. It could be orbiting fast enough to emit a lower frequency radiation. The outermost neutrons might be orbiting fast enough to emit visible light. One might have to move towards the center, past several layers of neutrons in order to find a layer of neutrons that is emitting heat.
This explains why very heavy elements emit radiation. Electrons within Plutonium can be situated very far from the center and have extremely heightened orbital speeds. Their natural frequency bandwidths are very high. They emit very high frequency waves of non-visible light (radiation) into the ether. The frequency gets so high as to fall into a range beyond the capabilities of any other atomic system that receives this energy. In addition to that, all of the photons in the vicinity of radioactive atoms blend their waveform to match that of the high frequency emanations of the electrons. Such highly vibrating photons prove to be destructive to all systems they come into contact with. We call this “radioactivity”.
If neutrons are orbiting far enough from the center they can acquire too much speed energy. They start to become imbalanced. Their motion becomes erratic and causes the entire atom to oscillate. They can get detached from the system. A neutron that does so would be the one that is furthest from the center. When it departs, it takes its orbiting proton and electron with it. The circumference of the atom thereby decreases, and so does the speed manifested in the outermost layers of the atom. This process continues as, one by one neutrons get thrown out of the system until finally the speed manifested at the circumference is slow enough for the atom to spin without oscillating. When a stable state is reached and the neutrons can spin and orbit in a balanced way, the atom becomes stable. The outermost electrons are now not as far from the center and orbit their protons slower. Radiation emissions cease. Science has already observed this process and knows about it and has named it. It is called “radioactive decay”.
Analysis of this process allows a complete understanding of the nature of radioactive decay. Knowing how the system works allows better control and management of it. A correct understanding of the system would bring realization that calculations are meaningless when it comes to trying to determine the total passage of time based on radioactive decay. How can one make any rational assumptions as to the input and output of inertia in that system over the past thousand years, or even one hundred years?
The current theories of radioactive decay already have established that the process is erratic and unpredictable. Scientists have taken an average reading of decay rates in “controlled environments” and assumed that it is representative of all environments in all of history. Obviously it isn’t. Even in a “controlled” environment over short periods of time the decay rates weren’t constant.
What if a sample taken from the outside had been exposed to cold and snow? How much would that change things? What if the wind blew on it? What if it got wet? Was it exposed to sunlight or in the dark? If it got hot, how much of a change would happen to the decay rate? Energy inputs into the atom change the rotational and orbital speeds of the components. These inputs either destabilize its motion more and accelerate decay, or cause it to become more stable and slow down the decay. It depends on the situation. How could scientists even think that the decay could be used to accurately calculate elapsed time? Just look at the model of the atom that they used to create that theory.
Once scientists realize exactly how the system works, the benefits to all fields of science could be immense. Take the field of medicine for example. Consider a virus. What is it? A virus is not alive. It is a little machine. Essentially, it is no different than the little self-propelled vacuum in people’s homes. The virus moves about sucking up surrounding inertia and radiating its one frequency of inertia. That’s it. That is all that it does. When inside a human body, the effects are devastating.
Under normal conditions, the virus does not exist. But some environmental change caused some atom or molecule to speed up or slow down enough to connect to another which it normally wouldn’t have connected to. The virus is born (It’s a little more complicated than that, but essentially, that’s it). It is unstable by its nature. That would mean that it oscillates extremely. That instability causes it to continuously emit energy all around it into the ether. Nearby cells that are exposed to its oscillations become unstable in its presence. They absorb the oscillation and release other “good” inertia to balance out the overload of input. They emit heat (we get a fever) and whatever other frequency that, in turn, feeds and stabilizes the virus. The instability within the virus creates a proportionate instability in nearby atoms which perpetuates the cycle. Eventually, the atoms in the cell begin to become so unstable, that atomic disconnections start to happen. The cell dies. Meanwhile, the vibration emanations of the virus recreate the conditions in other nearby atoms which created the virus in the first place. Those components merge and the virus seems to be replicating itself.
Ever wonder why we like music so much? Why do people say “It’s got a good beat”? Why do we moan when we are in pain? Low frequency vibrations insert inertia into our neutrons and make us feel better. Perhaps this balances a low frequency energy drain. Is vibration medicine a valid scientific concept? We know that vibration of too high of a frequency definitely damages cells. Can other frequencies repair them? Can vibrations even cure addictions? Can they destroy cancer cells just as with viruses? It might be worth a look.
How does one atom transmit energy to another atom in a molecule? The same way the electron transmits to the proton. It has to do so through physical contact. Therefore, all one atom has to do is position itself so that one of its components touches the components of another atom, and the systems will exchange inertia. Usually, the outermost component would be an electron, but really, any component will suffice. Upon contact, all their components instantaneously interact with one another. Within a single atom, electrical inertia moves from electron to proton to neutron to proton to electron.
There is a minute delay in the time it takes for the outermost components of two different atoms to orbit around and come into contact again. The more components an atom has, the less time between component to component contacts. The less intermittent the contacts, the easier it is for the speed of the two atoms to stay synchronized. In the case of Hydrogen-to-Hydrogen contact, contact is so intermittent that conditions that would cause perfect synchronization to occur are extreme. Only at very cold temperatures (extreme inertia drain) can they become synchronized enough to mesh and thereby become a liquid. Once they do make contact (by random chance), they are synchronized and can remain connected. This causes the Hydrogen to transform from a gas into a liquid. If external inertial input remains constant, they stay synchronized. Very cold temperatures ensure this.
The momentary breaks between electron contacts are another reason as to why electricity travels slower than light. It is also a reason as to why electric encounters have that pulsating, jolting effect which we call "getting shocked”.
Consider a water molecule; two Hydrogen atoms and one Oxygen atom. The Oxygen has eight of each type of component. In the time that it takes for all of its outermost components to pass by the Hydrogen, the orbital speed of the Hydrogen’s single outermost component is proportionate in such a way that it is guaranteed that it will touch at least one of the Oxygen’s many outermost components as they pass by, each time they pass by. In atoms with fewer than eight components, there might be times when the orbits are not synchronized properly and the electrons “miss” each other. This is why water is such a stable molecule and exists in such abundance.
An atom with sixteen different atomic components (Sulfur) would then seem to be able to make contact with twice as many Hydrogen atoms. However, Sulfur commonly links up with just two Hydrogen atoms, creating a poisonous gas known as Hydrogen Sulfide. This is because, even though there are sixteen components, they are not arranged in such a way as to create double the outermost components. Stacking of neutrons above and below the center of mass changes the speeds of those stacked components, limiting the quantity of Hydrogen that can effectively merge with the Sulfur. This effect really complicates the analysis of molecular behavior. The analysis is indeed more complicated, but with accurate models of the atom, the effects can be analyzed and understood.
Earlier it was mentioned that atomic components must match speeds before they can link up. Given the enormous speeds involved, even slight differences could have disastrous results. How can two components have the “exact” same speed? Atoms connect and disconnect all the time to form new molecules. How is it possible that they can be so perfectly synchronized? How can they maintain a perfect distance apart from one another?
