Unification through non-linear E/M

[RayTomes]

The Future of Science section header asks

Has science taken a wrong turn? If so, what corrections are needed?

There are no doubt many things that could be raised here. I think that the deepest misconceptions are never even discussed. One deep error can lead to half a dozen or more errors at the next level and only compounds from there. So I want to raise a small number of misconceptions only, which are related to each other, and which I think compound into the whole structure that is stuck for a way to go from here.

1. The fundamental laws of the universe are those of electromagnetism and it is non-linear.

The establishment would not waste there time replying to me on this because they "know" that I am wrong. So I can only guess at the "reasons" or "prejudices" that they have that lead to that conclusion. Firstly, they know that Maxwell's equations are linear because that has been known from the beginning. So I have to overturn that idea and at the same time preserve the facts that lead to that being believed in the first place.

a. The reason that I am so sure that E/M is non-linear is that we have sense and they work. OK, that needs explaining. If E/M was linear, that means that all E/M waves just travel through each other without interaction. And yet we can see things, so clearly something interacted. It is totally undeniable that an interaction occurs. So the excuse appears to be made that E/M can interact with matter and matter is different stuff. I don't buy that. So I have to say ...

b. Matter is E/M spherical standing waves which means that the field strength gets very strong as you approach the centre. That means that the non-linearity gets much greater very close to "particles" (which term is to be understood always as "E/M spherical standing waves"). If we are to have a single set of equations that describe everything then we cannot have matter and e/m being made of different stuff. They must be made of the same stuff because they interact.

c. So why is it that light appears to be linear in most circumstances? We can see distant galaxies, and that light is criss-crossed by other light traveling from every part of the universe through every point along its path. And it gets here without any obvious interference in most cases. The answer is simple. In most places in the universe there is very little matter nearby and only very low e/m field intensity. Therefore the non-linearity is extremely miniscule. Therefore it looks for most purpose like light is linear.

d. Why then does this change when light gets near matter? We know that when light travels through matter it actually changes velocity by a substantial percentage, -25% in water, -33% in glass and as much as -75% or more in metals. Quite clearly the non-linearity becomes huge when light gets very near to atoms, especially atoms with larger atomic weights.

e. If we want a unification of everything then we must recognize the non-linearity or we will have many more equations than we really need. In my case I think these things are best understood by going back to the old concept of the aether. This will explain the non-linearity in obviously valid mechanical terms. However there is so much mental baggage that is carried by physics that mentioning aether makes you a crackpot. So be it. That means only crackpots can make progress. You can do it without aether, but it is much harder because there is no obvious explanation for the form of the non-linearity. The equations of e/m are the equations of a tensile aether. The operators like div and rot used in e/m actually refer to stretching and rotation of the aether. E/M makes sense when these vector (or other forms) are understood as mechanical operations.

f. So why does a non-linearity arise in the aether? Especially, why does it do so near matter? Let us look first at what are the properties of a tensile medium. A tensile medium propagates waves according to the standard wave equation - the same wave equation used by Maxwell in the E/M equations. A wave equation takes the form (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_equation):

d^2u/dt^2 = c^2 (d^2u/dx^2 + d^2u/dy^2 + d^2u/dz^2) (Note I expanded del^2 to the three space dimensions).

What this equation says in simple language is that the sum of the curvature of the field in the three space dimensions causes the change in the change of the field over time. And the proportionality depends on the wave speed of the medium.

There is only one place there to make the system non-linear, and that is to have c be a variable. Why should the wave propagation speed be variable? Quite simply because the aether sometimes gets stretched. The effect is exceedingly small in outer space, but in matter the aether has so much activity that the aether has a higher tension. The exact same thing happens in a guitar string - if it is plucked lightly it has one frequency, but if plucked energetically the string tension is increased and the wave propagation speed goes up and as a result the frequency also increases.

g. So we must recognize that c is a variable. It depends on the local aether tension which in turn depends on the level of e/m activity, which is clearly much greater in matter than elsewhere. But didn't Einstein prove that c is constant? No, he didn't, he assumed that it was. But he never assumed that it was constant in matter because everyone knows that it is not. There is a thing called refractive index which is the inverse of the speed of light in the material, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refractive_index which states:

The refractive index (or index of refraction) of a medium is a measure of how much the speed of light (or other waves such as sound waves) is reduced inside the medium.

