top of page
Chapter 7


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 momentum within the two objects trade places, and both objects instantly attain the other object’s momentum 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


COPYRIGHT © 2017, By Jonathan P. Volkel

     This chapter will provide a basic introductory idea of what gravity really is. Science’s original ideas regarding gravity was that it emanated from somewhere within atoms. It somehow traveled through the vacuum of space, "grabbed" onto other atoms by some unknown means, and pulled on them, dragging the affected atoms back towards the source of the gravity. Isaac Newton derived the law of universal gravitation which defines gravity as a force and provides the formula to calculate it.

     Since the force of gravity between two objects causes those objects to move without any observable physical contact between them, gravity was classified as being something other than a contact force. It was called a “field” force. Einstein proposed an extremely radical idea about gravity. He believed that it was a field force that did not exert any force at all upon matter. Instead, be believed that gravity’s non-tangible force affected space, causing it to bend. As a result, moving matter which passes through that bent space ends up changing direction in order to follow the resultant curvature. 


      So then, according to Einstein’s theory, where does gravity come from? Exactly where and how is it created? What is this "field force" that can bend space? It must be very amazing stuff. It can "bend" the nothingness of space, but somehow has no effect on matter, even though it comes from matter. Einstein’s theory creates more problems than it solves. Science now has the additional task of figuring out what space is made out of so that the intangible force of gravity can affect it.


     Einstein’s 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. The idea that the nothingness of space is a “something” with some sort of substance that can be bent is too illogical and absurd to be taken seriously. For more details on his theory, read the Analysis topics “Relativity.” That chapter explains 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.


     Einstein said that gravity was a “field force” and not a contact force. Ignore that. Newton’s laws make it clear that a force is a mass in motion, and that only a force can cause an object to change its motion.  Despite the acceptance of Einstein’s theory, every dictionary definition still describes gravity as a force that directly affects matter. It is also certain that inertia in motion has a direct link to gravity. That is why artificial gravity is created by spinning things. But what is gravity?


      Gravity is not 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 a specific pattern of motion propagated through the photons of the ether at light speeds. Chapters 5 and 6 explained how the motion of the electron created a patterns of photon motion which propagates through the ether as a wave in patterns that we identify as light and magnetism. Those patterns are created by atomic components that are orbiting and spinning at very high speeds. What is the source of gravity’s pattern of motion? Gravity seems to pull on objects and its energy manifests in other atoms as inertia in motion. What is this energy and where does it 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 degree of motion that is inversely related to its mass. That is, the greater the mass, the slower the motion. And yet, gravity causes all objects to move at the same rate regardless of the object’s 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 do not 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 the direction and speed of objects, it therefore must be a force. Newton’s law of gravitation also defines gravity as a force measured in Newtons.  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. Einstein’s “bent space” theory is the best explanation that science could come up with to explain the paradox.


     The energy of gravity is the exact same energy that creates electricity, light, and magnetism. It is the energy that causes matter to attain motion. 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.  What that energy is, where it comes from, how it works and why it works will be explained. Here is the secret to untangling the paradox. The gravity wave that propagates through space and reaches out to affect objects is created by a force. The motion that the wave causes in objects that it encounters is not a force. Objects that move because of gravity are not moving because of Newton’s second law of motion. 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 matter in motion. It is the result of the organized, focused and directed motion of a continuous stream of photons that all move through the ether with the same pattern of motion. No one individual component of the atom can generate that stream of photons and thereby cause 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 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 perpetual back-and-forth motion of the photons that fill 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 force that creates 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 object’s “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 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 can do what it does is revealed in Chapter 12. For now, the mass-less explanation provided will suffice. Just accept that it does work. When the full picture is finally revealed, the simplicity and obviousness of it might be a bit surprising.

      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. And so it is with the atom. If an atomic component was not revolving, it gets pulled in. If it was revolving, it establishes an orbit.

     Things get a little complicated when this is applied 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 cannot move at all. They all try to keep moving towards each other, but there is nowhere to go. Incoming inertia builds (amplitude increases) without resulting in inward linear motion. However, what goes in must also come out. The atoms transform the pattern of the incoming linear motion into the patterns of heat and light. This is why stars are so very hot and bright. They are constantly shedding into the ether the overabundance of incoming linear gravity inertia as higher frequency heat and light. Because the inertia at any point cannot exceed the energy level of the ether for any real length of time, such things as “Black holes” are impossible.

     How does gravity become 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 our perception of 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 an object on a river and drifting with the current. That current forces everything in the river to travel at its speed. An object can swim against the current, but as soon as it stops swimming, the current will speed it up again. It can swim in the same direction as the current and move faster than it, but as soon as it stops swimming the current will slow it down to match its speed. 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 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 in many commonplace ways. It is the concept of "blending" or "equalizing" energy. If a pot of hot water (high amplitude energy) is poured into a pot of cold water (low amplitude energy), it blends to become warm water. If the top of a carbonated beverage is opened, 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.

