So the universe is electric

[borut]

>>So photons are actual particles, they are not phantom messengers?

No they are very very real.

>> Does this mean photons come in different flavors?

If you stack two spins: fist is axial spin and the other is orthogonal over 2R then you get particle with a sort of wave properties.Best way to visualize is to go to Miles page on Photon and watch a video.
And what is best. With stacking spins, you can go from photon to electron to proton and so on.

[Indras9]

Best... means regards, thanks etc.

No they are very very real

So they have been observed, why then does mainstream make them virtual?

Couldn't find that video link you mentioned. Sorry.

My original 3 questions have obviously been read by a good few readers but don't seem to warrant many a response, maybe because they are dull questions to ask in this domain.

Thanks to junglelord who offered that without doubt all mass is charge, does this mean that all charge is therefore mass, that charge is the fundamental 'material' that shapes particles and gives them apparent solidity. If so, why is the LHC looking for some god particle when this is the charge particle?

Thanks also to you for taking the time and patience to ride with me.

However I am still no closer to understanding what the EU model weaknesses are other than a general defintion of data and math. I assume the math is a weakness because there is no mathematical model for an EU universe and data because mainstream isn't looking to collect the kind of data EU needs?

Thanks

[borut]

follow this link : http://milesmathis.com/wave.wmv on his paper http://milesmathis.com/super.html

what you are asking me is what Miles is explaining best. You should start reading.


lp
Borut

[junglelord]

Sorry for being late in replying.
Nice thread you started.
I believe that mass is equal to em charge, and that the two are just two ways of seeing the same thing.
Mathamaticly mass is only in 2-d and based on the geometry of charge, must be a circle. Meanwhile charge is always 3-d and distributed. Consider a stop sign. Mass would be the thin edge, charge would be the surface.
Mass is a line, probably rolled up into a circle. Pi is part of all charge equations. Mass is best understood as a pure dimension. The universe has more then four dimensions, it has five, ten or twelve and I can name them.

1. length, area, volume (thats three)
Volumes creates charge as it is distributed, and this is quantum resonance
2. Frequency the inverse of time, which has two domains, linear time (the clock) and quantum resonance (Tesla's discovery) which is two more for a total of five.
3. Charge, two fundamental charges, EM AND Electrostatic which is always distributed.
Electrons and Protons are dual charge entities. So we have four dimensions here, two for each sub-atomic unit, so we are now at nine dimensions. It is here that geometry again becomes apparent based on charge forumlas.
EM charge is a toroid, which surrounds ES charge, which is a sphere.
4. Mass, which is a linear line, probably a circle, for a total of ten dimensions.
5. Spherical Geometry is possiblly another one as well for eleven.
6. Tensegirty is the 12 dimension.

Some tutoring I received from Dave Thomson when I was learning the Aether Physics Model

Hi Dave, I have a question, why do dimensions count as only five?
Is it wrong to count them as 10 like this?
3 length
2 frequency
1 mass
4 charge
= 10 dimensions?

Some times I get mixed up when you say dimensions as 3L 2F (is that five) or is it L, F x 2, M, C = 5, or both?

Hi Junglelord
Actually, I do count the dimensions like that in the book. There is one or two more dimensions if you count the 4pi dimension.

It turns out there are two groups of five dimensions, depending on how "dimension" is meant. There is the 3L 2F group, and there is the length-frequency-mass-charge-curvature group. If dimension is meant as spatial-temporal, then it is the 3L 2F group. If dimension is meant as a type of characteristic, then it is the length-frequency-mass-charge-curvature group. There is a third group, where we would be talking about all the real dimensions of existence, which would include the ten you listed plus two dimensions of curvature because 16pi^2 is equal to 4pi x 4pi.
Dave Thomson, Aether Physics Model

Everything is spin and geometry.
Miles work about combined and stacked spins makes total sense.
If Miles is correct then gravity is Acceleration.

However I am very interested in Electrogravitics and have seen way too many things that connect to discredit another approach. I am leaning in the opposite direction and going in the direction of Laviolette and Sub-Quantum Kinetics and Aether Physics Model. I understand both and see alot of it as complimentary in the first place, but the original authors and most proponents do not see it that way, but then again I think different then other people.

To me geometry is essential. Tensegrity is essential. Charge is essential.
I believe the Aether is a rotating magnetic field (RMF) with a quantum spin of two.


When angular momentum (the 2-d circular string as it were) is encapsulated by the RMF of the Aether, it gains properties of the Aether. We find that every electron has the same mass and charge and also the proton. Neutrons are not fundamental and will disapate into its sub-divisions (e-, p+, anglar momentum of a neutrio) in 14 minutes when free. The ES charge of the electron and the proton are both the same, derived from the aether. The EM charge of the e- and p+ are both proportional to their mass. Thats why mass is the same thing as EM charge. It is the 2-d representation of the 3-d charge component of angular momentum.