So It is always accepted that c is variable, especially in matter. in relativity the variation that is denied is only to do with moving frames of reference.

h. If matter has more energy and that stretches the aether, wouldn't that make c get higher inside matter rather than lower? Yes, it would. However it also makes light travel by a much more circuitous path because the atoms and particles are always in vibration and light gets strongly influenced by this. That effect seems to be twice as great as the other meaning the final result is an apparent slowing down.

i. What about light, doesn't it come in photons? Well, light is emitted by matter in discrete amounts and is absorbed in the same discrete amounts, but in between I reckon that the e/m field is entirely continuous and there is no such thing as a photon identity. QM has somewhat agreed with this, but when Feynman says "light is a particle", it causes endless confusion. Light, like everything else is a wave. The only particle nature it has is the discreteness of the events that cause its emission and absorption by matter. Those events are discrete, because an electron van only orbit in certain arrangements (and likewise for nucleon arrangements) as the in between states are unstable and fall back either to the original arrangement or the new different one.

j. So why is it that it seems that we see something far away as if a photon was emitted there and absorbed here? The answer is because there was an emission there and an absorption here and they are causally connected. Did I just contradict myself? No. The connection is through the continuous e/m field. The wave emitted just adds to the continuous e/m field that exists everywhere (or the wobbles of the aether if you like) and the affects propagate according to the wave equations. Experiments in the 1950s have proven that a single emission event can cause multiple absorption events (or one of none) according to "luck" because the distribution is a poisson one with mean 1. In fact a laser could not work if a single emitted photon could not cause interaction multiple times. How else would there get to be multiple "photons" with identical phase?

k. So if that is so, how does the double slit experiment work? Why does light appear as either a particle or a wave but no both? Where does this duality come from? The answer is that it is always a wave. The particle nature refers only to the absorption of e/m energy by an atom (or molecule or nucleus or whatever). The statement that when the slits are watched the particle only goes through one slit is based on a big oversight. When a single emission of a photon occurs, then the proportion of its outgoing wave energy going through each slit is typically only about 1 part in a million or less. This means that the chance of each photon being detected is less than 10^-6 at one slit and the same at the other. So the chance of seeing both 10^-12 or not very often. When the very rare event happens of both being detected it will be assumed to be coincidence. My claim can be easily tested by experiment and I am quite confident of the result. If the light source is very dim and a large reflector is used to catch nearly all of any outgoing wave and then focused through a lens towards a half-mirror splitter so that almost all of the emitted energy arrives half at each slit, then I predict that even with low brightness source, there will be many more occasions where the two slits see the same wave / particle.

l. When these views are adopted, it becomes very clear what the confusions are in standard thinking. It opens up the possibility of experiments that easily prove the view correct. It also allows the real work of working out the correct waveform of particles to be examined. Non-linear standing waves are not likely to be solved analytically. But simulations based on a tensile aether will allow stable forms to be found that should have corresponding properties to the know particles. I am pretty convinced that this would totally revolutionize particle physics.

m. I have not found any problem with this view adapting to all known experimental results. This is very important as the historical results must stand. But the wrong turns must be abandoned.

n. There are additional things predicted as a result of such a view that have not been recognized even by other people who agree with me that there is a Wave structure of Matter (WSM). Firstly, if e/m is non-linear, and matter is spherical standing waves, then the non-linearity is very large near the centre of particles. This means that particles are not 100% stable, but must evolve over time. The primary evolution is that any non-linear standing wave must develop harmonics. These harmonics are always multiples of the original frequency. Any unification of e/m with matter must have this property, even though I may be the only person in the world saying so.