   For everything within the ether to be fully equalized, all matter would have to be evenly distributed throughout the entire universe. It is not. Once matter exists as large clusters of masses, such as in planets, stars, and galaxies, lots of atomic 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 energy is added to the surrounding photons and the amplitude of the gravity increases. The further out the gravity travels from the center, the further apart the atoms are from one another and the less frequently the gravity acquires new energy. The gravity weakens. Once a gravity wave is free of the object that created it, the process of focusing the photons into a directed stream completely ceases, and the amplitude of the gravity diminishes as the propagation of photons in outer space blends the linear motion into random vibrations. The gravitational ether current is strongest close to the object and weaker the farther away it gets.


        In an atom, the neutron does more than just contribute to the production of gravity. It is also responsible for creating other manifestations of energy besides gravity. The low mass of an electron allows its atomic to orbit to be 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 propagate through the ether as something we refer to as “light.”


     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 (applied energy of motion), “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 creating the high frequency waves that exist in the upper half of the electromagnetic bandwidth. The neutron is responsible for creating the waves that exist in the lower half of the electromagnetic bandwidth.  Waves created in the ether by electrons and neutrons both propagate through the ether at light speeds. The only difference is the frequency of the wave.


      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 that strikes an atom causes an instantaneous jump to a new speed. However, to us, it seems as if an object slowed down or sped up gradually. Such proportionate instantaneous jumps 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 sub-atomic jumps results in microscopic changes that we perceive as smooth acceleration or deceleration. These changes are very noticeable to a microscopic neutron and to all 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 neutrons, protons, and electrons were made from of tiny particles, then those tiny particles would break off from the incessant light speed photon collisions. Little pieces of neutrons, protons, and electrons would eventually break away. How do the atomic components survive this onslaught? That is a question that cannot be ignored. If no such material, force, or energy (or lack thereof) could account for this, then the system does not 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 cannot be answered, we cannot just invent some imaginary new energy or theoretical super glue to explain this. If this cannot be explained, then this is just another unsubstantiated theory. It HAS TO be explained.  We MUST look deeper to answer the question “Why do the atomic components appear to be indestructible?”

      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 will proceed from there.

    The neutron processes most of the frequencies that the electron does not process.  The neutron is the counterpart to the electron. This reveals an interesting characteristic of the atom. It is the engine which creates all 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 are not (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. Its pattern of motion determines the shape of the wave that it creates in the ether.

      When combining gravity, speed and rotational movement to a sub-atomic component, the result is a specific orbit. Small electrons have small mass and therefore have high speed. 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 compatibility with lower frequencies.  

    The behavior of an atom can be compared to the behavior of a solar system. That would mean that 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 cannot be right because it goes directly against the Bohr model of the atom! Chapter 9 will clarify this.)

     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.

      There is one frequency band that neither neutrons nor electrons “like.” There is not just a high and low frequency. There is also a middle frequency range. As a matter of fact, it makes perfect sense that such a cushion would exist between the two frequency ranges. We even build automobiles with a first, second and third gear to allow for smoother transitions of increased power. So too, the atom possesses three components, each accommodating a different frequency range of the electromagnetic bandwidth.

     The middle 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. The third atomic component is responsible for all types of heat. It will be discussed in Chapter 9.

     The ability to convert motion into low frequency vibrating waves is not so strange or unusual. In fact, we already construct a device that does that on a regular basis. 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 photons are continuously transmitting all motion information as waves, whereas 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. The propagation through the air occurs in pulses of motion that have a wave pattern. When the wave pattern of air motion reaches our ears, our eardrums vibrate with the same pattern. 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. The ONLY reason our bodies can do it is BECAUSE that is exactly how the atom does it.


     Newton’s third law of motion can be restated as; “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 do not oppose each other’s motion. They do not cancel out. Both experience unopposed inertia and so both of them 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 the same behavior seen between the electron and the photons. 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 pushing equally against someone else. If one of you suddenly step aside, the other would suddenly move 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 is like trying to push against something that suddenly is not there anymore. The neutron ends up moving in the direction it was pushing. Thus, the neutron moves towards the photon, and the photon moves through the neutron. How this works is explained in chapter 12.







Chapter 9


COPYRIGHT © 2017, By Jonathan P. Volkel

     There is one more piece of the atomic puzzle that has not yet been addressed. 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 (the neutron) and the high frequency system (the electron). 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.

     The protons mass causes it to have a speed that creates frequencies that fall into the bandwidth of heat. Heat is a specific rate of vibration. We feel heat because vibration of matter within that bandwidth had transferred to us. Heat is the one frequency that does not reside comfortably within the speed limits 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.

     Refer again to the bandwidths of frequencies from the frequency chart. At the junction between the IR range and the lower frequencies is the microwave range. Microwaves are used as a quick and convenient way to create heat and cook food. At the junction between the upper edge of the IR range and light, the first color of visible light that is seen is red. Whenever a fire is created to make heat, it is accompanied by 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.


      Newton’s laws make it clear that energy only transfers from one piece of matter to the next by physical contact. And, for the motion of one piece of matter “over here” to affect the motion of another piece of matter “over there,” without them directly touching one another, then the motion had to propagate through some medium 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.


