Toroidal Electron

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Toroidal Electron

Unread postby Steve Beck » Mon Apr 01, 2019 7:46 pm

Electrons are magnetic dipoles, and have "spin." Two high energy photons with the energy equivalents of the electron's rest mass convert into a pair of electrons, each with opposite charges. In the reverse, an electron and positron annihilate and convert back into photons.

So for the sake of reaching a unified theory, electrons appear to be the same as photons, just in different forms. In this model in the making, an electron is a confined photon with the topology of a torus. Ring models of electrons have been postulated for a long time, by Ampere for example, and by a few others. I think Rene Descartes, a famous philosopher, also believed in toroidal vortices in a fluid aether as the particles, that is if I am not mistaken.

Here's a starting paper for my research from 1997 that inspired this model of mine, Is the electron a photon with toroidal topology?

Electron being vortex rings might be able to explain many phenomena in physics,like why electrons and positrons annihilate, among other things.

Here's an interesting experiment with photon beams forming "smoke rings," Optical "Smoke Rings" in Laser Pulses so light can produce vortex rings, much like smoke rings and bubble rings. There are also analogies to "smoke rings" in plasma physics too.

At the astrophysical scale, there are examples of ring-like phenomenon. In fact, the universe itself could be toroidal in shape.

I am sure others in this community share the same ideas as this, and I would hope this thread would bring some contribution to their research, as well as mine.

Kindest regards, Steve
Steve Beck
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 7:18 pm

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby Julian Braggins » Wed Apr 03, 2019 4:48 am

I once read long ago' Occult Chemistry' by Annie Besant and Col. Leadbeater published over 100 years ago which from memory had an electron as a Moibus strip formation, rather like a skein of wool but with a single twist. They also counted electrons in all known elements and concluded some had one or two extra in some elements and proposed what was later termed 'isotopes'

If you can get hold of a version of the book (Gutenberg Project?) you might find it interesting how they got the information and how much closer to reality it was than to the then current paradigm of the late 1800's. My field is art, so the similarity of the figure in your paper and that book jumped out at me.
Julian Braggins
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 11:13 pm

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby crawler » Wed Apr 03, 2019 4:40 pm

Steve Beck wrote:Electrons are magnetic dipoles, and have "spin." Two high energy photons with the energy equivalents of the electron's rest mass convert into a pair of electrons, each with opposite charges. In the reverse, an electron and positron annihilate and convert back into photons.

So for the sake of reaching a unified theory, electrons appear to be the same as photons, just in different forms. In this model in the making, an electron is a confined photon with the topology of a torus. Ring models of electrons have been postulated for a long time, by Ampere for example, and by a few others. I think Rene Descartes, a famous philosopher, also believed in toroidal vortices in a fluid aether as the particles, that is if I am not mistaken.

Here's a starting paper for my research from 1997 that inspired this model of mine, Is the electron a photon with toroidal topology?

Electron being vortex rings might be able to explain many phenomena in physics,like why electrons and positrons annihilate, among other things.

Here's an interesting experiment with photon beams forming "smoke rings," Optical "Smoke Rings" in Laser Pulses so light can produce vortex rings, much like smoke rings and bubble rings. There are also analogies to "smoke rings" in plasma physics too.

At the astrophysical scale, there are examples of ring-like phenomenon. In fact, the universe itself could be toroidal in shape.

I am sure others in this community share the same ideas as this, and I would hope this thread would bring some contribution to their research, as well as mine.

Kindest regards, Steve
Hi Steve, do u have a theory? Or do u go along 100% with Williamson & van der Mark.
I notice that Williamson believes in spacetime, & doesnt mention aether. But he has some good ideas.

Did u get your pair creation & annihilation ideas from Williamson?

Williamson's idea re Lorentz length contraction of a confined photon is interesting, ie LLC of a moving electron. LLC of course strictly speaking does not apply to an electron, it applies to the orbit of an electron, & LLC applies to the electrostatic forces tween atoms etc. But i think that Williamson is correct, but it needs a different name, eg WLC.

Williamson doesnt believe that gravity can give sufficient force to explain things in an electron. But i believe that gravity is the only force in the universe, & that em etc forces are all due to micro gravity (& psuedo gravity).

However this idea of mine needs a new ingredient, this is the centrifuging of aether. A spinning or orbiting object pulls in aether radially at the equator & expels aether axially at the two poles. At luminal spins this acceleration of the aether into the spinning body is a stronger force than ordinary gravity. So here spinning mass has a much greater gravity force than ordinary mass. And a spinning looping orbiting confined photon too has this psuedo gravity.