Every thing spins, and spin will resolve any superposition problems of quantum mechanics and wave/particle duality issues with particle models. I always see spin and geometry. I never see the universe under five dimensions.

Four dimensions, a dumbdown.

[junglelord]

Miles of course explains mass as charge volume and charge density. Again mass is charge, and in this instance components of charge characteristics in its distributed nature. I see no problem reconciling Miles and APM in this instance. The mass=EM in APM is equilivant to the changes in volume and density of Miles, as in APM the charge volume and densitys always expand and contract...In Miles work the universe always expands and this expansive acceleration is gravity in his work. He derives this by turning Einsteins space curvature inside out and applies it to matter. Pretty simple, but quite possible to be wrong as neither Laviolette or Thomson believe in Einsteins work in the first place. Miles gives a lot of credit to Einstein. That is one place the two versions split. Laviolette and Thomson derive their work from Tesla and TT Brown...and thats an important distinction.

I used to love Einstein.
I now love Tesla and Birkeland.
I am in the Tesla camp.

I sent a lot of stuff to Miles on Eric Dollard, Hutchinson Effect, etc, and he dismissed it all, with a sweep of the hand based on other personality traits, rather then the work I presented.

I asked him about that, but he said it was snake oil.

I choose to believe that Laviolettes work on Sub-Quantum Kinetics Systems Theory has the perfect model for a EU that can never come to equilibrium...behaving like a Belousov-Zhabotinskii reaction, a dye indicator which elucidates wave-like zones of regularly alternating chemical ion concentration that spontaneously arise in the reacting solution.
http://www.etheric.com/LaVioletteBooks/ether.html

Simply put the Universe is playing an eternal game of equalization it will never reach.

If we wish to relate my gibberish to Junglelord's "information theory" which indeed seems to be emerging as the "fabric" of the cosmos, simply: It is impossible to know everything about the entire Universe at one time. You will always be missing at least one tile.

I would research APM and Paul Laviolette...

both agree with Blazelabs, another good place and also treeincarnation is a good tensegrity, spin, dual opposite website.

Some particular revelations I have come to on my own are due to my dual education in both electronics and medicine. I came to the realization that energy = information about 12 years ago when I was working on my thesis of quantum biology.

Concerning the EU, I of course was the first person in 100 years to state and believe that the Tesla Impulse Magnifying Transmitter is a Star Machine as it is the worlds largest Z Pinch ever made that ran in continous pulse mode. I was the first to point out to Dave Thomson and to believe (I never knew Bucky taught this at the time) that Tensegrity makes matter via angular momentum being encapsulated by Aether, creating a EU which is continuous charge tension (plasma universe) and discontinous matter compression (planets, stars). I believe that geometry rules matter and sacred geometry rules the nano world. I agree with Bohm that the universe is holographic and fractal. I agree with the concept of the Dirac Negitive Field and the dual opposite paradigm. I believe in Collective behaviour and Coherent behaviour. I believe that the spin and the gyroscope are one and the same and never the two shall divide. I believe that Structure and Function cannot be seperated. If you know the structure, you control the function. I came to then realize that all Tesla coil geometries are charge geometries...and then I figured out the double layer from plasma physics was essential as the capacitor is a double layer, the diode is a double layer, and the double layer is a archetype, like the spiral soliton scalar is a archtype and of course is the main archetype.

[Harry Costas]

G'day Junglelord

That is a mouth full.

I kind of agree with what you say, although we are just starting to understand supersymmetry and color-superconductor in explaining spin in compact objects including our Sun.

[Birkeland]

4. Mass, which is a linear line, probably a circle, for a total of ten dimensions.

Derived as implications of c: Would it not be more precise to distinguish between one-, two- and three-dimensional distrubutional properties of charge, where those mentioned do not fulfil the criteria of mass until it evolves into a three-dimensional spiral, in some cases building up further intrinsic tension which then radiates away perpendicular to the direction of propagation when it reaches its three-dimensional spatial frequency limit? Building dimensions on top of known spatial limitations seems like a misconception to me.

[Indras9]

Thanks junglelord

Its going to be some time before I am up to that kind of spec but I thank you for all the info and the links.

[Indras9]

You should start reading

As much as I can my friend. Thanks for the link to the videos, it was a good demonstration and I believe I understood what MIles was on about - it is interesting, but I doubt it will ever be him that gets the credit for it, he upsets way too many people

[Harry Costas]

G'day

In normal dimensions you have 4. Length, depth,width and time. In super symmetry you need to bring in other dimensions to explain the activity. This does not mean that you can travel in other dimensions in fantasy land.