o. It follows that the mass of particles must vary over time. This same conclusion (arrived at via a different path) has been reached by Arp and Narlikar and is caused VMH or variable mass hypothesis. It causes two direct results. The first is that over time all transition frequencies vary with the particle mass changes so that matter gets bluer with time. Yes, I said bluer, meaning higher frequency. We see distant galaxies as they were in the past when all matter had lower or redder frequencies. The further away galaxies are the further back in time we look and the redder they seem.

p. The second effect is that the absorption of energy by particles means that the outgoing part of the standing wave is weaker than the ingoing part. Gravity really does suck. This explains that matter behaves in accord with Lesage gravity. There should be gravity shadows and this would lead to testable predictions. And Feynman was wrong about this too.

OK, I am running out of alphabet, so will stop there. There is surely more, but it is all related.

I think that it all flows logically from 1 above. But most people have never contemplated these things. I am trying to make a groove that others can deepen in the future so that eventually it becomes the path most traveled.

Enjoy the ride
Ray

[RayTomes]

The stuff about gravity etc is further expanded in the thread:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... php?t=2720

[junglelord]

Unification is possible if one identifies Electrostactics as fundamental....not as a process because of a buildup of electrons, but a fundamental function within electrons....infact what if an electron or proton is a dual entity, made of both charges?

Your stating that material and EM are the same, as they are, but they are also ES. So I see an electron as a dual charge entity, a dual standing wave of a EM distributed toroid surrounding an ES distributed sphere.

According to my understanding of radio, EM is a traveling wave and according to Tesla, ES is the common standing wave of a Impulse Magnifying Transmitter. I will offer that up for thought.

Also are not all Z pinches electrostatics?
Totally nonlinear.

Cheers Ray, I love your work.

[GaryN]

A description of radiation and fields wrt antennas.

Fields are really just mathematical descriptions of forces between charges. We have three simple conditions that create physical forces between charges. They are electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic (radiation) forces. They are all created by distinctly different physical actions in a system. We can't mix the various names for effects resulting from a certain physical condition and create a new cause! Fields describe the effects of certain causes, they don't create the causes of those effects!!!

http://www.w8ji.com/radiation_and_fields.htm

[seasmith]

Ray,

Having been visiting your website for a couple of years now (while sharing your fascination with cycles and waves),
may i just say that you are now really pulling it all together, in a most coherent way.


JL,

...infact what if an electron or proton is a dual entity, made of both charges?

Good to see you are now saying entity, rather than particle. The "duality", and the EM/ES distinction, seem really to be just different dynamic geometries, or harmonics of the Engendering Aether.

seasmith

[junglelord]

I never believed in particles. The Uncertainty principle is based on a wave/"particle" duality.
There is duality, it is dual charge. EM will wave, ES will stand. Hence the wave/"particle' duality.
There is no uncertainty.

[junglelord]

Systems theory of a transmutating aether. Wave Models are the key to understanding all processes.
http://www.etheric.com/LaVioletteBooks/ether.html

Basically, he postulates a subquantum layer or layers, not directly observable, which give rise to matter and anti-matter in a manner similar to patterns forming in non-linear chemical kinetic systems, such as the Belousov-Zhabotinskii reaction.

A novel systems approach to physics that has far reaching implications for field theory, astronomy, and cosmology

Subquantum kinetics is a revolutionary physics methodology that was inspired by advances in our understanding of how nonequilibrium reaction systems spawn self-organizing wave patterns. Replacing the fragmented and self-contradictory framework of modern physics, subquantum kinetics opens the door to a truly elegant unified field theory. Electromagnetic, gravitational, and nuclear potential fields all emerge from a single set of nonlinear equations representing subquantum processes postulated to take place throughout all space. It is the first fundamental theory to have its predictions of the nucleon's energy potential profile later confirmed by particle scattering form factor data.