And now i need to point out another deficiency in Williamson's model (& everybody else's). Once again this might be shocking, but, em radiation is not photons, & photons are not em radiation. em radiation & charge radiation are due to photaenos, which emanate from the helical central main body of a photon. But that is another story.
crawler
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby Steve Beck » Wed Apr 03, 2019 7:00 pm

Julian Braggins wrote:I once read long ago' Occult Chemistry' by Annie Besant and Col. Leadbeater published over 100 years ago which from memory had an electron as a Moibus strip formation, rather like a skein of wool but with a single twist. They also counted electrons in all known elements and concluded some had one or two extra in some elements and proposed what was later termed 'isotopes'

If you can get hold of a version of the book (Gutenberg Project?) you might find it interesting how they got the information and how much closer to reality it was than to the then current paradigm of the late 1800's. My field is art, so the similarity of the figure in your paper and that book jumped out at me.


Thanks for the reply. Yes, I am aware of the strip model. It actually is fully compatible with toroidal models as both are visualizations of a spin 1/2 particle, ie the electron. A particle confined in a torus geometry can rotate at a 720 degree angle, while the strip can visualize the path of the particle the same way.
Steve Beck
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 7:18 pm

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby Steve Beck » Wed Apr 03, 2019 7:29 pm

crawler wrote:Hi Steve, do u have a theory? Or do u go along 100% with Williamson & van der Mark.
I notice that Williamson believes in spacetime, & doesnt mention aether. But he has some good ideas.

Did u get your pair creation & annihilation ideas from Williamson?

Williamson's idea re Lorentz length contraction of a confined photon is interesting, ie LLC of a moving electron. LLC of course strictly speaking does not apply to an electron, it applies to the orbit of an electron, & LLC applies to the electrostatic forces tween atoms etc. But i think that Williamson is correct, but it needs a different name, eg WLC.

Williamson doesnt believe that gravity can give sufficient force to explain things in an electron. But i believe that gravity is the only force in the universe, & that em etc forces are all due to micro gravity (& psuedo gravity).

However this idea of mine needs a new ingredient, this is the centrifuging of aether. A spinning or orbiting object pulls in aether radially at the equator & expels aether axially at the two poles. At luminal spins this acceleration of the aether into the spinning body is a stronger force than ordinary gravity. So here spinning mass has a much greater gravity force than ordinary mass. And a spinning looping orbiting confined photon too has this psuedo gravity.

And now i need to point out another deficiency in Williamson's model (& everybody else's). Once again this might be shocking, but, em radiation is not photons, & photons are not em radiation. em radiation & charge radiation are due to photaenos, which emanate from the helical central main body of a photon. But that is another story.


Thanks for the reply. No I don't have a developed theory but it is in the works, a hypothesis in the making. For now I am going along with Williamson as a starting point, but there are probably errors in it, and if needed they can be corrected or replaced as the model develops. A long time before I discovered Williamson's paper and even the Electric Universe itself, I had some similar ideas of creation and annihilation of electron/positron pairs, and how electrons work, and I never had an aether in my old, now abandoned model. At the time, I didn't believe in an aether, but empty space in the Newtonian sense. Now, that has changed.

There is a concept in my working hypothesis, a gas model of the aether. Electric currents, like in wires, act like wind tunnels, and the magnetic fields wrap around the current much like you see in this image

Image

This toroidal particle model works like his but in a continuous, closed circuit. This should be able to satisfy energy and momentum, and the confinement of this current should explain the indefinite lifespan of an electron. Many particles decay in very short lifespans after their creation, and I think that has to do with instability of toroidal vortex rings with certain amount of energy that the external aether can not hold together.

Both EM and Gravity are known to travel at the speed of light, so they should naturally be the same force, or separate forces of the same thing, as in the aether.

My head's in the clouds today so my apologies if my post makes no sense.
Steve Beck
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 7:18 pm

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby crawler » Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:59 pm

Steve Beck wrote:Thanks for the reply. No I don't have a developed theory but it is in the works, a hypothesis in the making. For now I am going along with Williamson as a starting point, but there are probably errors in it, and if needed they can be corrected or replaced as the model develops. A long time before I discovered Williamson's paper and even the Electric Universe itself, I had some similar ideas of creation and annihilation of electron/positron pairs, and how electrons work, and I never had an aether in my old, now abandoned model. At the time, I didn't believe in an aether, but empty space in the Newtonian sense. Now, that has changed.

