It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Fidler-Morton Vortex-Electron model requires an aether. New theory of atomic matter.

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 11:15 PM
I have become quite intrigued in the ideas of Sid Deutsch and other people that he mentions in his book; "Return of the Ether." It appears that Sid's work [and that of the other people he quotes or mentions] compliments my own work in ways that have me quiet excited, and suggest that I'm definitely on the right path.

His work provides possible solutions to both of the two slit experiments for photons and electrons. The solutions make use of something I had realized about the nature of the way electrons appeared to behave as a result of the structure for them that I came to hypothesize about, and that they seem to possess. I had surmised that a field of the fabric would form ahead of an electron as it moves, but beyond generating a magnetic field I had not conceived that such a field could also explain both of the two slit experiments for both electrons and photons. These solutions explain that which cannot be explained at this time by the standard model, and absolutely require an aether or fabric of space. Its interesting to note that an "ether" was totally dismissed, and yet now a similar "animal" is arising due to the work around the big bang theory. Dark energy and dark matter. All arising because of the ever increasing degree in the apparent red shift of light from more distant objects in space.

Also, very important is his suggestion to a lead on a solution to Bell's Theorem and entanglement, which reports that some times photons appear to display superluminal (faster-than-light) behaviour or communication. Something that just does not make sense. Once again an aether is the key.

Currently I'm awaiting for the arrival of two of the books written by Steven Rado. Sid recommended looking at Rado's work in his book. I'm not sure if Steven Rado is still alive, and like Sid he was born within the same decade. 1920. I'm currently trying to make contact with him.

I'm hoping that I won't have to work as much as I have had to this past few months for my normal job. Although its finally allowing me to catch up on my bills, at the same time it takes away time for me to work on this project. Given sufficient funds not only would I just work on this book but I'd like to hire a couple people to work with me. To do research for me, and - what ever else it would take to expedite writing a book. As well as working on some of the mathematics that I now see arising from the work, and that I have started working on.

posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 11:33 PM
reply to post by buddhasystem

The basic premise of the argument is always that an electron could never inhabit a nucleus, due to its obvious greater wavelength/size. Since in EOC we are seeing electrons freely entering nuclei and not coming back out, then its obvious as they gain energy their wavelength/size is decreasing. Whatever their original size might have been it is not preventing them from entering and disappearing into nuclei. They become negative pions.

They are not coming back out. And the neutron count goes up by one. The proton count goes down by one.

How much more obvious does it need to be that energetic electrons in the form of pions reside within nuclei? And pions outside of the nucleus revert back to normal electrons.

Electron Orbital Capture is an empirical measureable fact.

posted on Feb, 19 2012 @ 12:07 AM
I was going to provide a more in depth update. However, due to a lack of desire and time that I'd like to spend on this at the moment, I thought that I'd at least provide a brief update.

Sid Deutsch and Steven Rado have provided me with some great information and answers to some questions - some of which I had not even thought to ask. Alas, both are now deceased. Steven Rado passed away in January. His family has indicated that I am more than welcome to quote some of his work. Sid Deutsch's family have not exactly stated the same thing, but seem likely to also give me their permission.

I hope to include chapters of their work in a book of which I would produce. I would quote them since there is no point in re-inventing the wheel.

Also, there have been a few documentaries that have also provided some great leads and information. The Aether, aka FOS, seems ever more likely to be accepted by everyone. Due in part to the rise of dark energy, and dark matter, taking on the characteristics of an aether in everyway except in name. Its just a matter of time.

Currently I've been attempting to work on a mathematical model of the atom. I've acquired a mathematical program, and a 3D model of gravitational orbits written for this program, that can easily be converted to an atomic model. I've just been struggling with the mathematics and made some attempt to find a "cheap" mathematician for hire. Time and money is, as always, an issue. Even though I was an A student when it came to calculus and mathematics, developing a mathematically precise model is somewhat challenging. A lack of some of the empirical data that would make this easier is also not helping matters.

With some luck I will make contact with a mathematician who can help me with some of the mathematics. Or luck out and figure out what I need to on my own. Although part of my challenge is sometimes just finding the time for all of this.

More importantly the atomic model I'm working on not only appears to be useful in nuclear fission and fusion models, likely giving rise to a useful lead in fusion reactions, but it also Unifies and answers how and why there are differences between classical and quantum mechanics.

It may be months before I update this site again.

posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 04:22 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


new topics

top topics
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in