Science has already discovered the answer, and the system to handle this problem is already being used by us in a commonplace application. It is called “fluid coupling”. It is an effect used in automobile automatic transmissions. If you recall, it was stated that the ether was like a fluid. That’s because it behaves like a fluid. As two atomic components are drawn towards one another by gravity, an ether “vortex” occurs between them, causing both components to gradually blend their speeds. By the time they come into contact with one another, their speeds exactly match.
This whole concept of all these atoms drifting around in space and positioning themselves at such perfect distances from one another so that their components can brush against one another in passing seems impossible. How can they position themselves so? As it was within a single atom, so it is from atom to atom and molecule to molecule. This is accomplished thanks to the ether and fluid coupling.
Realize that atoms are not floating around in space. They are floating within an ocean known as the ether. Tiny ether vortexes occur between spinning atoms. These currents work in combination with gravity as they move closer together. Once close enough, the ether currents guarantee that the atoms don’t crash into one another. The inward pull of gravity combines with the outward turbulence of the ether current to create a balanced and perfect distance from one another and a smooth coupling. Without the ether and its photons, atomic interactions would be completely impossible.
The understanding that the atoms are all floating in the ether ocean should begin to expand your awareness of "where" we are. We think of the ground as solid and the air as not solid. The real truth is, everything is "submerged" in the ocean. The ground and all solid matter are actually made up of dense concentrations of ocean. Air is actually less dense ocean, and outer space is the ocean in its least dense form. When we, and all matter moves, we are "swimming" through that ocean.
The spinning motion of a microscopic atom causes the macroscopic world around us to behave as it does. In other words, by watching the behavior of motion in the world around us, we can have a clearer understanding of atomic motion. Examination of how gyroscopes behave would reveal exactly what type of behavior an atom is capable of. The spinning motion prevents the gyroscope from tipping over and allows it to spin in different directions at different angles. Considering all the different configurations of atoms and molecules, the resultant effects are hugely diverse.
Regrettably, we can’t actually look into an atom and see the real arrangement. That’s because all of the atomic components are moving far too fast for us to see or measure. However, once the system is understood, computer simulations of atoms might reveal exactly which configurations produce the known behaviors of the elements in the Periodic Table. Whatever the parameters of designing this simulator may be, one thing is certain. KEEP IT SIMPLE. It might be as simple as: One shape with three sizes that interact in creative configurations. Once a simulated model is built that produces output that exactly matches the known actual behavior of atoms, then you’ve found it. If the output deviates from actual observed behaviors, try again. Don’t invent new forces or theoretical energies that have no basis in the known laws of science in order to try and validate data that isn’t understood. Haven’t we already lived through enough of that nonsense? Don’t over-complicate the structure of atomic components. Instead, reconfigure the simple structures and stick to the known laws.
CAUTION: Designing a computer simulation is not a guarantee of accuracy. A correct understanding of how atoms work requires that one at first has a correct understanding of how the ether works. Incorrect assumptions about the speed, mass, shape and spacing of photons will cause the computer to create incorrect atomic models. Simulations will only provide accurate results if they are programmed with FACTS and not theoretical assumptions.
For now, the description of the atomic components that has been provided will allow science to build a model that gets us closer to the reality of the atom. You could build a network as large as you like. Once you do, move any one “gear” and see what happens. They all move simultaneously. This is why inertia transfer is instantaneous. The importance of this will become clearer later on.
Now that a more accurate picture of how atoms and molecules function has been provided, it is necessary to take some time to clarify a few things about vibrations. Earlier on, vibration was spoken of in terms of individual components, sitting all alone and by themselves. As such, vibrations can be just random back and forth movements that continually change direction and speed. This is essentially what a photon does. Any inertia that strikes it from any direction at any magnitude transfers into that photon and causes a corresponding movement. A photon is getting bombarded by so much different inertia information in such a continuous stream, that the end result is that it seems to be "standing still" in one spot and vibrating. A photon does not orbit anything, so it can move about according to whatever the incoming inertial information tells it to do.
Things are different with the atomic components. It was stated earlier that electrons were able to take incoming vibrations and transform them into a smooth vibration pattern. At that time, it had not yet been revealed that the components all orbited around a center of mass. Now that you know the full picture, then understand that the smooth vibrating pattern that was referred to earlier was actually an orbit around a central point. Isn't that essentially what a vibration is? An orbit is a path of travel that is constantly changing direction, but instead of being random, it is moving in a systematic and patterned way. It is, essentially, a controlled and orderly vibration. Changes in amplitude can speed up or slow down the rotational spin of the electron. Changes in frequency can speed up or slow down the orbital speed of the electron.
Take a look at the above image of a sine wave. As the wave increases in height, it means that the power is increasing. Remember that there is one, and only one, energy in the universe. That energy is inertia. The sine wave is showing us an atom’s inertia in motion. Motion is defined by two things; speed and direction. Thus, amplitude=power=SPEED. A change in amplitude means a change in speed. Thus, as the wave height diminishes from its uppermost peak, it means the speed is slowing down, but still going in the same direction. As the wave dips below the center line, the speed becomes negative. That means that the object being observed is now traveling away from you. As the negative amplitude increases, it means that the object is travelling away from you faster. As the sine wave heads back up to and above the central line, it means that it then slows down, stops and changes direction (when the sine wave again crosses the center line), and then comes back towards you again. Does this mean that the object is traveling in a straight line, towards me and away from me, back and forth like a yo-yo? No, it doesn't. Here is what the sine wave really means.
The above image is of an electron orbiting according to the Bohr model of the atom. As such, it assumes that the protons and neutrons are clumped together in the center and there is no physical contact with the electron. Of course, this model is wrong, but the above illustration is really just focusing on the electron’s orbital direction of movement. The image is depicting a single electron and showing its position at four different times during its orbital journey around the proton. The arrows displayed in the orbit in this picture will help in visualizing the continuous changes in directional movements.
The motion of this electron creates patterns of motion in the ether that propagates through the photons as waves. Take a look at the electron when it is in position 1. Assuming an oscilloscope probe was positioned at the bottom of the image, the electron’s overall direction would be towards the probe. However, it is not heading exactly towards it. Some of its speed is towards the left, and some is towards the probe. When combined, the overall speed and direction is at the angle that you see. To the oscilloscope, it appears as if the electron is coming towards it and is moving slowly but is increasing in speed. When that electron reaches the "9 o'clock" position, it will be headed straight towards the oscilloscope. As far as the oscilloscope is concerned, at that point it is still heading towards it, but is now at maximum speed. When the electron reaches position 2, it is still traveling towards the probe in a general sense, but some of its speed and direction is heading towards the right. To the oscilloscope, it appears as if the electron is slowing down.
Now look at the electron in position 3. It has "rounded the corner" and is now headed away from the probe. The oscilloscope interprets this in a way that indicates that the electron had stopped, reversed course, and is picking up speed. By the time the electron gets to the 3 o'clock position, it will appear as having maximum speed away from it. Once past that point, it will head in a direction that carries it more and more to the left, as can be seen by position 4. As far as the oscilloscope is concerned, it is still traveling away from it, but will be moving away more slowly. This movement away from it is displayed on the oscilloscope as a wave that dips below the center line which increases, then decreases in speed.