There is a concept in my working hypothesis, a gas model of the aether. Electric currents, like in wires, act like wind tunnels, and the magnetic fields wrap around the current much like you see in this image

This toroidal particle model works like his but in a continuous, closed circuit. This should be able to satisfy energy and momentum, and the confinement of this current should explain the indefinite lifespan of an electron. Many particles decay in very short lifespans after their creation, and I think that has to do with instability of toroidal vortex rings with certain amount of energy that the external aether can not hold together.

Both EM and Gravity are known to travel at the speed of light, so they should naturally be the same force, or separate forces of the same thing, as in the aether.

My head's in the clouds today so my apologies if my post makes no sense.
I get my ideas from Reg Cahill (Process Physics) & Conrad Ranzan (DSSU) & Van Flandern (speed of gravity) & Ivor Catt (electricity) & Pollack (EZ water) & Dr Robitaille (the Sun)(CMBR) & Stephen Crothers (Blackholes)(Bigbang) & Miles Mathis.

Re gravity i reckon that it travels at at least 20 billion c. Quadrupolar GWs are nonsense, travelling at c is nonsense.

em radiation or at least charge radiation travels at praps 5c in the near field (Gasser).

There is no such thing as current in a conductor, or amps, or voltage (Catt & Forrest Bishop).
Hope i have helped. Enjoy the ride.
crawler
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby Steve Beck » Wed Apr 03, 2019 9:27 pm

crawler wrote:
Steve Beck wrote:Thanks for the reply. No I don't have a developed theory but it is in the works, a hypothesis in the making. For now I am going along with Williamson as a starting point, but there are probably errors in it, and if needed they can be corrected or replaced as the model develops. A long time before I discovered Williamson's paper and even the Electric Universe itself, I had some similar ideas of creation and annihilation of electron/positron pairs, and how electrons work, and I never had an aether in my old, now abandoned model. At the time, I didn't believe in an aether, but empty space in the Newtonian sense. Now, that has changed.

There is a concept in my working hypothesis, a gas model of the aether. Electric currents, like in wires, act like wind tunnels, and the magnetic fields wrap around the current much like you see in this image

This toroidal particle model works like his but in a continuous, closed circuit. This should be able to satisfy energy and momentum, and the confinement of this current should explain the indefinite lifespan of an electron. Many particles decay in very short lifespans after their creation, and I think that has to do with instability of toroidal vortex rings with certain amount of energy that the external aether can not hold together.

Both EM and Gravity are known to travel at the speed of light, so they should naturally be the same force, or separate forces of the same thing, as in the aether.

My head's in the clouds today so my apologies if my post makes no sense.
I get my ideas from Reg Cahill (Process Physics) & Conrad Ranzan (DSSU) & Van Flandern (speed of gravity) & Ivor Catt (electricity) & Pollack (EZ water) & Dr Robitaille (the Sun)(CMBR) & Stephen Crothers (Blackholes)(Bigbang) & Miles Mathis.

Re gravity i reckon that it travels at at least 20 billion c. Quadrupolar GWs are nonsense, travelling at c is nonsense.

em radiation or at least charge radiation travels at praps 5c in the near field (Gasser).

There is no such thing as current in a conductor, or amps, or voltage (Catt & Forrest Bishop).
Hope i have helped. Enjoy the ride.

I do follow Stephen Crothers and Dr Robitaille and collect ideas from them as well. Miles Mathis is where I actually discovered Williamson and van der Mark's paper.
Steve Beck
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 7:18 pm

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby Steve Beck » Wed Apr 03, 2019 9:45 pm

Found this image on Pinterest and while interesting I am quite confused by it...

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/7e/f8/5b ... 584fbc.jpg

The image is too big according to forum settings so a link will have to do.
Steve Beck
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 7:18 pm

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby crawler » Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:47 am

I am thinking that a good model or reality itself will show elec'mag'charge radiation as various excitations of the aether, one of them, the primary one, possibly like tornadic tubes, each tube possibly a mini-helix emanating from the central main helix.

I think that we should firstly define the free photon better, then worry about the confined photon.
crawler
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby Webbman » Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:57 am

Steve Beck wrote:Electrons are magnetic dipoles, and have "spin." Two high energy photons with the energy equivalents of the electron's rest mass convert into a pair of electrons, each with opposite charges. In the reverse, an electron and positron annihilate and convert back into photons.

