Visualizing matter

[Siggy_G]

This is not really any revolutionary view, but based on the current knowledge of the atom, the following seems to be the case.

(click image to see full width)

(The image below had to be split up due to the forum's restrictions of the tiny 50 kB attachment size.)

[junglelord]

All charge is distributed. There are NO particles.
The statement the electron creates a shell of energy....that image is the distributed charge of the electron.
A point charge is linear and that is not true or correct. All charge is distributed.

[Siggy_G]

You're saying there are no particles, but mention the distributed charge of the electron. Isn't the electron a particle? A particle is defined as a tiny cell with certain properties/energy, like a unit. The electron has charge counter to the nucleus, the charge is distributed as spherical harmonics between them and makes the electron move gyroscopically within this "shell". That is, according to the traditional model. Isn't it right to say that the charge and particle-velocity keeps the particle in a centripetal (and spherical) path, causing a "shell" of kinetic energy, for that particle? It's the accelerated particle that has energy, not the charge itself. The charge defines the potential energy. Well, I guess you can say that the distributed charge, is charge (field) and accelerated particle combined, and hence the "energy field".

My original point though, is that matter seems to be of little cut-through density (99,99% consisting of empty space, if we allow for the term) and probably being of only electromagnetic nature.

[junglelord]

Nope, no particles. Only distributed charge with nodes of harmonic resonance that may be taken as a particle.
Yet the distributed charge merely creates harmonic nodes that actually are the forms of platonic solids. Dr Moon of the Manhatten Project realized the uranium outer shell geomtery was the octahedron. Blazelabs have shown the platonic solids form the geomtery of the electron shells. This is simple excitation of specific points on the distributed charge sphere.

Hence you have the wave/particle duality, yet of course its neither. It has to be something different from both exclusive views. Once you realize that all charge is distributed and that most charge equations are already a distributed equation, then you realize that current as a linear expression is not representative of charge, for charge is always distributed. There is no particle, no wave and therefore there is something else. Distributed charge with harmonic nodes, voila the duality is solved.

[saturnine]

Nope, no particles. Only distributed charge with nodes of harmonic resonance that may be taken as a particle.

If there are no particles, what exactly is charged or carrying the charge?

[Siggy_G]

There is no particle, no wave and therefore there is something else. Distributed charge with harmonic nodes, voila the duality is solved.

How does this coincide with how photons are emitted and absorbed (the whole electron switching from one energy shell to another theory)? Does the distributed charge, or the harmonic nodes, affect photons? If nodes (i.e. connected vertexes defining the charge shells) were moving, it sounds to me like it would distort or disharmonize with the structure of the distributed charge.

Also, is there any reason you can think of, as to why changing the direction or velocity of a distributed charge (or EM field) should cause inertia or momentum? Photons have momentum, but that formula isn't restricted to mass anymore due to its speed. So, if mass is of electromagnetic nature, and consisting of charge structures, it seems any element of EM nature could have inertia/momentum. When there are larger structures of such elements, it could be measured and felt as evident matter, with its known properties. So, the properties of matter seem to be the sum and structure of EM elements.

[junglelord]

A photon is an electron expanding at the speed of light, they exchange angular momentum, not energy.

[Siggy_G]

A photon is an electron expanding at the speed of light, they exchange angular momentum, not energy.

Hm, bizarre... Why is it expanding? (I see that as its shape and volume expanding) If a photon traveling 1 light year really is an expanded electron with a *radius* of 1 light year... how can it retain its energy at any given point at its then enormous surface? When it hits the lens of an observer, it's supposed to have a certain energy/color. A photon as a package may explain this, but I don't see how a fragment of an electron's expanded surface should give this effect (it should fade radically with distance - relation between increasing radius and the surface of its sphere). Also, the entire universe will consist of all these expanding, but also *intersecting*, electrons (thought of as spheres)... I see that as a structural chaos.

If you mean a photon and an electron is the same, then ok... Maybe the are the same kind of energy package changing angular momentum, one which is spinning in a tiny area, the other traveling and stretched out practically along a straight line. Would be interesting to see if there are studies/observations that indicates this kind of explanation.

Also, have in mind that an electron is calculated/measured (?) to have some mass, while photons are assumed to have none. However, photons are calculated to have momentum, with a formula that don't require mass as a factor (but frequency). As mentioned initially in the thread, mass seems to boil down to be of electromagnetic origin.

[junglelord]

That quote is accurate except for the identification of light as being only primary angular momentum without a relationship to encapsulation by the rotating magnetic field of the aether. The Compton Wavelength identifies the geometry of the photon. This is where we need to start, as geometry is the key.