Keep in mind that, during the whole orbit, the electron's speed was constant. The only time that the actual maximum speed was perceived and measured was when it was heading directly towards or away from the probe (the peaks of the sine wave). When it was traveling directly to the right or left, its distance from the probe did not change, and this is interpreted by the oscilloscope as meaning that the electron had momentarily stopped. (This is where the sine wave crosses the center line.)
Essentially, a sine wave is a two dimensional representation of a three dimensional orbit. This is why one full cycle of a wave represents 360 degrees (a circle). Compare the image of the sine wave to the motion of the orbit. When the orbiting electron that is heading towards you "rounds the corner" and heads away, that's when the sine wave image dips below the center line.
The distance between the peaks of the sine wave is the frequency and indicates how long it took for the electron to make one complete orbit. This is why and how orbital speed determines the frequency. The faster the electron orbits, the less time it takes to complete one orbit. Frequency essentially means; "How many times the electron completed one full orbit in one second." The faster it goes the more orbits it will make in one second, the higher the frequency.
As for the amplitude of the sine wave, the electron will bump into photons as it orbits and send them your way whether it is spinning on its axis or not. The electron's orbiting motion will always send inertia in your direction. If that electron is also spinning on its axis, then the photons that it sends to you will have greater inertia, which means faster speed, which means higher amplitude. Why?
Imagine that you are the electron, and you are walking around in that circular orbit at a constant speed. Imagine that you are carrying a baseball bat and you are just holding it out to the side as you walk. Imagine baseballs floating in the air all around you. As you walk, the extended bat will bump into some balls and "bunt" them away from you. But what if, instead of just holding the bat out, you also swung it at the balls as you walked? The balls would fly away from you very fast (increased speed = increased amplitude).This is how the spinning of the electron affects the amplitude of the sine wave. The spinning of the electron adds extra inertia to its impact with a photon. The faster the electron spins on its axis, the greater the force of impact with a photon, which translates into higher amplitude.
Realization that there are two different motions that affect amplitude makes analysis of the sine wave a bit tricky. How much of the amplitude seen on the oscilloscope is caused by the orbital speed of the electron and how much is caused by the rotational spin of the electron? Perhaps someone will be able to figure out a way to tell.
Looking at a sine wave and thinking that you are looking at only one movement can also lead to confusion in understanding what the sine wave means. A sine wave is showing you two separate movements (orbital movement and rotational movement) displayed as one single line. Let’s look again at this concept of two separate motions happening at the same time.
Perhaps think of the sine wave as representing a quantity of water flowing through a pipe. If you have a single pipe with a lot of water flowing through it slowly, it will output a certain quantity of water per minute. If you decrease the volume of water, but make that water flow faster, you can still get the same final output of water per minute. The problem here is that this analogy does not accurately represent what you see in a sine wave, because it is only looking at one flow of moving water.
A better analogy would involve the use of two separate pipes to supply water. In the first pipe, the water is flowing in a continuous stream. This represents the movement of photons associated with amplitude (rotation). In the second pipe, the flow of water is being turned on and off at regular intervals. This represents the movement of photons caused by frequency (orbital speed). At the end of these two pipes, the two flows converge into one pipe and one flow of water. The single combined output flow of water will increase and decrease according to the “on and off” rate of the “frequency” pipe. The volume of the water is directly affected by the steady flow from the “amplitude” pipe. The combined output travelling through a single pipe is a representation of two different motions occurring at the same time and represents what you see when you look at a sine wave.
The flaw with this analogy is that a sine wave shows two different directions of travel (an orbit that moves both towards and away from you), whereas the water analogy shows water flowing in only one direction. However, taking that into consideration, if you were to study that final combined flow of water through that one output pipe and try and deduce what caused the water to behave that way, you would run into difficulties in your understanding if you thought that the flow was originating from one pipe only.
What sort of things would have to be going on in order to create that kind of output from only one water source? Such a scenario would be difficult to analyze, but whatever it is that you were able to figure out, it would be the wrong conclusion. An initial wrong assumption (there's only one source pipe) would lead to the creation of wild and inaccurate theories. Once you realize that you are looking at the linear representation of water coming from two separate source pipes, interpretation becomes much simpler and easier.
And so, it can be seen that the two separate motions that create a sine wave are: the spinning motion of the electron rotating on its axis and the orbital motion of that same electron revolving around a central point. You can easily simulate these motions with a home experiment and create your own sine wave. All you need to do it is to have a garden hose with a trigger type nozzle.
Let the flow of water represent the amplitude. Squeezing the trigger more increases the amplitude. To simulate the frequency, aim at a target, and squeeze the trigger. Then, move your hand holding the nozzle around and around in a circular motion. Just make sure that the direction of circular travel is such that, half the time the nozzle circles towards the target, and the other half of the time it circles away from the target.
As your hand circles towards the target, the speed of your hand adds to the speed of the water. As your hand circles away from the target, the speed of your hand subtracts from the speed of the water. As your hand circles around and around, the direction of travel of your hand is imparted onto the water. This results in the stream wiggling back and forth. You have just created a sine wave. The energy of motion that comprises the speed and direction of the water stream (amplitude) combines with the energy of motion that comprises the speed and direction of your moving hand (frequency). These two forces combine right at the tip of the hose nozzle and occupy the emerging water as one single solitary force. This results in one stream of water that carries the combined momentum information of two separate contributors. At any point in the stream of water, the quantity of water and its direction of travel indicate the combined information which reveals “How much and in which direction at that moment in time”. “…that moment in time” is the moment in which the water departed from the hose nozzle.
If one tries to analyze the exact minuscule responses of an atom to incoming inertia it can become quite a complex procedure. When amplitudes from other inertial sources blend with the electron, it would mean that the electron would spin on its axis either faster or slower. When frequencies from external sources blend with the electron, it would mean that the electron orbits either faster or slower. The same concept holds true for all the incoming inertia to all the atomic components. And, since they are all physically connected, when any one component changes orbital speed or rotational speed, that change ripples through the interfaces between all the components, affecting the rotational and orbital speeds of all the components which results in diverse inertia emissions into the ether.
Think about how all these speed changes within all of the components affects the position of the atom in space. The entire atom could start to vibrate as one single entity. Then, this vibration passes on to other atoms that it is connected to, and entire molecules start to vibrate. In the same way, vibrations in the macro world which affect entire molecules filter down into the atomic components themselves. What happens here in the macro world affects the micro world, and vice versa. A thorough analysis of this topic is too complicated to go into here. Here's why.
Imagine a bicycle wheel spinning. Focus your attention on one of the spokes of the wheel. When we think about the components of an atom spinning around a central point, we might have a tendency to envision it like the movement of that spoke. The atom is not nearly that simple. There is a lot more going on than just that one simple rotational movement.
In an atom, that "spoke" isn’t a rigid and solid rod. It is made up of many different individual components. Not only is each component orbiting around another atomic component, but it is also orbiting around the center of the atoms mass. Each component is also spinning on its axis. In addition to that, each component is also vibrating in three dimensions. Because of this, the whole line of components is rippling back and forth in all directions in a vibrating pattern. And, to top it all off, the entire structure of components can be bouncing up and down in an oscillating wave that ripples down the whole length of the atom. Each and every one of these different motions creates an effect that propagates through the ether. All kinds of frequencies of electromagnetic radiation, heat, gravity and magnetism are being created from so many different causes all at once. The analysis of these forces as described within this paper is extremely simplistic. The intention here is only to provide an overall generic understanding of what makes the system work. Exact understanding of every cause and effect will take many years of analysis.
