[continued from previous message]

It crushes human hopes for making faster than light motors, restricts the scopes for humanity, makes us all prey to disaster from asteroid hits... surely
these are issues big enough to cause the reconsideration of the existing dogma.
That light is used as the standard for length does not in any way invalidate
my position that the speed of light varies with the speed of emitter.
I do expect people to go through all my theoretical and experimental work and consider them carefully, as opposed to blanket dismissal. Surely there are
SOME honest scientists still left on the planet!

However those same facts can be

demonstrated without the assumptions that Einstein had to
make.

What are the REAL objections to the aether theory? I suspect it
is something theological, and so, nothing scientific. "Though
vanquished, he will argue still". Only religious people can
behave like this!

GPS is the only good use for the Lorentz transform, but that is
pure conformal mapping. SR can only be correct if the Earth
stays put as in Aristotleian thinking. In which case, the
transform works with two wrongs giving a right. The two wrongs
are: Earth is still, and space is twisted.

I know it is tough for scientists to give up on SR, GR, QM, etc.
but this has to happen. All the so-called relativistic effects
are simply due to the motion of the Earth in aether.

Another thing about the fake EM theory. Accelerating charge
do not "radiate": 1) Lamor's theorem is derived base on a
huge dose of assumptions: a) speed of electric interaction
is at light speed. Although benj believe it is correct, I
hold a different view. It is more a carry over habit from SR
that nothing goes faster than light. In gravitation, it
seems there are analysis that shows gravity should transmit
almost instantaneously in order that a planet's orbit is
stable. b) the very mathematics of the derivation seems
questionable. 2) According to QM, all radiations come only
from bound electrons of atoms jumping quantum states. So
accelerated free electrons cannot radiate as there is no
intrinsic energy that the electron possess. Even the theory
of bremsstralung radiation is questionable as those particles
are not bounded to nucleus and have nothing to "radiate".

Radiation is due to the changing electric field which creates a
changing magnetic field which again creates a changing electric
field and that creates a changing magnetic field and so on and
on and on. This happens in truly infinite ways from every object
in the universe. If you are an antenna engineer, as I was,
making radiators out of dull metal, you can know the feeling when
it suddenly starts to radiate at some frequency corresponding to
the design. Without knowing how the electric fields will form it
is not possible to make a radiator, nor is it possible to
optimise its performance.

This it totally wrong. Faraday's law is bogus (see my website and
Jefimenko.

Putting up some name does not convince. Science does not work like
religion. At least, that is what I was brought up to hold in my long
career in engineering and mathematics, including the physics of
radiation and em forces.

So your idea is that if you never examine any facts then your beliefs
must stay true. You have no career in engineering and mathematics.
Sounds more like a long career in journalism.

As you simply drop names and deny, you do not carry any scientific thrust. Trying to put me down only exposes your fundamental hollowness.
To the extent people like you manage science funding, humanity is cursed.

Thought of radiation as a stream of particles merely confuse the
issue. It is based upon the photoelectric effect, but that can
be easily explained with antenna theory.

No it can't. The two are incompatible.

Antenna theory came much after all the relativity and quantum stuff.
Anyone like myself who has designed phased array radars cannot have
any use for quantum, photons, etc. It is easy to apply the
fundamental non-linearities associated with frequency to the
mechanics of the photo-electric effect to get rid of the objections
to classical physics. I suppose, in those days they did not have
such a good idea about the internals of atoms, so they made up a
theory which was shonky to the extreme. But, out of loyalty or some
other reason, they are still hanging on to it.

There is no "antenna theory" Get busy Mr. Designer! There is just some
nibbling around the edges. If I give you a conductor in space of some
arbitrary shape, can you give me the currents on it and the radiation
from it? You are allowed to use Maxwell's theory. No such formula
exists. No such algorithm exists. It's not that it can't it's just that
nobody has done it.

You are not just wrong - you are also thoroughly ignorant. Having currents on conductors and predicting the radiation pattern with the resulting electric
fields is what antenna engineering is all about.

Ok. I'll give you an arbitrary conductor in space with a couple of
terminals an you can give me the current distribution on it. OK>
I"ll wait right here for your break-through formula. Why is it the less someone knows the more they think every one else is ignorant?

That is a dipole. Well explained in Jordan's book. The formulas are complex.
It takes years to fully understand them and implement them with engineering. They said back in 1989 or so that I was the only one around who really knew
how antennas worked, and I used my knowledge to make antennas from scratch, that worked beautifully. In fact, they have been used to keep Indian defence systems alert, with top-quality radar. I did have some colleagues who understood my work, and carried it on for the safety of the nation. Nonsense like QM I had to study in my engineering course. It took me quite a while to dismiss it as of no worth to engineering. e=mcc and e-hv are simple equations for ancient and simple minds, who are best off watching such low TV stuff as Big Bang Theory! Characters there are not just ignorant, they are clowns.

But then, we cannot make the modern world with bad old ideas - in the engineering world of antennas, quantum theory does not exist! It is only Maxwell.

This is complete ignorance. I'm not even going to bother to explain.

You cannot explain. You are not an antenna engineer.

btw for 10 years I have made exactly the formulas and implemented them in software to design antennas with specified radiation patterns, like every other antenna engineer. To us, the qm types are the veriest of quacks and fruitcakes. We do the designs that work, make money, makes the world go.

The Einsteinian charlatans can still find refuge with the media and academia.

That is because Einstein is GOD! Get over it!

heh-heh-heh-heh-heh-heh-heh-heh The truth at last! Modern physicists are atheistic nutcases with some dead guy as their one true god. Okay I admit that relativity is a religion, but why should I think they are scientific??! :-)

Sorry dude, but I"m not here as a missionary to convert you. You have to
do your own thinking. Start with questioning your own thoughts. It's
been a hoot! But you still haven't a clue.

I am the missionary here. I am out to convert the voodoo
physicists to the real physics of the infinite universe, with these two formulas:

c(v)=c+v
e=0.5mVVN(N-k)

and my video films:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqBfwAClVlg
IFE - 1 Ground Experiments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9eGq4Oiv9s
IFE - 2 Experimental setups

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3hC48BMrno
IFE - 3 Pendulum experiments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sSPxGsLkws
IFE - 4 Evolution of spaceship

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJdM6UDPauU
IFE - 5 Hydrogen Transmission Network

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUAcx7rAplc
IFE - 6 Spaceship Design

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5Zbpvc3fdA
IFE - 7 Anti-Gravity

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA9LUwqMhxY
IFE - 8 New Physics

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

The Taj, or Tejo-mahalaya

It was a temple-market complex like Humayun's tomb in Delhi before it was converted to a mausoleum.

I was there in the Taj and its surrounds in 2016, with my family. It was obvious to me, what it was like say some 1000 years ago. The blue waters of the unpolluted Jamuna, teeming with life... boats with goods docked just behind the temple, and goods
were unloaded. They were put on display along the niches of the walls, and stored in the many rooms of the complex.

The two buildings on either side, and the entry building, were places of rest for the travellers and businessmen. And also offices, where money and goods were exchanged, for mutual profit. All under the kindly gaze of Lord Surya over Lord Shiva, as
unlimited supply for unlimited goodness, in the main temple. And that in turn presided over by Lakshmi, meaning unlimited grace and beauty, the true motivation for all business. The excellences of all the involved parties were demonstrated in music and
song, on the marble platforms.