     There is only one type of force that exists, and that is a contact force. There is only one type of wave that exists, and that is a mechanical wave. There is no such thing as a mass-less “field force,” and there is no such thing as a self-propagating mass-less “electromagnetic wave.” The existence of the ether explains the physical contact and eliminates the impossible mass-less concepts.  


     The Bohr model of the atom was created by embracing the impossible mass-less concepts. Since mass-less field forces do not exist, then the Bohr model of the atom must be 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 that is needed is to put the pieces of the puzzle 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 does not then it is just a crazy theory. If the solution to this puzzle requires creating some mystery force that operates in a 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. 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 "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 invented a theoretical strong atomic force in order to make a theoretical field force seem true. They chose to believe in unbelievable and imaginary forces rather than admit they might be wrong. It is time to see the truth which embodies provable scientific principles and to forget the fairy tales.

   Here are the clues that aid in building a correct model of the atom. 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 directly to do with electrical movement and so, for the moment, the focus will be only on the realm of energy transfer from atom to atom.

     In order to transfer energy directly from one object to some other object, (from atom to atom or, from one solid thing composed of atoms to another) how would that be accomplished? All the scientific laws of inertia and motion reveal how. The answer is obvious. One object would need to go to the other object and touch it. It 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. For energy to transfer, 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 are not touching anything!

    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 contact 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 the laws of the universe demands that it does so. Every input of motion into an atom contains rotational sequences. The biggest contributor of motion is perhaps, the universe itself. Everything within an atom must be aligned with that rotational pattern. 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 change in their motion? 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 individual objects at all. They are 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 is discussed in the Analysis topic “Sub-Atomic Motion.” For now, just accept the concept that there is no slippage.


     How would atomic components be arranged if all the components were in physical contact with one another? The best way to envision it is with gears. Imagine having 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. Science already has a great deal of information on how gears work. All the physical laws of science that have already been observed in action in the macroscopic world that we can see exist because that is exactly how it also happens in the microscopic atomic world that we cannot see.

      There is no such thing as the weak or strong atomic force. The protons do not 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 around the neutrons, held in place by the same forces that hold the planets in place. The parts that make up the atom 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 the energy of motion.

     Remember the medium and small gears and how they interacted? Now build upon that. 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. There is a problem. The whole system locked up and will not spin. What went wrong? When turning 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 will not move. An adjustment needs to be made. The gears need to be arranged in such a way so that the second medium gear fits in without affecting the big gear.

      If the second medium gear is tilted away so that it is only touching the other medium gear and then move any gear, it works again. The second medium gear could also be placed 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 does not touch any other gears. Spin any gear and watch the motion of all the gears. Now add one more big gear. It must be added so that it meshes with the other big gear but does not simultaneously touch any other gear. 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 the option to reposition the second medium gear. It could be moved so that it touches the second large gear instead of the first large gear. Turn any gear and watch the motion. It works. The result is a model of a Helium atom.

     That is all there is to it. Science just never realized they were employing the exact same forces in our everyday tools that the universe also uses in the atom. 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 does not burn out.

     We build engines using those techniques because 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, 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. And, since they are not nailed down, they are all orbiting around one another.

     Secondly, if the small and medium sized gears were uniformly orbiting around the larger gear, then, even though they are all moving at different rotational speeds, they would all complete one orbit around the large gear in the same amount of time. Doing so would cause all the gears to create the exact same frequency wave in the ether. The only difference in their waves would be the amplitude. The atom can create 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 visually magnify 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 that surround and bombard every atom 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 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 is almost always in physical contact with the neutron. When the electron orbits around the proton and comes between the proton and the neutron, contact is broken. This is because the electron and neutron have the same spin direction. This creates opposing ether currents which push the components apart. However, the electron is so small and is moving so fast, the break is contact is very brief. This is one possible scenario of what would happen when the electron orbits into a position between the proton and neutron.


     There are other possible effects to be considered when the electron comes between the proton and neutron. If the electron was able to make physical contact with the neutron, it would mean that either both components would momentarily stop spinning, or that one of their rotational spin directions would 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 its spin direction 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.

     The most likely scenario when the electron comes between the proton and neutron, is that 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 the same direction (clockwise, for example) then they are spinning in opposite directions at their potential point of contact. So too are their ether whirlpools. The currents push away from one another, preventing the two components from making contact. As the electron orbits away from the neutron, the proton returns. Its whirlpool matches the direction of motion of the neutron’s whirlpool, and the two components can restore 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.

The atom 2.png


     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 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 meet one another as shown in the right image for Helium. The electron’s spin and their 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 the components stretched out in a straight line. However, those components may try to move as close to one another as possible. The 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 from occurring.  Ultimately, whatever the actual configuration is, the components cannot connect with some sort of triangular arrangement. Three adjoining neutrons cannot simultaneously contact 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 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 the theories. Thus, an isotope of Lithium might 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 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 will be seen, 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 does not 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 cannot 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 would not 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 the same as any other piece of Gold. The ONLY way that this is possible is if every electron in the universe is the same size as every other electron. All protons must be 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 meet 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 hear it as a buzzing hum, but only if a lot of power is flowing. Even lower frequency emissions can be felt as physical vibrations. All 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 did not 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


COPYRIGHT © 2017, By Jonathan P. Volkel

         How big can the system of atomic components 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 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 will not 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 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 will not 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 continue to move in relation to one another. Their behavior might more likely resemble the behavior of two tornadoes or hurricanes that meet 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 is 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 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 does not 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. Such a thing could 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 is 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 like this, because the spinning forces require it to be so.