Chapter 11 -THE BIGGER PICTURE
COPYRIGHT © 2017, By Jonathan P. Volkel
Despite all the evidences, explanations and descriptions of the ether provided herein, there remains one overwhelming obstacle to believing in its existence. If the ether exists and we are in fact submerged in this dense ocean of particles, THEN WHY CAN’T WE SEE IT? Are we now expected to believe in “invisibility”? Isn’t the claim that the ether is invisible just a convenient and unrealistic fantasy explanation concocted in order to make the impossible seem possible?
Actually, we all already believe in invisibility without even giving it a second thought. We do so because we live with it and experience it every day. The air around us is composed of solid atoms and molecules. There are an awful lot of them too, as evidenced by the fact that a strong enough wind can cause those tiny particles to knock over trees! And yet, despite the abundance of these atoms and molecules, our vision is unobstructed and we can still see. We see, not because we look between or around these atoms and molecules. We see because they are invisible. We see right through them. And if invisible air is so commonplace and essential for our existence, then why would it be difficult to understand that the ether has the exact same characteristics. As a matter of fact, it is because the ether behaves that way that enables the air to do so too. But, how and why does invisibility work?
Perhaps the best way to explain how the invisibility works is with a comparison to an ordinary everyday object. That object is a flat screen television. The screen is comprised of many thousands of pixels. Those pixels are tiny projectors, each capable of emitting a beam of light. There are different colored projectors arranged in groups of three; red, green and blue. By varying the intensity of light emitted by these different pixels, the entire rainbow of colors can be projected.
When the television is turned off, the screen is dark. If you were to look at the screen closely enough with a magnifier, you would be able to see each individual pixel, dark and inert. As soon as the television is turned on, the pixels “disappear”. Instead of seeing them, you now see the light that projects from them which enters into your eyes. Technically, you can’t see the screen and its pixels anymore. What you see instead is the light that travelled to your eyes from the pixels in the screen.
The ether is just like a giant three dimensional television. Its resolution is perhaps the equivalent of trillions of pixels per cubic inch. It is always “on”. We can’t see the photons that comprise the ether because we are instead always seeing the light that they broadcast to our eyes from them. The images that they send to our eyes come from whatever is relayed to them from behind. A three dimensional television, the size of our universe! How’s that for a big picture?
If that is true, then why is it that when we look into the blackness of empty space, we don’t see darkened photons right in front of our faces? After all, when the television is off, we can see the darkened pixels in the screen. Isn’t the blackness of space the equivalent of the photons being turned “off”? Shouldn’t they appear to us the same as the darkened pixels in a television screen? Why then, does dark space have the appearance of stretching off into infinity?
Although the blackness of empty space does appear to our eyes as if the photons are “off”, special cameras reveal that that is not the case at all. The range of light that our eyes are able to detect is very limited. All photons everywhere are always "on", and they can broadcast frequencies that are beyond the ability of our eyes to see. For example, X-rays are invisible to our eyes, and yet special film in cameras can detect them and create images that the medical profession uses regularly. The photons in the areas of space that seem black to us are actually always transmitting light that is invisible to our eyes. As such, the photons themselves seem invisible. Because of that, the overall resultant effect is that we see through them, and can see to the source of that invisible light.
It is a scientific fact that there are frequencies of light that we cannot see, and we have no trouble in intellectually accepting the concept of invisibility in that context. All one needs to do is realize that it is not the photons that are invisible. Sometimes, it is the light that they relay to us that is invisible, which causes us to see to infinity (or, more precisely, to the source of the invisible light). When the light that the photons relay to us is visible, it causes us to see to the object that was the source of that visible light. In either case, we don’t see the photons themselves. We see to the source of the light that the photons transmitted to us, whether visible or invisible.
What of the motion of the ether? The entire ether must be spinning around some central universal point like a great whirlpool. All of the galaxies are travelling around in that current. In fact, if all the galaxies near us are all caught in the same current and we are all being swept along together, then the overall effect is that, from our perspective, there is no current at all. Despite how it “looks” or “feels” to us, that current exists. It is the force of that current that imparts its inertia into all atoms. Perhaps it is the major force that has the greatest influence on our “universal orbital plane of rotation”.
If you look at a distant galaxy, its shape allows you to deduce its apparent movement in space quite easily. The invisible ether current in that galaxy is exactly equal and opposite. The "localized" ether currents are strongest within the matter itself, and fade out quickly the further it gets from matter. The current has the exact same shape as the matter, but opposite direction. One’s inertial reference to the ether is constant no matter where you go in the universe. It’s just that the references are not the same in one place as it is in another place. It doesn’t really matter though. Whenever we calculate our inertial reference, we make such comparisons between one another and we’re usually close enough to each other to be in the same ether current. It's only when we try to calculate very far interstellar distances that we run into trouble. Especially when we try to use light as the "measuring stick".
If one object moves by another, is the first one standing still and the other one is moving, or is it the other way around? Does it make a difference which one is moving? The change in distance between the two is the same no matter which way you look at it. The entire math works out exactly the same, with the exception of the direction of travel. We try to resolve the dilemma by either comparing to a third item or by deciding on a reference point to designate as zero.
What if you are comparing just two items and do not have a reference point? How can you decide which is moving and which is not? One of the biggest questions that science may never be able to answer is; “Which one is moving? Is it us, or is it the ether, or is it a little bit of both?” As far as our everyday lives are concerned, it does not matter. If we were standing still and the ether was moving around us, things would be the same. If the ether was standing still and we were moving through it, things would still be exactly the same. All the laws and math would work in either case. Despite the fact that the math works out either way, it does make a big difference which one is moving. Soon, you will realize exactly why, and why science may not be able to answer that question satisfactorily.
One other big question of doubt about the ether also remains. If we are submerged in this ocean of particles, why doesn’t it hinder our ability to move? In the next chapter, you will see that not only doesn’t the ether hinder movement, but that without it, any movement would be impossible. Then, you will see why the question; “Which one of us is moving?” is so important.
Chapter 12 -THE SMALLEST PICTURE
COPYRIGHT © 2017, By Jonathan P. Volkel
This chapter contains topics that will challenge everything we think we know about light and the photon. That is why this topic was saved until now. There are three intellectual bombshells coming your way that will go against everything you were taught about mass-less photons and the nature of MATTER. When these bombshells “explode” into your mind, you may be left with feelings of disbelief, so brace yourself.
The first bombshell will deal with the speed of light. 186,000 miles per second (the speed of light) is believed to be the fastest speed that anything can travel at. It is believed that it is impossible for anything to go faster. Einstein created theories and formulas to try and validate this belief which we all now accept as reality. Was he correct?