So for the sake of reaching a unified theory, electrons appear to be the same as photons, just in different forms. In this model in the making, an electron is a confined photon with the topology of a torus. Ring models of electrons have been postulated for a long time, by Ampere for example, and by a few others. I think Rene Descartes, a famous philosopher, also believed in toroidal vortices in a fluid aether as the particles, that is if I am not mistaken.

Here's a starting paper for my research from 1997 that inspired this model of mine, Is the electron a photon with toroidal topology?

Electron being vortex rings might be able to explain many phenomena in physics,like why electrons and positrons annihilate, among other things.

Here's an interesting experiment with photon beams forming "smoke rings," Optical "Smoke Rings" in Laser Pulses so light can produce vortex rings, much like smoke rings and bubble rings. There are also analogies to "smoke rings" in plasma physics too.

At the astrophysical scale, there are examples of ring-like phenomenon. In fact, the universe itself could be toroidal in shape.

I am sure others in this community share the same ideas as this, and I would hope this thread would bring some contribution to their research, as well as mine.

Kindest regards, Steve



in my view electrons arent so much toroidal photons as photons are torsioned electrons.

you need continuity of shape and function

heat = wild motion of free single strand/tube, basic building block of the aether.
electron = regulated loop for storage and transmission of waveforms.
light= torsioned loop, transport version of the electron. all waveforms accounted for by nature of torsion and tube count. Like electrons the larger structures are less stable.
electricity/electric/magnetic field= alignments of the tubes motions via transverse (current) and longtidual waveforms (pressure).

the tubes exist because they are at near infinite electrical pressure. Dont know how or why.
We shall know them by their works
Webbman
 
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby Steve Beck » Thu Apr 04, 2019 10:28 am

crawler wrote:I am thinking that a good model or reality itself will show elec'mag'charge radiation as various excitations of the aether, one of them, the primary one, possibly like tornadic tubes, each tube possibly a mini-helix emanating from the central main helix.

I think that we should firstly define the free photon better, then worry about the confined photon.


This experiment should be of interest here: https://www.osa-opn.org/home/newsroom/2 ... ?feed=News

Laser beams forming into vortex rings.
Steve Beck
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 7:18 pm

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby Steve Beck » Thu Apr 04, 2019 10:35 am

Webbman wrote:
Steve Beck wrote:Electrons are magnetic dipoles, and have "spin." Two high energy photons with the energy equivalents of the electron's rest mass convert into a pair of electrons, each with opposite charges. In the reverse, an electron and positron annihilate and convert back into photons.

So for the sake of reaching a unified theory, electrons appear to be the same as photons, just in different forms. In this model in the making, an electron is a confined photon with the topology of a torus. Ring models of electrons have been postulated for a long time, by Ampere for example, and by a few others. I think Rene Descartes, a famous philosopher, also believed in toroidal vortices in a fluid aether as the particles, that is if I am not mistaken.

Here's a starting paper for my research from 1997 that inspired this model of mine, Is the electron a photon with toroidal topology?

Electron being vortex rings might be able to explain many phenomena in physics,like why electrons and positrons annihilate, among other things.

Here's an interesting experiment with photon beams forming "smoke rings," Optical "Smoke Rings" in Laser Pulses so light can produce vortex rings, much like smoke rings and bubble rings. There are also analogies to "smoke rings" in plasma physics too.

At the astrophysical scale, there are examples of ring-like phenomenon. In fact, the universe itself could be toroidal in shape.

I am sure others in this community share the same ideas as this, and I would hope this thread would bring some contribution to their research, as well as mine.

Kindest regards, Steve



in my view electrons arent so much toroidal photons as photons are torsioned electrons.

you need continuity of shape and function

heat = wild motion of free single strand/tube, basic building block of the aether.
electron = regulated loop for storage and transmission of waveforms.
light= torsioned loop, transport version of the electron. all waveforms accounted for by nature of torsion and tube count. Like electrons the larger structures are less stable.
electricity/electric/magnetic field= alignments of the tubes motions via transverse (current) and longtidual waveforms (pressure).

the tubes exist because they are at near infinite electrical pressure. Dont know how or why.

Thanks for the reply,

Unfortunately I don't understand how all this works. Let's begin with, what structure is your aether?
Steve Beck
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 7:18 pm

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby crawler » Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:25 pm

Steve Beck wrote:
crawler wrote:I am thinking that a good model or reality itself will show elec'mag'charge radiation as various excitations of the aether, one of them, the primary one, possibly like tornadic tubes, each tube possibly a mini-helix emanating from the central main helix.
I think that we should firstly define the free photon better, then worry about the confined photon.