     When the stability allows it and neutrons stack 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 will not 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 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 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 meet. 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 that manifests 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 is not. Even in a “controlled” environment over short periods of time the decay rates were not 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 reduce 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 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 would not have connected to. The virus is born (It is a little more complicated than that, but essentially, that is 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 causes damage to 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 must do so through physical contact. Therefore, all one atom must 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 very small 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.

      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 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 contact 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 if accurate models of the atom can be created, the effects could 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. It was previously stated that the ether was like a fluid. That is 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 meet 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 empty 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 do not 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 awareness of "where" we are. We think of the ground as solid and the air as not solid. The truth is, everything is "submerged" in the “ocean.” The ground and all solid matter are made up of dense concentrations of “ocean.” Air is 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 cannot investigate an atom and see the real arrangement. That is because all 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 that model may be correct. If the output deviates from actual observed behaviors, try again. Do not invent new forces or theoretical energies that have no basis in the known laws of science in order to try and validate data that is not understood. Haven’t we already lived through enough of that nonsense? Do not 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 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.  


     Now that a more accurate picture of how atoms and molecule’s 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 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 the full picture has been revealed, 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.    


      The above image is 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 does not. 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 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. 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 is 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 it represents only one movement can also lead to confusion in understanding what the sine wave means. A sine wave is showing two separate movements (orbital movement and rotational movement) displayed as one single line. Let us 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 there was a single pipe with a lot of water flowing through it slowly, it will output a certain quantity of water per minute. If the volume of water is decreased, but that water flows faster, the same final output of water per minute is still achieved. The problem here is that this analogy does not accurately represent what is seen 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 is seen when looking 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, studying that final combined flow of water through that one output pipe and trying and deduce what caused the water to behave that way would be very difficult if it was believed 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 conclusion was arrived at, it would be the wrong conclusion. An initial wrong assumption (there is only one source pipe) would lead to the creation of wild and inaccurate theories.  Once it is realized that the output is a linear representation of two separate input source pipes, interpretation becomes much simpler and easier.

     And so, 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.  A simple home experiment can easily simulate these motions and create a sine wave. All that is needed 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 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 the nozzle circles towards the target, the speed of the orbiting nozzle adds to the speed of the water. As the nozzle circles away from the target, the speed of the nozzle subtracts from the speed of the water. As the nozzle circles around and around, its direction of motion is imparted onto the water. This results in the stream wiggling back and forth. This is a sine wave.

     The energy of motion that comprises the speed and direction of the water stream coming out of the nozzle (amplitude) combines with the energy of motion that comprises the speed and direction of the nozzle’s orbital motion (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 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 is why.

    Imagine a bicycle wheel spinning. Focus 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 tend 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" is not 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 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


COPYRIGHT © 2017, By Jonathan P. Volkel

     Despite all the evidences, explanations and descriptions of the ether provided herein, there remains some overwhelming obstacles 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? Why don’t we feel 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 to make the impossible seem possible?

    Actually, we all already believe in and accept the reality of invisibility without even giving it a second thought. We do so because we live with it and experience it every day. Perhaps instead of thinking of the ether as being “invisible,” think about it as being “transparent.”

      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 the air’s atoms and molecules, our vision is unobstructed and we can still see. We see, not because we look between or around these floating particles. We see because they are transparent. 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 sub-atomic particles that comprise the ether have 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/ transparency work?


     Perhaps the best way to explain how it 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 one looked at the screen closely enough with a magnifier, each of the individual pixels could be seen, dark and inert. As soon as the television is turned on, the pixels “disappear.” Instead of seeing them, the light that projects from them is seen. Technically, the screen and its pixels cannot be seen anymore. Instead, the light projected by them is seen.

     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 cannot 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. Imagine a three-dimensional television, the size of our universe! How is that for a big picture?

     When looking into the blackness of empty space, why don’t we see darkened photons right in front of our faces? After all, when a 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 can 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, high frequency X-rays are invisible to our eyes, and yet special 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 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 to our eyes, 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 do not 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? Does it impede our movement? Does it assist our movement? Does it have any effect at all on our movement?

   Everything that can be seen in outer space is in motion, and all of it is spinning around something. This leads to the conclusion that the entire ether must be spinning around some central universal point like a great whirlpool. All the galaxies are travelling around the universe in that immense whirlpool 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 does exist. It is the force of that current that imparts its inertia into all atoms immersed in it. That current imparts not only its momentum into all the atoms, but it also imparts its direction of travel. Perhaps it is the major force that has the greatest influence on our “universal orbital plane of rotation.”