An electron expanding at the speed of light....a photon, assumes a double cardioid shape as it expands.

In 1923, Arthur Compton noted that J.J. Thomson's model of the electron did not account for the lower frequency (longer wavelength) associated with "electron scattering." To account for this, Compton imagined the photon as a billiard ball that passed through the atom and dislodged electrons from a force within the atom according to the Doppler principle. [1]

Compton's theory accounts for the momentum of the photon itself, and explains the scattering of radiation in terms of corpuscular photons, but it does not explain how the photons always manage to miss the nucleus of the atom or fail to strike electrons from the outside toward the inside of the atom. His theory also fails to take into account the angular momentum of the incident photon.

Further, Compton's theory of a corpuscular incident photon assumes that the light is emitted as bullets that happen to be shot directly at the target. Also, this bullet would have to retain its full energy from the moment it left its source and transfer its full energy to the target atom.

Quantum Photon
In the Aether Physics Model the photon is quantified as a true quantum of angular momentum. It is equal to the angular momentum of the electron (Planck's constant) times the speed of light:

Photon = h x c

Light is then quantified as the photon times frequency:

Light = photon x frequency

Transmission
The quantum Aether unit has two spin. That means there are four half-spin spin positions in the Aether unit. The photon has one spin. As seen in the image below, the photon fills two spin positions within the Aether unit.



The 1 spin Aether unit looks like a snake in the above picture, but that is what it would look like moving through time. Since we are already moving with time, the only view of the photon we have is from the z axis. The photon looking down on the z axis appears as the following image:



The photon expands in a cardioid shape. The function that produces this shape is the Compton function:



Absorption
As an atom absorbs light, the angular momentum is stored in the positron spin position of the valence electron. The amount of angular momentum available from the light is determined by the distance between the emitting and absorbing atoms and the power available at absorption. The further the distance between the emitter and absorber means less power is available.

light = power x length

Because the atom has only certain resonances in which it can absorb angular momentum, the amount of angular momentum being absorbed depends on the resonant frequency of the absorbing atom

power = h x resonace

In the above case, the angular momentum is not quantum, but depends on the power level reaching the absorber atom and its resonant frequency.

Emission
As the valence electron fills the positron spin position with angular momentum, it eventually attains the mass of two electrons and has a net zero electrostatic charge. Having a net zero charge, the nucleus of the atom no longer pulls the combined electron-positron onn and it explodes outward toward the next Aether unit.

Depending on the amount of power reaching the atom, the double-sized onn either splits into a separate electron and positron (pair production) or splits into two photons. One photon emits outward according to the geometry of the Compton function above and the other is reabsorbed to the valence position and all the angular momentum moves to the electron spin position.

For a more detailed introduction to the Aether Physics Model, see our white paper, "A New Foundation for Physics," or our book, "Secrets of the Aether."

[1] Great Experiments in Physics, edited by Morris H. Shamos, Dover Publications Inc., 1959

http://www.16pi2.com/angular_momentum.htm

A photon is an aether unit - angular momentum dual, that is an electron expanding at the speed of light, the shape is a cardioid as indicated by the Compton Wavelength. The transfer of angular momentum is the key. The transfer of energy means little in a sense of geometry. That leaves a vague conception. Structure identified, reveals the functions in all possible aspects that would turn into technology. The angular momentum technology revolution is coming and will coincide with the 2-d materials technology.

Mark my words.

[Siggy_G]

I'll read more into the angular momentum theory. Seems like the hypothesized geometry of the photon is based on it moving along a 2d sine wave with z-axis spin - then one gets that 3d snake shape during a sequence, if we really are to translate nature literally into geometry. Angular momentum was some of my initial point regarding the act of matter, but described as the gyroscopic velocity of the electrons.

However, some of the content on the 16pi2.com website made me lift an eyebrow, because it supports the existence of black holes and strongly indicates that the force behind the Aether is evidence of God (just because a physical force is strong, doesn't mean there's a god behind it...?!). In my opinion, religion has nothing to do in nor physics or politics, but sadly it keeps pursuing its way through. As far as I know, George Lemaitre, the father of the Big Bang theory, was a mathematician and high ranking member of the Catholic church. It was his aim to reconcile science and religion, which I guess led us to the predominant cosmological paradigm, which really boils down to creationism. In other words, hiding creationism behind, and mixing it with, increasingly complex math and geometry. It would be a shame if the Aether theory / angular momentum theory is doing the same...

[Solar]

A photon is an aether unit - angular momentum dual, that is an electron expanding at the speed of light, the shape is a cardioid as indicated by the Compton Wavelength.