This approach, which is consistent with the ideas of Whitehead, Einstein, de Broglie, and Feynman, provides answers to many fundamental questions: Namely, how does the subquantum matrix generate the zero-point energy continuum and spawn the formation of matter? How do charge and mass come into being and how do they generate fields consistent with the laws of electrostatics and gravitation? Subquantum kinetics also lays the foundations for a new wave theory of matter. Its nondispersing, periodic structures resolve the wave-particle dualism and produce de Broglie wave diffraction effects consistent with observation.

Subquantum kinetics also leads to a new view of our cosmos: an open, order-generating universe, continuously creating matter and energy. Its prediction of a new form of energy, continuously emerging within all planets and stars, led to the discovery that planets, brown dwarfs, and red dwarf stars all share a common mass-luminosity relation and it also anticipated the anomalous blueshift found in the Pioneer 10 maser signal.

This book addresses many other subjects such as: Is the universe really expanding? What produces the cosmological redshift? Do black holes really exist? What makes stars pulsate? Why do blue supergiants produce supernova explosions? What powers galactic core explosions? It also provides some insights into the electrogravitic connection that Brown was researching. In particular, chapter 11 gives some background information on Townsend Brown's electrogravitics.
http://www.etheric.com/LaVioletteBooks/Book-SQK.html

[junglelord]

Oh lookie what I found, a lenghty PDF from LaViolette! The prologue is good.
Electrons have a stationary standing eletrostatic Turing wave pattern whose form is maintained via the ongoing nonlinear reaction-diffusion transmutating aether which fills all space.

A lot of people all see the same thing.
Its a Turing standing wave of electrostatic design.
Furthermore subquantum kinetics has proposed that this Turing wave should have a
wavelength equal to the particle's Compton wavelength.
Systems Theory is the answer to subquantum kinetics.

http://www.etheric.com/Downloads/nucleon.pdf
Subquantum kinetics, a physics methodology that applies general systems theoretic concepts
to the field of microphysics has gained the status of being a viable unified field theory.
Earlier publications of this theory had proposed that a subatomic particle should consist of an
electrostatic field that has the form of a radial Turing wave pattern whose form is maintained
through the ongoing activity of a nonlinear reaction-diffusion medium that fills all space.
This subatomic Turing wave prediction now finds confirmation in recent nucleon scattering
form factor data which show that the nucleon core has a Gaussian charge density distribution
with a peripheral periodicity whose wavelength approximates the particle's Compton
wavelength and which declines in amplitude with increasing radial distance. The subquantum
kinetics explanation for the origin of charge correctly anticipates the observation that the
proton's charge density wave pattern is positively biased while the neutron's is not. The
phenomenon of beta decay is interpreted as the onset of a secondary bifurcation leading from
the uncharged neutron solution to the charged proton solution. The Turing wave dissipative
structure prediction is able to account in a unitary fashion for nuclear binding, particle diffraction,
and electron orbital quantization. The wave packet model is shown to be fundamentally
flawed implying that quantum mechanics does not realistically represent the microphysical
world. This new conception points to the possible existence of orbital energy states below the
Balmer ground state whose transitions may be tapped as a new source of energy.

Introduction
Subquantum kinetics is a unified field theory whose description of microphysical phenomena
has a general systems theoretic foundation (LaViolette 1985a, 1985b, 1985c, 1994, 2003). It
conceives subatomic particles to be Turing wave patterns that self-organize within a subquantum
medium that functions as an open reaction-diffusion system. In so doing, subquantum kinetics
presents a substantially different paradigm from that of standard physics which views particles
as closed systems. Whether these be subatomic particles bound together by force fields, or
quarks bound together by gluons, physics has traditionally conceived nature at its most basic
level to be composed of immutable structures. Unlike living systems which require a continuous
flux of energy and matter with their environment to sustain their forms, conventional physics has
viewed particles as self-sufficient entities, that require no interaction with their environment in
order to continue their existence.