The amazing thing about the ether is that even though the photon responds to inertia the same way that atoms do, it does not seem to have the same proportionate speed. Imagine a billiard ball and a marble sitting on a table. Tap the billiard ball and observe its motion. Tap the marble with the same force and observe its motion. The marble moves faster because of the difference in mass. The smaller the mass is, the greater the speed which is caused by that exact same inertia. This effect is an established law of momentum: p=mv. An object whose mass approaches zero should always respond with a speed that approaches infinity. As it turns out though, speed is apparently not infinite. The speed of light has been declared to be a constant speed of about 186,000 miles per second. Since transfer of inertia is instantaneous, then it would seem that the supposed speed limit must be caused by something inherent in the photon. But, a photon is believed to have no mass. Shouldn’t it travel at infinite speed?
The only thing that is faster than light is the speed of the transfer of inertia. If it is instantaneous, then it is occurring at infinite speed. Is such a thing as “infinite speed” possible? Perhaps the transfer of inertia is not infinitely fast but instead requires some infinitely small duration of time. If that is true, then the speed limit that restricts light to 186,000 miles per second is caused by propagation delay and is not actually related to the upper speed limit of a photon. The speed of light would then be a function of the speed of a photon combined with the speed of the transfer of inertia. So then, which is it? Is the speed of a photon infinite and the speed of inertia transfer finite, or is inertia transfer speed infinite and the speed of a photon is finite? Maybe it’s a little bit of both?
Therefore, if the speed of the transfer of inertia is finite, then the declared speed of light is actually a factor of the speed of inertia transfer. That would mean that 186,000 miles per second might not be the upper speed limit for light. The proof of this is in the observations that were made of light moving at speeds other than the “speed of light”. Scientists rationalized this effect by reasoning that space was stretching (or contracting). Part of what they actually observed was light travelling through ether currents. In other words, they saw light travelling at a speed different than 186,000 miles per second. But, is this phenomenon caused by propagation variations?
We are encountering a dilemma here. Is inertia transfer instantaneous or isn’t it? Is p=mv a law or isn’t it? If it is a law, then it must work ALWAYS. There can be no speed limit. Is there an infinitesimally small piece of matter which, when applied to the formula of p=mv, would yield a speed greater than 186,000 miles per second? Of course there is. Why would the law fail at that point? Obviously, we’re missing something. Although the speed of light is declared to be fixed, there seems to be no rational reason as to why there should be a speed limit. We can’t just assume that some new unknown principle of science exists which limits it. We must be able to define EXACTLY what that is and why the limit exists. Something else is going on in the universe that we failed to take into consideration.
Once it was accepted by scientists that the ether did not exist, Einstein began searching for answers as to what light really was. His studies led to the observations that both particles and waves were involved. He then made a HUGE assumption. Light itself is a mass-less wave and therefore the associated particles are mass-less too. His belief that photons had no mass, combined with the fact that light had finite measurable speeds, required the conclusion that light had a constant and fixed speed. Then, to him, the only “logical” interpretation of this was that p=mv failed and 186,000 miles per second was some sort of unbreakable barrier that represented the absolute maximum speed limit possible for a mass-less object. Then what about p=mv? How and why could it fail? If his assumption was correct, then p=mv needed to be rewritten. It was this kind of thinking that led to ideas about mass having “at rest” energy which increases when that mass moves, and ideas that electron and photons smash into one another and transform into electromagnetic energy. The misconceptions about the atom eventually led to the development of E=mc2.
Just like that, a new formula was created which tried to support all his ideas about the atom. The concept that an object with no mass had an upper speed limit led to many new theories about unproven, unscientific energies and interactions. According to those new theories, the closer you get to the "speed of light", the more massive you become. Thus, as you get closer to the "speed of light", you become so massive that it becomes impossible to go any faster. Your mass starts to become infinite. This was called relativistic mass.
Where is this mass coming from? Is it appearing out of thin air? Is your mass the same but just simply becoming “heavier” somehow? By what mechanism does this occur? Explain the force of nature that causes this. Exactly how and why does mass increase and decrease? Perhaps energy transforms into matter? How? Apparently, the force that causes that is a theoretical (imaginary) one. Its processes and workings are unknown and unprovable. With no proof at all, science has accepted that it just simply happens. Einstein’s explanations as to how your mass increases delve into even more and more theories about relativistic mass. None of these theories can be proven by any scientific means available to us. And yet, in every experiment that we can actually perform which gives measurable results, p=mv never wavers.
Relativistic mass isn’t a reality. It has never actually been proven to happen in any measurable way. It happens only because Einstein said so. His theory claims that the mass change only becomes noticeable at speeds closer to the "speed of light". Since we don’t possess the ability to perform such an experiment, we have to take his word for it. Then he created a formula to “prove it” (they also created formulas to calculate time dilation, but, as previously demonstrated, they are all sleight-of-hand nonsense). The formula he created went against all the already known and established laws of science, but it made his theory appear to be true. Despite all the reasoning behind the relativistic mass theories, they still make no rational sense.
Think it about it like this. If you observed that particles were associated with light, and that light is a mass-less wave, would you conclude that those particles must be mass-less too? Not only that, but there is a finite speed associated with those particles, which would then mean that a known factual scientific law, p=mv, would therefore have to be inaccurate. You would be faced with two choices. Either rewrite the known laws of science, or face the possibility that your initial assumption about the particle being mass-less was incorrect. Which would you choose? The concept of a mass-less particle is absurd to start with. Dismissing p=mv is even more so.
Apparently the scientific community knows this. P=mv is still considered a LAW. E=mc2 still falls under the category of “The THEORY of Relativity”. It is still a theory because it can’t be proven to occur in any reliable and measurable way. It’s been a century since it was created, and still there’s no proof. The only reason that the "speed of light" is thought to be the maximum speed possible is because Einstein said so. He then “juggled the books” to support his claim. P=mv is the one and only correct formula. E=mc2 is the result of a false assumption. Simple logic and common sense, when applied to the provable laws, tells us that the speed of light is not and cannot be the maximum possible speed, nor is the speed of light fixed and constant. BOOM! (For more details on this, read the Analysis topic "Time, Space, Matter and Energy")
Now for bombshell number two; what is the actual nature of a photon? The entire flaw with Einstein's thinking was in his initial assumption: photons have no mass. The existence of a mass-less particle is a fantasy concept. If some particle has no mass, then it doesn’t exist. In order to even be a particle and exist, it must have mass. The entire time the ether was explained in earlier chapters, it was stated that photons collided with matter while simultaneously not impeding the motion of matter. We all accepted the concept of a mass-less particle because we were taught to. But in truth, every time it was mentioned, didn’t it bother your brain just a little bit? Didn’t you wonder: “How can that be possible?” Such a concept defies everything we know about the laws of nature.
How can you transfer inertia without making physical contact? YOU CAN’T. How can you make physical contact (or even exist outside of matter) if you have no mass? YOU CAN’T. In order to meet all the requirements and do all those things, photons would have to be some sort of a “semi-ghost” particle. Perhaps it is an extra-dimensional particle which phases in and out of existence at just the right times? The more the theoretical explanations that one creates, the more ridiculous it sounds. Trust your instincts. It is ridiculous. There is no such thing as a mass-less particle.