Can we do better today? In my mind's eye I saw elevated crystal walkways at various elevations going all around the existing paths, where people could get even better views of the Taj temple market complex. It would take an architectural genius to do
such a thing. Make various unobtrusive elevators, moving platforms, etc. to carry the people around in huge numbers for unlimited profit and joy. The work could start with money raised from keeping the Taj to its original purpose... the niches could once
again be filled with shops, and business reign in the area.

Could the level of the Jamuna be raised once again to the former levels? Now that is an even more formidable task!


The physics aphorisms of Arindam

1.1 While relativity is completely wrong, such cannot be said of quantum theory.

1.2 However it depends upon energy levels of the orbital electrons. It ignores the existence of aether. It is devoid of any geometric basis for electron movement.

1.3 Depending upon energy levels to begin with is perilous. Energy is for business and money-making - the physicist should be interested primarily about forces. And as force unlike power/energy is a vector quantity, and so has direction, the geometrical
situation is of paramount importance.

1.4 Using quantum theory, reflection of light may be explained this way - an incoming packet of energy called a photon causes an electron to jump from a lower energy orbital shell to a higher energy orbital shell. This is unstable, so it jumps down from
the higher energy orbital shell to the lower energy orbital shell. The difference in energy is emitted now as a photon.

1.5 In 1.4 above the implicit notion is that the electron orbits are circular. It is also implied that the photon must have some mass as it has energy following e=mcc, and this mass with movmentum mc has the energy to kick up the electron to the higher
orbit shell.

1.6 Now let us consider the above phenomenon in terms of aether, forces and geometries.

1.7 Aether by definition is a very fine solid through which all protons and electrons and neutrons pass the way bullets may go through grass which does not break but just bends. The photon in the aetheric context is a small burst of radiant energy. It is
a disturbance with no mass.

1.8 When this aetheric disturbance caused by the radiation reaches the electron and as it envelops the electron, it changes the orbit of the electron by displacement.

1.9 In the process of displacement the disturbance loses its energy as the force to displace the electron is lost with the movement of the electron. This is for the first quarter cycle of the wave - from zero to peak

1.10 As a result of the energy absorption the orbit of the electron is no longer circular but elliptical, and more "high energy" that way.

1.11 An electric field is created with the dipole effect caused by the elliptic orbit. There was no electric field before the disturbance; now there is; so there has been a change of electric field meaning that has to be a corresponding changing magnetic
field. Which will creating another changing electric field and so on till we have a burst of radiation, equivalent to the photon.

1.12 The electron at the higher energy level or greater ellipticity can be returned to the original orbit shell with the next quarter of the wave, from peak to zero. Again, as per 1.11 there will be a electromagnetic wave formation completing the half
cycle.

1.13 The electron in this case does not behave as a single orbiting particle but as a thin and elastic rubber band.

1.14 The idea of the electron not as a particle but as a rubber band is of crucial importance in our study of he nucleus of an atom.





2.1 Aether, a solid made of infinitely fine particles, fills the entire infinite universe.

2.2 The particles can vibrate, that is, oscillate about their mean positions.

2.3 The only force in the universe is electric as matter is made up of positive and negative charges.

2.4 When the electric field changes, it creates a changing magnetic field, which creates a changing electric field and so on. The changing electric fields vibrate the aether.

2.5 If the electric field loops as in a current, there is a steady magnetic field.

2.6 Matter is made up of negative charges called electrons and protons that are positive charges.

2.7 Under mutual attraction, they go through aether as a diver through a wave. When static, they let the wave push them this way and that.

2.8 Aether is a solid but its density cannot be found as aether fills everything including the space within the atom.

2.9 Only the density of protons and electrons can be estimated, for their mass and volume may be known from experiments.

2.10 Aether cannot affect the normal movement of the electrons and protons as they go through aether. There is no drag.

2.11 Aether bends to let electrons and protons squeeze through. No loss of momentum, thus, in the normal situation.

2.11 But with the applies electric field there is aetheric swaying from vibration about their mean positions according to the frequency of the changing electric field. This is what moves the electrons from their normal states. In this displacement of the electron the kinetic energy of the electromagnetic wave is absorbed.

2.12 Thus only when there is an electric field causing vibration to the aether there is momentum transfer to the electron.

2.13 Electrons are like rubber bands while protons may be spherical.




3.1 The aether particles are infinitely small by definition.

3.2 As they are infinitely small like points they have as you say no shape nor structure not volume.

3.3 Under the impact of electrical forces they vibrate and this vibration impacts upon the momentum of the electrons.

3.4 Thus the kinetic energy of the vibration transforms to the kinetic energy of the electron.

3.5 The reverse situation happens when the electron loses its kinetic energy. It creates the aetheric vibration.

3.6 This is understood it as water molecules going past a very thin set of wires forming a sieve. Only this time the water molecules stick to each other in their relative positions.

3.7 Aether particles bend aside to let the electrons and protons pass through them.





4.1 The definition of aether follows from a book referred to and quoted from in my 2005 post.'

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.culture.australian/wwQ4LkfM4bc/7uhLA2kLDfQJ

4.2 aether: a solid where infinitely fine, infinitely elastic particles filling the entire infinite universe including the inter-atomic spaces maintain their respective positions. It is the medium for the propagation of energy with electromagnetic waves.

4.3 The 19th century notions of aether are extended to explain the propagation of electromagnetic waves acting upon the electrons in matter; and how matter receives these waves and creates these waves. This is the field approach where forces with their
directions are given primary importance.

4.4 This is a far superior and intuitive approach than its alternative, the energy based quantum theory which depends solely upon assumptions piled upon assumptions.




5.1 Consider a firecracker - the amount of gunpowder is small as compared to the amount of packing. When the cracker explodes, the paper or string is blown out. It is supposed that the energy of the firecracker comes from the powder alone. For the string
or paper surrounding the powder is chemically inert.

5.2 The above fact, that packing is needed for powerful explosions, was very well known to all those using muzzle loader guns. They had to pack the powder in.

5.3 That loose powder does not explode, merely burns well, is also clearly shown by the behaviour of fuses.

5.4 If we go by the calorie output of fuses and crackers, we should get the same result.

5.4 However firecrackers, bombs, etc. that require a lot of packing (paper or steel casing) produce a lot more kinetic energy than the fuse.

5.5 This kinetic energy is evidently coming from the packing.

5.6 Tighter the packing, greater the energy.

5.7 These are some of the basic issues, observed from Nature, that will be useful to understand the formula of energy creation and destruction, namely 0.5mVVN(N-k).





6.1 Let a mass m in free space have within its geometry an internal energy source that can increase its velocity by an amount v each time an amount of energy k.E from it is utilised. The kinetic increases after each hit increases by E = 0.5mvv. k is an
efficiency factor greater than 1 related to the losses involved in converting the internal energy to the kinetic energy. After N hits the velocity will be Nv. With respect to the initial state the kinetic energy of the mass will be 0.5mvvNN. The internal
energy used up will be NkE or 0.5mvvNk. Thus the increase in energy e after N hits will be, if N>k, e=0.5mvvN(N-k).

6.2 The most obvious display of internal energy creating internal force equally in directions is the chemical explosion. A matchstick, a bullet, a chemical bomb - these are all examples of chemical explosion showing the utilisation of internal energy used for creating internal force, that causing heat and kinetic energy to
the surroundings.

6.3 Aphorisms 5.1 to 5.7 (given below) elaborate on the nature of the explosion in relation to the energy generated, with respect to packing of the explosive matter.

6.4 The nuclear explosion creates a great deal more destructive kinetic
energy than a chemical explosion. This is because the packing in a nuclear explosion is much more dense than a chemical reaction. In a chemical reaction atoms are involved. In a nuclear reaction the nucleus is involved.