This closed system paradigm has elevated the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics
from laboratory rules to rigidly enforced universal laws of nature. The imposition of the First
Law, the law of energy conservation, accords well with a universe that behaves as a closed
system for in a closed system energy can be neither created nor destroyed, only converted from
one form into another. Similarly, the Second Law enforces the idea of a closed system universe
whose entropy can only increase over time, never decrease. These rules, of course, are
conveniently put aside to accommodate the creation of the universe which otherwise should
never have been able to come into being.

Physics, though, is ripe for a conceptual revolution. String theory, the unified field theory that
for some time has been in fashion, has made no testable predictions in the 30 years of its
existence. Moreover its higher dimensional mathematics are so abstract as to be inaccessible to
most theoretical physicists, string theorists included. As a result, many physicists have become
disappointed with string theory and believe it is time for a change (Smolin, 2006; Woit, 2006).
By comparison, subquantum kinetics has made a number of testable predictions and twelve of
these were subsequently verified (LaViolette 1986, 1992, 1996, 2003, 2005); see Table 1.

The present paper focuses on the first prediction presented in table 1, namely that the electric
field in the core of a nucleon does not have an aperiodic cusp shape, as classical nuclear theory
had envisioned it, but rather is configured as a radially periodic stationary wave pattern which
may be termed a Turing wave. Not only does this Turing wave model solve long-standing
problems in modeling the phenomenon of particle diffraction, it also provides a new understanding
of hydrogen atom orbital energy levels, giving credence to emerging technologies that purport
to be tapping a source of clean energy from electron transitions to energy levels below the Balmer
ground state.

2. The Subquantum Kinetics Approach
Let us summarize the subquantum kinetics approach and examine how it predicts the existence
of these unique wave patterns in the core of the nucleon. Subquantum kinetics was inspired from
work done on chemical wave phenomena such as that observed in the Belousov-Zhabotinskii
reaction (Zaikin and Zhabotinskii 1970, Winfree 1974) as well as modeling work done on open
chemical reaction systems such as the Brusselator studied by several investigators (Lefever 1968,
Glansdorff and Prigogine 1971, and Prigogine, Nicolis, and Babloyantz 1972, Nicolis and
Prigogine 1977); see figures 1 and 2. Under the right conditions, the concentrations of the
variable reactants of these reaction systems spontaneously self-organize into stationary reactiondiffusion
wave patterns called Turing patterns, so named in recognition of Alan Turing who in
1952 was the first to point out their importance for biological morphogenesis. Alternatively,
they have been referred to as dissipative structures because the initial growth and subsequent
maintenance of these patterns is due to the activity of the underlying energy-dissipating reaction
processes.
The Brusselator is defined by the following four kinetic equations:
A -----» G
G -----» X
B + X -----» Y + Z
2 X+ Y -----» 3X
Y -----» Ω

The capital letters specify the concentrations of the various reaction species, and the ki denote
the kinetic constants for each reaction. Each reaction produces its products on the right at a rate
equal to the product of the reactant concentrations on the left times its kinetic constant. Reaction
species X and Y are allowed to vary in space and time, while A, B, Z and Ω are held constant.
This system defines two global reaction pathways which cross-couple to produce an X-Y

A -----» G
G -----» X
B + X -----» Y + Z
2 X+ Y -----» 3X
Y -----» Ω

[RayTomes]

Junglelord (and others) thanks for the kind words. Also thanks for this reference. I really must get LaViolette's books. Previously I have just read some of his papers.

Systems theory of a transmutating aether. Wave Models are the key to understanding all processes.
http://www.etheric.com/LaVioletteBooks/ether.html
...

[seasmith]

“PDF from LaViolette! The prologue is good.
Electrons have a stationary standing eletrostatic Turing wave pattern whose form is maintained via the ongoing nonlinear reaction-diffusion transmutating aether which fills all space.