What then is the REASON why 186,000 miles per second is the fastest speed measured for light? There are several choices. Either it is the maximum possible speed limit of the universe, or it is the maximum speed limit of a photon, or the propagation of inertia is slowing things down. Or maybe it’s something else entirely that we haven’t even considered. Mass-less light should be able to go faster than what we’ve measured. Why would something with no mass have a speed limit? Why then, is light limited to that speed? It is believed that a light wave is an object that has no mass. If the photon associated with that wave is also mass-less, then the only possible thing that could cause mass-less light to be stuck at that speed is propagation delay. That would mean that transfer of inertia is NOT instantaneous, but that it takes time.
This assumption is contradicted by three major things. First, if it were true that the propagation of inertia takes some amount of measurable time, then it stands to reason that the further light travels, the more propagation it goes through. Thus, light travelling further distances would seem to ALWAYS be traveling slower. Although such things have been documented, they have not been observed as occurring in such a way that ALWAYS relates to the conclusion that further distance equals slower speed. Second, if propagation of light always slowed things down, then there would never be a situation where light appeared to be going faster than the "speed of light". In other words, science would never think that space could contract (and they do). The third problem is that which can experimentally be proven. Build a model of the atom using as many gears as you feel like. Turn a gear on one end, and the farthest gear will instantaneously move. Everything we know and can experimentally verify indicates that transfer of inertia is instantaneous. There is nothing that affects this or slows it down.
Light is the energy of motion which travels in a wave shaped pattern of vibrating energy that propagates through photons. Energy has no mass and therefore nothing can slow it down. Zero mass must respond with infinite speed. Thus, propagation (the transfer of energy from one particle into another upon physical contact) must be instantaneous. Every test or observation involving the transfer of this energy confirms this. Zero mass responds with infinite speed, and infinite speed means instantaneous transfer of inertia. It is the only logical and correct interpretation of the evidence. P=mv holds true for energy transfer with zero mass.
This leaves only one possible conclusion. Photons are the reason why the speed limit exists. That leads to the next logical conclusion. If transfer of energy confirms that having zero mass equals infinite speed and photons also have zero mass, then why don’t they also respond with infinite speed? There is only one possible explanation for this. The assumption that photons have no mass must be incorrect. PHOTONS MUST HAVE MASS.
Their speed is a direct result of p=mv, which we already know is a proven law and not a theory. If “v” is a finite number (186,000 miles per second), then “m” must also be a finite quantity (it must have a measurable mass). Which is easier to believe: photons and energy are mass-less and yet their speeds are not infinite, meaning that p=mv fails, or, that photons have mass which causes them to have a speed limit, and the propagation of mass-less energy is instantaneous, meaning that p=mv holds true under all conditions? The second choice is the correct one. Therefore, the speed limit associated with the speed of light is due to the nature of the photon. It must have mass.
Then 186,000 miles per second isn’t the maximum speed limit of the universe? Of course not! Light traveling in ether currents proves that. Scientists tried to explain this as the stretching and contracting of space. They had no choice. They thought that there was a speed limit. Up until this point, the speed of light was referred to in earlier chapters with vague phrases and quotation marks with the term. This was done because we were all trained to think that it was constant, and it was too soon to “rock the boat” too much. This concept had to be arrived at gradually and gently.
The speed of light is NOT constant. It varies up and down a great deal. The speed that we measure should actually be referred to as “The AVERAGE speed of light.” Its speed changes up and down trillions of times per second. That is far too fast for us to measure. As a result, the best that we are able to do is to detect the average. Even then, any accurate measurement of the speed of light is impossible, because the result is expressed in terms of meters and seconds, and we do not have accurate definitions of those parameters. As a result, scientists have simply trusted that Einstein's theory is correct and that photons have no mass. Since they have no mass, their speed cannot change. And so, science simply picked a number and declared that to be the fixed and constant speed of light.
Then, if photons do have mass, why do they seem to have an upper speed limit? If more inertia was applied to them, wouldn’t they travel faster? Absolutely yes! The big question is: Apply more inertia from where? What energy are they being hit with now that causes that speed? Why does it seem to be constant?
The energy that causes the photon to move at the speed that it does is the exact same energy that causes all the atomic components to spin at the exact speeds that they do. The coasting speed of any atomic component (neutron, proton or electron) is constant too, just like the photon’s coasting speed is constant. That speed is a function of p=mv. The greater mass of the atomic components reduces their speeds to far less than 186,000 miles per second. In other words, it’s not exactly the speed of the photon or the atomic component that is relevant to this understanding. Their speeds are the result of the fact that, for all of them, their overall speed doesn’t change because “p” is the same for all of them. It’s the speed of the spinning universe that is constant, and that is the energy imparted to the photon. In the formula p = mv, for all of the photons, electrons, protons and neutrons, “p” is the same for all of them and is constant. Therefore, each component responds with the speed appropriate for its mass. If such a particle existed who’s mass was less than that of a photon, it would absolutely have to travel faster than a photon. P = mv demands that it must. The overall momentum of the universe is constant for everything right here, so the average speed of light is constant here.
Since the fastest speed that we have ever measured is always associated with the photon, then it must be the smallest distinct mass in the universe. The rotational forces of the universe dictate what “p” is for everything in the universe. “P” is constant, and so the coasting speed of the photon is constant.
The speed was referred to as the “coasting” speed. The photon can go faster if it receives an extra input of energy, and it can go slower if drained of energy. However, it will always be forced to return to the coasting speed. Perhaps think of it like this. Imagine a car travelling at a constant rate of speed on “cruise control”. If you input a lot of energy and pushed on it, you could get it to go faster, but it would push against your efforts while you did so. As soon as you stopped pushing, it would quickly slow you down to its cruising speed. If you pulled on it from behind and tried to slow it down, it would pull on you while you dragged on it. You could slow it down, but as soon as you stopped pulling, it would drag you back up to the cruising speed.
The cruising speed of the universe can be exceeded, but only for as long as the extra force was applied. Where is that extra force going to come from? Rocket ship engines function because they transfer inertia between themselves and the ether. They only transform the existing vibration inertia into directional inertia. To go faster than photons, you would have to do more than just transform inertia. You would have to take from other sources and add it to your own. You can go faster, but be warned. The force of the universe will work at forcing you right back down to the coasting speed. If you go too much faster than the ether current you are in, the ether will violently enforce a balance of energies. The end results of this will become apparent when the nuclear bomb is discussed.
At other places in the universe, the speed of the rotational spin in that place would be different than the speed of the rotational spin here. That means the speed of photons is different there than here. Light would travel slower or faster, depending on where it is in the universe. Light closer to the center of the spinning universe would move faster because the rotational speeds of the ether are faster there. Light that is farther out would move slower because the rotational speeds of the ether are slower there. If one thought that the speed of light was exactly the same everywhere, and yet observed it to be going faster somewhere else, one might conclude that space was contracting. If light was moving slower, one might conclude that space was expanding. However, space is actually constant and cannot expand or contract. It’s the speed of photons that is changing. Its speed is a result of the overall universal orbit it is in. The speed of a photon here is the result of its mass factored into our universal rotational speed.