6.5 In quantitative terms, the dimension of an atom is of the order of 10^-10m; the dimension of the nucleus is of the order of 10^-15m or 10^5 times more. This is the linear dimension - in three dimensions the packing of nuclei will be denser by a factor of 10^15. However in a nuclear explosion it is not as if all the
atoms are bunched up as nuclei - so the packing factor is in between 10^5 to 10^15. Let us say that a nuclear explosion the active constituents are packed to the order of 10^6 with respect to the chemical explosion to be conservative.

6.6 From the above rough analysis, it is obvious that the nuclear explosion, for the same mass, should be 10^10 times more powerful than the chemical explosion. 1 ton of TNT generates 5*10^9 joules; a nuclear bomb of mass 1 ton of active material (the
nuclear material plus the packing surrounds) should thus generate 5*10^15 joules. Now a hydrogen bomb of 1 Megaton generates 5*10^15 joules.

6.7 Thus the simple matter of packing the fissile material explains the vast disparity of energy between the nuclear explosion and the chemical explosion.

6.8 What is happening is that the N factor in the equation e=0.5mvvN(N-k)
is much higher for the nuclear explosion than it is for the chemical. Each atom in m gets hit N times in any explosion - greater the packing, more the N. The outer atoms get hit by inner atoms that are getting out in all directions, again and again. The
force is directed in all directions; the non-fissile elements get hit by the fissile atoms that keep on expanding out at a great velocity.

7.0 About the hydrogen bomb, and how the so-called strong nuclear force is actually the familiar electrostatic force operating at the atomic nucleus level.

7.1 The hydrogen atom is composed of a single proton and a single electron circling around it, as per the most established model of the hydrogen atom. There are isotopes of hydrogen occuring naturally - there is a neutron associated with that single
proton. It is this isotope - deuterium - of hydrogen that is used in nuclear bombs (called hydrogen bombs, based upon supposed fusion).


7.2 In fusion, the deuterium is supposed to become another isotope - tritium - after intense heat is applied as a result of an earlier fission bomb. There is apparently a drop in mass, that is translated into energy. However, we can propose another
alternative explanation for this great energy.


7.3 Consider a neutron to be a close union of a proton and an electron. The bond between them is extraordinarily strong - two charges joined at a zero distance, so the bonding force is very great. However, let us assert that the electron does not lose
its identity even in this close union.


7.4 A deuterium atom can thus be seen as the union of two protons joined by an electron. The bonding force here is very strong, but can be broken with enormous impact is caused as a result of nuclear fission.


7.5 Nuclear fission causes the extraordinary aether vibration to break apart the bonding in the deuterium atom. The two protons in the nucleus cannot be held together by the electron. As the electron gives up its hold, the two protons, that are at a very
close distance, move apart with extraordinary force.


7.6 The movement of the protons with respect to the electron causes a time varying electric field, which will create a time varying magnetic field, and together they will proceed as a very high energy electromagnetic gamma ray once again causing aetheric
vibration. This vibration will dissociate the other deuterium atoms, causing a chain reaction. Being very fast, and very powerful with the most extrordinary electrostatic forces being released, the hydrogen bomb is thus created.

7.7 The hydrogen bomb thus has nothing to do with fusion, but with the fission of the deuterium isotope of hydrogen.

7.8 The deuterium isotope may be considered the fundamental building block for the nuclei of all other elements. Multiples of them, with extra neutrons, constitute the nuclei of the heavier elements. The electrons glue the protons together, while
presenting a net positive charge that are balanced by the electrons orbiting the nucleus.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

[continued from previous message]

results) then the null results indicate that if the Earth is
moving and not fixed, the speed of light must change with the
speed of the emitter. The link below gives the details.

MM found no "aether drift". Indeed Jefimenko has shown that
Einstein's assumption of the constant speed of light is NOT needed >>>> to formulate SR. I highly recommend reading what he did. However
centuries of experiment shows that the speed of light does not
depend on the velocity of its source.

When you take the Earth as moving, then the apparatus is also moving >>> just as the light has left its source. Taking the movement of the
apparatus in space into consideration, the MMI experiment gives null >>> result ONLY when the speed of light varies as the speed of the Earth. >>> MMI null results clearly show that if the Earth is moving, then the >>> nulls take place as the speed of light varies with speed of the
Earth, as the emitter has the speed of the Earth. What they forgot to >>> take into consideration was that the apparatus was also moving in
that time interval. Not taking that into consideration led to the
huge bungle which is modern physics.

Details below-

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.culture.australian/wwQ4LkfM4bc/7uhLA2kLDfQJ

there are lots of bungles in modern physics but this isn't one. The
reason light is now used as the standard of all length is because the >> above story is wrong.

This is the biggest bungle of all, that light speed is invariant. It is absolute nonsense. To continue to believe in it, is criminal to the extreme.
It crushes human hopes for making faster than light motors, restricts the
scopes for humanity, makes us all prey to disaster from asteroid hits... surely
these are issues big enough to cause the reconsideration of the existing dogma.
That light is used as the standard for length does not in any way invalidate
my position that the speed of light varies with the speed of emitter.
I do expect people to go through all my theoretical and experimental work
and consider them carefully, as opposed to blanket dismissal. Surely there are
SOME honest scientists still left on the planet!

However those same facts can be

demonstrated without the assumptions that Einstein had to
make.

What are the REAL objections to the aether theory? I suspect it >>>>> is something theological, and so, nothing scientific. "Though
vanquished, he will argue still". Only religious people can
behave like this!

GPS is the only good use for the Lorentz transform, but that is >>>>> pure conformal mapping. SR can only be correct if the Earth
stays put as in Aristotleian thinking. In which case, the
transform works with two wrongs giving a right. The two wrongs
are: Earth is still, and space is twisted.

I know it is tough for scientists to give up on SR, GR, QM, etc. >>>>> but this has to happen. All the so-called relativistic effects
are simply due to the motion of the Earth in aether.

Another thing about the fake EM theory. Accelerating charge >>>>>>> do not "radiate": 1) Lamor's theorem is derived base on a
huge dose of assumptions: a) speed of electric interaction
is at light speed. Although benj believe it is correct, I
hold a different view. It is more a carry over habit from SR >>>>>>> that nothing goes faster than light. In gravitation, it
seems there are analysis that shows gravity should transmit >>>>>>> almost instantaneously in order that a planet's orbit is
stable. b) the very mathematics of the derivation seems
questionable. 2) According to QM, all radiations come only
from bound electrons of atoms jumping quantum states. So
accelerated free electrons cannot radiate as there is no
intrinsic energy that the electron possess. Even the theory >>>>>>> of bremsstralung radiation is questionable as those particles >>>>>>> are not bounded to nucleus and have nothing to "radiate".

Radiation is due to the changing electric field which creates a >>>>> changing magnetic field which again creates a changing electric >>>>> field and that creates a changing magnetic field and so on and
on and on. This happens in truly infinite ways from every object >>>>> in the universe. If you are an antenna engineer, as I was,
making radiators out of dull metal, you can know the feeling when >>>>> it suddenly starts to radiate at some frequency corresponding to >>>>> the design. Without knowing how the electric fields will form it >>>>> is not possible to make a radiator, nor is it possible to
optimise its performance.

This it totally wrong. Faraday's law is bogus (see my website and >>>> Jefimenko.

Putting up some name does not convince. Science does not work like
religion. At least, that is what I was brought up to hold in my long >>> career in engineering and mathematics, including the physics of
radiation and em forces.