      The shape of distant galaxies allows us to deduce their apparent movement in space. The motion of the invisible ether current in that galaxy is exactly equal and opposite to the motion of the galaxy’s atoms. That is, the current has the exact same pathway of motion as the atomic motion, but opposite direction.  The “localized” ether currents are strongest within and around the atoms themselves, and fades out quickly the farther it gets from atoms.

     Everything in outer space (atoms and ether) is in motion and is moving at a steady and constant speed. Since everything is space is coasting at a constant speed, then one’s inertial reference to the ether is constant everywhere in the universe. It is just that the references are not the same in one place as it is in another place. Ether speeds are constant everywhere, but not the same everywhere. The different references throughout the universe do not really matter to us here. Whenever we calculate our inertial reference, we make such comparisons between one another and we are usually close enough to each other to be in the same ether current. Errors happen when we try and calculate the motion of very distant objects because the differences in the ether currents can become quite large. This causes differences in inertial references which can result in inconsistent and erroneous calculations if those differences are ignored and not factored into the result.

      If one object moves by another object, is it because the first object is standing still and the other object 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 objects is the same no matter which one is moving and which one is standing still. The entire math works out the same either way.  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 the motion of two objects is being compared and there is no fixed reference point? How can it be decided which object 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 appear a certain way. If the ether was standing still and we were moving through it, things would still appear to be exactly the same way. All the laws and math would work in either case. Even though the math works out either way, it makes a big difference which one is moving. However, the difference is not in the math. The difference is in our perception of reality. Are we moving through the ether, or is it moving through us?

     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, the nature of all motion is revealed. It will be seen that motion is impossible without the ether, and conversely, the ether causes motion. And so, one cannot help but wonder; “Is our motion creating ether currents, or are ether currents creating our motion? Could it be a little bit of both?” The question “Which one is moving?” can become troubling and the key to our very existence! 


Chapter 12


COPYRIGHT © 2017, By Jonathan P. Volkel


     This chapter will focus on three topics that will challenge what science has taught about the nature of light and photons. The first topic concerns the speed of light. The second topic deals with the concept of the photons being mass-less. The third topic deals with the photon’s true nature and why it seems to have mass-less behavior.


     The speed of light has been declared to be a fixed and constant speed. In the “vacuum” of outer space, light travels at approximately 186,000 miles per second. Even though the speed of light has been measured to be slower, depending upon what it is passing through, it has never been measured to be faster. And so, it is believed that it is impossible for anything to go faster than that.

    Proven formulas, such as F=ma and p=mv, demonstrate that there is an inverse relationship between mass and the rate of motion. As mass decreases, the rate of motion increases. And so, as the quantity of mass approaches zero, the resultant speed approaches infinity. Despite that fact, Einstein still imagined that the photon has zero mass, even though the speed of light has a finite (NOT infinite) value. If it is true that a photon has no mass, then why doesn’t it move at infinite speed?

     Why would the speed of an object be limited to that maximum value? Is it possible that there could exist a piece of matter small enough which, when applied to p=mv, would yield a speed greater than 186,000 miles per second? For some reason, Einstein decided that, no matter how small a piece of matter might be, it could not exceed the speed of light. He theorized that this was only possible if the speed of light is the fastest possible speed in the universe. In an attempt to validate this theory, he tried to invent new formulas and additional theories to explain this belief. Apparently, he decided that ignoring the laws and coming up with his own fanciful theories was an acceptable alternative to reality and facts.

     Think it about it like this. If you knew that light was a wave, and observed that there were particles associated with that wave of light, would you conclude that those particles must be mass-less? Not only that, but there is a finite speed associated with those particles, which would then mean that a known scientific fact, 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.


     Deep down in their subconscious awareness, the scientific community knows this. P=mv has NEVER been documented to fail and is still considered to be a proven fact. Einstein’s explanation still falls under the category of “The THEORY of Relativity”. It is still a theory because it can’t be proven to be true in any reliable and measurable way. It’s been a century since his theory 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.  Simple logic, observation and common sense, when applied to the provable laws, tells us that the measured speed of light is not and cannot be the maximum possible speed, nor is the speed of light fixed and constant. (For more details on this, read the Analysis topic "TIME, SPACE, MATTER and ENERGY).



     Is the photon mass-less? If so, then why does the speed of light never seem to exceed 180,000 miles per second? If not, then what is preventing the photons from moving faster?

     One major flaw with Einstein’s thinking was in his assumption: photons have no mass. The existence of a mass-less particle is an impossible concept. If some particle has no mass, then it doesn’t exist. In order to even be a particle and occupy space, it must have mass. The entire time the ether was explained in the earlier chapters, it was stated that photons collided with matter while simultaneously not impeding the motion of matter because they behaved as if they were mass-less. The concept of a mass-less particle with ghost-like abilities was accepted only because we were taught to accept it. But in truth, every time the photon’s mass-less behavior was mentioned, the concept must have seemed implausible and magical. Didn’t such described behavior inspire the question: “How can that be possible?” Such interactions defy everything that is known about the laws of nature.