As a side note, it was just stated that rotational speeds at the center of the universe are faster than they are at the outer edges of the universe. This might seem to contradict common sense. In a wheel, rotational speeds increase the further out you get from the center of the wheel. That is because the outer part of the wheel is directly physically connected to the inside hub of the wheel. As such, one complete revolution of the wheel causes all parts of the wheel to return to their original starting point at the exact same time. Since the outer circumference of the wheel is greater than the inner circumference, the outer edge must move faster in order to get back to the starting point at the same time as the rest of the wheel. This type of behavior does apply to the workings of an atom.
The universe, although circular, is not exactly a wheel. The outer parts are not directly connected to the inner parts. They are connected indirectly by the propagation of energy through photons. This causes both a time delay and the spreading out of energy as those energies travel from the center outward. As such, the behavior of the universe can be more closely compared to that of the behavior of a hurricane. The fastest speeds of a hurricane are at the eye. The further from the eye that you get, the slower the wind speeds.
And so, at the center of the universe, the speed of light would be much greater than 186,000 miles per second. All of that extra energy would manifest as drastic changes in the environment. For example, perhaps the periodic table could be larger. Elements like 115 through 118, which can exist here only briefly after being artificially created, might exist there naturally in a stable form. At the outer edges of the universe, where everything is spinning slower, less energy is available for the atoms to use. The periodic table there would be smaller too. Gravity would exist, but at much lower amplitudes, and so would be weak and far less effective than here. Elements might not be able to hold together in order to form stars and planets. Here, where we are within the universe, the rotational speed is such that it allows light to move at the average speed of 186,000 miles per second. Where we are in the universe is the “sweet spot” that allows the perfect conditions to maximize gravitational effects and result in the periodic table that we have.
And so, putting all of that together, propagation of mass-less energy is always instantaneous and therefore always has infinite speed. The measured speed of light is actually limited by the finite speed of photons which then instantaneously transmits by propagation the inertia pattern of light. What does all of this mean? PHOTONS CONSIST OF MATTER AND HAVE A UNIFORM MASS RELATIVE TO ONE ANOTHER. THEY ARE THE SMALLEST PIECE OF DISTINCT MATTER THAT EXISTS AND THEREFORE THE FASTEST MOVING MATTER. BOOM!
Bombshell two is completed. This is it. This will be the last and final piece of the puzzle. Put on your seat belt and brace yourself. It’s going to be quite a big bombshell. The best was saved for last! How do photons do what they do?
It is indeed the only logical conclusion that neutrons, protons and electrons are actually made up of something. You may have wondered if neutrons and protons were actually clusters of electrons which were all compressed together somehow. Even if that were true, then what are electrons made of? The concept that they are made of something is reasonable and logical. It makes perfect sense that there is one basic building block that is the foundation of everything. This is it. It is the photon. In fact, it is so infinitesimally small that when compared to an electron, it is like a tiny speck of dust.
It could have confused you if this had been stated at the beginning. It was best to think of them in larger terms at that time so that you could more easily visualize the laws of motion that affect everything without simultaneously violating everything that had already been ingrained in you. We were all taught theories from schools, textbooks and television that were based on misguided assumptions. Try forgetting the theories and just stick to the natural laws that we know are facts. The “theory mindset” must be peeled away gently.
How can photons collide with atomic components and not damage them? How can an object that has mass transfer inertia without cancelling movement? How can it result in inertia that moves in the opposite direction away from the object? Without satisfactorily answering those questions, everything that has been discussed so far falls to pieces. Without answering those questions, this becomes just another theory and everything discussed can be tossed in the garbage. Obviously, there are answers for those questions. Think you can figure it out? Give it a try, then resume reading.
Before answering those questions, it is necessary to discuss the photon. Is there anything smaller than a photon? What is it made of? What does it look like? There are some really difficult questions there. Since they are too small for us to ever see, capture or measure, answers come from the application of common sense, logic, and the known laws of science.
What are they made of? We may never know. Whatever it is, ultimately everything that has mass is made out of them. This means that, just as there is only one unified energy in the universe, so too is there just one unified matter in the universe. Everything that has mass is made of this one unified substance. We can’t compare this matter to any element, because the behavior and characteristics of all elements are merely the result of varying vibrating effects of inertia in motion caused by different arrangements of neutrons, protons and electrons all spinning in a functioning atom. The photon itself is made of something that we probably wouldn’t be able to understand even if we had it under a microscope and could dissect it. Close examination of a single photon seems impossible.
Evidence would suggest that photons are indestructible. After all, they slam into each other all the time at light speeds. If they were capable of being damaged, they would have been damaged by now. If even one could break in half, then they all could. A half photon would have half the mass and would therefore travel twice as fast. If they were breaking into pieces, then light would not consistently measure as 186,000 miles per second. It is the consistency of data that suggests they are indestructible and are therefore the smallest piece of matter that could possibly exist. That’s why atomic components don’t get damaged when they collide with photons. Since the components are made of photons, then when a photon collides with a component, it is no different than when a photon collides with a photon.
Is it possible for something to actually be "indestructible"? In the Analysis topic "TIME, SPACE, MATTER and ENERGY", the exact nature of MATTER is discussed. In the Analysis topic "Sub-Atomic Motion", the resultant effects of combining matter with energy are revealed. These topics provide the details of how and why photons are indestructible.
What do they look like? In the Analysis topics “TIME, SPACE, MATTER and ENERGY” and “Sub-Atomic Motion”, this question will be answered in detail. For now, let’s just say that their shape doesn’t really matter. What does really matter at this point is that they are not rigid. They are liquid in nature. As such, it’s not the form of the shape as it is the quantity of the mass that really matters. When photons come together and become a larger piece of matter, a liquid nature would cause them to merge completely, thereby creating a larger uniform and discrete object with absolutely no gaps or spaces within. If they were round, rigid pellets, packing them together would create tiny gaps between each other.
One of the clues that support the conclusion that individual photons are liquid is the liquid behavior of the entire ether. If that were indeed true, then the next logical conclusion to be drawn is, since neutrons, protons and electrons are made of photons then they too are liquid. As such, their shapes would not be fixed and permanent. In fact, their shapes would change according to the inertial forces applied to them. Neutrons might bounce up and down like a water filled balloon. If an atomic component becomes situated between three other masses, those contacts could apply forces causing it to momentarily take on a three sided shape.
Then why doesn't all this liquid just merge together into one big glob of liquid? The reason is because all of the other droplets out there (photons) are all moving at light speeds. As soon as one droplet is added, the force of the impact causes another droplet of equal mass to pop out the other side. Because of the light speed motion, contact always results in an equal exchange of mass, which makes it impossible for the atomic components to get any bigger.
The liquid nature of matter is actually an unprovable conclusion. No one should attempt to create any theories as to the evolutionary origin of photons without first proving what they are made of. After all, how could any intelligent person even begin to speculate about some natural evolutionary theory of where they came from without even knowing for sure what they are made of?
How do photons pass right through objects and carry inertia away in the opposite direction? How do they transfer inertia and do it without opposing motion? The answer to those questions was already shown at the very beginning, and you knew it to be true but never realized its implications. You already accepted the answer to those questions before they were ever asked. Do you remember the earlier comparison of the ether to the Newton's balls pendulum or the billiard balls? Did you have any problems understanding the transfer of energy? Are there any scientific laws that it conflicts with? Those examples were used because we all already know their behavior is fact because we can see it and watch it happen.