That should tie in well with EM/ES harmonic geometrical progressions then if he follows through. Turing was a big fan of D’arcy Thompson and was close to a proof for a reaction-diffusion-with radial symmetry cause
for Fibonacci Phyllotaxis, before extinguishing his own light in the early ‘50s.


Turing (wave) patterns – Reaction/Diffusion

…Evidence of a subatomic Turing wave pattern
Author: Paul A. LaViolette a (Show Biography)

Abstract

Subquantum kinetics, a physics methodology that applies general systems theoretic concepts to the field of microphysics has gained the status of being a viable unified field theory. Earlier publications of this theory had proposed that a subatomic particle should consist of an electrostatic field that has the form of a radial Turing wave pattern whose form is maintained through the ongoing activity of a non-linear reaction-diffusion medium that fills all space. This subatomic Turing wave prediction now finds confirmation in recent nucleon scattering form factor data which show that the nucleon core has a Gaussian charge density distribution with a peripheral periodicity whose wavelength approximates the particle's Compton wavelength and which declines in amplitude with increasing radial distance. The subquantum kinetics explanation for the origin of charge correctly anticipates the observation that the proton's charge density wave pattern is positively biased while the neutron's is not. The phenomenon of beta decay is interpreted as the onset of a secondary bifurcation leading from the uncharged neutron solution to the charged proton solution. The Turing wave dissipative structure prediction is able to account in a unitary fashion for nuclear binding, particle diffraction, and electron orbital quantisation. The wave packet model is shown to be fundamentally flawed implying that quantum mechanics, although mathematically workable, does not realistically represent the microphysical world. This new conception points to the possible existence of orbital energy states below the Balmer ground state whose transitions may be tapped as a new source of energy.” “

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/conten ... mptype=rss

2D cross-section:



http://vagueterrain.net/journal14/jonathan-mccabe/02

[StefanR]

That image resembles the North Pole Vortex of Saturn a bit

But beside that, I have a question for RayTomes:
-You mention in that text a view items like particles, matter and aether, what are the differences between those things (or what are they) and how do they stand in relation to each other?

And a question concerning that text of LaViolett for anyone who knows his ideas:
Laviolette is talking about particles, aether and a medium, what are the differences between the those (or what are they) and how do they stand in relation to each other?

[junglelord]

Etherons in this reaction system play a morphogenetic role similar to Turing's morphogens.
Variations in the concentrations of the three reaction intermediates form observable electric and
gravitational potential fields which, in turn, form material particles and energy waves.
Subquantum kinetics identifies G concentration with gravitational potential, lower G
concentrations being correlated with more negative gravity potentials, a G etheron concentration
well corresponding to a matter attracting gravity potential field. The X and Y concentrations,
which are mutually interrelated in reciprocal fashion, are together identified with electric potential
fields, a positive electric potential being correlated with a higher Y and lower X concentration,
and a negative electric potential being correlated with a lower Y and higher X concentration.
Relative motion of an electric potential field, of an X-Y concentration gradient, generates a
magnetic (or electrodynamic) force (LaViolette 1994, 2003). As Feynman, Leighton, and Sands
(1964) have shown, in standard physics magnetic force can be mathematically expressed solely in
terms of the effect that a moving electric potential field produces on a charged particle obviating
the need for magnetic potential field terms. Also relative motion of a gravity potential field, of a
G concentration gradient, generates a gravitodynamic force, the gravitational equivalent of a
magnetic force.
The subquantum kinetics ether functions as an open system, etherons transforming irreversibly
through a series of "upstream" states, including states A and B, eventually occupying
states G, X, and Y, and subsequently transforming into the D and Ω states and from there
through a sequence of "downstream" states. This irreversible sequential transformation is
conceived as defining a vectorial dimension line termed the transformation dimension. Our
observable physical universe would be entirely encompassed by the G, X, and Y ether states,
which would reside at a nexus along this transformation dimension, the continual etheron
transformation process serving as the Prime Mover of our universe. According to subquantum
kinetics, the arrow of time, as physically observed in all temporal events, may be attributed to
the continuation of this subquantum transformative process. Since etherons both enter and leave
the etheron states that compose physical forms, the observable universe is open to the
throughput of etherons. Consequently, the universe's state of order is able to spontaneously
increase provided that its ether reaction system (Model G) operates close to or above a critical
threshold. Thus spontaneous matter/energy creation is allowed in subquantum kinetics.
Since etherons react and transform in a stochastic fashion, changing their individual etheron
states through a Markov process, the etheron concentrations characterizing any given etheron
state will vary stochastically above and below their steady-state value, the magnitudes of the
fluctuations conforming to a Poisson distribution. It is known that such fluctuations are present
in the chemical species of reaction-diffusion systems such as the B-Z reaction and the theoretical
Brusselator system and such would be true as well in the Model G reactive ether. Hence
subquantum kinetics predicts that stochastic electric and gravity potential fluctuations should
spontaneously arise throughout all of space, in regions both where field gradients are present and
where they are absent. This stochastic ether concept is similar to the conventional idea of a zeropoint
energy background, with the exception that these fluctuations for the most
part are not large enough to nucleate the creation of material particles, fluctuations of such a large
magnitude being extremely rare. As described above, the zero-point energy background arises as
a direct result of the ether's regenerative flux and hence is conceived to be an indication of the
ether's open system character. At the same time, these emerging zero-point energy fluctuations
constitute the ether's incipient ability to create order, each fluctuation being a potential seed for
nucleating physical order.