      How can inertia be transferred without different objects making physical contact with one another? IT CAN’T! How can something make physical contact if it has no mass? IT CAN’T! In order to meet all the requirements and do all those things, photons would have to be some sort of an intermittent “semi-ghost” particle. Perhaps it is an extra-dimensional particle which phases in and out of existence at just the right times?  The more theoretical explanations one might create to explain its abilities, the more ridiculous it sounds. Trust your instincts. The concept is ridiculous. There is no such thing as a mass-less particle. This concept is addressed in depth in the Analysis topic “The Energy of Motion”.

    The impossibility of mass-less objects leads to several obvious conclusions. A wave is not, and cannot be, a mass-less object. It is simply a pattern of motion that propagates through a medium. The speed of propagation through any medium entirely depends upon the makeup of that medium. Clearly, the particles associated with a light wave (the photons) are the reason why the speed of light has the values that it does. That leads to the next logical conclusion. The assumption that photons have no mass must be incorrect.  PHOTONS ABSOLUTELY MUST HAVE MASS.

      Their speed is a direct result of p=mv, which is known to be a proven fact 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 be a measurable mass). Which is easier to believe:  photons and waves are mass-less objects, 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 proportionate to their mass, meaning that p=mv holds true?  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 travelling 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 were used with the term.  This was done only because everyone was trained to think that the speed of light was a constant and unbreakable speed limit, and it was too soon in the earlier chapters to “rock the boat” too much. This concept had to be arrived at gradually.

      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 precise 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 now subjected to which 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 average coasting speed of any atomic component (neutron, proton or electron) is constant too, just like the photon’s average coasting speed is constant. That speed is a function of p=mv. However, the greater mass of the atomic components reduces their speeds to far less than 186,000 miles per second.

     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 average 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 whose 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 average coasting speed of the photon is constant.

    The speed was referred to as the “average 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 back 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 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 existing vibrating and spinning inertia into linear inertia. To go faster than photons, you would have to do more than just transform the patterns of existing inertia. You would have to take from other sources and add it to your own.  Theoretically, you could 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 in other places than it is 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 different. A photon’s 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 farther 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 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.

     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 a 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 wind speeds of a hurricane are near the eye. The farther from the eye that you get, the slower the wind speeds.

     Scientists do not believe that our universe is spinning. They believe that it is expanding outward due to the Big Bang explosion. But, consider the obvious evidence provided by the effects that we can easily see and verify. Why does a hurricane spin? The simple answer is, it spins because the spinning of the Earth makes it spin. Every galaxy that we can see is spinning, and our own galaxy is a big spinning spiral. Why do they all spin? The simple answer is that the spinning of the ether makes all of the objects within it spin as well.

     Just as the spinning speeds are greater near the eye of a hurricane and lesser at the outer edge of a hurricane, so too is it with the ether. That’s because the spinning energy has to spread out to fill a larger and larger area the farther that it moves from the center. And so, every galaxy within the ether has one side of it closer to the center of the universe, and the other side farther away from the center. As a result, the side closer to the center will move faster than the farther side. This ultimately causes a galaxy to spin.

     And so, near the center of the universe, where the spinning speeds are faster, 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 also 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 balance gravitational effects and result in the periodic table of elements that we have.

      And so, putting all of that together, the measured speed of light is actually limited by the finite speed of photons which then transmits by propagation the inertia pattern of light. The existing surrounding energy, applied to the photon’s mass, and combined with the spacing that exists between photons, results in light moving through space at 186,000 miles per second.


    The final topic discussed in this chapter is: How are photons able to behave as if they have no mass? The explanation is not only surprising, but it seems to be a concept that science has not expected. The reality of what a photon is and what it is made of is so simple and obvious, that it is almost startling.

     It is indeed the only logical conclusion that neutrons, protons and electrons are actually made up of something. Science has theorized the existence of many different types of particles that they think the atom might be made of. Those particles are listed in something called “The Standard Table of Elemental Particles”. Despite science’s bold declaration that the atoms are made of those various assembled particles, they never even attempt to explain what each of those smaller particles could be made out of. Their existing theories create more questions than they answer. The “Standard Table of Elemental Particles” is completely wrong because it was created upon the foundation of so many incorrect assumptions and theories.

     Science suspects that some sort of unified type of ENERGY exists and actively seeks to discover a unified field theory to identify it. However, the existence of the Standard Table of Elemental Particles reveals that they have not even considered the parallel concept of a unified MATTER. If science is so sure that ENERGY must be a unified thing, then doesn’t it stand to reason that the same concept equally applies to MATTER? And, that’s not all. That very same concept also applies to TIME and SPACE. These concepts are explained more fully in the Analysis topic “TIME, SPACE, MATTER and ENERGY”.

    An understanding that all of the atomic components are made of only one specific MATTER is reasonable, logical and inevitable. It makes perfect sense that there is only one unified basic building block that is the foundation of everything. This is it. It is the photon. It is what everything is made of. It has such an infinitesimally small quantity of mass that, when placed side by side with an electron, it is like a tiny speck of dust in comparison. When enough photons are combined, they form the three different and distinct quantities of mass that science has named “neutrons”, “protons” and “electrons”.


     It could have been confusing if this had been revealed at the beginning. It was best to think of photons in larger terms at that time so that the laws of motion could be more easily visualized. We were all taught faulty and misleading 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 completely peeled away.