I can't help but wonder how that relates to the photoelectric effect wherein supposed incoming photons are knocking electrons out. If I'm not mistaken; if not grounded, the metal plate will pick up an overall positive charge.

Some of you may also be interested in Aetheromety's deduction of the nature of photon's. It sees the shape of the photon similarly 'pear-shaped' and "globular" like the double cardioid when viewed from certain angle.

… one of the critical tenets of aetherometric theory is that massbound charges under acceleration do not emit photons; it is only when they decelerate – caused by collisions, electrostatic repulsion or field gradients – that photon emission occurs.
Aetherometry also suggest that light does not consist in the transport of photons (ballistic theory), nor in their transmission by electromagnetic waves. Rays of light, as we shall shortly see, are treated as spatial concatenations of photons that present a given rate of formation in Time.

… a material medium – and one in motion – always exist for the concatenation of photons into lightrays.

... there is no transmission of light per se, just a virtual concatenation of photons…

If photons have invariant wavespeeds c referenced to the inertial frame of the emitter, then the predicted aetherometric volumetric structure of the photon is globular, and not fascicular (nor toroidal, like the structure of the energy flux constitutive of an electron). A photon would form a local spinning globule of energy, and this would be the deep reason why its emission ‘unfolded’ a spherical envelope. - Linear and angular light Doppler shifts and the Sagnac experiment

The above free .pdf publication is rather lengthly and also compares Doppler aspects of photons when the receiver is approaching to; or receding from, the source. Also covered is a 'filamentary' aspect to light rays depending on the type of light emitted. This is well worth printing out and taking one's time assessing the ideas put forth; even if ignoring the math.

Lastly, if physics admits to the photon being 'massless' then it seems that there would need to be an aspect of science dealing with that 'massfree' nature. That science is Aetheromety.

[junglelord]

I'll read more into the angular momentum theory. Seems like the hypothesized geometry of the photon is based on it moving along a 2d sine wave with z-axis spin - then one gets that 3d snake shape during a sequence, if we really are to translate nature literally into geometry. Angular momentum was some of my initial point regarding the act of matter, but described as the gyroscopic velocity of the electrons.

However, some of the content on the 16pi2.com website made me lift an eyebrow, because it supports the existence of black holes and strongly indicates that the force behind the Aether is evidence of God (just because a physical force is strong, doesn't mean there's a god behind it...?!). In my opinion, religion has nothing to do in nor physics or politics, but sadly it keeps pursuing its way through. As far as I know, George Lemaitre, the father of the Big Bang theory, was a mathematician and high ranking member of the Catholic church. It was his aim to reconcile science and religion, which I guess led us to the predominant cosmological paradigm, which really boils down to creationism. In other words, hiding creationism behind, and mixing it with, increasingly complex math and geometry. It would be a shame if the Aether theory / angular momentum theory is doing the same...

I know for a fact that David Thomson does not support black holes.
The revelation of a "conscious field" is not a big deal, get over it.


Photons appear massless due to the oscillating dynamics between a electron and a positron charge. Since Mass is the linear or 2 dimensional view of EM Charge, a definition that needs to be realized, then we have successfully defined Mass for the first time. I will repeat that, Mass is a 2d perfect circular string. This string scans an area of Aether which is a rotating magnetic field with a quantum spin of 2. This circular sting picks up elemental charge *Electrostatic Charge*! This ES Charge is the same for all units (e- p+ n*). It also has a EM charge which is PROPORTIONAL to the Mass of the unit! Thats right the Mass of the unit is proportional to its EM Charge. Charge is always distributed, 3d. Mass is the 2d aspect of 3d charge. It never changes and like charge is steady. The mass of the e- and the p+ or the combined n* never varies, neither does its EM Charge or its ES Charge.

A Photon is a unit that is expanding at the speeding of light which has the potential of both left and right hand spin parity. This causes a rotation between both charge parities. This results in a Null Mass result. Simple, elegant, profound.

[Solar]

Photons appear massless due to the oscillating dynamics between a electron and a positron charge. Since Mass is the linear or 1 dimensional view of EM Charge, a definition that needs to be realized, then we have successfully defined Mass.

A Photon is a unit that is expanding at the speeding of light which has the potential of both left and right hand spin parity. This causes a rotation between both charge parities. This results in a Null Mass result. Simple, elegant, profound.

Nice. I like that.

[junglelord]

I was making an edit. Thats a 2d aspect, not 1d....sorry.

[Solar]

It's the photon's 'appearance' of massless-ness, according to the statement or finding; that I find intriguing.