This experiment should be of interest here: https://www.osa-opn.org/home/newsroom/2 ... ?feed=News
Laser beams forming into vortex rings.
Yes that laser eddy stuff is interesting. Lasers affect the refractive index of the medium (air helium) & this results in some kind of focusing or polarising etc. This is a light wave & wave front & wave train kind of happening i guess, & doesnt happen in vacuum. Which reminds me that in vacuum a laser beam will affect (attract) another beam. But i guess that this is getting away from an electron. But like i said to understand an electron (a confined photon)(Jeans -- a bottled photon) we firstly have to understand the free photon. But to understand a free photon we have to understand emc radiation (photaenos).

And for emc radiation i read Ivor Catt's stuff (papers & youtube)(& Forrest Bishop's papers) which is mainly about electricity. Catt doesnt believe in a rolling wave where electric fields & magnetic fields tumble over each other, Catt believes in a uniform slab of E by H, what he calls the Heavyside signal, propagating at c/n, n being the refractive index of the medium surrounding the conductor(s). This signal never weakens or dies, it is perpetual, which supports the idea that photaenos emanating from a photon propagate to infinity (whatever this means). But Catt doesnt mention aether i think.

But i dont understand much of any of this electric & magnetic & charge stuff, i aint a scientist, i know a few buzzwords. & i can spot a good idea when i see one.

Anyhow photaenos are sticky, they love to fly in formations, hencely we easily get waves of light, & wave fronts & wave trains. Photaenos are slowed by interference from other photaenos, because the aether has a limited capacity for making photaenos, the photaenos fight for the use of the available aether. Hencely a high density of photaenos slow all of the photaenos, & the slowing feeds back to the main helical body of the free photon, slowing the propagation of the photon, what i call photaeno-drag. Photaeno-drag is responsible for slowing of light in medium & near mass, which gives us refraction, diffraction, bending of light near Sun etc etc.

This photaeno-drag stuff must come into play inside an electron, where i guess all emc stuff annihilates (ie it doesnt merely cancel).
crawler
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby crawler » Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:57 pm

deleted
Last edited by crawler on Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.
crawler
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Re: Toroidal Electron

Unread postby crawler » Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:57 pm

Is a confined photon one wavelength long?
Is a free photon one wavelength long?

Standard science doesnt mention the length of a photon. Or if it does then the inference is that it is at least one wavelength long.

Praps a free photon is one wave long. It makes sense that a photon has length, & length needs two ends. The emitted photaenos give a photon width, which i guess makes the photon a kind of cone propagating along & out. And the cone has a pointy front.
The rear of the cone is also a cone, a cone of nothingness, in effect parallel to the cone of thingness, two cones propagating along at c/n, both cones defining the edge between nothingness & thingness, the thingness in between the cones having an axis joining the two points, the axis being the main central helical part of the photon, & the rest of the volume tween the cones being full of photaenos emanating out squarely from the central helix (moreso than squarely from the axis).

But if a free photon is many wavelengths long, praps without a neat clear bum, then a confined photon might nonetheless be only one wavelength long, ie by virtue of an overlapping kind of process, rather than a clean head biting a clean bum kind of process.

If photaenos propagate outwards at c whilst the photon itself propagated forward at c then the two cones angle back at 45 deg. However a 45 deg angle would only apply to very long wavelengths, the angle for shorter wavelengths would be more than 45 deg because photaenos dont emanate squarely from the axis, they emanate squarely from the helix, hencely some photaenos angle forwards a bit. Hencely the leading cone is always more than 45 deg, the shorter the wavelength then the tighter the helix & the more forwardness of propagation of some of the photaenos.

And the rear cone (defining the rear edge of nothingness) would angle back at less than 45 deg, because some photaenos angle back a bit. At the rear the photaenos lose contact with the helix, ie they are shed off, ie individual photaenos are not dragged along by the helix.

However, photaenos propagate at praps 5c in the nearfield (Gasser), not 1c (or praps 5c/n i suppose). So here we have a problem. It means that for very long wavelengths the two cones dont angle back at 45 deg, ie 1 in 1, they angle back at 5 in 1 (ie giving very blunt cones).
And for very short wavelengths some photaenos must angle forward out ahead of the front of the main helix.
So, the forward cone might be very blunt, or even over-blunt, & the rear cone would have its own angle.

This free photon stuff must affect what happens inside & outside an electron (ie a confined photon), ie it must affect what an electron is & what it looks like & what it does. Just saying.
crawler
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:33 am

Next

Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests

cron