Furthermore subquantum kinetics has proposed that this Turing wave should have a
wavelength equal to the particle's Compton wavelength. The Compton wavelength of a particle,
λ0, is related to its rest mass energy Eo, or to its rest mass mo, by the formula:
λ0 = h c/Eo = h /moc
where h is Planck's constant and c is the velocity of light. The Compton wavelength for the
nucleon calculates to be 1.32 fermis (λ0 = 1.32 × 10-13 cm). To generate a physically realistic
representation of the subatomic particle, the parameters of Model G (kinetic constants, diffusion
coefficients, and reaction concentrations) must be so chosen that this result is obtained.
The Compton wavelength is twice the wavelength of a hypothetical precursor gamma ray
photon capable of generating the particle. That is, in the course of pair production, a gamma
photon energy of approximately 2hc/λ0 would transform into a particle and antiparticle each
having an energy hc/λ0. In this way, the transition from the energy wave state to the matter state
becomes essentially a change of wave propagation geometry, the initially linear wave propagation
mode of the precursor photon changing into a radial wave propagation mode as the electric
potential field of the newly created particle expands radially outward from the particle's core.
Collision with a heavy nucleus provides the needed boundary condition to absorb the photon's
forward momentum and effect the resulting change of wave geometry with energy being
conserved.
Subquantum kinetics identifies positive charge density with an excess production rate of Y per
unit volume coupled with an excess consumption rate of X per unit volume. A negative charge
density would involve an excess consumption rate of Y and excess production rate of X per unit
volume. These production rate balances produce corresponding electric field potentials, either a
positive potential (high Y/low X) or a negative potential (low Y/high X). These terms, positive
and negative charge density, may be used to describe the X and Y concentration minima and
maxima that form a nucleon's electric potential Turing wave pattern. For example, the positive
electric potential (high-Y/low-X concentration) at the center of the Turing wave of a neutron or
proton would be produced by a local excess Y production rate per unit volume correlated with an
excess X consumption rate per unit volume, which subquantum kinetics identifies with positive
charge density. Similarly, the negative potential well prevailing in the spherical shell that
immediately surrounds this positive core would be produced by a local excess consumption rate
of Y and excess production rate of X which constitute a negative charge density.
The appearance of these charge densities necessitates the simultaneous appearance of the
particle's inertial rest mass. The shorter the wavelength of the Turing wave, and greater its
amplitude (greater its etheron concentration wave amplitude), the greater will be the inertial mass
of the associated particle (LaViolette 1985b). Since acceleration requires a structural shift and
recreation of the particle's Turing-wave dissipative space structure, the particle's resistance to
acceleration, its inertia, should be proportional to the magnitude of its Turing-wave charge
densities; that is, proportional to the amount of negentropy that must be restructured (LaViolette
2003).
The proton's electric potential pattern is positively biased relative to the ambient potential, as
indicated by the hatched region shown in figure 4. Correspondingly, the electric potential of the
antiproton's Turing wave is negatively biased. Subquantum kinetics identifies this biasing with
the origin of the particle's long-range electric field and predicts that such biasing should be absent
in the neutron's electric potential Turing wave pattern. The unbiased electric potential profile for
the neutron is portrayed in Figure 5 which shows two neutrons in a hypothetical state of nuclear
bonding (LaViolette 1985b Fig. 10, 1994 Fig. 15). It should be kept in mind that the charge
densities that generate the proton's Turing wave pattern, and that are associated with its inertial
mass, are distinct from and additional to the charge density that centrally biases its Turing
pattern and produces the proton's long-range electric field. The former periodic densities emerge
as a result of the particle's primary bifurcation from the homogeneous steady-state solution,
while the latter aperiodic bias emerges as a result of its secondary bifurcation from an existing
steady state Turing solution. The origin of charge as a secondary bifurcation is described further
in section 5.
The subatomic particle, then, may be conceived to be an organized entity, or system, whose
form is created through the active interplay of a plurality of particulate structures existing at a
lower hierarchic level. Whereas quark theory postulates that a nucleon is composed of just three
quarks, subquantum kinetics proposes that a nucleon should be composed of a myriad of
constituent etherons, e.g. over 1025 per cubic fermi. Moreover whereas quark theory proposes
that quarks exist only within the nucleon, subquantum kinetics presumes that these are far more
ubiquitous, filling all of space and forming the substrate for all fields.
http://www.etheric.com/Downloads/nucleon.pdf