So your idea is that if you never examine any facts then your beliefs >> must stay true. You have no career in engineering and mathematics.
Sounds more like a long career in journalism.

As you simply drop names and deny, you do not carry any scientific thrust.
Trying to put me down only exposes your fundamental hollowness.
To the extent people like you manage science funding, humanity is cursed.

Thought of radiation as a stream of particles merely confuse the >>>>> issue. It is based upon the photoelectric effect, but that can
be easily explained with antenna theory.

No it can't. The two are incompatible.

Antenna theory came much after all the relativity and quantum stuff. >>> Anyone like myself who has designed phased array radars cannot have >>> any use for quantum, photons, etc. It is easy to apply the
fundamental non-linearities associated with frequency to the
mechanics of the photo-electric effect to get rid of the objections >>> to classical physics. I suppose, in those days they did not have
such a good idea about the internals of atoms, so they made up a
theory which was shonky to the extreme. But, out of loyalty or some >>> other reason, they are still hanging on to it.

There is no "antenna theory" Get busy Mr. Designer! There is just some >> nibbling around the edges. If I give you a conductor in space of some >> arbitrary shape, can you give me the currents on it and the radiation >> from it? You are allowed to use Maxwell's theory. No such formula
exists. No such algorithm exists. It's not that it can't it's just that >> nobody has done it.

You are not just wrong - you are also thoroughly ignorant. Having currents
on conductors and predicting the radiation pattern with the resulting electric
fields is what antenna engineering is all about.

Ok. I'll give you an arbitrary conductor in space with a couple of terminals an you can give me the current distribution on it. OK>
I"ll wait right here for your break-through formula. Why is it the less someone knows the more they think every one else is ignorant?

That is a dipole. Well explained in Jordan's book. The formulas are complex. It takes years to fully understand them and implement them with engineering. They said back in 1989 or so that I was the only one around who really knew how antennas worked, and I used my knowledge to make antennas from scratch, that worked beautifully. In fact, they have been used to keep Indian defence systems alert, with top-quality radar. I did have some colleagues who understood my work, and carried it on for the safety of the nation. Nonsense like QM I had to study in my engineering course. It took me quite a while to dismiss it as of no worth to engineering. e=mcc and e-hv are simple equations
for ancient and simple minds, who are best off watching such low TV stuff as Big Bang Theory! Characters there are not just ignorant, they are clowns.

But then, we cannot make the modern world with bad old ideas - in the engineering world of antennas, quantum theory does not exist! It is only Maxwell.

This is complete ignorance. I'm not even going to bother to explain.

You cannot explain. You are not an antenna engineer.

btw for 10 years I have made exactly the formulas and implemented them in
software to design antennas with specified radiation patterns, like every
other antenna engineer. To us, the qm types are the veriest of quacks and
fruitcakes. We do the designs that work, make money, makes the world go.

The Einsteinian charlatans can still find refuge with the media and academia.

That is because Einstein is GOD! Get over it!

heh-heh-heh-heh-heh-heh-heh-heh The truth at last! Modern physicists are atheistic nutcases with some dead guy as their one true god. Okay I admit that
relativity is a religion, but why should I think they are scientific??! :-)

Sorry dude, but I"m not here as a missionary to convert you. You have to do your own thinking. Start with questioning your own thoughts. It's
been a hoot! But you still haven't a clue.

I am the missionary here. I am out to convert the voodoo
physicists to the real physics of the infinite universe, with these two formulas:

c(v)=c+v
e=0.5mVVN(N-k)

and my video films:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqBfwAClVlg
IFE - 1 Ground Experiments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9eGq4Oiv9s
IFE - 2 Experimental setups

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3hC48BMrno
IFE - 3 Pendulum experiments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sSPxGsLkws
IFE - 4 Evolution of spaceship

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJdM6UDPauU
IFE - 5 Hydrogen Transmission Network

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUAcx7rAplc
IFE - 6 Spaceship Design

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5Zbpvc3fdA
IFE - 7 Anti-Gravity

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA9LUwqMhxY
IFE - 8 New Physics

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

The Taj, or Tejo-mahalaya

It was a temple-market complex like Humayun's tomb in Delhi before it was converted to a mausoleum.

I was there in the Taj and its surrounds in 2016, with my family. It was obvious to me, what it was like say some 1000 years ago. The blue waters of the unpolluted Jamuna, teeming with life... boats with goods docked just behind the temple, and goods

were unloaded. They were put on display along the niches of the walls, and stored in the many rooms of the complex.

The two buildings on either side, and the entry building, were places of rest for the travellers and businessmen. And also offices, where money and goods were exchanged, for mutual profit. All under the kindly gaze of Lord Surya over Lord Shiva, as

unlimited supply for unlimited goodness, in the main temple. And that in turn presided over by Lakshmi, meaning unlimited grace and beauty, the true motivation for all business. The excellences of all the involved parties were demonstrated in music and
song, on the marble platforms.

Can we do better today? In my mind's eye I saw elevated crystal walkways at various elevations going all around the existing paths, where people could get even better views of the Taj temple market complex. It would take an architectural genius to do

such a thing. Make various unobtrusive elevators, moving platforms, etc. to carry the people around in huge numbers for unlimited profit and joy. The work could start with money raised from keeping the Taj to its original purpose... the niches could once
again be filled with shops, and business reign in the area.

Could the level of the Jamuna be raised once again to the former levels? Now that is an even more formidable task!

The physics aphorisms of Arindam

1.1 While relativity is completely wrong, such cannot be said of quantum theory.

1.2 However it depends upon energy levels of the orbital electrons. It ignores the existence of aether. It is devoid of any geometric basis for electron movement.

1.3 Depending upon energy levels to begin with is perilous. Energy is for business and money-making - the physicist should be interested primarily about forces. And as force unlike power/energy is a vector quantity, and so has direction, the

geometrical situation is of paramount importance.

1.4 Using quantum theory, reflection of light may be explained this way - an incoming packet of energy called a photon causes an electron to jump from a lower energy orbital shell to a higher energy orbital shell. This is unstable, so it jumps down

from the higher energy orbital shell to the lower energy orbital shell. The difference in energy is emitted now as a photon.

1.5 In 1.4 above the implicit notion is that the electron orbits are circular. It is also implied that the photon must have some mass as it has energy following e=mcc, and this mass with movmentum mc has the energy to kick up the electron to the higher

orbit shell.

1.6 Now let us consider the above phenomenon in terms of aether, forces and geometries.

1.7 Aether by definition is a very fine solid through which all protons and electrons and neutrons pass the way bullets may go through grass which does not break but just bends. The photon in the aetheric context is a small burst of radiant energy. It

is a disturbance with no mass.

1.8 When this aetheric disturbance caused by the radiation reaches the electron and as it envelops the electron, it changes the orbit of the electron by displacement.

1.9 In the process of displacement the disturbance loses its energy as the force to displace the electron is lost with the movement of the electron. This is for the first quarter cycle of the wave - from zero to peak

1.10 As a result of the energy absorption the orbit of the electron is no longer circular but elliptical, and more "high energy" that way.

1.11 An electric field is created with the dipole effect caused by the elliptic orbit. There was no electric field before the disturbance; now there is; so there has been a change of electric field meaning that has to be a corresponding changing

magnetic field. Which will creating another changing electric field and so on till we have a burst of radiation, equivalent to the photon.

1.12 The electron at the higher energy level or greater ellipticity can be returned to the original orbit shell with the next quarter of the wave, from peak to zero. Again, as per 1.11 there will be a electromagnetic wave formation completing the half

cycle.