    How can photons collide with atomic components and not damage them? How can an object that has mass transfer inertia with another object without opposing the other object’s movement? How can a collision with an object 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.


     Before answering those questions, it is necessary to discuss the photon in more detail. Is there anything smaller than a photon? What is a photon 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 in the periodic table, because the different behaviors and characteristics of all elements are merely the result of varying unique patterns of motion in each element caused by different quantities and 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. In fact, close examination of a single photon is completely 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 at only 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 exists in our universe. 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. Their substance behaves like a liquid. 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.

   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 that cause it to momentarily take on a three-sided shape.

     Then why doesn't all this liquid just merge together into one giant mass 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 to a larger object, the force of the impact causes another droplet of equal mass to pop out the other side of that object. 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 un-provable conclusion. It is impossible to capture, or even see, a photon. 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 about 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? How can a collision between a photon and a larger object cause the larger object to move in the opposite direction (towards the direction the photon came from)?

      The answer to those questions was already shown earlier, in Chapter 4. The example provided there was simple, easy, observable and obvious. However, the full implications of that example were not mentioned at that time and probably went unnoticed. Recall from Chapter 4 the comparison of the ether to the Newton's balls pendulum and the billiard balls. Were there any problems understanding the transfer of energy that occurs in those examples? Are there any scientific laws that those reactions conflict with? Those examples were used because we all already know that the described behavior is an undeniable fact because we can see it and watch it happen.

    Apply the billiard ball behavior to the behavior of photons. What if a moving photon struck an object on one side? That collision would result in the propagation of inertia that traveled right through the object instantaneously, and caused a photon incorporated in that object, on exactly the other side of that object, to detach from the object and move away. It makes perfect sense. We can observe for ourselves that the concept actually does work that way by using the billiard balls. But how does that affect the movement of the object that was struck? Watch this!

      Imagine a single 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 detaches from the line and moves away. Once the incoming ball makes contact with the ball at the front of the line, 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 and numbers are used in the illustration below to help in the visualization of the process.

propagation balls 1.png

     Can you see it? The inertia enters in from the right and emerges out to the left; the line of balls simultaneously shifts from left to right.  Only the balls at the ends are the ones that actually move. The entire line, though, is propagating (shifting) towards the incoming inertia. Technically, none of the inner balls move at all, but the entire line of balls, 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 incoming photon passes right through the larger object like some sort of a ghost, and simultaneously transferred its inertia without opposing motion. This results in the photons (the incoming and outgoing single balls), and the atom (the entire line of balls), moving in opposite directions to one another.



     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. The storm of photons “sticks” to the entire side of the larger object that it strikes (because the photons have lost all their forward inertia) and an exactly identical quantity of photons moves out the opposite side, with the exact same inertia away from the object, in the exact same pattern that the incoming photons had. 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”.

     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 if they were a single larger object (an atom), and an incoming external force is applied by a photon to the right side, then the single larger grouped object responds with a change in its position in space which is a change in the 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 the larger object on the right side, and the larger object shifts its position one photon’s diameter towards it to the right. At the same time, a mass of one photon’s diameter detaches and travels away in the opposite direction to the left. As a result, the larger object moves in the opposite direction of both the incoming and outgoing photon. This behavior explains and demonstrates why the third law of motion is what it is.

     The application of the second law of motion (F = ma) is really remarkable. All of the incoming force and mass enter in from the right, and an identical quantity of force and mass depart from the left. There is no energy left over for any other type of motion. However, when each individual object (the photons) are blended into the larger object on one side and then are simultaneously removed from the single larger object (an atom) on the opposite side, the larger object’s position ends up being shifted 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.


     Some of the mysteries about gravity’s unusual behavior are unraveled by the above explanation. It demonstrates non-inertia motion. That is, motion by propagation. One of gravity’s mysteries is its ability to ignore Newton’s second law of motion. That law reveals that when a fixed force is applied to an object, then the more mass the object has, the slower it will move. And yet, gravity causes all objects, no matter their mass, to accelerate at the same rate.

     Motion by propagation demonstrates why this effect occurs. 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. It’s not the mass of the object that determines the resultant speed. It’s the rate at which the photons strike the object that determines the rate of propagation and the resultant rate at which the object moves through space. This is how and why gravity causes all objects to move at the same rate no matter the quantity of mass an object may possess. Gravity is the result of both a force (photon motion) and a non-inertia type of motion (propagation) working together.

     Gravity’s mysterious ability to cause accelerating motion in objects is also explained by the previously described propagation motion. The stream of incoming photons moves at a steady and constant rate. That stream would strike an atomic object at that same steady rate IF the atomic object stood still. But, striking an atom with photons causes the atom to propagate towards those incoming photons. This means that the atom moves towards the photons at the same time that the photons move towards it. This causes the rate at which the photons strike the atom to increase. This increases the rate of the atom’s propagation motion towards the stream of incoming photons, which further increases the rate at which the photons strike the atom. The process keeps building and building, resulting in greater and greater atomic speed. This results in the effect known as “The acceleration of gravity”.