[junglelord]

When it comes to wave functions, one needs to apprciate time reversal waves, aka, phase conjugates.

Time reversal theory has decades of distinguished and important usage in physics, although most engineers in fields outside nonlinear optics have little or no appreciation for the concept.

However, the phase conjugated (time reversed) wave is a general solution to the wave equation and applies to waves of all types. It has been accomplished with sound waves, for example, although little engineering use has been made of the effect except in the field of nonlinear optics, where it is an essential part of the paradigm.

That phase conjugation (PC) waves can have beneficial effects on the human body has been addressed by Tom Bearden. Prestigious French scientists demonstrated that advanced electromagnetic machines, constructed by Antoine Priore using complex multiple signals of radar frequencies mixed and phase conjugated in a rotating plasma, exhibit significant healing characteristics, even against terminal cancers and leukemias.

The process of sight is a phase conjugation process as is hearing.

Phase Conjugation is essential to a EU, as fundamental as Spiral Galaxies.
It is an archetype of wave form processes.

[RayTomes]

Hi Junglelord

I haven't time right now to fully digest this post, but wanted to make a quick comment or two:

... The Compton wavelength for the
nucleon calculates to be 1.32 fermis (λ0 = 1.32 × 10-13 cm).
...

and in the next post

When it comes to wave functions, one needs to apprciate time reversal waves, aka, phase conjugates.
...

IMO the Compton wavelength of any particle is the wavelength of the standing wave. This fact leads directly to all of de Broglie's equations for particles in motion (as these waves make interference waves with the matter of the observer). Also, the phase conjugate results from the ingoing wave of a particle after it passes through the centre and becomes the outgoing wave. These things are all understood by the WSM (Wave Structure of Matter) folk and some of these have made very good explanations of them. See in particular, Milo Wolff's books and Gabriel LaFreniere's animations.

Regards
Ray

[junglelord]

Very well explained Ray, your a smart man.
That was good connecting and gave me a good vision.
Carry on then....