1.13 The electron in this case does not behave as a single orbiting particle but as a thin and elastic rubber band.

1.14 The idea of the electron not as a particle but as a rubber band is of crucial importance in our study of he nucleus of an atom.

2.1 Aether, a solid made of infinitely fine particles, fills the entire infinite universe.

2.2 The particles can vibrate, that is, oscillate about their mean positions.

2.3 The only force in the universe is electric as matter is made up of positive and negative charges.

2.4 When the electric field changes, it creates a changing magnetic field, which creates a changing electric field and so on. The changing electric fields vibrate the aether.

2.5 If the electric field loops as in a current, there is a steady magnetic field.

2.6 Matter is made up of negative charges called electrons and protons that are positive charges.

2.7 Under mutual attraction, they go through aether as a diver through a wave. When static, they let the wave push them this way and that.

2.8 Aether is a solid but its density cannot be found as aether fills everything including the space within the atom.

2.9 Only the density of protons and electrons can be estimated, for their mass and volume may be known from experiments.

2.10 Aether cannot affect the normal movement of the electrons and protons as they go through aether. There is no drag.

2.11 Aether bends to let electrons and protons squeeze through. No loss of momentum, thus, in the normal situation.

2.11 But with the applies electric field there is aetheric swaying from vibration about their mean positions according to the frequency of the changing electric field. This is what moves the electrons from their normal states. In this displacement of the electron the kinetic energy of the electromagnetic wave is absorbed.

2.12 Thus only when there is an electric field causing vibration to the aether there is momentum transfer to the electron.

2.13 Electrons are like rubber bands while protons may be spherical.

3.1 The aether particles are infinitely small by definition.

3.2 As they are infinitely small like points they have as you say no shape nor structure not volume.

3.3 Under the impact of electrical forces they vibrate and this vibration impacts upon the momentum of the electrons.

3.4 Thus the kinetic energy of the vibration transforms to the kinetic energy of the electron.

3.5 The reverse situation happens when the electron loses its kinetic energy. It creates the aetheric vibration.

3.6 This is understood it as water molecules going past a very thin set of wires forming a sieve. Only this time the water molecules stick to each other in their relative positions.

3.7 Aether particles bend aside to let the electrons and protons pass through them.

4.1 The definition of aether follows from a book referred to and quoted from in my 2005 post.'

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.culture.australian/wwQ4LkfM4bc/7uhLA2kLDfQJ

4.2 aether: a solid where infinitely fine, infinitely elastic particles filling the entire infinite universe including the inter-atomic spaces maintain their respective positions. It is the medium for the propagation of energy with electromagnetic

waves.

4.3 The 19th century notions of aether are extended to explain the propagation of electromagnetic waves acting upon the electrons in matter; and how matter receives these waves and creates these waves. This is the field approach where forces with their

directions are given primary importance.

4.4 This is a far superior and intuitive approach than its alternative, the energy based quantum theory which depends solely upon assumptions piled upon assumptions.

5.1 Consider a firecracker - the amount of gunpowder is small as compared to the amount of packing. When the cracker explodes, the paper or string is blown out. It is supposed that the energy of the firecracker comes from the powder alone. For the

string or paper surrounding the powder is chemically inert.

5.2 The above fact, that packing is needed for powerful explosions, was very well known to all those using muzzle loader guns. They had to pack the powder in.

5.3 That loose powder does not explode, merely burns well, is also clearly shown by the behaviour of fuses.

5.4 If we go by the calorie output of fuses and crackers, we should get the same result.

5.4 However firecrackers, bombs, etc. that require a lot of packing (paper or steel casing) produce a lot more kinetic energy than the fuse.

5.5 This kinetic energy is evidently coming from the packing.

5.6 Tighter the packing, greater the energy.

5.7 These are some of the basic issues, observed from Nature, that will be useful to understand the formula of energy creation and destruction, namely 0.5mVVN(N-k).

6.1 Let a mass m in free space have within its geometry an internal energy source that can increase its velocity by an amount v each time an amount of energy k.E from it is utilised. The kinetic increases after each hit increases by E = 0.5mvv. k is an

efficiency factor greater than 1 related to the losses involved in converting the internal energy to the kinetic energy. After N hits the velocity will be Nv. With respect to the initial state the kinetic energy of the mass will be 0.5mvvNN. The internal
energy used up will be NkE or 0.5mvvNk. Thus the increase in energy e after N hits will be, if N>k, e=0.5mvvN(N-k).

6.2 The most obvious display of internal energy creating internal force equally in directions is the chemical explosion. A matchstick, a bullet, a chemical bomb - these are all examples of chemical explosion showing the utilisation of internal energy used for creating internal force, that causing heat and kinetic energy to

the surroundings.

6.3 Aphorisms 5.1 to 5.7 (given below) elaborate on the nature of the explosion in relation to the energy generated, with respect to packing of the explosive matter.

6.4 The nuclear explosion creates a great deal more destructive kinetic energy than a chemical explosion. This is because the packing in a nuclear explosion is much more dense than a chemical reaction. In a chemical reaction atoms are involved. In a nuclear reaction the nucleus is involved.

6.5 In quantitative terms, the dimension of an atom is of the order of 10^-10m; the dimension of the nucleus is of the order of 10^-15m or 10^5 times more. This is the linear dimension - in three dimensions the packing of nuclei will be denser by a factor of 10^15. However in a nuclear explosion it is not as if all the

atoms are bunched up as nuclei - so the packing factor is in between 10^5 to 10^15. Let us say that a nuclear explosion the active constituents are packed to the order of 10^6 with respect to the chemical explosion to be conservative.

6.6 From the above rough analysis, it is obvious that the nuclear explosion, for the same mass, should be 10^10 times more powerful than the chemical explosion. 1 ton of TNT generates 5*10^9 joules; a nuclear bomb of mass 1 ton of active material (the

nuclear material plus the packing surrounds) should thus generate 5*10^15 joules. Now a hydrogen bomb of 1 Megaton generates 5*10^15 joules.

6.7 Thus the simple matter of packing the fissile material explains the vast disparity of energy between the nuclear explosion and the chemical explosion.

6.8 What is happening is that the N factor in the equation e=0.5mvvN(N-k)
is much higher for the nuclear explosion than it is for the chemical. Each atom in m gets hit N times in any explosion - greater the packing, more the N. The outer atoms get hit by inner atoms that are getting out in all directions, again and again.

The force is directed in all directions; the non-fissile elements get hit by the fissile atoms that keep on expanding out at a great velocity.

7.0 About the hydrogen bomb, and how the so-called strong nuclear force is actually the familiar electrostatic force operating at the atomic nucleus level.

7.1 The hydrogen atom is composed of a single proton and a single electron circling around it, as per the most established model of the hydrogen atom. There are isotopes of hydrogen occuring naturally - there is a neutron associated with that single

proton. It is this isotope - deuterium - of hydrogen that is used in nuclear bombs (called hydrogen bombs, based upon supposed fusion).

7.2 In fusion, the deuterium is supposed to become another isotope - tritium - after intense heat is applied as a result of an earlier fission bomb. There is apparently a drop in mass, that is translated into energy. However, we can propose another

alternative explanation for this great energy.

7.3 Consider a neutron to be a close union of a proton and an electron. The bond between them is extraordinarily strong - two charges joined at a zero distance, so the bonding force is very great. However, let us assert that the electron does not lose

its identity even in this close union.