What if a moving photon struck an object, and resulted in the propagation of inertia that traveled right through the object instantaneously, and caused a photon on exactly the other side to move away? It makes perfect sense. We can observe that concept by using the billiard balls. But how does that affect the movement of the item that was struck? Watch this!
Imagine a line of six identical billiard balls, each touching the other. An incoming ball strikes the first billiard ball in the line, and the ball at the end of the line moves away. Once the incoming ball makes contact, it stops and stands perfectly still (because it transferred ALL of its inertia through the line of balls and to the ball at the end of the line). Keep sending balls in, over and over again. Colors are used on the balls to help in the visualization of the process.
Can you see it? The inertia enters in from the left and emerges out to the right; the line of balls simultaneously shifts from right to left. Only the balls at the ends are the ones that actually have motion. The entire line, though, is propagating towards the incoming inertia. Technically, none of the inner balls moves at all, but the entire structure, when looked at as if it were a whole single object, seems to have “motion” in the opposite direction of the applied inertia.
As a result, because all photons are identical, it appears as if the photon passed right through like some sort of a ghost, and simultaneously transferred its inertia without opposing motion and results in both objects seeming to move away from one another. It creates the illusion that the photon had no mass.
So what? One photon strikes an object and stops dead, and another pops out the other side. How does that affect anything? Think bigger: Think on a Much, MUCH grander scale. Not just one photon. It is a cloud of photons thicker than any dust storm or blizzard ever seen. It “sticks” to the entire side of the object it strikes (because the photons have lost all their forward inertia) and an exactly identical quantity of photons moves away out the back, with the exact same inertia away from the object, in the exact same shape as that side of the object. It’s like growing a new skin on one side and simultaneously losing the same amount of skin on the other side. As a result, the entire object propagates through space, one photon of thickness at a time.
We, and all moving matter, are the result of a blizzard of particles propagating us through space one photon’s width at a time in an exchange we call “motion”.
(You were warned that it was a big bombshell.)
Take a moment to consider how important this type of motion actually is. Compare it to the laws of motion. It complies with the first law of motion (An object continues in its velocity and direction unless acted upon by an external force). When all of the balls are grouped together and viewed as a single larger object, then an incoming force is applied to the left side, and the single larger grouped object responds with a change in its position in space which can be viewed as a change in velocity and direction of that single larger grouped object.
It also complies with the third law of motion. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. That is, a mass with one photon’s diameter comes in and strikes it on the left side, and the single larger group of objects shifts its position one photon’s diameter towards it to the left. At the same time, a mass of one photon’s diameter detaches and travels away in the opposite direction to the right.
The application of the second law of motion (F = ma) is really remarkable. All of the incoming force and mass enter in from the left, and an identical quantity of force and mass depart from the right. There is no energy left over for any other type of motion. However, when all of the individual objects (photons) are viewed as one single larger object (atoms), the larger object’s position ends up shifting over in space. No inertia (energy) at all was required or used to accomplish the shifting over in space. As a result, F = ma does not even apply to the motion of the grouped object. It only applies to the motion of the individual photons. Thus, the second law of motion is not violated. This is non-inertia motion. It is motion by propagation. It does not matter how much total mass an object may have. All objects subjected to the same stream of incoming photons will propagate through space at the exact same rate. This is how and why gravity causes things to move. Gravity is the result of both a force and a non-inertia type of motion working together. The exact step by step details of how the atom creates the force that moves the photons, and how the photons cause non-inertia accelerating motion is detailed in the Analysis topic “Sub-Atomic Motion”.
Einstein knew that gravity caused objects to move in a way that defied the second law of motion. He tried to explain this phenomenon as the bending of space. His solution is bad on many levels. Gravity bending space is an action. What is space’s reaction upon gravity? According to his theory, there isn’t one. Gravity somehow seems to ignore the space that it bends. In addition to that, the bending of space would actually only affect the direction of an object if there was no other space in existence beyond the bent space. Otherwise, inertia would carry an object straight through the bend (the first law of motion) and past it into the non-bent space. And why would changing direction cause acceleration? It wouldn’t. A force needs to be involved in order to accomplish that, and Einstein made it quite clear that gravity is a “field” and not a force. He had to invent a new phenomenon of nature (fields) in order to try and explain the non-inertia motion caused by gravity, and his explanation was seriously flawed.
As you can see, the non-inertia motion previously described violates none of the laws of motion. It is a simple and easy concept. It is a concept that can be experimentally verified quite simply. Science does not see or understand this for a simple reason. There is an old expression: “You can’t see the forest for the trees”. That is, you can’t discern the status of the greater whole because your attention is focused on the individual components. In this case, science is suffering from the opposite condition. They can’t see the trees for the forest. Their minds are so locked on observing the behavior of the greater whole that they are unable to discern the smaller individual components that are responsible for the motion of that larger grouped object. That is, they “see” the atoms, but do not “see” the photons at all. That is because they do not believe that the ether exists. As a result, the best explanation that they could come up with for the non-inertia motion that is caused by gravity was “bent space”.
How do we move through that “storm” of photonic particles? We don’t exactly move through it. We trade places with it. When our eyes trade places with it, the vibrating inertia of a patterned sequence of photons travels to our brains and we interpret that vibration as light.
This is an awfully big concept to accept. Even so, the truth of it is undeniable. Science has already proven all the laws that indicate that it must be so. Knowledge of this does not affect any of the natural laws as we now know them. It relates to the concept of “which one of us is moving?” Now you understand why that question was repeatedly asked. Does it really matter? You’ll still get the same result. Did you know that experts in electricity already theorized about this concept without realizing its true implications? They thought that electrical current wasn’t so much the movement of electrons as it was a hole in potential propagating through the wire. A gap in the electrons moved from right to left as electrons traded places with the gap from left to right. They already perceived the concept of how the ether works without realizing the full extent of its meaning and application.
Now you may realize why none of this was mentioned when the ether was first discussed. Now you know why it was acceptable at that time to continue to think of photons as being mass-less. It was easier that way. It could not be accepted as a possibility until after it was established, and you were convinced, that the system runs on inertia and that the ether and photons really existed. Think about it. It is the ONLY logical conclusion that can be arrived at based on all the LAWS OF NATURE that we know for a fact are in existence.
Think about a fish in the water. Doesn't the water hinder its ability to move? On the contrary, without the water, the fish couldn't swim at all. What about birds? Doesn't the air hinder their ability to move through the sky? Without that air, the birds wouldn't be able to fly at all. And so, doesn't the presence of the ether hinder everything's ability to move? Without the ether, any kind of motion at all would be completely impossible.
This takes us back to the concept mentioned over and over again. “Am I moving, is the ether moving, or is it a little bit of both?” Does it make a difference? Scientifically and mathematically, no it doesn’t. You’ll still get the same answer either way. But, somehow, that explanation doesn’t seem adequate. For some “illogical” reason, it still feels like it makes a BIG difference. The very substance of what you are made out of now is not the same as it will be moments from now. The thought of it weighs heavily on the mind. It does indeed make a big difference, and it is a topic that absolutely needs to be, and will be addressed.
TOP OF PAGE