     Another mystery of gravity that is revealed by this explanation is gravity’s ability to pass through everything. Apparently, nothing can hinder, decrease, weaken, obstruct, neutralize or block gravity. The previous illustration of propagation motion shows exactly why. The mass which makes up the photon comes to a stop when it collides with the atom, but the photon’s energy of motion does not stop. It passes right through the atom, occupies an identical quantity of mass that the incoming photon had, and emerges and detaches from that atom on the opposite side with the same speed, direction and mass that it had upon entering it. This explanation not only obeys the laws of motion, but it also reveals why the laws of motion are what they are.     

      Newton’s laws define only two types of motion in this universe. These motions are defined in the second law of motion and the law of universal gravitation. Einstein knew that gravity caused objects to move in a way that defied the second law of motion. He tried to explain this phenomenon by creating a third type of motion. That is, motion caused by 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 affect the direction of an object only 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.


       Einstein made it quite clear that gravity is a special type of “field” that does not affect matter, but instead bends space. Since it does not directly affect matter, then it cannot be a force. Even so, Newton’s law of universal gravitation defines gravity as a force, and that has never changed.  Einstein had to invent a new phenomenon of nature (gravity fields) in order to try and explain the non-inertia motion caused by gravity, and his explanation was seriously flawed and created a huge paradox.

     As can be seen, the non-inertia motion that was previously described violates none of the laws of motion and creates no paradox. It is a concept that can easily and quite simply be experimentally verified. 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. In fact, their theories ultimately mean that they do not even believe that the photons actually “exist”. Science thinks that they are somehow mass-less, ghost-like particles. Since there is no such thing as a mass-less particle, they end up trying to describe the behavior of an imaginary concept that isn’t even real. They do this because they were fooled by the illusion. As a result, they resorted to concepts like magical “fields”, imaginary “ghosts” and bent space as the best explanations that they could come up with for the non-inertia motion that is caused by gravity.

    The inability of science to distinguish the difference between individual objects (photons = “the trees”), and a group of objects moving together in a patterned formation (a wave = “the forest”), has resulted in the mis-identification of energy. It has resulted in the classification of a wave as being a mass-less object. It has caused magnetic polarities to be defined as objects which are “magnetic monopoles”. It has caused gravity to be perceived as a “field”. The Analysis topic “Relativity” explains the difference between objects and patterns, and includes a little visual test to aid in demonstrating the difference.  The Analysis topic “Objects and Quantum Illusions” explains the illusions in greater detail and demonstrates how those illusions have tricked scientists into believing in the quantum entanglement theory.

     The crucial component that makes this system work is the unified nature of MATTER. Every single tiny piece of MATTER (photon) is made of exactly the same MATTER as every other piece. The only difference between two different photons is their state of motion (speed and direction). Since all of the larger objects are made of combined photons, then all of the atomic components and all of the elements in the Periodic Table of Elements are all made of various quantities and arrangements of the exact same unified MATTER.

     Each individual photon contains only one state of motion at any given time. That is, it is moving at one constant speed in one direction. The only difference between two photons is their state of motion. Combining many different photons into one single larger object (such as a neutron, proton or electron) results in that larger object containing multiple states of motion at the same time. As a result, the larger object vibrates and spins. Adding one photon to the larger object and simultaneously removing another photon with the same speed and direction of motion from that object results in the larger object moving through space by propagation. If the departing photon has motion with a different speed or direction from the entering photon, the larger object experiences a different kind of change in its state of motion. It moves according to Newton’s second law of motion.

     This means that, at any given moment, the MATTER that makes up our bodies right now is completely different than the MATTER that we had mere moments ago. On the other hand, since all photons are identical, then the swapping of MATTER results in no real difference at all. The only thing that really makes anything different from one moment to the next is an object’s state of motion.


   This is an awfully big concept to accept. Even so, the truth of it is undeniable. 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?” The importance of that question is amplified once one understands the true situation. Are we the ones who are moving, or is the ether moving us? Does it really matter? You’ll still get the same result.

      Experts in electricity already theorized about the concept of trading places and propagation of motion 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 a vague concept of how the ether works without realizing the full extent of its meaning and application. They never made the connection because they did not believe that the ether existed.

    None of these concepts were mentioned when the ether was first discussed. It was necessary at the beginning of this paper to continue to think of photons as being mass-less. It was easier to explain that way. The reality could not be accepted as a possibility until after it was established that the system runs on inertia and that the ether and photons really existed.


    How can we be submerged in a universe sized ether “ocean” and not realize it? Wouldn’t all those closely packed particles hinder our ability to move? 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 circles back to the concept mentioned over and over again. “Am I moving, is the ether moving me, or is it a little bit of both?” Does it make a difference?  Scientifically and mathematically, no it doesn’t. The answer will still be the same either way. But, somehow, that explanation doesn’t seem adequate. For some “illogical” reason, it still feels like it makes a BIG difference. The thought of it can weigh heavily on the mind. The very substance of what you are made out of now is not the same as it will be moments from now. It challenges our perceptions of “What am I?”  It does indeed make a big difference, and it is a topic that absolutely needs to be, and will be addressed.



bottom of page