7.4 A deuterium atom can thus be seen as the union of two protons joined by an electron. The bonding force here is very strong, but can be broken with enormous impact is caused as a result of nuclear fission.

7.5 Nuclear fission causes the extraordinary aether vibration to break apart the bonding in the deuterium atom. The two protons in the nucleus cannot be held together by the electron. As the electron gives up its hold, the two protons, that are at a

very close distance, move apart with extraordinary force.

7.6 The movement of the protons with respect to the electron causes a time varying electric field, which will create a time varying magnetic field, and together they will proceed as a very high energy electromagnetic gamma ray once again causing

aetheric vibration. This vibration will dissociate the other deuterium atoms, causing a chain reaction. Being very fast, and very powerful with the most extrordinary electrostatic forces being released, the hydrogen bomb is thus created.

7.7 The hydrogen bomb thus has nothing to do with fusion, but with the fission of the deuterium isotope of hydrogen.

7.8 The deuterium isotope may be considered the fundamental building block for the nuclei of all other elements. Multiples of them, with extra neutrons, constitute the nuclei of the heavier elements. The electrons glue the protons together, while

presenting a net positive charge that are balanced by the electrons orbiting the nucleus.

Something must have hit your head arim...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

[continued from previous message]

Which just shows the power of truth to brainwash those with scientific minds.

As I now point out, they have made the same mistake with result to the analysis
of the results, by ignoring the fact that the apparatus moved along with the
Earth. Repeating the same bungle a thousand times shows how silly they have all
been. Sooner or late some bright mind (alas, not from the West as you say!)
will understand my reasoning. Then they will have a lot of fun and action throwing out the old text books and rewriting new physics books based upon the
observations that c(v)=c+v and e=0.5mVVN(N-k).

Einstein took some of the speculation toward this end and
mashed together to give SR. To decide "against" SR (as is so >>>>>> common in the INTERNET) is simply wrong because it is deciding >>>>>> against observed fact.

What observed facts? The MMI experiment clearly shows that the >>>>> speed of light DOES depend upon the speed of the transmitter. I >>>>> pointed this out in 2005. When we take into account the fact
that the apparatus is moving along with the Earth (this was
ignored, a subtle but horrific bungle in the analysis of the null >>>>> results) then the null results indicate that if the Earth is
moving and not fixed, the speed of light must change with the >>>>> speed of the emitter. The link below gives the details.

MM found no "aether drift". Indeed Jefimenko has shown that
Einstein's assumption of the constant speed of light is NOT needed >>>> to formulate SR. I highly recommend reading what he did. However >>>> centuries of experiment shows that the speed of light does not
depend on the velocity of its source.

When you take the Earth as moving, then the apparatus is also moving >>> just as the light has left its source. Taking the movement of the >>> apparatus in space into consideration, the MMI experiment gives null >>> result ONLY when the speed of light varies as the speed of the Earth.
MMI null results clearly show that if the Earth is moving, then the >>> nulls take place as the speed of light varies with speed of the
Earth, as the emitter has the speed of the Earth. What they forgot to
take into consideration was that the apparatus was also moving in >>> that time interval. Not taking that into consideration led to the >>> huge bungle which is modern physics.

Details below-

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.culture.australian/wwQ4LkfM4bc/7uhLA2kLDfQJ

there are lots of bungles in modern physics but this isn't one. The >> reason light is now used as the standard of all length is because the >> above story is wrong.

This is the biggest bungle of all, that light speed is invariant. It is
absolute nonsense. To continue to believe in it, is criminal to the extreme.
It crushes human hopes for making faster than light motors, restricts the
scopes for humanity, makes us all prey to disaster from asteroid hits... surely
these are issues big enough to cause the reconsideration of the existing dogma.
That light is used as the standard for length does not in any way invalidate
my position that the speed of light varies with the speed of emitter. I do expect people to go through all my theoretical and experimental work
and consider them carefully, as opposed to blanket dismissal. Surely there are
SOME honest scientists still left on the planet!

However those same facts can be

demonstrated without the assumptions that Einstein had to
make.

What are the REAL objections to the aether theory? I suspect it >>>>> is something theological, and so, nothing scientific. "Though >>>>> vanquished, he will argue still". Only religious people can
behave like this!

GPS is the only good use for the Lorentz transform, but that is >>>>> pure conformal mapping. SR can only be correct if the Earth
stays put as in Aristotleian thinking. In which case, the
transform works with two wrongs giving a right. The two wrongs >>>>> are: Earth is still, and space is twisted.

I know it is tough for scientists to give up on SR, GR, QM, etc. >>>>> but this has to happen. All the so-called relativistic effects >>>>> are simply due to the motion of the Earth in aether.

Another thing about the fake EM theory. Accelerating charge >>>>>>> do not "radiate": 1) Lamor's theorem is derived base on a >>>>>>> huge dose of assumptions: a) speed of electric interaction >>>>>>> is at light speed. Although benj believe it is correct, I >>>>>>> hold a different view. It is more a carry over habit from SR >>>>>>> that nothing goes faster than light. In gravitation, it
seems there are analysis that shows gravity should transmit >>>>>>> almost instantaneously in order that a planet's orbit is
stable. b) the very mathematics of the derivation seems
questionable. 2) According to QM, all radiations come only >>>>>>> from bound electrons of atoms jumping quantum states. So
accelerated free electrons cannot radiate as there is no
intrinsic energy that the electron possess. Even the theory >>>>>>> of bremsstralung radiation is questionable as those particles >>>>>>> are not bounded to nucleus and have nothing to "radiate".

Radiation is due to the changing electric field which creates a >>>>> changing magnetic field which again creates a changing electric >>>>> field and that creates a changing magnetic field and so on and >>>>> on and on. This happens in truly infinite ways from every object >>>>> in the universe. If you are an antenna engineer, as I was,
making radiators out of dull metal, you can know the feeling when >>>>> it suddenly starts to radiate at some frequency corresponding to >>>>> the design. Without knowing how the electric fields will form it >>>>> is not possible to make a radiator, nor is it possible to
optimise its performance.

This it totally wrong. Faraday's law is bogus (see my website and >>>> Jefimenko.

Putting up some name does not convince. Science does not work like >>> religion. At least, that is what I was brought up to hold in my long >>> career in engineering and mathematics, including the physics of
radiation and em forces.

So your idea is that if you never examine any facts then your beliefs >> must stay true. You have no career in engineering and mathematics.
Sounds more like a long career in journalism.

As you simply drop names and deny, you do not carry any scientific thrust.
Trying to put me down only exposes your fundamental hollowness.
To the extent people like you manage science funding, humanity is cursed.

Thought of radiation as a stream of particles merely confuse the >>>>> issue. It is based upon the photoelectric effect, but that can >>>>> be easily explained with antenna theory.

No it can't. The two are incompatible.

Antenna theory came much after all the relativity and quantum stuff. >>> Anyone like myself who has designed phased array radars cannot have >>> any use for quantum, photons, etc. It is easy to apply the
fundamental non-linearities associated with frequency to the
mechanics of the photo-electric effect to get rid of the objections >>> to classical physics. I suppose, in those days they did not have
such a good idea about the internals of atoms, so they made up a
theory which was shonky to the extreme. But, out of loyalty or some >>> other reason, they are still hanging on to it.

There is no "antenna theory" Get busy Mr. Designer! There is just some
nibbling around the edges. If I give you a conductor in space of some >> arbitrary shape, can you give me the currents on it and the radiation >> from it? You are allowed to use Maxwell's theory. No such formula
exists. No such algorithm exists. It's not that it can't it's just that
nobody has done it.

You are not just wrong - you are also thoroughly ignorant. Having currents
on conductors and predicting the radiation pattern with the resulting electric
fields is what antenna engineering is all about.

Ok. I'll give you an arbitrary conductor in space with a couple of terminals an you can give me the current distribution on it. OK>
I"ll wait right here for your break-through formula. Why is it the less someone knows the more they think every one else is ignorant?

That is a dipole. Well explained in Jordan's book. The formulas are complex.
It takes years to fully understand them and implement them with engineering.
They said back in 1989 or so that I was the only one around who really knew
how antennas worked, and I used my knowledge to make antennas from scratch,
that worked beautifully. In fact, they have been used to keep Indian defence
systems alert, with top-quality radar. I did have some colleagues who understood my work, and carried it on for the safety of the nation. Nonsense
like QM I had to study in my engineering course. It took me quite a while to
dismiss it as of no worth to engineering. e=mcc and e-hv are simple equations
for ancient and simple minds, who are best off watching such low TV stuff as
Big Bang Theory! Characters there are not just ignorant, they are clowns.

But then, we cannot make the modern world with bad old ideas - in the engineering world of antennas, quantum theory does not exist! It is only
Maxwell.

This is complete ignorance. I'm not even going to bother to explain.

You cannot explain. You are not an antenna engineer.

btw for 10 years I have made exactly the formulas and implemented them in
software to design antennas with specified radiation patterns, like every
other antenna engineer. To us, the qm types are the veriest of quacks and
fruitcakes. We do the designs that work, make money, makes the world go.

The Einsteinian charlatans can still find refuge with the media and academia.

That is because Einstein is GOD! Get over it!

heh-heh-heh-heh-heh-heh-heh-heh The truth at last! Modern physicists are atheistic nutcases with some dead guy as their one true god. Okay I admit that
relativity is a religion, but why should I think they are scientific??! :-)

Sorry dude, but I"m not here as a missionary to convert you. You have to do your own thinking. Start with questioning your own thoughts. It's been a hoot! But you still haven't a clue.

I am the missionary here. I am out to convert the voodoo
physicists to the real physics of the infinite universe, with these two formulas:

c(v)=c+v
e=0.5mVVN(N-k)

and my video films:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqBfwAClVlg
IFE - 1 Ground Experiments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9eGq4Oiv9s
IFE - 2 Experimental setups

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3hC48BMrno
IFE - 3 Pendulum experiments

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sSPxGsLkws
IFE - 4 Evolution of spaceship

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJdM6UDPauU
IFE - 5 Hydrogen Transmission Network

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUAcx7rAplc
IFE - 6 Spaceship Design

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5Zbpvc3fdA
IFE - 7 Anti-Gravity

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA9LUwqMhxY
IFE - 8 New Physics

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

The Taj, or Tejo-mahalaya

It was a temple-market complex like Humayun's tomb in Delhi before it was converted to a mausoleum.

I was there in the Taj and its surrounds in 2016, with my family. It was obvious to me, what it was like say some 1000 years ago. The blue waters of the unpolluted Jamuna, teeming with life... boats with goods docked just behind the temple, and goods

were unloaded. They were put on display along the niches of the walls, and stored in the many rooms of the complex.

The two buildings on either side, and the entry building, were places of rest for the travellers and businessmen. And also offices, where money and goods were exchanged, for mutual profit. All under the kindly gaze of Lord Surya over Lord Shiva, as

unlimited supply for unlimited goodness, in the main temple. And that in turn presided over by Lakshmi, meaning unlimited grace and beauty, the true motivation for all business. The excellences of all the involved parties were demonstrated in music and
song, on the marble platforms.

Can we do better today? In my mind's eye I saw elevated crystal walkways at various elevations going all around the existing paths, where people could get even better views of the Taj temple market complex. It would take an architectural genius to do

such a thing. Make various unobtrusive elevators, moving platforms, etc. to carry the people around in huge numbers for unlimited profit and joy. The work could start with money raised from keeping the Taj to its original purpose... the niches could once
again be filled with shops, and business reign in the area.

Could the level of the Jamuna be raised once again to the former levels? Now that is an even more formidable task!

The physics aphorisms of Arindam

1.1 While relativity is completely wrong, such cannot be said of quantum theory.

1.2 However it depends upon energy levels of the orbital electrons. It ignores the existence of aether. It is devoid of any geometric basis for electron movement.

1.3 Depending upon energy levels to begin with is perilous. Energy is for business and money-making - the physicist should be interested primarily about forces. And as force unlike power/energy is a vector quantity, and so has direction, the

geometrical situation is of paramount importance.

1.4 Using quantum theory, reflection of light may be explained this way - an incoming packet of energy called a photon causes an electron to jump from a lower energy orbital shell to a higher energy orbital shell. This is unstable, so it jumps down

from the higher energy orbital shell to the lower energy orbital shell. The difference in energy is emitted now as a photon.

1.5 In 1.4 above the implicit notion is that the electron orbits are circular. It is also implied that the photon must have some mass as it has energy following e=mcc, and this mass with movmentum mc has the energy to kick up the electron to the

higher orbit shell.

1.6 Now let us consider the above phenomenon in terms of aether, forces and geometries.

1.7 Aether by definition is a very fine solid through which all protons and electrons and neutrons pass the way bullets may go through grass which does not break but just bends. The photon in the aetheric context is a small burst of radiant energy.

It is a disturbance with no mass.

1.8 When this aetheric disturbance caused by the radiation reaches the electron and as it envelops the electron, it changes the orbit of the electron by displacement.

1.9 In the process of displacement the disturbance loses its energy as the force to displace the electron is lost with the movement of the electron. This is for the first quarter cycle of the wave - from zero to peak

1.10 As a result of the energy absorption the orbit of the electron is no longer circular but elliptical, and more "high energy" that way.

1.11 An electric field is created with the dipole effect caused by the elliptic orbit. There was no electric field before the disturbance; now there is; so there has been a change of electric field meaning that has to be a corresponding changing

magnetic field. Which will creating another changing electric field and so on till we have a burst of radiation, equivalent to the photon.

1.12 The electron at the higher energy level or greater ellipticity can be returned to the original orbit shell with the next quarter of the wave, from peak to zero. Again, as per 1.11 there will be a electromagnetic wave formation completing the

half cycle.

1.13 The electron in this case does not behave as a single orbiting particle but as a thin and elastic rubber band.

1.14 The idea of the electron not as a particle but as a rubber band is of crucial importance in our study of he nucleus of an atom.

2.1 Aether, a solid made of infinitely fine particles, fills the entire infinite universe.

2.2 The particles can vibrate, that is, oscillate about their mean positions.

2.3 The only force in the universe is electric as matter is made up of positive and negative charges.

2.4 When the electric field changes, it creates a changing magnetic field, which creates a changing electric field and so on. The changing electric fields vibrate the aether.

2.5 If the electric field loops as in a current, there is a steady magnetic field.

2.6 Matter is made up of negative charges called electrons and protons that are positive charges.

2.7 Under mutual attraction, they go through aether as a diver through a wave. When static, they let the wave push them this way and that.

2.8 Aether is a solid but its density cannot be found as aether fills everything including the space within the atom.

2.9 Only the density of protons and electrons can be estimated, for their mass and volume may be known from experiments.

2.10 Aether cannot affect the normal movement of the electrons and protons as they go through aether. There is no drag.

2.11 Aether bends to let electrons and protons squeeze through. No loss of momentum, thus, in the normal situation.

2.11 But with the applies electric field there is aetheric swaying from vibration about their mean positions according to the frequency of the changing electric field. This is what moves the electrons from their normal states. In this displacement of the electron the kinetic energy of the electromagnetic wave is absorbed.

2.12 Thus only when there is an electric field causing vibration to the aether there is momentum transfer to the electron.

2.13 Electrons are like rubber bands while protons may be spherical.

3.1 The aether particles are infinitely small by definition.

3.2 As they are infinitely small like points they have as you say no shape nor structure not volume.

3.3 Under the impact of electrical forces they vibrate and this vibration impacts upon the momentum of the electrons.

3.4 Thus the kinetic energy of the vibration transforms to the kinetic energy of the electron.

3.5 The reverse situation happens when the electron loses its kinetic energy. It creates the aetheric vibration.

3.6 This is understood it as water molecules going past a very thin set of wires forming a sieve. Only this time the water molecules stick to each other in their relative positions.

3.7 Aether particles bend aside to let the electrons and protons pass through them.

4.1 The definition of aether follows from a book referred to and quoted from in my 2005 post.'

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.culture.australian/wwQ4LkfM4bc/7uhLA2kLDfQJ

4.2 aether: a solid where infinitely fine, infinitely elastic particles filling the entire infinite universe including the inter-atomic spaces maintain their respective positions. It is the medium for the propagation of energy with electromagnetic

waves.

4.3 The 19th century notions of aether are extended to explain the propagation of electromagnetic waves acting upon the electrons in matter; and how matter receives these waves and creates these waves. This is the field approach where forces with

their directions are given primary importance.

4.4 This is a far superior and intuitive approach than its alternative, the energy based quantum theory which depends solely upon assumptions piled upon assumptions.

5.1 Consider a firecracker - the amount of gunpowder is small as compared to the amount of packing. When the cracker explodes, the paper or string is blown out. It is supposed that the energy of the firecracker comes from the powder alone. For the

string or paper surrounding the powder is chemically inert.

5.2 The above fact, that packing is needed for powerful explosions, was very well known to all those using muzzle loader guns. They had to pack the powder in.

5.3 That loose powder does not explode, merely burns well, is also clearly shown by the behaviour of fuses.

5.4 If we go by the calorie output of fuses and crackers, we should get the same result.

5.4 However firecrackers, bombs, etc. that require a lot of packing (paper or steel casing) produce a lot more kinetic energy than the fuse.

5.5 This kinetic energy is evidently coming from the packing.

5.6 Tighter the packing, greater the energy.

5.7 These are some of the basic issues, observed from Nature, that will be useful to understand the formula of energy creation and destruction, namely 0.5mVVN(N-k).

6.1 Let a mass m in free space have within its geometry an internal energy source that can increase its velocity by an amount v each time an amount of energy k.E from it is utilised. The kinetic increases after each hit increases by E = 0.5mvv. k is

an efficiency factor greater than 1 related to the losses involved in converting the internal energy to the kinetic energy. After N hits the velocity will be Nv. With respect to the initial state the kinetic energy of the mass will be 0.5mvvNN. The
internal energy used up will be NkE or 0.5mvvNk. Thus the increase in energy e after N hits will be, if N>k, e=0.5mvvN(N-k).

6.2 The most obvious display of internal energy creating internal force equally in directions is the chemical explosion. A matchstick, a bullet, a chemical bomb - these are all examples of chemical explosion showing the utilisation of internal energy used for creating internal force, that causing heat and kinetic energy

to the surroundings.

6.3 Aphorisms 5.1 to 5.7 (given below) elaborate on the nature of the explosion in relation to the energy generated, with respect to packing of the explosive matter.

6.4 The nuclear explosion creates a great deal more destructive kinetic energy than a chemical explosion. This is because the packing in a nuclear explosion is much more dense than a chemical reaction. In a chemical reaction atoms are involved. In a nuclear reaction the nucleus is involved.

6.5 In quantitative terms, the dimension of an atom is of the order of 10^-10m; the dimension of the nucleus is of the order of 10^-15m or 10^5 times more. This is the linear dimension - in three dimensions the packing of nuclei will be denser by a factor of 10^15. However in a nuclear explosion it is not as if all the

atoms are bunched up as nuclei - so the packing factor is in between 10^5 to 10^15. Let us say that a nuclear explosion the active constituents are packed to the order of 10^6 with respect to the chemical explosion to be conservative.

6.6 From the above rough analysis, it is obvious that the nuclear explosion, for the same mass, should be 10^10 times more powerful than the chemical explosion. 1 ton of TNT generates 5*10^9 joules; a nuclear bomb of mass 1 ton of active material (

the nuclear material plus the packing surrounds) should thus generate 5*10^15 joules. Now a hydrogen bomb of 1 Megaton generates 5*10^15 joules.

6.7 Thus the simple matter of packing the fissile material explains the vast disparity of energy between the nuclear explosion and the chemical explosion.

6.8 What is happening is that the N factor in the equation e=0.5mvvN(N-k) is much higher for the nuclear explosion than it is for the chemical. Each atom in m gets hit N times in any explosion - greater the packing, more the N. The outer atoms get hit by inner atoms that are getting out in all directions, again and again.

The force is directed in all directions; the non-fissile elements get hit by the fissile atoms that keep on expanding out at a great velocity.

7.0 About the hydrogen bomb, and how the so-called strong nuclear force is actually the familiar electrostatic force operating at the atomic nucleus level.

7.1 The hydrogen atom is composed of a single proton and a single electron circling around it, as per the most established model of the hydrogen atom. There are isotopes of hydrogen occuring naturally - there is a neutron associated with that single

proton. It is this isotope - deuterium - of hydrogen that is used in nuclear bombs (called hydrogen bombs, based upon supposed fusion).

7.2 In fusion, the deuterium is supposed to become another isotope - tritium - after intense heat is applied as a result of an earlier fission bomb. There is apparently a drop in mass, that is translated into energy. However, we can propose another

alternative explanation for this great energy.

7.3 Consider a neutron to be a close union of a proton and an electron. The bond between them is extraordinarily strong - two charges joined at a zero distance, so the bonding force is very great. However, let us assert that the electron does not

lose its identity even in this close union.

7.4 A deuterium atom can thus be seen as the union of two protons joined by an electron. The bonding force here is very strong, but can be broken with enormous impact is caused as a result of nuclear fission.

7.5 Nuclear fission causes the extraordinary aether vibration to break apart the bonding in the deuterium atom. The two protons in the nucleus cannot be held together by the electron. As the electron gives up its hold, the two protons, that are at a

very close distance, move apart with extraordinary force.

7.6 The movement of the protons with respect to the electron causes a time varying electric field, which will create a time varying magnetic field, and together they will proceed as a very high energy electromagnetic gamma ray once again causing

aetheric vibration. This vibration will dissociate the other deuterium atoms, causing a chain reaction. Being very fast, and very powerful with the most extrordinary electrostatic forces being released, the hydrogen bomb is thus created.

7.7 The hydrogen bomb thus has nothing to do with fusion, but with the fission of the deuterium isotope of hydrogen.

7.8 The deuterium isotope may be considered the fundamental building block for the nuclei of all other elements. Multiples of them, with extra neutrons, constitute the nuclei of the heavier elements. The electrons glue the protons together, while

presenting a net positive charge that are balanced by the electrons orbiting the nucleus.

Something must have hit your head arim...

No, don't project from your own experience. Not all of us are dropped on our heads in infancy.
Anyway, this reaction is very satisfying. From imbeciles casting ridicules, to adoration from the wise, is but a step.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)